17 Burst results for "Senator Haggerty"
Simply Bitcoin
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Simply Bitcoin
"Um, also Chrissy Legard's, you know, meme video, basically saying the digital hero is coming and it's here to stay. Right. Um, that tells me that I think that they understand they're under, they're, they're, they're on the clock and they're trying to roll this out as much as possible. And that tells me that we're winning. That tells me that we're over the target, but let's talk about the backfire because that's what we're going to talk about today. So here's Pierre Richard and he says Elizabeth Warren spread disinformation to exploit a crisis. It's backfiring and now undermines her misguided anti Bitcoin agenda. Here's another one. Neeraj, he's part of Coin Center, which is a, a crypto lobbying arm, right? The Bitcoin Policy Institute, shout out David Zell is the, is the Bitcoin lobbying arm. Uh, but sometimes, you know, the incentives do align not on everything, but, um, Coin Center was, has been there for a while. And at least it presented some type of voice in Washington, DC. Um, he said, watching the Senate banking committee, uh, banking hearing on Hamas financing, I must say it was refreshing to see the panel of expert witnesses repeatedly fact check Senator Warren's assertions that crypto should be the focus in combating Hamas funding. Now let's check out some of these clips because it was an absolute massacre. Uh, so let's check out this first one. It is by Senator Haggerty. Um, let's check it out. And another thing guys pay attention, right? Neeraj said Senator Warren's assertions, right? And again, once you connect the dots, you know, did Senator Warren have something to do with that wall street journal article? No way to know for sure. But again, lots of coincidences are happening these days. Um, so anyways, let's see what Senator Haggerty has to say. The wall street journal recently reported that Hamas and Palestine Islamic jihad since 2021 have received roughly $130 million in crypto financing of the offshore exchanges and platforms like finance. It's important to note that these figures are disputed and per independent analysis that was released just this week could be overestimated by as much as 99%. The data analytics firm cited in this wall street journal report has even disputed the estimates that were reported stating that there is no evidence to suggest that Hamas fundraised anything close to this $130 million reported. Make no mistake. Any such funding is unconscionable and should be addressed in a thoughtful targeted way in order to choke off these terrorists. But we should do this without pushing the crypto industry overseas. In this case, we need a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. The wall street journal recent report. In this case, we need a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. And make no mistake. The FinCEN proposal is a sledge hammer. Now, that discrepancy number 99%, how did this Senator get that number? That is the same number that Sam Callahan reached with his viral tweet. That is the same number, roughly the same number that Preston Pish reached in his article that he released for Bitcoin magazine. So clearly make no mistakes. The efforts of all of you guys on social media to bring attention to this at the speed that it, that it happened in, right? Because remember before social media, we'd not, we would have to go through those gatekeepers of information and hope to God that they would find the story interesting and then publish it. But the community, the Bitcoin immune system reacted very, very, very quickly. So it wasn't only Senator Haggerty. Here is another expert and let's see what she has to say. So Senator, that was Senator Haggerty. So that was an actual politician. Here is an expert who, who was offering testimony. Let's don't lose sight and focus from the big picture. Crypto is currently a very small part of the puzzle. The major funding channels are where and remain state funding, Iran and others that those are the major players. Most of the funds are still being transferred by the traditional channels that we all know from the past. Banks, money transmitter, payment system, hawala, money exchange, trade based, terrorism, financing, charity, cash, shell companies, and crypto. The efforts should be global and focus on imposing global sanctions on Hamas and their sponsors as was the case with ISIS. Let's don't lose sight and focus from the big. Okay. Lots of breakdown there, right? The vast majority of the funding and it's not coming from crazy Bitcoiners online came from what? The traditional financial system. It did not come from, they say crypto Bitcoin, you guys know the deal. So yeah. Uh, like what, what else do you got to know at that point? Like clearly, clearly the fact that the wall street journal has not reject, uh, retain, uh, retracted the article or offered a correction, even though the analytics that they used, the own analytics company said, wait a second, you misrepresented the information. The fact that they haven't retracted it tells you everything you need to know. That article was pivotal in their strategy to try to shove down the throats, this FinCEN proposal, which would circumvent the normal legislative process, which they know they can't pass because they don't have enough support.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Lobbied hard to weaken those rules. Ultimately, Congress signed off, and then it got bad. Really bad. Regulators burned down dozens of safeguards that were meant to stop banks from making risky bets. Now the three of you here today represent the US Treasury and two of our top banking regulators. I'd like to know if you believe that we need to strengthen our banking rules going forward to ensure the safety of our financial system. Vice chair bar, let me start with you. Do you believe we should strengthen our financial rules going forward? Yes, I do senator. Thank you. Vice president President Biden agrees with you as well. Two weeks ago, he stated that we must quote strengthen the rules for banks to make it less likely that this kind of bank failure would happen again. Chairman gruenberg, what about you? Do you agree with President Biden that we need to strengthen our banking rules? I do agree, senator. Good. And now, under secretary Liang, do you agree with the president on this? Senator, I agree, that we do need to prevent these types of bank failures. Well, I'm asking you, of course, we need to prevent them. But supervision. But that's not by simply wishing it. It's by stronger regulation. Is that right? I agree. Okay, good. Now, we need better laws here in Congress, but let's also talk about how we can strengthen the rules today, even before Congress acts. Under current law, the Federal Reserve has the discretion to apply stronger Prudential standards on banks with assets between a 100 billion 250 billion. Exactly the size of Silicon Valley bank. That authority is not being used right now. Vice chair bark will you use your authority to strengthen rules for the largest banks in this country. As you use your authority to strengthen the rules for the largest banks in this country, will you be reaching banks with assets of at least a $100 million? A $100 billion. Senator, we, of course, would need to go through a notice and comment rulemaking. In this process. But I anticipate the need to strengthen capital and liquidity standards for firms over a $100 billion. Okay, so this is the area we're looking at. We're going to push down further in terms of the greater scrutiny. Chairman gruenberg let me turn to you. Once the fed began torching rule after rule in 2018 for big banks, the FDIC under your predecessor joined in on the fun and also started weakening FDIC rules across the board. Capital and liquidity requirements stress tests, you name it. In fact, your predecessor explicitly told these banks that if FDIC bank examiners were asking too many questions that they should quote let us know. Now, there's a banking regulator who makes it clear that she is there to serve the big banks instead of the American public. Chairman gruenberg will you commit to using your authority to undo the rollbacks that your predecessor initiated and to strengthen the rules and supervision for banks with greater than a $100 billion in assets. Senators, I think you know I was a member of the board at that time. And voted against those measures. And I certainly think it's appropriate for us to go back and review those actions in light of the recent episode and consider what changes. Well, I have to say, review sounds a little wishy here. You didn't think they were good rules to begin with. My views haven't changed, senator. All right, so you still think they were bad idea. I do. Got it. You know, each of you at this table has authority that you could exercise right now to strengthen rules for big banks. And to ensure that our banking system and our economy are safer. I urge you to use that authority and I urge my colleagues here in Congress to do our part to protect American families and small businesses from yet another banking crisis. Thank you. Mister chairman. Senator haggerty from Tennessee's recognized. Thank you, mister Republican. The bill haggerty of Tennessee begins his questioning at the Senate banking hearing on the recent bank failures. Let's check the market with the S&P 500 right now downgrade four points. 39 72 is the SUV tragic 70 32,502 NASDAQ down 69 points. Can your treasuries down three 32nd families 3.5% bodies? Life coverage of the Senate banking can also acknowledge the bravery of the national police department. They stepped into harm's way and within 14 minutes brought the situation under control. Tremendous bravery at a time when it's called for. And I would acknowledge there, sacrifices. And now let's turn to the matter at hand. And I know that politics in Washington always seizes upon any crisis as an opportunity to achieve whatever regulatory or legislative opportunity or goal that may be in front of them. But I'd like to talk about managerial execution here. Specifically, I'd like to start with you, chairman grimberg. I like to talk through a series of events that followed SVD's failure two weeks ago. As you know, Silicon Valley bank was taken into receivership on a Friday morning that gave the FDIC three days to find a buyer before markets opened on Sunday Night. You had tremendous resources at your disposal. 18 years of experience on the FDIC
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"With an eye on the markets and then we'll bring back our panel for some thoughts on this Jess, are you surprised to see green here? I know it's not been a good day for a lot of regional banks, but the indexes are holding up here. Right, and it definitely leaves people scratching their head, but when you're looking under the surface for the S&P 500 to try to figure out what's going on now. If you're looking at the leaders among the industry groups in the index, utilities and real estate, those are the ones driving the gains and I wanted to point that out because that shows you that people are buying income, especially with what you're seeing happening in the bond market with a two year treasury yield, basically falling close to its lowest in years now. And so if in particular, if you're looking at the real estate sector, the second best performing index in the group and that's really due to treasury yields are falling, the expectations are building that the said will suddenly potentially pause and you have banks like Goldman Sachs pointing that out. And so in that case, those dividend payouts from utilities and REITs would replace treasury buying for income purposes, Joe. Fascinating. That was my next question, by the way. Markets decided we get no rate hike. Next month, right, or next week, rather. And so this really builds it up because as you know, there is no fed speak this week. We are in a blackout period and we have the CPI data coming in tomorrow and that's really pivotal because the batch of data that we got not only for CPI, but other inflation measures in January this did show obviously that inflation was persistently higher than what the fed would want to see, but now you throw in all of this drama with what's happening with these regional banks and what does this mean for the Federal Reserve moving forward and so now especially if you look at the world interest rate probability in the terminal that really shows you now investors are the probability that the fed may not even hike at its next meeting and now markets are trying to price and potential cuts later on this year. Right. Unbelievable Jess, thank you so much. Just met and is our deputy team leader of U.S. equities with us live from New York. This will probably change ten more times, right? But we're looking at that CPI as Jess just mentioned here. It's reassembled the panel for some final thoughts from Rick and Jeannie. With the idea of this being a bailout. Senator haggerty says it's a bailout. Kathy hochul, the governor of New York today, not a bailout. The banks are
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Bank. What happened here? Is a disgrace. The second largest bank failure in history. Where was management? Where were the regulators? How did this happen? Many questions remain unanswered. We're going to get to the bottom of this. We're going to get to the bottom of this, you said, we're going to assemble our panel right now to begin a conversation with two of the most trusted voices here on Bloomberg radio in a time where we really need some help. Jeannie Chan Zeno and Rick Davis are here at Bloomberg politics contributors. They make our signature panel here on sound on. It's great to have both of you with us. Rick, your thoughts on this. Following 2018, we just heard from senator haggerty doesn't seem to think that at anything to do with what happened over the weekend, do you? Yeah, it's going to be a very choppy political environment around this issue, just like it's a choppy economic environment on the markets. It depends on which Republican senator, for instance, you want to talk to today. Mitt Romney, without talking about how he thinks that the fed and the FDIC and treasury worked in concert well to do the right thing. Others have different views. I think Billy represents what we think is going to be the sort of Republican maga approach to this, which is blame it on ESG and blame it on woke clauses. Crony capitalism. And that will echo some of the more progressive democratic views. So it's going to be a while before there really is a point of view that you can get any sense of, which is going to be echoed out of democratic leadership and Republican leadership in the House and Senate. Judy, I can't imagine a world in this Congress where any new regulations are passed. I don't know if you think that they are needed. But let's just start with what happened over the weekend. Did the Biden administration do the right thing to that actually prevent this from being more than two? Yeah, I mean, at this point, it looks like they reacted quickly and they should be applauded for that. I don't think they had much choice on that. I have to say, I thought about our friend Rick Davis all weekend. He's probably has nightmares back to 2008. But yeah, we'll get to that. But you know, I do think there is been this sort of constant voice on the Republican side so far. It's still early as Rick mentioned about ESG and woke, the one exception to that I would note, as I like to watch truth social for you, Joe. All right, thank you. Yeah, I like to keep up when I know you're busy. Is that Donald Trump's statement there was very different than we heard from people like Nikki Haley than we heard from people like John McCain. He was talking about tying this to Joe Biden's economic policies overall. In other words, he's not going necessarily yet. The woke route, he's saying, he's saying, Joe Biden is Herbert Hoover. You should all shutter. We are back to the 1930s, the banks are failing, panic panic. So it is a vast difference in terms of tone we're getting on truth social. We're just getting started with our panel and we are going to go
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"On this, but thinks that the president should pick somebody to be a counter to Jay Powell. As she argues, sending the economy over a cliff is what will happen if he's allowed to continue hiking rates. Should there be a check if you will on the fed to that extent? The fed already operates in that way. Chair Powell, of course, that's the agenda. But he's only one of the members of the open market committee. And the folks that determine this are the fed as a whole. That governors as a whole will make the impact. We'll make the decision on rates looking at the impact of a broad variety of factors. So I don't see that as a need at all. I think chair panel is doing an admirable job trying to navigate again challenging times. But I think the last thing he would want to see, I think any fed chair would want to see is our economy going to a recession. They can do anything to avoid it yet at the same time. He's got to bring this inflation under control. Senator haggerty, I know you stopped by cpac last week, part of an event there. I think you were interviewed among many folks who were speaking. Much was made of the fact that many mainstream Republicans did not attend and that this was largely a sort of Trump style rally. I wonder having actually been there and interacted with the crowd and the organizers, is that the past of the Republican Party or the future? Well, I've supported the American conservative union for years appeared at cpac for years and would plan to continue to do so. I didn't notice any sort of change in the demeanor or temperament. At the event at all, I was interviewed on Thursday on issues that I think concern all of us with respect to China and the aggressive posture that China is taking more wide and certainly as it impacts America. And the response I got from the audience was enormously positive. I think the concern and the realization show of the fact that China is a real threat right now continues to grow the American public had an opportunity to wake up since about 2015. I would give a lot of president a lot of credit president Trump in terms of initially calling this out on a broad scale basis. And I think the American public particularly at the pandemic has seen China's behavior as something that is particularly concerning to all of us. So very well received in terms of that topic at the event. I was not there for the entirety of the event, but I didn't see any sort of change in my mind. And I think it will continue to be in the future of the conservative movement. Based on what you've been hearing, will you support Donald Trump if he's renominated? I think that you'll see a Republican Party that will definitely support Donald Trump. And we'll do everything we can to make certain that we take The White House back no matter who the nominee is. We are very focused in my lane on the United States Senate races in 2024. I'm deeply concerned about the ground game that we need to have in place. President Trump actually talked about this at cpac. I've been working on this in terms of understanding where there are gaps in our coverage on the ground game so that we are even though we may not like the new set of rules that emerged after 2020 in terms of mail out ballots and ballots harvesting. We're well equipped to engage on whatever the rules that happens to be. Once the 2024 election gets underway. And I want to see a ground game that's up to the task. We expect a big field this time. It looks like it could well be a very large field. We've seen this happen before on both sides of the aisle. When you've got an opportunity to challenge an incumbent president, I think you'll be a large number of people. Certainly, I know there are large number looking at the race and we'll see how it all evolves. But it certainly sounds to me like we'll have broad field. Senator Bill haggerty, Republican from Tennessee. Let's do it in person next time you're in Washington, D.C.. We thank you as always for the insights today. I look forward to it, Joe. Thank you so much. And thanks for joining us on Bloomberg sound on. We're going to talk to critic Gupta coming up next about, again, why this is being termed the most important week of the year on Wall Street. First to check
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"A Bloomberg business flash. Hi, Charlie, thanks for being with us, and thanks for joining us. Here on Bloomberg sound on the chairman of the D.C. city council wants to stop the Senate from voting on the crime code. This is just breaking today, in fact, just the last couple hours. Have you heard about this? The city. This is the District of Columbia. It's controversial revision to the criminal code. Which actually lowers penalties for some violent crimes, including robberies and carjackings, trying to pull this withdraw this and head off and expected vote in the Senate this after President Biden said last week as we told you that he's going to support the effort. He will not veto this if it does in fact pass its way through Capitol Hill. And look, this is really touchy around here. This is a city that is obsessed. With getting a vote in Congress with being actually regarded as a state. And it's not saying a lot about home rule as we call it around here. Now the Senate is set to vote on this and it's something I spoke earlier today about with senator Bill haggerty. He wrote the bill that would overturn these relaxed crime laws. The Republican from Tennessee spoke with us a bit earlier today. And I started by asking him if his bill is going to pass this week. It will pass this week with the help of Democrats. I think that the whole defund the police movement is not worked well for the Democrats in The White House. People are waking up to this. And it's regrettable to see what the D.C. kit city council is engaging in. They're trying to push some sort of woke messaging in a way that would desperately worsen the situation. The crime situation that's unfolding in Washington, D.C.. They've been working on this bill. The D.C. council has been working on criminal justice reform for two years. What they come up with in the wake of a massive increase in carjackings. In fact, carjacking is a tripled over the past three years. We're at a homicide rate now in D.C. of north of 200 homicides a year over the past two years and it's actually accelerating right now. And the D.C. council decides it's a good idea to lower the penalties for serious crimes like this to make every misdemeanor entitled to a jury trial, which would completely clog the systems and basically mean no misdemeanor gets tried. It would be a catch and release system in D.C. for misdemeanors if this were enacted and it would make D.C. essentially a wall is placed. Remember, this is the federal District of Columbia. This is the nation's capital and the D.C. council seems to want to make it an embarrassment for the nation. Even the mayor is vetoed this. So if you look at the public sentiment in Washington 72% of those cold in D.C. are with me, the D.C. police union is with me, the fraternal order of police are with me. What does this say to the idea of D.C. statehood? I think it's definitely not a step in the right direction if that's the way they want to go because this is the federal District of Columbia. You should be they should be doing everything they can to make it safe. And a secure place for people from all over the nation come to visit. We are more than happy to have citizens from the District of Columbia here in Tennessee with in state tuition. I think this is D.C. enjoys a particular unique place unique posture in the United States of America as the federal district in our nation's capital. And we should make it a place that's safe in the place we should be proud of. And again, not to create a national embarrassment just because we've got council members that want to set off on some sort of woke agenda. Senator haggerty, you serve on the banking committee that we'll hear from Jay Powell this week. What's the first question you want to ask him? I think the chairman Powell has been dealt a pretty tough set of cards. He's trying to navigate very, very troubling level of inflation. In the midst of just massive spending that's been undertaken in Washington over the past couple of years. I was against this reconciliation process that dumped billions of dollars into the system back in March of 2021. It's only continued. In fact, still unspent money unspent stimulus money that's in the pipeline. And again, it's got inflation baked into the future. So you've got chair of pal trying to navigate the private economy, not throw us into recession, but at the same time try to tame this massive inflation. There's one more challenge. He's also got an energy policy here in America that's driven up the cost of energy that's feeding inflation too. It's beyond his mandate, but I think he's got a tough set of cards. So I'll be talking with the chair about where he sees rates going, what the long term prospects are. And I'm also going to talk to him about the cryptocurrency market as well. If the fed waited too long to start hiking and I think that's your belief center, you can correct me on that. Does that guarantee your session here or is it possible for the fed to still stick the landing knowing there could be some lag time with these rate hikes? Well, Joe, you're exactly right. We talked about this before. I wish that had begun this process much earlier. They kept focused on the notion that this inflation was transitory in some way. And I'll grant that there are supply chain disruptions that did have a transitory component. But it was obvious to any of us that when you undertake the massive amounts of spending that Washington was voting on. And when you wage war on the domestic energy markets and drive those prices up, but this is anything but transitory. This is massively installation area which should have begun to deal with it sooner. That being said, I think every American hopes that your pal and the sad are able to navigate in a way that minimizes the damage and avoids a recession, but I think we're running dangerously close to that situation now, particularly as I talked a lot of folks in the private sector are telling me that they are cutting back on staffing. They're seeing orders decline. It's a challenging environment with a lot of mixed economic information. Yeah, it's a noisy time and the data doesn't always want to back up what people think is happening. What's your thought right now on the process of choosing a new vice chair for the Federal Reserve as lael brainard goes to work for President Biden. Have you heard a name that you'd vote for? You know, I have not heard sufficient specific yet. I've heard the name of a number of names being spun around, but I don't want to get ahead of the process at this point. Let's see where The White House begins to narrow this focus. My understanding is that they are working on it hard. But I certainly hope that they take into account the need for certainty in the marketplace, clearly they need to take into account the fed needs to stick to its mandate and not be any way contorted to an institution that's trying to achieve political goals or policy goals and objectives rather than just maintaining stable markets in certainty here in America. We've heard from the likes of senator Elizabeth Warren, who I know you do not agree with on this, but thinks that the president should pick somebody to be a counter to Jay Powell. As she argues, sending the economy over a cliff is what will happen if he's allowed to continue
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Kevin McCarthy is reportedly making plans to meet with Taiwan's president Tsai ing Wen in McCarthy's home state of California last summer, the new speaker said he would visit Taiwan if he were to take the gavel, but the Financial Times reports McCarthy and Tsai have agreed to meet instead in California next month. That's to avoid a show of force from China similar to the one when then House speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the island. Last August. The head of Ukraine's ground forces has made a new visit to troops defending the besieged eastern city of Bach mote, commander in charge oleksandr sirsi says the intensity of fighting in the city has reached its maximum level with Russia's Wagner mercenary group sending and reinforcements overnight the Russian defense ministry released a video of defense minister Sergei shoigu making a rare visit to troops in the eastern Donetsk region. Here in the U.S., nearly three dozen people were arrested last night in the Atlanta area, police say demonstrators through bricks, large rocks and molotov cocktails at a site where they're building a massive police and fire training center, community organizer Micah her skin says they've planned a week of protests against what they call cop city. We don't need a $90 million police training facility anywhere that people marched in 2020 saying, hey, actually take the resources that we put into policing and instead invest those into community care and housing and mental healthcare and healthcare. That's community organizer Micah her skin did Atlanta police say the demonstrators were trying to create anarchy. The Senate will pass a bill this week to overturn Washington, D.C.'s criminal code overhaul that's what we're hearing from Republican senator Bill hagerty. He says Democrats support the effort and President Biden would sign the bill. Meantime, the head of the D.C. council, which passed the criminal code overhaul, tells The Washington Post. He's asked the Senate to withdraw the revision before the Senate can vote on this resolution. You can hear our full interview with senator haggerty. It's coming up on Bloomberg sound on the show now airs at 1 p.m. Wall Street time on Bloomberg radio. Global news, 24 hours a day. Powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. I'm Nathan Hager. Now let's get a check of the markets with Charlie pellet. Hi. Thank you very much
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Think should happen in that space, which would address the concerns of people. Both as it pertains to crime more broadly and also securing the border. Yeah, so let me give you a couple of things on that. Senator haggerty and I have a piece of legislation, the restoring Law & Order act, which would put more resources to local law enforcement and also would keep these violent criminals locked up. It would require some timely processing of the rape kits. So that is something that is good. Another provision that I think the house will take up very quickly is to take those 87,000 new IRS agents and turn those positions into positions for local law enforcement and for border patrol. Those things would make a big difference. And as a border patrol is you know, they've said for decades that they need three things they need a wall or some kind of physical barrier where they can not have a barrier, they need better technology, and they need more officers and agents. If you give them what they say, they need to do their job, I think you will see the border secured which will have an impact on the crime issue. In our communities, right now, our local law enforcement agencies tell us they're on the front line, fighting these drug cartels, fighting the gangs, dealing with the issues that are so heartbreaking about fentanyl. I think we have time for one more of a Rick Davis. Real quick we've talked about some of the contrasting issues this election cycle senator. But how about China? You recently taken a trip to Taiwan shortly after Nancy Pelosi did, and it seems to be an area that we might be able to as Republicans and Democrats agree to start to push back China's malign influences, especially in the Pacific. Are there things that we can do as a party to work with The White House to actually help in a united front with China? Yes, and coming against the CCP. And their aggressiveness is important not only to Taiwan. But to the other island nations that are there in the indo Pacific. And we need to be very explicit and stepping forward. Making certain that foreign military sales are conducted to Taiwan. So that they have what they need to protect themselves, helping them move to that asymmetric battle posture is something that will be truly a positive. And you're going to see more emphasis on that that should be an area holding China and the Chinese Communist Party to account. It is an area where we should work together to make certain that U.S. corporations are abiding by U.S. law and not abiding and kowtowing to the communist Chinese. Okay, thank you so very much senators really a pleasure to have you with us. That's Republican senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. Great to have you, senator. Thank you for your time, and we're also, of course, have with us Rick Davis of stone court capital and Jeannie Chan xeno of university. They'll be staying with us. So what do you make of that? Do they have specific work that they can pursue? Yeah, look, I mean, there's going to be an agenda answering Genie's question about crime. There's obviously things that are going to try and put in there, whether or not the administration is going to go for that or whether they can even get the votes for it is going to be a big question, especially because under any circumstances is only going to be a margin of two or three. Yeah, exactly. A lot of ambition. But thank you so much to Rick Davis and genius and coming
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Sure. So we, when we pivoted and started talking about raising rates last year, markets have priced in rate increases so that all out all out of the curve of debt maturities, interest rates have already moved up to reflect interest rate increases that we haven't actually made yet to. So what we have right now is a low short term rate, which is our policy rate. So in the increase that we made, we made one decision at the last meeting, which was to raise by 75 basis points, but only to 1.6%. And we thought that was the right thing to do. I'm happy to discuss why. But really, the point is that our policy rate is still at a relatively low level. And in principle, we want to get it up to a more neutral ish level, even more expeditiously than we had been. And that's what was behind our thinking. And that's really so the concern, I don't think this is about the level. It was with the speed. Are we moving too quickly? And I think we were I was persuaded that it was important that we make this move now and not wait and telegraph it and do it 6 months, 6 weeks later, for example, or the meeting after that, it was important to do it now because where we are with inflation is having seen inflation come in above target over and over again and we said we'd move more aggressively if it was appropriate. We thought it was appropriate and we did. So you said you want to get to things more to a neutral level and are we to a neutral level now? No, so we estimate that the longer run neutral level of the federal funds rate to be around two and a half percent and actually we think it will be appropriate to raise rates above a neutral level into a moderately modestly restrictive level because this is very high inflation. And it's hurting everybody and we need to do our job and get inflation back on a path down to 2%. And the way we're going to do that, we think is raise rates. Of course, to that level. Of course, everything depends on the data that we see. We're going to be we're really strongly committed to getting inflation down to 2%, but we're going to be flexible as we see the data coming in. Do you agree with the perspective and then I'll be done, but do you agree with respect to the interest rates go too high too fast it could drive us into a recession? Certainly a possibility. It's not our intended outcome at all, but it's certainly a possibility. And frankly, the events of the last few months around the world have made it more difficult for us to achieve what we want, which is 2% inflation and still a strong labor market. Thank you. Thank you. Senator haggerty of Tennessee is recognized. Thank you, Jeremy Brown. This is Republican senator Bill haggerty of Tennessee begins his questioning the S&P 500 is up 18 points or a half percent the Dow Jones Industrial Average up 89 points that's a gain of three tenths percent. The NASDAQ 100 is higher by 98 points again at 9 tenths of 1%. This is Bloomberg radio. That's exactly what's happening today. And as of March of this year, Federal Reserve had about $330 billion worth of unrealized loss on its balance sheet that numbers probably close to half a trillion right now, given the rise in rates. So my question to you is, do these unrealized losses limit the Federal Reserve's ability to execute its monetary policy objectives and specifically, will the fed sell mortgage backed securities and realize a loss? Or will the fed be cornered into holding these securities until they appreciate? So those kind of unrealized losses have played no role in our decision making, have no effect at all on our ability to conduct monetary policy. They're just not a consideration. And they won't be a consideration when we, when we decide whether the cell and in what quantity MBS, we said we would look at selling MBS when the normalization process for the balance sheet was well underway. And that means not soon we haven't decided exactly what that means. When we make that decision and the reason, by the way, the reason we want to do that is we're committed to having a mostly treasury balance sheet and with these higher rates MBS prepayment speeds have gone way down. And so to achieve the mostly treasury balance sheet, we may well need to sell MBS at some future date. When we turn to that, we're going to be very transparent and give lots of transparency, obviously. But it won't be thinking about the balance sheet. I mean, remember that we've contributed a $1 trillion in profits to the treasury over the course of the last ten years. The reason we don't have a lot of capital is that we give our capital that would give our earnings to the treasury every year. So it's not at all a concern for us. But to be clear, these long dated mortgage bank securities may be sold as a loss, you're not limiting your ability to do that to sell them laws. No. And that could happen. I just think that the downside of quantitative easing is very much illustrated for us when you find yourself in this situation of holding these long dated securities. To turn to another point chairman of palette, I realize there are a number of factors that play a role in those historic inflation that we're experiencing. Supply chain disruptions, regulations that constrain supply. We've got rising inflation expectations and excessive physical spending. But the problem hasn't sprung out of nowhere. And in January of 2021, inflation was at 1.4%. By December, of 2021, it had risen to 7% of 5 fold increase. Now, since the war in Ukraine began in late February, the rate of inflation has risen incrementally, another 1.6% to a current level of 8.6%. So again, from 7% to 8.6%. Given how inflation is escalated over the past 18 months, would you say that the word Ukraine is the primary driver of inflation in America? No, inflation was high before certainly before the war in Ukraine broke out. I'm glad to hear you say that. The Biden administration seems to be intent on deflecting blame and has recently as just this past Sunday, spread the misinformation that Putin's invasion of Ukraine is the biggest single driver of inflation. I'm glad you agree with me that that is not the truth. I'd like to turn to the situation we find ourselves in now tightening. A recent survey of global CEOs showed that more than 60% of executives expect to recession in the next 18 months. Meanwhile, per its most recent forecast, the fed will be tightening monetary policy for the next two and a half years. Thus, the fed could soon find itself in the challenging position of potentially exacerbating an economic downturn in order to address the historic inflation that's been unleashed by the Biden administration. So mister chairman, as you know, the fed has a dual mandate. Stable prices and maximum employment. As we look to the fall, how do you think about balancing this potential tension between the fed's two mandates, particularly of the economic outlook worsens, but inflation remains elevated. So we do have a dual mandate as you point out right now the labor market is extremely tight and I would say unsustainably hot. And there's a mismatch between supply and demand there. As you know, there's a more job openings than there are by a factor of two to one, then there are unemployed people looking for work. On the inflation
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"More damage than it actually was My heart goes out for them in the nation as morning right now as you are and as so many are At the same time I hear what emery said I hate to see this become a political weapon something that's used just like the Dobbs case that probably used to try to divert America's attention away from the real problems that we got right now in terms of inflation what's happening overseas You've got situations like last weekend in Chicago Over 28 people 28 people shot in Chicago That's a city with the greatest huge gun control regulations there And this is happening in America I didn't hear President Biden talking about that As we look at legislative solutions I think my tendency is not to look at abridging Second Amendment rights for law abiding Americans to protect themselves What I'd like to look at is how you harden soft targets like schools When I've come to see you David in your offices It's harder to hit into your office than it is to get into some of these schools We ought to take a hard look at that So that goes to the question I'm asking you and I understand people go immediately to gun control something you've said you're against other people are for Let's put that to the side for one second because I think for a lot of Americans in the wake of things like sandy hook And now what we've seen down in Texas what we saw in Buffalo I think a lot of Americans are saying is that there is simply nothing that can be done We just have to get used to it or is it that we lack the political will to do what needs to be done I don't think we have to get used to it Look there are mental health problems If you look at my home state we've got huge problems We closed mental health facilities because we don't have adequate funding The funding mechanism is broken It actually advantages urban situations and disadvantages rural ones We've got a mental health problem that's really ratcheted up significantly through the pandemic We need to look at that again I'd look at security around schools There are areas where we need to be focused But immediately to turn to let's take away or do away with the Second Amendment I don't think that's a starting point right here Senator as I say I really want to ask you about Asia because the president just got back from there And you are the former U.S. ambassador to Japan said you know a fair amount about it I want to start with a discussion with one of your colleagues yesterday with rob Portman Republican from Ohio We talked to him about it And what he said he thought it was doable to get a real agreement a trade agreement with Japan Here's part of what he had to say I think what's doable is an agreement with Japan Remember during the Trump administration there was phase one of an agreement with Japan to lower some of the barriers in Japan to our exports including on the agriculture side which was a breakthrough I would say we're about one third of the way toward actual free trade agreement with Japan already because of that phase one So senator haggerty what do you say to that Is there a deal to be done with Japan.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"A couple of moving parts today It's not just the funding for Ukraine but of course before President Biden left for his trip to Asia which we'll be talking more about in the days ahead He hosted the leaders of Finland in Sweden at The White House they held an event as you might have heard earlier this hour to support their bids to join NATO which appears to be on the fast track right now So things are happening And Jeannie I'd like to start with the bill on Ukraine This comes after Republicans told the president he was not doing enough that we had to send more more MiGs more missiles more everything And I read the statement here from senator haggerty Bill haggerty of Tennessee Says the size of this bill is the size of my state's annual budget When a much more obvious answer is we should stop the war on American energy right now As the president lost some Republicans when it comes to this war effort There is obviously as Mitch McConnell himself said a growing isolationist trend And I'm not even so sure it's growing It's always been there at least for some time in the Republican side Likewise there is that in the democratic side as well But the reality is and for people like Josh hawley and Rand Paul and Bertha Blackburn and all these people at least 11 in the Senate now on top of the 57 in the house who voted against this bill is what is it they are proposing to do The president is right now heading to Asia for this first big trip If the United States takes no action of substantial proportion to allow Ukraine to defend itself we are going to then be in a challenge at Vis-à-vis Taiwan and China This is very much like Ronald Reagan's idea in the 1980s You support people who want to defend themselves in that case with communism In this case if we don't do this we then will be entering because we have a NATO obligation when Putin enters our NATO allies So Ukraine wants to defend itself let's allow them to do that Does this come down to oversight Rick was this the Rand Paul complaint that we're spending too much without oversight without accountability and potentially adding to inflation with deficit spending which of course senator Tim kaine kind of dismissed earlier this hour when we were talking with him I realized Rand Paul is one thing but are these other senators going to be called out for this or I'm assuming that they wanted to send more money to Ukraine what made them say no Well I don't think you can assume they want to send more money to Ukraine I think that they follow along different fault lines I mean obviously Rand Paul most notably is the anti deficit hawk in the caucus And so he usually complains about any kind of spending and especially deficit spending So that's his grind And a few of them have that point of view But they also fall on the non interventionist line which regardless of spending they don't want to have U.S. activity in a war zone outside the United States And that could be in Syria that could be in Afghanistan that could be anywhere else In this case it just happens to be in the Ukraine And then there are those like Josh hawley who are really nationalists right They don't even want to talk about what's going on outside our borders They just want to focus in on what's happening here and believe that a strong country pursuing his nationalist goals is strong enough to ward off any other kind of threat from around the world Look these are doves at the core of it in a hawk party And yet there are a lot more of them now than there used to be I remember Lindsey Graham specifically told me that he ran against president in 2016 to be a contrast to Rand Paul who was many of us forgotten actually running for president in 2016 Didn't last very long here Does this become an issue For them though on the campaign trail those that will be up for reelection Rick you voted notice and more money to Ukraine It was a Republican principle to send as much as we could to Ukraine They're coming from pretty conservative states Alabama Tennessee Indiana Idaho But they also have incredibly high numbers of military and military veterans in their states And I think ultimately this kind of activity which is just politics right They knew this bill was going to pass and they took a walk on it to try and make a political point And at some point I do think that backfires on you Would they have voted yes if it was a Trump Bill Jeannie I'm not so sure about that You know you look at the polls the morning consult shows the number of Republicans who are saying the U.S. is doing too much in Ukraine has doubled since March So you know I don't know if even Donald Trump himself as much control as he has over this wing of the party could have made that case but of course Donald Trump has gone along with this isolationist trend as it pertains to Ukraine He's been criticizing this spending as well So there are shades of bipartisanship here Rick As far as Finland and Sweden are concerned I'm assuming that is a bipartisan move here Republicans and Democrats want to see the alliance the alliance expanded here in this case and to protect our allies in Europe Tim kaine who of course serves on armed services and foreign relations told us earlier he thinks that will actually have the opposite effect on Vladimir Putin This will not be escalatory but in fact might contain the war to Ukraine is he right Well I hope he's right You know you don't.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"senator haggerty" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Senator Bill haggerty of the banking committee you know why GOP senators deny quorum on banking panel I read on the terminal also of course considering Powell brainard cook Jefferson nobody clears today As Republicans on the committee block votes on the 5 picks not happy about this idea Of Sarah bloom Raskin being vice chair for supervision but as we heard from senator haggerty he wasn't a fan of Lisa cook either So we've got a lot to talk about with the panel here and we're going to sort of go through our two main themes over the course of the hour with some smart minds We also have the matter of Russia and Ukraine to deal with as we discussed with the senator as well So we assembled a panel Bloomberg politics contributor and democratic analyst Genie Chan Xena was here along with John said elitist geopolitical strategist at trilogy advisers with us for the hour here on Bloomberg sound on a consultant to the State Department great to have on this day of days Genie I'll start with you on the fed This is not what we expected Who says Washington is always scripted This is an interesting maneuver by Republicans How does it end though Do we still end up with the same nominees being confirmed You know I don't think we know yet And when we talked yesterday we said this could be tight and it could be tense and I think it went well beyond what we imagined Boycott Yeah a boycott that sort of nobody saw coming but I thought what was fascinating listening to your discussion with the senator was while the Republicans are boycotting over this potential relationship she may have had with this company and we've talked about that The fact is there's no evidence to back up any sort of special treatment that she would have given to them but the reality seems to me and you heard it in that interview you had with him that their real concern is the fact that she may go well beyond the fed's mandate and she was trying to tamp that down during the hearing they said she didn't do it successfully That seems to be the sticking point here They don't want the fed mandate increase the way they think she will so she's making policy from the fed and they're using this to slow things down This is also why she agreed to an expanded ethics agreement John When you hear the chairman sherrod Brown say we will get her confirmed we are not separating her vote from the other fed picks What do you see happening over the next couple of days is this going to be a standoff now or just Raskin really need to provide more information Whether it's a standoff or a showdown between the Congress and The White House it remains to be seen I think genius absolutely right We just don't know how this is going to play out in the days ahead but my sense is that the Republicans have targeted miss Raskin and they are not going to relent on this And I think a large part of this is as the senator mentioned issues about the proper functionality of the confirmation process and the references to 36 questions which she answered I do not recall or I was unaware so there's a sense of evasiveness on the part of Republicans regarding the responses and also obviously the FinTech firm assistance and have it played out But I think there's a larger ideological issue that's playing out here also Joe And that's the issue of her potentially single minded focus on climate policies And the Republicans have been talking about the need for neutral regulators especially if she's going to become the vice chair with significant unilateral power to target Wall Street and to target what she might consider to be disfavored industries So I think it's very great concern that the oil and gas industries of the United States would be unfairly targeted by someone with an ideological bias as opposed to a neutral perspective on proper Wall Street regulation Republicans have certainly said that she's done her best to ease their concerns about it but Jeannie we've seen other nominations obviously go bust before we saw the omarova more recently that was a withdrawal Is that what Republicans are trying to force here If you're not going to break them up you're going to have to change one of these names This is the downside of doing 5 at once Yeah and I think because the Democrats are trying to do 5 at once it suggests that they've known all along this was going to be a problem because the other four by almost every count at least the three seem to get through fairly easily It's cook a little bit less clearly and then certainly Raskin so I think Democrats have known that for a long time And let's not forget if this is a big if If the Republicans rather stayed away and they tried to put Powell's nomination up with Elizabeth Warren he would not get what he needs to go through either So this creates enormous complications for even people who are widely supported You are right Jeannie senator Mark Warner is the one who said this last evening We played sound of him describing the need to do this as a package essentially But John that was because of expected trouble on the floor when it went to the full Senate Not in the committee was leadership here cut off guard and pat toomey pull a fast one on sherrod Brown I don't know exactly what kind of communications the senators have had on this My own senses that they've been hinting at very very strong reluctance to see miss Raskin go through under current conditions as a Republicans are obviously very unhappy with both the prospect of her being on the fed reserve but also the way in which he has handled this confirmation process But let me add one more thing Joe here if I have just a minute Even if she were to be approved out of committee there's no guarantee that the Democrats will hold fast as a block and go for a tie breaker Well that's right The vice president There may be one or two Republicans that may decide to approve her nomination but it's very difficult to see how senator Joe Manchin and again we've come back to Manchin and the fact that Joe Biden is in the teams in terms of popularity and west as an enormous amount of uncertainty here on the floor just like in committee John.
710 WOR
"senator haggerty" Discussed on 710 WOR
"As we continue with Tennessee Senator Haggerty is with us today. What is? How does how do we deal with the fact and why is there zero interest? With all the talk about quitting pro and quos. How come the media in this country? How come Democrats in this country You have one anonymous hearsay whistleblower? Only one fact witness who said Donald Trump asked for nothing. Everybody else was an opinion witness or hear, say witness. They impeach Donald Trump over this, But you got Joe on tape bragging that he leveraged the billion taxpayer dollars to fire Ukrainian prosecutor that was paying millions to his son's company and his son goes on Good Morning America and admits he has no experience in oil, gas energy Ukraine That would be a real quick pro. Quote to me. The media doesn't care. Big tech doesn't care Democrats don't care. I mean, we now living in this Alternate universe where only conservatives go to jail and are held accountable. It feels that way, Sean. The double standard is enormous. You know, on on my election night, I spoke with President Trump. He was certainly congratulating me on my win, and we were talking about what looked like was going to be his win. And he said, You know, Joe Biden wasn't wasn't my opposition, he said. My opposition was the media and big tech. He said. If I'm able to defeat them that that's amazing, given the amount of effort that they put into defeating me, and if we think about the effort that that goes into silence and conservative voices That the the media and big tech or bought in so deeply that it is becoming enormously difficult to address this, and it's incredibly unfair. The double standard you mentioned is something we've got to voice loud and clear. How do we reconcile? The radical Green New Deal Socialism policies of everything's free. How do you reconcile on the Second Amendment? How do you reconcile and have a discussion with people that want to dismantle and defund police departments? How do you have a discussion with people that want to confiscate pretty much everybody's wealth and redistributed and everything is going to be free. Um, and positions such as the one taken by the squad on on Israel and Hamas, etcetera. Um And how do you reconcile any of these differences? Because I find them irreconcilable. I don't even find any pathway to negotiation in any way. Sean. I think you are exactly right. And rather than looking for reconciliation, and we should talk about that in the context of parliamentary procedure in the Senate, But if you talk about that they are irreconcilable. I think it's incumbent on us as Republicans as conservatives Stand up and make our voice clear to point this out in the clearest terms possible, make it uncomfortable for the Democrats like Joe Manchin, like like Christmas Cinema that you know, can't agree. And and and buy into some of this crazy left wing policy. Make this clear to the American public and let them understand that that the policies that are being put forward by the extreme left Are in sync with America and give the more moderate Democrat leaders the support so that they are emboldened to push back. Yeah, Senator. Great to have you back on. As always. We appreciate it. Senator Haggerty, the great state of Tennessee, and we loved by the way, we had a great time in Nashville. We met your governor who was on the show with us and Other great governors from around the country that are actually doing a great job. And everybody I know in Nashville and the rest of Tennessee is loves their state. They love it. They have a passion for it. And they're appreciative of good governance as supposed to say, New York and California, New Jersey So in Michigan. Thank you, sir. Let freedom ring. Thanks, John..
710 WOR
"senator haggerty" Discussed on 710 WOR
"Continue to fight for our rights in Palestine. And in Ferguson, we stand with you in solidarity arise today to recognize the deep trauma and loss of life perpetuated by systems of oppression here in the United States and globally, we must acknowledge and condemned the disproportionate discrimination and treatment that Palestinians face versus others in this region. Palestinians are at best third class citizens in the nation of their birth. The prime minister of Israel has repeatedly stated he has committed to annexing Palestinian Lands. This is a person that definitely needs to be held accountable for war crimes. People need to understand. I'm not asking you to stand against. Um you know the the various people there but the leader there, but it's promoting this kind of violence that is leading to the continuation of killing of, you know, Children. And and Just a continuation of just the pain and the harm depression. Uh, the violence towards Palestinians, That is, that is something that has continued to be enabled and supported by this prime minister. In the United States must acknowledge its role. The injustice and human rights violations of Palestinians. This is not about both sides. This is about an imbalance of power. Instead of condemning play in crimes against humanity and human rights abuses, Many members of Congress have instead falling back on a blanket statement defending Israel's airstrikes against civilians. Under the guise of self defense. Palestinians are being told the same thing as black folks in America. There is no acceptable form of resistance. We are bearing witness to egregious human rights violations. The pain, trauma and terror the Palestinians are facing is not just the result of this week's escalation but the consequence of years of military occupation. Right, Joining us now he's just back from his trip to Israeli went with Senator Ted Cruz has Senator Haggerty of the Great State of Tennessee. Senator. Welcome back. Always great to have you. Um, we do have apologists. For for those for a terrorist organization known as Hamas that fired over 4000 rockets into Israeli cities to kill Israelis. And I'm having a hard time understanding why the leaders of the Democratic Party don't condemn this caucus. Me as well Shown, by the way, it's great to be back with you. Also, um It was is I just listen to what you played. They've got it exactly backwards. It's just as you say, Hamas launched 4000 rockets into southern Israel. Thank goodness the Iron dome was there to counter that, but I went and visited. It in on site demolished homes of Israeli civilians. It's Hamas who shot at and killed Israeli civilians, You know, indiscriminately killed Israeli civilians targeted Israeli civilians. And if you look at what the Israelis did with Iron Dome, they've been very precision manner. Dealt with 90% of the rockets that were shot. But if you look at the Hamas tactics, they fired these rockets indiscriminately in some 20 to 30% Sean 20 to 30% of these rockets that were fired, landed inside Gaza. Destroying their own property and destroying Palestinian people. So this is an incredible misrepresentation by the left here in America, you know, I I just worry. It's sort of like, okay and and I know you asked this question. Senator Cruz asked this question. I'm no Lindsey Graham was also over there. You know why do we even have to make the case that if a terrorist organization whose own charter calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, our number one ally in the Middle East? And 4000 rockets are fired at its people. What would we do? If those rockets were fired at us. I know what I would want our government to do. Well, I I feel exactly the same way and I think all of America does to Sean. That's why I think it was important that that I'd be there. Senator Cruz was there that Senator Graham was there after this 11 day war essentially launched by Hamas. We need to show our ally Israel that we stand with Israel. And if you ask the people in Tennessee, whether they're Democrats, independents and Republicans, we stand with Israel, and I think that's true across the United States of America. This is a very small yet very vocal minority in the Democrat Party that is pushing their entire party's leadership. In the far left direction, and they're going to find themselves with these anti Semitic comments and support for terrorism and a wrong place versus America. It really it really is a frightening scenario. You know, the under reported story of our time is both Russia and China are providing the Iranians with arms. That they're using to ship to Yemen to fight their proxy war in the Middle East. Now, um, that ought to alarm everybody. And my big concern is I see Joe Biden as weak, frail and a cognitive mess, And I think it was pretty obvious that the Chinese felt emboldened to lecture of the United States and Anchorage when they had their summit there. About human rights of all things when we should have been lecturing them about their lying and covering up on covid. And then they should be paying a price for the world for that. Um, then we've got Vladimir Putin saying, Yeah, you want to debate? Let's do it before the weekend. Um yeah, And I hope you feel better. Obviously, he sees Joe Biden is cognitively week, but then you got to look at the compromise. You know these deals with Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Russia, Russian oligarchs, Kazakhstan Oligarchs Chinese Nationals China, the Bank of China and Hunter And I'm really beginning to worry that Joe Biden is completely compromised because of the actions of his son. Based on all these new developments. Well, I think it's a grave concern and the Biden family's financial ties both to China and Russia, that you've so clearly articulated in the past that that's a major concern. But just look at what you know from from the standpoint of Vladimir Putin as he as he looks forward to his meeting coming up with Joe Biden He's getting everything he wants with conceding nothing. The North Stream two pipeline, Let's let it go through. That's that's black. Explain that to make didn't didn't we just stopped? Didn't we just fire And take jobs away high paying career jobs from from people that were working on the Keystone XL pipeline. Correct me if I'm wrong Senator and then he gives a waiver to Vladimir. It makes no sense whatsoever. We finally achieved energy independence under President Trump. And what does what does Biden do? He kills that by killing the Keystone XL pipeline that oil and gas is going to go to China. They're laughing all the way to the bank. In the meantime, while he's hampering and cutting back on America's energy independence, while he's cutting back on our oil producers, he's approving. The Russians effort to control oil flow into Europe and and it's just unbelievable that he would prioritize Russia's interests over America's Yeah, I mean, it's inexplicable to me. It doesn't make any sense. I quick break more with Senator Haggerty, the great state of Tennessee is on the other side than your calls. 809 41 Sean, our number Come on, man..
News Talk 1130 WISN
"senator haggerty" Discussed on News Talk 1130 WISN
"How do we deal with the fact And why is there zero interest? You know, with all the talk about quit and pro and quos? How come the media in this country? How come Democrats in this country You have one anonymous hearsay whistleblower. Only one fact witness who said Donald Trump asked for nothing. Everybody else has an opinion witness or here's a witness. And they impeach Donald Trump over this, But you've got Joe on tape bragging that he leveraged the billion taxpayer dollars to fire Ukrainian prosecutor that was paying millions to his son's company and his son goes on Good Morning America and admits he has no experience in oil, gas energy Ukraine That would be a real quick pro quo to me. The media doesn't care. Big tech doesn't care Democrats don't care. I mean, we now living in this Alternate universe where only conservatives go to jail and are held accountable. It feels that way, Sean. The double standard is enormous. You know, on on my election night, I spoke with President Trump. He was certainly congratulating me on my win, and we were talking about what looked like was going to be his win. And he said, You know, Joe Biden wasn't wasn't my opposition, he said. My opposition was the media and big tech. And he said, if I'm able to defeat them that that's amazing, given the amount of effort that they put into defeating me. And if we think about the effort that goes into silencing conservative voices that the the media and big tech or bought in so deeply that it is becoming enormously difficult to address this, and it's incredibly unfair. The double standard you mentioned is something we've got to voice loud and clear. How do we reconcile? The radical green New Deal. Socialism, policies of everything's free. How do you reconcile on the Second Amendment? How do you reconcile and have a discussion with people that want to dismantle and defund police departments? How do you have a discussion with people that want to confiscate pretty much everybody's wealth and redistributed and everything's going to be free. Um, and positions such as the one taken by the squad on Israel and Hamas, etcetera. Um And how do you reconcile any of these differences? Because I find them irreconcilable. I don't even find any pathway to negotiation in any way. Sean. I think you're exactly right and rather than looking for reconciliation, and we should talk about that in the context of parliamentary procedure in the Senate, But if you talk about that they are irreconcilable. I think it's incumbent on us as Republicans as conservatives. To stand up and make our voice clear to point this out in the clearest terms possible, make it uncomfortable for the Democrats like Joe Manchin, like like Christmas Cinema that you know, can't agree. And buy into some of this crazy left wing policy. Make this clear to the American public and let them understand that that the policies that are being put forward by the extreme left aren't in sync with America. And give the more moderate Democrat leaders the support so that they are emboldened to push back. Yeah, Senator. Great to have you back on. As always. We appreciate it. Senator Haggerty, the great state of Tennessee, and we loved by the way, we had a great time in Nashville. We met your governor who's on the show with US and Other great governors from around the country that are actually doing a great job and everybody I know in Nashville and the rest of Tennessee is loves their state. They love it. They have a passion for it. And they're appreciative of good governance, as opposed to say, New York and California, New Jersey.
WNYC 93.9 FM
"senator haggerty" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Question being making its way through the Senate chamber up to Patrick Ladies. Democrat Jacky Rosen, asking this question. Myths. A question for the House managers. And the car Corrina. In January, 6 The anti Semetic Proud Boys group that President Trump had told to stand by laid siege to the capital alongside other writers. Including one wearing a camp Auschwitz shirt. Is there evidence that President Trump knew or should have known that his tolerance of anti Semitic speech? Hate speech, combined with his own rhetoric could incite the kind of violence we saw on January 6th. One of the impeachment managers will be answering this question from Nevada Senator Jody Rosen. Mr President, Senators Donald Trump has a long history of praising and encouraging violence is he saw he is the spouse hateful rhetoric himself. He has not just tolerated it, but he's encouraged, hateful speech by others. He has refused, as you saw in the September debate that interview to condemn Extremists and white supremacist groups like the proud voice, and he has at every opportunity and courage and cultivated actual violence. By these groups. Yes, he has encouraged actual violence, not just the word fight. He told groups like the proud Boys who had beaten people with baseball bats to stand by. When his supporters in the 50 car caravan tried to drive a bus of Biden campaign workers off the road. He tweeted. A video of that incident would fight music attached to it. And wrote. I love Texas when his supporters sent death threats to the Republican secretary of State wrath INS Burger in Georgia. He responded by calling Mr Raffles Burger and Enemy of the state. After he knew of those death threats and in the morning of the second million Maga march, when it erupted and violence and burned churches. He began that day with the tweet. We have just begun to fight. I want to be clear that Donald Trump is not on trial. For those prior statements, however, that hateful and violent and inappropriate they may be But his statement the president's statement make absolutely clear. Three important points for our case. First President Trump had a pattern and practice of praising and encouraging violence. Never condemning it. It is not a coincidence that those very same people, proud boys organizes of the Trump Caravan supporters and speakers of the second million Maga March. All showed up on January 6 to an event that he had organized with those same individuals who had organized that violent attack. Second, his behavior is different. It's not just that it was a comment by an official to fight for a cause. This is months of cultivating a base of people who were violent. Not potentially violent, but where violent And that the prior conduct will help him cultivate the very group of people that attacked us. It also sells clearly that he had what that he had that group assembled. Inflamed and all the public reports ready to attack. He deliberately encouraged them to engage in violent on January 6. President Trump had spent months calling his supporters to a march. On a specific day at a specific time for a specific purpose. What else were they going to do to stop the certification off the election? On that day, but to stop you. To stop you physically. It was no other way, particularly after his vice president said that he would refuse to do with the president asked The point. Is this that by the time you called the Calvary, Havel re not Calvary, but cavalry of his thousands of supporters on January 6 An event he had invited them, too. He had every reason to know. If they were armed. Violent. And ready to actually fight. He knew who he was calling and the violence they were capable of. And he still gave his marching orders to go to the capital and quote Fight like hell to stop the steel. How else was that going to happen? If they had stayed at the Ellipse. Maybe it would have just been to violently in fight in protest with their words, but to come to the capital. That is why this is different, and that is why he must be convicted and acquitted. Have them. To see impeachment manager delegates. Stacey Plaskett answering that question there. Is president. Bath of Senator Scott of South Carolina and myself would like to submit a question to the desk. Serve. Tennessee shows minute Mm hmm. Question from Senator Bill Haggerty of Tennessee being delivered to Patrick Leahy. Now who's going to look at it and handed to the clerk to read? The question is for counsel for the former president from Senators Haggerty and Scott of South Carolina. Our quote every the question. Given that more than 200 people have been charged for their conduct at the Capitol on January, 6 That our justice system is working toe hold the appropriate persons accountable and that President Trump is no longer in office. Isn't this simply a political show trial? That is designate designed to discredit President Trump and his policies and shame the 74 million Americans who voted for him..
860AM The Answer
"senator haggerty" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"Here, So I'm going back to reality again. Yeah, I wanted to explain it. In best case scenario, it still goes back to states. And most of these states would probably re certify their votes. Um, but, you know, I mean, getting who knows, But you get to that point is impossible. Because the Democrats control the house. Even even the Clintons have consequences. Let me give you an example of where it does right here. So this is the problem, but I see Andy is and I do think that these are valid and their constitutionally done should be done. Hunger is doing this. I think what we have to realize. Is that for it to actually impact the election? In other words, to be outcome, determinative. So many things have to line up that seem improbable. You'd have to have first the house a majority of the house and the majority of the Senate say we're going to do this. We're gonna reject these. Which I just don't see that happening in the house second. Second, then it would go back to the states, and at least three of the significant states would have to say We're not that we're going to change the slate of electors. Yeah, I think we have to be realistic on the vote in the House and the Senate. Obviously, it's not going to pass the house the house as controlled by the Democrats, and they're not going to vote for this commission. And then again, if you would work to have the commission, some form or fashion, and then you would, as you just said, Go back to the states. I don't think it's very likely that the states are going to change the slates of electors that already have been sent to Washington and that will be opening countered by the president of the Senate. I just don't see that happening, as you say. So many things have to line up and it's so improbable that with the state of the politics being what it is in the hat in the house that is going to happen there. And I don't think that the states are going to change enough of their electoral votes that they have certified to make a difference. Tweeted out earlier today that the vice president Um, has the power to reject fraudulently chosen electors. Now the There's a lot of debate on that. Constitutionally. The question really is, is it and go back the fan on this isn't a question of Rejecting or is it a question of questioning? Thus could he say, I'm going to go back to this state's the six states and Sarah? I want to re certification. Basically, Yeah, well, that's why I think the idea put forward by Senator Cruz has the most traction because that's what he's saying. That's what Senator Cruz and these other senators, like. Senator Haggerty are going to object that can Mike Pence do that without the vote of the House and Senate. My reading of the Constitution in the Electoral Count Act is that he cannot. I mean, the reading says that he opens the certificates, hands them to the counting tellers. And then the senator's object. Now look, there's disagreement. J. My reading of it is that he cannot. Yeah, there is By the way, there's lawyers. I know that there's Dean's of law schools that are arguing this right now, so it's not like that I just where they're getting in the language. The language is not that vague. It's pretty kind of like the chief justice roll in the impeachment. It Z only about rather not. To accept the questions, right, you know, and like, it's a question, right? The decorum write that kind of thing. And then at the end, he counts the votes. Well, I think there's some of these law professors are making the argument. I think layers tried may have made it in 2000 and three That there's the vice president has.