Posi commatatus, you know, you know
those old western television shows where
it said we got to form a posi to to go
after the bad.
>> That's posi commatatus. It's it's an old
kind of common law back in the middle
ages. It's power of the county. It's
getting the county together to go after
bad guys. That's where the term posi
comes from. It's posi commatatus.
Um so he's trying to invoke this kind
of, you know, lawlessness. We got to get
a posi together to go after lawlessness.
In DC, the president has more power to
do so because ultimately the president
is the head of the National Guard in the
District of Columbia.
>> When he wants to go into the states like
Chicago, no, the governor is the head of
the National Guard. And the way that
normally works, except for extraordinary
circumstances, is the governor has to
request like there's a big flood or
something and you need national help to
deal with it. Well, then the governor
will make the request or or whatnot. So
this is the legal basis he's trying to
go on. And you got to note, I mean, most
of these cities he's going after, crime
rates are falling. But more importantly,
the Republican controlled major cities,
he's not talking about putting the
National Guard in with them. It's only
the Democratic controlled cities that
he's doing, which really makes this as
just a political move and a political
stunt and kind of underscores the
ugliness of it, not the necessity to
fight crime.
The president has uh used federal title
32 orders uh to get us this far because
this is in Washington. And to your
point, he's got a little more leeway
here in the federal city with armed
National Guard troops. Do the guns make
a difference, Robert, or that's just a
development that the Secretary of
Defense decided to move on?
>> I think it's just more for show than
anything else. It's this continual image
that we're tough. Now what the guns do
is you now have people who are not
trained in police work. These these
people these men and women of national
guards who have done great service for
this country in in foreign wars in Iraq
and Iran, etc. Um Iraq rather. Um that's
what they're trained to do. Now they
have guns in a situation where they're
not trained. Police get a great deal of
training of when they can pull their
firearms and when they cannot. And
that's because the police serve us the
citizens. Well, now you have people that
are trained in a totally different way
of using their firearms walking around a
city street with firearms. Um, frankly,
when Donald Trump says he wants to clean
up Washington DC, I think that's a
really bad look for Washington DC street
because generally speaking, in a
democracy, we don't want armed troops
all over the place. It's a bad look for
democracy and the chance for something
happening um is just much greater when
you have a bunch of guns with people not
trained to use them in this context.
They are trained to use their firearms
but not in this context.
>> We're showing people that view on
Bloomberg TV and on YouTube right now.
Some images taken uh night before last
when these troops were first deployed
with uh rifles and sidearms. Governor JB
Pritsker is waiting for something to
happen in Chicago. He's telling Trump
not to come, not to deploy the troops
there. Robert, he made a post on Twitter
to Donald Trump and his administration.
If you hurt my people, and remember,
there are of course massive political
overtones here for what could be a
future presidential candidate. Nothing
will stop me, not time or political
circumstance, from making sure you face
justice under our constitutional rule of
law. a political bluster maybe, but does
the governor have any power to keep the
troops out of his city?
>> Well, it's going to be a power to go to
courts. Um, you could have a if you get
to the situation where people are having
this militia versus that militia. Well,
the last time that really happened was
the American Civil War, and I don't
think we exactly want to go back to
that. Uh, remember the firing on Fort
Sumpter in April 1861 was the South
Carolina National Guard essentially that
started the Civil War. So that's kind of
what he's invoking. Look, a president
can invoke the National Guard for a
national interest um and to protect a
federal building. The best example of
that was during the civil rights
movement in Little Rock, Arkansas, where
President Eisenhower nationalized the
National Guard to affect the national
interest of civil right, which was
directly under the dictates of the 13th
amendment, the 14th amendment, and
ultimately the 15th amendment, but
mostly the 14th amendment. So there was
a direct federal interest and a changing
value in this country about the
importance of fairness and education and
racial equality. That's where we're
talking about the National Guard coming
in. And Donald Trump just saying, "Oh,
I'm going to fight crime." Well,
fighting crime on American streets
belongs to mayors and governors who are
crying for maybe federal help to have
more police officers to hire. That's why
you get crime,
>> more programs, not sending in the
National Guard, which is all a show, so
the Secretary of Defense can play with a
gun.
>> That's where we are.
>> Been hearing those calls from governors
and mayors as well. Robert, I have to
ask, I never thought I would be asking
you about the Federal Reserve, but hey,
you're on Bloomberg, so come on in. The
water is warm. The president wants to
fire a Federal Reserve governor. No one
has tried this uh from the Oval Office
before. It's unclear if he has the
grounds. She's not been charged with
anything. What do you make of this salvo
that came from the White House last
night?
>> Well, Joe, okay, I'm going to risk being
a little too constitutionally geeky
here, so I'll apologize right now.
>> Okay, let's do it.
>> What this really is about is your
concept of the presidency of the United
States. Donald Trump and his people talk
about a strong unitary executive. Okay.
The Constitution gives all executive
power to the president. the president to
article one starts with the executive
power of the United States will be
vested in the president of the United
States but it's always been known to be
what's called a weak unitary so there
are checks and balances on the president
he wants somebody to be a commerce
secretary or you know secretary of state
they got to go get approved by the by
the United States Senate which is the
legislative branch right
>> well okay so they created the Federal
Reserve Board as an independent agency
and there's been several independent
agencies because presidents have a great
interest in making the economy look good
while they're president, but they don't
care when the other guy has to make the
economy look good, who follows him,
right? Which can be really terrible for
the economy. I mean, Donald Trump wants
to make interest rates as low as
possible, which might be great to make
him look good, but that could be
terrible and could cause inflation to
increase and cause ultimately employment
to go down. So, the Fed was created to
be independent of that. And the
constitutional question is, is Donald
Trump's strong executive theory enough
to give him that kind of control over
the independent Federal Reserve? Now,
economists are horrified at that idea
because they want that decision to be
independent. And I I think the real
question for Republicans who want to go
after Cook just as an excuse. I think
the case looks pretty protectual against
her. But the real question is, you know,
if Barack Obama was doing this, would
the Republicans like it? Because, you
know, you want to give the president all
this power. Well, Republicans aren't
going to always be in power. At least I
I hope not. And I hope Democrats aren't
always in power because we have a better
system when there's balance, right?
Well, you really want to brought all
these people yelling about Donald Trump
should have all this power. They were
the same ones saying that somehow Barack
Obama was having an imperial presidency
because he issued a executive order
related to DACA kids.
So remember, every constitutional
argument, you got to look at sauce for
the goose. Sauce for the goose is sauce
for the gander. And you want to argue
your position in the Supreme Court.
Well, just think if there's going to be
another president there someday who you
don't like so much. Do you really want
him to have that power? Or do you want
what the framers intended, which is a
constitutional system of checks and
balances with a weak unitary executive,
not a strong one. So that's the
underlying geek.
>> Fascinating.
Leave it to Robert Mcwarter to be our
best guest on the Federal Reserve today.
How did I know this was going to happen?
Um,
>> so Robert, she's fighting back. She's
got Abby Lel. They're going to they're
going to file suit. Does this go to the
Supreme Court?
>> Oh, very well could be. And here's the
issue in the Supreme Court. You know,
the Supreme Court has been very, this
Supreme Court over the objections of,
for instance, Justice Kagan, soayor, and
justice uh Jackson have been very
accommodating to the president taking
over these independent boards. They were
created to be independent. Well, in the
opinions, the conservative justice says,
"Well, this wouldn't apply to the
threat." And Justice Kagan in one of her
descent said, "Well, why doesn't your
reasoning apply to the threat?" You
know, this is coming down if the Supreme
Court underscores upholds the
independence of the federal board, which
I believe they should. Well, then it
begs the question, gee, Supreme Court
justices, you like the Fed board to be
independent because this helps the
structure of our economy and the way
business works. But when it's consumer
protection board, you don't like it.
Maybe it's just because you don't like
the Consumer Protection Board and you
can say Donald Trump can get rid of
these people. But we want to protect the
threat from Donald Trump, even Donald
Trump. It makes these conservative
justices on the court look pretty bad.
But they should uphold the independence
of this because the world needs an
independent central bank for the
greatest economy in the world, which
still is the United States. And that's
why people invest their dollars with
their foreign money in US dollars, which
strengthens our economy because we have
a independent federal board. And 95% of
all economists will tell you exactly
what I just said.
>> Robert, the president is talking to his
cabinet as you and I are having this
conversation. And producer James is
keeping me tabbed uh keeping me posted
uh on on what's happening in that room.
He just suggested the death penalty.
We're doing this in real time, so just
walk through this with me here. Uh
suggesting the death penalty for
murderers in DC. Here's the quote. If
somebody kills somebody in the capital,
we're going to be seeking the death
penalty and that's a very strong
preventative and everyone that's heard
of it agrees with it. Is is this
something he could do?
>> Uh dubious. He would have to have an act
of Congress. And I think the best
response to that is well, what about the
um what happened on January 6 with the
with his supporters who killed Capitol
police officers? Maybe they should get
the death penalty now. Um, you know,
again, let's go with sauce for the
goose. You want to start doing that. The
death penalty, if you look at it, um, in
terms of its efficacy, it doesn't reduce
crime. Um, there are too many human
behavior connected with crime is far too
complicated. People don't usually make
that calculus when they're in the middle
of a situation where death results or
commit the crime of homicide. Um I have
represented many people accused with
homicide and I can tell you none of them
all thought that clearly at the time
they were committing that act.
>> So this is another get tough thing
interesting
>> and what he's talking about with
juveniles and any cash bail are just
things that are going to hurt people and
not make anybody any safer in the long
run.
>> All right, before you go, Robert Mcwer,
you saw they've been setting up
checkpoints here in Washington. uh ICE,
uh it could be another federal agency,
Department of Homeland Security, DEA. In
some cases, we're seeing uh officers
identified. Tell our listeners and
viewers what they should do if they run
into one of these checkpoints in the
>> Well, you got a couple choices. What you
have a right to do is say, "I don't want
to talk to you. I don't have to talk to
you. I can tell you my name." I, you
know, if they ask, "What's your name?"
You could, you're pretty much required
to say that. But you don't have to give
any of the statements. Remember, we have
the fifth amendment to the constitution
which says you not be compelled to
incriminate yourself in any way. So you
can say go pound sand. The trouble with
that of course is if you just want to
get to the grocery store, you might not
want to spend the next three hours
messing around with some checkpoint. Um
so you have the right to assert your
rights, but there's going to be
consequences if you do so. Ultimately,
you'll you'll not suffer it, but they
can detain you and that that that could
really make your day a mess, right? Um,
so that's where we are. But you got to
say something. Why are these DEA agents
running around in Washington DC when you
have a fentanyl crisis in Arizona and
DEA agents are being taken away from
protecting the America from the flow of
fentanyl across the Arizona Mexico
border.
>> It's a it's a total reworking of
priorities simply because he wants to
try to get his deportation numbers up.
And frankly, Biden's numbers are still
beating him.
>> Yeah, it's a very real question. Do I
have to roll my window down if I get
stopped at a checkpoint?
>> Serious.
>> What the law says is your information
about your name is not constitutionally
protected.
>> Do you have to roll your window down?
It's probably a good idea because they
might do nasty things to you if you
don't.
>> Okay.
>> Um, you know, there's constitutional
rights and then there's if you really
want to, you know, go ahead and get eggs
at milk at the grocery store, right? But
that being said, you have no you have no
constitutional obligation to incriminate
yourself in a way. And you don't need to
answer that question. Are you a citizen?
But of course, like I said, if you want
to get to the grocery store, a lot of
people just say, "Yeah, I'm a citizen. I