tv Bloomberg Markets Balance of Power Bloomberg July 23, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm EDT
david: welcome to balance of power politics beats business. shaun donovan in washington on a new way to look at trade and tolerance from london. sean, welcome. you have a new piece out, taking a different look at trade. on the one hand with goods and foreign investment on the other. tell us what is different. we talk about a lot when we talk about trade. to refund the trade wars that we have seen launched here by the u.s. and will we talk about when we talk about the trade wars is often goods. we're talking about a slowdown in global trade in goods, driven in part by the trade war than the imf today when it did its update on the physical economy. the reality is also an we think about globalization. globalization increasingly is not about physical goods. it is about things like services
we sell or receive. it is about the transfer of data. it is about royalty payments, licensing deals we have dealt with. the world is much more global than we think. and globalization is a kind of and mucher force softer force. david: to what extent does the trump administration embrace what you are talking about? is that why they are embracing intellectual property? a they really pursuing what you are suggesting? in one sense, they are. intellectual property is a huge part of where the 21st century economy let's. but at the same time, we have a huge this is from this administration in washington on manufactured goods and on the manufacturing center -- sector, bases tariffs away to boost manufacturing when the fact is
there are more disruptive forces in the world economy and the world of manufacturing. and the simple fact that i can listen to whatever i want on my whatever music i want on my iphone. i do not have to go out and buy a cd. i do not have to buy anything physical to get all my summer beats music on our phone. much. so let's go over to london. of the a new leader conservative party, about to be a new prime minister. queen,e has been to the what do they expect to hear? >> that is the question. his victory speech was pretty muted. they were hints of being conciliatory and phlegmatic but it was not the speech of unity that perhaps one might expect. it was brief as well. mps he has been talking to
so this is a closed door meeting . the mps grabbed around and there , and of course there are also those already resigning because they do not want to work for boris johnson. it is under threat. people you might have heard of -- he is probably going to resign and lead the block of tory mps who are going to fight against the no deal brexit. policy what we have in the , we structured the way that it torches us. people trade when we look out for any kind of flexibility, of compromise. we are going to start to hear
winky appointments. who is leading the brexit negotiations? we are going to be looking at any signs of wiggle room. his track record is relationship with steadfast truth. is not a different other leaders perhaps. let's see how the campaign rhetoric contrasts with borges -- boris johnson is premised or. the eu side, though -- they are trying to figure out what or stocks and is going to mean. sayingeague has been they do not want to reward boris johnson for starting brexit in the first place, making promises. but it was going to be in no next game. read.ey find him hard to so much.ank you
let's get a check on the market spirit we turn to abigail doolittle. abigail: we have been looking at gains earlier. take a look at the dow and the s&p 500. the nasdaq has been higher earlier but also flipping between small gains and losses. not a lot of conviction despite the fact we have strong earnings reports rolling in and that bipartisan debt. we have more strength as one pretense of 1%. atcloseted to percent came 35% and this is pushing the sox to very high evaluation levels. go to the bloomberg. take a look at and adjusting try. this is the bloomberg best forward pe. you see coming out of the financial crisis that has been doing well eight times, and then in 2013 reaching levels at 17 times capped by this level now at its highest level in 10 years
despite the fact that the last all-time high was back in april, that tells you the earnings are string -- shrinking. we're going to see whether where -- whether or not we can get a better picture. we will have more information after the bell. texas instruments reports tonight. intel reports on thursday. let's take a look at the shares trading on the day. investors are looking for earnings and revenue to fall. those shares down slightly. investigators -- investors do not see -- do see intel up there. they boosted the outlook on mikeyarrow space and martin died by 1%. there was some thinking they would of course, thinking funding would be relief but now we see very small moves. there was more military spending on the way.
david: this is balance of power. we return to mark crumpton for first world news. mark: president trump a great to make timely decisions on whether tech companies can make sales to huawei. larry kudlow says lebanese are only seeking waivers to sell when there are no national that couldplications move the u.s. and china closer to face-to-face talks on trade. increasedrr says
encryption on data in messaging apps is putting security at risk. speaking at a security conference, the attorney general said law enforcement is hitting roadblocks when it tries to access information. the justice department is poking -- pushing tech companies with better access to encrypted data during criminal investigations. boris johnson will be the next prime minister of great britain. the former foreign secretary defeated jeremy hunt in a ballot of the conservative party's 100 80,000 members. johnson will take over a country in crisis and a government on the link of breaking apart. he will have 100 days to negotiate a deal with the eu before the u.k. is due to leave. global health officials say the ebola emergency in the congo morebuy or three times money than is being provided. the world health organization have to make $324 million to fund its response and
preparedness in the region of the next six months. that is on top of the $114 million contributed since august. the latest outbreak has killed more than 6000 people. global news 24 hours a day, on-air at tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts, in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton, this is bloomberg. thanks. congress and the president have reached a bipartisan deal to extend the debt ceiling for two years and modify the spending cap. here to take us through the numbers, we welcome lanhee chen at the hoover institution and former policy director for the romney residential campaign in washington today. welcome back. the good news is we are not going to buckle under the debt ceiling. we are paying a price because we will run up bigger deficits. is that a problem? >> it is a major problem.
the reality is this deal does nothing to constrain spending. we are going to increase spending by some estimates of up to $300 billion over the next two years and adds $1 trillion, a little more to the deficit over the next 10 years. this is a significant problem if you think about the long-term trajectory. the discretionary spending side which is what this deal affects is less important than the entitlement spending side where we face fiscal prices -- crisis. david: there was a sensible savings here, will some of that seemed to be an accounting issue. are they trying to get their arms around? there is no political appetite. if you look at the president, he has not expressed a religious to dealing with medicare or social security and in congress coming you do not see a lot of leadership either. the $77 billion you refer to is
more of an accounting gimmick than an actual spending cuts. some might look at it as a spending reduction. no, there is not real effort to engage in systemic reform. that is a challenge some members of congress will take up sin because we have not seen leadership on it so four. -- so far. david: is there a silver lining in that this actually ends up being fiscal stimulus? , particularlyhart in defense spending. they really have been taking it up. that does seem like the economy? lanhee: if we are spending on military construction, if we are spending on new boats and planes , if we are spending on military pay, that might be another. one thing this administration has done well prioritizing raising the defense levels after the obama years where there is
convince spending. you can look to that and say they are increasing the debt ceiling. they are removing all good things. at what cost is the ultimate question. david: we have an election coming up in 2020. quite a few people would like to be in the oval office. anyone being responsible when they talk about the economy and the deficit? democratic on the side. all you hear is spending programs, whether in health care , student loan forgiveness or housing. all of the proposals seem to moneyor my money -- more and spending. fundamentally, we are not seeing a level of responsibility. on the republican side, get tont trump said if i a second term, i will engage in spending restraint. it is tempting to spend now and worry about consequences later.
hopefully the president does hold to that promise. to thei have listened president. he is willing to constrain spending in one specific area. which is domestic programs. is that sensible? tohee: it is not sensible take the approach only discretionary spending is what matters. that is actually small pieces of it. control dealst with the fiscal crisis several years ago, they actually did a very good job of that. the issue going forward is more about addressing our mandatory spending. social security and medicare in particular are two programs where demographic challenges are going to leave spending over the next 10 years. the president is serious about fiscal responsibility. david: you were policy director for mitt romney's campaign in
2012. you have been inside of this. there is no percentage in getting votes by saying we are going to cut entitlements. how do you address that issue when you're trying to get elected? lanhee: this is a challenge. fiscal responsibility has become less, not more popular with electorates. important for candidates to campaign responsibly. people take liberties during the campaign and on the campaign trail they want to be popular. it is also important to say look, in the long run what are we doing for our kids and grandkids. what does spending look like and what does that result in? i think those are important to start on the campaign trail. david: go back to the democrats. are some being more responsible and some less? when you look at medicare for all, how much would that cost? youee: it depends on who ask but there are estimates that we are looking at tens of trillions of dollars in
additional federal spending in the next decade by enacting a full medicare for all program. i do not think it is a serious proposal. i think it is a political talking point but it could be serious of -- if some like -- might say, how about medicare for more? how about a public option when we debated obamacare in 2010? i expect that will be the fallback position. more fiscallylot responsible but medicare for all is entirely ludicrous when you think about the impact on federal spending. time, is the same fiscal responsibility going to be on the agenda in 2020? i don't render it being on the agenda in 2018 or 2016. lanhee: i think the political cycle is one where focus on issues of fiscal responsibility will not be on the agenda. this is why candidates run. they run to express a point of view and an agenda on things
they want to get done. i would hope that you see some of the more moderate democrats, people like steve bullock, john hickenlooper, bennett that senator from colorado. these are the more moderate candidates. maybe they will say we cannot be irresponsible and there still has to be some check on what we are spending. david: let's talk a bit about monetary policy. the dollar, because we have a president who is lobbying for further rate cuts as a candidate for the fed who is now lobbying for the fed to cut it. u.s. treasury might likely intervene to weaken the dollar. does that make sense? is that possible? lanhee: it is concerning in the sense that we have always valued to the independence of the federal reserve and their policymaking was driven by economic data and the experience and expertise of a pointy's to thatbody -- appointees to body, not political motivations.
the concern is mixing the politics with what should be policy data-driven decisions. it is concerning that you see this intervention in the political process. i would hope we can the way from that in the coming years. stats of aknow the lot of the candidates. as you look around and look at the policy directors, who has got the best staff? lanhee: elizabeth warren, whether you agree with her or not, policy has been a focus. they have a focus on developing policy on using her senate record and what she has done with it to build on those things. she has done a good job of building the team. kamala harris has good folks working on policy. hiredt -- pete buttigieg someone well regarded. the candidates are focusing on policy and that is great but the conversation. let's hope quarters follow the lead and ask tough questions. david: let's hope. thank you so much to lonnie chen.
david: president trump is speaking now to the turning point usa's teen action summit. let's listen in to what he has to say. >> we will be naming them if you do not mind because we want to get the word out. we have to get the word out. conservatives, we are grateful for the heritage of being an american. it is important to us. we know america is the most just and virtuous republic conceived. we fight for other countries. i was with other countries to weeks ago -- two weeks ago.
we had the g20 and -- who do you fight for? just our country. we fight for all these countries. it costs us a fortune. some of the countries are wealthy. got all of them and said, you have to now pay for the military. we are fighting for countries that are so wealthy, some have nothing the cash. nobody ever asks them, why aren't you reimbursing us for the costs? we now ask those questions. we get little oil from the streets -- straits now. u.s. tankers. they are all from china, japan. japan gets 25%. other countries get a lot. ask you a stupid
question. we hardly use it. we get 10% only because we feel an obligation. exporter.an we are an exporter now. [applause] for many the ones that decades, we are the ones that released did. we never get reimbursed. we police up for these countries . i said a while ago, why are we policing for china? for japan, very rich. we're policing for countries, some of whom we are friendly with, like saudi arabia. but why are we doing it? why do we have our ships there and we are putting our ships insight? for religious people, they ally -- like a lot. -- can see it playing on the laying on the beautiful bed of
water. they said we never shot down a drone. captured 17 have americans. i call of the cia. totally false. but they make up stories. for religious people, they lie a lot. we know the story of america. -- america is the story of good defeating evil. we protect so many people and in some cases -- david: we have been listening to president trump give remarks to summit ineen washington. now wilbur ross. he is the secretary of commerce. thank you for joining us today. there was a meeting at the white house we heard about with tech leaders yesterday and the tech leaders said we would like to
learn as quickly as possible on the applications for exemptions with exception to selling to huawei. how fast can you will on those exemptions? ross: let the semi conductor said was theyy understand the process we are following. they agree with the process and they voice no complaint about it. ,hey know that in some cases the applications have just been filed. few of them said they have not even gotten their applications in. there are 50 some odd applications from around 35 companies that have been received and within the next couple weeks, we expect to have berdych's. david: on some of these, within the next two weeks? ross: within the next few weeks. david: is this 4-6? there is no point
specifying particular numbers. we are processing them as quickly as we can. some of the potential applications, they have not even filed yet. the notion they can set an exact date by which we will come to a conclusion on all the applications is relevant. alsorce leads its but it involves the department of state, the department of defense and the department of energy. this is not a simple thing but in general, the principal we will be following, which is endorsed by the participants in yesterday's meeting is things that are not sensitive from a national security point of view. we are looking favorably upon those that are sensitive.
that we have to be very careful about them. david: that is on the subject of waivers potentially. for some sales to huawei, what of the possibilities of further sanctions? there was a report that i found odd. with north korea . might that give rise to further sanctions? ross: we are continuing to watch carefully everything about huawei, including the information in that article yesterday. beyond that, we cannot really comment pending the investigation. david: fitness into the larger u.s. china trade negotiation or lack thereof. but not one trains the chinese side.
we move forward to a time when we can have more robust discussions with china as we get past huawei, we get past agricultural issues. is not necessarily a part of the trade negotiations. wasei in its general sense an enforcement action and taken purposes.al security trade talks remain with vale's spin, namely doing away with artificial values to market having respect for intellectual property rights. doing away with forest technology transfers, the whole kind of plea of activities with which we very to know you and making sure there is a proper enforcement mechanism so we can
get what we think we bargained for. david: there is a power-play of these issues and in talking to -- occasions, it is very sad. president trump has said they should have committed to buy more agricultural products. from what you know, is china moving toward at least allowing that gate to open so we can get to that panoply? sec. ross: i'm not aware the gate has opened to any significant degree. david: we hear secretary mnuchin and ambassador lighthizer may be going to china. what is the next step in negotiations sec. ross:? the next step -- sec. ross: the next step would be for our team to go to china. the regiment we have always had is one meeting in washington, the next meeting in china. the last meeting was in washington. logically, the next meeting should be in china.
david: you've been there since the beginning of the administration. you have said you are staying. you expect you will get a resolution on that panoply of issues before you depart? all, i'm notrst of contemplating any departure so there is no conjunction between that kind of silly rumor and the trade talks. it does give a sense of how long you think it might take? sec. ross: it is impossible to judge how long it will take when the president's objective is to get a proper deal or go ahead with the tariffs. whether itmportant be done a week from tuesday or a month or two months. it is important if we make a deal, it is a proper deal that is a good deal. that is his overriding objective.
it is much more important than exact timing. david: we are speaking with commerce secretary wilbur ross in washington. let's turn to the deal that was announced by president trump yesterday. a bipartisan deal with congress to extend the debt ceiling for two years and to suspend some of the spending caps. the thing i'm interested in, as commerce secretary, is this a fiscal stimulus, particularly on the military side, because it will be more spending. sec. ross: what is important is making that deal depoliticized, at least for the moment. that is good. too ceiling and budgets are important to be thrust into the immediacy of the presidential campaign and the congressional elections next year. people on both sides were very wise to take that off the table. god knows there are enough other
things on which we disagree. that should be put to the side. it has been put to the side. i think that is very constructive because it eliminates some of the uncertainties that businesses otherwise might have been confronted with. i think it is positive for the economy that those decisions were made. david: one of your responsibilities is the census. we know the litigation and the citizenship question. president trump said do not put it in the census, we will use the other agencies to track how many citizens we have in the country. is that something you are involved in? is that under your responsibility to marshal all the agents of u.s. government? sec. ross: the president's executive order designated that commerce, in the form of the director of the census, would share the interagency corporation movement. we are making a lot of progress
already. the problem of data sharing within the government historically has been that some of the parts of government were not so eager to share the data. now with the executive order, that will be solved and then we can use that data in conjunction with the information that we get in the census. we are much better use of administrative records. that is a direction i was pushing for anyway. as you recall from earlier statements, using more administrative records, i think, is a very good thing. the census is a very expensive activity, partly because they have not used so much administrative records as they could. in addition, we are spending $500 million on marketing, in a variety of languages, in a variety of ethnic media.
that is up from $375 million in the 2020 census. we are making a real effort to get is complete and accurate a census as we can. david: is also faster than going through the census process? do you have an estimate about when you will have numbers for the president? sec. ross: we have to have the numbers to him during calendar year 2020. that will occur. in terms of speeding it up, what is going to be helpful, we think, is we have added internet as a response medium. not instead of the historic ones of paper and telephone, but in addition. in the test we made in providence, a majority of the responses did, in over internet. for many people, that is a more convenient way to do it.
we're not requiring internet response. we are simply adding it. we are also adding much more rigorous call centers and outbound calling in order to encourage people to cooperate. finally, we have an extremely robust, once more robust than in 2010, process for enlisting trusted community organizations to be our partners in encouraging people to participate in the census and we have gotten for truly all states to form jointly with us complete committees. that is far up from the efforts that were made in 2010. a lotroud we have taken of measures to make the census the most accurate and complete we can. david: very helpful and very informative. thank you to wilbur ross,
david: breaking news. mark esper has been confirmed as president trump's first pentagon chief since december. the senate confirmed him in a vote of 90-8. boris johnson is in line to be the new british prime minister committed to taking his country out of the european union and angela merkel is struggling to maintain her dominance in germany, leaving emmanuel macron as a possible successor to the leadership role in your.
-- in europe. you know france so well, having served their. as you look at europe, what are the prospects that emmanuel macron, still a relatively young man and young on the international stage, can step into the shoes? >> i think he could. when he was first elected, the concept initially was he would lead but with angela merkel by his side. clearly that is not happening in germany. france, weer i left had the vote on brexit. that was a change. i think emmanuel macron was poised to lead when he first one. as everybody knows, the yellow jackets in france did create a problem. they still exist. they are waning.
that does not mean the policy issues they care about argonne. -- our gone -- are gone. that is something he will have to deal with in france and good in the future stop some of his reform agenda. i do not know if stop, but he may not be as aggressive with his reform agenda as we had thought. david: you refer to the yellow vests and we have a populist movement in germany and italy and you can argue brexit as well. are they similar? do they have a common denominator or are each different in their own way because of their nationalities? gov. patrick: they are dipped -- jane: there are different and even that within the yellow vests movement itself, people want all different things, there was a segment of the yellow vest that wanted higher speed limits. it was very diverse. there was not much leadership,
and it did not ever coalesce around one idea. having said that. i think there is a thread through all of them and it is the reaction, particularly in rural areas to lack of economic growth over this last decade. and to inequality. to thelet's turn back united states and the 2020 election. you have heard there would be an election? jane: i did. [laughter] david: i remember you talking about 2018. the democrats had a quite good midterm election. some women were elected. jane: fantastic women. david: moderates did pretty well for the democrats. what about some of the women you worked with? what do they need in 2020 to hold onto those seats? a lot of those women said we would get something done. it is hard to get anything done in this washington. jane: one thing on the midterms, i think the misconception that is out there is the democratic party went left. to your point, the democratic
party won the midterms mainly in the suburbs. they wanted in the suburbs and mainly with the centrist candidate. interesting, as you talk to them, and i talked to them quite a bit during this campaign, even though new jersey, michigan, virginia, the issues were similar. people wanted to get something done and at the top of the list in terms of getting something done was health care. now we have the first democratic debate. in 2018 it was president going to take weight or health care. and we had the first immigrant debate and it is going to take away your private health insurance. it is surprising the democrats would going that direction because that does not sound reassuring. was: i was -- jane: i reading a poll yesterday and if you talk about medicare for all
and making it voluntary, which is if you want to be in it, the numbers are higher. , youu say it is mandatory lose your private insurance, the numbers plummet. i do not think, looking at the district's where the democrats , i think people are asking what those candidates ran on. they will make sure people that have a child should stick -- that they do not lose their home page for their children's health and prescriptions. that if they have a parent to is get the parent can prescriptions and i have to pay $10,000 a day. a lot of the women that ran, and men have personal health stories. she saide stories -- there is nothing worse than trying to save a parent and at the same time wondering how you will pay for it and go bankrupt.
the american people said that loud and clear. prescription drugs, no pre-existing conditions, health care that works for all. i do not think they went as far as medicare for all. if you look at the states you talked about, michigan for example, you know this well, the unions have fantastic insurance. why would anybody want to give that up? thing a uawast member wants to do is give up their private insurance. most people are not interested in that. jane: i do not think so. david: many thanks to jane hartley, former u.s. ambassador to france. this is bloomberg. ♪
he is now managing director at bain capital and cochair of serving american together with other leaders such as stanley mcchrystal and bob gates. we welcome governor patrick to bloomberg. gov. patrick: good to be with you. david: tell me what you're up to with this server america together notion. what is it? gov. patrick: it is an initiative general mcchrystal and others have been working on for a long time. making service universally available and the expectation of young people growing up in america. the server america together presidential challenge is to make sure this notion of encouraging national service, whether it is military or civilian is something the candidates have thought about and are encouraging to take a position on, because we are at a time where the nation needs everybody on deck contributing what they can and we do not know each other well enough as
citizens. getting out of ourselves and in contact with others from different backgrounds, different orientations, different ways of thinking about the world and serving together in strengthening our communities, both here and abroad is a wonderful way to encourage our coming together. i first heard about this, i thought about seth moulton, a fellow massachusetts resident, one of the two from massachusetts running from president. has anybody signed on the dotted line? gov. patrick: not anybody has signed on in these terms. the candidate who has been most explicit in supporting the server america together initiative is mayor pete buttigieg out of south bend. , has congressman moulton expressed and worked on behalf of service. i have myself in other contexts. i think we will see more and more candidates as they begin to fill out their policy agenda see
the value of this, particularly on the democratic side and i hope we do on the republican side as well. david: going back to my law this --ays, how we keep how we make this something real. it is one thing to make them do it. gov. patrick: the committee, well before my time, had a lot of conversation about whether to propose something that was mandatory. very much on the model of the state of israel, which has an extraordinary program, or make it voluntarily but universally available. arrived at the latter conclusion for a host of reasons. to make it universal, assure that people were paid. nots not folks -- it is something folks with independent resources could afford to do. anyone could do it in get a livable wage. another element to think about is that it becomes even more
well-developed is that so much of the conversation and our political debate has been how to relieve student debt and make college and other trading opportunities affordable to people. you can see a service and exchange for something like that. making sense and appealing to people generally. let's turn to the 2020 presidential election. there were rumors you might be taking a look at it yourself. gov. patrick: everybody is taking a look at it. david: is not an exclusive club. i think that is fair to say. [laughter] as you look at that large club and the positions they are taking, do you see someone who can take on donald trump in the states of pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin, and speak to what i think is important -- the workers. saying you've been left behind, you've not been respected. president trump address that,
whether you like what he said or not, he addressed those people and give them answers to their problems. is there anyone addressing those people effectively today? it is such an important question because i think the one truth candidate trump spoke is that conventional or establishment politics is not working well enough for most people. that is something that candidate sanders also spoke. it is something that candidate obama spoke more than a decade before. it is a truth we have to face. i'm not sure if it is quite fair to say that one selected the president has addressed in practical ways those concerns, that those concerns persist even in an economy that is performing well. i think that all or most of the democratic candidates for the nomination are addressing that in various forms.
some with specific policy. ,n that way, in a practical way other than rhetorically, i think it has to be faced, and it has to be faced with a philosophical frame about what it is we think government can and should do to help people help themselves, and also in the form of specific policies. because it is early and because i have a lot of friends in the field, i will not prognosticate about who is best positioned to do that. as a democrat, and as an american, i think we have to ask and expect this of our candidates and indeed of our leaders. whether for good or ill, politicians find someone to blame. you can say president trump blamed mexican workers, lamed the chinese. right now we have some candidates who are intent on blaming wall street. i'm talking about the fact that
you are a managing director at a. is it possible for someone in your position to run for president of the democratic orty, whether it is you somebody else, or does that disqualify you because you are associated with wall street? gov. patrick: [laughter] i do not think that is the case, but there is a lot of blame to go around. i'm not sure if blame is a tried-and-true politically tool is the best solution for how we govern after the election. in fact, what we need are solutions that make sense and work for everybody. understand weo have common cause. this is not just about the so-called winners and losers, as the current president sometimes describes. it is about how we unify around , orting or reestablishing
in many cases creating for the first time a real ladder of opportunity for people and talent we know exists in every community. there are ways to do that. i frequently think about how when i was growing up on the southside of chicago, a lot of that time on welfare, there were people around me, who especially after the steel mills moved out of chicago, who felt like the economy had moved on and left them and their families behind. .he shock and anxiety questions about self-worth that come from that. there was opioid addiction in our neighborhood, indeed in our household. frankly, those kinds of experiences are being felt much more broadly around the nation today. you could look at that and say those are opportunities that divide us. in fact, the solutions are opportunities to bring us together. they do have to do with how you
create real opportunity for people to help themselves. not to do everything or solve every problem in their lives, but to help them help themselves. great strategies, proven in the past and thought about in the future that can matter today. david: that is terrific. i appreciate you spending time with us today. that is former massachusetts governor deval patrick. coming up, we will hear from the formal -- from an economics professor at dartmouth college to give us his opinion on boris johnson becoming prime minister. sign up for the balance of power newsletter at bloomberg/politics.com. this is bloomberg. ♪
check it out! now you can schedule a callback or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not. mark: i'm mark crumpton with bloomberg's first word news. president trump threatening retribution against guatemala after the country blocked in asylum deal with u.s.
the president spoke at the tournament point student action summit in washington today .----- signey are supposed to this and they went back, so we are going to do tariffs or we will do a form of tax, or we will use our an. -- ban. mark: it would've required central american migrants to apply for protections in guatemala instead of the u.s., even though that government never said it agreed to make such a deal. army veteran and former defense industry lobbyist mark esper has been confirmed by the u.s. senate to be the nation's new secretary of defense. won bipartisan support today with a will of 98-8. the post has been vacant since september.