washington bureau, i'm david westin. welcome to "balance of power," where the world politics meets the world business. we have been watching robert mueller testify on capitol hill, trying to stick to his report as congressman try to move him beyond that. ,e are joined by kevin cirilli who is on capitol hill and has been following this closely. have we learned anything? no.n: the way republicans are looking at this is they are seizing on something robert mueller said that there was no evidence that members of the trump campaign fired -- conspired with members from russia in order to influence the election. democrats also finding things they like in robert mueller's testimony. the question is whether or not it will be enough to increase their calls for speaker nancy pelosi to get to impeachment. jerry nadler asked the special counsel robert mueller in their opening exchange whether or not

the report exonerated president trump and he has said time or counsel robert mueller said no. things for democrats and republicans to light for a number of reasons, but in terms of moving the needle on impeachment, questionable if the first hearing would do anything to do as much. david: we have a second hearing shortly after they're done with this one. if they are not moving the needle, might this be good news for speaker pelosi? she has made no secret of the fact that she would not fight the 2020 election on impeachment. kevin: from her perspective, yes. respective,akers impeachment would impose a significant political risk. in terms of also the agenda setting for the democratic party. from the progressive base's perspective, they feel that this

is something it is time to come to fruition. they feel the base once this and they feel their voters and constituents, particularly in altra progressive district, have been calling on this for several years -- in ultra progressive districts, have been calling on this for several years. from trump's perspective, republicans saying it is time to turn the page. a republican from texas saying that robert mueller through the entire-- drew the department of justice against president trump and that is speaking to what many senate republicans are saying as well. this is been a polarizing hearing. not moving the needle on impeachment. david: just what we needed is more polarization on capitol hill. thanks to kevin cirilli. we have about 15 more minutes of that hearing and then we will go to the other hearing. now let's go to london to rob hutton who is joining us on the

telephone talking about boris johnson as next prime minister. we have his first speech. what did we learn? it was a speech that was slightly all over the place. britain will was be out of the european union by october 31. he repeated a threat to the eu that he will withhold money if they do not deal with him. he said he wanted to do a new deal, a better deal. we are none the wiser as to what his brexit plan is. domestic a load of promises, more money for schools, more money for hospitals, that kind of thing. david: and the british government the cabinet plays an important role, maybe more important than the united states. what we know about the new prime minister's cabinet? rob: after making that speech he goes to downing street. he is in a private room firing a

large number of theresa may's cabinet. we are learning about this on twoter, where we have had announce they are leaving the government. the trade secretary is leading the cup -- is leaving the government. he is clearing out the old or in some cases, you may have offered a lesser job. what we do not have yet are his picks, who he wants for the big names. we do not have his pick for chancellor the exchequer. we do not know who is foreign secretary is, we do not know who was home secretary has. it may be some people are refusing to move. right now, the defense minister structs me, because he has -- the strait of hormuz and what is being done with the british tankers. rob: a lot of people feel this is a bad moment to be losing

your defense secretary. they were only a few months in the job, but she comes from a royal navy background show she did -- so she did understand the initials. officials into a been pleased with her. another was sacked in may after being accused of stealing from a national security meeting. one rumor says he might come back. he has been a key boris johnson advocate. if that happened, that might raise eyebrows among defense officials. david: thank you so much for reporting from london. that is rob hutton. now let's get a check on the markets from abigail doolittle in new york. abigial: looking at small mixed moves for the major averages. the dow is underperforming .5%, being dragged down by caterpillar and boeing. the s&p 500 fluctuating between small gains and losses.

the nasdaq managing to hold onto small gains. helping the nasdaq in the s&p 500 have green, take a look at the stocks up 2.6%. the philadelphia semiconductor index hitting a record high. texas instruments -- let's look at a three-day chart. they put up a strong quarter. as for other earnings movers, we have lots of big movers on the day. ups up 7.8%. they beat their forecast. costs went down. volume and revenue was better. the best day since 2008. edwards life-sciences up 8.3%. that company put up a great quarter. to the downside, those drags on the dow. look at caterpillar. down 3.4%. their profit outlook dragging on that stock, some saying is a warning shot of what could be ahead. boeing down 2.7% as they put up a surprise loss with the max

rounding. you had a great conversation with the former chair of the fed, alan greenspan, and he did endorse the idea of the fed cutting rates as an insurance plan. here is the current view of what the market is pricing in. about 30 basis points, exactly what it was said the rate cut would be. this does support your conversation with alan greenspan. david: he said it had worked. he tried it in 1998. he said sometimes an insurance cut does work. we turn to mark crumpton for bloomberg first word news. mark: as our rob hutton told us a moment ago, britain's new prime minister boris johnson promising the u.k. will leave the european union on october ands, or buts."

prime minister johnson tried to persuade the public to back him, saying the time has come to act on the nation's departure from the european union. lawmakers are getting their first chance to question former special counsel robert mueller. robert mueller's testifying before two house committees. he was asked about russia and collusion in the 2016 presidential campaign. >> our investigation found the russian government interfered in our election in sweeping and systematic fashion. second, the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired with the russian government in its election interference activities. added thert mueller report did not exonerate president trump when it came to obstruction of justice. in other news, the federal judge says the trump administration can enforce its new restrictions on asylum for people crossing the u.s./mexico border while loss lose challenging that --

while lawsuits challenging the policy play out. the judge rules the immigrant advocacy group did not prove their work would be irreparably harmed by the policy. the proposal prevents most migrants from seeking asylum in the u.s. if they pass through another country first. the governor of puerto rico reportedly is set to step down after two weeks of massive of thes according to two commonwealth's largest newspapers. we should make clear that the governor has not yet resign. the governor had vowed to stay in office despite the disclosure of scandalous text messages. global news 24 hours a day, on air and @tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i am mark crumpton. bloomberg. david? back to you. david: coming up, robert mueller speaks. the special counsel is facing lawmakers on capitol hill but is he telling us anything we do not already know?

we'll ask a former federal prosecutor. that is next and this is bloomberg. ♪

david: this is balance of power on bloomberg television. former special counsel robert mueller is spending the day in ofnt of two committees congress answering questions about his report and doing his best not to go beyond the four corners of what the report says. the former fbi director facing tough questions from republicans. like is starting to look you having desperately tried and failed to make a legal case against the president, you made a political case instead. you lit it on fire, dropped the porch, and ran. you reviewed ank

report that is as thorough, as fair, as consistent as the report we have in front of us. david: and from democrats as well. >> why did the president of the united states once you fired? -- want you fired? >> i cannot answer that question. david: we welcome former presidential prosecutor seth waxman. have we learned anything? seth: a little bit. mr. mueller has been sticking to his report, but there were a couple high watermarks. one that stood out was his comments that have the president, once he leaves office , that he could be a person charged with a crime. we have heard several congressmen go through that. david: wasn't that established law? the justice department itself said that. it is not new. seth: it is not new but to hear mueller stated outright and then

have congressmen and athlete tie-in once he leaves office could he be charged -- congressmen adeptly tie-in that once he leaves office he could be charged has an effect. david: what else has he learned? seth: mr. mueller stated that this report do not totally exonerate the president as trump has repeatedly stated. while that is a statement we already knew, to hear mueller state that definitively is a moment the democrats will jump on, and then we have the context of what this means. from my perspective, impeachment -- they can bring articles of impeachment, but you have to have 18 republican senators defect from the party and vote to remove the president. i do not think anybody thinks that will happen. what we are looking at is how does this play in the 2020 election. david: you've practiced law in washington. you operated the intersection between law and politics. it is not up to robert mueller

to decide whether to impeach the president. seth: 100%. david: law may inform it. our congressmen looking for cover or justification? what are they looking for. it is their job, having read the report, to decide whether to impeach or not. seth: i think there is a basis to bring articles of impeachment taste on obstruction ground. the question politicians are asking is if it makes sense politically. ofid: on the narrow question whether there is not legally to bring charges of obstruction of justice, if you attempted to obstruct justice but the people did not do it, is that a crime? the report says he tried more than once to get them to stop things and they did not do it. seth: the failure to achieve the ends is not a defense to the crime of object structure and. -- of obstruction. if you try to do it, that can be charged the loan. david: as a prosecutor, would it mitigate against that that there

were other things he could do that he did not do. he did have his people cooperate with the investigation. does that mitigate against his trying to stop the investigation seth:? he did not sit down for questioning but whether he quite braided or not is a difficult question. prosecutors can take into consideration mitigating factors. my impression is that 10 instances would be enough to charge. david: if you are congressmen on the judiciary committee or intelligence committee, what would you ask robert mueller they are not getting at? seth: they are asking all the right questions. not surprisingly he is not answering the questions. this is looking for a sound bite on the democrat side to put in front of the american people and robert mueller is not giving that. he is not giving a narrative. there is a lot of leading questions that they a yes or no answer. what the democrats may have hoped, although they did not suspect they would get it, is

robert mueller stating in a narrative sense how outrageous the conduct was. david: laying out a case. he is not doing that. thank you so much. that is former federal prosecutor seth waxman. the second mueller hearing is due to start later this hour in front of the intelligence committee. $20 billion ups expansion plan is already paying off with second-quarter profit crushing estimates. we will talk with the chairman and ceo next. this is bloomberg. ♪

david: you are watching balance of power. i'm david westin in washington. a banner quarter for ups. the biggest jump in more than a decade after the shipping company beat its own profit

guidance, sign the new projects are paying off. we welcome the chairman and ceo of ups, david abney. glad to have you with us. i was on the air this morning when this broke and i was surprised. i underestimated. we were concerned that some of the problems with global trade, slowdown might be hurting ups. you would actually take in your estimates and you beat those. how did you do it? david a.: a lot of good execution and a combination of our strategy, our investments, and then the timing could not have been any better. -- thisxample of that structural change of next day delivery at the same time a lot of the major retailers are going to next today, we are handling 11 aircraft this year. when you can time investments with the structural change, that is one example that led to the success we talked about today. been making a lot

of investments in technology and modernizing your process. what has that done your employment situation. are you implying -- are you employing more people or fewer people? david a.: more people. we have just short of 500,000 people worldwide. we look at technology as an enabler, something that will help us be more flexible and help us to respond better to our customers. it creates opportunities for our people. david: you mentioned the commerce and how is transforming retail overall. we have all been watching amazon as they are moving into delivery themselves. my, aare becoming a frene competitor and a customer. they taking business away from ups? david a.: amazon is a big customer of ours and there are places we overlap. we monitor that.

they are growing so fast they are creating a lot of opportunity. i want to tell you, even though they are important part of e-commerce, there is more to e-commerce that amazon and that is where a lot of the initiatives we announced yesterday are going. a lot of those smaller and midsized companies, retailers and etailers to compete and offer things like next day and compete with the large e-tailers . that is where our focus has been. small to midsize customers. david: if you take a look at the various e-commerce people, you of amazon in one bucket, all of the others in another. which is growing at a faster rate, the amazon or the others? david a.: from our standpoint we would not compare growth rates. if you read the reports that are out there, amazon is growing at

a rapid rate. i can tell you we have other customers that are seizing the moment and they are also growing. not at the size and scale of amazon or a walmart or any of these other large retailers. david: i said we were looking forward to your earnings. we're expecting headwinds for international. i think you did have headwinds. how bad is the situation internationally because of trade problems? david a.: it is a dynamic situation. no doubt about it. global trade is not growing as fast as it was. it is not shrinking, but not growing as fast. we are seeing trade lanes that are changing and we are having to respond to that. at the same time, is allowing us to offer different solutions to our customers. even with this dynamic environment, we had our best

second quarter ever in our international business and we are finding ways to continue to bring value to our customers. david: give us a sense of geography. where are you seeing the biggest upside and where are their bigger challenges? david a.: upside, if you look at china, and china to the rest of business there is certainly growing. china to the u.s. is not because of the tariffs and the trade policy. brexit, thecerns in u.k., we are looking at that. there is a lot of opportunity in central asia and other parts of asia to the united states and asia to europe. we are seeing companies moving their supply chains from china to other parts of asia to take advantage of the difference in trade laws. david: as we have said, you're

moving forward on technology and making big investments. how much more upside is there and let me ask you about drones. are they coming? david a.: i knew you would get to drones. let me talk about technology first. we are automating our facilities throughout the world, taking advantage of the latest in technology. we are doing the same thing when it comes to optimizing our routes of our drivers. this new drone initiative we have talked about and the new subsidiary flight forward is focused on us utilizing drones in the health care industry. we've been doing that for the last couple of years in rwanda and ghana and then we started in the u.s. in north carolina. for there applying highest certification you can get from the afa i, which is report 135, which would allow us

to fly drones basically where ever would be illegal to fly in the u.s.. once we get that authority, we think we may be one of the first to get that, then you will see us continue to replicate the in north carolina and other health care clinics and facilities and eventually it can expand into other parts of our business. .t is a big bill it is not intended to take the place of the uniform driver. there's a lot of utilization. david: my 17-year-old is looking forward to it. david andy, chairman of ubs. coming up, alan greenspan. this is bloomberg. ♪ i don't know why i didn't get screened a long time ago.

i kept putting it off... what was i thinking? ok, mr. jones... we're all done. i told you it was easy. with life line screening, getting screened for unknown health conditions is so quick, painless and affordable, you'll wonder why you hadn't done it before.

so if you're over age 50, call now and schedule an appointment near you. for just $149- a savings of over 50%- you'll receive a package of five screenings that go beyond your doctor's annual check-up. ultrasound technology looks inside your arteries for plaque that builds up as you age and increases your risk of stroke and heart disease. after all, 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom is a stroke. so call today and start with a free health assessment to understand your best plan of action. so why didn't we do this earlier? life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. david: this is "balance of power." i'm david westin. for bloomberg first word news, we go to mark crumpton in new york. mark: pretense new prime minister boris johnson is about

-- vowing the u.k. will leave the eu on october 31 "no if's, and's or buts." in his first speech, prime minister johnson tried to persuade the public to back him, saying the time has come to act on the nation's departure from the european union. >> though i am today building a great team of men and women, i will take personal responsibility for the change i want to see. never mind the backstop, the buck stops here. mark: as she left the house of commerce chambers, theresa may was given a standing ovation by conservative lawmakers, many of whom helped bring her down by rejecting her brexit deal. after saying goodbye to the downing street staff, may stood outside the prime minister's residence and spoke publicly for the last time as britain's leader saying the job has been her greatest honor. former special counsel robert mueller dismisses president

trump's claim that his report totally exonerated him. mueller told the house committee that is not what his report said. he will test before another committee this afternoon. in this morning's testimony, mueller resisted pressure from democrats who hoped he would reveal additional information about his investigation of the trump campaign. blocked threee new abortion restrictions in arkansas minutes before they were set to take effect. they include a measure that opponents say would likely force the states only surgical abortion clinic to close. the judge found if the clinic closed, two thirds of women seeking to terminate a pregnancy in arkansas would be denied and abortion. puerto rico's governor has not resigned although he remains under pressure to do so. his office has issued a statement saying that "incorrect rumors are circulating." the governor has vowed to stay in office despite two weeks of massive protests calling for his

resignation. global news, 24 hours a day, on air and @tictoc on twitter, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in over 120 countries. i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. back to you in washington. david: thanks so much. i sat down with a former federal reserve chairman alan greenspan in his office today. we talked about u.s.-china relations and he started with some basic that he thinks many people are missing. alan: tariffs are tax. tax not on your opponent, but on your own people. they pay the tax. and the question has always been taxes -- taxes are deflationary. that somebodyrue won a trade war. to be sure, there was a winner

and loser, but from the point of view of how much economic activity that changed, they both lost. the one who lost the least was declared the winner. david: we have tariffs now. china has imposed retaliatory tariffs. are we seeing that in the economies of the u.s. and china in slowing them down? alan: you can see it certainly in the industries. we do not have enough overall data on china to make much of a judgment. but it has to be. you put taxes on something, there is less of it. you do not need to calculate it, you just know by the nature of the product. china is drifting off. -- there was a

major change. thereafterdent [indiscernible] when we got to the next leader, he said i wish we were the united states. that was in it -- an extraordinary comment for a chinese to tell an american. it is not that way anymore. that presidentw xi was having difficulty finding a replacement, i said, yeah. [laughter] david: let's talk about monetary policy, something you know terribly well. we are at a time a very low interest rates and they seem to be going south. we have almost $13 trillion in negative yielding debt. we are having growth challenges. our lower interest rates -- are

lower interest weights -- rates a way to address growth? alan: how in the world did we end up with negative interest rates? i mean, i have been an economist since i left the music business. rates are a major component of a time preference. to the extent of discounting a human beings make about values today versus value tomorrow. spoke withso chairman greenspan about the recent u.s. debt deal. here is what he had to say about that. alan: when you increase the prolonged, it is will end up as inflation. decades one -- when

people became a very irresponsible, what would happen? , whichld get inflation is not a coincidence. people would be discarding money in a manner which affects prices. the more and more i hear about what is going on -- david: why aren't we seeing inflation? the fed has a target of 2%. they cannot get to the target of 2%. low interest rates, we have a lot of borrowing. why aren't we getting to inflation? alan: same issue as negative rates. if you go from negative to positive, or semi-positive to more positive, the relationship is the same. down,e whole structure is

and we have not yet really answered of question as to what has happened? human nature has not changed. the rates of discount of discounted future values have not changed that significantly. something is going on. question to about large number of very prominent economists whose views i respect. we that could change the paradigm -- we hear talk about that that could change the paradigm. one is globalization. goods, we generate services, and value. alan: not really. fundamentally, value preferences

are human preferences. do, orvery little to should have, the technological structure, and indeed, that is one of the aspects of why we find negative interest rates so particular. -- peculiar. human nature has not changed at the point where we are talking very low rates. these rates, the probability, based on past history of them going higher rather than lower, is very high. i've been saying that for months. i have bitten my tongue so often on this issue that it needs resuscitation. david: that was part of my interview with former federal reserve chairman alan greenspan.

catch more tomorrow on daybreak americas and "balance of power." coming up here, from talking about trade to booking his flight. robert lighthizer is headed to china next week. what will it take for him to get talks back on track? we will ask a man who is no stranger to trade deals, jack lew. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

david: you are watching "balance of power." i'm david westin in washington. steven mnuchin made news today when he said he was not advocating a weaker dollar policy, not in what he called "in the near term." despite what president trump has adjusted, it is the response ability of the treasury department to determine taller -- dollar policy. we welcome someone who had that

responsibility under obama, jack lew, after serving as white house chief of staff. welcome for today's conversation. great to have you with us. jack: good to be with you. david: let's start on this currency issue. toeven have an issue counteract some currency manipulation. doesn't it make sense for the u.s. at this point to pursue a weaker dollar policy? jack: i was one of many treasury secretary's who on many occasions, said that the strong dollar would reflect the strength of the u.s. economy. and we urged others to take action to strengthen their economy. right now, we see policies in place that are having the effect of hurting the u.s. economy, hurting the global economy. i think it would be wiser to focus on the policies that are driving things in the wrong direction. the trade war that is not good for the u.s. or global economy, i think tax cuts that raised our

deficit to a point that is going to create problems in the future. these are policies that created a problem. i think the focus is in the wrong place. david: even if it was u.s. policy to weaken the u.s. dollar, is there enough resources to do it? there is a fund set aside for stabilization but i have heard economist's saying it is not large enough to move the value of the dollar significantly. jack: it is not a very large fund and it is also a fund that is only intended to be used in moments of crisis. it is the fund we turned to in the clinton administration during the peso crisis. forink the idea of using it more casual purposes because you want to try and affect short-term economic performance would be misguided. it is an authority that has existed for a long time because it has been used prudently. david: i want to turn to the question of trade. let me ask one last question. there is a rulemaking pending in the department of commerce,

saying we will change the rules so we can have countervailing duties opposed on countries based on their weakening their currency. there is a jurisdiction dispute between treasury and commerce. what do you think about that? jack: i have had a clear position on this for a long time. i think the idea of moving authority over policy regarding the dollar or over monetary policy anywhere other than the treasury and the fed is a mistake. i think it is clear that you put to make practices that exchange rates into play in an unfair way. that has to be part of the conversation. i raised the issue so many times in my dialogues with the chinese government. we actually got them to move on their policy. i don't think the right answer would have been to put it into a trade resolution mechanism. you go back to our financial crisis and the response to it, there were a lot of countries in the world that thought the

response both in terms of qe and other extraordinary moves had the effect of intervening in our currency. granted, it was a fed action. i remember at the end of -- i came into treasury at the end of that time, having to make the case that we took domestic policy for domestic purposes in order to prevent a depression in this country and the world. you don't want a commerce department or trade agency second-guessing central banks. that does not mean a country should be able to set its exchange rate to gain unfair advantage. . . it is right to be pressing. and we did. the exchange rate has not been an issue with china. david: let's turn to trade. a delegatione have going on of robert lighthizer as well as secretary mnuchin to shanghai to negotiate. does president trump in the administration have a point about china that there is fundamental problems, more than tariffs here or there, problems

in the way of trade with china? jack: there are fundamental issues with china that are not new. if you go back and look at the issues we raised during my time, and before that, going back several administrations. they are the same issues. we have made progress on them by engaging, being tough, and by insisting that they change their policies. i just referred to the exchange rate which was a big problem. it was right to raise it. there are big problems in the area of intellectual property. there are big problems in terms of subsidies to state owned enterprises. i think one has to approach this with that kind of care that you approach the other second co-leading economy of the world, and not in a way that creates a trade war that is not good for either side. how you do this is important is what issues you raise? i hope coming out of this round of talks is a set of steps

forward they get us out of a trade war, into a place where we make the progress that shows we are moving in the right direction. i don't think it is likely that this will be a discussion that ends all issues with china for all time. i think it is a mistake to be on a courseware there is no ability to make that incremental progress and instead you force our countries into a state of conflict that is dangerous both here and around the world. david: let's also talk about the deal that was done last week involving the debt ceiling. and the increased spending caps. was not a good deal? jack: -- was that a good deal? congress passes the agreement, there will either be a government shutdown or a crisis over the funding of our debt. i think getting those issues off the table was really important and i give credit to speaker pelosi who managed to negotiate with the administration under difficult circumstances and will be hopefully shepherding that across the finish line. i think there is no question,

but there is going to be an impact on the deficit because of the agreement. i think one has to look at where we are now, not by looking at a snapshot of what this agreement it, but by taking a step back and looking at where we have been over the last three years. the hugest driver of the deficit has been the tax-cut. there is going to be a need at some point to come to terms with what that has done to our fiscal sustainability. i don't think having a fight over either default or a government shutdown would have been good for the country, the economy, or the global economy. i think it is a good deal. to under i give credit adverse circumstances working out a bipartisan agreement. david: you mentioned the tax-cut which was a fiscal stimulus. frankly, even this increase in the spending cap is another form of fiscal stimulus. particularly on the defense side, there are more dollars being pumped into the economy

that otherwise would not be there. are we getting our money's worth? are we encouraging building the economy to the extent to which we are running up the deficit? jack: you have to distinguish the different policies. i do not think we are getting our moneys worth out of the tax-cut. i think there has been very little evidence that the tax-cut lead to the increase in investment that it was intended to produce. i think it has increased the inequality both of the way we treat current income, but also the accumulation of wealth. i think it has taken problems we have had and made them worse. there was a way to do tax reform and pay for it. that would have been the right answer. that is what we worked on and negotiating with then chairman and speaker ryan to do. by taking a different path, spending $2 trillion we did not have on a tax-cut that does not address the real needs of the countries -- of the country, i think we have created a fiscal problem that will hang over us not just today and tomorrow, but

for a long time. we are at a moment where we have had a historically long time of growth. we are late in the business cycle. a moment will come when there will be a need to respond to the business cycle taking a downturn. instead of coming into its strong, we will be coming into it having spent our money when the economy was growing. that was a mistake in the case of the tax bill. in terms of the spending agreement, the alternative of not having an agreement would have done harm to the economy, would have ultimately reduced revenues because the economy would have been hurt by it. david: that is a compelling criticism. let's talk about the alternative. looking to 2020 d.c. candidates coming forward with an economic plan that makes sense? jack: i think you are seeing a lot of the candidates talk about new ideas, big ideas. they say they are paying for them, the question is whether the ways of paying for them really hold water?

i think if you go back not just to the campaign, but to when the democrats took control of the house, they put rules back into place in the house. candidates on the democratic side are saying we need to pay for the things of that we need to do in this country. i think that is an important step. it obviously does not correct the damage of the tax-cut. that is going to take some more difficult bipartisan effort. i think it is an important thing that you are hearing democrats talk about paying for things. my own view is that they cannot all fit, these ideas will turn out to be more than can be paid for. that is what budgets are about, what governing is about. you end up making choices and you pick the most important things and take them on first. david: no one knows that better than you do. lew, formerto jack treasury secretary under president obama, also the budget director. coming up, robert mueller is about to face the house intelligence committee. we will head to capitol hill for

the latest on the testimony. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

david: this is "balance of power." i'm david westin in washington. where former special counsel robert mueller is right now sitting down for a second house hearing in front of the intelligence committee. we welcome bloomberg's chief washington correspondent, kevin cirilli outside the hearing room on capitol hill with the latest. we are getting underway. give us a synopsis of what came before and what we should expect this time? kevin: we are just getting word from the white house, stephanie grisham putting out a statement saying it is "an embarrassment" for dare -- for democrats as the first round of the hearing before the house intelligence committee as they get their opportunity to question special counsel bob mueller.

we are also hearing from the president's attorney, he says the first hearing showed that the case is "case closed." all of this comes as the republicans have tried to make out bob mueller's investigation to be political, and investigators to be political. democrats pushing back saying that a president for all intents and purposes obstructed justice. special counsel mueller testified earlier that it did not exonerate president trump, his investigation. but he also said there was no evidence that any of the trump campaign officials conspired with russia. a lot for both sides to digest, process, to think about as we head into the second two hour hearing before the house intelligence committee. david: are the democrats frustrated at all? do they have a feeling they are not getting what they need? kevin: you know, that is -- no one is saying that publicly. privately, behind the scenes in

the hall with staffers walking from the hallway, there is -- the conversation is whether or not this moves the needle on impeachment. the consensus and chatter in the halls of congress that is trickling out is that it would not. it does not change anybody's mind. there was no bombshell, so to speak, in the hearing that would lead to more calls for impeachment. david: it is hard to change minds on capitol hill. that is kevin cirilli who will stay on capitol hill. you can catch every moment of the mueller testimony by using live go on your terminal. tonight, bloomberg big decisions. i sit down with mark mobius at 9:30 tonight. this is bloomberg. ♪

scarlet:scarlet: i'm scarlet fu. this is "bloomberg etf iq." assets, focus on the risks, and rewards offered by exchange traded funds. forget the fed. a bond laddering. .anguard's active winning --