caroline: from bloomberg's world headquarters in new york and from here in london, i'm caroline hyde. joe:joe: i'm joe weisenthal. >> i'm romaine bostick. everything closing out a record high today. joe:joe: the question is, "what'd you miss?" caroline: we take a beat, we take a breath. stocks and power that might surprise some people out there

considering the pictures we saw 24 hours ago. this though is nothing new. over history, there has been various examples of protests and unrest has not caused major indices to lose. markets choosing to focus on finally some sort of clarity and certainty amid the chaos. joe: in d.c. yesterday, it does not scream clarity per se, but we seem to be getting closer to something of a clear idea of what the next administration and senate makeup is going to look like. but who knows what's really going on, other than the fact that stocks are going up in a straight line? here's the last five days of the major indices. the blue line is the blue line is the small caps. that makes sense.

then you look at a day like today with the nasdaq rallying 2.5% and people piling into tech and momentum names, so everything goes up. romaine: when you talk about small caps, it was a lot of the remove -- renewable energy you had marijuana companies when we will see softening on regulation, and biotech as well. joe: absolutely. let's bring in the renaissance macro research head of u.s. economics. after the democrats won both of the georgia senate races, you sent out a note advising people to continue to keep their foot on the pedal and some of these cyclical areas like banks, and energy, that would do well with more stimulus, more reflation. why do you think there is still more upside and some of these sectors? that thether think yields are going to keep going higher or you don't. i think they will keep going higher. morning, iw this

think "the washington post"'s recording that they're not only checks, they $2000 are talking about you i extension, they are talking about state and local government aid. we are talking about fiscal stimulus on a scale we've never seen with the economy. 5% then itfour -- otherwise would have been in the absence of the pandemic. withe filling a -5% bucket 10% to 12% gdp stimulus. it's unprecedented. and the simple fact that the fed is and what i call a passive easing approach, growth picks up, they accommodate the improvement. you go back to 2017, what were we talking about? monetary offset. now?about

actively encouraging additional fiscal stimulus and signaling and extended on whole policy and talking about substantial progress towards dual mandate goals just to get the tapering clock started. what does that tell you? it is bearish for the dollar. what's interesting though is that perhaps, when we were all sort of handwringing about a potential blue wave in november, it did not feel like the mood music was great and we would power on to record highs. now it is here. so why is it that perhaps the regulatory concerns people have for big tech and issues surrounding biotech or the health care part of the equation, this isn't going to impact the worst fear scenarios that could happen in november? > for investors, i think sector allocation is important. we know the momentum in the tech

industry has been impressive. at the same time, we know technology stocks have done well from people staying at home to combat the coronavirus pandemic. whether it's online retailing, wasting away on social media, digital streaming services -- and the stocks that have done poorly are those that require people to get out of their house like cruise lines, restaurants, and so forth. we know tech is a huge part of the market capitalization of the u.s. equity market. , industrials less so. to me, it is more about a sector allocation call. if you are going to ask me to short the u.s. market, no, but you should take a look at certain sectors of the market and make a pretty compelling case for emerging markets relative to the u.s. at this point. romaine: with regards to the

cyclical dynamics and so many people piling into materials and construction companies, tractor makers, and economic recovery that will include tangible developments and not just some bro in silicon valley finding a better way to get your burrito. is that the trade going forward or is that going to be fraught with pitfalls people aren't necessarily aware of? >> i think so. the dollar has an important role here. we know the dollar is an important driver of financial market conditions, particularly in emerging market economies. i mentioned passive easing from the fed. at stollar negative. we know trade tensions are likely to ease. if you look at 2018, 2019, we know that the markets move down on days of erratic trade

andcies getting worse increasing tariffs. the dollar rose on those days. there was a risk premium associated with the trump administration's trade agenda. i'm guessing trade policy will not be as erratic going forward. that's just my guess. this someook at this, chance trade policy eases outright. particularly in respect to the european union. that stollar negative. that will drive commodity prices higher and we know emerging-market commodities tend to be commodity exporters. feedbacks a positive loop in those economies helping growth. joe: great stuff. we have to leave it there. neil dutta, renaissance capital group.- research the fallout from yesterday's mob

violence, that fallout continuing in washington. a lot of calls from several politicians asking for trump to resign or be removed. the latest out of washington. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> the united states has squandered its moral authority. to the quite clear public that this is a president who has actively encouraged this kind of haven year. if he hadn't, it wouldn't take place. >> this is not a case where you are dealing with something that came with no warning or no intelligence. if you opened a newspaper over the last week, you saw that they were boasting about coming to washington to use the president word, going wild. >> don't dare call them protesters. they were a riotous mob.

insurrectionists. domestic terrorists. >> certainly the people who did are responsible but certainly the president needs to do introspection on whether or not he contributed, what his family did. >> business leaders gave money to this man repeatedly when it was known, should have known, where this would end not only financially supporting them but believing they would enrich themselves and i find it disappointing behavior. >> american democracy will leadersand none of our will be intimidated. they unleashed an all-out assault on our institutions of democracy and yesterday was the culmination of the unrelenting attack. >> i joined the senate democrat leader on calling on the rise president to remove this president by immediately invoking the 25th amendment. >> as to the 25th amendment being invoked, i do not believe that's appropriate at this point.

romaine: joe: those joe: are just some of the business and political leaders reacting to the chaos in washington. for more, let's bring in mario parker, bloomberg white house reporter from washington. less than two weeks into this administration, it's always a little hard to tell how real some of this is, either by removing via impeachment, the 25th amendment. how much of this is talk and how much has a chance of going somewhere in a short period of time? >> a lot of it at this point seems to be talk. as you mentioned, there are less than two weeks before the inauguration and democrats have been vocal about removing the president over the last 24 hours. republicans have been less so, as you played the clip with senator graham, who broke with the president last night in voting to certify president-elect joe biden's victory. of saying theort

president should be removed via the 25th amendment. like,ne: it does feel cancel culture has become such a turn of phrase in 2020, that it has been president detached clearly from facebook. do you know what the response is from the white house? reporter: we don't know. i think it speaks to the fact that we have become so dependent on the presidents statements coming via twitter, a tweet, social media. we are not quite sure what the presidents response to this has been. couldn't besure he pleased with having his most powerful platform taken from him. willone way or another, we have a new administration in less than two weeks here. is there any sense the biden administration, have they hinted at all that they will pursue any

sort of charges against trump himself once he leaves? know from joe we biden, he condemns the president's actions in a speech today as he rolled out the department of justice staff more -- members and nominees. today, he really condemned the and that ofbehavior his supporters who stormed the capital as well. on the other hand, president-elect biden has said he wants to heal the nation, not revisit some of the risks, to bridge these divides. in terms of going after president trump in this manner, i'm not sure that would work toward his goals of uniting the country. so trump is going to be out of the white house in a couple weeks at the latest. at that point, it may be that the events of last night, the major emblems, the major icons of the party associated with it,

senators ted cruz and josh hawley, coming in for a lot of criticism, even among members of the party. what did they do for their standing last night? did they become heroes, or does the action of yesterday leave such a dark vibe and sour taste in people's mouth so that they will regret that they became the icons of that movement? reporter:reporter: i think one key anecdote over the last 48 hours is the footage circulating on social media of utah senator mitt romney, who wasn't going to of thepate in the denial electoral college and who had been quite critical of the president's actions, where someone at the airport criticized him and then he was criticized again on an airplane. but last night, he was applauded as he spoke on the senate floor. i think that gives you an idea

of what the tenor is around all of this here in washington. caroline: what did people make of joe biden's, the president-elect's speech towards uniting america? reporter: you are seeing even from republicans, lindsey graham for example, a staunch supporter laste president, the tone night once congress resumed was different from the tone it was before that angry mob descended .cross the capital the tone seems to be more unification going forward, which plays right into how joe biden at least had said he wants to govern the country. joe: a lot has to be sorted out for our country. , who has covered the trump administration for the washington.rs, in

coming up next, we will continue talking about the events of the last 24 hours and get perspective from a historian. we really have to put this into context. patrick wyman, who has written a lot about american history and political history, will be here to talk about what happened yesterday. this is bloomberg. ♪

joe: today, we are focused on the events of the last 24 hours where the world watched as a capitol.ed the u.s. ofhave historian and host the tides of history podcast, patrick wyman joining us. thank you so much for joining us. let's start big picture, your initial thoughts, the view of the long sweep of history of the u.s. and the world, what came to

mind for you when you saw the images in d.c. last night? >> i think the first thing is the fact that political systems are constantly in flux. the way they change has to do with the way how we process violations of norms and what happened yesterday was a series justolations of norms, not one, but several about political violence in the sacrosanct nature of public spaces. when those norms are violated, what happens next matters a great deal. if the line is crossed and nothing happens, the line ceases to exist effectively. if people know they can get away with these things and application of violence in a political system, sending an open application of violence becomes a form of the political system. romaine: and that's a great point. another issue here is a lot of people grapple with, what happened yesterday really wasn't

i guess a surprise or something that just cropped up in the last couple weeks or something. this has been a slow moving really,w for years, obviously with this particular white house administration, but even prior to that, a lot of the rhetoric we have seen infiltrate of political campaigns and the way it was used to divide the country. that's been going on for years now, if not decades. >> i think that's absolutely right. we are so inclined to think in terms of days, weeks, and months and to think about an event like yesterday, we have to place it in context of years, decades, longer. is notal violence something we experienced in the recent past in american history but we do have traditions. inthe 1960's, and definitely the reconstruction era, where political violence has been a part of how we conducted business. worldwide, different systems

have different policies for how much violence they allow and how it fits more broadly. caroline: looking at your podcast, around echoes of the past, echo the past of when we and seen lines overstepped they have been redrawn. do you think the line has been redrawn firmly enough that it would be breached and can't be erased? >> the political system echoes our own falling into something that it will become is the roman republic. there are a lot of parallels, far more than i'm comfortable with in that situation, where you can see the habitual overstepping. you can see the same characters involved year after year and decade after decade, long before pompeii magness was pompeii magness, he was a teenaged butcher. you would see these people pop

up, do something bad, suffer no consequences or even be lauded, and then decades later they are active participants in what happens later. to answer your question, i don't think we've seen any real consequences for anyone involved yesterday. from political officials who big date on, to the president -- egged it on, to the president. the next time this happens, it will be worse, and there will be a next time. joe: we saw that trump's own vice president did not support the idea of thwarting the count. by and large, the senate didn't do anything but some grandstanding. it passed ultimately later in the night. you could argue that the people who stormed the capitol were not serious militants. some people called them larp or that got out of hand, wearing elkal qaeda and so forth --

hide and so forth. how do you calibrate and really know what historical lessons to take? you can argue the system, in the end, it worked. how do you measure the degree of damage that was suffered in an event like yesterday? >> i think that's a really excellent point. we are inclined to think in terms of worst-case scenarios. we are inclined to think of debt -- bad things that have happened in the past. we know that no bad thing happens without seems like yesterday. if it gets really bad, things like yesterday's will have led up to it. not all the scenes we see over the course of history necessarily lead to those worse outcomes, but they all start that way. there's almost no situation where things have just exploded into shooting in violence in civil war without a long prelude, without a long series of prior provocations, of lines overstepped, systems and institutions falling into

disrepair, or shifting as times change. we never get to the bad stuff without some stuff that doesn't look as bad, that doesn't seem as serious. boiling and frog water situation where you might not recognize how bad it gets until you get there. to your point about larping, it's a good point. fascist movements, authoritarians, extrajudicial purveyors of violence, like the ku klux klan after the civil war, there were lots of elements of theatricality to that. a lot of people thought they were silly. after germany after world war i were not rhodes scholars. you never knew whether they were serious about the things they met or not until the moment they did it. romaine: some of us know they are serious here. democracy had a pretty good run country. you say that the systems can't

last forever when you look at history right now, does it seem to suggest it has run its course here? when you look at history as a guide to the present, you have to be really careful not to think you can plug-in variables and you will get an answer. what we have our parallels, analogies, and tools to think with. when i mentioned earlier things like knowing that the bad stuff involves events like what we saw yesterday, we still have time. as long as we recognize the seriousness of what we are dealing with and as long as the people in power take it seriously and don't try to craven lee use it to their advantage, then we still have time. joe: fascinating conversation. really appreciate you coming on. historian patrick wyman. you can hear more expensive conversation. he was a recent guest on the out loud podcast i cohost along with tracy alloway. we actually talked about the black death on that one, another happy conversation. check it out on the terminal or on spotify.

always trying to entertain. caroline: lighten the mood. meanwhile, that's all for "what'd you miss?" joe: "bloomberg technology" is up next in the u.s. romaine: and "bloomberg daybreak: australia" is up next in asia. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: i am emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up, and the 24 hours since pro-trump reporters stormed the u.s. capitol, he has been suspended from facebook, twitter and multiple club platforms, putting the president off from his base. is it enough? we will speak to the former ceo of reddit. and investors hot on the coals.