tv Risk and Reward With Deidre Bolton FOX Business February 16, 2016 5:00pm-6:01pm EST
>> i'm shocked. [laughter] >> what recourse do you have in leader mcconnell block as vote on your supreme court nominee? do you think if you choose someone moderate enough republicans might change course and asked all a vote? as you consider that choice who to nominate what qualities are important to you and is diversity among them? >> thank you. >> first of all, i want to reiterate heartfelt condolences to the scalia family. obviously justice scalia and i had different political orientations and probably would have disagreed on the outcome of certain cases but there's no doubt that he was a giant on the supreme court, helped to shape the legal landscape. he was by all accounts a good
friend and loved his family deeply and so, you know, it's important before we rush into all the politics of this, take stock of somebody who made enormous contributions to the united states. and we are grateful not only for his service but for his family's service. the constitution is pretty clear about what is supposed to happen now. when there is a vacancy on the supreme court the president of the united states is to nominate someone. the senate is to consider that nomination. and either they disapprove of that nominee or that nominee is elevated to the supreme court. historically this has not been viewed as a question.
there's no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off years. that's not in the constitutional text. i'm amused i hear people who claim to be strict ten terse of the constitution -- interbetters of the constitution reading into it whole interpretations that are not there. there is more than enough time for the senate to consider in a thoughtful way, the record of a nominee that i present and to make a decision. and with respect to our process we'll do the same thing we did with respect to justice kagan's nomination and justice sotomayor's nomination. we're going to find somebody who is outstanding legal mind. somebody who cares deeply about our democracy and cares about rule of law. there is not going to be any particular position on a
particular issue that determines whether or not i nominate them but i am going to present somebody who indisputably is qualified for the seat and any fair-minded person, even somebody who disagreed with my politics would say, would serve with honor and integrity on the court. now, part of the problem that we have here is we've almost gotten accustomed to how obstruction it the senate's become when it comes to nominations. i mean i've got 14 nominations that have been pending that were unanimously approved by the judiciary committee. so republicans and democrats, on the judiciary committee all agreed that they were well-qualified for the position. and yet we can't get a vote on
those individuals. so in some way this is argument is just an extension of what we've seen in the senate generally. and not just on judicial nominees. the the basic function of government requires that the president of the united states in his or her duties, has a team of people, cabinet secretaries, assistant secretaries, that can carry out the basic functions of government. it requires the constitution requires that we appoint judges so they can carry out their functions as a separate branch of government and the fact that we've almost grown accustomed to a situation that is almost unprecedented where every nomination is contested, everything is blocked,
regardless of how qualified the person is, even when there is no idealogical objection to them. certainly where there are no disqualifying actions by the nominee that have surfaced. the fact that it is that hard, that we're seen discussing this is i think measure of how unfortunately rancor in washington has prevented us from getting basic work done. now this would be a good moment for us to rise above that. i understand the stakes. i understand the pressure that republican senators are undoubtedly under. i mean the fact of the matter is, that, the issue here is that the court is now divided on many issues.
this would be a deciding vote and there are a lot of republican senators who are going to be under a lot of pressure from various special interests and various constituencies, many of their voters to not let any nominee go through. no matter who i nominate. but that is not how the system is supposed to work. that is not how our democracy is supposed to work and i intend to nominate in due time a very well-qualified candidate. if we are following basic precedent, then that nominee will be presented before the committees. the vote will be taken. and ultimately they will be confirmed. justice kennedy when he was nominated by ronald reagan in ronald reagan's last year in office, a vote was taken, and there are a whole lot of democrats who i'm sure did not agree with justice kennedy on
his position on a variety of issues. by they did the right thing. they confirmed him. and if think voted against him they certainly didn't mount a filibuster to block a vote from even coming up. this is the supreme court. the highest court in the land. it's the one court where we would expect elected officials to rise above day-to-day politics. and this will be the opportunity for senators to do their job. your job doesn't stop until you're voted out, or until your term expires. i intend to do my job between now and january 20th of 2017. i expect them to do their job as well. all right? see who we got here. jeff mason.
>> thank you, mr. president. following up on that, should we interpret your comments just now that you are likely to choose a moderate nominee? >> no. >> okay. >> i don't know where you found that. you shouldn't assume anything about the qualifications of the nominee other than they're going to be well-qualified. >> all right. >> okay. >> following up, would you consider a rye ses appointment if your nominee is not grant ad hearing? >> i think that we have more than enough time to go through regular order, regular processes. i intend to nominate somebody, to present them to the american people. to present them to the senate. i expect them to hold hearings. i expect there to be a vote. >> that means no recess. >> full stop. >> and lastly, as long as we're doing this in a row how do you respond to republican criticism that your position is undercut by the fact that you and other members of your administration who were in the senate at the
time tried to to filibuster judge alito in 2006? >> look i think what's fair to say that how judicial nominations have evolved over time is not historically the fault of any single party. this is become just one more extension of politics. and there are times where folks are in the senate and they're thinking, as i just described, primarily about, is this going to cause me problems in a primary? is this going to cause me problems with supporters of mine? and, so people take strategic decisions. i understand that. but, what is also true is justice alito is on the bench right now. i think that historically if you look at it, regardless of what
votes, particular senators have taken, there has been a basic consensus, a basic understanding that supreme court's different and each caucus may decide who is going to vote where and what but that basically you let the vote come up and you make sure that a well-qualified candidate is able to join the bench, even if you don't particularly agree with him. and my expectation is that the same should happen here. now, this will be a test. one more test of whether or not norms, rules, basic fair play can function at all in washington these days. but i do want to point out this is not just the supreme court. we have consistently seen just a
breakdown in the basic functions of government because the senate will not confirm well-qualified nominees even when they're voted out of committee, which means they're voted by both parties without objection. we still have problems. because there's a certain mine set that says that we'll grind the system down to a the ha. if we don't like the president then we're just not going to let him make any appointments. we're going to make it tougher for the administration to do their basic job. we're going to make sure that ambassadors aren't seated, even though these are critical countries and it may have effect on our international relations. we'll make sure judges aren't confirmed despite the fact that justice robert himself has
pointed out there are emergencies in courts around the country because there are not enough judges and too many cases and system is breaking down. so this has become a habit. and it gets worse and worse each year. and it's not something i have spent a huge amount of time talking about because frankly the american people on of arage, they're more interested in -- on average, they're more interested in gas prices and wages and issues that touch their lives in more direct way so it doesn't get a lot of political attention. but this is the supreme court. and it is going to get some attention. and we have to ask ourselves as society a fundamental question. are we able to still make this democracy work the way it is supposed to, the way our founders envisioned it? i will challenge anyone who purports to be adhering to the
original intent of the founders, anybody who believes in the constitution, coming up with a plausible rationale as to why they would not even have a hearing for a nominee made in accordance with the constitution by the president of the united states with a year left, practically in office. pretty hard to find that in the constitution. all right? you've gotten at least, you gotten four now, jeff. tolu. >> thank you, mr. president. two different topics. first on syria. last year when president putin was about to enter into syria you said he was doing so from a position of weakness. that he would only get himself involved in quagmire there. >> yes. >> now with aleppo about to
fall, seems like president putin is basically getting one of his goals which is to bolster as yod and rebels that the u.s. is booking? what is your plan if aleppo does fall? do you plan to step up military action to help rebels in syria who you said who are key to taking on isis? then secondly i want to ask you about 2016 as well. >> okay. this is getting to be a lot of questions here. you asked me a big question right there. how by just answer that one? >> okay, sure. >> all right. the, first of all, if you look back at the transcripts what i said was that russia has been propping up assad this entire time. the fact that putin finally had to send his own troops and his own aircraft and his, and invest
this massive military operation was not a testament to great strength. it was a testament to the weakness of assad es position. that, if somebody's strong you don't have to send in your army to prop up your ally. they, they have legitimacy in their country and they're able to manage it themselves and you have good relations with them. you send in your army when the horse you're backing isn't effective. and that's exactly what happened. now, what i said was russia would involve itself in a quagmire? absolutely it will. if there is anybody who thinks somehow the fighting ends and russia and the regime made some initial advances, about 3/4 of
the country is still under control of foles other than assad. that's not stopping anytime soon. i say that by the way with no pleasure. this is not a contest between me and putin. the question is, how can we stop the suffering, stablize the region, stop this massive out-migration of refugees who are having such a terrible time, end the violence, stop the bombing of schools and hospitals and innocent civilians? stop creating a safe haven for isis and there's nothing that's happened over the last several weeks that points to those issues being solved and that is what i mean by a quagmire. putin may think he is prepared to invest in a permanent occupation of syria with russian military. that is going to be pretty
costly. that is going to be a big pies of business and, if you look at the state of the russian economy that's probably not the best thing for russia. what would be smarter would be russia to work with the united states and other parties in the international community to try to broker some sort of political transition. now john kerry working with his russian counterpart has on paper said that there is going to be cessation of hostilities in a few days. this will test whether or not that's possible. it's hard to do because there has been a lot of bloodshed and if russia continues indiscriminate bombing of the sort we've been seeing, i think it is fair to say you are not going to see any take-up by the opposition.
and yes, russia is a major military. obviously a bunch of rebels are not going to be able to compete with the hardware of the second most powerful military in the world. but that doesn't solve the problem of actually stablizing syria and the only way to do that is to bring about the some sort of political transition. we will see what happens over the next several days. and we will continue to work with our partners who are focused on defeating isis to also see how we can work together to bring about more lasting political solution than aerial bombardment of schools and hospitals are going to achieve but it's hard. i'm under no illusions this is going to be easy. a country has been shattered.
because assad was willing to shatter it. and, as repeatedly missed opportunities to try to arrive at a political transition. and russia has been party to that entire process. and the real question we should be asking is, what is it that russia thinks it gains if it gets a country that has been completely destroyed as an ally? that it now has to perpetually spend billions of dollars to prop up? that's not, that's not that great a prize. unfortunately the problem is that it has spillover effects that are impacting everybody. and that's what we have to focus
on. one thing i do want to add though, this has not distracted us from continuing to focus on isil and we continue to press them hard both in iraq and in syria. that will not stop and if we can get a political transition in syria that allow us to coordinate more effectively not just with russia but other countries in the region to focus on folks who pose the greatest direct threat to the united states. all right? and drew beady. -- andrew beedy. >> thank you, mr. president. i want to ask you first of all whether you think military intervention will be necessary in libya to dislodge the islamic state? and as extension of that do you think by the end of your presidency the islamic state will still have geographical strongholds throughout the middle east? i'm sorry i can't resist asking a third, how is the stadium
course? what did you shoot? >> the last for non-golfers is reference to pga west. very nice course. very difficult. my score is classified. [laughter]. with respect to libya, i have been clear from the outset that we will go after isis wherever it appears, the same way that we went after al qaeda wherever they appeared. and the testament to the fact that we are doing that already is the that we took out isis, one of isis's most prominent leaders in libya. we will continue to take actions where we've got a clear
operation and a clear target in mind. and, we are working with our other coalition partners to make sure that as we see opportunities, to prevent isis from digging in, in libya, we take them. at same time, we're working diligently with the united nations to try to get a government in place in libya. and that's been a problem. you know the tragedy of libya over the last several years is, libya has a relatively small population and a lot of oil wealth and could be really successful. they are divided by tribal lines and ethnic lines, power plays. there is now, i think a recognition on the part of a broad middle among their political leadership that it
makes sense to unify so that there is just some semblance of a state there. but, extremes on either side are still making it difficult for that state to cohere. if we get that done, that will be enormously helpful because our strong preference always been the case is to train libyans to fight. the good news in libya is, that they don't like outsiders coming in telling them what to do. there is a whole bunch of constituencies who are hardened fighters and don't ascribe to isis or their perverted ideology but they have to be organized and can't be fighting each other. so that's probably as important as anything that we're going to
be doing in libya over the coming months. carol lee. >> thank you, mr. president. the democratic race to replace you has gotten pretty heated lately and you have hillary clinton saying that, or at least casting herself as the rightful heir to your legacy and the one candidate who will be a keeper of your legacy while also saying that bernie sanders has been disloyal to you. is she right? >> well, you know, that's the great thing about primaries that everybody is trying to differentiate themselves when this fact bernie and hillary agree on a lot of stuff and disagree pretty much across the board with everything that the republicans stand for. so you know, my hope is that we can let the primary voters and caucus-goers have their say for a while and let's see how this
thing plays itself out. you know, i know hillary better than i know bernie because she served in my administration and she was outstanding secretary of state and i suspect that on certain issues she agrees with me more than bernie does. on other hand there may be issues where bernie agrees with me more. i don't know. i haven't studied their positions closely. here's what i have confidence in. that democratic voters believe in certain principles. they believe in equal opportunity. they believe in making sure that every kid in this country gets a fair shot. they believe in making sure that economic growth is broad based and everybody benefits from it and if you work hard you're not in poverty. they believe in preserving a
strong safety net through programs like social security and medicare. that they believe in a foreign policy that is not reckless, that is tough and protects the american people but doesn't shoot before it aims. they believe in climate change. they think science matters. they think that it's important for to us have some base regulations to keep regulations to keep our air clean and our water clean and make sure banks are not engaging in excesses that can result in the kind of thing that we saw in 2007, 2008. so there is a broad convergence of interests around those issues i think what you're seeing among democrats right now is a difference in tactics, trying to figure out how do you actually get things done? how do you actually operate in a political environment that's
become so polarized? how do you deal with the power of special interests and frankly, how do you deal with a republican party right now that has moved so far to the right it is often hard to find common ground. that is healthy debate. ultimately probably have an opinion on it based on both been a candidate of hope and change and a president who has got some nicks and cuts and bruises from getting stuff done over the last seven years. but for now i think it is important for democrat, democratic voters to express themselves and for the candidates to be run through the paces. the thing i can say
unequivocally, carol, is, i am not unhappy that i'm not on the ballot. ron allen. nbc. >> let me continue the 2016 questions. on republican side, and a lot of your guests were probably very intrigued by the fact there is a candidate who is still winning called for a ban on muslims and significant segments of the population in america agree. >> intrigued is way to put it. >> what is your reaction. that is one of my five questions. [laughter] but the point is -- >> ron, let's stick to two. >> the point is in the past you have explained that as anger, resentment insecurity, economic insecurity, the question is, how much responsibility do you accept for that reservoir of feeling in the country that is propelling that sort of candidate? a couple weeks ago you told
matt lauer, that donald trump would not win the presidency. do you now think he will not win the nomination as well? what about rubio, what about cruz? >> i think foreign observers are troubled by some of the rhetoric taking place in these republican primaries and in the republican debates. i don't think it is restricted by the way to mr. trump. i find it interesting that everybody is focused on trump primarily just because he says in more interesting ways what the other candidates are saying as well. so, so he may up the ante in anti-muslim sentiment but if you look at what the other republican candidates have said, that's pretty troubling too. he may express strong anti-immigration sentiment but,
you have heard that from the other candidates as well. you have a got a candidate who sponsored a bill that i supported to finally solve the immigration problem and he is running away from it as fast as he can. they're all denying climate change. i think that is troubling for the international community. since the science is unequivocal. and you know, the other countries around the world, they kind of count on the united states being on the side of science. and reason. and common sense because they know that if the united states does not act on big problems in smart ways nobody will. but this is not just mr. trump. look at the statements that are being made by the other candidates.
there is not a single candidate in the republican primary that thinks we should do anything about climate change. that thinks it is serious. well that's a problem. the rest of the world looks at that and says, how can this -- that be? i will leave it to you to speculate how this race will go. i continue to believe mr. trump will not be president and reason is i have a lot of faith in the american people and i think they recognize that being president is a serious job. it's not hosting a talk show, or reality show. it's a not promotion. it's not marketing. it's hard. and a lot of people count on us
getting it right. it is not a matter of pandering and doing whatever will get you in the news on a given day. sometimes requires you making hard decisions even when people don't like it. and doing things that are unpopular. and standing up for people who are vulnerable but don't have some powerful political constituency. and it requires being able to work with leaders around the world in a way that reflects the importance of the office. and gives people confidence that you know the facts and you know their names and you know where they are on a map. and you know something about their history. and you're not just going to play to the crowd back home because they have their own crowds back home. and you're trying to solve
problems. and so, yeah, during primaries people vent and they express themselves and seems like entertainment and often times reported just like entertainment but as you get closer reality has a way of intruding. and these are the folks that who are having folks in. ultimately say where i'm standing right now, has the nuclear codes with them. and can order 21-year-olds into a firefight and, have to make sure that the banking system doesn't collapse and is often responsible for not just the united states of america but, 20 other countries that are having big problems or falling apart and are going to be looking for us to do something.
deirdre: you heard him go down that q and a session. he answered a lot of various questions from the supreme court to questions about foreign policy to questions about the presidential race going on right now. questions of loyalty from hillary clinton and senator sanders. also made comments about the gop candidates, trump, rubio and cruz. also finished by saying being president is a tough job and
it's not about entertainment, it's about problem solving. my political power pant is here. welcome to you all. so glad you are here. you have been listening right alongside of me. i want to start with the first question the president was asked. lisa, president obama made it clear he will nominate a successor to just cities scalia. >> the constitution is pretty clear what's supposed to happen when there is as vacancy on the supreme court. the president of the united states is to nominate someone. the senate is to consider that nomination, and either they disapprove of that nominee or that nominee is elevated to the
supreme court. historically this has not been viewed as a question. deirdre: lisa, what do you make of the president's comments? >> of course he can nominate someone. but the republicans in the senate can also block that individual. that is the constitution. that's the different branches of government at work. this is a president and party, mind you president obama in 2006 tried to filibuster the nomination of alito, justice alito. senator chuck humaner in 2007 vowed to block any george w. bush nominee. this is a party days after the death of justice scalia is fundraising off of his death and turning this into a political football. i find great irony in president
obama and the democratic party saying republicans are making this political when there is a history of democrats making similar -- deirdre: it seems president obama said times have changed, here is the president talking about justice alito's confirmation. >> justice alito is on the bench right now. historically if you look at it, regardless of what votes particular senators have taken, there has been a basic consensus and understanding that the supreme court is different. deirdre: i have to bring you in here. did the president sidestep? it feels like times have changed. >> the filibuster is different from not giving him the right to even appoint a nominee. they can deliberate and filibuster. but to say that he should circumvent this whole thing and wait for the next president to come in.
the whole thing is unprecedented. we had 11 judicial nominees go through the process. the real issue is the fact that congress doesn't want to do anything. we have 39 federal nominees held up right now. deirdre: i want to bring in art laffer. i have to ask you what you make of the president's comments and about some of the discussion we have had, is he being somewhat hypocritical in that he did move to block justice alito. >> if i can say, scalia is a conservative justice on the supreme court and passed away. it's not as if it were a liberal member of the supreme court, it would be more understandable to keep the balance going if it were a liberal member, you take his nomination seriously and
vote up or down. but when it untilts the entire supreme court, that puts a whole new wrinkle in the process. deirdre: 4-4 right now. >> the republicans in the senate are correct saying be cautious to allow that unbalance to occur under their watch. i think they should keep the appointment of the next supreme court justice for the next president. deirdre: if we have a year like 2000 and there is a contended presidential race and we are 4-4, that would be unprecedented. >> it might be but so what? i don't see anything critical about that. let, manage you got a supreme court justice that was liberal or conservative. it sets a long-term tone for the country, but politics is
politics and whatever the next congress and next president will do will be done whether the court is liberal or conservative. but it's just like cold mow mow molasses. you are going to see an economic revolution whatever they do in the supreme court. my view. deirdre: we are asking because we know you have a strong penchant for being right, art, numerous times. i want to ask what you think about president obama's comments, being president is tough, it's not entertaining and he does not think donald trump will get the nomination. what do you make of that? >> i don't know what he bases that on. but right now donald trump seems to be doing very well.
i think donald trump will make a great president. i think it other candidates are also awfully good. they are fighting like mad. they are supposed to. this is a tough game. it's the season and it's good for them. they have got to learn to take the heat and after the nomination all the republicans will get together and defeat the democrat and hillary and bernie are going at it crazily as well. but this is all about economics. the last 8 years have been terrible economic in this country. it'it's got to change or you ani won't have a long period of prosperity. deirdre: i'm going to bring you in, dory. i'll ask for your reaction. >> so he may up the ante in anti-muslim sentiment. but if you look at what the
other republican candidates have said, that's pretty troubling, too. deirdre: that's president obama speaking about donald trump essentially being for the frontrunner. >> it's a very serious position. it takes a lot of intellect, a lot of patience, a lot of energy. i don't think donald trump los angeles energy, i think he lacks seriousness and it has left people wonder fell has the demeanor to have this job. deirdre: jeb bush says he's not a serious candidate. >> people find him amusing and entertaining but they wonder if he has the gravitas to do the job. let's say he were the president of the youth and had to have an international summit and speak with the leaders of saudi arabia
and egypt and jordan. deirdre: they might not be able to take a meting out of prior diplomacy. >> i think that's something people ought to think about as they go to polls this weekend in south carolina and beyond. deirdre: here is the president commenting further on trump's candidacy. >> i continue to believe mr. trump will not be president. i have a lot of faith in the american people. and i think they recognize that being president is a serious job. it's not hosting a talk show or a reality show. it's not promotion. not marketing. it's hard. deirdre: we heard the president say a lot of different things as i mentioned. he spoke on such a range of issues because reporters were throwing him all kind of different questions.
what stood out to you as significant. whether it was foreign policy or whether it was him i felt trying to helping his bets between hillary clinton and senator sanders. what stuck out in your mind? >> what stuck out in my mind was the libya question. he gave an indication that he was willing to go into libya militarily if is there are were there. he said before he will follow isis to the end of the earth to take him down. we were talking about this, he referred to it as isis. i worked in libya and helped train some of the leaders there, and he was correct. there was a frustration within the government that they are trying to create. they are anti-extreme isthmus limb and the american government did not go inner enough to train their fighters to protect their borders. which is why you have this spillover, muslim extremists going in.
deirdre: when you say you don't think donald trump is the right candidate, what do you see? >> i think marco rubio would make an excellent president. he's very well spoken and he's a very smart gentleman. he is from florida and if he can carry florida that's 10% of what you need. and on class warfare, he's the southern of a bartender and bar maid. the rich thing isn't going to stick to him. also if republicans nominate a hispanic, saying the republican party is racist collapses. i think he would make an excellent nominee and if elected, he would make an excellent president. we'll be back in just a few
moments. we'll be talking about a possible cancer breakthrough. scientists are claiming extraordinary success on a treatment to tackle cancer. >> the police officer killed, this time in mississippi. my next guest says the president should be doing more press conferences on the recent string of police shootings. >> he ema theses with people in fear of police violence instead of recognizing he's the head of the police community. african-americans and latinos disproportionately carry the burden of crime. and there are no more conservative new yorkers when it comes to law enforcement than african-americans.
when cigarette cravings hit, all i can think about is getting relief. only nicorette mini has a patented fast-dissolving formula. it starts to relieve sudden cravings fast. i never know when i'll need relief. that's why i only choose nicorette mini. we were in a german dance group. i wore lederhosen. so i just started poking around on ancestry. then, i decided to have my dna tested through ancestry dna. it turns out i'm scottish. so, i traded in my lederhosen for a kilt.
>>yup... now, you would think your insurance company would cut you some slack, right? >>no. your insurance rates go through the roof. your perfect record doesn't get you anything. >>anything. perfect! for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claim centers are available to assist you 24/7. for a free quote, call liberty mutual at switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509 call today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
deirdre: the medical community excited about a new therapy that retrains the body's immune system to fight cancer. 97% of patient reportedly went into remission after the treatment. dr. siegel, great to see you. this sound fantastic. 90% of the cases are showing hope. >> i'm excited about this. the cases showing hope are the cases that are not responding to common therapy. along comes this treatment and 95% of leukemia patient and lymphoma patients are showing a response. it used to be you poisoned it
with chemotherapy. now they are targeting abnormal proteins on the cancer cell. now we are taking the white blood cells out of the body, pawght receptor on it that recognizes the cancer, sticking it back in and it attacks the cancer cell directly. then the rest of the immune system comes in and joins the war. deirdre: that is great news. it makes me think the medical field is advancing and making progress as leaps and bounds over almost any other industry. >> immunotherapy, less side effects. deirdre: british researchers have been given the green light to use genetic editing on human embryo to potential think screen out diseases like cancer.
but there is fear this could be used to create desired humans. >> there is a tool called crispr. it's just as exciting as what i just told you about. crispr is an editor that we can use to edit the genes of an embryo. and it could allow to you say i want to look like deirdre, not dr. siegel. i want blue eyes not green. my kids are uncoordinated. imagine if i could choose kids that could go into the nba. the problem is who is going to draw the line? in this case it will be the british government and that bothers the heck out of me. deirdre: a lot of governments said hang on, u.k., you weren't supposed to green light these projects.
>> it's a great tool, but it has to be used in the right hands, and we cannot have designer babies. deirdre: protesters gathering before nfl headquarters protesting her black panther super bowl performance. my next guest says owr our president should be more worried about the recent string of police shootings than the supreme court nomination. >> the climate we are in with what happened with the department of just justice in ferguson led to the epidemic of police killing. where to get in... where to get out. if only the signs were as obvious when you trade. fidelity's active trader pro can help you find smarter entry and exit points and can help protect your potential profits. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be.
critics of the president point out he has been noticeably silent. they penned a letter saying mr. president your silent on these events affects volumes. '. radio host and fox news contributor david remember it's great to see you. that's a strong letter to the president and an open one inviting president obama to come to some of these services for the fallen police officers. >> absolutely open and frank. if anyone doesn't want to buy my side, the officer's side. look at the record of barack obama and how he reacted to law enforcement. he sees them as a prop to be used like the military. when it comes to ferguson and al sharpton and how he deals with that and the black lives matter crowd.
realize president obama only cares when he comes to serving his agenda. cops around the country feel left out. in this country we have 300 million people. we have 800,000 law enforcement officers in different agencies to protect us. they are getting the butt ends of it from the president. deirdre: you feel this is worse than any other administration you have covered. >> yes because of the lack of bundled response. -- because of the lack of balance of response. speak out about a law enforcement community tasked with protecting all of us. without structure our society falls apart. deirdre: kevin jackson called out some of these events.
>> the climate we are in with the department of justice and what happened in ferguson and all around the country led to this epidemic of police killing. deirdre: he called it an epidemic, equally strong in language. >> there is a broken trust that goes so much bigger. baltimore broken trust. martin o'malley rowrnlds up 20% of the population and ran for governor. and that broken trust played not you large part after the death of freddie gray. it's not been ajude kaitd. and the broken trust in community where police are part of the picture because the police deal with you at worst point. they meet you at a crime, at an accident which is good when they show up to help you. but the interactions with police happen before they deal with the courts and the system.
deirdre: the markets closing higher on the day. oil closing lower. charles payne has more on all of that right now. charles: the best back-to-back day since august of last year in the stocks. the music plays again in paris as the eagles of death metal play a concert. president obama raising the stakes on the supreme court nomination. can congress hold the line? donald trump continues to go after his gop rivals.