tv Cavuto on Business FOX Business December 18, 2016 2:30am-3:01am EST
it's up 20% in a year. >> jonas. >> mom, dad, hit mute, on december 26th miami is one of the few locations where burger king will take all the junk and garbage and toys you don't like and exchange for a whopper. that is good for restaurant brands international. neil now. all right. a mad dash to switch electoral votes ahead of monday's crucial electoral vote. hi everyone. glad to have you. i'm neil cavuto. by all accounts no matter how the electoral college vote goes down, put this down. donald trump is and will still be america's next president. but that is not stopping a number of celebrities urging electors to vote against him, or democrats demanding an intelligence briefing into alleged russian attacks they swear helped him, maybe tipped the election. the leader is none other than christine pelosi, daughter of nancy pelosi, who joined me on fox business network. do you think hillary clinton lost this election and the
electoral vote? >> i think that hillary clinton was severely damaged by the hacking of her e-mails and the dnc e-mails that went on a drip, drip, drip basis every day for three months -- >> so you think this russian hacking influenced the election results? >> absolutely. it absolutely did. >> so it wasn't her message that didn't reach voters who were subject to high unemployment states, like wisconsin and michigan, that that wasn't what did her in. this thing did her in? >> no, i think there are several factors in winning and losing. >> she lost. she lost. the russians didn't make her lose. she lost. well, that went well. we did save time by talking over one another, which is always a worry of mine. we have charles payne, charlie gasparino, along with holmes and gary. dagen just did usual great job sub hosting on bulls and bears,
ben stein at a rally, who knows. what do you think of this push and how it's changing things and may be hurting donald trump in the process? >> well, look, it's post election stress disorder, the best way i can describe it. it started with the jill stein and this recount that lasted three minutes. but for me if you just go back to wikileaks, this is the m.o. of the party. they use the media and they isolate something, which is russia, and basically what they're doing is they're going after donald trump. and it doesn't start here. it's going to start when he starts his presidency 1,460 days of driving to the hoop on the guy. and there's nothing you can do about it. day in, day out. >> all right. but they have to sway 37 electors, essentially. can they do that? >> no. i had the misfortune of interviewing miss pelosi as well. and i can tell you amazing. >> not a fan of yours either. >> no, she's not.
here's the thing, neil, obviously the effort to delegitimize donald trump's presidency before it even begins. we understand that. maybe that's what the wall of opposition does. but i think the democrats are looking so awful at this point they really need to stop, huddle up, go to the sidelines and listen to what the american public said november 8th. we know this isn't going to work. even if it worked by the wildest imagination, it will go to the house, which is controlled by the gop. so it's an exercise -- >> there's a lot of money behind it. there's a lot of effort to sort of get this thing going so they can have intelligence briefing for the hollywood types to gather around, do all these psas, at least they're honest enough to say it's nothing to do with russia, we hate the guy and don't think you should elect him. but if you think about it, charlie gasparino, i mean, if a company went through these extremes and excuse making over election results, or over the launch of a bad product. >> quarterly results. >> and not address -- i mean, the whole staff would be fired. >> not only that, the analyst
community, some of the voters for corporate america would be laughing the ceo out of his job. so whoever's -- i agree with charles here. this is like desperation times ten. it's not going to work. it makes them look so desperate and pathetic and little. it's funny that they're actually doing it. and it reminds me we're not -- you might be, but i'm not. >> really, we're going to go there? >> richard nixon kennedy. there were efforts the mob gave to the election, jfk, not richard nixon, and nixon of all people did the classy thing and said i'm not going to put the country through -- >> i've heard that analogy sometimes. it's a good point. bottom line is here is the goal to make donald trump damaged goods? and coming in to make him a
damaged president? >> i think that's exactly right. we've heard the jill stein recount, we're hearing now the russia hacking. all of these reasons, but democrats aren't listening to bill clinton who actually criticized the hillary clinton campaign for not going to wisconsin. hillary clinton did not visit wisconsin once. that blew not because of the berlin wall but because of hillary clinton's own campaign tactics. and i would say in fact democrats are proving donald trump's point, which is that the elites have been in charge. the elites are trying to now drive the narrative, drive the way that we consider our president. and donald trump he went to the people, he went to the rust belt, he got those votes. >> remember the criticisms you're wasting your time. >> also do you remember on november 7th we were told if donald trump lost and did not accept a peaceful transfer of power that this would be undermining democracy? well, now look who's doing it? >> adam, i want to go something charlie and i were talking about this money theme, wasting money,
companies did this, ignore results or blame it on weather or whatever, there'd be hell to pay, but hillary clinton herself saying comey did it, the russian stuff did it. reed blaming comey and a whole sort of other things, i think they threw in a lunar eclipse somewhere. my point is everyone is doing everything they can in the nktic party to cite other factors than their own bad campaigning or bad vat ja strategizing. >> well, i listened to your question to pelosi, i think i can answer it directly. there is no question that donald trump won the electoral votes. and furthermore -- >> that's very interesting because she could not say that. >> yeah, i noticed that. >> couldn't say it. >> and i don't understand why. i mean, that is just the truth. and furthermore, unless the russians manipulated computers to change the votes, they didn't affect the election either. all that said, i mean, this unseemly behavior absolutely began with donald trump with no evidence saying this thing is
all rigged. i mean, it's a horrible situation where nobody's behaving themselves. >> saying it was rigged during the campaign -- >> who's talking about rigged elections now? who's talking about the speed of results now? >> if i could jump in -- >> neil, this is my point. this is the level of discourse that we've descended to. and i do think -- >> if i could jump in. what is bizarre is basically the hillary clinton campaign is blaming russia for giving her a 2.4 million popular vote lead. how does this add up? >> now you're being creative. >> the russians rigged the election so hillary clinton could win the popular vote? >> that's great. but are democrats going to change anything? normally company encounter something like this, gary, has to change and reshift strategy, think through this, whatever. i was talking to a number of republicans this week said, good, i hope they continue with this denial because they'll never get their act together. you say what? >> look, all i know is they're
worried about what the republicans are doing. they better get going on what they've been doing. they lost the election. for me though this is not about this week's electoral votes. this is about 2018 and 2020. they are setting it up along with the national media to destroy this guy. they are going to investigate him every day. they're going to accuse him every day. they're going to do the things over the next four years they haven't done in the last eight years to drive the point home. >> you're right about that. charlie gasparino, i was talking to senator leading democrats already to say if he doesn't divest himself, all his business entanglements, any one of those entanglements could be grounds alone for high crime misdemeanor, an impeachable defense right off the bat. >> just so you know legally, i'm not saying this should happen, there are a lot of trip wires when you own businesses and you're the president. >> sure. but i think it's a bit premature to say get the impeachment running. >> get back to the question with gary which i think was a great
one -- >> you didn't like my follow-up one? >> i liked that too. and they will try. but here's the thing, will the democratic party change? there is a debate right now, shouldn't we put the white working class voter back into the democratic coalition, or should we as we have been doing for the last probably 20 years ignore white working class voters? >> bill clinton's answer was no. >> no. >> by the way hillary clinton's answer in 2008 was no as well. >> my answer is honestly hillary clinton didn't take any voters into account, to be quite frank with you. she took the whole thing as a coronation and it blew up in her face. so far the post election moods with ellison, pelosi, the mother, just show these guys are not listening to the message of the people. bottom line. they are tone deaf and making a huge mistake. >> the black vote stayed home. >> but they weren't motivated to go out. >> naming keith ellison to be the dnc chair, this is obviously
tone deafness. >> i think charlie and i -- gasparino are more up on the black vote, really. >> really? >> he gives me all my good tips. >> please, please. >> anything i say will get me in trouble. >> no, all of us dive into that one. forget about a hack from russia, how about a very real threat from china? after this. today on "forbes on fox" some gop leaders suggesting delaying president-elect donald trump's tax cuts because of our growing national debt. but with a new report showing the nation's 500 biggest job creators would save $87 billion a year from trump's tax plan, the forbes gang says they should pass it on day ononononon vitte
>> so what would you do if china were telling you straighten up, fly right, don't lecture us about our currency, on and on and on, what would a secretary or a president donald trump say or do? >> i'd tax the hell out of them. i would tax them back to china. >> all right. thank god for videotape and he was talking to me. that was donald trump more than six years ago. and it's been a consistent theme of his, as a businessman, as a politician and now as president-elect of the united states. this week china seems to be sending him a message. u.s. navy seizing a u.s. underwater unmanned drone in the south china sea and more flare ups like this are happening on a frequent basis. amy, what's going on here? >> well, i noticed your interview was in may of 2010, and as you mentioned donald trump -- >> you were 6. >> yes, i was a mere wee little child. and donald trump has been
campaigning on china his entire life. >> he's been very consistent on that. >> i would not presume to advise the president-elect on china policy, but i would warn him that china is very willing to flex their military muscle. if you remember george bush jr. in the first month of his presidency had to face a china crisis with one of our navy jets got clipped by a chinese plane, it was grounded for ten days. for ten days seized our people -- >> happened back then. >> and even under bill clinton he had a china confrontation with warships being put in there. so for donald trump it's been a lifelong campaign against the chinese, but it has real world foreign policy implications. >> but charles payne, we've always -- with the chinese. one thing weird or refreshing about donald trump is he's not. >> he's not. but again, i think amy's got a point with respect to mexico and canada are going to fold on nafta. that's going to be pretty easy. but china already they flew that long range nuclear bomber, you know, they have militarized or
they're militarizing that manmade -- >> so you'd be afraid to take them on? >> no, you have to. the longer we wait, the more powerful they become. i'm glad donald trump has an opportunity now to put some action behind words. >> but the question is what he does. >> what he could do. listen, our leverage in the middle of the chinese sea, south china sea, is not very good. and not only that -- >> but these are presumably international waters. they claim they're their waters and they're not. >> i understand that. are we going to war over it? >> so you too would fold. >> here's what i would do, i would implore donald trump to be more like nixon and less like himself. and nixon was tough with everybody, but it was all behind the scenes. and there's ways of negotiating this. here's the bottom line, he gets into a trade war, we're not going to have a real war with them, but he gets into some trade war where they start doing sanctions against us, start dumping our treasuries. >> then we respond tit for tat. >> our markets will go down --
they'll take it before we take it. >> really? >> i think so. >> i also add donald trump should not put himself in a position as president obama did and allow himself to be publicly and symbolically snubbed. >> adam, what do you do in this case, adam? i mean, all of a sudden you're in a position where the chinese avoid -- with american leaders of any party, we have your debt, you need us badly. donald trump in that same interview from like 68 years ago, but one of the things you pointed out was that we've got to start acting like they need us a lot more than we need them. he consistently pounded that theme. do you agree with that? that we're afraid to take on china not realizing china needs us a hell of a lot more than we need them. >> i think it's just the reverse. we've been behaving that way for so long even though we were the only global super power. either that's not true or very shortly not going to be true. and i think he has to be very, very careful with them. >> he's sick of it. >> yes, i understand that.
and that's worrisome. >> okay. what do you think of that, gary? president trump comes in and says i'm not going to play these kind of games. >> the problem is china thinks they own everything over there and that's why they're doing this. this was a little bit more brazen. >> for a good reason. >> not done anything they militarized these islands that aren't even theirs, how is that going to suddenly change? >> it's not going to change. they're going to keep doing it. look, nobody has done a thing. they put up airstrips, military buildings, charles mentioned that the bomber last week. they're going to keep on keeping on. this is the first time they have somebody that's really yapping at them. basically they're just saying, hey, donald, we know you're there, and guess what, look what we're doing. we'll talk to you down the road. and i think the good news is i think trump's hired some people where they'll get him to negotiate much more quietly. it should not be out loud. >> it was okay for john f. kennedy but not for donald j. trump, a history lesson for critics who are bashing the president-elect's cabinet
outline, they're ceos who know about getting things done and who understand accountability, and why not, after all these failed years of professional politicians coming up short, why not have people who are accustomed to this kind of people. >> how about robert kennedy, his brother. >> but the guy running ford, that's not a bad thing. all i'm saying is media very different when this involved someone like donald trump than when it involved someone like john kennedy. >> donald trump has his ceos, all of these people build things, material things. it feels like the press is kind of forgetting -- with bits and
bites or whatever they're doing. the point is that the president gets to choose his cabinet, these are people who are going to advise him on executive policy and they're forgetting that we have congress, hello, hello. >> but all the tech guys hate him. >> here's the thing, the funny thing about donald is he actually has a millionaire for these guys that are coming in. so he really does push it. by the way, there's nothing wrong with rich guys. i worry about diversity of thought. if they made a lot of money, that's great. >> diversity of thought, that's great. >> adam, what do you make of all this? >> look, rich ceos are just fine, but he ran a campaign where the little guy was saying, hey, we hate these rich ceos. it's a little incongruent.
>> we have had eight years of anti-business legislation, give me wilbur ross and people who understand the greatness in this country is in the workers and the business. and get rid of all the mandates, taxes, regulation and all that crap. >> and give me more of those carls jr.'s commercials. >> that too. >> someone told you, they're very, very -- i'm sorry. look at the time, amy, we have to go. meanwhile, small companies make it big for foreieieieiei
this, better to go with indexes. >> you think the small cap guys are running? they've been going like crazy. >> everything's going to run like crazy until it stops. >> that is profound, young man. more now. hoping for a massive tax reform on day one of the trump administration? you might want to listen to this incoming white house chief of staff reince priebus has to say about that. >> we're probably going to lead with obama care repeal and replace, then you'll have tax, we'll have a small tax reform package and then a bigger tax reform package at the end of april. >> steve forbes says don't delay, go big, and do it on day one. hi, everybody, welcome to forbes on fox, let's go in to focus to find out with mr. steve forbes.