tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business March 16, 2017 12:00pm-2:01pm EDT
visit ireland in the future. >> some point in the future he will visit. that is moments ago. they subsequently turned around to walk inside of the capitol building. that is honor of st. patrick's day tomorrow march, 17th. we'll be here for you and i will wear a green tie. how but, charles payne, in for neil cavuto? charles: i will see if i have a green tie. i might have one among 3 or 400. >> in charles is talking to me i can't hear. i lost my ears piece. charles: no problem. catch you tomorrow. i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. president trump and paul ryan are at a luncheon with the prime minister of ireland. we'll bring them to you when they begin. this is the first time presidene laying out the agenda. he released a budget that he wants congress to act on. blake burman with the latest. blake?
reporter: he released a tweet, his first reaction to the skinny budget as it is called. the president tweeting, quote, a budget puts america first, must make safety its number one priority. without safety there can be no prosperity. along those lines it is the defense industry and national security which the budget is being beefed-up. look at three different agencies there will be increases according to this proposed budget. the department of defense, president wants to see 10% increase all the way up to $54 billion when said and done. department of homeland security. increase of 7%. that would include money for proposed border wall. veterans affairs which president talked about more than a year-and-a-half. now closer to two years, fixing problems there. he wants increase of 6%.
whether you talk about decreases there are major decreases. they will have budgets cuts according to white house. environmental protection agency. the trump administration proposing a 31% cut, that would include 3200 jobs. the state department, 28% cut. that includes $10 billion in total. much of that coming from foreign assistance. then there is labor and agriculture departments. the trump administration wants to see a 21% cut. when you talk to folks within the administration, they say look, this is exactly what president trump campaigned on. democrats say, that is the exact problem as well. >> we're spending more money to defend the country. more money to enforce the laws. more money to secure borders. more money to take care of vets. more money for school choice and less money for foreign aid. that is exactly what the president said he would do. that is what it is. >> billions of dollars of defense, ransacking america's
investment in jobs, education, innovation, clean energy and life saving medical research. it will leave our nation weakened. reporter: charles, when you look at specific cuts here, i will give you a few examples. the trump wants an end to corporation for public broadcasting. winding down funding to npr and pbs. ending funding for the national endowment for the arts. nearly $6 billion worth of fundg for the national institutes of health. a lot of cuts in there. but as you heard from the president's tweet, this is all to beef up, to boost up military spending. charles? charles: break thank you very much. defense spending has bonn down but the has the left railing these days. the question how necessary are the cuts? go to former democratic congressman dennis kucinich. the president ran on this platform. the american public put him into office. he is keeping his promise.
so that is not a surprise. although i would say many observers are really shocked at any elected official, no less the president of the united states is going to actually cut the bloat in federal government, dennis. >> well, you know, the president's new to washington. i'm not. this budget is not fiscally conservative. the pentagon has never passed an audit. it has over, has trillions of dollars in accounts that are not reconciled. general mattis will have to get control of this and tell the pentagon that it is not exempt from ordinary oversight. and we've got to find out how the money is being spent. so you know, you want to drain the swamp in washington, mr. president, you don't have to look too far from the potomac. charles: you would not disagree that our military has been he depleted? that our military readess is really shaky lows as the world is coming on? combination of bad actors who are lethal, isis, al qaeda and larger adversaries like china
building man-made militarized islands in the south china sea? zooms to me the most obvious part of the plan is increase in pentagon spending? >> well, excuse me, but the pentagon has over, about 800 bases in 130 countries. we have problems here at home. that we are not taking care of. and the priorities are misplaced. i'm telling you again, it is not fiscally conservative when a department has never passed an audit. when it has trillions dollars in accounts that have not been reconciled, to go ahead plus up the budget $54 billion. this is something general mattis is going to have to get control of. congress will have to ask for more explanation on black ops. where is the money going? this is american. charles: i think the first line
of defense that al qaeda doesn't fly a plane into a building. ask but the cuts, are you offended epa 31%, health and human services 16%. department of agriculture, department of labor 21 is% each? department of transportation down 13%. we know there is a lot of lot of bureaucracy out there. we learned through the, when the government shut down that term non-essential personnel. we also figured out that you know what? we might not only be able to operate with a lot fewer people but maybe we'll become more efficient at that? >> well, if we become more efficient while the air becomes dirtier and water can't be consumed, that's not the kind of efficiency which the american people will come to appreciate. i want to go back to what i said. this isn't about al qaeda. we've got plenty of money to take on al qaeda. we've got plenty of money to take on isis. we should stop funding terrorists which is what tulsi gabbard and rand paul are trying to do.
we have to get a grip on this. listen to me. they haven't passed an audit, ever! there is trillions of dollars in accounts that have not been reconciled. how does that serve the interest of the american people if we don't even know where the money is going? that is what i'm advocating. it is fiscally conservative approach and i think general mattis will be in a position to tell the agencies within the pentagon they're no longer exempt from oversight. charles: listen, i don't think anyone in the audience has a problem with accountability in washington, d.c., which is why so many archeering the actual notion that someone actually, president trump is actually going to take a meat cleaver to the bloat. i need you to hold on one second, congressman kucinich. i want to listen in to paul ryan. he is speaking now. >> about a family that is out for dinner. the father calls the waiter over and says, sorry, lad, my son spilled the water. the waiter says, no problem, sir, i will get you a new one.
the father grabs the wait are's arm, okay, but make sure this one likes hurling? [laughter] take a second for those to sink in. my family comes from kilkenny. i had to go with a hurling joke. i always try to give a irish joke every year. i ask my staff to give me a good list of irish jokes for the lunch so they did that. top of the list, number one, your irish accent. charles: paul ryan not necessarily slaying them yet. he is warming up. by the way president trump will spoke momentarily. we'll keep it on the screen. i want to bring in former u.s. small business administrator, hector bar-etto. along with congressman kucinich staying with us. hector, you've seen a the budget. major commitment to military spending. major commitment to building the wall. major commitment to helping
veterans. feels that president trump with the so-called skinny budget is keeping his promise to america. what do you think? >> we had to deal with budgets every year. we had a flat line budget, every year we broke records. the democrats were always telling us we didn't have enough money. they couldn't understand how we were so effectively with the resources that we have. we tried to explain to them. it is not what you have to spend, it is what you do with it. we're much more concerned with outcomes than they are with actually putting in. so i think this is a good budget. obviously they're going to work it out. it is a proposal. the appropriations committees will have to go in there look what the effects of some of these line items are going to be. i think they're going in the right direction. this reminds me of ronald reagan, when he strengthened -- his commitment was we'll strengthen our security and our military and improve our economy, and that is
what this administration is trying to do. charles: absolutely. this is the largest proposed increase in the military budget since ronald reagan. we won the coal war and went through a year, a -- cade of prosperity in this country that really has not been met since then. >> let me ask a question here if. charles: please do. >> how do you know you are safer if you don't know how the money is being spent? >> i don't disagree we need better accountability from all agencies, not just the military. listen if there is some congressman wantsantiquated military product, whether a tank that sinks in the sand we make sure we don't have those. i don't disagree with that. i don't think that the american public does. you must acknowledge that our military readiness is at a weak point. i don't think we are this vulnerable since world war ii. >> how do you know that if you don't know how the money is being spent? this is fiscal conservative approach. the pentagon is exempt from audits. trillions of dollars in accounts
never reconciled. never passed an audit. let's look at that that is what i'm urging general mattis to do. look how the money is being spent. then come and tell the american people what your he needs are. charles: meantime, as general mattis contemplates that, with a bunch of generals and bunch of ceos i think one the first things they will do look at the bottom line. we know with a $4 trillion budget, our federal government still with sweeping cuts is way too bloated. i want to get back to you, hector. 80 programs are being cut. a lot that the mainstream media will point to saying hey, you're destroying the poor. there are a lot of job retraining programs out there. there are certain organizations to help business development. hold on one second, guys, because president trump, he see if he can, a little funnier than his rifle, paul ryan. [applause] >> thank you very much.
[applause] >> thank you very much, speaker ryan for that wonderful toast. although i have heard better jokes. thank you to all of our friend and distinguished members of congress for joining us here today. great honor. and a really great honor to be th you vice president pence. you have been terrific. [applause] and auld of our friend, welcoming kishok, that is my new friend. my new friend. great guy.
[applause] and you are something very special. we sat, we talked, and i think, we're friends now too, right? and it is really an honor. thank you. thank you. [applause] thanks, finola, appreciate it. also the delegation members, very, very special. we've spent some time together and we're going to have a very, very great, long-term relationship as we would with ireland anyway, but this is a very special group so i very much appreciate it. we're here today to celebrate america's commitment to ireland and the tremendous contributions, and i know it well, the irish immigrants and their descendants have made right here in the united states and throughout the world. the very first st. patrick's day parade, i spent a lot of time at st. patrick days over the years
i will tell you that, was held in my home town, new yk city, march 17th, 1762. with each subsequent year the irish people marched and selled another accomplishment. they celebrated hard-erred success. they had tremendous success all over the world but in this country they have had tremendous success. over the years they passed the beautiful st. patrick's cathedral, a memorial and monument to faith of irish catholics in america. they celebrated their shared success in american society with the election of john f. kennedy. [applause] they fought for america in war and combat and their battlefield courage has earned admiration
and acclaim throughout the world. they have great courage. the proud tradition started in seven -- 1762 and flourished by all americans of all faiths and background across our very beautiful and very special land. as we stand together with our irish friends i'm he reminded of that proverb, and this is a good one, this is one i like, heard it for many, many years, and i love it, always remember to forget the friends that proved untrue but never forget to remember those that have stuck by you. we know that, politically speaking. a lot of us know that. we know it well. [applause] it is a great phrase. the people of ireland and the people of the united states have stuck together through good
times and bad times over many centuries. we have built a bond that thrives, inspires and endures and with us it will be closer than ever before, i can tell you that. [applause] so as we celebrate our share history and our enduring friendship, let us commit ourselves to working together as we will to build on that bond to the benefit of our citizens for many more generations to come. thank you, god bless you, and may god always bless our deep and lasting friendship and relationship. we love ireland and we love the people of ireland. thank you very much for being here. thank you. [applause] charles: that was president trump toasting ireland's prime
hey gary, what'd you got here? this bad boy is a mobile trading desk so that i can take my trading platform wherever i go. you know that thinkorswim seamlessly syncs across all your devices, right? oh, so my custom studies will go with me? anywhere you want to go! the market's hot! sync your platform on any device with thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade live-streat the airport.e sport binge dvr'd shows while painting your toes. on demand laughs during long bubble baths.
that second federal judge blocking president trump's revised travel order. the president slamming the ruling but what are his options now? to "judicial watch" president tom fitton how the white house can implement a court-safe, activist-save order, if that is possible, tom? >> it will being tough at least in the lower courts. the ruling yesterday was in the ninth circuit out of hawaii. the ninth circuit will obviously be unfriendly to president trump. you have activist judges who are, really making political points in their rulings as opposed to legal points in many ways which is particularly troubling. in the end it will be up to the supreme court. i don't know how the supreme court will rule on these issues. there is this anti-trump bias in many judicial courtrooms across the country evidently. and i don't know if that is going to affect supreme court thinking from otherwise sensitive justices there.
charles: last night judge derek watson, hawaii federal judge, he starts it off, starts off the 43-page ruling by saying the i will lodgic of the -- illogic of the government's intentions is palpable. if that palpable? is that obvious to you? why does see see it this way? is it because of his idealogical bent? >> what your viewers should understand, president trump said in the past he want ad muslim ban. so a subsequent executive order that targets countries where terrorism is a major problem and there is no functioning government that would allow us to ascertain the backgrounds easily of those entering the united states that there should be a pause rig people in from those countries. but the courts are hyper focused on the phrase, muslim ban. therefore they think it is religiously-inspired and there is no reasonable purpose for keeping islamic jihadists out of
the country in a way that would prevent everyone from that country from coming into the united states for a period of time. i don't buy it. it is not persuasive. but that is the problem the president is facing from these judicial activists who are not giving the president the benefit of a doubt that frankly they ought to under the law which in matters of foreign policy it's really, you have to go, you have to be on firmer ground to second-guess the president's actions here, which are really based on policies implemented by president obama, which were issues, these countries are issues of concern of the prior administration. charles: that is how the initial seven, now six countries were he developed or at least how they were focused on but, tom, he also said overwhelmingly muslim populations of these countries are 90.7 to 98.8, it gets to the argument that a dog is a
quadroped but not every dog is a quadroped is a dog. we have can't defend ourselves from any country from overwhelming religion of any sort. that seems to hamstring is and i'm pretty sure not the intent of the framers of the constitution. >> can the president conduct wars in those countries? charles: no, but the idea -- >> that is the logic of this? this is the absurdity of the court's logic, because the president expressed concerns about radical islamic jihadism, that he is against all muslims and is therefore all foreign policy that targets muslim countries is suspect and can be stopped by one federal court judge, can run our nation's foreign policy. that is not the way our system is supposed to be running. charles: the saga continues. thanks a lot with you len your legal expertise on these things. >> happy to, thank you. charles: is the obamacare
replacement bill about to be replaced? the plan passed a key hurdle. there are still major republican resistance and opposition to this. we have the details for you right after this. ♪ hi my name is tom. i'm raph. my name is anne. i'm one of the real live attorneys you can talk to through legalzoom. don't let unanswered legal questions hold you up, because we're here, we're here, and we've got your back. legalzoom. legal help is here.
legal help is here. hidden in every swing, every chip, and every putt, is data that can make the difference between winning and losing. the microsoft cloud helps the pga tour turn countless points of data into insights that transform their business and will enhance the game for players and fans. the microsoft cloud turns information into insight. please repeat the objective. ♪ thrivent mutual funds. managed by humans, not robots. before investing, carefully read and consider fund objectives, risks, charges and expenses in the prospectus at thriventfunds.com.
>> we are on track and on schedule clearly intended to be this whole time. we made a promise to repeal and replace obamacare. we are going to keep our promise to the people that elected us. charles: speaker ryan saying that obamacare replacement built on schedule right now, but there's still some resistance comment a fair amount from republicans. dr. janet mossad planned very well. you've met with lawmakers on the hill to discuss the bill. why do you think it's getting so much pushback? >> k., charles. good to be here.
thanks for having me. there is no plan that is perfect. every plan of problems and issues. we worked through them and we have to do it with the benefit of the american people. we've got to look at the problem. the initial problem is because of the initial architect of the aca. it was built on eighth faulty foundation with no recourse and no regard for the financial burden and impact it would have on american people. to me that is fundamentally wrong at its core. i am hopeful. i am hopeful because the hhs secretary tom price and he's a doctor. he knows, he understands the importance of cultivating a device in the health care system for all americans that will allow for better access, high-quality care that's affordable and meaningful. you can't just have any health care plan. you might have a huge deductible. patients can afford that appeared true into sure. on paper you have a plan but you can afford to use it.
you talked about some of your patients. give us an example of how obamacare was detrimental to this. >> is so heart wrenching and heartbreaking. i had a diabetic patient come in. he was sick, feverish, weak, dizzy. when did you last check your blood sugar? a few days ago. he hasn't checked it in a few months. the reason is he couldn't afford the clue crows strips for his machine. he can afford his medication because he has such high deductibles, 3000 or $4000 just to pick up some lifesaving medications. and set up a $150 for his medicine that his insurance wouldn't cover comment he hasn't been -- had to be in icu on an insulin drip. that is something that got to change. the guy to make a difference because a lot is at stake here. charles: now two groups of defense so far. republicans who are
conservatives concerned about certain aspects of this that make it seem like obamacare, but then you have democrats saying the poor will be disproportionately hurt by this and others. would you say to them? we know obamacare is part and parcel of an effort of redistribution if you will. what is the answer for people who are afraid poor people will have less coverage? they make you know, that's not true. it's natural and normal to be scared and fearful of change is ahead of us. anyone on medicaid are going to lose it. there'll just be changes. they will either retain what they have or what they have is reformed. they are not going to lose their health care. paul ryan has said it appeared they will not pull the rug from underneath you. the goal in the mission in the mission president trump said from day one is transparent in his mission, his goal is to protect the american people not just rebuilding the military but
repealing in reforming obamacare that is to allow everyone to have affordable, accessible, high-quality health care. no one is going to lose their health care. it's a matter of making changes to what they currently have. we have to do that. we have to make changes, otherwise our country is going to go bankrupt because we are putting all of our dollars into the health care system and we need tbe doing it in a more vice fashion. charles: thank you very much. we appreciate you coming on. >> my pleasure. charles: a new government report shows #-number-sign dropped by half a million people. house minority leader nancy pelosi suggesting it's because the gop sabotaged. what about rising premiums, and all the other hard stories independent women's forum along with former new york republican congresswoman dan hayworth appeared congresswoman hayworth, i guess 12.2 million people in
this room down from a year ago, certainly people are hearing about this because what i have read his people have actually had to use obamacare are the ones most dissatisfied with it. >> absolutely, charles, for the recency were just discussing with dr. janette nesheiwat. if the premiums have skyrocketed from which most of the time they have, is premiums make it difficult for them to have health care. i say no, obama carries in a death spiral. the insurance industry, which has been heavily subsidized by obamacare, they signed off on it, has been withdrawn because it simply doesn't work. we need transformational legislation and not one the challenges we face in a three-step approach. charles: we are almost over the first. a lot of friction in between house republicans and senate republicans.
we still haven't they? if we have anything at all. >> it's a process and there continued to be some amendment made in a lot of changes before we get to a final plan of consensus. republicans hope in the reconciliation is one of three steps including administrative action and further legislation through regular order after the bill passes. i want to go back and debunk some of the talking points nancy pelosi and others use when they talk about how republicans have sabotaged obamacare. first of all, they point to a program called to risk corridor program. because republicans may change preventing taxpayer funds from effectively bailing out insurance companies that somehow republicans are responsible for financial losses insurance companies made. they may be harder to believe, the insurance companies didn't price their premiums high enough for obamacare plans to account for the cost.
that's effectively what happens. americans would be happy to know their taxpayer dollars were going to make payments through the corridor program for insurance companies. that is unfair for pelosi to say republicans are responsible for sabotaged in the law. what is to say about the law that insurance companies they bailing out? charles: let's face it, they put buffers and for themselves and as soon as they ran out, they ran out of style. congresswoman hayworth, that brings us to how complicated this is ultimately to push through because you've got doctors, patients, insurance companies and american taxpayer. how do you see it ultimately? is it too early to envision what the final product may look like? >> what we need charles is to keep an eye on the visn. my house republican did have their eyes and a great vision. that includes fundamentally getting the government hand off our health care as much as we can. that means not having the
federal government in power insurers to the point that our taxpayers and patients can't afford their health care. we need to open up theto compet. that's one of the key things republicans have talked about for a long time. i will hearken back the president shortly after they said if we have to, we have to break the filibuster rule in the senate and really get it passed efficiently. the president should brainstorm this is a good option. republicans don't need to worry politically because the next term will likely gain senate seats. if we are right about this, we will have economic improvement that people will be happy to provide political support to do even more. >> the ultimate game of political chicken.
charles: controversy at mcdonald's over a tweet. the official twitter account of mcdonald's. donald trump, you're actually disgusting excuse of a president and we would like to have barack obama back. also, you have tiny hands. shortly after that, mcdonald tweeting its account was compromised and is investigating what happened. many people think it was the guy from burger king. anyway, i messed that up. donald trump supporters are
calling for a boycott of this company right now. you have been treating me all day, wanted to ask where the stock is. it's up 32 cents. go pro stock is searching up after the company announces job cuts. 270 jobs to get back into the swing of things. canada goose, you know the canada goose. they are making their debut today, going public in america and canada have been a successful launch there. actually the biggest ipo since snap, which continues to fall apart of those hanging above 20 at least for now. yesterday, tomorrow rate hikes coming this year. president trumps for the economy of the two bigger growth should the fed be prepared to step on the gas. the market watcher jason herzog. you think we are going to see more rate hikes this year. >> i think we have to be careful. europe has a lot of elections going on right now.
they think we slow and steady move out -- move up the race. i do want to see a quick rise in rates. charles: here's the thing i thought was interesting yesterday. they are seeming to have a baby and different, but they are not giving donald trump a lot of credit. they are looking at 2.1% growth this year and 2.1% growth next year. seems like it would be a lot more than that. >> what you expect janet yellen to do? throw donald trump rocks? she wouldn't do that. the economy is looking better. the economy is at the lowest it's been the last eight years. unemployment as i said is doing really well. consumer spending is really well. we are seeing economic factors go into positive pathway. of course you will see this interest rates more quickly versus slowly. >> waited 235,000 jobs the first month in office. 30,000 manufacturing jobs.
delivering on its promises. charles: 59,000, 66,000 according to a dp construction jobs. those are great paying jobs. you've got to wonder how much of role that would play with the fed as well. i think janet gave her a little bit of a matcher comme in other words, allowihe economy to heat up more than general because would she be foolish enough to derail the economy as it's coming out of this multiyear slumber? >> well, i do think it's a political animal for another segment. if we had 3% to 5% gdp, that's when we have to intervene. charles: here's the problem. inflation will go about 2% before gdp goes up 3%. unless she's understanding the signs are there. the best housing starts number for single-family homes, i love this number because this is
traditional. white picket fence, family formation, having kids. i love that kind of thing. she's going to have a dilemma on her hands. >> it's getting easier for younger people to buy houses. the report that just came about, people getting access to credit. the fico scores, other means to start boosting the credit. people have access to capital lot more. you see a lot people see that happening. to your point, it's going to move faster initiative move faster. we should've hyped the funds rate years ago. >> eight years of free money. >> literally free money. i think it behooves -- it would behoove her to go ahead and start hiking the rate a lot faster than the next couple months we should see another rate hike. charles: if i were to happen, do you think wall street but have a temper tantrum? >> it doesn't look like they did
have a temper tantrum. >> i think to hikes. anything above that in the 3% to 5% gdp, we are rocking and rolling at that level. >> and she's hiking rates it means good things for the economy. you'll see wall street bulk of another rate rate hike cap in. charles: jacinto said their political animals. december 2014 breakfast talk market and not wasn't done for the economy. to prove she was an independent animal and she didn't need wall street's approval. sort of a grudge thing. we paid a price. >> vide pia loco is happening in the economy at the time. nowhere near where we are right now. unemployment was dismal. >> the labor force participation rate >> consumer spending was not even happening. we are different place in 2014 and we are right now. >> the world the story, hi
grace, but take it easy. thank you very much. appreciate it. the congressional budget office. we want to ask you about president trumps budget. his thoughts may surprise you. also, charlie gasparino. how the white house may be facing a new risk within. he always has the details. right back after this. ♪
approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget.
all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything. the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide and start gathering the information you need to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪
charles: well, the dutch prime minister holding onto power despite losing the two anti-immigrant nationalist. some say this is a blow to the populist movement in europe. many say this is just the beginning. of course, the populist candidate was number two now number three. onto the big story today. the white house released its budget blueprint to the public. charlie gasparino reported while there is some rest on the inside over this as well. every time something comes out, and there is i guess i could party. >> the white house defense, this is how the sausage is made. i used to work at an italian restaurant in ea actually make sauce. charles: is to work in a butcher shop and make sauce. -- sausage.
>> you know how it's made. it's never a clean process. kind of messy. for the fattening nodding, this come about. in the end it comes out okay, taste good. this is part of the process. we are getting sources inside the white house and we should point we ran all of this. there is some sort of ringing up the hand that they actually went after health care first instead of going after the regulatory tax cuts as their first 100 day priority. from what we understand the president himself, trump, is questioning that approach, that maybe they should of went after tax cuts instead of health care. charles: why focus on that now? >> here's the thing. my only point you brought up yesterday as you know donald trump. maybe this is the sign that he's willing to take a detour and say screw this. we are going for the tax cut. put this on hold until we get it
done. the senate is a problem, particularly senate republicans for getting this one plan passed. when i talk to people on the hill, they say this thing is not going to happen. charles: even though the house budget committee with 1917. three republicans voted against it. >> it is here that because paul ryan is essentially ryan's plan. what they are saying is now you are seeing the white house saying why did we go there? what does this mean for the average person? my point is this, that you could see is the kind of pointed out yesterday trump do a detour and put this aside. not saying it's happening, but you could see the stuff aligning to go after tax cuts, go after regulatory cuts. i think that will be big for the market that that's what he does. if you post this aside. if you are an investor, watch this thing.
donald trump does a detour, post this aside and goes for the tax cuts as his main priority now. then you see the market respond positively and it may be a time to start buying stocks. i'm telling you the dow 21,000 is predicated on that fiscal stimulus. the quicker it gets, the more the market will stay at its current level or go out. charles: yesterday i think rand paul had some choice words for . i interviewed kevin brady on the show yesterday and he more or less had choice words for senate republicans. could someone amongst those become a hero, unite them somehow? >> the one guy they could do that is president trump. now, i d't know if he's done that yet. he supposed to have a bowling party for something like that. he's a good salesman. he now. he now said to put things together. charles: he acknowledged some issues. >> let's see if he does that or
detours and goes to tax cuts. that's the real question here. the problem he had is i don't think the senate republicans are going to move. they seem very serious on this. but they worry about his premiums go through the roof and gets stuck with it. charles: thanks a lot. the left fuming over cut too big bird. in fact, we may not have to worry about how to get to "sesame street." why someone here says that is what birds are for. after this.
charles: welcome back to "cavuto: coast to coast." i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. this hour president trump on capitol hill for the first time since addressing a joint session of congress. he laid out his agenda then. just releasing his budget today. it is calling for a big boost in defense spending paid for by massive cuts in domestic spending. those cuts have many on the left fuming especially when it comes to cuts to public broadcasting. to gerri willis on if this outrage is overblown? >> well, hi, charles. i think that it might be just a little bit overblown. let's talk about this. you showed a couple full screens. we're spending 445 million out of the federal budget for public broadcasting. think for a second what would go away if i didn't have public broadcasting? big bird, right? "sesame street." we wouldn't about the there.
mass tear past theater which i personally like. antiques road show, austin city limits. i think if they can exist in private sphere. there are networks out there. sci-fi, where people watch nothing but science fiction for goodness sakes. clearly public dollars don't have to support this. let's be clear. trump is not the first president to suggest defunding public broadcasting. reagan did it. nixon did it. bush 43 did it this is pretty common actually initiative when you take a look at it. i want to say, this is not the only weirdo thing that we pay for as taxpayers in my view. i just want to show you a few of these, charles. the national institutes for headlight, spending $387,000 for what? massages for rabbits. i kid you not. so this was a test to see if they could help rabbits feel
better by giving them swedish massages. crazy. lions on treadmills. 856,000. from the national science foundation. you name it. we got it. golf in space. nasa testing effectiveness of golf equipment in space. they spent $15 million on that. kids dressing up as vegetables and fruits. when i say kids, i mean college kids at the university of tennessee, getting five million dollars for that. let me tell you, our taxpayer dollars get wasted every single day, charles. you are just scratching the surface of the problem. charles: i gotcha. although i did not know about the rabbit thing. that blows me away. gerri. >> funny. funny. charles: thank you very much. >> you're welcome. charles: signs that the house and senate republicans are not on the same page when it comes to health care. listen. >> the house has a current bill personally i don't think gets the job done.
i believe we're poised for 2017 for this to be the most productive congress in decades. now, we could easily screw it up. >> this is a great opportunity for them to follow through on their pledge to open this up to allow the house to do more. i'm anxious to see them deliver on these bold pledges because let ell you what. from the repeal to restoring state control and restoring the free market, the house is all-in on that. we're anxious to have that partner in the senate to complete the job. >> senators are not helpless with respect to the house. the house passes its bill. it sends it to the senate. they get to take it from there. senators if they have a concern or an issue are free to amend that bill when it goes over there. that is part of the legislative process. charles: house republican conference vice-chair congressman doug collins on the gop. not looking like it's on the same page yet. congressman, thanks for joining us.
i think we heard comments from president trump that signals that he believes that perhaps you guys are going to start move closer. when i say you guys, i mean house and senate republicans. what i'm hearing potential compromises, a freeze on medicaid, expansion. and also work penalty if you will, some sort of, if you're on medicaid you have to get out there to hit the bricks. a 30% penalty, somehow getting rid of that 30% penalty. it feels like there are constructive ideas out there to bridge this gap? >> i think so. i think what we're seeing here is a republican party that doesn't act like democratic party and simply follows in line and does whatever leadership tells them to do. we're republicans. we've been listening to american people. we're working with the american people. this is a process messy at time, legislative process going back to the founders was never meant to be easy but it was meant to take into account the views the american people and also their
concerns. words you're hearing, things could be changed and added at this point, and something valid. talked about previous on the show we are moving forward. moved through the two budget committees and hopefully comes to the floor next week. we're doing what we're supposed to be doing. the senate has a lot of ideas, well, they get the bill pretty soon. let them go work on it as well. charles: you moved through the budget committee but three house freedom caucus members did not participate in that. that is something of a red flag things to come. the conservative brethren on the senate side, won't be swayed at least in the current configuration of this bill. >> they needed to vote the way they needed to vote. they're bringing their concerns. the bill got out. the bill is moving forward. i think that is what is missed a lot of the time. the president and vice president especially while on the hill, confirmed the president, vice president, administration has our back up here. they're working to make it the best bill we possibly can to move it through the process.
are we all going to agree? no. many analysts including "wall street journal" this is our biggest chance to make changes to our health care system and federal bureaucracy from medicaid on down we've had. this is our best opportunity and look forward to continue the process. charles: the cbo score showing increasing premiums until 2020, when you have inflection point until they come down. a lot of elections between now and then. can you go back to your constituent and say, hey, we put through what some people are calling obamacare 2.0 and your premiums will still go up near term? >> what you have to understand this has been a process. for those saying using that kind of language, explain how they will go home and vote against it, or how we did nothing or we wanted something and chose not to get everything we have. we have to continue it to work. there are valid concerns. when you take the cbo score into account. when you look at other aspects of tom price working hhs.
other bills we pass that is part of a whole market solution. we're looking to make sure that works and in the next book or so in the house we'll have those conditions and look adding thing we may need to add or take it away. put to the floor and vote on it. get it to the senate. those with a lot of requests over there i look forward to their discussion. it is part of the legislative process. charles: congressman collins. thanks for taking time for us. >> always good to see you, charles. take care. charles: president trump's revised travel order was set to be implemented today. you have two federal judges put a stop. connell mcshane on details that are now breaking. reporter: a federal judge in maryland has put a temporary ban in place on at least parts of this revised executive order adding to what we heard from a federal judge in hawaii yesterday, when he was reacting to the hawaii decision when he said this last night in nashville. >> this is the opinion of many an unprecedented judicial over
reach. [cheering] the law and the constitution give the president the power to suspend immigration when he deems -- reporter: judicial over reach on behalf of the judge derek watson out there in hawaii. president trump says that order which he was, or is temporarily banning and putting a stop to, was a watered down version of the first order he had in place. even spoke last night about the possibility going back to the first order and fighting that as he said all the way, presumably to the supreme court. now, we don't know where that will go yet. but one thing we can tell you looking what both these judges have said, maryland and hawaii, is they both brought up comment that have been made on television by the president and his white house advisor stephen miller and they used those comment against them. they argued the ban, revised ban
no matter what it is is still a muslim ban, still meant to discriminate against muslims even if it doesn't say that, temporarily banning people from six nations. we'll show you, charles, where the american people are. fox news asking the question on the revised order and the majority, 54% disapprove of it. 43% approve. on the question about whether or not it makes us safer, even on that, mixed at best for the president, 34% say it makes us safer. 32% say less safe and 32% say it makes no difference atall. the we'll follow it again through the appeals process. maybe again back to the ninth circuit. charles, we'll see. charles: connell mcshanehank you for helping us understan this. this is a maze of legal hurdles. thank you very much. dnc putting out a statement calling the ruling against the travel order a huge win for our constitution. but trump calling it judicial overreach.
to former bush 43 chief immigration lawyer. linden, i'm sorry. it's gone back and forth now. you've got two judges, more or less saying that because of comments that president trump and or surrogates have made throughout the campaign and since, that no matter, it seems to me no matter what he puts through it's a temporary travel moratorium, in their eyes a travel ban aimed at muslims. >> that is a real possibility. the courts are trying to figure out what was the purpose of this policy? at the time the first order went into effect all they had out there was president trump's campaign statements about a muslim ban. since that time, after that first order was issued the department of homeland security and department of justice have put out bases for the new executive order but it was clear that these judges based their decisions on statements made before the first executive order. they're not looking to let the
president out of that box anytime soon. charles: stephen mill are was on fox news channel. he made comments. both judges alluded to the comments. he said the public, these bans, these orders rather, were the same thing. was it okay for them, for both of these judges to cite that as a reason to underscore the fact in their minds it was a muslim ban? >> this was not the first time immigration actions have been brought up before the courts and the courts having to figure out where the constitutional lines are. traditionally court are very reluctant to look behind the stated reasons for executive action as long as an action was facially valid, just facially valid they're reluctant to look behind those reasons. here the president himself as a campaign statement it and then have his top policy advisor making statements about their purpose for the executive action and so it heated up as something the courts could put their hooks
into and base their decision on but in the past this is unprecedented in the sense that courts in the past have been reluctant to it look behind the documents themselves. charles: judicial activism is a term we've become accustomed to over the last several years. more so now perhaps than anyone's lifetime. there are five, that i know of, there were five members of the ninth circuit judges who were appointed by republican presidents that have come out and said they think the rulings have been completely off base, without merit. so, i guess are we stuck with a judicial system that is now going to start to rule against, party lines rather than the way the constitution and framers set out our laws in the first place? >> well it's a little bit early to reach that conclusion in this situation. immigration is its own space with its own issues and different constitutional analysis. you're right, five judges on the ninth circuit did write a fairly lengthy dissenting opinion where
they took dissent with the lower court rulings. i think this is going to go up. the president views himself in a win-win situation. he will win on the merits or point the finger at the courts. i think it will continue to play out. charles: if he points the fings at the court and it never goes inteffect and ultimately loses out in his goal stated goal of keeping america safe. >> he will have to point fingers at the judges. i don't think folks at the department of homeland security want the outcome. they want to see the executive order put into effect. charles: before i let you go, the idea it goes to a eight-person supreme court, could you handicap a potential outcome? >> well, like i said, i do think in the past that the courts have been very deferential towards executive action, particularly when it bumps up into constitutional issues. so i think right now i would say that the executive branch feels like they're in a good place if
it goes up to the supreme court. charles: thank you very much. we really needed that help there. this is a complicated story. it seems to get more complicated each time. we appreciate it. >> thank you, neil. charles: neil, chars, same thing. why douglas holtz-eakin, reaction to the white house proposed budget might surprise you. remember, he is the former cbo director and he's next. ♪ ways wins.
especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business.
charles: well the budget blueprint is out but looks like deficits are still in. the white house says it's a win because it doesn't add to the deficit. former cbo director douglas holtz-eakin says we're just pushing off our debt problem. douglas holtz-eakin, $4 trillion spending of the listen, president trump increased defense spending and offset it with cuts, long-needed cuts by the way to some of these overbloated government agencies but you're a purist. you've seen this from the inside and you think it is time we tackle our overall debt here? >> yeah, i mean this is not a complete budget. there aren't any economic assumptions of the we don't see the tax proposals. and most importantly it leaves out entirely the mandatory spending programs, the so-called entitlements. those are the programs that are driving us to trillion dollar deficits over the next eight
years or so. if we're going to tackle the debt problem you can't restrict yourself to 30% of spending which is in particular proposal. now, i think when people look at it, they will agree we need to spend more on men and women who are in the armed services. there is no disagreement about that. but they're offsetting with cuts that historically have been hard to achieve. some of which are going to get bipartisan protection. if you cut 6 billion out of national institutes of health you will have republicans unhappy about that as well. i'm not sure they get to 54. i would much rather get serious about parts of the budget where real money is. charles: 70% of the budget are so-called entitlements. when we use those terms the audience, i get a deluge of emails and tweets saying, i worked for that money. it is not an entitlement. i put money in social security. i put money into medicare. they took it out of my paycheck. why would he tinker with that? >> so we get programs people can be proud of.
right now the promise in social security that you will have your benefits cut 25% across the board while in retirement somewhere in the next 20 years. that is no way to run a pension program. that is not a pension program america should be proud of. get a social security system that isn't bleeding red ink and you can rely on the retirement benefits. you can say the same thing about medicare and spend enormous amount of money for seniors and don't get high quality results. same about medicaid, which republican are reforming but they get an insurance policy but can't see a doctor. these are programs people want to rely on and they can't. we need better programs. charles: when you say to the american public, we want to do reform. has nothing to do with coverage. move the retirement age to 67. it gets politicized. and third rail of politics. ultimately it will build into something that we can't fix.
>> sure. charles: so how do you get that through? >> i agree with you, that has been the historical sort of way politics played out but the old rule if something has to change it will, it has to change. there is no more money. we already have an enormous amount of debt. it is set to spiral. if you literally go out to 2024, at end what would be two terms of president trump, if we don't change trajectory the second largest spending program in the federal budget will be interest on previous spending t will be bigger than the pentagon and medicare. that is not a sensible way to run things. we have to change course. to change course the politics will have to be different. you will do a favor to american people to shore up social security or fix medicare or fix medicaid. charles. that is the bottom line. charles: a lot of fiscally conservative republicans that i know were really adamant about this saying hey, you know what?
with the new trump agenda, get rid of these regulations. lower taxes, reinvigorate the american spirit, a lot of evidence already showing that it is already beginning to happen, you get that supply side-effect and that no economist, particularly the cbo taking into account the velocity of money and what that means, not only for our economy but for the treasury. and saying that, so the focus should be on growing the economy first, reinvigorating this economy and then addressing those issues that you're talking about right now. >> yeah, amen. we do need to grow much more rapidly. that is exactly the top priority athime. you and i both know there is no way 'll address social security reform, medicare reform, anything on those big social safety net programs if we're in a recession. so let's get a better economy. the important step, it is the quickest way to raise the prosperity of the middle class but it won't solve these problems by itself. a crucial part of the equation but you still need to do serious
work on the structure of these programs. charles: doug, we're 20 trillion in debt right now. how much do we need to lower it? i don't think anyone watching thinks we'll ever get rid of it all. so how much do we need to lower it to side, to sort of sidestep the risk that you're concerned about? >> i think realistically you want to look as debt to fraction of economy, debt relative to gdp. it is high and going higher. it could be towards 90%. number one you stop the increase. number two you start it on downward trajectory. send the signal to the world capital market that the u.s. will not run itself into the ditch. it is climbing out of the ditch and it is going down. how fast it goes down is less important than getting it going in the right direction. that is hard enough. would i be happy to see that happening. charles: interest rates going up, some of that is unavoidable, right? >> yes but the good news interest rates are going up because the economy is getting better that is the right reason
for the rates to rise. this isn't the fed ahead of the curve and preemptively slowing the economy. this is the fed catching up to reality. that is good for me. charles: before i let you go, does big bird make it, does big bird survive? >> yes. we've seen this symbolic war and we see how it ends. i wodn't have picked this war but we'll see how it goes, douglas holtz-eakin, thank you. >> thank you. charles: the gop plan clearing a hurdle but signs it won't pass if it makes it to the full house vote. key republican leader kathy mcmorris rogers on this bill's uncertain path right after this. hey gary, what are you doing? oh hey john, i'm connecting our brains so we can share our amazing trading knowledge. that's a great idea, but why don't you just go to thinkorswim's chat rooms where you can share strategies, ideas, even actual trades with market professionals and thousands of other traders?
why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cial if youtake ni, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.
house budget committee. peter barnes in washington with the latest. peter. reporter: that's right, charles. barely getting approval of the house budget commiee. this is the legislation that will send the republican health care plan to the floor for a vote by the full house. the committee approved the legislation 19-17, with three conservative republicans, bratt, sanford, palmer, voting against it because they favor a tougher approach on repealing and replacing obamacare. a tie vote would have stopped the process. now the speaker said, onward, while democrats said stop. >> we feel like we're making great strides and great progress getting a bill that can pass because it can incorporate the kinds of feedback from members of all walks of life from our conference. >> it's a fraud. it is a sham. it is a charade. it is a hollywood-style production that will destroy health care in america. first trumpcare will directly
lead to millions of americans losing their insurance. reporter: now the budget committee will meet today considering motions instructing the house rules committee where the legislation gets final prep for floor action of the those motions would instruct the committee on how to handle that final package. charles? charles: peter barnes, thank you. back to the budget. many on the left fuming over major cuts saying it will lead to too many layoffs but real clear markets editor john tamny says the government should operate a leaner workforce. john, it is going to be pretty lean. some of these cuts are 31% epa. 28% at the state department. 31% at agriculture. also the labor department. 13% at hud. we've been calling for this. we know, a of these agencies are marbled with bureaucracy. can we get them through? >> let's hope we can get them through. i'm skeptical.
they always talk a big game about spending cuts that never occur. let's be very clear, major austerity for the united states is big government spending. it is not the government's money. it can only spend to the extent it extracts resources from the private sector it. we have to see unsigns, microsoft, walmart's, future, nike, that never see the price of day that because government consuming precious capital that retards growth. charles: but they borrow. i'm not sure how much you heard with douglas holtz-eakin but the idea of 20 trillion in debt and counting particularly as interest rates go up, that is a ticking time bomb. no one knows when it goes off. so you're happy with that part of the plan but overall it doesn't reduce, it doesn't reduce the spending because that money will be shifted over toe ? defense, border, taking care of our vets. do you have a problem with that? >> i have a problem with it to
some degree. i think we're less safe of a nation precisely because so much defense spending goes to protecting some of the richest countries in the world as opposed to protecting the united states. i'm all for helping out vets. i question whether the border security is going to mean anything. we've had a drug war for how many decades? it hasn't kept drugs out. charles: but we haven't had a wall before. >> we haven't had a wall but partial walls. people always get around a wall to find opportunity. i don't think that is going to change. i think it will be wasted money. it is symbolm. we need smaller government. smaller government is the path to economic growth. this is the th to new companies. charles: let me ask you about the federal reserve yesterday. the markets initially were pretty thrilled with what they heard. apparently janet yellen is okay with just hiking rates two more times this year. not making any positive assumptions or negative assumptions about the trump agenda per se. the federal reserve, are you happy with what is going on there right now?
i know you're not a fan of the federal he reserve in general but are they doing something of the right thing but removing accommodation? >> i don't think so. i think anytime you try to meddle in any market you're doing something wrong. interest rates are price like any other. banks could easily set the rate and they do set the rate which they lend to one another but in a big picture the fed is dealing with anti-waited, massively overregulated banks. my argument, why pay them any attention. what the fed does with banks has very little to do with the most dynamic economy on earth. we flatter janet yellen with attention she doesn't deserve. let's look elsewhere. charles: ability to create trillions of dollars out of thin air is something pretty noteworthy, isn't it? >> it is. we have to remember not so much the fed is printing money and borrowing with banks they doesn't deal with in the first place. i'm not defending qe. it was a economic negative and propped up government spending
and housing in the u.s. but we overstate the impact of the federal reserve. most credit occurs well away from banks. most lending, most finance. the fed's over here dealing with banks, back in the real economy we'll continue to be the most dynamic, innovative economy in the world recalledless of what the fed does. charles: could america survive without a fed, without a central bank? >> without question. it serves no useful purpose. it's a bank regulator. it is disasterously bad at that. look at 2008 alone. the fed sets target rates which banks lend one another. serves no useful purpose. the fed also, is a lender of last resort, not to solvent banks but insolvent banks. its very existence weakens the banking system propping up the weak at the expense of the strong. the fed serves no purpose that market forces couldn't do a much better job of doing. charles: john tamny, thank you very much. appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: we're moment as way from the white house briefing.
office of management and budget director mick mulvaney will join sean spicer today, addressing president trump's budget. but first, charlie gasparino is working on a major story. he will tell us all about it in just a few moments. kevin, meet your father. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.
charles: president trump and speaker ryan coming out of that luncheon with irish prime minister. speaker ryan saying earlier everything is on track with health care but conservatives, well, they're still pushing for changes. congresswoman kathy mcmorris rogers is the chair of the house republican conference. she just left a meeting with the president and speaker ryan and joins us now. congresswoman, thanks for joining us. >> thank you. good to be with you. charles: great to have you. you're the perfect person to talk about this. a lot of confusion in the public. we understand it's a messy process. everyone is pushing for their own specific ideas. there is a lot of concern now, maybe this won't happen because
there is too much animosity and dirust amongst conrvative republicans, whether house caucus members and those in the senate, and your colleagues in the house and what they put forward so far. what can you tell us? >> i tell you that we continue to listen to everyone. that is part of the legislative process. we're hearing from a variety of folks just today, just this morning, the budget committee passed this legislation out of the budget committee, sending it to the rules committee. we're on track. last week it was energy and commerce. all of the republicans in energy and commerce, all the republicans in ways and means passed it last week to the budget committee this week, to rules and on the floor next week. that is our goal.
some sort of work requirement. in addition to freezing medicaid expansion, a work requirement. would, is that something you could get behind? >> yes. this is so the idea is that there would be an auction through the states to require work in order to qualify for medicaid. this is something that we included last year with the snap program, which is for food stamps, to allow the states that option. we want to empower the states to set up the program in the way they think is going to best serve people. medicaid, as i said, is a he very important safety net. some of our most vulnerable. we want to make sure we're protecting medicaid for those that need it most. for those able-bodied. those that have the potential of finding jobs and getting their health care through their jobs or have access in the marketplace, we want to make those options available to them. because unfortunately, even some of these able-bodied that are
employed didn't feel like they had any other option except for medicaid or the exchanges. charles: what about the 30% penalty? there is some talk that also could probably be an area that helps to bridge the gap. where do you stand with respect to that? >> you know, we're working through all of these questions and this is part of the legislating process. you have to get a majority, 217 votes in the house. you have to get a majority in the senate. these are ideas that will help make for a better outcome and help us in our goal to insure that people have better health care in this country. there is a lot of, different states every corner of the country represent this process and leads to better outcomes. it is important that we do listen but i also believe it is very important that we act because if we do not take action the future is going to be worse for millions of people in this country as they continue to see premiums going up.
as they see their networks closing, the lack of choices and it is impacting the quality of care too. so that is why action is so important. charles: all right. let me switch to the budget. the budget out this morning, the so-called skinny budget. a huge boost, all under the banner of america first, keeping america safe. getting our miliry bacup to snuff. borders, department of homeland security, taking care of our vets. these are things we all embrace and we all love. the criticism it comes at a very heavy price. everything from "sesame street" to job he retraining programs. what are your thoughts on those? >> oh, well, we'll take a look at it. the president has offered his blueprint. clearly he is prioritizing defense, national security. you know, then we'll go to work to do our job in the house and the senate. one thing about president trump, that he is going to he rethink the federal government from top to bottom.
really reimagine the way we do business. through that we can find efficiencies. we think programs, and agencies, in a way that will make them more effective more efficient and make sure we're spending those taxpayer dollars, those hard-earned taxpayer dollars as well as we possibly can. i think americans have been hungry for us to do it that kind of a review. that is what he is initiated in the process. charles: it is an exciting time. you guys have a lot of pressure. so i appreciate you, representative cathy mcmorris rodgers, for spending the time with us. thank you very much. >> great to be with you. charles: thank you. charlie breaking it. charlie gasparino with a big scoop. after a quick break. we're moments away from the white house detailing their new budget outline. where does it go from here? we have a lot more. we'll be right back.
and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's 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 claims centers are available to assist you 24/7. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance
>> have no idewhere they got it but it's illegal. and you're not supposed to have it and it's not supposed to be leaked and it's certainly not an embarrassing tax return at all but it is an illegal thing. they have been doing it. they have done it before. i think it is a disgrace. charles: president trump saying a leak of his taxes are illegal but is he considering legal action. to charlie gasparino, with the latest details.
charlie. >> sources close to the trump private lawyers we should point out, different than the white house, are telling my producer brian schwartz. trump's private legal team they are weighing a case against msnbc and journalist, david k. johnston focused on trump and taxes. big time pulitzer prize winner on taxes. but the legal team is weighing a case against both of those entities for the publication of the 2005 tax returns. they're looking at violations of federal privacy law for that broadcast. remember, it was on tuesday on rachel maddow show, where rachel maddow showed the two pages, 1040s, david johnston, d.c..org website aired it simultaneously. he is the one who obtained the documents. here is the interesting thing. you can tell from that clip trump is obviously hinting that i think this is illegal. charles: sure.
>> he said it's done at times released a portion of a state tax return earlier in the campaign which showed he took a massive loss on some properties. this one showed quite the opposite he made a lot of money. charles: that is the speculation he didn't pay taxes because he had a carry forward. >> this one showed he did pa substantial taxes 2005, and made a lot of money. people doubted that he was really rich, he made $153 million in 2005. be that as it may we're hearing from the trump camp. he is really angry. he thinks this is a violation of law. here is the rub, charles, both johnston and maddow, particularly johnston, claims he got it anonymously. charles: was in his mailbox. >> in his mailbox. as a reporter, i have done a lot of investigative stuff. you get stuff mailed to you and verify all that. which apparently he did, this guy is a good reporter.
if he obtained it that way, according to everybody i talked to, brian i spoke to number of lawyers, this is uphill battle to press a case. the only way, and donald kind of intimated at this a couple times, even in his tweets, how would a no name journalist like this, he is not a know-name journal i, trump words get this document? they have to prove that maddow and johnston were actually complicit in the theft of it. somehow they made a payoff to the guy stealing it. that there was some benefit incurred, almost like insider trading. when a guy gives you information there was some benefit given, if i gave it of benefit to you, that shows i'm complicit. charles: one of these lawyers, would that be michael cohen, would that be one of the lawyers? he put out a cryptic tweet about this yesterday. >> what did he say? charles: at joe msnbc. as potus personal attorney.
i know who has his taxes. you better have proof to back up your claim and big mouth. >> we understand. we put a call into the trump organization or should say brian did. this is brian's reporting mainly. it is very good. we've gone through it step by step. he put a call into the trump organization. the his personal lawyer there who referred us to michael cohen. we should point out we have spoken with michael cohen. he neither confirmed or deny they are actively thinking about a lawsuit. but you know, this two-ways looking at this story. it is donald trump getting mad and going to blow off some steam. that's number one. but i can tell you from people inside of the circle, he is really mad. he want this to stop. he thinks -- charles: why you would do the lawsuit, just as deterrent for this kind of nonsense in the future. >> i will tell you that the precedent protects journalists on something like this is the pentagon papers case. that is a hard one to fight against. david k. johnston, he was long
with "new york times." he is private journalist. charles: he had some issues. >> really. i always found him to be a credible guy. rachel maddow, say what you not. she he is liberal but a nice person. but the fact of the matter protects liberals too. charles: charlie gasparino. good stuff. appreciate it. thanks. right after this.
charles: you heard charlie gasparino's report that trump's private legal team:00 pm on the foxbusiness network i will break down the budget and what it means for you. a lot of talk from both parties but we will be on the talking points, the budget and the agenda that has everything to do with your wallet. foxbusiness will give youhe
financial news you need throughout the day. trish: we are moments away from sean spicer speaking alongside mick mulvaney. any minute to address the president's trillion dollar plus budget unveiled this morning. and array of cultural programs, medical research, and down payment, i will talk about all of it. welcome to "the intelligence report". it is called in america first budget blueprint to make america great again with trump tweeting a budget that puts america first must make safety its priority, and prosperity. the military getting a big boost when you talk about safety to the tune of $54 billion, 10% of the largest we have seen since the 1980s was the coffer for veterans affairs going up%, homeland