tv Varney Company FOX Business May 3, 2017 9:00am-12:01pm EDT
spring clearance event. only at a sleep number store or sleepnumber.com >> my thanks to my all-star panel we had today. that will do it for us. "varney & company" begins right now and here is charles payne in for stuart. take it away. >> good morning, thank you very much, maria. i'm charles payne in for stuart and you've got a lot, apple cash pile makes them a very powerful company. and think about all the things you could buy with that money. nevertheless, the stock is reacting to the news that the iphone missed last quarter. hillary clinton, let's face it, she can't get over it. blaming the fbi director, wikileaks, everyone for her election loss and president trump and kellyanne conway responding on twitter. wait until you hear what they have to say. and director mick mulvaney
blasting the democrats for taking a victory lap and he says the shutdown in september is still a possibility. >> and richard branson says bringing back coal is the worst idea he's ever heard. we'll ask about that. "varney & company" is about to begin. ♪ . >> stop! oh, (bleep). guy is crazy. >> that's right, that's not world heavy weight boxing, it's better. two passengers aboard a los angeles-bound nippon flight,
the fighting it wasn't aggravated enough. american reporting decreasing leg room one to two inches in economy class. apple shares in the premarket. right now, the key was iphone income is expected and the company sitting on $256 billion in cash and you can buy ten border walls for that much money or buy everyone in america a new iphone and kill two birds with one stone. let's bring in shah gilani. it's close to your net worth, i'm not sure you need the money, but the stock hasn't come down? >> it's got so much money to execute buybacks and that's one of the reasons, they bought back between dividends and buy p buybacks. and they're projecting 300 billion.
there's a bid, i'd like to see them doing special dividends. >> even though they have the cash pile, thissor about 100 billion. indirectly, they're using that money by taking advantage of of low interest rates, but that does nothing for our economy. a lot of people are saying at this particular point, it's an amazing company in part because of a americn american company. do they have any responsibility to bring some of that money back home and not necessarily share the wealth, but create economic opportunities? >> i think so, i think they're trying to do that. they're looking forward to repatriation and tax rate on the money. i hope they don't put it all into buybacks. i think it's better if it's handed out in terms of special dividends on a regular basis. >> they did increase the dividend, 63 cents from whatever. >> that's a nice for the stock. better than the money market or
10-year treasury, but it's probably better spent elsewhere, certainly they can make he acquisitions and expand production in the united states. >> the red flag is iphone calls almost 51 million, but wall street is looking for 53 million. do we get to the point where everyone simply has an iphone, everyone, but me. >> they'd like to get us to that point, but i was not unimpressed with the results, it didn't seem to phrase the stock. i don't think the stock is going to get hammered today. revenue was up 4.6, profit up 4.9%. the sales aren't that off because everybody is waiting for the new iphone in the phone. stuart: tim cook said something to that effect. >> by the way, talon upped the fox. maximum 173, and all of them love it and they wanted to know
should they buy it? >> if you buy it, a tight stop, other than that worth a buy. >> the market has been more or less side ways all morning long. slightly lower. looks like it's going to be something of a down move at the open. money, more coming in at the cyber security girl, in the meantime, fireye, great morning, the third consecutive quarter they beat the wall street concensus. on the other end of the spectrum, software maker trilio lowers, overall cutting back from using the service and that's devastating. >> i own both of those stocks. >> and mcdonald's, this stock is now a buy. that's one of the big names, what a shift now back to politics.
budget director mick mulvaney on mornings with maria defending president trump's call for a government shutdown in september. roll tape. >> we're supposed to pass 12 appropriations bills a year. we don't do that. at best pass one in the giant omnibus bills the end of the year. they're massive and people don't get a chance to go through them and that's a lauzy way to run a country and the president says in his mind, he's right. we need to fix that. if it takes a shutdown in september to drive that home, we'll do that in september.t a security, we know what that means. took 150 government departments, this doesn't get covered. took 150 government apartments
and consolidated or eliminated them. this is constant negotiation and now they're talking about a shutdown in september. we'll see when we get closer to that. if they get the democrats to believe they may shut the government down they may get a deal in september. >> with all due respect i think a lot of the criticism came from conservative media and folks who would like to see a government shutdown right now as a big part of draining the swamp. >> they call it a deal for a reason. in a deal you don't get everything you like. republicans, particularly re ifrt could republicans, like me, i'm a conservative republican. republicans in congress need to kcome to grips with the fact you don't have a filibuster-proof, and if
great leadership with paul ryan and the rblgs have to get on board. >> with all due respect, i think the that core voters that propelled donald trump to the white house would disagree with a lot of things you just said and this is the sort of things that made them angry at both parties for so long, the notion that paul ryan is a great leader because he did so much compromise here, i think that business is usual is exactly what the american public, particularly conservatives that elected this president and critically important because our military is way underfunded and we're in trouble worldwide. he got 12 billion, at least 12 billion for border security. they elected him to build the
wall. he's got money to start building that wall. reducing size of government with the departments that are gone. even the green energy fund is and i love the fact that the democrats think they won. that's the ideal situation, you always want the people you outnegotiate to think to leave and think they outnegotiated you. the next time a deal comes up and do the same thing in the previous deal. >> there's one democrat knows she didn't win, but is blaming everybody else. i want to roll the tape and get your response. >> i was on the way to winning until a combination of jim comey's letter on october 28th and russian wikileaks raised doubts in the minds of people
who were inclined to vote for me, but got scared off. disclosures, that's not what caused people to doubt her. what caused people to doubt her, what was in the wikileaks disclosures, what they said. she's misrepresenting. she got a bounce from comey in july and she doesn't like the fact that she didn't get a bounce in october. who knows what effect that has. the most important thing she ignores, she house on their own. donald trump had plans for that and she had none and that's why she didn't working womening middle class voters.
she can say whatever she likes. she didn't have a plan. >> no plan, i think it hits the nail on the head. always appreciate it. >> good to see you. >> president trump meeting with palestinian leader abbasa, and it's part of the president's plan to try to bring peace to the middle east. richard branson has a message for president trump. he says the president's plan to bring back coal is stupid. we're on it. more varney after this.
>> higher profits at yum! brands, a strong demand at taco bell. the kong movie and batman helping profits at time warner as well. president trump will meet with palestinian leader abbas later today. and congressman peter king jones us, republican from new york. both men, congressman king, have both sort of laid out their personal agendas.
do you see room for some sort of major step, perhaps, to the ultimate goal that has eluded all presidents going back to the 1970's, peace in the middle east? >> i don't see a quick move, but it's porn that president trump have this meeting and mak waiting is over and start serious negotiations that he's not going to be like president trump, not going to be criticizing the israelis and giving false hope to the palestinians. it's important that the real negotiations with abbas so he can negotiate for the palestinians. hamas controls much of the power, certainly where they control gaza. so basically it's time for abbas to show he's real and can deliver and show, for instance, he's willing to recognize israel and make just the most basic akcomplications that could be made. i think it's as much style as
any, showing president trump, showing, yes, he's willing to negotiate and it's real negotiations and real talk and not allow this to go on as it's gone on for so many years. back in 2000, the palestinians basically were offered everything they've been asking for and yet, our part walked away from the table with president clinton. so this is, palestinian has been delayed and delayed and president trump would say, hey, it's now or never. >> president trump, one of the major concessions, stop paying the terrorists in israeli prisons or crimes against the israeli people. that's, you know, you talk about the power of battle among the palestinian people themselves. that would be a huge nugget for them to give up. do you think it's possible though? >> again, if abbas is serious and not wasting everyone's time, that's a basic step that should be taken. these are crimes committed and
yet, they call them i shall a-- them arab martyrs and martyrs for the palestinians. they're not martyrs, they're murderers and killers and abbas has to make that clear. that would be a good sign whether he's serious or not. the last time you were on our program, we discussed and the ms-13 and growing influence on long island. has there been any progress since attorney general sessions visit there? >> first of all, he showed the police and fbi that the administration is totally behind them in this effort and agreed to work with them to get extra sources, involving cast forces and-- task forces. there's been 11 brutal murders carried out by ms-13. just about three weeks ago now, four young men who were not just murder, but butchered,
beheaded in a residential neighborhood, in a park where kids play, i mean, this type of murders, he this were two brutal killings of high school girls and they kill with what schetties and knives and brufl. it refirquires our efforts. >> to your point, the methods are not unlike isis or some other savage terror group out there. it's sadly ironic, of all places they have a foothold in long island. you would never have thought something like that would have happened. >> and ms-13 has gamed the system. 12 of the young men indicted back just last month for the two murders, actually for three murders, of those 12, seven have been unaccompanied minors and they came in two or three years and assigned to live in the brookville center community
and they've gotten families to sponsor the kids. they're turned over to health and human services and health and human services has to find homes for them. families are terrorized or paid off to volunteer to take the kids in, the young men in and then they actually are recruiters for ms-13. seven of the 12 unaccompanied minors into the country the last couple of years. there have been 400 assigned to suffolk county the last two years. charles: amazing. representative king, thank you. berkeley, california has had a plan to stop violence. left wing protesters in the city, they're not going to arrest them. this is berkeley, they say they can solve the problem with laughter yoga and you can't make this up. more varney after this. you always pay
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. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today.
liz: the mayor of the city appears to endorse this, too. talking tents, square dances, flowers, volleyball, bubbles, wavy gravy kind of dances. i mean, this is the block of protesters who has been doing the most violenting rioting. destroying property. and love how environmentalists destroy property, by the way. they think it's the way to go and they're talking in this e-mail that was leaked to the website heap street. they're reporting this, we're moving to verify it, according to heat street. don't malign the people who wear the blast masks, they have their bad apples, provocatures taking advantage, and regrettably they're bad actors, but we got medics last time to deal with, you know, any situation in the riots. they think that sponge noodles and foam swords and square
dance is going to solve this violent rioting. charles: listen, shah, i guess there are a lot of ways to sooth the savage beast, but i don't know how it's going to work. >> and i don't understand how any school, the university of california a fantastic system, not sure how they allow the crushing of free speech by either side, left or right. i think the left has gone too far off the deep end in repressing free speech. liz: the way you stop it, enforce california state law, you're not allowed to wear any mask at any protest, take it off. charles: maybe throwing pepsi cans at police officers. liz: molotov cocktails. charles: and have a list of these and what's the name of that. liz: the empathy tent. charles: check out the futures. the market, a little soft moments into the opening bell. got a little softer as we were talking.
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 cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, 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.
the opening bell. again, we had a huge week last week and we've been sort of side ways this week, digesting earnings and ahead of that big, big jobs report on friday and believe me, it's absolutely huge. we're going to need to see something of a major rebound. and adp suggests 170,000 jobs, that would be good compared to last month. let's check on the big board, the dow 30, a smattering of green, performing stocks at the top. most are down and the key stock today in the market will be apple. iphone sales there were not up to snuff. less than 51 million and wall street was looking closer to 53 million and consequently you could see the shares are down 1 1/2%. and remember, facebook, they're going to report tonight after the close, that stock near all-time highs and trading higher. weight watchers, the confidence to raise the forecast, oprah winfrey doing pretty good there. we did see weak forecast from
trilio, two major customers and uber, uber cutting back big time on services. joining me pliz macdonald, shah gilani and we'll have to start with apple. what are they going to do with the huge cash pile? >> they're going to keep it there until they get a deal to bring it over, repatriation and put it to work back here. charles: the dream is that they bring it here and build factories and create jobs, instead of continuing to buy back stock. do you think they're-- you know, right now they're up to $10 billion to buyback. do you think they start to shift gears and say how about doing something in america? >> i would hope they could assembly the phones here, they could do that for $50 more per phone and i think that americans would be happy to pay
extra 50, most the time the cell phone companies pick it up anyway, but assembly of the parts is $50 more per phone if you did it in the united states of america, that would create jobs and lots for your money and change the dynamics are what you're doing here. charles: lee iacocca promoted that and saving chrysler and done throughout history. could it be done again? could apple say we're going to bring back the shops and factories and put people to work and it's going to cost a little more so you have to step up to the plate. liz: and tim cook said there's nothing patriotic about paying more taxes. charles: if they remove the taxes. liz: we're not anywhere near tax cuts right now. the president is talking dodd-frank reform and bringing back glass-steagall. if you see the money coming back soon. it sounds great in theory, but in practice, i don't see it happening anytime soon.
charles: we should point out to the audience we're the country in the world that taxes profits overseas and every other country brings it back. and this could go into domestic development. >> 256 billion dollars, you know, we use the numbers and throw them around all the time and don't realize the magnitude of that number. that's more than the foreign currency reserves of the united kingdom and canada combined a tremendous amount of money. countries, it's bigger than the gdp of the majority of the countries in the world. >>, but it keeps the country open for a month. charles: but i tell you-- . >> bring it back. charles: another discussion on government spending. don't get me started. liz: the interest cost for a year on that. charles: and when you talk about apple, you think about facebook and they report after the bell. the stock has an all-time high. shah, do you like it at this level?
>> how can you not? they've got momentum behind them. positive earnings and momentum in earnings growth and all of those stocks are must have-must hold stocks. charles: todd. >> no, facebook, great company, phenomenal, great job, but just remind me a lot of the '90s, charles. we're due at some point we are going to have a little bit of a beatdown, not long, if you're an investment it shouldn't bother you, it will come back. charles: if this is in your 401(k) you would not sell it. >> i don't sell it if i own it, but not sit here at step in at 153 with those into earnings. even if they beat on earnings, does it have enough juice to run higher? as an investor, i think you sit back and wait. >> to todd's point, a great point. people basically like facebook to stay in touch with family and friends, but the problem is, user traffic or user, rather, user time spent, could be starting to trend down because people have negative
experiences on facebook, they don't feel good when they are on it. and they're saying that facebook may have a problem. >> they're expected perhaps 40% increase in net. liz: 46% net. >> fantastic. how can you not own a stock like that. todd, i would disagree with you in the sense that i wouldn't necessarily buy here, but some place to put money any one of the big tech stocks. charles: one thing we know that winners continue to be winners. playing a guessing game when they're going to crash have caused a lot of short money. tesla, shares lost 3.7 billion on tesla, they report after the opening bell. let's check the big board. the dow off. and higher profits, strong demand at taco bell, the new hot taco, really good and higher sales at clorox, but the stock is moving slightly lower. in the movies, well, kong, skull island, isn't that the one to see. liz: i love it.
charles: and the lego batman movie and everyone saw that and time warner, shares higher. new york times had a profit versus a loss a year ago, you know, take news sells at any. and medicaid advantage, and that stock is doing well, from humana, aetna, more and more pulling pulling back from the obamacare exchanges. what does it mean for obamacare? >> i'm not surprised. i think we've known that the aca is problematic in terms of the exchanges, how they're structured and these health care providers leaving the exchanges. i think aetna is down to maybe four and i think in 16 they were participants in 16 exchanges. and they're down to four and i think they'll cut the rest out. fortunately for the states they're in, there are other providers and they may be pulling out, too, it's going to get worse.
liz: the back story, localities have threatened to raise property taxes to fund the exchanges if it continues to go in the down ward spiral. charles: of course, the administration has to decide whether or not they want to continue to fund. they deep dangling that, as a deal breaker, a budget or some other legislation. >> it would be nice if we went back to the real free markets and everybody compete in the free market and you might have a different story. and if you om have one provider in a city or state or have two, there's no-- >> that's unintended consequences, that president obama ultimately orchestrated this to end up with single payer. i don't think that was mad gene just, i think they got a socialist crack at it and got what happens when you do that. is it possible that we could end up with some sort of single payer. >> under the current administration, i think not. [laughter] >> but i think, i don't know
that they planned it that way, but i think that's the direction. if you watch the money flow goes into different perhaps, it's trying to guide everything into a welfare type of state. >> at this moment the atlanta fed is predicting the quarter we're in right now growth is going to be above 4%. todd, is that possible? >> no. charles: no? you don't see it? >> the only possibility if there's a gigantic soy or green deal that goes to china. where are we going to get the growth from? where does it magically appear from? we're not seeing a new development. we've got full employment of lousy jobs. charles: there is wage pressure so we might see authentic wage gain. >> i hope so. charles: and might see the wages make it into the economy. what do you think, e-mack. liz: i hear your point there
are quirks in numbers, but the atlanta fed has been dismal in the forecast, for them to say this, what a 180. charles: although i think they're pretty good when it comes to direction. they never get the exact number, but-- >> it says 3% next year. >> they predicted .5% gdp growth when everyone was around 3% so they hit it pretty well on the head there. charles: i want you to take a look at this, arch coal, take a look at middle america and coal and railroads, and shaw, i -- shah, i'm seeing these, it's not glamorous. >> i know you like the stock and like the group, but i think there will be more, unless we get something out of the administration. i think the stocks will flounder a bit. charles: todd, i agree with, hey, they anticipate regulatory
health, it will continue business. but i haven't been to a city in the last two years, that so many cranes, it looks like dinosaurs are running around. we've got major building going on in this country already and if we can add infrastructure, it might not be too bad. >> i agree and you might see some help here. i think one of the biggest problems we had is when they eliminated the use of coal put them out of business and trying to bring them back and work and get through it and that will be the energy. charles: thanks a lot. i want to say thanks to todd, thanks to shah. you were fantastic. how about this? billionaire richard branson's take on president trump's plan to utilize coal. he says, i can't think of anything more stupid. hillary clinton talks about
>> all right. folks, let's check on the big board. about where we've been down 35 points. we've got news right now on amazon. want to go to nicole petallides with the story. nicole: well, billions of dollars, thousands of jobs and more amazon everywhere. in this case, it's amazon india. they're committing $5 billion to open up another seven warehouses. so by the end of june, they will have 41 fc's. fc's is the new terminology, fulfillment centers. try and say that a few times, right? the stock is down right now, but it's a behemoth. it's up 40%. the short sellers on tesla, they've got hit on amazon as
well, lost over a billion dollars betting the wrong way on amazon. so expanding there in india. charles: nicole, thank you very, very much. in we'll come back to you. in the meantime, secretary mnuchin says he wants to make it easier for banks to left-hand you money, roll tape. >> i've seen the best of the mortgage business and i've seen the worst of the mortgage business. we purchased a bank from the fdic that probably had about one of the worst, if not the worst mortgage business that existed at indymac and we saw the servicing problems that took years and years and years to work out. clearly, we cannot let occur what occurred before. charles: all right, e-mack. what do you think? >> he's leaving out the time at goldman sachs, where there were fp credit swaps and why
elizabeth warren called him the "forest gump,gump," because he stumbled into the messes. that's harsh from elizabeth warren. they'll have to have fights with democrats like this. while he has respect, he has to come out with full disclosure. and there's a combined resume', yes, we saw the worst of the worst, what's your role of the worst of the worst. charles: even as we acknowledge that, the pendulum swung. it's stopping people from getting a house in the first place. liz: the other point, democrats need to acknowledge, including elizabeth warren, you cannot solve income inequality by giving somebody a house or making it easier for them to buy a house, which is what the democrats did throughout the 1990's, that's their big role and they are behind of the problem of that collapse. charles: community reinvestment act. now this report, president
trump's decision whether to stay in the paris climate deal rests on one single phrase. here is what the provision says, quote, a country may at any time adjust its existing national determined contribution with the view it enhancing its level of ambition. joining us now is epa administrator scott pruett. thanks for joining us. >> good to be with you. charles: the united states, where are we? where we going to get out of the paris climate accord? because many feel it would be the smartest move at this point. >> that decision is being made by the president very soon as he's discussed. and we've had many many meetings with the president and when you look at paris making sure we have international discussion with how good of a job we're doing across the grope with the co 2. it's a pad deal for this
country. a cost of compliance, 2.5 trillion dollar gross domestic product hit over ten years, 400,000 jobs cost with respect to that program. so he what paris represents is america's second strategy. we're already at pre-1994 levels with respect to our co 2 footprint. when america went to russia, china, india, all contributed zero and as far as india and china they didn't have take take the step to close until 2030. and when we're already refusing your co 2 footprints. charles: would we ask china to contribute more or would we want the same deadline as china. and the argument, you guys are an economic powerhouse and we want to catch up. >> the united states is leading the world.
and our co 2 footprint it's been accomplished without a government mandate. and you've got investments from the private sector reducing the footprint. we need to sell our story and don't need to be apologetics. paris is a bad frame work and let us share with the rest of the world to improve our output. charles: the fracking miracle could be replicated with american help. i want to ask you one more thing, richard branson calling out president trump on his coal plan. take a listen. roll tape. >> i didn't think of anything more stupid than to talk about bringing coal back. actually, there are some things more stupid, but anyway. charles: it's so -- so much arrogance on full display there. what are your thoughts? >> it's dead wrong. when you're blessed with the ind coo of re-- kind of resources, as a country. we have the high emissions in
japan, and co 2 is captured in a substantial way. and burning coal. we have need a strategy and everybody talks about that from a political situation, every company needs security. when peak demand comes, you need the hydrocarbons. and what when you have converted to natural gas and you don't have coal on the grid. burn coal, burn natural gas, use renewables and it needs to be part of the fuel diversity across the country. charles: scott pruett, thank you very very much for your time here. >> thank you. charles: the dow 30, about, you can see more stocks are down than up. no disasters at least with respect to the big board. now to this, alleged gender
bias at facebook, computer code writing, written by female employees rejected more often than male counterparts. the full story right after this. aving for a house, or starting a college fund for my son. actually, i want to know what you're thinking. knowing that the most important goals are yours. it's how edward jones makes sense of investing.
hearing today. all rise, judge andrew napolitano is here. it feels like comey is on capitol hill every other week. what are they going to get from him and what exactly are they trying to get from him this time. >> he has a lot of explaining to do about the appearance, the appearance of the fbi into the presidential campaign and i say that because the director, jim comey, made some public announcements, which arguably violate longstanding, i mean, generations old fbi and department of justice regulations. so, when he announced on july 5 that hillary clinton was not going to be indicted, that violated the regulation. charles: by the way, after laying out a whole, you know, layout of reasons she should have been indicted. >> correct, he says we're not going to indict her, but here is the damning evidence against her. violated there.
and discovered anthony weiner's laptop and huma abedin had e-mails many of which from hillary. instead of quietly examining the laptop, announced we're reopening the hillary clinton investigation we think we might have missed something. they said they went through all the e-mails and found nothing and announced closing ever the investigation twice. that's four announcements, hillary, here's not going to indict, the evidence against her and reopening twice. when he was asked under oath if the trump campaigning was investigated, he wouldn't answer or surveillance of
trump tower, and he's going to of to answer. charles: let's hope we get answers. it seems that every hearing leads to more hearings. >> i don't hold water for mrs. clinto clinton, but she does have a point that the fbi into the presidential campaign was unprecedented, unheard of and probably influenced the outcome. charles: i think the first announcement, it went from bad to worse and it's a shame. it is what it is. >> when you try to explain something, your explanations make it worse. charles: in this case. happening later today, president trump meeting at the white house with palestinian leader abbas and we'll show it to you live as it happens. and the person who is challenging nancy pelosi for her congressional seat in california. he's a self-described hard core bernie sanders supporter. [laughter]
what is scary? pneumococcal pneumonia. it's a serious disease. my doctor said the risk is greater now that i'm over 50! yeah...ya-ha... just one dose of the prevnar 13® vaccine can help protect you from pneumococcal pneumonia- an illness that can cause coughing, chest pain, difficulty breathing, and may even put you in the hospital. prevnar 13® is approved for adults 18 and older to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. get this one done! ask about prevnar 13® at your next visit to your doctor's office or pharmacy.
charles: i'm charles payne in for stuart. here is what we have for you this hour. we're following apple very closely. right now you see the stock is down 1.6%, two bucks. here is the thing. they're sitting on a quarter of a trillion dollars. small drop in iphones sales, and in the stock. big news there. hillary clinton won't take the blame for her election loss. kellyanne conway sends a scathing tweet in response. pell pell face as challenger from a pro-bernie candidate. he will join us. we have prove taxing the rich does not work. one state's plan backfiring big time. the second hour of "varney & company" is about to begin. >> i was on the way to winning until a commodity nation of jim
comey's letter letter on october 28th, and russian wikileaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me you but got scared off. charles: hillary clinton placing part of the blame for her election loss on the fbi director. any minute now, james comey himself will testify before the senate judiciary committee. we'll be listening in for any news on hillary or the russian investigation. more on that in a second. first, breaking news on the economy. the ism service number is out. emac. liz: coming in stronger than expected, 62.4. wall street was looking for a 55.8 number. this is the 88th straight month the services sector has been improving. that is seven years of improvement in the services sector. continued growth there. so it looks like we're seeing real strength in tech services, info services, mining and real estate and utilities all coming in strong. charles: our financial guys weren't too excited about 4% growth this quarter, but that is
a huge number. that is the kind of number in my mind could support growth near 4%. thank you very much, emac. liz: sure. charles: breaking news. gop lawmakers meeting about the health care bill. you have the details on this? u. liz: fred upton, bill long, mike burgess. fred upton was saying hey, wait a second, what about the preexisting condition? will they get more money for higher risk pools? you know, i know we have betty ma coy has been becoming up on misreporting that preexisting conditions coverage will be gutted. i have seen that coverage too. they are struggling to get the health reform passed. the fact fred upton will be in the meeting is very key to get the repeal and replaced bill massed. charles: stay on health care. obamacare continues to collapse under its own weight.
aetna says it will scale back its participation in the exchanges next year citing massive losses. betsy. you say they're running scared? >> they're cowed by reports, false media reports that this bill guts protections for people with preexisting conditions. that is exact quote from the cnn website, a lie right across the top of the cnn website. typical what they're hearing. if they read the bill, something novel for members congress, they will find out in fact people with preexisting conditions are fully protected. the big difference between this bill and obamacare, instead of putting the entire cost of the very sick on small number of people in the individual market which is what pushed premiums out of sight and deductibles as well, in this, there is a federal fund chipped in by everybody in the country, right, a huge fund, $13 billion a year,
to take care of people with preexisting conditions. it will pay the higher premiums for people with preexisting conditions. allowing the 96% of people in the individual market who are relatively healthy to pay, maybe as little as half of what they're currently paying. charles: because they, you also will have a wider range of offerings, right? bare bones offerings for younger people as some more complicated thing they were forced to accept under obamacare. >> the real thing here, the ceo of aetna put his finger on it, 1% of my obamacare enrollees eat up 44% of the health care. if you're charging everybody the same, charging like paying. people with huge he premiums and huge deductibles all the money extorted didn't go for their own health care, it went to pay for the very sick.
we have fairer system, federal dollars contributed by everybody, not just people in the individual market, willfully pay the costs of those people with preexisting conditions. it is a fairer system, and it will protect those people. charles: but will -- >> you can tell i'm passionate but it because i hate the lies. charles: that is why we have you on you but by the same token the moderates, president trump will try to flip today. then in flipping them do you upset the freedom caucus because -- with the federal government should be involved in preexisting conditions? give it to the states or get rid of it all together? >> fact they give the states the authority to administer this program but the money is coming from the federal government. it's a bargain, 13 billion a year compared to $48 billion a year currently spent on subsidies. not targeted at people who need them. liz: to charles's point, will the freedom caucus getting message?
>> they are already signed on. wafflers, fence-sitters, people in the quote moderate wing. i called with them off the record, be assured people with preexisting conditions are protected. charles: well, listen coming down to the wire. and listen, i get your passion but people are concerned about that. >> legitimately concernedded but the truth is in the bill. so don't look at cnn because they're lying. charles: you're sentencely saying this is magic bullet will cover preexisting conditions and drive premiums down? >> that's right. instead of relying on market to cover the preexisting conditions, we're relying on government, taxpayers that is the big difference. charles: i want to switch to this a little bit. president's visor kellyanne conway tweeted quote, you ignored wisconsin, called us die morable, irredeemable, oodles of money, lost to a better candidate, from a woman in the
white house. >> yes. charles: betsy, what is your response? >> my response, right on, kellyanne conway. hillary keeps saying misogyny, if she weren't a woman, she would have lost even more votes. the fact some women went to the polls voted for her disregarding everything else she was a woman. to blame russian interference in the election, russia interfered with public opinion and countries have been doing that since the beginning of time. remember the alien and sedition acts? remember how britain interfered with our 1940 public opinion on the eve of will key-fdr election. charles: right. >> they didn't tamper with the voting machines. they didn't tamper with the vote tally. they simply influenced public opinion. that is an old story. charles: i'm so sick of it too. it is an old story. hillary you lost because you were a terrible candidate. you are a great guest. thank you very much. check this out. president trump says he is considering breaking u investment banking side.
dick bove joins us now, rafferty capital markets banking analyst. dick, you and i had the conversation a few times the last couple weeks what would you say to president trump tossed this out there meeting with community banks? it is reduced its position in germany, japan. bank of america, has pulled back
merrill lynch from operating overseas. jpmorgan has gotten rid of tens of thousands of customers, literally around the world because of government regulations. so, the point that i'm trying to make to you is, if you keep shrinking the size of american banks, if you keep pulling them out of the international operations, you are creating a vacuum into which the chinese have already stepped. in other words, when the wto agreement was already signed with china, basically china had a couple, maybe, 10, 15 banks around the world that would accept its currency. there are well over 10,000 banks around the world that accept its currency now. being international reserve currency. we're shrinking, they're increasing. we want to shrink some more. charles: the yuan is number five used currency international transactions at 1 1/2%. i get what you're saying.
i'm not sure i'm connecting the dots in a way person watching this show who feels you know what, chase bank, not jpmorgan chase, but chase banke trading in commodities instead? >> we have gone over this multiple times. clearly biggest profits at chase bank, in fact chase bank is totally a consumer bank. all the profits come from lending money to consumers. charles: chase bank. see no impact on their business whatsoever other than their ability to increase their -- charles: i will have to let you
go. i have breaking news. always appreciate you having you on. we'll finish discussion. breaking news on facebook stepping up their effort to monitor live video. this is huge, liz. liz: they're adding 3,000 people on top of 4500 they already have, to review what they say are millions of reports about violent videos put on facebook either through the live stream app or after the fact videos who are taped, then put up. it is mark zuckerberg making a statement on his blog post on facebook. for the last three weeks we've seen people hurting themselves and others on facebook. we need to respond quickly. he is saying in addition to adding more people we're going to work more closely with law enforcement and make it easier for our reviews to basically work with cops or law enforcement if it someone needs help. charles: right. liz: as these videos pop up. we know since the live stream app debuted last year, 50 violent incident of suicides,
murders, rapes posted on facebook. charles: such a shame. they're stepping up to the plate. this is much-needed move. thanks a lot. budget director mulvaney says it is strange democrats claiming victory on the bipartisan budget deal, warning democrats on future discussions. president trump will host the palestinian president all in the next hour. is the deal-maker-in-chief about to tackle an elusive goal of peace in the middle east? second hour of "varney" company is next. rise and fall... predictable is one thing you need in retirement to help protect what you've earned and ensure it lasts. introducing brighthouse financial. a new company established by metlife to specialize in annuities & life insurance. talk to your advisor about a brighter financial future.
charles: check on the big board here. the dow near the lows of the session down 44 points. little bit of a struggle obviously this morning. we can't forget gold. gold staged a pretty good rally. stalling more recently, down seven bucks. facebook breaking news emac just had. they're adding three thousand more people to monitor live video.
that is contentious issue for them. president trump for the first time talks with russian president vladmir putin over the phone. liz, what exactly did they talk about? liz: they talked about syria. they talked about the need for safe zones there. suffering has gone on in syria. this, possibly a july, july 20 meeting between president trump and vladmir putin. so, you know, the talk, this is the third phone call between the two world leaders. one at the inauguration. one after the april terror attack in st. petersburg. we may see a face-to-face meeting coming up this summer. charles: it is interesting, the liberal media taking shot at president trump's, vladmir putin or kim jong-un, but i think other was say this is what you want a president to do. thanks a lot. we appreciate it. now this, the president trump will meet with palestinian leader abbas about an hour. david rub bin joins us now. former mayor of shiloh, israel. david, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure.
charles: what are your initial thoughts about this meeting? >> well, we know that the meeting was going to happen. the problem with trump meeting abbas and talking about a peace process is that we've been doing this for about 30 years now and mahmoud abbas has been paying terrorists to perform terrorist attacks against israels. every single terrorist that commit as terrorist attack against an israeli getting thousands of dollars. you know, if he is not alive, if he dies in the terrorist attack. so, his family gets thousands of dollars. charles: right. >> this has been going on for years, no one holds them to it. charles: president trump already said, this will be one of his major talking point. if we're talking about steps it to ultimately solving the issues
that have dogged the region for decades and many american presidents it begins with palestine no longer making those payments. now on the other end abbas will come in say, hey, if there is ever a palestinian state we want ease jerusalem to be its cap. toll. would you be okay with that. >> absolutely he continues to say that and that is why it's a nonstarter. president trump is going in the right direction because he is making it clear that the first priority is the to stand with es rail. israel is an ally of the united states, a very strong ally of the united states and that anything any sort of negotiations have to have the clear understanding. president trump is coming to israel supposedly on may 22nd, which is the day before jerusalem day, which is when israel celebrates the reunification of jerusalem after the six-day war in 1967.
so it seems pretty clear to me that, that he wouldn't be coming the day before jerusalem day if he wasn't coming to declare, to recognize jerusalem as israel's undivided capitol. that is a step in the right direction. charles: david, i also want to ask you about this. "wall street journal" saying the terror group hamas changing its stance towards israel. i want to give you the israel. hamas drops calls for israel's destruction. are you buying that? >> no, not at all. we've seen these nuances in the way that they craft their public statements for a long time. what you need to do is take a look at what they said afterwards in arabic to their own people, which is that they're still committed to israel's destruction. that there will be no negotiation with israel, and, you know, i just want to remind the viewers that hamas and
fattah which is mahmoud abbas's terrorist organization, the two of them are joined by the hip in the palestinian authority and even though they have their disagreements between each other, the palestinian authority is on equal opportunity employer. it gives the same thousands of dollars to hamas terrorists as it does to fattah terrorists. so, i think we have to keep that in mind when we're talking about negotiating with terrorists. charles: right. >> that that is indeed what is happening. we have a diplomat coming to washington. he wears nice suits but the bottom line is that he is an archterrorist. fattah, hamas, they're all in the same boat. charles: everyone knows that it is a long shot but i think to your point, president trump making the attempt. we know he is not going to dither. he will be pretty strong. he will represent our ally which
is israel. david rubin, thank you very much. we really appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: up next one state decides to tax the rich, sending it to over $2 billion. we'll tell you which state is facing now this burden that comes because they thought they could get the money from rich folks. stay with us. more "varney." ♪ you always pay
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. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call
you see they decided to tax the rich. guess what happened to revenue? you got it, it is less than originally forecast. gerri willis, she will give us all the details. this always happens, doesn't it? reporter: unbelievable how stupid the state has been collecting tax revenues. and now the revenues are collapsing. they are $450 million short of where they thought they would be on this year's tax collections. take a look with it will mean for next year's deficit. originally projected at 1.7 billion. it will now be $2.2 billion. right now the state is scrambling to find $217 million to make up the short fall for just this year. they have only have a couple month to do it. they will not hire anybody. they are doing everything they can to shut down taps on spending. meanwhile the state legislature, you know. lots of democrats up there, they want to put in place a 16% surcharge on hedge funds. you now it is hedge funds who have been leaving. edward lampert, paul tudor jones
both left because of these high taxes. charles: they were big chunks. these guys represented huge amounts of money, right? >> absolutely. they're industry leaders. very well-known. connecticut was considered the number three place in the world for hedge funds. they are losing that position. they are losing revenue. they are desperate. let me tell you. charles: this is slippery slope. california lost over a million people. new jersey over a million people. it feels like it's a slippery slope, gerri. once they go down it, they can never fet it back. >> they put in into place two high income taxes. they are poised to do it again. a sneaky thing in a bill about another bill. if that happens, god only knows what win hall. charles: thank you very much. >> you're welcome. charles: meantime, more "varney" next. actually, i think we have breaking news here. okay. at fidelity, trades are now just $4.95. we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage.
♪ charles: playing that song just for stuart varney. looking at the big board, in a very tight trading range. we're off the lows for the session which was down about 49 points. now want to get to weekly all inventories breaking at this very moment. emac, these numbers have become so critical. liz: down 930,000, draw down. so 930,000 less barrels of oil in storage. they were looking for a drawdown of anywhere 2.25 million to 2.33 million drop. so that is less of a drop than expected. you see he some slight bullish action in oil. the oil is settling though at around the second lowest levels of the year. charles: it has been breaking down really badly. you know, it is important. opec is doing what they said they would do. ironic, we brought too many rigs on too quickly. we want to take advantage of
high oil prices but consequently driving them down. you get gasoline yet? liz: we'll get that for you. this is the fourth weekly drop in a row for oil inventory drawdown. charles: we want that to happen. thanks a lot. another check of the big board. again the market has been in a very tight trading range. don't forget the fed is wrapping up fomc later today, a big jobs report on friday. a lot of anxiety out there. check on the big tech names. "varney & company," this is key, check them every single day. facebook hit another all-time high. they are reporting after the bell. big names, big movers have been pacing this market. check this out. doug schoen appeared on the program yesterday. he says democrats will take back the house because of donald trump. take a listen to this. >> i think there will be enough anti-trump sentiment a bunch what you call lunatics will win. charles: do you think in 2018 you got a good shot thing house back. >> why? >> donald trump. >> that's it?
>> donald trump and low ratings. natural low ratings, midterm of administration put other party in power. charles: joining us former arkansas governor mike huckabee. governor, what i did not hear there was a plan. i didn't hear a plan from hillary clinton. i didn't hear a plan from doug schoen. they really believe that they can just make elections all about donald trump. they were upset big time in november. but, seems like they believe it is going to work this time around. >> well they think but i don't think that is exactly going to happen in part because the demographics the house races are so now locked in, that it is hard to win a democrat getting a republican seat and republican getting a democrat seat because these seats have been so gerrymandered as pretty well be in concrete with a few exceptions. very few of them are going to swing. here is where the republicans have a problem. it is not so much that they're going to be unsighted just because they have done something horrible. you but if they cause their
supporters to just get discouraged, for example, if they don't see the republicans doing some big things, bold things, and quick things, and they think it is business as usual, they will stay home next year and that could spell disaster for the republicans. charles: but, governor, does that mean pass certain legislation that may not be exactly what president trump campaigned on, just to say we got some ws? will the public accept that? or do you think this time around the american public that propelled donald trump to the white house, they want to see real changes, a real draining of the swamp? >> they want to see the swamp drained. by the way the swamp is becoming less a swamp and more a sewer and they're sick of it. they want to see the wall built. they want to see planned parenthood defunded. we're tired of hearing they're going to do it but not do it right now. they want it done right now. they want to see tax cuts, corporate and personal.
they want to see obamacare, something put in place that will protect people not punish people for hard-working citizens. they want to see the border strengthened. they want tough action according to terrorism. donald trump has done some of those things to his credit but there are a lot of things he put on the table as promises. i think that he has got to overcome the resistance that he is getting from some of the republicans in the congress. charles: next one, governor, budget director mick mulvaney says, president trump got many of his campaign promises in this new budget deal. take a listen to this. >> i got to give them credit, their pr was better than 24 hours. why i went to do the press conference yesterday to set the record straight. the president got more money for defense. more money for border security, and more money for school choice. he did that without adding to the deficit. those were the president's priorities in march. the president's priorities during the campaign. it is what we got funded yesterday. charles: all right, governor, as
you know many conservatives not buying that. what are your thoughts? >> well, i think that is a lot of happy talk from the white house. of course they have got to say that i can tell you one thing. there was only one side dancing all over the streets of d.c., yesterday, and none were wearing republican buttons. they were all democrats. they're you all out auditioning for "dancing with the stars" and republicans look they have been to a funeral. the reason, because on major symbolic issues, go back to planned parenthood, that ought to be easy lift to the republicans. they have got the white house, they got the senate and they got the house. if they can't take out funding for that do it now, not september, not october, do it now they have a lot of explaining to do as ricky ricardo once told lucy. i'm afraid you can't take this in little pieces. when you have the majority, you have got to seize the day. i'm not sure they're doing that yet. charles: yeah. i was, a little, i don't know, the idea that they thought shutting down the government, they would get the blame for it,
i think american government would have been smarter than that. i a lot of voters want the government shut down, just to reveal how big, colossal waste goes on. you're a straight-shooter. that is why we love having you. see you real soon. >> thanks a lot, charles. charles: let's get back to the economic story, apple their earnings, more importantly that $256 billion. that is one heck of a cash pile. you know what you can do? you can build 10 border walls with that much money. you could buy everyone in america a new iphone. we have investment strategist bruce bittles. bruce, apple is what it is. it's a juggernaut. it missed on a few key metrics yesterday. what the american public is interested in beyond investment part, quarter of a trillion dollars, what do they do with that? why do they hold on to that much money?
>> stock buybacks have been very important to the entire bull market. that money being repatriated overseas if tax bill or tax reform goes through, it could be very critical to the buyback program going on again. there has been a lull in that the first few months of this year. i think that will ratchet up pretty sharply if we get tax reform. charles: are you a fan or not? are you critical of companies buying back their own stock? >> no. the problem with companies buying back their own stock, they don't have anything else to do with the money. charles: they always haveing to do, right? they're making a calculated decision. is it low-hanging fruit for apple to borrow $100 billion at almost 0% interest, rewarded the shareholders, rather than making economic gambles like building new factories particularly here in america? >> if you build a sustainable economy you don't build it on buybacks but capital spending
that lead to productivity gains and that leads to employment. that is how you have stable advance in the economy. charles: that gets us back to policy, federal policy, fiscal policy from the white house. the ability to get more regulations off the table and get these lower tax rates. >> we've seen monetary policy doesn't really work. it is not a very good tool for fixing structural problems in the economy. fiscal policy, on the other hand is really what you want to see. that is lacking the past eight years. charles: to your point, feels like the fed almost admitted as much, whether here or there, bernie sanders and janet yellen. seems like in the past they blamed obama for not doing his part. for underscoring the fact it wasn't a magic bullet. it did not create a virtuous cycle. >> it was counterproductive what the previous administration was doing. they were anti-business. they were contrary to what monetary policy was. you had gridlock. that is why the economy sat there for six years growing at 1.8%. charles: bruce, i like what i'm seeing though.
i like some of the numbers what i'm seeing. like what i'm hearing for ceos. i like soft and hard data. i say to people, remember the old debate, businesses aren't people? i say they're not people but they're organism ins, right? they to grow, expand and dominate. that is the natural state of business. so the idea that hillary clinton lost to a degree we still get back to the natural state of business where they do want to expand. they want to take market share. that could create economic growth. >> you saw what happened after the election. sentiments turned and seared to the upside not only for consumers but small businesses and ceos. there was global expansion in bullish sentiment. bullish sentiment typically precedes growth. that is why you see in the first quarter results. you saw cap-ex spending jump 9.7%. we haven't seen that since 2013 f that continues, the economy is on the right path. charles: then sprinkle in maybe a few victories for the white house on taxes. >> right. charles: bruce, thanks a lot.
really appreciate it. fbi chief james comey testifying before the senate judiciary hearing. let's listen in. >> director, i have one question regarding my opening comment. i view it as a most important question, and i hope you will answer it. why was it necessary to announce 11 days before a presidential election that you were opening an investigation on a new computer without any knowledge of what was in that computer? why didn't you just do the investigation as you would normally with no public announcement? >> great question, senator, thank you. october 27th, the investigative team that had finished the investigation in july focused on secretary clinton's emails asked to meet with me. i met with them that morning late morning, in my conference room. they laid out for me what they
could see from the metadata on this fellow anthony weiner's laptop that had been seized in an unrelated case. what they could see from the met at that data, there were thousands of secretary clinton's emails on that device, including what they thought might be the missing emails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any emails from her first three months. she was using a verizon blackberry then. that is obviously very important because if there was evidence that she was acting with bad intent that is where it would be in the first three month. >> but they weren't there? >> can i finish my answer, senator? they came in and said we could sigh thousands of emails from the clinton email domain including many, many, from the verizon clinton domain, blackberry domain. we think we have to get a search warn to go get thighs. the department of justice agreed we had to get a search warrant. i agreed. i authorized them to get a search warrant. i faced a choice. i lived my entire career,
tradition you can avoid it any election whether dog catcher, election or president of the united states. sat there that morning could not dea door labeled no action here. i could see two doors, both actions. one labeled speak and one concealed. here is how i thought about it. i'm not trying to talk you into this i want to know my thinking. having repeatedly told congress we're done, nothing is there, there is no case there. to restart in a hugely significant way, potentially finding emails that would reflect on her intent from the spinning and not speak about it, would require an act of concealment in my view. so i stared at speak and conceal. speak would be really bad. there is an election in 11 days. lord, that would be really bad. concealing in my view would be catastrophic. not just to the fbi but well beyond. and honestly, as between really bad and catastrophic, i said to my team, we've got to walk into the world of really bad. i have got to tell congress we're restarting this.
not in some frivolous way, in a hugely significant way. the team also told me, we can not finish this work before the election. then they worked night after night after night. they found thousands of new emails. they found classified information on anthony weiner. somehow her emails were being forwarded to anthony weiner including classified information by her assistant, huma abedin. they found thousands new emails. called me saturday night before the election, thanks to wizardry of our technology we only had to personally read 6,000. we think we can finish tomorrow morning sunday. i met with them. we found a lot of new stuff. we did not find anything that changes our view of her intent. so we're in the same place we were in july. it hasn't changed our view. i asked them lots of questions. okay, if that is where you are, then i also have to tell congress that we're done. this is terrible. it makes me mildly nauseous to think that we might have had impact on the election but
honestly, it wouldn't change the decision. everybody who disagrees with me, has to come back to october 28th with me, stair at this. what would you do? would you speak or conceal? i could be wrong. we honestly made a decision between those two choices even in hindsight this is one of the world's most painful experiences i would make the same decision. i would not conceal that on october 2th from the congress. and i sent a letter to congress. people forget this i didn't make a public announcement. i sent a private letter to the chair chairs and ranges of. distinction in a difference without a world of leaks t was very important i tell them, instead of concealing reasonable people can disagree. that is the reason i made that choice. it was a hard choice. i still believe in retrospect the right choice as painful this has been. i'm sorry for the long answer. >> let me respond, on the letter it was a matter minutes before the world knew about it. secondly, my understanding and
staff has just said to me, that you didn't get a search warrant before making the announcement. >> i think that is right. i think i authorized, department of justice agreed we would seek a search warrant. i don't see it as meaningful distinction. >> well, it is very hard, it would have been, you took an enormous gamble. the gamble was that there was something there that would invalidate her candidacy. and there wasn't. so, one has to look at that action and say did it affect the campaign. around i think most people who have looked at this say, yes, it did affect the campaign. why would he do it? and, was there any conflict among your staff? people saying do it, people saying don't do it as has been reported? >> no. there was a great debate.
i have a fabulous staff at all levels. one of my junior lawyers said, should you consider that what you're about to do may help elect donald trump president? and i said, thank you for raising that. not for a moment. because down that path lies the death of fbi as independent institution in america. i can't consider for a second who's political fortunes will be affected in what way. we have to ask ourselves, what is is the right thing to do? i'm very proud of the way we debated it. at the end of the day everyone on my team agreed we have to tell congress that we're restarting this in a hugely significant way. >> well, there is a way to do that. i don't know whether it would work or not but certainly in a classified way carrying out your tradition of not announcing investigations. and you know, i look at this exactly the opposite way you do. everybody knew it would influence the investigation before.
that there was a very large percentage of chance that it would, and yet that percentage of chance was taken, and there was no information. and the election was lost. so, it seems to me that before your department does something like this, you really ought to, because, senator leahy began to talk about other investigations, and i think, this theory does not hold up when you look at other investigations. but let me go on to 702 because you began your comments saying how important it is and yes, it is important. we've got, i think, a problem and the issue that we're going to need to address is the fbi's practice of searching 702 data
using u.s. person identifiers as query terms, and some have called this an unconstitutional backdoor search. while others say such queries are essential to assuring that potential terrorists don't slip through the cracks as they did before. so could you give us your views on that and how might be handled to avoid the charge which may bring down 702? >> thank you, senator. that is a really important issue. the way 702 works is, under that provision of the statute the fisa court, federal judges authorize us as u.s. agencies to collect the communications of non-u.s. people that we believe to be overseas if they're using american infrastructure. the criticism of the fbi has gotten, feedback we've gotten consistently 9/11 is, you have to make sure you're in a position to connect the dots. you can't have stovepiped information.
so we responded to that over the last 10 years, mostly to the great work of my predecessor bob muller, we have confederated databases so if we collect information under 702 it doesn't sit in a separate stovepipe. it sits in a single cloud type environment so that if i'm opening an investigation into the united states in a terrorism matter, intelligences matter, criminal matter, i have the name of the suspect, their telephone number and email addresses i search the fbi's databases. that search necessarily will also touch the information that was collected under 702, so we don't miss a dot, but, nobody gets access to the information that sits in the 702 database unless they have been trained correctly. if there is, let's imagine that terrorists overseas were talking about a suspect in the united states or, someone's email address in the united states was in touch with that terrorist, and that information sits in the 702 database.
when we open a case in the united states and put in that name and email address, it will touch that data and tell us there is information in the 702 database that's relevant. if the agent doing the query is properly trained how to handle that, he or she will be able to share that information. if they're not properly trained, they will be alerted that there is information, they have to get the appropriate training and appropriate oversight to be able to do it. but to do it otherwise is to risk us where it matters most, in the united states failing to connect dots. so my you view is, the information that is in the 702 database has been lawfully collected, carefully overseen and check and our use of it is also appropriate carefully overseen and checked. >> you are not masking the data? unmasking the data? >> i'm not sure what that means in this context. what we do, we combine information collected from any lawful source in a single fbi database so we don't miss a dot
when we're conducting investigations in the united states. what we make sure though is, nobody gets to see fisa information of any kind unless they have had the appropriate training and have the appropriate oversight. >> my time is up. thank you. senator hatch. >> thank you, senator. director comey, in january i introduced the s-139, rapid dna act. it is bipartisan cosponsors include senators feinstein, cornyn, coons, flake, klobuchar, me, on this committee, maybe more. charles: you are watching james comey with an impassionate and somewhat long convoluted answer if you will, to question to put him by senator dianne feinstein. why 11 days before the election did he announce the investigation into anthony weiner's computer. emac, this fellow weiner, they thought there were emails missing from the first three months of hillary clinton's turn in the white house.
he thought maybe this could be where those missing emails were. liz: showing hillary clinton may have been acting with bad intent. those emails were not on the anthony weiner and huma abedin laptop. dianne feinstein asking very pointed questions, saying essentially you made, you sent a letter to congress even before you got a search warrant to look into the weiner laptop, to search for hillary clinton emails. meaning you rushed into it. that was the implication there. then comey said, well i sent a private letter to congress telling them what i was doing. dianne feinstein of course, it would be and was leaked within minutes. charles: sure. liz: she is asking why did you carry out this announcement, telling congress? why didn't you stick with your tradition of not announcing probes? that is the fbi tradition. why did you do that? so he is basically saying we had choices. i had a choice. either i speak or conceal it.
dianne feinstein not buying that. saying concealment means fbi tradition of not announcing probes. it has to be talked about though in the context of the loretta lynch department the justice. there is word out there in "the new york times" has reported on it, that james comey has been worried about loretta lynch stepping in and hindering the hrc, the hillary clinton email probe or in any way dialing it down. charles: by making it public would stop her -- liz: he did go it alone strategy. that is what he was operating under at that time. charles: i thought to that point with the concealment, saying the decision was between catastrophic and quote, really bad, and he lost me a little bit there saying, well they went with really bad by alerting congress and fanning some ignorance somehow it wasn't, notifying the public. of course everyone knowing once the call went out to these congress, the press would find out about it immediately. also thought it was interesting,
he is saying, he is mildly, mildly nauseous about the idea that he may have had an impact on the election. liz: yeah. he would still make the same decision today. charles: right. liz: so it looks like people, excuse me, congressman, senator feinstein not buying his explanation. people are not buying james comey's explanation. why are you rushing these letters out to congress knowing, people know they will be leaked before the election? it did impact possibly fence-sitters who may have voted for hillary, then went for trump. that is the analysis that is out there but the context of it, again, this probe was going on for numerous, a long time. and it was under the loretta lynch-obama white house that james comey did a go it alone strategy. it seems that he was concerned there would be interference with his probe and fbi's probe into the emails. charles: i think historians, legal scholars will study this for years. you may want to bring psychologists in because feels
like once he made that first announcement to judge napolitano's point earlier, that, that it was a proverbial snowball that became a boulder. any attempt to fix the prior, you know announcement made it a larger boulder. liz: covering the fbi for decades i have never heard the head of the fbi talk about their tradition of keeping their investigations under wraps secret, quote he is calling it concealment if that is something bad. i don't see how he squares that. dianne feinstein not having any of that. charles: speaking of judge napolitano, your initial thoughts on that? >> i have harshly criticized director comey notwithstanding what was a stellar reputation both for respecting the constitution and for enforcing federal law. not easy to have a reputation good in both of those camps prior to the involvement with mrs. clinton but i obviously
agree on sentiment that two of you have been expressing and on senator feinstein's argument. regulations of the department of justice could not be clearer and regulations of the federal bureau of investigation could not be clearer. if he had this dilemma he just testified about, one door says reveal and the other door says conceal, he should have remained silent. or, he could have informed congress in a classified setting rather than in a public way. now that we know, of course we have hindsight -- charles: sure, sure. >> this goes to your question. why did you do anything before you knew what was in the laptop? look and see what is in there? turned out what was in in was fruitless around didn't change their mind at all. think could easily have conducted that investigation, below the radar screen and wouldn't have the need to report to anything. charles: yet, here we are. what will come out of this? what could come out of this? you know, i mean it is
fascinating, helps monday morning quarterbacking on election? >> i have to be intellectually honest. mrs. clinton was profoundly flawed candidate, profoundly flawed for variety of reasons we don't have to go into now, but when she says the fbi influenced the out come of the election i think she has an argument worth considering. the fbi in our society has such a high reputation in law enforcement, fortified by movies and books and culture that people assume that when the fib you by is investigating you, you must have done something wrong. to further that assumption, two weeks before election day, after on july 5th, you had publicly shut down the investigation, is compounding the evil. charles: then of course coming out saying that he could not, there was no way possible conclusion to have anthony
weiner's laptop before the election, miraculously, feels like every time we saw a press conference from comey, he lost credibility and so did the fbi. >> yes. we talked about this earlier. the more he tried to explain, more he tried to balance off what he did in his previous public statements the worse it got. the less you law enforcement and more political he appeared to be. charles: right toward the end there with as conversation about the fisa court. i didn't know if you heard that. >> did i be. charles: communication of non-use people overseas and lawful collection of information who would have access to that someone will pick that up on the democrat side or republican side in further questions, where do you think they're going with this? perhaps how the information got leaked about candidate trump and subsequently president-elect trump?
>> well the, that is exactly how it got leaked. section 702, without getting too much in the weeds. allows the, either the fbi or the nsa, whoever is doing this, to surveil communications of a foreign agent and an american person without a search warrant. they have per said the fisa court to interpret that to mean if the foreign person and american person mentioned the name of another american, not in the conversation, but mention him or her, that the government can surveil that person without a search warrant and if that person mentions the name of somebody else the government can surveil that person. they do this out to the sixth degree. if you do the math. that covers almost entire population of the united states. so totally defeats the purpose of fisa, foreign intelligence surveillance act, which is to put the judiciary with its legal standards between the fbi and the nsa and individual targets. right now we're at the point where the government captures
the digital version of every phone call, landline and cell call, every keystroke and every computer. every piece of fiber-optic data and does so without a warrant. charles: judge napolitano. stay right there. 11:00 a.m. on the east coast. 8:00 a.m. rather on the west coast. look at this. i want you to look at this. protesters in texas. this is after the state pass as bill cracking down on so-called sanctuary cities. several people have been arrested there. fbi james comey testifying before the senate judiciary committee. he says he was actually mildly nauseous that he may have had an impact on the election but had no choice to make the announcement that he was restarting hillary email probe. treasury secretary steve
it's not just members of the caucus but moderates as well. we love to follow the big-name tech stocks. i say the blue-collar names that say more about middle america and where this country is going. hour three of varney & company starts right now. ♪ ♪ charles: they slowed the music down. maybe they'll slow me down. [laughter] charles: i get excited with the comey thing. check first on the money. let's check on the big board. i'm not saying it's a coincidence, the market plunged so we are at new lows rather for
the session. not a catastrophe but certainly at the lows of the session. oil in the meantime, we saw inventory numbers up. it's been the big tech names. the focus today apple, they reported after the bell yesterday. best-selling author of american mojo peter kiernan and investment strategists, keith fitzgerald. gold on, guys, congressman walden after meeting with president trump. >> we want to make sure their product is sound and works for the american people and when issues come up we address them. i believe we've done that now with some changes to the legislation that will be bringing forward when it comes
to making sure people of preexisting coverage have the care and support that they need. mr. upton, mr. long and others have put together some ideas that have been embraced by both sides and the president. before i do, i want you to hear from doctor in the health subcommittee and has been integral in this entire process and worked on. >> thank you, chairman. the committee products that were worked on over a month ago as they left the committee that evening after a very long mark-up, i thought was a good product but i always knew there were areas that it could be improved and we listened, we worked with members. i'll just have to say i appreciate the engagement of the vice president and president to have their input and their thoughts on this. i think it's been extremely
instructive and helpful and i think we are in a good place. i certainly look forward to us having a vote on this bill. i don't look forward to language any longer. i may just vote yes, i'm anxious to see what the senate will do with our product, thank you. >> chairman of the committee. >> let me just tell you how we got to where we are today and i support the bill with this amendment that's going to be included as part of the rules package when we consider this likely tomorrow. i made it pretty well known last week that i was not comfortable with where this process after the bill left the energy and commerce committee. i made that publicly known. i had down at length with chairman walden and burgess earlier this week, monday night, with a number of colleagues and we talked about how we can add protections for those with preexisting illness.
staff wrote up my thoughts in terms of legislative language. i reached out to billy long last night and what this amendment would do is provide additional funds directly into the high- risk pools, spent for people that might otherwise lose their coverage because of a waiver that a governor will seek. it's our understanding that the $8 billion over the 5 years will more than cover those that might be impacted and as a consequence , keeps our pledge for those that, in fact, would be otherwise denied because of preexisting illnesses. so i talk to the president yesterday afternoon. i told him i could not support the bill as it was then moving through rules committee without added protection for those with preexisting illnesses and based on our discussions and agreement
in this amendment, i can support the bill with such amendment. ly turn it over to billy long, my partner in this amendment. >> thanks, i appreciate that, fred. my name is billy long, the show-me state and i heard joe scorboruogh said i'm new member of congress, i've on on media three times and i usually make story behind the scene and i made the mistake of saying no a reporter and ever since i started running for congress, i'm not a member of the freedom caucus. i guess i'm a member of the show-me caucus. i was trying to do the right thing for the right reason every day that i'm here. i have voting record but when this came out and i saw preexisting conditions, they
were going to be handled like the way they were, i will have a problem. i mention today one reporter, i don't get involved with the media a lot, so anyway, the president called day before yesterday, we had a 15-minute, 20-minute conversation. he wanted a yes. i was one of the president's earliest supporters, these guys can tell you, i saw the trump train. nobody knew thought i knew what i was talked about. i campaigned when a lot of folks wouldn't campaign on him in the campaign trail. i'm a supporter of this president and i'm a supporter of this bill, the original bill i spoke long and hard back march 22nd at a republican conference trying to get it through. so i was always for the underlying bill. when they made what i consider the change, preexisting conditions, that's when i said, i'm a no. the president said, really? we need you man, i said, you
don't have me. we really need you there. he called me back yesterday, we need, we need you. i said, i'm a no. and i stayed a no and i said fred and i have been working on some language that we could get in there that would get us both in the position where we need to be on preexisting conditions to make sure these people are covered because they need to be covered, period. and i said that all of my literature, i started running in 2009 but after they passed obamacare, there's two good things i like about preexisting conditions, keeping kids 26 on their folks insurance. i will stand for what i believe. it's probably gotten me trouble with the right and the left, but that's where i am, and that's why you don't see much of me out there. i usually do my work behind the scenes and i try to put a lot of work in the committee and energy and commerce committee. today we are here announcing that with this addition that we
brought to the president and solely in an over hour meeting with him, they were both yes' on the bill, there's still work to be done on the votes, i believe, we are still going to have to -- i don't know where the vote count is, we all still need to work for it. i'm happy to announce that the seventh district of missouri will have preexisting conditions covered adequately with this addition that we just talked to the president. [inaudible conversations] >> how far does your amendment go for people with preexisting conditions and where does the money come from? >> the money is in the bill, we signed off on the amendment last night. it's 8 billion over five years, the guess is that should a state decide to go for a waiver, fewer at the beginning than the end of the five years.
so 1 billion aa -- allocated for the first two years and i guess is -- i asked the question and the sense is that this is more than enough to cover those and it is as we -- as we wrote it, it is a direct result for those folks that otherwise may lose their coverage because of the waiver that's on. >> premium rise, i know this is a real problem, premiums of people with preexisting conditions and high-risk pools were going to skyrocket, what would this do to keep premiums down? >> we have to let greg answer this, put downward pressure on what the premium increases are there. >> yes, so let me address this first because the language in the amendment that's being proposed, maybe he will see both sides of the party endorsed.
you're only talking about occurring in the state that have a waiver, had a high-risk pool for people that might not have continued their coverage and only for one year because once you are in, you have continuous coverage. so it's a very small statement. it's something that we cared about. $8 billion should take care of that to buy down those premiums and secretary price has the authority or dhhs secretary to make sure that these people are appropriately cared for. and if you're not in any of those situations, the underlying stays the same for everybody else. it's just a tinny segment. but we care about those people and that's why -- >> congressman upton, what do you say to american with preexisting conditions that are concern that there's too much -- [inaudible] >> look, this amendment specifically targets those that would lose it because of governor may seek a waiver.
i talked to my governor a whole number of times including this morning. michigan is not going to seek a waiver. in fact, you may have some states that do that. this language is now specifically written for those states that may seek that waiver to protect those with preexisting illness. let's face it. this is the first step of -- probably the third step of what has been a long process. 27-hour-mark-up, bill that passed through the committee, likely now to pass to the house. it goes to the senate and they'll be a conference. this bill will -- will change from where it is today and likely from my perspective and others probably change for the better. [inaudible] >> no, no. i'm not in the lip conference. we explained to the president
yesterday. i read him back his statement where he said that this bill would be just as strong on preexisting illnesses as obamacare. i want him to keep that pledge. this amendment allows that to happen and cover those that otherwise might have been excluded because of the -- [inaudible] >> thank you. >> pressure from the white house to change your mind and what role did the president play in. >> no, the president was seeking our opinion on -- probably a lot of my colleagues over the last number of weeks. again, when he called me yesterday, i told him i was a no and i told him that i was a no because of the provision on preexisting illness and he said that he wanted it covered. the guy that sealed the deal,
billy long, billy long said let us come down and explain to you what we are going to do to protect those folks and in fact, that's what -- [inaudible] >> thank you. charles: there you have it. press conference for members of congress who apparently were sitting on the fence, three moderates, one conservative all around the issue of preexisting conditions and how handle vis-a-vis the federal government and state, states having the chance to -- to either seek a waiver and not deal with it at all or deal with the federal government backing them with a high-risk pool. is that essentially what we are -- liz: 8 billion over five years on top of 15 billion provided in an amendment for the high-risk pools. that's that. those are those pools. separate from that, there's
something called 115 billion-dollar state stability fund that's allotted for high-risk pool. we are talking big numbers to get 21, 22 votes on board to get obamacare, you know, repeal and replaced, moved out of the house and into the senate. charles: peter. peter: it's much bigger and we are on a slippery slope. it was necessary to get to the votes. charles: keith fitzgerald, looking at the hospital stocks, others down fractionally, all less than a dollar. i think wall street taking a wait and see look at this, for the moment, however, what do you think? what do you make of it so far? >> well, i think wait and see is the operative word. i'm with peter on this, this is a very, very slippery-slope. it's going to hit where it hurts, the wallet, it's not just the consumers' wallet -- liz: who oversees this money,
high-risk pools? charles: tom price and saying ultimately he will make sure that people with preexisting conditions are coverage. this, of course, was the core issue for the freedom caucus, they don't want preexisting conditions covered by the federal government. >> wait a minute, i thought we were getting rid of obamacare rather than keeping basic elements and tweaking it a little bit? that's exactly what is happening here. fred upton and those guys are comfortable with former colleague, dr. tom price, health and human services administering this. it's not going to be the health and secretary human services for ever. suppose she uses the fun for things that they don't like, it's too much money in the hands of too many bureaucrats, it's too much regulation of health care and it presumes, presumes that somehow the federal government has the obligation to provide health care for all 330 million americans and there's no law, no statute, no
principle of constitutional law that event suggests this much. charles: that means president obama in many ways won on this, guys, i want to turn to fbi director james comey, he's still taking tough questions from the judiciary committee and earlier they were grilling him on the informations into president trump's and hillary clinton. roll tape. >> director comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the trump investigation or the clinton investigation? >> never. charles: all right, you saw that. >> i'm chuckling because, a, who is ever going to admit they were anonymous source and b, who is going to admit on national television and, c, who is going to announce it under oath.
i think that senator feinstein from california hit the nail right on the head. how can you justify exposing the details of one investigation and keeping the other one silent when you knew that this would influence the outcome or at least affect in some way the outcome of a presidential election. charles: right. keith. >> respectfully i'm going to disagree with the judge on this very care occasion here. i think that law enforcement particularly the sitting director of the fbi, the last thing he wanted to do was have the allegation, even the hint of allegation that he concealed an investigation supposing that that had uncovered material data. charles: all right, guys, we only have a quick moment and i do want to ask the judge about breaking news, we've got a lot of protests going on in texas, they've got a new antisanctuary city bill, the toughest one in the country. it would let law enforcement question anyone's immigration status, anyone and could actually send sheriffs to ignore the law to jail.
some are saying it's profiling, some are saying it's a complete disaster, it is really -- very heated down in texas. >> as i understand it, what governor abbott and lieutenant governor patrick are trying to do is to coerce law enforcement of texas, much of whom ultimately works for him to cooperate with federal enforcement of immigration laws. in many cities including the one we sit now, local law enforcement has taken the position as they can under the supreme court per vialing rulings, they don't have to cooperate with the feds, feds can bring all of their own agents they want. they can't make local spend resources enforcing it. i don't think there's a problem with that telling federal -- telling sheriffs, you to cooperate. but there is a problem with stopping people and asking them about their immigration status because that was the portion of the almost identically worded arizona law that the supreme court invalidated three years ago. charles: keith fitzgerald, thank
(vo) when you wake up with miracle-ear... ...your mornings can come to life with sound. our exclusive speech isolation technology transforms a bustling café into a clear connection that helps you hear the laugh that made you fall in love with her in the first place. and, at miracle-ear, we take the time to get to know you, grandpa! so we can ensure you hear what matters most in your world. call, click or come in today to learn how to start your better days. miracle-ear...hear a better day.
charles: and now this, billionaire richard branson calls out president trump on his coal plan, roll tape. >> well, i can't think of anything much steeper than bringing coal back. [laughter] >> actually there are some things that are even more stupid, but anyway. charles: earlier this morning we asked epa administrator scott pruitt about that and here is what he had to say? >> it is dead wrong.
you need solid hydrocarbons. what would happen if we had an attack on infrastructure when you convert today natural gas almost exclusively and you don't have coal there as a safe guard to preserve the grid. charles: peter, what are your thoughts in. >> if he understand how coal works, making metals, if you look at companies like arch, they had a huge quarter. stock is up very significantly today, why, because metal coal has gone 70 bucks to 110. charles: on the thermal side, we have more coal than anybody in the world. it could fuel our growth for centuries to come, it's cheap, and we need it. we don't -- you can't get the kind of power need today run an economy from wind periodic wind
gusts and solar. >> i agree that coal versus wind. charles: richard branson thinking for the future. he has the elitist attitude about this. i think the markets would dictate when we need a lot less coal as oppose to government shutting down and putting tens of thousands of people out of work. >> if you go india and china they use a ton of coal. manufacturers can't keep up with the coal demand. charles: peter i have breaking news right now because puerto rico is about to request bankruptcy protection. liz: big fight with bond insurers, largest restructuring of bond debt, puerto rico is in the middle of ten-year poverty rate. they can only buy goods or bring in goods into puerto rico from
♪ ♪ ♪ liz: are you going sing again? charles: i was thinking about it. of course, we all know that's the eagles classic, hotel california. it's at the center of a brand-new lawsuit, the ban assuming the owners of hotel in méxico called hotel california. peter, you've been there. >> i have been to hotel california. you can check out but you can never leave. it's in a town called todo santos and it feels, acts like behave like, that's where the hotel california is written.
there's, in fact, a mission bell and a chapel across the street, you would not go in there and believe anything other than -- carlos charles did that influence you going there? what made you decide to go there? just a coincidence. >> hour and a half north of cabo san lucas, gorgeous, down to the sea, old méxico, not spoiled by all kinds of high-rises yet but in the middle of a town there's a hotel california and, yes, everything about it is present today you as if that's where the song was written. charles: wow, i love it. i hope they resolve this thing. i think it was kind of smart in a way. maybe they thought no one would find out. how long has it been around? >> the hotel has been there for a while. charles: i have tickets for july 9th and 30th for the
eagles, earth wind and fire, i mean, this is going to be the concert of the lifetime. i'm going hear the real thing. by the way, let's take a look at the white house because president trump has been catching a lot of criticism in first few months in office and my next guest say that is the first 101 days have really been a disaster for the democrats. fox news contributor joins me now. the first 100 days, everyone debated and talked about it, never went away, you're saying the real story here is how badly the democrats faired? >> absolutely. this has been disassous 100 days for the democrats. you look at what happened in with russia. they spent most of their first 100 days pushing this false narrative of trump collusion with vladimir putin and then donald trump goes up a blows airfield and attacks putin number one ally bashar al-assad and all of a sudden up goes
their theory of collusion with putin. we are now in a new cold war with putin. it's kind of hard to make the argument that donald trump is vladimir putin's puppet which is what they were trying to do. the biggest thing -- go ahead. charles: you said cold war, have we entered political cold war of being battle of public relations, every single day a battle of finger-pointing rather than getting to maybe old-school governing? [laughter] >> no, absolutely. it is. well, this is what we are having now. you've got the budget deal that was just negotiated which is a pragmatic bipartisan compromise to dealing with the mess that barack obama left us. this isn't trump's budget. this is barack obama's last budget that was supposed to be taken care of last year and they calm with a sort of pragmatic bipartisan compromise. democrats are running spiking the football saying, we won, we
won, we forced donald trump to do all sorts of things which they didn't do. it's kind of hard to -- it's hard to have bipartisan compromise and governing when one party has decided that it's not the opposition, it's the resistance, that their job is to stop and destroy the trump administration. you're right that we have gotten away from that. there's a reason for. one party doesn't want to play. charles: mark, to your point, it feels that every time they open their mouths now, the two candidates for dnc leadership, both extremely flawed, and neither reflect the tone and sentiment of the american public. so they seem so tin-aired but focus on trying to delegitimize president trump. >> they have done nothing to bring back all those voters who were twice obama voters in 2012 and 2008 who then voted for donald trump. 700 counties in america that
voted twice for barack obama, a third of them, a third of them switched to donald trump in the last election. what have they done to bring those people abod? they've done the exact opposite. they pushed them away. leader of the dnc says if you're pro-life, you're not welcome in the democratic party. the whole process of being resistance, they're telling voters, here is what you can do for you vote with donald trump, we hate donald trump and we hate all the people who sent them to washington. they're not going to win another presidential election unless they get points back. charles: thank you very much. floating the idea of breaking up the big banks. listen to what treasury steve mnuchin said about it this morning, roll tape. >> i have seen the best of the mortgage business and i have seen the worst of the emergency -- mortgage business. we purchased a bank from the fdic that probably had one of the worst, if not, the worst mortgage business that existed and we saw the problems with
that servicing business that took years and years to work out, so clearly we cannot let occur what occurred before. charles: my next guest is john ellison, former caito institute, a lot of debate and i have to be honest with you, for a long time i was one of the guys who said forget about it, let's get rid of glass-steagal. it seems they don't have to lend to mainstream america and they don't because they can make more commodities? is that the way american banks have served the american public? >> no, they really didn't. i don't think government bureaucrats know exactly how big banks ought to be. the irony is the too big to fail doctrine which was supposed to be eliminated by dodd-frank
created advantage for organizations. there's a cure, however, the cure is the choice act which has been proposed in congress which would allow institutions to get out of dodd-frank and what that would do put pressure on the large banks because they aren't properly capitalized to actually shrink and getting out of a lot of business that don't make a lot of economic sense. charles: john, i have peter kiernan on studio, what are your thoughts on this? peter: notion of too big to fail, one of the things that you can look at if you compare american banks with european banks where they did not recapitalize, they are dying over there, whether it's uni-credit and i've talk today bank leaders, they don't mind
dodd-frank so much. but i'm not sure we are terribly broken and that's the last time you want to try and fix things is when you're not very broken. charles: go ahead, i'm sorry, your comments? >> dodd-frank has been a huge benefit for the very large banks. i think the banks peter are talking to are happy, they are very resistant to change. keel-community banking. the community banks can't afford the regulatory costs and the large banks have achieved regulatory capture. if you like goldman sachs, you should be happy with dodd-frank. you care about small business lending which has been cremed in the u.s., then you should be very unhappy with dodd-frank. charles: all right. >> very slowed economic growth through no venture capital ending to small businesses. charles: you know what, i'm going to side with you even though peter is sitting next to me. [laughter] charles: john, thank you very much. i appreciate it. facebook reporting profits after
the bell, mark zuckerberg that they're adding 3,000 people to monitor live content. we have seen some ugly things happen and live and go on by -- go on streaming for 30 minutes, even longer. the american public has been in uproar. peter: justifiably. also from a business perspective. they have called zuckerberg himself and said our next mega trend, the next thing that's going to drive the business is video. that's going to come through instagram which is up to 700 million users, they have got to get this problem figured out. they have get to monitoring worked out not only where it's next to ads, sandwiches that you can put in the middle of mid rolls but the actual content itself, big, big issue. they have to fix it. liz: zuckerberg is setting earnings conference with wall street. how do this impacting your business when you have the term facebook killer? do you want the word killer next to brand name. that's really bad.
3,000 on top of 4500 monitoring content isn't enough. should they shut down that live-streaming app because you have suicides, rapes and murderers livestreamed onto facebook, 50 since that thick debuted last year. charles: that they have avoided, i think they are starting to accept it. now for the second time in a week, the u.s. air force tested a launch another long-range ballistic missile into the pacific. that's this morning, the missile was launched from air force base in california by team of montana, this is just days after north korea attempted to launch a missile of its own which fizzled on a launching pad. officials say that launching was years in advance and had nothing to do with north korea wing, wing. siding massive losses, we heard this hour that the replacement bill may actually have the vote,
s&p 500 down 6 points right now. watching some of the names, most sectors to the downside. hul, has launched live television streaming service, you can now get multiple channels, 50 channels, sports news and the like. take a look at groupon, down 13%, revenue decline there and really worst single day since october 2015. young brands, that's a winner, kfc and taco bell, taco belichicken chalupa flying off the shelves there. start at 5:00 a.m. on fox business. ur rates
articles charles republican lawmakers talking health care with president trump. earlier fred upton says he's a yes now. >> i told him i would not support the bill without added protections for those with preexisting illnesses and based on our discussions and the agreement on this amendment, can now be in a place where i can support the bill with such an amendment. charles: joining us house freedom caucus member, congressman, thank you for joining us.
pretty important press conference taking place right outside the white house, four of your colleagues on the fence including a conservative all now saying with the amendment, they would be a yes, where does this put the freedom caucus? >> yeah, that's great news. you know, at the end of the day what we have all been looking for is get the thing across the finish line and working together with our colleagues to be able to come to conclusions that we can all live with and be happy with and i'm grateful that we have been able to reach this conclusion. charles: in other words, do you believe now as of this very moment the white house will have the number of votes they need to pass this in congress and take the next step? >> i do, absolutely. and we are excited to finally be at this point. it'll be not only a great victory for the president but for america. it's about time that we replace the disastrous consequences of obamacare and move forward with affordable health care and health care for everyone.
charles: what part of the upton amendment that you think is palatable for your freedom caucus members an will get some of them to change their minds? >> well, i don't think the freedom caucus is going to change their mind. we are already a yes on this and the upton amendment is not going to change that. it just brings us some others in our conference who had a no who at that point are on board with us. so 90 plus percent was already yes and this amendment is not going the change that. charles: this amendment won't change the idea of states being able to opt out and send back preexisting conditions back to the federal government? >> well, that's correct. as i understand this does not change the policy of taking this back to the states and giving the states the right to opt out of the obamacare mandates. this amendment as i understand it simply provides additional funding for those with preexisting conditions to give
more stabilization in that regard. charles: congressman, i also want to talk to you about the battle of the spending bill. some democrats claiming victory. what's the real story because some conservatives weren't happy as well? >> there's some extent where either side can claim some victories, either side can claim defeats in this thing. my issue personally is that the president's agenda is not adequately reflect what the american people voted on in november is not clearly spelled out in this and that certainly raises concerns. charles: but the white house took great pains to say that this is a major bipartisan win in that there were certain elements of it including 1.5 billion for border security, some of which will actually result in wall being placed where fence is now. >> yeah, and that's like i said, in a bill of this magnitude there's always going to be some things that we can claim as
victories and, you know, i think the white house and i didn't speak for them obviously but they're ready to get this passed. the white house's first budget will come after this so their first official budget will come in september. at this point, i think it's let's get this one behind us, let's move forward and right in conjunction with that is health care being passed. charles: last one for you. fbi director james comey testifying before the senate judiciary committee. why don't you take a listen on what he had to say about the hillary clinton investigation. >> one of my junior lawyers said, should you consider that what you're about to do my help elect donald trump as president and i said, thank you for raising that, not for a moment because down that path lies the death of the fbi's independent institution of america, i can't consider for a second whose political fortunes will be affected in what way. we have to ask ourselves, what is the right thing to do and
then do that then -- charles: some feel that comey's actions has led to the death of the fbi, certainly reputation, what are your thoughts? >> that's the first i heard that quote and i think he's spot on. listen, no one in america, no one is above the law and whenever we come to the point that we are fearful to stand for that which is right or wrong because it might affect somebody's political future, that -- that leads us down a path of potential tyranny and who knows what else. listen, i think director comey has done the best that he can do with the information he's been given and with the investigative evidence that he was given and i think it's a great statement what he just made and i would agree with him. charles: representative, thank you very much, we appreciate your time. >> thank you. charles: any minute president trump will welcome abbas as part of plan to attempt to bring peace to the middle east. history will be happening before your eyes and you do not want to
around what they did is they brought terrorist incidents to jerusalem down significantly, terrorism is going to be the key and this man cannot control the terrorism. charles: there's a new study out there and shedding light on housing recovery and it doesn't look as good as some people think. apparently most zones are actually worth less than they were before the recession. that's breaking news. liz: one of three homes are worth more now than they were at their prerecession peak. where the homes hitting prerecession haecs are higher, denver, dallas, nashville, san francisco. where are they not hitting prerecession peaks, 5% or less are basically, these are the areas. las vegas, tucson, fresno,
campton, new jersey. 5% of the homes are not hitting prerecession. charles: many of them were at the heart of the housing bubble to begin with. peter: three things you to look at. inventory. but the other piece is demand, that's represented by two things, population moving in and job creation and good middle-class job creation, there are major cities like chicago, like hartford which don't have the job creation which don't have the population moving and so those job markets because they're stalled the housing markets have stalled too and lower percentage rates. liz: only 5% or less are hitting -- that's right, places like campton, new jersey, fort lauderdale is in the mix too.
charles: coal stocks, railroads, peter, we saw csx, if middle america is going to come back, we have to follow these kinds of names and industries. peter: arch coal is the perfect example. they are probably the leading player in metal coal. thermal 45 or 47 bucks a ton. what you're talking about is major shifts. they have a strong balance sheet and they're going after both thermal and metal and they have created a dividend for the first time and they're doing things to reflect saying, we are in a commodity business and the commodity right now that we are involved in is strong. people are looking at coal and
say it's a dead busy. if you look at the global market for coal, it's plenty strong and plenty of uses, there may be issues but what it does to the atmosphere but not -- charles: the clock is ticking here on manufacturing. i'm also seeing great signs with respect to manufacturing. i know we haven't had -- those key parts of the trump agenda put in place yet but it feels like movement has already begun. peter: i happen to love general motors. auto zone, pays 3.8% yield. that is great value and that is going to be a greater belt weather on how the united states is doing. charles: they might. in the meantime you're looking at alphabet and google, a thousand dollars a share. peter, thank you very much. now, to some other individual stocks that we are watching,
huge profits at yum brands. the stock up nicely. initially down and driven by taco bell. the movie king kong and lego movie helping time warner to profitability and higher profits of humana and actually haded members in medicare-advantage business. the stock is relatively flat. i want you to stay right there. we are not done yet
they liked the new bill. we just had a freedom caucus member say he is on board as well. i got to tell you it looks pretty interesting. stock market still guarded optimistically guarded but the market is coming back. neil, looking pretty good. neil: looking pretty good. thank you for peter, lizzie, deal with metallurgical coal issue. i might worry i have to explain it. charles: elitists like you look down on the coal stuff. neil: make america coal again. my thanks to all of you. we are following, my friend. only kidding you there. markets down about 13 1/2 point as charles pointed out, a lot might have to do with growing optimism, at least malcontent, not really keen on the latest rework of health care are more inclined to support the measure now. you know where that goes. at worst level we're down about 60, including a moment four