tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business August 4, 2017 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
pertaining to the tarmac. they signed under oath. now it turns out there are hundreds of pages. he said he's going after the leakers big-time. we have to pack it in. i'm sorry i took a couple seconds of your show right there. and just apologizing you took up an additional five seconds. it's always good hearing from you. i just want to tie something that boils me. at the latest cover of newsweek magazine. it is allegedly a newsmagazine and it calls the president la-z-boy. i have read the entire article. to tell you this is off the charts bizarre unfair to the president of the united states.
your hearing this from someone who it doesn't really had high regard. he is free to feel that way. i digress. this cover reports to say that the president six months and is already a failure that for the love of lincoln quoting in this article somebody forgot the tax cuts. he should be out there paying -- paving i-95. but to the la-z-boy analogy on the cover gets only better. so we sits and stews like al bundy. the sitcom of roiling white disconnect. or pundits. they are not done with that analogy. the approach is that. it begins in rage. it ends there also.
both the resident in the shoe salesman are driven by their unreasonable demands and unsuitable grievances where they sit in front of the television stewing. it gets better. and i say this because this is newsweek if you are one of the millions of americans counting the days until trump is no longer president his failures may seem like victories except he is your president and nobody wants to live in a nation of decline. i have some great guests on this. i've no acts to grind here. how many times have we criticized this president and praised his predecessor. we practice what we preach. we do that because we have a lot of hours. i've figured there 324 hour
business stations. we had time to get into that conclusion charges. and whether .-dot donald trump light about certain time -- things. we get into it all year. but we also try to look at the things that newsweek did not. just a quick cursory review. that is going to create 4,000 new jobs. this on top of fox, essentially they will do the same in wisconsin. all this on the same that they did that. is making it more than 1 million in the last six months. a similar good thing happened under barack obama. they would naturally credit it. the jobless points are at their lowest point in 20 years. the first new coal mine the food stamp use.
down 4%. $4trillion in added market value. i know a lot of people that is kind of mucky muck. they get into that. i don't see a lot of ceos and bigness -- business tags. veteran affairs department. for the first time here is an idea it's shared. there is a concept. we pulled out of the transpacific partnership which conrad black is can be a guest on the show have turned right on threatening those economic arsenic. there is a reason why he said that. there is a reason why others have taken great salvation in knowing the trade agreements that we scored are being
redone in the effort to make them more friendly to u.s. workers. newsweek was among those very critical of prior deals. it has been approved for construction. the u.s. daily production is up to $500,000 -- barrels a day. the first back-to-back double digit advances in corporate earnings and more than six years. i did that in three minutes in my office countering that. i also put together all of the problems that we've covered the dismal treaty of jeff sessions. the lack of loyalty that he has. his propensity to exaggerate the truth. it's needless fighting in distraction.
i had covered all of that. just like i covered all of the good stuff i just alluded to. that is news it's a balance it's fair. my point is bernie took about eight seconds for me and my point is to say when you see covers like that i wish i have the physical copy because my florida director but i love seeing him run back and forth. that is obscene. when we are in charge of doing this kind of stuff they can't even see it in front of them. that might be your opinion. there is nothing wrong with sitting on the la-z-boy and eating chips. that is my life and having said that but then to criticized for watching the five hours of television per day.
even at two or three in the morning. his five hours might be different. all is forgiven. my point my friend is that this article has a point. it's in a newsmagazine and impression of people who don't know anything about mainstream media bias leads right to the can. they may have been led to that impression. when the media was similarly harsh as he was a guaranteed one termer. they were dismissed in the first year of abraham lincoln administration. seen he was losing the war and didn't have a clue. i believe lincoln did okay. i think what ronald reagan did okay it is way too soon to say whether donald trump will do okay and be okay. but for me this kind of treatment is not okay. and it will confound everything and everyone if it is accepted as that.
and why do i fear it could be accepted because it was in a magazine called news week. it should be called news that's very weak. i'm done. i haven't even had lunch which could explain but i wanted you to be aware of this. it's not remotely fair or balance. we have the former new york congresswoman. and last but not least the radio show hosts. i can tell you're outraged and looking at the cover of newsweek i love the life. this is obviously what happens now with the magazine industry. it's click bait culture. they are desperate to sell papers and as what is going on here.
the reason behind it of course it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. he sort of like a chef who promises you the most tremendous online and then when he gets in the kitchen we find out he doesn't know how to break open any eggs. you're quite right. there are they are few and far between. i am just saying here in this coverage no one is giving them the benefit of the doubt. i'm saying there are benefits and doubts. this is not objective reporting. and while i hate to invoke this she used to talk about the great work right wing
conspiracy. these so-called journalists are disgracing the name of journalism. my big fear and i understand what they're saying it's not all one-way. these investigations that might be expanding have at it we reported. is a compelling legitimately big a story. if it leads to what some people say it can lead to. my only point is cover both. cover all. but to put the president of the received on the cover and conclude he's a disaster is not even approaching journalism. i've two jobs. this type gets up earlier than everyone. just this week alone he has
fired his communications director and hired a new chief of staff. have several meetings with small business people and veteran affairs. does it seem like a lazy schedule to you. this is clearly a desperate move. maybe you will be compelled by this. i do think that's part of it. it caught me right away. that is an interesting one. with the whole there is a reason that they sold for a dollar a couple weeks ago. on the legislative front he has had the struggles. he has faced a roll -- while in congress. he has signed a lot of legislation that has been very good for the economy and those are the congressional review acts. he has signed things to deregulate. the failure to develop that
and maybe we can tax cuts which you don't know yet. i believe you do count for something. there are other criteria used to judge the success or lack thereof of a president. they would be all over this president. the excuse that he's not lazy because he constantly had to release -- replace people. it doesn't really show the economy as you mentioned gdp is at 2.6 percent. he's on his 41st golf trip. this is my favorite one. i wish president trump was doing more to her to the country. it is crazy.
you want him golfing if you don't like the president. i'm not a liberal. a good moderate that will help them. to expect the good in the bad. i would much prefer getting both the left in the right angry and getting one side happy. if you look at the money being spent the optics are being horrible. when people in west virginia and coal mine. it is projected as he is on vacation. when vince was talking about those. they are not. president trump last night in west virginia was there when the governor of west virginia announced that he can no longer do anything for his people was a democrat.
his first tv energy -- interview is on this show. nearly minutes from now. i am quick to point out the failure to do something on healthcare. that blew me away. there are a lot of factors for it. it is a huge minus mark but i also look at this other stuff and it's pretty easy to point out. there is no question about it. they had reactivated the economy the stock market is soaring because there is a reflection of great confidence. i do think it could reverse. but give it this. they have already to the executive orders he has already through the change do
you agree with that. that is essential. i think the markets had responded really well to both deregulation and the promise that trump won't further regulate. if you make a bet on whether or not they will hamper that. you will do that there well not be more. he has campaigned on that and clearly within the things he can control if he can shrink the scale of the administrative state. it could have an economic impact. i think la-z-boy sales will go through the roof. and that's a problem. and that's why he tweets. in such a bizarre way by that media. he has to communicate that.
we gave you both sides. we gave you give you the good, the bad to make a point. you know what is agenda when they leave out that site altogether. we alienate a lot of people. hopefully you're not one of them and you're not turning off the set. i find lazy boys to be very comfortable and the more food on the la-z-boy the better. i'm years into this career. no one is on to me. man oh man that's not right. your insurance company
about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. e-mails and tweets coming in fast and furious on this. you will never be on the cover of newsweek. it's pretty good. mary writes you are full get over it. there are some choice once i can't repeat because they are using nasty words.
all of it without even mentioning one good thing. some other developments having nothing to do with newsweek covers. they are trying to track down leads and how they originate. but they can't seem to get a handle on it but they are making a full-court effort to do so. i think within the white house staff itself. i could be wrong. and as something obviously in the short life tenure they are trying to address. is it your since the new chief chief of staff well have any better luck. i do believe that general john kelly well have much more luck in tracking down these leaks. one is the classified
information leaks. that itself is a criminal activity. that's what happening in many of the agencies. and then you have the leaks. the fighting is going on within the white house. that is not criminal. important to differentiate between the two. he is amanda is well-respected. he understands the importance of limiting that access. and cramping down this information flow that was happening in the white house. it's about the chain of command and structure. he has had a lot of help from people. i'm beginning to put things together. i'm wondering if that's why he stood by jeff sessions that is general kelly because the two of them together could be quite the power brokers to
stop the step. i think what they're getting at is of the culture the culture of what's the big deal that is throughout the federal government and with people pursuing their own agenda. people risk their lives to get that information as the information as mercedes said on the classified side. our enemies both isis and al qaeda had active cells that comb through western western media looking for leaks and information that they can use to change their operations and don't forget edward snowden who essentially exposed our tired toolkit. i think it makes not only the united states but the world less safe and i applaud him for going after this hard. i want to thank you both. and this hard newsweek cover. great job. i appreciate it. certainly north of the border he is the guy on that and
neil: all right, the cover of "newsweek" says it all, sort of a quick snapshot of what might consider the mainstream media's general view of the president, that six months in he's a failure and if this whole investigation into so-called collusion continues, a former president very, very quickly. i expressed outrage because there wasn't even an approach of balance, especially when a good deal of the article is spent quoting people like lawrence o'donnell of msnbc and a white house staffer, "the new york times." nothing wrong with these people, but very little balance to those people, and they're slightly left of center on things. some of you have been tweeting some doozies.
k.j. on twitter: trump has accomplished more more in six ms than obama did in eight years. karen on twitter: golfing is exercise. wow, your guests today need a reality check. then cole writes: "newsweek" insults even the sheep. legislative inaction has nothing to do with donald trump's work ethic. and ralph on twitter: you are a real breath of fresh air for journalism, keep it up. i'm doing it for america. [laughter] okay. we've got former media mogul laura conrad. you know, obviously, throughout his career tried to provide balance and perspective and something called historical perspective. conrad, very good to see you. >> good to be with you again, neil. neil: what did you make of all of this? i don't know how familiar you are with this "newsweek" cover story, but it continues a general lambasting of donald trump that in some cases might
be deserved, he's had some doozies. but he's also had some pretty noteworthy accomplishments. totally lost in this article. in fact, not there. >> it's not fair, but it's not unusual. i must say i had hopefully thought that "newsweek" had gone down forever and we'd never see it again. i wasn't aware that it had come back to life. but claiming the president is lazy is outrageous. he's the hardest working president in our time. and incidentally, they do it how they do it. general eisenhower played golf a lot, he was a good president. president roosevelt was commandeering battleships to take him fishing, but he got his job done. neil: and by the way, watching television, eisenhower liked that, ron reagan liked that. at least mention some of the other things, and there is a reluctance to do that. maybe that's what a new chief of staff can do. i knew you had some choice words for anthony scaramucci, just want to quote from one of your
recent columns that was just outrageously good, you said the tide has turned finally, the ramshackle vendor's cart of the white house was turned into a pothole. the politically-interested part of the country held its breath as marine general john kelly settled in, and everybody con them complainted the most self-destructive utterance in the history of presidential spokesman. so i left out that particular utterance, but your point being that you're favorably impressed with the new guy in town. >> yeah. i think he's a strong marine corps general, and after one week -- which is not long -- there have been no embarrassing tweets, everyone seems to be on message, and i think the president is absolutely right to call this whole collusion thing what it is. it's just a smear job commissioned by comey after he was fired, forcing the hand of a new deputy attorney general with the attorney general having recused.
the problem, by the way, i think the president had was not that sessions recused, but he had the memory lapse and forgot he had the conversations that would require him to recuse. they're over that now, that's fine. but i agree with what the president said in west virginia last night. i was one of those who in the watergate days -- which, by the way, started with leaks -- neil: you're right about that. >> and there's still no evidence that mr. nixon himself committedded illegalities. he retired because he didn't want to embarrass the country -- neil: well, he was actively involved in the cover-up -- >> we can debate that. that's not contemporary news. neil: i mean, you did listen to the tapes, right? >> yeah. neil: okay, all right. >> you can debate it. neil: okay, all right. >> but what i was going to refer to in the president's remarks in west virginia was, all right, if you want to do this, then let's -- if we're into this, let's be fair here. let's deal with the democrats too. there's a great deal more
evidence -- or at least apparent evidence -- of possible wrongdoing, serious wrongdoing in the clinton foundation, the clinton campaign, the e-mails, the wasserman schultz fiasco, the unmasking of these people in the trump campaign with spurious surveillance in trump tower. i'm not saying anybody's guilty with, but there's a great deal of smoke there than there is in this foolishness about collusion with russia. there's never been any evidence of that at all. neil: where do you think all of this is going? obviously, now you have -- >> well, they're all addicted to the criminalization of policy differences, and i was one of those who said in the watergate thing as a young person this is going to lead to terrible things. by all means, let's have vigorous, fierce, democratic contestation over elections and public policy. but every time you have a disagreement trying to send your opponent to prison is not the answer of how to run the country. and we're going to get to the climax here. and the two sides can play that game. and donald trump is not such a
scrupulous, inhibited, moody, patriotic and unfailingly patriotic man as mr. nixon was. if their going to throw -- they're going to throw stones at him, he's going to throw them back, and he's the president. neil: you know, you're a great historian, so i want to go back to this news that just burns my butt here. they quote a historian -- >> just a democratic party -- neil: okay, i understand. but i want you to hear this. trump reminds -- [inaudible] of warren g. harding. he didn't have the big picture or the small picture of the man known as wobbly warren was not very bright. "newsweek" goes on to pretty much say and trump is worse than he is. >> yeah, that's outrageous. by the way, i think president obama and george w. bush, unfortunately, were both poorer presidents than warren harding. but comparing trump to any of them -- neil: but this is six months in, that's my point. >> the it's nonsense.
no one who is a historian would say such an asinine thing as that. neil: okay. i'll put you down as a maybe. [laughter] >> i'm waffling. neil: let me step back and get your sense, "rolling stone" recently put your illustrious prime minister on the cover, more or less bemoaning the fact we wish he could be our president. what'd you think of that? >> look, i like justin trudeau personally, i knew his father who was also the prime minister. neil: pierre trudeau, right. >> so i'm not going to take a shot at justin, i think he's fine. and he is, he's a good looking, stylish, suave young man, so he's not a bad guy to have on the cover of "rolling stone," but his methods and ideas wouldn't be suitable to the governance of the u.s. and i gather that the trudeau-swooning, trump-hating community has done an about face and decided our merit-based immigration in this country, as my friend mark steyn put it on your network the other night, means we're ku klux klan,
moose-hunting ground now. there's nothing wrong with justin being on the cover of "rolling stone," he's a good man. but it's horses for courses. he's prime minister of canada not president of the u.s., any more than donald could get elected here. neil: always good sewing you. >> always -- seeing you. >> always a pleasure, neil. neil: we've got the first tv interview since it was made official to the world, jim justice, went from democrat to republican last night in west virginia with the president of the united states. why he did what he did despite what "newsweek" is saying on its cover, after this. [radio alarm] ♪ julie is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-
positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ♪ ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. and ibrance plus letrozole shrunk tumors in over half of these patients. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts... ...infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. julie calls it her "new" normal. because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance, the number-one-prescribed, fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc.
itwhat's possible.nk rethink the experience. rethink your allergy pills. flonase sensimist allergy relief uses unique mistpro technology and helps block 6 key inflammatory substances with a gentle mist. most allergy pills only block one. and 6 is greater than one. rethink your allergy relief. flonase sensimist. ♪ ♪ ♪ neil: you know, a lot of you are are saying, neil, you're selling a lot of copies of "newsweek." i probably am, but this is very typical of what i see in the mainstream media. in this case the cover showing the president on a lazy boy with
a bag of fast good and potato chips. nothing wrong with either. but what bothered me about this article is it didn't even try for fair and balanced, it has concluded the president's a total failure and didn't cite anything good that has happened under his administration in the last six months. as you know, we've been critical here and weighing the good and the bad. we see a little bit of both in this administration. real quickly, some of you have been tweeting, "newsweek" is "newsweek." it's desperate to sell magazines and will stop at any level, including dishonesty, to sell their trash. then we had someone talking about the cover of both "newsweek" is biased and stupid. say and think what you want, but lazy boy's not one of them, referring to the treatment of the president. still another viewer, the "newsweek" bash of potus was disgraceful. ignore the trump hater, thank you for addressing it. still another, you're right on, "newsweek" cover is outrageous. how disgusting to stoop this low. pathetic and plain wrong. i got an e-mail from alan who
writes: i don't care, cavuto, trump hates you, i hate you and no whining about a magazine cover will change my opinion of you. p.s., regret that you survived your heart operation. now, that hurt my feelings. all right, we've got former cke restaurant ceo andy puzder. so, andy, i guess i'll go to you a because this cover purports the show a president who just loves to eat fast food, junk, all that stuff, and six months in he is a total failure. it is beyond the pale. and believe me, if fox did something similar, you know, they would be all over us. but this is "newsweek" purporting to be a news weekly. what did you make of that? >> this kind of coverage really hurts the mainstream media. at this point say two things, one is whether it's "the new york times", washington post, "newsweek," "police coe," why would anybody believe anything they read in any of these
publications? they'll distort facts that come up with anything -- you know, if you've been covering this, you know this. second thing, when would you see a "newsweek" other than when you're in a dentist's office? you'd have toes pass up entertainment weekly to open it up. but the cover, the fact that they did this, the fact that you're covering it here, this is really damaging to the mainstream media, and they've got to stop this conduct or they're going to have no credibility at all. neil: and i don't think this is indicative of everyone in the mainstream media. i know a lot of journalists who try to balance it out, there are a lot of people who watch this show and we do something critical of the president and his treatment of jeff sessions which we found to be pretty abysmal, just my point of view. but this plant with mazda and toyota and the 4,000 jobs it promises, the one million jobs gained under his watch, i mean, we'd certainly make note of it if it were the reverse. so i say have at it. and i also say for all news and
business networks that are 24 hours, we have time to get into both. so just as i shouldn't be all praise all the time, i shouldn't be all jerk all the time, you know? >> no disagreement at all. i just think that at some -- when you go to some publications, it's so slanted that you really can't trust what you read. i don't have problems attacking the -- with attacking the president or me or fox news or fox business -- neil: well, you should have problems with me being attacked, andy. >> other than the heart attack thing was a little over -- neil: by the way, it sounded like it came from you. [laughter] >> knot -- not true at all. neil: i remember in your case you got abysmal treatment when people didn't check out the facts. you weren't bitter and angry about it. we tried to explain what was going on. i think it was more your point of view about being against a $15 minimum wage, how that could boomerang. some of the things you were eerily proven prescient judging on what's going on on the west coast right now.
the other thing was subterfuge, to go after you for that. and i see that happen a lot. and that's not good either. >> no, it's not. you know, what really comes through in all this, i don't think people were afraid that i'd be a failure as secretary of labor. i don't think their -- neil: i think they were afraid you'd be a success. >> and the same thing with donald trump. they're not afraid that donald trump's going to fail, they're afraid that donald trump's going to succeed, that we're going to have the kind of economic boom that we had under reagan. if we have that kind of economic recovery under this president, it's going to to be years before the progressives, the democrats have a chance to pursue their agenda as they have for the past eight years. and i think losing that is a tremendous disappointment to them. they thought hillary clinton would be sitting in the white house today. neil: that's right. >> the fact that she's not disturbs them greatly. like i said, there are just some publications i can't read anymore because you get one side. there's no purpose to -- neil: we do know after this lazy
boy sales are going to soar. you and i have gotten into in that the president does have to be more disciplined. i don't think he's lazy at all. he never sleeps, so he's not that. >> no, he's not. neil: but i do think his treatment of staffers and people, that would be a long day for me, but you know him far better than i. we point that out, and we say that, you know, what comes around goes around. you expect loyalty, you don't give it, that could come back to bite you. i think there's a lot of legitimate cause to that, exaggerated as he has in some cases, but he's had system greating successes. and the $4 trillion in market value, the one million new jobs under his watch, whether you want to give the guy all the credit for that, we do blame the president when the opposite is true, so what's fair is fair. what do you make of thatsome. >> i think that's absolutely right. and looking a little deeper into those jobs numbers, we saw 53,000 more manufacturing jobs since the beginning of the year this year. last year for the same time
period under president obama, they went down 43,000. he should be getting a lot of credit for the fact that manufacturing is starting to come back to the united states. foxconn, toyota, mazda, these are meaningful jobs. these are good paying jobs that are coming back because of this president leaning on companies to manufacture in the united states, and his reduction in regulations in the u.s. which has been tremendous. he wanted, like, two down -- you had to delete two if you added one. well, they've deleted 16 for every one they've added. not bad at all. neil: andy, thank you, my friend. >> good seeing you, neil. neil: all right. a first, the west virginia governor, jim justice, he was a big rock star with the president last night in west virginia. why he switched parties, and even now with the "newsweek" cover and all this, he doesn't regret it one bit. ♪ ♪
you totanobody's hurt, new car. but there will still be pain. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do? drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement™, you'd get your whole car back. i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
hit could be the next big thing i should totally get that domain name... get your great idea online too... get your domain today, and get... ...a free trial of gocentral from godaddy who knew that phones would starentertaining us,ng? getting us back on track and finding us dates. phones really have changed. so why hasn't the way we pay for them? introducing xfinity mobile. you only pay for data and can easily switch between pay per gig and unlimited. no one else lets you do that. see how much you can save when you choose by the gig or unlimited. call or go to xfinitymobile.com. xfinity mobile. it's a new kind of network, designed to save you money.
[cheers and applause] neil: with us now, the republican governor of west virginia in his first tv interview since that shocker of an announcement, jim justice joining us on the phone right now. governor, good to have you. thank you. >> oh, no, neil, thank you, sir. you know, i'm a big fan of yours, watch you all the time and appreciate you having me on. neil: i appreciate that. you know, why did you do this? >> well, neil, the bottom line is just this, you know, my family's been republican all of our lives and everything, but i ran as a democrat and everything because i really do care about our people, and, you know, not that the republicans don't. i mean, they surely do. but at the same time, i just felt more positioned, you know, at one time i was a little concerned about how serious our republicans were about really helping business and doing the right things there. but it really just came down to just this: at crunch time, i mean, when we had a budget that
was going to be passed that was going to help us in a lot of different ways and everything, for whatever the reason may be just from a pure political play, the republicans walked away -- i mean, the democrats walked away from me only because they were upset that there was a component of the budget that was tax reform that was coming from the republicans. and it was a terrible move, and it hurt a lot of people. it really, really hurt a lot of great west virginians in a lot of different ways, and i just said i just can't do this anymore. this is absolutely silly, you know? i feel more in tune with the republicans, and i absolutely think that i can work with them here. and i have a great relationship with our president. and that is the most significant thing. i think he's doing a fabulous job -- neil: when did you tell him? when did you give him a heads up on this? >> well, probably about two and a half weeks ago we started discussing it and everything, and he was, he was excited. it was nice that we were able to
keep it as quiet as we kept it, because if it had come out, you know, it would be just a media barrage. and so the long and short of it is we did keep it, and we were able to keep, you know, something from leaking from the white house or leaking from here for a good while, so that was pretty good. neil: but did you have any doubts, governor, maybe in light of, for example, late yesterday before you met with the president in your fine state this revelation that a grand jury has been impaneled in this so-called russia collusion story that you might be, you know, hitching yourself up to the wrong horse? >> no, neil, i really don't. i mean, i really think that we as americans are getting flat sick and tired of hearing about the russians. i mean, just think about it. we've got a stock market at 22,000, we've got real hope going on within our state. i truly believe with all in me that the president as well as myself, we ran for office to get something done, first and foremost, and we don't want
anything from it for ourselves. we've given up a lot of our lives, and we really at the end of the day, we're doing what our founding fathers really did. we stepped up and served for nothing for ourselves, and so i think the public's getting sick and tired of hearing about all this russian stuff. and what we want to do is get on with doing great things for the country. neil: do you ever worry, governor, that some of it is sticking, whatever your views on the subject the constant barrage, this latest "newsweek" cover is a good example of that, that it's hurting the president's popularity, it's dinging him and not so much among his core base and there's no more core base than in your state, but that it could, and it could stymy his presidency? >> well, it can. i mean, there's no question about that, neil. that's why some way, somehow he's got to get through that, ask is with we've got to get on -- neil: what have you told him to do? you're both very successful businessmen. i mean, you're a billionaire. i mean, billion mare to
billion -- billionaire to billionaire, what do you talk about? what do you saysome. >> well, i think, you know, really and truly, and everybody would say this, but i'm surely not going to try to tell the president of the united states what he should do. i mean -- neil: maybe someone should though, right? everyone could use advice, i'm sure you take advice from people. the rap against this president, i don't know if it's fair or not, sir, is that he doesn't. and maybe for good reason because he got there ignoring all sorts of so-called expert advice. but now that he's there, do you think these staff shake-ups, a new chief of staff will point him in a right direction? >> well, i do. i i mean, you know, when you think about, you know, having a general as your chief of staff, that's significant. and it's significant from an organizational standpoint and a lot of different ways. and i think, i think that will help things, no question. but, you know, i've been to the white house multiple times in the last two or three weeks, and i can tell you they abound with
qualified, good people. and the bottom line, and i've got to say this, people don't know our president. our president genuinely cares. and that is so significant. and this man wants nothing for himself. he wants goodness for this country. and we've got to get past -- and i don't know the intricacies in any way, shape, form or fashion with all the russian stuff, but we've got to get on with doing all the great things i know he's going to be able to do. neil: he has a pretty acrimonious relationship with the media. i don't know how it goes in your state, sir, so excuse my ignorance. any advice on that part? >> well, i mean, last night his speech that he delivered, you know, i really believe that he stayed on task and everything. it was a fabulous speech. but again, how in the world can jim justice tell the president of the united states what he ought to be doing and everything? it's just preposterous to think
that, you know? at the end of the day, he's got great advisers around him. you know, neil, anytime there's change, anytime -- and change is tough. and at the end of the day, you know, it's just, it's just as, i mean, he's not perfect. nor is jim justice. and change is tough. but i would ask everybody one question. in the past, in the recent past, how's it been working for you? i mean, for crying out loud, let's give the man his due and give him an opportunity to lead this country in a positive way. neil: do you think that much hinges on getting tax cuts through, governor, that if he doesn't succeed at that -- and it's looking dicey given the legislative deadline and everything else -- it's tough not only for the president, but for republicans in general? >> i think he's got to succeed at that -- neil: do you think they have to do it this year, governor? >> i think it has to be this year, i really do.
neil: do you think they should be retroactive? >> i don't know about that, but, you know, that's something that would have to be left in the economists' hands. but i think he's got to get it done this year. neil: are you in the camp, sir, and i know you have to go, but says the rich don't need a tax cut? there have been many on capitol hill who have suggestedded maybe we skip the very richest, don't give them a tax cut. >> neil, there's a real argument, you know, for the fact that the wealthy are the job creators in a lot of ways, and there's an argument for that. but in my belief really and truly, i would probably be one that would say, you know, at some point in time, i mean, the wealthy could step forward here, be great americans and defer themselves and to where the middle class or the lower income could get a little bit bigger bite of the apple. and i think we all, you know, as wealthy would ten forward and say -- step forward and say we don't need it right now, let's move this country forward.
neil: so you're in kind of the steve bannon camp, the chief strategist at the white house, who said those who earn $5 million and over should see a tax hike to 44%. now, we're told since, governor, that that's the been kind of pooh-poohedded by others at the white house, that recommendation was ignored, but it's the out there. and they're really job creators and that's very true. what i said is maybe what we should do is pause, you know, the wealthiest and let them step forward, and, you know, say, let's bring our middle class and our lower income classes and help them the most. but i really believe at the end of the day, you know, a significant reduction in the corporate income tax and, you know, and an income tax break
across the board, i would weight it heavier towards the middle and lower income brackets but all of that has to be passed, and maybe a slight reduction at the very highest levels would be fine with me, or no reduction at the highest level. neil: i just want to be clear, governor, are you now officially a republican? >> no, i'm not officially. i've got to figure out exactly the details what i've got to do. i've got to get across the hall and get it done today. before sundown today, i'll be a republican. neil: governor jim justice, thank you very, very much. appreciate seeing. >> you neil, thank you for all you do. appreciate you, sir. >> a governor who would not change anything with all the backlash the president has been receiving and this news week cover, the president of the united states featured on a la-z-boy with fast food and potato chips.
there is nothing wrong with a la-z-boy and nothing wrong with being surrounded by food, and everything wrong with portraying the administration as a total failure. one little doozy that stands out in the article that exemplifies a lot of the reporting that comes the president's way. for the love of lincoln, someone should tell them forget tax cuts and muslim bans, should be out there painting i-95 and slapping fresh paint on the chesapeake bay bridge. that's fine, that's your opinion. here's where it gets almost insulting, sits and stews like al bundy, that predicted trump better than any political scientist or pundit. but the coup de grace for me was this. trump's approach is the approach of al bundy, begins in age, it ends there too, the resident, the shoe salesman are driven by unreasonable demands and grievances with the couch where they sit in front of the
television, stewing. making no mention of the toyota and mazda $1.6 billion plant commitment that will guarantee 4,000 new jobs in this country. the same week we learned of the $10 billion foxconn commitment, that will do essentially the same in wisconsin, or the latest employment report showing 209,000 additional jobs added to the economy, and more than one million in the last six months. jobless claims at their lowest in 28 years. i could go on and on, i'll rifle through some of these and want to pause it to a lot of you as i did in the last hour, i am neither an apologist or condemner of donald trump. he is not a fan of the show or a fan of the critical issues we've gotten into. he's free not to like me, sometimes i don't like me, we have to be fair, an hour on my
fox news show, time on the weekend shows. the fact of the matter is we have time to cover the good, the bad and everything in between. not all negative all the time, you wouldn't want to be judged that way. i certainly wouldn't want to be judged that way, and a lot of you are taking exception to how blatantly biased this newsweek article was. on twitter, you are fair and balanced and elegant, that's a separate story, by the way. so elegant i could cry. you're not the only one. jack on twitter -- and carol writes -- that might be very difficult to do, but i understand where you're coming from. we've had choice ones as well, including ilana who e-mailed me earlier. i hope i'm not repeating this e-mail --
i'm not saying support or rejection of trump, and the globalist thing i don't understand, unless you're referring to my waistline being like a globe, i digress, that's not fair, not balanced, that's not right. other media organizations would come down on fox like a pile of bricks when we would do anything approaching that, and this passes as real journalism. it's not fair, not balanced. not right to. "national review" contributor editor deroy murdock and strategic communications director, i should say, adrienne elrod. to my point on, this it's not right, not remotely right. >> i think you're correct. listen, donald j. trump can't get a break from "newsweek" or
anyone else in the mainstream media. why doesn't he calm down. he's going to be attacked. main thing he's done to improve the economy growing at a steady clip, the unemployment labor figures are quite good today is change the tone in washington. over eight years of obama. you're a businessman, evil, terrible and so on. he's changed the tone and treated business people as heroes, people are creating jobs, the positive tone they hear coming out of washington, d.c. and the administration. neil: not showing in his approval numbers. >> i'm talking about business confidence and the desire of business people -- neil: the confidence and economic confidence. >> investor money and so on. neil: understood, john, i don't miss for a second the fact that the president's created a lot of his problems and his own stumbling into issues he could have avoided by not going off topic and the way he treats personnel and the jeff sessions thing. we got into that ad nauseum on the show and elsewhere. there is a balance to it.
that's my argument to it, there's not much balance here. >> i would agree completely with that. this is shoddy sensational journalism. "newsweek" had a lot of problems, sold a couple times, trying to get relevance anding to it through the sensational photograph. to me, it's just not right either. the president came in and promised health care reform. the reason he felt so confident is republicans said for seven years, day one when we get back in charge, we're going to give you health care reform. he told him i have a pen, get it to my desk. the republicans have not done that. neil: that could also be him trying to fostter along. i think it works both ways. i understand the frustration here, adrienne, obviously, there's optimism on the part of democrats who feel that this is a great opening for them. how do you feel? >> well, you know, look, first of all, there's sensational
journalism on both sides. may be over the top to the extent of the "newsweek" cover. donald trump has no legislative accomplishments. neil: whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, that's not fair. so by the market value, up and under, bill clinton it did, you give him credit, when it reverses you wouldn't give him credit. first new cole mine opening in pennsylvania in decades, 500 jobs, these new jobs and commitments of those who want to stay here. that didn't happen with a snap of fingers. >> yeah, look, in terms of coal jobs in west virginia. the jobs are simply not coming back, may be new jobs -- neil: i just named 500 that did. you can't even -- you are defining his success by legislative achievements and you are quite right to point out on that front, he's coming up goose eggs, but ignoring all this other stuff because you don't see him through that prism. >> i want to point out the fact that the "washington post" had
a really interesting piece today on the 19 times that donald trump has called the jobs report fake news, and all of a sudden when it looks favorable toward him, he praised that and the jobs report. neil: everyone does, that he wouldn't be the first one, you lived when they're looking good, and damned when they're not. what do you make of this? >> there are legislative accomplishments. early on in the administration, president trump signed 14 different congressional review act bills which basically reverse implications ended during the end of the obama administration. he signed the executive order that says before you add one new regulation to the federal books, kill two old ones, sensible idea. neil: in other words, we define a very important barometer, i don't minimize it, that's not right either. >> and again, he signed legislation which is deregulatory, and roll back red tape, done beautifully on that. that's a big reason why the
economy is starting to pick up. neil: we shall see, guys thank you very much. a news breaker, the house freedom caucus member republican dave brat. you might recall some of the back and forth on this, and maybe the "newsweek" cover on this. i don't want to overly emphasize it, but that it's all one way in the media, that he's a failure, and soon to be kicked ought of office. i have no idea where the russia investigation, collusion thing goes with the impanelled grand jury. to kill him six months in, i don't know, what do you think? >> no, i don't think so, i think we got to pivot. health care we had the house and the senate had seven years to come up with the health care plan that would actually get votes, we failed. so now we're going to pivot toward the president's specialty. that is tax cuts, the house and the senate.
neil: you got get them. >> right, and then i think his second specialty has to do with apprenticeship. if he combines the tax cut piece with kids coming out of college, the workforce and labor markets are a mess. everywhere i go, i'm back home, visited 20 businesses, they said we cannot find skilled workers in our trade. truckers, drivers, welders, mechanics, he needs to take his apprentice show skill set and the branding he can do with the bully pulpit. do apprenticeships, internships, business certificates, get the chamber involved, the chamber of commerce is working hard in the region to do these things. you put tax cuts to incentivize the supply side, gift middle class a tax break so the guy that gets up at 4:00 a.m., sets alarm clock, gets 200 bucks more back a month and the single mom has extra money to pay for the kids.
neil: you got to do it. hail mary pass time. >> we got it. going to get this one done. neil: time awaits, the soonest you get a senate vote is november. that's very close to the end of the year, and i know these things have gone, keep getting pushed back. >> yeah, there's new momentum after the health care failure. everybody knows, this is the touchdown, health care no one was going to be doing somersaults over that bill one way or the other. tax cuts, everyone is excited for. neil: yeah, but not everyone is on the same page. i know you and, of course, conservative group that's been bemoaning this lack of progress both on the health care front and on the tax thing, and the house did whether people like it or not, did submit a measure, but the senate is quite strict on rules, and they have their own parliamentary procedures, and a lot of the moderates want these things paid for, which means the tax cuts won't be that big, and i
know you guys noupt something big, so how is this going to go? >> yeah, that's been my worry, i've been on your show four months talking about the border adjustable piece and the health care piece, if we don't get those passed, going to be a couple trillion light. i talked with paul ryan a couple weeks ago, he's got contingency plans to find funds and wants to keep the rates as low as we can. mark meadows all over the place saying we want the corporate rate in the teens. neil: wait, what was the reaction to that? because senator orrin hatch said that ain't going to happen, maybe 20, 25%, that's just one difference, right? >> yeah, well, the reaction -- i hope the business class from around the country weighs into the senate. if we don't get a tax cut through, we're going to have zero percent economic growth for the next 40 years. we had anemic economic growth,
zero productivity growth for 20 years, the people back home are cranky because wages are flat for 30 years, productivity is flat and they're rightly so mad at us. we should be at work right now but the american people are demanding this from us. the democrats make up cliches, give everyone a pay rays, set wage rates at $100 an hour, fiction land, and throw money at monopoly education system uncorrelated with productivity. if president trump talks about apprenticeships, getting kids in the workplace for eight hours a day, for a few weeks internetship over j-term or second term, that will be a home run, it will motivate the whole country. neil: it is do or die for you guys. sir, thank you very much. >> you bet, neil. neil: attorney general sessions is on the crackdown to leakers,
easier said than done, that is unless the chief of staff is on board with him? and he is. rethink what's possible. rethink your allergy pills. flonase sensimist allergy relief helps block 6 key inflammatory substances with a gentle mist. most allergy pills only block one. and 6 is greater than one. flonase sensimist. ♪
of information act request was filed by the american center of law and justice, requesting documents pertaining to the infamous meeting june 27, 2016, between then former attorney general loretta lynch and former president bill clinton on the tarmac at sky harbor airport outside of phoenix, arizona. now, here is what is contained in the more than 400 pages of documents that were dumped today in regards to that freedom of information act request. a series of e-mail exchanges between department of justice press officers talking about the talking points they will create for then attorney general loretta lynch. they say, and this is a quote, the question was just asked at the press availability, a local reporter noted that sources say that the a.g. met with former president bill clinton and asked whether benghazi was discussed. the a.g. stuck to the talk points. i want to show you the talking points have been redacted.
so what the talking points exactly were, you're not going to get them in the document dump. another series of e-mail exchanges in the more than 400 pages regarding press accounts and reporters trying to get information, one in particular from a "washington post" reporter who had said, quote, that his editors were still interested in chasing the story, quote, my editors are still pretty interested in it, and goes onto say, i'm hoping i can put it to rest by answering a few more questions about how the meeting came about? who approached who? and how did they realize they were in the same place? that reporter trying to get to the bottom of the story. as i throw back to you, this is quite interesting and begs the question why would jeff sessions control the department of justice want to protect loretta lynch? there it is in black and white, mostly black, back to you. neil: that is weird. leaks are leaks. how it gets out? anyway. adam, thank you very much, adam shapiro.
let's get a read on all of this, just to get to the bottom of this, no matter where they're coming from or what the result is. attorney general jeff sessions and dan coats are promising they're going to crack down on this, take a look. >> the department of justice is open for business, and i have this warning for would-be leakers. don't do it. for the past several months, we've already made changes and are seriously ramping up our efforts. if you improperly disclose classified information, we will find you. we will investigate you. we will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law, and you will not be happy with the result. neil: they have not done that thus far, especially if the trail leads to the white house and nothing that the president may be doing some of this or certainly when he came right
into office. to fred fleitz. therein, lies a challenge. >> the president cannot leak, the president has ultimate classification authority, if he wants to release declassified material, he can do that. neil: someone there, especially when he just got in was getting a lot of the stuff that since came to light including the conversations with these other world leaders, but go ahead. >> this is very serious. these leaks put lives at risk and undermine the ability of the president to be able do his job. what i really liked about what i heard today, other than explaining the seriousness of leaks is when the director of national intelligence coats made it clear there are other legal avenues, including going to congress and the intelligence committees. i never heard an intelligence official stress that. they usually say go management or the i.g., i said we have we have to have another place for people who want to be intelligence whistle-blower to
go without breaking the law, that should be the intelligence oversight committees or their member of congress. neil: i know the leaks, somewhere vital, others are transcripts provided of conversations, phone conversations the president had early on in the administration with the president of australia, the president of mexico. who gets that? who would have that? who would have access to that? >> well, it's worth noting we haven't had any intercepted communications like the prime minister of australia since january. that took place in january. the transcript was just released. there will be a lot of people listening, in taking notes, maybe in multiple buildings, my belief is after the initial leaks of the conversation in january, the president drastically cut down who had access, that's the reason we haven't gotten the details of other discussion said. neil: so, where do you think this goes?
obviously, you're right to point out that kind of stuff may be tamped down soon after the president took office, you hope, but it just seems to be open season, and i don't want to assume the worst that some intelligence agencies might be inclined for a little tit or tat, the president bashed them and reliability on the russia campaign, they kind of turned the favor. am i being too jaded? cynical? >> you know, leaks have been a problem for every administration, it's a little worse in this administration because people put in place by the obama administration, who i think have been leaking with the encouragement of former obama officials. i think there's going to be quite a crackdown and i think the crackdown has to start by limiting access to sensitive information and frankly too many people have security clearances, including a number of former officials as well as former obama officials. i think these people, they should no longer have clearances. neil: but they do.
i'm always surprised to hear that you can keep that depending on your status or stature or level prior. you can keep that for the rest of your life. how many have such privileges? >> well, it's a courtesy that an administration usually offers to the officials of a former administration. it doesn't always happen. we heard yesterday that h.r. mcmaster extended the security clearances of former national security adviser susan rice after she was accused in this demasking scandal, which i just found hard to believe when there is hostility or former official is accused of wrongdoing, they shouldn't have their clearance extended. and i think in this instance, all the obama officials should have security clearances pulled, because there is so much leaking and some are responsible for it. neil: fred, thank you very much. >> good to be here. neil: to one point, on your world on fox news, the president is not thinking about firing robert mueller. after this.
. >> the president is not thinking about firing bob mueller, this is -- the speculation that's out there is incorrect. neil: would you advise him regardless of a grand jury, that would be a bad idea? >> look, my job is to -- look, my job is to deal with what? deal with the facts as we have them and the case as we have it. the decisions the president were to make on bob mueller is a decision that i'm not involved and would not be involved in, and frankly the president has not raised with me with our legal team. neil: all right, so does that end the drama there? that the president isn't considering right now, reports to the contrary, getting rid of mueller, maybe this has progressed too far with the impaneling of grand jury and the like. it's past the point of go. former u.s. attorney john wood, and jamil jafr on that. what do you make on that?
>> the president is not considering firing him, that makes sense, the smart play for the white house is let mueller do his investigation, let that play out and refer questions on russia to them and focus on the agenda. that's what they should be doing instead of talking about the investigation. neil: genius, you are both attorneys and know law better than i ever will. i wonder if i talk of impaneling a jury and hiring a legal team north of 16, including a couple that gave up very lucrative private practice work, you don't do that if you don't think something big will happen, or am i being naive? >> i think you're almost right. i think you don't do that unless there is something big to investigate. so this doesn't necessarily mean that charters will be brought against anybody, doesn't mean that bob mueller and team will find he committed a crime. neil: won't it be a waste of
time, for those just joining, quite the legal team. >> it is. neil: and nothing comes of it. for them and the high-profile individuals, why did they do it? >> yeah, andres, an experienced prosecutor until a few days ago was a partner at davis polk in new york. i'm sure he wouldn't have done that unless mueller gave him indication this investigation will go on for a significant period of time, and mueller would not have staffed up that way unless he anticipated this would go on for a period of time. i think there's a lot they're looking into, this will go on for many, many months to come. neil: really? >> it doesn't necessarily tell you whether they will bring charges. neil: i guess getting a grand jury in place allows you a subpoena. is it safe to assume, jamil, that subpoenas are coming? >> i think they're out, there some have already come out of
edva, eastern division of virginia. and ddc. neil: what is ddc? >> john is exactly right. this is just an investigation, you need subpoenas to conduct an investigation. neil: apparently there is a standard, and again, media reports could be very wrong, gentlemen, but what i've heard, john, is it is centered on the june 26, meeting and the russian entities, what would you take from that? >> yeah, that is one of many things bob mueller and team are looking into. i have heard the subpoenas are specifically focused on that meeting. i think they're going want to to know exactly who was at that meeting, why the meeting was set up, what the various people's understanding was going into the meeting and what happened at the meeting. stories about possibly a document left behind. they're going to want to know for sure what information was provided, whether it was provided orally or in the form of a document and want to know as much detail as they can.
i expect they're going to put people in front of the grand jury as well as issuing subpoenas for documents and things like that. so the benefit of the grand jury as opposed to just having an fbi interview is it's compulsory, you can force somebody to testify before the grand jury, unless they take the fifth and they're under oath. neil: jamil, do you think if we're past the point of go for the president to entertain firing mueller? >> i think it will be a mistake. i think the right play here is actually to let the investigation continue. if john is right, this is going to take months and months and months, and while that's ongoing, the president can shift to agenda whether it's immigration, taxes or health care. shift to that rather than getting in the back and forth about should bob mueller do this, that and the other thing. bob mueller is going to do the investigation he's going to do. it's going play out.
bob mueller is a man of great integrity. i know folks who worked directly for him. he's a rock star prosecutor and solid fbi director. >> you don't think because there are a lot of clinton campaign donors in that group, others who were appointed in the obama administration, some are suspicious he won't be fair? >> look, i think that's a concern, but i think you got to hope that a guy like bob mueller with integrity and reputation is not engaged in a political witch-hunt. i think he's going to do the right thing and let the secrecy rule of the grand jury stay in effect and let it play out. neil: want to thank you, both. nice of you to stop by. >> thank you. neil: maine's governor is very, very angry. not at the washington process, but his state's own two senators who he says botched it over health care. he's next. you each drive a ford pickup, right? (in unison) russ, leland, gary: yes. gary: i have a ford f-150. michael: i've always been a ford guy. potsch: then i have a real treat for you today.
michael: awesome. potsch: i'm going to show you a next generation pickup. michael: let's do this. potsch: this new truck now has a cornerstep built right into the bumper. gary: super cool. potsch: the bed is made of high-strength steel, which is less susceptible to punctures than aluminum. jim: aluminum is great for a lot of things, but maybe not the bed of a truck. potsch: and best of all, this new truck is actually- gary: (all laughing) oh my... potsch: the current chevy silverado. gary: i'm speechless. gary: this puts my ford truck to shame. james: i'll tell you, i might be a chevy guy now. (laughing) approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,
they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations.
plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything. the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide and start gathering the information you need to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪
hey, i'm the internet! i know a bunch of people who would love that. the internet loves what you're doing... so put your idea online with a domain name from godaddy. enter your idea and we'll find you a one of a kind name. we've helped 17 million people find the perfect domain name for their website. get your domain name and start building your website for free!
. neil: well, a lot of republican governors across the country are furious at washington for botching on a health care rework, rare is it to see a governor like the one in maine go after his two state senators for contributing to that, but that's exactly where governor paula page is coming from, saying the democratic senator king and republican senator susan collins botched an opportunity to do just that. governor, very good to have you. >> it's a pleasure to be on. neil: so your argument is they dropped the ball, explain? >> absolutely. you know, senator collins has no experience in dealing with deficits but senator king when he was governor he created a billion-dollar structural gap. had $750 million debt he did not pay to the hospitals that i had to deal with when i came in, plus another quarter billion dollar budget shortfalls every year in medicaid.
right now in maine, we have the oldest state in the union, we have the highest premiums, high deductibles and insurance is unaffordable. we are the oldest population, and therefore, whether or not they agree with the senate bill is irrelevant. the point is you got to continue the debate because we got to get an answer. in january of next year, we will not have insurers in maine that will insure the private market. the individual markets. so we need some help, and i think had they passed the bill, it would have gone to conference, there's much in the house bill that is very, very good. in fact, much of the house bill is designed after public law 90 that we put in play in 2011. neil: by not voting for the skinny repeal, they didn't advance that. now, what's divesting is senator king is an independent but votes mostly with the democrats. >> exclusively with the democrats.
neil: has been consistently voting against any of these republican efforts, including the repeal measure. so what are you left to do now, and, if they seem to talk a lot about revisiting this, but you've talked about working for those benefits in maine, right? could you explain? >> right, right, what's happening in maine is we created some wait lists of elderly, disabled and mentally ill patients because there's just such a big, you know, deficit, and so what i'm saying, they've allowed, they expanded medicaid in 2002 in maine, we have 15 years of history. we know what's happening in other states now, we have the history of what's happened in maine. we need to deal with this issue. obamacare will falter on its own. we have opportunities to improve the lives of american
people and certainly mainers by addressing health care in america. neil: how would it work, governor. the way it's explained to me, your state's version of medicaid would require sort of like what they did years ago for work to welfare, welfare to work? >> yeah, yeah, what we do, we're saying that able-bodied people between 19 and 50 have to have skin in the game. free is expensive to somebody, and usually it's for the rest of the population. so we're saying, we want to have a safety net for elderly, disabled, mentally ill, but if you're an able-bodied person going to work, you have to have skin in the game. that's all we're saying. we can't say you have subsidy, but it can't be free. neil: all right, now, this has already been branded and you're used to criticism from the press, obviously, that as a heartless measure and dealing with that.
how do you react to that? >> i react to it this way: my colleagues and the democratic party in the state of maine have a wait list. i removed the wait list in the last two biennial budgets, i'm not the heartless ones, their priorities are not on the disabled, elderly and mentally ill. i am. that's a priority for me. anyone that says that paying a little bit, for instance, in maine, we assign, when a person uses the emergency room, we sign a medical family physician, if they go to the family physician, it's free, if they go back to the emergency room, they ought to pay a $25 deductible. if they refuse to use the physician assigned to them. that's all we're asking. we're not trying to be draconian here, we're saying everybody has got to have skin in the game. you got to participate. and by getting involved and, you know, some people in maine
are getting premiums of $1.75 a month. i don't think that's too much to ask if you're working. neil: especially for states and localities that can't afford to keep paying that exclusively themselves. but looks like health care rework looks next to nil to get done. how do you feel about that moving onto tax cuts in washington and dropping the health care thing altogether? >> well, if you do that, then next year, the state of maine won't have any insurance carriers in our state, and that -- who's going do it then in the federal government going to fund? are we going to start an insurance company at the federal level, like we had to in 1992? if they want us to do that, i'm all in. give us the authority to set up my own insurance company, we'll capitalize it and sell insurance. we had a company in 1992 when all the insurance carriers left the state for worker's comp, we set up our own system.
if they gave us the authority to do that, you'd never hear another word, i'd go to work and get people insured. neil: paul lepage, thank you very much. >> pleasure to talk to you, neil. neil: same here. what the governor wants to do and the "newsweek" cover seems to want to do, after this. veter, both served in the navy. i do outrank my husband, not just being in the military, but at home. she thinks she's the boss. she only had me by one grade. we bought our first home together in 2010. his family had used another insurance product but i was like well i've had usaa for a while, why don't we call and check the rates? it was an instant savings and i should've changed a long time ago. there's no point in looking elsewhere really. we're the tenneys and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today. rethink your allergy pills. flonase sensimist allergy relief helps block 6 key inflammatory substances with a gentle mist. most allergy pills only block one. and 6 is greater than one.
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
. neil: all right, i want to pass along this news, dow jones industrials sources are saying google is developing technology for snapchat-like media content here. this seems to be the way the whole high-tech world is going, you get your content going, programming going, that's all we know about that, but it does continue. they're all coining to get copies of this show. maybe not. all right, in the mean time, did you see the "newsweek" cover? i might have mentioned it once or twice. we have fox business' gerri willis, and charlie gasparino. i find the whole thing offensive. we have our differences with the president. >> you don't like the fine corinthian leather. neil: he's lazy, he's a failure, six months in, he's finished. >> well, that's ridiculous. first of all he's not lazy, i
tell people every day, i can't keep up with the 70-year-old man. he's tweeting, talking, doing something, there's that, and then they say he hasn't passed any legislation. hello! we live in the republic. the president doesn't pass legislation, it's the congress. if anybody's lazy here, it's congress. neil: if we look at it, that's the only metric, i'm not dismissing it, and lose sight of other things, executive orders mattered when the last president was in office. you blame the markets if they're going the other way. jobs game. i'm not saying that's all he's doing. i am saying you would certainly see the opposite if it wasn't. >> i think the lazy part is really what's at issue here, and wrong, right? i don't agree with his tweeting habits and getting up in the middle of the night and attacking jeff sessions on twitter is counterproductive and the other stuff he does. he hasn't been particularly effective in getting legislation passed obviously.
neil: doesn't make him a failure. >> doesn't make him lazy. he hasn't been effective yet. neil: by the way, jimmy carter was one of the hardest working presidents we've known, and the president has been deemed -- >> bogged down because he wanted to set the times of the tennis -- . >> i remember that. >> that is a cheap shot against him. listen, donald trump has a lot of negatives that we could point out. >> look at stock market. we're 31 record highs on the dow, right? unemployment looking good. lowest level of unemployment in 16 years. on and on it goes. there are good things. we have the announcement today, toyota mazda investing billions in this country. neil: by the way, none of that were happening, you'd be blaming the president, not you, if it weren't happening, bad news sticks with a president. good news, not with this president. >> i was telling you yesterday and the day before and the day before. markets like donald trump not because he's doing so much, because he's not hillary clinton. neil: that's true.
>> and some of it is just because -- neil: but comparing him to al bundy? >> he's anything but lazy, the guy is work all the time, and doing stuff, we have to be fair here, he has not been particularly effective when it comes to legislation. neil: ronald reagan was deemed a certain one term because of the stumbling. >> agree, agree. neil: all i'm saying is just be fair, to counter the obama campaign or white house staffers or the daily beast or morning dow or "the new york times" where, was the counter to them? >> right. >> this reads like a poorly written editorial. this doesn't rise to the level of intellectual hest in the "wall street journal." neil: this was going to be an editorial here, and they're makeing -- >> full disclosure here. i used to work for "newsweek" back in the day.
"newsweek" was a different magazine. neil: it did news? >> it did news. there were a lot of liberals. they hired me, like a diversity hire or something, but you know, the paper now, the magazine now is not -- is less relevant than it ever was. neil: this is an extreme example of what i see a lot. >> but here's what they do, they stretch on the cover, and fact we're talking about it. neil: absolutely, and i said a lot of people are criticizing me, that leaves a lot to "newsweek". so be it. i want to point out that this is not an anomaly. this isn't like a one-off. it's comment. i see it again and again. >> the assumption of people in the media that you agree with them that they believe trump is successful. that trump is a bad guy? it's not that he's not doing a good job as president, that we personally do not like him. neil: in the story, robert
dallek, he's a warren harding, didn't have the big picture or small picture, he said he was not very bright, saying the same of donald trump. >> there is a business angle and this is it. as much as they blame fox for being the right-wing network, attracting that segment and it's a business model that works, they say this about us all the time, you and i and you are freethinkers to be honest with you. we hit both sides. there is a whole business. neil: but you're hated by everyone. >> equally. >> what's wrong with that? anyway. my point is there's a whole business on the left to attack donald trump, and it's a business that sells. >> i think they feel personally threatened by him. what he stands for is diametrically opposed to what they are about. neil: he's no fan of this show or me, hard to believe, i know. >> he loss of you. neil: i'm saying that's not right, that's not fair, not balanced. if it were done to you folks,
everything. stable economic growth says something. and, covers the "newsweek" be dammed. they seem to think times are pretty good. putting money on it. cheryl casone through the next hour. hey, cheryl. cheryl: neil, weirdest thing, going by your office and there was this huge stack of "newsweeks" in front of it. neil: i bet, i bet. cheryl: check it out. neil: all righty, i will. cheryl: thanks, neil cavuto. we have a lot of news to cover, we'll stay on it. attorney general jeff sessions issuing a stern warning to would be intel leakers hurting our country and undermining our democracy. don't do it because you will be found and prosecute. as dow hits another all-time high, thanks to better than expected jobs report. we'll talk about that as well.