tv Cashin In FOX Business October 29, 2017 3:30am-4:00am EDT
for my taste, auto parts, safety and electrical. david: e-mack. >> i worry that amazon is eating its lunch. david: amazon is eating everything. that's it for forbes on fox, have a great weekend. thanks for watching. the number one business block continues with cashin' in. liz: does dnc stand for do not cover. some of the mainstream networks downplaying that the clinton campaign paid for the dossier on president trump. the major evening network coverage spend six minutes and 31 seconds covering the dossier news, but spent 31 minutes and 10 seconds of news accusing don, jr. of meeting with russia. is this media bias at its worst? hello, i'm liz claman, welcome to cashin'? .
welcome, everybody. gary, i'll start with you, do the numbers say it all here? >> absolutelily the numbers are much worse. i love when the media holds the powerful accountable. i hate it when they hold the powerful selectively accountable. we've seen for years, they've played defense attorney for one side and prosecuting attorney for others and in trump's case, judge, jury and. you can go into the dossier, the uranium one, the bottom line, they're not curious, inquist tiff, when it comes to trump they'll hire 100 people to look into it and sits sheer promise at this point in time. liz: gerri, "the washington post" had an op-ed bringing up the point. when will the mainstream media get over this hate-fest of president trump? >> washington post is considered a fabulous source inside the beltway, right? the left loves "the washington
post" and, yet, you remember that in the jetsons, that character that says, does not compute, you can see the journalists thinking this makes no sense to me. really, really? they can't get their arms around what's really going on here, that this information is bogus, that it comes from the russians and the dossier should be thrown out. liz: michael, give me your thoughts on this. >> i don't think it's a coincidence that the reports are coming out at the same time. that the mueller investigation is starting to ramp up. "the washington post" reported on this and also reported on don, jr. the new york times reported on this and reported on rather, the dossier, there has been consistency. one story don, jr. admitted to and the other stories doesn't hold many legs. there was not nuclear energy exchanged or rather the raw nuclear material exchanged and there isn't a narrative here. liz: rachel, this is a big question, too, this dossier stuff costs millions of
dollars. >> that's right. liz: there is a report that there was a republican competing against donald trump during the election campaign who had the same company and obviously went over to the dnc. >> right, and you know, your last guest was right, donald, jr. said at this meeting and suddenly nobody at the dnc knows anything about this. i'm of political stock, and when there's juicy information on the candidate, people know. and people in charge of the campaign know what's going on. this is so fishy and kudos to kimber kimberly strassel for doggedly follow this story letting the investigators and congress to keep following this trail. i think that the dnc is guilty here, i think that hillary must have known. the uranium bomb making-- what we're seeing is the collusion was all the on the other side and of course, the people who are pushing this story, the people saying democracy will die in darkness
want the russia story to die in darkness. liz: back to the media coverage or lack thereof, the morning that the washington post story came out, gary, the today show carried it and also had cbs this morning also carrying it and suddenly by the evening news, which is of course a compressed half hour of time, had not been too interested in this. >> and look, what they do is when they decide to cover 30 seconds of it, they'll bring somebody like adam schiffon to ask what do you think of this? and what do you think he's going to say? look, for me, again, we can talk for hours about nine people from uranium one paying into the clinton foundation. tens of millions of dollars, prior, during and after the deal. my question is, do you not even care about investigating any of this? and the answer is, no. because time and time again, when you're on their side, when they like you, you're god. when they don't like you, we're
going to go after you with vim and verve and put you guilty as charged beforehand and that's all we've been seeing sense day one. liz: gerri, as a journalist, it's important to point out, there seems to be a discrepancy between in depth investigation at the network television level and then at the newspaper level because, again, "the washington post" isn't exactly friendly to president trump at all, yet, it was the one who invested the time and its reporter's work to break this story. >> well, you know, listen "the washington post" has broken many stories that are negative and against the trump administration, that's for sure. this was a change of pace. what's interesting, the dossier has been out for weeks and months and the first time we're hearing it was financed by clinton and the democrats. why did it take so long to come out? why didn't we know this before? >> it was the buzz feed release of a lot of the information,
michael, controversial. a lot of networks didn't touch it back then, they could not verify it, but the dnc and hillary clinton in her book said it's an outrage it doesn't come out before the election and journalists couldn't verify it, most quality journalists and they didn't put it out there. >> and then a lot in the dossier are verified. >> a lot of this i think so in there that-- >> and that's not true. >> which is why-- >> not even close. >> there have been things in the dossier verified and things now that the intelligence committee is continuing to look into, but that doesn't negate the fact that both sides do opposition research. this isn't something that's out of the norm. liz: the allegations in it are ridiculously silly. >> i mean, it's not like accusations that you want to take action on. it's ridiculous nonsense and one single reading of it shows that this should not be part of the-- >> and it's open to question though, gary, about whether and
how we have foreign agents getting involved or that we have organizations like fusion gps, the company that eventually led to this dossier, that go to-- by the way it was a united kingdom former soldier involved in doing some of the research here. they're going to foreign governments to get stuff on us. >> isn't that what the republicans were supposed to do? and by the way, here is another issue that's not being talked about. what about the fbi? did they use this to go after trump on his investigation? bad research funded by the clintons and the dnc? all the way around, again, it should be investigated, it should be talked about, and i've got to tell you, when the whole thing with don, jr. came up. i turned on different channels and 126 times it he -- at the bottom of the screen was don, jr. and trump and russia,
a big difference. >> more damning than the dossier i think is the uranium one stuff. it's very, very damning and i would say, "the washington post" does not get a pass on this. the attorney for the informant in that case has not even been contacted by "the washington post" or any of the major networks. so, again, democracy dies in darkness and it applies both ways. >> hyperbolic language makes it all flowery and makes a good talking point. let's be serious here. you've said earlier that campaign wives, campaign spouses family members know what's going on. >> that's right. >> how come the president didn't know about don, jr.'s meeting and why was he kept in the dark. >> because don, jr.'s meeting was not significant. he was approached by the rush sluns and did nothing with it. the clintons on the other hand were funding this research in collusion with the russians. liz: all right, coming up, stay away from my 401(k). lawmakers looking for a tax revenue money grab are now
man: i am a veteran; my victory was finding the strength to be a champion. man: my victory is having a job i can be proud of. narrator: at dav we help veterans get the benefits they've earned. woman: my victory was finishing my education. man: my victory was getting help to put our lives back together. narrator: dav provides veterans with a lifetime of support. man: my victory is being there for my family. narrator: help us support more victories for veterans. go to dav.org.
>> 401(k)'s to me are very important and they're important because that's one of the great benefits to the middle class. i didn't want that to go too far. that's why i ended it quickly. >> kevin brady, the chairman of house, ways and means committee said this morning it could be on the table. >> maybe it is and maybe we'll
use that as negotiating, but trust me, that's one of the great things. you know, there are certain elements of deals you don't want to negotiate with. 401(k)'s and kevin knows it, and i think kevin brady is fantastic, but he knows how important 401 k's are. liz: that throws in a question mark. taking away from your 401(k)'s, it could change millions of 401(k)'s plans, including capping the amount of contributions that could be tax deferred. gerri, the president said hand off and mick mulvaney says we'll veto anything that will touch it and we have a question on the house republicans and the president used the word compromise. >> so casual the president saying, maybe we will, maybe we won't. at the end of the day, it's no surprise to me congress is going off 5.8 trillion dollars in 401(k) savings. that's not a surprise. what is surprising is that the
republicans that are doing it, not the democrats. that's who i expected to come after our money. after all, here is what brady and co want to do, they want to move up tax receipts. they want you to pay taxes now on your 401(k) savings. i say that's wrong. any change to the 401(k) will dissuade people from saving. you want it take away my ability to save, but you're not giving me anything else to help me out. i think it's a tragedy and a big mistake. liz: it's infuriating, is it not, michael? the 401(k) is sort of that last little thread hanging from an already shredded tax code, and it really helps people in their later years when they need money because they don't have income. >> it does. it especially helps middle class people, we don't have pensions as much anymore. those have gone the way of the do-do bird. and when you have social security, which obviously has its own issues when it comes to
it, we need to make sure that middle class people have a safety net and they're not just relying on governmental programs later on. when we remove that tax-- or make it so that the income is taxed from 18,000 down to 24. >> look, it's always been taxed, the question is when. it's not a deduction, you pay for it when you take the money out, there's nothing wrong with that and brady and co should take their hands off my 401(k). liz: rachel, they've got to find revenue to help pay for a mult multi-million dollar tax cut to everyone. they're looking at 401(k)'s. >> i agree that people need to be financially independent in their old age, but the deal, they need to find streams of revenues because they're living by rules of net neutrality that the democrats put in place.
the democrats put the rules in place to make it harder to cut spending and guess what? we won the election, why are we playing by democrat's rules. we need to get rid of the rules and get rid of the budget neutrality and do a tax code that works for the american people. the economy's dynamic. if you get more revenue in-- look, we're bringing in more money than every have and we still have these budget deficits. the problem is spending, not taxes. liz: are there any true fiscal conservatives left? and why don't they put their brain power to work, gary, and figure out something here that doesn't hurt the very thing that is supposed to keep us off the government dole in our later years? >> well, look, if they screw with 401(k)'s, they're going to be hearing from a lot of people. there are 50 million workers, over a half million companies involved with this. almost $6 trillion in there. look, i've been saying this for years. government spending is the greatest bull market in
history. it goes up every year no matter what. we just went from 3.7 to 4.1 trillion in one year. how about carving a little bit out of that. no, we can't. in three years, we're going to be at 5 trillion and nobody says anything even on the right. >>. i'm tired of several the so-called conservatives, we care so much and fiscally responsible and boom, we throw in another budget with 4.1 trillion dollars in it. we've got to change the trajectory. the markets are doing great right now, but one day they're going to start reacting to debt and deficits out there and i hope not to be around when that happens. >> and the market is going to react if they change the 401(k) rules, the money comes in from 401(k) gets invested and it's not going to be there, that's not good for the market. >> it sends a bad news if they cut the estate tax and tax people on 401(k)'s, the messaging is terrible. liz: got to figure it out. coming up, drug store giant cvs reportedly wants to buy health
scheduled programming. >> forget repeal and replace, is this the future of health care? the wall street journal reporting cvs is looking to by aetna for $66 billion. it's a deal that could mean big changes for your health care services. gary, good changes or bad changes? >> i think potentially good and one word, amazon. amazon's getting involved in the business in a big way and where there's more competition there's the potential for prices coming
down. now, for cvs this is about one thing, touch. they want to be able to touch more people. aetna is a ton of people. cvs already has all the people coming in and this will just add to it and let's just hope competition breeds lower prices as we move forward, but leave no doubt that health care is big a blob that has to be worked out over time. liz: and like the blob it's bigger and bigger and moving towards us. rachel, what would it mean to a consumer who is upset about paying such high pharmaceutical prices. i know it's hard to anticipate, but what do you expect? >> well, i think exactly what he just said. i think that we may see prices come down as there's no competition. what i find interesting is as we see millions of aetna subscribers or members going into cvs or pushed into cvs, does cvs move more into health care and providing services that you once had to go to the hospital to get?
i have eight kids, i hate going to the hospital. the idea that i can do these things or at least some of these things more easily at my local corner drug store. i like that idea. liz: and getting the flu shot was the first breach of that wall with you've got to have a doctor. michael, what do you think? >> i think that access is going to be the big thing. like rachel said in rural and urban areas people mo maybe can't afford to go to the doctor on a regular basis because of time or location, use cvs's and other pharmaceutical stores to get their health care and i think that's a good thing. liz: yeah, especially veterans who sometimes live in rural areas as you said. let's hope these people, gerri. >> i think it's good news for pharmaceutical prices because cvs is going to have more leverage to negotiate with big pharma and maybe we'll see some prices come down. no surprise that there's a tie-up here and really, coming back full circle, it's motivated by amazon. amazon is driving the bus here and making changes. you've got to keep your eye on
who was very sensitive to lights and sounds. so he built secret hiding places where nothing could get in. the boy didn't like looking people in the eye. it made him feel uncomfortable. one day, he found out he had something called autism. his family got him help. and slowly he learned how to live with it better. announcer: early intervention can make a lifetime of difference. learn the signs at autismspeaks.org. (smoke alarm)
casey mom (little girl coughing) wake up honey. (coughing) what's going on? we gotta go. stay low. (coughing) (coughing) (smoke alarm) >> welcome back. time for fox on the spot. rachel, let's start with you. >> the russian narrative that the media and the democrats worked so hard to cultivate and feed to the american people is going to continue to blow up in their faces, as more information comes out, and it's going to be impossible for them to ignore the fact that ironically it was the democrats and hillary who were colluding with the russians and not donald trump. liz: gerri. >> the coalition that brought you the budget is not going to hold together. not going to allow the plundering of the 401(k). liz: that budget was too close for comfort.
>> the republicans and president can distract, but the mueller investigation is in advanced stages and i think we'll see indictments and participatory agreemen agreements. liz: you're saying smaller fish will give in for the big fish? >> they'll start to move up. liz: gary. >> whichever way that health care goes, united benefits quarter after quarter. another great 2018, stock going higher. liz: cashin' in, that's the title and you talk about that stock. i looked back in 1984 that unh went public at $6 and today, up believable. >> big stuff and growth is about it the hmo care keeps on kicking. liz: it's going to go on and on and on, more tie-ups and mergers in that category. >> we need to health care plan that doesn't kill the entire system. thanks for our cashin' in crew
for joining us and thanks to you. have a great weekend, america. i'll see you weekdays 3 p.m. eastern on the fox business >> lou: good evening, everybody. we are coming to you from the swamp, washington d.c. and i can tell you we come here rarely and only for the most important of reasons and that is to speak today with president trump. president trump promised voters to drain the swamp, but he's finding the swamp fill would with creatures that are more cunning and elusive and more dangerous than he expected when he was campaigning for the job he how holes. washington d.c., corruption of all kinds is high on