tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX Business July 20, 2019 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT
for you could be just a quick call away. so...call. next. eric: stay cool. we'll see you in one hour. president trump: these congresswomen their comments are helping to fuel the rise of a dangerous militant hard left but that is okay because we will win this election like no one has ever seen. paul: welcome to the journal, editorial report. i'm paul jacoby that was president trump on wednesday at a rally in greenville, north carolina. he's doubling down on his attacks on the four freshmen congresswomen what he calls their anti- american political views. the night to get ugly turn with some of the crowd chanted send her back in reference to minnesota representative omar echoing the president treat from
earlier in the week. the president on thursday expressed regrets about that chant saying he disagreed with it. is his feud with the four democratic congresswomen setting the tone for his 2020 reelection campaign? let's ask wall street journal communist who served as senior advisor to president george w. bush, karl rove. carl, welcome. you wrote this week for us that you thought that alexandria cortez and i assume some of the other women in her squad are hurting democrats and helping the republicans. how so? >> they are so big a presence in social media and in the media generally that their left-wing views are getting an outsized attention and so when alexandria ocasio-cortez puts out a draft for the green new deal that talks about how flatulence and unspecified measures to restrict people from getting on planes to take their vacations in a transfer mission of our entire society it gets attention.
similarly, their views on things like israel and the war on terror - the first week in july aoc called for the abolition of the foreman of homeland securi security. people with box cutters should get on planes. paul: those views are beginning to find the democratic party in some or in the eyes of many swing voters but nancy pelosi, speaker of the house, seems to get this because she's been criticizing them and trying to reduce their public profile, at least their influence in washington but then you get the president of the united states interjecting himself into that debate with his comments on they should go back, is he undermining some of the benefit for republicans? >> he did. with his tweet and then it got carried to an even bigger level in his rally with people starting to chant, send her
back. i can't improve on the arguments that were laid out in this excellent friday editorial of "the wall street journal" on that issue but i think the president understood that and that's why he said in the cabinet meeting on thursday basically distancing himself from it and i hope everyone heard what he had to say. the more the focus is on their ideas and views and values and the less it is on their them personally the better off the president is for making the argument. paul: i think i'm hearing privately from republicans before in particular the presidents expression of regret but even afterwards that they are anxious about the ruling party being defined in the eyes of a lot of voters as anti- immigrants in creating their own group of deplorable's with this rhetoric. >> look, who are the key voters in the 2020 presidential
election? each side has its own base but the election is ultimately going to be decided by people who are weakly linked to either party and in 2016 and off of those voters voted for donald trump for him to win the election in the electoral college in 2018 they shifted their votes to democrats for congress which is why principal is he the speaker of the house. they will be one not buy things that create a sense that donald trump is uncomfortable with diversity or uncomfortable with women and uncomfortable with immigrants but they will be won over by saying these people have values and views in the democrat leaders are navigating things that are bad for our country. the more he keeps it on the substance the better off it is. in the policy - you talked about her earlier and she's fighting a two front war. she understands the democrats are being simply overwhelmed and whatever the doing and house of representatives is being overwhelmed by the talk of impeachment and increasingly the talk by the squad of these left-wing lunatics wacky ideas. she's - she loved the fact that she got a moment to unify the
democratic party and go on the offense to condemn the presidents rhetoric and stand her in better stead with those swing voters but ultimately the left-wingers will undermine the democratic party on the sum or another they can file them or diminish the impact. paul: for a bit, let's turn to the democratic presidential race and joe biden seems to have lost some ground since the first debate. how much trouble is he in, do you think? can he survive these attacks? >> he can survive them but you got to get his sea legs underneath them and solidify support. he was at 41 in the average shortly after he announced and it was unbelievably high. paul: there was a lot of name recognition. >> and yes and dominated in the news. five or six weeks later he was down at four which is a respectable number when you have the field as wide as it is now. but that is down to about 26, 27 in the real clear politics average which means he's lost about a quarter of his support between when he stabilized and after the first debate. he's got trouble there and the interesting thing to me is that
all of this change in the field is not benefited bernie sanders and he's declined as well. we now have essentially four plus one plus everyone else in the 4r biden, harris, warren and sanders and the one is people to judge who has money and buzz but does not yet have the poll numbers and everyone else is part of the amorphous minor mob. paul: one thing that struck me is that there's been no one else in the moderate lane whose of the party who has been able to emerge as an alternative to joe biden and why do you think that is is it that they're too obscure or too many or is it that the party that the energy in the party was really with elizabeth warren, bernie sander, molly harris and mayor pete on the left? >> look, the energy among an activist is what is clearly with the left. the interest of the media is clearly with the left and with pete buttigieg but not so much
invited. what we know is that so-called moderate, the liberal /-slash lot moderate lane is the biggest lane inside the democratic party for what we've got is sanders, warren, harris and others trying to carve up a slice that is basically a plurality, not the majority of the democrats. what will be interesting to me in the next day is a makeover shark who will be in the first night's debate with warren and sanders will she tried to display herself as a moderate alternative to them and thereby begin to crowd that space in the event biden begins to fall but right now hard to see how someone in that third tier, four plus one, plus everyone else - hard to see how they bumped themselves up at this point, especially since the fundraising has been rather . paul: good to fly back that will be her real opportunity. thank you, carl. when we come back, it fails in
the house but puts the democratic divisions on full display. can house speaker nancy losey keep her caucus together as she pursues her agenda ahead of the 2020 elections. >> were not having them set our agenda but we are setting our own agenda. ♪ ♪ limu emu & doug mmm, exactly! liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice! but uh, what's up with your partner? oh! we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance because no two people are alike, so... limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. ya... he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design.
has overwhelmingly voted to kill the most ridiculous project i have ever been involved in, the resolution - how stupid is that - on impeachment. paul: house ordered wednesday to block an effort to impeach president trump. the first test of that divisive issue since democrats took control of the chamber but house speaker nancy pelosi has tried to hold toe the line on launching impeachment proceedings but outraged on the caucus on presidents tweets prompted al green of texas to reduce the resolution on tuesday. the vote putting the parties divide on full display with 137 democrats voting to table the resolution and 95 voting to move forward with impeachment proceedings. let's bring in our panel. wall street journal communist, kate batchelor odell and editorial board member kyle
peterson. kim, what do you make of these impeachment vote? is at the end of this saga or is it a sign of pelosi and trump that maybe it could come back? >> oh no, this is just the beginning, paul. look, what happened this week is that democrats were exposed as impeachment phonies. they love to talk about this issue and it sounds really good to their base and the president is criminal, high crimes and misdemeanors, except when it comes down to it mrs. pelosi knows it's not what the country wants and it would probably backfire on her more generally. the problem is the more they continue to talk about it the more the pressure builds to actually hold a vote. you saw the beginning of that this week. paul: can, i read the resolution and it did not - in the constitution is as high crimes and misdemeanors but all the article of impeachment is said i misdemeanors and listed a series of character traits and behavior
by trump but nothing criminal, no obstruction of justice, no collusion, nothing like that but we think trump is unfit for office. obviously, that will not work politically. >> well no, look, they came up with absolutely nothing out of the mueller probe and put all their talk into that probe and now they are grasping. again, having spoken about impeaching trump for 2.5 years and getting rid of reversing the last election the radicals in the party are not going to drop this but will continue to pressure mrs. pelosi but holding these investigations and to have an impeachment inquiry about. paul: kate, as you read the house democratic conference, any difference, any differently? will there be more pressure to have this come back? >> no, i think kim is reading this right. immigrants have assumed much of the political risk of impeachment by moving forward with some kind of resolution and they have achieved none of the
results. they are forced here - of 95 people voting for it which is a large contingent of the democratic party but 137 against and that includes all moderate members who are trying to straddle democratic bases with the independent voters who elected them and won them congress in 2018. i think it will continue but i think it will continue to just radiate and bad ways for democrats. paul: the condemnation by the house of donald trump tweets, is the policy called them racist tweets. that was an effort, i think, to unify democrats against him and jump after they have been fighting for several days over the direction of the democratic party but did that give republicans a chance to say look, you are just politicizing this issue and instead of letting the criticism of the presidents tweets be out there on their own and do some political damage. >> sure it did and that is what
makes this week so strange but it's been a war of attrition with each side running to its corner and digging in. >> it is like the wilderness in the civil war. >> exactly. as far as what the democrats did nancy pelosi has played her cards pretty well here. be impeachment resolution by this representative from texas, al green, has offered that twice before. it's the third procedural vote he is forced on it but if the policy has given her caucus a way to vent steam. think about this. one week ago we had just spent several days in a country talking about how nancy pelosi and this squad and these four. left-wing members of her caucus were at each other's throats and now that is gone and they are united and we spent several days talking about whether the tweet by donald trump is technically racist or not and we've heard him at a rally with people chanting, send her back, about a
u.s. citizen or congresswoman so that's another week were not talking about unemployment or wage growth and i don't think that's where donald trump wants to be. paul: but i think he does, kim, he does want to be there or at least thinks he does because i agree with kyle that if this is the focus in the campaign focused on donald trump's results with the economy and fulfilling the promise or many of the promises he made as a candidate versus the democratic agenda i think he has an advantage but if it's on his character and behavior then i think that gives us someone like a biden who says let's return to a normal politics give them a chance to win. >> yeah, maybe. then again look at what donald trump accomplished this week. i agree and a lot with negative headlines for the president but on the other hand the only thing that was in the news other than him were these four incredibly radical hard left women who are
rapidly becoming the face of the democratic party and that is what the white house wanted to happen in one regard. probably, without the other drama but the cameras will not go away now and follow these women around from now until next year and this is how we would like to set the race up and it's between his policies and the socialism or socialistic policies that these women and others on the radical left of the party are proposing. paul: kate, there's another line of attack the president darted to open up which is the do-nothing congress and that is he saying there, see nothing in all the worried about his attacks and impeachment and these resolutions that don't add up to anything for the american public. is nancy pelosi going to try to do anything here in the next 15 months? >> sure, if the posting was was to have a relatively easy week announcing people like - it's gotten out of hand and i think
that he is a point that the democratic congress does not have much to show for being in power for two years. they will continue to do both on the minimum wage and other issues but even things that looked possible at the beginning like a deal on drug prices more distant now though still possible but i think it's entirely possible that he come out of this congress without many significant polity achievements to show for it. paul: that will not help the swing moderates who in the swing districts gave the democrats their majority. all right, when we come back, it was a battle that help to find president trump's first term in office and out in the book takes us behind the scenes as the kavanaugh supreme court confirmation f brad, i've got an idea for a song. nationwide has this app. you can pay your bills, even start an auto claim. so what i was thinking... let me guess.
♪ start a claim right from your app. ♪ have you been looking in my notes? ♪ dto experiencer gthe luxury you desire on a full line of utility vehicles. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $389 a month, for 36 months, and we'll make your first month's payment. experience amazing.
on fancy technology for help. snail mail! we were invited to a y2k party... uh, didn't that happen, like, 20 years ago? oh, look, karolyn, we've got a mathematician on our hands! check it out! now you can schedule a callback or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not.
♪ president trump: we confirmed more than 125 federal judges to apply the law as written, including two supreme court justices, neil gossage and brett kavanaugh. paul: as the president has into his 2020 election campaign the judicial nominees remains front and center with a bitter battle over sprinkler justice brett kavanaugh on the defining events of his first term and though he was ultimately confirmed by a vote of 50-48 my next guest says there were no real winners in the kavanaugh fight. chief counsel and policy director of the judicial crisis network and co-author of the new book, justice on trial, the kavanaugh confirmation in the future of the supreme court. welcome, good to have you here. we've had a lot of nasty political fights over the justices before. we had robert and clarence
thomas and was this different in your view in any financial way from those? >> in some ways we trace this injustice on trial in phoenix progressing hostility on those nominations but we also see some stand out from others in this unfortunately did take us to an absolute new low. the scene last-minute leaks of allegations before with clarence thomas hearings but however, this was a new low in terms of the number of dirty tricks played and in terms of the level of allegations and by the end we were talking about serial gang rape being alleged with virtually no evidence out there and lots of contradictions on these things. the fact that got dragged out with a lot of bad actors in the media who played along and then in the senate and so as we wrote in the journal on monday there needs to be a con ability or we worry it will happen again. paul: when you say a con ability, what do you mean? are the charges that have to be brought? the people - do you think people
lied and if you lie to the senate judiciary committee that the crime or are you think people need to be prosecuted for that? >> that's the same crime as if you lie to the fbi. some people sending in these allegations may be were not thinking through that. some have been referred for prosecution to the department of justice by chuck grassley who is in the judiciary committee chair but unfortunately we have not seen, to my knowledge, any progress on that and it's concerned because there were people who even in the moment were admitting they were saying things that they had made up or that were - someone in this letter and i thought it was important so i basically put my name on it and forward it and that is horrible behavior and dragging someone's name through the mud and also using the committee resources that should be spent on better things. politicians that can be held accountable at the polls and that happened to some extent in 2018 and media who left their journalistic credentials aside and were acting as partisan. paul: want to ask you a couple
quick actual questions because they came up at the time. diane feinstein was the first person to disclose the christine blaney ford accusations and did she know about that several months before and made deliberate decision to hold that to the last minute? >> yeah, she had that letter in her hand in july and there is a process designed after the thomas still hearings that allow for investigations happen financially so she did not have to disclose the name to do so but instead of going to that senate design process that she knew very well existed she held onto it and we learned that with something that was foster great ability for people like susan collins who were a swing vote. paul: did you think she did this as a late hit the chances increased that somehow railroad republicans to have the nomination withdrawn - was that the strategy? >> we don't know if she looked
at it and said these are old allegations and no cooperation we don't need to look into it or if it was something that was held in her back pocket for later and i think either way what happened was a national circus and a disgrace. paul: did chuck schumer, democratic leader in this all along? did he know what was going on in that it seems to be hard he did not. >> he came out on the gate and said will take whatever it takes to stop the summoning. we did hear from talking to people working around the front desk of the rumors of their were plans all along of how they would take down the nomination and some of those included allegations of sexual misconduct so that is a real concern. paul: what are your lessons for the next nomination fight here? anything you would advise the demonstration or next nominee? >> again, making sure people recognize the seriousness of making under verified charges like that and blatantly false charges. the next nominee has to be ready knowing that regardless of how pristine i record they have in life they have led there could
be allegations like this coming at the last minute. americans have have their antenna up as well to recognize things like this when they happen in is a pattern of procedure that the democrats . paul: how can you defend yourself against if it's completely demented? you can't go insane while i wonder if they accuse me of this so how do i defend myself if you don't know what it will invent. >> and you can't prove a negative. having the people realize that this is not coming up because there's a problem with the nominee but generally it comes up with all this historically because of the seat and a major shift happening in a major political things going on around it. that helps these rumors and allegations not gain traction when they don't have evidence behind them. people see it's just or there they go again be one quickly, i want to ask you about brett kavanaugh's first term on the supreme court. build your expectations and particular, as often has he agreed with chief justice roberts, does that give you
pause? >> notice that it's generally the times when you have justice alito agreement chief justice roberts and there are times when he and the other the more conservative justices have diverged from the chief on cases but there are great wins where we have chief justices vote as well whether on gerrymandering or keeping the court out of what is an inherently political question and religious freedom and pushing back on the concealed jurisprudence that has been there for a long time and inappropriate deference to administer the agencies where reports have exceeded their proper role and the court is finally moving back in the right direction. a lot to be grateful for. paul: so you're happy so far? all right. thank you. appreciate it. thank you for coming on. still had, joe biden, bernie sanders square off over their healthcare plans of the former vice president defend obamacare and vows to build on it but is
his plan that far from sanders push for single-payer payer healthcare? >> a lot of people are running the party who want to get rid of obamacare and start over with something new. of savings and service. whoa. travis in it made it. it's amazing. oh is that travis's app? it's pretty cool, isn't it? there's two of them. they're multiplying. no, guys, its me. see, i'm real. i'm real! he thinks he's real. geico. over 75 years of savings and service.
employer-based health insurance they like, they can keep it. paul: that was democratic presidential hopeful joe biden rolling out his health care plan in iowa this week the former vice president promising to finish the job over obamacare and rejecting calls for medicare for all. it's an effort to distinguish himself from some of his 2020 rivals, including vermont center bernie sanders. he took aim at biden this week accusing the democratic front-runner of sounding like donald trump on the issue but were back with him and stossel, kate odell and kyle peterson. kate, what is the fundamental difference between what biden is proposing and what the medicare for all crowd needs? >> there making much of their differences this week for the primary purpose but i don't think the differences are all that large. joe biden is talking about a public option and what a public option is the government ensures that expose and line of credit from the treasury and thus can undercut other insurers on premiums and cost and then can
also have huge leverage to decide what to pay doctors. what a public option does overtime is cannibalized as the private market. paul: that is different than what what bernie sanders want to do what should do away with private insurance right away. >> sure but my point is that where you end up over time is not that different. the bernie bill does outlaw private insurance over some that transition time. but what biden is proposing would de facto get rid of public and private insurance over time versus this swift transition so it's one blow or installment plan. paul: think the public option has so many competitive advantages and has zero cost to capital because they would get the capital from the government because it has political backing from congress and the democratic administration and we would be able to essentially have advantages over private insurance competitors, is that what you are suggesting? >> rights.
it also changes the economics of the employers offering insurance if anyone can buy into it which is what biden is suggesting, what. paul: private employers would dump some of their employee plans onto this private option? >> no, but it's not clear if an individual to make the choice between employee insurance and the public option and it's not clear how exactly that would shift. right? if the public option is saying we offer all these free benefits at a very low price or whatever it will change the market dynamics of offering employer insurance. paul: kim, how does this play politically and is is a smart move to differentiate himself biden from the folks on the left? >> it's a smart move because if you remember this last a set of debates they all basically sounded like the same left-wing party up there all raising their hands at the same time for most things. what we are lacking here is a
moderate, more moderate front-runner someone who distinguishes himself from the other frontrunners who are the bernie's and elizabeth warren and molly harris who are in the progressive wing. i agree with kate and don't think this is all that active that much of a moderating principle and this is in fact monica to get for all just on the installment plan but at least he can claim that he is not going as far as the people in right now that is what biden needs to differentiate himself. paul: how is this bernie going to fight back, kyle? >> you will say it's not enough. there's always been talk about the biden plan is not universal coverage because it leaves some people uncovered and there's been a progressive voice saying that it would kill 125,000 people over ten years. paul: kill them providing insurance it would kill them? >> because the people left off the insurance it would be covered by the bernie plan would have health effects. paul: that's ridiculous it's a
complete crystal ball gazing but the optimistic case here for biden is that there will be someone, the next democratic debates for july 30, 31 and there will be someone on the state to potentially take a hammer to the bernie plan so the bernie plan, if you look at it, there's a lot of odd things. there are no co-pays, no deductibles which is more generous than basically any state health plan anywhere in the rest of the world. paul: or private health plans. >> right, and it takes the skin out of the game so every patient who's thinking should i go to the urgent care or wait to see my regular doctor on monday will take the more expensive option and yet he says it will save money and he's talking about how it will raise taxes to the middle-class and cost 30, $40 trillion but he won't be paying your premiums and the optimistic case for biden is that there will be someone who will go on the debate stage and point out those things.
paul: but kate, the public option in 2010 when the democrats ran held 60 votes in the senate and had dominance of the house of representatives and could not pass the public opti option. >> rights. that was had 40 votes at the senate at the time and i was years ago. the affordable care act included these things called cooperatives that were supposed to remove the motor from healthcare and compete with private offerings and they were infused with billions in taxpayer loans and other 23 original ones that existed there are, i think, four left in 19 have failed. we seen some evidence that this does not go as planned. paul: briefly, kim, your advice to joe biden would be to go right out bernie and say your plan can't pass and you will destroy private health insuran insurance? or would you summarize? reporter: absolutely. hammer away on how it will take everyone's plan away and what it
(sfx:birds singing, distant dog barking) hi hi ♪(whistling tune: "don't worry, be happy")♪ content on their endless quest, to nowhere.s, run hopelessly in their cage. but perhaps this year, a more exhilarating endeavor awaits. defy the laws of human nature,at the summer of audi sales event. get exceptional offers now. paul: is congress coming after your ira? a bill passed by the house the summer and now to be considered
by the senate and could upend years of retirement planning for some americans. it could potentially stick it to middle-class savers. all right, kyle, called the secure act passed the house overwhelmingly support from both parties and what would you do, good and bad. reporter: a lot of stuff in the bill 125 pages long and most of it is controversy also for instance, it would raise the age at 70 and a half year to stop the money into additional ira and reset to the many do and it would expand 401k offerings for many part-time workers and a lot of that is pretty uncontroversial in the past with three nobles but the real issue is that this is way to pay for those expansions of tax benefits and the way they chosen to do that is by suddenly limiting the tax advantages on heirs who inherent retirement accounts, iras so under the current law if you give an ira with money in it
to a child or grandchild the child of the grandchild can stretch the distributions out for essentially their whole lifetime and use that to pay for college or use that to buy a house or pay for their own retirement what the bill would do is push that up and required the account to be emptied for any errors in essentially ten years. paul: how much money in 401k's would be affected? >> according to estimates three and $4 and iras would be unaffected so were talking 25% of ira dollars that are given to these nonspouse errors and if you talk to think about it it adds up to money so fidelity investments puts out a census of its account holders and says it has about 350,000 account holders with more than $1 million in their retirement accounts and another 30000 federal workers who have $1 million in the federal retirement account so there's other people who potentially . paul: the argument would be look, this is something that iras and 401k's were for your
retirement were not intended to be passed along to heirs these are just rich people so why should we care? >> one reason is the fundamental fairness of the issue. the change would take effect for anyone who dies after december 31, 2019. if you are 95 years old and have a bunch of money they put into an ira in your plan for years and years as you've invested was to give that to your child, grandchild to help them along to build family wealth it's quite a change to suggest that in six months from now you have to redo your full retirement and holistic plan. paul: kim, the other thing is iras are promised that from politicians that you can make your money text protected will not come after it done the road after inducing you to save so there's a little concern here
that once congress gets into this act of changing the rules on iras maybe they change them to start to limit or raise your taxes on them or other ways to go after that money? >> first, to your first point this is a fundamental premise. for years politicians have encouraged americans to engage in private savings because it also was meant to take the stress and strain off of government programs, like social security. this is one of the reasons we have this program and one of the big things they always say is remember like on like social security or private retirement something is yours forever to keep and gets passed down so that's a fundamental problem to this. this is a warning sign as well but it's a warning bell, as it is, watch out because there are billions of dollars of retirement savings out there and nothing the government would love more to get there hands on part of it or some of it via taxes et cetera and it's an
engagement and argument that americans really need to pay more attention to. paul: kate, politically why did republican vote for this so overwhelmingly and will it pass the senate? >> paul, i think there's this momentum in congress that basically you want to do something good like change the retirement withdrawal rules on a system of 70-72 or payment rules and then you look at the couch cushions for ways to pay for it in the procedure guide the policy more than the policy outcomes by the policy. i think that's what is happened here. i don't think it was a particularly good process and so i think that now instead of just being jammed with the house felt like the senate might otherwise i think the senate might take a look at this for their own bill and at least slow down the process and not go forward with it so quickly because if you remember resident obama once floated changing the tax treatment of 529, college savings, that lasted about ten seconds because the public outcry was so fierce.
i think politicians are aware that coming from your retirement account is not popular for one bad idea. when we come back, a facebook executive faces a grilling on capitol hill. skeptical lawmakers question the tech giants plan to launch its own digital currency. ♪ all right brad, once again i have revolutionized the songwriting process. oh, here we go. i know i can't play an instrument, but this... this is my forte. obviously, for auto insurance, we've got the wheel route. obviously. retirement, we're going with a long-term play. makes sense. pet insurance, wait, let me guess... flea flicker. yes! how'd you know? studying my playbook? yeah, actually. ♪ ♪
award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. hey! i live on my own now! the volvo xc90. i've got xfinity, because i like to live life in the fast lane. unlike my parents. you rambling about xfinity again? you're so cute when you get excited... anyways... i've got their app right here, i can troubleshoot. i can schedule a time for them to call me back, it's great! you have our number programmed in? ya i don't even know your phone anymore... excuse me?! what?
playing with a toddler who is gotten his hands in a book of matches and facebook has a burn down the house over and over and called every arson a learning experience. paul: that was democratic senator sharad brown of ohio grilling facebook executives over the tech giants intention to launch digital currency. he faced two dates of questioning with lawmakers voicing skepticism over the company's plans citing its past record on privacy and concerns over the growing power of big tech. andy writes the tech column for "the wall street journal" and thank you for coming in. but he make of the libra currency? is the potential for good here? >> look, first of all, it's admirable. someone is finally trying to undercut the two-3% credit card fees we all pay. it's also providing services for the unthinkable, not only in the u.s. but burma and bangladesh they will finally have banking and i also think the way they
are doing this is a stable coin, it's not like bitcoin will fluctuate in price but it will constantly have a stable price. there's nothing special about crypto currency or block chain how they implemented it. they can do this with index cards and the fact that it's crypto currency don't be full by that and it's just a way of implement the. paul: it sounds to me, andy, this is more than a crypto currency and really an alternative payment system and a competition for mastercard and visa and for people who are blocked out of debit cards because of the dodd frank act and now maybe this is or tends to be low income and maybe this is an alternative. >> i agree. therefore it is admirable but however, unlike the name libra it's not free. the way it works is they take your money and go by treasuries and other instruments and then they keep the interest on it. you get nothing. it's a like a checking money
checking account with no money or no toaster is not free to consumers and i don't think it's ever going to be free from regulators. the way it set up is it will be a regulators haven. paul: well, okay, so - i guess the bottom of the question will be do you think regulators will let it happen? we know already that central banks are not going to let it become an alternative currency because they want the monopoly over currencies. but the question is will the regulators allow this to be an alternative payment system for people? >> that's a big question. what is it. it looks like time deposit and looks like a checking account but it's also your buying into a fund and might be an exchange traded fund and also it could be a security and have the ftc involved in the thing with secretary when mnuchin worried about money laundering and terrorist finances so therefore
any number of regulators will pile in and say this is under our jurisdiction and under a bank or in exchange for this is someone selling the stock and i don't think facebook has quite thought through just what kind of company they will become with all these regulators attached to them. paul: so, the labor of crypto currency disruption of this is hyped. as of now and is that how you would put it right now that there's a lot of things that have to happen before this can become backed? >> there will be a huge number of things that take place and i don't understand why they did not do a joint venture with j.p. morgan or citibank or someone who knows how to deal with this hereditary environment so that way the sink to be done much quicker. part of their coalition is visa and mastercard who want a seat at the table but uber and lyft
and spotify and paypal and ebay so they could of gotten this thing done very quickly if they had done a joint venture but they want to do it themselves and silicon valley is run fast and break things and that's fine and they may pull it off long-term but given the scrutiny that facebook is under for the leakage of user data - remember, the way they get paid is not only collecting interest but the transaction information of all the stuff that we buy. banks are not allowed to explain that information. will facebook be allowed to? that's up to the future regulators and their inviting men into the tent. paul: related issue the $5 billion of the trade commission is apparently will find facebook and we don't know for violating its privacy agreement. we don't know the details of this but is by billion packaging for facebook? does that matter? >> yeah, i think it will be a
relief. all sorts of calls to break up big tech from elizabeth warren to ted cruz. it's coming from all sides. the reality of it is i don't think they will be broken up or it's a very long process to break them up. the fact that the federal trade commission said look, pay a fine and we will have a little extra oversight on facebook is a great sign for facebook. it will not stop the calls to break up big tech but to do that you really need to change the definition of antitrust. right now is about consumer harm and hard to find the consumer harm in terms of pricing because there is no pricing. everyone is trying to ban the antitrust laws to find ways to break out facebook and break up amazon and break up google but that will be a tenure process if it happens at all. paul: thank you, andy. we have to take one more break and we come back hits and misses of the
♪ limu emu & doug what do all these people have in common, limu? [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go.
expedia. at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. >> time now for hits and misses
of the week. kim, start us off. >> paul, in california they've long been synonymous with crazy. and in keeping, this week to the municipal code they got rid of all gender references. now you do not drive over manhole anymore you drive over a maintenance hole. they do not have manpower they have human effort and the students not stand for
sororities and fraternities a living collegiate greek residence systems. add to this they also disband natural gas condemning everyone to use electric stoves. i was going to give it a miss but that might be gender bias so i'll just give it a pass. >> and this is moving more of the bureau of land management staff out west to colorado. they have uniquely western mission and manages so much land in the west. it makes sense to run more of the operations on while if management working with ranchers and working cooperatives with state government. to do some of the work out west, so cheers to interior secretary david bernhardt for getting it done. >> kyle? >> a hit, 50 is believed to neil armstrong, buzz and michael for the moon landing 8 to 69. i re-watched the video this
week and is still thrilling. they cannot seem to find them into the back to the moon but those guys got it done. >> i remember that. thank you for >> they're cars you never heard of. >> he liked to buy unique cars -- kissels, grahams, overlands. he always used to say, "i don't want to meet myself on the road." >> it's a great hobby. keeps you out of the beer joints. >> do you have your foot on the brake, teacher? just in case? >> i haven't jumped out yet. >> these heirs hit a fork in the road... >> so that is a point of contention. do you donate cars here? do you have an auction? >> it's really tough to get every sibling on the same page. >> yeah, i'd say we're no different. >> ...until they hear an emotional voice from the past. >> when we go by his gravesite, he's probably on high spin mode up there. >> it's just money. can't take it with you.