tv Lou Dobbs Tonight FOX Business June 19, 2020 5:00am-6:01am EDT
i'm jamie colby for "strange inheritance." and, remember, you can't take it with you. ♪. lou: good evening, everybody. it has been an historic day in washington where the u.s. supreme court today ruled on the trump administration's right to rescind former president obama's executive order on deferred action for childhood arrivals program. or daca, as it's more commonly known. it was created by president obama's 2012 executive order. his order provided temporary amnesty, work permits, other federal benefits to more than 700,000 illegal immigrants who were brought to the united states as children. in a 5-4 ruling the high court
said that the trump administration acted improperly by terminating the program in 2017. that is the last clear-cut statement from the majority opinion. the court's reasoning tortured throughout. and these five justices appear confused as they often do, when roberts, the chief justice is the swing vote. for example, this ruling does not touch the merits of the program, meaning daca remains in place but it could end, end, the pin of this or any other administration. president trump reacting on twitter, he said, quote, these horrible and politically-charged decisions coming out of the supreme court are shotgun blasts into the face of people who are proud to call themselves republicans or conservatives. we need more justices or we'll lose our second amendment and everything else.
vote trump 2020. siding with the four liberal justices today was chief justice john roberts as i said. and this is the second time this week that he has sided in a ruling against the trump administration. in the majority opinion today the chief just test wrote, quote, the dispute before the court is not whether dhs may rescind daca. get ready for this. all parties agree that it may. the dispute is primary about procedure, the procedure that the agency followed in doing so. well, the procedure, chief justice roberts is referring to, came in the form of a 2017 memorandum, written by former dhs acting deputy secretary elaine duke. her memo called the daca program illegal because it allows daca recipients to have benefits like
social security and medicare and allows them to legally work in the united states despite their status. chief justice roberts in his opinion says that duke memo just doesn't get into the heart of daca. his words, the legal protections against deportation, and in his majority opinion, roberts concluded that dhs must somehow offer a better explanation if it is to reconsider rescinding daca, which everyone agrees, that the department of homeland security has the power to do. the court, however, chose not to evaluate the merits of a subsequent memo from former dhs secretary kirstjen nielsen. in 2018 she elaborated on duke's reasoning to rescind the program and said in part, quote, if a policy concerning the ability of this class of aliens to remain in the united states is to be
adopted, it should be enacted legislatively. trump, appointed justice brett kavanaugh, who wrote his own dissent to the court's ruling today. kavanaugh explained the nielsen memo provided a reasonable explanation to end daca, saying this, the nielsen memorandum shows that the department back in 2018 considered the policy issues that the court or at least the majority of it today says that the department did not consider. adding, quote, the only practical consequence of the court as decision to remand appears to be some delay. that delay cheered on by the globalist business groups like the business roundtable, the u.s. chamber of commerce, wall street, the radical dems and rinos who long thought to flood the american job market with low-wage immigrant workers and the business roundtable said this today. we applaud today's supreme court
decision to protect the hundreds of thousands of daca recipients who play a vital role in our economy and our communities. the chamber of commerce, oh, they had to have something to say and this is what they said. it is long past time for congress to provide permanent relief for dreamers. now while the globalists and big business today made it very clear if there was any doubt in anyone's mind just who owns the chief justice minority leader chuck schumer suffered something of an emotional meltdown over the ruling. >> i cried tears of joy a few minutes ago when i heard the decision of the supreme court on daca. these wonderful daca kids and their families have a huge burden lifted off of their shoulders. they don't have to worry about being deported. wow. the decision's amazing. i am so happy.
lou: we're all relieved for schumer who was on the verge after of a breakdown. there appeared never intention of president trump to deport any one of the so-called dreamers. the trump administration not looking particularly good today on the first day of oral arguments in the supreme court when president trump tweeted this. president obama said he had no legal right to sign the order but would anyway. if supreme court remedies with overturn, a deal will be made with dems for them to stay. wow. that's encouraging isn't it. the law in drive-by form. the white house move was to win some sort of leverage in order to force the radical dems in the house to make a move on immigration. how did that work out? not well at all. former attorney general jeff sessions in 2017 called it an orderly lawful wind down of
daca, that left time for congress to act. but as is customary, congress has done nothing. republicans and even members of the president as cabinet have yet to fully support his immigration position and agenda. not that they should but one would think they would. the dems have called to abolishing immigration and customs enforcement and they pushed an open borders agenda. so really everybody would be welcome if the left had their way and the business roundtable and of course the chamber of commerce. congress it appears is content to use immigration as a political issue as opposed oppoo actually coming up with a solution but we should be thankful that is their position. justice clarence thomas wrote the main dissent to today as daca ruling. justice thomas said the court's decision now allows any administration to use second tough action to essentially bind the following administration to
the laws that result from that executive action. thomas writes this, quote, even if the agency lacked authority to effectuate the changes the changes cannot be undone by same agency in successor administration unless the successor provides sufficient policy justifications to the satisfaction of the court. think about that. to the satisfaction of the court. in other words, he wrote, the majority erroneously holds that the agency is not only permitted but required to continue administering unlawful programs that it inherited from a previous administration. justice thomas saying it straightforwardly and succinctly and clearly. the court is confused, it is contradictory. and it is quickly becoming a laughingstock under justice roberts.
the executive branch in the view of those justices, at least the majority, can legislate by executive order, so long as the majority of the high court and the administration to a lesser degree in this case, the obama administration, are idealogical aligned. what they're basically said today, to hell with the law, to hell with the constitution, we know better. breaking news tonight, a federal judge will hold a hairing tomorrow on the justice department's efforts to halt the distribution of john bolton's book. it is due to be released next tuesday by the way, due, means when the publisher wants to. it is at this point very much not, not on the schedule for the president of the united states. in fact the president today tweeted this about bolton's book saying, bolton's book, which is getting terrible reviews is compilation of lies and made-up stories all intended to make me
look bad. many of the ridiculous statements attributes to me were never made. pure fiction. just trying to get even for firing him like the sick puppy he is. while the president also taking to twitter to clear up what u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer meant yesterday, when he said this. >> i think that was a policy option years ago. i don't think it's a reasonable policy option at this point. so, but you think that you will see supply chains come back as a result of u.s. policy including the kinds of things that you all did in the tax bill but also with the regulatory space that the president has done as well as the tariffs we put in place. lou: the president clarifying on twitter, he said this, quote, it was not ambassador lighthizer's fault yesterday in committee and perhaps i didn't make myself clear but the u.s. certainly does maintain the policy option
under various conditions, of a complete decoupling from china. well now we have got that straightened out. on wall street today, stocks finished mixed. dow jones industrials lost 40 points. s&p up 2. nasdaq gained 33. this is what we call a calm day these days on wall street. volume on the big board, 4.4 billion shares. crude oil gained more than 2%. it is at $38.86 a barrel. listen to my reports three times a day coast to coast on the salem radio network. up next, tens of millions of americans are out of work but the globalists elites call for more foreign workers, guest workers. we look in depth with the center for immigration studies heyed, steven camerota. what in hell is going on when anyone would be pushing such nonsense in the midst of
there seems to be a massive disconnect between... ...what's going on in corporate america and what investors are believing is going on in corporate america. the message to you: don't trade because you think you're gonna to get rich quick. because you... book two separate qualifying stays and earn a free night. the open road is open again. and wherever you're headed, choice hotels is there. book direct at choicehotels.com. there are people who say things aren't made here anymore. those people should make a trip to michigan. or kentucky. or illinois. where you'll find our workers and dealers and engineers and technicians. building for america. we're proud to employ more hourly workers than any other automaker in this country. because we build for this country.
i got this mountain bike for only $11. dealdash.com, the fair and honest bidding site. an ipad worth $505, was sold for less than $24; a playstation 4 for less than $16; and a schultz 4k television for less than $2. i won these bluetooth headphones for $20. i got these three suitcases for less than $40. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save.
americans remains extremely high, and it is ec e treatmently difficult to justify the continued entry of new immigrants on the grounds of a labor shortage. we're talking about 40 million people not working. according to the cis research, the unemployment rate for native-born americans is more than three times what it was before the china virus pandemic hit. the number of unemployed native-born americans also at levels three times higher than in february. another cis study done last week found that between 2000 and 2014 immigrants, both legal and illegal, who held a job increased by 5.7 million. the number of native-born americans holding a job declined in the same period by nearly 130,000. from 2000 to 2014, 17 million immigrants arrived in the united states. working age, a native-born americans declined from 74% in
to 71% in 2017 to 66% in 2014. despite the evidence and the empirical evidence this represents, the globalist elites -- the chamber of commerce, the koch-backed libra initiative, americans for prosperity, the business round table and as well wall street itself -- continue to clamor for an increase for foreign workers. all at the expense of, yes, the american working man woman and their families. joining us tonight to sort out why so many special interests in this country are seeking to provide even more competition to already unemployed americans in this period of crisis is dr. steve camarota, director of research at the center for immigration centerings. steve, great to have you with us and appreciate it. these are staggering numbers, and give us a sense of why --
some of us may think we know the answer to this, but why there is such pressure on this administration and pressure that, by the way, seemingly is at least by some advisers being accepted as the basis for policy. why is there so much pressure for this administration to raise the number of h-1b visas? we have documented the problems with the program for 20 years. what's going on? >> yeah, let's remind your listeners. that's a program that supposedly brings in more skilled people. it's a mixed skilled group. remember, if we look in the sectors where h1 is b is, that's like computer science and so forth, real wages haven't grown. now, if there was a a terrible shortage of workers, we would expect over the last 5, 10, 15, 20 years wages to be rising rapidly as desperate employers bid up the price of labor. that's not happening. if we look at other programs for the unskilled like the h2b program which is for seasonal, unskilled people, it's for,
like, tree trimmers and food service workers, things like that, their real wages have either stag a nateed or declined. -- stag may noted or declined. again, very little evidence there's a short an. right now, of course, in those sectors unemployment averages between 10-40%, so it's incredibly high. and yet they're still pressuring for more. i think the first thing to remember is this tells us it was probably never about any idea about there actually was a shortage, because if people are still arguing they're desperate for workers right now, that means what it was really mostly about is keeping the flow high and keeping wages lower and increasing the bargaining power of employers. but to be honest, lou, it's not so strange that the chamber of commerce or the business round table or any other business association wants to shift bargaining power to, you know, employers. that's not to strange. they've always -- so strange. they've always wanted that. but we'd like to think our public officials, the people who make policy, would step back and
look at the wage data, look at all the people out of work and say, look, the evidence doesn't support what you're contending. but, unfortunately, now, i say the trump administration's been a little bit so, you know, than previous administerings. you've got to give some credit here. but the reality was there was never any evidence of a labor shortage when you look at the actual data the government collects. and now to suggest that more workers are needed is absurd on its face. lou: on its face but also being entertained as we, as you and i both know by elements of the administration. and elements close to the president. this is outrageous. and as you say, this president has done many things, great things. but this is one of those things where he was very clear to those who form the base of his support throughout this country. building a wall, stopping illegal immigration and hiring american, buying american and
protecting the american working -- worker and family. this flies in the face of that pledge. this is a slap in the face of the american worker, is that too strong an ec e presentation? expression? >> well, it certainly is an lawyer where the democrats would be -- area where the democrats would be vulnerable. you would think the president -- and you've got to give him credit, they could do just more. they could just point out the lack of wage growth, the unemployment rate and say it doesn't make sense right now at the very least. now, of course, when you look at it long term, it never made any sense. let me give you one just quick statisticment right now the unemployment rate for new immigrants, people who came in the last two years, their unemployment rate is nearly 20%. it actually went up between april and may. it's one of the only groups that went up. so how can it make any sense to bring in ever more people given the fact that the new arrivals aren't doing so bad? it's also the case that only
about 48% of working age immigrants -- again, who came in the last two, two and a half years -- actually have a job. so it doesn't -- lou: yeah, i want to ask you -- >> it's pretty clear we don't need more immigrant workers. lou: and the evidence is also clear that the american working man and woman in this country need all the help they can get right now. >> that's for sure. lou: i want to show this, according to your organization, the top ten h-1b visa sponsors. if we could put that up so everybody understands these deprived firms that are so desperate for these h-1b visa holders. amazon, google, earn and young. ibm and microsoft -- ernst and young and microsoft. now, why would they be so eager to bring in people who are not as well educated as americans,
who are, frankly, going to be paid lower than the prevailing wage in their job categories if history is borne out? why? why are these companies so desperate? >> i mean, for the same reason you might guess. look, they may not be able to control everything, but if they can pressure the government to give them access to ever more workers, it helps keep wages down, it helps increase their return on investment. and in a way, you can kind of understand it. it's just naked self-interest. but it's important for policymakers to step back and evaluate whether that makes sense. are wages rising very rapidly whether we're talking about janitor it is or computer programmers? -- janitors or computer programmers? the short answer is no, and i'm talking about were covid. -- before covid. if we look at the employment situation right now, of course, it looks terrible for everyone.
whether we look long term or just the latest data from just last month, extraordinarily hard to make the case there's some generalized need for workers. but, you know, business assets own interest. we just hope that policymakers take the broad interest of the country rather than just listening to what -- lou: well, we haven't even mentioned -- yeah, don't worry about that because that's not going to happen. i've talked with some of the people who are running the immigration program for this president, and they don't get it. they don't understand artificial intelligence, they don't understand the impact of robotics, and they sure as hell don't, obviously, specifically i can think of one person who has no damn idea what it means for 40 million people to be out of work facing this kind of a lobbying effort, you know, before the president runs for reelection. steve, i want do you one last question. daca, any thoughts there as we wrap up? >> well, a reminder to listeners, remember, it's not so
much what everyone advertises. you don't have to be able to speak english, you don't have to have a college degree, you don't even need to have a clean record. you can have at least two misdemeanors and still qualify. and that's important to understand. so the other thing that seems crazy about the ruling or the biggest problem is obama created it by executive fiat. what the court is essentially saying is it can't be ended by executive alaska. it seems like a gross inconsistency. as you pointed out, it means that one administration can put something in place, didn't go through review and comment, but -- lou: [inaudible] >> you know, then it's a big, long procedure. it effectively allows one administration to make law that's very difficult for the next administration to undo. and it's not congress passing it, it's just executive fiat. it's a terrible precedent. lou: apparently, it has the
support of chief justice roberts, is so everything's okay. stephen camarota, good to talk with you again. it's been too long. come back soon. we've got a lot the chew over. thanks so much. up next, the target of robert mueller's investigation says president trump was targeted because they wanted to fix president obama's failed foreign policy. investigative journalist john solomon joins us. we'll be taking that up right after these quick messages. please stay with us. spygate get worse and worse. oh, we love our new home. neighborhood's great. amazing school district. the hoa has been very involved. these shrubs aren't board approved. you need to break down your cardboard. thank you. violation. violation. i see you've met cynthia. at least geico makes bundling our home and car insurance easy. and it does help us save a bunch of money. two inches over regulation.
you see, president obama thought it'd be just a grand idea if he could send a couple of emissaries -- in this case, two republicans -- to cairo e to sort of explain why there should be 10% of the new cc government that would be muslim brotherhood. didn't work out too well. phares told john solomon that he was interviewed by mueller's special counsel after working as an unregistered lobbyist for the egyptians. solomon reports those uncorroborated allegations were in rod rosenstein's scope memo which authorized mueller to look into criminal allegations. joining us tonight is john solomon, award-winning investigative journalist, ed editor in chief of just the news.com. john, good to have you with us. phare e s is now the mystery fifth person to be targeted by the special counsel in addition
to flynn. your thoughts, and i know that you're doing an extensive reporting on this. >> yeah, absolutely. well, for a while t been a mystery, who was the fifth person. we knew about george papadopoulos and carter page and mike flynn and paul manafort, and we knew there was this redacted section of the memo where another person was identified, and we have now confirmed that was dr. walid phares. and what's interesting is the referral predominantly deals with egypt. it was about a policy dispute. and where the similarities begin is that the allegations turned out to be as frivolous as most of the things in this steele dossier. so dr. phares will get a lawyer, he has to go through this entire process for an extraordinary amount of inaccurate information. and i think at the end of the day the most to found thing he said to me was when i look back at this, this looked like the whole russia case, looked like an effort to sideline all the foreign policy advisers of president trump so he would be
handicapped in foreign policy when he began. and he specifically believed that one of the things they were trying to do was preserve the iran nuclear deal. president trump was clear he was going to throw that deal out when he became president. well, when mike flynn and walid phares and all these others get sidelined, it slows the president down in getting to his foreign policy agenda. lou: well, it also brings in to play another connection, and that is the efforts of the obama administration to send john mccain, lindsey graham to egypt to insist that the sisi government accept the muslim brotherhood in the new government that el sisi, the new president, was forming. and here they go again. also john mccain implicated for his role in getting that, that dossier to the fbi. >> right. well, listen, i think that
there's a period of foreign policy that we're all going to take a look back in a few years and realize how flawed it was; libya, iran, the arab spring, egypt, allowing the muslim brotherhood to temporarily take control of the country. and those all occurred on barack obama, joe biden and hillary clinton's watch. and i think people are going to have to look back and realize we're still trying to repair the damage from that. here's one of the most interesting things about the iran deal that doesn't get focus, it had an enormous benefit to russia. as soon as iran got the money and got the sanctions lefted, it -- lifted, out went and bought hundreds of millions of dollars of russian military equipment. vladimir putin once again got a check. a lot of people don't make that connection, but if you want to have a scandal about russia, take a look at what happened after the iran deal was consummated by barack obama. lou: that's fascinating. and we've got about a minute left. i want to turn to bolton's new book. your reaction to it and his
obvious betrayal of the president he worked for. >> yeah, listen, there's a lot of issues, classified information. you're not supposed to talk about conversations the president had with world leaders because they're assumed to be classified at the outset. but remember, i did a lot of work on the wmd disaster in the intelligence community during the bush years. john bolton was at the center of that, taking a few threads of fact and trying to weave into this a big theory that there was wmd in iraq. that turned out to be wrong. i think you'll find out that this book falls the way of the wmd tale when we're all done. lou: all right. john solomon, just the news.com. we recommend it to you and, of course, john highly as well. and we appreciate your being with us, john. ing thanks so much. john solomon. well, up next we finally learn some details about secretary pompeo's meeting with the chinese in hawaii. what the hell went on, and is in any way to run an american
actually occurred and what was discussed lacked, well, specificity, we'll be kind. state department spokesperson morgan ortega simply stated they stressed u.s. interests. that's good to know. full transparency in fighting the china virus -- there is none -- and the need for reciprocal dealings between the two. and we don't know much about that. a member of the pompeo delegation also tells fox news the chinese delegation could not be described as, quote, forthcoming. joining us tonight a man who is always forthcoming, dr. michael pillsbury, director of the center for chinese strategy at the hudson institute. mike, good to have you with us. my god, what in the world is this administration doing? the secretary of state is at hickam air force base in a meeting with his counterpart from the people's republic of china, and we have no idea in
hell what transpired. what is that about? >> well, secret diplomacy e really with china began with henry kissinger, and a lot of drama to it, lou, that nobody will know for 30 years what exactly happened in the meeting. fortunate lu in this case, secretary pompeo is -- has already revealed something pretty important just in the last couple of hours, that the chinese side committed or you might say recommitted to everything in the phase one trade deal. that's really quite important because they've been slip aring on their purchases, cases -- slipping on a their -- lou: wait a minute. mike, let me put that in context, if i may. >> please. lou: robert lighthizer yesterday appearing before the house ways and means committee saying every discussion that he had had, every discussion that his staff had had with the chinese over the course since april 1st, everything they've absolutely reaffirmed their sincerity in
working to meet those obligations under the phase one historic trade agreement. the only problem is they're looking to fulfill those commitments, they haven't actually done it. >> right. lou: i mean, this is a little bizarre that the secretaryover state comes back and sayses he got assurances when we've got the trade representative saying the same thing on capitol hill the day before. >> i'll give you a theory, lou, that this is china's last chance. it's been made very clear to them at the dinner in hawaii with secretary pompeo they have not been transparent on the virus, they're not, as you say, they're not making the purchases under the trade agreement. there's quite a few more problems, let's use a diplomatic phrase for it. in a way, this is a warm channel being created to make sure china understands they're basically looking for a lot of trouble from president trump if they
don't change their ways. now, it's better to do that, i think, tactfully at a dinner, in a talk halfway in between in hawaii, but we're getting into a dangerous area where china is just not making the concessions that they should or that they promised to. it's a dangerous area we're getting into. lou: it looks to me like there are two reto have call voids here -- rhetorical voids here, the voids offered by the chinese are their committed to trade, to their commitments to purchasing our products whether primarily agriculture or not, but nonetheless their commitments. there is that rhetoric that is actually, it's only given shape by rhetoric. and we have the same issue. our rhetoric is really that of acquiescence and continued acceptance of hostility, aggression when it's the south
china sea, whether it's over the air space of taiwan -- >> yep. lou: we are putting up and have put up with what looks to me now to have moved dangerously close to appeasement and accommodation that, as you well know, is dangerous, dangerous stuff for any nation but particularly for the world's only superpower. we're sending some very bad, weak signals to the chinese who seek dominion over the entire globe. >> well, i agree, lou. and one thing the president said many times is previous american presidents have in a way conditioned the chinese to get away with this. so his problem the first three and a half years is to convince the chinese of his seriousness of purpose about these many, many issues. they have been allowed to get away with so much, lou, that the president's quest here to give them a last chance, as i'm
calling it, i think it's very much in doubt what they're going to do. they're tough customers, we know that. but they have to understand the punishment that's in store for them could, in fact, be decoupling or even worse. lou: well, and today, i mean, we have the situation where the trade representative said that decoupling was not a policy option, telling the house ways and means committee that, and the president having to correct him -- >> yes. lou: this is, i mean, this goes to the sovereignty of the country, for god's salk. if we -- sake. if we don't have volition over who we'll do business with or if we have such extraordinary dependency on another, then we're no longer a sovereign nation. i mean, i just can't even imagine what the hell lighthizer was thinking about. can you? >> well, bob's role is trade, and decoupling is another area. i think the president's very smart today to put decoupling
back on the table and explicitly and as seriously as he did. as you know, companies may decouple on their own, decide i'm leaving china. but the government has a lot of staff to contain to make sure decoupling accelerates. so i suspect the president's overall approach now he's got many means of putting pressure on china. ultimately, he wants a deal the, he wants relations, but if they don't make concessions, lou, we're in for a really dangerous period. lou: yeah. you know what to me is deeply concerning, that when it is so clear the path that we are on that we would not be ready for what is obviously the onset of what looks to be something a little stronger than simply a cold war. that prospect is entirely, it seems to me at least, possible. dr. michael pillsbury, thanks for guiding us through all of this. as always, we appreciate it so
much. dr. mike pillsbury. up next, we'll have more on the supreme court's incredible ruling today on daca. where does the trump administration go next? we'll be joined by california's republican national committee woman march meet dull loan. stay with us, we'll be talking with her here next. you don't want to miss it, stay with us. ♪ right now is a time for action. that's why usaa is giving payment relief options to eligible members so they can pay for things like groceries before they worry about their insurance or credit card bills. discover all the ways we're helping members today. book two separate qualifying stays and earn a free night. the open road is open again. and wherever you're headed, choice hotels is there. book direct at choicehotels.com.
♪ ♪ lou: joining us tonight is harmeet dhillon, rnc committee woman for california, member of the 2020 trump advisory council. she's also suing california to stop millions of ballots being sent to inactive voters and doing other things that i think could come under the heading of the lord's work. great to have you with us. let's start with how is this vote-by-mail nonsense going? are the dems going to win on this? are they going to be harvesting ballots and doing all sorts of shoddy, sinister things? >> well, yes and no, lou. as a result of the lawsuit that we filed in california, we won a partial victory today in that the state of california, instead of having this done by the governor's order, has a passed a law that really defines it. that's part of the issue, but
the other part is ballot harvesting. unfortunately, we're not going to be able to change that at least in california. so it's really important that republicans protect these interests by voting republican in other states so that this disease we have in california, ballot harvesting and ballot box stuffing -- lou: did i just, did i just hear you say that california's lost, it's beyond even the idea of integrity, let alone the practice of it at the polls? >> well, in our lawsuit we're going to be continuing to proceed there on the issue of the fact that the state has not cleaned up its rolls. there are ballots potentially being mailed to people who are dead or ingel able to -- ineligible to vote. that is something that, frankly, the department of justice really could and should step in on. but in terms of the ballot harvesting, that's not something we're going to be able to roll back, unfortunately, lou. lou: yeah, that's unfortunate. it's also unfortunate in new
jersey, in new york, in state after state. >> yes. lou: the republicans are going to get rolled in november, is that what you're saying? we're going to get rolled? >> i'm not saying that. [laughter] i'm not saying that. i think that we are stepping -- lou: let me rephrase, let me add an ambiguous, let me add some nuance. it looks like we're going to get rolled, to me. am i wrong? >> i think in blue states the deck stacked against us, and it already was, lou. is so i don't think we can plan on president trump sweeping new york, new jersey, california. the real battleground is going to be in congressional races and in senate races in those -- lou: how about michigan? >> we have to keep fighting. michigan is a challenge. so michigan is going forward with mailing requests for ballots. so it's not universal vote by mail like california, but they are mailing applications to people. i don't think that's as big a deal as actually sending them the ballots. people can vote by mail in those states, it's already legal to do
that. so the question is, is the state and is the doj, by the way, going to enforce the obligation to have clean rolls. one person, one vote, no dead people, no multiple votes, i think we're in a much better situation to have an honest vote where we don't have that, and that's the case in many states -- california, michigan and others -- then we need to do a better job. we do have the department of justice that is supposed to go in and help with those issues and, frankly, hasn't brought those cases for many years. lou: very quickly as we wrap up here, there's so much we could talk about in the law and in politics. daca today, the ruling by the supreme court, it looks to me like john roberts has lost his mind. >> yeah. lou: that's some of the most tortured reasoning i've ever seen by a chief justice. each time he goes with the liberals. >> i don't think it's intellectual capacity, i think it is results-oriented jurisprudence which is really
bad no matter who is doing it. and we obviously began to see that with the obamacare pseudo-tax ruling that he had and then so many others after that. he really cares about being liked more than being right. so his ruling today made absolutely no sense. it is a disaster. it is fractured. it's hard to tell what's the majority ruling and what isn't, and it's all over the place. as you pointed out earlier, justice thomas really had the best word on this x we have allowed an administrative state to grow up in this country, and this is what we are end reaping from that. it is bureaucrats rule the day, judges make up the law, and the rule of law is thrown out the window. so that is why we need four more years of president trump. lou: that's one of the reasons of many. harmeet dhillon, great to see you. thanks so much. come back soon. stay with us, we'll be right back. ♪ and because we don't know exactly when this crisis is going to be over and we don't know exactly when the stock market will reach its bottom, we've got to be prepared for this to last a long time.
and it's my vision, my morning walk, my sunday drive, my grandson's beautiful face. only preservision areds2 contains the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. it's how i see my life. because it's my vision... preservision.
2.5 million. lou: and that's it for us tonight. we can't wait for the return of prosperity. tom fitton and "wall street journal" bob davis. pastor robert jeffress dagen: good morning, everyone, i'm dagen mcdowell in for maria bartiromo. friday june 19, top stories at 6:00 a.m. eastern. covid cases on the rise, spiking in cases like florida, texas, arizona bringing new discussions over protection measures as california with mandatory mask order for indoor spaces. 251-point gain on futures after mixed close yesterday, stocks pairing losses in the final minutes of trading. daca at the forefront. president trump slamming a supreme court