tv Shepard Smith Reporting FOX News January 11, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PST
senator risch thank you for being here. you have a ten minutes. >> thank you, i will not take that full ten minutes. mr. tillerson thank you for your willingness for doing this. it is a difficult time with u.s. relationships. it spiralled out of control from time to time and we are not in a good place in many parts of the world primarily because of u.s. policy. and it is going to be rethought and redeveloped and i thank you you for willingness to take that on. i was struck when you were named that this is something that has been off of the radar screen of most americans and that is the importance of the work that the state department does in dealing with our companies and commerce in foreign countries.
most americans don't realize how difficult it is to do business over sea and the state department needs to focus on that more than what they have and be helpful to countries that do want to do business overseas. a lot of times thas to go through government sources to get into business over there. and so i was impressed with with that. and i am glad having your business background, you will be helpful in that regard and helping the state department further understand its responsibilities. and the state department, everyone of them as travelled oversea and sometimes in bipartisan fashion. and we are always treated regardless of the political party so well with with our state department people. and we have talked a lot. russia has a lot of play in this
meeting and we haven't talked much about iran and north korea. and those are challenges for us. and those policies, as far as those two countries are concerned, really need to be rethought and recalibrated and reannounced in a way that they understand what america is going to do and where we are coming from and what we are going to do. in talking with with people, our allies, they are confused to where we are going and the same is true with isis, how we are going to handle that situation where they are operate nothing iraqing and syria. i will not press you on those, because you are just getting your feet on the ground and i hope the president-elect will be after you're able to get your arms around the things, he will
listen to you careful and the policy need to be different than what they are. in that part of the world, the sipping tean and singing kumbayan is not a way to be successful. they understand strength. not necessarily the use of strength, but they understand people who possess strength and will use that strength if necessary. they need to be convinced of that. a lot of people are complaining about the relationship between mr. putin and the president-elect and yourself and mr. putin. i hope he gets to know both of you guys really, really well. because i think he will be convinced that you do project american strength. and that america still has the muscle that its and we stand for
what we stand for and we are going to project that around the world. and so in that regards, i hope mr. putin does have a relationship where he knows both of you guy and especially the president-elect. i think that will impress him he will not be able to get away with the stuff he got away with crimia or syria and other places why they meddled where they shouldn't. and finally, let me say, thank you for are your willingness to do this. i have been impressed sitting here. the meeting in my office was good and able to develop the thoughts more deeply than we can here. and i want to say i am impriszed having come from a private sector background myself, it is difficult for people to understand the transition of private sector of business in the world of diplomacy is very
different. it is a transition that needs to be made and sitting here listening to you. i am impressed that you are making that transition and speaking in terms that diplomats understand. i appreciate that and i think it will serve you well going forward. thank you for your willingness and with that thought i yield back time. >> this was the last person of the first round. and we'll get back in to what we were before. senator johnson. >> i want to go back being to the responsibilities that secretary gates laid out. advise the president enegotiate agreements and lead us abroad. and i met you the morning i returned from the trip to israel a couple of days the way i term it the u.s. abstainful exemption of voting.
i never understood why combh any administration who did this on a bipartisan fashion would force a friend or ally to sit down and negotiate i guess partner that refuse to acknowledge the right to exist. in business, it is sitting down and forcing negotiations to buy a company someone doesn't want to sell it. you have a similar type of view on that? i think it complicates the future negotiations on that? >> i do do have a view on it, senator and thank you. it would be akin, if you are negotiating with someone who denies the right to exist. why would they live up to an agreement if they don't expect you to be around. it is already a complex negotiation. and forcing one party to the table through cocanertion or how you want to describe the recent
resolution is not useful. there are many opportunities since the osly accord to sit down and work out. leadership has not seized those opportunities. the palestinian leadership renouncedless violence, it is one thing to renounce it and another to take concrete action being to prevent it. and until there is a serious demonstration on their part that they are willing to do more than just renounce the violation but interrupt, it is difficult for around the cementingsment. >> you agree that israel, palestinians just refuse to say yes? >> i think there are many, many opportunities for progress to be made and those have never been seized upon. i do think it is a matter to be
discussed and decided again the two prospects. and that is a role we can play. the end it has to be settled between the two parties. >> in terms of negotiating agreement and advice to the president, i think congress has willingly given away the advice and consent power. most recently, the iranian agreement. that was a treaty. we upheld the vote it should be 100- 1 and every senator should support and defend the sfugz and guarding our power and consent. do you believe it was a treaty
>> it looks like a treaty and appearance of a treaty. >> what about the paris accord. you believe that is a treaty that the executive can enter on its own. >> it looks like a treaty. >> would you work with us and as you negotiate for the nakz to respect the sfugz and come to the senate for advice and consent on treaties. >> senator i respect the both roles of government. and the president-elect expressed the same views. under the past administration, the executive branch has gone pretty far out there in terms of recognizes the p role of congress as a body and express its own view. >> being in the state department, and you were ceo of
a functions and successful organization. 75000 employees and they are the same mission statement and understand the roles to achieve the goal and sentive of the goals of the organization. you are going to be assuming the leadership of a department. many cases entrenched bureaucrat tonight -- might be high schoolist to it how are you going toy reanth and deal with that? >> you are right. they had over 75 employee and the about the size of the 40000 of those are deployed over soit
and they are half bay washths now the accountist is more thane spl interest and national security. part of leadership is expressing clear views and having an organization that has clear line of sight on issues as to who owns these? and who will be held accountsable for them. and a consideration that is working in concert toward that objective. my experience is, that people look for leadership. there has been be a absence of strong lead are: there is
rewords for and not support their own a januaria. i have used that in many times. and general interest of the state department is the american people's intchlt and if anyone is working to advance their own interest. they are not work nothing -- working in the general interest. that is those who work in the state department to work in the general interest. >> thank you mr. tillerson. >> thank you, mr. chairman and i am glad you came back after lunch, mr. tillerson. i appreciate your response. my experience with state department employees, overwhelming majority are dedicated and they do their work
at great sacrifice and it sounds like you share the appreciation for the sacrifices they make. >> i have a great affection for those willing to take overseas assignmentes many in different location objection and they deserve the recognize for that and appreciation for it. >> well, thank you. there is discussion today about the concerns that this committee has experienced about, which i think are legitimate about potential conflicts of interest that you might face as confirmed as secretary of state. there is a precise approach that you have taken to divest your interest in exxon, i do
appreciate that you took concrete actions and plan to take more if you are confirmed. >> why do you think that that is important? >> senator, i had a great gron and half year career. that part of my life is over. i have been humbled and honored with the thought to serve my country. i never thought i would have an opportunity to serve in this way. when president-elect trump asked me to do this. first thing to do was to obtain a counsel. i must have a complete and clear and clean break from all of connection of exxon mobile and not even the appearance. and what ever is required get it
in place. and i am appreciative of the exxon mobile board were willing to work with with me to achieve that. it was their objective, too. and if that required me to walk away from things, that is fine. whatever is necessary to achieve that and i don't want the appearance that there is any connection to the future or fortune was exxon mobile. >> thank you for that. i think it stands in stark contrast of what we heard from president-elect trump who will not divest himself of the vast business interest. i appreciate that you see it is important to maintain that position with with the american people and world. you talk about eliminating isis as a top priority if p you are confirmed and your opening
statement connects islam to isis and you make the point of saying that you think it is important to support muslims around the world who reject radical islam. during the last congress. this community heard about the working of the muslim community to combat isis and the domestic terrorist that are produced as a result of isis ideology. in your view, is it help to feel suggest as manners we should be afraid of muslims? >> no, senator, in my travels and in my past work, i have travelled extensively in muslim countries not only in the middle east but southeast asia. and gained an appreciation of the great faith and that's why i made a distinction that we
should support the muslim forces that reject the radical islam. we have to win it not only on the battlefield. and our greatest it is the people of the muslim faith who speak in their rejection of their faith. >> and do you support the travel. >> we are able to mackay judgment about the people coming in to the country. no, i don't support a blankiet rejection being of any dwroup of people. but clearly we have serious challenges to be tiebl vet people come canning in. and particularly under the current circumstances. and the instability in the parts
of the world. and massive migration that occurred out of the rennion. and and a lack of document woke can vng we have to recognize that and developing a means to deal with it. >> i certainly agree with that which is very different which is a man of >>y would need to havie more information how the if it probably extends to other groups had are and one of the things
you and i discussed, when we met was the special immigrant visa program that we maintained for afghans that have helped our men and women on the military and in the ground. will you support continuing that program to ensure are able to come to this country when lives are it is important to protect those whose lives are truliy at ridiculous. >> i i don't know it is also importance to fwol not expand it to allow people to come through the it gets back to follow and
letabby's be they don't meet that criteria. >> i think congress narrowly focused the program. i appreciate that. >> thank you, i do want to say i appreciate the fact that you are able to highlight and the shares his views and ultimately has to carry out the policies of the president and he's not successful. i think it is good to desinchish. they lobby've we want to hear mr. tillerson's he may not issue >> senator gardener.
>> thank you pleasurings change and in particular t and participation in this important discussion. i would follow-up with the discussion on human right's issue. the administration sanctioned two july if the younger sister of kim jong-un were sanctioned for human rights and the minister of the state secretary in north korea. >> i appreciate you tell will me and people who corand something members in congress should refresh your recollection china has been reclaiming and building
islands in the south >> reports some of these recommissioned areas. we had a resolution called for the obama to take against china. they violated philippine sovereignty, what dew believe be that the position ought to be in the south china sea and more to do to stop china from violating international law? >> we have to take a whole china government approach. part of where we struggle with china and i mentioned in my
opening remarks. we have important economic relationships and our economies are intertwined. we have to look at china activities. the one with the island building in south china sea and declaration of a space close to it japan. they are taking territory or declaring control of territories that are not rightfully chinas. the island building in many respectses in high view. putting military assets on that island is akin to russia's taking of crimea. it is taking territory that the others lay claim to. what the u.s. can dispute the
area and china should respect the international process. some of their actions were challenged in the courts in the hague and found doing in violation. china's activity in this area is worriysome and the failure of a response allowed them to push the envelope. we are where we are and we have to deal with it. we have to show up with traditional allies in southeastazzia and reengagement. and use oscion. most members of them are affected by. this 5 trillion of economic trade goes through those waters every day. and this is a threat to the global economy if china can can digitate the passage in the
waters. it is important alloys. >> you would support a more a gleszive first island building is stopping. and access totem will if the be. last year the president signed a law. twian is our friend and last sunday, mainland chinese as a result of some of president-elect trump's activities and actions, the global times said if trump rekneeinged. the chinese peel will demand revenge. there is no room for bargaining. and they should push the military pressure on taiwan. it appears that/beijing
increased its pressure on taiwan. can you share the trump's administration position on taiwan. >> with with respect to taiwan with. we made important commitment to taiwan and we should express reaffirmation on this. this is part of the approach, we made commitments and we need to reaffirm and live up to them. it is important that ti man knows we will live up. and that in and of itself is a messam. the importance of that action to again, the whole of china approach that i am speaking about. we have to deal with china's action and recognize we have these balances forces in our relationship that need to be
dealt w. >> in terms of one chinese policy. the new administration's position? >> i don't know of plans to alter the one china position. >> thank you. and the issue in colorado is coming to the attention of a lot of pem they have served 2 million certain. and they they had 50 million in aid to india and provided scholarsh scholarships. and compassion is the target of governmental attacks and it is it is you machine due to the restrictions bow the dpft.
the state department should take notice of the am it is brought by the the state department should should insist the indian dpft refer we appreciate combror dprm the administration does nothing more than helping upon >> i upon to duszing itin know secretary rise is concerned about this. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. tillerson, in your capacity of ceo of exxon mobile, you praised the paris agreement
noting that addressing climate change requires broad base practical solutions around the world. do you personally believe that the overall national interest of the united states are better served by staying in the paris agreement and if so why, and if not, why not? >> i indicated having a seat at the table to address this issue on a global basis. it is important, i think it is 190 countries or there abouts have signed on to begin to take action. we are better served at being in the table than leaving the table. >> you understand that it is a generation or more that it itself takeeb be to get all of the countries to sign an agreement and move forward with targets and it would be uncurrent to move away from the
table. and so thank you for your answer well. >> i wanted to follow-up on with the information on and it you have low tolerance for fingerprint >> regardless what oneinngs about the cuban government. the policy of isolation has not achieved office. the castro regime. but thises employer >> with with & you mentioned you would to a bottom's up review. i point out these things have happened and are positive p. first of all, we have worked
with cub ans to combat disease, such as zika and diabetes. ifrts to increasacess to the internet paid off with with new wifi hot spots in if alabama and improved cellullar access to the island. and increased bilateral business affectivities and supported by the u.s. chamber of commerce and last week, the united states and cuba signed a bilateral agreement to prepare for and respond to oil spills and hazardous can substance solution in the gulf of mexico and the straits of florida. our new policy shows that 72 percent of americans support the renewed diplomatic relations and 73 percent p support ending the
embargaino. i doubt well is a we are not letting them down. but such efforts are made and showing no >> it is leading to increased opportunities for cuba and american business in cuba. will you recommend to president-elect trump a policy of engagement in cuba to foster change. or go back to the old policy of past 50 years that failed to bring real change or undermine the castro rey je -- regime.
>> the job if confirmed of the diplomat is to engage. we would always want to engage to affect change. we have to be honest with the engagement with cub a. there is long-standing statutes in place that govern that relationship. the training and designated list of state sponsors of terrorism. if we who are conducting affairs with cuba are in compliance with those. if we engage in a positive p way and meet all of the commriants of those statutes, that is a good thing. i don't know. i haven't had an opportunity to have a fulsome activity. there is activity and someone had to make a determination that
something change. did it affect change? i would like to see the documentation and information around that. if we are going to change the relationship, we have to change those statutes as well. i believe we live up to agreement and law and fully enforce them. they were put there for a reason. if circumstances change, and we change our postsure. but it demands a bottom's up review. much has been changed by executive order are and the president-elect would like to understand that. what was the criteria that the state department used to make its determination and that's what he would ask me. >> the reason i cited those polls, i think the american people are at the point of wanting those statutes set
aside. i appreciate your answers in terms of consulting state department people and you know, i can't think of better professionals the stat department professionals who spent decades learning about the regions that they serve in and the countries they work on and i appreciate your thoughtfulness in terms was doing that. and a final question. as senator men endez issued it is issue of fugitive. we have a fugitive by the name of charlie hill that should be brought to justice. i believe we have a better chance to get him out than a policy of isolation. thank you for that. >> thank you. thank you. we'll continue on the same theme for a bit.
we'll talk about what it is we hear the word concessions and shouldn't have concessions to dictators or despot. the executive evereds that are taken over the past couple of years first of which is in 20 are 09. cuban american families had families in cuba had to choose between the father or mother's funeral if they died within three years. dew believe it is it a concession to the regime to allow the cub an- american to go to the funeral. >> senator, they are heart breakingy questions. again, i have to take us back to what are the statute and provisions that govern that and this is where concessions become
difficult. i want to be honest with you. my expectations if p confirmed is to do a bottoms up review. and what provisions are we making exceptions and what provisions a lou for a waiver or grant perhaps an exception for someone to resolve these difficult personal issues for people and not undermine our values. >> i don't think it was the president executive authority to make that change. i don't think it was a question. there were no lawsuits filed or any real resistance as soon as they travel back to cuba, it was assumed it was a great thing and
they have remitted more money. it was illegal for them to send fish hooks to their family members. i submit they are not concessions to the regime to allow americans to travel those sanctions are on american and knots cuban and with regard to diplomatic being relations. we have diplomatic relations with with unsafory leaderships with some countries. saudi arabia, we don't agree with how they treat women and political opponents. is it a concession to the regime to have diplomatic relations to the country. >> this is a question that is ground in long- standing historic policy of the united states. >> right. >> and that policy and the
statutes that govern that policy. if that is time to alter the statutes. that is the role of congress. in the state department, if i am there and confirmed to be there, it is our role to enforce what congress expressed its desire and so if the judgment of the congress and the judgment of the state department and president-elect through consultation views that we have moved to a different place we should address that and not ignore what the law of the land is. >> i understand that completely. i am just saying diplomaticky relations to countries is not a concession. it is in our national interest and the way we practice state craft and diplomacy and have diplomatic relations and i would say that with cuba.
there are fugitives of justice from cuba we would like back and in other countries we would like back as well. we use diplomatic relations and state craft and diplomacy to try to arrange those things. if we said to every country that held fugitives was justice we'll with hold diplomatic relations and recall our ambassadors, where would we be. a review is prudent and glad that the administration is undertaking a review. and it will conclude measures to allow americans to travel to cuba. i would suggest that americans place more money in the government when they do travel to cuba. that if we lifted the travel ban completely and they could more
easily ensure that more money goes to family member and entrepreneurs sxchlts i am glad that the review will take place and i am glad you are going to be a part of the review. in a minute and half left. you talked about sanctions. i shared aversion when they are practiced unlaterally. sanctions is a method or a tool to change behavior and to enduce or to punish countries. what other tools do we have without resorting to sanctions? >> depending on the issue and the target country is. we have tools related to immigration and visa exchange
policies in particular. we have soft power and hard power to use. it relates on the specific country and issue and what our relationship has been and what are the pressure pointses that they are going to feel it. because that is the issue i have ensures that sanctions are properly structure and hit the proper pressure point and that changes the direction in their thinking and going. it is a case by case in terms what we can use to apply pressure to whatever government we are notting to alter their course. >> i appreciate your comments on cuba and i will say, you will find on on both sides of the
aisle. people sitting next to each other having different views and i hope you will seek input of all and dot top to bottom review. i want to clarify, i don't think necessarily an aversion to sanctions. what you may have expressed is just insuring when they are implemented in a way that is appropriate; is that correct? >> that is correct senator, chairman. in one comment. having ineffective sanctions is worse than none at all. it sends a weak signal to the target country and then they say they are not serious after all. if we are going to sasanctions, they need to be carefully crafted so they are effective. >> in the americas, you have
done work in the america and being a texan. you understand the importance of relationships. we have grappled on this committee and company. unaccompanied miefrns. migration is at a 0 point. but the instability in the northern triangle. and violence and drug trade created challenges. we supported in a bipartisan way investment. but want to make sure they other are targeted to accomplish the objective and creating more stability and ability and so people don't need to fleechlt talk about that part of our mort folio. >> senate're senator, i appreciate you bringing it back to the western hemisphere. and i say that in all seriousness. i don't think we should in any
way down grade the western hem mispeer but not only central america but south america. there are national security issues in this hemisphere also. as to the immigration sxhj you described it well. that what happened in the recent time is a real shift in which these people are coming across the border in an illegal fashion. they are largely coming from south of mexico's border. i am aware of the northern triangle project trying to strengthen law enforcement because a lot of people are motivated to run from high crime ridden area. and anti- narcotic trafficking and strengthening the government institutions and providing a safer environment to the
people down there to the extent we can direct assistance programs. some of this again how do you use not only the special targeted effort and the funds that have been made available there, but other aid programs like the millennial challenge to develop the capabilities of these countries to perform better. and you i spoke about this in your office. out of our true compassion for people coming across the board. many accompanied minors, how to deal with that. in response to that challenge, there is well intended action in programs like doca. and deferred treatment of adjudeication and all well
intended and they were translated back to the host country, the places these people are leaving from, we know that it got misinterpreted and even the leaders of those countries spoke in public. look, the wrong signals are sent down here as a result of the effort to be compassionate and incentizing them to take greater risk to themselves and their children to go across mexico using illegal smugglers to get them to this country. we have to be very thoughtful about look at the signal and look at mexico and work with mexico. it is it a challenge for them. how to to secure their southern
porious border and deal with all of the transients in their country to get to the land of the free and home of the brave where everyone wants to be. i acknowledge the challenge we have before us. we'll have to deal with the situation we have today, the reality of it. and i think this is where it is intent of the president-elect in while he does express it in the view of the wall, but he's expressing we have to get control of the boarder and prevent and stop the flow of people comes across and how we do that and what policy and how we execute those are yet to be developed. but the state department would have a big role in the foreign aspect. once they come across the border they are prumarily homeland
security's responsibility. the state department is what can we do to stop them illegally. we want them to come legally. >> thank you. and as i said in my office. i encourage the secretary of state to fly north and south and not east and west. there is huge things to take advantage of. and there is opportunities. i assume you support the u.s. position that is in place since the 1940s to do what we can even if it is hard to promote a two state solution in israel and palestine. living peacefully side by side. and that is the dream we hope for that region. >> i don't think anyone would take a position that they don't hope for peace in that area. >> peace with with a two state solution as was determined by the u.n. and bipartisan policy
of the united states since the late 1940s. >> that is the dream that everyone is in pursuit of. whether it is a reality remains to be seen. >> i think it is frustrated all of us. there is so little progress toward it. what do you think from the secretary of state's position you could do to try to hasten a day. people thought for hundreds of years there would be no peace in ireland. >> i am glad you put it in context of hundreds of years, and that it is indictive of conflicts like this. and sometimes it takes another generation to have a change of view. up times we have to make the situation stable as possible be
and limit the impact on the people living there now. the palestinian people have suffered a lot under their own leadership in many cases as a result of there not being more progress made. it 2450eds to be resolved. but the issues are long-standing and it is the state department's role to try to create an environment that brings parties together that want to find a way forward. i can tell you under the conditions today, it is extreme he challenging to do that. but that has to be the goal. and to your example, sometimes it takes a different generations that is not carrying the baggage of the past with them. >> thank you. >> mr. tillerson, i just want to thank you of the level of candor
you have shown in the hearing. you have engaged on issue and answered question and adept at time and i want that from our nation's chief diplomat. and the only request. they don't coach that out of you should your nomination move forward a& you become next secretary of state and i suspect you will. in a prepared statement you wrote. defeating isis must be the first priority in the middle east and also note later that defeat will not occur on the battlefield alone, we must win the war of ideas. something we discussed with here. we have to win the war of ideas. we can kill every irconcileable be that subscribes to this
poisonous ideology with those who join isis do and yet we'll have a problem. the organization will reconstitute itself and there is something deep tore tap in to. a deeper tap roots. in your reare paired statement, you will ensure the state department here on the war of ideas. based on your presentation for the hearing. what is your assessment of the state department current performance in the war of ideas and once you make your comments specific to our effort against the islamic state. >> i am not sure i can articulate what the current state department is doing on the war of ideasorn condemning this type of brutality. i think your observation that even if we defeat isis and its
caliphate in syria and in iraq, they will morph to something else. and this is where we have to be truthful and realistic in our conversations with with the american people. terrorism has been a part of the world for centuries. it is the nature of man. the unfortunate nature of man. we have limit it and suppress that it is no longer a threat to our national security or imminent threat to american and all people in the world that value human life. clapper indicated that he believes that the u.s. might re-establish, the united states information agency to fight the information war and advance our efforts to defeat radical,
extremist or terrorist however one chooses to brand them. do you agree that this would be a good idea? >> i think i indicated in the exchange with with senator portman, we have to up our game in terms of how we engage in the digital communication world, because that is where isis is effective and other radical groupings, al-qaeda and others have been effective in using the digital communication space to spread their message. we have to be effective in countering that message. and i take senator portman's observation that it is not all digital. there are other communication mechanisms that are effective broad base in terms of how we communicate particularly in those partly cloudies ever the world that are suscept able.
neil will continue. >> shepard: president-elect trump responded to the report of russia collecting information about him calling it nonsense. he held the first new's conference and right off of the bat. the president blasted the report and those who published it. >> it is fake new and phony stuff and didn't happen and gotten by opponents of ours because you reported and so did many other people. it was a grout group of opponents that got together and put that crap together. sick people. and i will tell you you not within the meeting and outside of the meeting, someone released it. it should not have entered paper and never have been released and i read what was released and it is a disgrace. it is an absolute disgrace.
>> shepard: president-elect trump went on a twitter tirade. and said russia never tried to use leverage. and someone was prosecuting him for are wing the election. and ripped the intelligence communication questioning if we lived in nizy germany. he escalated his own word and likening their actions like that of a nazi and call today a tremendous blot on the community if the officials released anything. and the kremlin said russia does not collect compromising material. >> there is ample evidence that they could marshal to make public. to refute those claim and accusations that they say are
baseless and they refuse to do so. that kind of sekress only serves public doubt. >> shepard: the president-elect said for the first time today he does believe that russia was behind the hacking of the democrat national committee. and said while russia shouldn't do hacking, the dnc did a poor job of defending itself. and trump defended the kind words he exchanged with russian president vladimar putin and saying it is in america's best interest to have a good relationship. >> we have a horrible relationship with with russia. russia can help fight isis. this administration created isusby leaving at the wrong time.
void created and isis. if putin likes donald trump, guess what, that is called an asset and not a liability. >> shepard: plenty stand against that statement. and the president-elect added he does not know if he will get along with putin but hopes he will. and donald trump said russia will respect the united states much more on his watch than others. and he told cnn jim accosta that his organization amounts to fake news. cnn exclusive reporting was different than the document dump executed by an on line news property. it is our observation that correspondents followed journalistic standards and neither they nor any other journal should bey belittled by the president of the united
states. >> your world with neil cuva to will be next. the dow is up 90 points today. and failed to reach 20000. and still 50 points short. >> neil: thank you, shepherd. i am neil cuva to. and rex tillerson getting a lot of heated questions. he seems to handle himself well for a guy who is never been a politician. he has been a guest on politicians when they have grilled the big oil ceo's. i want to update you on the dow situation and how the donald trump sent the markets in a whirl wind on the first press. he tlo threw