tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News August 2, 2017 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
century and a new millennium. the internet bubble and a real estate boom. before the great recession knocked things down and recovered. by the time president obama turned things over to president trump, we were near 20,000. we're 22,000 now. have a great day. >> neil: all in the name is who was allowed to come to the united states of america. welcome. i'm neil cavuto, this is your very hot and bothered world today. sparks flying at a press event today at the white house, the likes of which we haven't seen in some time and all over the president's plan to change the way we immigrate people into this country and more to the point, the legal visas we grant them. take a look. >> this whole notion of they have to learn english before they get to the united states, are we just going to bring in people from great britain and australia? >> honestly i can say, i'm shocked at your statement that you think that only people from
great britain and australia would know english. it reveals your cause of politan bias to a shocking degree that in your mind -- this is an amazing moment. this is an amazing moment, that you think only people from great britain and australia is insulting -- have you ever met an immigrant from another country that speaks english outside of great britain and australia? is that your personal experience? >> there are people -- >> that's what you said. it shows your bias. i want to say -- >> you're trying to engineer the racial and ethnic flow of people into this country to -- >> that is one of the most outrageous and insulting ignorant and foolish things you've said. for you, that is a really -- the notion that you think that this is a racist bill is so wrong and so insulting. >> neil: all right.
that went a little off subject and the whole english thing was aside set to a bigger attempt on the part of the administration working with senators david purdue and tom cotton from georgia and arkansas respectively to change the way we go about letting people in this country on a legal immigrant basis. those that get visas to work in this country as well, that we've been low-browing to it talk to one analyst, that we should go for those with a certain skill set and those that can offer something advantageous to the united states from the get-go. proponents of this attempt said would be going back to the case of the last century where germans would come with construction skills, italians with marble skills, a lot of the stuff that was talked about then. as time went on, more expertise in more areas. this has been something that we wanted to get over and get rid of. the administration is saying
with -- we have to find a way to protect american jobs and those that we allow in should be protected to make sure that they don't interfere with those jobs. peter canon joining us and charlie gasparino. at the heart of this is what? >> it's simple economics. the original purpose of our immigration policy is to have immigrants that help america's economic best interest. when my grandparents came here, the early 1900s, we needed laborers. we needed people that weren't necessarily skilled, people that worked in factories. we needed a lot of them. we didn't just let them in, we let these folks in during spurts. if you look at the immigrant experience of italian americans and probably other groups as well, they came in the 18800 and the 20s -- >> neil: as the decades progressed, we looked for more skill sets. >> as the decades progressed, what we did, we went from the
necessary -- we immigrate based on when we need people to family unification, which sort of opened this up to anybody and everybody coming in. >> neil: up to the 1940s and then it reversed itself. the idea was if you came to this country, you had to have some added value to this country. you would not depend on government. in the end, you had to have a support system in place if you did. >> that's true. then we went to family unification. the bottom line, this is about america. america's economic best interest. stephen miller is right. if you speak english, you're easier to integrate and to get a job in this country. what is wrong about having an immigration policy that favors entrepreneurs ph.d.s to put our people to work here? >> you have a different view of this, peter. best selling author, goldman sachs partner. the idea behind it was to make
sure that american jobs are protected, too. low-skilled workers that come in to this country legally are taking the jobs away. this is the way to say if you're going to come from other countries, if you have a skill set to help our country to advance us and not imperil american jobs. you have a problem with that. >> i don't have a huge problem. i'm not very cosmopolitan, so i'm can't have a bias. it's tricky when the government tries to project commercial ideas to beginning -- >> neil: but they've been here from the beginning. >> it's wonderful -- >> neil: and you're a fine irish -- >> i'm as irish as they get. i'm irish and italian. they both came path the stat ue of liberty into this country with the expectation to help this country, to build this country, to do menial jobs, other jobs to help. but to have a support system in
place to build on. what do you think of that? >> here's an example of something that you have done that is not very smart. if you take somebody from overseas and sends them to college, what do we tell them when they're about to graduate? go home. we've invested a lot in nurturing the development of some of these young people. if we can convince them to stay and help us, yes, they could solve some of the problems we have. >> neil: the green card program would address that to protect the minds we're nurturing -- >> we're talking about over a million people here. >> you're agreeing with stephen miller. you are. >> no -- >> you don't understand you are. you're trying -- >> neil: let him explain first. >> my view is this. i think that the federal government has every right to try to orchestrate the kinds of people and the kind of skills that we're bringing in here. i don't think the federal government has a particularly good record of picking winners
and losers -- >> neil: would you say the government has the right to pick people that they think that can help the country and not come in expecting something? there has to be a network in place or skills that are such that they will immediately kind of pay for themselves? that's the way it seems. >> the example i gave you, we're investing in people and green card situations where we can have them stay and do what you described. so i'm -- >> but your immigration policy -- >> when you talk about immigration policy that goes broader than that, a million people. there's not a million ph.d.s or programmers coming in. that's the problem. you're looking at it in a broad brush and his understanding -- >> neil: you're not against picking and choosing people that come in that add value. >> not at all. >> he's agreeing with stephen miller. it should be on need and
integrate and how much you can help benefit the country. of course a ph.d. student benefits the country more than some poor guy that comes from wherever. my heart goes out to the poor guy -- >> neil: the administration nakedly relayed that today. we don't want the poor guy that doesn't bring any added value to come to this country. that's what they're saying. >> that's the tried and true immigration policy of this nation for many, many years. and that's -- >> neil: that's what it was in the beginning, right? you came here and you can come but the assurance had to be that the government would be the fall back. >> here's the point. if you look at the founders of many of the great high tech companies, they come here tired, poor and not educated ph.d.s. and they -- >> they do a lot of good things and employ a lot of people. 200,000, whatever number, there's not that many ph.d.s. you have to bring people over
here that urge to create -- >> you make it sounds like we're pulling the immigrants from india off the streets. they come from top colleges in india. they come here. we do educate them but those are the type of immigrants that net-net are positive for our economy. >> neil: i wish we had a lot of time. i found this debate fascinating. we're needs testing the people that come here, peter. is that right? >> yes. >> neil: is there anything wrong with that? >> yes. after a point -- >> neil: but you don't want the united states government to be the fall back to support people coming here with nothing and nothing to offer us the way it used to be, right, and now you come here like my parents came and grandparents, yours as well -- >> came with nothing. >> neil: they have no guarantees the government is here to help them. they have to get ready to pursue the american dream without any government help. and you're for that -- >> by the current argument, i wouldn't be here today.
>> we needed cheap labor. we don't need it in a lot of -- >> neil: but we need the higher end -- >> the facts, most of the job -- >> neil: we're agreeing on the same concept. we don't want any labor that imperil american jobs. we want the talent that we don't want to leave the country to come in. >> why would you want more cheap labor to push down the rate for the poor people? it's insane. >> it's not insane. if you look -- >> do you want to pay $3 an hour? should that be the prevailing wage? come on. >> here's the point. you're missing it because you're looking at -- there's a million people coming in, more than that. so you're not going to have a million people that are ph.d.s -- >> neil: under this program it's going to shrink before it rises. going to get to 650,000, 500,000 and 400,000 and reverse. >> it will never get to 650,000. >> neil: i agree with you. i don't think it's going to pass
muster. but the way it's been painted is racist and callous and all that, that is -- >> that's silly. commercial enterprise deserves a place at the table when you're talking about what our immigration policy is. >> why treat a ph.d. with some guy equal to some guy that is illiterate? it makes no economic sense. the system that you're advocating -- >> my guess is none of us would be here if that were the case. >> neil: speak for yourself. >> that's because they needed unskilled labor then. they don't need it now. >> neil: bottom line -- i think what they're trying to say, this is not addressing illegal immigration. legal immigrant is okay. that we be more selective. that's what they're saying. the theory is that the numbers are going to shrink before they rise, but what is wrong with trying to make sure that you provide the best for those that want to get in the country, that they can give the best to this
country? >> these are reasonable comments. i'm not going from a million from 650,000. >> neil: you don't think it's going anywhere? >> i think this is appealing to the base. >> neil: part of the base is saying we're losing the jobs to the legal immigrants coming in. you say what? >> it's the most absurd argument to say that we flood the country -- >> neil: for those that are poor -- >> i don't care. i'm telling you immigration policy -- >> neil: so we remain a haven but select those -- that's what we did in the 19th and 20th century. >> when cure parents came here and great grand prints came here, the immigration law was designed as such that we will take people that economically benefit our country. >> neil: i will say this. i'm hearing this in my office and wasn't catching it. the fact of the matter is, we
have always had open doors to the world to come here. but there was always, even back in the 1900s with my family on both sides, there was -- what can you do for us? you're not dropping here without -- this america dream, how are you going to make it happen? >> we also had an expansive welfare state that didn't exist -- >> neil: i don't want to -- >> immigration with a brain is a good thing. immigration with a heart is not terrible as well. in between is where we belong. >> neil: you want them to be big brokerage clients down the road. >> yes. i'm out of that business but -- >> neil: always works for you. again, sorry to go on so long. these guys did it better than i. in this is a big issue that we have to get right here. it's been called a racist onslaught here where the statue of liberty is picking and
choosing. but the fact of the matter is, the statue of liberty was choose whoing she wanted to be here to help the country and made the dow a record. see that? we did it. 22,000. what do you make of it? >> can't believe it. donald trump can believe it. the president taking credit for this, which is the very best part of the economy he's talking about today. let's take a look at the dow drivers starting with boeing. up 70% since the election. they had the best ever for the stock price. apple drove it, this is a stock, a company that made the dow go through 22,000, responsible for 50 to 60 points on the dow. revenue up dramatically. earnings up 12%. mcdonald's doing well. visa, united health, caterpillar doing well. neil, back to you. >> neil: gerri, sorry with this breaking news here. i want you to meet the
congressman that says robert mueller, enough. you have to go. you have to listen to this. you will. he's next. hey dad, come meet the new guy. the new guy? what new guy? i hired some help. he really knows his wine. this is the new guy? hello, my name is watson. you know wine, huh? i know that you should check vineyard block 12. block 12? my analysis of satellite imagery shows it would benefit from decreased irrigation. i was wondering about that. easy boy. nice doggy. what do you think? not bad.
but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient what do you think? originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect.
for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you done.rs. super-cool notebooks. done. that's mom taking care of business. but who takes care of mom? office depot/office max.
this week, filler paper just one cent with five dollar minimum purchase. ♪taking care of business. >> neil: all right. new concerns the tax cuts could be delayed. "the washington post" raising that possibility. a lot of difficulty giving the number of legislative days that are left. that could mean speaker nancy pelosi again? some people are worried about that. others are looking forward to that. we have more on the market fallout and fbn's kennedy on this. maybe delay, delay and deny. kennedy? >> they spent so much time on health care that unfortunately looks like we're paying the price with tax reform. obviously we can't go back in time. we can't get in that delorean like we would like to and re-visit tax reform from the beginning. certainly it would have passed when we were still in the
honeymoon phase. newt gingrich is the one warning that if the republicans don't get it done this year and wait till 2018 you'll see nancy with the gavel again. >> if it were a worry for the markets -- >> but it's not. >> neil: it's not. so could the markets live with not seeing tax cuts this year? >> i try to look at things from a different lens. i look at the positive price performance, not the politics. let's look how far the markets have come. it's a cherry on top if we can get the legislative items done. but we're this far along regardless of what has happened in the nonsense out of washington d.c. let's remember the first six months. we talked 20 k. now we're at 22 k. if you compare that to the previous administration, they moved 20% in the first six months, this is a long-term momentum play that i don't want to step in front of.
pay attention to the other areas. the gold bugs are quiet right now. it's the unknown knowns that everybody is priced in perfection and something could happen down the road. i would like to hedge some way somehow. >> neil: we talked about this. maybe the markets have factored this as a give me. i have a hard time thinking that, if it's true that they can't get their act together as republicans and vote on this by november in the senate, which was the goal, even though that goal kept getting pushed back, i don't think it's a next-year event in a mid-term election year. i don't know. what do you think? >> the longer they way, the more risky it is for them. i'm an optimism. i would like tax reform so people can have tax cuts and enjoy their own income that they worked so hard for without the government stealing it from
them. we're seeing the markets working because there's so many indicators that say we have reason to be opt myths -- optimistic. >> neil: alan, you've been right on the markets saying they're following good earning and good fundamentals. how long do you see it happen? >> remain positive until otherwise. i'm still very optimistic as kennedy is. but at some point there will be some relaxing of this trend. i'm not in business of trying to pick that. i'm still looking at the value. crude oil has pushed up. that can stabilize energy stocks. i mentioned gold. something to keep an eye on and the fact that it's been forgotten about. that can lift minuting stocks and that sector comes back if we can push $1,300 an ounce. it's so interesting that nobody has used gold as a safe haven.
so, your new prescription does have oh, like what?ects. ♪ you're gonna have dizziness, nausea, and sweaty eyelids. ♪ ♪ and in certain cases chronic flatulence. ♪ no ♪ sooooo gassy girl. so gassy. if you're boyz ii men, you make anything sound good. it's what you do. if you want to save 15% percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. next! ♪ next! i have age-related maculare degeneration, amd, he told me to look at this grid every day. and we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression, including preservision areds 2. my doctor said
>> neil: all right. forget the fear that donald trump as president is so tired of what's going on with robert mueller in a bias investigation. the white house has said that there's a possibility he could fire him. to hear congressman trent franks tell it, the house judiciary committee member, mueller should leave, step down now over conflict of interest and a host of other things. he joins me right now to explain. congressman, your argument with mr. mueller is that there's plenty of conflicts there? explain. >> well, i really do believe
that. this is not to slander mr. mueller's personal integrity. this is to say that the statute is clear here. there's a lot of conflicts that he has here. the statute doesn't say they should or may step down, it says they shall in that situation. >> neil: where is the exact conflict that bothers you the most? >> i suppose that the statute, if you put it on the screen sometimes, they would make it clear to people. i essentially says that anyone that has a personal relationship with someone that is involved in the conduct that's being investigated and certainly one of the main investigations taking place is the conversation between mr. comey and the president. mr. comey and mr. mueller are very good friends. the more you look at it, the closer that friendship appears to be. consequently, i don't see how mr. mueller can be an unbiased
arbiter between those two perspectives when his perspective on which one is telling the truth has a major impulse for the whole investigation. >> neil: others have said they have worked together for many years. they're not necessarily good friends. but they do have some common areas where they both president bush's surveillance program and they developed a relationship there. further more, mr. comey has testified underest that he deliberately caused information to be leaked with the purpose that it would eventually lead to the appointing of a special counsel, hence mr. mueller. are you saying he knew in advance -- >> that's not a casual -- >> neil: i understand. but you think that telegraphed that he knew mueller would get that job? >> i can't speak to that. i won't speak to it. i have to stay focused on the things we do know.
for the -- for mr. comey to testify in open committee that yes, he caused information to be leaked with the sole intention of creating a special counsel, and then for that to be someone that turns out to be a friend of his -- >> neil: he said -- quoting comey, he said one person in government whom i could confide and trust. >> yeah. it's astonishing that the special counsel would be that one person that he felt like he confide in and trust. the truth is, if there were a court case, mr. mueller couldn't be a member of the injury. he would be clearly put out of the jury pool because he simply would not be qualified to be a member of the jury because he would be clearly biassed. >> neil: but you extended it beyond that. i know he's hired quite the legal team. 16, my last count, i'm talking about mr. mueller, four of them have ties to the clinton
administration or hillary clinton herself or to the obama administration, four were hillary clinton donors. i can see your concern there. others even knowing that, like ken starr, the former independent prosecutor going after bill clinton, told abc news of mr. mueller, this is a great, great team of complete professionals. so he wasn't worried. why are you? >> i guess i'm worried because i see the whole picture here. it was some of those appointments that made me decide that i had to say something here. we looked at the statute. the statute is clear. it's not only clear if there's a conflict, neil, it's clear if there's an appearance of conflict. for anyone to suggest there's not -- >> neil: let's say some are wincing, even those there's a number of hillary clinton donors as a part of that team. let's say he leaves and resigns.
doesn't look that way but things could change. should a new special counsel be appointed then? >> i was very much against a special counsel in the very first place. i thought this was clearly a fishing expedition. if you look at the conduct of the clintons and even the obama administration, it seemed like there's such a duel approach here. and i find it astonishing that we couldn't find a special counsel for other things when there's such an abundance of information. but for this we do? >> neil: no, no, you make a good point. what might not be fair or right in comparison. but a lot has developed since. this meeting of donald trump jr. that might be much ado about nothing. now talk the president might have coaxed his son on putting out a statement. could be much ado about nothing.
the other russian meetings that were forgotten or unknown and now revealed. there does seem to be as lindsey graham and others have said of pattern of not telling all. a special counsel or some time of person like that has to finish. what do you think? >> the special counsel is going in all kinds of directions now. now it's done to financial situations, tax records, personal information. this was supposed to be about an illegal collusion with russia. i've seen nothing there that indicates there's an illegal collusion with russia. >> neil: you don't think they should look at the financial ties, if there are some that are curious? >> i'm suggesting when you have a special counsel, can it go off the rails in any direction. >> neil: they always do. >> we should go with great caution. you can understand the president's frustration here. >> neil: you wouldn't advise the president to fire him? >> i'm not suggesting that. you can understand his frustration when he appoints an
attorney general, who is in my judgment a great man, pete sessions -- i'm sorry. jeff sessions is a great man. but when he took himself out of the way, handed it to the left -- >> neil: i hear you. we're going to put two more on this after this. >> thank you. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm from all nations. it puts a hunger in your heart to want to know more. twith choices like the classicr. crab lover's dream and new favorites like dueling crab legs with dungeness and snow crab. it's happening right now right here at crabfest. red lobster. now this is seafood. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston, 1,200 workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage, craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day.
>> neil: all right. i want to go to art laffer. i will be going to the judge, andrew napolitano, on the developments with trent franks, the house judiciary member from arizona wants to see robert mueller step down over a variety of conflicts that will not make him an impartial observer of this president and whatever role he had with russian entities or those in his office. the reason i want to start with you, art, if you don't mind, this is yet another thing that gets in the way of the agenda. some people don't flip over the president or wonder about collusion, they say so it should. now the immigration policy, legal immigration policy is creating this firestorm, some of it to me overstated that gets in the way of the agenda. do you worry about that agenda,
the tax cuts, the economic message that is roundly praised, but not getting much chance to breathe? >> i think it's going to make it, neil. they do. may not make hit the year or next year or the year after, but all we need is that long-term runway to have it happen. look what happened today. here it is on your watch and we break 22,000. stuart varney said it would occur on your watch. here it is. the markets are up there anticipating a better -- >> neil: so you think they ignore this drama? >> of course they do. yeah. >> neil: it's enough that you were involved in the iran contra stuff with ragan. that dragged on for years. >> i was in the white house with next son from 70 to 72. much more drama then. >> neil: i won't get started on the fillmore year. i'm only joking. but obviously ronald reagan got through that. the presidency was a big success and all. this is the moment.
talking about we have to get rid of this special counsel -- back and forth. >> it's amazing. >> neil: where do this go? >> if trump could pardon everyone in the united states for everything has happened in the political world and get it going from there. it's not what happens. special prosecutors are appointed to prosecute special people. they find something wrong and go after it. >> neil: i don't think at this point, i'll raise it that robert mueller will willy-nilly resign. >> he's not. >> neil: do you think it's wise for the president to contemplate firing the guy? >> yeah, he should contemplate everything. i'm not saying he should. far from it. he should contemplate all of his options. >> neil: such a move would be deemed like crisis building. do you buy that? >> it is sort of crisis building. when you have a special counsel assigned, it's a crisis. that is a real political problem for donald trump. i feel very sorry for him.
he's caught in the middle of it. there it is. i don't think it's going to affect our agenda. this country, what's going on, trump is doing a good job of economic and very pleased with the immigration stuff. very pleased with the regulation. very pleased with his attempt at trying to get healthcare reform passed. i think the tax stuff that he's doing with cohen and mnuchin and the rest of them, the vice president, is just spectacular. >> neil: so you' don't think it will be a problem? >> i don't think so. we have a long run ahead of us, 10, 12 years. very excited about america. >> neil: wait a minute. 10 to 12 years of what? >> bull market. just like we did from reagan. take it from reagan in 82 to bill clinton leaving office in 2000. that was a long, long run. the market was up in real terms. 771%. 1,340% nominal terms. that's a big bull market. >> neil: and don't worry about the immigration or mueller
thing. everything -- >> i don't say worry about it. if you're the guy being pr prosecut prosecuted, worry. but the normal guy, don't worry about it. >> neil: thank you. >> thank you. >> neil: judge, trent frank says mueller has to go. >> trent frank -- congressman frank is a friend of mine. but there's no conflict here. if bob mueller had a relationship with donald trump or with anybody else that he's investigating, that would be a conflict of interest. having one of the witnesses as your friend -- prosecutors are often friends of witnesses and the fbi agents -- >> neil: what about the 16-member team, four or five were connected to obama, the obama justice department and others say hillary clinton donors are in there. >> i give them the benefit of the doubt that they're all
former serious seasoned prosecutors. they're not the judges. they're not the jury. >> neil: so you say a mueller -- star was saying -- ken star that this is a great, great team of complete professionals. he's right about that? >> it's an excellent team of complete professionals led by a person of incredible integrity, respected on both sides. whether or not there should be a special prosecutor is another story. but the fact is, we have this guy and he shouldn't be kicked out because he's friends with some of the witnesses. >> neil: when a team is this big, judge, i don't know if the intention was to grow to 16. however money it goes to. does that say it's getting more involved and not going to result any time soon? >> yes, it does. >> neil: you can understand the president's frustration and i share in the president's frustration. >> he didn't fire him. he would have to direct the
deputy attorney general to fire him. if rod rosenstein didn't do that, he would probably fire rosenstein. >> neil: like nixon. >> yes and made it worse. >> neil: so best not to think about it. >> best not to do it. >> neil: so where does this go? looking into his financial transactions. the president might have provided more fuel with meetings that we didn't know about. >> yes. and when you misrepresent things that happen, man, that sets off light bulbs in the prosecutor yeah mind. i don't know where it's going to end. i looked at the background of the mueller team. some are experts on fraud, some are experts on wire fraud. they have a bunch of expert tease there that bob mueller must feels he needs to examine what we don't know is the size of his budget and the number of fbi agents working for him. think of it this way. about fbi agents per assistant
special counsel. we already have 16 special counsels. probably up to 100 fbi agents. you're talking about thousands of pages of documents and dozens of witnesses -- >> neil: this is years. >> probably. the iran contra thing went on for seven years. hope it doesn't do that. donald trump was elected to be president of the united states and to promote his agenda, not to fight off independent counsels. >> neil: what about the personal stuff? i know all you fine minds do this sort of stuff, way above being personally insulted. but the president has raised serious issues about mueller. i wonder if that stick in mueller's crow and affects his decision making. >> another mistake richard nixon made is antagonizing the fbi and i said the president shouldn't do it. but it goes both way. president trump says don't look into my personal finances. within 24 hours, he developed
subpoenas. >> neil: the president has a right to be anxious and think that maybe he's being treated unfairly. >> i share the president's anxiety. should there be some entity in the executive branch that is not responsible to the people, the president is responsible to the people. >> neil: who does he answer to? >> only answers to rod rosenstein and the concept of justice. >> neil: he's stepping back. letting him do his thing. >> there's a thing called the unitary executive that says everybody should answer to the president because he answers to the people. >> neil: real quickly on this immigration policy that we have with visas, green cards and the like. it got back to what were we doing in the beginning in this country when your forefathers and all came to this country. they had to have -- they couldn't get here without guarantees that there was someone there to support them, help them and not depends on the government. isn't the president trying to return to that or not? is there something other sinister stuff?
>> you know, i love my brother, gasparino, as much as i love life. i disagree with him. i think that hotel, agriculture, service industries will suffer terribly if we're more interested in ph.d.s than people that take those jobs. can the president make that determination and can congress authorize him to do it? is it wise to do it -- >> neil: it doesn't say near going after ph.d.s and guys like you. >> never mind guys like me but near going after high-end, educated english-speaking people. >> neil: and skin sets -- >> not dishwashers and grape pickers. >> neil: and he also said, not the kind of thing that encourages those to take jobs from those in this country. >> that's a very popular political argument and probably why he is making it. that will resonate well with his
base. >> really? >> neil: one just got a tweet from the president. poor judge, sad argument. >> i don't know if he said it but that's the way he talks. >> neil: legally i'm told this is an uphill battle. >> very much. because of schumer and company. he has to have 60 votes in the senate. he wouldn't have 40 from the republicans. >> neil: a notion that you had to have a family to come to this country and had to have some skill that could be helpful here. that's not alien. that's how the people have passed ellis island had to have that. >> in that era, as you pointed out to gasparino and peter, that's what we needed. >> neil: you're saying today there's no change? >> i think today there's a great need -- lindsey graham went berserk over this because materially affects the agricultural industry? south carolina. that's the tip of the iceberg. >> neil: this is for legal
workers in this country. >> yes. >> neil: the number of green cards goes down you think? >> yes, it does. that's a bad thing. as to our friends in the sixth floor that published the "wall street journal." >> neil: wait minute. gaspo wants to talk to you. >> he's waiting for me with the baseball bat. >> neil: exactly. where is the judge? i want to see the judge. more after this. >> love you, charlie. binders. done. super-cool notebooks. done. that's mom taking care of business. but who takes care of mom? office depot/office max. this week, filler paper just one cent with five dollar minimum purchase. ♪taking care of business. what are all these different topped & loaded meals?
it's an american favorite on top of an american favorite, alice. it's like rodeos on top of rollercoasters. get your favorites on top of your favorites. only at applebee's. and it's also a story mail aabout people get your favorites on top of your favorites. and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you
what?!? with liberty mutual's 24-hour roadside assistance, get a jump, tow, and more - any time of day. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. >> neil: do you remember when i told you that north korea, it's the -- possibly an accident, something gone awry that worries me that would be bad? a missile went in the path of an
air france flight going from tokyo to paris and likely if this stuff keeps happening. lucas tomlinson has the latest. lucas? >> neil, the pentagon has warned of the dangers north korea's missiles pose to shapers and planes. turns out, an air france jet was missed by about ten minutes. in a statement, air france said there was no threat to the aircraft and didn't report the incidents. north korea still has to do three things but it can hit the united states with a missile. number 1, hit a target. number 2 miniaturize a warhead and place it on a missile. u.s. officials tell me china fired 20 missiles at mock-ups of u.s. thad missiles and air force 22 fighter jets. china has protested the american
thad batteries to south korea. this coincided with china's army day. this comes a week after a pair of chinese fighter jets buzzed a spy plane in the east china sea. >> neil: worries me, the possibility that something happens accidentally and the world is at a loggerhead. and now china is testing missiles. you and i just got into this a few days ago, this idea of the unintended consequences of constant missile firings. this comes to mind. what do you think? >> yeah. north korea is a reckless country. you know, we watched them -- sometimes we can watch them set up missiles and we have warning before we see them test one. if they use their rail missiles, those are the ones that can be rolled out and surprise us. so they're if getting increasely
provocative and aggressive. i will push back on what your reporter just said in terms of the north korean capability. we have not seen them, tests that reentry vehicle, the parts that reinterests the atmosphere. we believe that if north korea really wanted to, they could do that, if they pointed that missile at the united states. as far as hitting a target, doesn't matter if it hits in the pasture of kansas. if it hits the united states, it hits the united states. doesn't have to have a lot of aim. >> neil: and the other thing, the north koreans are not stupid. in other words, every time a missile goes off track or even explodes or misses its destination, they seem within a few more launches to get that part right or to advance to something that heretofore was thought they were incapable of doing. so what do you make of that,
that they're moving quickly whatever they're doing? >> it's wrong to laugh at the north koreans when they have these fails tests. unlike the united states, they don't have this bureaucratic acquisition process. they just want to make sure it works. they have mistakes, adapt and learn from them and next time they increase their technical capability. it's wrong to laugh at the north koreans. they are smart. they do have capable scientists. by the way, they share this technology they have in the past with iran. so this has far-reaching global complications. it's so important that the trump administration has to do something different than what the obama administration did. we're talking very seriously about doing that, but we have to see major changes happen. >> neil: normally this is advanced and his father and grandfather before that with the expectation that we will do nothing. rant and rave and have some rage
at the united nations, say things like the time for talking is over and talk about the time for talking is over yet again. so they must think that we're not going to do anything. now, our options are what? >> right. the great strategist her man khan said the most way to be willing is to be willing. so the trump administration has to be willing to pass secondary sanctions on china, china again has all of the economic leverage over north korea. 90% of north korea's trade -- >> neil: with the heat on china. >> we started to do that. we sanctioned one bank and a couple of entities. we have to do more. we have to russian to field these missiles -- >> neil: you have to go after the entire chinese bank system. they're like cockroaches, right? >> and we can't talk about it. we have to do it. that's one way. then we have to rush these
missile defense systems. china opposes this thad battery to south korea. they say it threatens their own forces. first of all, it can't. the united states shouldn't concealed the argument to them. it's not the cold war. we're going to defend south korea and the united states from the missiles that threaten us and that's north korea. >> neil: thanks, rebecca. thanks very much. all right. i do have good news for you. stocks are still advancing. stocks are still at records. even if the whole world is gone, you'll be richer.
excess of 20% for a market that seems to be riding high and fast on good earnings and expectations things are going to be better and maybe tax cuts in the future. see you tomorrow. >> eboni: i'm eboni k. williams with eric bolling kat timpf. this is "the fox news specialists" ." we'll get right to the top story. president trump with senators tom cotton and david perdue introducing legislation aimed at cutting down legal immigration into the u.s. the bill aims to downsize current family chain migration and implement a merit-based system. focuses on the immigration agenda protecting who trump says our american taxpayers heard by the immigration system. >> for decades, the united states has operated a low skilled immigration