tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News March 16, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
>> the case is about the corruption of elite college admissions. to the steady application of wealth, combined with fraud. there can be no separate college admissions system for the wealthy and they will not be a separate criminal justice system either. paul: welcome to the journal editorial report on paul gigot. federal prosecutors announcing charge this week against some 50 people in six states and with the department of justice says is the largest college
admissions scam ever prosecuted. dozens of wealthy parents including permanent business leaders of two hollywood actresses charged in the scheme includes bribes, doctored entrance exam scores and fake athletic achievements. all indicating the children admitted to elite colleges and universities across the country. let's bring in wall street journal columnist, and deputy editor, dan heninger, columnist jason riley and kate batchelder odell. kate, what does this episode tell us about the state of colleges and admissions process in america. >> paul, i think the public has really been fascinated by the story and watching this pretty closely because i think it confirms what a lot of people thought independently which is that the college admissions process can be a bit of a racket. and sometimes without even committing crimes. i think there is a perception that you can buy your way into a wealthy school either by donating a building or by name for the best test prep or paint for the best activities for
your kid. i think it confirmed a lot of the perception that already existed. even though obviously doctoring test scores and faking athletic profiles is an entirely different class. >> there is a difference between zone that says it goes through tests in advance, not real test but just these prep tests, try to drum up the experience of having to take a test under pressure. versus actually having someone come in and give you the right answers on a test!that is outright fraud. >> right, paul. i think one thing to note is how popular this fake athlete approach seems to have been. meeting some of the kids did not play the sports that they said they played and they were listed as recruits. and somehow they will go to the school and not show up for sports practice and none of this was detected. you can see this happening in one school or one separate
program and the colleges you know not knowing but it's really astounding how broad it was, how many coaches and how many different schools and how many different athletic programs were accepting bribes to recruit students who did not play the sport. paul: on the admissions process, how it can seem from an outsider, to be arbitrary, and there was a lawsuit for bias with asian americans. they admitted it is sort of a black box. >> it is a black box. it's become indecipherable. that's why a lot of parents if they can, now higher consultants like rick singer who turned out to be a crook. but there are a lot of other companies that are in the business of charging parents a lot of money to explain to them the process of getting your child into college. it's no longer straightforward as it was. there were not fully explain what the basis is for the admissions.
that is what's at the heart of this lawsuit against harvard about the asian americans. there is a wide array of criteria. people say what you do with my children to make them fit into whatever these universities are looking for. and it could be that they have to do a lot of work in this common prosocial projects and things like buildiof thing. studying, doing well on the sat. >> but there is nothing really wrong withthat. >> listen, they are suggesting it is a rig system. it is a racket. and therefore, you have to figure out how to game the system and once you step across that line, the norm standards and traditions that normally apply to a process like this simply fall away. >> such as merit. >> right. i think to follow up on what dan said, when you move way from the process from using grays and test scores and class rank, you open yourself up to this sort of thing.
admissions officers become susceptible to bribes and corruption. it is inevitable. and that is what unfortunately we see happening. >> llp would say the merit system isn't fair because the tests aren't fair. and do you agree with that? does it show that the tests, are they unfair? >> they're not perfectly fair, no. but we do know and studies have shown that things like the sat, tests like the sat do a decent job of predicting whether a child will in fact make it through college. so they have a very good track record in that sense. paul: what about the universities? are they the victim here as some of them are saying? or are they least aiding and abetting some, not in a legal sense but just in the way they go about their business? >> sure. the indictments basically say that the colleges are victims of this fraud which reminds us of the ncaa scandal. you kind of wonder how accurate it is. as you said not on a legal basis but basically, if they did not commit crimes and i
don't think anyone is accusing them of that, did they create a culture that allows this to thrive like jason mentioned? and did they not do enough due diligence for the athletic coaches that were just without much oversight, these are the kind of questions i think make colleges not look like innocent victims there claiming to be. >> what about the larger political significance of this? i think as kate said, it is resonating with the public in a way a lot of the prosecutions don't. where will this go political? >> owner should go to much of anywhere politically. federal government doesn't have a big role in the education title ix. they have things like sexual abuse on campuses because they take federal money. that in some ways is part of the problem here. all of these universities virtually are taking federal
money now. answer the file they have to comply with the federal government goals are things like diversity. diversity then got very complicated not only ethnicity, it started in things like gender, that's been subdivided. and it has become a kind of morass. that's why you end up with people thinking the only way they can succeed as if they break the rules to get the kids into these colleges. paul: thank you. when we come back, beto o'rourke jumps and peered with the former texas congressman plans to do in an already crowded democratic presidential field. will it feel like the wheend of a journey?p working, or the beginning of something even better? when you prepare for retirement with pacific life, you can create a lifelong income... so you have the freedom to keep doing whatever is most meaningful to you. a reliable income that lets you retire, without retiring from life.
wasting no time getting behind a top progressive priority. >> some will criticize the green new deal for being too bold or being unmanageable. but i tell you what, i haven't seen anything better that addresses the crisis we face when they could at worst lead to extension. paul: we back with jason riley, dan henninger and alisha finley. what is the selling point for better or work for democrats? >> he brings his populist aspirational style he's very uplifting, optimistic, he's young, he's 46 years old. one of the younger candidates, he is also very difficult to pin down. in a general election -- paul: fact is, he is not really committed to a lot of specific policies. is that what you're saying?
>> that's right. he really hasn't endorsed the green new deal. he just says well, haven't seen anything better! [laughter] paul: okay. so it is a charisma? >> yes, his, here most people little bit of barack obama. the comparison has been made before comparing to jfk, jimmy carter, bill clinton. he is a very bright and optimist. paul: kind of -- >> he is like to the heart. >> horses running? >> democrats love to fall in love with their candidates. >> they do but alisha is right. i think he has an attractive optimism. people like bernie sanders and elizabeth warren, you can see
the appeal. a great fundraiser, massive social media. he does have a thin resume but i think he has these other things going. paul: is there an idea in there somewhere? [laughter] >> more of a pragmatist i think is alisha said. he hasn't really endorsed the green new deal, he is not called for packing the court. he says he's a capitalist. >> so the idea is beto. i mean he is selling beto. >> the order of beto which relates to the demographic he is appealing to. one way or another there a lot of people especially in the democratic party, mainly want their candidates to have their heart in the right place. they want to feel good about their ideas. where they actually want to accomplish anything or not, it's actually a good question. i like the green new deal
because it sounds good. >> he makes me feel good. >> i'm also not sure he isn't running for vice president, paul. i can see maybe a joe biden and beto o'rourke ticket if of course the identity politics would let them get away with it. but they could do a lot worse. paul: what about the ability of someone with an idealism to hold up against a lot of harder edged politicians who are going to be saying, wait a minute! are you really endorsing the green new deal? and this specific policy and that specific policy. you say you are a capitalist but what is that mean? are you for higher taxes or not? >> as a house minority he didn't have take a vision of many things. he came out one case against daca which was providing work payments to 5 million on document immigrants. he basically criticized the need. paul: and through executive order, >> exactly.
and i think he's going to be pressed on that. and do you still believe this? are you still against this? things that you had done or said in the past. paul: so he could be smoked out in a way during basically you have to commit to something. >> he's been pretty -- managing and negotiating with issues but on a stage with seven or eight in a debate, i think they will press him on it. paul: the other thing was a dan is electability. >> yeah. paul: he's basically saying implicitly it could put texas in play. he said that explicitly but also i can beat trump. >> was talk about electability in terms of the history of the democrats running for the presidency. whenever they run a candidate from the left, george mcgovern, mike dukakis, they have lost. and when they win they elected a southern governor no one knew much about at the time. carter or clinton. when they were no more centrist
candidates they went to pinellas everything is changed we can run to the left, we can win by running our progressive policies. the open question is, is that true and is beto o'rourke and let's say joe biden, go to trying to find a way to need the thread the needle -- >> what do you think? >> i think if they go to left they will lose again. most voters are uncomfortable with it. i think donald trump couldn't be happier if they were to nominate a left-wing candidate. paul: quickly jason, is he in the top tier? >> yes. i think based on his fundraising and ability to generate excitement yes, definitely. paul: and welcome back, boeing woes. they suspend new deliveries after the second deadly crash in five months. talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. ♪ ♪ yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs
with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. linzess is not a laxative. it works differently to help you get ahead of your recurring constipation and belly pain. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain, and swelling. so say yesss! to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess. that we're playing "four on four" with a barbershop quartet? [quartet singing] bum bum bum bum... pass the ball... pass the rock.. ...we're open just pass the ball!
no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. yea. [quartet singing] shoot the j! shoot, shoot, shoot the jaaaaaay... believe it! geico could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. not having a good breakfast can make you feel like your day never started. get going with carnation breakfast essentials®. it has protein, plus 21 vitamins and minerals including calcium and vitamin d, to help your family be their best. carnation breakfast essentials®.
this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. >> boeing is an incredible
company. they're working very hard right now and hopefully they will very quickly come up with the answer. but until they do, the planes are grounded. the safety of the american people and all people is paramount concern. paul: that was president trump wednesday announcing an emergency order to ground boeing 737 max jets. the united states turning other nations in running the planes following ethiopian airlines crash last sunday that killed 157 people. investigators are working to determine the cause of the disaster. new evidence suggests similarities with another 737 max crashed in indonesia in october. homan rights for their wall street journal. welcome.
>> thank you. >> there is a point when the public grounds apply because there is no longer willing to fly on it. i don't think was a good safety reason for the u.s. to ground the plane. the faa talked to the pilot unions, to the airlines, and anonymous incident reporting system. it tells you if the policy having pals with the plane. no one was having issues. even though they had some issue american pilots have no trouble turning this off and flying manual. they would never have been this issue. paul: in the united states. really? >> they say the pilot of the ethiopian plane was also experiencing trouble handling the jet from left off. >> right. in the indonesian crash which we do not have a final report on yet, but the system is supposed to stop the plane from stalling and losing aerodynamics left which pushes the nose down, somehow got out of control and force the
plaintiff crash even as they fought against it. maybe this will happen in this ethiopian case. it seems extremely unlikely because they made such a big to do in the worldwide media and all the aviation -- there would not be a pilot in the world that would not notice immediately and not which switch to throw to turn off your loan number evidence. paul: in the ethiopian airlines is not a fly-by-night operation. he wrote that this week in your column. i mean -- >> yes, twa helped found them, under -- the airline has always been an excellent airline. paul: so you said the american pilots, that is, trained united states pilots, for american companies, would have been able to handle this computer upgrade. >> they from the past that if they've any trouble from the computers act in a way that they do not expect they can
revert to manual flying and take care of things.>> will be the difference between those pilots and those for indonesia? this is just speculative but in asia especially where they are growing faster pilots that are brought up on some leaders that have done relatively little real flying. they are trained to rely on the computers and do not know what to do when they are not working. maybe that is the factor here. i think both of these questions will be a lot more complicated. >> may be more than just a system failure. paul: they tend to have many complex -- >> when the pilot is in a tizzy not understanding what's going on doing the wrong things under circumstances where it's very easy to do the right thing. paul: the president tweeted this week that the technology and aircraft are becoming too complex. he prefers something a lot simpler. he says we need albert einstein to be able to fly the plane. does he have a point about technology there? >> he certainly does. a lot of accidents in last 20 or 25 years, the palace and the computer got -- this happens a
lot not just boeing. on the other hand, safety has improved dramatically. what is the connection between automation and safety? we're not sure but we assume automation plays a big role. as we get more automation the contest between the pilot and robot and what the plan should be doing is a problem. we have to figure that out. paul: training a generation of pilots to get so comfortable with simulators. so comfortable with the systems and autopilot. which do most of the flying now. so if you get to trouble, if you get conflicting data, maybe they do not have the experience to be able to handle that. is that part of this? >> even experienced pilots get confused when computers stop working the way they expect them to. that is part of the problem. i think there is no way to solve this either remove the pilot altogether or get the
pilot -- paul: that will inspire confidence![laughter] >> will have the pilot be more in control more of the time. paul: and you do that by turning over it to autopilot only a portion of the flight? >> yes, something like that. relying on the autopilot for routine flying and as a backup if something goes wrong. it is another way to go about. i don't know how they will solve this but you have to fight the actions that are happening. paul: what does this mean for boeing commercially and legally? >> you know, it depends. if it is fundamentally problematic they are in deep trouble. paul: it is one of the most popular aircraft. >> the reason they put this computer system in there, we are talking it is so they don't have to learn why this behaves different than previous generations of the 737. it is not in any way screwed up plane. it just happens to have a different lift characteristic because of where the engines are mountain. rather than teaching pilots how the plane is different, they put in computer software to make it behave like it was the
same. so that pilots can have less training transitioning. it might have been a mistake right there. paul: the faa will be crucial in determining what they need to do to get back up and running. >> i think they can do it pretty easily. paul: thank you holman. appreciate it. and define the president and the veto after the vote to overturn the emergency declaration at the border. what the move says about an increasingly tense relationship between the president and lawmakers in his own party. ♪
the sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999... senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? how smart is that? smarter sleep. so you can come out swinging, maintain your inner focus, and wake up rested and ready for anything. only at a sleep number store, save $500 on select sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, free premium delivery and setup. ends march 17th. paul: live from "america's news
headquarters" i am eric shawn. the amenities of a deadly massacre into nuclear mosques appearing in court say. eric: he was charged with one count of murder. the judge suggesting more charges are forthcoming.the man suspected of shooting and killing 49 people my lifestream the whole thing on facebook. new zealand per minister says the country will change the gun laws in response to this horrible attack. crews in the midwest losing boats and helicopters to evacuate families trapped by rising floodwaters. rivers and creeks across the region have been overwhelmed by melting snow and days of torrential rainfall. authorities in nebraska say the rescue efforts have been hampered by multiple bridges. the storms so far being blamed for at least one death. i am eric shawn in new york. we are back to 4 pm east at the
top of the hour with arthel neville for all of your news and another hour of "america's news headquarters". >> i told republican senators vote anyway you want. about how you feel good. but i think it is bad for a republican senator. i think it's also think it's bad for a democrat senator to vote against border security and vote against the wall. i think if they vote way it's a very bad thing for them. long into the future. paul: that is president trump wednesday warning republicans a vote against his emergency declaration is a vote against border security. 12 gop senators ultimately defying the present and siding with democrats thursday on a resolution to overturn the order. prompting president trump's first beetle. it was the second senate rebuke this week with them breaking rank wednesday to end military assistance for the saudi backed war in yemen. we are back with dan henninger, kate bachelder odell and jason riley.
jason, why did the dozen republicans break ranks?>> they will tell you it was on principle. there is a separation of powers here. congress has control the power of the purse. and it should be respected. paul: do you believe them? >> some of them i do believe. some of the same people criticize obama when he tried to go around congress and i think they are being consistent here. but it is significant paul, 12 people breaking with the president on his signature issue. and you have to wonder, it would be hard to come up with a better example of self-inflicted wound in this one. by president trump. he could have said, i have billions and billions of dollars for the wall. we are building it and move on to the next subject. i think he wants this issue. and he sort of boxed himself in. he said i'm going to declare an emergency.there are people in his own party that came to him and so we can get a minute without declaring an emergency. he wants the issue. paul: kate, i spoke to a lot of
centers about this republican senators. i can tell you they are enormously frustrated. i'm talking about not just moderates but conservative republicans who did not want to have to put the conference in this position. they are mad at the president. >> yes, definitely, paul. was interesting about the 12 republicans is what a broad cross-section of the gop conference they represent. susan collins of maine but you also have mike lee of utah, have pat toomey of pennsylvania, it is not a moderate versus conservative question. if anything, i think this was a tough vote for many people because even among them, the people he decided to vote against the president, many of them support the priority of appropriating more funding for the border. they just think that the present was abusing his authority inviting a bad precedent. paul: i would think it was interesting that thom tillis of north carolina originally said he would override the president. but then he switch at the present pain he's running in 2020. do you think that had anything to do with it? >> sure x when he had a tough caucasian to make.with martha
mcsally and gardner. they voted with the present i think they made the decision that alienating from supporters in 2020 would not help them. also, you have the white house making this a loyalty test. you have to wonder how they would fare with the president if they went against him here. so i think they had to make a tough calculation but they've also really made themselves vulnerable to attacks from democrats. they made it harder to assemble a coalition that includes independence. paul: what are the large applications of this dan? this allows a vote like this every six months. you can have a couple of more votes, three more votes i would guess before the next election. that will really make republicans in the senate happy. >> well it is a question raised by that whether the interest of the republicans in the senate are the same as those of president trump or whether their interests are diversion. it begins to look here as
though that interests really are diversion. the president is in a reelection campaign. it is all anyone is talking about now. 2020, who is donald trump going to be running against? the 16 or so democrats. it reminds me a lot of barack obama. dear member in his first term he counsel give speeches about the wealthiest and the one percent. almost in the same way donald trump talks about the wall and the border. and both of them were using those speeches and comments to feed into their base. using social media to animate their base and keep them agitated. and you know what? a lot of people wondered how barack obama was going to get reelected. well, he did get reelected and i think that is where the trump presidency is right now. when he for election with that base. thom tillis is aligned with it, a lot of senate republicans have a much more complicated political base of their own. paul: jason, what will happen
now is the present will veto, house or take up an override vote. probably not succeed. that will end politically in the near term. but that will have votes every sixmonths and then the states are suing . they probably will find a court somewhere to enjoyments of the president may not be able to use the money anyway. until the court case is settled. whereas if he had taken the advice of the senators, he could have had 5.7 billion to spend on it right now. >> i still think the white house sees this as a win-win. paul: why? what is the politics of this? >> to the point of dan, he think this is the issue that got him elected and will get him reelected. paul: do you agree with that? >> i think he's experiencing
some of that. he is not removed the needle much in the past year or so. eddie tried to make it an issue in the midterm election. and the house went to the democrats. so i don't think it's working. paul: if you are a president in office why not get a victory? at least partial victory. still ahead, house speaker nancy pelosi trying to tamp down impeachment talk. but will the party left-wing cooperate? >> they want to impeach president bush for the iraq war. i didn't believe it then and i don't believe in it now. it divides the country.y. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ drivwhat do you charge forer. online equity trades? um ah, i'll look into it. lisa jones! hey carl, what are you charging me for online equity trades? laughs/umm.. and do i get my fees back if i'm not happy? like a satisfaction guarantee? ugh. schwab! oh right, i'm calling schwab. thanks, carl! (click). wait, lisa! lisa...
when cravings hit, hit back. choose glucerna, with slow release carbs to help manage blood sugar, and start making everyday progress. glucerna. you need insurance. but it's not really something you want to buy. it's not sexy. or delicious. or fun. but since you need both car and home insurance, why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%? which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like...
well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan, that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪ >> i am focus on what we said we would do. healthcare, job creation, cleaner government, gun safety. issues like that. and it is not worth our time to take our attention from that. if the mueller report comes back with information, i don't they? should impeach a president for political reasons and i don't think we should not impeach a president for reasons but give
the ironclads in terms of your facts. paul: that was nancy pelosi there is a reiterating her opposition to pursuing impeachment proceedings against president trump.policy came under fire for members of her own caucus earlier this week after she said that the president was quote - just not worth it. with some going to move forward with impeachment despite the speakers reluctance. he was michigan freshman, rashida tlaib. >> speaker pelosi and all members of leadership have always encouraged us to represent our district. and it is important to continue to be -- i will move forward obviously. paul: we are back with dan henninger, jason riley, and alisha finley. dan, what is a speaker trying to do? >> i think the speaker is trying to convey to congresswoman rashida tlaib the reality what she just said. she claims in trying to represent my district. speaker pelosi, the speaker of the house of representatives now, democrats have retaken the house because a lot of moderate democrats out there in the midterm elections defeated
republican members of the house. she is trying to do is protect these moderates who won two years ago in the suburbs of dallas, houston, kansas city, oklahoma city, atlanta. she understands that they will be at risk if the party moves too far left. and that's what she's trying to convey to these people. but a lot of progressive members of the house now, they just don't care about that. they are obsessed with their politics. nancy pelosi wants to protect the party, not just congresswoman meng wanzhou 's interest. paul: is there an implicit message that may be robert mueller, special counsel report will provide not a lot of new information about the russian collision? and therefore, you know, sort of protect the members from full charge on week information.
>> sure, there is that. and in her heart of hearts, i think nancy pelosi would love to see donald trump be impeached. but she is being very politically shrewd here.she knows that despite the fact that ocasio-cortez and tlaib get the media they do not have control. she is looking out for their interest and she knows that impeachment could be a backlash. her problem is, these chairman, committee chairman, your nadler, adam schiff and so forth who are all impeachment all the time. while nancy palooza may want to do the politically shrewd thing, whether she can keep the other folks in line is another story. paul: and not just the committee chairman. because bribing a committee chairman, know your good friend, tom stier, who has been spending money for two or three years now. >> he's been running ads, we need to impeach donald trump. he is a criminal, there is no
evidence that he is. but nonetheless, there is going to be a lot of grassroots progressives pushing for this. it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the presidential race. paul: will he thought about running for president but he's even running town halls and some of these committee chairman districts and richard neal had a ways and means in springfield massachusetts who is really a pelosi stalwart. staying that you must start impeachment proceedings.you must get donald trump tax returns. and once you start the political machinery here, how easy is it to stop? because if you accumulate a lot of evidence, do you then say to all of the grassroots people, never mind. we will not have a vote? >> that can create a vote within the democratic party. i think that is why nancy pelosi is preemptively trying to tamp down on this.
paul: is a going to work? what do you think? >> no, i do not think she can i trying to calm things down. medicare for all, the green new deal. she'd been out there saying the pie in the sky notion. be realistic, we are here to win an election.>> of taking control of the house of representatives, music it to conduct politics in the business of the house. if two years from now they've accomplished basically nothing, other than impeachment toward the president, it is going to be a problem for the democrats. unless the electorate in general just doesn't care about these things anymore. but i suspect they do expect if you have control of the house like that, you are supposed to do something more substantial than hold hearings on the impeachment. paul: i guess my argument, if i were a democrat in the house would be, look, we can hold all of these hearings and we can really neck up president trump. we can throw a lot of stuff out there that will hurt his standing. we don't really need to impeach him. we do not need a vote for democrats necessarily if we don't have the real overwhelming case for it.
and that's going to make it easier for us to beat him in 2020. >> i think that's precisely what they are doing. they believe president trump is this likable and if they drive his dis-likability down far enough, they will win the presidency.it is as simple as that and i suspect will find out whether there is truth to it. you can do that to a president. paul: alisha do you think that they will impeach him? >> no, i do not. paul: jason, billy. >> look, no i don't. paul: dan? >> adam schiff wants him indicted but not impeached. [laughter] paul: might have to wait until he leaves office for that. when you come back, brexit turmoil. britain plans to leave the european union, it remains uncertain after a series of votes in parliament this week. we will get the latest from london, next. >> this is a government in the face of a huge national crisis. i don't keep track of regrets.
to seek a delay in the exit from the european union. and that averting a chaotic departure at the end of the month. a series of votes this week left the path forward uncertain. with lawmakers rejecting the prime minister theresa may withdrawal plan for a second time on tuesday. voting to block the uk from leaving the eu without an agreement on wednesday. with no divorce deal yet approved, may will now seek to extend the march 29 deadline. something that requires the unanimous consent of all 27 eu member states. wall street general, joe is joining us. would we go from here? >> it goes any number directions now.
one strand that they are going down is the notion that they might try a third time to press the withdrawal agreement by theresa may. this is a big trade agreement that would cover interim arrangements with britt and then would have to negotiate a trading agreement with the eu. they could try to vote on that one third time next week, hope it gets across the line and then focus all energies on negotiating that long term deal after brexit -- paul: joe, why would anybody believe they could pass it one third time? i guess that is a question that i have. >> well, i think what has happened is that some of the members of parliament who really support brexit are becoming afraid it will never happen. because they also saw the confusion in parliament this week. they discovered a lot of good collies are skeptical about brexit in the first place. they are concerned that if the second strand that theresa may
is pursuing, initiative asking for a delay from the rest of the eu, these brexit members of parliament they awaited by a long process that would give more time for other politicians to argue against brexit to hold a second referendum, to engineer a general election, it would elect numerous of parliament who would try to thwart brexit. or some softer form. so you have a lot of people makinglicated calculations and not very much time. paul: the other question is, the eu now may go and say give us a delay.what incentives do they have to give them the delay if there is no expectation that there is a consensus for any kind of brexit deal in london? >> that is the other big problem that theresa may is going to have to deal with next week when she meets with those leaders. the best case is probably that they don't want people to think that they were responsible for pushing britain out.
so they do have some incentive to try to be forgiving on the timing there if they think they can give britain a little more time to run here just for it to be absolutely clear that it is the fault of the uk parliament that this is happening. against that, they also have a lot of political problems in their own countries. the eu has a lot of other priorities that remain at -- that the others want to move forward with. they might want to get this over with on schedule and let the chips fall where they may. paul: if they do give britain an extension, it's likely to be a longer extension than a short one. that if they give them three months is probably not enough time for britain to get his act together. if you give your maybe they can have some, a new referendum or new government or new election and really change the political dynamics in britain. >> exactly, in fact, some of the suggestions that we hear are for extensions up to two years.
that would require britain to participate in elections for the next european parliament. the interesting thing is some of the conversations might actually make it easier for theresa may to pass her deal next week. because of the probe brexit members of parliament might be listening to the discussions about long delays, european parliament elections, the notion of being tied in for a long time and conclude they should just take the deal and run. paul: joe sternberg, thank you very much. when we come back, hits and misses of the week. oh, what a relief it is!
where our interests are at stake, and it really protects the country. paul: jason. >> this is a miss for california governor gavin newsom. the problem is that californians have voted to support the death penalty 31 times since 197211 or or -- 1972, they voted 11 times. we know where the voters stand. i think this is an insult to victims and californians. paul: alicia. >> facebook, which had a 24-outage this week, but it also shows that, you know what? life does go on without facebook. paul: you can do without it?
>> every day. paul: can your mother do without it? [laughter] dan. >> i'm giving a miss to the social justice brigades. about two weeks ago, a federal judge sentenced paul manafort to about four years in prison. this showed there were two systems of justice, one for the wealthy and one for the poor. just this week another federal judge sentenced hem to another four years, and probably the state of new york is going to pile on some more. they're just going to move on to the next outrage. paul: and i think there's a real issue here of double jeopardy, because some of these incidents that he's going to be charged with could relate to what he's already been charged with federally. >> yeah. paul: tweet us@jer on fnc. thanks to my panel and all of you for watching. i'm paul gigot, hope to see you
here next week. arthel: we begin with new developments on the deadly rampage in new zealand. the man accused of opening fire inside two mosques during friday prayers yesterday appearing in court. police accusing the gunman of killing at least 49 people and injuring dozens more and livestreaming the massacre on social media. welcome to a brand new hour, i'm arthel neville. eric: hello, everyone, i'm eric shawn. thank you for being with us. the self-proclaimed white supremacist has been charged with murder and is expected to face even more charges this as the small island nation is reeling with grief and searching for answers. survivors are speak out. >> i