tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business December 14, 2015 12:00pm-2:01pm EST
cruz does. he is the choice for republicans. very interesting election. a lot of people watching it very closely. neil cavuto, time's yours. neil: all right, stuart, thank you very much. we're also following up on what's hitting the markets now, what's got them well off their lows of the day. you have been hearing a lot about oil, you've also been hearing a lot about junk bonds, we intend to get into both. suffice it to say that david stockman has been indicating in his writings -- and he's a bit of a pessimistic oracle when it comes to this -- december 16th as the day everything hits the fan. he's basing that on the day that the federal reserve makes a decision presumably to raise interest rates, quoting from his report here, janet yellen and her posse better pray for a monetary tonto, because they are riding headlong into an ambush in the canyons of wall street, saying that they cannot possibly raise money market interest rates even by 75 basis points without massively drain
liquidity from the casino. now, what the former reagan budget director is getting at and what was getting the market earlier this morning was this belief that even the slightest uptick in interest rates will lead to more trouble in the junk bond arena. you've heard, of course, what happened to this third avenue credit fund that last week was blocking investors from selling any money a host of other junk bond funds have been seeing their yields go 7:as their prices are battered, and that is presumably before the federal reserve moves on interest rates. then you have the oil development here. oil all over the map. it had gotten as low as just touching $33 a share, now at around $36 -- i'm sorry, $33 a barrel, and now we're at around the 36.22 level. but that comeback in oil has been enough to take the markets off their lows. oil and junk bonds, we'll start with oil, and phil flynn, on what led to that turn around. >> well, i think, basically, we
had a record short position going into today, and the market was so negative, neil, everybody thought it was just going to fall out at that. but when we didn't see a response, for example, in the u.s. dollar index, the dollar was a little bit weaker, we started to come back up. also those concerns about the junk bond market, that's starting with the oil price, neil. these energy companies under a lot of pressure. but it wasn't enough to get us to follow through. the market started to turn back up. there was also some talk that the possible lifting of the u.s. export ban which is looking more and more likely could also be another supportive factor and another reason why we're getting out of the market. how we close today is going to be very, very critical. these record short positions are coming close to option exploration. if they start to cover, that could be a big move. and one reason they may want to cover pretty quickly is exactly the fed meeting. because the fed can have the major impact on where oil prices are going up. you know, if the fed decides to raise interest rates, that's largely priced into market.
and part of the reason why oil prices have been selling off. if they raise rates, we'll probably see a little bit of a short-covering rally. now, if they decide not to raise rates because they're concerned about deflation -- which they probably should be if you look at the commodities -- then you could see even in a -- even a bigger recovery. we know about the supply, we know about the warm weather. we don't know about the fed and its impact on prices, and i think that's why some people are buying back those contracts. neil: all right. very fast market conditions, as you pointed out. thank you, my friend. connell mcshane stepping back from all of this and promising what will likely be a volatile week for stocks regardless. we've got, certainly, a lot of cross-currents. >> boy, it's some week. and with the meeting and decision coming up, it's going to be interesting, there's no doubt about that. i mean, you have the oil price maybe, as phil says, stabilizing a little bit. earlier today we thought we'd test the financial crisis low of $32.40 a barrel, but we're up above 36.
that's one thing that shows the economy may be slowing down, and the federal reserve may raise interest rates while it's slowing down. the other, of course, is you mentioned what's happening in distressed debt, this junk bond market. we have three funds that have been forced to unwind over the past weekend. talking to investors there, more damage is expected as more investors want their money back or may want it back before the end of the year. so that is the market that is being watched even more closely than oil. but as phil points out, the two are coupled, in some ways, together. we see more fear, more concern, more volatility, we see the vix -- the fear index as it's calls on wall street -- up for the second day in a row. and the gains there, it was above 26 earlier, as a matter of fact, for the first asylum -- first time since september 29th. but the gains there today are on top of the 26% jump we saw on friday. so that tells you what kind of fear is building up in the markets. if the fed is going to raise interest rates, looks like it'll
do do do it in what of a shaky market. credit markets are showing that, oil markets are showing that, and either are a very good economic omen an interesting time to raise rates if you're doing that. neil: to put it mildly. markets continue to swing sort of extremely either way. in this environment, liz ann saunders, the charles schwab investment strategist extraordinary their, i've got to ask you, some of these hitting the wires right now, david stockman are right, the federal reserve is kind of damned if it does, damned if it doesn't. it goes ahead and hikes rates, even if it's a quarter point, it's not going to force all this junk bond contagion, in other words, all these issues that are so sensitive to the slightest uptick in rate, that they all go kablooey. what do you think? >> i think the sensitivity is greater in terms of the decline of oil. there are a lot of comparisons, stockman and others, to what
happened in 2007 with blowout spreads there -- neil: but hasn't all this been pressed before, it's always been a worry that the fact that now we're closer to a decision the bullet point or what? >> oh, i think leading into it, we've been cautious all year, and a lot of that is a function of not only what we've been see anything the high-yield market but, certainly, regarding fed policy. i just think the difference this time versus, say, 2007 into 2008 is that there's a concentration in the energy sector versus in the financial sector back in 2007. and if you think about the proximate cause of high-yield problems in 2007 being a collapse in the financial system and massive leverage, that's bad for the economy, that's bad for risk assets. it is, hopefully, different this time in that the concentration is in energy. the proximate cause is the plunge in oil prices which ostensibly is good for a consumption-oriented economy. so i don't want to whistle past graveyard here, but i think that is the most notable difference between then and now. neil: as you've reminded me as
well, it's always different this time than the past. the argument made for us being vulnerable to an even slightly upward tick in interest rates or progression of them is that so many are so leverageed, particularly these high-yield guys, particularly those who haas week the one fund that just, of course, was closing off selling, that it wouldn't take much even without rationale or reason for people to sell off in a panic, right? >> and that's one of the problems, is con stay john. but -- contagion. but the leverage is concentrated this time. it's not systemic like it was back in 2007 -- neil: but stockman, he's been waiting for that. >> there's likely to be contagion, but i think the big question is does what's happening with third avenue and maybe other funds, is it more like lehman in 2008, or is it more like orange county in 1994 which turned out to be the crescendo closer to the bottom as opposed to the first domino to fall in the collapse of the financial system.
and i think it's more likely to be like an orange county type of situation, or certainly that's the hope. neil: you know, you've always been -- i'm not blowing smoke -- a calming presence in crazy markets. and you know what happens when we get crazy markets or people hear just the report, you know? i even heard it friday night when i got back, neil, did i hear that a fund was not paying its investors? they just hear it secondhand, and all of a sudden they start panicking, what if my fund did the same? boy, this sounds a lot like 2008. what do you tell investors who worry about that kind of language, that kind of talk? >> so our tagline has consistently been really since 2008 that panic is not an investing strategy. in fact, i wrote a report in '08 titled that, and we've trotted it back out and edited it three times now. what's remarkable to me about this entire bull market is how quickly investors move from maybe something close to enthusiasm or at least optimism right back toward panic again.
that's good news in the sense that it suggests the wall of worry that the market likes to climb is still very much intact. and i think because we went through two severe bear markets within a ten-year period of time, investors are so keen to make sure they are not dragged down with the next one that -- and i don't want to diminish the importance of something like this. neil: right. >> but i think that that initial panic reaction has not, certainly has not served investors well throughout this entire bull market. and we think this bull market is ongoing, but that this is a tougher phase for it right now. and you can have -- neil: what is tougher phase, what does that mean? >> so when you get to a more mature phase in a bull market, and we do think this is a secular bull market. and i hate to bring this up, it's an extreme example, and i don't think we have a crash coming by any means, but remember the strongest secular bull market was the one from 1982-2000 during which we had the crash of '87. so when you sometimes say secular bull market, it sends the impression that every year
it's going to be hunky dory and the market's going to continue to go up. you can have pretty significant corrections in an ongoing secular bull market, and i think it's the sentiment environment and just how skeptical investors have been this entire bull market that keeps me in that secular bull market camp. but i think given stretch valuations, what's going on in the high-yield market, uncertainty regarding fed policy, very weak earnings growth, that tells you we're in a more mature phase and more subject to pullbacks and volatility certainly like what we've seen in the last week and back in august. neil: all right. so real quickly, liz, and if you'll indulge me on sort of running this market, wednesday the federal reserve opts to raise rates a quarter point. the fed funds overnight bank lending rate, widely expected. it does so. to hear david stockman tell it, panic selling will ensue. the reality of the forces of higher rates at a chain of events is in effect, but it will do too little to help vulnerable
players, you say what? >> i think markets tend to be discounting mechanisms and move in advance of something particularly that has been telegraphed as widely as this has. now, again, i don't know what's going to happen when they make the announce bement. but i have to think that some of what we're seeing, the volatility, weakness in markets is associated with the expectation. i think the bigger surprise would be if the fed did not to anything as opposed to if the fed does something. neil: yeah. that would almost surely trigger sales. >> be i think it would trigger a concern that, boy, they're so reactionary and with every pullback in the market, they're going to accept back and say no mas. neil: thank you, liz, very much. >> thanks, neil. neil: all right, we're getting some news concerning pete rose. anyone who was hoping to see him land in the hall of fame, you're going to have to keep waiting. major league baseball commissioner has just decided not to reinstate pete rose, so if you're waiting for him to sort of be recognized for many of his fans say one of the greatest players of all time
from the major league commissioner, ain't gonna happen under his watch, at least not right now. also we have a separate report on donald trump that he's just crossed a crucial threshold in a new national poll, and this despite comments he's made about muslims and banning any new muslims from coming into the country. if you thought that would hurt him, this is a national poll that shows he is up to 40%. he has never polled higher in this race. he is at 40% nationally which is donald trump's way of saying i'm a winner, the rest are losers! [laughter] we'll have more after this. when a moment spontaneously turns romantic, why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use, is the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction
so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. insurance coverage has expanded nationally and you may now be covered. contact your health plan for the latest information.
that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. tand that's what we're doings to chat xfinity.rself, we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. neil: all right. just to let you know at the pentagon this is the scene right now where the president is meeting with his national security team and also those at
the pentagon who sort of want an update on his isis strategy. but when you think of that national security team, i keep forgetting how big it is and how many sit on it, obviously, besides the president, the vice president and the secretary of state. it includes the secretary of treasury, the secretary of defense, attorney general, and it goes on to include all their respect i deputies, the head of the u.s. central command, the commander of the u.s. special operations command. now, some in the military in particular have been very critical of this strategy without questioning their commander in chief outright, saying that he has not really given them a consistent or reliable plan as to how to deal with isis since these latest terror attacks, not only the ones in paris but, of course, in the california. john hammer is joining us now, former national security adviser to vice president dick cheney. good to have you. i see this trip, and you know better than i, as a sort of a hand-holding effort on the part of the president to remind the pentagon i'm on top of this, let's all speak from the same
page on this. am i misinterpreting it? >> no. i think you're probably right on target, neil. i've got always high hopes for the president but very low expectations. i think this is really about political theater, as you say. going to be long on optics, messaging and performance, but i think pretty short on strategy. it's, in essence, kind of a do-over from a week ago in the oval office where he really didn't get the job done reassuring the american people that he's up to the challenge of defeating isis. neil: my dad used to tell me that if you have to keep explaining bad grades, then either you're lying or you're stupid. so i'll leave my own grades out of it for the time being, but if he failed to headache that connection and re-- to make that connection and reassure americans days ago, what can he possibly do now with the backdrop of the pentagon? >> yeah, my guess, like i say, i think just changing the medium;
that is, putting -- not having it in the oval office where it was a dismal failure, but putting him in the seat of american military power saying that more or less the same thing, but with more conviction and surrounding him with his top generals and national security advisers, they're hoping this time it'll be the charm. neil: now, you know better this process. when you disagree with -- there was very little actually nobodyny -- acrimony, maybe in the latter stages of the iraq war with the president and vice president, but how do military types convey to the president or the white house, look, we think this strategy isn't working or we think that this might be a better strategy? because it seems odd to me whether you're listening to ash carter or the fbi director they both raised serious concerns about our safety as if reaching out to the public and then trying to get to the president,
hey, this is, this is big? >> yeah. no, i think it's -- these guys are in very difficult positions. it's quite clear, as you say, that they understand that this is not working or at least it's not working in a fast enough time frame to really keep the united states and the american people safe from another attack. but there's really limits to what they can do. if they've got a white house that is determined simply to try and contain isis, to get through another year, to hand off to their successor, there's not much that they can do, unfortunately. neil: you know, we're committed to hear from the president, but one of the things he has argued, and i'm paraphrasing from a statement about a year ago, don't make a bigger deal out of isis than is warranted. yes, they do have some headline-grabbing attacks that sort of grip us, but by and large they're not this huge force that threatens global security.
what do you say to that? >> well, unfortunately, i think, a, it's completely out of tune with where the american people are, of course. the president -- neil: well, what he's saying is you're fearing and giving too much attention to aberrant attacks. scary attacks, but for me to respond with a huge military operation or whatever is not warranted and only feeds the beast or feeds what they want to see. >> yeah. i just don't buy it. i mean, a, these guys have only got to be right one time. one paris attack here in the united states, neil, and the country is changed forever. our freedom, our free society is really changed forever and alterably. so i think you got to be vigilant. the country is looking not for hysteria, but for a commander in chief who's able to convey a sense that he's on top of this, he's going to defeat these guys, and he's got a coherent strategy that makes sense. and he's -- this is his highest priority. and he's going to get this done before he leaves office. he's not about handing this off
to his successor and just getting out of town without another terrorist attack on his watch. neil: well, i get the feeling, to your point, i think it's a brilliant point that he came into office promising to sort of extract us from this region. and the irony is now he is in the position of potentially getting us more involved in this region than he ever wanted to. but he hopes in the next year or so to sort of run out the clock. i mean, a lot of people get this sense that he'd rather not get reengaged in this area, certainly not with a large number of troops. he has growing doubts about our so-called allies in the region, growing concern about the turks and what they're doing. do you feel partly he's justified there, particularly with looking at allies and those we consider friendly that oftentimes they're not? so maybe that isn't the answer? >> yeah. no, listen, there's no question that the middle east has never been a place where you go in search of gratification and satisfaction. neil: right.
>> it is unbelievably frustrating -- neil: what does he have to do for you, john? given the vagary and the alliances and shifting friendships, it is going to be up to american boots on the ground, and there's no way around it. lindsey graham is saying at a minimum 10,000, ideally 20,000. you know the deal, you have heard some of the candidates on this, what the president has said, that we can't rely on so-called friendly neighbors in the region to do anything, because they don't. >> yeah. i don't buy that. i buy the point about american leadership, but i think you've got to hearken back 25 years to the first gulf war and putting that american foot forward that we're going to lead this, but we're not going to do it alone. i think you do actually mobilize the rest of the world behind you. that's what i'd like the president to do. it's what president george w. bush did in 2006 at the darkest days of the iraq war. he said my strategy's not working. i task my generals to go back to the drawing board, produce a military plan that's going to
doe feet these -- defeat these guys in fairly short order, and that's what he did at great political risk. i'd like to hear our president the same thing, that he's giving these guys two weeks to defeat isis, and then he's going to take this to the congress, to nato and to our allies in the middle east to mobilize them behind this strategy and win this war. neil: you know, i had forgotten the historic significance of what you just said. you're right, president bush said, look, my strategy before the troop surge is not working, i've got to pivot bigtime. but he did acknowledge, and i'm thinking way back to abraham lincoln when he went through generals like tissue paper and finally found one who could do the job and get it done. both presidents acknowledged mistakes that were made and that it wasn't working. i could go later on to john kennedy at the time of the bay of pigs. he could have blamed that on his predecessor and the brightest military minds and saying that was the way to go, and he didn't. now he has an opportunity to redo things.
this whole speech is a sort of a redo from his address at the white house eight days ago. for those of you tuning in, that's the pentagon in the briefing room where the president is expected very, very shortly to spell out that. do you think he acknowledges, look, i didn't really outline this sharply, clearly, forcefully enough? here's point by point what i'm going to do? what do you think? >> yeah. my guess is that he changes around the kind of presentation he gave a week ago and that he does provide a little more detail about what he's both doing to fight isis abroad and to keep us safe here at home. unfortunately, and, again, i hope i'm wrong here, neil, but i don't expect any major changes in the strategy itself. neil: well, john, you've never been wrong on this show, so i don't think that's an issue. let me ask you something. on the national security council, i guess, it's grown over the years, but it includes a number of top economic people, the treasury secretary, the undertreasury secretary deputy,
the terrorism task force that reports to the secretary of the treasury, a lot of economic types. that's the type, those are types that are going after and tracking down where this black oil that's on the market that isis depends on, who who's buying it more to the point and how forcefully they can stop that. that's a key part of this, isn't it? >> it's a huge part of it, shutting down the financing. this is now the most powerful terrorist organization in the history of the world not only in terms of manpower and land, but in terms of economic wherewithal and revenues whether it's smuggling of oil and antiquities, whether it's taxing a poplation of several hundred million -- population of several hundred million people, control of the banking system inside of iraq and syria. that's the stuff that our economic warfare -- neil: they now have a government, right? they have a finance minister, a banking minister. they have everything but a rewards card. the fact of the matter is they've got a system in place. what i'd like to ask you is what
are we going to do if we find out some of our friends and allies, let's say the turks -- a nato member -- are buying that cheap oil or delivering it to those other players in europe who might need it? then what do we do? >> it's not a question of if we find out, we know this is going on. we know we've got imperfect allies -- neil: do you let the world know that, john? in other words, you say, look, we need turkey, but truth be told, they've not exactly been on the up and up with us? that makes us look like we're agreeing the vladimir putin. a lot of things we're juggling, right? >> yeah, no, you are dealing with a lot particularly because of the russian/turkish angle now and the whole nato question. you don't want to be looking like you're publicly undermining and humiliating a nato ally. at the same time, you really do need to given bringing -- to begin bringing real pressures to bear. and the president can do that. part of the problem we have here is we've got a commander in chief who really doesn't seem all that engaged. it looked like climate change or
gun control or closing guantanamo are all higher priorities for him than setting aside the rest of his presidency to defeat this enemy that not only is threatening us and our allies in the middle east and in europe now, but here in the homeland. that's the kind of message he's got to convey. and if he brings that kind of priority to this process, it has a real effect on our allies if they think the president is now the desk officer for this war who's going to be after them constantly, week after week. neil: you know, john, how does this go? it's running a few minutes late, but you're often told military commanders will be very blunt with their commander behind closed doors. as for those who were sitting down with president kennedy at the time of the cuban missile crisis, and then they have a united face when it comes to meeting the press or any public statements at all. how frank are you allowed to be in those venues? how willing is the commander in chief, any commander in chief,
willing to take on criticism from his military guys? >> i think they're willing to do it, neil, if they feel that it's welcome. the problem in this administration is i think the pentagon and a lot of these military and intelligence advisers have become so battered by the process of the last seven years they know that this message of continuing to be on the offense against al-qaeda and isis and the terrorist threat is not something that the white house really welcomes. they really, as you've said, want to get out of this process. they want to disengage from this region. they don't want to hear that they're actually got to get deeper involved if they want to stop these threats from coming to our shores. and i think that's a real problem, it's an inhibitor to our military, and we've seen it now in the scandal we have at intelligence, defense intelligence out of centcom where commanders are actually now altering the intelligence that's coming up and painting a rosier picture about the war
against isis than is actually warranted by the facts on the ground. neil: amazing. john, great job. thank you very much for your insight. i know i learned a lot. i think it's fair to say our view earth did. john hannah, former national security adviser to dick cheney. what you're seeing is the scene at pentagon as folks -- we're going to hear, i should say, from the president of the united states. the backdrop will be his top national security team. he will be taking no questions, however, but this backdrop is crucial. real quickly before we take a break here, i want to show you the markets. maythey've been all over the ma. you've heard some of the latest rumors and concerns that junk bonds are vulnerable to a huge selloff if the federal reserve, as expected, hikes interest rates on wednesday. again, we have had about a 210-point swing, i think by my math, but i could be a little bit off. but i highly doubt it. [laughter] anyway, we have a lot more from the president and what he's going to do eight days after a speech that many say failed to bring home the message that he's on top of dealing with isis,
after this. (vo) me? i don't just wait for a moment. i watch for the perfect moment. the one nobody else sees. and when i find it- i go for it. (announcer) at scottrade, we share your passion for trading. that's why we give you the edge, with innovative charting and trading features, plus, powerful mobile apps so you're always connected, wherever you are. because at scottrade, our passion is to power yours. you can't breathed. through your nose. suddenly, you're a mouthbreather. well, just put on a breathe right strip which instantly opens your nose up to 38% more than cold medicine alone. shut your mouth and say goodnight mouthbreathers. breathe right
be missing here and what the president has to do. you may have heard the prior discussion. the top of the gun team. who was who in that cabinet. just to remind people, he has there back in this. >> i think that we all saw isis is contained. i do not think he will get them all on the same page. the reality, i think, is very different. >> i had seen this a number of times. some of the concerns for security. it is almost as if it is screaming past the president we have the security issue, we have
to isis brett. fifty states. as this they say, you are not hearing us. >> absolutely. he talks about overseas strategy. he did not talk about the bureau. he has 900 cases. we know that it takes seven individuals to watch one person. actively monitoring this one person. where is the call to beef up the fbi? if we are truly in this moment with this threat and all the information about the social media out there, there is so much information. >> domestic and foreign. you want to address as well, isis and its roots over there.
what do you want to hear out of it? >> i think we need to focus not just on the tax to go. ne a policy has fit absolutely perfect with the narrative and the policy wants to see from us. they have a narrative that portrays that they are under fire. the iran deal, lack of interest with assad. there is a narrative that has played perfect sleep. our policy is effectively becoming isis test. neil: syed rizwan farook behind the san bernardino killing.
at least worshiping sessions. the president has to also be careful about overdoing it. i do not want to make this something bigger. it is what we make of it. it is a grand war. doing exactly what they want. that is their argument. >> one of the key challenges is how do we fight an idea. this teacher capability. it is an idea. how do you stamp that out? trying to recruit. that is what isis is proving to be so good at.
it is a magazine. the kind of work roots that they want. to the isis prophecy that they all believe in, that will be the place where we have this big war. that is obama's right. in the sense that that is what they want. they want a land war. knowing that does not mean we should activate any strategic responsibility. we're very good at winning firefights and battles. we are not very good at winning wars. two things. one, essentially, the iraq and syria, those borders are gone. they are able to move logistics
supply chain to those two things. you have to cut that off. unfortunately, it is not just one idea. you are talking about multiple ideas. iran, syria, iraq, saudi arabia, they all have competing agendas. some of it is fiscal motivation. unless those things are taken into account and we present a full picture strategy, all we will be doing is kicking doors and peered if we have learned anything or should have learned anything from iraq and afghanistan, it is what happens after that firefight. neil: the american people. they are concerned about terrorism. they're also worried about getting bogged down.
he is getting mixed messages. he feels it his right not to get overbought. >> we always are wondering whether isis had the ability to project like al qaeda did during 9/11. >> they have not yet seen that isis gets a cell inside the united states and has any perforation. san bernardino was not a cell. they were inspired, but not instructed, necessarily. neil: the wife was communicating to someone. >> take a look at the other.
>> now we will jump to the conclusion, all right, national interest. that is a part of the conversation. >> we are waiting for the president. the former cia director. one thing that comes up is that the president may outline, the social media sites that will relay how they watch. someone of questionable rantings write off their site. the next step alerting authorities that they have kicked syed rizwan farook off of this case, facebook. >> i think that they will need to. they will need to do something different than they are doing. they do not have a strategy. a little bit to do with reality.
it is what they keep coming back to. they have to change something. >> if you were the president and you were behind closed door meetings, what do you tell the commander-in-chief? >> i think in theater, in iraq and with isis, i think you go after them very hard from the air and on ground. not with tens of thousands of troops, but with a few thousand special forces. neil: he has not done enough on that. >> he also has not done anything else that is really very effective. he needs to crack down on things at home, as you suggested. he needs to make it possible for
us to take out isis or you'll. it was crazy to let them go for a year without oil tankers sitting there. that is $1 million a day. >> we know some of our friends are getting ahead a little bit. >> once again. you hear 200, you hear 50 there. in that time, you have to have a solution for what will come next. we will send troops over there to come in at night and keep the doors an end do all of that. that is great. that is part of the strategy.
you have a very different, you have a majority in syria with a very minority shia. it cannot be that american force that will be there for the next five-10 years. working with us in the surge. making possible the awakening. ready to help. neil: i did not know that they were ready to help. what they are doing now is not encouraging that. they are just sort of sitting there and let everything be ran by the shia in baghdad and elsewhere. get them to work with you, you cannot go through the corrupt
government in baghdad. >> soon after san bernardino killings, i would bomb the you know what out of them. sort of a knee-jerk reaction to do something. do you think that that is likely? >> no. i do not think that he will react that way to the trump comments. it is insane. what happens after that? >> here at home, what we have to do is get into the business of using micro- targeting with artificial intelligence to be able to do what advertising agencies do and pick out huge
amounts of available public data. use that for pulling together our understanding of groups. small groups that we can move against. neil: out of my sight. >> i think that they would find that we would not be using any data that would not already be publicly available. the way that this has been left for us is the u.s. government has crippled far more than them. >> there is a difference. when you're talking about intelligence collection and technology, artificial intelligence and all of that, it is generally within our domain. talking about encryption.
>> most of the greatest strategies because the troops did not know but the chiefs stood. >> we were fairly unrestricted by virtue of our authorities. i'm talking about little authorities overseas. collecting information. i could collect information and put it into a target packet. neil: security. >> today the united states and our armed forces begin to over lead to destroy the group isil. our strategy is moving forward with a great sense of urgency on
four fronts. fighting i -- isil on the ground. financing propaganda. finally persistent diplomacy to end this eerie and civil war so everyone can focus on destroying isil. i just had a chance to meet with our security council. i want to thank secretary carter, chairman and vice presidents for the leadership of our men and women in uniform. we heard from general austin. the special operations forces playing a vital role. i want to provide a brief update on our progress against the isil court in syria and iraq. we will make it harder for isil to pump the terror and propaganda to the rest of the
world viewed even before the revolting attacks in paris and san bernardino, i ordered new actions to intensify our war against isil. special operations forces. it continues to be a fight, as i said before. they have dug in, including urban areas. human shields. relentless. we have to be smart. targeting them with precision. our partners on the ground are rooting isis out. neighborhood by neighborhood. block five block. that is what this campaign is doing. we are hitting isil harder than ever. fighters, bombers and drones have been increasing airstrikes. nearly 9000 as of today. we dropped more bombs than any
other month since this campaign started. leaders, commanders and killers one by one. we have removed one of the top leaders. the second-in-command. a top online recruiter. the new member julia murdered americans and others and in recent reeks finance chief senior extortionist and weapons trafficker. the list goes on and we are going after isil from their stronghold right in downtown. all the way to libya. the point is, leaders cannot hide. our next message to them is simple to you our next. every day we destroy more of the forces. heavy weapons.
von making factories, compounds and training camps. losing the freedom of maneuver. they know if they mask their forces, we will wipe them out. this summer, isil has not had a single successful major operation on the ground and either serious or iraq. in recent weeks, we have unleashed a new way to strike on their lifeline. destroying hundreds of their tankers, trucks, wells and refineries. we will keep on handling those. isil has already lost. more recently as sin jar losing a strategic highway. oil refinery. we saw it being supported by our special forces. master sergeant joshua wheeler
made the ultimate sacrifice. they have lost about 40% of the populated areas. it will lose more. forces are fighting their way deeper. they're working to circle and cut off the roots. again, these are urban areas where they are entrenched. they face a very tough fight ahead. we will continue to back them up with the support that they need to ultimately clear isil from iraq. they continue to lose territory in syria. syrian kurds, arabs, christians having success. they have pushed isil back from almost across the entire border region from turkey. we are working with turkey to
seal the rest. losing thousands of square miles. it will lose more. special forces began supporting local forces. cut off supply lines and tie and the squeeze. meanwhile, more people are seeing isil for the thugs in the fees in the killers that they are. others have tried to escape and be executed. an extortion continues to rappel and help fuel the refugee crisis. so many people are migrating. she said they will end up all alone. all that is said, we recognized the progress needs to keep coming faster. no one knows that more than the syrians and iraqis living under the terror. just as united states is doing
more in this fight, this is our allies chance. doing more. that is why i have asked secretary carter to go to the middle east. he will depart right after this press briefing. with our coalition partners. on a diplomatic front, secretary carried will be in russia tomorrow. a process to end this eerie and civil war. the department of homeland security is updating its system to help the american people stay vigilant and safe. as always, our men and women in uniform continue to put their lives online. this holiday season, many of our troops are far from their families. we want to say thank you. we are grateful. we are proud for everything that
you do. because of you, the america that we know and love and cherish is leading the world in this fight. because of you, i am confident. >> on the ground facing a very tough fight ahead. it wants control this in iraq. the islamic state continues to lose territory. one sign of success is that it has not been able to conduct any attacks in iraq or serious. sympathizers. having said that, nothing really new here. back with my guest. the former cia director.
director, he is gone, i apologize for that. what do you think? >> i will agree with one thing. he did say that we are hitting them harder than ever. to me, we have people going block by block. we are being relentless. if he is talking about our partners and they will support the iraq ease, we have seen it already causing issues, the shiite militia. are they going block by block? that will not go over so well. >> are you taking help by anyone? >> again, let's go back to that narrative. we are not conducting airstrikes in partnership with the iranians. look, that is a new one.
i guarantee that they do not see the difference. to them, it looks exactly like we are supporting the militias. >> something that the president may have failed to do. >> i am stunned at the lack. the only thing that you mentioned was the alert system. one person could argue that it really is not the answer. >> the third level for not really being a big deal. having another alert that is not a big deal. nonspecific threat warnings are not really helpful to anyone. terrorism is now one of the top concerns, if not the top concern among americans. what have we done after an attack in san bernardino california. we're ramping up our resources. 900 active cases.
>> i want to bring in former national security under president bush and president obama. islamic state leaders cannot hide. the u.s. message to them is you are next. he has taken out some of the tough ones. they are like cockroaches. you step on one and more calm. none of them taking out the top operatives. maybe some of the sympathizers are ready radicalized. crazy. they are in place. >> they are already in place. i think that is why time and time again the president has said there will not be military or diplomatic corps polluted coast solutions to the problem. i agree with him there.
i think that that is 100% right. i do not see any progress. they came to this conclusion about defeating the ideology. i have not seen any government programs in place to help convince people here at home and abroad. >> 40% fewer. whatever it was. the top operative team taken out. that said nothing about the influence. in france. california. the united states in general. >> i think after the paris attacks especially, what people across the world has recognized is it is irregardless of whatever process we are making. they have extended their reach into the heart of western europe. that is where the
counterterrorism focus should be. >> do you think it makes a difference to be playing by the top security officials, including military grads they are? that is supposed to remind people. this is a strategy. everyone is on board. a psychological level. >> sure. it is absolutely meant to make a difference. he wants to show that he has the might of the military behind him in all of these decisions. >> the follow-up after white house. >> yes. sure. this speech today, these remarks are all part of this that he is doing around washington to make people feel better.
what would really make the american public feel better is it is allowing the military to defeat isis. >> over there and over here. keeping us safe. do you think that they are -- he has your guys back. your colleagues back. americans back. >> no. we had troops in firefights. i do not know how you justify that. number two, we are still fighting under and authorization of military force. passed right after september 11. designed very specifically to go after people that perpetrated 9/11. we are still using something from 14 years ago. we have not declared a war since
world war ii. >> i think so. for no other reason than this. if we become a country that does not understand the cost of war, the people do not have a voice. then they do not really have an understanding of what that will cost us. and then you essentially are allowing a war to be declared without the consent of people. the president is supposed to be riding the a you on that. congress said no. they felt that it was too restrictive. >> we are sending mixed messages. >> completely. >> you are just saying what the optics are. >> the fbi director. maybe you should have had a police chief. >> they were not there.
what is the visual message? neil: thank you very much. this 50-point run-up. a concern here. selling this that could grip us on wednesday. nothing to do with the security matters. you know these guys. based on the second. that is why try not to seize on where the dow is at any given second. i just want to leave this for a second time. less inclined to worry about wednesday. it is still monday. we will have more after this. ♪. ♪
some very impressive points. the bad guys are winning big times. he has never had trouble with cash. the rising very rapidly. including this fox iowa poll. it is the second major poll to show he is leaving donald trump. donald trump is more popular than ever. the fact that cruise is set a threat, maybe not nationally, has already prompted trump to throw. gina, the one thing you said, from the outside is watch the passion. follow the money. even when he was not polling well. now he is. what do you think of this?
it looks like brilliant strategy to me. he has been quietly working away behind the scenes. most of his supporters have for maned relatively diligent and not capped a lot of stones that trump and his people. i think this is perhaps what has catapulted him into these new polling numbers. neil: they say we will get into this as well. as impressive of a speaker he is, brilliant lawyer that he is, constitutional writings. the opinions are almost etched in history now. he cannot win the general election. what do you think? >> i think that ted cruz, i call him the mad political scientist. he really understands the psychology behind elections and
tried to micro- target and really reach out to the voters. i can see him applying that in a general election. will he be able to beat hillary clinton, that is a big question. he will need to gain women voters. i think it is too soon to say he cannot win a general election. generally nothing by the time we have a nominee. these guys are all competitive. >> donald trump. i guess it may be a race to who is least likable. ronald reagan was a controversial figure in his own time. do you think it is possible he can overcome that negative
image? >> the psychology has to be considered here. the one obama just made. if we have a bush or another establishment candidate, i can assure you this will not motivate the base. the base will not turn out to vote. we will see a repeat of what happened with mitt romney, john mccain, bob dole. neil: the united states senator. he may get rowdy. >> not part of the establishment, though. >> ted cruz is a populist candidate. really has come to washington to disrupt and really not be attached to washington. >> some of the other senators on
the right and left. i want to thank you both. it is resonating and registering. i wonder what donald trump had to say about it. >> look at the way he has dealt with the senate. a little bit of a maniac. you cannot walk into the senate and scream and call people liars here an end not be able to get along with people. you will never get anything done. that is the problem. neil: having said that, republican, what do you think? donald trump may be responding to the heat that cruise is generating. what do you think about that? >> the second that a candidate starts to move up in the poll, he starts to attack them. >> dismissing his candidacy.
that is how he interpreted it. go ahead. >> there has just been a back-and-forth of donald trump. more specifically than some of the other candidates. he has not been afraid to take some of these jobs as a candidate. i think you should be a little bit concerned here. they have not supported donald trump throughout this nominating process. you look at someone like ted cruz. 57% of the iowa caucus goers consider themselves evangelical christians. i think we will start to see the republican field. also some changes as we move into the iowa caucus and new hampshire are primary. >> mr. donald trump and cruz. carson now has fallen back in the polls. there is this resentment.
i guess a typical view of this doubtless make candidate. again, i know senator cruz is a senator. not your typical petri dish. that rage is still palpable in that it shows two out of three voters. >> there is this antiestablishment sentiment among established motors. if you look to the left, there has also been some of that divide. let's be honest. that divide, like we have seen to the right. i do believe that there is this antiestablishment sentiment. i think voters feel angry. if you look at obama care. you look at issues like immigration. candidates like donald trump and ted cruz are seeking to that.
>> thank you very, very much. neil: i call my buddy charlie gasparino. exactly where that sentiment is building. those holding their money and those holding back a little bit. charlie: the upcoming debate. i was going, but then the market started to implode. first things first. nicole: three there are still telephones. ted cruz rising in the polls. particularly iowa. the las vegas casino billionaire probably up there watching the debate. there were a few stores. mostly money behind.
he was going to side with rubio. a lodge of hedge funds and billionaires. from what i understand, he is now somewhat having second thoughts. he may go with rubio. i don't know. there is some structural reasons why he may support rubio. lots of support from the jewish community. wall street. associated with israel. right now -- neil: waiting it out. like the coke brothers are waiting it out. >> my report is he is thinking about supporting ted cruz. what looked like rubio locke. he may have a good run in the
southern primaries. that is just included. you can make a compelling argument. >> i heard that exact point. already big in the south and all of that. >> monmouth county poll, university poll, that university poll -- neil: trumps numbers have never been higher. charlie: really do have 55% of the vote going to nonestablishment. you are talking, with all due respect, marco does not have much of a chance. the typical. >> nonconventional. even now.
>> which one of these nonconventional guys i should support. most of it went to rubio. now, this is, you know, rubio has done better than jab. they are looking for who of these nonestablishment players are more likely. pushing them out of the way. registering in the polls. clearing the field. charlie: too much money is behind them. pushing donald trump out of the primary in new york state. i have spoken to republican heavy hitters over the weekend.
why even get involved? >> if he is such a lousy candidate. charlie: look at these numbers. marco rubio. he is still not registered. ted cruz. making a point about him being more established. his wife works at goldman sachs. >> very good point. >> don't let them fool you. he is a high-end broker. >> very good point. all right. thank you very much. the loyalty player that charlie yes. he promises me on january 14 that he will be there. >> let me tell you something. >> fox business is doing this again. we are very happy to do this. we hope you will be there for us. >> i can ask chris christie
about famous football. >> that should go over really well. [laughter] he is a guy that you want to go out with. we never reimburse them. [laughter] neil: you may have also heard in other cases. wednesday. the federal reserve wrapping things up. they will raise rates. >> i think that they have to raise rates. i think that it will be messy no matter what. >> we will be covering that live. lou dobbs amber rhea bartiromo. who is who. the same ones bringing another debate. we are following your money. it is important to us. you are important to us. >> yes. ♪ [vet] two yearly physicals down.
martha and mildred are good to go. here's your invoice, ladies. a few stops later, and it looks like big ollie is on the mend. it might not seem that glamorous having an old pickup truck for an office... or filling your days looking down the south end of a heifer, but...i wouldn't have it any other way. look at that, i had my best month ever. and earned a shiny new office upgrade. i run on quickbooks. that's how i own it.
>> 48 hours we will know. the federal reserve is moving interest rates. a nine year long party and have gotten used to it. how will we get used to it? kerry, i know we begin with you on the prospects. >> if they do raise rates, it will be one and done. there are just so many things going on in markets right now. i am against just about every pundit out there. >> you should be running away. >> the junk bond market is imploding. already know about china. markets have been heading south. i know the set has been watching the markets more than the economy over the last few years.
>> i kind of agree. i think that they will raise rates. i think that these adjustments, i think the market is like that. neil: do you ever wonder what happens if they do not? the last go round back in october, it was not widely expected that they would. for some reason, people began to chew on it. >> i think things will be stagnant throughout the election. >> hitting the markets. >> i think that a lot of it is priced in. it is hard to tell. on the short term, i do not think that we will see a major selloff. over the long-term, we will see that can out. we have the election. we have candidate housing job creation. we have the said tightening the monetary policy. it is an oxymoron.
neil: going ahead and tighten even a quarter point. now, all of a sudden, you have had a lot of developments. concerns about financial stability. spitting up blood last week. concerns that this may be a very bad time to do this. >> i agree. even if they do raise rates, fed funds rate that will still be easy. as i said, there are a lot of things underneath that are going on right now. just remember that said. their famous words picked we are data dependent. the data that has been coming in recently, there is trouble out there. by the way, i cannot think they are doing it because of interest rates, i think they are doing it because of the economy and credit issues. we will see you next year.
>> this is a fun last week that had been making it very difficult leap possible. others are in a precarious situation. we have seen high yields rocket up. using a little bit today. the fed has not even moved. how big of a concern is that? >> i think that when people see the underlying fundamentals, we have all of these problems underneath. i think that it takes credit less secure. they think that the fed raising rates will push it over the top and push it off. i do think that they are very afraid. sometimes, this happens at a glacial rate. obviously, we will then see a crisis.
>> 48 hours away. special coverage on coast-to-coast on wednesday. it starts at 1:00 p.m. we are there. we have our own economic team, including lou dobbs, charlie gasparino, liz claman. by the way, we do so in english. we think that that is very valuable to you. we start with that premise. english may be a good start. be with us. we will sort out what the impact is for you, your finances, your money. it could all be on the line. meanwhile, we are focusing on something else that does not get much attention in the mainstream media. 130,000 to date. it has been getting decimated.
we were under $34 a barrel which represented close to a decade low in the price of oil. those big jobs. the trend is keeping in place, i imagine more job cuts will be coming. what do you think? >> you will see cuts. you will see cuts in price and production. that is because we are where we are right now. look at the board. we made new lows. neil: what happened there? i did not understand that. >> last week will we have the breakdown, that was an important point. $33 is an extreme low from 2009. at some point, you will see some short covering. this may be the beginning of it.
everyone had been short for some time. almost straight down. you can see a little bit of a squeeze up to 40. we will see what the market is made of. >> do you think, i heard one argument, the climate change deal. secretary of state kerry and others over the weekend. it may actually help oil prices. since they are so negative on fossil fuel and limiting their availability and emphasis, it may at least in the near-term profile those prices up. what do you think? >> i think that the psychology might be there. the markets have been selling off, selling off. that is out of play now. what is important to me is the energy etf. it has not made new lows.
that is a positive divergence there. higher lows that we have in august. things are starting. a look at the big boys. they are not making new lows. maybe we're getting stability. it is now negative on the day. maybe things are starting to stabilize ahead of the big deal. the big deal is looking to raise rates with it actually happening. the question is, then what? a 50 / 50 chance of what happens next in march. >> thank you, very, very much. we were talking about that climate. you heard about it with fossil related prices moving up. john kerry is saying it will do something else. it is going to add jobs. a whole host of other areas.
terms of the demand of their citizens. neil: jobs created? keep in mind we lost up to 130, when all said and done, at least 150,000 oil-related service jobs as a result of slowdown in the global economy. some say presaging attention away from additional energy that we have a lot of to some of these other strategies that might not yet be tested. republican senator deb fischer from nebraska joining me right now. senator, do you believe that a lot of jobs could be in the offing? would they be enough to offset jobs already lost in the traditional oil industry? >> well, neil, americans are concerned about a lot of things. they're concerned about security and that is national security and economic security. and by watching the performance that went on in paris this last week, that doesn't calm their fears about economic security. in nebraska, we understand that the costs will be to every
citizen in the state. we are 100% public power. that means that the people of nebraska own the electric call power in nebraska. we'll be paying for that as individuals, as family businesses, and, that is going to be a heavy cost to bear. neil: now, i don't know whether those are all coal-fired plants but we obviously -- >> 2/3s are. neil: to your point that is industry target of the administration that is dirty and has to be penalized. we have to see the cost of that go up, maybe prohibitively. the administration poo-pooed your talk and other republicans talk that they will be very high bills compared to what we have now but what numbers are you crunching? >> we're a public power state. 2/3 of our electricity comes from publicly-owned power plants, those coal-fired electric plants. neil: right. >> we'll be looking at increased costs. under the proposed plans under the clean power plan, we were
looking at 26% cut in emissions. under final rules that came out, that is 40% cut. nebraska is hit hard. nebraskans are some of the largest losers in -- neil: we should explain, you know this inside and out, there is rough correlation between emission cuts and correlation of a similar run-up in utility bills as a result. in other words, if the requirement is cut emissions by 40%, plan on your bill going up 40%. that could be prohibited. >> exactly. we're looking at that hitting consumers. when you're public power it will cost you more to turn on your lights but also cost you more to buy goods that businesses provide. as owner of those plants every citizen in nebraska has to pay for the retrofitting of those plants, or, they're going to have to, even if they're closed, the plants are closed they have to pay for that debt. that doesn't go away. so we are really going to be hit hard. neil: the argument is republicans don't have to accept
this you could fight this but conversely the president is saying legally he can pursue to his heart's content. you say what? >> i say that nebraska has joined with 27 states in filing lawsuits begins this cap-and-trade scheme that the administration has come up with. neil: we'll watch very closely, senator. thank you. >> thank you. neil: the bottom line is this climate deal is going to kill fossil fuels, especially president of some 190 countries signing on to this get their way. that is big leap to assume they get their way, nick. you take it as given there is global strategy to wean ourselves off traditional fuels, even though they led to dramatically low fuel costs in our country and dramatically less dependence in other countries we'll reverse all that right? >> they will try to. unilaterally the obama administration is implementing regulations to kilt industry and drive up costs for american
families and businesses. that was the theme of the paris talks, was to decarbonize our energy economy. when more than 80% of the world's energy needs are met through carbon-emitting natural resources you will be hit again and again with higher energy costs to reduce those emissions. there is huge, huge, economic costs to these proposals with very little if any climate benefit. neil: the administration will arc with the climate benefit but it will be painful bump to adjust to this change. it will be cheaper, cleaner, worldwide, for wind, solar and other technologies you don't need any other country anyway, what are you whining about? >> i think if win and solar renewable sources can compete that's fine. there is multitrillion dollar opportunity to turn our lights on and off. if those technologies can compete in the marketplace then that's great but we shouldn't subsidize them with taxpayer dollars. john kerry had some really
telling remarks when he was in paris saying that even if the united states and every industrialized nation reduced emissions down to zero it still wouldn't make a dent in global climate change because of developing nation, india and china. they are not going to play ball. those countries want to build more coal-fired power plants and they will do so -- neil: you don't take them at their word, in china's case in their word, they're choking on their own air in beijing and residents are getting upset about it, that it is in their interests to follow up on the plan eight years out to start doing something? you don't look at that promise as much to bank on? >> i don't look at their promise to stop using coal. they have plans to build more than 800 coal-fired power plants. india will double the coal-firedded power plants even with this agreement in place. they should clean up their air around water quality and this has nothing to do with greenhouse gas emissions. they should tackle smog and
issues they're facing and have adverse health and human environment impacts. let address those first. give them a addressing a better standard of living instead of a non-problem. neil: nick, thank you very much. i appreciate that. look at the dow. we're down all over the map. concerns about energy and junk bonds that might be vulnerable. high yield bonds that might be vulnerable to isoff. fear is rampant and volatility runs rampant, vix, key measure of market volatility starts zooming
again. it is crazy. it is what it is. more after this. (mic screech) there's a big difference between making noise... (mic tap) ...and making sense. (elephant noise) (donkey noise) when it comes to social security, we need more than lip service. our next president needs a real plan to keep social security strong. (elephant noise)
>> it is time for your fox business brief. we've seen if anything a little bit of stability to the markets since neil came on the air with cavuto "coast to coast." concerns about the oil market and junk bond market. we'll start with distressed debt, so-called junk bonds. that is tough to show you on the screen. we're looking exchange traded fund that tracks market, barclays etf. it was lowest point. another one is high yield corporate bond etf. again it tracks the market. lowest point since early in the session since october 2011. four years ago. that is kind of action we've seen in the market. in terms of energy all the stocks are still down. every single one hit a new low, a 52-week low. baker hughes, southwestern
a former federal prosecutor and fred tecce on whether you should or not. going to be top cal issue, fred, because the argument seems to be obligation, if not you as user maybe the companies involved. what do you think? >> look, neil, i think as citizens of the united states we have a moral obligation. i think we have an ethical obligation. if you want to live in free society, you have an obligation to see something to say something but the law does not impose on you to say something. if i see some guy buying 30 propane tanks at walmart i need to say something but the law doesn't obligate me to do that. neil: when you register a site or big and influential as facebook, scott, do you ever find there is a tendency to say we take the objectionable material down or shut the person down say in the case of syed
farook they shut him down period. why can't you go to the next level and alert authorities? >> i think they actually do. in the case of facebook they have a stated policy actually that says when they see a imminent threat or when they see the likelihood of a terrorist attack that they will under their user policies or under their privacy policies they will notify law enforcement. neil: we know syed's writings were strong. they took his page down, whatever the vernacular is, but they didn't go to the next level of alerting authorities that is the policy they don't want to breach proprietary or independent or freedom of sweep, you heard the drill. is that appropriate or where do you draw the line? >> no i don't know posts from farook that i wasn't aware he posted something in advance that would have alerted facebook. neil: you're right, not
presumably in enough time. >> right. in the case of his wife, that might have been a missed opportunity but you know there is a lot of stuff to try to sift through and always easier in hindsight you should have done something or been more careful. i think in light of this event i think whether it is facebook or whether it is twitter, i think there were some twitter alerts today that went out about potential threats. neil: right. >> i think that people will be much more proactive because you know, as, your other guests just said, people feel the moral imperative, to in the words of amtrak, see something, say something. that is much more of a culture. neil: i hear you, fred, online people say most outrageous things, to the point of threatening or killing them. obviously that is urgent level. even there companies say that is kind of not their job. what do you think? >> they can say that, but they're burying their heads in the sand. they have user agreement.
pursuant to the user agreement they shut people down. i have seen facebook close down people's pages because they don't like something they say. what could be more important living in our society if you see someone saying something or doing that is dangerous, you know, neil when i was federal prosecutor i prosecuted people for making terroristic threats and threatening to kill people but they were directed at particular person. it boggles my mind when facebook or twitter when they had this information in their possession, take it among themselves and assume the duty to provide information to law enforcement. i think they should. >> can't compel them to. in light of heat over the whole encryption debate i think they will be more proactive. >> they better. >> facebook and twitter they love to protect their users although they can do with their date what they want. i think they will be more proactive, particularly in light of encryption debate. >> the ultimate protection is keep their users alive. neil: there is that.
>> thanks for having me. neil: tuned in, not aware of this, few minutes ago, major league baseball chosen not to reinstate pete rose. he got more hits than anyone history, am i right, guys? not home runs but hits. all-time hit leader. baseball commissioner indicating not the time to do that. not being readmitted to baseball he is not eligible for the hall of fame. so the wait continues for mr. rose. we'll have more after this.
this is the one place we're not afraid to fail. some of these experiments may not work. but a few might shape the future. like turning algae into biofuel... ...new technology for capturing co2 emissions... ...and cars twice as efficient as the average car today. ideas exxonmobil scientists are working on to make energy go further... ...no matter how many tries it takes. energy lives here.
hgoogle voice response:t inachim sigsa. how long does milk last? google voice; one week after the sell-by date. how much vitamin c is... is in an orange? set timer for twelve minutes. google voice: ok, twelve minutes. where can we find donuts around here? coffee? what about crepes? how about a bagel? what is the most important meal of the day? google voice: breakfast is the most important meal of the day. neil: everyone on fed watch. 48 hours weil get idea where we're toll first time in decade, raising interest rates. charles payne on what you do in that moment and getting ahead of that moment. how are you doing, buddy? >> doing pretty good.
didn't get dan snyder tie. dan snyder hooked you up? isn't that redskins -- >> no, this is walmart. >> excuse me. the fed, i think they will hike rates. i think janet yellen has gone out on a limb. they have almost zero credibility. i'm talking almost zero. neil: you have got to do this because you said you would. what if they don't? >> if they don't the dow is off 1000 points. if they do i think we could be all over the place. i think a year we'll be up 7%. two years we could be up 25%. neil: what do you tell investors get nervous, need a lot of hand-holding. what do you tell them? >> got to tell you something, neil, i've been doing a lost hand-holding already. neil: not true these rumors thaw hang up on them? >> ever since they allowed them to go back to the credit card companies. no, you got to ride this out. you have to ride these periods out. neil: how long? you could argue better part of eight, nine years, you have a wonderful run.
getting long in the tooth, depending who you talk to so maybe don't ride this out? >> here is the point of the beneath the surface there is already carnage. at one point in the session, five stocks in new york stock exchange at new 52-week highs, and 530 at new 52-week lows. neil: is that right? >> think about the ratio, there are a lot of stocks. if you take out facebook, amazon, nike, google, you take about 10 names out this market sun mitigated disaster. unmitigated. it is ugly. neil: you're not fearing junk bond contagion that they are vulnerable to a minute my kneltdown? >> junk bonds in general are down 10%. that is extraordinarily mismanaged fund. neil: any others seeing their price tumble and yield rocket as a result? >> it was $700 million fund, very small as funds go. obviously reminds you -- neil: third avenue credit. >> this particular fund, focus
credit fund. neil: yes. you don't think others are going to follow suit? you remember what happened better than anyone, right? >> absolutely. neil: it was fear contagion. >> fear contagion is out there. junk bonds is one of smaller markets t was not as big as it once was but it is yellow, not a red flag. neil: if you talk to people what do i do day of? >> i say hold tight. i do implore people to have cash. i do implore people to be ready to buy great names. if this market comes down on fed fear, there are a lot of great names already oversold. that is when you start to buy. let it come down. hate to say it -- neil: buy on average, ben stein, compares, performance of dow, s&p, nasdaq? >> i think you have to hold. listen, every year is not going to be up year if that kind of investor. if you're beating markets, these are the moments you beat it when it gets hit on this kind of news. this news won't necessarily
change fundamentals of any names. neil: charles payne, 6:00 p.m. spells it all out. we have more after this. ♪ come on, wake up!!! come on,why ya sleepin'? come on! what time is it? it's go time. come on. let's go, let's go, let's go. woooo hoooo!! yeah!! i feel like i went to bed an hour ago. yeah!! i'll make the cocoa. get a great offer on the car of your grown-up dreams at the mercedes-benz winter event. it's the look on their faces that make it all worthwhile. hurry, these offers end january 4th. thank you santa!!!
neil: all right. still have a couple hours to go. trish regan. trish: hey there, neil. president obama in damage control mode. defending his isis strategy. welcome, everyone. i am trish regan. the president insisted that his plan is working. he goes on to list all the leaders. let's listen to him here. >> coalition aircraft, fighters, bombers and drones have been 9000 as of today. we are also taking out leaders, commanders and killers.