tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business May 24, 2017 12:00pm-2:01pm EDT
ashley: another varney in the building? stuart: you know what that means, "fox & friends"? ashley: getting very early. stuart: call time is 4:00 a.m happy birthday, angie. you will love it at fox. neil cavuto. seriously, it is yours. neil: does she get up every morning and go ka-ching, ka-ching? stuart: what? where did that come from, cavuto? neil: she is very lucky young lady. her dad is international anchor star. if she plays her cards right, stays on her good side, might not have to worry about working ever, right? stuart: no, that is not the case. let's scotch that right from the beginning here. neil: you've been cheap throughout the poor girl's life. stuart: absolutely. neil: i wanted to confirm all that. thank you, stuart. we have a lot going on here. the president meeting with the prime minister of belgium. elsewhere police investigating a network now of suspects behind
that attack at a ariana grande concert a couple nights ago. connell mcshane with the late of the. reporter: terror threat in the uk doesn't get higher than it is right now. the investigation into the manchester bombing does continue. about we heard this morning four people in discuss hedy, three of them rounded up earlier today. one reported to be the brother of the bomber. we received a report from reuters a few moments ago, another brother taken into custody in tripoli. these developments are coming in as the hunt still on for a possible bomb-maker as well. this is really widening. when we heard from the prime minister theresa may, her message was clear the threat is broader than just one man, the now dead suicide bomber. >> we can not ignore that there is a wider group of individuals linked to this attack. the threat level should be increased for the time-being
from severe to critical. this means that that their assessment is not only an attack remains highly likely, but a further attack may be imminent. reporter: so what british first have done they have deployed nearly 1000 troops at high-profile sites around the country. soldiers replacing police officers at places like buckingham palace, 10 downing street and british parliament. we know of a isis claim of responsibility. we know the bomber was identified as salman abedi, british born. two brothers in custody. abedi believed to travel himself to syria. the french say there are proven links between this man and isis. finally neil, we have victims young as eight years of age, widely reported by now. in all 22 dead, 64 injured. of those 64 injured, 20 remain in critical condition of the so the investigation continues.
seems like it is widening here by the hour. neil: connell, thank you very, very much, connell mcshane. everyone is back to the homegrown radicalization could be a major focus of this particular event. american-islamic forum founder zuhdi jasser is here on that. what we're learning about salman abedi, he was born to parents of libyan birth, second youngest of four children. he was on the british security services radar for upwards of the past year. thought to have returned from libya. they knew about that as recently as this week. just days before the attack, i could go on and on but again this is part of a tight-knit libyan community, many whom settled in manchester after the overthrow of gadhafi but what are you contacting there as we're connecting that here? >> will i think for national security sake we need to look at the commonalities. everyone of these narratives,
neil, ends up being a lone wolf, having a travel history. we hear his mother was teaching him the koran. went to the mosque. he got upset that the imam was critical of isis. a lot of things common we heard with the boston bombers, with chattanooga, with san bernanadino. bottom line, neil, we get distracted if we look too much into the branches of the tree. we need to step back look into the forest. the forest there are idealogical precursors before they became operational jihadis. he might have become an operational jihadi put on suicide belt, how to make it in syria or libya, but before that, what took him there was a community, a culture that taught him that radicalized him, that the west was the problem. he is a victim in the west. the conspiracy theories of the west created these tyrants in the middle east. all of these types of ideologies put forth by islamist
organizations fueled by petro islamic ideology across the world is the radicalization pathway. until we stop just spending billions, neil, on that last step, trying to find them before they put on the suicide belt, and by the way we did find him. he was a known wolf, not a lone wolf, known. we ignored all the previous steps. we need cultural revolution defense theocratic ideology brewing inside of our countries. neil: do we know, for example, whether his own community knew he might have the violent tendencies? or do they protect their own? >> oddses are they probably would have reported it, most of them if they knew he had violent tendencies but that is just the last step. now having said, remember the paris attacks on november 15, that same cell, this is probably why london and britain is still on high imminent alert because, remember, that same cell in paris committed an act in brussels four months later in march 2016.
so there is probably still parts that they might be protected within families, within close networks but the majority of the muslim community would report him if he was expressing any type of violence, et cetera. neil: i hope you're right. take your word on that but i don't know. what i do know a lot of attacks we've had here are of the homegrown variety. in other words, those who might have sympathy and been radicalized abroad or here, but are, but are recognized as citizens here or here legally through visas and the like. so are we chasing the wrong bogeyman by going after isis elements abroad? >> we need to do both. it's a military problem abroad in syria, iraq. it is an idealogical cultural global revolution for modernization reform of islam, a coming to terms with ma dernty. think cold war, global war against communism.
that is what we are, global war against islammism. as much as the community might look for violence they are contributing, just like fighting drunk driving. they would stop the guy to take away his keys but probably hand him substance, ideas that hate the west. ideas that blame the west. ideas that are conspiratorial, misogynistic. those are the underbelly offed are callization that most of our islamic establishment are in denial, that pushes them on the conveyor belt towards radicalization. we're not even touching that. neil: let's accept half-full glass version of that story, that they don't want anything to do with this but they are afraid to address the rogues in their midst. >> neil that is a copout. i mean, maybe in syria or in egypt or iraq or in saudi arabia where they get imprisoned for these kind of things they would be afraid. listen, counterterrorism center in riyadh is a joke it is a waste of time. we need to do it in the laboratory in america where have
freedom to do critical thinking to counter leadership, to fight the establishment. to say they're afraid, they might get pushback, i have been attacked, not physically, idealogically in my mosque ands where. what happens? they come to terms with critical thinking and respect those who have counterideas and are trying to do it from a position of tough love. that is what we need to give our muslim community. not apologetics and oh, we won't be bigots, treat them as equals tell them you know what? are you a british citizen who wants to fight in our military, or are a jihadi possibly that believes in the global movement of political islam? even if it is non-violent that is loyalty problem. neil: keep to themselves, maybe for very valid reasons, language barriers and rest, cultural and the rest? but they're more inclined to stick to themselves and not share this sort of thing? >> well, it is because we give them a pass.cause they don't see urgency. nobody telling them what is your legacy going to be? not my problem, i escaped that
in the middle east. actually because of coddling of political correctness there is no stimulus for them to say, you know what? if we don't lead this battle of ideas and marginalize and counterthe imams publicly we're going to leave a legacy that islam is inch -- incompatable with america and british culture. neil: zuhdi jasser, american-islamic founder and president. i mentioned the ongoing attack against isis positions. they have soared 50% under president trump, yet incidents like this still happen. former navy seal officer leif babin if the airstrikes are enough. i raised that with saudi, good to have you. not as if we don't attack isis strongholds but we still see isis-inspired events? >> we're doing a lot of work to
attack isis strongholds. there are very brave men and women forward working hard to support iraqi troops. they're taking back the city of mosul. i would love to see 50% increase on isis. they have an effect. you're seeing that happen -- neil: assume we're talking about airstrikes in syria? i think that is what a lot of this is referring to? >> we're talking about syria. we're talking about mosul. we're talking about in support of the anti-isis campaign in general. neil: what if it has gone beyond this, leif? that is one aspect of this but apparently the problem again and again in these attacks is radicalized element, usually born to that country or moving to that country but all perfectly legal? in other words, here in those countries legally. >> well, i think in my time, threw three deployment in iraq i spent a lot of time with the people in anbar prove verier the people there they don't want to live under that kind of evil islamic terror.
the vast majority of folks there don't want to be living under that. they want to be liberated from that. the real estate really matters there. it inspires attacks here in america and western europe like you saw manchester if we allow the caliphate as they call themselves to exist. it is absolutely the right call to ramp up attacks and smash them. you i would like to see more happen, frankly. the president's directive of annihilation campaign as he called it, to surround areas and not let fighters escape, jihadi fighters can flee back to europe or america, elsewhere to attack, inspire others we have to stop that. what you saw in manchester is great example how evil these person are. this is not new. neil: where are they getting money for this. it doesn't cost match to do what they do, but it is always happening. i'm wondering that's why i guess they're looking at accomplices
in britain and they're very sure with a critical level of threat that something could happen again but that's assuming that he had help. do you think he had help and do you think there is a financial network as well at play here? >> there is no question that's the case. i think this idea that we live, we live in this world where we just continue to bury our heads in the sand of the islam religion of peace -- neil: you think it's a religion of peace? >> zuhdi jasser is exactly right. combating that ideology, when you in particular hear terms like lone wolf or self-radicalized these are invented terms to try to make ourselves fool bert. talking about people who have support network from, whether that -- neil: how do they get radicalized though? how do they get radicalized? >> associates online. it's a real problem. we have to really stamp that out. i have a lot of friends in the law enforcement community. they do amazing job.
they simply can not follow all possible leads that come in. we have to do a better job in america, western europe, to take proactive measures rather than reactive, another example of someone who was reported, you always hear see something, say something. neil: right, right. >> someone else reported just like in orlando, just like in san bernardino, just like in boston and brussels and paris, these people were, law enforcement was tracking them. understood they were a threat yet was unable to do anything about it. neil: in this country you just can't pick up and arrest someone to detain them indefinitely on fears they're a threat or even questionable phone calls or visits abroad, in that case going to libya, possibly syria as well. we're handicapped by the very free system we have. >> i think obviously, we're not talking about arresting people and holding them indefinitely. just on hearsay or suspicion but i think there is a lot of steps
we can do to really remove political correctness. neil: should we get past the political correctness or holding people until we nail it down? >> we have freedom of speech in this country but there are things, if you threaten the president secret service talks to you. neil: what if you never threatened someone, made a number of curious trips and hanging out with nefarious crowd, what do you do? >> pretty he's to associate people like this. we have law enforcement officers are too reluctant, if they get seen as islamophobic, racist and big gotted comments -- bigoted comments thrown about them, they have to fear their own promotion and careers. its coming to america as well. we had number of small-scale attacks. it doesn't take a lot of funding for something like this. i think they have proven that you don't have to have a lot of financial backing or substantial
training to inflict a lot of damage. we have to take very proactive measures to do that. removing some shackles that we placed particularly under the previous administration for last eight years on law enforcement communities, military overseas will help us tremendous i. neil: leif, good to see you again, leif babin, former navy seal and best-selling author as well. one of highlights of the president's trip abroad start of trip when he scored better than 100 million-dollar deal for the saudis that will benefit a lot of u.s. contractors and a lot of u.s. jobs but to hear rand paul tell it. not what it seems. why the senator is dead-set against that deal and some other things the president is cooking up. he is next. ♪ dear predictable, there's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony.
♪ what we do every night is like something out of a strange dream. except that the next morning it all makes sense. to power global e-commerce fedex networks are massive, far-reaching and, yes... a little magical. fedex.com slash dream will you be ready when the moment turns romantic? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines,
and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis. and get medical help right away. i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business.
neil: all right. this foreign trip, first one of this president is over, no doubt herald beginning of the trip as probably most note worth he think accomplishment. when the president scored $100 billion weapons deal with the saudis. many consider that a tour today force and will benefit defense contractors seeing their stocks soar on wall street ever since. senator rand paul not quite convinced all it is appears to be. he joins me on this budget issue, so much more.
senator, good to see you. >> thanks, neil. neil: explain to me what you didn't like about that deal. >> my concern, what will the saudis do with the weapons? for example, we know from hillary clinton's emails leaked through wikileaks she was concerned that the saudis were giving financial assistance and arms to isis, and to other radical islamic groups in syria, around the world. we know from bob graham's investigation of 9/11 that there were many who imply and believe saudi arabia might have have had something to do with 9/11. we know saudi arabia is currently involved in a war in a neighboring country in yemen which tens of thousands of civilians are dying and there is a humanitarian crisis created by this war. so i'm concerned what will saudi arabia do with these weapons, and i think the weapons in a way belong to the american public because american tax dollars go to developing these weapons for our defense. so this isn't like trying to convince someone to buy apples
from the united states or to buy tobacco from the united states. this is something that is intimately involved with our national security and we shouldn't sell weapons to country who i think may well do more harm than good in those weapons. neil: what if they use those weapons to go after isis? >> well, what if we know historically from the leaked emails from hillary clinton they were using the weapons and giving them to isis? so i don't know they're to be trusted. they have supported al nusra. they have supported al qaeda elements. they have supported isis in the syrian civil war. their concern is to promote their radical form of islam wahhabiism. that is really a virus spread throughout the world. it teaches hatred of america and intolerance. i don't think that is something in our best interests to support them. neil: earlier this morning, senator, speaker paul ryan said that he did not agree with president trump that james comey was a nutjob.
what about you? >> my concern with comey was that i think he politicized investigation into the clinton camp, what she did with her private server, and whether she breached national security. when you start having press conferences it becomes more about the person and less about the investigation. i think almost everybody in the country thought he did a bad job. the democrats thought he indicted her publicly saying she was guilty but didn't have you enough evidence to prosecute her. republicans thought, if she was so guilty of all this why didn't he prosecute her? i don't think anybody in the whole country was happy with the way he went about the clinton investigation. from my personal point of view i also thought the fbi let us down with the orlando killing, the terrorist shot up the nightclub in orlando. neil: right. >> i also thought whenever there was an attack on the homeland he sort of would not accept any responsibility for it but would come back and ask for more invasions of our privacy, more breakdown on encryption, all the
things he was asking for, give me more power, instead of how cot fbi do a better job preventing terrorist acts. neil: we've had a lot of stories, usually unsourced as you point out in prior interviews about the president trying to impede this russian probe. do you think he has tried to block, thwart, prevent anything having to do with this probe potentially linking his campaign with the russians? >> no. in fact his administration has a special counsel that is going to look into this. i don't think there will be any impediments to this. neil: anything you heard in the past, senator where he, this is coming from unnamed source, "washington post" and others he was urging the top security folks to do what they could to make the fbi thing go away, you don't believe that? >> i wasn't in the room but from what the reports i heard, the way i understand the conversation went down he was probably annoyed saying this is ridiculous, when are you going to be done with this stupid russian thing?
the implication was he wanted it to be done. i think a lot of us want it to be done there is no there there. i mean the best article i've seen last couple weeks was alan dershowitz who said, even if the trump cram pain spoke to the russians about releasing things to wikileaks, there isn't a federal crime against that. it's stupid and they shouldn't have done it but you have to actually have a federal crime. so far, all these people that are stirring this thing up, not one of them have put forward what crime, what crime has been committed. neil: they all leap on this obstruction of justice thing, if you talked to the fbi director about making an investigation go away, no proof of that. one word against another, but do you think, talking to the fbi director in that way about making an investigation stop or going light on general flynn, would that to you, rand paul, united states senator, who would have to weigh on the matters if it ever escalates to that, do you think that is obstruction of
justice? >> i think expressing annoyance over the slowness of an investigation and saying you know what, if there is something there, let's get out there and be done with it but let's not just sit to let it fester, i don't think that is obstruction of justice. that is impatience to get to the truth. that is the way i look at it. this is all sour grapes -- look every democrat in the country wanted james comey to go. they all thought he lost the election to hillary clinton. hillary clinton believes this. they all want him to go. until he went they're hot and bothered thinking this is obstruction somehow. it is sour grapes for the election. we have to get into the account account -- neil: what does this say about john mccain, is that bad blood between the two. mccain has personal disagreements with the president, i can't go there what is involved with that adversarial relationship, what i have seen no evidence of a
crime. if there is i will reevaluate a situation but i think sooner, better we get this done with, get the investigation to its completion, i think really in the end, even though i wasn't a big fan of having a special counsel, at least now we can say look, we have a law enforcement professional will take care of it. let it go where it will go, not get too involved with politics. see what happens. neil: senator, finally on the budget, it has been blasted by democrats. that isn't too, too surprising. chuck schumer says it take as cleaver to the middle class. what do you think? some republicans are afraid it will put them behind the eight ball going into the midterm elections what do you think? >> i think that when you look at the overall budget easier way to do we'll cut a little bit everywhere instead of a lot in some places and none in other places. what i have advised if you would freeze spending, actual balance five or six years. then everybody equally across
the board will have to give up a little bit. neil: freeze it at these levels? in other words, because you'rehs still going up, it will not go up as much. freeze at levels they're at now? >> that is one of the things been most misreported on medicaid. they're like, oh, he is going to slash medicaid. medicaid is going to grow a little bit slower than it has been growing. neil: you're right. >> in washington they call that a cut. it is increase in spending for medicaid but at slightly slower rate than medicaid sin creasing. that is not a dramatic cut. that is what you have to do to preserve our country, not let us get swallowed up by the debt so enormous. neil: is it dead on arrival what some of your colleagues? >> what happens around here military hawks want more military spending, initial cuts show pay for it, by the time it gets the military spending and domestic spending we get a
bigger debt. my prediction everybody gets everything they want except for those of us concerned about the debt. there will be much expansion of the debt under whatever comes out of congress. neil: senator rand paul, thank you very much. >> thank you. neil: let's take a peak what is happening at wall and broad. dow down 30 -- up 30 points. a week ago we had a 300 point swoon. defense stocks at near all-time highs. financial issues have clawed back. technology issues had clawed back. whatever going on getting through the markets last week on fears donald trump might be impeached, that is how far it is going, certainly easy ad up since. more after this.
private attorney to represent him on whole impeachment thing, someone who knows ins and outs of that. red alert, ron meyer, phil stutz, and "washington free beacon"'s liz harrington. liz on this, the fact that we have the administration i guess lawyering up just in case, is this going to be a real battle here? what do you foresee? >> i think it has been a real battle from the beginning against democrats and media attacking trump for nearly everything he does. it makes sense trump to bring in trusted ally. this lawyer has been with him over a decade and handled a lot of legal battles which trump is accustomed to in his career. makes sense to he bring in someone he can trust and an ally. this investigation will continue. leaks are going to continue, trump needs someone there to help him push back on that. neil: ron meyer, where do you think this goes?
at the very least it could change the possibility of joe lieberman becoming fbi director because of his connection to that said law firm, but beyond that, what do you think? >> beyond it i think that it means trump is taking these things more seriously. he is trying to have people around him he can trust. i think the problem is when you hire a special prosecutor to look into russia ties, you have to ask what crime are they investigating? another problem with the special prosecutors, are they going to find something, try to do anything, otherwise, you kind of wonder why they exist in the first place? so there is pressure on these people to find something to investigator find something to prosecute on. and so that is kind of the question. what we saw from the brennan hearings, former cia director, there is no evidence, further what crime would they be looking at? as senator rand paul pointed out on your program, what crime are they looking for the trump campaign could have been engaged in? talking to russians is not a crime, even if they did that. and further, wouldn't the cia director have access to the
conversations because they have phone records? wouldn't they already prosecute in the first place? neil: always comes back, phillip, maybe why people seized on watergate thing which is a little bit of a stretch, but having said that, it is what happens after the alleged crime that to ron's point you can't prove, this notion that the president was trying to obstruct an investigation or urge his top guys to do their best to get it out of the way. now a lot of that you could give difference to the president saying he doesn't know the political niceties, rules of the game, unlike the business world that doesn't look good and that could be unconstitutional but leaving it aside, do you think that argument, that the president was doing his best to stop something or thwart something is what comes back to bite him? >> you know, that is a really good question, neil, i keep going back to this, the reason you would bring in your own personal lawyer has to do with campaign issues, white house counsel's office could handle
what is going on since the president has been sworn in. really the main focus right now he wants to have his own personal lawyer in place. he will have to pay for it out of his own pocket. neil: is that right? i guess that is right. >> that is. that precedent was set by bill clinton back in the '90s. remember this, jack quinn was white house counsel for president clinton. he came out and said this is something that is necessary and very appropriate for donald trump to do. neil: you know, liz, i did mention before his business background and where this sort of thing where you just speak frankly and off-the-cuff and you want to know what is going on, you want the latest, that doesn't fly in washington where appearances count for a lot, even looking like you might be doing something untoward counts for constitutional crisis, having said that, do you think the president would be well-advised now not to discuss, mention, share, talk about any of this with anyone but that lawyer? >> well i think he would be
well-advised to find some of the leakers from in his own administration who are leaking private -- neil: seems like he is. that is whole another ball of wax? >> it is insane. you have all of these leaks. what was the fear with the russia meddling in the first place? that they're undermining our democracy by interfering. what is more undermining to our democracy when unelected bureaucrats on daily basis leaking classified information selectively which seems on the sole basis to undermine the president they work for? that is the real scandal we're talking about here. trump would be well-advised to get that under control first, maybe with his lawyer, only talk to him from now on. leaks are really out of control. neil: ron, everything depends whether you can keep your own party in your fold. that began to dissolve for richard nixon as soon as
discovery of tapes and they got the tapes. that. is not happening right now. some republicans disagree with president, characterization of james comey as nutjob. speaker paul ryan didn't share that view. they are supporting the president or keeping their opinions to themselves. what are you looking for in the weeks and months ahead? >> i think you have to look at those running in swing districts in 2018, some started to abandon the president. this is why it is in the president's interest to get this job quickly as possible, what should he ask his attorney to do sore speak on this? encourage the government prosecutor using taxpayers dollars to get this done as quickly as possible. neil: they will not let him wrap this up. this is pay-per-view event. >> that is the issue. it is our tax dollars. >> neil, i'll tell you this, i have a lot of friend in congress work on democratic side. they said since this president has been inaugurated their
number one behind closed doors conversations they have with their bosses is impeachment at some point in the next two or four years. they're not overt about it right now. they're covert. that is their number one priority. this is the first stone in the water. neil: might want to look at republicans under bill clinton thing, that is the party that went one step too far, came back to bite their respective heinies. we'll see. neil: thank you very much. >> thank you. neil: meantime red alert over red china. moody's downgrading china's debt, first time since tianamen square in 1989. why this would be the first of other disruptive events, for china. ♪ ♪ predictable. the comfort in knowing where things are headed. because as we live longer... and markets continue to rise and fall... predictable is one thing you need in retirement to help protect what you've earned and ensure it lasts.
introducing brighthouse financial. a new company established by metlife to specialize in annuities & life insurance. talk to your advisor about a brighter financial future. whether you're after supreme performance... ♪ advanced intelligence... or breathtaking style... there's a c-class just for you. decisions, decisions, decisions. lease the c300 sedan for $399 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.
from march's 10-year high. we're close to the-year high here. furthermore, mortgage application volume rose 4.4% last week. a bit of a bullish alternative to that mortgage application, volume would seem to portend better, home sales news down the road. we'll watch that closely. moody's cutting china's rating on worries that its economic growth could be slowing, that is if you buy the fact that, first quarter something that is real and sustainable period. keep in mind that is 10 times the growth we experienced in the first quarter. so always been questions about whether that data is reliable or whether there is something else going on here, or for that matter china is tripping here. top forbes executive editor is here on what he is looking at here. i always had trouble, michael, i know you and i had trouble with this, believing anything comes
out of china because it seems to good to be true but what do you make of this development? >> i think you have to divide by two, multiply by 1 1/2, subtract three, something like that, neil. i think moody's is right, but kind of late, right? the chinese stock market has not been doing well in two years. chinese imports of u.s. go has fallen for 2 1/2 years. we've seen the slowdowns in the stock market and in terms of their imports of u.s. goods. so i think it is a real slowdown, neil. neil: let's say that, you don't buy these levels or seem a little grand. now moody's is saying, china is acknowledging we can't continue to grow at this clip, real or not. if they start slowing the fear seems to be, if moody's is right, the fear is real, that this economic catalyst for much of the world be is going to affect much of the world, what do you you think? >> i think that's true.
not only in terms of imports and exports, neil, but we have businesses over there. they have businesses over here. china's main problem, as i see it, neil, they printed a lot of money for a long time, kind of inflated their economy. then all of a sudden the real estate bubble happened over there and they pulled back sharply. neil: right. >> i think that is at the root of a lot of this. neil: many have argued, i think president trump did while he was candidate trump, that the chinese rig their currency, they're not to be trusted. over many years he has always spoken more of the chinese than the russians because he, he figured they were the greater global threat. now we need them to sort of deal with the north koreans. so we've been sort of giving them a longer leash on some of this other stuff in the meantime. when do you think that patience will wear thin? >> well i think, i don't know when the patience will wear thin
and who knows with what goes on in d.c., but sort of to your point, neil, if we get our economy growing at much faster rate, that will help china's economy. in fact, that would make it easier for them to work with us and help with us in terms of what's going on in north korea. neil: so when you look at their growth, 6.9%, whatever it was in the first quarter, what do you think it really is, michael? >> you know, seriously neil, would kind of cut it in half. by that i mean there are some quarters where it grows six, 7%. neil: right. >> there are other quarters where it grows 1%. it is hard to tell -- people have gone there, they built towns over there that no one lives in. so, there is a bit of a bubble. neil: yeah. >> but, i think another good thing to keep an eye on are commodity prices. when china was really going at sort of sustainable, 4 or 5% clip a few years ago they were
buying a lot of commodities, things like copper, things like that. that has slowed a lot. that's why i think whatever that reported rate is, say it is 6% or 5% i think it is likely closer to two, 3%. neil: australians are feeling that commodity recession going on. you're quite right. >> absolutely. neil: that could be much more telling. michael, very good seeing you again, my friend, thank you. >> same here, thank you. neil: any minute due out, i don't know about any minute, but i always fine this when we say any minute you are not going to leave around i don't want you to leave. maybe you leave for lunch, keep the set on. if you're a nielsen family all the more but we're expecting a cbo score on this republican health care plan and a lot of people are relying on that, that is really only game in town. it is true, only numerical game in town but it has been sloppy and wrong a lot. i don't take fault on the cbo but the fact of the matter is, more often than not their scoring has been well, awful.
the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp.
like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. neil: gerri willis and i talking about the cbo score on new health care bill, not really.
but, they are waiting for that, gerri? that is big deal and definitive stamp and cost of republican plan. unfortunately, i know only game in town, we're not anti-cbo but they have been wrong a lot. >> don't hold your breath. this is not definitive statement what it will cost. why dough i say that? because they have been wrong in the past. take something as simple how many people will enroll in obamacare. the government new how many people were on government programs, right? medicare, medicaid, chips, you name it, va, they had all the numbers in hand. they knew how many people were on employer sponsored health care but whether it came to guessing how many people would sign up for obamacare, they said 22 million. it was 11 million, half of their guesstimate. that is a guesstimate when you have that the information and can't come up with answer. medicaid expansion, that proved difficult. they said $42 billion would be the cost of the medicaid expansion -- sorry, 42 billion.
t was 68 billion. they were wrong on that as well. they have this track record of not getting it right in health care. why? it is very difficult to predict choices. neil: not slap at them trying to do this, what bothers me they put a great stock and it could affect votes on this thing, right? if you're in the senate, working on own plan and working on house plan aside, emboldening your argument it, will end up costing more than the republicans in the house originally said it would. >> that is absolutely right. the senate wants to write their own bill. the exercise, how meaningful is it? senate wants to make big changes to the bill, right? they want to make sure essential health benefits. subsidies bigger. asking for all kinds of things, that would change the horror of it. anybody's guess how useful the number will be. all eyes on it. two things to wife honestly. they have to save $2 billion. that is critical and important
otherwise they can't use simple majority for the bill to pass in the senate. secondly they have to look at how many people would lose coverage, 24 million in the last go round. neil: that is based on 10-year time frame. 11 or 12 million with obamacare now. when they hear that, that bugs, 24 million people will be out of insurance. that is the growth estimate. premium estimate. how many people will have coverage next 10 years. that is the bet they won't have that. but, where do you think the health care thing will go? will they be able to agree on a package because so much hinges on it like the tax cuts, everything else? >> everything hinges on it. it is critically important. it is the first domino that has to fall, right? but i don't see consensus yet. i don't want to be negative. i like to be, glass half-full with me. i'm always positive, right? this is hard to see it happening. if they could -- neil: no wiggle room in the senate. two votes, all of a sudden it is not happening. >> absolutely right.
neil: thank you, gerri willis, very, very much. meantime we're getting some more news on concert attack a couple nights ago. a fifth person arrested that might have been working in concert with the suicide bomber. what we're learning and finding out that is scaring a lot of folks and justifying this heightened terror alert in britain, right now the highest it could possibly be. ♪
. neil: all right. we're getting some more news on this manchester, england attack. police say a fifth person has been arrested in connection with suicide bombing. police investigating what could be a network of suspects, as we learn the bomber likely traveled to syria and libya. fox news middle east analyst on all of these developments. i thought there was a way of isolating when someone travels to these regions, especially where travel is forbidden or at least discouraged that authorities would cross-reference that, the individuals who had gone there is that they're just incapable of then bringing someone in to talk to them? maybe, like, in this country, you just can't detain them indefinitely? what? what happens? >> look, the system by itself has to be addressed and probably revised. in these attacks. i mean, people traveling to other countries could say we are going there for religious family economic reasons. though, the government may
know that these guys are in touch with other organizations. now, the decision to send somebody to speak to them could be fought legally by many pressure groups, so it gets complicated. short of actually establishing a link between that person is a terrorist organization. it's very tight. very difficult. so now is the time for great britain, maybe the europeans, and eventually us to have a different reading of how to deal with a jihadist, even before they act. neil: so now we know that there might be a network of possible players here. was that why you think teresa may, the british prime minister raised the threat level to critical, that that network might be behind an additional attack? >> usually the uk authorities would not say why, would not tell us why after -- until after the fact. but now, assessment by analysts could tell us what they're trying to do is
deter. by declaring there's a wider network and probably there could be another possibility of a copycat or of a near future attack, this would deter those who are trying to do it. at the same time, this would allow british authorities to go after these networks and decide which individuals want to talk to or even arrest and then investigate. . neil: where do you think this goes? i mean, there's been so much attention on trying to eradicate isis strong holds in iraq and syria. yet most of what we see in this country involves radicalized young men, sometimes women, who are legal citizens of those countries, particularly in britain. or are they on perfectly legal valid visas? so how do you police that part of it? and how do you trace those that might be susceptible, as this young man was to getting radicalized? >> my i address the first point, neil, quickly.
the idea which is now roaming between the united states and europe is that we defeat isis in the middle east. that alone should decrease the number of jihaddists in the west. i think at this point we are a little bit late for that. of course it would help. certainly those most active are going to get their training and get their guidelines so on and so fourth. but already within west europe and australia as well, there is an isis caliphate that exists within the west, a network of jihaddists. so these are two diffe we need to bring down mosul, roqqa, but we also need to go into the virtue enclave that exists right here, including great britain, and that's a different strategy. neil: all right. thank you very, very much. it is sad, but it just doesn't let up. meanwhile, president trump is going to be meeting with the belgium amid all of these worries. of course a stranger to these repeated terror attacks.
scary one even at christmastime. worries that blake burman is following in italy as well where the president just wrapped up a meeting earlier today with the pope. blake. >> hi, there, neil, and this is day five of the president's foreign trip he has. right now the president as you just mentioned in s in brussels there. he wrapped up a meeting with the belgium prime minister. this is ahead of the big nato summit with dozens of world leaders. this taking on a renewed and sudden focus after the attack in manchester earlier this week. the president made a comment about that attack and the need for the rest of the world to step up the fight against terrorism a little while ago, in which he said -- i'm quoting here -- when you see something like what happened a few days ago, you remember how important it is to win this fight, and we will win this fight. that's from president trump earlier this afternoon. when he started his day on this day, neil, it was a personal highlight for him as
the president went to the vatican, met with the pope, of course one of the greater themes there when he met with pope francis, consistent of the rest of this trip trying to obtain world peace. neil,. neil: all right, blake, thank you very, very much. meanwhile, rex tillerson says that the president plans to get tough on nato, that big terror meeting tomorrow. on how nato will react. i guess, john, what he had
neil: and yet whenever we're going to share that burden, or even the resistance that barack obama encountered when he wanted a more globalist view, i guess, and that we would always do things in concert with all of our allies. even that type of effort is met with resistance because most seem to prefer the united states just do it, pay for it, handle it, deal with it. this president seems to be saying here i'm open to dealing with a lot of this stuff, but you guys have to pony up more. is that the gist of it? >> i think it is, neil. i mean, this free retired problem has been going on forever. we had a secretary of defense in the 1970s that wanted nato countries to pony up 5% of gdp to defense. now we're down to 2%. i think the president has got to stay on this. i do think he's shaking them up in europe. and now he and general mattis and rex tillerson have got to
stay on top of this problem and force these guys not only to spend more but to spend more in the right direction to meet the key threats that the west now faces from terrorism, russian aggression, refugees, whatever it is. we've got to be spending more and doing better to fight these and combat these threats. . neil: all right, john, thank you very much. john, the former national security adviser to dick cheney. good seeing you again, john. >> thank you, neil,. neil: mitch mcconnell has bad news for those who think they will move quickly or get things done fast on that senate version of the health care bill that has landed in their lap of the house. right now locks the vote to approve such a package as of now. the markets up 31 points thus far. but i'm sure as they digest, they're going to start worrying about things that if the votes aren't there, maybe that's feeding the obvious and maybe the markets won't be surprised, that that could delay a lot of things, including those tax cuts. again, this is one of those things that republicans have
>> and what we've been doing for too long, both parties, by the way, in this city have been taking money from people without laying out a plan for how we're ever going to pay it back, and we start doing that with this budget. this budget does balance within a ten-year window, something that is completely new in this town. >> it's the least honest and competent budget that has been put out in 40 years. look, there are value judgments about the poor. i don't agree with those value judgments, but they were elected, and they have a right to make their value judgments. there are optimistic economic forecasts. they're further away from the postal consensus than any administration in more than a generation. that doesn't seem like the best bet, but they're entitled to their opinion. but they're not entitled to violate the laws of arithmetic
and logic. . neil: okay. that extreme criticism that republicans have claimed, a taxpayer first budget and questioning math and arithmetic. this is the same guy, by the way, who built in 4 to 4.5% growth and assumes a budget of #% growth as a stretch of math. now, i'm just saying, larry summers, i mean, if you're in a glass house, i would kind of put down the soap. former reagan economic adviser art laugher, chris edwards. you know, i don't know. i know we all a political line when judging these things. you try not to, but i found that, art, to be a bit of a stretch because you can always look at things in the eyes of the beholder and these budgets tend to be. but he was really getting at with maria bartiromo, the former treasury secretary the
assumptions on which it was based. and he was guy who came with very generous assumptions during the clinton boone years that built in very generous assumptions assuming they would last, and they didn't. i don't know. i just fdt a little galling. do you? >> yeah. i sure do. but not because of his forecasting. he's just wrong now. he is the author of what is called the new normal, neil. the new normal is that the u.s. is caught in this horrible consumption expenditure and we're going to grow at 1%, 2% for the next 1,000 years. neil: and it's the best we can do. >> the reason this happens of course is because of obama taxes, because of the stimulus spending by both w and obama. and once we reverse those, this thing has no place to go but up. i think 3% if anything a little bit too modest. neil: one thing that stands out in this and, again, you could pick apart all budgets.
i always fault those that don't look for reigning in growth for all budgets, including for republicans who don't want to touch a $600 billion defense program to try to look for cost overruns or contain it there. having said that, though, is this a draconian budget to you? is the medicaid, now more money is going to be going to medicaid over ten years than would be the case period. is that draconian to you? >> no. look, this is the most fiscally conservative budget since ronald reagan, but i don't think that's draconian. i think it's compassionate and pro growth. i'll give you two strong themes in the budget. one is the idea of federalism. the more the cost of medicaid and food stamps ought to be put on state governments because if the federal government pays all the money for these programs, the states
tend to waste it. so we could have smaller programs if states run them. the second theme that director mulvaney has talked about a lot is getting millions of people off the sidelines who were not working into the workforce. so, for example, reforms for social security disability insurance, that program has put many people on the sidelines who want to get into the workforce, but they have a disincentive to. that program needs to be reformed and many people with moderate disabilities can get back into the workforce. that would be good for everyone. and good for the overall economy. neil: you know, art, i'm looking at some of the so-called callous assumptions that have been built into this budget or chuck schumer saying it takes a sledgehammer to the middle class. the fact of the matter is this budget, in fact, in the latest year north of $4 trillion any u.s. president or any leader anywhere on earth has ever submitted ever. but it's up from 1.8 trillion
as recently as 2007. total spending over those ten years is going to be north of $53 trillion. the so-called cuts totaling about 3.6 trillion amount to barely 6.5% of that. we're showing medicaid spending chart that shows it's slowing the rate of increase. it's not reversing it. what do you make of that? >> well, you know, you're right on that, of course. but chris' point i think is really the serious one here is we need to get growth and budgets create growth, or they destroy growth. i was the first chief economist at the omb when it was formed, neil. and, you know, when you look at these budgets, if you pay people not to work and tax them if they do work, do not be surprised if you find a lot of people not working. and what chris is saying is bring the people back into the labor force and then you can be like john f kennedy where chuck can quote here, the best form of welfare is still a good high-paying job. and i wish chuck schumer would understand that.
he does everything not with static accounting, he does it with stagnant accounting. neil: he's a smart man. i think chuck schumer understands how idiotic this argument is and a program growing at a 9.7% clip when you bring it down to a 6% cliff, that is hardly draconian. >> you're right. neil: but this is the world in which we live, chris. where is this budget going? even by the likes of prominent republicans, what are we going to get? >> no, i think that, you know, the main themes here will be pushed pretty strongly by trump and his budget adviser. the idea of putting costs back on the states, getting people back into the workforce, cutting out a lot of the fraud and waste in these programs, you know, the earned income tax credit program, which trump would cut, the fraud rate is 25%, which is absolutely remarkable. so a lot of these cuts have nothing to do with
compassion. they have to do with good government, frankly. and, by the way, the last president doubled the national debt from 10 to 20 trillion. there's nothing compassionate about pushing all those costs onto young americans in the future. so i'm glad trump has as a goal to eliminate the deficit. the deficit is not compassionate. if pushes costs to young people, which is totally unfair. neil: we should be thinking a budget is one that's born by the people who have to pay for it. and too often i think we forget that. and i think it would be a good reminder to republicans and democrats alike to know everything costs money. and it is on you, the taxpayer, that that responsibility lies. so we forget that about someone getting something and not about the people who keep paying something. >> yeah. it's a double entry accounting system. someone who receives it and someone who pays for it. and that's all true. but then when you come to the
bottom line, neil. the only times we've ever had budget balances clinton, under kennedy, is after enormous economic growth. the only way to balance the budget is economic growth, and you don't get economic growth by taxing people who work and produce. you cannot tax an economy into prosperity and frankly, a poor person can't spend themself into wealth either. it's silly. and what chris is saying is exactly the right thing. the earned income tax credit is a farce. it's a hoax. it doesn't really work. jobs create good high paying jobs, and you'll get all of these people doing really, really well isn't? neil: gangbusters under the type of way we do budgeting now. so we can try changes. i didn't know that about you, art, about the omb economist. >> you didn't? . neil: no, i did not. did president lincoln treat you well? >> oh, my god.
oh, my god. neil: i'm just kidding. thank you, my friend. very good job, guys, just looking at the pros and cons of this, art law enforcemen laffer of course who served abraham lincoln very, very well. mitch mcconnell in case you didn't hear lacks votes on a health care measure in these early stages. that is not a shock. of course it was an uphill battle, he seems to be stating the obvious. remember that a number of senators said whatever the house came up with, we're going to put aside, we're going to start from scratch. but remember, it's a 52-48 senate republican versus democrat. so just a couple of peeling off there means that you don't have a deal, and he's sating the mathematically obvious. house freedom caucus member david of the fine state of virginia with us right now. are you surprised that's just put it out there, congressman? the votes aren't there right now. >> yeah. a little bit. but i think they'll find when they try to start from scratch, they're going to have the same problem. so they may circle a little bit.
but they may come home to our product at least somewhere in that ballpark. neil: you're waiting on the cbo scoring and as you and i discussed, these go back to your professor days before you became this big international media star. is that -- the cbo, it's not the best at forecasting. that's not always their fault. they have to work with a lot, they're the only game in town, i understand that. but if they score your measure, the measure that came out of the house adversely, it could further complicate efforts in the senate. does that worry you? >> no. not really. because they scored the bulk of the bill up front, and we only added on improvements. and so if the score, you know, they were off by 50% on the enrollments under obamacare, et cetera, so it depends if it's on the price side or the enrollment side. but what's key is art laugher, you just had him on. he's one of am i idols. the key is the health care on the economy going forward. that's what we have to pay way
more attention to. everyone just pays attention to static washington, d.c. government piece and not enough -- this is one sixth of our economy we're talking about. if you don't move to a free-market system where prices matter again and there's some transparency, and you get to shop for products with your own buck, that's what matters over the long run. you can put in something that scores well. socialism might score well. communism might score well, but it doesn't work 20 years out. so that would be an error. neil: do you worry, though, that we're building all of these expectations into budgets as the budgets just get obscenely huge. i mean, we're looking at a $4 trillion budget the president proposed right now as recently as 2017 it was 2.8 trillion. a few years before that, it crossed the 2 trillion mark. this is unsustainable. it's just unsustainable. >> well, it is and everybody knows the mandatory program, social security, medicare, medicaid, et cetera, used to be about 25% of the budget. now they're 75% of the budget. in 15 years, those programs
will be 100% of all federal revenues. so there won't be any money left for transparency, education, and military. neil: do you try to explain that, though, congressman? i always tell people even if you were to tax the rich at 100% just to keep up with entitlement spending at the rate it's going right now, just that, it wouldn't do. it wouldn't go more than a couple of years. and yet, i try to explain that, i even do my impression, which i think is very good. but it falls on deaf ears. >> yeah. well, another way to put it is the democrats right now are shrieking over -- we're going to save a trillion dollars over ten years. one trillion where will 100 trillion light on this mandatory programs. and the kids won't get any of them. if we don't fix these programs, medicare and social security are installment in about 15 years. that's way before the kids retire. there won't be any system left. they get zero. so we're not talking about, you know, cuts to something of
5% to 10% by a baseline. actually, most of these programs keep growing. we're talking about kids losing major programs. so on the democrat side, they don't have a budget that biologica balances in 70-year program. neil: we just have to do the math. congressman, thank you very, very much. just to put this into perspective again. i know i keep repeating these numbers but to the congressman's point, i fault republicans for not addressing defense, so i don't want to go down that hole. the fact of the matter is that this budget over the next ten years calls for spending 55 plus trillion dollars. it calls for curbing the growth by about $3.5 trillion. it is 6% off that top-level number. it is a rounding error within a rounding err within a rounding error furthermore over ten years. if that is draconian, if that is heartless, everything that is near and dear to those who say you are near and dear,
then they are lying through their teeth. all right. in the meantime, the father chester rested in the living capitol of tripoli by counterterrorism forces. this is coming to us right now just on the wires right now. the brother of the manchester attack was planning a terror attack in the libyan capitol. this is according to counterterrorism sources. libyan security, again, saying that both the brother of the attacker and the father of the attacker were part of these updated attack plans. maybe that explains the heightened sense of urgency in britain where the threat level has been up to critical. the highest it can be, indicating an attack is eminent. stick around ♪ ♪ what we do every night
meeting the king was wonderful. i had a great discussion. and we will work together on various problems. number one right now is terrorism. and we are, we are fighting very hard. we are doing very well under our generals and making tremendous progress. when you see something happen like two days ago, you realize how important it is to win this fight. and we will win this fight. it's a horrible situation what took place is horrible, unthinkable, but we will win, 100%. thank you. >> thank you. neil: all right, the president in belgium right now meeting with his belgium counter part here. all of this under this heightened terror alert here that has gripped much of the european continent. joe borelli, former trump new york campaign chair and
jessica deloach, democratic strategist. this terror attack in manchester changed the complex of this trip a little bit. how so, do you think? >> the attack in manchester changed the context president trump's trip will be framed. clearly you saw the trip with respect to visiting israel, saudi arabia, two countries the previous administration was largely dismissive of. we are forced to confront the fact we need these two allies more than ever to confront the threat of isis as well as iranian threat. now he is meeting with leaders of nato and the eu, of course the g7 summit later in the week and it could not come at a more critical time to protect interest of our westernç allies in europe and of course here at home. neil: jessica, the president has been urging a lot of those nato countries to pony up more to help in the defense effort here. very few passed the 2% minimum
of gdp to put toward the defense. some are changing, not all. how strongly do you think he should push that, even barack obama was aware of the disproportionate amount of contribution we make. obviously as the world's richest nation, did express privately alarmed at other countries with clearly the dough didn't. how far do you push this? >> i think he should definitely push it a lot farther because everyone needs to be doing their fair share here. what we've seen with the incident happened at the ariana grande concert, that is one example of how this type of terrorism can strike any place, anytime. it shows you how devastating it can be in an instant. we need everyone to buy into this effort. and the president was absolutely right for going abroad saying it is time for us to come together to do more. the united states can't do all of the heavy lifting here. he was right for doing that. >> guys, sorry to truncate this short with all the breaking news.
we'll keep an eye on that and what the president has to say ahead of big nato pow wow, but more receptive to president's ideas, eye rohn i cannily buoyed by a terrorist incident. we're keeping track in this country about mcdonald's facing new protests but exactly over what? i thought mcdonald's had addressed a lot of this stuff. apparently not. >> shame on you! shame on you! shame on you! ♪ here comes the fun with sea-doo. ♪ ♪
[shouting] neil: all right, mcdonald's shareholder meeting facing more protests. this turned into almost an annual event. so many concessions from mcdonald's. protesters are focused on a living, workable wage. there are others in the past mcdonald's tried to address, to little avail. they can not keep these protesters at bay. jeff flock outside after
mcdonald's in oakbrook, illinois. jeff? reporter. not far from the shareholders meeting i know you love mcdonald's as much as you love adele, but they were under fire today as they are every year. they want $15 an hour what they call a living wage. talking to someone in the crowd, this one woman i met adriana alvarez, i pointed out the company said we'll pay extra dollar above whatever the local minimum wage is. she says she makes $9 a hour. she don't let her work 40 hours, gets no overtime or no benefits. i said why don't you go somewhere else. you're a smart girl, why don't you go somewhere else to get a the per job. here was answer. >> other things i wanted to do but life happens. i had to stay at mcdonald's. i don't see why i have to pure you sue other things, i like my job at mcdonald's. they make plenty of money they could pay me a liveable wage and everybody else. they're a global company.
and they should use that power to do good, not to do bad. reporter: the voices this year, neil, have been added to the workers by the voices of the millionaires, the group patriotic millionaires, run by that fellow morris pearl, who used to be a managing partner at blackrock. he wrote an open letter to steve easterbrook at mcdonald's. mcdonald's is part of the problem. mcdonald's can't survive over the long term if it is workers are scraping by. the business model they pioneered in the '50s is falling flat with 21st century consumers. i would make the point that the business model seems to work pretty well over the course of the past year or so. six month return on the stock, 23% by my calculation. they're on track today, neil, for an all-time record close today if we stay where we're trading right now, the stock would be at an all-time record. maybe a good time to give people a raise when you're doing well. neil: protesters argument, jeff.
a lot of them too, seem to forget, mcdonald's alwaysç comes out and say we, this is issue in the franchisee level. this is not a corporatewide statement we make because it's a little bit different in fast-food, but that argument never goes very far, does it? reporter: no. 90% of the mcdonald's restaurants are not owned by mcdonald's. they're owned by fran chooseees. in fact mcdonald's is selling even more of those. it is not mcdonald's ultimate problem. it is small business folks all around the country. neil: jeff, thank you very, very much. meanwhile uber in the news again of the admitting it was stiffing some new york city drivers and not by a little, by quite a bit. to tracee carrasco on problems seem to come uber's way again and again. tracee? reporter: neil, this mistake could cost uber an estimated $45 million. here is how it happened. uber was calculating their commissions before any taxes or
fees were taken out instead of after. say a passenger paid $20. taxes and fees were two dollars. they were taking the commission from that $20 instead of the 1dollars. uber once they realized mistake they fixed it right away but on average new york city uber drivers could get a refund up to $900 plus interest. i spoke with some new york city uber drivers who worked for other driving companies. they tell me uber is trying to pull a fast one. >> it is not an accident. they knew it, you know, but, they never thought people were going to find out they have been stealing. now they're trying to do right. >> this is really bad. this is really bad. we work so hard. we have to pay car payment, gas, maintain and all kind of fees. reporter: not fair, right? >> it is not fair. reporter: in a statement uber tells me we are committed to
paying every driver every penny they are owed plus interest as quickly as possible. we're working hard to regain driver trust. neil, they will have to work very hard to regain their drivers trust. neil: tracee, thank you very, very much. meantime corner of wall and broad here, stocks up 44, 45 points, a lot of this even on the heels of mitch mcconnell, republican leader in the senate, the senate leader period, indicating right now if they had to do this right now and vote on a health care measure, the votes are not there in the senate. keep in mind the senate, it is their turn right now to take up what the house passed along to them. senators already said we're starting from scratch on a this measure. some people interpreting mitch mcconnell stating obvious that the votes are not there on a start from scratch package. so that might not be a fox news alert development here but it is a reminder this could drag on a little bit longer than thought. and remember, this is crucial to getting the tax cut thing done because they need the revenues
and all of that from this to move on to tax cuts which could be pushing it further back still. having said that speaker paul ryan was optimistic that the timetable is solid. they will get this and tax cuts done this year. we shall see. we'll have more after this. break through your allergies. try new flonase sensimist allergy relief instead of allergy pills. it delivers a gentle mist experience to help block six key inflammatory substances. most allergy pills only block one. new flonase sensimist changes everything.
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.
>> the foundation for the plan is 3% growth. that is trump-nomics. you're the budget director, trumpnomics whatever get us to 3% growth. if it doesn't get to 3% growth unlikely we'll never balance budget again of the that is not a plan. that is not moral continue to take money from people without a plan to pay it back. neil: budget director, saying 3% growth dismissed by larry summers by our own maria bartiromo, it is perfectly doable. the kind of growth we're seeing is subpar by historical standards. in boat the reagan and clinton years we averaged substantially stronger than that. he is getting back to the mean which would be 3% growth. many argue the groth could be significantly stronger than that it is always in the eye of the beholder. but this budget has been getting rip the apart on capitol hill from democrats saying draconian and severe.
even though medicaid they point the cuts are not really cuts at all. just cuts off the growth in medicaid going forward. and by the way, on budget matters, just to put them in perspective over 10 years, since these are 10-year plans, trump administration wants to balance pudge jet within 10 years. this 4 trillion-dollar budget to kick things off, richest ever,ç calls for federal spending next 10 years totaling more than $55 trillion. the draconian cuts, $3.5 trillion, a little more than 6% in the scheme of things. as i said before, that is a rounding error on a rounding error. we can argue about little details within each, but those societal programs, those entitlement programs, the ones particularly regarding medicaid, even social security disability benefits, continue to grow, just at a slower pace. just want to get that out there because not many people are. all right, also want to -- we're beginning to understand
why theresa may, the british prime minister, heightened the terror alert to critical. that attack could be imminent. the father and brother of that manchester bomber has just been arrested now in libyan capitol of tripoli trying to plan attacks there, god knows where es. we're on it after this. when they actually did start saving. this gap between when we should start saving and when we actually do is one of the reasons why too many of us aren't prepared for retirement. just start as early as you can. it's going to pay off in the future. if we all start saving a little more today, we'll all be better prepared tomorrow. prudential. bring your challenges.
♪ predictable. the comfort in knowing where things are headed. because as we live longer... and markets continue to rise and fall... predictable is one thing you need in retirement to help protect what you've earned and ensure it lasts. introducing brighthouse financial. a new company established by metlife to specialize in annuities & life insurance. talk to your advisor about a brighter financial future. >> all right. just earlier the father and the brother of
the uk terror suspect arrested in the capitol of tripoli. former staffer jillian turner. we're beginning to understand why the british prime minister raised the terror alert level in britain to critical, that a attack could be eminent, that there were presumably accomplices or could be. what do you think of these? these are pretty fast-moving developments here >> they are. and immediately after the aftermath of a terror attack like the one in manchester we saw on monday, the first 72 hours afterwards are wide open in terms of the amount and the type of information that the law enforcement community can gather. so what we're seeing here is the circle. they find the perpetrator and from there, they start looking at who his closest associates and his family members are. what kind of relationships he has with them, in addition to the relationships he's got with whatever type of terrorist organizations he's inspired by or is working
with. so this is not surprising in the sense that his immediate next of kin are going to be suspects and potentially have information about him neil: you know, jillian, when you work for the national security counsel, and you always hear this topic of noise, noise, chatter, that sort of thing. some of the tied in this case to the attacker in london, or at least they knew about his travel plans or knew about his communications. why in these kinds of cases play monday morning quarterback, so i apologize, but why can't we nab someone right then? to say why were you in libya going to these countries? what are you doing? you can't hold someone on that for very long so you don't bother or slip through the cracks? what happens? >> well, you can think that way. i share that with you. what more do we need? it seems in the aftermath of all of these major attacks, the arrows point to suspects who for the most part, not
always, but have histories, have traveled to places like iraq and syria where we know terrorists are training them and then sending them back to europe and the western world. the probo number one, i think coordination between britain and the united states, we're very now tightly. like our law enforcement, our intelligence community, counterterrorism officials, the gaps have been sealed. the feedback and communication loops are fairly complete, and we do a really good job of coordinating information. we can stop things like this. but once you're talking about going across an international border, things still break down. i know this is something the trump administration is making a priority, which is encouraging but the problem is here once he set foot outside and went to libya, it's very hard to then trace his where be sur whereabouts, follow
him once he comes back inside the country. does that make sense? neil: it does. certainly more sense than what i was just saying. but let me ask you about what the deal the president made with the saudis in that country feeling that we have much bigger fish to fry. but i had rand paul here earlier, jillian, saying the saudis are far from looking out for this interest. what do you think? >> so my take on that is the saudis relate to the game when it comes to terrorism. they turn a blind eye to things that were going on inside their country and in the broader region for many years. however, i think starting a few years ago, they really stepped up to the plate, they came to the table in terms of trying to clamp down on this. the problem is that these terrorist organizations have been festering for decades now and so trying to get a handle on the situation once it's
already exploded is obviously more challenging than trying to get a handle on things when they're still in progress. so i think the saudis really are trying now. the younger members of the royal family. neil: let's hope so. jillian turner, thank you so much. so much on this fast-moving development. trish regan to take you through all the above. hey, trish. trish: the uk on high alert. authorities searching for more suspects connected to monday's terror attack in manchester. just a short time ago, authorities arrested the terror suspect's father and brother in libya bringing the total number of suspects in custody to at least six. i'm trish regan, welcome to the intelligence report. prime minister teresa may raising the terror threat level, warning folks another terror attack may be eminent. we're going to have a report for you from manchester in just a few moments. plus, president trump just wrapping up a busy day in europe, a day