tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business April 10, 2018 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
i think i'm right in saying ash and liz, this rally has not faded. ashley: no. stuart: straight up and staying there. we're up almost 500 points. 462 to be precise. neil cavuto, it's yours. neil: stuart, thank you very, very, very much we're following on what is happening on to called tariff response. as you've been indicating on your fine show built on expectation that the chinese will make key concession. we don't know what those concessions might be. there are vague references to easing up on some of the tariffs or taxes that the chinese placed on u.s. and foreign automobiles in their country but no exact detailing of that or what that could mean for example, for us, or whether he will follow up on that. xi xinping, the chinese leader. we're following mark zuckerberg who is little over an hour away from testifying from lawmakers on on capitol hill. markets are soaring on optimism that this will work out fine. maybe not necessarily for
mr. zuckerberg but for us. we have "wall street journal" veronica daguerre, and joe borelli. joe, begin with you, this rally is built on optimism, this trade war. can we? >> seems like the one media talked about went pretty well for america what president xi spoken about earlier today pans out. the media was in a tizzy over possibility of what could happen before any proposed tariffs were implemented from what the chinese had done years ago. this is positive sign. hopefully with everything else going on will take a little bit of a victory lap and seal the deals president xi was talking about. neil: connell, all about how the trade deal looks. to resolve any crisis or war better it looks for stocks. >> that's right. neil: the opposite is true when it goes bad. >> i would say, my take on it as
least, xi xinping is a pretty smart guy. a communist leader yes, but understands financial markets and how they act and who is in this for the long haul. if i had to bet i think he knew exactly how market was react when he said what he did. he buys himself in time for a negotiation that will take a long time because he knew if you look like you're open to giving in, that is how it is painted some way, shape or form that will be food for financial markets. the only thing i would says as note of caution on auto tariffs, for example, lowering china's barriers on autos will help europeans, there is nothing wrong with that. it could help european carmakers, bmw, mercedes more than u.s. carmakers. ford and gm make their cars in china. tesla would be helped. takeaway from it we're in this for the long haul. this will go on for a while. neil: carmakers, big ones in the united states, ford, gm, tesla, fiat chrysler have been jumping
on the notion they will be selling more of their vehicles in china eventually but you know is it your take, veronica, if this works, the p, the president had a strategy to go bense every economist and leader on planet, get tough, respond fire with fire, and it works that could be lever we use in the future, right? >> that could be a new norm and he comes off as brilliant for doing it because it worked. what is really interesting about today, what the market liked today about china's point of view. we're opening, potentially opening financial markets, manufacturing markets broader. that is red meat for the bulls. that is red meat for any investor. what is really interesting, he said something to the effect this isn't a zero sum game. when he says things like that he didn't mention the president. there is sort of implication that is how the president is seeing things. he is saying i can get this
market to jump 500 points or more by potentially -- neil: anything i say. i don't want to jump over you. this the emir of qatar meeting with the president here. remember we had a weird relationship with this government because the saudis and united arab emirates have been fighting, sometimes physically with this government and its protection for militants within its midst. that is what they say. they argue they are more sympathetic to hearing all sighs. argument we provide additional funding to them because they have been a big help fighting islamic threat. they counter they're doing all good here, cooler heads will prevail ahead after september conference featuring all middle-eastern leaders including saudi arabia and united arab emirates. this is pow wow. we'll get a spray from the room
when the president wants to do from the region and peace he is looking forward to this relationship, kind of goes back, connell,. when the prince was here, go slow talking with the guys and here he is talking with the guy. >> what veronica talking this looks great i told you so-called experts this is the way i will do it and handle it. neil: will this work out with china? >> we talked about this a number of times, everybody follows economics, larry kudlow is in this group, tariffs are not a good thing. nobody wants to end up down the road where we have tit-for-tat war of tariffs actually being implemented as he opposed to threat of being implemented.
i think president xi was buying some time to set up effective negotiations. neil: republicans or democrat, the big, big picture. can do what you're leader for life, joe. let me ask you a little bit about mark zuckerberg final big story we're watching today, he has a lot of pressure on him. you had a funny line about the social media giant who now dead center in front of a lot of people. >> i think he will have a tough time in front of cameras and lights talking with congress. he invented a social media platform that limited interaction with other people in real life. one. great situations he might feel comfortable with. if i were him i would be concerned not the questions whether facebook is data mining, and selling the data, i would be more concerned whether they're mining data from the private message platform that facebook offers. google ran into trouble and
going through people's emails and selling data. people don't have expectation of privacy when they post i love the beatles on public page but when they message somebody the plat form has to act like utility or messaging platform. some of the post office doesn't go through your mail. western union doesn't go through your mail. neil: how do you know on some sites, you search for things and ads start appearing for that? facebook will come back at you and say, well, you ought to go after those guys for that because we don't do that? >> google was doing that for a long time and they did get into some media trouble when it came out they were poking stuff into your private email. neil: this is why the whole industry is alarmed. they feel whatever you do to facebook, whatever limitations you put on facebook could be put on us. we don't like that. >> exactly. this is not just a mark zuckerberg issue. this could be affecting twitter, google, what have you. all the folks are closely watching this.
by default is becoming the spokesperson for the industry at least in social media right now so the pressure is on but you have to think from an investor's point of view, there is a threat of further regulation, what that is going it mean. a lot of people we talk to, if this does happen it will not happen overnight. they will not all of sudden put in all the regulations to go after facebook and go after the social media companies. that is going to take a while. these companies have a lot of lobbyists. this is an election year. that will be interesting to see how hard even the democrats senate -- neil: what about to get off the thing. it is. >> especially if you joined early on. a lot of -- >> seeing as much public outrage as possible. amazon comes out with the echo product, alexa, they tell you we'll listen to your conversations in your house. people say, alexa, on. >> there are a lot of people -- all these questions will be brought up. maybe they should be brought up in tech regulations obviously to discuss but i think the larger question for facebook that will
have implications for other companies in the industry what type of company is it? i think we'll see that in the way the questions are formed today. if long term conclusion facebook is a media company, it opens itself and other companies in the technology industry up to far more regulation, even possibly oversight or at least looked at by the fcc eventually. that is a long-term -- neil: i think, you said, official washington sup in arms. media is up in arms. privacy has been compromised. it if this was a big dealer to users they would be canceling out facebook accounts. a lot easier said than done i grant you. people like the convenience of the technology and stick with it. >> right. neil: they get annoyed, i don't want to understate that, this is what that comes down to people will say, zuckerberg will say we have no evidence people are leaving us en masse which he reported in the past? if that is true, do these
investigations have a leg to stand on? >> that is a good point. if congresspeople are not getting calls from your constituents saying you need to do something about this, what is the motivation, especially they could accept money from facebook to further their campaigns. that is a tricky thing. i think you're right about users not backing away from this. from investor point of view facebook also has instagram. if you want to reach, younger, cooler users, that is where you go. that is where the growth is anyway. so mark himself may be slowly, slowly backing away from facebook and emphasis will shift to instagram anyway. >> a lot of this will be up to the republicans. first of all they control congress. they're seen as anti-regulation to begin with. they will drive a lot of this, if they suddenly come on board open to regulation, maybe we'll see it. democrats are already open to it. republicans maybe there is anti-silicon valley bias in
there but if that comes out -- neil: who will be rougher, republican senate or, because on the senate side, judiciary and commerce, tomorrow on the house side, who will, i think they both will be loaded for bear. >> i think republicans will be rough, because there are stories and evidence how tech companies like to put their thumb on the scale with some liberal issues. in many cases the young chance you have to yell at mark zuckerberg as sort of a metaphor for the whole entire tech industry. >> that gets into whether it's a media company or publisher. i was talking earlier how you regulate it or who regulates it. republicans might bring it up. one thing i was reading earlier, the better be careful what they wish for, republicans use facebook according to most accounts more effectively than the democrats in the last election which is fine. neil: i know you're close to the trump folks and all, president is going after amazon every day yet not a peep out of jeff bezos. what is that about?
>> i guess good message discipline on jeff bezos. he doesn't want to go the same direction as mark zuckerberg. there just doesn't seem to be for whatever reason that much public outrage getting behind this anti-amazon sentiment, if it doesn't even exist at all really as there is on facebook. i think largely to do with the cambridge analytica scandal, only a scandal because trump used it effectively, not president obama. neil: that's interesting. we'll see what happens. thank you very much. we'll look at wall street right now. the dow is in and out of session highs, up 437 points. a lot of that dissipated by day's end, the run-up. that had to do with the raid of michael cohen's offices, the trump lawyer. the we got late wind of that late in the day, and that rally petered out. there is no way to guarranty way it goes rest of the day. we're following a couple very
♪ neil: all right, the troops are arriving in texas and arizona. among those states beefing up troop commitments they made, to make sure they're down there at the border as the president wishes. texas governor greg abbott joins us, why he decided to increase number of troops he is sending to the lone star state. we have white house reporter that is with us how this plays out politically. what do you think, gabby? >> the potential this could be really food for republicans in the midterm elections. immigration is not always a issue energize republican voters in the midterm years but it has the potential when you look at the border. president trump talks about enhancing border security and plugging up loopholes that exist in our judicial system that allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country for extended
periods of time. this is issues the administration is tackling now. if they are in fact dealt with in the coming month that could certainly give republicans juice ling into the midterm elections. neil: they have to explain how long the troops will be there though. i am wonder if this is in place of a wall or until a wall, what are you hearing? >> there is a lot of questions about the purpose of this, how long they will be there. what enforcement measures they will take? what liberties national guard officers will have, in addition to immigration and customs enforcement that are down there. governor brown is still reviewing the request from the white house, exactly how long will they be there, what would the end of the operation be? when would this be marked a success so we could withdraw the troops from national southwest border? i think that is a question that still has to be answered by this white house. neil: california not committing any troops for the moment. oregon against it. montana against it. how much of a debate is raging
here? >> well i think a lot of these states are obviously opposed to this administration's agenda on immigration. they may not particularly like president trump. so anytime the white house comes out with a request like this, one that i might add is pretty realistic, and has been in fact done before both under president obama and president george w. bush, that they are going to have some resistance to that. for every state that doesn't want to engage in this effort there are others that do. neil: gabry, thank you very much. the president with the meeting with the qatari emere. >> he is a great gentleman. he is popular in his country. his people love him. we're working on unity in that part of the middle east. i think it is working out very well. a lot of good things are happening. also we have gentleman on my right who buys a lot of equipment from us, a lot of purchases in the united states and a lot of military airplanes,
missiles, lots of different things. but they have been great friends in some ways and we're working very well together and i think it's working out extremely well. so emir. thank you very much for being here. appreciate it. >> thank you very much, mr. president. i'm very happy and honored to be here. thanks for this invitation. our relationship between qatar and the united states has been more than 45 years. it's a very strong, solid relationship. our economic partnership is more than 125 billion. our aim and goal is to double it in the next coming years. our military cooperation is very solid, very strong. as everybody knows, that the heart of fighting terrorism is from the base and thank god, it has been very successful campaign against the terrorist groups around our region.
lately before i come here i was in tampa. i visited centcom. we met with the generals. it was a very important visit and it shows how strong our cooperation is between the armed forces. of course we speak today and we see the suffering of the syrian people and me and the president, we see eye-to-eye this matter has to stop immediately. we can not tolerate with war criminal, someone who killed half a million of his own people and this matter should end immediately. thank you very much, mr. president. >> thank you. emir and i have been working a number of years before in fact on terrorism. we're making sure terrorism fund something stopped in the countries that we are really related to because i feel related but those countries are stopping the funding of
terrorism. that includes u.a.e., it includes saudi arabia, it include qatar and others. a lot of countries that were funding terrorism. we're stopping it, getting stopped, fast, very important. you have become a very big advocate. we appreciate that. >> thank you, mr. president. i want to make something very clear, mr. president, we do not and we will not tolerate with people who fund terrorism. we've been cooperating with the united states of america to stop funding terrorism around the region. we do not tolerate with people who support and fund terrorism. i would also like to thank the president for him being involved personally, in solving the gcc crisis. he has been very helpful. he has been supporting us during this blockade. i would also like to thank the american people for being very supportive. and his role is very vital to then crisis in our region. thank you, sir. >> thank you very much. [shouting questions]
>> question. >> we're leaving now. thank you. thank you all, we're leaving now. >> thank you very much. [shouting questions] >> thank you very much, everybody. >> we're leaving now. thank you all. thanks, everyone. neil: all right the president meeting with the emir of qatar, this at a time when everyone is waiting for response to the syrian chemical attack will be. it could be coming within the next 24 hour. there is no way of knowing. the president wouldn't tip his hand or telegraph any of that. no response as well to what has been a sign of improvement in the frosty relations between ourselves and the chinese regarding trade. china's xi xinping overnight, seemed to speak of concessions. maybe big ones, that could solve this sooner rather than later. the read from our former ambassador to china, gary loch, after this.
so lionel, what does 24/5 mean to you?rade well, it means i can trade after the market closes. it's true. so all... evening long. ooh, so close. yes, but also all... night through its entirety. come on, all... the time from sunset to sunrise. right. but you can trade... from, from... from darkness to light. ♪ you're not gonna say it are you?
neil: all right. i was closely scrutinized speech overnight from the chinese leader xi xinping throwing out an olive branch if you will, beyond america to the global community that china looks for progress rather than complaints and for moving forward rather than looking backward, making a number of initiatives here to encourage foreign auto companies, for example, to do business in china, hinting of a cut in their tariffs. right now most such vehicles are taxed, tariffed if you will at 25% in this country, for example. similar vehicles coming from abroad taxed at 2 1/2%, tariff of 2 1/2%. that is the president says grossly unfair. there are wrinkles to that. there are wring the chinese premier is trying to iron out. at least to the investment committee on developments.
let's go to former secretary gary lock. >> thank you, my pressure. neil: what do you make of the overtures on the part of the chinese leader? >> we heard these promises before for in fact every speech that the chinese leaders give and top government officials give they say the same thing. we heard it year after year after year, very little action. when xi xinping came into power there was excitement over many reforms he was announcing. unfortunately many of those reforms have been slowed down or have been shelved. and so it is and encouraging sign but again the proof is in the pudding. we'll have to wait and see whether or not they really follow through. what are the time frames by which they will implement some of these assurances? american companies, foreign companies, have long had grievances with the industrial policies of china. the fact that they limit foreign investment, so many sectors of the chinese economy are off limits to foreign investment whereas virtually no limits in the united states to any type of
foreign investment from china or germany or any other place but financial services, transportation, automotive sector, energy, many of those are off limits. if american companies do invest in china, they have to do it with a partner and when they have that partner, they have to share their technology, their know how, their expertise with those partners who eventually will run with it, and become competitors to the american companies. neil: you know, in other words you're kind of saying trust by verify here and i can't blame you. there has been a rap and concern about the numbers we get out of china, back in the days you were representing this country during the obama administration about whether we could trust the data we were getting out of china. some quarters they claimed to grow at double-digit rate but statistically and technically impossible, kind of inconceivable. it is what it is, and china is a economic juggernaut. so going forward we would have to have clear benchmarks, right,
to make sure they're living up to whatever they're committed to? >> yes. for instance they have been saying for quite some time they want to improve the climate for intellectual property in china. in fact they have been making progress. they're changing the legal system, the court system to actually kind of mirror what we have in the united states. they're trying to centralize the court decisions so there is more consistency and higher caliber decisions as opposed to decisions being made at the local level. neil: but they control those court decisions, right? >> yes, yes they can in many cases although there are many american companies have been winning court cases over intellectual property in china but again the progress is slow. we need them to continue those efforts. we need to make sure they're not forcing american companies to transfer and share their technology as a condition of doing business in china but clearly imposing tariffs is the wrong way to go. that is really going to hurt the consumers and american companies ultimately in a trade war.
neil: but if they were hurting, ambassador, chinese are conceding albeit check what they're doing, wouldn't that be a kick with rather crass approach some of the guests on this show put it works, gets the desired response? >> well i really believe, there are many other ways which we can exert pressure on the chinese to open up their markets, level the playing field. neil: but they never have, right? they never have. you tried mighty hard. but they never had. >> we never invoked those tools. i think there are more strategic effective tools international community can use. we need to join together. not just american companies have concerns about doing business in china, it is other countries as well. we need to make sure all countries force china to play by the rules and perhaps we should limit reciprocate by saying if you're not opening up your markets and your sectors to foreign investment, if you will require those transfers of technology, then we'll do the same of your chinese companies
here in america or europe or elsewhere. we're going to close off our sectors of our economy to foreign investment. neil: that sounds like tariffs by another name? >> no. it is saying that you can't invest in america if you don't allow americans to invest in china. but if you impose a tariff for instance, on chinese goods coming into the united states, a lot of those are components that american manufacturers use in making their products. it is going to raise the price of their product they ultimately sell either in america or abroad. which makes the american product less competitive, reduces sales of that american product, and for consumer good. there are certain consumer goods, a vast amount only made in china. virtually all microwaves are made in china. you raise a tariff on goods coming to china. the american consumer has no choice but to buy a chinese good at higher price, which means less money the pockets for vacation, buying automobile,
remodeling their home or college. neil: depending how the argument is made, mr. ambassador, compelling moment to make a patriotic case you will feel pain. president made indirect reference to farmers and potential pain they could face, this is the right thing to do, it will hurt in the beginning but longer term it will be -- do you think americans respond to that. >> i don't think they will, especially if there are other tools that are available to try to get at the same result, without inflicting the pain on american consumers or on american companies. because, once we get into a trade war, china can impose tariffs on u.s. goods. they do not have to buy a bowing airplane. they can buy airbus. they don't have to buy soybeans from american farmers. they can buy soybeans from brazil and many other countries in latin america. neil: i don't know those soybeans would satisfy their
demand, there is a lot of it. >> if they reduce the purchases of american soybeans in half, made up for it with the bumper crop available in brazil and many other countries in south america. neil: right. >> i mean, yes there will be some pain. there will be pain on both sides in a trade war. nobody wins in a trade war. neil: true enough. >> but there are more effective tools to get at the concerns that american companies and other foreign companies have regarding china's policies. neil: ambassador, thank you very much for checking with us. >> thank you. neil: ambassador gary lock. also the commerce secretary. to the governor's point, what he was saying, our trade representative holds true here, a lot of the items that are directly affected by this are in the agricultural commodity arena. a lot are soybeans, wheat, cotton all this, briefly dipping, since come back, in some cases to their all-time highs. we'll explore that with the guy that runs the cme where a lot of this stuff is traded and what
phenomenon is going on there. there shall we say a little bit of interest in a lot of those commodities having to do with this, after this. ♪ copd makes it hard to breathe. so to breathe better, i go with anoro. ♪go your own way copd tries to say, "go this way." i say, "i'll go my own way" with anoro. ♪go your own way once-daily anoro contains
two medicines called bronchodilators, that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. anoro is not for asthma . it contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. the risk is unknown in copd. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder, or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if you have worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. ask your doctor about anoro. ♪go your own way get your first prescription free at anoro.com. [ phone rings ] how's the college visit? does it make the short list? yeah, i'm afraid so. it's okay. this is what we've been planning for. knowing what's important to you is why 7 million investors work with edward jones.
that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. nah. not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call to save $500 off bath walls with your walk-in bath, or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info.
we're on the move. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. terminix. defenders of home. when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest
price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. ♪ >> just heard they broke into the office of one of my personal attorneys, a good man and it's a disgraceful situation. this is a total witch-hunt. talking about a lot of serious things with the greatest fighting force ever and i have this witch-hunt constantly going on for over 12 months now. neil: the president was enraged last night responding to the fbi raid of his personal lawyer, michael cohen office and home. where this is going, whether the investigation is accelerating, veering off or doing both.
charlie gasparino, what do you think? >> warlock hunt, the male version of a witch-hunt. warlock hunt. neil: you're an idiot. go ahead. >> first of all they didn't break in. what they did was, mueller gave to the u.s. attorney for the southern district who went to a court, a federal judge and said, we have probable cause that something is wrong here and we need to get these records. by the -- neil: under suspicion that he could destroy them, hide them and this is the only route to go. this is a big route to go. >> not only that. this is high bar. higher bar than fisa warrant to get communications between his lawyer. neil: they did the same thing with manafort. >> this is even higher bar. they didn't break in, obviously something there problematic for
the president. i just want to disclose, i have known michael cohen a long time. always had a very good relationship with him. but you know, he is described, described himself as you know, as donald trump's fixer in fixing something, looks like related to the stormy daniels stuff, there was a trip wire. i want to make a couple points here. i don't know exactly what the fbi and mueller has. i do know this, from witnesses that were talking to mueller's office they are looking at two things involved michael cohen. they're looking at sames to stormy daniels and possibly anybody else, to keep, that they described as alleged hush-money to quiet women, not go public with, any allegations they had sexual affair with candidate trump and private sit is send trump, that is one area. why they're looking at this, who knows. it could be considered a campaign contribution f you did
something to aid the president before the election. the other thing they're looking at is, his relationship with a guy named felix satter, a businessman who was born in russia, has ties to russians. their whole attempt to start a trump hotel in moscow. they're looking at that relationship, whether they dealt with any other people in the sort of nexus between government and business in russia. and how that might -- neil: that seems far afield of collusion charges? what are they looking at, a relationship? >> we don't know, because those are the types of people that you could collude with theoretically to try to influence the election. this is what they're investigating. i'm not saying they found anything. the stormy daniels thing, this is my surmise, seems like a way to put pressure on michael cohen to flip. just my surmise. surmise of legal people i've spoken with. it is very tangential, there may
be something wrong there. that is what i think they got here. i think that is what they go after. if you get your personal lawyer to flip on the president, turn evidence, that's a pretty big deal. that is why the markets turned pretty sour yesterday. remember they came off the highs yesterday, when deficit, when the deficit happened. the whole line about the deficit. neil: bigger thing what the heck was going on. bullets from the new york ties. >> right. neil: let me switch gears. i don't want to dump this on you. "wall street journal" is talking talks heated up again between sprint and t-mobile. sprint shares have been halted for a lot of this headed up north 6%. now up 13% now? what do you make of all this? >> here is what i make of it. i think wall street is getting comfortable with the fact that the at&t time warner deal might go through. they don't think the government has done a very good job presenting its case. neil: is that right? >> that's right. based on investment bankers, lawyers i'm talking to, analysts in that space.
they don't think the government has done a very compelling job. they think the judge in this case, judge leon, who is, he is pretty much of a stickler by the books guy. the government, betting is that the government hasn't reached that bar to show this vertical merger two disparate businesses put under one will be anti-competitive. in that context you will see, particularly if this deal can go through, if at&t wins, justice department loses, you will see a lot more mergers. that is what some of this is. people will be talking like crazy if this at&t deal -- neil: the environment now? separately, the bayer-monsanto merger was green-lighted. we see more happening in that arena, more happening in lots of arenas, the bets are off in this environment that there will be mergers? >> i would say this bayer-monsanto is different. there is particular bugaboo
president has about media mergers and media consolidation. that is different. monsanto, we've been signaling the bayer-monsanto deal broke when it first got announced two years ago, likely to happen, get through the justice department with a few things of the not quite one of these sort of mergers that will, that could squeeze media. one thing they are worried about with bayer-monsanto whether chinese could buy into a piece of it and use some of their technology. they were actually talking about that they dealt with that issue. it was matter of taking some chips of at table. neil: by the way, all ancillary issues about verizon, 4% run-up. deals are back in town here? >> particularly media. if you can get, if the at&t deal goes through with time warner, media rush everybody has been talking about that would happen probably will happen because then you have, justice department can just, it
establish as precedent that vertical mergers can happen. that means a lot more horizontal mergers will happen too. neil: you need content for that. you and i streamlined on those tiny little phones. i fine that very thinning. >> you imagine you and i having our own channels? neil: in other words, when you're on tiny device, you can't tell you should have tried the salad today. >> or he, can you tell if i'm drinking? neil: that screams, need one of these devices. hate to throw so much at you. know you can handle it. latest indications sprint and t-mobile restarted talks. they have been on again, off again for couple years. >> you will see a lot more than that if the at&t deal goes through. neil: thank you very much. you never-trumpers. email away. more after this. were you satisfied with the attention you were getting?
there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why. medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. 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: all right. well, you know, never let a deal talk just sort of wither on the vine here. sprint and t-mobile apparently talking again about another deal. remember talks collapsed, too strong of a word. maybe dissipated back in the fall. now they're retalking. sprint's stock was halted last time i checked, up 17% of the time. the attention is entire sector.
verizon is moving up on optimism in this sector all happening all over again. would not be the first time we've seen the phenomena where the goodwill spreads to other issues in that. a lot of telecommunications and related etfs, i can imagine, special funds would benefit from the new interest in this sector. speaking of new interest in deals, new interest in a sector, small business confidence, remaining at or near record highs. yale economics professor robert schiller what is going on here. i assume much more than deals. so, robert, maybe you could update me on what the small business sector is seeing. is this in response to the tax cuts and just, that wind at their back or what? >> i think it is a response, mainly to the republican congress and donald trump's election. you will note that the national federation of independent businesses, small business confidence index jumped up a lot right after trump's election.
it reminds me, it is at near record highs now, but. the record high was in 1983. when they recovered from a recession when ronald reagan was president. it is having a business oriented president surely boosts small business confidence. neil: i'm way too young to remember any of that, robert, as you might suspect, in all seriousness that is interesting development. who is leading whom? little guys leading big guys. big guys leading the little guys. when you look at trading indices, russell 2000, what have you, they tend to go their own way, while biggers guys go their own way. what is going on here? >> donald trump is not exactly a small businessman, maybe he started out that way. maybe his father started out that way. so he is a living legend.
he is provideing a script approving of that kind of lifestyle, admiring of it. seeing a contribution to our productivity that people like that contribute. there is a boost in spirit. i don't think it is just the tax cuts. i think it goes beyond that. neil: you don't start filling up your showroom or hiring more people at your corner store unless you're confident the environment will sustain it. we've seen that in that area with a lot of local hirings and the like. how real is this? in other words how long do you suspect this goes because fighting the wind at their faces here of higher interest rates and all of that? >> yeah, it is hard to know where it goes. i was reading the nfib report. it turns out people who are optimistic are not worried about interest rates. they don't tend to mention them at all. so i think that the fed is
really a sideshow here. assuming they behave responsibly, which it seems like they are. so, yeah, it is just some sense of the, our time is here. that, that sense could last. but on other hand, i have to say that nobody can forecast the economy well out a year or more. so, you know, it is anybody's guess how long this feeling will last. it could last a long time, but something could disrupt it.it, ? >> well, i don't, i don't, you know, it might disrupt it. i can't say. it is not like trade wars have ever been a really big influence on our economy. neil: right. >> if you go all the way back to the smoot-hawley tariff, the celebrated smoot-hawley tariff in 1930, it had very little impact on our trade deficit actually. that is why it has been overstated. neil: i think you're right about
that. thank you very much. good seeing you again. >> my pleasure. neil: robert schiller. a lot of developments here as we wrap up the first hour here with the dow up about 392 points. apparently a big media deal or at least a telecommunications deal that could be back on between sprint and t-mobile benefiting that sector. we have troops coming to the texas-mexican border. the read from texas governor greg abbott. we have maybe a cooling with the so-called trade war with china. the guy that trades at cme with all that stuff affected, soybeans, wheat, traded at his exchange. terry duffy is coming up as well. you're watching fox business. the day after chemo might mean a trip back to the doctor's office,
just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home, with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection, which could lead to hospitalizations. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, .. .. n cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. at crowne plaza, we know business travel isn't just business.
neil: albright, you've been seeing the dow jones industrials come back here. nothing has been written on paper yet that the chinese xi jinping is even the trade gap between our two countries starting with cars and lowering tariffs on them from the united dates in other countries. still to early to tell whether that will translate into other areas we want to see progress on intellectual property that sort of thing. for now, the markets are liking what they are hearing. also following a spokes tax today. testimony on capitol hill. it could be a rocket could be rockets appeared today on the
senate side, tomorrow the house side. deirdre bolton with the very latest. >> hi, neil. i'm literally stuck above for mark zuckerberg is going to be sitting in a spot to you. you can see one single chair. this is a huge day for him. a huge day for facebook. they seen some really tough questions from a senate commerce and judiciary committee. earlier on, senator grassley spoke with us here and here's what he had to say about how he expects the afternoon to go. >> if we can keep it out of the legal environment, if these companies do what they say they're going to do to protect privacy that they have an doneness far and will continue to do that can reduce and enhance their credibility with the public, then maybe we don't have to do it this way.
>> you heard senator grassley's town, which seems to be more we would prefer to face the release itself, but if it's not ready to come and not capable of it, we will step in. not all senators are going to have that liberal a take if you want to call it that, with the company. there will be a slight delay timing wise as we are all following a senate vote happening right now. scheduled to have been through 2:15. we might be late in starting this hearing. i also want to call your attention to the fact there is a small but growing number of shareholders paid mark zuckerberg should not be ceo and chairman and how will the voting rights that he does. in fact, new york city pension plan the sent a letter to facebook and they say listen, there should be an independent chairman to the pension fund manager and three other board
members be seated. that is just one pension plan, but that idea is great as well but perhaps mark zuckerberg recently built a machine that he can't manage and they should not have voting control to ceo and chairman. >> market watcher keep fitzgerald with us. congressional reporter. what do you think happens now the next couple of days? we watch this talk in response to how facebook investors feel and holding up here. >> well, from my death, the stock absolutely is going to be dependent upon how we does. it's going to be interesting. he is facing such a huge challenge because his trust in the trust with the public has
been decimated for choices they made, largely in my opinion. i think the board in this case needs to do something. i'm not sure that zuckerberg is the right person to be in the feed at this point, given the damage to the brand because of the failure to the public. i think investors will see over the ensuing months really make a call for some greater level of accountability on the leadership side. it is just beginning, but after doing what he did with russia and allowing access and certainly with cambridge analytic and just the failure to control data in general, people's data over money, over greed, of relaxed regulation within their own company. he needs to face a greater level of scrutiny and accountability that the public is not calling them out on.
yet they have not done their job in my opinion to hold them accountable. tree into a watch on that. one thing that seems certain is a push for regulation here. i don't know which is going to gather more steam and how quickly, but we do know republicans are open to regulating, even though senator grassley was saying don't go too far. >> i think that's really significant that chuck grassley said he was open to it with the appropriate warning not to go too far. republicans been open to it comes after a series of failures. they probably would not be seen as earlier on, but we saw with the election in russia and now cambridge analytica and the public is upset about this. this is why you say republicans be open and of course democrats will be pushing really hard for the bringing up things about the russia election meddling as well. neil: technology may like facebook and has added a lot to
my portfolio and market gains. i'm worried about how this goes. i'm worried whatever is on facebook will be if i need to in my stock, investment, my company market leaders. do they have a legitimate fear? >> i think they've got a legitimate fear with facebook. the distinction is one you've got to draw. if you're a company based on real results, real businesses, real margins and there's plenty of them out there. we've got a very different scenario. that's a choice as an investor you got to make. >> it is party to both of those, right? >> well, facebook is an abomination. zuckerberg is way out of his league. he cannot control the monster he created. the government as a smokescreen, politicians act in as inquisitors depend on facebook to build their communities. there's a real sense of hypocrisy here to be an investment analyst.
you can't separate the two. we advise people to get out of facebook several weeks ago because i didn't like the undercurrent. neil: might be a little extreme. do you get a sense this will change how we view sort of free will technology that the government has had this lovely fair approach from a hands-off let these guys do their own thing? >> i think they are largely going to be gone and in the respect of how been structured today. but it's going to be interesting because i'm not a proponent of government regulation. there needs to be some mechanism to hold them accountable for these companies and perhaps allow the public to be able to have some type of redress in the form of civil fines, liquidated damages feared something that would allow for people that if your data is misused that you can get some kind of recompense.
there's been cases in the past with the government has done this right. if you look at the communications decency act passed in the late 90s, it allowed for a structure with public companies from people that were using copyright information or using privacy related activities that were against the law and didn't hold the tech companies necessary viable. this would be the inverse of what i suggest what happened, which would be you would hold tech companies liable using a similar mechanism, but an inverse situation. neil: i realize not to play off the ronald reagan line. could they create more problems? >> that is a worry from the republicans. we will have to see how that is today.
that is that key question that people see what facebook is doing will be enough for a filamentous divan. neil: thank you very much. an hour away from the testimony. the senate commerce and judiciary committees tomorrow on the house side of things, so be along 24 hours for this young billionaire maverick who started this site called facebook come originally as a dating mechanism, a way to find girls. in the meantime, we've got texas governor greg abbott here on the president move troops on the border. why now, for how long will they be there? more after this.
so lionel, what does being able to trade 24/5 mean to you? well, it means i can trade after the market closes. it's true. so all... evening long. ooh, so close. yes, but also all... night through its entirety. come on, all... the time from sunset to sunrise. right. but you can trade... from, from... from darkness to light. ♪ you're not gonna say it are you?
neil: we might be making progress on that, really help in these markets. what do you think? >> raid on trade, one ends it seems like progress is being made with nasa's deputy think it's very important to have a revised updated map to and close a deal that will promote trade among canada, the u.s. and mexico. understand texas is one of the state has a trade surplus with mexico. this is very important to the texas economy. i just got back from a 10 day trip to india with a robust act committee involving trade. we did something the president wants to achieve and we recently went with the largest steel manufacturer in india where they are spending half a billion dollars to create 500 jobs for texans in texas, to be used in the oil and gas fields. this is one of the ways in which texas is helping lead the way to
expand trade across the entire globe. >> on this particular issue with the chinese, the first sign overnight that chinese premier was open to low-grade tariffs on foreign automobiles and american non-mobiles, which is something this president has been demanding. do you think the chinese are going to budge on this and how do you check to make sure they are? >> this is a sign or signal that the chinese want to budge. the last thing they mail on trade need is a trade war. you have a bunch of losers in china would be one of the losers if there is a prolific trade war. this is a good signal saying listen, let's put our arms down a little bit. the other deal is easiest to compromise on because they're terrorists were 10 times what the terrorists are. >> many in your party say the president is absolutely right.
but this is not the way to go about it. >> , china has been a trade abuser for a long time. the president was right to take action and because of his action, that is why china is coming to the table trying to reach deals. this'll be good for the united states. it's going to be smart for china to compromise. neil: troops at the border. more than the president originally requested and you committed to. there are a number of other states say no. montana saying. are you surprised? >> there are polarized politics in the united states that are completely unhinged for national security and the rule of law. texas is a national security and the rule of law state. of course we will step up and do our part to make sure the border is secure. i've received phone calls already from governors of other
states. a phone call from the governor of south carolina. i know the governor of arkansas, the governor of other states that want to stop step up and help out. they are going to be there a long time, years. because if you look at what the president said, he said this is a gap filler until he gets funding for the wall and greater border security. neil: that might not come for years. >> that's my point. we will have president fared to make sure we do everything we can to better secure the border. >> some say he's pumping the anti-and potential violence by having his troops there. whether it's a caravan or other caravan of illegals. >> i disagree with that for two reasons. the catalyst for this is not the caravan. the catalyst for this was a dramatic rise in the number of
cross-border illegal immigration as well as cross-border heroin trafficking that increased more than 200%. there is a demonstrated need the president was trying to get ahead is to make sure he tamp down any dramatic increase. the second thing to show it will not lead to greater attention and that is if you recall george w. bush. president george w. bush put national guard, more than what trump is doing back in 2006. president barack obama added national guard to the border in 2010. >> in president bush's case, it was concern over drug-related violence. >> this event are related to drugs because has increased more than 200% across the border. but texas has maintained the national guard presence on the border for more than four years now. so this is something that hasn't led to any greater attention. the national guard will be a
force multiplier for the border patrol where they need to have more personnel on the ground, making sure they are are interdicting in apprehending anybody coming across the border illegally. neil: you know, this border thing came on the same day as the president taken action in response to syrian chemical attacks. lo and behold, look at the president offices raided by the fbi. what did you make of that? >> all in a days work. you've got the area, the border. neil: [inaudible] >> i'd have to -- i don't know what the catalyst was. when you look all these together, it was preplanned what would go on in the border. this series first came out of the blue that was not preplanned i assumed, but something the president had to respond to in the lawyer situation is
something. neil: why did they choose yesterday to do it? no idea. we all wonder about it and i think most of all we will never know. neil: you are though you're of course. that is an unusual measure to take. what is he after? >> subpoenas are not unusual. subpoenas for documents for lawyers are highly unusual. neil: the president is not a fan of it. in fact is apoplectic about it yesterday. a lot of people think of fire molar. should he? >> that obviously would cause some tension across the country. i don't know if i would be the smartest move. we need to wait and see if there's better strategies. neil: there is frustration saying that this investigation however darted is off course. it would be the first time as he reminded me in the ken starr investigation that did as well. but do you think this is now
running amok? >> wednesday of a special counsel, it seems like there's no end to it. when a special counsel began, there was one assignment instrument danielson hadn't anything to do with it. neil: with interesting a stormy daniels could be the issue that changes everything here. how they were done. it's weird to >> it seems like everyday there is another page turner with the information provided. who knows will happen tomorrow. neil: you are in the camp that fires smaller on the house more problems. >> i think it could cause some problems if molar is fired. neil: do you find unusual or that you have to have a very good hunch when you read someone's office or home as the fbi didn't paul manafort case the president former campaign chairman when they ransacked his home, you are usually taken extreme measures knowing how it
looks. >> this is a lawyer who has information subject to attorney client privilege information. that's a complete different situation. we have to assume that mueller, whoever authorized this knew what they were doing. this is information we will learn more at in the coming days hopefully. i will tell you this. americans deserve to know why this information was requested. those asking for it need to be forthcoming and share it to the entire country exactly what's going on here. like you come in the rest of the country is asking all these questions and we deserve some real answers. neil: if this is still going on a year from now, this whole investigation, what would you think? >> at the investigation is going on a year from now, that would likely mean they are not coming up with information that leads to real prosecution and is just being dragged out. neil: the president called that
a witch hunt. >> we will find out. >> it depends if they lead to information that turned into real violations they will prosecute. if not, it looks more like a witch hunt. neil: imagine after the beginning. your concern of the border. is it your belief the president will have a revised nafta agreement and not torpedo and leave it? >> we've seen the evolution of these negotiations and they continue to look very promising. every conversation i'm having is looking more like we will have a new updated modernized data that will be very good for the united states and also good for mexico and canada. these are robust important trade partnerships that can be made even better. i think we will conclude the sole nafta renegotiation process with an even better agreement. >> when bill clinton was looking at these other deals, do you
think the president is right to say it was a sham? >> is absolutely right saying it was outdated. he may be right in the sense that there were some in the united states who were disfavored from it. the texas perspective of course which is the data that i know the most and that is texas trade surplus with mexico. economically, this has been very beneficial to the state of texas. i don't know how it works with regard to the other states. we in the state of texas want to continue to see robust trade we have with mexico. neil: the markets have been doing very well today. earnings have been very, very strong. and yet you have these polls do show a blue wave coming in the midterms. is there a disconnect to you and some republicans who hear it, others who don't buy it. what do you think? >> i think it's too early to tell. you recall of course everyone in
the entire universe predicted who would win the last presidential election and they were all wrong. there is always -- there was always a whole lot of hope and hype at this stage of campaigns. as we get closer to november, in texas certainly, but also across the united states, people will begin to see more money in the pocketbooks of people. more people have jobs. unemployment will remain low. the types of things that lead people to favor a particular party or going to line up with the republican party because you will see policies passed that make life better for people because of the leadership in place. neil: real quickly, sir. you have a lot of crises to deal with from hurricanes, shooting, natural disasters. and you have to deal directly with the white house quite often. the talk is you're the
president's favorite governor appeared i don't know if that's true or not. in your discussions with him, how do you feel he's faring? the mac is doing great. i talked to him yesterday and he was in a tremendous mood. neil: he must not have had wind of what was happening. >> it was earlier in the day. he was in a great mood. but also, and i talk frequently because of what's going on at the border and the response of the hurricane, respond because texas played such a pivotal role. it works well with him and the vice president and is a collaborative productive relationship. neil: governor, thank you very much. governor greg abbott. talk about a governor who's in everything but the kitchen sink thrown at him. incredible. you probably know a lot of the items directly affect did, whatever you want. a lot of that stuff.
to read from the guy who has the cme were all but death is. if they are worried they are having a funny way of showing it. kerry dusty is maxed. its maximu. bravo, tall meeting man. start winning today. book now at lq.com start winning today. but i'm not standing still... and with godaddy, i've made my ideas real. ♪ i made my own way, now it's time to make yours. ♪ everything is working, just like it should ♪
neil: well, everything old again is new again. t-mobile and sprint are chatting with one another again. verizon and at&t moving at the whole sector potentially in play. in the meantime, also following the market reaction to hint that the chinese might be willing to budge a little bit for president trump including a pinup or auto markets do auto manufacturers. right now the chinese impose a 25% tariff sold there. some very expensive ones with the higher tariffs. be that as it may, xi jinping overnight hinting that they might be able to move i'm not an intellectual property and the like. too soon to tell.
what we do know is this has had an indirect effect in the commodities arena where the corn and wheat and cotton were in the crosshairs of the chinese as a response to what the administration was doing. originally, a lot of those items were going down on the believe they were closing itself off for these items. the cme is where a lot of stuff is traded in ceo terry duffy knows it. very good to have you. welcome. >> thank you mineo. appreciate being here. >> i get a sense reading the market and the trading going on by you that it is calming down a little bit or at least the concern is calming down. what would you say? >> well, i think it is to some extent, but it seems to be changing by the day, neil. we've seen such extreme volatility in the market place good look at the overall market.
you talk about out of time. 300 down, 300. today the market seems to be react and quite positively to president xi's comments about what you were just referencing. let's see if it's sustainable. we heard this type of comment coming out of china before whether an intellectual property or their products, but one of the things for the american producers of food is a very big deal because that is one of our number one export products we have. we have plentiful supply in the united states. we're a big exporter. farmers are very proficient in what they can produce. but if the global market. any tariffs in their margin is squeezed dramatically on the family farmer, which we don't need any more pressure on the family farmers today. >> a lot of people were saying prices were going down for a while. american consumers would benefit and i was talking to a farmer who was saying as long as it could drive me out of business.
those threats were very real. who has been driven? i imagine much like stocks in the news come you get them newcomers in this environment. >> i don't know if they trade in a different other than it becomes on people's radar is because it has an influence on their economy. agricultural sector is a big part of the u.s. economy. it could have big effects on businesses or do koch remember learning component to everything we do in the united states. more and more people need to pay attention to the prices of these products. you just referenced it went down exponentially over the last several weeks when these were announced. there's people that i once again some of the production. and then you have the grain producers. so there is a big component associated in finance with these
products. neil: again, they seem to have almost returned. not across the board, but where they were. that has changed people's views of these types of commodities, these types of investments. a lot of people don't find investing in corn or soybean or wheat or pork bellies, but it is quite the growing market mechanism. i am wondering if because of this it's not all over yet, that it's forever changed. people are now looking at commodities in a way they never did before. >> that's an excellent point and i will tell you just the other day, a week or so ago we traded over 3 million agricultural products. to put that in there, 15 years ago the average daily volume and total at the cme was about 2 million contracts. the smallest sector of the cme group, which is our acceptor traded 3 million contracts can i record that will participate in
the marketplace. people are very concerned about the asset class as well they should be. >> on interest rates and rates going up, have always been curious whether there is a correlation as to what happened but i know you go way beyond these commodities. i could get into energy contracts and all the lake. but we are living in a rising rate environment. how has that changed things for you guys? >> the biggest change i was saying is you know this as well as your viewers to is the fatter central bank has announced they will take down their balance sheet, which means he will not be accumulating as much debt. in return, that means someone has to do it. we are running up record levels. we need to issue bonds and treasuries constantly. if the fed is going to not participate like they once did, other participants need to pick up the slack. we are the only federal reserve
that does not hedge their portfolio. the people that are participating in buying the u.s. that do need to hedge it. they don't have the same ability like the u.s. government by believing it's unhedged. i will continue to do without participation into the market cme group. neil: at another trillion dollars deficit soon. you also trade these bitcoin future is here and how is that going? >> study as it goes. i was on the mindset we put a lot of different controls would not put on other products. i want to be cautious about this. i was very concerned it was a potential bubble on the pricing, but i didn't want people caught up in the euphoria of the bitcoin. so we made margins extremely high, limits very tight and i think it served us well. we launched it in 18,600 now
it's trading around 6600. seawater is brought in participate in the professionals have been in here. 47% margin we are holding for bitcoin. we are still holding back. they've gone very well. still holding the same amount of march and even though the prices down more than half. we've done a very prudent thing here. knocking it out of the park as far as volumes go, but this is a new asset class potentially and i want to make sure we walk on here. neil: i think it's the right strategy. you also want to be an adult about it. not a crazy bubble here. thank you for taking the time. i appreciate it. >> thank you, neil. neil: terry duffy, the man who runs the cme. to go to exchange for the more exotic investments and some everyday, but it has changed the complexion mightily about where
people chase money. in the meantime i was telling you about the deficits just around the corner. both parties have been blamed for that. now what. hey, what are you gug here? we're voya. we stay with you to and through retirement. so you'll still be here to help me make smart choices? well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement.
when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.
neil: all right, they are getting ready for mark zuckerberg on capitol hill about 17 minutes away. keeping an eye on that. also keeping an eye in the meantime on the deficits piling up and of course expected to hit a trillion dollars in the next fiscal year to the committee for responsible budget. jana galan was the money mess in a speech recently but other economists blaming the tax cuts. shouldn't she have been blaming the spending as well? >> yeah come anyone who looks at
the numbers that came out of the congressional budget office yesterday were terrible and really quite frightening. they have to be baloney both sides of the budget in that we have an entitlement crisis that has been building for years and years driven by health care costs and aging population. we've known it's come our way and will put immense pressure on our budget national debt. on top of that, we put forth to major policies in the past month. a tax cut that instead of tax reform that would be revenue neutral ended up losing a lot of revenues to make the deficit bigger and a huge budget bust on the spending side. basically the budget was broken to begin with because of these entitlement and we took every measure we could think of to make it worse in the past couple months. that's where we are. >> you know, it wouldn't take a lot to put us closer to a better path. just trying to rein in the growth of the entitlements are not necessarily sticking into beneficiaries or even
intermediate beneficiaries. we don't do that and i think we are past the graveyard every time we miss a chance. >> completely correct on that. every year we wait, the cosco. if we had done this 10 years ago, we basically couldn't fix these programs without anybody feeling any real effects on the revenue was down inside of the budget. we waited longer. more baby boomers are moving to retirement. it's gotten harder, but still mentally doable and we don't have to cut benefits. all we have to do a slow the growth of a lot of a lot of programs and that will protect the who depend on them. the problem is congress doesn't do anything that's hard at all until the very last minute. people are pointing saying we don't have to do this immediately. i think that we wait until the last minute when the changes are made they will be much, much more painful and affect people who must depend on the program and really reflects a tremendous shortsightedness of our whole
political process that kind of sacrifices those people who depend on the programs. neil: don't get me going. democrats and republicans i always say wasting money is wasting money and letting deficits pile up is beyond the pale. the president now wants to look at the $1.3 trillion spending measure both parties agreed to after the fact. what do you think of that whole idea? >> i think it makes a great deal of sense. it will depend on which programs are altered and people will say that's not fair. i wasn't part of the deal. this spending bill was a terrible deal and frankly most of the folks who voted for it know that it was and it has more spending on almost all parts of the discretionary budget than most people are and are asking for or could be justified. we should find ways to pale that back, still that back. let's remember they busted through the spending caps and basically gave up any and all
savings from the past years. again, huge budget deficits driven by entitlements like you said. both sides are saying here is another way we can make it work. let's throw some more money at these things. the uncertainty is going into the economy is really going to cause a problem if we don't fix it soon. >> i hear you. thank you very much. always good seeing you. we are waiting for mark zuckerberg, 10, 12 minutes from testifying on capitol hill. the facebook ceo has posted this on facebook. i wonder how he was able to do that. in an hour, going to be testifying in front of the senate about how they take a broader view of our responsibility to make sure those tools are used for good. i'll do everything i can to make facebook a place where everyone can stay closer with the people they care about and make sure
problems than you are to have. >> i think it could cause some problems if mueller is fired. neil: bowed the an understatement. firing bob mueller would be a big problem for the president of the united states, maybe even in our country. judge andrew napolitano on that. >> welcome i agree with what governor abbott said. senator lindsey graham and chuck grassley, two supporters of the republican party leadership both at the miller language. it would be the beginning of the end of his presidency. neil: why would that be? >> would appear as though the president is pardoning those that can harm him, firing those who are tormenting him, abusing the powers that he has two get himself peace of mind, knowing this will create a constitutional crisis. the constitutional crisis comes about when one branch of
government thinks the other branches illegitimate and you think members of the congress would begin to think that about president trump. my columnist argues his biggest threat in his own lack of self-restraint and if he can exercise self-restraint and see this through following prudent legal advice rather than lashing out in firing. neil: when someone reads your lawyer's office, much like his reaction with paul manafort, these are tactics that are eyebrow raising. why would they be allowed to send? >> the quality and quantity of evidence that must have been presented by federal prosecutors in new york city to a federal judge to get to sign the order. it's a very high bar. you have to show the defendant likely to destroy this evidence we don't grab right away.
there is no other reasonable way to attempt to get this evidence and you will try to do so through a request. neil: with you here in the meantime? what is the urgency of it, that he would take it, burn it, destroy it, hide it? >> i think there is some evidence to that effect of the race a federal judge would not have signed the order knowing in the evidence about michael cohen, which is not telling the banquet he was really going to do. what banquet monday 130,000 if you told them fruitfully what he was going to do it, give it to stormy daniels. the judge must have known. in that swoop of documents about wire fraud and mail fraud, documents about donald trump's personal financial matters, which are none of the business of prosecutors in lower manhattan would've been scooped up anyway.
a federal judge is willing to take that risk. were safeguards in place of the criminal procedure which require vetting. the prosecutors dispatched the act vi agents will not see what those agents obtained until an independent teams poster and decides what is trump, what is cohen, what is privileged, what is not privileged or double take days. neil: last week the president wasn't considered a target. with these developments change your view of that? >> at night. i don't also change my view, but a change to the those who decide when you progress from subject to target. that progression can happen in a heartbeat depending on something the president says or something they discover. i'll tell you what i don't think will happen. the one good thing will come from this i can imagine donald trump sitting down. i think that is absolutely off. neil: that's a possibility, too.
>> he was apparently willing to take that chance. neil: judge, you are the best. it's all fun to me until i talked to the judge. >> and onto zuckerberg. neil: mark zuckerberg is set to testify any moment. i want to talk to the judge about this. we ran out of time, but i thought we would want to get his latest take on that. a lot of you swear by that is you showed, by the way. mark zuckerberg coming up.
neil: all right. we're up about 436 points. last i look facebook's stock is up ahead of mark zuckerberg getting ready to testify on capitol hill. he has got quite a 24 hours ahead of i am to the house tomorrow. trish regan. trish: we'll be all over it as neil said. what minutes away from facebook ceo mark zuckerberg much anticipated testimony on capitol hill. lawmakers expect to grill the facebook ceo for failing to protect personal data and fake news during the 2016 election. some trade fears are beginning to ease. president xi announced that china will reduce tariffs on imported vehicles. seems like the tough talk on trade may actually be paying of. don't forget, we are china's