tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business May 22, 2018 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
more than that, showing up to watch it from around the world. north korea destroying its biggest nuclear testing site in the northeastern corner of china, or north korea. stuart: who would have thought. who would have thunk. our time is up. neil, it is yours. neil: thank you, very, very much. we're waiting to hear from the south korean president. remember when they used to come through the south entrance. now with this president, every one comes through the north portico. we're waiting from the south korean leader who we're told trying to make sure everything on track for the june 12th talks. blake burman from the white house what we can expect to hear. reporter: we're getting ready for the south korean president moon jae-in, who will be here with president trump, what will be a strategy session for expected summit. 21 days now in singapore between president trump and kim jong-un.
on the south korean media plane when they made it over here to the trip to the white house, they believe 99.9% this summit will go forward 21 days from now. so some optimism there. as we look toward north korea, there are questions, and some many criticisms whether or not the president is going, essentially soft on china, on trade, because he needs their help with north korea. the president has enlisted the help, has pressured president xi xinping of china to do something about north korea. some are singling out exactly what is playing out with zte as a possible example. "wall street journal" as you know has reported overnight and they are the sole outlet i should note at this point, there is a possible deal in the works regarding zte, that would allow u.s. companies to sell products back into china. would change the management structure with zte.
china would then eliminate tariffs on farm products. here is what i can tell you, one source telling me today there is consensus building around at broad outline for a possible solution. that is how it was described to me by one person. another source telling me on this front progress is being made. in any event up on capitol hill earlier today, treasury secretary steve mnuchin was testifying. there was a host of issues about zte. and mnuchin stress ad couple different points here. first he said, this is a commerce issue. he says this doesn't really have anything to do with trade. and secondly, he took up the national security issues that many have on this front. listen here to mnuchin from earlier today. >> the national security issues are being addressed. that was paramount with the president. this was not a quid pro quo or anything else. that merely president xi asked president trump to look into this which he has done.
reporter: i love live tv, that is moon jae-in pulling in for you, neil. give it five seconds. you can probably see president trump waiting in the front to greet him. i send it back to you, neil. neil: how long are they supposed to be with each other today, if you include the working lunch and everything else? >> there is working lunch. a meeting between the two, bilateral, i don't know the exact time, man, i should know that, neil. neil: very, very disappointed. call it a working lunch. we're having a non-working lunch. we're not doing anything of any consequence but they can't say that, right? reporter: the president always works. isn't that what this white house says? >> absolutely, absolutely. there were reports, you might have touched on it, the south korean president especially with the more bellicose talk from the north koreans that this was unraveling that the president was talking about even the need
to go to singapore, i guess some of these concerns eased a bit but this is not still clear sailing. reporter: there are reports that the north koreans are pointing finger at john bolton for potential backing off of the meeting, the position north korea took last week. john bolton had stressed the libya model which north korea clearly does not want. you know how that played out for muammar qaddafi down the line. telling our south korean colleagues they feel this is 99.9% going to happen 21 days from now in singapore. neil: thank you, my friend. you're the best. blake burman at the white house following all of this. they have what they call a pool spray. when they meet and get that tape back, maybe something else later on with the working lunch and it is a working lunch ensues. we shall see not every one is keen on way president is handling the latest situation.
maybe because of the upcoming north korea talks, you can understand why he has been a little tentative. maybe didn't extract that many concessions allegedly or reportedly about the policies. marco rubio is serious about it. do we have his tweet or outright bite? do we know? it is i think a tweet. i don't have hard copy of that. i can not read it, i apologize. bottom line he is concerned if this would go through this wouldn't be a deal and it would be easily given the fact there is such anger and sentiment, not this particular tweet. that he is very concerned to bring this to the fore, the president is making a big mistake helping people that shouldn't be helped out including that chinese telecom concern. kiron, marco rubio put a face on
growing concern of senators and congressman that the president might be giving away the store here. what do you make of that? >> i think it is too simple to put it that way but i do understand. neil: my producer put it that way, and i'm so annoyed. but you're right. go ahead. >> what i'm trying toe say the zte issue is poster-child for globalization. how deeply enat that graded companies and governments are, around the world. sanctions on zte make it impossible to have access to american technology components. the company under scrutiny by the united states, huawei, could go in the same direction. this is frightening for the chinese. that is a lot more complicated from the americans. we see a back and together with statements by secretary mnuchin and the president and trade representative that don't always
sync up. we don't understand how to impose sanctions on. chinese in context of doing global diplomacy like the upcoming north korea summit. the fact that the administration is struggling to find its way could be a good sign. i wish the senators would jump on board and help the administration figure out the problem. neil: larry, the markets want the whole trade impasse to pass, that i can understand. anything that looks like it avoids a trade war would be created favorably like yesterday. this might be selling after that news but the president has been saying that, you know, some of the stuff we go through in the process justifies an agreement that will still call for the chinese doing more than they have to correct this trade imbalance than they have ever done before. is this good enough for you? >> you know, neil, you make a great point here. this is about balancing what is in the best interests of our
nation in the long run in terms of economic policy with the short-term political fallout that rubio is raising but also the stock market fallout. there is clearly a sense of relief in wall street over last three days that our worst fears have not materialized with respect to trade wars. there is not a trade war but a trade conversation. it is a conversation been neglected for decade. so it is an important conversation. rubio is probably right. look, we'll probably get the worse of the deal but still a much better deal than we have now. we'll probably shrink our trade deficit by $200 billion. wall street knows we have a broken trade policy and it will -- neil: $200 billion? you're smoking something. that is not happening my friend. >> neil, it will be a lot better than we have right now. we're starting from a weak position with very low leverage. we'll not get the best deal possible. we'll get a better deal. neil: it will not be 200 billion. he raises a good point, and it is this. no matter what comes out of this, it will be more than any president of any party ever achieved with the chinese in the
past. there is something to be said of that. what do you make of that? >> well, neil, you're dealing with a communist nation. so i don't make a lot of that. their first idea was lift tariffs under cars. it's a global tariff lift. it is not just the united states. we'll compete with the german cars, japanese cars coming into china. neil: that's fine. that's fine. we make great stuff. let's see how we do. you're right, bmw, lexus, will be able to take advantage of lower tariffs and we will too. >> neil, by the way, great to see you. it is not state specific to the united states. so what trying to negotiate our goods getting into china, when they're saying across the board we'll let goods from all over the world come in. you still have the competition level on that side. the other side of the issue, because it is a communist country, their labor costs are very low. we'll be continuing running into that issue. with this issue about zte, this company with this intellectual
property, i think this is a very serious issue. i think that is what is bringing the chinese to their knees but i still think the administration needs to go further about this this is not a problem now. this has been a problem for a long period of time and they're getting our information and they're putting it to use and they're using it against us. a communist country. we can't forget who we're dealing with. neil: we'll see what happens. we have the breaking news, waiting to hear from the south korean leader visiting the president from the white house. a little more than three plus weeks ahead of the june 12th pow wow with the north korean leader. meanwhile getting word that this fbi probe is widening out right now. what the white house is planning to do on all of this stuff, but of more interest right now is, how this all falls out right around the same time the president's is going to be meeting with the north koreans. you can not find a busier time for the president of the united states. can you say time, busier time? can't really.
oh, boy, are my producers going to hear it from me. and i came up with those words on my own. we're down 26 points. more after this. ♪ into retirement... and a little nervous. but not so much about what market volatility may do to their retirement savings. that's because they have a shield annuity from brighthouse financial, which allows them to take advantage of growth opportunities in up markets, while maintaining a level of protection in down markets. so they can focus on new things like exotic snacks. talk with your advisor about shield annuities from brighthouse financial- established by metlife.
neil: this is going to be weird because we have congressional leaders able to go through classified information about the fbi's source from the whole trump campaign probe, actually a lot of other stuff. we don't know how far this goes. we do know it is meant to quell a bit of a storm, republicans say agenda, vendetta campaign against the president. former fbi special agent. john, thank you for taking the time. >> thank you for having me. neil: what do you think is in this stuff? i know you can't give away state secrets but obviously has been meant almost a revolt among republicans authorities have been way too secretive and way too tight with the vest with all these cards and want to see some of the cards but they can't show them all the card so what do they get to see? >> first of all one of the things they will get, reassurance look at caliber of who is being used at the source. that says, okay, the fbi is
putting effort into having really good sources but, the other side of the coin is, what are they going after? are they targeting the trump campaign or president trump in of itself? they will be able to show information not involving anything significant classified for national security and have a general idea what was being south after. neil: all right. so if you're the president, anyone at the white house, sometimes you can't blame them for being a little paranoid because it seems like every one is out to get them. republicans share the view, a lot of them, gone on too long, spread too far, gone too afar from the original intent of the investigation. now there is talk that it could all be wrapped up by september 1. do you buy that? >> i hope it is. as it drags on it is not good for the presidency. it is certainly not good for the fbi. at this point there is a lot of questions being asked by many people, what exactly was going on there? with this source in particular, even if the possibility of
gaining information was valid, the issue is optics. do you want to put somebody in a position that could maybe look like the fbi is playing politics and has favorites? neil: you know, you have to wonder whether they are. i know now when they're in office they say there is no bias, none of this. we learned since they have left office, whether it's comey or number two andy mccabe or any other security officials at the time from clapper to brennan to on and on and on, we now know how they view the president. i'm sure they harbored those views while he was campaigning for president. they are the bosses, chief figures. they're the ones offering these very negative opinions of the president now, i can not emergency that would have crept up in investigations? >> well that is exactly what is not supposed to happen. neil: i know, but you got to wonder. guys like you were with a blindfold on but is that possible? >> it is possible. the reality is 35,000 fbi
employees, most of whom the vast majority of keep their politics out of it. i spent 21 years in the fbi. i didn't even have a sign in my front yard for a candidate during that time. but there is clearly a couple of people that cross the line. they were in positions of authority. that is where i believe it ends. and that, director wray is doing an excellent job changing shop up there on the 7th floor to make sure we have people that keep their biases out of it, and look at investigations purely for the facts. that is what the fbi does. neil: yeah, i hope so. you give me hope though, john. thank you very much. all right, we are following the president and these on going discussions he is having with the south korean leader. some dribs and drabs coming out of these meetings including this whole china deal whether we're giving away the store as marco rubio alleged. the president is saying that there is no deal on zte, the telecom concern found guilty of espionage and sanctions slapped
on them. there is nothing of the sort going on there. he has gone on to say when it comes to north korea we're moving along on this summit. there are certain conditions we wanted. if we don't get them, we won't have the meeting. he is saying if it doesn't happen now, maybe it will happen at another time. he is sort of laying it out there, look if we have to walk away from this before we even go there we will. more after this. with this clever little app called audible. you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside. binge better. audible.
the digital divide is splitting this country. we have parents who are trying to get their kids off of too much social media and computers, and then we have parents who would only hope their children have access. middle school is a really key transition point, right. the stakes start changing. students begin to really start thinking about their futures. what i like about verizon's approach is that it's not limited to just giving kids new tools, it's really about empowering educators to teach in different ways, and exposing kids to more active forms of learning. giving technology is not a total solution. teaching technology, now that is.
neil: all right. the president apparently, this is something we'll get in this pool spray he is having right now with the leader of south korea, hinting, telegraph, you know there is a possibility we don't have a deal, we don't get together. what is the exact wording, i did not get the exact quote? i just did. that there is substantial chance the summit with kim will not work out for june. i misquoted that. that is a big deal, if that doesn't translate into
something. we're down about 35 points that is the kind of thing markets don't like to hear. we'll watch that closely. facebook ceo mark zuckerberg testifying this time in parliament as the apology tour continues in brussels. deirdre bolton following all of that. that is her assignment. she is tinkled pink to follow it. what is going on. >> i'm watching european equivalent of c-span. neil: not that there is anything wrong with that. it is in a different language. >> not that there is anything wrong with either. this is an apology tour. this is part two of what we saw in washington, d.c. earlier in april april. this is mark zuckerberg saying i'm sorry, i will take full responsibility for data security on facebook. anything that touches facebook, whether it is developers, whether it is our interaction. whether it is quizes. essentially this is facebook's apology tour on the other side of the atlantic. it is also the i love europe tour. he is going to be announcing that he is adding 3,000 more jobs in addition to the 7,000
jobs already exist in europe. so they will have 10,000 employees in europe by the end of this year. i think that is obviously, let's just say mark zuckerberg is a strategic thinker if nothing else. neil: was he asked to go there? >> he was asked to go there by the head of the european parliament. there is a little bit of a kerfuffle. it was supposed to be private. a lot of lawmakers said we'll not participate unless it is live streamed. neil: really? >> yeah. so now it is being live streamed. numerous news outlets are covering it as well as european parliament's -- neil: this is live video? >> it is. he is there taking questions. essentially facebook was worried that the story was going to become european. lawmakers refusing to go if it weren't made public. essentially mark zuckerberg said fine, fine, we'll go. the timing of this is also really important. as of this friday new data laws go into place in europe. they do affect the american companies.
as long as an american company has customers, users in europe. they have to follow these guidelines. in facebook's case it is pretty serious. if they are found to misstep, this applies to google, applies to everybody, but in facebook's case it could be worth $1.6 billion per year if the company is found to go astray of these new gdpr, data production regulations. neil: what does that mean, 1. 6 billion? >> it is essentially a penalty they have to pay to a body in the eu. presumably facebook is not going to do that but that would be the harshest penalty eu can enact. neil: wow. >> it is no joke. it is 4% of annual revenue. neil: is the guy speaking a language zuckerberg doesn't understand? he seems flummoxed by what is going on. >> he should be able to, that is the head of the eu. neil: he is giving a look what the --
>> that should be eu parliament head who speaks english. neil: he is speaking english, all right. they could get tough, a lot tougher than we are in this country. >> could be tougher on him than we were, because professor scott galloway spoken a lot about this. europe has the all the bad parts of all our tech companies, not quite the good parts. they have the citizens complaining about privacy. they have these annoyances. they don't get bragging rights we do, hey, we created these companies. neil: do they have an equivalent of a facebook? >> honestly they're lagging a little bit. neil: okay. thank you very much, deirdre, you're the best. you have to go back into your office, watch the next eight hours of this. meantime starbucks implementing a campaign today that anyone can use their restrooms. they do not have to be starbucks customers. easier said than done. kristina partsinevelos has some reaction from customers. she has been monitoring them today. hey, kristina port --
reporter: hi, yes you're right. you don't have to be a customer just sit there. as long as you don't do anything like drugs or anything inappropriate and not sleeping in their stores. i was able to go in and get a code without showing starbucks coffee cup. this is because they're trying to be more inclusive n april there was an arrest of two african-american men sitting in starbucks. they didn't buy anything. they were non-customers, they were arrested because one employee felt uncomfortable with their presence. just five days ago, just five days ago there was one starbucks employee wrote a racial slur on a latino customer's cup. this is clearly issue, why today, starbucks initiated the policy. i spoke to a lot of people in the location in downtown manhattan. listen what they have to say. >> i'm in and out of starbucks. so i never sit in there. it doesn't really affect me. it is their policy. so they will have more work to
do. they will have to clean it all the time. >> it's ridiculous. >> you don't care? >> no. who cares? it is not news. shows level of intelligence of america. it is absolutely ridiculous. reporter: well, right now i have a lot of people on twitter and a lot of viewers for fox business that are angry because i am in a downtown location. so this starbucks here, you do have a lot of flowing traffic. people don't sit here. they're not really studying. where you have other locations across the united states that is not the case. a lot of people took to twitter saying how angry they are. worried about the smells in the starbucks location. worried about people loitering around. starbucks says you can't sleep here. they will be training employees, this is big, next tuesday, may 29th, over 8,000 starbucks locations will shut down half a day for racial bias training. they will focus on the brief
situation. they will teach employees how to work with people who may be disruptive, who may be sleeping, how to get them out of the stores. starbucks stock was down half a percentage point. nothing to do really with the story. more than starbucks based off a few notes i wrote is more of a dividend story as opposed to a growth story right now. they have hit saturation. i will be there next tuesday, reporting about starbucks and their racial bias training you see here. neil? neil: i would love to see, kristina, how they recommend you deal with someone who has fallen asleep there. we'll have to see. reporter: exactly. or someone who refuses to leave? it's a big onus to stick on an employee. neil: absolutely. it will be messy. kristina, thank you very, very much we're awaiting comments from the president. united states with his pow-wow with the united states leader but boy, he is ripping and roaring with number of developments and not pleased how the trade talks went with china,
how they're going with china. we're told they are not complete. he may have another idea on that. also, on north korea and everything else, the president is saying right now while he is hopeful, there is no guarranty and there is no way of knowing how this all will turn out or how, whether it will even work out. all right. more after this.
today we're out here with some big news. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill proven to both significantly reduce the chance of dying from a cardiovascular event in adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease... ...and lower your a1c. wow. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar.
neil: these comments are getting more terse by the moment right now. the president has a lot to say on these developments and not really looking forward to the progress we've seen or lack thereof on trade talks with china. or prospects of anything happening at all with the north korean leader if it happens at all. maybe we'll get the full gist of that, when we get the pool spray which is that moment when every cameraman and his uncle barges
in the roosevelt room or cabinet room, wherever they meet, and inundates the president. meantime we have radio host ben kissell and. so ben, does any of this rattle you a little bit? we were going on the express train to a trade deal with china or looked promising, not dour, that the talks were on the north koreans for june 12th, maybe not. what do you think? >> donald trump has shown his hand before, before the end of the game here and i think it is really coming back to hurt him. when it comes to zte, the chinese company they're a major culprit when it comes to intellectual property theft. evidently there is no problem with that any longer. i think this will come back to hurt the republicans and hurt donald trump in the midterms. neil: put you down as a maybe on prospects there. when you are looking, see this, as a sign maybe the president is trying to brace people for not ideal ending, either on the
trade front with china or on the negotiations with the north koreans? >> i mean i think -- neil: i'm sorry, angela? >> that's all right. i think you're seeing kim jong-un use the only bargaining chip he really has left. he said he doesn't want to trade with americans. guess what, who loses from that? it is the north korean people. he really can't do much of anything to hurt us, especially now that he is about to dismantle a nuclear site this week. his only remaining bargaining trip just to walk away. it is unfortunate he is threatening to do that. it would also be unfortunate if trump sort of gave up on the america first concept that he really sold us on and started to take it easy on china, maybe let china get away with some unethical things just for the sake of getting something done with north korea. it is a little bit like two steps forward one steps back, one step back, when we need to be just going forward. we need trump to hold the line and get tough on china. neil: ben, one of the things
we're getting out as more details flow out of this meeting that, south korea's president moon says that he is aware there are skeptical views in the u.s. that the summit will happen and nuclearization will be realized. that he understands people doubt that. but that it will still happen. that the prospects are still good. >> right. neil: i think i'm getting the gist of that. what do you think of that? >> again donald trump's, he reeks of desperation right now and he seemed -- neil: he has gone further than any u.s. president, right? >> no, i understand that i think strategic patience was a flawed policy. i'm not just a hater. it is what it is. at this point -- neil: you don't know what it is. i'm giving you flashes off the wires. >> neil, let me tell you this, right now kim jong-un has all of the power because donald trump has said how badly he wants to meet with him. he has called for full denuclearization of north korea. neil: he said he ever wanted to meet with the guy badly.
i don't have a horse in this race. he has not talked about high expectations. quite often he talked about just up and walking away if it doesn't look promising. >> oh, no. neil: say it didn't happen. i'm taking a leap here, that is probably not fair or even right. if it does not happen, would it drive the north koreans to reassess and come back or back to the cold tensions we have or maybe have? >> if the u.s. decides to walk away, that is huge embarassment for kim jong-un in a company that lives and dies by propraganda. you want to talk about how trump will spin this, look how kim jong-un will spin this. i don't think he has all the power. he has given up several u.s. hostages, people who were held hostage there. >> right. >> he is about to dismantle a nuclear site. he was shaking hand with south korean president moon jae-in on his own turf. that is something that has not happened until that point in my lifetime. it was absolutely a historic moment.
so you see kim jong un taking all the steps. neil: he sounds like a hater to me. >> when it comes to north korea xi xinping has a lot of power over there. obviously in china. neil: talking about the chinese -- >> president moon has a lot of power. kim jong un does not need the united states. he will be able to create some trade deals with the chinese and i think that is why we're giving up so much on china right now. neil: can do that for decade just like his father and grandfather. he needs to talk to this guy, right. >> when it comes to donald trump right now, when it comes to zte, somehow concerned about chinese jobs, all of that is because he wants to have a relationship with north korea and at this point, it is not benefiting us whatsoever. neil: ben, i will tell you this, you're a very good man if this were barack obama on the cusp of talks with the north korean leader you would be so 180 degrees different. >> i don't think that is true. neil: oh, yes. >> neil, you don't know that,
neil. neil: really? all right. guys, thank you both. >> thank you. neil: i want ad mature ending to this because i didn't like the way it was going. calls for another special counsel to look into the justice department. i don't know about you, i think we're running out of counsels. anyway new york congressman lee zeldin is leading that charge. congressman, why do we need this? why can't we add this on to the inspector general and his report? why this? >> the inspector general's pow remembers limited. the resolution we're introducing today is a 12-page resolution highlighting all sorts of misconduct at the highest levels doj and fbi with regards how and why the hillary clinton probe ended, how and why the trump russian probe began and fisa abuse that took place. the department of justice can't be expected to investigate themselves. so the inspector general, who is, he has done a really good job being able to get answers to certain questions --
neil: that is what an inspector general does. let him do that. >> he is limited to actually do something about it on the accountability front. the inspector general can investigate, can help tell us what we already know and maybe find out some new things as well. neil: how do you know he will find out some new things? i take no umbrage what you're trying to get at here, there could be an agenda, that the trump campaign was fine there, is a lot to get upset about, i certainly understand that, but i don't see it outside of the purview of an inspector general who is already gathering a lot of dirt on a lot of people. just add it to the list. >> but the inspector general can't actually do anything about it. neil: you can. the inspector general comes out with a report that is damning you can, you're a congressman. >> the united states congress has oversight powers a lot of jurisdiction using that. that is how we get a lot of answers with regards to this misconduct but we're not actually the once who prosecute. when you see someone who gets in
trouble for lying to the justice department, and then the inspector general comes out with a report, that shows that mccabe was lying to the justice department, that's a crime. other people go to jail for that. neil: you don't like the whole idea, congressman, when they got this special counsel to look into the whole affair that is now bob mueller's affair to look into better part of a year. you might have had perfect justification for being concerned of that, but you're piling on by responding with the same approach. >> well, first off, what is very important is, the supervision of a special counsel as well as scope of a special counsel. you can word a scope where you can go in six million different directions with it. now with regards to the special counsel that currently exists, i'm still not aware of any evidence, not only that president trump did not collude with the russians to win his election, i'm not aware of donald trump committing any crime at all about anything to win his election. so there is a special counsel is probe and there is a cloud over this president even though we're year-and-a-half into his
presidency of a four year term. neil: ayou get your way, congressman, i know you well, but you get your way. all of sudden we're talking about a counsel report that wouldn't be out until after the september, supposed moment where bob mueller's investigation is wrapped up. in a weird way you will keep in nightmare going on and on and, investigations into investigations into investigating other investigations. >> neil this, is narrow scope -- neil: so what is the mueller probe, sir. the mueller probe was a narrow scott. >> i disagree. neil: i appreciate your frustration but you don't appreciate americans frustration with back and forth of this nonsense. >> there is actual evidence of misconduct -- when you have the attorney general meeting with the tarmac -- neil: i'm not, no, no congressman. hear what i'm saying. i can definitely appreciate the magnitude of charges that do require investigating but i think we have a process in place to do it. you are lining up lawyers like
planes at laguardia. >> here is the problem with that where we try to provide -- where we ask for a document, to shed light on something to do with this, the justice department will say we can't provide the document because we're risking national security. then the document ends up getting provided in there. nothing in there has nothing to do with national security, what you see in looking at paper, it causes embarassment for people and shows misconduct. the justice department in responding to requests for interviews, responding to requests for documents, the justice department has proven they can't investigate themselves. neil: but you know the ig has already proven though an obama appointee, going back to a clinton appointee, cotake matters into his own hands, be very fair, very balanced, chastise the number two fbi official andy mccabe essentially saying he was lying to people and recommending further action should be taken. we have a process to deal with
the very legitimate beef you have. the idea that adding another lawyer to the mix will make it less fair, i don't know, it seems crazy. >> but the inspector general don't have the tools. neil: you do. you do. >> i can't prosecute -- neil: i'm not saying you, you think that information comes out and it is very damning, that you and your colleagues can't do something about it? >> we can't prosecute. neil: impeachment actions begin with you guys, not prosecutor's office. not someone investigating this in a third party role. they begin with you. >> that's right. and that is why we have been able to learn as much as we have. so when james comey testifies before congress that he prepared seven memorandum and he provide four of the memorandum and we know at least one of them must have been classified and he did so in order to trigger a special counsel investigation, that is one particular fact pattern of many in our resolution we're introducing today, that is a product of congress doing its oh sight roles and getting to the bottom of particular questions
we need -- neil: i know the political games, believe me as i said at the outset i understand your frustration, but isn't this about deflecting, about anything mueller is doing and questioning how mueller's investigation began and biases intent on that, and deflecting from any progress or news updates that are coming in from that investigation? in other words, don't focus on this. focus on this? >> i just posted the resolution on my twitter account. it is on my website. i would encourage people to read it, because it is 12 pages of actual misconduct of actual facts, so where -- neil: you think only way that can be addressed is for another lawyer to convene another investigation on top of an investigation that is looking at another investigation? are you as confused as i am? >> no. well the first off, there isn't anyone going after all of these facts that are, that are in our resolution. you do have the inspector
general helping with some of this but we have no one prosecuting all of this. and this isn't, when you read the resolution, it is not about, i don't even mention robert mueller's name but he do talk about how the way the trump russia probe began, where you yu have as we learned in recent days, at least one person planted inside of donald trump's campaign to infiltrate and surveil, collect information on the campaign. neil: are you a lawyer, congressman? >> i am, and former prosecutor. neil: i bet you're a good one. former prosecutor. you don't think we have enough handling this and enough powers that be? >> i don't think we have anyone handling this. that is our whole issue. neil: you don't think anyone is looking into this, this whole transaction and ig is looking into this? you don't think that is going on? this would be separate from that? >> ig is looking into some of what we get into in our resolution. neil: i would say, all right, ig, give us an update on this, how it is coming along. if you're doing such a crappy
job we'll have another ig or another lawyer take your place or do something because you're not getting it done. buff can't we first try through efficiency see what is going on right now? i'm telling you i'm running out of lawyer's names? >> i would say the ig is doing a good job. neil: so let them complete this. >> but the ig can't actually prosecute. congress can't prosecute. neil: congressman, thank you very much. good seeing you. we'll see how that goes. see how this goes? no political axe to grind here, folks. investigation on top of investigation, that could drag on for months or years. this is why people kind of get disheartened in system here. it is not left or right thing. just stop it thing. more after this. so no matter what you trade, or where you trade, you'll only pay $4.95. fidelity. open an account today. you'll only pay $4.95.
brbut how will his dentured to thicope with... a steak. luckily for brad, this isn't a worry because he's discovered super poligrip. it holds his denture tight and helps give him 65% more chewing power. leaving brad to dig in and enjoy the tastiest of t-bones. super poligrip, helping you enjoy the foods you love.
neil: markets holding their own. disappointing news on trade front. what is happening certainly preparing for the north korean summit front. as he talks to the south korea. phil flynn, how is this affecting oil? in stocks we're not doing much. what is happening? >> right. initially oil prices were higher on optimism that the chinese stocks were going good. initially when it was reported that china reduced import quota for automobiles, that was a positive sign but the sign president trump hasn't been pleased with how the talks are actually pulled the oil market
down a little bit. the other thing adding to oil, neil, is geopolitical risk in with president trump and his 12-step program, if you want to call it for iran. obviously 12 stops a lot of people don't think iran will actually follow. so it increases the odds of more tension in the region and higher prices for oil. we definitely have scene movement here. a lot of focus on these trade talks with china. it is impacted every market down here. whether we talk about it, grain markets, popped up on optimism, hey we'll maybe see light at the end of the tunnel. or the copper market for example. because you will start selling more cars and making more cars. commodities are living and dying every headline on this. the latest headline from president trump, he is not too pleased. neil: i hate to jump on you right now. president with the south korean leader. >> thank you very much, it's a great honor to have president moon from south korea with us.
we've become great friends over the years. we have now known. we've be discussing that. we have a big trade arrangement we're renegotiating with south korea. they have been excellent people to work with, for the trump administration. and, we will have some good news on trade. we'll discuss other things. the big topic on singapore, meeting, see what happens. whether or not it happens. if it does it will be a great thing for north korea, and if it doesn't, that is okay too. whatever it is, it is, but i look forward to spending a quite a bit of time with the president and i think a lot of good things will happen. i want to thank everybody for
[speaking korean] >> translator: i would like to thank you mr. president, for your warm hospitality, sharing much of your time with me. i know we have a very domestic calendar as all-important u.s., north korea summit. i heard tragic news of many lives in shooting at texas high school a few days ago. i would like to convey my condolences to you and american
people. on brighter note i would like to congratulate you on on the amern citizens detained in north korea. thank you for your vision of achieving peace through strength and as well as your strong leadership. we're looking forward to the first-ever north korean summit. we find ourselves standing one step closer to dream of achieving complete denuclearization on the korean peninsula and world peace. all this is possible because of you mr., president, i have no doubt you will be able to complete, accomplish a historic feat no one has been able to achieve in the decades past. i have to say that the fate and future of korean peninsula hinge on this. i will expend all effort to the end to support the success of outcome in the u.s.-north korea summit and stand with you all along the way, mr. president. >> thank you very much. >> mr. president -- [inaudible]. >> i do think he is serious. i do think, he would like to see that happen. he will at same time he is going
into future different from what they have had. i think he is absolutely very serious, yes. >> mr. president -- >> go ahead. john. >> can you give us update, sir, just where things stand with the summit? president moon's national security advisor on the way here seemed to think that things are on track and that this will indeed happen? >> we're moving along. we'll see what happens. there are certain conditions that we want and i think we'll get the conditions. if we don't, we don't have the meeting. frankly it has a chance to be a great, great meeting from north korea. and a great meeting for the world. if it doesn't happen, maybe it will happen later. maybe it will happen at a different time. but, we will see. but we are talking. the meeting scheduled as you know on june 12th in singapore. and, whether or not it happens, you will be knowing pretty soon but we're talking right now. >> -- denuclearization would
take place? >> i do. i have a very strong idea it will take place, we're talking about it must take place. i have very strong idea and very strong opinions on the subject. i have very strong opinions that north korea has a chance to be a great country. it can't be a freight country under the circumstances that they're living right now north korea has a chance to be a freight country. i think they should be seize the opportunity. we'll soon find out whether they want to do that yes? >> have you spoken to kim jong-un? >> i don't want to say that. i don't want to say that. >> [inaudible] >> no reason to discuss that. no reason to say that. for a short period of time, we've been dealing with north korea and it has been a, you know, good experience. we have three hostages. back. they're home. they're living with their we are three hostages back. they are home, living with their families. they are very, very happy. i can only take for sure. a time.
it's a relationship and we'll see how long it continues to work. hopefully it continues to work for a long time. >> can you tell us more about rod rosenstein yesterday? >> a very routine meeting. as you know, the congress would like to see documents open. a lot of people saying they had spies in my campaign. if they had spies in my campaign, that would be a disgrace to this country. that would be one of the biggest insult to anyone's ever seen. very legal aside from everything else. it would make any political event ever look like small potatoes. we want to make sure there weren't. but some men got paid based on what i've read in the newspapers and on what you reported, some person got paid a lot of money. that is not a normal situation the kind of money you're talking about. so play that would be -- i think the department of justice wants
to get down to it and i can tell you hopefully they'll all be together. general kelly and setting up a meeting between congress and the various representatives and open a document could take a look and find out what happened. if they had spies in my campaign from entering my campaign for political purposes, and that would be unprecedented in the history of our country. >> can you give us an update about dpe -- [inaudible] >> now, president xi and i have a great relationship as president moon can attest. but there is no deal. we will see what happens. we are discussing various deals. we can do 301, we can do where we don't need china and say this is what we want. this is what we think is fair. that's always a possibility if the deal doesn't work out. as i said, we lost $500 billion a year for many years and then
it varied from 100 billion to 500 when you are losing $500 billion a year, you can't live in terms of a negotiation. it's really easy to win. but i want this to be a great deal for the united states and i want to be a very good deal for china, to if that's possible. it may not be possible. as far as zte is concerned, the president asked me to look into it and i am doing now. don't forget for the ones that say gee, maybe trump is getting a little bit easy. zte, we closed it. it was in another administration. it was this administration that closed it. a phone company for those that don't know. a very large phone company. but it's also a phone company that buys a large portion of its parts that make up the sound from american companies. when you do that, you're really
hurting american companies also appeared i'm looking at it, but we were the ones that closed it. it wasn't done by previous administrations. it was done by us. so we will see what happens. as a favor to the president, i will take a look at it. they were incorrectly written and i'm not sure that's the reporters fall. i'm not talking about the trade deal. i don't like to talk about deals until they're done. i will say that deal could be much different from the deal that finally emerges in a much better deal for the united state. >> your confidence in rod rosenstein? >> what's your next question? >> i don't have the president of south korea. he doesn't want to hear these questions if you don't mind. [inaudible] >> how much confidence and trust you have in resolving the north
korean issue? >> i have great confidence in your president. i think he's brought a different perspective to the talks with north korea. he wants to be able to make a deal. you cut them very hard-line administration and you have president moon and others before president moon who also had more or less this attitude. i think he's a very capable person. i think he's an extremely competent man. he's a very good person and he wants to have what is good for the korean peninsula. not just north or south for the entire korean peninsula. i have tremendous confidence in president moon and i think his way, the way he is really is helping us to potentially make a deal. whether the deal gets made or not, who knows. it is a deal. you never know about deals. you go into deals 100% certain comic doesn't happen.
you go into deals that have no chance and it happens and sometimes happens easily. i know deals better than anybody knows deals. you never really know. he's a good man and a very capable man. i think south korea is very lucky to have them. he's not hearing what we're doing it. go ahead. [speaking in native tongue]
there's a chance from a very substantial chance that it won't work out. i do want to waste a lot of time and i'm sure he doesn't want to waste a lot of time. is a very substantial chance that it won't work out in that's okay. that doesn't mean it won't work out over a period of time, but it may not work out for june 12. there's a good chance we will have the meeting. >> in terms of denuclearization, should it be an all-in-one or could it be incremental with incentives along the way with kim jong un? >> all-in-one would be nice. i'm not going to go beyond that. i don't think i want to totally commit myself, but all-in-one would be a lot better. [speaking in native tongue]
>> royalties for physical reasons over a short period of time. you do have some physical reasons that she may not be able to do exactly that. for physical reasons over short period of time. that would be all-in-one. [speaking in native tongue] [inaudible] >> i will guarantee his safety coming at us. we will guarantee his safety and we talked about that from the beginning. he will be safe. he will be happy. his country will be rich. his country will be hard-working
and very prosperous. they are very great people. hard-working, great people. look at what happened with south korea. don't forget, we help south korea. we have spent trillions of dollars. not billions, trillions of dollars over many years. we help south korea and south korea is one of the most incredible countries in terms of what they do. you know that. that's where you are from. same people. so, yeah, i think he will be extremely happy if something works out. and if it doesn't work out, honestly he can't be happy. but he has a chance to do something that maybe has never been done before. i think if you look 25 years into the future, 50 years into the future, he will be able to look back and be very proud of what he did for north korea. and actually for the world. but he will be very proud of what he did for north korea.
[speaking korean] >> in just a finish that because it's a very important question. south korea, china and japan. and i spoken to while three. one i happen to have right here. they will be willing to help and i believe investor very, very large sums of money into helping to make north korea great. [speaking korean] [speaking korean]
>> what you want from president moon about his sons are made and what will he tell you is you preparing for the meeting? >> that is what we are here for. he is going to tell me. he's got his own meetings. he may have been meeting coming up. he may not. the word is that he may not and may be directly with us. it may go directly to us in singapore or maybe at a later date. that is one of the reasons he is here to talk about that. [inaudible] >> nothing. now, we speak a lot on the phone. they should not be that long of a meeting actually. [inaudible] >> he may or may not. right now he doesn't know whether or not he has a meeting. he may or may not have a meeting with kim jong un. [speaking korean]
[speaking korean] >> mr. president -- [inaudible] about the trade talks [inaudible] >> no, not really. i think they are a start. look, china has been -- i really call it a dereliction of duties that if you look at it, and the military they say it's a dereliction of duty. what happened to our country that our representatives allowed other countries. and i'm not just talking about china. china is the big one. to take advantage of us on trade the way we've been taken advantage of.
china as an example has made a fortune. a transfer of wealth like nobody's ever seen in history. they're the big one. they are almost all, the china as the big one. i am not satisfied, but we'll see what happens. i wanted to go fairly quickly. you talk about numbers like that, billions of dollars a week. when they say let's meet in a couple weeks, that's $2 billion. i view it that way. we are talking about billions of dollars a week that we suffer. we lose. and so, we are looking to go quickly. i am a little disappointed because when kim jong un at the meeting with president xi in china. the first mini we knew about come in the second meeting i think i little change in attitude from kim jong un. so i don't like that. i don't like it from the standpoint of china.
now i hope that is not true. i have a great relationship with president xi. as a friend of mine. he likes me, i like him. two of my great days and my feet and china. i don't think anyone's ever been treated better in china ever in their history and i think many of you were there. it was an incredible thing to witness since he. we built a very good relationship. we speak a lot. but there was a difference when kim jong un left china the second time. and i think they were dedicating an aircraft carrier that the united states paid for. we pay for a lot. [inaudible] >> no, but i think that president xi is a world class poker player. and i probably may be doing the same thing you would do. but i will say this. there was a somewhat different attitude after that meeting and
i'm a little surprised. maybe nothing happened. i'm not blaming anybody. i'm just saying maybe nothing happened and maybe it did. there was a different attitude to the north korean folks after that meeting. so i don't think it was a great meeting. nobody knew about the meeting and all of a sudden it was reported that he was in china a second time. the first time ever would know about are the second time was like a surprise. i think things changed after that meeting. i can't say that i'm happy about it. [inaudible] [speaking korean]
will truly be successful and whether north korea will be realized. [speaking korean] >> i think the really positive elements in history if we just assume not. if we all fell in the past, it will be happening again. [speaking korean] >> there have been many agreements between the states in north korea previously, but this'll be the first time they will be an agreement between the leaders. [speaking korean] >> translator: and moreover, the president is in charge is president trump. [speaking korean]
>> translator: president trump has been able to achieve a dramatic and positive change happening right now. [speaking korean] [speaking korean] [speaking korean] >> translator: and i have every confidence that president trump will be able to achieve an historic feat for the upcoming u.s. north korea summit
successful in the korean war for the past 65 years and along the way to achieve north korea with a permanent peace regime and all the normalize relations between the united states in north korea. i have confidence that you'll be a will to make an historic turnaround and i will spend to provide all necessary support. [speaking korean] >> translator: and i believe that all of this will lead to a great saying in guarantee the security of the north korean regime and also i promised peace and prosperity in north korea as well. >> could president xi admit -- [inaudible] >> i would like to think so. i hope so.
we are dealing mostly on trade. you see, when i'm dealing on trade, i have many things in mind also. every time i talk to china about trade, i'm thinking about the border because that border is a very important element in what we're doing. it has been cut off largely, but it's been opened up a little bit lately. i don't like that. so we have a very full -- very powerful hand on trade. you say well, and these are a much bigger picture than i have in mind. trade has always been a very important element in my life in talking about other countries ripping up united states. i've been watching them do it for 35 years. i've been watching them doing it for so many years and nothing has changed other than over the last 15, 20 years it has gotten worse. and it's not just china. when i think of trade with
china, i'm also thinking about what they are doing to help us with peace with north korea. that's a very important element. we will see how it all works out in the end, it will work out. i can't tell you exactly how or why, but it always does. it's going to work out. okay? thank you all. go ahead. >> what is your vision for the long game with north korea? is it to korea's north philly coexisting or would you like to see reunification at some point? >> what i think is going to happen is we'll start out with two koreas and then it's largely up to them with whether they get together. the border was artificially imposed many, many years ago and imposed to a certain extent in very large extent by us. it's an artificial border, but nevertheless that is what you have. i would say that we are looking certainly right now at two koreas. two very successful koreas.
you have a very successful north korea and a very successful in your debut, south korea. south korea was in condition that was as bad as north korea many years ago when they started this great experiment. it worked out so well for them. now you look at samsung and lg and what they are doing. it's incredible. when i was over there, i threw over plans that are incredible. what they've done is incredible. i see two koreas and ultimately maybe someday in the future, wouldn't be now, but someday in the future maybe the get-together and go back to one korea and that would be okay with me, too, as long as they both wanted that. thank you all very much. thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> you mentioned you are looking into zte. how do you anticipate that and enough? >> well, again, zte buys a tremendous amount of equipment
and parts for their telephones. they are as you know the fourth-largest in the world. they buy them from american companies. so immediately, when i looked at it, it was my administration that close them down. one of the data, i said you know, they can pay a big price without necessarily damaging all of these american companies, which they are because you talk about tremendous amounts of money and jobs to american companies. so i envision a very large fine. i envision perhaps new management, new eras, very tight security rules. but we caught them doing bad things. not anybody else. we caught them doing bad things and we essentially made it so difficult that it would shut down. by shutting them down, we are hurting a lot of american companies. really good american companies. and i will tell you, don't think that we didn't hear from them by shutting down this massive phone
company. so what i envision is a very large fine of more than a billion dollars, could be a billion three. i envision new management, new board and very, very strict security rules. and i also envision that they have to buy a big percentage of their parts and equipment from american companies. thank you all very much. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> for a friendly reporter, he
until you leave and the president of course had a lot to say and better than 30 minutes you're taking questions on the north korean summit. if it happens, happens that i'm optimistic it will happen and if it does it does or north koreans have all the benefit if they take part in this. also on the china trade talks and issues as to whether the president could be caving on that. he says when it comes to zte come the big chinese telecom concern. we are going to be tough on these feared they could be facing a billion dollars fine to get them back in our good graces, it will be a lot easier said than done. a lot easier than the market sort of working and not going smoothly on the trade front to back those congressional reporter katelyn owens joining us next. i think we have charlie gasparino here. you heard all of this, caitlyn. the president sort of dousing cold water on a lot of this stuff. or is he just lowering
expectations? >> it's hard to say. we brought up a lot of topics there. north korea but the headline. the summit may or may not happen on june 12. it may get delayed and it just means there's a lot up there's a lot up in the air right there. we also hear a lot on zte in the trade talks with china. that sounds like the president is not happy with how that's going so far and there's no deal on zte yet. it seems like there's a lot of things we are waiting for answers on. >> i was wondering if the south korean leader, moon jae-in was getting a simultaneous translation because he was a little jarred, it would seem on a couple of key points by the president's comments, our president's comments that he could and would walk away even before that planned meeting. what did you think of that? >> it definitely seemed to be an element of tension as you would know what donald trump was going to say. is he going to undo what he just talked about? i think they have a quality
about. i also think it is still early to know whether we are winning or losing us. a lot say we are losing the trade negotiation with china and you see signs winning it on some level when you see they are reducing tariffs on imported cars in china which has been a long, long thing, help them build up your auto industry from globally dominant industries. it also moved production they are if the tariff comes down a little bit. a little early, but we'll see how good a negotiator he is. a lot of factors here at play. he has control over some of them. is he going to give away too much, get rid of the tax that protects the entire u.s. auto industry with the pickup truck which is why for did not go bankrupt in an effort to get deals to them. some of his ideas don't seem that bad. would it be better to find a telecom company zte as opposed to stop exporting as a way to solve this problem but the deleterious nation.
neil: you know, charlie gasparino, sometimes you when i get some social media comments from folks. this one i thought i would share with you concerning what is going on right now. bhutto front underdog, that word bothers me. does it occur to you that this president is getting more under the chinese than any president before, then any deal is miles ahead of anything republican or democratic assessors have done. get that through your thick skin. by the way, tell charlie gasparino he's ugly. i don't know where to go with that. >> let's focus on the ugly. charlie: ensure that was gentle. neil: any deal would be better than no deal in the history of our relations. charlie: ensure that gentle man or gentle woman has absolutely
no idea. neil: the person's name as a writer 2020. charlie: it could be about from russia. i'm sure that person is not an expert in our trade negotiations. neil: what do make of the premise? transfer listen, let's be real clear here. listen, i don't think the north korea business is the headline because clearly the market didn't sell off. this has been baked in. the real headline here is the utter disarray of trade policy in this white house did not only trade policy. trade talks. you literally have steve mnuchin the other day suggesting that all of the turks against china suspended because of this stuff. and guess what, they're not. there is no real coherent goal. and i disagree with jonas. i don't know if the chinese are giving up. i read an excellent piece by a very middle-of-the-road reporter used to work with at "the wall
street journal." look at the concessions. non-confessions are different china. ramos getting nothing. neil: they haven't sold out anything. transfer we do know what is being agreed to around the edges and it ain't much. it really is sort of pathetic. neil: i happily disagree my friend. one of the things they discussed his reducing the tax on vehicles, all vehicles going in to china, to 50% from 25%, 6% around 18%. they agree to that and they also have a flat qualifying vehicle tax of 1320%, half of what it is now. i don't know how that will move the needle for us. it also invites foreign competition. german cars will sell more, so will japanese cars may be to charlie's point. what do you make of those headlines confessions? >> it is far short of what we
were talking about. it is a tangible thing to point to can say we got this change here. in some ways that could help american countries. are we going to see this car manufacturers relocate in the u.s. from china? probably not. almost certainly not. train to mr. half-empty glass here. >> we started out with i think they ask for a lot. you settle for the middle. this guy asked for a lot any settling for almost teen. neil: is that what you have to do? neil: so jonas, where is it going? you see it right now. where do you think it's going? >> maybe we haven't gotten as much as we wanted, but we haven't given up a whole lot either. some risk starting a trade war and causing a recession and there's a lot of stuff. sure we might be played in this game. maybe we are playing chicken and
losing. it's possible most of what we are giving us stuff we argue don't need anymore. they've achieved their goals of the import tariff on cars so now they can throw that out and be like look at this. on the other hand, we are not getting rid of terrorists on trucks. charlie: jonas, when you go into the booth and incoherent object is, we don't get to the root cause. the root problem for us is then stealing their intellectual property. neil: you have to crawl before you can walk. you have to walk before you can run. >> it's not that easy. it's a difficult problem to solve. [inaudible conversations] neil: they are not going to solve the world's trade problems here. just outline some of the things that could be a star. >> while, something we haven't thought up yet is president trump reported it this morning. these issues in north korea, and
involving gun issue are not unrelated to china in trade. neil: you've got to talk to charlie. i don't know if he gets that. i can't believe it. charlie: i love being called that. i've always been about what's next. i'm still giving it my best even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin, i'm up for that. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. so what's next? seeing these guys. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to,
as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you.
>> vig is looking into some of whether you get into a resolution. neil: i would say ig, give us an update on how it's coming along. if you're doing such a job, we'll have another ig or another lawyer take your place or do something because you're not getting it done. but the efficiency, what's going on right now. i'm running out of lawyers names. >> i would say the ig is actually doing a good job. but the ig can't actually
prosecute and congress can't prosecute. trigger those new york republican congressman lee zeldin pushing for a second council to go back to work on all this. the former ohio secretary of state ken blackwell. can my only argument with the congress say enough already. this is something i think the ig could handle it so outrageous the report comes out in congress is up in arms about it. by all means they can take it to the next level. he says they can't. i was reading my level of the constitution. pecan. i was wondering where is this going. i'm going to hire a lawyer, your lawyer, investigator investigators. >> i think this is about leverage. as you know, this is in resolution form because the congress can't appoint itself. neil: by the way, are there any
prosecutors left? are there any out there? >> good question. i think you take the case, for example, look at what utah is doing, what horror with his doing, the ig. i think this is just another way of saying let's bring this to a close. let's make sure we are looking at all of the wrongdoings that have taken place over the past several years about all of the principal actors. look, what i just heard from the president come and this guy is a cross between a riverboat gambler is the nature of maverick, of tv fame and an innovator in public diplomacy. you have him leveraging iran, special counsels in china and
free trade all in a goldfish bowl. i don't think his opposition has ever had to deal with someone who is this good dealing in center ring as he is. i think this is all a leveraging process to get us in the case of special counsel to bring us rapid closure on this. neil: although you did a far more particularly with half the words. they are using this as leverage in in deflection, maybe justifiable deflection and trying to remind folks this is a loaded gun at us and we don't like it. but i do feel in the end, an inspector general would get to the bottom of that in a new york minute and added to the list of duties his art he had. i do feel the lawyering back and forth in the talking back and
forth doesn't add anything. >> again, the president really wants -- he's like a prize fighter whose best when he can get the fight into the middle of the ring. the message that he is sending another freedom caucuses ending i can take from a bible verse. in john three comment as those who would do evil love the darkness. so this is just a more common way of saying what shines more light on this mass. let's not let folks operate in corners of the ring. let's bring it centerstage and we can in fact bring it in much more rapidly than if we keep dribbling us out. neil: when you are quoting that was james garner and mel
gibson -- [inaudible] >> absolutely. callaway, how come your big head so far. how come it's so -- [inaudible] >> i can even deal with it. >> always a pleasure, my friend. we have this rivalry going. you get to see it's not even a battle. after this. 76.5 points. stay with us. how do you win at business? stay at la quinta. where we're changing with stylish make-overs. then at your next meeting, set your seat height to its maximum level. bravo, tall meeting man. start winning today. book now at lq.com start winning today.
tso why binge in here, when you can do it out there. with this clever little app called audible. you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside. everyone's doing it she's binging... they're binging... and... so is he. so put on your headphones, turn on audible and binge better.
>> there's a chance, very substantial chance it won't work out. he doesn't want to waste a lot of time. as a very very substantial chance that it won't work out. that doesn't mean i won't work out over a period of time. but it may not work out for june 12. there was a difference when kim jong un left china in the second time. and i think they were dedicating an aircraft carrier that the united states paid for. we paid for a lot that was built in china. >> two different thoughts go in there. i think the president commenting there is no guarantee we are going to see much progress.
the author of movie night, a beautiful book, brings you back to a time of innocence or they would watch movies, have friends come largely at camp david and they would be nice. i'm not saying this president is not bad. i am saying mark is one fine person to judge. ronald reagan was saying, also threatening to walk away with mikhail gorbachev. >> is whose overriding philosophy was it's better to talk to people and you mentioned reykjavík. he did walk away. it was a bad deal. donald at the time, white house chief, white house chief of staff asked will there be another summit and he said another summit, never. look what happened. neil: i believe what prompted
the walkout was they showed the papers that the agreement in ronald reagan's face. i saw the papers and everything else where he had to agree the defense initiatives instead will. >> his phrases i want it restricted. he said he wanted it restricted to billboard tory. i just can't do that. reagan even offered in that meeting to share it with the soviets. we were on our way back to washington. neil: but they ultimately did get a deal. i wonder if they are taking a moment to lower expectations. that was startling back then. to set the stage for what could be disappointment. not even going to the summit. >> maybe. clearly there's some things going on behind the scene. if they are talking to each
other, they're not shooting at each other and maybe they could begin to establish a relationship that will take them where they want to go. >> one thing interesting in this addresses the second comment we were playing there. the president wondering if the second meeting i can jong un that change things. i don't remember what the south korean leader said about her, but something happened differently. the chinese recalibrated with the north korean leadership day. what did you make of that? >> i was surprised that he said we were surprised by it. i would not have admitted they didn't know was occurring. why didn't we know? maybe that day. clearly something happened there. whatever it is comments better when when the leaders talk to each other face-to-face.
reagan felt about the russians, if i could just get them in a room and tell them man-to-man debris of two things. we have no hostile intent towards you, but we won't have hostile intent towards us and we could make progress. that's what happened and it could happen again. neil: reagan was they that's the approach we're going to to take with north koreans. talking about the nuclear rising. we need to see proof of that. we have very different definitions. ronald reagan knew exactly what he wanted to see out of the russians and what he would hold onto firmly when it came to us. so we had a blueprint going in there. >> his entire career he had studied the soviet union. he knew about nuclear weapons. he knew exactly what he wanted. >> he thought he was a lightweight. >> he sure did. it is very interesting because gorbachev was the young new kid on the block.
he knew more about it than anyone. >> you think the north koreans through the chinese to the president's point are playing the same sort of cynical view that this president, an old guy, some of the things they said about ronald reagan man. what do you think? >> he might be. the bolton factor is looming here. i would not underestimate president trump with the chinese or the north koreans. neil: so you are saying what? >> i'm saying they should meet sooner rather than later and start the process. the world will breathe easier by the fact that these two men shake hands and establish a process for conversation. >> what you think ronald reagan would think of donald trump? >> i'm sorry, what did you ask me about the weather? >> mark weinberg, it's just a time back to a first couple that
interference in elections and develops misusing people's information. we didn't take a broad enough view of our responsibility and that was a mistake and i'm sorry for it. neil: facebook ceo mark zuckerberg. he is continuing what they are calling this world apology tour, this time in brussels meeting with european leaders who are not just satisfied with just mere words. they want to see facebook change its ways. maybe accept fines. no indication where that is going. a lot going on, 45 seconds away from our colleague and friend trish regan. we have congressman steve scalise on "your world" at 4:00 p.m. get his read on what the president saying walking away from a china deal if it doesn't go well, even the north korean summit if it doesn't look like it could. third party west virginia candidate don blankenship is on with us. this is the first interview saying he will run as a third party candidate. can he do that? the laws are such in the state he can not. but if he can that could be very
disare up tiff for joe manchin that he will stay the democratic senator for west virginia. that is the fear. i will ask him. sort out what is going on. the dow down 70 points. trish regan. trish: how are you, neil? neil: very well. trish: good. the president is wrapping up his meeting with south korean, the south korean president where he did suggest kim jong-un and that whole summit thing might not actually happen. all of this as u.s. officials continue to try to work through the china issue. try to get some kind of fair trade agreement with china. you know what? the president is not happy with things as they are. he is not pleased with their results so far and he's right not to be happy. i will tell you why. i'm trish regan, welcome to "the intelligence report." ♪ trish: at this hour we're reporting on a