tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX Business June 17, 2018 8:00am-9:00am EDT
♪ ♪ ♪ paul: welcome to the journal editorial report, i'm paul gigot. the long-awaited report from the justice department's watchdog was released thursday and concludes that former fbi director james comey deviated dd from bureau and justice department procedures in his handling of the hillary clinton e-mail investigation, inspector general going so far as to call comey insubordinate from concealing his plans to make public statement in july 2016 when he ultimately exonerated clinton or was found, however, that comey was not motivated by political bias, the report also found that comey made a serious error of judgment in sending
letter to congress in october of 2016 announcing he was reopening the investigation. let's bring in wall street journal columnist and deputy editor dan henninger, and columnist kim strassel and bill mcgurn. so kim, what's the single biggest take away we should have out of this ig report? trship under jim take away is comey was disgraced by this report. he said that jim comey was insubordinate as we noted, not only did he decide to cut out the department of justice, go around the chain of command, he concealed that from the people that were his bosses and against advice, went out and did press conference exonerating hillary clinton but then also chastised her for things that she was not charged for which is something that the department of justice does not do. a lot of this was put in rod rosenstein's memo for why donald
trump fired him and we now know that he was correct to have done that firing. paul: okay, let's dig into the substance of comey. so pretty really rough criticism, but comey, of course, defended himself and memoir in particular, why would he do this if it was so against justice department rules? >> well, i think he thought -- i wouldn't say above the law but he was the law. if you look at the report, to me the most damming thing was ad hoc decision making based on personal views. paul: it's not political bias but it's about him? >> about his own reputation. i think the bureau's reputation suffered because he put his own personal reputation first and said -- sent awfully bad signals. the reason they are procedures is to guaranty fairness, not just fairness but also the appearance of fairness so that people can have confidence in institution. the irony is by putting ego first and people that have written about james comey for 20
years have never really accused him of being political, they've accused -- paul: political in the sense of being partisan. >> they've accused him of being grand-standing above everyone else and the bureau suffered terribly for it and the deceit is a big part, the way he dealt with loretta lynch and the people at the justice department and the announcements kind of, you know, informing them after he's informed the press that he is going to have press conference, it's outrageous and there's no defense. the fbi's letter at the end of the report that they defend mr. comey on this. paul: dan, the irony here is that comey claims to have done this to protect the reputation of the fbi but by breaking the rules in the end he undermined the fbi probably to a greater degree than we can recall since jay edgar hoover. >> i think he has done significant damage to the reputation of the fbi. clearly he was at the least incompetent to be the director of the fbi, what he thought he
was doing was manifesting the title of the book he wrote to a higher authority and that's what he always thought he was doing but there were higher authorities than james comey at the department of justice and we should say what were they thinking, loretta lynch presumably felt that she had t -- she did not recuse herself but take herself back with meeting in the tarmac, there was no reason -- this has made clear in the ig's report, they wondered why did not attorney general lynch or deputy attorney general sally yates step in and try to take more control over what comey was doing, he was left to run on his own with no accountability to anyone. paul: kim, what about this question of political bias? i want to get into some of the emails by other members of the fbi right now, but i want to ask you about comey himself and the decisions that were made about the clinton investigation, the ig said they weren't, he didn't deceit political bias but he did really raise a lot of questions
about breaking normal practices? >> well, actually what he said and i think this is a very important distinction is he said they did not find any factual evidence that bias made an impact on specific decisions having to do with the investigation. so that's essentially saying, we didn't catch anything to write a letter saying we should start this or let clinton off the hook so that she can be president. paul: right. >> they didn't find any evidence of that. but he did say that in fact, there was a great deal of bias which he found and that that cast a cloud over the entire credibility of the investigation and i think if you look at some of the decisions that were made in terms of immunity deals, in terms of their agreeing to clinton lawyer demands on what they could search for in laptops, the kit glove treatment over all, what he was essentially saying, i think you
cannot stop yourself from asking whether or not bias did influence the way that they -- they dealt with this investigation. paul: a lot of questionable decisions waiting a month before the investigation. >> mr. comey's explanation for that is he didn't know who huma abedin and anthony weiner were married. it's an extraordinary -- imagine if general flynn gave that kind of defense. it's incredible. further to kim's point, as ed, former justice department said, no evidence of bias affecting decisions does not mean that there was evidence of no bias. in fact, the ig pointed out that peter strzok's decision to prioritize the russia investigation over following up on the emails, they didn't have confidence that it was free of bias. paul: we will get more on peter strzok, much more on the ig report as well including new sctiny of texts exchanged between two fbi employees and
whether political bias did play ♪ this is not just a yard. it's where memories are made. and you have the best seat in the house. the john deere x350 select series with the exclusive mulchcontrol™ system. nothing runs like a deere™ a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip.
we just switched to geico and got more. more? they've been saving folks money for over 75 years. a company you can trust. geico even helped us with homeowners insurance. more sounds great. gotta love more... right, honey? yeah! geico. expect great savings and a whole lot more. with the lexus is.e thrill of the moment lease the 2018 is 300
and is 300 awd for these terms. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. paul: the inspector general's report shining a new light on text b fbi agent peterstrzok ani lawyer lisa page in an exchange included in the report page asked peter strzok, quote, trump is not ever going to become president, right, right? peter strzok responds, no, no he won't, we will stop it. while the inspector general said he did not find documentary evidence that political bias affected any decision-making, he concluded that because of his views peter strzok may have improperly prioritize russia investigation over the clinton probe during final weeks of the campaign. we are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and bill mcgurn. so dan u it's an extraordinary e-mail, what was going through peter strzok's mine, he's a law
enforcement officer who is supposed to be disinterested? >> right. he was not disinterested and that's the problem. not only peter strzok and lisa page but they identified at least two other fbi agents, fbi agent 1 and 5 and fbi attorney number one and two who were exchanging similar highly-politicils or texts and what happened here is that these agents, these people at the fbi went into a simple panic, political panic at the idea that both donald trump could become president, they were doing this before the election and then, indeed, after the election. they completely lost professional discipline and there seemed to be no one around to impose discipline and the question is whether that informed some of their decisions. i think the inspector general horowitz gave them a break by saying it did not inform their decisions. it really challenges credibility which can be exchanging texts like that and not have the
affect professional decision-making. paul: bill, one other fact, maybe you can shed some light, the second part of that peter strzok exchange with page, congress had asked for that and that was left out on what was provided -- >> the lisa page part from ron johnson. the question is whether there was a glitch or whether deliberately excluded. we don't know and i don't think that the fbi and the department of justice have earned the benefit of the doubt given redactions of all of these documents. further to dan's point, the one thing the inspector general could not find in 568 pages is that pro trump than anybody else, fbi agents have right to opinion but this was on fbi devices, investigation of the
two leading candidates. they have to look fair in addition to being fair and maybe one of the comparisons is not just was this decision reasonable in hillary investigation but compare the the hillary investigation, let's cooperate with the witnesses, let's let cheryl mills active counsel and sit in with the fbi investigated donald trump which was fisa warrants and we will plant informant there, trey gowdy suggests that's a big problem. paul: kim, let's take the response, peter strzok said there was no -- lawyer said there was no political bias so really no problem, these were just private views and didn't affect the investigation, so what's your response to that? >> well, my response is the texts that you just named, we will stop it and the inspector general went out of his way to say why this particular text is very problematic is because it goes beyond having a political view and suggest that you will
take action using the powers that you have under your control at the fbi. >> how do we know that? once you say, we will stop it, now you have to look at every single action that peter strzok took and do not forget, i mean, this is very important, he was the lead investigator on the russia probe. he was the guy who flew to london to debrief this australian diplomat who first supposedly tipped them off about the russia collusion and if there was any -- he was the guy calling the shots. when you have a guy on record saying we are going to stop this, i think the implication is that every single action he might have took was taken to stop donald trump from being president rather than because he believed that there was an honest issue or problem.
paul: dan, what do you think this all does to the mueller probe? obviously mueller was named after this -- after the campaign, but at the very least it was seem to complicate how he's going to proceed going forward or the reception of what he produces will get? >> that's right. let's recall that mueller was appointed after donald trump fired james comey, the idea was that perhaps trump was doing it to obstruct the investigation into the so-called russian collusion story. this ig report makes it clear as did rosenstein's memo that trump was absolutely justified unquestionably justified in firing jim comey. so that predicate for the mueller investigation is now very weak and the question is what is he left with other than the peripheral investigations that he's been going with, some of the people at the edge of the trump campaign, so i think the
mueller investigation is really on pretty weak ground, paul. paul: thank you, dan, bill, kim. when we come back, breaking down the trump-kim summit, was it merely a photo-op or the beginning of something more? >> we signed an incredible agreement, it's great and it's six in the morning. she thought it was a fire. it was worse. a sinkhole opened up under our museum. eight priceless corvettes had plunged into it. chubb was there within hours. they helped make sure it was safe. we had everyone we needed to get our museum back up and running,
this isn't the past. this isn't another administration that never got it started and therefore never got it done. paul: that was president trump in singapore tuesday following his summit with north korean leader kim jong un. the historic-one day meeting with signing, critics called vague, was the summit a photo-op or something more? we are back with dan henninger, bill mcgurn and wall street journal editorial board mary kissel, so bill, summit big pr success for sure, the president dominated the world stage, what about substance? how successful in. >> well, we don't know. we know that president kim in theory has agreed to complete denuclearization, look, this where i depart from ronald reagan, i was never a trust and verify guy. i'm a distrust and verify guy. there should be a lot of skepticism. [laughter] >> that said for all the criticism, everything that donald trump does comes with a
lot of noise, it's like the circus coming into town and i think we have to -- to me the test is whether any of these things are worth it, is whether we get what the agreement says complete and verifiable denuclearization and we won't know that for a while. paul: in that sense, mary, we are betting on donald trump being right as he assesses the intentions of kim jong un. >> yes, that's right, a correction to bill, it didn't say complete verifiable irreversible. it just said complete, mike pompeo said, all the other things are in there, trust us. i think it's positive that the president is keeping pressures on. the thing that worried me is the president's remark that he wants to stop war gaming, he calls exercises provocative, really anything but, they serve to deter north korea, they keep our troops ready and it's really a
unilateral concession on the president's part to suspend. paul: they were only suspending two exercises, the big one in the spring and another one in august which now have suspended. he had to walk back afterwards, it's not clear, can you clarify for us whether or not more extensive, even routine investigations or training will be suspending? >> routine training is going to continue but the pentagon isn't returning phone calls asking about the big exercises. look, paul these aren't one off exercises that you can cancel. they are meant to keep our troop readiness up and coincide with the north korean exercises. you have troops coming in from the united states, you have allies coming in. they are meant to familiarize this joint coalition with the terrain of the korean peninsula. you know, you can't say let's just cancel them, there are real costs to doing that. paul: dan, here is the argument from the people in the
administration, nothing else has worked, give the president a chance, the sanctions are still on, give him some running room, they can always -- the military exercises can be restarted. the sanctions to be toughened. let's just see if this can happen. >> yeah,let us, indeed, do that, paul, but let us not delude ourselves that this is different from what previous presidents have done, all right. what he has done is meet personally with the leader of north korea, any other president could have done that with kim's father, but where we a is the same point in the foothills of negotiations with no commitment as there was not in previous negotiations from the north koreans to do anything concrete or material to wind down their nuclear capability and so, yeah, we are hopeful and at the moment they are not testing missiles, they are not testing more bombs, that will hold for a while presumably but make no mistake,
kim jong un's scientists will be working in their labs to try to protect the weaponization of ballistic missiles while the negotiations go on and what we are looking for is material commitment from the north korean side such as inspectors inside that country soon but we have not seen that yet. >> well, here is a thought, if the president cares about provocations, what about having the north koreans pull their troops back 50 kilometers from demilt -- demilitarized zone. what about accounting in the wmz program? what about list of countries they supply goods in trade with? >> i would push back on that. one thing, you can't expect leader of the country to come to a meeting to be publicly humiliated before the world. probably he came because if he worries that if he doesn't cooperate there's a plan b,
military force. the effort up to this meeting, the president got hostages out, he put in very tough sanctions that other people haven't. again, you can have a lot of questions about the details and if president trump fails, it'll be number one very harmful to american security and massive humiliation for him. he staked his credibility on this. paul: how different is it really other than the photo-op? >> first of all, a lot tough going into it, right, bill clinton stood and said -- did anybody get american hostages? >> we had under george w. bush administration. >> not as tough -- i think that the policy proceeding this was a lot tougher than we've had before. again, the test for me is will it be worth it? it'll be worth if we do get it
denuked. it won't be worth it it would be muim -- humiliation. >> the proof is in the pudding. i don't think it's helpful to make unilateral concessions talking about war gaming. paul: trump administration insisting that sanctions will remain in place on north korea until denuclearization is complete. so what do we know about pyongyang's nuclear arsenal and how do we know whether that's achieved, we will ask the former weapon's inspector general next. man: i got scar tissue there.
same thing with any dent or dings on this truck. they all got a story about what happened to 'em. man 2: it was raining, there was only one way out. i could feel the barb wire was just digging into the paint. man: two bulls were fighting, (thud) bam hit the truck. try explaining that to your insurance company. woman: another ding, another scratch. it'll just be another chapter in the story. every scar tells a story, and you can tell a lot more stories when your truck is a chevy silverado. the most dependable, longest-lasting, full-size pickups on the road. i'm a tin can tied to your bumper, cause.... i don't think enough people heard about your big day. but nothing says "we got married" like a 12 ounce piece of scrap metal. yo! we got married! honk if you like joint assets. now you're so busy soaking up all this attention, you don't see the car in front of you. and if i can crash your "perfect day", imagine what i can do to the rest of 'em. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem. like me.
>> we believe that chairman kim jong un understanding the urgent p urgency of the timing of completing this denuclearization, that he understands that we must do this quickly and sanction relief are un sanctions, the sanction's relief cannot take place until such time as we have demonstrated that north korea has been completely denuclearized. paul: that was mike pompeo in seoul this week insisting sanctions will not come to north korea until it completely denuclearizes. a process the secretary of state could take a long as 2 and a half years. pyongyang staged the destruction of one of its test sites last
month but dismantling its entire nuclear program is another matter how can the u.s. verify what north korea actually has in its arsenal, let's ask david alright, founder and president of institute of science and international security and former weapon's inspector. thanks for being here. >> good to be here. : so let's start out by -- how many nuclear weapons do we think north korea really has? >> well, it's a very difficult estimate to make because we know -- not that much. i mean, estimates i've made anywhere fro15 to 35 nuclear weapons, the number could be higher if they have more capability than -- than we are estimating, so it's very tough but they have, you know, a couple of dozen nuclear weapons, maybe, there's a chance it's fewer, but, again, uncertain. the problem is it's very hard to
know where countries make nuclear weapons and where they store them, so what we fall back to typically is trying to look at their capabilities to make plutonium and weapon grade uranium and those facilities tend to be easier to understand and to inspect. paul: all right, how many of those facilities do we have, for a while we had a plutonium site but we didn't know about enriched uranium site? >> that's right, plutonium is much better understood. a focus of the six-party talks in the 2000's and earlier, and a lot is known about that. i don't think they have a secret reactor but they do have a secret enrichment plan we are pretty sure, and we don't know -- western intelligence has a good idea where the plant is. they also have another one which they built in secret and revealed in 2010. so i think the working assumption is they have two
substantial uranium enrichment plants, one north korea admits to, and one it doesn't and those plants are going to have to be thoroughly inspected, but before that, i mean, what you want in verification is for the country to reveal in an honest way what its nuclear capabilities are and in this case including its nuclear weapon's production capabilities and size of nuclear arsenal. paul: right, that means that at a first step what you want from north korea is essentially a declaration, a list, here is what we have in terms of our weapons, in terms of our sites for building those weapons, in terms of sites on building uranium and plutonium and so on and so on. >> and the initial list could be almost just like a list, but you would like them for them to allow visits to those sites so inspectors can in a sense get the lay of land and inspectors should not be international atomic agency. it should be effort organized by the united states and allies in
that region including china, well, not call them ally but at least a friend on this issue and then north korea needs to create a narrative of its nuclear weapon's program a that would become a full-blown declaration which could be verified by inspectors. paul: when you talk about inspectors, an international group, not the un and the u.s. should be part of that, but does it have to be inspections that are essentially on demand, that means anywhere we want to look, we can go and you'll help us look and see what you've got? >> they don't have to be that intrusive, i mean, but north korea has to be willing to allow, well, to tell an honest story, i mean, in the sense you know when you see it, then there's going to be some places. we have list of sites that are suspect nuclear sites and they are going to have to allow some level of visits to places where we just want to check it out, you know, where were wrong and
were we right, is it falling off the list because it's closed down but so there's going to have to be fairly broad and doesn't have to be like the case of iraq where the inspectors had the absolute right to go anywhere. it can be less than that. paul: but why less than that if we know from the past that north korea has not told the truth, why shouldn't it be just as intrusive because saddam lied for years as well and that's why it was intrusive? >> what i'm saying it would be great if could be that intrusive. north korea hasn't allowed inspectors to go outside beyond maybe one or two cases where u.s. had a special mission to do and paid quite a price to get there. so i think what you want to do is design a system where it's good enough, but you don't want to demand perfect. paul: okay, do we have to insist that they stop enriching uranium and we basically be able to haul
out all of the stockpiles of enriched uranium and plutonium and haul it out of the country? >> they certainly have to stop. i mean, that's going to be an issue. north korea will say, we have needs, civil reactors, we want to fuel, i think the united states has to be very firm. no enrichment at all. it's just a bad idea given the history of the whole effort with north korea. they should be shutting down and dismantling uranium and enrichment program along with plutonium and weapon's program and that's absolutely necessary. it's not about freezing, it's really about getting rid of in a verifiable manner and so it's critical to do that. paul: i would assume that would include plutonium as well? >> for sure. they may keep reactor operational that if somehow making electricity, they may even import reactors but they wouldn't be enriching uranium for those reactors, those reactors would be structured or dissigned in a -- designed,
proliferation resistant, but that part of the peaceful program with north korea has to be negotiated carefully and really i don't think we are even at that stage yet. paul: right. it's fascinating, thanks for the insight, mr. albright, appreciate it. >> thank you. paul: slamming steep tariffs on china, what it means to the t how do you win at business? stay at laquinta. where we're changing with contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. this is not just a yard. it's where memories are made. and you have the best seat in the house. the john deere x350 select series with the exclusive mulchcontrol™ system. nothing runs like a deere™
means they won't hike your rateseness over one mistake. see, liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance. - [voiceover] this is an urgent message from the international fellowship of christians and jews. there is an emergency food crisis for elderly holocaust survivors in the former soviet union. - this is a fight against time. what we're dealing with is coming out, meeting someone who's 85, 90 years old, can't get around, has no food, has no water, and just wants to give up and die. and that's where we come in.
we are called to comfort these people, toa blesng to their lives. - [voiceover] for just $45, we'll rush an emergency survival package to help one desperate elderly person for a month. call right now. - [eckstein] call the number on your screen. - in ukraine, there's no supper network. they don't have food cards or neighbors that come in to help. they're turning to us because they have nowhere else to turn. - [voiceover] your gift is a life line to help these elderly jewish holocaust survivors, help them to live out their final years with dignity and love. call right now. - [eckstein] call the number on your screen. - what i pray is that you won't turn your eyes, but you will look at their suffering and your heart will be changed.
- [voiceover] with your gift of just $45, we can rush an emergency survival package to help one desperate elderly person for a month. call right now. - [eckstein] call the number on your screen. paul: the trump administration announced friday that it will impose 25% tariff on up to $50 billion of chinese goods, swift retaliation from beijing and dramatically trade tensions between the world's two largest economy, punishing china for stealing american technology and trade secrets, tariffs will apply to over 1,000 imported products and will chinese
aerospace, robotics, manufacturing and auto industries, we are back with dan henninger, mary kissel and wall street journal editorial board member allysia finley. >> identified right problem but wrong solution, by taking unilateral action under u.s. trade law, the united states foregoes in concert with allyies multiple provisions that we could have used here to punish their intellectual property violations, to punish them for state subsidies, exports and all manner of things. i think by doing this, trump risks first of all a trade war that would hurt u.s. consumers but he also isolates the united states, look, european allies, asian allies, they think they have the same problem with china as well. so let's get them on board with us and let's act together against china, let's not go it alone. paul: allysia, you have been looking at the list of products that are targeted by the trump administration and now china
targeting american products, who is going to be hurt here in. >> i think manufacturers, aluminum and steel makers. paul: american manufacturing? >> right, components in machines, drilling machines u -- constructional, cost for infrastructure projects. one of the goals ofrate tax reform is increase investment in capital expenditures and that's really going to take a hit. paul: so this is from the tariffs that we are imposing on china, what about the tariffs that china is imposing on american goods? who are they targeting there? >> mainly the farm, you see soy, pork and to the extent airplanes but these are -- paul: could be boeing. >> possibly boeing, yes. paul: so they are going to -- that's trump country. you think they are deliberately targeting trump states?
>> well, of course because these are -- they are trying to maximize political pressure and so you're going to have iowa farmers, this could escalate in trade war this could ripple into recession. paul: because the farm belt is actually one of the weaker parts -- >> income has become declining for the past couple of years. paul: dan, i don't know if you saw, gary cohen, president former economic economic adviser said that could begin to undermine if this gets out of control, the trade tit for tat and the president is fighting with europe and méxico, canada and japan and now china, this could escalate in a way that puts a big dent in the economy, do you agree with that? >> i agree to the extent that yes, it could, we are not there yet, but we need some results if we are going to avoid that result and we just have not seen them yet but it's very complicated. the trump administration is kind of playing three dimensional
chess here. we've slapped $50 billion of tariffs on china, who we want to help us negotiate denuclearization with north korea, all right, and as mary suggested, we should have our allies along if we are going to rightfully target china's trade practices, however, we have also targeted all those allies britain, europe, japan, south korea, with tariffs of their own. so this is a very complicated process and i presume the white house has a plan but if it doesn't pan out, gary cohen is right, we will start seeing negative impact on the american economy eventually. paul: that plan i don't see frankly. i think this looks to be ad hoc, but here is another thing that i don't quite understand, the sanctions that trump lifted against zti. that's a chinese telecom company that buys products from america's qualcomm and had death sentence because twice, not once
but twice violated un sanctions against exportsz of technology to iran and north korea, he gave them a reprieve even now as he turns around and slams tariffs on china for other goods, what's the common thread or plan if i may here? >> yeah, dance at three dimensional chess, i'm not seeing three dimensional, paul, this looks like a game of checkers in a playground. look, he's -- there is no plan here. i think the president is an emotional person and i think he acted because president xi jinping asked him to save zte and he has congress against him and rightfully so because by helping zte that was rightfully sanctioning you are undermining the sanction's regime, other violaters as well, you know what, if your head of state calls the president and says nice thing you will get a rebrief too. paul: are they going overrule
the president on zte. >> there's widespread opposition to letting zte off the hook. paul: okay, may have to veto if he wants it out. when we come back a federal judge green lights at&t's acquisition of time warner a deal that could transform the american media landscape it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same. but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does.
and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. our phones are more than just phones.up! they're pocket-sized personal trainers. last minute gift finders. [phone voice] destination ahead. and discoverers of new places. it's the internet in your hand.
any condition. the justice department sued to block the 85 billion-dollar merger last november arguing that it would hinder competition and raise prices for consumers. we are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and allysia finley. allysia, you have been covering this, good decision by judge? >> right on all the merits an really sent message to the justice department, the last time a vertical merger was challenged by the justice department was 1977 and it lost. here it was even more dubious because in the media in broadband markets they are becoming more competition and more convergence, google and facebook now have more advertising revenues than all tv combined. paul: so when you talk about a vertical merger, companies that don't directly compete with one another? >> distributors and content producers. paul: that's what this combines? >> right. paul: the government argued that this would raise prices because
at&t would deny time warner content to other people. judge said, no, there's no evidence. >> there's no evidence that they relied on this one university california berkeley professor but all the other economics disputed his assertions and assumptions and even the judge really picked apart 172-page ruling of these arguments. paul: so, kim, help me out on the politics here. if the -- the law and the marketplace was so clear to the judge, why would the justice department lead with its chin in such a high-profile case? >> well, it might have something to do with the fact that the guy at the top donald trump opposed this merger, not necessarily on any strong legal grounds but because he didn't like cnn much which happens to be one of the entities at question here.
here we have antitrust chief, they decided to go out and try to -- didn't work on the merits and it shouldn't have and, you know, we will see what they decide to do next. they said they are considering next steps but this is one where they ought to let it go because it's right on policy and right on the merits. paul: dan, you and i have covered antitrust for many years, and always antitrust lawyers in justice department look for any case to try to stop to complex muscles to show they are still relevant even though they end up losing, is this going to now -- with this defeat unleash a lot of mergers in the media business, you know, there's a bidding war for the assets of fox now which -- which, of course, owns this network and some of those assets between disney and comcast, are we going to see all kinds of mergers? >> unquestionably we will see mergers. the amount of economic activity is going the take place in the media business is going to be
extraordinary. in many ways, at the end of the day, it's what this all mean for consumers, customers of this video content and in way like we were at the dawn of hollywood or the golden age of television all of which were predicated on the fact that there are massive numbers of people who want to absorb entertainment through a screen. that means a lot of money and these people are now the result of this economic activity going to be afforded all sorts of ways to get that material and probably at a pretty good price. i don't think most consumers could care less whether the platform is at&t or netflix or amazon prime. they just want good product and i think that's what's going to result from this process. paul: one of the interesting things, allysia, you will see amazon, youtube already in the entertainment media business, facebook investing in content, you are going to see all kinds of companies, comcast bidding for more, what does this
suggest, though, to you about the the future of antitrust against the big-tech giants? are we going to saib maybe -- see maybe the justice department turn to them and say, you control so much market share, now we are going to target you? >> right, when you have facebook and google controlling 70% of all digital ad revenues that raises -- and they use their cloud to kind of block competitors whether it'd be yelp, wall street journal editorials and i think you are going to see a bigger push especially from capitol hill to put pressure on these companies and you're already seeing some calling for them to break up. paul: fascinate to go watch, we will take one more break, when we come back hits and misses of the week ♪ a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts
on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. this is not just a yard. it's where memories are made. and you have the best seat in the house. the john deere x350 select series with the exclusive mulchcontrol™ system. nothing runs like a deere™ kyle, we talked about this. there's no monsters. but you said they'd be watching us all the time. no, no. no, honey, we meant that progressive would be protecting us 24/7. we just bundled home and auto and saved money.
that's nothing to be afraid of. -but -- -good night, kyle. [ switch clicks, door closes ] ♪ i told you i was just checking the wiring in here, kyle. he's never like this. i think something's going on at school. -[ sighs ] -he's not engaging. i think something's going on at school. running a small business is demanding. and that's why small business owners need more. like internet that's up to the challenge. the gig-speed network from comcast business gives you more. with speeds up to 20 times faster than the average. that means powering more devices, more video conferencing, and more downloads in seconds, not minutes. get fast internet and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more per month. comcast is building america's largest gig-speed network to give small businesses more. call 1-800-501-6000 today. my secret visitors. appearing next to me in plain sight. hallucinations and delusions.
these are the unknown parts of living with parkinson's disease. what stories they tell. but for my ears only. what plots they unfold. but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's ll experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. and these can worsen over time, making things even more challenging. but there are advances that have led to treatment options that can help. if someone you love has parkinson's and is experiencing hallucinations or delusions, talk to your parkinson's specialist. because there's more to parkinson's. my visitors should be the ones i want to see. learn more at moretoparkinsons.com >> paul: time now for hits and misses of the week. >> the president of harvard university, she sent out a
letter to the wider harvard community, including alums like mary, explaining harvard's position in this lawsuit by students for fair admissions which is arguing that asian americans are discriminated against by harvard's affirmative action program. this case is probably headed to the supreme court. i think trial's going to start later this year. and what it shows is that harvard's going to fight for diversity with all its might, even if that means taking away spots from asian americans. >> paul: kim. >> a hit to the united states, canada and mexico for winning the right to host the 2026 world cup, beating out morocco. what i love about this is it's a reminder that the united states is strongest when it works with its closest allies, not against them. the u.s. lost out on a bid, a recent bid to host the cup and the people who voted this time made it clear that canada and mexico clinched the deal. maybe we can remember that on issues like trade and
immigration too. >> paul: mary. >> a half hit to the trump administration for reinstating funding for syria's white helmets. this aid group rushes to the scene and treats bombing victims, gives them medical care. it's a great gesture. but unfortunately, paul, it is treating the symptom and not the disease and that's the ass regime. >> paul: dan. >> well, paul, notwithstanding kim's hit to the united states for working with our canadian allies on soccer, the department of homeland security this week says it's going to strengthen our northern border strategy and it's talking about not letting things in from canada, this comes in the wake of donald trump's famous set two with justin trudeau, the prime minister up there, over canadian product as a threat to our national security. dhs is talking about drugs and immigrants but i think i hear a wall going up on the canadian border. >> paul: a wall to prevent anybody from coming from says cash juan.
and remember, -- saskatchewan. if you have a hit or miss be sure to tweet it to us. that's it for this have a great weekend. good night. >> announcer: from the fox studios in new york city, this is maria bartiromo's "wall street." maria: welcome to a special one-hour edition of "wall street." i'm maria bartiromo. we have got a fantastic lineup this weekend. it was a very, very big news week. in just a moment i will speak with chrysler ceo. and we'll have the latest on the historic events out of singapore's summit this