tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX Business November 25, 2018 10:00am-11:00am EST
as always, there is much more information on our website at foxnews.com/propertyman. be sure to send me your questions or property stories at firstname.lastname@example.org. i'm bob massi. i'll see you next week. [ woman vocalizing ] paul: welcome to the journal editorial report. i am paul gigot. as we look ahead to the busy end of the year in washington. the mueller probe perhaps winding down with president trump 's attorneys on dancing this week they have submitted written answers to the special counsel questions. about russian interference in the 2016 campaign. this is the house and senate gets set to return from thanksgiving break. facing jampacked agendas the final three weeks of the 115th congress. the president keeping the door open to a partial government
shutdown early next month. if congress fails to give him the money he wants to fund a border wall. >> we are talking at the border wall. we are talking about quite a big sum of money. about $5 billion. and i think probably if i was ever going to do a shutdown over border security, we look at the caravan, when you look at the mess, when you look at the people coming in, this will be a very good time to do a shutdown. paul: joined the palm of this week wall street journal comments, dan heninger. editorial writer kate bachelder odell and assistant editorial page editor james -- how lame
will this lame-duck be? >> i wish i could spread more holiday cheer this week but i think i'm expecting this my appointment on all fronts. the congress is a lot to get done by the end of the year and it mentioned some appropriations process also a farm bill and openings for things a prison reform perhaps. if the majority leader -- judges and denominations are also a big priority. we do not expect very much. >> what about the shutdown scenario? because donald trump seems to be serious about it and if he's ever going to get some money for this, probably would the best chance would be now before democrats take the house. about two thirds or so of the government is a ready funded for the next year. the shutdown would be less severe. does that create an opening here that maybe we do get a showdown over this wall funding? >> i'm not convinced of the wisdom of the strategy. the senate has agreed to about 1.6 billion for the wall and physical barriers and donald trump wants closer to five. my question is, as always, the shutdowns, was a plan after the
shutdown? if they were to agree to a short-term continuing resolution to move this to january, as you described, the hand gets so much weaker. so i think this is an opening to get as much as you can but i do not think beyond the 1.6 billion, the policy trade-off republicans want to make to get more money. i don't think they're very good if there even possible. >> james as i read the democrats and say you want your 5 billion, we will give it to you but here is the risk, a, b, c, d. protection from robert mueller. policy concessions on trade and other things. is it worth the trade? >> i don't know if you have to make that trade. i think as you said the top, the present is in a strong position for the military is funded so the constituency that might be against the shutdown is not really relevant here. you basically have a lot of left-leaning people who work in the domestic agencies who want to get paid, republicans historically have not done well in these battles. this president is the exception.
and it was of immigration that the schumer shutdown happened. it lasted a weekend and democrats didn't have the stomach for it.i think the president has some literature. paul: this because chuck schumer wanted it and advertised the shutdown.>> there were calls all we can from their constituents that depend on governments so you keep the checks flowing.paul: dan, can you mediate this dispute? >> it is not going to be easy. it is a lame-duck session. and it will end at the end of december. there are only so many days left in the congressional calendar. and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has a to do list. included on that list, about 35 federal judges, he would like to get confirmed and approved. he wants them through. you need votes on the house on the senate floor to do that. and they're also going to try and negotiate the wall. while israel the tail wagging the dog. donald trump insists on that wall. all of the other spending and all the other activity that will take place in december is going to be affected by that. and there is one other thing,
one of the peasants pet projects is criminal justice reform.that bill is out there too. mr. mcconnell would probably rather do the judge's in criminal justice reform but donald trump forces a government shutdown, a lot of this including the judge's will push it to the side. paul: of the judge's issue, it looks as if mcconnell does not necessarily want to get all of the judge's through. he has a couple that he wants to push but not as many as 35 in this congress. and when they hold the senate in january they figure they can do it, they can get some more. that a fair summary of the facts? >> i think it is still shaping up. i think we can see more. it will be voted on after then skipping with dan said, there are more than 30 ready for a
flare of road at any time. i think that should be the bare minimum that congress does before heading home for christmas. probably a little earlier than the rest of us. then there are also 20 more that are still awaiting a vote in the judiciary committee. that jeff flake has been saying he will hold up because of the mueller investigation. he wants to vote on the protection bill, right? there's a lot of opportunity more judges done and i'm confident we will see more than two. depending on how the farm bill and prison reform shape up, hopefully we get at least 30. paul: and robert mueller. donald trump samiti the answers to the questions, i think was a call not appearing in person with robert mueller. but rudy giuliani saying, this is close to wrapping up. i don't have any confidence that that is true. i don't think we know that. >> yeah, it is a debate about how long you go without these long-sought collision evidence. the government has now been at this for 2 and a half years. mr. mueller, specifically, a year and 1/2. i think it is reasonable to say out with it. if you have a collision case, let's hear it. if not, let's move on. paul: once again the flake
footnote. senator jeff flake, a lame-duck on his way says he will hold up votes on judges unless he gets a vote on the mueller protection. >> and his leverage in the committee to do that but i think basically, this is an unconstitutional provision. you cannot tell the president not to fire someone who is inferior officer. >> when has that ever stopped anyone in politics? [ácustomá you know, jeff flake surely knows that. this not really the way i think you should go out. paul: trade tensions are high as a president prepares to meet with the chinese president xi jinping @ next week g 20 summit. can the two sides reach a deal? >> john has been ripping off our country.
(toni vo) 'twas the night before christma, and all thro' the house. not a creature was stirring, but everywhere else... there are performers, dancers, designers the dads and the drivers. there are doers of good and bringers of glee. this time of the year is so much more than a bow and a tree. (morgan vo) those who give their best, deserve the best. get up to a $1,000 credit on select models now during the season of audi sales event. >> china wants to make a deal
but they want to make it very badly. i have another $250 billion worth of tariffs to put on if we do not make a deal. and believe me, i will be putting them on. paul: the president warning that the u.s. will proceed with a threat to impose additional tariffs on $250 billion worth of chinese products if washington and beijing do not reach deal on trade. signaling that tough negotiations are ahead as the two sides prepare to meet at the g 20 summit. which begins in buenos aires. the president and xi jinping are scheduled to sit down on the silence of the summit. the first face-to-face meeting in nearly one year. what should we expect? let's ask john murphy, senior vice president for international policy at the u.s. chamber of commerce. welcome back.good to see you. the president says china wants to do a deal badly. how do you size up the incentive on both sides to do a deal?>> i think the
ministration has a good diagnosis about the industrial policies and trade practices that china has undertaken that are a problem. they deserve to be confronted. specifically the theft of intellectual property, the forced technology transfer policies. but so far it is unclear just how this is going to play out. this is a meeting where they have been that much staff work to prepare for it yet. it is difficult to say the deal is right and u.s. trade representative bob -- has released a statement saying in his ear is not exactly time for a deal yet. we may see this linger on for quite a lot longer. paul: it seems to me the president is correct in that the chinese economy is feeling some pressure from the tariffs. and slowing growth. no question that there is some capital flight out of china.
and if you look at the united states, we seem to be slowing down too. you can see in the business investment figures that there is some uncertainty affecting business investment in the united states from trade. how do you diagnose on either side, the, the weight of incentive to do a deal? >> right. i think it is absolutely right that across united states, we are seeing the impact. in agriculture, china historically, has been buying 30 percent of all u.s. production of soybeans francis, the top crop in the united states and it's been switched off this year. so that has been felt. and other crops as well. for manufacturing as well. we are seeing a lot of the input that have come from china. raw materials and components that have gone into u.s. manufactured goods more expensive. companies do not like talking about that much that their cost is going up but the pain is there underneath the surface
and you see it in construction as well where a lot of the input cost you see prices rising. paul: the president needs a strong economy. if he goes into reelection year with two percent growth or worse, i think he will lose. so sooner or later he's got to do a deal. it is for that reason, something, deal in the early part of 2019 at the latest. >> certainly, pressure will be mounting. because the tariffs that were slapping on china are actually taxes paid by americans. and that is why we at the chamber think they are the wrong approach. so we do think that this is going to linger on a bit longer. but the pressure is going to be there mounting i think day by day. especially if after january 1 we see a lot of that 10 percent tariffs match up to the 25 percent level. paul: let me turn to nafta.
the new nafta, the president signed this with mexico and canada. us-mexico agreement, canadian agreement. normally you think that would be something to be voted on in the next congress. but pat toomey, republican senator from pennsylvania came out to say with other republicans, sign this and get a vote on or before the end of the congress. is this realistic? >> probably not. a senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell says is just not time. and a lot of them look at that way. everything would have to be lined up. as you know, there are many other items on the agenda for the lame-duck session. paul: i will tell you what, it looks to me that the politics of this are not going well for the next congress. you're ready hear democrats saying well, okay. this bill, this nafta deal, we will look at it but you have to do several things before we even consider a vote.
for example he has to tighten up the enforcement provisions, yet to do more labor protections and environmental protections. the environmental lobby is lined up totally against it and the cio is lukewarm on it. i guess my question is, will this have a hard time passing a democratic house? >> there certainly will be a lot of wheeling and dealing. and a lot of talk about how to enhance the enforcement provisions in the agreement. we have the chamber see a number of things that you can do to prepare the way. when that we think is a priority is to lift the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from canada and mexico. the ministration pledged these would go away. as soon as the new nafta deal was struck but yet they are still there. we think addressing issues like that could help build support across both sides of the aisle. paul: that would certainly increase support amongst some republicans but it will not get you sherrod brown 's vote in ohio, will it? how many democrats will that really turn? >> i think that in the incoming
house of representatives, there are quite a few members coming in. or democrats who spoke out against tariffs. it was an interesting cycle in that sense. so it is too early to say. but there is interest and working on the trade issues on both sides of the aisle i think. paul: john, thank you for coming in.we will follow this closely. appreciate it.>> thank you. paul: will become back the trump administration stands by saudi arabia. taken in america first stance in the wake of the khashoggi incident. >> is a mean nasty world out there. the middle east in particular. there are important amer
when my hot water heater failed, she was pregnant, in-laws were coming, a little bit of water, it really- it rocked our world. i had no idea the amount of damage that water could do. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they were on it. it was unbelievable. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. we're the baker's and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today. but when i started seeing i knew aboutthings,emors.
i didn't know what was happening... so i kept it in. he started believing things that weren't true. i knew something was wrong... but i didn't say a word. during the course of their disease around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. but now, doctors are prescribing nuplazid. the only fda approved medicine... proven to significantly reduce hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia-related psychosis and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the most common side effects are swelling of the arms and legs and confusion. we spoke up and it made all the difference. ask your parkinson's specialist about nuplazid.
i am a techie dad.n. i believe the best technology should feel effortless. like magic. at comcast, it's my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience. my name is mike, i'm in product development at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome. >> if we abandon saudi arabia
it would be a terrible mistake. they are buying hundreds of billions of dollars of things from this country. if i say we do not want to take your business, if i say we will cut it off, they will get the equipment, military equipment and other things from russia and china. right now we have oil prices in great shape. i'm not going to destroy the world economy and i'm not going to destroy the economy for our country by being foolish with saudi arabia. paul: president trump tuesday defending the administration supportive saudi arabia. pledged to maintain the military and economic ties to the kingdom despite news reports that u.s. intelligence has determined that the crown prince mohammed bin salman was directly involved in the murder of the "washington post" columnist, jamal khashoggi killed the set of the saudi counsel it in istanbul early
october. u.s. sanctions 17 officials in response to the killing with many members of congress including republicans, calling on the administration to do more. we are back with dan henninger and james freeman. dan, what you make? >> i think we will call that is -- it means that the interest of the united states matters. everything else is secondary or perhaps, irrelevant. there is a lot of real practice like this in the cold war in soviet communism.one difference here. the saudis clearly have virtual knowledge that there is -- their intelligence have killed
him. >> have acknowledge that? >> yes they've acknowledged that. paul: they say the crown prince was someone who gave the order or did he for example, say yes, you can take him but and then, it just got out of hand. >> yes and the witness developed it would suggest that mohammed bin salman was only person in leadership did not know this was going to happen. it is a violation of the u.s. ideal. and in the statement the president really gave no bow whatsoever to the horror of what happened here. this is a position most public figures in the united states cannot defend. and i think our big concern over what the president has done is a lot of what he said about the middle east was true. he loved what he said about iran and his threat is true. but by not acknowledging that there was a violation here of america's ideals by not be more critical of mohammed bin salman, it makes it very difficult for his natural supporters in washington such as senator lindsey graham or senator mitt romney to support his policy.
it makes it more difficult to achieve his policy goals in the middle east. which i do not think was his intention. paul: this is real, their meaning showdown, the alliance against iran. we care about, it is important. also, arms sales, good, okay. we can sell that. but it is the reductionist description of that in his rhetoric that says, that's all it is. everything most americans say, really? you know, we can't be more forthcoming and denouncing killing in opposition thinker? >> yeah, we buy their oil and they buy our weapons. maybe it is not the most persuasive for a lot of people. he saw the tuesday press conference one of the reporters and asked about the moral case in that is when he went to i think the more compelling argument that iran is even worse and this is essentially, a counterweight to them. but it is the crown prince and
his regime obviously not making it any easier. whether or not he actually ordered this killing and it is kind of interesting watching the political left and now embrace the cia conclusions. suddenly the cia is to be trusted at all times. funny how that has changed especially in relation to the middle east analysis in the few decades. i think what is a problem here is that the crown prince and saudi arabia has sold himself as a modernizer who wants his country to enter the 21st century to adopt western-style tolerance transparency, etc. and we are not seeing it and we are not seeing it with the news reports of women being tortured. essentially political prisoners inside saudi arabia, we would like to see the proof of modernization. >> i covered asia, south korea when it was run by a dictator and they attempted to kill the opposition leader.
i was covering the philippines under marcos when -- was killed. there was an element of idealism and in the relationship and in the statements. and they distanced themselves from marcos and they really squeezed -- for example, not to hurt him. it was, you do not behave this way is the message that we sent. i would hope that the u.s. would say that to mohammed bin salman. you do this again and there will be real consequences. chris said they would have to do that because a relationship with saudi arabia going forward will be difficult because mohammed bin salman has shown some errors in judgment. yes he's attempted to do exactly what james described in modernizing saudi arabia. but this was a real bad call on his part and he is made some
others. i think secretary state pompeo, national security john bolton now have got to talk straightforwardly with them and say look, we've got to have a better understanding of our relationship. it cannot be based on what we have seen. paul: still ahead, the trump economy. the president is touting robust growth and the economy. but turmoil and challenges ahead. we will ask a former economic advisor next. >> as a country we are doing great. on the claimant is at a record low. look at the different statistics, i think tech stock will have some pals but that
a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast.
♪ ♪ >> we have the greatest economy, one of the greatest economies we've ever had and we've tad -- by the way, had the other side won, it would have been a disaster, you would have been down 4.2% instead of up 4.2%, in the economy you have to give me an a plus maybe. paul: president trump giving himself modest grade of a plus in interview with chris wallace setting robust growth and low unemployment. signs of global slowdown, are there challenges for trump economy ahead? let's ask senior economic adviser 2016 trump campaign and coauthor of new book, trump.
>> hi, paul. paul: would you you define trump onmics. >> understanding the conservative movement and having read bill buckley and things like that. trump is nod ideological, he's common sense businessman and one of the points in the book is he addresses -- he sort of brought business principles to the white house and fortunately those are kind of common sense principles, get taxes down, get government off to back of business, reduce regulation that is we don't need but he's also, you know, he also is very proworker. i mean, that's one thing people don't -- people care about rich people and so on, every conversation that larry kudlow would have with him on the campaign. okay, we would suggest policy, how is that going to help the steel worker in pennsylvania or the coal minor in west virginia
or auto worker in flint, mitch geant. he knows who brought him to this dance and he's very hyperconcern. paul: i would argue that reagan cared about those people, deeply about those people. >> right. paul: two big places where i see a difference with most conventional conservative economists would be trade and immigration because most conservative economists i think you agree you need people to work and we have a labor shortage now and that's hurting in some areas and on trade, a tariff is a tax and a tax, you tax something you get less of it. he doesn't have problems with either of those. >> so i will make a point to you that you may not like to hear but i believe those were the two issues that probably won him the election. the fact is -- by the way, i'm proimmigration and protrade, but that message doesn't sell very well in a lot of mid western
states, people really believe that it was the chinese or the mexicans that were responsible for, you know, their factories leaving and so trump used those issues to great effect to win -- to crash. paul: even if i accept that and i might dispute. >> let me make the point, you were selling out principles, no, we told donald trump we disagreed with him on those issues. one thing trump is very transactional. paul: i want to talk to you about tax cuts, you in -- you follow debate. in the summer of 2018, 2017 donald trump was saying, why not 44%, top marginal tax rate, steve bannon was pushing that inside and only republicans in the house and senate, no, no, you have to tax cuts across the board. my question is, if he is that
transactional, taxes, let's raise them? >> trump understands his conservative base. i think he does understand, look, if i start raising taxes and do things that alienate voters i won't win in 2020. he may make some deals with pelosi but he's not going to -- he's not going to give up these kind of core principles that help win him an election. the tax cut was big election. paul: i would argue that it helped him. it helped him enormously. >> the polls are wrong. in 2020 that democrats run on repealing tax cuts it's not a winning issue. paul: would he be willing to do a deal, somebody asked him in the press conference recently,
well, if you want that middle-tax class cuts you are talking before the election would you make adjustment in the raising rates on steve moore? [laughter] paul: would he do? >> i don't believe he would. he understands that top 1% are business owners. you have to cut the corporate rate. he would say, yeah, i kept that, what are we going to do, that's why we cut the highest rate and that's the tax that the small business -- paul: signs of a slowdown. business investment is a shaky right now. what's going on? >> well, look, i'm not -- i'm still pretty bullish, i think we
will get 2 and a half percent. paul: was down. >> i know it is. still, for the year we will come in and i don't believe the forecasts by the goldman sachs people created recessions, it's around the corner. the left looks at the situation today, they can't understand how it is trump's policies have created this prosperity. they have fallen back on this position, it's sugar high. paul: sugar high. >> the problem, number one it isn't sugar high, it's not like it expires next year, we have 5 more years of this. in my view the tax cuts are kicking in. paul: you have trade problems and slow growth abroad. >> no question about that. i'm going to give you the positive twist on this. if trump prevails on china and i am hard liner in china as trump is, he has to win here. i think he is going to win, 3
months or 6 months or 9 months, if he can get the deal, paul, that opens up chinese market, so if this has positive outcome it's good for economy and workers. paul: thanks very much, steve, facebook under fires, reports of management turmoil as the management turmoil as the company struggles to respond
jardiance asked- management turmoil as the company struggles to respond and now you know. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill proven to both reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease... ...and lower a1c, with diet and exercise. 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. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. isn't it time to rethink your type 2 diabetes medication? ask your doctor about jardiance- and get to the heart of what matters. if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today.
paul: facebook and executives are under under fire over claim to combat fake news, recent new york times story accused facebook of attempt to go deflect blame over russia's election manipulation and revealed that the social media giant hired a dc consulting firm with republican ties to plant negative stories about its competitors and critics. we are back with dan henninger, james freeman and wall street journal editorial board member
and facebook follower, allysia finley, why is the media so hard on facebook? >> i don't know if it's suddenly, all year they have been attacking facebook partly because of the news that facebook or russian agents used facebook to promote fake news, disinformation that may have benefited donald trump. paul: you don't -- >> no. spent a hundred thousand dollars to make 3,000 ads. that did not in any way determine the outcome of the election or even probably influence it. paul: drop in the ocean of all the media coverage in 2016. what about the recent management problems? >> well, what we are seeing or what we are reading about is mark zuckerberg really doesn't have control over his company and in terms of what he doesn't know what's going on, he even said that, what do you expect me
to know what's going on with 10,000 employees. he claims he was unaware that they had hired this pr firm in dc to push back against critics. i wouldn't call it opposition research firm that the left does but he was unaware that this -- that they had hired them. paul: you're arguing that given the political stakes here, something that he should have a handle on? >> i think that's exactly right. and certainly his chief operating officer sheryl sandberg that was brought in to manage pr. paul: our colleague says that facebook is a scapegoat for the russian election -- for donald trump's victory. >> well, yeah, and i think also said that facebook is essentially a scapegoat for all the problems of society now. [laughter] paul: james would agree with that.
>> mark zuckerberg himself said earlier this year, when you connect more than 2 billion people, the number of facebook people, you will see the good and bad of humanity. well, that's right. and you know what facebook's revenue was last year, over $40 billion. i mean, mark zuckerberg with facebook basically captured the sun, he's got the whole world, you know, coming on the facebook, making all the revenue, that's all they do now and he has to figure out a way to manage it. it's not clear to me, paul that this is company is indeed manageable because they want him to be in charge of fake news, they want him in charge of trolling content and so forth, yeah, all of bad of humidity show up on social media and how is mark zuckerberg control all of that? paul: profit from content good and bad but they don't want to pay for any of that content or take responsibility for it. >> well, that would suggest the base model is working pretty
well. maybe maybe. >> maybe mark zuckerberg is onto something here. paul: is it going to last? >> i don't know, part is on anger on the left, they're kind of acknowledging it now in an effort to improve pr relations but they should, they should continue to point out that it didn't really affect the outcome in 2016. as far as business model generally, they have had phenomenal run by having all of us trade our personal data to them in exchange for free services which many people around the planet enjoy, so i think consumers ought to be very skeptical of any washington deal that tries to rein in facebook whether on privacy or anything else, probably great for facebook and not so good for potential competitors. paul: what about the content differentiation, do they have to
behave more like a publisher? >> the question is if the government will force them to. they are loathe to do that, they don't want to make decision whether something is quote, unquote fake or misinformation versus real or conveying actual news. partly that's going to unleash criticism that they have censoring which they don't want but on the other hand they are going to invite -- political scrutiny if they don't. paul: going to be fascinate to go watch. thank you, when we come back education secretary betsy devos under fire from the left for her newly released proposal on campus sexual assault, we will campus sexual assault, we will tell you what's in the
betsy devos released long-awaited proposal to overhaul how colleges and universities handle sexual misconduct complaints and reaction from the left was swift with california democrat maxine waters claiming it amounts to destruction of civil rights protections for students and former vice president joe biden saying it would return us to the days when schools swept rape and assault under the rug. so what exactly is devos proposing? wall street journal editorial page writer jillian is here, jillian, you followed this, what -- what are the key proposals? >> so i think the most important thing is that every single campus hearing about sexual assault or harassment is going to have cross-examination now. you want to ask hard questions and view the demeanor of somebody as they are making assessment. paul: that was frowned upon obama guidelines?
>> subject victims to to retrauma and focus on due process, focus on truth finding and -- paul: title 9 being the law that applies to education, schools that get federal funding. >> exactly. paul: okay, so cross-examination, sixth circuit saying it was required in case of the university michigan to devos in that sense is following court precedence. >> i think so. there's been several title 9 john doe cases, accused of sexual assault and deprived without due process and it's working its way through courts. paul: one thing she didn't change was preponderance of evidence standard, 51% proof that something happened, she didn't go to clear and convincing standard which is sometimes used in courts much less beyond a reasonable doubt
standard, why? >> you have other due process protections and it's sometimes okay, but even with reform we are not seeing all due process protections. i think this was a compromise move to try to get some of ore cross-examination evidence rules, other things through, this was the bone that she threw to the left but i don't think they are taking it. i don't see -- paul: she's not getting credit for it. >> she really not. paul: why not, since when is the left against cross-examination of accusers? >> it's kind of amazing how bedrock principles have become controversial suddenly lately, due process, the right of the accused to -- paul: confront accuser. >> people would be cross examined. one question is, why are these questions for college
administrators, these are legal matters. if it is an assault, it should be handled by law enforcement, not by college administrators setting up some kind of sort of legal judicial process but not really. so i think to the extent these cases whether civil or criminal can be move intoed the law enforcement arena where they belong, i think that would be -- paul: dan, what do you think of that? you are attending our school, question we get to decide whether or not you get to attend the school. >> well, that's true. what has to be understood here is that what the obama education department -- the obama education department was full of lawyers who had come out of law schools, left-wing juries prudence arguing that sexual assault accusations, due process should be altered or modified. preponderance, believing the victim and that's what they did in title 9 guidance.
this is indeed a parallel system of justice, the question is would they just stop at sexual assault or do they start pushing into other areas of criminal justice such as f such as white-collar crime and the answer is no, they would not as we saw in kavanaugh hearings where due process was simply set aside by the democrats. paul: what happens now, jillian, would this go forward with the education department? >> it's open for notice and comment right now. it's going to face a ton of controversy but i hope devos stays strong on this. reading through this and some of the things they had to specify, evidence that you can't be a bias and this are so obvious that i think it is important to stand up for them on campus. paul: thank you, jillian, one more break, when we come back i know you want to leave me for schwab,
but before you do that, you should meet our newest team member, tecky. i'm tecky. i can do it all. go ahead, ask it a question. tecky, can you offer low costs and award-winning wealth management with a satisfaction guarantee, like schwab? sorry. tecky can't do that. schwabbb! calling schwab. we don't have a satisfaction guarantee, but we do have tecky! i'm tecky. i ca... are you getting low costs and award-winning wealth management? if not, talk to schwab.
misses of the week, kate, first to you. >> paul, i'd like to give a hit this week for promising results in experimental drug for peanut allergies, paul, the point is not for the drug to be able to allow people with severe allergies to eat peanut butter but could allow patients to avoid severe allergic reactions from trace elements that might be in kit cat bar or something, this could be huge game-changer for day cares, i hope the president takes a look at the good news and says i don't want to do anything to lower incentifer to bring new cures to market. >> potential hit to senator lindsey graham, south carolina senator who became legend against democrats in judiciary committee during the kavanaugh hearings, he's about to become the chairman of that committee which puts him in charge of the justice department, the fbi, the nation's judges and i think this is something worth watching, it could be interesting but it really will be entertaining.
paul: allysia. >> miss to stacy abrams, finally made nonconcession concession speech this last week, basically blaming systematic disenfranchisement for her lost, voter turnout had record high the last midterm, 90% higher in county around atlanta, what she's trying to do is stoke minority turnout but more -- paul: more turnout when she runs again in 2020. jillian. >> hit at my own expense. so came out with a game, it is called monopoly for millennials and motto is forget about real estate, you can't afford it anyway and instead millennial collect experience points, the first to crash on your friend's couch or find a vegan restaurant or yoga retreat, that sort of thing, the game pieces are actually instead of the classic
ones, emojis, hashtag, the most millennial ever, selling for 20 bucks at first, now 75. supply and demand. paul: that's it, thanks to my panel, thanks for watching, i'm paul gigot, ibell" at 4:00 p.m. eastern. have a great day. happy thanksgiving weekend. welcome to the program that analyzes the week that was and helps position you for the week ahead. i'm maria bartiromo. hope you had a very nice thanksgiving. coming up in just a moment, "wall street journal" editor at large and host of the new fox business show wsj at large, jerry baker is coming up. plus later in the program i sit down with federal reserve bank of dallas president, robert kaplan, both my special guests coming up. you won't want to miss that. stay with us. first let's get to