tv Making Money With Charles Payne FOX Business May 30, 2019 2:00pm-3:00pm EDT
remarks at the air force academy. he is commencement speaker between the air force academy. they rotate between the president, vice president. join us on "after the bell" at 4:00 p.m. we have a lot going on including results from uber. time for maybing a little money. here is charles payne. charles: thanks, connell. good afternoon, everyone, i'm charles payne and this is "making money." investor are kicking the tires on stocks especially retailers in absence of a major headlines. this follow as rebound from yesterday's close from a massive drubbing could have been much worse if it wasn't for nancy pelosi. you heard me right. she saved us from total collapse twice yesterday. i will give you a hint one of the reasons why, it has to do with the i word. president trump calling mueller a never-trumper, proclaiming his innocence. new threats from china borrow
from the past military glory, coupled with harsh words from secretary of state mike pompeo have many wondering if the trade war with china could turn into a military showdown. all that and so much more on "making money." ♪ charles: president trump erupting today, a day after robert mueller broke his silence on the russia probe saying he did not exonerate trump of committing a crime. trump said that mueller led a biased investigation from the very start. he can't imagine being impeached. >> i think mueller is a true never-trumper. he is somebody that dislikes donald trump. he is somebody that didn't get a job that he requested, he wanted very badly. i never thought that would be possible to using that word. to me it is a dirty word, the word impeach. that is dirty, filthy, disgusting word and had nothing to do with me so i don't think,
because there was no crime. high crimes and, not with or or, it is high crimes and misdemeanors. there was no high crime and there was no misdemeanor. charles: for her part house speaker nancy pelosi continues to discourage her members from demanding impeachment saying while investigations will surely continue, time to focus on things like infrastructure. hillary vaughn live on capitol hill with more. hillary? reporter: charles, house speaker nancy pelosi is resisting colleagues calls in congress to move towards impeachment after former special counsel robert mueller's comments yesterday but 2020 presidential candidates are also calling for impeachment saying it is time for the democratic-controlled house to act on what mueller said. senators kamala harris, cory booker and elizabeth warren all saying impeachment proceedings need to move forward but yesterday pelosi said she still plans on stalling this process. >> you have to get the facts. the american people deserve the
truth and that is what will take them there. we won't be swayed by a few people who think one way or another, who are running for president as much as i respect all of them, and they have the freedom to be for impeachment. we have the responsibility to get a result for the american people and that is where we're going. reporter: pelosi is standing in the way of democrats in both the senate and the house that want to move towards itch peaching the president. 40 house democrats supported the process publicly. that is less than 10% of the house as a whole but the decision to move forward with an impeachment is really in the hands of the house judiciary committee and its chairman, jerry nadler, who yesterday said, congress needs to hold the president accountable but he stopped short of using the "i" word. for now it is unlikely, charles, that nadler would move forward with the impeachment process without the blessing of pelosi.
charles? charles: hillary, thank you very much. joining me now, national republican lawyers board member harmeet dhillon and. let me start with you. it is clear, nancy pelosi she understands political history. she understands there are indeed a lot of people in this country believe there has been presidential harrassment. this might stoke those feelings even more? >> well, charles, it pains me to say this but nancy pelosi is very correct on this matter, she is showing very good maturity and judgment on the part of democratic party by not plunging their party, much less this nation into impeachment when there is no evidence to support it, when the people don't want it, when even her own body only about 8% of them want it. those are the extremists. so it is her job to guide through the center. she is doing that, doing it well. charles: ethan, overnight. democrats running for president, count seven or at least 10 or 11 are calling for impeachment, she
kind of dissed them, i hear where you're coming from but you're not going to move me? >> yeah, harmeet and i have some level of agreement here, speaker pelosi taking the slow approach is probably the smart one even if i disagree with her. i disagree with harmeet on the point whether there is evidence to begin hearings, there is absolutely is. special counsel mueller said so yesterday in his beautiful legalese. speaker pelosi is right, needs to get the votes first. impeachment is end of process. let's begin the hearings. let's get tax return documents that haven't been turned over, that are being blocked, people are not complying with subpoenas. let's start seeing what the obstruction evidence looks like underneath. hearings must begin. that is what chairman nadler. >> he can't be impeached over the tax returns. that is kind of silly, if you want a sideshow over that they can. their job as nancy pelosi said is to get legislation come accomplished for the american people. they're not doing that they're
failing at that job. charles: ethan, let me ask, a lot was put on the mueller probe. democrats bet a lot on this. they built up mueller. they built up the probe. there were a lot of act accusations made. the fact of the matter no one is talking about collusion. that was the main reason for the probe. the okay struck shun now we have obstruction of a crime that never took place in the first place. a huge american issue the american public say in poll after poll, they're tired of it. >> whether or not people are tired of it, there are still principles at play here. first off, there was conspiracy, not to the level -- charles: let me ask you about the principle we had an investigation and we got results from that investigation. yesterday mueller himself said, listen the report, read the report. he stands by the report. he doesn't want to go before congress. he won't add anything to it. more than 400 pages tells the
story. is this presidential harrassment or really something you think congress should be going for? >> absolutely, congress should exercise their art well one powers. special counsel mueller in section 2 of the report clearly laid out the case for obstruction. obstruction doesn't require a crime to be prosecuted. it merely means you're obstructing the process of investigating, with officials, with juries, anything of that sort. it is very broad. the obstruction statutes cover a number of different topics in the federal code. in that case, absolutely congress can exercise their article i powers, they should do so by beginning hearings to look into it. charles: harmeet, i found it interesting though, because if i listened to mueller closely yesterday, if i'm correct, it sounds like he said we know we didn't have the ability to charge president trump but we wanted to find out if there was
any tomorrow of obstruction. listen to the sound bite. i will ask the you a question about this. >> bound by that department policy, charging president with a crime was not an option we could consider if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. we would, would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. charles: harmeet, they knew they couldn't charge the president with a crime but they investigated anyway. what i find interesting, no one has been charged with obstruction. no one. isn't that something, isn't that pretty telling, that no one has been charged with obstruction? >> so many things are nonsense about what robert mueller said yesterday, first of all the attorney general and the deputy attorney general have said publicly when they spoke to mueller, that mueller did not say that the reason he reached his conclusions with regard to charging the president was as a result of that office of legal counsel opinion. and secondly, if that were the
case, why would you take the job in the first place if you knew that the outcome was that you could never recommend anything? reality is that he is turned the burden of proof on its head. he has done a disservice to the concept of rule of law in this country where everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty. not guilty until a prosecutor self-appointed can say, declare as judge and jury whether they're innocent or not. secondly with your point with regard to obstruction, you're absolutely correct with 19 biased democrat prosecutors, 700 days almost of investigation, $35 million worth they could not find or charge any crimes of obstruction against anybody. so that speaks for itself. it is time to move on. it is case closed. for democrats to keep rehashing this when the american people are saying they're tired of it is dumb politics. charles: we have to leave it there. thank you both very much. we appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: the markets are trying to recover today. it has been a roller coaster
ride. all day yesterday was really crazy one. we traded in much narrow range. it was nancy pelosi who actually saved the markets not once but twice yesterday with the two statements she made. she never mentioned impeachment. she said something positive about trump on infrastructure. now the market trying to gain some equalibrium or momentum if you will because the fed is back in the picture. i want to bring in david dietze from point wealth management and dr barton, chief technical strategist at money map press. we had comments a moment ago, david, looks like the fed could be back in this. i want to point out the gdp number was revised today. the part of inflation is the lowest since 2016. you know, jay powell sent this market tumbling on may 1st, it never recovered after he said it was transitory. people are wondering what transitory means. maybe the fed has to change their mind? >> absolutely. when you look at not just the stock market but other markets, for example the bond market
where we have the lowest 10-year treasury since the fall of 2017. look at the copper an oil markets. copper is often called doctor copper because of the uncanny ability to predict the market, down 10%. we're seeing a whiff of deflation. the fed has to be nimble. they can't be locked into any one position. they have to look ahead here. charles: dr? dr, can you hear me? >> yeah, now. you bet. ashley: what do you think now that the fed may be creeping back into the conversation after today's gdp number. that the main inflation read dropping to lowest level since 2016, that it is just transitory, maybe something is going on there, by the way the fed should be concerned because they have been trying to push inflation higher to the target and they haven't been able to do it? >> yeah. you're seeing that reflected,
charles, what traders are using to headlong term portfolios, when we look at the chicago mercantile exchange numbers where, they are trading the futures, they're saying, there is a lot more chance that we're going to see lower rates before we see, you know, before the fed would bump rates up because bumping rates up of course is contractionary. with every little whisper about any of these things, interest rates, pelosi's statements, the china trade, it is really the markets are just a little jittery. it is bouncing up and down with every little whisper. i think this is going to be a big deal until the fed comes out and has something to say. charles: another part of this, david, we saw consumer spending, 1.3%. that number was extraordinarily low. residential investments down five quarters in a row. feels like there is something interesting. a lot of people wonder if the consumer run out of money or is
becoming more cautious for a variety of reasons? >> might be the latter. we're seeing record low unemployment. we are seeing wages ticking higher, but just not filtering through prices. there is something about the consumer that seems to be holding back. three other factors i would also point to suggest that the fed needs to be very wary of, be ready to react accordingly. one is the trade talks. that has the potential of ultimately tipping us into a downward spiral. second of course is the value of the dollar. the sal you of dollar goes up, that reduces prices of goods coming into the country and finally of course the global economic conditions. we have scene weakness in europe and that could play into our situation. charles: d. are, retailers are doing well but they have been absolutely rushed. some are up across the board, 7%, 8%, i think it is bottom-fishing. have you started to make moves in this market? because this was a rough may. may has been pretty devastating?
dr? >> loading on, yeah the back-end loading we've seen on earnings, charles, in the earnings season. it just has been broken up into the haves and have-nots. we've got, we have some that have been really great. we had strong ones today, dollar general, others. yesterday, day before yesterday, abercrombie & fitch got slammed. we've seen capri, the old michael kors get really slammed. the have and have-nots. i think that continuing to pick the stronger stocks on a little bit of pullbacks, doing shorting. i've been putting some of those spread plays on, buying some stronger retailers, shorting some of the others like tiffany's, we went into a short today. i think that is a kind of play we'll continue to see, haves versus have-nots. charles: great stuff. david, dr, thank you very much. we appreciate it.
vice president mike pence holding a joint news conference with prime minister justin trudeau on the new nafta. the question are we really close to making usmca a reality? from a trade war to a actual war, secretary of state mike pompeo telling maria bartiromo says america needs to make sure we avoid military conflict with china. more on that next. ♪ it's tough to quit smoking
cold turkey. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking,
aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner?
>> we watched president xi make a commitment he wouldn't to to the south china sea to build militarily yet he has done so we need to make sure we stay in a posture to deter this threat so we don't have to send soldiers, airmen, sailors, marines into a war. charles: those are harsh cautionary words from secretary of state mike pompeo. actually have some wondering if this trade war with china could turn into a military showdown. despite saying war with china is unlikely, the fact that it was brought up has a lot of folks worried including bridgewater associates ray dalio is warning that they could escalate in
dangerous way. former undersecretary of state un-bush bush, robert charles. robert, the last couple days what we've seen out of china, is belligerence that happened under long march under mao. don't say we didn't warn you, the term proceeded 1962 border war with india and 1969, china vietnam war. maybe they are using this to stoke nationalistic pride but it gets worrisome here, doesn't it? >> you have to keep historical perspective. the incidents you mentioned are certainly part of that perspective. generally speaking trade negotiations and military engagement are completely separate tracks. i don't see them crossing here frankly but i do think we're at the last stages of the agreement. the last mile is always hard coming to trade negotiations. that is what we're experiencing here. people are playing every last card in order to get whatever it
is they think can get to the final document. on the military side, the secretary is a former west pointer. he was number one in his class. he is aware of military dimensions. he was right, in the south china sea, chinese built out. we're looking at modernization on breakneck pace. we're ahead of them, we're modernizing. they're not at the same time, participating in pack rim 2020 which they used to. i think at the end of the day you have to be attentive. my own view we're not anywhere near a real, any kind of real military conflict with them, but i do think you have to watch history. maybe the best and most important incident in history to think about is 1941. in 1941, summer of 41, we restricted oil to japan. japan was the power, not china. japan became more and more in a way reactive. they were allied in germany.
december of 1941 we know what happened. we have to be attentive to the risks but in my own view the risks are small. charles: to that point, some are saying okay, using japan example you laid out, what we've done with huawei is akin to that, huawei for many people is just an extension of the chinese government. while this is considered trade talks, this goes way beyond ordinary trade talks. it goes to intellectual property. it goes to the sort of domination that china has laid out there. now they have sort of remarketed it to china 2035. right now in the country, their media is pushing idea of this 15 year move. just like mao's, they will ultimately win all of this and it just, when you start to beat the drums of war, even if they're at low range like this, how do you prepare for that? how do you cut that off from becoming louder? >> you make a good point. huawei does really key on a security risk. there is no question, newt
gingrich and others talked about this at length, there is no question the 5g competition is critical. the analogy to 41 which you make which is not invalid at that time japan was looking to extend out a sort of hegemonic presence across the region. many think the belt and road is essentially a hegemonic move to essentially do the same thing so we have to push back. there is many a slip between the cup and the lip. just because you get to be highly competitive on the economic front there is some trigger moment it becomes military. this is very incremental effort. this is number one and number two economies in the world. they don't want to go to war. it would end poorly and that is not going to happen. charles: thank you for your expertise. >> yes, sir. charles: vice president is in canada to trout the new trade
deal, but is their pitch enough to make congress actually pass it? ♪ back then, we checked our zero times a day. times change. eyes haven't. that's why there's ocuvite. screen light... sunlight... longer hours... eyes today are stressed! but ocuvite has vital nutrients to help protect them. ocuvite. eye nutrition for today.
charles: vice president mike pence, meeting with canadian prime minister justin trudeau to discuss the new trade deal with canada and mexico. this after the u.s. dropped steel and aluminum tariffs, kicking the tires on the usmca. kristina partsinevelos is live with more. >> thank you. you have a situation where finally the aluminum and steel tariffs are lifted. countries are working together to get the usmca ratified. pressure in canada is to get it done before june because their parliament is off a few weeks. then becomes federal elections on october 15. there is a lot riding on that to
get it done so they can call it a win for the liberals. on the screen both leaders are speaking right now. we got notes from the pool there is a lot of positive back and forth. trump playing the messenger, telling prime minister trudeau the president of the united states is very appreciative of this agreement thus far and trudeau drove a hard bargain as trump. both of them mate statements to reporters. listen to the optimism. >> a win-win win for our countries. ratification pros sell will be opportunity to work together and collaborate for the benefit of our citizens. >> i want to assure you're making energetic to move approval through the congress of the united states. reporter: we got to include mexico in this because they do today said they would push it through the senate to ratify. the big question, where is the
stonewalling going to happen? most likely that will be in congress because democrats an nancy pelosi they want to make sure labor law is enforced which is why next week you have congressional members of from both sides of the party heading to mexico to make sure the labor law is enforced over there so they can move forward and ratify usmca. we'll see if that happens through congress. there will be a lot of pressure to stop it. charles: kristina, thank you very much. i want to bring in "the wall street journal" editorial page writer jillian melchior and author of how do i tax thee, kristin tate. it seems like it is stalled here in the united states, even though a lot of things in there are typically things that democrats root for, right? more cars will be built here. emphasis on better conditions for workers in all three countries. nancy pelosi though, you think she is stalling this because a way of sort of showing just, sort of resistance towards president trump?
or could this be in trouble? >> i think robert lighthizer crafted the deal betting if we gave enough to democrats that he would get their support. i'm not sure that was a good bet. there is couple things going on, one wing of the party, protectionist, unleft, would be happy blowing up whole deal protection of their industry regardless of consequences to broader economy. i think you also hat a segment don't want to hand trump a victory. they don't want to collaborate with him. interestingly you have a fragment of the democratic party they are dependent on u.s.-canada trade. it will be to see how the calculations play out because their congressional district has the moats to lose. charles: kristin, auto workers are key constituents. what have you done for auto workers. i'm not sure why, they have been a proxy for all american workers. this apparently is supposed to
be a pretty good deal for u.s. auto workers. >> it's a great deal for all workers. the president has done his job, it is time for congress to do theirs and get this passed. this would spur so much economic growth in the u.s. the u.s. international trade commission, if the deal passes it would increase exports to canada and mexico, $14 billion and $19 billion respectively. most of the democratic concerns have been dealt with. he exempted countries on tariffs on steel and aluminum. mexico reformed labor laws to be in align with democratic concerns. nancy pelosi continues to slow-walk negotiations. i think you're exactly right. because she doesn't want the optics of trump having a big win. that could help him be reelected in 2020. charles: by the same token, jillian, nancy pelosi is thinking about her own legacy. what happens to the party under her watch.
she lost the speakership once. that is why she is avoiding impeachment. she wants to get infrastructure done. i feel like she wants to get certain things done. she thinks that historically, that will look better on democrats, give them a the abouter chance winning the white house as opposed to resist, resist, obstruct, obstruct. >> trade has been a game of chicken. trump is always in the back corner, if the threat is if you don't pass this i will blow up nafta. pelosi she could make the bet that would backfire on the economy but the political backlash will hit trump. charles: that is a hell of a gamble. >> that is a gamble. both parties, democrats, republicans have a lot to lose. charles: ultimately you think it would get passed here? >> i don't want to put a bet one way or the other. charles: really? kristin, what about you? >> i remain hopeful there is over 50% chance this will get passed. nancy pelosi is smart enough that democrats will need
something to show voters ahead of 2020. keep in mind 12 million u.s. job are somehow dependent on trade and invests between these three countries. many of those jobs are located in areas where democrats hold power so i remain optimistic. charles: let's not forget about the farmers. we do a lot more exporting of agricultural products to mexico and canada than we do to china. you can't say hey, the poor farmers we feel for them, not vote for this. at least i don't think you can. thank you both. disneyland's newest attraction garnering all kinds of hype. fbn sitting down with ceo bob iger ahead of the big opening. what he is about to say, what you will hear him say about abigail disney because she is shamming his pay. later in the show, nancy pelosi is taking on facebook for refailing to remove a take video of her. ♪
♪ charles: it's a huge week for disney. the new disneyland "star wars" attraction is opening tomorrow. deirdre bolton sitting down with disney ceo bob iger before the big event. deirdre? reporter: hey, charles, you're exactly right. "star wars" galaxy's edge opens tomorrow. i got a sneak-peek. i rode on the millennium falcon behind me, fastest ship in the universe, as you know if you are a "star wars" fan. this is big business for disney. if you measure by revenue it is the biggest part of disney, that is to say the parks, attractions. when "cars" land opened up, that saw a 23% increase in park attendance that year. this is a huge investment by disney. 14-acres, one billion dollars. so when i sat down with the ceo of disney, bob iger, we spoke about that, of course.
the business of the theme parks. we also spoke about the future of media. here is what he told me. as far as hitting on obviously the changing landscape with technology, how much more consolidation do you see coming, not necessarily for disney but among your peers? what does media look like five years from now? >> i think there will be channel consolidation. i don't know about combinations of companies. we've probably -- reporter: i'm assuming you're finished after 71 billion? >> we're a little spent right now i guess i should say. we have a lot to digest though. i think you will see probably more consolidation, more importantly i think you will see consolidation in terms of types of products that are brought out, particularly channels. there will be fewer channels in five years, to use your timeline than there today, globally. reporter: advertising goes where? >> i think it finds its way to the consumer. hulu sells advertising, more than the majority of the people who sign up for hulu are
watching hulu perhaps with advertising in it. we know there is advertising on facebook. there is advertising on variety of new platforms, not on netflix. there won't be on disney plus. the advertiser, given technology available, given the data available will find its way to the consumer so to speak, a way of delivering their messages. reporter: you've been ceo since 2005, with the company before that. the stock has gone from its 20s, to above 131 last price i checked. you created enormous amount of shareholder value. what is your take on somebody like abigail disney who goes to capitol hill, says she tried to raise questions about ceo pay and you and others personally, felt she had to go public. are you surprised she did that? >> i don't really want to address what she had to say. we care about our employees and cast members deeply. there are 200,000 of them around the world. we're mindful of what they are
paid, what benefits they get, other things they offer. we launched a education program aspire, to give free education for hourly employees. reporter: about 80,000 people. >> i love the fact so many have signed up. we just announced yesterday of a program to help support child care here in the southern california area for disneyland employees. we try to balance between benefits, between direct sally, but also between opportunity. one of the things the education program was designed to do was improve people's education so they have more opportunity at the company. this is tremendous upward mobility at our company. i'm very proud of that. reporter: people can take classes online. they can go to university. last question. i know you said you will retire in 2021. what if the disney plus rollout is not going as planned. can you be scooped back in. >> the disney plus rollout wit be fine. reporter: 2020 is steady.
>> the i go. pleasure. reporter: had to asked the retirement question, announced it two other times in the past, pushed it off. one of the reasons we assume for that fox entertainment deal to close which that did this past march. but again, looking at that share price, he has created a lot of value since his tenure as ceo began in 2005. the stock going from 23 where it stands now. i spoke with him about disney plus saying, did he expect consumers to keep paying a high cable bill to get abc, to get espn, to get the disney channel. then also subscribe to disney plus? what he told me separately is at that he thinks they have really priced disney plus streaming for value. so in his mind, consumers will be willing to pay both. but as we all followed from previous analyst calls, charles, we do know that disney plus according to bob iger will not
be profitable for its first five years. charles? charles: real quick, the tenure 2005 to now, stock up 200%. abigail disney may feel he is overpaid but wall street loves him to be with the company. it will be tough when he walks away, won't it? reporter: that is a great point, charles, if you look at the data we've gone through, all salaries are available through sec filings for all public companies, he is really within the range. if you look at any other consumer company and media company, he is actually within the range. also you will find the disparity between sometimes media companies and pure tech, but pure tech do not have hourly workers as part of their staffs, charles, as many people will point out. back to you. charles: you get all the fun assignments. i'm a little jealous i admit.
at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
♪ charles: president trump is expected to unveil an executive orders early as this week to bring transparency to health care prices. the "wall street journal" reporting that the order could ask federal agencies to disclose prices across industry. this comes as scrutiny over rising prescription drug prices. researchers as at good rx, an app, offers customers coupons. a 2.5% hike from brand names and generics in first quarter of this year alone. why good rx is trying to disrupt the industry. the company has helped americans save up to $10 billion in prescriptions since they launched in 2011. we have the director of research and he joins us now. thomas, first of all, congratulations. >> thank you, charles. we're working hard but we have a
lot of work to do. charles: there is a lot of work to do. the founders of your firm are from facebook. are you taking experiences of technology, using apps to really address something that longerring problem and acute problem for america? >> sometimes we do what happened to every other industry, finally coming to health care which is transparency and disruption. bringing, what we do, we make prices available to people, so they can make a good choice, a consumer driven choice, to find the medication at the best price for them. so it is pretty simple but there is a lot of work behind the scenes. charles: i looked at your filing. you put a list of the 20 most expensive drugs. there is a drug with list price of $52,000, $45,000. you can't comprehend that it would cost this much for a drug and yet, you go out, find these discount. why is there such disparity? why can you buy these drugs at
one place at another price and another place at significantly lower prices? >> those drugs get all the headlines. they are the ones that cause a lot of outrage but actually most americans don't take those drugs. they take routine drugs like statins or high blood pressure medications. those have a lot, often time those are really expensive too even if you have insurance. so what we are working on, basically trying to address the out-of-pocket costs, when people are asked whether they have a high deductible plan, they're being asked to pay 50, $100 for a routine drug, to bring that price down to $20, $10 with a coupon like from good rx, that is meaningful impact on people's pocketbooks. charles: where do you go from here? president trump wants to address the issue, cush drug prices, something that all americans really, really need. perhaps the number one issue in this country? >> absolutely. we hear it.
we're watching very closely what is happening in congress and in washington. hopefully they will do something. hopefully they will bring transparency and choice but it is a really complicated industry. so we're working that it is a policy end, we're working on the consumer end. we're trying to engage with the choices that people are going to make and just trying to make that pharmacy transaction easier, more affordable, what we're doing for prescription medications, hopefully we can do for other health care services as well in time. charles: you saved people $10 billion and counting. that is a good start. thank you, appreciate it. >> thank you, appreciate being here, charles. >> at the top of the show we talked about nancy pelosi saving the market couple times. someone might need to save facebook from nancy pelosi. why the speaker calling the social media giant, quote, willing enabler of russian interference. that's next.
the cloud i need? it has to keep up with sales, supply chain, inventory - ♪ ♪ it needs to track it all, from cincinnati to singapore. ooo! ♪ ♪ and protect it all. customer records, our financials, they better be secured. but i also need easy access, to manage data across my clouds - no matter where it lives. ♪ ♪ so if an auditor shows up, i can be a step ahead. that's the cloud i want. is that to much to ask? expect more from your cloud.
unwitting but clearly they witne wittingly were accomplices of false information to go across facebook. charles: facebook facing the wrath of nancy pelosi after refusing to take down a doctored video of the house speaker appearing to slur her words. the social media giant resisting making judgments about the truthfulness of the post or for risk of charges ever censorship or political bias. so where do you come down on this? are you sympathetic to nancy pelosi here, or is she going too far trying to connect the dots of this to facebook being complicit with russian interference in our election? >> very hard to be sympathetic for me to nancy pelosi, but i think she's going way too far with the russia connection. it's like this happens every day to normal people. you don't have to be a public figure, which she is, speaker of the house. that comes with a lot of scrutiny. we know the internet, we are both in media. what people can do with it. any time something is photoshopped, altered, sound
bites are added in which happens all the time on the internet, that is doctored. she's just upset it pertains to her. i think hillary clinton calling this sexist is way out of left field, too. this could happen easily to any man as well. charles: has this happened to you? >> not to that extent but i have had fake accounts come up, i have had comments posted that were very actually sexist and very offensive that the social media giants are reluctant to take down. i do like that facebook incorporated like a notification if it was shared that this has been fact-checked and it's not accurate. i think those efforts should be in place but come on. this happens to nancy pelosi, it's not the end of the world. charles: youtube i think did take it down. now you perhaps have youtube saying yeah, this goes beyond, this goes past the line and it's too offensive and so that sort of muddles everything because there's no unified set of standards here. >> there never is, with any of them. i think twitter is the most contradictory out of all the
mrplatforms where i even tried report accounts that said very crude things about women and it's like doesn't violate our terms of service. other times they will. we need consistency on all these platforms but just because it happens to a famous democrat doesn't mean it's not happening to everyone else and it's free speech. even if it's altered. charles: for you there's no limits to free speech? >> i think there should be checks and balances, like they started doing, incorporating notifications if you try to share that. there were 11,000 comments on that post at the height of its viral aspect. i think you should just tell people it is doctored. that doesn't mean you have to take it down. what do you think? charles: listen, with me, i'm only on twitter. i love the fact there's a mute and a block button. i just hit block. if you are a jerk, i hit block. it's pretty simple for me. but people, we do know social media, there's a call for everyone on social media to maybe have a certain standard and to be consistent, to your
point. the inconsistency is what bugs a lot of people. >> go outside, play a sport. do something healthy. don't yell at people online. charles: pass some legislation. the dow down six points. liz, we have struggled. there was a nice rally yesterday in your hour. liz: well, look at us now. six measly points but we had been up 92. we are watching it all. charles, thank you. breaking news. team trump hoping to lock down the usmca trade deal with canada and mexico by this summer. at this news conference, and it is happening live at this very moment, 13 minutes ago right after mike pence, vice president of the u.s. and prime minister justin trudeau of canada sat together, spoke and pence opened by saying he's pushing congress to ratify the usmca in the next few months. pence making the remarks in ottawa after meeting with justin