tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business September 9, 2019 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
>> two or three seasons. very much plot driven. they move you along. stuart: we're holding on to a modest gain for the dow industrials. all through the averages, dow, s&p, nasdaq, are a couple percentage points from all-time high. neil, it's yours. neil: thank you, stuart, very much. we're following that. congress back in session. sprinting to avoid another government shutdown that could be in a matter of weeks. we'll explain that. china is starting to negotiate trade with the u.s. is plummeting though. are they ready for a deal because they have to make a deal? there is a lot of give-and-take on that one. stocks as stuart indicated nearlying all-time highs particularly for the dow. s&p about a percent or so away. what is making all of this happen? we're on it. coast to coast is now. the big news not what is going on at the federal level targeting tech but scores of states across the country.
40 attorneys general are setting sites on google. it could be a preview of coming attractions when you hear facebook, amazon pop up. first on the google fight, hillary vaughn outside of the supreme court. hillary. reporter: almost half of the country state ag are joining forces to investigate silicon valley's biggest tech companies, the first on their list is google. state watchdogs are taking action, looking into whether google is guilty of undermining the competition by buying out startups and ultimately harming consumers through lack of choice. over 40 state attorneys general are joining the effort and will hold a press conference here on the supreme court just two hours from now. google is responding to this investigation saying they have endured numerous probes related to antitrust globally and are willing to work with regulators, writing this, the doj is asked us to provide information about these past investigations. we expect state attorneys general will ask similar questions. we always worked constructively with regulators and we will continue to do so.
consumer data is also a focal point of this investigation. the states will look whether or not google takes too much personal information uses it to build revenue, while at the same time violating consumer privacy. investigating google is a starting point for the bipartisan group, neil. they did lay out. they are looking into big tech firms that could lead them to other companies like facebook and amazon. neil? neil: hillary, thank you very much. what is amazing in the federal push to rein in these guys not to mention the 40 attorneys general are looking to do here, bipartisan support you would think stocks would be under enormous selling pressure. you would be wrong. why that is the case, hard to fathom. maybe the long legal haul here. we have jennifer huddle ton and dave maney. what is explaining these stocks relative resistance to probes
expanding now bipartisan? >> couple things, neil. number one, if you look back historically i'm not sure it is a bad thing when companies come under antitrust scrutiny for their investors. i look what happened to microsoft. which first came under antitrust scrutiny in 1992. it took 12 years to resolve it through regulatory agencies and courts. look at price curve of microsoft, it keeps going up and up and up, first allly unbroken thing for the tech bust. for investors i'm not really sure it is a bad thing. under that, if you look at the complexity of this probe what they have to do, you think about 40 elected state attorney generals from two parties trying to get on the same page how they will go about it, good luck, good luck. neil: you know, i'm looking at it to, jennifer what they're going after. in google's case, easy to see with their size they can leverage a lot of things. just their search engine alone
is 80% of all search is down out there. they account for that. they use that, sort of make sure you get google, you push your android operating system which they also have, and chrome, their web browser which you also have, they make it very difficult to find alternatives. that is just one part of it. the other aspect, youtube, they own that. that think simply have their fingers in too many pies. that is what these guys are saying. what do they do in response? >> technology is a very dynamic market. just over a decade ago, now, there were headlines about how yahoo! had won the search wars. here we are talking about an entirely different group of players, not because of breaking up of big tech, but because innovation came along and provided even better competition on a variety of these different elements that is what the companies beyond google are saying.
anything points facebook being amazon, no one setting guns on amazon time being. probably a matter of time, dave. dave, play this out. what happens in interim. go ahead. >> they are coming under that scrutiny. no doubt that is happening. amazon is as well because they're supplying more of their own product to the channel. i think my point is the dynamism jennifer pointed out is very real but it is not just dynamism from other companies. what if they crack down on google, made all its data portable to other competitors use would that materially harm them? my answer say that they would be less monolithic and more nimble. i'm not opposed to probes. i think they should be probed. my point from investor point of view i think it is anything but
doomsday news for the target of the probes. i think it might be beneficial to them. neil: where do you see it going, jennifer. >> that is a good question. what would a break-up actually do. how much is about other tech policy concerns that antitrust actually is a really poor tool to resolve. it's a sledgehammer, not a scalpel. there have been a lot of conversations about things like fake news, data privacy. antitrust is looking at the market competition here. so if you saw a breakup of these companies, there's a question of, one, on practical front, what would that breakup even look like? would that raise other inneroperability questions and questions about walled gardens. two, would that actually resolve these other concerns we keep hearing? neil: i want to thank you grice very much. now to the real issue at the core, the government, whether it's it's the answer. john, in the past we've seen
regulators aggressively go after at&t and ultimately break it up into the baby bells, now the behemoth today, you could make an argument it is stronger, varied, technologywise, a much more important player than it was back then. so unintended consequences in that case were favorable, what do you think? >> well, yes, let me go back for a second. the commentary that i was able to listen in was phenomenal. in terms of the comment antitrust and the government may not be the right way to go breaking up company or right size a company that has gotten too big in some people's minds i think on forensic level that is right. when you look at statutes, when you look at the statutes what happened, something like with we're seeing today, where the federal government gets involved first. you have 40 states attorneys general. the outcome will be a very different landscape in this area of big tech, area of all of our lives than we're seeing today. you and i talked about a month
ago. i told you on air this is a big story. it is probably the biggest, most boring story, most boring big story out there, it will impact all of our lives. neil: they're still trying to make it appealing. you are succeeding to a degree. it is an interesting argument. what is advocating google's case it simply has gotten too big for its britches. has lion's share of advertising market. owns the search market with android operating system, ubiquitous with non-apple phones which are by the way the world's majority. it has a distinct edge. you have to rein that in. what worries me is when government types start calling shots. i see they're not too good with financial matters themselves. that is what worries me. >> you should be worried but let me make two points really quick. number one, state attorneys general, although antitrust is not really a state purview, when 40 state attorney generals get
together they will move the needle on this they always get at it through consumer protection issue. there is consumer protection issue when state attorney generals band together can make a change in an industry. when it comes to, government in general, look, it is the perfect storm. the interesting thing here, you're talking about companies they're going after that have enormous resources and they are staffing up with incredible in-house attorneys and outside counsel. one of your commentators before said why is this not affecting the stock price? this will take years, maybe a decade to come out in the wash. neil: do you think it will? you're quite right about the precedent that attorneys general can set that ultimately gets to be like the technology version of this case the tail wagging the dog. i think what happened after they went after big tobacco companies. they went after mortgage lenders. just now drug pricing and the rest. they make a lot of noise, get a
lot of press, ultimately succeeding in the type of corrections and improvements, improvements in the eye of the consumers that lead to wholesale changes in policy but, but, for those companies, it can be very problematic? >> it can be, there is no doubt about it. anybody who is watching this should be saying look, should there be changes made in the big tech? okay, fine. but you know, should we be worried that government is getting way too involved in the private sector for no good reason? it is a countervailing issue i think right now the pendulum is over on the government side. i have faith the pendulum comes somewhere in the middle. attorney generals when they band together, even like antitrust which you think is purview of the federal government they can have enormous amount of influence in the states you talked about. perfect examples how they make huge change in area where you think it is purview of the
federal government. neil: real quickly, you alluded to the technology world itself, how rapidly it changes, i remember government is concerned aol was getting too big for its britches. so things change. netscape, when government authorities were really reining that one in. microsoft trying to rein that one in. all of sudden new technologies emerge in the interim. those same companies that everyone feared are not the fearsome players they once were. some of them are out of business. >> it's true, neil. here is segment we have to do on another day. university of law school in chicago on antitrust and columbia university. right now a professor out of columbia university, wrote a book, elizabeth warrens bernie sanders, a lot of attorney generals are all over, the thesis there is evil in a company that gets too big by virtue of its size. in their opinion they don't necessarily have to be doing anything wrong, once you get to a certain size that is not good. that is a whole another
discussion. it is at the core what is going on washington and big tech. neil: google is at that point. facebook is at that point. you could argue amazon is at that point. all bets are off. john, thank you very, very much. >> thank you. neil: let's take a look at the corner of wall and broad where we have the dow up 50 points. you will need 500 point advance to get into record territory. we're not that far. all major averages 1 1/2 2% from highs reached in july. many say this is the week they will try to do it, a lot of potentially favorable data could come in. this might seem like contrary indicator. the data out of china was very, very worrisome this morning. it shows its trade is being impacted by the ongoing trade war. we got separate data out of japan said the same thing. all right, what does japan have to do with this? japan was saying that the global headwinds from trade wars are affecting its own numbers, that extended to what we are hearing
out of the european union last week. that kind of news puts pressure to make a deal, sooner, rather than later. this is a case of wall street pouncing on what would be deemed bad news and trying to see a silver lining. sometimes they're not always morose, evil, money-grabbing you know what, after this. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin.
and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity.
exclusively what china is shipping abroad. this is very fine tuned measure. it is dropping dramatically. the talk is, lack of progress on the talks and trade snafus we have had between us for better part of 18 months. edward lawrence following all of it. does this give as you heightened sense of urgency we think the chinese now have to score a deal because they're hurting? >> we do believe the chinese have an increased sense of urgency. the chinese, there is no telling how much economic pain they're willing to endure. the chinese stimulate the economy as new tariffs start to go into effect. the central bank announced they will lower amount of cash reserves at other banks within the country need that. means it frees up $126 billion to be loaned out. last month the chinese in addition stream loan process to streamline fees.
that keeps the cost down for the prepayment costs. all in an effort to keep their economy going. now the industrial out put growth hit a 17-year low in china. so on a trade deal, the two sides are still talking. they expect to talk at a lower deputy level this month. trade sources tell me one of the items for progress could be removing china as a currency manipulator. >> i would also just comment, i expect the governor of the people's bank of china to come over for these talks. so part of the conversations we will be having with them is around currency and currency manipulation. reporter: in the past those meetings have been one-on-one with the treasury secretary. china wants off the currency manipulator list. trade sources tell us at deputy level meetings they will discuss a roll back of tariff increases of october the 1st. 25% going to 30%. they will discuss china buying more u.s. farmed goods. more agriculture from the u.s.
also an aggressive plan to reduce number of joint ventures that force merger of technology and decreasing foreign wholly owned companies in china. should the talks go well, we don't have an exact date for that, should they go well we're looking at early october meeting when the chinese delegation comes here to washington to continue those trade talks, neil. neil: what is interesting, ed, they don't like to be called currency manipulators i get that but they are. you don't have to be left or right to see it plain as day. what will that prove to say, voila you're not longer deemed a currency manipulator? what does it lead to? >> we're talking about the chinese saving face. they don't want to be called these types of things. they don't believe they do that or publicly they say they don't do that. neil: they do. they do. i could call my sell thin, well, fine. for sake of conversation.
reporter: there are a lot of wall street experts saying the chinese are propping up their currency. it should be a little lower what is happening here but they're letting it fall. so going forward from this, for them it is about saving face. neil: i hear you. >> trying to come to a deal here and you know, they don't want to be called names. they believe everything they do, publicly say everything they do is aboveboard which we know isn't true. neil: right, right. reporter: so -- neil: it is always interesting to me. they claim that we play fast and loose with the facts but we do an they're no stranger to it, covering them for decade now, even when it comes to the economic data and what they are doing on the currency front, boycotts -- boy scouts they are not. >> reporter: what will be interesting if the positive movement going forward if we end up back in may the chinese pull
out of this back. neil: true. reporter: look like they could possibly come to some sort of conclusion on this, but, will the chinese then pull it back? that is the question. neil: that is the big question. sorry, ed lawrence to pepper you with nonsensical points but i want to get it out there. if it leads to making a deal, to save face, that's what the markets pounce on they're hearing about subjects that are going to come up. we don't call china currency manipulator. we might entertain doing business with huawei, officially we way we'll not do that. this is the drama, i call it kabuki theater to sort of get deals moving forward. in the meantime we tell you how it is impacting china. we do know it is impacting our economy, jerome powell the federal reserve chairman was saying last week, we'll act accordingly, we'll do what is necessary to deal with very real impact of this tradeshowdown.
the japanese following up on what the europeans were saying last week. these headwinds are affecting them as well. it adds to a lot of uncertainty. if you're the ceo of a big company, you're less inclined to expand if you have this question mark out there. so anything and everything is ventured. john layfield all of that, how this plays out. what do you think, john? >> i think you're spot on with the global uncertainty. add to germany, they're 8% down as far as manufacturing activity. they're a huge export economy. when you have a couple of big countries, biggest in the world economically depressing their currency, when you have an export economy like germany it is hurting. we're in risk of tipping the globe into global recession here, if we're wrong about this with china and i don't see an off-ramp for president xi right now. even though things are bad in china, and they are going to get worse by the way, because they front-load ad lot of their gdp right now to get ahead of the tariffs. there will be a quarter coming up really bad for china. looks to me xi doesn't have an
off-ramp here. i don't see an easy answer to this. neil: you reminded me at its worse, china is growing faster than the united states, even allowing for the cheating, lying going on. that is interesting because it makes you think twice about their need to come to the table at first, when in fact our economy is hiccupping a little bit the fact we need a deal done as well. >> there is argument with some validity we're losing the trade war. look what china is doing with the gdp. 6% number appears to be wrong. it is probably 3%, when you look at factors you can see in a very opaque economy as far as retail sales, corporate earnings, satellite imagery, ports, looks like they're growing 3% which is better than the united states. in the united states we have two straight quarters of manufacturing contraction which is technical recession as far as manufacturing activity. add to that our farmers we bailed out at $28 billion. that doesn't look to change next
year. china to me, it looks like a standstill to me as far as who is losing. no one wins a trade war they always say. we're not winning this one, i don't believe. neil: we haven't budged in 18, 19 months since it started. in fact it has gotten worse. we'll have more after this. just another reminder of the value you'll find at fidelity. open an account today. why accept it frompt an incompyour allergy pills?e else. flonase sensimist. nothing stronger. nothing gentler. nothing lasts longer. flonase sensimist. 24 hour non-drowsy allergy relief
neil: all right, they're back. the government is now back in session. congress is back. if you think about it, they have 16 working days to technically avoid a shutdown. they have 12 spending bills that have to be decided so in rapid fashion. that could prove a lot easier said than done. chad pergram months ago when they were scoring this so-called shutdown avoiding bill, democrats and republicans both mutually jumped off the fiscal cliff on it, he had warned it was not a done deal. it is still not a done deal, isn't it? reporter: that's right. part of the problem is time. house majority leader steny hoyer is talking about putting together a interim
spending bill. senate appropriations committee will try to move four bills through committee in next week or two. we'll see if they sync up with the house for the remaining eight bills. here is the fly in the ointment. president trump started to go around congress, bypassing congress, moving around money for military construction projects to pay for his worder wall. you could see where members of congress from both sides of the aisle, neil might want to put restrictions in the spending bill from doing that the power of the purse according to the constitution goes to the congress. that is the problem they have with that. the other issue here is impeachment. house judiciary committee is going to try to formalize what they will look at in a mark-up session on thursday. this could incense the president, they can't come to any agreement what sorry. that will be real problem here. the other issue they have to work out is the usmca. there weren't many talks over the august recess. in fact i was told a couple point they might even get a piece of paper up here,
formalizing that. that never happened. house majority leader kevin mccarthy is putting pressure on speak of the house. listen. >> only one perp has the power, speaker of the house. if she delays it, it is about politics instead of putting america first. >> here is the problem, they don't have the votes to advance it. you will need a coalition of some republicans and democrats. pelosi wants to get people on board dealing with enforcement, intellectual property, pharmaceuticals all these areas there so she has a big chunk of democrats. when i talk to democratic aides, the president wants a piece of paper signed here. democrats feel like they have the upper hand. you can see where the issue on the usmca starts to ramp up because congress is back in session, neil. neil: it has been almost a year since the leaders of canada, united states, mexico wrote off on this thing. that is amazing. >> absolutely. a lot of people thought it would be an end of the year project
anyway, more like october, november, december but we started to hear rumblings this could drip into next year. if you're in election year, it is katy-bar-the-door at that point. neil: real quickly, these 12 spending measures, do you need them all passed to avoid any disruptions to the government? >> yes, yes. they could lump them all together in interim spending bill but can they knock out a couple individual ones? possibly. that is what the senate wants to do. but they would have to align with the house of representatives. neil: thank you my friend. we're up 10 points. concerns about trade. concerns what happens now on this ongoing back and forth with the government now. now technically open but facing growing signs it might not be open much longer. after this. the world is built for you.
so why isn't it all about you when it comes to your money? so. what's on your mind? we are a 97-year-old firm built for right now. edward jones. it's time for investing to feel individual. every curve, every innovation, every feeling. a product of mastery. lease the 2019 es 350 for $379 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
now you can, with shipsticks.com! no more lugging your clubs through the airport or risk having your clubs lost or damaged by the airlines. sending your own clubs ahead with shipsticks.com makes it fast & easy to get to your golf destination. with just a few clicks or a phone call, we'll pick up and deliver your clubs on-time, guaranteed, for as low as $39.99. shipsticks.com saves you time and money. make it simple. make it ship sticks.
neil: we went from pretty heady gains to fractionally unchanged. microsoft leading way down on concerns that pursuit of technology companies, microsoft is not included in them, will be an ill wind for all of technology, only leap i can take from that, don't necessarily hang your hat on that, one of the few catalysts i saw develop during the course of trading here. we'll follow it. we're following what the president does now africans selling talks with the taliban scheduled we're told over at camp david. blake burman at white house with latest what they do now.
blake. reporter: this was a very public u-turn from president trump over the weekend as he revealed on twitter leaders of the taliban would not be coming to the u.s. to resume peace talk negotiations and specifically not be coming to camp david as those discussions were scheduled for yesterday. the reason that the president gave as he took to twitter over the weekend was that bombing in kabul on thursday which a member of the u.s. military was killed in that bombing. the president has been facing criticism from both sides of the aisle about inviting the taliban which aided in the 9/11 attacks, too camp david just days before the 18th anniversary of 9/11. that drew this defense from the secretary of state mike pompeo. >> we know the history of camp david. we reflected on that as we were thinking about how to deliver for the american people. i want to talk to the taliban negotiators. i want to look them in the eye. i want to see if we can get to final outcome we needed so we
could sign off on the deal, to find the arrangement acceptable and the verification was adequate. we concluded this was perfectly appropriate place. reporter: top democrat chuck schumer took issue how the afghan government has not been involved with these discussions. >> when trump takes over things get messed up. for the u.s. to meet with the taliban and not have the leader of afghanistan to meet with the taliban, is something that doomed to failure. reporter: so, neil, on afghanistan, pompeo, secretary of state says for now the talks are off. separately pompeo also said as it relates to potential discussions with north korea, that the u.s. is hopeful that those talks could potentially take place here at upcoming weeks, if not days. we also heard on that front from a top north korean official who said that north korea is willing to continue the discussions at some point later this month but neil, also much of the same for north korea, also threatening that if the discussions are not
are not what they want, they would move on from the proposals. neil. neil: blake burman at the white house. so what if we did not have the attack that killed a u.s. serviceman, would those talks be on? former presidential envoy to iraq under president george w. bush, paul bremer. ambassador, very good to have you. what do you think, if we did not have the attack, the talks presumably would have been on and now they're not what do you think? >> you have to step back a step. this administration's policy ultimate goal in afghanistan is the same as previous two presidents which not let another attack be based in afghanistan on the american homeland. the problem is this administration's approach is muddled. the president said in his tweet calling the whole thing off that he concluded that the taliban probably doesn't have the power to make an agreement. so why are we talking to them? why are we talking to them all these months? he also said, i just don't understand people who would kill
so many people just to improve their negotiating strategy. what kind of people are they, he said? well, the news is, those are the kind of people who want to win. that is what they do if they want to win. we're in a real problem here which is we're talking to a group, many, including nine former american ambassadors from all three presidents have said, has not committed to peace. that's a real problem. neil: so, how do we even progress? i can remember when it was huge controversy when andrew young, who was former ambassador to the united nations under jimmy carter, secretly met with the plo and, boy, heads were ready to roll. it was staggering development. yes of course, we yawn at that in retrospect. i'm wondering if talks with the taliban or anyone else, today's most vilified, evil killers, change as time goes on? this is just not the time?
>> well, if you're going to negotiate with the enemy, that is the only person to negotiate with, it happens to be the taliban. the problem is the taliban is not committed to peace. it still working with al qaeda and is, the islamic state, who have conducted attacks and continue to conduct attacks and the taliban, just as recently as yesterday issued a statement saying quote, we intend to continue our jihad. how we go forward, i think there are three steps. we have to get the afghan government some way involved as senator schumer pointed out that means letting them go ahead with their planned elections later this month. secondly, we need a clear program that's concise and precise with real deadlines and real measures put in it that the taliban is committed to and the gaffe began government is committed to and under no
circumstance should we establish dates for withdrawal of any american forces. that puts it directly into our political process. neil: surely, ambassador, someone would have been taking a peek at the calendar, though? anniversary of 9/11. bad timing, maybe do this afterwards? how, how much goes into play when you think of something like that, when you look for negotiations whether rumored or actual? >> i agree. i don't know how, even if had been a well-organized process and substance were better, which it wasn't, somebody should have blown whistle long ago, long before the attack that killed the american on thursday that having the taliban, who were responsible for the attack on 9/11 here three days before the anniversary was simply not a good measure to put mildest term on it. neil: ambassador. thank you, very, very much. we'll see what happens now. sir, good seeing you again.
>> nice to be here. neil: review what is happening on the dow jones industrial average, i had a hunch, seeing microsoft turn around, there might have been something forward. i feel better, our own stock experts charlie braid dishes the smartest stock watcher i know on the planet there, is something going on with tech. the second biggest laggard next to health care dragging on stocks. with fairly pricey issue of about 136 bucks it can dis dispronatalie affects the dow. issues like paypal, qualcomm, hp, among those following suit. that is all you need sometimes to take a rally and sort of stick a pin in it. after this. i knew about the tremors.
but when i started seeing things, 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. hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪
neil: ever been to the department of motor vehicles in your state, any state? not a pleasurable experience. now a negative image has been reinforced by accusations it has been selling data on those who have licenses. a lot more at stake hear than the reputation of dmv. there are privacy issues. grady trimble is outside in wisconsin, what is going on. reporter: from our own government, including dmvs like this one in wisconsin, according to a report by vice news they're selling all sorts of personal information, things like your name, your address, dates of birth, even vehicle information and they're selling this stuff to private investigators, towing companies if they want to repossess your truck or car, they can come find you. insurance companies as well. they're making a lot of money doing this, by the way. recent annual revenue for wisconsin where we are,
$17 million across the state. south carolina and florida making even more. you might be asking yourself, there is no way this is legal, right? well it actually is. according to the drivers privacy protection act the purpose of that law passed in the '90s was restrict access to private information but there were a lot of exemptions including for private investigators. so that is how all this happened. we talked to a lot of customers today, some of them surprised and concerned this is going on. others saying hey, maybe it generates revenue and that could be a good thing. >> really bothered me, and who knows, maybe those funds come back to, you know, cheaper fees which i doubt. reporter: lower taxes maybe? which i'm guessing would you support? >> yeah, exactly. reporter: all of the dmvs that vice news reached out to, say they don't share your driver's license photos or your social security numbers. so that could be some
consolation but a lot of law make remembers calling on congress to close the loopholes in the law i mentioned to stop this type of practice. neil? neil: grady, thank you very much, i think. across the world what is going on with boris johnson who is not backing down on brexit, but the threats, well, they're increasing, after this. here, it all starts with a simple...
hello! -hi! how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. [ sigh ] not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please. [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind.
neil: september, back to school, back to apple announcing some newism phones. tomorrow is the big day for the launch. we still don't know all the details but i bet you jackie deangelis knows quite a few. what is in store for tomorrow? reporter: neil, highly anticipated event every year. apple doesn't tell you what they will announce but somehow details slip out a little bit,
and speculation is certainly out there, that we'll see the iphone 11 announced tomorrow. that will look similar to the iphone x line we saw last year. but there will be changes, news junkies and tech junkies speculate. they're looking for a true depth camera. they're looking for enhanced face i.d. they're looking for the back of the phone to look a little different to accommodate that new camera as well. an interesting camera feature, after you take the photo, you can actually expand it to add part of borders in that aren't necessarily in the photo. that is sort of cool. they will be harder to break, shatterproof technology and new colors as well. there will be bigger processors inside that is what people would think that would require a bigger battery. that would mean a longer battery life. so that is a positive thing. before you get too excited. don't expect this, don't expect 5g phones or any folding flip phone.
don't expect in display fingerprint technology. these are not highly anticipated features. the price will probably be in line with phones from last year. also you can get on the preorder list, starting on friday. that would be september 13th, if you want to get in queue for that. the apple watch, they're saying you could see some changes there. but they're saying don't expect too much. either apple was able to keep a lid on what features those would be, or, they're just not doing that much to it, neil? neil: jackie, thank you very much. we're focusing what is happening right now in england, future pace of brexit. we're getting word right now that the speaker of the house of commons, john berkow, the one that says we have to have order, order! he is taking himself out of the running. the whole thing is a sham to him. he would not run should a general election be called before then. he wants to step down by the october 31st deadline britain is scheduled to leave
the european union. he says decorum is gone out of parliament. we degrade this parliament at our peril in an interview with the "new york times" moments ago. the former ambassador to the eu, anthony gardner on this what do you think, anthony? >> the houses of parliament will be recessed tonight. deep uncertainty will continue. i lived in this country 22 years, i'm sad to see this country tear it apart, over eu membership which is at best a secondary issue. they are have topics of concern, infrastructure, health care competitiveness, nothing to do with the eu i agree the country is at risk degrading its great democracy that will sadden all of us who are great fans of britain. neil: now the british people voted for this, what was it 52-48 something like that back in 2016. they have yet to see this thing completed. what's next do you think? >> very hard to tell.
look, the extraordinarily situations reflect in the fact that the government is apparently considering some extraordinary measures, none of which themselves which are probable but could happen. they are considering challenging this law that binds the government's hands. they need to send a letter to the eu extending the brexit deadline again. they're thinking of challenging that. or they're thinking of ignoring it which would be extraordinary they could be brought to court. or, they're thinking of bringing a, vote of no confidence motion itself in their own government which would also be extraordinary. they're thinking, if we send a letter to the eu, we could send a second letter which actually the government doesn't want an extension. they're asking or considering asking members of the eu 27 actually not to grant such a request for an extension. all those are extraordinary things but none of them can be taken off the table. the only thing now really does look like likely there have to
be elections in this country t can't go on as is. the question is when. the opposition parties are hopelessly divided are united in one thing. well, we want elections overly after the extension of the deadline and no-deal brexit taken off the table. neil: how likely is that? >> well, you know, not particularly likely partly because the labour party is run by someone still deeply unpopular. people don't want a government, say national unity government, interim government run by jeremy corbyn. neil: right. >> but there will be elections and the bet, the big bet of the opposition is, if brexit doesn't happen by october 31st which is likely, because the e.u. summit, there won't be a deal by the e.u. summit, the 16th of october, the bet a lot of votes for the tories, conservative party will abandon them go to the brexit party of nigel
farage. that is a big bet. right now boris johnson is well ahead in the polls. neil: real quickly, the europeans are ones who sort of scoffing at this, saying britain will lose a lot, you won't be able to move around if you're british, ireland it will be a disaster, irish border situation but what, do you think the europeans are afraid too? that this could boom every rang on them? -- boomerang on them? >> no doubt about it. i speak to people in russia. there is no pleasure what is going on in britain. this would be a loss to the eu 27. it is also a distraction. they really want this to be solved. there was a deal on table, prime minister may's deal, was considered to be a pretty good deal even though sadness to leave the uk deal. they want this involved. eu 27 have major issues not being discussed efficiently because of this omni shambles of brexit.
neil: i like that. omni shambles. anthony gardner, thank you very much. dow up 14 points. british pound has been down all day, largely on concerns this will drag on quite a while. more after this. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪
i've always been i'm still going for my best... even though i live with a higher risk of stroke due to afib not caused by a heart valve problem. so if there's a better treatment than warfarin, i'll go for that. eliquis. eliquis is proven to reduce stroke risk better than warfarin. plus has significantly less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis is fda-approved and has both. what's next? sharing my roots. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take
certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis, the number one cardiologist-prescribed blood thinner. ask your doctor if eliquis is what's next for you. "have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off.
looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. neil: all right. we're up 30 points on the dow and the tech stocks are the ones to watch here because this started turning south when microsoft started [ inaudible ] on trade concerns as well. we will get into that in a second. another issue that could affect that trade is hong kong. the protesters are not going away and demanding the u.s. step in before china does. then is congress approving some 12 spending bills in a month? that's the task right now and it's 16 working days to do so. play that one out. we will here. "coast to coast" is now. we are about an hour away from -- excuse me. charlie gasparino, the latest.
hey, charlie. >> get you choked up all the time. yes, we do have, let's just break down essentially what tech is facing in terms of the regulatory assault. on friday, it was confirmed letitia james, new york state a.g., is investigating facebook, the big social media platform. today, we will learn at 2:00 that the ag of texas will be launching a similar investigation but this one against the other big tech company google. what we also know is the u.s. governme government, the department of justice antitrust division, is looking at all of them. amazon, google, facebook. you name it, on possible antitrust violations. we should point out my producer reported last week pretty interesting news, how they are looking at the federal level data as a commodity. it's a new way of looking at antitrust, that if you can trade data, if you can monopolize
data, then maybe we can break you up. this is all happening realtime. i will say this. i'm surprised the stocks aren't off more. there is a perception that trade is a bigger worry, that these are state attorney generals that generally don't do anything, the trump administration may just be doing this for publicity gains because an election year, you know, in the old days it was great to beat up on the big banks. now, you know, tech, evil tech that controls all the information is the bugaboo out there in the markets. i will point this out. this is where it gets interesting for shareholders of these stocks. back when i covered banks, there was a competition between the state a.g.s, namely eliot spitzer and some others, tom galvin and massachusetts, richard blumenthal, when he was a state a.g., competition between them and the federal government to bring cases against the banks. that led to a lot of settlements, lot of fines, class action lawsuits, lots of money
being paid by the banks including reputational damage that impacted the stocks. if you are an investor and don't take that into consideration, you are making a huge mistake. this thing is just revving up. yes, these are big companies with a lot of cash, they can pay fines, i get it. but there is an intense scrutiny and a competition between the feds and the states on this thing that i think could have a big impact on the stock. back to you. neil: it could drag on for awhile. stay there, charlie. i want to bring in the "wall street journal" editorial board member bill mcgurn, political science professor jeanne zaino and jpmorgan chief economist anthony chen. the argument for the time being is google but it might not end with google. there, you have this juggernaut that controls most of the searching going on online around the world, owns the android operating system, it's ripe for
picking, isn't it? >> it really is. for a time, the argument was the consumers are getting all these services for free so how could they possibly be hurting the consumer? but as you just heard charles gasparino mention, now that the data is considered a commodity, we now have to estimate what's the value of that data because that is an important consideration in determining what the real price to the consumer is. if that price is not the right price, consumers are, in fact, being negatively impacted. neil: but it's a changing landscape, isn't it? i can remember when prodigy was deemed a threat, when aol was deemed a threat, when net scape was deemed a threat. lot of people hearing these names saying what, what, what, but at the time they drew regulators' attention. >> they did. i think the biggest challenge for google here is that this is a bipartisan effort. this is not one side or the other. neil: 40a.g.s. >> 40 a.g.s. the federal government. let's not forget, much of this regulation has already occurred or is in the process of
occurring overseas, in europe, for instance, which has taken a very different regulatory look at these types of companies. neil: they have already -- the eu already fined google. >> already fined. i think that that is a concern. i would also say a concern for google is if you look at their work force, their work force is very very sensitive to the arguments being made here. they are by and large democratic liberal and this idea of data as a commodity that can be used, so the threat here is not only to other challengers in the corporate structure, but to citizens, to consumers on the ground, to democracy itself. that's a concern for google. neil: what do you think? >> in general, i think the u.s. has prospered and been innovative because we haven't taken the european union approach to regulate everything in sight. neil: this is the second time we are trying to follow europe. >> yeah. mcgurn's second law is that no consumer or market was ever made better by an initiative by letitia james.
[ speaking simultaneously ] neil: let me get your sense then on this, charlie. where does this go? oddly enough, it's the attorneys general in these states who are leading the charge. the federal government, i'm not saying it's a hands-off policy, they have been critical of these guys, but we know from experience in the past that they often lead the way when it comes to going after big tobacco, going after the drug companies, going after lots of -- >> wall street. neil: right. wall street. >> bill mentioned james. forget about her. how about eliot spitzer? remember what he did before he was client number nine. this guy was essentially setting the regulatory agenda against banks. he did it for a long time leading up to -- made him governor before we know what happened next. we don't have to go there. here's the thing. this is a very -- this is a politically fraught issue. let's deal with real politics here. it doesn't matter that tech has done a lot of good. they got the bull's eye on them now. this notion that data is a
commodity, that you can stop new entrants from coming in and challenging facebook or google because they control so much data, is something that i can tell you, the trump administration doj which is not exactly a socialist organization, really believes. they pressed that button. it could have real damaging impacts to the stocks here. i will point out one other thing. it's interesting that ken paxton, the texas attorney general, is leading this charge against google. he is a republican, right. we should also point out that at & t is in texas. you know, there is a little bit -- this gets very politically fraught. at & t increasingly looks at tech as, you know, the big telecom company as a competitor on all sorts of services. remember, there's lots of interesting political dynamics going on here. these politicians don't, you know, care more about getting votes and getting re-elected than they care about the future of innovation. these companies, they believe,
are ripe. both the republicans believe that for different reasons, the trump administration particularly, and democrats believe that like letitia james. neil: let me get a sense of this. i was just looking at google alone and its influence. they do have disproportionate control of not only one industry but they leverage off others, as any good behemoth will do. but if you think about it, they control the android operating system that's ubiquitous in more than half the world's smartphones. they own youtube so you can leverage that. the chrome browser itself that they force you to get if you have one of these devices, and on and on and on. you can even talk about double click, of course, their advertising venue that gives them access to close to half the digital advertising out there. that's a lot. now, the question is, do they take advantage of that or is that even an issue now? >> i think any company that has
that much power will, in fact, leverage that power to their advantage. there's no question. neil: wasn't that why they were going after microsoft, the same thing? >> absolutely. you also look at another aspect, digital advertising, google and facebook control close to more than 60% of all those digital revenues out there. that obviously raises -- neil: it makes it the standard by which you get that revenue. >> that's right. the second thing is many of these are focused on innovation and now because they have a target on their back, every time they come out with a new innovative product, whether it's facebook, the dating app, or whether it's facebook with libra, again, because they have a big target on their backs, it's going to be something that serves as a headwind to that innovation which again, if we are trying to compete with other countries, if we are stifling innovation, that's something we also have to face. neil: what about what bill was saying about the model with europe, imitating them, but we are. even the way we're pursuing
lower rates in this country to keep up or down with what europe does. i just find the wrong horse is leading the wagon here. >> well, you know, i'm going to disagree slightly with what bill says because i do think there is a way in which regulation is critical. none of us are served if there is one power structure in charge. competition is critical. now, i agree, the government should not go overboard. i don't think we ever get to a european model of regulation in the tech space in this country. but i do think -- neil: -- with a solution? >> on some, i agree, the ones on privacy are worth looking at. we have no privacy protections like they do here. i do think there's a role for the government to play in making sure there is competition in this space. and making sure that innovation is still thriving and that these big behemoth companies are not eating everybody -- [ speaking simultaneously ] >> look, everyone is in
principle for the moderate amount of regulation, it's like the unicorn. i don't think it exists. i think, look, you worry about going the european direction. president elizabeth warren i think would go that way. i'm just a skeptic about antitrust in general. as you point out, there are so many things that at one point looked impregnable. ibm. even the big auto companies. someone came up with a different business model. we all worry that business can' captured because what they do, here's the status quo, we freeze that in place and keep out competitors. >> bill, listen, i tend to agree with what you're saying as a libertarian conservative. i hate regulation and antitrust is never -- is a very blunt instrument. but just let's be clear here. what the proponents of these breaking them up are saying is these guys control so much
private information of the average citizen that this is big brother reincarnated. that they could -- they could -- they basically know everything before you do anything. >> we agree. we give them our information. >> i agree with that. what i'm saying is if that's the case, if it's really that bad, which i don't know if it's that bad, i get pop-up ads. i bought neil cavuto once a hoodie with a dad's booed d on and i get pop-up ads for that. neil: whatever you're doing in your free time is your business. >> i'm just saying, is that as bad as it is or is the privacy a lot worse? neil: i think that's what bill was saying, right? >> i would say one other thing. at any moment, something can look like there's no challenge until there is a challenge to it. neil: true. >> again, i don't trust 40 attorneys general and i don't trust the attorney general in
washington to have the idea for this. i trust in competition. as charlie says, they will say this stifles competition. i would rather leave it to some market innovator. >> but it's getting left to google and the executives at google. >> she's saying now. neil: okay. >> when you say we have agreed, kids haven't agreed. neil: charlie, i do want to get you back to talk about this. we are out of time. i did a search on you and i don't want you -- >> wait until you see the pop-up ads you get now. neil: we will explore that. so many technology issues are coming back a little. to the point we have mentioned here, they have been very resistant and holding their own throughout this. maybe it's their way of saying for now we don't think it's a problem for now. after this.
your business is up and running, but is it going beyond fast? comcast business gives you high speed internet. we also have solutions like powerful wifi that gives your entire business more coverage and automatic internet backup that can keep your business running. and it all starts with our gig-speed network. so give us 10 minutes. if we can't offer you faster speed or better savings than your current internet service, we'll give you 300 dollars for your time. call now to get your comcast business 10 minute advantage. comcast business. beyond fast.
this time, hong kong protesters marching on the u.s. consulate. they need american support, they want that support. we have the very very latest in hong kong. jonathan? reporter: neil, the protesters, as you say, want u.s. help. hong kong, meantime, is warning the united states to mind its own business, and beijing is presumably wondering how long it can let all this go on. this after what was supposed to be a relatively small rally turned into a vast one sunday outside the u.s. consulate, as tens of thousands of hong kongers turned out to plead for president trump to quote, liberate hong kong and to demand that as u.s. congress comes back into session, it pass a hong kong human rights and democracy act as a warning to china. but today, hong kong's government slammed the bill and said in a statement quote, foreign legislatures should not interfere in any form in the
internal affairs of hong kong. the protests and the clashes meantime show no signs of waning. more radical elements again damaging subway stations and other infrastructure yesterday as pro-beijing lawmakers say the protesters need to pack up and go home. >> must respect the rule of law. their voice has been heard. it is about time they stop the violent protests so that hong kong, we can restore hong kong to order. reporter: now, the next big date here is october 1st. that is chinese national day, the 70th anniversary of the founding of communist china. it's feared that china will not allow that party to be disrupted by protesters here in hong kong, so the fear remains that before then, china might yet send in
the army. neil? neil: jonathan, thank you very much, my friend. back with bill, jeanne and anthony. bill, at their core, we are told the chinese are not the militaristic responder they were at tiananmen square 30 years ago. what do you think? >> i think it's nonsense. look, the problem with china, i lived in hong kong for ten years. this is so distressing, it's all unnecessary. as i say watching hong kong with china is like watching a stradivarius in the hands of a chimpanzee. this was all unnecessary. the longer they wait, the greater the cost to resolving it. it's nonsense to say we can't have anything to say we have $80 billion invested there, 20,000 americans living there. what they need is a way out. we focus on naturally the visuals on protesters doing -- you know, there's a photograph last week of a protester hurling a petro bomb and he had a glock. no private citizen has a gun in
hong kong. there's a lot of suspicions it was an undercover police officer. they don't necessarily have to bring in the army. there's the peoples armed police, they can infiltrate. there's a lot of low level stuff they can do. neil: the chinese are not going to let this continue very long. >> i don't see how they can let this continue too long. i think the protesters tactically and strategically are smart to be calling on the u.s. and the rest of the world to step in. it puts enormous pressure on china and the u.s. as well, but enormous pressure on china because this thing has gotten way too far down the road for them to allow it to continue much longer. the impact on their economy alone is going to be severe if they don't step in. neil: from the president, he's been very careful on this hong kong issue, saying he hopes the chinese respond humanely, leaving it at that for now. more after this. we believe your money should always be working harder. that's why, your cash automatically goes into a money market fund when you open a new account.
the next gold rush is just beginning. so don't wait another day. physical coins are easy to buy and sell and one of the best ways to protect your life savings from the next financial meltdown. - [narrator] today, the u.s. money reserve announces the immediate release of u.s. government-issued solid gold coins for the incredible price on your screen. these gold american eagles are official gold coins of the united states and are being sold for the price on your screen. - pick up the phone and call america's gold authority, u.s. money reserve. with nearly two decades in business, over a billion dollars in transactions, and more than a half a million clients worldwide, u.s. money reserve is one of the most dependable gold distributors in america. - [narrator] today the u.s. money reserve is releasing official gold american eagle coins at cost for the incredible price on your screen.
these government-issued gold coins are official u.s. legal tender made from solid gold mined here in america and fully backed by the united states government for their gold weight, purity, and content. do not delay, call now to purchase your gold american eagles for the amazing price on your screen. gold is now on sale at prices unseen in years and this year could be one of the greatest gold-buying opportunities of all time! call now while vault inventory remains. as one of the largest u.s. gold coin distributors in the country, the u.s. money reserve has proudly served hundreds of thousands of clients worldwide. don't wait another minute, call now to purchase your american eagle coins at cost for the amazing price on your screen. income inequality's at an
all-time high, made even worse by the godawful tax cut that trump has passed, benefiting virtually no one but the super wealthy. >> we must finally create a government and an economy that works for all of us, not just the 1%. >> we have a country that is working great for the wealthy, and leaving everybody else behind. >> we are not going to tolerate a government where tax cuts go to the wealthy and the middle class is left picking up the crumbs. >> his tax plan was a giveaway to the rich and to corporations. it's killing working families. neil: all right. i think the upshot there is not fans of the tax cut. that was orchestrated by republicans the year before last, became law last year. the fact of the matter is, though, almost everyone did get that tax cut, you can argue about whether it was slanted to the wealthy or whathave you. in percentage terms they get more because they make so much. that's not being debated here. it's not about math.
it is about politics and it is about how this is resonating. back with my panel, bill and jeanne, anthony chan. anthony, the big theme at this new hampshire convention, where all the prominent candidates, i believe they were all there, to a man or woman, they are saying we get in a lot of those cuts go away. then what? >> that's the goal. again, i think you are spot-on that sometimes in politics, we sort of slant the facts and we stretch them. i think the american voters have basically raised their tolerance for stretching of the facts. so i think that's true for democrats, that's true for republicans. where the democrats have the disadvantage is that i don't think their base is as loyal as it is in the republican, and the reason they are not as loyal for the democrats, because they have more to choose from. the republican side, obviously -- neil: where is that base, as you say? is it in the progressive wing that says we are really going to stick it to the wealthy? that's at the elizabeth warren,
the bernie sanders approach. biden, you could argue, is a little more measured. i think he wants to raise the corporate rate from 21% i think to 28%, not get rid of it entirely. but even that is seen as anathema with a lot of democratic voters. where do you see this going? >> i think the problem the democratic party has right now is this is going to be a very close election. they must win in the rust belt but all the energy in the primary of the democratic party is with the progressives and the liberals. that would be bernie sanders, elizabeth warren. couple that with the fact that elizabeth warren is running the best campaign of any democrat so now -- neil: she's doing it in small denominations, raising $19 million. one at a time. >> she has done a very good job as a campaigner. so the moderate wing, amy klobuchar, joe biden, they don't have the energy on their side. so i'm not sure how they get a
candidate who can appeal in that rust belt at this point, when the messages out there are things like give illegal aliens health care, medicare for all. these are not winning strategies. neil: even rahm emanuel said that over the weekend, the former obama chief of staff, chicago mayor, saying be careful, guys, we could be screwing this up. i'm paraphrasing. >> we constantly hear that the democratic voters, right, as opposed to the candidates, want someone who can beat trump and are not into all these left wing things. it's not reflected in the polls. except for biden, right. biden has been thrown overboard. if that were really the case, you would think he would be trying to emphasize his moderate dreeng credentials, but he's throwing them overboard. the hyde amendment, the green plan, spending more money. i agree, there's a regular democratic base that might be very enthusiastic about this green new deal, but then there are those blue collar workers in pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, i
think there's 30 to 40 seats in the house that trump carried that went democrat in the last election and the question is, will those people want this kind of thing. questions like impeachment and so forth. neil: right. you have to distinguish between that, right? >> so far the debates have basically been in-kind contributions to republican party. who is in favor of free coverage for all illegals, who wants to put coal miners out of jobs. i mean, that's going to come back to haunt them. neil: i'm wondering who resonates, then. you know, it's sometimes tough to gauge passion with a winning formula. in 1972, after muskie stumbled out of the gate, the famous crying in new hampshire incident, the base rallied around this passionate left winger named george mcgovern. he drew huge crowds, got the nomination, and you know, then had a very bumpy ride and got
annihilated in the election. so is that a model you think that they should be watching out for? >> i really don't think that's going to happen. i think that as more and more people drop out of the race, these progressives, these super-liberals, whatever you want to call them, will move closer and closer to the center. neil: you know what happened with mcgovern on that issue, he started to raise money. he raised money. when you have to place your bets on a candidate and put your money down on that, those days i don't think we had any, but they couldn't find him. there were huge crowds. but the money wasn't following. i'm noticing money follows elizabeth warren. establishment money, big pacs of course supporting joe biden. but i tend to maybe disproportionately follow that aspect. that's why it looks very interesting for warren. >> it does. i will say one thing belelizabe warren, people haven't talked about, behind the scenes to the democrat party, she made signals she's willing to moderate.
neil: really? where have we seen that? >> she has in terms of sharing data and in other aspects. so i'm not saying she will, but i do think this is real for the democratic party. it's almost always follow the money except if we look at donald trump who well outspent by hillary clinton. neil: what about a lost peopt oe listening to candidates in new hampshire say i know joe fumbles a lot but he just seems like a nice guy. >> i actually agree with that up to a point. i'm not a person that thinks gaffes are disastrous. ronald reagan -- neil: thank god. >> ronald reagan had gaffes and my boss, george w. bush, had a few gaffes. but a lot of them were endearing. they humanize you. people say i could make that. everyone is jumping all over you. the problem with joe biden is that his recent gaffes look like he's out of it. i was vice president during the parkland shooting, i'm in new hampshire, i'm in vermont, not
new hampshire. he gets the story of -- neil: i think anything you do or say reaffirms it. >> also the democrats will fight him on it. republicans don't fight for the nomination as much. the republicans are like the elk. they say it's the guy who has been here the longest, it's joe's turn. that's how we got john mccain, bob dole. but democrats, except for hillary clinton -- neil: we don't waste turns. >> democrats really fight. think of kennedy going after carter. you really have to earn it. it's going to be a tough ride for biden. i agree with jeanne, i think elizabeth warren, her campaign is more disciplined and i think she's the real contender. if you look at the polls, hers is the only one that's sort of been a constant rise. neil: yeah. >> she will moderate and you know why? if she gets the nomination, she wants to win. neil: that's a good goal. all right. there's a new way to keep track of a president's tweets and how you can, you know, move markets on them. there has to be an index for
that. apparently now, there is. after this. ♪ all right brad, once again i have revolutionized the songwriting process. oh, here we go. i know i can't play an instrument, but this... this is my forte. obviously, for auto insurance, we've got the wheel route. obviously. retirement, we're going with a long-term play. makes sense. pet insurance, wait, let me guess... flea flicker. yes! how'd you know? studying my playbook? yeah, actually.
"have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro.
neil: all right. they still think this is a week we hit new highs because we are about a percent or two away from all the major market averages. we are having a bumpy ride, negative for the time being. a lot of technology leading the way south here as they weigh the pros and cons of some of the not only legal efforts on the part of state attorneys general to go after big names like google potentially down the road,
facebook, but their exposure to china if we don't get a deal there. lenore hawkins follows this closely and joins the panel now to get to the root of it. this back and forth has more to do with what we're doing, our government, to influence technology than for the time being what china is doing, for the time being. what's going on? >> well, we have seen a real change with what's gone on with the technology as far as regulation, and those really were the big leaders in the stock market and those guys are now getting hit really hard from a regulatory standpoint. but what we're seeing in the market that is gaining a little bit of optimism is a real shift from the pain we were suffering in august. back in august, the trade war was very hot and right now it seems to be on a low simmer.
that's an optimism that maybe something happen. we'll see. right now, the market's feeling a little better about it. we had a really ugly hard brexit become a real possibility back in august and with what's happening with boris johnson, leadership in parliament, that's becoming a lot less likely so that's calming things down as well. investors aren't quite so terrified the worst case scenario is going to happen. similar with italy. italy, where i am right now, looking like they were going back to the polls because the coalition government fell apart. now we have even stranger coalition of government put together that i don't think is going to last very long but at least it's a lot less [ inaudible ] than the prior one was. on top of that, hong kong looks like it's backing off a little bit. china looks like they figured out they pushed too hard. you put that all together with the big finger crossing the ecb will really come forward with monetary stimulus and traders are happier today. neil: they don't have a lost wiggle room, the european
central bank. but jeanne, do you get a sense, though, that when japan talks about this trade thing is something we worry about, we are already seeing it, the caution on the part of european companies, american companies, when it comes to hiring plans going forward, that this is spilling other, or is the president right to say a lot of these companies blaming the trade situation for whatever is ailing them is sort of like retailers who blame bad weather for a lousy quarter. >> i do think there is some of that. my view on this is most people at least in the united states, they thought the president was right on taking on china. i think the question now is one of timing. how long can this go on. are you going to be able to deliver on -- neil: let's say it's not solved before the election. then what? >> i think it's a problem. i think what markets hate most is the cliche is uncertainty. they would almost rather have a bad deal that they can price than the uncertainty which they can't price.
you know, hong kong could make, if it goes really south there, could make a trade deal really ugly or there will definitely be calls on the president to do something more with china. so i think -- and also, this is an environment where we are really the only ones growing. the rest of the world, europe and so forth, are really quite sluggish. neil: now our growth is slowing. >> our growth is slowing down, too. neil: you know, anthony, i want to go back to your old home, jpmorgan, where you were a star for decades and we talked to each other for decades. they have come up with an index to track the president's tweets. the understanding being that they move markets and here's a quick way you can follow that. what do you think? >> i think it makes sense because you have, what, over 14,000 tweets since the president was running for election, averaging 10 tweets a day. some days we have more than 80 tweets. i think what is fascinating is if you track the number of
tweets with sensitive words, they in fact do move the market. you also track on days there are no tweets and you get a response to the market. in fact, the results, not just jpmorgan but other signs when you don't have these tweets with these negative or sensitive words, that the market actually does better. i think there's no question that these tweets are impacting the market and when you have so many of them -- neil: they have the means by which you can quantify it. lenore, do you find it handy to have an index that can track this? all we know is it takes just one tweet for him to sabotage a rally or even hint of some promising signal that can start a rally. >> the reality is today very much, we saw even just today where the president was announcing, he was commenting on
elliott investing in at & t and he commented on at & t, the parent company of the fake news company. he has the ability to affect stocks on a daily basis. bank of america merrill lynch did a study on days where he's really active, the stock market tends to lose nine basis points and on the days where his thumbs are otherwise occupied, the market goes up five basis points. you do need to be on top of it. like we needed to get more complicated. neil: there's an app for that nowadays or trading index for that. thank you very, very much. all the way from italy. where apparently a microphone is not a priority but she has a booming voice so it came in handy there. we are awaiting this ongoing antitrust probe right now that's happening and in case as we were saying at the outset or earlier on here, supreme court weighing in, you've got the ftc, the justice department launching investigations, all these attorneys general and you would
neil: they used to call it the stock of widows and orphans, at & t in the day. the shares attracting a little more interest right now. it gets into all sorts of new technologies and interests and all of a sudden a big investor comes along to say you know, we will take a stake in you. and everyone is talking about what next. kristina partsinevelos at the new york stock exchange with more on that. hey, kristina. kristina: hey, neil. that investor is elliott management. this is the largest stake they have ever taken, the largest company they have ever gone after, at & t. you even had the president weigh in today saying that it's great news that elliott is doing so. so what is this activist investor pushing at & t to do? they own a $3.2 billion stake. they have called on at & t to sell some of their assets because they believe, i quote,
that returns have been disappointing. they have also questioned the deal at & t buying time warner, time warner operates cnn, hence the reason why the president weighed in. they are still trying to understand that -- the value behind that $85 billion deal. then last but not least, elliott management also predicts that the stock could climb to 60 bucks, helping a lot of people get in. we are talking about the stock year to date up about 27%. still off the highs from the late 90s, but doing quite well. one of the biggest movers today on the s&p 500, i like to point out the company is highly levered. speaking of highly levered, let's talk about a completely different company. wework. remember wework, they were talking about this ipo, everybody was criticizing the s-1 filing about how highly valued this company is even though it's not making any money at $47 billion. well, there's a new report from the "wall street journal" stating that that valuation, that ipo that they are trying to seek out right now is going to
be worth $20 billion. so less than half of its original valuation that we were talking about in its latest private round of funding. if you wonder what's wework, they lease long-term contracts, renovate it, throw in some beer and coffee and sublet it into smaller chunks to short-term tenants. so right now, the next step for wework is to go on a road show to raise some funding. according to the "wall street journal" there are some sources saying they should be pulling out of this ipo. we'll see. another unicorn possibly to hit the market. back to you. neil: here we go. thank you very, very much. well, it says something about our times when everyone is chasing all the big names from google and facebook and potentially amazon and a host of others. left out of the equation is microsoft, which used to get decades ago more scrutiny than anyone. that was then. why is everyone leaving it alone now? after this. what a time to be a. the world is customized to you. built for you. so why isn't it all about you, when it comes to your money?
that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today.
here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
neil: all right. if you were trying to google google nightmare, this is the image that might come up. the supreme court of the united states, where attorneys general across the country are going to be arguing for reining in the search engine giant and much, much more. we have former microsoft vice president, chief operating officer. bob, good to have you. this should be kind of like deja vu to you if you think about success and the controversy it triggers, microsoft dealt with this for years, now it will be google's turn. how do you think this ends up? >> well, the fundamental issues pertain to, you know, are consumers being harmed and is competition being stifled. those are the fundamentals of antitrust law. so if you step back, what's the
problem here? consumers are fed up with all the breaches of security, their information going out, their identity being compromised. consequently, the regulators are really cranking it up now. wondering if there are real problems there. so they will be looking at privacy, how do they protect that data, how do they use it, what do they tell the user is going on, if anything. they will be looking at stifling competition. are these companies buying up small players so that they don't have any competition to speak of. what about all the fake information that's out there and the inflammatory information? is this harming consumers? what about ad prices? are they driving up ad prices because they've got the power to do so? neil: in other words, when you say it's going to be a long haul. i want to bring in my panelists.
jeanne? >> i wanted to just ask, what do you make of google's response so far to, you know, this action coming down the pike, and what would you advise them, how would you advise them to respond given your work with microsoft? >> well, they better start acting like humans and realize that they have to be into these issues and they have to hear the other side, understand what the concerns are, and do something about it. you know, they faced these problems for two years and they have had a cold shoulder to the whole thing. they have done nothing. so consequently, one of the big problems here is people are angry at the attitude of some of these people that come to washington, d.c., have these hearings and they are basically cold fish. that doesn't work. neil: bill mcgurneys here as well. bill? >> i wonder how much is a p.r. problem. look, you mentioned the security breaches that people are really upset about. i'm a former white house employee. my information is in the hands
of beijing now because the government couldn't even keep the -- you know, our top security professionals couldn't, you know, what should be the penalty for that? >> well, that's where it gets exciting. for the folks in the technology world. because the penalties are not clear at all. also, the links to whether consumers are really being harmed is not clear. so to some extent, this is a lawyer's paradise because they will be working on this for years in the context of figuring out -- in the context of classical antitrust law, how does all this fit in the new world of technology. so it will be a long, drawn-out affair. >> bob, obviously since these companies offer these search engines essentially for free, would you recommend to some of these companies that they offer rebates or free services to compensate? because obviously, now the regulators do not think the price of zero is too low or too
high, that in fact the consumer is still being ripped off. what would you recommend to them in order to ameliorate that situation? >> they are way down that path. it would be hard to backtrack. the fact is there's no such thing as a free lunch. when you get a browser and you get youtube and all this for free, basically the reason why is they are tracking everything you do and exploiting that. in a number of different ways. the consumer really hasn't been aware of that. they are starting to become aware. some of them don't care. but you have touched on the core issue. there's a reason why they're free. because they're not free. you are passing along the ability for them to track you. neil: you should see the dirt they have on mcgurn. i'm just getting wind of it right now. bob, let me ask you, microsoft president brad smith has gone after the u.s. treatment of huawei, saying it's unconscionable, not fair, not
right. obviously i understand there's a lot of vested interest and business ties there. where is this going, the huawei line? >> well, i think first of all, what you see from brad is a bunch of frustration. you know, people have been at this now for over a year, dealing with as you pointed out in the last bit of information, a lot of tweets that come regularly that change the ball game. so consequently, you are constantly saying am i going to get hit with tariffs, no way. maybe i am. you know. you just don't know. so for example, apple tomorrow has an announcement on a new set of iphones. their pricing is in a very difficult position because they don't know whether they will get hit with tariffs. huawei is a completely different beast. no one understands why they are being hit as hard as they are. neil: indeed they are. bob herbold, thank you very much. we will keep track of this. the president will be on his way to north carolina, big rally
neil: these attorney generals going in, looks like leaving. to charles payne right now. hey, charles. charles: thank you very much, neil. markets are more or less sideways. everybody anticipating the big news we heard about all these different states going after these large, big names. first one up is google where you have a whole lot of different theories, but for the most part it is conceded they have simply gotten too large, too uncontrolled at the very moment. this issue brought together republicans and democrats around the country joining nations around the world, that google,