tv Lou Dobbs Tonight FOX Business November 23, 2019 4:00am-5:00am EST
we'd love to hear it. send me an e-mail or go to our website, strangeinheritance.com . [♪] lou: good evening, everybody. the radical dimms and the 59 days of impeachment inquiry as far aso -- farce that they conducted failed to put forward a plausible pretext to overthrow the president. the president's approval numbers are on the rise despite those 59 days. support for impeachment on the decline, and the democrats are fortunate to have the thanksgiving recess with which to recover and regroup. but those 59 days of absurdist political theater have awakened millions of americans to the
greatest political scandal in our nation's history and more evidence is on the way. those democrats appear to be well on their way to electoral disaster in 2020. president trump is strengthened and validated by the radical dimms disastrous failures of their so-called impeachment inquiry. the president says he wants a full trial of the facts in the u.s. senate. president trump eager to expose further the corruption and baseless charges of the deep state and the radical dimms that track back to the obama white house. president trump today crowed about this banner week for his presidency. >> tremendous things are happening. i think we had a tremendous week with the hoax, you know the great hoax. we call it the impeachment hoax. that worked out incredibly well. we have tremendous support.
lou: the fcc unanimously voted 5-0 to ban up much telecom companies from using federal subsidies to buy or maintain equipment made by i huawei and zte, labeling those companies a national security threat. the fcc also beginning the process that would force u.s. telecom companies to replace existing zte products with a process that could cost $2 billion over two years. choing us, the chairman of the federal communications commission. he has been focused on the issue of telecom and other companies using taxpayer money. for years commission chairman ajit pai led that 5-0 vote today
and joins us tonight. congratulations on the vote. a clear-cut statement of putting u.s. national security, national you interest above commercial interest, and congratulations to you and the commission for doing so. >> it's a unanimous vote. when it comes to the national security of our communications network, we don't know party affiliation. it's about the security of the country. >> the attorney general of the united states announcing clearly that both these companies, huawei and zte pose a national security threat. he went further and said it's the conduct of the people's republic of china that goes into his assessment of their national security threat and the risk posed. how far is this going to go, and what are the next steps for the united states? these two companies have been features prominently by the chinese and their efforts to
drive a potential potential -- . >> each of them has engaged in conduct intellectual property theft and bribery and corruption. they are required to secretly comply to requests from china's intelligence services. we propose to want use of fcc funding. and looking backward we want to understand if there is existing network equipment from those companies and figure out how to rip and replace it. this is not a risk we can allow in this country. >> it has to be something every american is rejoicing upon hearing the chairman of the fcc say that. but we are also looking at a whole government. the united states government.
is it a whole government effort we are witnessing or is it somewhat ad hoc in the you midst of foreign policy concerns arctic late by secretary of state pompeo recently in a speech declaring china's threats to this country is simply unacceptable. >> all i can speak to is what the fcc believes. from our perspective these two companies present a national security risk to the united states. i have done many trips abroad where we presented a coherent and consistent message. lou: what's the response? >> it's generally favorable. other countries understand the risk. lou: there is also a competitive risk here and a structural risk.
that is, the companies we assumed would be in the lead in this country on 5g, at&t principle among them haven't been -- principal among them, haven't been hitting their markers. what will this mean for the adaptation of u.s. telecom. >> we have been implementing the 5g fast plan, making it easier to deploy infrastructure in the future, whether it's wireless or new entrance to dough ploy that structure at scale. we are working with all the companies to give them a full and fair chance to compete. we want to make sure every american company has the maximum incentive. lou: are you concerned about what has been a lag on 5g
companies? >> we'll have 92 commercial deployments. so i'm hopeful although we still need to maintain that lead, visa advice chain a and other companies that want to see that opportunity for themselves. >> rural farm communities that are desperate for lower priced, huawei zte-type equipment, is it replaceable? is that a possibility? wilbur ross is very concerned about the implications for those rural communities who frankly just have a disadvantaged position when it comes to telecom. but 5g in particular. >> that's a concern i share as a rural american. but at the end of the day one of the things we want to make sure is our communications networks
are secure. we are working with the rural carriers to make sure they have a financing mechanism in place. at the end of the dade my message is simple. the only problem with cheap equipment from huawei and zte is it costs too much. we need to make sure the rural carriers and all of us are on the same page. lou: the attorney general said this in his letter to the fcc. the attorney general writing, we should not signal that huawei and zte are anything other than a threat to our collective security. their own track record as well as the practices of the chinese government demonstrate that huawei and zte cannot be trusted. again, congratulations on that 5-0 vote. good for you, good for the commission.
good for the country. thanks so much. good to see you. we are learning more about the long awaited report on fisa abuses by the justice depth inspector general michael horowitz. the inspector general has reportedly found evidence that former fbi attorney, kevin kleinsmith manipulated a key document in order to justify surveillance much former strum advisor, carter page, that is to facilitate spying on a presidential candidate. the "new york times" reports tonight horowitz will likely absolve top-ranking fbi officials for abusing their powers, namely, james comey, andrew mccabe, peter strzok, and lisa page. we'll be taking up that story in greater detail and assessing what the prospects are for those folks who have been named to this point.
up next the trump administration issuing a new warning to left-wing activist judges blocking i.c.e. in their courthouses. judicial watch's tom fitton joins us. also john bolton using twitter to take shots at the white house and threaten the white house. i'll be talking about that and much more with white house press secretary stephanie grisham. secretary stephanie grisham. stay with us, we'll be r r r r
lou: on wall street stocks closing higher. the s amed p up 7. volume on the big board 2.3 billion shares. markets finishing lower overall. crude oil flat. trading at $58 a barrel. gold down a quarter percent. silver gaining a quarter percent as well. listen to my reports three times a day coast to coast on the salem radio network. former national security advice
year john bolton is back on twitter and taking shots at the presume white house. bolton tweeted earlier today quote, since resigning as national security advisor the @white house refused to retain access to my personal twitter account. for those who speculate i went into hiding i am sob sorry to disappoint. the white house says it doesn't have the means to do so. and bolton adding further clarification. president trump says he wants to call adam schiff, hunter biden and the whistleblower to testify if the senate calls a trial. he says calling these witnesses will provide shim due process. president trump: we couldn't have any witnesses. you know who i want as the first
witness? i want a trial. >> you want a trial? >> look, number one, they should never ever impeach. lou: of course there should be due process from the very beginning which they have denied this president and the american people. joining us tonight, white house press secretary stephanie grisham. the president standing straight up and saying, i think he also looked at those poll numbers and saw the way the american people reacting to this charade put on by the dimms. he wants to have a full-on trial and raise a little hell it appears. >> when you have done nothing wrong and you have had to endure months and months after people saying you have done all these horrible things. i agree with him. i think adam schiff should go up first.
he has lied what he knows about this whistleblower. we know for a fact his staff was dealing with this whistleblower. he has a lawyer who tweeted on day one of this presidency that he must go down. if there is nothing to hide, let's go. lou: as adam schiff put up all of these so-called witnesses to see time and time again, speculation, presumption, assumption, hearsay. it became a parade of nonsense, only it was directed at the president of the united states. he has the patience of jobe to put up with this. >> he does, and he continues to work for the country which i admire so much. you are right, i couldn't keep a track of the words presumption. i want to point out of all the witnesses that were spoken to during the sham hearings. one witness who did speak to the president albeit a few times.
he said that the president told him, i don't want anything, i don't want a quid pro quo. i want zelensky to do the right thing. i want him to do what he ran on. which is corruption. to me it should be over. i don't understand how we are continuing to talk about it. lou: that reference to ambassador sondland's testimony which he left out of his opening statement was the essence of what he said. it was entirely exculpatory. the republicans stood up as i have never seen them in my career. shoulder to shoulder and dismantling every one of those folks to tried to assault the president of the united states and all of them baselessly. >> it has been so amazing to see the republicans united. this is one of the many ways this will backfire on the dems.
i think the country is united behind his president, too. i was just handed a "vanity fair" article saying it looks like this won't work out for the dems. if we have a "vanity fair" article saying that -- >> that's a high source. >> ambassador bolton today with this nonsense about twitter wanting his dedicated, you know, handle, that was never in the possession of the white house, was it? >> it was his personal account that he continued to use while he was at the white house. i don't know a lot about it. my father is of an advanced age and he may not understand all you have to do is contact twitter and reset your password if you have forgotten it and i will leave it at that. lou: i am trying to calculate
whether myself or bolton is the older with the twitter account. it's a shame to see bolton behave like this. he was next to the president, serving the president of the united states. it's very disappointing that he would stoop to the level he has in innuendo. >> i hear he's got a book deal and he's been on quite the speaking circuit charging high fees for that. i guess money can get you to do a lot of things. lou: stephanie, great the see you, congratulations on another terrific week. we look forward to many, many years more. thanks so much. stephanie grisham. share your comments. follow me on twitter @loudobbs. follow me on instagram
@loudobbstonight. on a programming note. john solomon, congressman mark meadows and lee zeldin among our guests monday. up next, how attorney general william bear is characterizing the suspicious death of jeffrey epstein. and john solomon fighting back against what has been a wholesale highly targeted disinformation campaign against him during the radical dimms impeachment farce.
jessica: when i was ten, my mom got deported. we had a difficult time, and i feel that's why i didn't get to finish school. gustavo: jessica has been through a lot in her life from early childhood. jessica: my husband is really supportive in the way that he pushed me to go back to school. john: she came in looking to complete her diploma. she had a family she had to take care of. anytime she needed help, we provided her help. she realized that we were here for her. gustavo: she wants to have a career so her kids can look up to her.
jessica: my graduation, it was something i will never forget. i couldn't explain the emotion i was feeling, because people like you and me may sometimes have doubts in themselves, but i feel that everything's possible. john: jessica's future is brighter than ever. vo: find free adult education classes near you at finishyourdiploma.org lou: attorney general william barr and chad wolf today taking action urging the chief justices of the oregon and washington supreme courts to stop block
i.c.e. agents from detaining illegal immigrants in their court house. the attorney general and wolf arguing their actions, those judges in those two states, pose an outright danger to the public. the attorney general describing the mysterious death of jeffrey epstein as a perfect storm of screwups. he says after personally reviewing security footage i can confirm no one entered epstein's cell the night he died. prince andrew has been kicked out of buckingham palace after he defended his friendship with epstein. disputing vindman, award-winning journalist john solomon refuting vindman's claim that all of the key elements of his ukraine reports are false.
he laid out rebuttals and asking vindman to question what was wrong with his reporting. joining us, tom fitton of judicial watch. the attacks on john solomon are extraordinary. no other reporter has done as much as solomon to reveal what is going on in ukraine. no one -- i mean this -- across the board, in my reading of all of the coverage. no one has sourced his or her work even close to the degree that john solomon has. >> been vindman and fiona hill, listening to democratic operatives spin the information. it goes to show that the experts that the president is suppose to be relying on as given to him by the deep state people like hill and colonel vindman.
they don't know what they shall talking about. either they are iser in rant or being men days in suggesting crane wasn't working with the obama-clinton gang to target trump. ukrainians were distrustful of trump. and pretending it didn't happen -- i don't understand it. it's either ignorant -- lou: or the other. i don't know there is a lot of question about which it is. fiona hill actually saying the republicans were not across knowledging russia was responsible for interfering with the u.s. presidential elections in 2016. that wasser in the issue,er in the case, and the republicans point out that she was absolutely dead wrong. and the extent to which she pursued that untruth was i
thought astonishing. let's listen to fiona hill, the self-cast at least leading expert on ukraine. >> i have heard some of you on this committee appear to believe that russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country and perhaps somehow for you some reason ukraine did. this is a fictional narrative that is being perpetrated and prop gate by the russian security services themselves. the unfortunate truth is russia is a foreign power that systematically attacked our democratic institutions in 2016. lou: the arrogance of that. >> was that john wren man or fiona hill? i can't tell the difference. no one is making the argument the russians were playing around in our election. they were playing around with hillary clinton.
they spent a couple hundred thousand on facebook ads. no one proved it took place in a court of law. but the dispute is were the russians in it to help trump or in it to help clinton. it's the dossier people that were pushing the lie or the information without evidence that the russians were in there to help trump. i'm glad hill is no longer in the white house. lou: i hope none of these people will ever again be in the white house. vindman talking about zelensky being asked about whether he was -- whether zelensky served in the military. he didn't know the answer to it, and he considerr considered himself the leading expert, not fiona hill. but not to know that, even though apparently the zelensky government offered him the role of defense minister?
he should know. >> a well-read american citizen knows more about ukraine and the trump issue than the two experts paid to advise the president. i don't know why vindman is still at the white house. lou: it's difficult to comprehend what this president has had to put up with, the abject disloyalty and simple honor. you would think that a president should expect better. ist g. michael horowitz has -- is coming forward with his report. the suggestion is that perhaps there will not be great accountability for the top level of the fbi and justice department. your thoughts? >> well, i don't know if that is spin or not. but it wouldn't surprise me,
because that's what i.g.s do. they are both cover-ups -- they are both coverups and expose's. the last big i.g. report that exposed the strong-page hatred for trump and pro clinton activity, he pretend had nothing to do with the investigation. i suspect we have evidence of crimes taking place, and are they going to tell us it had nothing to do with what comey and brennan is attacking trump every day. idea he was running the cia and running operations against him. they won't draw any adverse conclusions? the president needs to appoint a special counsel to get into this. you can't rely on the system. lou: i can't wait for the barr conclusion to this.
i remain somewhat optimistic. i know that makes me alone on this set. >> i'm outraged because i'm optimistic. i hope for the right thing and it just doesn't happen. lou: president trump weighs in on the protests in hong kong and how those protests may affect the trade deal with china and the president's role in assuring the safety of thousands of those dem craters. we'll be right back. stay with us.
my twin brother jacob has an autism spectrum disorder i remember one moment after being at school all day and i remember him getting into the car just balling... and saying: "mom, i have no friends" "why don't i have any friends?" it broke my heart. ♪brother let me be your shelter♪ ♪never leave you all alone that was the moment when i realized that i needed to do something about this. i needed to make a difference in his life. go! and i knew that if i could help him find a friend, i could help teach other people that including people with differences is the right thing to do. ♪bring it home ♪brother let me be your shelter♪ that was the inspiration behind my non-profit "score a friend" educating people to include the people with differences is so important because when jacob's included
he feels like he can succeed in life and he feels like he actually has a purpose. ♪..home lou: welcome back. former characteristics a officer sentenced to 9 years in prison for conspiring with china. federal authorities say jerry cheung lee was given $840,000 by the chinese intelligence agencies. in exchange he provided the chinese with secret information including the names of cia sources. president trump calling
democracy protests in hong kong a complicating factor in the negotiations with china. president trump: he's got a million soldiers standing outside of hong kong who aren't going in because i asked him, please don't do that. usual make a big mistake and it will have a twre impact on the trade deal. lou: the president said he will take a good look at legislation in support of those protesters. and the legislation passed by the congress and the senate awaiting his signature. joining us tonight. dean, good to have you with us. let's start with the legislation. the hong kong human rights legislation passed by both houses by overwhelming margin. our thoughts on it and how much
of a complicating factor that is for the president. >> it's undoubtedly a complicating factor. we have a bill regarding hong kong which clearly is of concern to the chinese. the chinese have been saying if you sign this, bad things will happen. for the president, if he signs it it creates a complicating factor for trade. if he doesn't sign it it will be portrayed across the board. but one of the things to think about here is are the chinese actually hoping the president does sign this bill? because after all. the trade negotiations don't seem to have produced the results we have been hoping for. >> it's probably -- i can't say this as an absolute certainty. but this is a president committed to those tariffs and it's unlikely he is going to
accede to demands and threats suggesting there will be revenge taken if you sign this legislation all but assured his signature on that, i would suspect. >> if he does sign it, the chinese can claim the perfect excuse for walking away. they can say we were ready to sign a trade deal. it would have been fantastic. lou: they haven't shown any need for an excuse. they reneged in may. they were to sign an agreement november 17. what in the world would they have done and what is there to sign? no one sees text. but there is no text that we are
aware of. >> by creating a situation where they can clearly blame the president, the chinese aren't playing to themselves. they are flying two other audience. the american and the global audience. audiences that have been primed by our own press that donald trump is the bad guy. here donald trump created a situation that forces china to walk away from the negotiating table. lou: troubling to me are reports that there have been continuing efforts by wall street, the donor class, and major business interests in this country to undercut the president and his trade plans, his plans of strategy to balance trade and preserve those tariffs. i mean, that's deeply troubling that we have a business community committed to the
chinese stratagem and positions rather than to the u.s. president. >> wall street i would suggest is doing what is in its if i --s fiduciary interest. lou: they have responsibilities to the nation, they have responsibilities to this government. and they are american companies. we know google is creating search that is designed specifically for china. we know what big tech is doing there. december 1 the ability of the chinese government to just in one swoop scoop up all of the data from u.s. companies doing business in china and these companies have no defense against it. what are we doing? we are not assuring privacy.
we are not assuring the rights of american citizens or our own values. >> the companies unfortunately have little or limited financial interest in keeping data private. lou: give them some damn reason. regulate the hell out of them. >> hold on a second here. if you regulate them you are opening up the door at that t -- i think elizabeth warren would be delighted to regulate facebook. i think half the democratic lineup -- lou: elizabeth warren was talking. talking about anti-competitive conduct by big tech and silicon valley. that's his concern that he articulated first. this isn't about elizabeth
warren. >> it's not about elizabeth warren. but the question you have to ask is, is regulation the right approach to competition? lou: i see one alternative. to see the chinese prevail. corporate america decided that somehow its fiduciary responsibility to rape, pillage and plunder irrespective of the interests of the nation. >> you introduce the potential of a lot of mischief once you start requiring companies -- lou: what would be more mischief than the united states losing its values and not standing up for its own values, freedom, independence, liberty, human rights, and suddenly because some fool things we shouldn't regulate we simply allow this country to be consumed, sub
resumed -- subsumed by the chinese? are you kidding? >> the party that supports regulation the most are pro pounding values that fly in the face of a lot of things -- lou: i can't find the meaning of the words you just used. i'm talking independence. i am talking about liberty. personal freedom. human rights. where do you find those in china. >> no, i'm not saying china. lou: that's the context. between china and the united states. >> what competition is between china and the united states. when you force companies to start thinking -- lou: there is this view that corporations are citizens, right? aren't they legally? >> depends -- lou: overall. they have the right to freedom of speech.
>> they do. lou: but they don't have a responsibility to the nation that makes those rights vivid and makes those values indelibly critical to the nation? >> i don't remember the last time we actually literally drafted a corporation. corporations -- lou: in that case what are we to do with them? i'm not ready to say that corporate america is our masters. and i'm not willing to say our values don't matter in some libertarian view. >> i'm hardly saying values don't matter and hardly saying companies don't have responsibilities. what i'm saying -- lou: vis-a-vis the chinese. you are going to pick a winner. you tell me who you want. >> i want the company -- lou: leave the company out of it. who do you want to be the winner between the united states and china. >> that's not even a question.
the united states. lou: how are you going to assure that if you won't defend our values. >> they have include aspects of economic freedom. lou: no one has done more against regulation than donald trump. but you would oppose regulating companies that will put profit ahead of the national snint. >> no, i'm saying we have to help companies recognize profit and national interest are not contradictory. >> i would give them that much credit. and meanwhile we are going to have to wrap this up. lou: tesla unveiling its new pickup truck in california. but a test of its so-called unbreakable windows didn't go
exactly as elon musk planned. here we go. >> well, maybe that was a little too hard. lou: he had his head of design throw another, promising it would be bulletproof. and the stock didn't exactly go through the roof either. president trump sees a bump in the polls. america's appetite for impeachment declining. the president clearly the winner of this impeachment inquiry. sara carter and charlie hurt join me after these quick words. join me after these quick words. stay with us.
in the face. they presented a case for the american people based on hearsay and presumptions. that was a word used by gordon sondland. they didn't have anything to prove a quid pro quo. even more damaging is the fact that president trump slid the ukrainians with lethal aid, something president obama never did with the javelin missiles. he also supplied them with humvees and other necessary equipment that they need. lou: i think the reason the democrats -- what you are alluding to, it's not what he said. it's the fact that this president has done more than any other president in modern history in his first three years, and it scares the hell out of them. >> they are desperate to not have a campaign based on issues
because the president will beat them on issues. what i love during the hearing, they use the squirrely words like quid pro quo. or obstruction or witness camperring. bribery. extortion. my favorite one was when adam schiff in all seriousness looked at sondland and said are you worried about this continuum of insidiousness. and it just goes to show if you cannot explain it in clear terms that an 8-year-old can understand, then you probably don't have a case. >> they simply don't have a case. you can hear people's feeling. we know in any administration people will be bantering back
out of this. polls say strong and impeachment less assured certainly. >> just look at the ratings they got on television, the impeachment ratings. i think's in a much stronger position. we know why nancy pelosi did not want to go down this rabbit hole. >> her greed for power is why she did it. >> i have to agree with charlie. i was thinking the exact same thing. nancy pelosi did not want to go down this road at all. the pressure adam schiff just drug her into it. i think she went in hesitantly, now she went in full force. and as i said from the beginning, it's hitting them in the face. lou: that's it for us tonight.
we thank you for being with us. john solomon, mark meadows among our guests. have a great weekend. good night do not go anywhere, i will see you at 8:00 p.m. monday night, it is a date, maria bartiromo. >> from the fox studio in new york city, this is maria bartiromo wall street. >> happy weekend, welcome to the program that analyzes the week that was in positions you for the week ahead. i maria bartiromo. coming up the president of the new york stock exchange is here, stacy cunningham will join us. the godfather of the venture capital industry, alan is here to look at private valuations and where the growth in the economy is today. it's been an exciting year on wall street, the dow closed above 28000 for the first time ever, rockers all over wall street several big-name companies went public in filed ipos but has