tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News June 2, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
>> i'm chris wallace, president trump has as liters on mexico. in a supporter. what will it be for the u.s. economy? >> we have to do something to secure border, we have to make sure we are perfecting the people of this country and the president is looking at all options. >> we will discussion the president decision and the practical havoc consumers. illegal immigration in the u.s. mexico trade you with chief of staff mick mulvaney. and former counsel robert mueller breaks his silence. >> if we had confidence that the
president clearly did not commit a crime -- >> he did not help me get elected, you know who got me elected. i got me elected. but mueller says he does not want to go before congress. >> the work speaks for itself. >> we will discuss what is next in the russia investigation with congressman doug columns a top republican on the house judiciary committee. plus, we want to do what is right and what gets results. >> we will ask our sunday panel how long speaker nancy pelosi can hold off democratic polls to impeachment. in some words of wisdom for the play of the 2019. >> i was told that i was going to be taken off the evening news and put on a talk show. that actually worked out for me. >> all right now on "fox news sunday".
chris: hello again, today from the university of dubuque. tonight the start of the town hall with senator kirsten gillibrand on fox news channel. we came to the masterpiece on the mississippi as is called here to get a sense of where the democratically stands here in iowa site of the first of the nation caucuses in just nine months. but president trump continues to dominate the news this week with a surprise plan to use tariffs, the pressure of mexico to stop the flood of migrants to the u.s. border. in a moment we will speak with white house chief of staff mick mulvaney. but first kevin cork is live in london ahead of the president state visit to the uk tomorrow. >> the president's latest visit here to the uk comes at a time of political change as you know the british prime minister was to be stepping down from her post. it also comes the growing political headwinds back home. there are now republicans that are patting the presidents turf
it. >> mr. trump made headlines in the uk by joining his support for boris johnson saying he'd make an excellent prime minister. the president also suggested that the uk make a heartbreak with the eu with a 50 billion-dollar fee. adding that the u.s. could quickly make a deal with the uk to help soften the blow. back in the states turf talk dominated the week and the president threatening to hit mexico with explaining tariffs if this country did not and it's passive cooperation with the mass migration from central america to mexico to the u.s. of the border. the tariffs are going to affect june 10 climbing monthly and 5%
increments all the way up to 25% by october 1. >> we are axing mexico to help stop the people coming into central america. >> the presidents approach linking mass migration would judge trafficking and trade policy is growing sharp criticism from members of the party. chuck grassley called it a misuse of presidential tariff authority. fellow i was senator joining jot said the farmers and produces art's sake. >> all with usmca hanging in the balance, on wednesday we expected for mr. of magnet into mexico to be in washington for meeting with the counterpart. mike pompeo and the two sides try to figure out the terror threat. >>
reported from london, kevin, thank you. joining me now from washington, white house chief of staff, mick mulvaney, how scarcely to retake the presidents threat to resist
tariffs, is this basically in negotiating ploy to get mexico's attention or does he really mean it that mexico does not stop the flow of migrants across our southern border that he will start imposing these tariffs on june 10? >> good morning, thank you for starting for the easy question, his deadly serious. i expect the stairs to go on for at least a 5% level on june 10. the president is deadly serious to fixing the situation at the southern border. from the first time a monumental program talk about what happens in the u.s. border. we've been talking about it for months, six month ago we told everybody it's an emergency situation and very few people believe this. exact attempt to the about how democrats refuse to believe the fact six month ago. it is real, we had a group of 1000 people, one group of a thousand people walk across the border just in the last couple of days. 2500 people are coming over every single day as opposed to 702 years ago. the numbers are huge, the
situation is real and the president is deadly serious about fixing the problem. >> the president says in his words that this problem must be remedied and the question is, what does that mean. what specifically did mexicans have to do and how will he judge whether or not they met his goal? >> there's a couple different things that they can do. bobwhite heiser is meeting with mexicans this week, mike pompeo is meeting with the mexican representatives along with mr. kershner and we will talk to him about what they can do and they know these things. they can secure the southern border, there's of the border with guatemala and most of the people who are coming into mexico now are not mexicans there from guatemala and el salvador another country south of mexico. that border is only a quarter as long as the border with the united states. think it's they can secure the d moving people across mexico.
anyone time is 100,000 migrants in mexico making their way up to the united states. lastly they can make mexico a safe place for these people to claim asylum or when you leave a country like el salvador new claim asylum you do that in the first safe country in which are right. mexico is safe, the people should be able to stay there if there really seeking asylum. specific things that the mexicans can do. regarding the measure, we intentionally left the deck relation so we can work with the mexicans to make sure that things get better. there's no specific target or percentage, but things have to get better and have to get dramatically better and have to get better quickly. >> let's talk about the possible downside that a lot of people reason, the u.s. imported last year $350 billion in mexican goods, everything from cars to other condos. if the president ends up with a
terrified october which would represent if they haven't been remedied, that would amount to an $87 billion tax increase but american companies and consumers. >> two different answers, first, i get that, that's economic orthodox that when tariffs up consumer prices go. but the proof is in the footing, there is no inflation. prices has not gotten. we put tariffs on china, were put in tariffs of mexico, and inflation is still under control that is because the old-fashioned economic orthodox does not work when it is not relatively easy to substitute other goods. prices in china have gone up in american consumers have got a product made in america. they don't carry the tariffs and think the same thing will happen here in american consumers will not pay for the burden of his tariffs. secondly, there is already a price associated with illegal immigration and the american taxpayers are paying hundreds of billions of dollars for illegal
immigrants. so hundreds of billions of dollars to the drugs that come across the southern border. there is already a cost associated with us that we are trained to get off of the backs of ordinary americans. >> let me go suit the next concern that people have. this will blow up other trade deals integration has both parties including republicans say this could end up killing congressional passage of the usmca, the rewrite of nafta. they point out that a country like china, why make a deal with the u.s. and the president will turn around and raise tariffs anyway because of another issue? >> let's deal with the mexican situation before we tackle china, we have been very specific from the minute that the proclamation loss. this is an immigration that are not a trade matter. so usmca is a trade discussion back ongoing that's why bob lighthizer's meeting with mexican counterparts, is an immigration matter in the church supper. we hope we sold one but we hope
herself both. the two are not interactive. we believe usmca is a great deal to the united states of america, we also think it's a good deal for mexican and canadian partners and we hope congress will pass it. we believe very firmly that if nancy pelosi would give it about it would pass. because it is a good deal. we put that in one category and immigration, the situation of the southern border is a different issue in the national security issue and will deal with it separately in the usmca. >> you talk about immigration. a lot of people said because the president even today has been treating saying will happen here if this goes on is companies in mexico will decide they don't want to pay the tariffs and move back to the u.s. crating more jobs here. the flipside, then a lot of mexicans lose their job and the concern that a lot of them come over the border to the u.s. in the whole injury results is it brings more illegal migration not less.
>> what you described is a great reason for the mexican government to engage to help fix the problem. in the last 24 hours mexican president has already reached out and said he think they could do better and he takes it will do better in their sending evaluations for the first part of this week. what you laid out is actually probably not inaccurate but that's exact reason we did to put pressure on mexico to help us solve the situation. we think they can do that and they have tremendously strong immigration laws much stronger than ours, they have the ability to do things that we cannot. congress will not help us fix her loss so returning to mexico to help us fix the situation on the border and what you just described as being that they will help us. >> let's turn to you other issues with the time that we have left. let's start with robert mueller. he was a presidents reaction today to his comments. >> i think it's notably conflicted because as you know he wanted to be the fbi director and i said no.
as you know i had a business dispute, not a nice one he was not happy with what i did. >> the mueller report says that is not true. "the bannon that mueller met with the president but did not want to return to be the fbi director and also quotes him as saying on discussion of a conflict with which is about initiation fee in a golf club, they said any idea that was real conflict was ridiculous. >> i am not familiar with that knows not heavily involved in the transition of those coming into the director of office when the just discussions are coming on. and i'm not sure steve bannon is the most reliable source for information about what was happening at the time. >> use as defined under oath. >> that is fine, my statement stands. i'm not sure steve gannon is the best source for information.
look at this way, the mueller report is finished, he closed down the shop this week, you heard what we had to say about this many times, cleared, nope collision, no obstruction, case is closed, democrats want to keep going in issues like this we think are behind us now. >> i want to squeeze two more things in. president trump talks about his close relationship with north korean leader kim jong-un. >> go back and forth and then we fell in love. [laughter] he wrote me beautiful letters and the great letters. we fell in love. >> but there are no reports that after the failed trump kim summit in hanoi that he has some of the key members of his negotiating team for that field summit, some were executed and others present to prison camps. first of all, the intelligence that you have, is that true?
secondly, given all that the president still feel he's in love with chairman kim? >> i don't believe we can from that yet and i'm not good to speak about classified information that we may or may not have on the issue. let's assume for sake of this discussion that reports are true. having a relationship with a person, he heard the presidents language and for those of us than of the president that since manner, that's how he speaks, and having a good working relationship with somebody, anybody, how is about thing? house having the ability to pick up the phone to write a letter as a president reference in touch another world leader regardless of what they're doing and domestically or internationally? we think helps a dialogue going forward. but with large. >> even if is a brutal dictator? - even because numbers of his regime let alone people in this country? >> what the central issue of north korea, why we engaged
north korea because were concerned about them having nuclear weapons. we do not want that to happen, we do not want people to be accused of doing what kim jong-un is being accused of doing, that is like the president is doing this. keep in mind is going slower that we expected, foreign-policy is not about short-term political gain it's about global and u.s. security. that is how we are addressing it. a good working relationship with them but he is never about thing. >> finally, during the president's trip, actually before he went to japan the white house military office sent this e-mail to the navy and i want to read it, uss john mccain needs to be out of the site, once the story became public here was a presidents reaction. >> somebody did it because i thought i did not like him. and they were well-meaning i will say, i did not know anything about it, i would never have done that. >> two questions, i have 30 seconds for you. >> what does the president mean,
it was well-meaning and second, have you as white house chief of staff, how it was that somebody in the military office in the white house decided it would be a good idea to hide the ship that it's an honor of the american war here? >> the president did not know about it, i didn't know about it, literally hundreds of people involved in moving the president overseas and the senator the low-level person could surprise anybody. we think it's much to do about nothing. will 70 the white house be disciplined for as and for fox news for saint so-and-so doesn't want to sit next to so-and-so in a meeting. this is a minor issue that we think the media is making into a large matter. >> let me just say or pursuit, the pentagon had his chief of
staff called the white house to say the pentagon much that he doesn't think it's another idea. but again nothing happened because they asked the question during the preparation for trip and if you understood how any people were involved understand a number of folks could've understand this question 23 to 24 said look, is it a good idea for this to be, that's not an unreasonable question of national television on sunday. [laughter] >> thank
you for your time. always great to talk to. up next will bring in the sunday group to discuss the policy and politics of the president terror threat as fox news sunday reports from the university of dubuque and iowa. 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. ♪ we're oscar mayer deli fresh your very first sandwich,m... your mammoth masterpiece. and...whatever this was. because we make our meat with the good of the deli and no artificial preservatives. make every sandwich count with oscar mayer deli fresh. ♪lean on me, when you're not strong.♪ ♪and i'll be your friend.♪
according to officials the numbers going to be even higher in may and just this week, take a look at this video on wednesday. more than 1000 migrants apprehended, crossing the border near el paso for the 1000, is the largest single group ever encountered in the history of the border patrol. can you understand why the
president is fed up and wants mexico to back down quick. >> what i do understand is that the president policy, this ministrations policy around asylum and the inability to process asylum-seekers in a way that allows for the orderly movement across the border at introverts has exasperated the problem. i think the president brought this on himself. it is appropriate for democrats and republicans to work together on an informed order policy and separate that from a trade policy, ultimately the american people if there's chairs and posts are going to pay the price as consumers in completing trade and immigration i think is entirely the wrong direction to go. >> let me pick up on this with you. and go back to what congressman was talking about. the idea clearly as you make a tough rat, mexico toughens up in
the chairs do not going to throw up. in case of china, the president made demands of them in the pushback, their sovereign country, now or in a trade war with china. you at least had to consider the possibility that this does not and with mexico and nothing later, it ends with tariffs packing forth across the border. >> i think that is right and because of it there's going to be movement. there has to be economic and political impacts that these tariffs go into effect. we will have a problem with the border economies, texas, arizona, mexico, our economies are tied to mexico, mexico get sick we get sick too. there's good to be a problem, auto industry, nearly 30% of what goes into automobile cousin from a mexico plan if you raise products there, auto sales in the u.s. are already shaky and
part because of the aluminum and steel tariffs, if they get shakier than the auto states of places like michigan and ohio and indiana get really sick. then you have the act states, as jason pointed out, he got two senators from iowa to divert even humored by china. that is why things are going the way they are. if you take a look at what the president said in the last 24 hours, they want to try to get something done. their high-level delegation next week, the foreign minister with mike pompeo and lighthizer, i think they're going to say look we want to get this done because they don't want about economic impact and they also understand if their own rule of law, all these people are coming up through their country, there is a price for respect for the rule of law and economically for them to have that many people coming up from guatemala, honduras and nicaragua. >> do you share carl's optimism that mexico faced with all this is going to make a deal and back down on the people?
it is that mexicans just coming across the border, its people from central america by huge majority. coming from the southern border, transiting the country taken about three weeks and then getting to the u.s. border. >> that is a very important point. just to pick up on some things that congresswoman edward said, give different asylum rules for people coming from mexico anyway and they cannot make the appeal. so the different set of incenses. i think the key thing in the pickup on what carl was saying, it will have an impact on the american economy. if you think of this of camping thomases, to crack down on immigration, he would improve her trade deals, while what is happened with nafta, have they got a new deal? >> they've negotiated. >> but they have not passed by congress. indochina obviously you see. >> he promised higher prices, home depot, walmart haverty said the prices are going up, also done in manufacturing for the so-called forgotten men women he
was talking to on the computer. we see a slowdown in sales of papers, textiles, chemicals, he promised for the farmers he would have to give them essentially welfare payments at the same time we see a decline in exports of farm goods. it is crushing the markets. a lot of these countries were buying soybeans from iowa that were buying corn are now going to presume other countries. their establishing new market. >> york during the fact that is a huge price to be paid for illegal immigration. it's overwhelming our systems, schools, medical facilities, it cost billions and billions and billions of dollars to have this flow of illegal immigration come across reporters not to mention the drug trade, trafficking, all of that is getting left out of the equation from the democrats. the usmc is ready to go, congress, nancy pelosi -- >> when you look at who is
coming, it's not an invasion in which the president is saying. >> is a military third, this is not about drugs or what you are just saying, this is about families running away, seeking to come to our country because of the violence, lack of economic opportunity in the country, that's a way to deal with it not to create a campaign issue that polarizes us. >> in your way that asylum-seekers has been handled through much more orderly process, they come through points of entry, their process -- >> in years past we've never had this kind of influx. he didn't have 100,000 people month, this is the highest number since 2007. >> part of the reason is it's been driven because of the clampdown in the united states around the process of people in central america are seeing that in bringing their families thinking, this is my last shot. this flow has been driven by the
bad policies of this administration. >> absolutely not. the same policies that were in place under bush, obama, clinton, are still in place today. it is bedroom by two factors, one instructs, the drug cartel had figured out that they can charge people to bring them up from central america in enhance the casual, second of all, it is broken by the fact that the volume is so much from such america. in 2007, the last year we had this many people come in a supporter, the vast were most americans. we have the authority under all laws and agreements with mexico to turn them around and return them within 24 hours. other than mexicans, we do not have the same authorities, the laws were broken under clinton, bush, obama, it's crushing the system because four and five times as many people come from such america as a used to come. >> great conversation and my guess is will continue in the
future. >> it this will not get settled in the next week. we are going to take a break and will see later. robert mueller says his report does not clear president trump. setting up new calls for impeachment from democrats. the top republican on the house judiciary committee joins us next. "fox news sunday" report from the university of dubuque in iowa. ♪ their rates are good , we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. we're the tenney's and we're usaa members for life. call usaa to start saving on insurance today. eh, not enough fiber... chocolate would be good... snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar. glucerna. everyday progress
will come back to dubuque iowa where will be holding a town hall for the presidential candidate houston children. many democrats interpreted robert mueller's remarks this week about president trump as an impeachment referral to congress. joining us now from georgia, doug collins of top republican on the house judiciary committee were formal proceedings would begin. congressman, both attorney general barr and special counsel, former special counsel
robert mueller, there were contradictions, here they are whether president obama committed obstruction of justi justice. >> their substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angry by his sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents and field by illegal leaks. if we had confidence that the president really did not commit a crime we would have said so. you signed with attorney general and you say that the world mueller report shows there is no obstruction but when you listen to robert mueller that's what he says. >> robert mueller starts the premise interestingly for the americans is trying to take that their approving that they until
we prove you innocent. it's an interesting correlation, now it's out and we seen the report the you stated earlier that it was a call for the democrats and they been wanting to impeach this says november 2016. they've never liked him, these any excuse to use impeachment process but what we found is there's no collision, no destruction. attorney barton rob rob bernstein came under no legal opinion is that there's no charges to be had when they made their final report after getting it from bobbling. what he said this week was sort of frustrating because he wanted to memorialize what yorty written down and to customer question for many of us instead of finding answers we still find more questions. >> all right, then there's the issue of whether or not mueller felt bound by the office of the council of the printed justice but the wealthy ruling that the
same president cannot be indicted for crime here again our bar and mueller. >> he reiterated several times in a meeting that he was not saying that for the old the opinion he would've found obstruction. >> under long-standing department policy, if present cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. that is unconstitutional. >> again, barr says that the department guidelines was not the issue and fall mueller indicates it was essential considering. >> bobbling stated this is nothing new, it is been out for a while, it was written in a report and a lot of people are saying that this was some kind of a new revelation for bobbling this week, no it was written in the report, we talked about it then. - -- he does not contradict,
what barr was saying, the attorney general when he said mueller said that that was not an issue in public since it was an issue. it was at least setting the record straight with regard to what attorney general barr was saying. >> he made it clear that the bar and robert rosenstein did not take that into account when they took the information from bobbling when he said he will not make a decision based on the evidence that they found and when we look at this the frustration is report has been out, mr. miller decided he wanted to into time and go back in the private life, he did so by going up and restating that he wanted to do. i respect him, he needs québec public if that's what he must do is fine. but when we look at this report is also anything that was unanswered over started, how to get the information, why they
only picked to choose a little bit of the dossier but yet not talk about other issues around it. when do they stop inviting occlusion that exist pre-when do the continual with the continuation of looking into the president? this is a continuation of a discussion that happened that should've ended with a report and now should've ended. isobel barr is right in saying how do we get to this point to start with. this is a critical point, you've had two years of turmoil caused by a cabal that started at the fbi that were now hitting a chance to look into. >> all right. i promise i will get to that in a moment. but you raise a lot of questions that robert mueller could answer in the past, in the past year said he would like you to testify before the committee and he made it clear he has no interest in doing so. would you support a vote by democrats on your committee, the house judiciary committee to subpoena robert mueller so they can of their questions and you
cannot scores? >> that's an interesting question because chairman natalie is shown he's willing to spend anything that moves and it's amazing he is not talked about that with robert mueller. i don't believe he really wants to talk to robert mueller because it's better for him to continue a narrative that robert mueller said things were implied things that he is trying to apply the american people impeachment. i stand with the first republicans of said that they would like to talk to robert mueller because we do have questions. i believe it's a twofold process, i believe chairman natalie wants to continue the innuendo and the valve is in place at the same point robert mueller doesn't want to testify before congress because he's going to get real questions about the investigation, where it started, how became and was in the report. how this actually got going, i think it's a two-way street. we'll see what chairman natalie does, will sue he does not. >> let's get to the question you
are raising, attorney general barr has indicated that he is now austin investigation into the origins of the russian probe, what is the single biggest question that you have that you would hope that this investigation would answer? >> is taken into account what we releasing as a pattern developed what i called a craft, we've paid, with comey, with mckay, it seemed to me a picture sooner of going on from the midyear investigation, the clint nemo investigation that moved into the russia investigation, the information that was given to the fisa court, the information of the dossier that mr. cumming later said was unverified but he verified that it was accurate before the formal court. these are the kinds of things that you look at initial concern every american not just republican or democrat or
independent they should consume every american that your group of department of justice and the fbi that cabal that was saying we don't like donald trump, we don't want to see him president, david said in texas is will have an insurance policy, they were going around about way to say will take it into her own hands. this should concern everybody when use of court such as the fisa court which is a secret court which is one in which they have seemingly not used on them evidence that the capri. >> i got less than a minute left and one ask one last question. this goes to the investigation for james connie said, they had information by july of 2016 that the russians were hacking democratic e-mails. we know the george papadopoulos an advisor of some sort to the trump campaign was talking about that. comey says they would been derelict in their duty if they had not pursued that. you agree? >> jim comey is trying to rewrite history.
i believe his 15 minutes are up, he knows that he's going over work talk about the things that he did or should've done. i think the issue is he does not want the like of the investigation signed on with their oxygen. they are remaking themselves now. they go back and look at this, when you look at the information that they had which is essentially disproven in many times even to his own word for unverified. how do you take that with a straight face of the court? >> mr. comey, times up. it's time to find a how the starting and go from there. >> thank you so much. thank you for joining us today. these come back sir. >> we will chris, thank you. [crowd boos] up next, nancy pelosi faces new pressure from the res left wingf her party to start impeachment proceedings against president. how long can she hold out against those demands? watch what happens within 2020 candidate for president again in california democratic party convention pushes back on
socialism. all of that when the sunday group returns here in dubuque, .iowa. ♪ slather it all over, don't hold back. well, the squirrels followed me all the way out to california! and there's a very strange badger staring at me... no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. uh-huh, where's the camel? "mr. big shot's" got his own trailer. ♪ wheeeeeee! believe it! geico could save you 15% or more on car insurance. it opened up so dnmany doors. it's a lifelong adventure finding all of these new connections all the time. new features. greater details. richer stories. get your dna kit today at ancestry.com. play it cool and escape heartburn fast
the opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. >> they had said that they all wanted to be unspoken and many of them are resetting their views as well of those of their constituents. >> robert mueller appearing to hand the trip investigation and the possibility of impeachment over congress by house beginning nancy losey say not so's past.
>> she got her number slightly wrong, will put them on the screen, section 50 house democrats out of 235, still 20% who call for starting a formal impeachment inquiry. but distinct minority is pelosi right howling to think she can hold off among her democratic caucus. >> i don't know how long she can hold off but i think she's right to be concerned about this. >> the interesting thing to me, sensible report came out, two things have happened. the president's approval ratings statewide and the percentage of people who post impeachment hazards in. nancy pelosi is smart and tough and she knows first law talking impeachment is obscuring everything that the democrats are trained to do in the house. nobody knows what the bills are that the passing preach she also understands that given the fact that she is a speaker the 31
democrats flipped republican seats in districts of donald trump, those people at risk, she loses two out of three of those democrats and republican seats she is no longer speaker inches is hard left that's giving her such problems. she also understands with regard to the point of 2020, the election is about the independent swing voters who today are strongly opposed to impeachment. >> robert mueller, former special counsel made it clear in his press conferences week he does not want to testify before congress, take a look. >> we chose his words carefully and the word speaks for itself. the report is my testimony. i would not provide information beyond that which is arty public in any appearance before congress. >> congresswoman edwards you have a column in the washington post as we can where you say that the house judiciary
committee needs to get robert mueller to testify one way or the other. why? >> i think they do. one because i think it's important for him to put his report into some context to the market people. let's face it most people have not read 440 pages and i know all of us have but most people have not and indeed to be able to tell story to the market public, the other thing, i think attorney bars interviews over the last couple days have raised more questions because the attorney general challenge the legal analysis of all mueller and i think it becomes imperative for him to testify about his legal analysis given it's been challenged and overruled by the attorney -- >> district quickly, you also want to made-for-tv spectacles. >> no, i'm not described as a spectacle, but i do think that television is powerful and live television is and i think the
focus is is a market public and the whole story is really important from the russian interference in the election to the president tend obstructive act. i don't think that you get that by spreading over committees by multiple subpoenas in court proceedings. >> let's turn to another interesting subject. something happened that the california state democratic party convention in san francisco yesterday, former governor of colorado one of the 2000 democrats running for president was addressing the convention when he said this. >> if we want to be something in achieve big goals socialism is not the answer. i was reelected. >> he went on from there, a
governor of colorado when he was there who govern and quite successfully was republicans of who controlled the state legislator for the first part of the term gets booed when he said socialism is not the answer. >> this is the public democrats have, they been bernie sanders who is not a registered democrat and is more is in the socialist camp and believe me republicans are going to go out and remind people what socialism is and what this policy and platform is of the democrats. i think he made it cockily to move in the audience but that's a radical group of socialist in part that was there in california. >> u.s. 20 to be responding to that. we keep hearing, democrats what they care about most is beating donald trump, they care about that for the any logical purity and hears him saying something is up. he's booed.
>> percival, what is that convention's emphasis was available group of people. i would say it's far left. but the big point to me, republicans want to paint democrats as socialist and what he went on to say, we cannot let republicans that would put us at a disadvantage of the state of wisconsin and michigan are working people who would say what is socialism about but the reality is, and this is what he also said, we need to achieve democrats need to achieve progressive goals because the american people not only do they like the idea of dealing with income inequalities specifically high level of student debt, problems with the healthcare system and of course things like medicare and social security, that is not socialism. those are means of moderating the access of capitalism and democrats in this era of inequality quantity of those issues. so he's right but it's when you
start using the term socialism i think you are hazing to the character sure the republicans are painting. >> he may be right on every point he made but that the clip and it's going to play out and democrats make it easier for the republicans to make the case when they boo him when he says socialism is the answer. >> yesterday. they also make it easier for republicans with iphone people like representative omar and senator warren and when they embrace all these naughty ideas. there's a wealth of a munition to provide in the key decision for the democrats is one that one alluded to. are they going to pick 70 was a more traditional democrat and says answer is to strengthen and protect the affordable care act or somebody who says we want single-payer, we want the government to be in charge of
all your healthcare decisions pray this will be a gold decision for the democrats. if they pick some but in the latter camp it's a big easy target. >> -- >> we cannot choose anymore traditional candidate the three public and that. >> i think the booing on socialism was because voters and democrats do not want to be painted that way and don't want to fall into to the character >> thank you we will see you next sunday back in washington. good advice for the class of 2019 from our power players of the week. ♪ let's be honest. it's kind of unfair that safe drivers have to pay as much for insurance... as not safe drivers! ah! that was a stunt driver. that's why esurance has this drivesense® app. the safer you drive, the more you save. don't worry, i'm not using my phone and talking to a camera while driving... i'm being towed.
delegates, how do you vote? (wild cheering) (music plays) sample: yes... y-y-y-yes... yes... woman: that is freaky. 't easy. 12 hours? 20 dogs? where's your belly rubs? after a day of chasing dogs you shouldn't have to chase down payments. (vo) send invoices and accept payments to get paid twice as fast. (danny) it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you.
chris: it's become an annual tradition here to sample the wise words college aggravated assaults are hearing at their commencements. this year the speakers include a pair of media moguls and a chart-topping singer. and they're all our power players of the week. ♪ ♪ >> when i was 28, it wasn't working out for me on the news because i was too emotional. i'd go to cover stories and cry because people lost their houses or lost their children. i was told that i was going to be taken off the evening news and put on a talk show. that was a demotion for me at
the time that, actually, worked out for me. >> people have a tendency to assume the worst about those on the other side of the aisle, and when it comes to those on your side, they tend to see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. >> that is what your time at this great academy has been all about, preparing you to do whatever it takes to learn, to adapt and to win, win, win. gonna win so much, you're going to get so tired of winning but not really. [laughter] [cheers and applause] >> sometimes i think that when we deny what is worst about ourselves, we also deny what is best. we repress our ignorance and, thus, we deny our capacity to learn. we repress our faults and, thus, we deny our capacity to change. >> at some point you will realize there is no finish line to cross, there is no moment
when you're just supposed to be happy. while you wait for those moments, while you wait for the perfect job, the mcat score, the engagement ring, your life is happening. and isn't it enough? happiness is your own responsibility so attack it. >> wow. and people got afraid when i got my driver's license. [laughter] now i'm a doctor. [laughter] chris: and our best wishes as well to students and parents of the class of 2019. now this program note. join me back here at the university of dubuque in iowa tonight at 7 p.m. eastern on fox news channel for a live town hall with senator kirsten gillibrand. but that's it for now. have a great week, and we'll see you next "fox news sunday. ♪ ♪
paul: welcome to journal editorial report, i'm paul gigot. special counsel robert mueller wednesdayy made his first public remarks since he took over the russia probe two years ago saying that there was insufficient evidence to prove a broader conspiracy between the trump campaign and moscow during the 2016 election, but noting thatle his office did not concle that president trump was innocent of obstruction of justice. the special counsel, however, claiming that charging the president with a crime was not an option. >> if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. we did not, however, make a dete