tv Bulls Bears FOX Business December 16, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm EST
those? melissa: you mean it isn't on its way? connell: what about this one? melissa: it is very nice, but i want the diamonds. it is wonderful to have you back even though you didn't buy me the tree of my dreams. connell: i think she means it. thanks for joining us. melissa: bulls & bears right now. david: tonight remember "new york times" columnist paul krugman's prediction of gloom and doom for the markets on the very day the president was elected? he was wrong, the dow jones gaining 10,000 points since election night. many think there is more room to run. >> very big day in the stock market today as you know. that will be 133 days where we set a new record. and that's fantastic. our whole country is thriving. it is thriving like never before. the jobs numbers are incredible, best in 51 years, and i think soon we're going to be able to say historic. david: david: thanks for joining us.
i'm david asman. joining me is jonathan hoenig, zachary karabell, gary kaltbaum and liz peek. we're digesting donald trump's victory on election night, 2016, paul krugman famously said quote if the question is when markets will recover? a first pass answer is never, end quote. three years later, markets keep hitting all-time highs, with the dow today notching its 102nd record close since president trump was inaugurated. one bank of america strategist is even predicting a front-loaded 2020 where the s&p 500 could surge more than 5% by march. so gang, are you surprised as krugman that the markets have been doing so well? gary? >> well, look, he's only off by 10,000 dow points. [laughter] >> come on. david: yeah, give him a break. [laughter] >> the problem there was he put politics in front of sanity. you know, his hate in front of
everything else. to make that comment, to try to scare the you know what out of people is just ridiculous. and unfortunately, he just believes a little bit more in the state than the people. and i have always believed that lower taxes, less regulations, and get the heck out of the way usually does the trick in the economy, as well as markets, and we're getting some of that of course with easy money, but the amazing thing is, he keeps coming back and saying that everything that's being done is wrong, and i'm no big fan on the tariffs and the way they have gone about this trade thing, but maybe to take a step back, because my parents once told me listen when you are wrong a few times you take a step back and try to fix it. >> he doesn't want to take a step back. the democrats are intent on convincing people that this is not a good economy, we are looking at a recession. paul krugman also suggested on the election eve that we were
looking at a global recession. he has been wrong on every front. right now his big criticism is the usmca, the updated nafta treaty. david: we will talk about that in a second. >> exactly. he's also wrong on that front. there's nothing the president has done that paul krugman likes and that's not going to change. >> look, on november of 2012, president trump tweeted that if obama gets elected over romney, the markets and the dollar would plunge. the s&p was up 50% over the next four years. the idea that the president is somehow, you know, the market maker here is the problem of these conversations. while i get the fact that it is fun to bash paul krugman for being chronically wrong -- >> it is. >> a lot of people are chronically wrong about calling the markets. the trump tweet from 2012 that obama was equally wrong. >> he's not an economist who won a nobel prize. >> economists who won nobel prizes are never got market mavens. a nobel prize economist 1929
lost his shirt saying stocks were at all-time high. >> krugman didn't win his nobel for economics >> that's true. >> the market was up under obama. it's also been up under trump. >> yeah. >> it's been up quite a bit. paul krugman is quite simply a hater. to liz's point, he's going to bash anything and everything trump does. he's not going to evaluate the policies. there have been some objective reasons for concern, like the trade war, like the inverted yield curve, those are reasons real economists would be concerned. but paul krugman is a hater. that's why he's been completely wrong when it comes to the markets. david: i want to push back on the notion that presidents don't have anything to do with an economy. i mean, the fact is that president obama, when he was president, he was facing a terrible recession. instead of making it easier and cheaper for businesses to do what they do, he increased taxes and increased regulations enormously, that slowed the recovery until trump came in and did exactly the opposite, and it was trump's policies of deregulation and lower taxes
that got the economy chugging. >> and let me just say something, and i've been saying this all along, the tax cut's good. the deregulation, huge, unfortunately, with all due respect to president obama, he loved regulations. he got the championship belt on regulations. he went too far. every business i spoke with would say it's too much, too burdensome, answer to the calling too much, spending too much money, if you back that away, look out, they backed that away in a big way and you see what's happening. >> fossil fuels was a great example. that's an industry that president obama targeted specifically, wanted to essentially put them out of business. david, to your point deregulation under president trump has helped that business and helped america thanks to lower energy prices. david: liz mentioned china. we have the china trade deal which is really driving the markets higher, as the u.s. trade rep, robert lighthizer said that phase one is quote totally done, but even here paul
krugman is sounding off, series of tweets, saying trump has made us weak. he has lost the trade war and american consumers have paid the price for tariffs. so will krugman be as wrong about this, liz, as he was about the market? >> well, i think so. we have already gotten one phase of the china agreement done. as i was going to say, also, he's obviously concluded the usmca, which paul krugman also took potshots at because he said nothing changed. in fact, i could go through a litany of things that have actually changed in that. i think the point about the confrontation with china, everyone i talk to in the business community, even people who hate tariffs, understand that it was time to stand up to china, and they may not like the approach that was taken, but in fact, it is paying dividends. companies are moving their businesses out of china and diversifying their supply chains which they absolutely had to do. i think it was a win. i think paul krugman is wrong. >> i'm neither defending obama's
handling of the economy nor excoriating trump's. i'm simply saying there's been economic trend in place the past six seven years have accelerated of late. usmca is in many ways is nafta with a little tweaking on the margins. the china stuff it is because we have a robust economy that we can afford 30 billion dollars in bailouts to farmers and what is essentially 20 to 30 billion dollars annual run rate tax on american consumers with the tariffs that are still in place. that's not a positive thing, even though it is not a huge thing in an 18 trillion dollars economy, growing 2% a year >> which i was completely against paying off the farmers with taxpayer dollars. to this day, i'm not thrilled, but i have to add something else, and i've been talking about this a lot, millions of people are coming off of welfare and getting jobs. david: right. >> what a difference of -- have you ever met somebody who hasn't had a job in two years that has to collect a check from the government and hand to mouth,
whether they are going to have a dinner tonight? now they are in jobs. have you ever seen their faces? david: that's a great point. >> the fact we have 3.5% unemployment. i remember when 5% was a miracle. 3.5 is amazing. let's hope it continues. >> there's been tremendous job creation. when it comes to the deal with china, though, david, are we going to see it? has it been published -- it hasn't been published. david: we've had a lot of teases, you are right. >> i will believe it when i see it and when it is signed on the dotted line, but there's no question that american consumers and businesses have paid billions. we will wait to see. david: we will see as the president says so often. trouble for the usmca as the house prepares to vote on the deal. mexico's top trade negotiator and a republican senator say they are against it. does that mean nafta is here to stay? we will ask usga trade advisor, who is joining us next.
wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (thud) (crash) (grunting) (whistle) play it cool and escape heartburn fast with tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tu-tu-tum tums (shaq) cooli(chime)ationmagenta? i hate cartridges! not magenta! not magenta. i'm not going back to the store. magenta! cartridges are so... (buzzer) (vo) the epson ecotank. no more cartridges. it comes with an incredible amount of ink that can save you a lot of frustration.
♪ the epson ecotank. just fill and chill. available at... (vo) thewith every attempt, strto free itself,pider's web. it only becomes more entangled. unaware that an exhilarating escape is just within reach. defy the laws of human nature. at the season of audi sales event. (brakes screeching) okay. so, today you're going to leave your phone with a guy named flip. (ding) but it's more than your phone, it's your business, your customer data, your sales figures. and who can forget, those happy hour selfies? not flip. (honking, gasping) this isn't working.
david: the house is set to vote on usmca this thursday as mexico throws a potential wrench into the deal. the country's top trade negotiator saying there's one part of the deal he will never sign off on. old ward lawrence has the very latest -- edward lawrence has the very latest live from d.c. edward? >> the first of the ratification process in the u.s. goes forward in the house ways and means committee tomorrow. they scheduled a meeting that will look at usmca, setting up a full house vote on thursday. white house economic advisors taking a victory lap on this one, touting the agreement and some first ever parts that will set the standard for future agreements. >> -- property, protecting the family, protecting creativity, protecting the technological advances that make america the best economy in the world. that's going to attract huge, volumes. i'm talking about hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars new investment into the united states. >> and over the weekend, some in
the mexican senate voiced concerns that the new usmca allows the u.s. to put inspectors inside mexican plants to verify labor provisions. mexico's top labor negotiator flew here to the united states today to meet with u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer about this. the u.s. assured mexico that the five attaches are for assistance, not inspection. in a letter, the u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer says the experts will offer technical expertise to help mexican businesses, the role of verification for compliance, according to the letter, stays with a three panel team made up of a neutral party as well as representatives from mexico and the u.s. the bottom line is there was a lot of concern, the mexican ambassador, as well as their top negotiator, now say this was settled, that mexico has already ratified the new usmca. canada hasn't started their process yet, and our senate is expected to take this up after the impeachment trial next year. david: edward, thank you very much. here now is usda trade advisor,
who was talking from the peanut gallery as we were discussing -- [laughter] dfd you mentioned mexico has already signed -- david: you mentioned mexico has already signed off on it so that's a done deal. a republican, pat toomey is voting against the usmca saying it will diminish trade because of all the add-ones. let me play a sound bite from him yesterday and get your response. >> unfortunately, usmca is an exercise to all kinds of new provisions to diminish trade, and that's why i hope republicans will reconsider this. >> first of all, the details haven't been released. with all due respect to senator toomey, he hasn't seen the details either. from what i told you a few minutes ago, i just got off two one-hour conference calls with one on china and one on usmca. a lot of which haven't been made public. i don't know where he's getting -- david: what can you make public?
>> i can tell you it is going to produce probably 2 trillion dollars in business between china and usmca. usmca is going to open up markets to -- for example, take dairy. u.s. dairy has never been able to get their milk. imagine living in vermont can't get your milk over the boarder? they could not because of restrictive duties and tariffs and borders. >> into canada. >> into canada. >> right. >> look, what they are talking about about these monitors and lighthizer wrote a letter to the ambassador, wrote a letter today, and mexico supposedly signed off on it is it's not the same sort of country as ours, so they have different labor practices. we know that. they have a much diminished labor rate. we know that. and i think u.s. labor is concerned about that, and some in the house and i think schumer is concerned about it. these safeguards are being put in there to address that. is it perfect? nothing's perfect, but it is a big step. >> tom, it's jonathan hoenig. thank you for being with us. a lot of the changes in the
usmca have a lot to do with the auto manufacturing industry, in particular, like now 75% of an auto's comment has to be made here in order to avoid tariffs. >> right. >> why is it so important for the administration to focus on auto manufacturing? that's an industry whose employment has been falling for decades, primarily thanks to robotics what's so important about the automobiles? >> u.s. automobile manufacturers have -- there's been an outmigration of u.s. automobiles being made and parts being made in other countries. this is i think a very good attempt by the administration look you want to escape tariffs, bringing products in, the chassis, the motor, all the vital components i think you are right it is 75%, have to be made in the united states and verifiable. >> senator toomey i presume is concerned about things like the monitoring of labor in mexico and all these kinds of restrictions and impediments to just opening the doors and letting stuff come in; right? >> i think it is a viable
concern. >> but in fact, we already had pretty high -- it wasn't 75% -- >> it was 62. >> exactly. it is like those things were already in place. i mean, i would think that the dairy access outweighs that. i would think that also you've got, you know, reduced tariffs and things like that, it seems to me it is very positive. i'm surprised that he would single out that one issue. >> these are the big labor states. maybe he's hearing from some of his constituents or labor unions. we don't know the whole story >> if we go back to nafta, which is the fallback position, isn't that worse? >> we lost a lot of business due to nafta. this will open up a lot for us. in the long range, this is going to be very good for north america. >> you did point to something which is the way the agreement is structured at least from what we can tell is there will be tariffs and penalties if 70 plus percent not made in the u.s., if the cost differential of not making it in the u.s. is less than that plus the tariffs it is still going to be out -- >> the government is going to be -- there will be monitors in
place to check this stuff. you can't say we'll do 71 and we'll eat the tariffs. they're not going to let that happen. david: i need to ask you about china because farmers really took a bath with regard to the tariffs. they had 24 billion dollars worth of agricultural goods they were selling to china in 2017. that went down to 9 billion dollars. they lost more than half of their business from china. can we get it back up with this deal? >> china's committing to buy 24 million of the 2017 number is going to be the baseline. they're committing to 16 and 16 on top of that, which will make it 40 and 40 in 2020. david: that would be more than ever. i mean -- >> 2020? yeah, i think so, 2020, 2021 and maybe another 5 on top of it. again, like you and i chatted real briefly, there's so many different things in play in china. you know, they are trying to give us, you know, take a hard-line on sanitary -- our
sanitary system is so far than anything they have ever dreamed of. their butchers butcher in the street. david: right. >> they have had swine flu and sars and everything else you can think of. they are trying to hold a tough line, but on the other hand, they need our ag products. david: tom, i appreciate you taking time. >> thanks for having me. david: thanks a lot for being here. boeing out with a major announcement about its max 737 jet. the details and what it will mean for boeing, its employees, the major airlines and you the traveler, coming next. most people think of verizon as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us.
(woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. but you don't feel good. with polycythemia vera, pv, symptoms can change so slowly over time you might not notice. but new or changing symptoms can mean your pv is changing. let's change the way we see pv. you track and discuss blood counts with your doctor. but it's just as vital to discuss changing symptoms as well. take notice and take action. discuss counts and symptoms with your doctor. visit takeactionpv.com
what are you doing back there, junior? since we're obviously lost, discuss counts and symptoms with your doctor. i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of.
he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing. david: a fox business alert, boeing just making a major announcement that it will temporarily halt production of its 737 max jetliner in january. shares of boeing closing down
more than 4% in anticipation of the announcement. the company just releasing this statement moments ago, that reads in part, quote, safely returning the 737 max to service is our top priority. we know that the process of approving the 737 max return to service and of determining appropriate training requirements must be extraordinarily thorough and robust in order to ensure that our regulators, customers, and the flying public have confidence in the 737 max updates, but, you know, there's an overall question here, zack, should the 737 be grounded permanently? >> look, i'm not an aviation expert. i don't work for the faa. although apparently the faa wasn't entirely working for the faa when it came to certifying the boeing 737 max. the fact is this plane will get certified and will get back into service. there were clearly issues. it turns out there were all sorts of other issues as there
are in any large complicated industrial process, and this sheds light on that. they are going to have a hard time restoring safety concerns to consumers. it wouldn't surprise me if they perhaps appropriately end up renaming the next generation of this, calling tip -- calling it the 737 max 2 or something, to make some differentiation. this is going to happen in 2020. i'm sure we will look at this as one of the signature moments of industrial regulatory failure. >> boeing has been a stalwart forever. and i must tell you, the one thing they are going to work on big-time going forward is their credibility. just a couple of months ago, they came out and said oh, this thing is going to be flying december and january. they were overselling it and guess what? now they're underdelivering it. and i must tell you, in a bad market that stock would be down 40 today. let's hope they get it right because if they don't, there's
going to be job losses, write-offs you name it and nothing but problems going forward. they have a big competition with a little company named airbus. >> gary, it seems to me as though regulators having been sort of lax in overseeing this process, or at least that's the story that's come out over the last few months are now being sort of overzealous, going to make it extremely hard for bowing to put the airplane back in the air. i know you have been following this very closely. do you think there's some of that going on here? >> well, i think also, the regulators are a little bit on the culpable side. >> that's what i mean. >> there's been talk throughout the years that boeing and the regulators who are supposed to regulate them, are a little bit too close. kind of what happened in 07 with the financial companies and the regulators that basically did nothing. i gather the regulators are a little bit upset themselves right now and are going to be looking in the mirror on how they handle this going forward also. >> i'm going to give this as a softball to jonathan for a second. isn't this also a case -- you can't both want deregulation and
then get up in arms when the regulators fail. the fact is they outsourced a lot of the regulatory self-certification to boeing itself as happens in many complicated industries. jonathan, should the market work this out? everybody else is saying let's keep up the regulating. >> it's not boeing that is grounding this jet. it is regulators. they are the ones who are not going to certify, and i think to the panel's point, yeah, regulators want to act tough right now. this has become a political issue, an emotional issue. the government is the one who grounded the planes. i think the decision should be customers. it should be boeing itself. if people want to take the risk, the fact is that air travel is safe, but zach, to your point, what we're going to see something not dissimilar to value jet? the company was renamed i think airtran after its 1996 crash. you will see the same thing with 737. it will fly but they will call it something else. david: there's also the arrogance of boeing, because even after the planes were grounded, they were creating 40
new planes every single month in their plant in seattle. they have a backlog of 400 new planes. they just kept going on thinking that eventually they would get through all this. >> well, look, they've had orders, and they just got a bunch of max orders a couple of weeks ago from somebody. so their job is to fill those orders. i get it. but again, as i said earlier, the way they've handled it, not very good, and i suspect they are going to hire some outside people to talk to them about messaging and how they handle -- i guess there's companies out there that help you, and there's a crisis out there. i think they are going to need that going forward because i'm a big believer, they mishandled this. they could have done a lot better job. david: looking at the numbers we just put up on the screen, 80% of people say they wouldn't fly on one of these planes. >> why would they fly? every day the government has been telling them this is unsafe. be scared. but obviously the airlines themselves, david, as you pointed, boeing had orders for
these planes even after these terrible tragedies. obviously the airlines themselves weren't. david: the house democrats releasing a massive report detailing their case for impeaching president trump as senator schumer is gearing up for a trial. a congressman of the house judiciary committee responding to ate you will. he's next. -- responding to it all. he's next. >> the president has offered nothing exculpatory to disprove the evidence that's been put forward. instead he's orchestrated a cover-up. each day our planet awakens with signs of opportunity. but with opportunity comes risk. and to manage this risk, the world turns to cme group. we help farmers lock in future prices, banks manage interest rate changes and airlines hedge fuel costs. all so they can manage their risks and move forward.
it's simply a matter of following the signs. they all lead here. cme group - how the world advances. cme group - ♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ quitting smoking is freaking hard.st, like quitting every monday hard.
quitting feels so big. so, try making it smaller. and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small... ...can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette ♪ ♪ ♪ everything your trip needs for everyone you love. expedia. male anchor: ...an update on the cat who captured our hearts. female anchor: how often should you clean your fridge? stay tuned to find out. male anchor: ...this year's most buzzed about premieres... female anchor: makes it red-carpet official with... male anchor: 50 5-star products you can buy online right now male anchor: tributes pouring in from fans... female anchor: her hot new album is just one of the things we talked about.
male anchor: beats the odds at the box office to become a rare non-franchise hit. [anchor voices ramp up together becoming indiscernible] you can provide the help and hope that survivors need. by consolidating your credit card debt into one monthly payment. and get your interest rate right so you can save big. get a no-fee personal loan up to $100k.
>> conducting an impeachment trial in the senate is enormously weighty and solemn responsibility. i told leader mcconnell i was ready to discuss trial rules. instead of talking to me, he spoke publicly about what a trial may look like and said he was taking his cues from the white house. david: senate minority leader chuck schumer there. this as the democrats on the committee released a big report calling for the president's impeachment and also released 169 page assessment of the case accusing the president of bribery even though that charge
is not one of the two articles of impeachment. joining us now is a congressman, a member of the house judiciary committee. so congressman, i'm just wondering, you know, you have discredited charges of bribery that were never proven and they didn't actually use them as charges in the impeachment, but now they're mentioning them again. they may come out in a senate trial. it's kind of like a prosecutor using something that wasn't proven by a grand jury bringing them up in a trial anyway. >> you are exactly right. they can make out the case for bribery. then why not have the bribery included the articles of impeachment. you have to look at the revolution of all this. remember, it started off as quid pro quo, and then that didn't poll right -- or that didn't poll well for the democrats in focus groups, so they changed it to bribery, but then they couldn't make the case for bribery, because they don't have the facts to make out the claim, then it achanged to abuse of
power -- then it changed to abuse of power. ever evolving democrats on impeachment. >> thank you for being here and also thank you for your navy service. i know there's a lot to blame here with the democrats here, are you at all frustrated that the president kind of gave them some ammo when it comes to this 600 plus page report? >> look, the report was just dropped on us today. it's just an attempt for the democrats to bolster their claims because they're really failing to make out the case for impeachment. but if you go back and look at president trump's conduct, nothing in his conduct gives me pause. i read the actual call, the transcript of the call that this is all based on. there's no quid pro in the call. no connection between investigation and the 2020 election. so no, and at the end of the day, we have to remember, that there was no investigation that took place, and javelin missiles, the aid in former javelin missiles was released to the ukrainians, so they got the
military aid. >> congressman, i cannot seriously understand or imagine what is in that 800 pages of documents you just received, based on the hearings that we saw, there were not a whole lot of facts in evidence. there was not a whole lot of information, but putting that aside, if you were calling the shots in the senate, simply on a political basis, at this point, would you want to see an extended trial with, you know, republicans bringing in witnesses that they claim should have had a chance to speak out? or do you think the public really wants us to move on? >> you know, i'm of two minds. i used to be a district judge, so the district judge in me says dismiss this on day one because the facts don't support the elements of the crimes that are charged or the articles of impeachment, so again, the judge in me says just dismiss it for lack of cause, but the political animal in me says drag this out as long as possible because we have to remember, the candidates that are running against trump in the senate are going to have to sit at their desk, just like
they are jurors, have to listen to evidence, no cell phones, six hours a day, six days a week, it will kill them on the campaign trail and it will expose how weak and flimsy this entire impeachment was and it is going to show the democrats for what it is. it's an absolute fraud and a sham. there's no evidence to go forward with the impeachment. i'm of two minds. we will probably get something in the middle of those two extremes. >> congressman, look, i know everybody in washington has a habit of saying the american people dot dot dot, and you are no exception to that, and the democrats are no exception to that. but it is true, that under most polls, about half of the country is supportive of an impeachment of the president, including fox news own polls, some are favorable of an impeach but not removal. it would be to hear from you and your colleagues some acknowledgment of the fact that there is in fact a divided opinion about this. that there are many people who feel these issues have substance and should be heard. and there are many people yourself included that feel these are meritless and
groundless. it would be good to hear you in acknowledgment that this is not a one-sided issue or a country that's united on this one side of the ledger. >> we're a divided country right now. the only thing that unites us right that we can agree that the peloton commercial is horrible. we can unite around that. let's go back to the polling briefly. i'm not really concerned about the national polls. i want to see what the polls look like in the swing states. my home state of pennsylvania, where you've got to look at wisconsin, michigan, and in those states trump is actually gaining ground and he's double digits ahead of some of his opponents in pennsylvania, and we also have to look at what we call the battleground districts, districts where congressmen and women hold from the democrat party, but where trump won that district, and in those districts, we're gaining a lot of steam. and if you doubt me, just look at congressman andrew. he represented a district that trump won. he was a democrat. he's switching parties. that's indicative of where the pressure is on the democrats and
where the real poll numbers are in those critical states and critical districts. >> congressman, this is gary kaltbaum. this leads me to my question from what you just said, do you hear any inklings from any others on the democratic side of those 31 districts that are waivering right now, do you see a decent number that may change the playing field, or just a few people? >> you know, it's weird because about a week ago, i was hearing a lot of whispers that they were pushing for a censure vote. that's off the table at this point. i think that nancy pelosi has been really pushing them to vote in lock step. i feel bad for those 31 democrats because they are in a situation where they either have to vote with the people in their district, the people that sent them to d.c. in the first place, or they have to vote with aoc, tlaib and omar. do they vote for their moderate districts? or do they vote with the social justice warrior democrats that have taken over the democrat party? they are in a tough spot. david: congressman great to see you. thanks for coming in. please come back.
>> thanks for having me on. david: lori laughlin and her husband continue to proclaim their innocence in the college admissions scandal, and now they say the government is actively working against them. judge andrew napolitano joining us next for the very latest. there's a lot of talk about value out there. but at fidelity, value is more than just talk. we offer commission-free online u.s. stock and etf trades. and, when you open a new fidelity brokerage account, your cash is automatically invested at a great rate -- that's 21 times more than schwab's. plus, fidelity's leading price improvement on trades saved investors hundreds of millions of dollars last year. that's why fidelity continues to lead the industry in value while our competition continues to talk. ♪ talk fidelity. as a principal i can tell you this. when one student gets left behind, we all get left behind. this is a problem that affects each and every one of us. together with ibm, we created a whole new kind of school called p-tech.
within six years, students can graduate with a high school diploma, a college degree, and a pathway to a competitive job. you know what's going up today? my poster. today, there are more than a hundred thousand p-tech students around the world. it's a game changer. p-tech students around the♪ orld. oh, ho! oh, ho, ho, ho! you... you got me. uh, what do you want? i've got uh, ai robots, i've got vr goggles. i want your sled, please. no. [ chuckles ] timmy. it'd be a shame if this went viral. for those who never compromise. the mercedes-benz winter event. whoa. he was pretty good this year.
from ancestry. (thud) (crash) (grunting) (whistle) play it cool and escape heartburn fast with tums chewy bites cooling sensation. ♪ tum tu-tu-tum tums david: actress lori loughlin and her husband are still fighting the charges against them in the college admission scandal, accusing the government of concealing evidence they say could help their case by showing they didn't know they were paying a bribe to get their daughter into usc. fox news senior judicial analyst andrew napolitano joining us now. do they have a case, or is this just a hail mary pass? >> usually, david, this kind of a motion, the government didn't give me brady material named after brady versus maryland. that's material that the government has that is harmful to the government's case or helpful to the defendant's case. usually the defendant finds out
about this material after conviction, and then the judge in the trial has to decide if this were known at the time, would the jury have come up with a different verdict? david: how did they find out about it? >> we don't know how they found out about it. this is not only before conviction, but it is before trial. the issue is, does the government have something harmful to the government's case or helpful to loughlin and giannulli which they were obliged to give? what might it be? i suggest to you it is a tape recordi ining singer, the ringlr of this, saying they didn't know what they were doing, they thought it was a legitimate gift. if something like that is in there, the government has an absolute obligation to surrender it. david: wow. >> we all know as we saw last week when michael horowitz testified, the government doesn't dot every i or cross every t, in fact sometimes it does the outright unlawful. that's the allegation here. >> judge, this is gary kaltbaum.
hope you are doing well. >> thank you, gary. >> every time i hear lori loughlin's name, i think of felicity huffman. it seems like either she's the smartest person in the world or she had the greatest advice, because she's paid her dues. but lori loughlin looks like she's in the crosshairs here. did she ever have a chance to plead on this? or do you think because of the size of it, they were willing to go to the end going after her? >> that's a great question. i don't know this to be so, but i believe they were all offered a similar deal early on. now, sophisticated experience criminal defense lawyers will tell you, when you have a large gaggle of defendants, the first people that surrender get the best deal. they were all offered decent deals. when she persisted in asserting her innocence, she was punished for that. in my opinion, that's a violation of the constitution, to punish somebody for asserting their innocence. what was the punishment? a re-indictment for crimes
having nothing to do with this, for conspiracy, for running a racketeering organization with her husband, stated differently, it expanded the exposure to jail time and expanded the money the feds can seize from them if they are convicted. >> judge, isn't this fairly standard operating procedure for prosecutors in today's day and age which is to threaten the kitchen sink of, you know, you're going to go to jail for 100 years, each of 100 indictments unless you plead out and take 18 months? is there any move afoot, you know, i know the koch brothers and some organizations on the left have joined forces to try to work on criminal justice reform to make it, you know, so the prosecutors do not have an incentive to do these things. this is par for the course. >> you are exactly right. the prosecutors always overcharge in every case in which they can do it. and it shows the awesome power that they have to beat people into submission to getting them to plead guilty. they say no what will happen to
them if they assert their right to innocence. you are right to assert your innocence. it is guaranteed in the constitution. >> but gary is quite right. in this instance, it seems like the simpler path would have gotten her out through this process and out the door, wouldn't be talking about her anymore. >> right. >> it seems to me what they are doing now accusing the government of not playing fair, doesn't that prolong it and make it even worse? >> well, if they believe the government has failed to surrender brady material and don't seek it, they would forever give up the right to seek it after conviction. they have to make it now. david: judge andrew napolitano, always a pleasure. >> i was waiting for my friend from chicago saying why is this a criminal case? david: jonathan, you need to pick up the phone and call the judge because we need to move on. great to see you. let's see what's coming up on evening edit tonight with liz macdonald. liz: the update, president trump getting things done as impeachment is under water with voters. more voters now opposing it based on the average of seven polls. even with more new facts about
how strong the economy and the bull market is under the president on the eve of impeachment. and we've got more critics slamming adam schiff claiming he was unaware of the fbi abuses of the fisa court. it was schiff last year who led the attack on devin nunes for spelling out the same problems in his memo. we've got more on former fbi director james comey dodging and weaving with fox news chris wallace in his non-apology. the stories tonight, david. david: we will be watching, liz. thank you very much. while the far left fights for 15 as they say, one single mom telling our own stuart varney how the minimum wage hike cost her a job. nationwide helps you invest for your future, brad. so you can plan for retirement and save for college. oh, that explains this. the nationwide dome. state-of-the-art venue. 80-yard screen. fantasy sports lounge. climate controlled seats. sushi bar. club level pool. really? lastly... retractable roof. whoa. touchdown!
bureau of economic research finding small businesses in areas with a high minimum wage actually suffer from higher loan defaults and lower employment. one example seattle is set to boost its minimum wage above 16 bucks an hour starting january 1st. a single mom says she's lost her job and is struggling to find a new one as restaurants prepare for all of this. listen. >> i have a stressful time right now. at the first of the year, my restaurant that i've been working in for six years will be closing. my second job or former job that i had that i thought maybe i could go back and get some hours there, it's going to be closing at the beginning of the year, and the one interview that i got in the last couple of weeks, before i could even confirm that interview with the manager, that restaurant is closing as well. so all of this is due to the minimum wage increase, paired with other laws that are coming down through our city council. david: do the costs outweigh the
benefits for higher minimum wage? what do you think, liz? >> we talked earlier in the program about the importance of people getting jobs. so nothing could be more important than that woman losing her job. i don't know how many studies are going to have to be done, real life examples developed and exploited to the public -- explained to the public before democrats get off this minimum wage enthusiasm because what we know, and this study by the way was huge, a million loans they looked at, and pretty conclusively proves that higher minimum wage hurts businesses and in particular hurts small businesses which are so critical to job creation. it's very discouraging. >> this is not news. >> exactly >> we've known about this since the 30s when the first minimum wage was actually instituted. david, it is not like there's a trade-off, some benefits some detriments. there's no benefit to the minimum wage. it destroys jobs, and in particular, it destroys that first job that allows people, particularly young people to get the skills to move up the
ladder. wages are not arbitrary despite what democrats would have you to believe and minimum wage kills jobs particularly at the low end. seattle is the latest example. >> you don't need studies. you just need logic. when you mandate higher costs of business, and business owners without any commensurate productivity gains, they are going to react, less hours, less people, robots, and the shame of this is somebody who may have gotten a job at 10 or 11 bucks, may not get the job at 15 to 16 because of what the owner thinks. it is just plain old stupid, and it's never worked. i don't understand why people don't just get the logic of it. >> all right. well the fact is, even with 3.5% unemployment rate, there are multiple municipalities around the country that are setting minimum wage laws which means it is clearly not destroying jobs nearly as absolutely as if it is something carving through the low wage employment sector with robots showing up at every mcdonald's.
yes, it is disruptive in the short-term as businesses adjust. yes, there will be people who will lose their jobs. >> why should they adjust? it's their businesses. some of these people started from scratch and built up, and they put up their risk capital and their time and sweat and their toil for having the government of bureaucracy tell them what to do and how much they have to pay? >> you know as well as i do there are regulations that we do think are important to protect, including cleanliness and safety regulation >> that's a red herring. the fact is that an employer cannot hire somebody at $15 an hour who only produces $9 an hour worth of work. that's a lot of businesses. that's why jobs like this young lady's are lost over and over again. >> the push for federal minimum wage to $15 makes no sense at all because cost of living varies so dramatically from one state to other. david: that's the beautiful thing about this country as a
republic, we get a chance -- little petrie dishes all in various states can come up with their own solutions. some will work. some won't. we will all be able to see and tell years from now. meanwhile meatless meat is shaking up the food industry in 2019. now one major athletic brand looking to disrupt the shoe game in 2020. would you buy a plant-based sneaker? i'm your 70lb st. bernard puppy, and my lack of impulse control, is about to become your problem. ahh no, come on. i saw you eating poop earlier. hey! my focus is on the road, and that's saving me cash with drivewise. . . . sorry! he's a baby! audrey's on it. eating right? on it! staying active? on it. audrey thinks she's doing all she can
to manage her type 2 diabetes and heart disease but is her treatment doing enough to lower her heart risk? [sfx: crash of football players colliding off-camera.] maybe not. jardiance is the number 1 prescribed pill in its class. jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. that means jardiance can help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. plus, jardiance lowers a1c and it could help you lose some weight. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack? on it... with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance.
the type 2 diabetes pill that's on it. learn more at jardiance.com the type 2 diabetes pill that's on it. most people think as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready. you may have gingivitis. when you brush, and the clock could be ticking towards bad breath, receding gums, and possibly... tooth loss. help turn back the clock on gingivitis with parodontax. leave bleeding gums behind. parodontax. ♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪
♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ david: move over, mootless, mootless. meatless meat. popular athletic brand reebok is set to release the first plant based non-leather performance shoe. the new forever floatride grow sneaker is made with castor beans, algae, eucalyptus trees, natural rubber in effort to reduce use of petroleum based plastics. we don't know how much the sneaker will cost but we know that nike's 100% organic shoe
ralphed off 150 bucks a pair and resold for $1046. would you buy a pair of these. >> could i put them on the grill? david: you could. >> stole my line. >> if you get hungry you could eat it. >> i could be 100% vegan. david: run a mile with them. you burn them and eat them after you're through. jonathan? >> they come with a side of ranch dressing? i don't understand. this is like, a shoe version of a tesla. this is virtue signaling. come to shoes. we should embraced oil based shoes. they are our friend. eucalyptus based shoes? why? guysry. >> these are my all birds. comfiest shoes, from eucalyptus, sugar cane, whatever works, it is comfy. >> whatever is good for comfortable shoe, good for runners. it is more choice is better. david: jonathan i thought you
liked innovation in the marketplace. they're not asking for tax rebate? >> david, subtext of this is oil is bad. variety alism. david: this market is big enough for anybody. if you have a new product bod -- god bless you. that does it for "bulls & bears." see you next time. liz: the dow hits another record high. congress faces big votes before it breaks for the christmas recess. impeachment on wednesday. nafta 2.0 trade deal on thursday. tonight the debate, president trump getting things done amid what nancy pelosi admits is 2 1/2 year process to get rid of him. this as impeachment is now underwater with voters. more and more voters opposing. new tax how strong the economy and stock market are under president trump. plus, bedlam, chaos, filing breaks out as voters heckle and shout down house intelligence chair adam schiff and