tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News June 26, 2019 1:00pm-2:00pm PDT
>> neil: it's all for the money now. president trump is off to osaka for the g-20 talks and particularly on the china trade tiff. are we getting closer to a deal? they were a lot of factors that hint that we are. kristin fisher at the white house on some of those hints of a deal that might not be immediate, but could be in the works. kristin? >> president trump is optimistic that he can cut a deal with president xi jinping on the sidelines of the g-20 summit. if they cannot cut a deal, president trump says he has a
plan b. >> my plan b is that i will tariff, maybe not a 25%, but a 10% but the rest of the $600 billion that we're talking about. we have more than $300 billion of products. what will happen then, all of those companies will move out of china and move to other places like vietnam and other places that take advantage of us. we'll start working on that, too. >> if president trump were to move forward with the plan b, it would mean expanding his tariffs to everything china ships to the united states. he said it could be 25%. he said likely they would start at 10%. administration officials are hopeful it won't come to that. steve mnuchin said the trade talks were nearly complete until china reversed course. >> i'm hopeful we see a deal. there needs to be the right efforts in place. we were about 90% of the way there. i think there's a path to
complete this. we'll see what we get. >> the talks start friday with the treasury secretary and u.s. trade representatives sitting down with the chinese vice premier on friday. on saturday, president trump and xi will sit down. it is poised to be the biggest bilateral meeting. president trump will also be sitting down with russian president vladimir putin as well. >> neil: amazing. thanks very much. meantime, where is this going? republican strategist john thomas, democratic strategist robin byro and melissa here. the read that we're getting is they're making progress. maybe the tariffs won't be 25%. maybe 10%. the chinese delegation is meeting ahead of the talks. you string it together, you get
hopeful, right? >> no. >> neil: they did warn me you wouldn't be open mystic. >> i hate to be a negative nelly and i pro trump. i believe he will get a deal done with china. that being said, i don't have 100% conviction it will happen this summer or possibly this year. here's why every time they make progress. but it's like taking 20 steps forward and 12 steps back. that's what it is. i wouldn't be at all surprised if in fact they get close to a deal again and it shuts down and then trump puts on the other tariffs and watch the market go just like that. >> neil: to her point, he did throw in an added thing against vietnam. they're watching them in a trade policy with them the last time i remember the vietnamese were the ones that were luring a lot of businesses ticked off about dealing in china come to us. so now these businesses went there and now they could be boomed twice. what do you think of that?
>> i think china is highly motivated. growth in the private sector has been slow. they're highly motivated to make a deal. it's whether or not it's worth the political cost to them. that's where we have to dial down on this. they have three redline issues. they won't move on the first two. keeping the tariffs in place. unilaterally reimposing tariffs. we can negotiate on the third, adjusting the quantum number, the number of trade goods. >> neil: i have no idea what you said. he's very good. he's so smart. he leaves me in the dust. one thing that i noticed, maybe to melissa's point, you have a little bit of sugar and a little bit of salt. the salt was that the u.s. sort of directing all chinese companies not be dealing in any way, shape or form with our companies on 5g technology. that has upped the ante.
>> trump's plan b that he talked about with maria of increasing tariffs -- >> neil: i think he was making that up on the fly. >> probably right. but his instincts are right here. >> neil: you think there's a pattern to this a strategy? >> i absolutely do. trump's basic premise, we have a bad business partner named china. >> neil: no doubt. but he threw the vietnamese things out. i'm not dismissing it. don't misinterpret me. where are we going? i thought the focus was china. now these companies that you urged to relocate not too long ago go to vietnam and now vietnam is a focus. it's like a bad abbott and costello skit. >> the president will refocus on china, this is a win, whether he gets a deal or not in 2020, it's a win for him. >> neil: really? >> i think so. trump is the first -- >> neil: the tariff goes into effect and would be felt. >> but trump is the first president in decades to go to
those rust belt states and say look, i'm the only one sticking it to china and standing up for you. >> neil: some of them are saying you're sticking it to us. >> exactly. >> neil: this might not be resolved. i don't think it's going to affect him not getting elected. >> it's the fact that he's taking action. >> neil: no, the -- but what i worry about is, and i caught a lot of that interview with maria, i thought it was kind of all right, we're doing and wae'e doing this. if i'm on the other side, i wonder where we're going here. >> he's good on the fly. some people stink on the fly. >> neil: we don't know yet. we don't have a deal. i hope it works out. you're cynical. >> i'm not it cynical about it working out. i'm cynical saying every time trump tweets that everything is great or mnuchin says we're 90% there, the market rallies --
>> neil: steve mnuchin said there's a path to complete it. i use that with diets. there's a path -- >> of course. >> neil: i never take it. so i'm looking at this and whether the markets might be jumping. >> absolutely. i agree. this is basically the way trump operates. i think it's very much on the fly. but he's pretty savvy at some things. he know what's he's doing to a point. i'm nervous. >> neil: the american people going to look at him and this approach and say at least he's got an approach. >> number 1, he had an approach and he's got guts. the chinese think he's crazy enough to go all the way and up the ante on tariffs. i think he's projecting that. >> and china wants -- >> neil: the crazy thing or -- >> china wants something. they don't want the tariffs to be lifted. they want something in return. the way it's been forever and ever is the way it was. so in order for trump to lift the tariffs, china wants
something in return. what that is, i don't know. what i'm thinking they need, they need and expert, a person that understands chinese culture -- >> neil: too late for that. chinese culture thing, if you don't have that down, good luck. but you guys are great. i didn't understand where this goes. >> on the fly works. >> neil: i built a career on it. another big story today, would have been the lead story any other day, robert mueller set to testify next month. the house judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler saying it will have a profound impact. with us, ken starr. ken, good having you. nadler says it will have a profound impact. do you think it will? >> it has the potential to. i don't think it will. i have a feeling, lindsey graham was quoting saying, this will backfire. it has the potential to backfire
on the democrats as well. if you just try to analyze it, script the rhetoric away, it's more likely than not that bob mueller will stick with the script. the script is the 447 pages. so if you asked as the democrats will, did the president of the united states commit the crime of obstruction of justice, i believe, my prediction, i could be proven wrong, that bob mueller says the report speaks for itself. everything that i have to say, substantively about what the president did and the people around the president are set forth in the report. >> neil: they're going to go beyond the report, ken. they know he wants to do that. but republicans will ask him what was the genesis. what did you rely on. why was it knee deep in
democrats advising you, putting it together. and the democrats said you were open-ended on the obstruction of justice thing. can you explain this process because you didn't exonerate the president. i can see how they could both try to take him off script. >> oh, of course. they will try to. but it's unlikely he will go off script. someone took a look at how many times has he testified before congress? a lot. it's not going to be deer in the headlights. i did want to say one other thing. that's on the republican side, i do think that's where the fireworks can come and likely will come. because the hard questions about the mueller probe have not been asked. they have not been answered. people have asked the questions but not in this context where i think bob will have to say, i know bob mueller, he's an honorable person but there's serious questions and concerns
that he will be called upon to answer and he can't look to the report. for example, he said in his statement that the report statement that he essentially, my characterization is vouching for the integrity of the people in the investigation. the report is the fact, not the issues of the integrity, the fairness or open mindedness. those are the things that the republicans can appropriately ask. the american people frankly have a right to hear. >> neil: you think it changes any minds in the end? regardless of your political purcha persuasion. i'm wondering if the needle moves at all. not that it has to move. i'm saying do you think in the end that this announces anything or any changes? >> much more likely than not
your prediction is right. the needle won't move. barring moments of pro mueller or anti-mueller. we can't rule that. my betting will be that there will be real fireworks with the republican interrogation. if it's effective, not reason to believe that it's not, i think there may be pent-up frustration on the democrat's side. that's my sense. >> neil: got it. all right. ken, always good chatting with you. thanks very much. mueller testifies next month. it's a in two different house committees. it's almost getting the build-up of a pay per view event. i don't know. it's close. who says two sides can't work together in washington? the bipartisan push to make sure if the president wants to attack iran in any way, shape or form, they run it through congress first. they're next. uh-oh, looks like someone's
still nervous about buying a new house. is it that obvious? yes it is. you know, maybe you'd worry less if you got geico to help with your homeowners insurance. i didn't know geico could helps with homeowners insurance. yep, they've been doing it for years. what are you doing? big steve? thanks, man. there he is. get to know geico and see how much you could save on homeowners and renters insurance. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. e-commerce deliveries to homes what's going on? it's the 3pm slump. should have had a p3. oh yeah. should have had a p3. need energy? get p3. with a mix of meat, cheese and nuts.
is this ride safe? i assembled it myself last night. i think i did an ok job. just ok? what if something bad happens? we just move to the next town. just ok is not ok. especially when it comes to your network. at&t is america's best wireless network according to america's biggest test. plus buy one of our most popular smartphones and get one free. more for your thing. that's our thing.
>> neil: i was just checking. are pigs flying? democrats and republicans found something to agree on. a new bipartisan plan to make sure that president trump first gets approval from congress before taking any military action against iran that involves matt gaetz, democratic congressman. i guess it's possible. if i can start with you, congressman khan. is it your fear here that the president was going to act unilater unilaterally? >> neil, the president has a right to strike for self-defense. that's under article two of the contusion. what we don't want is for the president to get into an endless war.
he campaigned against that. i believe the president doesn't want to do that. he has advisers that are pushing him to getting into another war. so we wanted congress to speak out to say before any action can be taken, you have to come to congress before we get in another war. >> neil: liz cheney, as you're aware, argued saying this was a bad idea, saying it's unconstitutional. it would be harmful to american security, sends a dangerous message. congress should never limit the president's ability to defend our nation. iran continues to escalate their hostile behavior against the u.s. and its interest. what do you say? >> yeah, cheney wanting us to get into war. weird. i look at a new coalition forming around the country that is not partisan in nature but an american first idea. we tonight -- we don't want to
get involved in these enless wars. ro is on the democratic said and i'm on the republican side. recent reporting in the hill showed that by a margin of 2 to 1 americans favored diplomacy and negotiation over war. again, what the ro and i are proposing not to lay our arms down and make victims or targets out of service members, of course the president would have the ability to defend our country and allies and troops. we don't believe that any president should lurch into a decades-long war in the absence of approval of congress. >> neil: what constitutes lurching? if the president was to respond and he was minutes away before cancelling a planned attack in response to the downing of our unmanned drone, would that have passed muster with you? would he have been justified in doing that? >> it would have been a mistake
but he doesn't have to come to congress for 60 days under the war powers act. >> neil: so anything he does in the first 60 days, unless it's just obliterate, that is okay. >> that's what the law is, he has 60 days to act under seven defense. i'm glad he didn't act. it would have escalated the conflict and entangled us in another war. i'm glad he show restraint. the president under current law has the ability to strike for self-defense. our amendment doesn't take that power away from him. >> neil: what is the difference here, congressman gaetz. some say if you reign in this president with this country, it's a risky time to do it. you say? >> yeah, that belies history. when we lock at these endless wars that we fought in afghanistan and iraq, we spilled
the blood of america's patriots. in afghan, we have 56% of the afghan districts -- >> neil: so i wasn't clear. but what is different here? what changes here? the timeline, how quickly has to check with you guys? >> no, the extend to which the president would keep us in a war beyond what is authorized by current law. as ro said, we would be authorized to take action for 60 days. i don't think the american people think it's too unreasonable that if we're in a conflict with another country for longer than a few months, we ought to take a vote in the congress as to whether or not we're willing to have that as a priority of our nation. if the people that fight these wars are brave enough to go down range, i think the politicians ought to be brave enough to vote for or against them is. >> one of the things is, we view china as our longest competitor. they haven't been in a war since
1979. 24% of the economy. iran is .55% what are we doing getting stuck in more middle east wars instead of taking on china? >> thanks very much. all eyes turning to miami, florida tonight. the first of two democratic presidential debates. there is annish european that is already galvanizing the party and it begins with something that elizabeth warren just recommended after this. turning 50 opens the door to a lot of new things... like now your doctor may be talking to you about screening for colon cancer. luckily there's me, cologuard. the noninvasive test you use at home. it all starts when your doctor orders me. then it's as easy as get, go, gone. you get me when i'm delivered... right to your front door and in the privacy of your own home. there's no prep or special diet needed.
you just go to the bathroom, to collect your sample. after that, i'm gone, shipped to the lab for dna testing that finds colon cancer and precancer. cologuard is not right for everyone. it is not for high risk individuals, including those with a history of colon cancer or precancer. ibd, certain hereditary cancer syndromes, or a family history of colon cancer. maybe i'll be at your door soon! ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers. what do all these people have in common, limu?oug [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
compare comcast business to your current provider. my current service provider does not provide half of what you provide. and to know that i could save money? i'd be thrilled. this sounds like a whole business package, which would be incredible. so what are you guys waiting for? let's do it. (laughs) comcast business gives you a full suite of products with great performance and value. get fast, reliable internet on the nation's largest gig-speed network for less than at&t. that's 120 dollars less a year. better, faster. i mean sign me up. comcast business. beyond fast. >> neil: all right. you're going to need a bigger stage. see, i was doing the jaw's thing. all right. fine. i was just trying. anyway, the 2020 democratic presidential hopefuls prepping
for their first debate. immigration is popping up to be a very, very big issue. peter doocy in miami with more on that. hi, peter. >> neil, elizabeth warren says that if she's elected president, it will not be against the law to sneak into the united states. it's an idea 2020 candidate julian castro came forward with. beto o'rourke thinks this would give human traffickers a free pass. if there's a disagreement, could be about the border. they have taken similar approaches and addressing separating border crossing kids from their parents and they either all have or all will visit the homestead shelter down the road. >> we speak out as a people, we speak out as moral citizens not just of the united states but of
the world. we will stay here in homestead until the facility releases these children and closes down. >> warren has seen her stock rise in recent polls. bernie sanders have struggled to keep up. sanders is a well known brand. andrew yang isn't yet but he told us a couple minutes ago that he thinks he's in a very good position because he doesn't think anybody will take pot shots sitting in fifth or sixth place on the stage. neil? >> neil: that makes sense. thanks, peter. peter doocy covering this. we'll look at this later tonight. bret baier and company. meanwhile, let's get the read from this, particularly what elizabeth warren is advocating here. just decriminalize those trying to get into this country. just let them in. that's the read from this. how will that play out
politically beyond the nominating process? if it was elizabeth warren as the nominee. what do you think? >> if there is a crisis on our southern border. you even have "the new york times" editorial board saying that democrats need to get on board and do something. a republican congressman told me the border it has ever been. the reason for that is because of our lacks asylum laws that incentivize people to come here illegally. making it less punitive and increasing the incentive further would make this disaster even worse. >> neil: you never want to put things down as a crass political impact. if you're donald trump and saying there's a crisis at the border and obviously democrats at the time were dismissing that. almost laughing at him. then jeh johnson puts crack in the glass to say yeah, there is a crisis, an emergency at the
border. we've gotten past that stage. everybody is on the same page now. >> yeah. everyone is acknowledging there's a border crisis. the question is what to do about it. we need to do something about it. that needs to start with reforming our asylum laws and making it easier to come here ely. doesn't need to star with warren's plan or castro's plan, not just to make it a crime, but maybe a civil offense. that would only further backlog our clogged up immigration courts and it would honestly create more of a run 0 on the border than we started. this is -- elizabeth warren has a plan for everything but this isn't so good. >> neil: much has been made of this father and his child trying to cross the rio grande and drowned. i'm wondering whether that become the game changer.
you have senator johnson talking about it and saying something has to be done. he's a republican. i'm just wondering if it's changed the sort of thinking on it. >> look, i hope it has changed what happened is tragic. that's why something has to be done about our border. unfortuna unfortunately, decriminalizing it would prompt more people to make the dangerous trek and you could see more incidents like the tragic father and daughter that drowned. elizabeth warren is not crazy. i understand you want to help these people and women and children crossing the border are not criminals, but this plan would have unintended consequences. we need to do something. this isn't it. >> neil: all right. thank you very much. just teasing, you can catch post debate coverage here 11:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. shannon bream and bret baier will be doing that to get the
lay of the land and how this sets the stage for the next debate tomorrow night that features joe biden and of course, bernie sanders. the border battle is underway as the deadline looms for congress to come to an agreement. the thing is, they're closer than you generally think, a house measure and a senate measure. they're trying to find a way to meld them. easier said than done in washington. john thune breaks down that battle after this. is that for me? mhm aaaah! nooooo... quick, the quicker picker upper! bounty picks up messes quicker and is 2x more absorbent than the leading ordinary brand. [son loudly clears throat] [mom and dad laugh] bounty, the quicker picker upper. now with new prints featuring characters from disney/pixar's toy story 4 now playing. i know what you're thinking.
i thought what you thought. some things are just too good to be true. just like you, i thought that reverse mortgages had to have some kind of catch. just a way for the banks to get your house right? well, then i did some homework and i found out it's not any of that. it's not another way for the bank to get your house. and it's also not too good to be true. a reverse mortgage loan is a simple idea, really. you turn your home's equity into cash, and you pay it back when you leave the house. most people use the money to pay off their existing mortgage, or pay some bills, cover medical costs even update their home. and, just as importantly, you still own your home, and you make no monthly mortgage payments. it's a loan designed just for older americans and it's helped hundreds of thousands to live a more stable, secure retirement
and stay in the home they love. aag is the leader in reverse mortgages. call us today for your free information kit. it will answer all your questions and help you decide if a reverse mortgage is right for you, and how to qualify. i know what you're thinking. i did too. i felt the same way, but i checked it out, and i found out a lot more. it's pretty simple. a reverse mortgage from aag can give you the retirement stability you're looking for. maybe you want to check it out. if you're sixty-two or older and own your own home, give aag a call to receive your free imformation kit. you'll receive the imformation you're looking for as well as tell you how much cash you may quality for. and receive your free information kit. so, what's your "better?"
>> neil: all right. democrats and republicans agree something has to be done at the border but what? the house plan, a senate plan and where are we right now with either plan? let's go to chad pergram on capitol hill with more. chad? >> the senate just passed their version of the bill, 84-8. it was a bipartisan vote. a lot of people that might be the only way they pass something because it can get 60 votes and earn the president's signature. i spoke with mitch mcconnell to say would they consider going to a conference committee to blend the bills. he said we have to try to get this done this week. i also spoke with nancy pelosi earlier. she spoke with the president earlier today. she said i will have something to say, but i want to see it to
my members first. here's the problem. the senate bill would probably pass the house but lose a lot of the liberal democrats. i'm going to read you a quote from veronica escobar, a freshman democrat from texas that represents a border district in el paso. she said the guardrails have to be there. he's an untrustworthy president. he will use the funds in nefarious ways. giving him a blank check is dangerous. nancy pelosi has to walk that fine line to satisfy her caucus but also get something done because they're going to run out of money if they don't solve it soon. >> neil: thanks. let's go to john thune on this. senator, how confident that something will happen here? >> something needs to get done. why have a crisis. democrats seven weeks after the president requested emergency funding, the house democrats
have recognized that. at the last minute they're acting on legislation. here's where we are. the house bill passed with i think three republican votes over there. so it was a party line partisan vote. we took it up in the senate today. the house passed version. didn't get a single republican vote. the president has said that he will veto the house-passed bill. in the senate, we passed a bill today, 84 to 8. huge bipartisan majority. a bill which the president has said he will sign. the very simple solution now is for the house to pick up the senate-passed bill, put it on the floor, pass it. it would pass and the president would sign it into law and we would get needed assistance to the crisis at the border. >> neil: as i understand it, democrats don't like giving the president a green light to do things with more wall building or something that wouldn't address the issue with kids and what is happening with migrants and detention centers. republicans are just as suspicious of democrats and
ignores what causes the problem with the kids at the border and the detention center and never the two shall meet. >> if you look at the main components, all that is there. there's money that addresses the humanitarian crisis. whether that is additional medical help, whether that is food assistance, whether that is housing. all of those things are in the senate bill. the democrats at some point have to recognize that if we're going to address the very serious human needs that we have at the border, they have to pass a bill that the president will sign into law. it seems to me if they are serious and expressing a desire to do something about this, we have a legislative vehicle to pass with a huge bipartisan majority that we know the president will sign into law that addresses the very concerns and needs that individual members are expressing. like i said, at this point it's
a simple path forward. >> neil: will this have more border patrol, people that are sidelined to deal with a lot of the kids and issues because there's been a dramatic influx? to your point to be fair, it's dramatically increased. i understand, quintupled with the number of kids arriving. i'm curious where you see those funds going to not only look at the kids but to provide more staffing to deal with this? how would that go? >> there is, there's money in this bill to address the concerns, department of homeland security officials, ice officials, to make sure that they have the resources that they need to appropriately staff and to try to slow the flow. as you pointed out, we had 600,000 people come in, have been apprehended coming in already, which is 200,000 more than we saw all of last year. so this is a growing crisis,
which needs to be -- that we have to slow that flow. that will require more personnel, more resources, all of which are addressed in this legislation. >> neil: thank you, senator, very much. good chatting with you. >> thank you. >> neil: tensions between the u.s. and iran seemed to escalate. now the united nations is the epicenter urging restraint with everyone. the u.k. ambassador to the united nations is here next. s. oh, could you, uh, make me a burger? -poof -- you're a burger. [ laughter ] -everyone acts like their parents. -you have a tattoo. -yes. -fun. do you not work? -so, what kind of mower you got, seth? -i don't know. some kid comes over. we pay him to do it. -but it's not all bad. someone even showed us how we can save money by bundling home and auto with progressive. progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto.
progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. parts of me i didn't even know. i find out i'm 19% native american, specifically from the chihuahua people. what?! that's... i find that crazy. it traces their journey in the mid-1800s from central mexico to texas. learning about the risks they took for a better life... ...it gives me so much respect and gratitude. it just shed so much light in my past that i never even would've known was there. 20 million members have connected to a deeper family story. order your kit at ancestry.com.
>> neil: all right. we just had a republican representative and democratic representative pushing legislation that would demand the president clear through congress any strike on iran. the united nations is saying let's just be cautious here. be very careful here. the u.k. ambassador, karen pierce here, a member of the security council joins me now. i don't know if you have ever
seen her in action on the floor when they start arguing. phenomenal. talk about a pay per view event. ambassador, very good to see you. >> nice to be here. >> the united nations is concerned about this. what is the feeling over the justification of the u.s. response when the drone was shot down? the president didn't opt to respond in kind. but he's leaving open the possibility that he still could. what do you make of that? >> i think for any leader that you don't want the other side to think that you don't have robust response. we've seen what the president supported by the u.k. and france did over chemical weapons. so you never want to say you wouldn't retaliate. as you just said, he didn't retaliate. we had a briefing on that from the u.s. affair monday and then what we have been discussing today has been the nuclear deal.
>> neil: obviously the president ripped that up. the iranians have been bellicose in their talks and childish in name calling. does the president need another provocative act to respond? he opted not to respond to the drone thing. the united nations is of the view that a delayed act would be a mistake. you need another provocative act. >> a lot of member states would think that if you're going -- if one is going to retaliate, that should be done quickly and in a proportionate way. but what tends to happen for leaders who have to make these decisions -- i'm speaking hy hype -- hypothetically, you have to do it at a time that it's military sensible. i think everyone was relieved to
see the restraint that the president showed. everybody calls to deescalation. we've been calling for diplomatic solutions to overcome these challenges. that's where a bulk of the united nations are. >> neil: most of the nations that signed on to the accord that iran had agreed to did not agree with the president when he ripped it up. many have gone over to the president's way here, but they seem to be as leery of the president as they are of iran. is that a fair assessment? >> within the u.n., one of the things you always have to guard against is the equivalence. you saw it in the case of north korea. north korea said in effect we'll stop launching nuclear missiles if you cancel those exercises you have with south korea. that's something that we wouldn't accept. an enormous difference between
illegally -- >> neil: and nor would donald trump in that vent. >> exactly. >> neil: the equivalence doesn't measure. >> we don't believe the equivalence but with respect to the tensions, so many supplies go through the straits of hormuz, ships have been under attack. this is a dangerous area and therefore i think people are looking for any action that does lead to deescalation. >> neil: part of the latest round of sanctions, ambassador, involve taking away, revoking the waivers that we have for country getting their oil from iran, china, india. do they have to agree to that? >> we did not agree with the u.s. decision to leave the deal. we regret the sanction waivers
have not been fully lifted in a way that was originally intended. that would be china and russia's position also. in terms -- >> neil: do they both sit on the security council? >> they do. and they're both permanent members like the u.k. and america. >> neil: and they don't like that. >> they believe the nuclear deal should not only be in place but made to prosper. because part of the deal was that iran showed nuclear restraint in exchange for economic benefit. now america is pulling out and reimposing the sanctions is taking away the intended commit benefit. >> neil: it's going to be a long ordeal, isn't it? >> i think it will. but both sides, there was a good debate in the security council. there was a lot of support for diplomatic solutions. >> neil: good. >> the united states has not retaliated and the president made his position clear. we'll have to see what happens next. >> neil: all right.
ambassad ambassador, thank you. karen pierce, ambassador to the united nations. now signs that this could be the start of something and i'm not even talking iran. i'm talking north korea. how about a third summit? yeah. after this. is this ride safe? i assembled it myself last night. i think i did an ok job. just ok? what if something bad happens? we just move to the next town. just ok is not ok. especially when it comes to your network. at&t is america's best wireless network according to america's biggest test. plus buy one of our most popular smartphones and get one free. more for your thing. that's our thing. hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria!
today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest. >> neil: all right. the president is going to be in the neighborhood but he's not going to stop by the neighbor. that's when he south in south korea after visiting japan, he will be so close to north korea but he will pass up a meeting with that country's leader. there's talk that the two could arrange another summit, the third. let's get the read on this with analyst and retired four-star general. four-star general, jack keane. good to see you. >> good to see you, neil.
>> neil: what does that say if the president says i'm going to be close to your house but i'm not going to go there? >> well, i think the personal diplomacy between the two of them as reported is very close. the president received a birthday letter where kim jong-un expressed warm affection to him. he mentioned happy birthday four times. the president since returned the letter. kim jong-un is critical of the security team. >> neil: he doesn't like pompeo at all. >> and he likes ambassador bolton evenless. he never attacks president trump. what he is doing is leaving the opportunity for personal diplomacy. i believe that the kim jong-un leadership, having had the strategy wrong for the meeting in hanoi and obviously the tragic ending that his chief negotiator took as a result of it and having been killed --
>> neil: is it proven? >> it's accepted, yes. >> neil: one of the things that came up is now they want a third summit. i think the north koreans are pushing for it. someone will have to have better ground rules, aren't they? >> yeah. you put your finger on the issue. we can't come in two heads of state again together without something on the table that we have already agreed to and it's an indication of progress forward. they have never given us anything substantive in terms of denuclearization, the missiles or even a plan to do that. so i think our negotiators want to see something tangible before we put president trump back in the room with kim jong-un. >> neil: you talk about the personal relationship the president has with kim jong-un. they write letters back and forth and all that. he was clearly trying to be not mr. nice guy but giving the
iranians the benefit of the doubt on the downing of this drone trying to say it didn't come from tehran, maybe some trigger happy general or soldier. even his reluctance to strike the militarily and admit its despair opting not to do so and yet the iranians respond with nasty comments and childish ones. that was something that i'm sure he didn't expect. what do you think? >> they didn't expect it either. it's factual that the national leadership was unaware that a tactical commander was taking this action on his own. secondly the president is in a different position as a result of having taken a kinetic response. simple that he's able to reach out to his allies in the sense that he has leverage. he's on moral high ground. that's what secretary pompeo is doing to help clear shipping lanes and protect them with our allies.
we'll see. i don't think it's as bad as it seems in my judgment. hopefully we don't get into a real kinetic exchange. i don't believe war is on the horizon. >> neil: that's good to hear. hope you're right, general. good seeing you. >> good seeing you. >> neil: all right. the protests over what happens at the border now involving a company that wanted to send beds there. we'll explain after this. >> we want them to institute a code for our sales people so they don't do it again in the future. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. . .
every day, visionaries are creating the future. so, every day, we put our latest technology and unrivaled network to work. the united states postal service makes more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. e-commerce deliveries to homes so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting. chantix reduces the urge so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms.
stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. quit smoking slow turkey. talk to your doctor about chantix.
still going down. >> supporters and also those employees of wayfair as you mentioned protesting as you mentioned the sale of beds to a government contractor that run as migrant detention facility in texas. just some of the things protesters were yelling no profit from prison camps, chanting holding signs. participants told us 500 plus employees signed on to a letter to company leaders expressing concern and anger about the atrocities committed at our southern border seek migrants seeking asylum. $200,000 worth of beds. to a facility ultimately detain hundreds of migrants children. the contractor bcfs responded we believe youth shut sleep in beds with mattresses the twitter handle results from to explain as retailer it is standard practice to fulfill all orders from all customers. the employees have called on the company to donate all profits. apparently wayfair has decided to donate profits to the red cross. that's not exactly what the
employees tell us they had in mind. neil? >> neil: confusing but going to happen. molly line in boston in the middle of all. joni ernst will be my special guest talking about justice and much more. here comes "the five." ♪ ♪ >> dana: hello, everyone i'm dana perino, along with katie pavlich, juan williams, jesse watters and greg gutfeld on "the five." you remember when robert mueller said he would prefer not to testify that was then and this is now. the former special counsel has agreed to testify in front of congress next month two committees after house democrats issued a subpoena. president trump is sounding off on what is sure to be a blockbuster hearing. >> at what point does it end? it's a disgrace. no obstruction, no collusion. now the democrats want a do-over. so they had a do-over in the house. that didn't work. they had a do-over in the
Uploaded by TV Archive on