. and my passion for this fight burns as brightly today as it did 20 years ago. i want to comment on a matter in the news today regarding iran. the president and his team are in the midst of intense negotiations. their goal is a diplomatic solution that would close off the wrong's pathways to a nuclear bomb and give us unprecedented access and insight into iran's nuclear program. reasonable people can disagree about what exactly it will take to accomplish this objective and we all must judge any final agreement on its merit. but the recent letter from republican senators was out of step with the best traditions of american leadership and one has to ask, what was the purpose of

this letter? there appears to be to view a logical answers. either the senators were trying to be help pull to the iranians or harmful to the commander in chief, in the midst of high-stakes international diplomacy. either answer does discredit to the letter's signatories. i would be pleased to talk more about this important matter but i know there have been questions about my e-mails, so i want to address that directly and then i will take a few questions from you. there are four things i want the public to know. first, when i got to work as secretary of state i opted for convenience to use my personal e-mail account, which was allowed by the state department because i thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal e-mails, instead of two.

looking back, it would have been better if i simply used a second e-mail account and carried a second phone, but at the time and it did not seem like an issue. second, the vast majority of my work e-mails went to government employees at their government addresses, which meant they were captured and preserved immediately on the system at the state department. third, after i left office, the state department asked former secretaries of state for our assistance in providing copies of work-related e-mails from our personal accounts. i responded right away and provided all my e-mails that could simply be work-related which totaled roughly 55,000 printed pages even though i knew that the state department

already had the vast majority of them. we went through a thorough process to identify all of my work-related e-mails and delivered them to the state department. at the end, i chose not to keep my private, personal e-mails e-mails about planning chelsea's wedding, or my mother's funeral arrangements, keep my condolence notes to friends, as well as yoga routines, family vacations, the other things you would typically find in inboxes. no one wants their personal e-mails made public, and i think most people understand and respect that privacy. fourth, i took the unprecedented step of asking that the state department make all of my work related e-mails public for everyone to see. i am very proud of the work that i come and my colleagues in our public servants at the

department did during my four years as secretary of state. and i look forward to people being able to see that for themselves. again, looking back it would have been better for me to use two separate phones and two e-mail accounts. i thought using one device would be simpler and obviously it has not worked out that way. now i am happy to take a few questions. >> madam secretary, turkish television. on behalf of the yuan correspondents association, thank you for your remarks. it is wonderful to see you again. madame secretary, why did you opt out to use two devices? at the time, if this did not come up, it would not be an issue. my second follow-up question is

if you were a man today, would all this fuss be made? hillary: i will leave that to others to answer. as i said, i thought, as a matter of convenience -- it was allowed, others have done it. according to the state department, which recently said, secretary kerry was the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov e-mail account. when i got there, i wanted to use one device for personal and work e-mails instead of two. it was allowed and it was for convenience. it was my practice to communicate with state department and other government officials on their .gov accounts, so those e-mails would be automatically saved in the state department system to meet

the keeping requirements, and that indeed, is what happened. i heard a little while ago the state department announced they would begin to post some of my e-mails, which i'm glad to hear because i want it all out there. >> thank you, madam secretary. can you explain how you decided which of the personal e-mails to get rid of, how you got rid of them and when, and how you will respond to questions about you being the arbiter of these? secondly, answer the questions raised about foreign contributions from middle eastern countries like saudi arabia, who permit violence against women, to the family foundation, and whether that disturbs you as you are rightly celebrating 20 years of leadership on this issue. hillary: those are two different questions, let me take them in

order. i will give you some of the background. in going through the e-mails there were over 60,000 in total, sent and received. about half were work-related and went to the state department. about half were personal that were not in any way related to my work. i had no reason to save them but that was my decision because the federal guidelines are clear , and the state department request was clear for any government employee, it is that employees responsibility to determine what is personal and what is work-related. i am very confident of the process that we conducted and the e-mails that were produced. i feel once the american public begins to see the e-mails they will have an unprecedented insight into a high government

official's daily communications which i think will be quite interesting. with respect to the foundation, i am very proud of the work foundation does. i'm very proud of the hundreds of thousands of people who support the work of the foundation, and the results that have been achieved for people here at home and around the world. i think we are very clear about where we stand, certainly where i stand, on all of these issues. there cannot be any mistake about my passion concerning women's rights here at home and around the world. i think people who want to support the foundation know full well what it is we stand for and what we are working on. >> i was wondering if you think

you made a mistake inexpensively using your private e-mail or in the response to the controversy around it, and if so, what have you learned from that? hillary: as i said in my remarks, looking back, it would have been probably, smarter to have used two devices. i have absolute confidence that everything that could be, in any way, connected to work is now in the possession of the state department. and i have to add, even if i had two devices, which is obviously permitted you would still have to put the responsibility where it belongs, which is on the official. i did it for convenience and looking back, i think it may have been smarter to have two devices from the beginning. >> did you or any of your 80's

delete any government-related e-mails from your personal account and at what length are you willing to go to to prove -- some people have suggested having an independent arbiter look at your server, for instance. hillary: we did not. in fact, my direction to conduct the thorough investigation was to err on the side of providing anything that could possibly be viewed as work-related. that does not mean that they will be by the state department once the state department goes through them, but out of an abundance of caution and care we wanted to send that message unequivocally. that is the responsibility of the individual and i have fulfill that responsibility and i have no doubt that we have done exactly what we should have

done. when the search was conducted we were asking that any e-mail be identified and preserved that could potentially be federal record. that is exactly what we did. as i said, we went beyond that and the process produced over 30,000 work e-mails. i think that we have more than that in the request for the state department. the server contains personal communications from my husband and me. i believe i have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private, and i think the state department will be able, over time, to release all the records that were provided. >> madam secretary, two follow-ups.

you mention the server, that is one of the distinctions. this was not gmail or yahoo! but a server that you owned. is that appropriate? is there any precedent for it? did you clear that with state department security officials and did they have full access to it when you were secretary? separately, will this have any bearing or affect on your timing on the decision to run for president? hillary: the system we use was set up for president clinton's office. it had numerous safeguards. it was on property, guarded by the secret service and there were no security breaches. i think the use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.

now with respect to any sort of future issues -- i trust the american people to make their decisions about political and public matters. i feel i have taken unprecedented steps to provide these work-related e-mails. they will be in the public domain. i think that americans will find that interesting, and i look forward to having a discussion about that. >> madam secretary, how can the public be assured that when you deleted e-mails that were personal in nature that you did not also delete e-mails that were professional but possibly unflattering, and what do you think about this republican idea of having an independent third-party coming in and examining your e-mails? hillary: first of all, you would have to ask the question to

every federal employee. the way the system works the federal employee, the individual, whether they have one, 2 3 devices however many addresses, they make the decision. even if you have a work-related device with a work-related .gov account, you choose what goes on that. that is the way the system works. we trust and count on the judgment of thousands, maybe millions of people, to make those decisions. i feel that i did that, and even more, that i went above and the island what i was requested to do. again those early in the common domain and people will be able to judge for themselves. >> that in secretary -- madam secretary state department rules at the time you were

secretary of state said that if an employee would use private e-mail, that e-mail needed to turn those over to the state department to be preserved on government computers. why do you do not do that, why do you do not go along with state department rules until nearly two years after you left office? the president of the united states said that he was unaware that you had this unusual arrangement. the white house counsel said you never approved it through them. why did you not do that, why have you apparently caught the white house by surprise? and then one more political question if i might. does all of this affect your decision in any way to run for president? hillary: let me try to unpack your multiple questions. first, the laws and regulations in effect when i was secretary of state allowed me to use my e-mail for work. that is undisputed.

secondly, under the federal records act, records are defined as recording information regardless of its form or characteristics. in meeting the recordkeeping obligations, it was my practice e-mail government officials on their state or other.gov accounts so that the e-mails were immediately captured and preserved. now, there are different rules governing the white house than there are governing the rest of the executive branch. in order to address the requirements i was under, i did exactly what i have said. i e-mailed two people and i not only knew but expected them to be captured in the state department, or any other government agency that i was e-mailing to at a .gov account. what happened in late summer,

early fall, is that the state department sent a letter to former secretaries of state, not just to me, asking for some assistance in providing any work-related e-mails that might be on the personal e-mail. what i did was direct my counsel to conduct a thorough investigation and to err on the side of providing anything that could be connected to work. they did that. that was my obligation. i fully fulfilled it, and that i took the unprecedented step of saying go ahead and release them and let people see them. i would be happy to have someone

talk to you about the rules. i complied with every rule. >> were you ever briefed on the security implications of using your own e-mail server and your personal address to e-mail the president? hillary: i did not e-mail any classified materials to anyone on my e-mail. there is no classified material. certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material. >> [indiscernible] >>hillary: because they were personal and private about matters that i believed were within the scope of my personal privacy and that particularly of other people. they had nothing to do with work. i did not see any reason to keep them.

at the end of the process. >> [indiscernible] forced to resign two years ago because of his use of personal e-mail. hillary: i think you should go online and read the entire ig report. that is not an accurate representation of what happened. thank you. thank you all. john: that was former secretary of state hillary rodham clinton standing before a packed house, a hallway at the u.n. taking questions for the first time in a long time certainly since the controversy over her private e-mail account had broken about a week ago in "the new york times." she was on stage for a little longer than we expected. we were told it was a brief cut rates. she was out there for quite a

decent chunk of time and took a number of questions. maybe not chris christie style exhausting everyone in the room, but she took a few. i want to go to mark halperin my partner on the scene, who is on the phone. i want to get your first reaction on the substance and as a matter of politics, how well you think hillary clinton did today in this momentous press conference? mark: i think she answer about half the questions that people had and she evaded or was then asked about the other half. certainly made progress in clarifying something that had not been answered but there is lots more and she alluded at the end of his may follow up. i suspect that we will see some background on this. the two biggest issues that were not addressed she was asked if she consulted with the government to make sure that her server was secure. she says she simply asserted there was no breach.

she did not say that the government has blessed the system that she went with. the other question was a gap of time between when she handed over the e-mails and -- pardon me, when she wrote e-mails and it did not go on the government server. there were subpoenas and freedom of information act request that would have unfulfilled because they were not turned over. the one thing that will route people over, and she was clear about it, is that she will not be open to having an independent person take this over. i think that will cause some people to say that this will not be laid to rest because they are not willing to take her word at this was done properly. john: it was notable to me that among the questions, there were many multiple-choice questions given by the reporters and she

sort of cherry pick the questions she wanted to answer. i believe she was asked how she would respond to those who found a troubling that she would be the arbiter over which e-mails were transferred to the state department and which she retained. she did not really answer the question and that seems relevant to me going to the question that you just raised. pretty much her absolute statement that she will not turn over any more e-mails than the ones that she has already turned over and the ones that remain in her possession will remain in her position only. the question that i had that seems a little unclear to me and maybe it was clear to you there. it seems early that she was asserting that she had destroyed those e-mails and that they no longer existed. do you have a sense that she still has a record that is easy to obtain, which she did not turn over to the state department? mark: she seemed to be saying that some of her personal e-mails were destroyed. that seems unusual.

presumably they bought a server with 80's and capacity. while she is a prolific e-mailer, i would be surprised if it was perched for purposes of storage space. the other question that raises is if you deleted those, did you delete others? we all know permanent deletion is not easy for a civilian to do. it's possible who were -- who was running her i.t. operation permanently delete it does. that goes to the question that will be the biggest one coming out of this event. she is asking her opponents to say i handed it everything over that needed to be. she said she erred on the side of caution, but do they trust her to say that i deleted some e-mails from my personal server but those were only personal e-mails. hard to imagine why she would've deleted personal e-mails, but she did not explain. the knowledge -- the notion that

she deleted some e-mails will raise some suspicion in some people. if you were deleting e-mails, how do you know that you did not delete something that you should not have? john: i have another technological question and we heard this yesterday from lanny davis. she repeated this line that she had done this for convenience to keep just one device. i don't know about you. you are fairly technologically advanced. i personally have e-mails from various accounts on my iphone that come up to my single device. it seems to be something suspect about the notion that somehow -- that she was doing this in order not to gary two devices around. it is easy to carry one device with multiple accounts from multiple servers. mark: i will speculate to that. there may be answers to that that she made it want to give about her and technology.

we know that generally state department tends to be behind the private sector. one reason is she may not have wanted to use the state department e-mails because it was clunky. the other is in may not have been possible to have state department e-mail on her chosen device configure the way the state department would want it to be configured. john: i will leave it there. thank you for being with us. we will talk about this a lot more tonight. i want to go to al hunt in washington. give us your sense, having watched this performance, what do you think on substance, style, political consequence? al: she did better than i thought she would do, it went longer. leave it to andrea mitchell to ask the essential question. the irony is that she is right. if in the beginning, she had a

state department account and a personal account, there would be no issue because all of those personal e-mails would be personal. i don't think the issue would go away. she will have to address more things. i still doubt it will become a big deal. mark alluded --john: mark alluded to the fact. for her most vociferous critics, there was nothing she could do part of having a pile of documents with every e-mail she had sent. but i do think this question related to whether she -- whether it was proper for her to be the arbiter of what you turn over, and the suggestion that she destroyed some e-mail although personal, for a lot of people not just those on the far right, will raise more questions going forward. al: you are right, john. you are really right. john: plenty more about this

tonight. thanks for watching. you can get the latest on everything hillary clinton related on bloomberg.com. stay tuned for "street smart" with alix steel next. ♪ . .

alix: welcome to the most important hour of the session. i'm alix steel and this is "street smart." the s&p erasing its gain for the year. the strongest dollar in 12 years versus the euro. all of that fueling a selloff in global equities. u.s. crude sliding below $49 a barrel and inventories are projected to rise from a record high. plus hillary clinton addressing scrutiny over e-mails as secretary of state. "street smart" starts now.

here are the top stories we're watching ahead of the closing bell. hillary clinton says she opted to use her personal e-mail account when secretary of state because of convenience. she said it would have been better to have two e-mail accounts. she answered questions today for the first time about her e-mails as secretary of state stop -- secretary of state. shares at a credit squeeze rising on the announcement of a new ceo. cold water on a recent rally -- deutsche bank saying last week's employment report added to speculation that federal reserve will raise interest rates by midyear. 30 minutes until the close of trading and stocks facing heavy pressure throughout the day. joining me now is julie hyman. we had stocks decline all day

and the s&p approaching the 100 day moving average. julie: it looks like stocks are moving toward the lows of the session. lowest on the s&p we have been in a month. the biggest decline for the s&p we have seen for two months time. there doesn't seem to be that much of a sharp catalyst. it looks like investors over the past several weeks have been recalibrating their expectations for when the federal reserve might be raising interest rates. that could be feeding into what we're seeing today. look at the u.s. dollar. is the highest since september 2003 versus an index of currency -- current seas. a seven and a half year high versus the yen. a record high versus the mexican peso. you get the picture -- the dollar has been rallying quite a bit. it has to do with the outlook on interest rates, but there is one fly in the ointment about this

theory. if you look at interest rates today, the 10 year yield is actually moving lower today. we see the biggest rally in the price for treasuries in two weeks. not sure how that jibes with what we are seeing other markets. in oil, we are seeing the biggest drop in oil prices in the lowest levels since february 26. not much change in terms of the outlook for supply. not seeing any relief on oil prices. >> thank you. we will check back in with you later the hour. the strongest dollar in 12 years versus the euro in my next guest says a strong dollar runs counter to the fed path 2% inflation goal. joining me to explain is the chief global strategist at westshore funds who joins me over the phone from stamford connecticut.

great to talk to you. we always have been seeing this stronger dollar over the last few weeks. what different today? >> it's just a continuation of the trend. you have to go back to december 2013 when ben bernanke start the taper. remember that yellen did not start the taper. first, taper the asset artists then raise interest rates and then reduce the balance sheet. it was all based on this idea that the u.s. economy was getting stronger and could bear the stronger dollar, but the fed data is coming in week, but the strong dollar is deflationary, so you have this conundrum. the fed wants inflation, they say they want to raise rates but raising rates makes the dollar stronger, which is deflationary. so they are moving away and none of it makes sense. if they raise rates, look out

below -- you will see emerging markets crash, probably worse than 1997. if they don't raise rates, the markets could rally because that is the equivalent of a rate cut. alix: you make an excellent point and i have a chart to bring up to talk to that point. we're looking at the dollar index and 10 year treasury price. we have seen a diversions over the last few weeks, but all of the sudden, we see them rally together. my assumption is easier huge inflow into the dollar as well as treasuries. where is that coming from and what emerging-market might feel the most pain? >> it is really coming from all over the world, except for china. a massive capital flow coming from all over the world, but the way to make sense out of it, this is a giant deflationary trade. if europe is cutting rates and

china is easing, then global capital wants to be in the u.s. dollar because you'll get a higher return. deflationary in the bond market not only are yield chasing deflation down, so you get a massive bond market rally which i expect to continue everyone else is lower than that, so this on the market rally could continue. stocks are saying you are crazy to raise rates in this week environment, so the question is when is the fed going to wake up ? the models is -- the models are wrong but they are data dependent. my guess is by june, they will realize how weak the economy is and they will blink and raise rates. but the markets could rally. if they expect him -- expected increase but don't, it's like a rally. but if they go to even qe4, they

could rally. you don't want to short sell but you don't want to own if they do raise rates. i think cash is a good component right now. alix: i know you are a lover of gold but gold has not been taking any benefit from this conundrum. if you take a look at where the fallout might be, we have seen stronger growth in the u.s.. it seems that it is overseas where it is the issue. what's the worst country right now? >> they are all in bad shape, but i think brazil, turkey china, mexico -- these are all places where the capital is coming out. those central banks have a dilemma because they want to cut rates because they want the growth. on the other hand, the corporations have borrowed enormous amount of dollars. that makes the dollar stronger which means they can't pay their debts. they either have -- that's why i

say this resembles 1997. it started in 1997 with the thai currency. >> --alix: why are we seeing this reflected in the gold market at all? a sort of rush to safety like the dollar in the treasury market question >> i think we are and here is why. this is a deflation trade. emerging-market currencies are collapsing, but gold has gone down a little bit. it is sort of holding its own. i would expect a highly deflationary environment, i would have expected gold to go down to 900. the fact that it is hanging in around $1100 or $1200 shows relative strength will stop you haven't seen the price soar, but why would it in a deflationary environment? rising real rates are bad for gold but gold is hanging in

there. that tells me it is poised to rally if the fed blinks. alix: a contrary view there. thank you for joining us. coming up a change at the top for credit suites. is this a strategy shift for the banking giant? ♪

alix: welcome back to "street smart." here are the top stories we watching out of the closing bell. president obama taking action into helping federal student loan borrowers, directing the education department to give our hours a simple way to lodge complaints about lenders collection agencies and universities will stop the u.s. accusing rush of sending new weapons to separatists in eastern ukraine despite the cease-fire worked out last month. nato jets intercepted a russian plane over the baltic and on capitol hill, the deputy

secretary of defense telling the senate the u.s. is actively considering more weapons for key of. a team from greece positive or national creditors is set to arrive in athens tomorrow but it is unclear whether the government will open its books for inspection. they are putting pressure on the country to speed up its reconciliation before it runs out of cash. a breath of fresh air is what one analyst is calling tidjane thiam the new ceo of credit smith. >> obviously it is very mixed feelings. we wanted to make sure this transition is done in the right way, which i think we have accomplished. i think that is actually quite good. a clean, nice transition -- i think the market is relatively positive about it, but obviously, there's a lot of history here, a lot of close

connections with people. i do love the firm and the people here, so that makes it hard. alix: what does this mean for the swiss bank? my guest is the chief global strategist at westshore funds in the author of "the death of money." what do you make of this leadership transition? >> it seems like a good appointment but i'm putting in a larger context stop this is part of a culture change affecting all the too big to fail banks. you see a lot of criticism from regulators about culture. they have conducted a crime wave. they rigged the libor market they rigged the gold market and energy market. this is not speculation. they have admitted to these fraud charges and in some cases colonel charges. terrorist finance -- it's hard to think of a crime they have not committed. i think the regulators are fed

up and one by one, they are going to change them. i wonder how long jamie dimon can hang on because he has had the most violations. they paid over 50 billion dollars in fines, penalties, restitution, damages, etc.. how long can this go on? this is part of a cultural shift. banks are having to reduce leverage, raise capital and change culture. i view this as part of a culture change. alix: not loving those bank ceos. we have seen eight european banks make this kind of change, but do you think that is going to spread to the u.s., like you said was jamie dimon? >> yes i'll stop major new york banks have been regulated -- going back to tim geithner's they as the president of the fed

in new york. it now the federal reserve in washington is taking over those regulatory responsibilities. washington is saying to new york, you appear to be incompetent because we had the whole thing where one bank regulator seem to be in the pocket of -- i think it was goldman sachs. washington is taking over and there is an old greek staying -- an old greek saying -- any organization that takes its cues from the ethics from the leadership. when you see this much crime going on -- alix: don't you think this is to do just that -- tear down its investment banking unit -- if there change has focused to asia and private wealth management aren't they trying to do it from the inside out? >> i would not discount the regulators behind the scenes. even these swiss banks are really under the thumb of u.s.

regulators particularly credit suisse and ubs. they have much bigger systems in the u.s.. this is how the u.s. from a geopolitical and national security point of view that's how we exercise so much control over them. they have to pay attention to u.s. regulators. this won't be the last changing of the guard again. alix: no love lost their again for banks. coming up, as oil continues to slide, investors are finding a way to profit off of that decline. ♪

alix: oil prices sliding today leading bond buyers to buy from energy producers. joining me is the president and ceo of 5th street asset management. when we see a lot of oil companies issuing massive amounts of debt with very high yields, do you like it?

>> i think they have to because oil prices are going to stay down for an extended time. we're going to look for is in april, they're going to reset the asset-backed bonds. we have some energy exposure that it is very limited about 1%. we are looking to this as a catalyst to be a high yield problem. alix: let's break that down. they come to banks and get their assets and re-rated -- they got $10 last year and maybe they will get two dollars this year. >> and what are they going to do with that shortfall question mark cost of capital is going to go higher. a lot of them are doing joint ventures. some of them are selling stock but a lot of this is value -- i don't believe it is going to recover so fast. >> what kind of yield should be

reflective of this kind of environment? >> this was a very heavily issued sector. they were issued at debt to earnings multiples very high six and seven times. 70 percent of them have no triggers. i'm not sure the recovery is going to be there. i'm not even sure what to pay for these bonds. but there's not a lot of trading in the prices are not necessarily reflective of where they are going. alix: it is an ill liquid market. do we have hedge funds offering deals good for them? >> our hedge fund is certainly looking. a lot of high net worth individuals who invest are keying in independently. but all of us agree that you want to wait for the june or september timeframe. >> wait until they don't get

their loans and see how desperate they are. the closes next on "street smart." ♪

alix: welcome to our viewers around the globe. you're watching bloomberg television and this is "street smart." joining me to break down the action is the founder and ceo of 5th street asset management mike regan and lisa abramowicz. we are looking at the stocks now at the lows of the session. the dow down triple digits, over 300 points. why? none of this information we have is new. >> i think that today, with the strengthening dollar, there is a

feeling that the u.s. is going to import deflation. that the european slowdown is going to come here by way of making it more difficult for u.s. companies to export their goods cheaply and that's going to slow the economy. >> there is a good reason why the dollar is so strong. japan is printing 10 times faster. alix: you can make the argument that is not working there. >> it actually is working because it actually that's why they want to print more. japan needed it. he have 90 million people -- you a declining population and a lot of issues. alix: growth is weak and we still have issue with what -- issues with wages there. >> it all starts and ends with earnings. we are looking at a decline in earnings this quarter and next quarter. a large part probably do to the

dollar importing deflation. but the market was trading at a multiple, a lot of confidence in growth, that earnings were going to keep going and we are not quite getting that. the fed rate might not derail a big rally like that but coupled with a lackluster earnings environment, it is a 12 punch. >> are you saying the fretted -- the fed is not going to increase the interest rate? alix: about 40% of s&p companies do have an exposure to exports. >> i think a big part of the story is oil. i think people are starting to get concerned about that. if you look at the longer and of the treasury curve, typically moves in tandem with oil prices. it plunged the most since january 30 today. alix: if you look at brent, which has been the downside when it comes to oil, it's off of its

lows we saw in january. this was something a lot of analysts expected, this decline so what is the new part? >> the new part is it could go a lot lower. all they long, you have been listening to news that it could go lower and it is spooking the market. remember the forward futures are showing a slight recovery. but if you don't see the recovery, you have a lot of companies that have real issues. >> i was talking to someone on the syndicate desk of a major bank. he said one of the big reasons energy companies are selling record amounts of that is they want protection against oil prices going lower. they say a -- they see a real possibility of oil prices go lower. >> they are already wide and they are going to get wider.

>> as far as the stock market, everyone will say crude oil is good for the consumer. [closing bell ringing] alix: we want to update our viewers on the close here. you see the dow jones closing around its lows of the session, off around 317 points, the s&p off by about 34 points. taking a look at the moving averages it's just right around the 100 day moving average, eating out a little bit above that 100 day moving average. stocks closing at a one-month low. does this continue? the -- it has been my the dip, but we are looking at two consecutive low days. >> liquidity has to go somewhere. if china continues to slow if

there's a problem in hong kong which i think there might be next year, then us -- venezuela for russia, there are a lot of issues that could happen. >> we have fallen into this pattern of 3% or 4% every month. will janet yellen leave the patient's language in their? it is a tricky call. if this -- ask if someone said to me everybody hates a rally that doesn't mean it's going to end. everybody kind of what's to get some resolution because it doesn't feel quite right. we're not really seeing growth we are seeing tepid stuff. >> but it is seven years already. it's one of the longest rallies in history. >> david bianco coming out saying the dollar could be a catalyst for a correction. he said the fed hikes are on the horizon and would likely

strengthening the dollar further. haven't we been hearing about that 10% correction for the last two years? [laughter] 2011 was last correction for the stock market and some people consider that a bear market. there is a wonky debate over whether the bull market is seven years old or whether we reset in 2011 so not to get to wonky about it but there's some tension between people who say the rally only started in 2011. alix: i want to point out that is not just here in the u.s.. is causing havoc all over the world. the emerging markets index falling, the pay so completely destroyed in mexico. brazilian currency is in desperate need of help. another note today saying turkey

is what we are watching because we see stocks get infected with this declining currency around the world. >> it's good stuff. >> it is risk off with the added issue of all of these countries that have issued dollar denominated that that need international growth in a more proportionate way, they are going to be hit first. >> we just saw that chart comparing the currency in turkey and seeing the decline in both of them being pretty severe. a pretty straight decline now that stocks are starting to pick up. >> if i were an investor in this market, you've got to be hedged. you've got to have liquidity to take advantage when and if this does correct. i think it's not going to be 5% to 9%. i think it's going to be worse. >> the hedges are going to be expensive. >> they are really not.

>> the biggest junk bond etf has a six volatility, which is nothing compared to historical volatility at 15%. go to your bloomberg terminal -- i think it's a terrific place to hedge. alix: u.s. travel are a -- u.s. treasuries rallied today as german bonds fell. the ecb bond buying got underway. this -- lisa is super excited. >> this is what is keeping a lid on treasury yields. julie hyman us a great question -- if everyone is worried about the fed hiking rates why are treasury yields going lower? here's the reason why. regardless of what the fed does u.s. yields look so high compared to what is going on in germany. >> the yield at -24 in germany?

>> how does that last when we continue to see the u.s. yield here come down as demand pick up? >> right now -- the trade of people coming to the u.s.? i think what you are seeing is there are a lot of central banks and financial institutions that need to go into treasuries and certain asset classes, so those pressures are going to be there. they might not be there for the corporate that sector but they will be there for the treasury market. that will be sustained for as long as you see this downward pressure. >> the average german yield for two years is -22%. >> i don't understand why the ecb eyes german bonds. you have a limitless reserve, so you could put a dollar often borrow 100 against that. they are forcing it into euro and stuff.

they excluded greece from that policy and we talked about that a couple of weeks ago, but it's an amazing thing -- why would you accept a two year yield of negative -- you are paying them to take it versus putting under your mattress, you save money. >> you must figure it's going to go even further into the negative. >> why not? if you can trade it later? >> it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. if you start having negative yields, that could slow inflation because people are losing money in their deposits and don't have as much to spend and are not encouraged to go invest. if you think there's going to be deflation, it's worth having a negative yield. >> i'm going to make the argument here we are to have inflation. have walmart increasing its minimum wage. they didn't increase it by a little, they increased by 10% or so.

alix: we're still having deflationary worries in europe. are we going to see massive amounts of money flood into the u.s.? >> of is what she's saying. >> is it going to go to stocks? >> we've seen it in the dollar and seen it in treasuries, but eventually we will see it in stocks. it has gone into stocks a large degree in europe. i think the question is, there are all of these complicated currency hedging and it's getting more expensive for people to hedge against increases so it is not as clear-cut as yields are higher here at yields are lower here. alix: i just want to go on to oil. >> i like it when lisa goes on. but let me tell you about my weekend. alix: we've seen oil coming off brent falling for the eighth

straight day. one analyst saying flows into etf totaled north of $5 billion since july of 2014. they say we will see brent come off a little bit as supplies get better and demand falls off, but this financial aspect is going to be a lot more severe than the actual fundamental dictate. >> you have a lot of speculators, a lot of inventories, a lot of ships full of oil with nowhere to go. look at the spread between wti and brent widening. >> what am i looking at here? the spread is 12. >> it's even worse. a month or two, it was two or three, so it's a massive difference. >> how much of oil is a currency story? does it all come back to the strong dollar? >> there's something else that

play because you see monti's like copper fall off. it has to do with weakening growth globally. there's a bloomberg commodity index at its lowest level ever. it is definitely something people are watching. expert they are all trading dollars. >> the great thing about low oil for a company like -- for a country like japan as it allows them -- it has allowed their economy to survive. it has been a real positive for japan as opposed to china who cannot pass it along by raising taxes because transfer prices are different. alix: what's the number one thing you are going to watch for the next few days question mark >> i'm worried about any big shock to the market. probably not much, but a big shock and oil and interest rates could really change things. >> thank you so much. good to have you here. coming up the free agency

underway in the nfl. i will check in with a former all-pro with his advice for current players switching clubs. ♪

alix: welcome back. here are the top stories we are watching after the closing bell. hillary clinton saying she opted to use her personal e-mail account while secretary of state because of convenience. she said it would have been better to use to e-mail accounts. she was answering questions today for the first time about her e-mail practices at secretary of state. fed chair janet yellen will be meeting with richard shelby at 5:00 p.m. today. the fed is under pressure to be more transparent and accountable. credits we's replacing longtime ceo brady dougan with tidjane thiam an insurance executive.

bloomberg spoke to him about that and here's what he said about taking the role. >> it is a really good brand. it means a lot to me because that is something you can work with. you have a lot of good people and a great staff. >> shifting to sports, a former line will be calling miami home. he signed with the dolphin for $114 million for six years. the nfl plus free agency time just got underway moments ago. and this just crossing on espn -- jimmy graham traded from the saints to the seahawks. lots more of this coming in the next goers. my next guest has played 13 seasons in the nfl. robert griffith played in the pro bowl in 2000 and now he is

running for executive director of the nfl players association. great to have you. take me behind what is going on for players right now. what is it like behind closed doors? >> there's a lot of excitement and a lot of uncertainty. players have the opportunity to get to free agency have to understand that this is their time to cash in on all the hard work they put in, all the training, all the hours in the gym, the nutrition, everything they have been able to accomplish on the field is now for them to cash in on for the highest bidder in a team that fits their needs. alix: is it more stressful than actually playing ball? >> it can be. we are talking about the lives of hundreds of men who have to take care of their families -- it's a small window to be able to capitalize on the market, and this is why we set up the system

this way. we fought for the ability to be on the open market and get the highest bidder and choose the team they would like to go to. alix: what is your message to roger goodell right now? are you satisfied? >> i love the nfl and i think he's doing a good job. he's got his position he has to play for the owners and we hear have to have our position and more importantly, we have to get along. that's the basis of why i'm here, to have fostered that communication and allow that to grow the game and keep growing it to a $200 million year situation. alix: give me your pitch. you want to be the executive director, what are you going to bring to us that someone else might not? >> as a veteran, as a guy who

has been around the nfl for 20 plus years, 17 as -- i was on the executive committee for seven years. during that time, we were able to foster a lot of good relations and signed five extensions. we cap growing the game and that is what it is about. it's about both parties getting along and seeing this thing through and putting a positive spin on a game we all love dearly. >> it has been a pretty tough past season for the nfl. deflate gate being kind of the last one. how do you rave the nfl right now? >> it was a tough year. at the end of the day, we still have the number one game in the world. tv revenues are out the was the. we had 114 plus million people

watch the super bowl, the largest tv show in the history of earth. and the players played their part. the owners have the teams, but the players play an integral part into growing the brand. that is part of what i will ring is just to lead by example. monitor your actions, understand that this is something that is an exceptional opportunity. i was an undrafted player and had a chance to play 13 years in this league. during that time, i'll waste knew it was a privilege. the message i'm bringing is that it's a privilege to play this game and let's lead by example and make sure we keep fostering this game and growing it. alix: so would that be a be -- would that the a b on the report card for the nfl?

>> i don't want to get into grades, but there's a lot of work that needs to be done to make sure we are not hurting the game in any respect. in growing the game, we have to look at all sides and i believe the players play an integral part. alix: what part of it do you think is a pr issue and the nfl needing to handle messaging more correctly and what our needs to come from the players? >> it is a four -- for players by players union. only we can control our brand. the nfl pa is a brand managing agency and we have to look at ourselves as that. each player has his brand that he has to keep growing and i believe also each player has to take responsibility on the actions they have on and off the

field. that grows our league and allows us to have more viewership and allows us to reach out to sponsors and say we are not only the best game in the world but we have the cleanest game in the world. >> we just had some news breaking being reported by espn that nick for was being traded for sam bradford. >> that is explosive. sam bradford, i wish both players the best of luck on their new teams. this nfl game is uncertain. players have to be ready at all times and they have to make split decisions on the field in front of 60,000 fans. even in the off-season, you have agents and brand managers and people behind the scenes working different avenues. the player has to go in as a hired gun and get it done. alix: explosive.

do you have a favorite teams? are you allowed to have a team you like the best? >> i like all 32 teams. the vikings of minnesota, they gave me a big opportunity. they gave me as an undrafted free agent a chance to make a team. i believe her. for sure. >> thank you so much for joining us. robert griffith when he is there. "street smart" will be back in just a few minutes. ♪

alix: the saying goes "you can't teach an old dog new tricks." but dun & bradstreet may be proving that you can. dun & bradstreet announcing it new brand modernization effort today.

joining me to discuss the turnaround strategy is the president and ceo, bob carrigan. good to see you. what is it like to reform a company, especially public perception after 170 years question mark >> our reputation is the crown jewel of ours. we've been through a careful process to modernize the brand. we are focusing on how we grow the highest value, the most valuable relationships for our customers by uncovering truth and meaning from data. we sit on the largest commercial database. we have a lot of information about these companies that are useful to our customer. couple that with predictable analytics that are proprietary to us that help our customers make decisions about what profitable segment should we go after question mark what company should we avoid do business with and which companies should we do

more business with? >> data analytics is not the sexiest business to get into. how do you translate that into something that will make people's eyes glaze over? >> in today's market, decisions are being made more and more through the lens of data. data is actually quite hot right now. it's being used in a number of cases, so companies are using data to identify the best prospects to go after. i was just with a major retailer and they use our data to monitor all the vendors at supply products to their store shelves because if anyone of those tenders goes out of business or has financial problems and cannot deliver on time, that causes a big problem. using data to monitor your supply chain, using it to target the most profitable customers, that is sexy stuff today. alix: what's the number one advice you give to a struggling company that wants to turn around?

>> dun & bradstreet is a profitable company, but it's about howdy help your customers grow westmark that is our entire focus. alix: that was more than one word. we will be right back. ♪

alix: welcome back to "street smart." i'm alix steel. here's the top stories we're watching -- bain capital green to buy blue coast systems. blue coast provides internet security software. brain expects the deal to be completed in the first half of the year. stephen cohen's investment firm is hiring about 30 employees that will be building computer models that collect publicly available data and analyze it for patterns, all of this

according to people with knowledge with the matter. as part of a project to expand quantitative investing. in celebration of national women's day, stephanie ruhle spoke with melinda gates about creating opportunities. >> i don't think we are there yet in terms of really empowering women in all types of work there at the various sectors in the united states until we have lots of different styles of women and far more women as ceos and far more women in congress. i don't think we are even close to where we need to be. alix: stocks closing sharply in the red, all 10 sectors closing lower. julie hyman is at the breaking news desk digging deeper. we saw a pickup toward the downside. julie: really gaining momentum. we are hearing from jeff dunlop from double line capital. looks like he is giving one of his calls talking about what's

going on in europe. we've seen some big action in the dollar rising to multi-year highs. he thinks the dollar will continue to rise and bond yields are likely to continue to fall. he says european quantitative easing will create more negative yields which is something we have seen already and limited sovereign bonds will keep a lid on rates. he says in the united states, it's more likely the 10 year yield dips below 2% this year. he's looking for a trade in european stocks. he says the fed is intent on being a blockhead. i assume that is a direct quote. he says the fed raising interest rates will hurt the economy so presumably that is why he is looking to europe instead of in the u.s.. it makes sense if you are looking at it from the perspective of looser monetary policy versus tighter monetary

policy. those headlines just coming out from jeff dunlop. alix: the dollar also implicated there. shifting to war in the middle east -- the death toll continues to rise in iraq as coalitions continue to battle islamic state. another casualty is history of the middle east as militants destroy cultural antiquities. top military officer in the u.s. said he was open to the idea of securing sites for priceless -- where priceless artifacts are located. joining me to discuss this is lieutenant colonel scott mann. what do you make of that, going in to protect antiquities? >> one of the things we are going to have to do is we are going to have to figure out where we are going to draw the proverbial line in the stand -- line in the stand -- line in the sand. they are going to destroy anything that runs counter to their fundamental ideology.

if that includes apostate idols that means they will do that. we will probably have to work with the iraqi security forces to protect those sites and i think iraqi security forces will are better suited to protecting that. alix: where do you think the line and -- the line in the sand should be? >> i think we're going to have to work with the sunnis. there are marginalized groups in iraqi that are major factors in the fight and we are not working with them to the extent we could. the marginalized sunnis in the tribal areas are being exploited by isis in a range of ways and we are going to have to get in and work from the bottom up with those tribes. that's absolutely essential to stabilizing iraq. >> how long do you think that is going to take? >> that's part of the conversation we have to hand -- we have to have about this style of islamist extremism. these guys are committed to an end of days scenario and we are

going to have to deal with this for a long time. we are not going to win this in one combat rotation or one presidential term. i think we can do it with a smaller footprint and smaller presence but we are going to have to take -- we're going to have to think long term. alix: i have been reading reports that islamic state is using antiquities and smuggling them out in order to raise funds. that makes it even higher stakes to get it -- to get it under control. is going after the funding and the money a better solution? >> i think it's one component, the same way going after leadership is an important part. two areas where we are not paying enough attention is holding up the narrative and the actual just cruelty and overt violence they are promulgating. we have to show that more so than what we are doing. but i think we have to work with

groups that are already resisting these folks and who want to resist. there are a bunch of them out there. alix: how do we show that? do we have to do that at home or get that out in the middle east? >> my nonprofit and the book i have written is really about understanding their narrative. there are a lot of americans who don't understand these guys are committed to assuring in an end of days scenario. their job is to manufacture a holy war between them and the crusaders, and that is us. alix: we found out over the weekend that boko from his pledging allegiance to islamic state. what do you make of that? >> i think it's a natural expansion of islamic state. i think you will see more and more of these groups who may have at one time pledged allegiance to al qaeda and a like this aggressive pursuit of the caliphate and the realization of this and of days scenario. people are buying into this.

young folks from the inner cities of the united states and terror groups in africa. they are going to expand. the sooner we take them as a credible threat, the sooner we can set about defeating them. alix: to get the message out there so people like me get it. >> we have to have this conversation with everyday americans so that they get it. alix: thank you so much for blowing my mind. it's going to be a long trudge there. coming up, we are looking at china's february cpi numbers. they are showing some improvement that could it be masking a bigger risk of deflation? more on that, next. ♪

alix: welcome back. here are the top stories we're watching after the closing bell. europe must on line -- largest online at fashion retailer selling its stake for 150 $5 million. shares are trading at about 13%

higher than listing price. they sell shoes and clothing and 15 european countries. the co-investor of swatch says apple could sell as many watches as all of switzerland. he says apple's entry will bring on the ice age four swiss watches. a chinese social media company saying their shares rose 47% higher than their guidance. monthly active users rose to an increase of 36% year on year. active daily users rising 31%. we have breaking news from google. julie: it says like google plus chief finance officer will be retiring. google says it could happen in the next six months. he will be retiring from the company. we don't have many other details

at this point. this announcement was made in a filing and it looks like google chairs -- google shares are trending downward in reaction to this news that the cfo will be leaving. just looking at his bio, and looks like he has been with google since august of 2008 as the senior vice president and chief financial officer. we will bring you more details on his departure when we have them. alix: looking ahead to asia's market open -- investors worried world's second-largest economy is headed for outright deflation. the consumer price index rose from a year earlier, but january's reading was the lowest in more than five years. despite the rebound, the inflation rate is still less than half the government's target of 3%. here to break down the problem is our bloomberg reporter. is china's policy working?

they want the inflation is it working? >> if it were any month except february, i might have a stronger answer, but there was a blip in february and that was chinese new year. during chinese you -- chinese new year, is the time of eating traveling, giftgiving and more eating. that drove prices for food. basically, looking at the numbers there, meet rose 1.4% rice and flour rose 2.9%. fruit invest all throws more than 4%. but if we take the food out of the mix, cpi would fall to just .9%. the actual official target is 3% for 2015. >> we have seen the central bank take action. it cut rates three times and no one is expecting them to do that. the expectation is they will

come more money in. what do they have in their toolbox at they have not done yet? >> is the same tools they have been using from before. rates and reserves. with rates, they can further cut interest rates. falling by 25 aces points to the deposit rate as well as the leverage rate. but they are expecting this to fall another quarter in the next -- another 25% in the next quarter. about three years ago, when i was reporting in hong kong on china's inflation, the reserve rate ratio was 21%. but that has been cut to about 19.5%. we are talking about an infusion of 96 million dollars. >> "bloomberg intelligence had a great article about this a couple of weeks ago pointing out that inflation is falling in tandem with those nominal interest rate.

in actuality, real borrowing costs are little changed, which could be part of the weaker growth we have seen in china. >> that's another question -- is deflation or disinflation going to be the issue going forward? different people will give you different answers. one person said while inflation is low, it will remain in positive territory. analysts are more concerned and investors the shanghai composite fell about .5% and the hang seng full -- fell about 1%. >> and all of that is in the backdrop of the fed in the move into the dollar and the treasury market wreaking havoc on its own. thank you very much. we will be right back with more "street smart." stay with us. ♪

alix: it is time now for the roundup. i'm here with julie and matt. did you guys have a hard time getting tickets for kanye west's door? matt: i have been trying 0% of the time. alix: you can buy a bag of air from the show but there is free shipping. julie: i'm sure you did try to get tickets to the dead shows in chicago. i think the bag of air from those shows. alix: this comes from julie's has been who may have a little bit of an obsession with phish. matt: their guitarist is actually playing with the

grateful dead on their tour. alix: that is $10,000. matt: the bid went up to $60,000. i looked around to try to see what other interesting things have gone for money on ebay. someone actually auctioned off in the realm of rock stars, and uneven piece of -- any piece of french toast from justin bieber. someone auctioned for $28,000 a piece of grilled cheese that had a bite taken out of it that has an image of the virgin mary. julie: timberlake or bieber? you could pull some dna. alix: we are so not the target audience. bloomberg is pledging to create one million jobs for women within the next five years. this is in partnership with the united nations with the aim of

advancing gender equality. i applaud that attempt and i also respect the issue that women are not in the sea suite. matt: they want to create a million jobs for women. they don't have a million spots on their executive board. alix: it would be great if companies wanted to diversify their c suite as well as. julie: i was surprised that 14% of their drivers are already women have a which i imagine is a higher proportion than taxi drivers. alix: who are you going to call? channing tatum. me and the pop culture, not so good. sony is planning a second ghostbusters film with tatum as a producer in addition to the reboot featuring melissa

mccarthy, who i do know said to be released in july of 2016. julie: there's so much awesomeness and all of that that it's hard to unpack. matt: my initial thought was if bill murray is not an it, that i don't want to see it. it then i heard channing tatum is in it and i do want to see it. he's hilarious. he has the ability to bring the laugh and still, i think chicks victim, right? is that not the case? alix: all right. julie: that's a franchise and merchandising -- it's going to be the next juggernaut. alix: which is impressive. matt: i just saw him in "magic mike." julie? alix: we have to go.

up next, you may never need to go to the gym again if you have this $2000 bike. ♪

alix: the future of this technology is now. paladin cycle is the latest addition to the indoor cycling craze. but is not just in manhattan it's in your home. a want their customers to invest in a video enabled bike and a $40 a month live stream workout package, taking advantage of all of the technology on my wrist. the ceo joins me now to tell us about this $2000 bike, which is the size of my daughter's room. what kind of demand are you seeing for roddick's like this?

>> we're seeing fantastic demand. boutique fitness has exploded in the last four or five years. people want more convenient more effective workouts and we are seeing crazy demand. to be honest, we can't make them fast enough. >> that's steep. $2000 a month -- $2000 plus a monthly subscription. what are you looking at? >> last year, we did $10 million in revenue. we're looking at doing $50 million. $2000 sounds like a lot but we don't make a lot of money on that. the bike is the best bike ever built, but the platform allows you to stream live indoor cycling classes from your home anytime you want. alix: are we looking at one now?

>> this one is live. we can jump over if you want. us do this real time. alix: who is this for? >> most of the demand is for young couples, their average ages 46 years old couples in the suburbs that don't have access to boutique cycling. the instructors here in chelsea are some of the best instructors in the world and the vikes are in 50 states, 16 countries -- anywhere you are. if you live in wichita falls you can get a 10 out of 10 instructor in your basement living room or bedroom at 6:00 in the morning on demand and the global leaderboard allows you to compete with other people, do video chat -- it's a very immersive technology. alix: what about where it is most popular. in new york, this would be a hard fit unless you live in a brownstone or duplex. >> we are seeing some people buy

them in manhattan because it is a value play overtime. it's $39 a month for unlimited classes. if you're addicted to the category, that can get expensive. you can put the bike in your bedroom. its silence, so it doesn't disturb your partner. put your headphones on and your partner is sleeping. >> how about profit? this is very expensive to build when the you expect to turn a profit? >> we are shooting for 12 months from now. it's a beautiful business model because it is subscription digital content. $39 a month is a very high margin for us. we don't make a lot of money on the bike, so the name of the game is to get the vikes in people's homes and spend money on digital content after the fact. alix: this is on par with wearable fitness. will you buy an apple watch?

>> i will because i need to know as a bike owner, suck going to change my world, but i think it's one of the coolest gadgets everyone is going to want to get. alix: thank you so much. that's it for "street smart." "when all the respect" is up next. ♪

john: i'm john heilemann. mark: i'm mark halperin. and with all due respect to hillary clinton, you need one phones work, one phone for personal stuff, and one for candy. ♪ a lot of candy. on the show tonight, there were 10 million reporters committee putting the turks at hillary's hallway press conference today. if you missed it, here's one of the most important to she gave on wife used personal e