i think we catch a lot of upgrades from the people who were too skeptical to fend it off. it's a bull market summer. be ready on "mad money". i'm jim cramer. i will see you tomorrow! [ music playing ] the syria small. it looks more like that supposedly imminent attack against syria may be delayed, at least until the g-20 meeting next week. plus british prime minister david cameron just lost a key vote in parliament that would have authorized a strike on syria. back home, president obama is talking about shots across the bow rather than regime change or taking out the syrian military. the syrian delay, and a better than expected gdp revision helped keep stocks in the green today, but if you take a closer look at the report, you won't find any reasons for a big second-half rebound. it was a day of national

protest by fast-food worker, they want $15 an hour, but these thing margin companies will be forced to lay off workers and drive up the unemployment rate. by the way, that is all especially true with obama care calls coming in, too. all those stories and many more on "the kudlow report" beginning right now. good even, everyone. this is "the kudlow report." u.n. inspectors conducted their third day of investigations into last week's alleged chemical weapons attack, this as international support for the military strikes against the syrian regime appears to be waning. nbc's ayman missou mo hell -- m

joins us. >> reporter: in the last 24 to 36 hours that's a spike given over the last several weeks they've been seeing -- that reflects a growing anxiety among syrians of what many people are saying is an impending military strike against the syrian government. however, there are growing concerns today beyond a humanitarian crisis. there are also concerns that this conflict could spread beyond syria's borders to affect the entire region. today a senior iranian commander came out and said if the united states attacked syria, it would be the second vietnam war for the american military and more importantly said it would be the beginning of the end of the israeli state. meanwhile, israel concerns are running high. the israeli government has called up a few reserves. more importantly there's been a run on in terms of gas masks, concerned that perhaps the

syrian government might fire chemical weapons into israel. here one of the closest allies, hezbollah said they would come to -- that has given a lot of countries in the region a moment of pause. egypt and jordan both expressing recent laze. many thanks to nbc's ayman mole din. to discussion the syrian crisis and potential military response, but the big question is whether the white house needs congressional approval before it acts. >> after vietnam congress swore it would never again be duped into war and even wrote a new law, the war powers act to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes, but no law can force a congress to stand up to a president. no law can make senators read

the intelligence that showed the president was overstating the case for war. no law can give congress a backbone if it refuses to stand up. >> all right. well, mr. president, now more than 150 house members are showing that very backbone writing this her, saying congressional approval is in fact needed for military action in syria. let's talk. joining us the man who spearheaded this effort, the republican from virginia, and one of his democratic co-signers, zoe lofgren from california. thank you to both. scott, let me begin with you, dame cameron, the prime minister of the united kingdom just lost a close vote in parliament on the syrian military attacks. are you going for something different here?

>> well, larry, we're going for the president slowing down a bit, following the constitution and if he believes the use of force is both warranted and imminent, first coming to congress -- and i don't think you could have giving us a better introduction than the president's own words. this initiative that we're all part of, i appreciate zoe, my colleague, joining us in this. it is not a partisan issue. it is a bipartisan effort to really have the president slow down a bit and do what we think is certainly the right thing and the constitutional man dade, which is to come first to this body, seek and receive authorization before applies military force in syria. >> ms. lofgren. >> by the way, welcome to "the kudlow report." >> thank you. >> tell me what specifically you would like to see in a letter or document that would go to the president? >> well the president needs a vote under the war powers act,

as he himself noted. i would note that vice president biden had the same opinion. >> i guess i'm quite skeptical about the idea of another war in the middle east, but certainly the congress needs to hear from the president, we need to see his facts, hear what his plan is, why this is good for the united states, why it would be good for the world, what the end game is, and so forth. so that hasn't happened. not only does the law require there, but clearly the situation in our country requires it. people in the country are weary of war, the polls show they don't want to do this. >> no, i hear you. >> the president needs to convince us. >> i hear that, and i think the shadow of iraq hangs over there. i understand that perfectly well. what i'm suggesting, though, is doesn't the president have a 90-day leeway period under the war powers act? >> no, no, he doesn't. i've actually posted the war

powers act on my website. i invite people to read it. there are three instances when the president can act unilaterally. -- not u.n. lat rayly -- when the president can bring us to the war, when there's regulation or statute tore authority or when the u.s. has been attacked. we've not been attacked. we've not declared a declaration of war. the reporting requirements are after those predicates have been met, and in fact later in the document, you can read it, it says nothing in the reporting relieves the president from complying with the lawyer. >> scott, look, from what i gather speaker boehner basically agrees. i don't see much daylight. >> no, there's a difference here and it's an important one. i respect what the speaker has been doing. he as ratcheted up the left of

accountability, but what we're saying is the president must seek and obtain not just consultation, that's a good thing, but specific statutory authority. that is a specific up or down vote in both houses. given what i know now, my vote would be no, but i would also enter into a joint session that the president can and should call us into if he thinks that the use of force is imminent. i would go in with an open mind. i am open to new information, but given what i know now, my vote would be no. >> i don't want to defend or not defend here. i don't want to do pro and con. i'm as skeptical as some of you are, but i think the argument will be made by the white house, by the president, that if something isn't done to syria.

he needs to fire a shot across the bow to stop what would be a regional conflagration. turkey, israel, jordan. and hamas, and hezbollah and iran. he's going to say it's going to be a regional conflagration, our great ally israel will be deeply involved, and in order to keep world peace and in order to enforce the laws of humanity, we have to do this, we being the united states government. is that satisfactory to you? >> they are all noble objectives shared by i think every member of congress, but absent a specific authority, should the president proceed until those grounds and apply u.s. force here without that statutory authority, i truly believe it's unconstitutional. >> so you want a piece of legislation and vote on the legislation up or down whether

or not to engage in this military? i just want to make it simple. >> i'm speaking to me, absolutely. that's what we said in our letters that 140 members signed on, including 21 of mice democratic colleagues. >> i would node that barbara lee has a her that's somewhat different but makes the same point that a vote is required. if you add up all the signatures, it's 185 members of congress who signed that in about 24 hours, which is extraordinary my guess is a clear majority of house is that opinion. >> this is big news i want yes, it is. >> particularly with david cameron in london using, and losing parliamentary voight. thank you both. i appreciate it. let's turn in and out to without military strategy, which frankly i still find so baffling. no game plan for regime change. i don't see a plans to take out

the chemical weapons, yet the white house is already telling assad's forces how long any attack will be. we're telegraphing everything. take a listen to this white house press briefing today. >> the president has been very clear that we're -- he is not contemplating an open-ended military action. he is contemplating what we're talking about here is something that's very discreet and limited. >> all right, discreet, limbed. here now is former white house middle east policy adviser, ambassador mark ginsberg. he's using phrases like a shot across the bow as though that's going to convince the assad regime if they stay in place not to do this again. let me ask you this directly. suppose we have a few shots across 9 bow. suppose it takes two or three days. what's to say he won't use them again? they'll still be there, and the military will still be there. >> i wrote about that very question that you just asked in

the huffington post today. look, no one, not the president, not god, knows what assad and the clique around him will do. how many cruise missile attacks will it take him to deter and accomplish the president's very limited goals here of in effect degrading his willingness to use chemical weapons against? i don't know the answer to that. i'm not suggesting that anyone knows the answer to that. would it be 20 salvos? 30? 50? the bottom line is the following -- the president made it clear in his limited goals and object 'tis that he wants to, one, punish assad that has clearly been based on intelligence -- >> let me follow through on that. i'm just going to ask you this question. you saw the headlines this morning -- no smoking gun has

been established linking assad to the chemical weapons. >> i don't agree with that. >> i understand that, but the u.n. inspectors are there, and let me go a step further not only has a smoking gun not been found you're going into the g-20 mark, and it's, what, september 5th and 6th, so what was going to be an immediate quick surprise to take the syrians out is now lost. >> what do you mean by smoking gun? i'm not sure i understand. >> the papers are saying they know chemical weapons were used. >> who is saying that? >> i've seen it written in several news reports. but they don't know who used them. >> let met make sure the congressman you had on and you understand, these inspectors, by mandate cannot and are not permitted to determine who is

responsible. the only thing that they can do is to determine that a chemical weapons attack occurred. how we then reveal the sources of information that corroborate the regime is responsible is what the obama administration is disclosing to congress based on interception. >> the shadow of iraq hangs over it, the shadow of colin powell addressing the united nations way back when, early 2002, i hope i'm close on that. and it since out the weapons of mass destruction weren't there. so now, not only has the administration failed to convince people that it was assad that dropped these chemical weapons. i'm not defending anything, these are facts. you've got a full-scale

rebellion from the prior segment, democrats and republicans in congress. won't let him dot it. if he doesn't prove his kay. the war powers revolution fight has been waged ever since this resolution was passed. look, turkey under our nato treaty alliance is a country that has already attacked by syria. if the president wants to use art five of the nato treaty, he does not need the war powers permission to do that. we have had 12 times since the war powers resolution was passed where the united states acted without the support of congress. >> you are probably technically right. you have much greater knowledge than i do. but i tell you what he needs. he needs the support of the american people.

without that it's going to be difficult for him to do more than a day's work or two days' work. you know better than i know that we can't solve this problem. no regime change. i don't think you could even take out the command and control. >> i agree. >> what i'm saying, is i'm saying to mr. obama, make your case to the american people. if you get them behind you -- you know, something will change and we won't have this regional disaster, which we may have on our hands which becomes, make even spread to europe. you see what i'm saying in he's got to do his work, and he hasn't done it yet. >> listen, it's -- i agree with you. secretary kerry made a statement corroborating what he understood, the president made a statement on pbs, david cameron lost his vote, because he took the cart before the horse.

the fact of the matter is that for the limited goals and objectives that the president wants to make, it would be important for him, in order to quell this mini-rebellion to put that information out. >> right. >> i can tell you the inspectors will issue their report and the president will provide the briefs material to the senior leaders, and you will see this change. >> i sincerely hope you are right, even though i'm probably more aggressive on the syrian thing. i hope you're right. i hope so, too. >> ambassador mark ginsberg, as always. let's look at how the stock market reacted to the new developments. we'll also look at the company that makes the missiles we're expected to use if we ever do attack the assad regime. later in the show, the picketers were out in force, demanding massive races for fast-food workers. won't that reduce new hires?

and drive up unemployment? don't forget free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. free labor markets should set wages, not the government. i'm kudlow. we'll be right back.

markets are up for the second day. here now we have jeff klein top, cleave market strategist, one of the vest best investment advisers. maybe a cause and effect, okay? david cameron, the prime minister just lost a syrian military vote. that means the coalition is breaking down. now, the price of oil just fell a buck.

i think unfortunately we have a lodge history of mitt tear conflict and strikes one committed to a military action, stocks usually fall, until we get to the point that the u.s. finally takes decisive action, certainly iran in 2008, serbia in '99. late lately the stocks have begun to rice, a week before. use it be the last two days are anticipating a strike this weekend, but also the fact that the president is leaves on the 3rd, on tuesday to head to sweden. >> i don't know. i'll go back.

i like yours point about stocks rising. gull to the iraqy war after the unand down, stock says exploded higher. now you have this existential stall. now with the u.n. inspectors, they've got to go to the g-20, september 5th appeared 6th everybody does waiting it out help or hurt? >> i think it hurt stocks. plus last week we have the manufacturing report, the jobs report, remember this pullback started on domestic policy concerns, not foreign policy.

the tapering from the fed and concerns about what the pace of economic growth, that still remains in the background. not the military. good enough. just one thought. jeff, hold on a second. we'll be talking about the market reaction, but there's one sector everybody might want to keep an eye on. less ate go to dominic i don't middle east defensive, i mean the ones who make weapons one of those companies is raytheon. one of its largest programs is the missile and ordnance systems there. they make a lot of them around the world, perhaps best known for the tomahawk cruise missile, a longer-railings -- typically

fighter, and raythene on characterizes it as an unmanned aircraft that goes on a one-way trip. they are ordering 196 missiles per year through fiscal 20189. in the next year, the plan calls for spending about $300 million, the approximate cost per tomahawk comes in at $1.6 million. raytheon has been on a tear. that did earlier this we're analysts downgraded a -- other defense stocks have had big run-ups. they're all had market returns this year, so defense certainly

one sector you want to keep an eye on. >> thank you very much. jeff, back to you. we're a little pressed for time, but quickly, defense sector or not, is it too expensive? or are you buying it? >> i don't think it's too expensive. as we get to the debt ceiling debate, you're going to look at defense my guess is we don't see the defense cuts, we see some of the negotiations, that could be a plus, so i see some positives there. >> you said you were looking forward to a bunch of important economic reports next week, i believe you mentioned the isms. can i ask you, in today's gmt dp report, the best part was probably profits. they went up i think year on year about 7%, or do mist pick profits went up 7%. overall up 5%. that means for the second quarter -- these are i.r.s.

profits, does that make you more bullish? do you think that's a surprising positive? importantly we sea profit margins rise, yes, we have relatively fla, but companies are going more and more lean and mean, so profit margins rising about 12% here. >> right here, last question, looking at the profits number, and buys or selling? >> we're buying them. i don't think this is -- i think we haven't seen the highs yet. don't think that's going to happen. these are the time when values are created itches well said. trick stuff. jeff, we appreciate it. dominic, we appreciate your

report, too. a major decision from the federal government on how to deal with the states that have basically legalized marijuana use. cnbc's mary thompson has that story next up on kudlow.

gl evening, larry. the nfl will paid $765 million to settle lawsuits, the players claiming the league knew and hid the dangers of concussions. it ends a legal battle and prevents the nfl from having to turn over information on what it knew about head injuries. it will be used to treat and compensation families. those laws allow pot for recreational purposes, and though still under legal review -- or though it's still illegal, i should say under federal law, the doj says it won't prosecute. and that means same-sex couples will get the same treatment until the tax law as

any other married couples. big stuff out of washington. thank you, mary. we appreciate it. now, sure they work hard, about you should young, inexperienced fast-food workers get paid $15 an hour like they protesters are demanding? we will debate market realities and economic sanity just ahead on "the kudlow report." when we made our commitment to the gulf, bp had two big goals: help the gulf recover and learn from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

license and registration please. what's this? uhh, it's my geico insurance id card, sir. it's digital, uh, pretty cool right? maybe. you know why i pulled you over today? because i'm a pig driving a convertible? tail light's out.. fix it. digital insurance id cards. just a click away with the geico mobile app. ♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools introduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announcer ] today, cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everyone goes home happy.

workers went on strike to demand higher wages, some saying they should be paid as much as $15 an hour, but we've learned that government wage setting drives down new hires and drives up unemployment. why not let the market set the wage? here is former chief economist to vice president biden, jared bernstein, and cnbc contributor carol roth. carol, whatever happened to the laws and supply and demand? i mean, $15 an hour, why not give them $50 bucks an hour? >> you've hit the nail on the head. that's what the market is all about. all about the employers and implodees coming together, evaluating skills, evaluating

supply and demand and deciding among themselves what the right value proposition is. if we enact a higher minimum wage, it will hurt entrepreneurs, and hurt the very low-wage works e. unskilled workers it's meant to protect when the jobs go to higher-skilled workers. >> i pads and robots, jared, look it, to me having a job, you're young, you're inexperienced, these are mostly young and inexperienced people. having a job is one of the greatest things possible. you learn discipline, you learn responsibility, you learn skills, you may learn how to cook or not. you may learn how to operate a cash register or not. you make money because you get promoted, and then you launch a creek. you just don't have the government say here's your wage. >> so i think the important thing to recognize is while you and carol have been making arguments that sound reasonable,

even to me, they actually just don't link up with the real world in the following way. i looked at the numbers before i came over here. if you look at the population of people who earn less than ten bucks an hour, and that's who we're talking about, 88% of them are adults. 44% of them have at least some college education. the tip. >> caller: work serious actually brings home half of their family's earnings, so i think the image that you have in your head of a teenager at an entry-level job certainly applies, but doesn't apply to the folks on the street today. one other people. the theory of supply and demand is all well and good, but i think carol said we don't know. in fact we know very well. we've had a minimum wage in place since the 1930s. we have 18 states with their own minimum wages. there are no area of labor economics that are better researched than this.

>> no. >> and it just doesn't work that way the the empirical evidence goes the other way. >> anytime i hear anything about the living wage or this is what we need to live, it says to me you don't have faith in the american people. i have unlimited faith in the american people. >> i'd like you to address the research. >> i'd like you to address the research. >> if you have the desire and if you have -- and if you have the will, you can go in and start with those entry-level jobs, and you can work your way up. that is what it's meant to be. it's not meant to be a career path, if that is what you want. for some people they are okay with that. i'm not judgmental of that, but if you are an american and you have the desire, you with go in and work your way up. that is what the -- what america is all about. >> so here's the problem. when you get into that's what america is all about, i think you're drifting very far afield from what's at issue here. the issue is if you increase the

minimum wage, will you actually hurt or help the beneficiaries? >> to a small business owner. >> hold on, carol, let me finish. can i finish? >> sure, jared. >> so we have had extensive research that compares neighboring states where one state raised the minimum wage and the other didn't. it's a great experimental kind of controlled design rare in economics. time and again we have found that in fact the bchb fits of the increase disproportionately help. >> carol, here's where i my nigh friend jared wanders astray. he doesn't look at it from the business side. you have these big changes like mcdonald's, most of them are franchises. most of those franchising are like small businesses. >> this is a good point. >> with very thin profit margins. that's the problem i have. you'll bankrupt the franchisee, and you have obama care coming,

which will make everything more expensive. take it from the standpoint of the business. >> we are simpatico. we have 28 million small business owners that risk their capital and risk their time. nobody is saying they should be guaranteed a wage, so what are you proposing, jared? you think we should have a small business owner with a living wage? they're the ones putting the capital at risk, and if so, who will fund that? >> i think this is a fair argument. you raise good points. i think the history of moderate increases show that in fact franchises do fine, but it is true that some of it comes out of their profit, some out of prices, some out of actually enhanced productivity and lower vacancy rates, so that's a good thing. >> have you ever small a small business before? >> i'm running one right now. that kind of a critique, really again if you want to get to my small business versus yours,

we're not going to get far here. we need to look at the national evidence. you guys have a point. what we find is minimum wage increases do not lead to the job loss effects you were going with. >> no -- >> yes, but they do. >> they affect all small business owners. >> they do have an impact on profitability. i agree with that. i've got to get out. all i'm asking for is reply and demand. i will say this also, the current minimum wage is $7.25 if i'm not mistaken. president obama wants to raise it to $9. all right? i happen to disagree with that, but that's his proposal. the seiu union that sponsored the protests, they said to take it from 7.25 to 15, double. to double the minimum wage i think would be an absolute catastrophe, pardon my editorial, but i just wanted to get that in. jared bernstein thank you,

carol, nice to see you again. we learned today the economy this spring was a good deal stronger, but there are still some real warning signs for the rest of the year, and we're going to explain that next up on "the kudlow report." [ male announcer ] come to the lexus golden opportunity sales event and choose from one of five lexus hybrids that's right for you, including the lexus es and ct hybrids. ♪ this is the pursuit of perfection. [ male announcer ] come to the golden opportunity sales event

to experience the precision handling of the lexus performance vehicles, including the gs and all-new is. ♪ this is the pursuit of perfection.

today as gdp revisions beat expectations at 2.5% growth in the second quarter, but if you take a closer look at the numbers, you'll see that business inventories look to be rising too fast and consumer spending and business investment are both very soft. therefore, i don't really see much hope for a second-half economic rebound, but let's talk. here are jim pepekukas, and jeff killburg, founder and kreismt off of kk financial. how do you seize it? >> i think you're spot on. we had a great growth, but remember q2, we're talking about april, may and june, a long time ago. the bright spots in that report was housing and exports. now, let's look at the last two months. we've seen emerging markets sell off, housing get crushed, and with the theme of college football tonight, they've both

been decleated. so we don't see that growth moving forward. it's actually quite sedating to see that number come out, even though a lot of people were quite uphoric. we're not buying it. >> in terms of the future, let's say the third quarter and fourth quarter, and maybe even early 2014, what did you see in today's numbers? ivities look, i really look the profits. i like the did corporate profits. talking about corporate profits, if you begin to look at profits, considering we're in a global economic, i don't think you have to have profits come down. private-sector gdp, let's put the government aside, up 3.3%, listen it's not a fantastic number, but, you know, we're moving along nicely.

i have word that the inventory may mean a little weaker third quarter, so toward the same old recovery, about 2%, not a disaster, but certainly not enough to make up for the huge gaps that we have. >> i talked to jeff kleintopf about the numbers, but let me ask you about this, jeff, how do you -- you look at these gdp numbers, it is sort of yesterday's story, i grant you that, but part of the story today we haven't discussed is inflation. inflation has been an ongoing theme. the inflation rate year on year i think is less than 1% on the gdp players. i think that's a tax cut. i think it's a tax cut for consumers, and a tax cut for businesses. do you agree with that? is that a positive? >> it is a positive, larry, but you know the pendulum swings too fast, and the fed, who is swinging the pendulum, i think inflation will be quite scary,

so right now until we see a wage inflation, we're not concerned, but we are being very, very cautious about what's coming down the pipeline, because it's going to rear its ugly head like it always does. >> let me go to the great reserve race. this is a fun story. "wall street journal" reports today that janet yellen is playing down her chances, and then richard trumka saying yellen would be a better fed chief. anyway, what are yellen's chances, james pethokoukos? what do you think? >> the folks i talked to thoughts that larry summers was a lock, and then pushback, negative stories, bond losses, the signal democrats about a third of the senate coming out against him. and he still seems to be the

front-runner. i think this administration wants larry summers. i don't think there's much that janet yellen can do. i think that she's some sort of dangerous super-dove idea. i think that's ma larky, but i would be surprised if it's not larry summers. >> jeff, i'll ask you for your choice, but one point quickly. both of those extinguished -- there's no taylor rule, no nominal gdp rule. it's called the phillips curve trade-off, but that's what they're going to do, they're both going to target. the unemployment rate. >> i think there is a difference, but from that perspective, yes, with you say it be moved from 6.5% to 7%. we think that was a big game changer, but i think yellen is the choice, it's a smoother transition. i think larry is brilliant, and we're not taking anything away

from him, but i think he's more volatile. there's a huge person kind of relationship in washington, so maybe he gets the nod, but from a more sedated perspective, yellen would be the better transition. >> listen, janet yellen, again she has spoken very positively about nominal gdp, afternoonors fed policy to a nominal gdp target. if you're looking for a rules-based candidate there's far more evidence. >> and larry, i think lastly, i think people forget that janet yellen knew the housing bubble was coming. she doesn't get enough props for that. >> i have to see this nominal gdp stuff from janet yellen. i don't doubt you, i just want you to show it to me. thank you both. now, reports say that google founder sergei brinn may be

splitting up with his wife. this isn't just about about money. we have the whole story on kudlow. alert.

the beach on your tv is much closer than it appears. dive into labor day with up to 50% off hotels at travelocity. is that true? says here that cheerios has whole grain oats that can help remove some cholesterol, and that's heart healthy. ♪ [ dad ] jan?

we have two personal stories about corporate leaders for you now. a bit salacious, a little sad, but i think very interesting. jon fortt has the love triangle at google. good evening. >> good evening, sergei brinn and paige founded google, when

they set up shot in a garage. many years later, and her little sister ann is married to brinn. that's where things get complicated. they are no longer living in the same space, according to a record from all things d. and he runs google x-lance is set to be dating a google employees whose job it is to market google glass. the impact on google is unclear. it seems they're dealing with each other amicably, and investors must be used to whispers. but i've hearty some concern from employees about mr. susan will be affected at all about the state of her sister's marriage to brin. i imagine it's never nice to have your name or your family member's names in the headlines.

>> i want to get back to this, but i want to go to mary thompson. we're going to the cfo, zurich insurance committed suicide. zurich insurance. now the ceo is resigning, because he thinks family members of the cfo and others are going to blame him for the suicide. whoa. i don't get this at all, mary. >> joseph ackerman stepping down as head of the insurance giant, saying he's doing so to protect the reputation of the swiss firm, the former chairman handing in the resignation, claiming he was being blamed for the suicide. on monday he was found dead, and ackerman resigning after a board meetings that followed. while insisting the company issue a statement rebutting the allegations, in the statement he said dish i have reasons to believe the family is of the opinion that i should take my share of responsibility as unfounded as any allegation might be. reportedly after her husband's

death, the widow complained about how her spouse was treated by the company an by ackerman. the company hurt by payments to cover damage from natural disasters and a low interest rate environment that's hurting the investment income, but the firm says it wasn't aware of any disagreements. while credited with billing deutsche bank into a financial powerhouse, ackerman has been dogged by criticism and controversy over his handling of his succession, and controversy over yes, sir turs and comments he's made that have been seen as arrogant and sexist. >> is the cfo's suicide, real quick, is because he worked too hard? is that why they're blaming ackerm ackerman? >> it's unclear. i don't know if he left a note, but evidently comments were made by the family that resulted in his resignation. >> and brin and wo juries can i had a prenup agreements.

unless they've been leaked out. who knows what's in the prenup? >> they haven't told me about it if there is one. >> who knows. >> and they haven't said they're getting divorced. ah. well, all right, this is over my head. jon fortt, mary thompson, you're great. that's it for tonight's show. thanks for watching. i'm larry kudlow. see you tomorrow evening. (announcer) scottrade knows our clients trade and invest their own way. with scottrade's smart text, i can quickly understand my charts, and spend more time trading. their quick trade bar lets my account follow me online so i can react in real-time. plus, my local scottrade office is there to help. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade. voted "best investment services company."

help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger. in a we believe outshining the competition tomorrow

requires challenging your business inside and out today. at cognizant, we help forward-looking companies run better and run different - to give your customers every reason to keep looking for you. so if you're ready to see opportunities and see them through, we say: let's get to work. because the future belongs to those who challenge the present.

>> in this episode of " american greed." they thought they were giving to god. >> if you can't trust the baptist, who can you trust? >> instead, they were taken on faith. >> i didn't understand. i didn't. how could this happen? >> thousands of investors, out hundreds of millions in an elaborate deception. >> as the debt grew and grew, more and more people had to be lied to. it must have been a nightmare. >> and later... when the feds find a podiatrist milking "medicare" for more than a million. >> just glaring fraud. >> a doctor banks on his patients to lie for him. one doesn't. >> that was her mission, is to stand up. >> then, turns up dead. >> a 54-year-old woman is found murdered inside a church basement. >> would a doctor