you have all this stuff but delta's earnings is increasing. >> give me your final trade. >> i want to watch xlf. >> wll. whole foods market. they're buying calls again. i think had is going to rock even higher. >> cash is going to go up for a while and it's really performing. good to have you here. >> "power" starts now. scott, thank you very much. welcome, everybody. i'm tyler mathis and global tensions front and center on this day. nato chiefs heading to the white house face-to-face with president trump. secretary of state tillerson meeting with putin, an unhe c unexpected meeting came in late, north korea also, of course, a big fear factor. this will never happen again. that's what united airlines ceo promises after that shocking video of a passenger being dragged off a plane -- there go the najarians again dropping their stuff all over the place. what united plans now in the future of oscar munoz. and a house divided.

the murdoch house didvided abou what to do over bill o'reilly. the latest developments on this one. "power" launches right now. >> welcome to "power lunch." i'm michelle caruso-cabrera. as we speak secretary of state rex tillerson meeting with vladimir putin about what to do with syria. falling below 50 day moving averages. check out the regional banks. they are down by 20% on average. >> i'm melissa lee. here is what else cutting 100 jobs. e-commerce strategy, samsung delaying the launch of apple

siri. and new data showing u.s. crude oil inventories are, in fact, falling. a lot going on. president trump meeting with the secretary-general of nato as diplomatic tensions rise with russia. kayla tausche is live at the white house. >> hi, melissa. those two leaders will be meeting in person. they shared a phone call during which the white house said the president expressed his support. national security officials say that that will be expressed again today. here are some of the other issues expected to come up during that meeting this afternoon. president trump cares deeply about the allies as part of nato increasing their defense budgets. he is expected to drive that argument home one more time. they're expected to discuss a swift resolution of the policy over what nato will do in afghanistan. but looming the largest today is how nato plans to approach

russia with secretary tillerson in moscow right now. we are awaiting word what was discussed in the meeting that is currently ongoing with vladimir putin. nato is a buffer zone of sorts to russia, and any expansion of the alliance is seen as hawkish by the kremlin. so you can imagine that their feathers were ruffled yesterday when the president moved to approve a long-standing consideration of montenegro in the balkan peninsula to become part of nato. earlier in the year, last month, the annual report, the secretary-general said, quote, at no time since the cold war has the nato alliance faced greater challenges to our security. so that is what nato has said on the record regarding the russian situation. relation ts between the two countries have intensified in the last 24 hours with white house officials having said russians were at the airfield, that they struck in syria last week, and that they believe russia was involved in attempting to cover up the

existence of that chemical attack. russia has responded and says it believes the trump administration is fab ricating that story. and this is on reports secretary tillerson had a contentious meeting this morning u.s. time with russia's foreign minister over the involvement of the u.s. in syria. but, of course, we await an official word from the white house on exactly what was discussed and where that relationship goes from here. guys? >> even the diplomatic language that came out earlier about that meeting, kayla, was pretty tense. thanks so much. as kayla was talking about in moscow right now secretary of state rex tillerson is meeting with russian president vladimir putin. this meeting was not certain. there was talk it would be called off as a result of the u.s. strikes in syria. tillerson told the russian government it must give up support for bashar al assad in the wake of the poison gas attack we saw last week killing 87 in northern syria. let's bring in contributor and tim frye, professor of soviet foreign policy at columbia

university. are you convinced this is what he did? an ultimatum on backing down? >> that's what the trump administration would like to happen. i think the odds of it happening in the near term are very low. i think this is the start of a much longer game in which the u.s. government will find way in cooperation with the russians to put pressure on assad and hopefully ease him out in a coordinated transition. >> fred, you should know we've just learned the meeting between tillerson and you putin just ended, and we are awaiting a news conference with tillerson and sergey lavrov. at some point we may have to interrupt here. if, indeed, we now have a new position under the trump administration that assad has got to go, what comes after assad? are we ready for that? >> we're not ready for that. what's really changed is the way this administration operates this is what you see in the nato

meeting. president trump in his previous business didn't have a commerce secretary, a treasury secretary, secretary of state, secretary of defense. he's beginning to get accustomed to hearing their advice and then following that. and last week was a very good week for him. and so what you have is rex tillerson going out to moscow. secretary kerry had many meetings with lavrov, with the foreign minister, but nobody paid much attention to it because he always showed up with little leverage. secretary tillerson is showing up with real leverage. what that leads to in the short term in terms of the joint press conference, there will not be a joint statement. we know that already, and europe not getting much press report because secretary tillerson still doesn't take a press pool with him. i think it's less what comes out than it is the absolute dramatic change of approach towards russia -- >> just so i'm clear, the leverages that we would bomb again? what's the leverage? >> the leverage is that you actually have to count on the fact that the u.s. is, again, willing to use military muscle in one way or another whether

it's north korea or whether it's syria. >> well, as i understood it this morning, the russians -- i'm curious, why do you still call it professor of soviet affairs? >> post soviet. >> they left the word out. >> yes, thanks for catching that. >> the russians have been very frank about warning the united states not to do it again. so where does that leave us? do you say, okay, we're going to call your bluff, we're going to bomb them again? >> if i could jump in, the strikes would have made a lot more sense if they were part of a long-term strategy. remember two weeks ago the trump add morgues was saying the problem of syria, of the future of assad is up to the syrian people. i think from moscow's point of view this looks like a one off rather than a strategy. >> are we pursuing a thought out strategy or not? >> i don't see evidence of that. this may be the first step -- >> or improvising, making it up on the fly? >> i'm closer to your view than

fred's view. >> fred? >> tyler, what we've done, it's an improvisation but the improvisation has been led by people, defense secretary mattis, mcmaster, who are strategists so they'll add strategy. >> fair enough. >> but don't forget what's going on domestically and this is what's important. the moscow market, the rts market, went up 22% in the first two months after trump's election. it went down 9% after the honeymoon was over in february and there's a lot of economic difficulty in srussia from capital flight, from sanctions, from oil prices and it is not in vladimir putin's interests to have relations with the u.s. >> don't you worry about the mission, fred? we're not going into syria. if you have to say that, people are asking the question. >> it was the speed of the trump

action. he did not get into mission creek and i don't think this administration will go there. >> you have to ratchet it up. you have to keep going. something that happens even though you don't want it to. that's why it's called mission creek. >> you can protect a lot of syrian lives by not putting a lot of boots on the ground. we've done nothing to that end. so just the beginning changes the conversation. >> one of the points, tim, we made last week, the idea in taking the action against syria and throwing a pabl up under putin's chin, if anybody had a question about being a puppet, a captive mr. putin's boy, he did away with that.

>> the stakes in syria are so much higher. any positive benefit mr. trump would get by deflecting attention away from the really serious charges i don't think is what's driving us. >> not driving it but some collateral effect. i don't think that's the motivation at all. >> i don't think it's the motivation, but i think it's right. the motivation is to deal with the problems in syria. the problem with the u.s. strategy is just not credible. we don't see what's the next step is going to be and on the russian side, they don't have any new ideas here either. the russians continue to blame the rebels -- >> general wesley clark told us they have a general. they have a general they can put in to replace assad. >> that general would have to be somebody who could command respect.

>> it's a situation in which russia wants a russian friendly leader presumably assad in power at low cost to them. what we're likely to see is the horrible to continue. >> fred, thank you for being with us. post-soviet affairs. >> we like you, too. >> absolutely. what are some of the geopolitical trades to consider right now? >> the japanese yen and gold are both seeing buying and trading at five-month highs but the rise in uncertainties beyond safe haven assets. if the conflict continues the likelihood of saudi arabia backing out of the opec deal

will rise and that could push the price down. investors scaling back their exposure. when you look at the country's five-year credit swap chart. the threat from north korea grows. add it to that china as drills shut down some operations of certain korean businesses. >> thank you. a news alert in the bond auction. rick santelli is tracking the action at the cme. rick? >> reporter: this is the third c-minus we've had three auctions. another c-minus for $12 billion, we're adding to it an issue

optioned in february. a little high where the market was tradinging. 2.23 bid to cover light. like the last several auctions, a little light. out the door and of course we'll continue to monitor how all this trades in the secondary market with the holiday weekend. melissa lee, back to you. >> shares of delta up after earnings beat estimates. shares of united continental still under pressure falling this week's fiasco. a strong buy rating on both delta as well as united/continental. great to have you with us. >> thanks for having me. >> anything we can draw on, how airlines are doing.

>> they definitely saw that in the first quarter and predicting in the second quarter. revenues are moving in the right direction and that's what i think investors are waiting to see in order to start pushing the stocks up and now is a good time. >> who benefits if at all from what's going on over at united? >> i think delta has an excellent reputation after united has dropped the ball on many occasions is set for a market share gain. >> do you think that video is going to change the minds of potential passengers in terms of delta over united? >> to the extent customers have a choice and in many cases they don't. for instance if you're applying out of newark, seven out of ten flights will be a united flight. business travelers want choice, a lot of options, and united gives them that.

at some point there's got to be a point there's pushback from customers. there will be some market share shift as a result. >> you have a strong buy on y united. are you reconsidering that? >> no, we're still sticking with we don't like the way the company handled the situation at all. it was a debacle from beginning to end. they're saying the right things about handling the situation but, for us, the fundamentals are good for the industry. united trades at a large discount to peers. you can see why they do. incidents like this but we expect both the industry will see price appreciation and united will eventually close -- >> they trade at a discount and they are proving it every day. they have earned it. >> any sort of gaps like this, jim, and you see people in office jump at this opportunity to step in and be the voice of the consumers to complain, to insist there should be regulations in place to protect the consumer. anything on the horizon you can see that could harm the airlines especially when it comes to

being able to overbook planes? >> there's been movement on this. a couple members are moving to have some hearings. governor chris christie has said he wants the president to step in and try to stop overbooking. if that practice is halted, it would probably have a negative impact on the revenue environment -- >> how much of a negative impact? >> demand is still strong. >> how much of a negative impact? >> maybe a couple of points of revenue pressure. this is not something -- planes are flying full. the difference between overbooking and fully booking is not that much on the revenue line but it is something the airlines do like to do. >> it's amazing they do it for so little revenue. >> exactly. >> jim, thank you. still ahead, green light capital blasting gm and upping the fresh europe for board representation. the latest plus gm's response ahead and the new york auto show under way now. we're going to head there. are we? we are going to head there for an interview with jeep ceo mike

manley. manly person. don't go anywhere. most etfs only track a benchmark. flexshares etfs are built around the way investors think. with objectives like building capital for the future, managing portfolio risk and liquidity and generating income. that's real etf innovation. flexshares. built by investors, for investors. before investing consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. go to flexshares.com for a prospectus containing this information. read it carefully. our 18 year old wase army in an accident.'98.

when i call usaa it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief. we're the rivera family, and we will be with usaa for life.

we're back. green light capital increasing the general motors representation. blasting gm accusing them of misleading ratings agencies

about the hedge fund's plan to split the stock into two clas s classes. gm had rejected the proposal in response gm saying the rating agency's public statements issued regarding the green light proposal clearly indicate that they understood the idea and all its facets and would represent a negative. flat this morning. >> just because it's negative doesn't mean the shareholders. oftentimes there's a battle. if the credit is negative -- >> for shareholder rights it's a terrible thing because it doesn't have much voting power and the voting power is held by the other class of shares. >> got it. >> sticking with cars, new york international auto show full swing now. just getting under way. phil will he he bow is there with jeep's ceo mike manley. >> reporter: let me bring in mike manley, the global head of not only the jeep brand but the ram brand. you have so many titles. i want to talk about jeep, particularly the growth in the

u.s. you have the compass rolling in the showrooms right now. does 2017 become a year where you really start to see that growth kick in once again? >> yeah, absolutely. it's a global vehicle. we'll build it in four plants around the world so you're going to see that continued expansion in all of our international markets. >> reporter: what is driving this brand aside from the fact that we see this rotation into suvs and crossovers continue? are you still able to leverage that jeep brand equity right now? >> absolutely. that's one of the perfect things that we have. you know, we've been in the international markets. they represent a huge amount of industry out there. everybody has known us for the year, for years and years and all we've been able to do is scrape the surface. we set up to globalize what we do. there's plenty more to grow in the markets. >> so many people focus on what's going on with growth in china but you want to talk about the fact you still have a long ways to go in terms of what you

can do here in the u.s. including eventually in a few years a jeep wrangler pickup truck. >> absolutely. >> we had the wagoneer, we walked away from that top part, left it to our competitors. we'll be back there in 2020 with an incredible vehicle bringing that great nameplate back and something in the job, the number one thing fans have asked for is a pickup truck. fully into development and we'll be available. >> reporter: does it potentially cannibalize the interest in ram or do you look at it and say two completely different audiences? >> in my mind completely different audiences. this is truly a lifestyle pickup and obvious ly will be very, vey capable, as you know. it also sits underneath where the 1500 ram kicks in. i think it's just going to draw more people to our showrooms, give us bigger opportunity. >> reporter: in a broader sense in the united states, what's your take in terms of what we're

seeing? as i walk around the show, i hear a lot of executives saying the sky is not falling. relax, everybody. >> no, i'm a big advocate of that. the first quarter is flat. this is a great industry. just think where it was. march may have been down a little bit but i think i'm not pessimistic at all. >> reporter: mike manley, guys, when they talk about brands that are hot right now, he's sitting on two of the hottest ones, growing two of the hottest ones. back to you. >> i've noticed in the numbers you've reported, phil. thanks so much. there are 850 million reasons for blackberry to celebrate today. they have a dollar sign in front of them. shares are sharply higher. where they got all that money and why next.

blackberry shares surging more than 16%, this following an arbitration in blackberry's favor against qualcomm for royalty overpayments. the reward represents 20% of blackberry's u.s. market c capitalization, a huge number, and could be a good sign for apple. apple filed a lawsuit against qualcomm in january also over royalties. >> the united ceo speaks out, but is it too little too late? we will discuss. plus, what are your rights should you find yourself bumped from a flight? we will tell you what you need to know next. trading tools, give you access to in-depth analysis, and a team of experienced traders ready to help if you need it.

it's like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. it's your trade. e*trade

i'm contessa brewer. here is your cnbc update. mitch mcconnell says president

trump absolutely had the power to launch missiles at syria without congressional approval. and then it sent a clear message. >> i think the message is pretty clear. look, there's no easy solution to syria and the president is not suggesting that this retaliatory strike is going to solve the syrian quagmire. >> volkswagen is trying to win back american customers following its diesel emissions scandal. a warranty on some of its 2018 models will go on sale later this year. vx says the warranty will be the longest in the united states. disneyland paris is se celebrating its 25th anniversary as its iconic characters like mickey mouse, pluto danced and sang in front of visitors as part of a grandpa raid. it opened its doors on april 12, 1991. that's the cnbc news update this hour. back to you, melissa.

>> thank you, contessa. a check on the markets. we do have stocks under pressure off the lows. the dow is down almost 100 points at one point. utility consumer staples leading. the semiconductors down 1.5%. a tough week down 3% so far. so day three of a story everybody is still talking about, and we do it on most commercial breaks, frankly, united airlines ceo is speaking with the media for the first time since the fiasco involving a passenger being dragged off that united flight this morning. >> as i think about our business and our people the first thing i think important to say is to apologize to dr. dow, his family, the passengers on the flight, our customers, our employees. that is not who our family at united is. and you saw us at a bad moment.

this can never happen again on a united airlines flight. that's my premise and that's my promise. >> the premise and the promise, but is it too little too late? can this by contrast help united regain altitude? let's bring in or back the former ceo of spirit airlines. welcome back, ben. you were here with us yesterday. has united started to turn the pr corner? >> i thought ceo munoz did a terrific job on "good morning america" takinging ownership and was appropriately contrite and sympathetic. i think that's what needs to happen. now the question will be can they fix the internal issues that caused the problem in the first place? >> and those internal issues are? >> i think, number one, communication. clearly someone in the operations team to that gate so the gate should not have been surprised and have the plane fully boarded at the time they needed to get on, they could have handled the issue long

before and made it quite passive and maybe even made four people happy by putting them on a later flight by putting cash in the pocket. to have it escalate to call in security when they could have internal procedures to maybe create more incentive opportunities when they need to take people off. those are the two things i think they need to look at. >> incentive means more money. >> it could be morme money. it could be better treatment while you're waiting. a quicker flight maybe even on another carrier or something like that. >> ben, when you're the ceo of spirit, you guys had a lot of cheeky ad campaigns. you were not afraid to really go at the competition. if you are in charge of an airline right now how would you go after united's business? >> united is a good airline and they're focused very much on the business traveler. at spirit we were always focused on the price sensitive traveler. it really depends if you're an airline who your customer base is. if you're united carrying the customers you want then the way you go after --

>> at the same time i would guess that the people who are getting bumped off the plane are the customers potentially of spirit. they're the ones who bought that low priced ticket, right? they're not the ones up front. they're not the going to get bumped, so there is an opportunity, isn't there? >> i think there is. there are plenty of carriers. it's one of the challenges of the current u.s. airline spaces if you're going to a small to mid-sized city there are not that many options. but that said, customers do have choices and they're going to make choices on the airline they fly based on how they're treated. >> i understand why airlines overbook. some people don't show up. the airline gets to sell the same seat twice so there is a revenue incentive for the airline. give me some idea on a flight with 100 seats how much that flight might typically be overbooked and how much

incremental revenue an airline gets from overbooking. >> it depends on what the mix of traffic is. but generally might be 104, 106 people -- excuse me, i lost my ear piece. >> you don't need to hear us. >> it might be to that level of capacity. >> can you still hear us? >> if it's all leisure, it might be booked more. people who pay low fares tend to no-show at a great rate. >> maybe that ear piece falling you out was fate because we have to go to the moscow where rex tillerson and sergey lavrov are addressing reporters about the meeting secretary of state rex tillerson also having an issue with his ear piece.

>> translator: a long conversation with president vladimir putin of russia more than two hours to be substantial and very frank they have comprised a whole gamut of issues important to our bilateral relations as well as our interaction in -- we have taken the fact of the current stage of our relations as well as international situation -- that have been from the previous administration, the obama administration. we are being realistic and we understand that to overcome the

obstacles we have to make efforts and we seek to do that with our american counterparts guarantee to us as well and our president has reaffirmed. we see that attempts -- escalate in the confrontation but we do not believe that this is an astute approach. we do understand that if moscow and washington cooperate this is for the benefit not of just our nation but also for the sake of the whole world we have reaffirmed that we both seek to fight without any compromise international terrorism. this issue has been raised by our president and the course of their telephone conversations

including their telephone conversation on april the 4th in the night when president trump called president putin in order to he can press his condolences on the terrorist attack in st. petersburg in the context of fighting international terrorism. we have talked about syria, of course. we have touched upon the incident that took place after when in syria chemical weapons were used. we have talked about the ensuing missile attack on april the 7th. we have restated our position on many occasions. there needs to be a very thorough. in favor of drawing the

attention of the hague to this incident saying that the acw has all the necessary confidences and powers to look into this incident. there's been an official letter by the syrian government to the u.n. and to the obcw with a request to dispatch as soon as possible a group of experts to conduct an unbuy ased investigation as well as the air base that was struck. we took note of the american counterpart's willingness to support such an investigation. we hope they have resorted to as soon as possible in this context. we believe will be counterproductive to adopt a s

resolution of the u.n. security council which would be dedicated but legitimizing the accusations against damascus. we do have some arguments but we're not trying to impose on anyone. we want a frank investigation. we have talk about the state of affairs and the interaction as well as the coalition headed by the u.s. and the context of the memorandum on preventing incidents as well as ensuring the safety of air traffic over syria. as you know we have suspended the memorandum. but we're willing to put it back

into force on the condition the primary force is going to be reaffirmed both the american coalition and the russian air force, the objective. we assume as well that both russia and the u.s., no intention to interfere within the domestic affairs of syria or any other state still in force and we do hope iraq's example as well as that of libya and other countries is going to be an admonition against trying to re-create the similar terms anywhere else including in northern africa. let me say that we are willing to achieve an absolute defeat of isis as well as all the other terrorists. this is our common objective.

we have seen this has been reaffirmed to date as well apart from the region. we also have another political challen challenge, to seek a political solution to the syrian crisis. the u.s. and russia have been at the forefront in recent years of international efforts at finding solutions, at rallying all of the participants concerned, to the syrian conflict and bringing them together, having to date we agreed to continue to work bilaterally in order to facilitate this process to push the process forward. we appreciate apart from the geneva which we are full fledged members together with the american counterparts. we also have the platform, the

american counterparts are represented as observers, russia and the u.s. have other opportunities to help the international community settle in libya, yemen, and, last but not least, tried to find common approaches to break the stalemate around the israeli/palestinian settlement. i do hope our ongoing contacts to that end are going to be fruitful. we have another matter in our agenda and that is afghanistan. over the last two years there have been different formats resorted to seeking to rally internal support for the afghan settlement. one of the attempts -- one of those avenues we pursue is going to take place on april 14 in moscow.

a meeting has been scheduled for the so-called moscow format which will be attended by afghanistan, its neighbors including central asian rebounds, the american counterparts representatives have been invited. they're going to be able to participate in the meeting. we have a common approach of 2015 to be observed and respected. under the previous u.s. administration had bilateral consultation channel forced between moscow and washington to supplement and we felt the interest of the current administration in resuming bilateral contacts to help find

soluti solutions. we are going to welcome these efforts. we are ready for them. we have also talked about the korean peninsula which is a sort of concern for all of us both russia and the u.s. speak in favor of rigorous observance of the u.n. security council resolutions to that end. we have also talked about pinding a way out of the confrontation spiral which would allow us to create the nuclear issue of the peninsula through diplomatic efforts. russia and the u.s. have a particular responsibility for the military and political security both at the

international levels. we've compared notes with regard to implementing the treaty such as the arms reduction treaties which are in force between our countries. we have agreed to overcome sort of what we have been witnessing in the processes. the white house team has changed and it's quite natural. we hope our contacts on strategic ability and arms control will be held in a business like manner. with a view to observing rigorously the agreements we have reached. we have touched upon our economic ties. an interest among business circles on both sides to build up our cooperation to buck the

negative trend we've been witnessing in trades and investme investment. we have promised to support business initiatives on both sides. we would like to get the support of both the russian government and the u.s. administration. there is another agreement to designate special envoys from the state department of the u.s. and the russian foreign ministry. these envoys are going to have a pragmatic conversation about the arrogance that have piled up in our relations under the obama administration primarily.

to yield results and will help improve our relations as well. on the whole we all understand how difficult our relations in the world as a whole. there are many who would like to give a try at using the current communication technologies and cyberspace and virtual reality. we know there are people who abuse the opportunities presented by the modern technologies they're trying to use these technologies to their advantage to pursue their goals which are far from decent, but, luckily, both in the u.s. and russia there are enough people who will be able to separate right from wrong and who will be

guided by the fundamental interests not just short-term interests of both our peoples as well as the international community as a whole. and my take from the negotiations that have taken place despite all the issues both objective and artificially created we still have many prospects for russia is willing to cooperate with the u.s. to be engage d in the dialect -- not just dialect but also common approaches and common actions to pursue the interests of both countries. we will look forward to the u.s. reciprocating our approach and i do hope the many hours that we've spent with rex tillerson together as well as with the president of russia have not been spent in vain. we understand each other better after the talks today.

we do hope these contacts will be followed up by us as well as by our staff and by other government agencies of both the russian government and the u.s. administration. thank you. >> good evening. we just came from a productive meeting, as you heard foreign minister lavrov mention, of about two hours with president putin. we frankly discussed the current state of u.s./russia relations. i expressed the view that the current state of u.s./russia relations is at a low point. there is a low level of trust between our two countries. the world's two foremost nuclear powers cannot have this kind of relationship. we further discussed approaches to improving our channels of communication. with a lengthy exchange of views

regarding the situation in syria and shared perspectives on possible ways forward. earlier today foreign minister lavrov and i had a lengthy conversation about issues that require immediate attention, and issues that require longer-term attention. we understand that improvement in the long-term relationship will be required if we are to make progress on issues where we have different views. we spoke extensively about syria and in some areas we share a common view. specifically, we both believe in a unified and stable syria, and we agree we want to deny a safe haven for terrorists who want to attack both of our countries. we agree that north korea has to be denuclearized. we agreed there needs to be more senior-level communication between our two countries. both at a diplomatic and military level. but there is a broad range of

other issues in which we have differences. some have global implications with long-term requirements, and others are understood to be bilateral. over the course of the past two years, a number of reciprocal actions have been taken to demonstrate the dissatisfaction each country has with the other. we need to attempt to put an end to this steady degradation, which is doing nothing restore the trust between our two countries, or to make progress on the issues of the greatest importance to both of us. we've agreed to establish a working group to address smaller issues and make progress towards stabilizing the relationship so that we can then address the more serious problems. foreign minister lavrov and i agreed we would consider further proposals made about the way forward in syria, including consulting with our allies and coalition members. and we will continue discussions

about how to find a solution to the syrian conflict. we also discussed current threats posed by the north korea's regime, the regime's ongoing development of their nuclear program, and the constructive role russia can play in encouraging the regime of north korea to change its course so that we can create the conditions for talks regarding the future. on minsk, we considered the importance of the accord. russia can make progress and implementation by de-escalating violence and taking steps to withdraw separatist armed forces and heavy weapons so that o.s.c.e. observers can fulfill their role. until full progress is made under the minsk accords, the situation in ukraine will remain an obstacle to improvement in relations between the u.s. and russia. i thanked the foreign minister for a productive round of discussions and look forward to future conversations. thank you.

>> translator: now we get down to your questions. russia, 24, please. good afternoon, and about russia 24, a question to mr. tillerson. over the last days from washington we've been hearing contradictory and aggressive statements like mr. trump's calling mr. assad and animal as well as mr. spicer saying who compared mr. assad to mr. hitler who said that mr. hitler never used the chemical weapons. do you think the rhetoric can change and is it helping diplomacy or not? thank you. >> well, i think the perspective from the united states supported by the facts that we have are

conclusive. that the recent chemical weapons attack carried out in syria was planned, and it was directed and executed by syrian regime forces and we're quite confident of that. this is just the latest in a series of the use of chemical weapons by the assad regime and notwithstanding their use in -- on more than 50 occasions of chlorine bombs, and cluster bombs and other types of weapons that are intended to maim and kill in the most horrific ways. so i think the characterization is one that president assad has brought upon himself. [ speaking in foreign languag ] [ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: it's quite evident this topic with regard to which we have differences of opinion russia insists there needs to be an objective

investigation and 23rd seeing the u.s. and russia initiated, the elimination of syria's chemical weapons and record terms we had prepared the necessary agreements, had the o.p.c.w. and as well as the security council of the u.n., there have weren't reports from the opcw which state the progress that has been achieved in eliminated the full stock of the chemical weapons the syrian regime has. the reports also state that the number of places where the chemical weapons were stored were under the control of extremists. so the presence between damascus has been ongoing. there have been difficulties yet we use our relations with the syrian government to encourage them to cooperate fully with the

ocbw and are fully committed to finalizing this work. again, to seek its completion. as for the investigation into the incidents, there is a fact-finding mission of, of the o.p.c.w. there is also a joint mechanism for investigations set up together by the o.p.c.w. of the united nations. we've got some questions. we want to be answered by these mechanisms, all of accusations against the syrian arab republic's government of having used the chemical weapons. all these accusations are based on the so-called merit evidence provided by some mpos. i'm not going to point out the white casks, helmets, that have discredited themselves on many

occasions they have been found to be guilty of fraud. now, as for all the evidence we've got of chemical weapons having been used in the territory under the control of the opposition, now, i can say that on many occasions both the russian armed forces and the syrian government have provided physical evidence, including samples required to conduct an investigation to the o.p.c.w. these were not some remote evidence. these were pieces of physical evidence. the study of these material evidence has been dragging on for quite some time. i'm not trying to level accusations of anyone, nor are we trying to exonerate anyone. we just insist there should be

an investigation into what has happened, and what happened on april 4th, and just as has happened in the past, it was time, quite interestingly, with the start of the conference in brussels. so when reports emerged on chemical weapons being used in the province's idlib, the participants started to demand vociferously that the conference should be used to look into those accusations, even though this was a conference dedicated to the whole gamut of syrian-related complicated issues. we see there's been so much talk about that and that is why we believe it is necessary and sensible to have an international unbiased and frank

investigation into this incident. a group of professionals, and experts harks to experts, has tos displaced to the place where chemical womenewome weapons were used as well as to the airport where american partners say was uses as the starting point in which took off the planes delivering the chemical weapons. we are not convinced that this was the case, nor are we convinced by the tv images or by the statements of people who were at the airport. there were no signs that would support the statement, the allegation, that chemical agents were used there at all. i'm sorry for taking so long to comment, but i would like to underline that we are 100% sure

that if our colleagues of the u.n. as well as the hague try to avoid this investigation, this will signify they are reluctant to find out the truth, but we will insist that the truth should be found. thank you. >> the press. >> thank you. secretary tillerson, i want to ask you about your conversations with president putin about syria. you've predicted that assad will leave power through a political transition. how will you compel assad to participate in a political transition that leads to his own ouster? are war crimes charges on the table? and how long will the united states wait for russia to come around? and for mr. lavrov, if i may. your government and the united states government seem to be miled apart on the syria issue, on ukraine and other issues. did you feel that you cleared up

any of those issues you mentioned earlier today? since you had those discussions with secretary tillerson? >> well, we did discuss at length the future role for assad. whether it be in a future political process, or not. clearly, our view is that the rein of the assad family is coming to an end, and they have, again, brought this on themselves with their conduct of the war these past few years. we discussed our view that russia as their closest ally in the conflict perhaps has the best means of helping assad recognize this reality. we do think it's important that assad's departure is done in an orderly way -- an orderly way -- so that certain interests and constituencies that he represents feel they have been

represented at the negotiating table for a political solution. how that occurs, we leave that to the process going forward. we do not think one has to occur before the other can begin, and it will take a pace of its own. but the final outcome in our view does not provide for a role for the assad, for assad or for the assad family in the future governance of syria. we do not think the international community will accept that. we do not think the world will accept that. >> what about the war crimes -- [ inaudible ]. >> we discussed the issue that as time goes by, and more and more evidence continues to be gathered, it is possible that the threshold necessary to charge individuals, including bashar al assad, may be achieved. as you know, this is a very high legal hurdle in order to bring such charges against an individual. so i would not suggest to you

that all of that evidence is in place, but i think the longer time goes by, it's possible that the case will be made, and there are certain individuals who are working to make that case. [ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: i for one would like to say that i do not think that russia and the u.s. have so degree of distance that cannot be bridged on many issues of the international agenda both in regards to syria and ukraine, it's not impossible. in introductory remarks with mr. tillerson we talked about regards to syria and ukraine. as for syria and bashar al

assad, we have had sort of a -- becomeground. rex said he prefers not looking into history, but to deal with the matters of today, but the thing is, the world is built in such a fashion that if we do not take lessons from the past, we will hardly be able to achieve success in the present. and i record certain situations when groups of countries, western countries, major countries, were sort of fixated on eliminated this or that dictator and authoritarian or totalitarian leader. this, in order to oust slobodan milosevic, president of yugoslavia, nato -- launched a war in 1999 and gross violation

of the u.n. charters as well as t housinky and presidential areas shelled, chinese embassy was also attacked, civil trains and bridges were bombed. the shelling went on for three months. and then they run out of targets that could be qualified as double, dual use facilities. there was another dictator, saddam hussein, who was hanged after the invasion we know how this invasion was justified. since that, i think tony blair

was the only one to repent publicly, admitting it had been a fake, all the grounds for the iraq invasion. there was another when omar gadhafi. it has been said there was no place for this dictator and his country it was said that democracy would prevail, but we know full well what has happened in libya right now. the libyan statehood has all but non-existent. our president talked about that yesterday with the italian president. right now we're trying to restore the libyan statehood through the presence of reconciliation. we're trying to put an end to the situation in which this country turned into a channel of human trafficking as your media

reported today. incidentally, there are other examples, not so recent. the president of sudan ammad albashore, there has been several days later the obama administration decided in order to settle this problem sudan had to be split into two parts. south sudan was established and the obama administration tried to help them secure ammad al bashar agreement this splitting up. the president held his end of the bargain. he cooperated. sudan was split into two parts, in accordance to the obama

administration's plan, and right now washington -- and then washington insisted that sanctions should be introduced against the country they helped create. so this fixation on trying to oust this or that dictator, an authoritarian or totalitarian leader is well known to us and we know how it ends. a successful ouster of a dictator as for me is very hard to remember. if you have any examples i'd be glad if you could share them with me. on syria, as our president has stated on many occasions, we are not trying to, to put outs on bashar al assad or anyone else,

as they do right now. we want them to sit at one negotiating table, as the u.n. security council resolution states, they have all to gather together, this has to be an intersyrian dialogue and at the resolution states the future of syria has to be decided by the syrians themselves without any sep acceptions. it has to be democratic, secular, something the high negotiations committee speaks against. all ethnic and religious groups have to feel safe. have to feel represented at government agencies, and only if such a consensus is achieved, which has to be done through

elaborating a new constitution will the issue s related to certain personalities be settled, without tragic conventions either for the country or for the people. thank you. >> the newspaper, please? >> no questions. >> and i have a question to secretary tillerson. have you talked today about the alleged interference of russia into the american election? in what way do you think russia's actions are different from the american actions in cyber security, in accordance with what the american media say we know that the iranian nuclear program was complicated by americanen virusestrying to pre

north korea by using the same means and a working group has been set up. are you talking about resuming the work of the bilateral commission? thank you. >> we touched on it briefly, on the issue of cyber security and in particular on the challenges that it is placing on everyone, in terms of a new threat, an emerging threat, but i think -- i do make a distinction when cyber tools are used to interfere with the internal decisions among countries as to how their elections are conducted. that is one use of cyber tools. cyber tools to disrupt weapons programs. that's another use of the tools, and i make a distinction between those two. clearly, this is an issue that has emerged in our time for which we have yet as an

international community come to some conclusion around how we want to respond to that. so there will be further discussions, and it is on the agenda and it is in the agenda that foreign minister lavrov passed to me for us to have further discussions in the future. [ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: i can only confirm that we are interested in close cooperation on fighting cyber crime. you have probably heard, we said that on many occasions, 18 months ago on october 2015 with regards to the obama administration given concern about the activities of the so-called russian hackers, they started to pursue over the world. without resorting to the legal procedures that exist between

russia and the u.s., they started to detain these hackers and prosecute them after extraditing them from third countries. back then we said that we were not interested in our citizens being involved in these crimes. therefore, we suggested that a special bilateral mechanism should be created that would exchange information in realtime about anyone trying to breach the international or national norms of both russia and the u.s. the obama administration refused. the president avows they didn't respond but then at the end of the obama administration in november last year they proposed we should meet, certainly our relevant government agencies agreed, but at the last moment, the obama administration changed their mind, because they were

probably very, very interested in undermining the american/russian relations before the arrival of the new administration in power. that's why we once again confirmed this interest of ours today. this is a relevant matter, and that is why we suggested that our contacts should be resumed at the he level of special envo at the u.s. delegation and also russia and the element of securities we feel that this time the result of these efforts might be different leading to the establishment of new channels of communication and cooperation and what is your second question? the bilateral presidential commission. no. we have not yet touched upon this matter. it has been buried, so to speak, but maybe it might be resuscitated.

still we've got channels to discuss some serious issues in our bilateral relations. it might not be under this umbrella structure. no. it might be in a different format. we have designated special persons who will sit down and common manner to look at our grievances, to look into those, and -- to look into how we can overcome these difficulties that exist. >> thank you. >> secretary tillerson, did you discuss today with president putin or foreign minister lavrov sanctions or other concessions that the united states might make in exchange for a change in behavior from the russian government, and, also, speaking about what you just answered previously. did you present to president putin or the foreign minister

specific evidence the russian government interfered in the u.s. election? and to foreign minister lavrov, if an independent investigation finds the assad government attacked his own people with chemical weapons, what will russia do? president putin says there's an effort to blame assad and plant evidence. did you present that evidence to secretary tillerson today? and would russia refuse to consider to agree to any circumstance that results in the ouster of bashar al assad? >> we discussed no change in the status of sanctions that have been in place with russia as a result of certain actions taken in ukraine, as you know. i think as to the question of the interference with the election that is fairly well established. in the united states. i think that has been spoken to on the hill as well, with the congress, and it is a serious issue. it's one that we know is serious enough to attract additional

sanctions. and so we are -- we are mindful of the seriousness of that particular interference in our elections, and i'm sure that russia is mindful of it as well. [ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: well, said secretary hasn't used new sanctions. he hasn't threatened us as all. we have had a frank discussion about the issues on our agenda, and unfortunately we've got some difficulties with regards to the majority of those issues. now, as for a chance that this investigation reveals the -- implication and chemical attacks. as a hypothetical, we do not want to speculate.

we see how speculation can bring results. we see some hysterical statements from the house of representatives from the senate after the air strike against the air base. we do not want to speculate on what's really important, on the serious matter of the use of chemical weapons, on trying to exonerate anyone, the attempts that staging an attack with the use of chemical weapons. what we want is establish the truth and full compliance with the american legislation, the russian laws. the legislation. the laws of any normal country, but the principle of innocent until proven guilt hy has to be respected. today we send an appeal to the

hague to -- to conduct an unbiased, transparent investigation, but shot there be attempts as dragging on this investigation we'll have to make the necessary conclusions. now, as for the allegations that the u.s. government has irrefutable proof that we interfered with the electoral campaign i have to say once again that we have not seen any facts, even hints at facts. we have not seen any evidence. no one has shown us any evidence, even though we have requested on many occasions that these evidence has to be produced to us, to support the allegations, the accusations we hear. we -- do understand there are many people who wants to undermine our relations, to

pursue their internal or external political interests, but these are just games with -- we want to hear concrete proof and then we were respond accordingly. thank you. >> good evening. question to both ministers. the u.s. sent a strike group with an aircraft carrier, "vinson" has this issue been raised in the talks, and what are the risks this step might entail for the region? and question for secretary tillerson. if this group has been sent to the korean peninsula, does this signify that the u.s. has some plans for military intervention in north korea? thank you. >> the "carl vinson" strike

group is routinely in the pacific ocean. it's in the pacific theater. and its movements in the pacific are made in a way that's planned by the military planners. there is no particular objective in its current course. the "vinson" sails up and down the pacific routinely. so i would not read anything into the "carl vinson's" current locations. [ speaking in foreign language ] >> the only thing i can say is that among other issues, we have discussed the situation in the korean peninsula as well as around there, as far as i understand, given all the nuances we still have a common determination to resolve this issue through peaceful means to

achieve the denuclearization of the peninsula through diplomatic talks. there are certain efforts undertaken by the participants of what used to be called the six-party talks. we also have ideas of our own, just as our chinese counterparts do. we believe that we've got to rally around the cause of finding peaceful solutions to this issue, and the last question. >> from the american side. thank you. >> cbs news. >> thank you very much. mr. secretary, before these meetings you said you believed russia was either incompetent or complacent in these chemical weapons attacks. of a your extensive meeting with both president putin and sergey lavrov, do you know which it is and what concrete can be done to

rebuild that lack of trust, and minister lavrov, if i can indulge you to answer in english, if you would, sir. president trump has called bashar al assad an animal. this is the leader your government continues to back. can you tell us how long russia will be willing to risk the lives of its soldiers and spend its money to protect him? >> with respect to russia's complicity or knowledge of the chemical weapons attack, we have no firm information to indicate that there was any involvement by russian, russian forces, in to this attack. what we do know and we have very firm and high confidence in our conclusions, that the attack was planned, carried out by the regime forces at the direction of bashar al assad. [ speaking in foreign language ]

>> translator: i can only say once again that just as in the case with the so-called russian hackers and the chemical incidents in syria we would very much like to get some concrete evidence. not just words. so far we have not seen any facts. let me highlight once again. in syria, we are asking, at the request of the government, the country which is a member of the united nations this country is under no sanctions of the u.n. security council. we are actioned there in order to fight terrorism. and those in our interests to prevent damascus from being engulfed by isis and on the

nasira front. if you look at the facts, over the last 18 months the coalition set up by the obama administration did almost nothing to achieve the objective that it had stated when being established. it had not fought consistently against the al mass ra front until deployments of our forces and after deploumt yment of our the u.s. obama administration only performed strikes against isis always sparing the el nasra front and we have suspicions. we think the al nasra front is spared to resort to plan b, to

overthrow the assad regime with force. we know how this is going to end, because we saw similar situations in libya and iraq and we do hope that the people will prevail who know how to learn from history. now, as for who is responsible for the crimes committed in syria, we've got to look into that, but as one american counterpart said -- there will be a time for everything we've got to set priorities and recently we've heard no priorities from washington saying that isis has priority number one and as mr. spicer has said, we have the resources to defeat isis without doing anything to the assad regime. this is the same thing john kerry had told me. the u.s. administration, he said, was convinced that isis was a more serious threat and a more important objective than

the assad regime. so i think we think along the same lines. we have to see the common threads. they are apparent. and if we are to fight isis, if we are to emerge victorious from this fight without outi ioustin regime -- when ousting the regime, this is no guarantee that we are going to defeat isis. on the contrary. isis might emerge victorious, if we oust the regime. so we should be guided by common sense. thank you. not by emotion. >> colleagues, this is the end of the press conference. thank you for participating. thank you. that ends the news conference. the current state of u.s./russia relations are at a low point with a low level of trust. some of the opening words from secretary of state rex tillerson as he sat right next to the foreign minister of russia

sergey lavrov, these two men sat right next to each other and said incredibly different things about what happened in the two-hour meeting with vladimir putin. sergei lavrov opens up saying we are pleased to hear the united states is willing to consider an investigation into who conducted, and if there was, a gas attack in syria, whereas rex tillerson said, chemical weapons attack in syria was planned, directed and executed by the syrian government. so there are differences on full display there, and yet the markets reacted as if this was lowering tensions. we saw the safety trade come off. >> initially. but lost -- dollar strengthening against the yen, traditional safety trade. we basically returned back to where we were prior to the press conference. an interesting market reaction initially in terms of what has gone on. >> but we did see the vix come down. gold came down, ruble started to recover. russian etf recovered. not big moves but certainly showed you what the market was

thinking. they've since come off as it became clear that the two men -- >> the tone of the meeting got worse after the first ten minutes. >> absolutely. >> it got into, i think, very, very heavy sledding with a rather padanic lecture to mr. tillerson the history what happens after bad guys get knocked out. whether milosevic, gadhafi, hussain, what's happened in sudan, yemen and so forth. >> all right. bring in quincy crosby joining us on the set to talk about the market reaction. also used to work at the state department. thanks for being here. >> yes. there's an expression that perhaps we don't follow and that is when you break it, you own it. that was general powell, secretary of state general powell's view. you break it, you own it. in fact, many times we didn't follow through with the institution building that we should have done, and you are hearing it discussed actually in washington now. the fact is, isis does make it

more difficult. there's no doubt about that. but the president has made it very clear. very clear, that something has to be done. and he said this is a new red line and this is what he expects to do. doesn't matter what this discussion was. i almost felt we were at the u.n. listening to the typical lectures we get that go on and on and on. >> we saw the market reacting in a positive manner, what sergey lavrov was saying, ignore that? >> exactly. you saw the ten-year yield push up a little, what, to -- pulled back down. g gold as you said. the issue for the u.s. market is north korea. that's the one. i do think in terms of syria, if we do anything it's going to be careful. it's going to be -- but the wild card is the north koreans. that's the wild card. not our actions in north korea, but their actions.

because it's a very unstable regime. >> bring in kate warn, investment strategist at edward jones. kate, how do you factor in geopolitical risk and market concerns which includes tax reform and earnings season? >> i think the geopolitical risks clearly are higher than they were and i think that's part of why we've seen treasury yields come down, and as i think we just heard a little bit that monies coming from the rest of the world, and that is the traditional safe haven. good news on that, lower rates in the u.s., especially low interest rates tend to be good news for stocks and the economy. that plays into the other fundamental trends we've been seeing, which are slightly under economic growth and federal earnings growth. why this is a risk? it's certainly in headlines, certainly important, i think it plays out very slowly, and it will just basically be a dull roar of adversity behind the scenes as investors focus on

much more of the mids and economy. >> every geopolitical -- we've seen back to russia, crimea -- those are buying opportunities. >> absolutely. >> you should not have left the geopolitical events, not let them scare you. >> absolutely. remember the iraq war. the first move. the market just took off. it's absolutely a buying opportunity, and what's interesting, though, is that this market has not pulled back dramatically. look at the leadership in the market technology which is finally being grabbed. >> this year leadership? versus the election leadership? >> this year. >> okay. >> what do you have? how many days of a pullback? but only slight. the fact is, this market has been incredibly resilient given the back drop of geopolitical concerns. the big concern for the market i think going forward, besides geopolitical, will be the earnings as they start to unfold. >> kate, where do you stand on earnings season, providing support for the market where it is now?

even if not a catalyst liar? >> i think overall since we saw a low rate of pre-announcements or negative preannouncements on earnings and companies are benefiting from both the slightly weaker dollar, that's helped, going to help international companies with international exposure as well as the fact the domestic economy is picking up speed and even in the absence of the pro-growth reform everybody expected, we'll see earnings coming in above expectations as they typically do. maybe not a catalyst, as you suggested, for stocks to move higher but is reassuring and should continue the trend of stocks moving up, but perhaps with a little more volatility, which we've expected, and haven't seen. as quincy said, the market's been extraordinarily resilient in the face of things we might have expected to lead to more day-to-day price moves and i think that's likely to continue short term through earnings even if we do see higher volatility in the future. >> all right, ladies. thank you good to have you.

quincy and kate. thank you. back to d.c. republicans control the house, senate and of course the presidency, but still couldn't get a health care bill passed. so will something even more difficult like entitlement reform be possible? john harwood sat down with omb director nick moll vy. >> the president is conscious of the people who voted for him but cares more about than just the trump voters. people who voted for him are hurt. that's not the issue. he wants to know are the folks, the coal miners going to be better off in west virginia whether or not they voted for me. he doesn't care whether or not they voted for me. best i can do for those votes whether or not they voted for me, figure how to get 3.5% economic growth. >> you're saying to all those people like ryan, other republicans, freedom caucus in the house, do not think we are ever going to go after main medicare and main social

security throughout donald trump's presidency? >> no. a message to the house and senate is, do what you think is best and i voted for, say, medicare premiums support in the past, part of the ryan budget, voted for that probably six times. my guess, the house will do either that or similar to that because of his pledge -- >> president trump would veto it? >> not a conducive way to maintain a relationship between the executive and administrative branch. let them pass that and talk about it. >> guys, as much of a budget hawk as nick is, mulvaney, one problem he's not going after any longer. export-import bank nap will continue to exist. guys? >> thank you very much. appreciate it. geopolitics are weighing on the market and we have the nato chief meeting with the president today. also had president trump's meeting with the, with china xi about north korea, that was last week. skd tillerser sshgt tillerson -- secretary of

state tillerson just meeting in russia with foreign minister lavrov. is wall street waging war? a piece on cnbc. a provocative thought. certainly mr. tillerson said that our relations with russia are at a low point. >> yeah. i think at the moment, and pardon my editorializing, hard to see a strategic vision with respect to the rest of the world when it comes to the trump administration and at the risk of misunderstanding, miscalculation and a pure military mistake, seems to be edging higher. now not to say something's imminent bet getting bellicose statements from russia, north korea, lack of cooperation from russia and china. heard people like leon panetta say the risk is as high as in modern times. that's a bit unsettling for someone head of the defense department and the cia. >> mr. tillerson is a man of if not few words, fewer words than most diplomats.

certainly on display there with lavrov. >> speaks way less than kerry. >> talks a lot less, but there is a lesson there that your words can come back to haunt you. the final question there in which mr. tillerson's own words were played back to him, russia was either incompetent or complacent. words that came out last week. those are inflammatory words he did not directly embrace today. >> yes. and with -- >> rhetoric matters. >> absolutely. this administration's not yet learned that. that the telescoping of intent is, you know, potentially consequential. you talk about unilaterally attacking china without consent, hitting syria again with missiles when there are still russian troops and planes on the ground. you run the risk of leading into something you don't fully expect nor planned for. any military strategist suggests, if you don't have a political solution to a problem in the world you do not use

military force. >> brought this up with the russia experts beginning of the show. when he, the headline is, we're not going into syria. it's because somebody asked him, are we going into syria? right? that's the, are we going to war here? >> the question, where's the strategic vision that really governs the behavior of the trump administration? and how they interact even with congress in this regard. >> michelle pointed out, asked quincy. in the prapast, with heightened geopolitical tension, it turned out after the fact to be a -- >> nothing really, a pullback. >> there hasn't. >> that's the amazing thing. >> plateauing, maybe. >>enured, you think would would drop. see headlines, think we would drop. we have not. >> $20 in gold, and volatility to 15? >> right. >> i look back, the most recent conflict, constructive in ways, the leadup to the first gulf

war, handled so much differently by george h.w. bush, so much back channel work, put together a coalition. had a specific goal in mind. this is so much less controlled that i think the market just is assuming nothing's going to happen. that may well be true. hard to predict war. no one can do this in a satisfactory manner. but i think that wall street needs to be, pay more attention to the risks that are rising, particularly since we're not getting much, not just leadership but much vision and clarity around these situations that are extremely volatile, and when you think about places like north korea, extremely dangerous, should we decide to lob in a bomb that is not something that won't go without a response, one would think. >> thanks, ron. biotech soaring 23% today. tell you the name and what's fueling that when "power lunch" returns. plus a big meat producer looking at organ transplants.

synergy i guess is there. you've got to hear about this one. that's next. >> announcer: you're watching "power lunch" with -- melissa lee and bill griffeth and sue herera. first business wide. the friends, the independence. and since we planned for it, that student debt is the one experience, i'm glad she'll miss when you have the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant. ameriprise usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life.

because when you really, really want to be there... but you can't. (cheering) at cognizant, we're helping today's leading media companies create more immersive ways to experience entertainment with new digital systems and technologies. get ready. because we're helping leading companies lead with digital.

bioscientists soaring after approval of one of its drugs. not just the approvapproval. it's the label. >> so much is in the label. what the fda approved the drug for and safety conditions on the drug. this one is coming on the expect the date of fda approval for a condition known at heartist discon dee discondysia. we have the labels here. you can compare. when people talk about a black box warning on a drug label what you see here for this drug. recently approved. this warns against suicide and depression. this is not in the label of this drug. at the top of the prescribing information for a drug and that analysts say will give the

company a lot of leverage in terms of getting this drug prescribed potentially. they were approved for different indications but a similar drug. down the line, if competing, this could give the company leverage here against teva. importantly, we don't yet know the price for this drug. we have to wait until may 1st that could further move the stock clearly a bump dupe to ate proval. >> and competitive. analysts assuming priced competitively without the warnings of teva, an advantage? >> exactly. seeing the stock move up about 24%. >> does the little black line mean that much? >> call it a black box warning. >> who sees it? >> doctors. >> they see it and know? >> hard for viewers, but a black box right here. very thin. >> like a rule around it. >> you would think a black box warning would be a little bigger. >> like on cigarettes. >> that's a black -- ooh. >> black line warning.

>> not on that other piece of paper. tell you that. >> we want to ask about another story. smithfield foods, establishes a biosciences unit? >> yes. a whole new way to think about our nathan's hot dogs. smithfield foods, a big producer of pork products, they've xaebed a biosciences unit. actually use of cow and pig parts in drugs and medicine is not new. >> operational. >> a lot of heart valves of that of pigs and cow parts. smithfield is starting a smithfield bioscience focusing on human therapeutics, tissue regeneralification, based on meat products. they supply pharmaceutical companies with this already. one interesting, supplying parts potentially for human organ donation. an area getting bigger in medicine trying to modify pig parts potentially, they're about the same size to supply for human transplants and of course, we know there is a shortage of human organs for

transplantation. 8,365 transplants waiting. going up over time. a lot of companies getting into this space. you know, mel, united therapeutic, a company works on this and trexon in this space. a company raised about $30 million in the series called ejensis. >> these guys are growing organs. no? >> they are. >> harvesting. >> well, they are. both of those. yes. you have to grow the pigs and then genetically modify them to make sure the human body doesn't reject them. >> harvest them -- >> so for -- >> harvest these organs from a live donor? in other words, the pig? same as you harvest human organs, make sure the pig is still alive? don't send the pig to the slaughter house and then take the organ? >> a question i'm still making sure i understand inks didn't want to know anyway. >> talking this morning who was saying there's importance in raising the livestock. i really need to figure this

logistics out how this all happens. >> fascinating topic, and something analysts aren't tracking, numbers and size of the market. >> could be up side. >> could be up side. >> thank you, meg. geopolitical, shoulding good for gold. right? time to buy? "trading nation" is next. "power lunch" is back. online u.s. equity trades...

♪ ...you realize the smartest investing idea, isn't just what you invest in, but who you invest with. ♪

your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claims centers are available to assist you 24/7. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance

gold rising to the highest level since november. let's get the next move with the trading nation team. is at the asset management. chad morganlander is washington crossing adviser. good to have you with us. chad, we came out of a press conference by russian's foreign minister lavrov and secretary of state tillerson. is it a reason to buy gold, geopolitical risks on the rise? >> we're ee constructive on gold. over the next six months we think you can get a 4 to 5% rise in gold. we think risk will elevate, financial conditions will tighten. one is geopolitical risk. not only internationally but also domestic with domestic policy uncertainty on the tax bill as well as fiscal stimulus. the second component in the critical driver is monetary policy here in the u.s. we think that as the fed raises rates and as they try to

reestablish an ald justment on their balance sheet, again, that's going to be a critical driver for long end of the yield curve going lower, a bid on the gold. gold will be going higher over next six months. >> we gave the stat, boris, of gold trading at highest level since november. maybe not coincidentally, the dollar is trading at lowest against the yen since november as well. when you talk about geo politics, is the yen trade going to be the dominant trade or does the dollar find a bid, because that obviously will pay a key role in direction of gold? >> it is all completely interconnected to the yield story. i think that's always been the case. gold to me is always first and foremost a yield story, and as yields -- as a flight to safety until u.s. treasuries come in and yields continue to compress, gold becomes more attractive. it is sort of the tail wagging the dog or however you want to phrase it situation, where one has a big impact on the other. yen reflect the whole yield story as well. >> right. >> and so does gold. so i do think that with the

trump administration, with militarization going on right now, the risk is very high so gold has a chance to go further. >> both like gold. thanks, good, boris and chad. for more market insides go to tradingnation.com. >> blame it on the booze, how booze helped lead to goe globalization. >> a word from our sponsor.

♪ to err is human. to anticipate is lexus. experience the lexus rx with advanced safety standard. experience amazing. i'm vern, the orange money retirement rabbit, from voya.

i'm the money you save for retirement. who's he? he's green money, for spending today. makes it easy to tell you apart. that, and i am better looking. i heard that. when it's time to get organized for retirement, it's time to get voya. it is time for the your business enprepare newers of the week. seeing double? these two animal lovers launched cuddle cloens in 2013 because they knew people like them would love to have a hugable rep lick kau of their furry best friends. for more, watch "your business" sunday mornings at 7:30 on msnbc. >> brought to you by american express. visit openforum.com for ideas to grow your business. or fill a big order

or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com. ♪ check, please. >> today a special version of "check please" involving champagne, port and gin. without drinks like those the pre-20th century global economy would not have functioned. that's according to a book called "empire of booze." traces how alcohol fuelled globization in trade and the author henry jeffreys joins us now. is it really true? >> i suppose so because walter would have been too dangerous to drink in a lot of places so people drank beer instead. drinks like rum would have act as a currency when you didn't have dollars or pounds or gold. so people used rum to buy stuff. >> kind of arbitrage.

>> were the british the main purchase veaorsful this kind of tray? >> they were because they controlled the sea with the biggest economy. they were the super power of the 18th and 19th century. >> drinkers, aren't we? >> we have a special relationship with alcohol. >> specifically when it comes to globalization, i mean did people actually put rum in casks and transport it with the idea it will be used as currency effectively? it is the most inefficient currency that exists because it is difficult to trap, it takes up a lot of space. >> oh, it lubricates transactions. >> it was very valuable. it compared with beer which took up a huge amount of space. you would have a small cask of rum and for that you could buy land, you could buy a house. you could buy whatever you wanted. >> wow. >> the english also take credit for champagne. >> well, this is a bit more controversial. >> yes, i know. >> i'm not going to say we invented champagne. >> that's not what you say in the book. >> no. but the technology for champagne, a strong bottle like this, and then fermenting it in

the bottle to make bubbles was invented in england in 1930s. >> to make glass strong enough so it wouldn't explode. >> exactly. you need strong glass. there was a man who was a scientist who invented a new way of firing glass so it was as strong as this. >> did the bottle come first or champagne first. >> bottle first. >> what was it made for originally? >> originally they would put wine in and they discovered sometimes it would referment and you would get bubbles. then they started to get deliberate and add sugar to make it ferment. >> a wonderful accident of history. >> why is this gin bottle -- >> that's because it is from my refrigerator. >> i always have a martini in the morning. >> a martini in the morning, yes. >> i associate the english with gin, i mean gin with the english. >> we are key. but america invented the martini which i think is greatest expression of gin. but you have done your bit. >> the gin and tonic spread to

south asia and india, part reply because it had quinine. >> what better way to make it nice, put some gin in it. >> so fun, "empire of booze" the intersection of liquor and global economy. >> exactly. >> a clever book. >> after every chapter you can drink your way through the book. >> a recipe? >> i thought you were going to say every other word. >> a list. >> thank you, henry. we have breaking news here. this is just coming in but apparently every single passenger on that united flight off of which dr. dow was dragged will get compensated. we don't have any more details. >> every passenger? >> every passenger will be compensated. no more details, but that's what is coming in right now. so united is trying to make good. >> i think we should drink to that. >> don't miss "power lunch" tomorrow. we have an interesting interview. susie welch sits down with maybe the best executive in all of sports. that would be coach bill belichick of the super bowl champion, new evening land patriots. that's tomorrow on "pow your."

>> absolutely. fascinating to get more details about the united headline. in the meantime thanks for watching "power lunch." . >> "closing bell" starts right now. ♪ hi, everybody. welcome to the closing bell. i'm kelly evans at the new york stock exchange. >> i'm bill griffeth. very busy day. >> yeah. >> we have a lot to cover over the next couple of hours, financials for one. they've been struggling to stay positive for the year, but once red hot trade seems to have lost its luster. we have a debate on whether earnings can reignite that rally coming you have. those earnings begin in ernest tomorrow. >> one prominent hedge fund manager is giving billions back because he believes markets are over valued. >> also, gold hit highest level since november earlier. goldman's held of commodities research joins us exclusively to discuss whether this rally still has legs.