team trump onbrand and on message. the president- elect is building an administration in his own image, one that's devoted to carrying out his plan for america. we'll look at what we know about his picks. plus, will trump's america- first policies put the

planet last? delegates at a climate conference consider what his election means for the fight against global warming, as critics slam trump's choice to lead the epa. a congressman with a history of questioning the science behind climate change. and we'll talk about the musk factor. billionaire elon musk has donald trump's here and his big bet on the president- elect is paying off to the tune of billions of dollars. we're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to "cnn news central. " president- elect donald trump is busy filling some of the biggest positions in his second administration. and this just into cnn, trump has announced former arkansas governor mike huckabee to serve as the new u.s. ambassador to israel. also a short time ago, trump officially announced congressman mike waltz as

his national security adviser pick. sources tell cnn that trump's likely pick for secretary of state is political rival turned fierce supporter, florida senator marco rubio, who is a staunch china hardliner. and we're told that trump's choice for homeland security secretary will be south dakota governor kristi noem, who has been lockstep with trump on immigration and will oversee its enforcement alongside border czar tom homan, and trump's expected pick for deputy chief of staff for policy, stephen miller, both of those figures key players in trump's controversial family separation policy of his first term. here with us now is cnn national security correspondent, kristen holmes, and senior senior house correspondent, kayla tausche. and i know you have some new reporting that trump is expected to name a slate of these deputies chiefs of staff in the coming days. some people might think, oh, secretary, that's a big one, but this idea of deputy chief of staff doesn't have to be confirmed. this could be very powerful. >> not only doesn't have to be confirmed, but they will have the president's

ear in essentially everything that he does. and the names we're hearing are people who have been incredibly loyal to the former president. so one of them is james blair. he ran donald trump's entire political operation. i am being told right now that they believe he's going to be deputy chief of staff of politics. we also have heard dan scavino will be named to deputy chief of staff. and of course as we reported, stephen miller. these are all people who have been with donald trump since truly 2021, when he left washington, when he was really isolated by a number of different republicans, particularly after january 6th. these are people who never really left his side. dan scavino has been with him since long before the first administration. he started as his golf caddie and is now one of his most trusted advisers. remember one of the things we've been reporting is that donald trump has been thank l the people around him constantly for winning this election. he is also now thanking them with these posts.

>> there's this deputy chief of staff. there's also the czar, which kayla, i know you've been reporting how focused trump is on this. we mentioned the border czar in tom homan and also have been told that trump is considering doug burgum, the north dakota governor for energy czar. how powerful are these positions? >> there's the possibility for robert f. kennedy jr. to be a health- type czar, and robert light howeser to be a trade cedar. but it's not just an attractive role for trump, when he thinks about people that are close to him, but attractive for some of these candidates when they think, perhaps i had a bigger sphere of influence if i didn't have to run an agency with tens of thousands of employees and federal bureaucracy. and then there's the gauntlet of the senate confirmation process and some of these people that care very deeply about the policy aspect and advancing the president's agenda, they feel like they could be more influential in a role that sits above that. in between the agencies and the

president. and of course, as we know, president trump thrives on proximity. often, it's the last person who speaks to him, whose idea he takes and runs with. for a lot of these people understand, if you're running an agency down pennsylvania avenue and a mile away from donald trump, you're already one step behind. >> if you have to make an appointment with him and get yourself to the white house, it's a much bigger process than just going down the hall or lobbying for some minutes on his schedule. take us inside mar-a-lago. speaking of proximity, there's all of these people that are just there or part of this process or lobbying to get a role. what's it like and when are you expecting more decisions? >> we are expecting more decisions as early as this evening. this is happening very quickly. but when i'm talking to people inside mar-a- lago, they've described two different scenes. the daytime scene, which is donald trump meeting with his transition team, they're watching clips of various people. he's been presented with essentially dossiers of information on people who might lead these cabinet positions. he's also being told, i'm told in part, what

these people have said about him maybe negatively in the past, which obviously, there are a lot of people on this list that have had not kind things to say about the former president. but then there's the circus aspect of this, which is the nighttime. as soon as those meetings are over and you get into members bringing guests. and i've been told that some members have been offered money to bring in certain guests because people want proximity to the former president. people have been shouting out ideas to him as he walks by. almost every night, he has a standing reservation on the patio at 9:00 p.m. occasional he's with melania, recently, he's been with melania and elon musk. obviously, as we've talked about elon musk's growing power here. but people are trying to get any kind of face time that they can with the former president, now president-elect. and a lot of that is causing kind of a scene at mar-a- lago, as that's become the real epicenter of this transition. >> table for three. interesting. all right, what do these personnel picks mean for biden, for his agenda, as he's heading out the door. >> it means it's pretty easy to undo a lot of this. and a lot of these

positions, these people who are being chosen are people who can essentially come down and roll things back on day one. they can roll up their sleeves and get right to business. and in talking to members of the biden administration, they've been doing some work to try to trump- proof their legacy. the term scaffolding has been used to describe some of the structural elements that they're trying to build around what they've done. but even scaffolding, brianna, can be torn down. it just takes a little longer. >> yeah, we see that in washington a lot, as they put a lot of it up around here. kristin, kayla, thank you so much for to to both of you for your excellent reporting. >> let's discuss all of this with cnn political analyst, mark preston. these picks are fascinating in a number of ways. you have ike huckabee, you have the nsa, mike waltz, secretary of state, florida senator plooub. marco rubio. those are fairly conventional picks.

no real surprises there. >> well, conventional picks in the sense that for official washington, they make sense, they feel comfortable. waltz served 27 years in the military, highly decorated, you know, has served on key committees in the house. marco rubio in the senate for several years. you know, conventional. mike huckabee, former governor of arkansas. you may not like his politics, conventional. it's the folks, though, the worker bees, the stephen millers, the other deputy chiefs of staff that we will see named over the next few days. >> not surprising that miller and tom homan were put up for positions that you don't need senate confirmation for. >> no question. >> as far as the head of the epa, lee zeldin, and kristi noem put up for the head of dhs, those are a bit perhaps counterintuitive, because lee zeldin doesn't have a ton of experience in the environmental world, in fact

he's questioned the science behind climate change. and noem, aside from the rhetoric, she hasn't done a lot of work to stem immigration. >> one word, loyalty. these two are incredibly loyal to president trump. we have seen that over the years. we've seen kristi noem -- at one point, she was on the short list, right? we thought months ago that kristi noem could potentially be his vice presidential running mate. she's always stayed close to him. that's why she's put in that position. same thing with lee zeldin as well. someone who has gotten very close to the president, has been on the campaign trail quite a bit. even on this show when we were talking, said, lee zeldin and waltz are both down at mar-a-lago. i guess it doesn't matter, as long as you have somebody who's loyal, then that's all you need. >> i'm also curious to get your thoughts on the use of czars. i mentioned tom homan a moment ago. he's going to sort of help shepherd immigration policy alongside stephen miller, but you also have this sort of

rumor floating out there that doug burgum is being considered for energy czar. does this have to do with senate confirmation, because it seems like burgum would have a decent chance if appointed to a cabinet position. >> if he decides to go that way with burgum, perhaps burgum doesn't want to be in the cabinet. perhaps burgum doesn't want to show all of his finances and what have you, would prefer to go the czar route. we should note, one is, i don't know a president who is coming into office that has put somebody in a cabinet position that is not incredibly, 100% loyal to them. so, however, him circumventing the process, what the founders wanted. that, in itself, you know, is troubling. we should note, though, barack obama had czars, george w. bush had czars. czars have been in play, interestingly enough, it was republicans who really had the worst to say about czars. these were unelected, incredibly powerful bureaucrats that controlled the money, the

deep state. >> yeah, a different day and age, i guess. mark preston, appreciate the analysis, as always. brianna? all right, donald trump's election victory is already having an impact on another one of his criminal cases. today, judge juan marchon hit the pause button in the president-elect's hush money trial, giving the d.a. 's office and trump's lawyers at least another week to make new arguments on how his election win impacts the case. judge marchon is now expected to decide the next steps in the case by next tuesday. we have cnn chief legal analyst, laura coates, our legal czar, if you will, joining us now. what does this delay tell you more broadly, ultimately, about where you think this case will go? >> it's probably going to go nowhere towards sentencing anytime soon, let alone perhaps at all. many people may be wondering, why would a supreme court ruling on immunity, based on actions in office, have any impact on what was done during a hush money case involving the campaign? well, it's because some of the testimony that came in,

the lawyers for trump are arguing, had to do with the official office. people like hope hicks and beyond. they were a part of the administration, and whatever the jury may have heard, actually was about things that could have been, in their mind, immunized testimony. they're thinking about this, what impact could it have. ultimately, you have this balancing act taking place right now, between a guilty verdict and honoring the regularity of that process, and the fact that he is now the president-elect. and the idea of a state court either seeking incarceration over the president of the united states, not only unheard of, but not likely to actually pass muster at any case. you have this really big balancing act you have now, a week from today to make their arguments in the prosecution, whether they should proceed further, i think the judge is looking for an opportunity to have somebody else perhaps decide the key issues and allow him to massage them after that. >> in the federal case before the election, jack smith had made a distinction, or

tried to. he'd argued one about how that immunity decision by the supreme court did not preclude him from using certain or arguing certain evidence of donald trump's guilt. is there an argument in this case for the prosecution to make when it comes to some of that testimony? >> remember, jack smith's at the federal level talking about the interference case. he's making those arguments and i believe judge chutkan was likely amenable to those same notions. she's saying, this is not a king. at the state court level, you run against this idea of the supremacy of the federal government and the rules they have versus a state action. so that could be part of what's coming into play. in any event, it's hard to decipher from a jury perspective what weight they assign the testimony that could have fallen under the umbrella of what kuf immunized in a federal case versus what they heard. a jury looks at the overwhelming evidence and the ideas of guilt, but if they were to. it a particular moment or had the ability to do so, who's to say they didn't focus on

hope hicks or someone else as opposed to the breadth of all the evidence coming in? that's where the judge has to plans those very notions. >> really interesting. and today you had the supreme court declining mark meadows' request -- mark meadows, of course, was trump's chief of staff, one of them, during his first term -- to move his case president georgia election subversion case to federal court. if you're mark meadows, you want this. get this out of state court, get to federal court, trump's incoming as president. it's denied. so what does that mean for meadows? >> me probably wants his name to be donald trump these days, because he has a bigger argument if east donald trump not to have these cases continue. but really it means that the idea of what is protected for a president, maybe a president-elect, is not necessarily chief of staff. he is in a lesser role. the same duties of what would implore a court to say, listen, we cannot have the president or president-elect have to be bogged down by these sorts of proceedings doesn't actually apply to you, let alone to somebody who's no longer in office. but he'll have to stay the

course. the big question is, what will happen with fani willis' case? it's still indefinitely postponed given the hearing pending. >> what a lot of legal hours that may have amounted to not much in the end. >> that's why i don't want to be the legal czar. >> all right. we'll figure out some other role for you here. >> thank you. >> laura coates, thank you. ahead this hour on "cnn news central," will donald trump follow through on his campaign promise to pardon january 6th rioters? we're going to be joined by one of the officers who defended the capitol that day, hear his message for the president-elect. plus, cashing in on trump's victory. we're going to tell you how the world's richest man has gotten even richer, significantly so, since election day. and the murder of nursing student lincoln reilly ignited a firestorm over immigration. today the undocumented immigrant accused of killing her waived his right to a jury trial. what it means for the case. these important stories and

more all coming up this hour on "cnn news central. "

today marks one week since the decisive election, returning donald trump to the white house and putting republicans back in control of the senate. we still don't know if the gop will have total control of congress, because more than a dozen house seats are still undecided, as lawmakers return

today after their extended election recess. picking a leader is the first order of business. cnn congressional correspondent lauren fox is on capitol hill for us. lauren, what's the latest? >> yeah, you are seeing a robust end of this campaign discussion, as all of the members are returning to washington today. and as it remains really unclear who the next republican senate leader is going to be. right now, you have vying for this position tomorrow, john thune of south dakota, john cornyn of texas, and rick scott of florida, who was long seen as a long shot in this race, but has gotten a surge of momentum given all of the a world endorsements he's starting to receive. one of the things that both cornyn and thune have been doing over the last several months is crisscrossing the country, fund-raising for their colleagues, appearing on the campaign trail for members that were trying to get into the senate for the first time. and a number of republicans are still not saying who they are going street for tomorrow.

and that is for a few reasons. one, it is a secret ballot election, which means that they can vote for whoever they want to, behind closed doors, and no one, including the incoming president donald trump is going to know who they voted for. meanwhile, you also have a number of republican senators who have been on the phone with president trump and elon musk, trying to make the case for their respective leader, who they want to see in this position. but at the end of the day, one thing that you're starting to hear from cornyn and thune is that they want to open up the process on the senate floor. they have the experience to lead. thune has been the republican whip over the course of the last several years. cornyn held that position before him. but obviously, it still remains a wide- open race, with just less than 24 hours ahead of this election. brianna? >> lauren fox, thank you so much. boris? donald trump is vowing to keep the promises that he made while on the campaign trail, and that poses major questions

about how far he's going to go with his vow to pardon the january 6th rioters. many of trump's most loyal supporters expect him to grant maximum clemency, even for some of the most violent offenders. but a majority of voters and even some of trump's republican allies believe that he should not pardon anyone who assaulted police that day. joining us now is one of the officers who was injured by those rioters, former u.s. capitol police officer, harry dunn joins us now. sir, thank you so much for sharing part of your afternoon with us. first, i'm curious to know your reaction to donald trump winning re-election. what did you think? >> well, boris, thank you, my reaction, i probably share it with a lot of the american people out there, of disappointment. on election night a week ago, i was at howard university with the harris campaign and when i was leaving, i felt as if my spirit, my soul was crushed.

that's one of the reasons why i continue to speak out on january 7th up and until the election night, is because it was important to me to not let -- one, not let the american people forget, diminish, or downplay what me and my coworkers went through on january 6th. but also from keeping donald trump seeing the oval office again. it didn't work. he won the election. and it's really unfortunate that a lot of american people, in my opinion, just said that january 6th wasn't enough of a deal breaker for them. and you know, he's going back to the oval office. >> i'm curious how you feel about that. because, as you noted, you campaigned for kamala harris, arguing that donald trump was a threat to democracy. our exit poll data found that of the 73% of voters who thinks that democracy in the u.s. is threatened, a majority of them voted for donald trump. i wonder why you think that is.

>> you know, i wish i was able to look into a crystal ball and tell you that answer. i mean, listen. a lot of the people that are jockeying for his cabinet positions now felt that donald trump was a threat to democracy. so it's not just people that, you know, the democratic on the left that thought that donald trump was a threat to democracy. marco rubio, some of his own quotes were talking about, a lot of people are going to have to answer for their decision to support him one day. it's just unfortunate that that day has not come soon enough. i wish i could understand it, but you know, it was important to me to get out there and do everything that i could do to make voters understand and never forget what happened that day. >> obviously, as we noted during the campaign, trump said that he would consider pardoning those charged with january 6th- related crimes. and as someone who witnessed that day firsthand, what do you think about potential for seeing those convicted potentially get

pardoned? >> you know, i followed the cases. i've testified in a few. i went to a lot of the sentencings. i stood by officers as they gave impact statements. and the thought of pardons, it's kind of mind blowing, a little bit. i'll tell you what i mean by that. listen, i'm all for criminal justice reform. i believe that the sentences that are handed down in the criminal justice system need to fit the crime. the punishment needs to fit the crime. if people were out there getting overly sentenced to felonies and multiple years in jail for peaceful protesting, then people should have a problem with that. however, i don't feel that there are many circumstances where that's the case. you know, i'm not 100% sure, but if there are cases where people have been, you know, sentenced to multiple years for trespassing or -- then that's problematic. let's be clear, they broke the law. there

were people there who were peacefully protesting. however, they were there unlawfully and they kept us from doing our job and securing the capitol grounds that day. but the people that assaulted the police officers, i have to sympathy for them. even if they were there to protest a stolen election or they got caught up in the moment, that's no excuse for the crimes that they committed. and they need to be held accountable. it would be a slap in the face to me to law enforcement, to the american people if donald trump would come in and just overstep the justice department, but it shows that he has every intention of doing so. and i don't think it's okay. however, i do believe that the punishment needs to fit the crime and if there are cases out there where people have been sentenced to multiple years or excessive, then, sure, we can look at that, but i'm not aware of any of those cases existing. >> i am curious about that nuance, because you seem to distinguish between the folks that were there and

were convicted for trespassing, which is a little less than half of those who have been convicted, and those who actually committed assault and destroyed property. do you think that prosecutors just threw the book at everyone, the way that some have suggested, in trying to seek maximum penalties? it seems like you don't have awareness of some folks that are convicted for trespassing, who you feel have been y inadequately sentenced. >> yeah, see, i'm not aware of those cases. i guess that's the point i'm trying to make. i think a lot of this is, woe is me, we shouldn't have -- everything -- we should have got you have scot-free. we were there because donald trump told us to be there. we had every right to be there. no, the punishment needs to fit the time. and whether that's, you know, a misdemeanor -- but i'm not aware of people being political hostages and spending their years in jail. those people that committed those crimes that are sentenced to multiple years, they assaulted police. they conspired to overthrow the

government. they impeded police while they were doing their job. those people, i believe they've been properly sentenced. now, like i said, i'm all for, you know, making sure that the punishment fits the crime. but i'm not aware of any of these cases that people are talking about, where multiple people are being politically persecuted unfairly. because they were peacefully protesting. i'm not aware of those cases. a lot of those people -- a lot of those people even got probation, too, so , i mean, that's a slip on the wrist. >> officer harry dunn, we appreciate you sharing your perspective with us. thanks for joining us. >> thank you. have a good day. >> you too. still ahead, how the biden administration is trying to trump- proof climate policies as the president- elect promises to roll back regulations. and bitcoin once again breaking records. the cryptocurrency surging

after trump's win. we'll take a look at the factors driving up the price.

♪ ♪ with so much great entertainment out there... wouldn't it be easier if you could find what you want, all in one place?

my favorites. get xfinity streamsaver with netflix, apple tv+, and peacock included, for only $15 a month. the head of the united nations warned today that the world is in the quote final countdown to limiting the rise of the earth's temperature by that all- important 1. 5 degrees celsius. climate experts have repeatedly cautioned that exceeding this threshold will lead to a

new level of danger from global warming. secretary of state general antonio guterres made his plea at the cop- 29 climate talks in azerbaijan. >> and the trump presidency is looming large. the president- elect says he will pull the u.s. out of the paris agreement where that 1.5 degree limit is enshrined. and the man he's tapped to lead the epa, former congressman lee zeldin, is on the record, casting doubt in 2014 about the severity of the climate crisis. >> i think it would be very productive if, you know, if we could just get to exactly what is real and what is not real. because i think both sides of the climate change debate are filled with people that are stretching truths. i'm not sold yet on the whole argument that we have as serious a problem with climate change as other people are. >> cnn's chief climate

correspondent, bill weir joins us now. what's the biden administration going to try to keep the u.s. climate efforts going? >> they are trying to trumproof it as fast as they can in these waning days of their presidency. last night, trying to button down rules around methane emissions. this is the by- product of natural gas, a very common fuel. but when it leaks, it's 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide, in terms of capturing gas in the short-term. it's about a third of the global warming problem right now, and the easiest to catch, capture, and store underground or use in other ways. so he's trying to stick that in. it would take an act of congress to roll it back. if the republicans win the house, they could do that eventually anyway. interesting news out of baku today, as the environmentalists and those climate activists who are trying to manage this huge problem got an interesting

ally in the ceo of exxonmobil. woods is one of the rare experts trying to make the case to not pull out of the paris accords. he did this unsuccessfully in 2016, thinking more fair regulations and less of a wild west would benefit everybody. and exxonmobil told cnn that a second u.s. exit from the paris agreement would have profound implications for the u.s. to reduce its own emissions and for efforts to combat climate change, which lee zeldin suspect sure is happening. we advocate for policy, security, and environmental stewardship, not distraction changes that could hinder the progress being made today. so there are sort of practical, pragmatic arguments being made toward the trump administration, but so far, he is indicating that he's stuck in the ideology that all oil is good, all renewables are bad, and everything the biden administration did must be clawed back. the practical realities of

that may be more difficult than trump anticipates. >> bill, remind us what happens surpassing that 1. 5 degrees celsius rise in temperature? >> well, over 100th of a degree means another ecosystem could be lost. we don't know where the tipping points are. where we get to a point where permafrost just melts up in the arctic and cannot ever be re- re- frozen again or if giant ice sheets collapse. the whole idea of 1. 5 was to hold the warming long enough for civilizations to adapt, to build better coastal cities, more resilient fireproof homes, better supply chains. but we're losing that time. these changes are happening much faster. so it's not like falling off a cliff, it's just a gradual degradation in which every little bit matters in huge chunks of life on earth. >> all right. bill weir, thank you so much, as always, for your reporting. next, her murder made headlines and sparked debate about the border crisis.

today, the undocumented immigrant accused of killing georgia nursing student laken reilly waived his right to a jury trial. so what this means for the case ahead.

the man accused of killing georgia nursing student laken riley waived his right to a jury trial. now a judge will decide the fate of jose ibarra. the case gained national attention after ibarra allegedly killed riley while she was

out going for a run. he was later indicted on ten counts, including murder, and you may recall, riley's death sparked debate over biden administration's immigration policy, as ibarra, a venezuelan national was in the country illegally. rafael romo is outside the courthouse in athens, georgia. you were in the court this morning. explain what happened. >> reporter: it was very difficult to see the arrival of laken riley's parents, alice phillips, and lake n riley's stepfather, john phillips, who were here for the proceedings this morning. and athens county supreme court judge had already rejected motions by the dwefs to throw out evidence regarding phone records, dna, and also fingerprints. he had also dismissed the motion to have the trial moved elsewhere, and we were expecting to begin jury selection on wednesday, and this morning,

the defendant, jose antonio ibarra through his defense attorney, justin kirby, decided that he was going to waive his constitutional right to have a trial by jury, and instead accept a pench bench trial. this means, of course, it will be the judge who will decide ultimately whether he's guilty or not. and we also heard from prosecuting a attorney shelia ross who said last week the defend approached her team saying they wanted to have a bench trial, this is how she explained it in court. lest take a listen. >> they let the state know that they wish to waive the defendant's right to a trial by jury. and instead, this defendant wishes to trial by judge only, a bench trial. the state has agreed to a bench trial as long as it remains before your honor and no other judge brougts in. s are brought

in. >> and ibarra appeared in court wearing a white and blue checkered shirt. he was handcuffed, he was wearing shackles, both hand and feet when he was asked by the judge whether he understood what he's -- what his decision meant, and that he was not going to be able to change it in the future, he said, yes, through an interrupter. of course, facing ten counts, including several that have to do with the murder of nursing student laken riley. one of them is malice, one of them is aggravated assault with the intent to rape. and according to the files, he hit the defendant in the head with a rock. but the trial begins on friday. boris? >> and what can we expect when the proceedings begin on friday? >> the one thing we know, this is going to be much,

much faster. as you can imagine, the days that are spent choosing a jury, we'll now have to deal with that. and a lot of documents that normally would be you'd are not going to be you'd used in this trial anymore. >> rafael romo outside the courthouse in athens, georgia. thank you. still to come, dozens of republicans warned against a second trump protest so why are markets rallying after his election victory? we'll discuss. stay with us.

president- elect donald trump's victory a week ago is already paying off for some of his most loyal supporters,

which includes elon musk who bet big on another trump administration. >> so far, it's been a good investment to say the least, because musk has seen his entire fortune and political influence surge since election day. cnn's richard quest is here with a look on this. so, richard, how much money has musk made in the last week? >> if we take a rough number, i would say he's made just roughly $70 to $80 billion. if you look at the valuation of stock at say, tesla, and his other investments and the way the market has risen overall, he's worth now more than $330 billion. you've got one particular number there. you pay your money, take your choice. he also shows $20 billion in a particular method, or particular methodology, but overall, it's probably $50, $60, $70 billion. certainly, he has absolutely made a fortune. >> and richard, economists have been warning for some time that

trump's policies, including tariffs, could be detrimental to the fight against inflation. and they could tank the economy. but markets have been way up. i imagine that is already pricing in some of the deregulation we might see under a second trump term? >> absolutely. that's exactly it. you're going to see spending cuts, which boosts the economy -- sorry, tax cuts which boost the economy. you're going to see deregulation across the board. not only in government and bureaucracy, but also, of course, in regulation for different industries. that's going to boost corporate profitability. you're going to see an administration that is far more business friendly, and therefore creating an environment where companies will make more money. that will boost the stock market. now, those warnings about the economy could go down. they are much longer term. they are going to be see tariffs, if and when they come in, they're going to be seen

tit for tat from other countries, they're going to be seen in a much slower environment. there's no question that in the short- term, the next administration is going to be far more business friendly, far more goosing up the economy, if you will. and unless the fed decides it's going too far with the risk of inflation, then the fed is going to let it take place, and maybe, just pause on cutting interest rates. >> and bitcoin going gangbusters, richard. >> bitcoin! >> what's up with that! >> same reason. first of all, interestingly, about half of corporate money to the campaigns came through bitcoin. the crypto industry is on fire, because they know those who love crypto, whether it's elon musk, howard lutnick, whoever it is that likes crypto has the ear of the president, the president-elect himself has said, whether you like it or not, you have to be in crypto. so are we going to see less

regulation, more encouragement, arguably some shifting of the reserve requirements for crypto exchanges. whichever way you look at it, we're moving into unchartered territory for crypto, because it is relatively new, and that's giving it a boost. it is an investment, as an asset class. you and i can disagree whether we think it is or not. the market is saying it's good for now. >> yeah. my kids still don't want their allowance in crypto. they want it in cold, hard cash. that might have nothing to do with -- >> i'm not sure if that -- >> hoa, whoa! time out. you could be sued in the future by your children who say that you were financially negligent in not diversifying their allowance into a bit of crypto and maybe a bit of -- >> i gave -- >> i gave them the choice, richard. they can sue themselves. >> you can't pay for like the ice cream cart in bitcoin

unless there's something i don't know about. >> yeah. it's true. >> or hot wheel cars, for that matter. richard quest -- but point taken, richard. and i will review this with the 6 and 8-year-old. thank you very much. >> thank you. also skyrocketing after donald trump's victory, sales of emergency contraceptives. telehealth companies say that women are stockpiling in preparation of a second trump presidency. we'll have that, coming up.