slow and steady. this is not a time to get fancy. >> i hear ya. all right guys, fantastic show. we really appreciate it. there is no such thing as safe but there is such a thing as great and that's us. the cost of freedom continues on a place for business, fox. >> the world getting a lot more dangerous. this week the hamas conflict flowing up just as a commercial airline is shot down and all of this is happening after the administration just claimed its helping making the world a safer place. >> i think there have been a number of situations where you have seen it intervene in a number of ways. you have seen substantially improved the, you know, the tranquility of the global community. >> have the administrations aid and trade policies actually made the world a safer place?

hi, everybody. welcome to forbes on fox. here with us is elizabeth mcdonald. along with rick unger and john tandy. rich, had the administration's policies made the world safer? i will say that aid and trade as practiced by since every administration has been good for global peace, globally speaking. we have not had a world war since the 1940s. what preceded was a global trade war. i personally like to see more trade. i don't think the obama administration can take credit for this. >> let's talk specifically about

aid to the palestinian authority which has awarded over $44 million with $440 million pending. the authority allowed into their organization hamas, which is a terrorist organization. they plant weapons and store their weapons in u.n. schools. these are bad people. should we be giving money that has them in their fold? >> in a word, no. this would be the key example of where aid is way out of line. i think you have to be a little bit careful when trying to apply that to every situation arnold the world. there are places where our aid does increase the peace but no. in a situation where a terrorist organization has partnered with the authority, we should have cut off the dollars on the day it happened. >> what about the palestinian question? once again you have money being given to an organization that is -- that has in its midst, right in its midst, has

partners, terrorists. >> speaking to officials in law enforcement, this is a tricky issue because of course you want to protect women and children with aid packages but when you give aid to terrorists in government they tend to just horde it for themselves treat those innocents as collateral damage. so you're right. i agree with rick. we should not be giving any aid to the palestinian organization or any terrorist in any government in any part of the world. we seem to be doing that routinely. it benefitted investors. so while he speaks that he is portrayed, he wants limited trade that only advances the causes of his krocronies that w advance him. >> they are blow ups. the president claims, we just heard a spokesman say because of

his aid and trade policies, the world is a more tranquil place. do you believe that? >> no, i haven't seen any evidence of that. >> we should take mention by the way, wednesday the administration came out with new sanctions. some say they do not include closing off funding. they will not stop business. the very next day we see this airliner shot down. >> i think the president has been offering a dishonest narrative of peace and tranquility going back to benghazi. that was the narrative that they were trying to sell then and obviously it wasn't true. so no, i don't think his policies have helped peace and tranquility throughout the world. >> john, what do you think? >> you know, i don't think the obama administration has improved things but i think that hardly makes it unique. my problem is with the aid in

general. we talk about the fallibility of politicians but seemingly when it comes to foreign policy they can do no wrong. i would argue that a lot of our global involvement makes us less safe and i don't like the idea of putting the american worker on the hook for the well being of countries around the world. i think that's wrong. >> rich, you might enjoy the idea of free trade and certainly i do. i think it has led to prosperity around the world but when they claim that their sanctions are doing good in anyway shape or form, we know that putin and all the russians are laughing at the sanctions. they are toothless, are they not? >> yeah. but that is because this administration is terrible at using back channel diplomacy that every president has used. the first george bush was good at back channel diplomacy. the grown ups have left the room and now we're left with amateurs in this administration. you can't blame it on trade. i want to go back to the contest

that we haven't had a world war since the 1940s. we are doing generally better. we're in a bad patch. >> david, as you pointed out already, the russian sanctions are demonstratively toothless. 11 of them are owned by one man in russia. i sns on the entire banking and energy sector in russia, they live off of oil and gas. hit that, hit that hard, shut that down. it will hurt our interest. and that's an issue. but you know what? if you do that, then russia will sit up and take notice. >> the fact is i know the europeans wouldn't like it if we did it but screw the europeans.

>> you can't say that. >> i can say it. i just did. >> look, first of all, let's be careful about one thing. i think drawing some connection between the announcement of more sanctions on one day and the plane crashing the next day, you had better be careful about that. >> hold on a second. they say their sanctions are making the world a more tranquil place, verbatim. i say they're wronger i seem saying there does not necessarily have to be a connection. this happens right after they said that. this is where you can't be too simplistic. we do have important allies in europe. they do matter to us. we do matter to them and we don't live in a world where we can simply roll out. >> this is -- i hear what you're saying. europe does depend on russian gas. a lot of dutch people were on that plane and they died. you rethink the reset.

you put missiles back into eastern europe and you hit the banking and oil sectors really hard. >> you don't even need sanctions. you need to do what ronald reagan did and you go with a strong dollar policy. that will help our european partners lower the cost of oil and other sources of energy. >> gentlemen, lady, we have got to leave it at that. illegal immigrants privacy rights. and a battle erupting that republicans say would halt the president's power grab. is that the best way to protech our constitution or a big waste of time and money? ica, we need e

right now! - ( pop music playing ) - i need to get something! - dance recitals are so boring. - ( video game noises ) ♪ there's a me no one knows ♪ - ♪ waiting to be set free... - so what's the empty suitcase for? the grand prize trophy.

duh! ( jessica speaks ) ♪ i was born to be somebody... ♪ now back to forbes on fox. >> suing to stop a presidential power grab gone too far. leaders say that is why they need a lawsuit against president obama to protect our constitution. democrats say it's a waste of time and money but one prominent constitutional law scholar who voted for the president the first time agrees with the gop. >> when the president can govern a loan he can become a president unto himself. >> who has got it right. >> you know, i love -- presidents have always tried to grab power but it's a waste of time and that's precisely why i love it so much. it's when politicians are active when they are passing laws that

we are made worse off. if you can promise me that president obama and the republican congress will be in court, i can promise you massive economic unrest. when they are left alone, chaos ensues. >> let's keep it specifically on this topic. what the president has been doing in changing law, in particular, obama care, you think of the ways in which he has changed the law. that is not executive order, that's changing the law. >> we have to be careful here. i understand that you may feel that way. >> what do you mean feel that way? it has happened dozens of times. >> i would argue with great detail and using irs regulations that he had the right to. but you want to talk about that as a lawsuit? we're talking about the lawsuit. >> the fact is whether or not suing the president for extending over his bounds as president is worthwhile. is it or not? >> no it's not.

the lawsuit in all likelihood will get tossed on standing grounds. why? they don't like to get involved in the squabble. >> we expect a lot of time with you. it was a unanimous decision in the case of recess appointments. >> yeah, look, there is always going to be a border war between the powers that congress has and the powers that the president has. never the less, you know, i think it should happen because we need clarity on this issue. >> mike, should the republicans

pursue this lawsuit or not? >> no. it's a big waste of time. i don't think the courts are going to take it and i think the disastrous part of this is it's going to embolden president obama once the courts say they are not going to take it. >> unanimous decision against the president on one extension of his authority. how about the hobby lobby decision? that was overturned. a much closer decision, this was a rule that was made up it was overturned by the supreme court. >> i think that is separate from an executive action. >> i get what you ear saying. i understand. the president has done things like this, executive actions at a slower rate than george w. bush or reagan or carter. what he has done is so big and huge, his decisions are so big it is up to congress to decide these issues.

he is doing what is called, what i think is an ad hoc line item veto. that's like a line item veto that is not allowed under current law. what we sere see something it's not just healthy for them. it's immigration, education, the environment. across the board. big decisions that congress is not getting to weigh in on. >> to john's point that this could take years and years to decide, they decided hobby lobby. they decided against it in the recess appointment decision. this could be decided within this term of the president. >> yeah, possibly. there is probably a greater likelihood that it will be thrown out because there is no standing but i think this is a great national debate to have. this president has imperialistic leanings. i don't know whether he came into office that way or he is frustrated that he can't get his way. but never the less it is what it is. and he should be tested on it. >> rick?

>> i agree. >> i agree. >> get ready

when you compare the top speed of dsl from the phone company with the top speed of comcast business internet... >> i agree. >> get ready well, there's really no comparison. why pay more for less? call today for a low price on speeds up to 150mbps. and find out more about our two-year price guarantee. comcast business. built for business. >> well get ready to shovel out more money to fill the potholes. the house passing a nearly $11 billion highway bill and this comes as a new report shows

several states are not spending all of our money on repairing roads and bridges, which they are supposed to. you say one more dime -- >> you know why? i get it. taxpayers out there want to trust the government that they give money in and they pay a gas tax and it's going to go to roads and bridges. a lot of the money does not go to roads and bridges. park visitor centers. we have no assurance that the remaining 80% goes to roads and bridges. and i get it. we want to fix them. but didn't we have stimulus where all the money was supposed to go to roads and bridges and it did not? maybe 8% went to roads and bridges? >> don't we at least need better accounting here? we have to be careful not to throw out the baby in the bath water.

in fact we need more money. it has to come with accounting responsibility. >> rich, you know what this reminds me about? the social security trust fund. it's supposed to be a lock box. only money going to social security but it goes to a lot of things. politicians dip in and use its for what they want. >> nobody can crack safes like politicians, i'll tell ya. look, if we want better roads, we are going to have to raise taxes or privatize more roads. i go for the latter. indiana privatized a lot of its highways and it has worked out really well. >> is it time to end these taxes all together. >> john, what i hear trust and

the government as in trust fund and the government, but just that word trust from the government doesn't seem to go together does it? >> it doesn't. i think traffic is the problem in search of a capitalistic solution. why not experiment a little? why not allow some of the states to sell off turnpikes and freeways. let them fix the traffics. >> that's a great place the experiment with things. what about that idea? >> yeah, i think it should be try it again. you know? this is a mathematical problem. if we want better roads, taxes are going to have to go up or you will have to auction off the roads to private owners who will invest and make the roads better. >> you have been studying figures and accounts for most of your life. that's what you do. you go over the numbers. you are geeky but we love you

anyway. the fact is why can't we get a clear accounting of these government figures? are there just too many hands in the pot? >> to many hands. the money comes down to the state level. >> can't we get some kind of attorney. >> unless you have taxpayers. i got to say. . >> get him on the roads and bridges now? >> we definitely don't want that. >> that is thanksgiving dinner table conversation. >> around the world, informers say you better protect yourself.

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ create a better website at squarespace.com start your free trial today.

>> we have the certain stocks to buy a fund. what is it? >> they try to match what the hedge fund managers do. >> we know they make money. >> it's been a great investment. my only concern is that they are concentrated in financial stock. >> good stuff. church and white. >> this stock is much less volatile than the overall

market. >> like it. it's a steady play. >> have a wonderful and very safe weekend. keep it right here. we continue with cashing in. >> the white house is saying this. there are privacy rights that are included in the law that this administration is committed to enforcing and following. >> but they are talking about illeg illegal's rights not our rights. plus shocking new evidence that america's youth is embracing socialism. more and more of what it means for the future of our country. and then, while hillary is yubing it up. she is laughing all the way to the bank. cashing in starts right now.