junk food at checkout aisles. well said! excellent comments today. neil cavuto, my time's up, it's yours. neil: thank you very much, live to washington, d.c., american university where the president of the united states is harkening back to another era. this president echoing john f. kennedy to rein in nuclear weapons with the soviet union at the time to get the iranians to do the same. many will argue that two very different times, two very different events, even though it's at the same university. but he is going to harken back to john kennedy's famous line, you certainly cannot trust who you are dealing with, but you have to trust your instincts. let us not be blind to our differences, kennedy said at the time, but direct our attention to the common interests. president obama is expected to

echo that again and again and again in favor of signing onto this deal. he's doing it at american university and will definitely be quoting john f. kennedy, not necessarily to win over those who are opposed to this but democrats who hold president kennedy in very, very high regard and saying this might get a few more doubters to be in the yea column. he's got an uphill fight here. already looks like congress will dismiss this deal, he's hoping not by the margin that could override a presidential veto. this is for all the marvels. also watching technology today. because despite their comeback performance today, apple shareholders are hardly breathe a sigh of relief here. they have been clobbered to the tune of $100 billion in market value. the stock is edging up. netflix, a very different story. that one continues to soar, up 8% yesterday, up again today. we've got it up since its ipo

offering, 9,900%. a tale of two very different issues in the tech world. take a look at this and connell mcshane will be following this as well. they are going up late in very, very different directions. and connell, again, notwithstanding, a lot of investors want to know which is the future of technology? apple or netflix. >> going in divergent directions. the apple stock price is something we've been talk about the next couple of days. one of the strengths of netflix is the concern for apple. what is happening in asia. get to that in a second. the netflix returns up $4 and the 10,000% return since the 2002 ipo are undoubtedly remarkable, but there may be a lesson for apple shareholders or netflix shareholders and what goes up eventually has to come down. that's what apple found out. year to date, the netflix stock price up by 150%. to get to the strengths of

netflix, people are going to talk about the content that they're putting forward in the house of cards and the fact that the video stores have been knocked out. these longstanding story lines that have been there, but more recently, an announcement it is expanding in asia has gotten investors excited. remember, when apple reported earnings, it was concerned about a slowdown in the chinese economy that got investors concerned two. different sides of it, neil. we should point out, the decline for apple stock price, lot of people say it's technical in nature, so the question now, are we seeing a buying opportunity? already stability in the stock today. neil: connell, thank you very much. an apple shareholder is concerned about the guy running apple, tim cook, and whether cook is dropping the ball. good to have you with us, justin. you are not delighted with the comeback, you've seen the stock swoon from its highs, it is up

appreciable up over the course of the time you had it. tim cook could say i'm doing a fine job, what are you whining about, what do you say? >> thanks for having me on again, neil. i think we can tie in iran to what is going on with apple. where i see tim cook's failure of leadership is in trust. right? when tim cook comes out as this social liberal engineer, he talk about gay and lesbian rights. what does he do? pens an op-ed blasting indiana's freedom religion law, taking power away from the government and giving it back to the people. he has a problem with that. he calls it discrimination what's going on in indiana. why is apple willing to open its doors and do business with iran? the message doesn't match the action. so there's a trust -- neil: as an investor, i'm going to be very, very crass, as an investors what do you care if the company does well and makes

50 products. that's great. the argument last time is they're distracted. the gay stuff, the doing business with iran, it distracts from the greater mission, that is coming up with neat, cool stuff that keeps making money, right? >> absolutely. i was listening to rush limbaugh, he had something that is applicable. neil: that is out of character for you, but go ahead. >> it was easier for him to get to the top than stay on the to. for apple to stay on the top. you are right. they need to focus on innovation. a lot of what we've been seeing with apple with the social issues, with things like the apple watch, the autonomous car project titan, it's a distraction from the core business, and i think a lot -- neil: think about it, would have you said when they apparently got distracted with the ipad or got distracted with the phone. in other words, these were areas that were outside their purview at the time, and now in retrospect, they did okay.

>> sure, you bring up a great point, neil. where we have a problem is the trust factor, because there was shrouds of secrecy regarding apple products in the steve jobs era. but time and time and time again he delivered. so the market built a trust factor when steve jobs would have secrecy regarding a project, right? there is no trust factor with tim cook in his level of secrecy. the iwatch, the first big innovative project. it was hugely delayed. the sales have been poor so far, and they wouldn't segregate it out in the last-quarter earnings report. there's a lack of transparency. neil: do you still own a lot of apple stock? or have you gotten rid of it or waiting for management change, what? >> i still own apple stocks i think where tim cook is distracting the business, there is a level of trust that he hasn't earned with investors because he doesn't have the track record yet to have the lack of transparency and to be

so focused on these social issues where the rhetoric of tim cook doesn't match apple's business whether it's on the gay and lesbian issues or the climate change issues. neil: your only point is it's distracting him from core business. very well said, thank you, justin. >> thank you, neil. neil: as justin was speaking we're getting more out of the president speaking at american university in washington, d.c. scott maybe have you heard this comparison to john kennedy, at the same american university in 1963 not too long after the cuban missile crisis where then president kennedy said now is the time we got to rein in all this nuclear stuff and i'm going to talk to the sof yets. and the analogy back then is why are you talking to the soviets, you can't trust them, they are duplicitous sob's, well, that's not exactly what he said. this is from john kennedy at the time. no treaty, however tightly it may be worded can provide

absolute security against the risk of deception and invasion. the president went onto say, jfk, but it can if it is sufficiently effective in enforcement and sufficiently in the interest of signers or for far more security and far fewer risks than unevaded, uncontrolled, unpredictable arms race. that is the exact argument the president is going to make for iran. one is a superpower, two our equal we're dealing with, trying to avert another world war. this to many, it's hardly in that league and far more duplicitous nature here they think my next guest say the comparisons stop right there. congressman peter rofkin from the state of illinois, notwithstanding are going to vote against the deal. congressman, i think with a pure marketing stance to try to

market support for this deal, it's clever on the part of the president to go american university, quote john kennedy, you argue it is apples and oranges and doing an injustice to jfk. what do you make of that pitch? i think he's reaching out to your democratic colleagues on the fence and don't know where to go, what do you think? >> he's reaching out and failed yesterday. congressman nita lowey, congressman steve israel, congressman ted deutch leading democrats on foreign affairs issues on the united states house of representatives said they applaud the president for trying to pursue the peace deal with iran but not going to support this. neil: i quote barbara boxer and tim kaine and bill nelson and nancy pelosi who say yea on all. this isn't this about getting a veto, override proof majority going. he knows he's going to lose but department is want to lose big. >> yeah, that's where all the action is. so without a doubt, the democrats in congress are going

to make the decision on this and have a huge responsibility moving forward. so three leading democrats against it. some democrats are coming out in favor of it. look, if the president says trust his instincts, his instincts are wrong. he called isis the junior varsity. wrong with libya, wrong with putin and wrong across the globe, and the weakness in the argument as it relates to verification. he's trying dismiss this by making a jfk comparison and saying well jfk spoke that you can't have an airtight deal, but the president's own deal has problems in it, and it's this there. isn't the 24-7, 365 inspection that would be implicit in any deal and you can't get to the iranians for 24 days, that's with tons of disclosure. the president and secretary kerry made an argument that is a flawed argument, and the

argument was you either go with the deal or we're going to war, but all during the negotiations, neil, they said a different thing. they said no deal is better than a bad deal. if you argue no deal is better than a bad deal, you are arguing implicitly it's a false alternative. there is no alternative but war. neil: fair enough, congressman, very, very much. on the notion that the congressman pointed out no deal is better than this, benjamin netanyahu saying yesterday i don't oppose this deal because i want war, but because i want to prevent war, so he frames it differently than does the president. there is another jfk distinction here. jfk coming from the position of strength after the cuban missile crisis. this president not so much. katie pavlich and charlie gasparino on how the president is trying to sell this. i argue, charlie, this is for

democrats on the fence and harkening back to a man who is arguably one of their heroes in the party, you might not flip over the president's approach to this, but if he can keep you with him quoting another democratic president who dealt with a controversial bully, so be it, and i have my yea votes. what do you think? . >> i think a lot of this is trying to get chuck schumer on board. the key vote, the u.s. senator from new york. key member of the jewish lobby in congress. you know, he would -- that would be big. listen, i think there's two things that people should look at when they think of negotiating with iran. it is not absurd to enter into a treaty with iran. what's absurd is they think it's hard to trust the obama administration's approach to it because they've misunderestimated so much in the past, isis being the jv team, but the notion that iran which has a sizable secular population, it's run by the mullahs, they get a bomb

anyway. it would be the framework what he's trying to doing is not absurd. this is a country, we have to deal with them whether we like it or not, we dealt with china, with russia and we're going to have to deal with them. they're going to get a bomb no matter. what the question is do you trust the obama administration for basically crafting a deal that works, and i don't, because i think they missed on so many other occasions. neil: katie, there is the other issue that john kennedy probably would not have signed onto a nuclear agreement that would have required the kind of stuff that this one does where the one you're trying to make sure is verifying all of this, gives you 24 days to double check. but that number of differences in the two approaches. nevertheless, i think this is a smart strategy on the part of the president to use jfk to try to get some of those wayward democrats, and he is winning a few over. will it be enough? >> you know, i don't think it's going to be necessarily, because you look at public polling on this issue, and

before the deal was set in stone so to speak, public opinion was pretty good about negotiating with the iranians and getting something out of it. now that we've seen all the details of the deal which are endless in terms of not being able to enforce things whether it's the united states not being involved in inspections, whether it's what you mentioned, 24 days to allow the iranians to clean up the nuclear sites, the iranians saying we have no right to inspect 24-7 when that was on the table in april as part of the deal. americans are calling senators, republicans and democrats, saying we don't like the deal, seems like there aren't answers when it comes to iran funding more terrorism against americans and they don't like it. it's not just a reflection of democrats, it's a reflection of the american people getting active and calling senators. >> are the polls that much against the deal? >> 30 points, 30 points. >> i think that a lot of people are distracted. it is the summertime, they're not really focused on this.

i think the president is probably making a smart move to be there at american university because this is all about keeping the no votes limited. >> this is one thing that people like katie pavlich can't really answer, it's this. they're going to get the bomb, anyway. >> that's not true, charlie. >> you think we're going to prevent it? neil: if they don't have it already. we have breaking news i want to pass along, the securities and exchange commission voted 3-2 in vote of the ceo pay ratio rule that requires companies to detail how the highest paid office, the ceo usually, is paid in comparison to lowest paid worker. the ratio used to be about 50-1, now north of 300-1. and many argue that isn't fair and the companies will be embarrassed to point that out or point out the simple fact things have changed in the workforce, whatever, meant to push them into a corner. a lot of companies don't like it and don't know how you would use that ratio.

would you include foreign workers or those who have a contract assignment. it's inexact. that rule has been pushed through and along party lines and a 3-2 vote that will force companies to align that ratio. this is something rick perry could benefit from. he has actually been talking a populist campaign against wall street, and corporate america and the iran deal. so rick perry is in the pole position for the first debate. that might be a very good thing for rick perry and for those in that first debate who didn't make the big primetime cut, it might be a very good thing that they're there, and not in primetime. i'll explain. technology empowers us to achieve more.

it pushes us to go further. special olympics has almost five million athletes in 170 countries. the microsoft cloud allows us to immediately be able to access information, wherever we are. information for an athlete's medical care, or information to track their personal best. with microsoft cloud, we save millions of man hours, and that's time that we can invest in our athletes and changing the world.

. neil: to cleveland right now, blake burman ahead of the two debates. what's the latest? >> reporter: hi, there neil, good afternoon to you, you were talking about rick perry and the two different debates that will take place tomorrow night. i'll give you something interesting we were just looking at. four years ago in this exact same time of the cycle, this was the moment when rick perry made his move and ended up becoming the front runner 2011, here we are four years later and tomorrow night he'll be front and center in that 5:00 debate, only three people to his right, three people to his left, jindal, graham, gilmore to his right. pataki and fiorina to his left. the big note is in the 9:00, donald trump front and center in that debate and perry and trump as we've been following have had a little back and forth. i want to direct to you a tweet perry sent out yesterday, 6:00 after he accepted the 5:00

invitation. he said and i'm quoting here, like forward to be 5:00 p.m. debate for a serious exchange of ideas and positive solutions to get america back on track. you can take that a couple ways that he is indeed excited but the serious exchange of ideas and positive solutions, a little dig toward donald trump. he might be able to stay beneath that fray at 5:00 tomorrow. neil: and he doesn't have to worry about donald trump stealing the oxygen in his debate, and he has the pole position in his debate. it could be like an ncaa tournament thing, he could advance to the next round. who knows? blake, thank you very much. now michael warren who says the guy to watch depending which debate you want to focus on is john kasich, among the latest to announce and gained the most. i think you're right about that, michael. he's in a key position, just announces, saved the embarrassment of not being able to participate in the debate in his own state, and he could be

the one to watch. what are you watching? >> well, you're right. so far he's hit all of his marks. he got into the race at just the right amount of time to get that boost and get in at the end of the time period into the first debate. i spent a little time with him yesterday in new hampshire he has a unique style. he's a little acerbic. he likes to joke around with people a little bit and i think he's got a mix of the jeb bush compassionate conservatism and chris christie tell-all that could play well. he could get a chance tomorrow night. >> the one thing that comes through in the debates, the zinger, the oneliner, i don't know if that will be easy to do with ten people up there, but scores high points for the polls that show who's your first, second choice? who is most likable. almost like who would you rather have a beer with?

on that count he seems to be less edgy and controversial than the counterparts. that could change, a lot say they don't like his medicated trust and don't like his trust in government for some things, but for now he's there for the debate and that's the big hurtle, right? >> that's right. look, he's basically undefined in this race, you mentioned conservatives, people who tuned in who don't like the medicaid expansion is some of the other steps he's taken as governor of ohio, but he's got a real chance, opportunity to define himself for republican primary voters tomorrow night, when they know least about him of any of the people on stage. it's a real opportunity for him, but he could very well turn people off. this is something, that style of his where he could be combative. could appeal to some people, and not appeal to others too. neil: the new sec rule will go

into effect by a 3-2 vote. there are a number of shareholder groups against, it worker groups who say it doesn't go far enough. obligation that company have to report the ratio what the ceo is paid versus the lower paid worker is unrealistic and mathematically impossible especially when you are including global workers who are paid a fraction of what u.s. workers paid. sec, you screwed up, you should go much, much harder. there must be more to this that both sides can not stand it. we'll have more after this. everyone loves the picture i posted of you.

at&t reminds you it can wait.

turn into whether you're reading and over words are not are just going to be on the front of "the wall street journal." page 62 ultimately goes into effect. voting predates you come and measure to layout rut the big

cheeses making. the big cheese or say not fair in we have to do that in some workers may have in asia or thailand where they're not paid as highly as american workers. others say we don't think this goes far enough. they will get away with murder and leave out what big it was talk and options in the dim towards the hide or mask how much they're getting. this will go into effect and you will see in an annual report and earning statements when they come out and pretty soon it's really big you will see it in newspaper had nine. you can count on that. apple despite the comeback today is down a lot from where applies. not only sec but apple and marketwatch here to join at the proverbial head.

first if i can work backwards. you very eloquently argued some time ago that apple was set for a meeting. today notwithstanding what were and are you saying that worries about what is going on with apple right now. >> you already have a market each year rating for the last six months to a year. when you have the most overrun stock in history breaking down, that just adds to it. there is a psychological component as well as a big weighting component to apple and the worry is another poll from the market that can affect the other things. the market is holding up well and until the s&p take that 2040 i'm not worried so much. also in holes lou of growth stocks with netflix and tarbox and the like and a fondness air

act and i'm okay. i think it's going lower and i heard in the list then everything is okay. neil: hiding of the market isn't over react. they are not appreciating all the stuff apple is doing and the fact that the cash forward. this isn't like netscape or some of these other great plan for the past. this is apple we're talking about. >> apple is not a flash in the pan. all i insane as the stocks come from 91 cents to 130. there's a point in time work it so so big, so large that there's only one thing left to do and that is selling. we are hearing that i watch not doing so well.

they have to continue to deliver and that's not an easy thing to do. so far so good. you'll hear in the next two weeks think there's going down. neil: we shall see what happens. i want to switch gears. there must be some pain with the worker rights groups that don't go far enough. the ceo of the company said it goes too far. they have to print the ratio with his or her lowest paid worker. where do you think this is going? and a third of "the scarlet letter" that will embarrass them. what do you think? >> this is government simply saying shame on you. you make too much money mr. ceo and look at the medium employee with the numbers i've seen then you have to report them and outweigh shareholders can revolt and do something about it.

to move the needle on executive pay in the sec has now gotten a job done and i expect shareholder meetings will see revolt on the companies -- neil: shareholders want to make money. your point is well taken a fiercely untreated she seems to be doing just fine. they are happy if they are making money. >> i would suggest things will be quiet. if the stocks are not doing so well, you will hear some loud voices. this is a seminal moment in time as far as you make too much, they make too little. neil: thank you very much. some of you might remember the coal industry not happy with an administration effort to kill this industry and are no kill him. some paranoid nut job from the fossil fuel tank and.

we now learn when they were crofting these rules that they didn't consult any of his colleagues. which is a little weird. we'll be back after this. when a moment spontaneously turns romantic, why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use, is the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure.

do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. insurance coverage has expanded nationally and you may now be covered. contact your health plan for the latest information.

it neil: the vehicle industry ceo. a lot of people e-mailing back and forth.

a lot of his rants are making sense right now because sometimes when they say you are paranoid you have a reason to be looking over your shoulder. now indications that the details the epa has high commissions and industry to make sure they do so. they were bouncing these ideas off of industry. they were bouncing off environmentalists. not not shocking but it does kind of indicate what they were saying. neil: environmentalist promoting ideas that have made them billions of dollars. i don't know if anybody's going to add up all of the money the fire mentalists have made that have gone to university, individuals who promote the global warming ideas. they get rich off of these ideas. naturally they promote things that get them more money. killing coal, even natural gas which is a cleaner more

efficient still carbon energy. neil: why not have the business guys in there. you can do what you want do you have to read the cost of what you recommend. >> they don't do it make sense. that is what it areas people like robert murray. these are efficient business guys. when they see government making regulations and make no economic sense that they're not going to correct carbon emissions, they are not affected by any of this. they think there is a conspiracy going on. even though robert murray goes overboard in terms of seeing conspiracies where there may not be any come you can understand his frustration because it doesn't make sense. neil: he was saying that there is no lobby for displaced energy workers, those who have been laid off.

no understanding. the lower prices in the industry >> they are not getting the taxpayer-funded billions of dollars developing its alternate energy energy things that aren't efficient -- how many people see in these windows and think they do at the obama administration claimed they could do. take your 25%, 30%. they are in the low single digits. >> if you have an energy system of the fossil fuel guys. >> all the claims in alternative energy will equal what we get from coal and natural gas than others versus like al gore 10 years ago same manhattan with the underwater because of global warming. same claims and suggestions. millions of dollars but these claims never pan out.

neil: may be for al gore. great show. he gets right to it. no one is more energetic. i do want to bring you up to date. this tie in with jfk is saying any military action threat that iran would drive the country's nuclear program underground and do more harm than good. the effort to re-sanction iran or get tougher could hurt us, the idea of being a lot of u.s. businesses would be heard because they want to do business over there. none of them live. this is for a very limited audience. those in the democratic party and those in high regard. legendary now and something the president is trying to seize onto right now.

we will have a lot more on this because this is a tale of two very, very different presidents.

neil: when they talk about the comebacks, people say it's getting heated in a point to developments like this is something we should worry about. jpmorgan looking to bring back a big, jumbo loan for $3 million. had a mortgage for $3 million. they won't be as stringent as they used to be. put 15% down and your credit doesn't have to be a hundred and a 680. people interpret that as we are getting too cocky about this and greedy about this. it is what it is an wells fargo and others following suit. former fannie mae executives and root. the immediate fear was here we

go again. when you think? >> there's no question the demand for jumbo mortgages without dramatically in direct result of the stock market being up near all-time highs. i think 50% since last year for jumbos. what jpmorgan has lowered the credit score required at from a lowered the down payment so you have risk, typically more defaults. neil: the argument for this is this is a quiet, a pricey, lucrative slice and these people have better credit record when it comes to default in that sort of thing than others. they are worth going out on the limb four. do you agree with that? >> thanks, neil. a nice getting too much credit as opposed to the low when not being searched.

jpmorgan, wells fargo know if they are doing. default rates are a third of what conforming loans are. you never want to bet on them for pure economic value. your relationships fail, people with million dollars homes is the reason they go after then a lot of collateral as well. neil: this flipside of that is what you do now with a wink and a nod to help one group and we did see that in the last housing run-up went all who were getting mortgages should not mortgages. this doesn't apply to the upper round but it effects those as well. not as many, but they did. that is your fear, right? >> i implied was jpmorgan changing credit requirements as long as it they are wrong and

take big losses that tax tears don't have to bail them out. and the free market they want more business and take a big marker share as long as they take the risk and that taxpayers are taking the risk. neil: tim, what is the risk right now? whether these people default or not, the fear is that creates a new bubble. all of a sudden it inflates property values and we started all over again. you are not concerned about that? >> the housing market is taking a bit of a siesta. the rebound effect in terms of property values dropping so far in getting back to where we were eight, nine years ago is a good thing. unfortunately, the fundamentals of the housing market, household creations, job growth to maintain not. the issue really is and on the

high end in terms of millionaires because they are not as contacts bear bailout. the ones that most need help, fha program, fannie mae and freddie mac programs are staying away because they've learned are not selling credit risk. they are granting it. the government comes down on them like a house of cards. neil: thank you both very much. and the right lower part of your screen with the monitoring disney stocks. nevertheless they could be slowing down a little bit. people introducing cable. they all feel disney is heralding something that is worrisome, that is bad. we will be i'm not as well without the president saying about trying to secure a deal in overcoming what these people say can't be done. disney and the land of make believe and critics saying the president is a world of make

believe. right after this. can a business have a mind? a subconscious. a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul?

can a business be...alive? nobody's hurt,but there will you totalstill be pain. new car. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do, drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement, you'd get your whole car back.

i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. new car replacement is just one of the features that come standard with a base liberty mutual policy. and for drivers with accident forgiveness,rates won't go up due to your first accident. learn more by calling switch to liberty mutual and you can save up to $509. for a free quote today,call liberty mutual insurance at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.

neil: take a look at oil right now down 74 cents. in and out of the $45 a barrel bubble that brings us back to levels we have not seen since march. a lot of that has to do with the feeling beginning to be a consensus that the iranian deal does go through. the president speaking about that american university in washington. if the deal should occur, iran gets 2 million more barrels a day of oil on the market. some say that will flood the market. bodmer supply, relatively tepid demand to spend things much further south. that is the tip of the proverbial bad deal iceberg.

he represented our fine country and by rain. he joins us right now on the phone. ambassador, we are already seeing the market is factoring in an approved deal. i know what would be rejected by congress but not by a margin that could overcome a presidential veto. they are saying oil prices have to go lower because of the a lot more iranian oil. they take it as a given that it's a done deal. du? >> as you said, congress may reject it did not like the majority sufficient to override a presidential veto. it will take effect. i ran presuming that it does what it is supposed to do in the agreement will sell oil and get revenue from not in the cat is

out of the bag. neil: that if the economic interests of others fear it would suddenly get unfrozen with tens of billions of dollars to put that towards nefarious uses. the bigger issue for you is the argument the president using again that there is no alternative. the alternative to war and those arguing against it are welcoming that. you buy that? >> no, i don't. what i find interesting is the irony comparing to go into a war in iraq. if you remember back in 2003 when the republican administration commends the american people if we don't go to war we are all going to die. is it better with the nuclear weapons and the nuclear pie.

we don't go in there and take them out, they will use it again. obama is using the same kind of rhetoric. it is neither war or this deal. what you get that extreme argumentation, you are doing a disservice to the public. the fact of the matter is i ran this like any other country. right now we give them all carrots, knows. i don't agree that only six will work. you've got to have a combination of incentives to good behavior and the deal is long on incentives, short on disincentives. neil: he was riding high much after the cuban missile crisis and there were verifiable means i'm keeping to an agreement with both abide by. that is apples and oranges. first of all, note 24 day waiting period before we could check out.

i don't know where the comparison was found. >> let's be clear, sir. the overriding logic of the cold war was virtually assured destruction. on negotiations were premised on the alternative and destruction of our country. i ran. not the situation. that is the stake in comparison number two. mistaken comparison number two is to call i ran a superpower for god's sakes. this is the islamic dictatorship that happens to be a regional hegemon but not a global hegemon. why are we giving this guy status of superpower. a huge mistake. neil: that is well put. ambassador, thank you area, very much. the comparison have been.

this is for a very select crowd. this is for those few democrats still on the fence when the president wants to keep on his side to avoid his veto getting overwritten. congress will reject this. he doesn't want to rejected by a super wide margin. we will have more after this.

.

. neil: you know generally when the fbi is looking into something or alerts you, you are looking into something, you worry. if you are hillary clinton, you really worry. the latest bad news for a campaign that has been floundering of late, not only is she running almost statistically even with bernie sanders in new hampshire but revelations that the fbi isn't only investigating the hillary e-mails from her days as secretary of state, but what else might be on the private server of hers. charlie gasparino is looking into all that. what are you learning? >> i'm learning there's a lot of nervous hillary clinton

backers on wall street. that's where a lot of her money comes from. you know what's interesting, if you look at wall street money, this is how you know they'll cut and run, evenly divided between her and jeb kind of. look at goldman sachs, goldman partners have given to hillary, many have given to jeb, they're hedging their bets, these guys are fickle, if it looks she's really vulnerable. neil: they cover their bases, john tyson of tyson foods given generously to both. so they just -- that's not unusual, but the fact they are not going all in says something. >> right. and also says something about the "new york times" article that was much disputed by the clinton campaign that whether it was a criminal referral, whether it was -- neil: right, right, right. whether they dialed it back. >> if it's her e-mails that

have been referred, maybe not her, she wasn't referred but e-mails have been referred to the justice department's criminal authorities, that's a problem for her. now maybe the times didn't get the exact language. neil: who did it to refer her? >> the inspector general did. neil: i understand that. is there a back way to say the white house is interested. >> maybe, there's all sorts of conspiracy theories that the obama administration wants bernie sanders to be the president of the united states or joe biden. neil: or joe biden. >> but i'm saying that story was solid in more ways than it was not solid, no matter what's going on. neil: it is adding up. negatives are adding up. we'll get on. that the concern now that she has to worry. it's still very, very early, but we've seen the 60-point lead in new hampshire evaporate. >> yeah. neil: and you wonder how she gets back in control. >> you know what else has got to be worrisome to big money donors that their names are plastered in the papers for six months.

if larry fink from black rock gives a major contribution, holds a fund-raiser, that's going to be a story. he doesn't want that out there, then it's going to come out that larry has cheryl mills is on the board, and she's on the board of the clinton foundation which is controversial. that's the problem she has. it's like blood in the water, all her business ties are going to be exposed, and these are generally businessmen that don't want to be exposed in this way. neil: do they really think they wouldn't be? campaigning like this? >> i don't think they realized to the agree. neil: stay, there i want to bring in jackie kucinich. we were mentioning about the wall street or corporate titans hedging their bets and trying to make sure they cover their bases and give to hillary and give to jeb bush but they're prepared. that's assuming they made the right choice and one or the other gets the nomination, also

the presidency, that might not happen. but what do you make of the way they're playing this? >> yeah, they're hedging their bets. and i talked to the campaign legal center about this yesterday here in washington, and one of the things they told me is this is common among a small group of people, particularly wall street. we saw a lot of these. of the 17 donors in our analysis that gave to both heavily, they're largely from wall street, they are businessmen and businessmen before they are democrats and republicans. they'll look out for their interests before they look out for the party. so yeah, i think if one of these two don't make it, that money is going to go elsewhere. it pays not to take sides. neil: what do you think? >> in the past three election cycles ago, they didn't take sides, they split it evenly. when barack obama ran in 2008, wall street and big money donors went heavily to obama, heavily. they didn't split it that much.

last election cycle with romney, they didn't split it thatch. heavily to romney, when it was romney versus obama. it's this election cycle we have the split initially, and my only point is if she keeps imploding that wall street money will flow to a republican and would be a republican like jeb or kasich or someone like that, that most of the wall street thinks is in the water. neil: interesting, now we're told quietly on the side, a lot of the people say, look, she's not as virulent on this as she sounds, but they get tired of being the bogeyman and tired of named the fat cats that have gotten to this point by nefarious means and they don't like that language, and they've had it. what do you think of it? >> i think they have thick skins at this point. >> no, they don't. neil: or they're just phonies. >> they're not thick skinned. you are not seeing her get less money from wall street, which is where you see the feelings

get hurt. >> my point is this, if hillary clinton, as a lot of people expect her to be the next president, the smartest guys. the wall street guys are smart. >> they have no soul. >> that's what i love about them, soulless, heartless, you need a metal spike to put through the heart. neil: who better to cover them than someone like you. >> soulless and heartless. if they thought that hillary was going to win, they wouldn't split it. that's what you're seeing on wall street. neil: it's still early. >> they think she's vulnerable. neil: jackie, are you getting a read from the folks you talk to she's vulnerable and there is a panic sign. >> no one is talking about vulnerabilities, there were people that donated in 2008 that decided not to this cycle. and one of them told me that one of the reasons he's no longer on board with hillary is

the democrats' foreign policy position. this donor gave $25,000 to jeb's super pac. she is losing people because of her record with secretary of state what's going on with iran and israel. those are among the shift who gave to her in 2008 and now. neil: what she says and does. >> it's going to be an issue. neil: art laffer, a big clinton backer, not that clinton, bill clinton, art laffer liked what he was doing on tax cuts and the rest. and a lot of you people associate he's a reaganite, a right wing kook. he is pure when it comes to the simplist of giving the government less, giving taxpayers more, whether you give to the left or the right, that is the tonic. so mr. laffer, i want to bring us to hillary clinton and views that repudiate her husband's

views, what do you think? >> totally the opposite right now. the worst i've seen, you've got to watch her over the campaign, neil. they change, candidates change and change a lot. i'm watching hillary changing, i'm not liking what she says on economics, she could change. it depends how the responses go. neil: now i don't envision her doing the tax cuts she's innovated with capital gains. >> terrible, terrible. neil: stages fears and using the government -- >> the worst i've seen, incredibly bad. neil: the republican candidates in the race, the 478 candidates we have running, then who registers to you on economic issues that apparently are near and dear to most americans? >> what amazes me is of all of candidates, all 478 are proposing strong pro-growth tax cut spending restraints, sound money, free trade, minimal regulations. i have never seen a group of candidates focusing on the

right issues at the right time as these guys. there are a couple of exceptions here and there, bottom line you've got one of the most impressive fields of republican candidates i've seen almost ever. neil: are you ever worried, they're tripping over themselves to see who could offer the lowest taxes. >> no! >> you don't fear that. who can do the best job for america. >> wouldn't be that horrible? neil: that's not what i said. is there such a thing as overcutting taxes. >> you've got rand paul's taxes. ted cruz's, huckabee's, rick perry's, you've got a lot of people. neil: you worked for ronald reagan, who would ronald reagan like in this race, if he were to come back and talk to you, art, who would he like? >> i think ronald reagan would look at candidates in different eyes than economics. but if it were just economics, there are a bunch of the candidates they'd like very, very much. neil: would he like, would he like donald trump? >> you know, donald trump

created a lot of excitement in the race, just the way teddy roosevelt did. neil: that's not what i asked, would he like donald trump. >> i think. i don't know. i think he would. our group in california, there were a lot of donald trumps around reagan for many, many years even after he was president. my godfather was justin dart, we had holmes, jack tuttle, bill wilson, all of the people were in the mold of donald trump. they were very outspoken and firm in their views. and by the way, they too changed their views but sure created the excitement. i think reagan would like donald trump, yes. neil: yes, and he had quite a few ceos in his cabinet. >> he sure did. there is nothing wrong with being rich. and donald trump is proud of being rich and that's so cool! it's wonderful when someone makes it in this world, and it's not to be sneered out or frozen. neil: and he embraced it. as you and i said, probably would not be the problems he encountered.

very well said, my friend. good seeing you. >> pleasure being with you. neil: same here. now you probably don't know this, there is a new planned parenthood video out. it's disgusting. it's controversial. here's the thing, though. you're never going to see it. the mainstream media will never tell you about it. the tree falling in the woods and no one is there. who sees it? who hears it? who cares? we think you should know about this, the new story on planned parenthood does not add up. the only way to get better is to challenge yourself,

and that's what we're doing at xfinity. we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can

to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. great time for a shiny floor wax, no? not if you just put the finishing touches on your latest masterpiece. timing's important. comcast business knows that. that's why you can schedule an installation at a time that works for you. even late at night, or on the weekend, if that's what you need. because you have enough to worry about. i did not see that coming. don't deal with disruptions. get better internet installed on your schedule. comcast business. built for business. . neil: all right, how do you say yikes in whatever number of characters or less. twitter continues to swoon a new low. the problem with the company is the same as they echoed in last week's report, they cannot find a way to leverage off all of the users and do the facebook

thing and make money at it. that and the fact they've got an aggressive hunt for ceo and had a devil of a time finding one. the question becomes takeover bait for whom? google is mentioned, facebook is mentioned. microsoft mentioned. no way of knowing, this much we to know, if you're a twitter shareholder, you have a major case of the gulps. planned parenthood thinks it's dodged the bullet by getting past republicans who want to shut it down or shut down taxpayer funding. a new video we're told is more disgusting and more controversial. a lot of it i had seen, i can attest to that. the question comes if it ever gets out to you, the mainstream media the stories all but ignored, they warned planned parenthood on the part of republicans gets the attention. is that fair? is that right? lisa boothe says defund planned parenthood road, tarrin

rosenkranz says not so fast. there is a reason why the judge shouldn't show these videos and the reason why he's decided not to release them. but the fact of the matter is they do illustrate pretty unsavory tactics do, they not? >> what i think happening here is something we've seen forever. this is gotcha politics at it's best. planned parenthood people have been advocating to defund federal dollars when federal dollars don't supply anything for abortions, preventive cancer screenings. neil: that's not what i asked. >> no. neil: you whether it's a crotch or kabal or effort to go after planned parenthood, what you've seen on the tapes is disgusting, right? >> i haven't seen the two hour conversation, these are heavily edited tapes. >> when they talk about feet us parts -- >> planned parenthood responded

they do not accept money for fetal tissue. neil: these guys were, if that's a criminal act to you. >> well, the judge would determine what's a criminal act. neil: fair enough, lisa, what do you think of that? >> here's the thing, anyone in politics knows that perception is reality, and the problem is in these videos that certainly looks like there's blurred lines here, and that's why it's up to both the federal government and congress to conduct an investigation as they have said they're going to do, and it's also incumbent upon governors, someone like abbott in texas is launching an investigation into planned parenthood. look, these videos are blurred lines and i highly doubt anyone sitting at home is going question the fact the practices -- neil: lisa, to her point, if this is the exception not the rule, if planned parenthood does a lot of good stuff. doesn't matter, shouldn't be taxpayer dollars funding any of this. >> i don't think taxpayer

dollars should be going to an organization that conducts these kinds of practices. and i think it will be telling once we have the investigations to determine if there have been federal laws broken or not. >> it's clear they're not doing these kinds of practices. >> look, there's multiple videos out there right now. there's been five, i believe there is 12, i could be wrong with the number. there is multiple videos where the lines have been blurred. anyone sitting at home is not going to think this is scientific research. they're going to think these are horrific practices -- >> refocus here, if people never get a chance to see or hear this, they're going to say it sounds incredibly true, we're going to go with the talking points it's a right wing kabal, you've heard the tape. you would say that's fair, right? >> right, and an investigation would be the answer. i think what we're jumping to on the other side is immediately jumping to defund instead of investigation. neil: were you offended by the part.

>> we're talking about body parts, we're talking about baby's body parts in the video. neil: were you offended by that language and that discussion at that portion of these tapes on any level? >> well, i think it's important to focus whether or not -- >> have you seen them? >> the fetal tissue to help save lives. >> body parts. >> is something they think should be an important part of getting investigated. the question is -- >> good luck. >> what i'm saying is it's a heavily edited video. neil: what portions were edited, the portions i mentioned were not edited. part of a larger conversation. >> each video is about i believe some of the videos have been eight minutes, we're not talking about incredibly doctored videos that hinted saying there is blurred lines going on and potentially illegal practices going on.

people who see baby's body parts aren't going to think it's scientific. good luck to voters. >> i think defunding -- >> ladies, thank you very much, see where this goes is where you will see or hear any of this. we're talking about technology stocks that come and go and whether twitter is getting pounded. there is one issue that stands out among all of these, despite the ups and downs of apple, one stock only goes up, a lot up. 22% last month. 8% yesterday. another, well, what do you say? almost 3% today? netflix on a tear. too much of a tear? after this.

shopping online is as easy as it gets. wouldn't it be great if hiring plumbers, carpenters and piano tuners were just as simple? thanks to angie's list, now it is. we're making hiring anyone from a handyman to a dog walker as simple as a few clicks. you don't have to be a member to buy their services directly at angieslist.com but members save more on special offers. angie's list is revolutionizing local service again. visit angieslist.com today.

. >> let's get down to business and make money. my first stock of the day is netflix.

all right, a name you know, netflix, nflx. i've been cute with it getting in and out of certain points. once again, netflix shares higher, even today, some of you sold it too early, don't worry about it, making money. neil: that's what he's good at. charles payne was recommending this, nobody else was. the panel would argue, shut up, charles. i love to say that, but then again, i can't because he's been so darn right. charles payne with us on netflix continuing to surge. many say it's getting pricey. >> mind-boggling, i said $600 a share, today hit the equivalent of $875 a share. neil: been adjusted for the splits and all. but the fact, come on -- >> it's nuts. i've asked everyone to take profits. this is a beautiful one, if you rode it, a heck of a thing. there is one thing interesting two, things that made me hop on

netflix over the last three or four years, everyone in the house had it but me, i'm serious, i'm going to buy dvd's, and my son and wife and daughter had netflix accounts, and two or three years ago, i'm at cheesecake factory, three kids in the line, one starts to left, my dad shorts the stock but binge watches everything. >> i knew he was talking about netflix. >> they got it, their dad, if he sells short, had to sell the house by now. this is outrageous, look at disney today. disney is getting walloped. we're saying a revolutionary shake-up, people are cutting the cable cord and want to binge watch when they want to binge watch, netflix happens. neil: that occurred to espn and all that. business was soaring but that was an issue. a lot of entertainment stocks here, but what is the lesson for traditional media companies, then?

>> i think the lesson is creative destruction, we've seen it across the board. now starting to see it with the technology names that are living up to some of the early hype. neil: how do you balance that, charles? you get out now, or look at apple, huge run-up announcement selling off. i don't know what your position was on apple. you don't want to get too greedy, what inflection point you can afford to get a little greedy? >> there are times people are so far ahead they don't have, to and the stock is up 100% in less than a year, you're playing with the house money. please. people have to contain their own levels. neil: netflix this week up north of 10%. last month up almost 25%. since it went public, 9,995%. that's a lot. >> it is. imagine, and i always dream, it never worked for me.

i bought the small $1 stocks and dreamed it would be a netflix. they're out there. and i think we become so short-sighted. i had someone tweet me and say hey, charles because of the flops at disney and apple are you comfortable with mobileye, and i wanted to scream. i'm going talk about this on the show. disney up 215% for the last five years. depends where your perspective is. markets, stocks go down, america is cyclical, our economy is cyclical, there is winners and losers. the notion the stocks go up every day kills people and think so ready to take a loss, neil. that destroys individual investors. you know they say individual investors can't beat the market. i bet you 50% of the people in the last two weeks took a loss in netflix, facebook in google, because it pulled back and they said uh-oh, better pull out. neil: they got nervous. not on this show, but others.

>> james bond watches you for comprights. neil: and also the quotes. >> this outfit by the way -- neil: not a word. >> did you see the word? the button thing. neil: does water sprinkle? >> alcohol. neil: that's fine. charles payne is the best and has the facts for making you money. and he does. do you ever go to the cvs stores and others, right at the checkout counter, they have the chocolate and the snacks. there is a move to get them out of there because they're impulse purchasing. lizzie mcdonald on the quest by the food police to ban the items from checkout lines, lizzie? [ laughter ]. >> there you go. the center -- this is make me sick. the center for the science of public interest really powerful, really influential group is trying to get target, walmart, bed bath & beyond, convenience stores like 7-eleven to stop with the junk food at the checkout aisles,

and standing in front of cvs, cvs was first in the country to yank tobacco products and cigarettes from the show. and cvs wanted to rebrand themselves as health conscious, it's all about health, but guess what? sales took a hit, shares are taking a hit and we have people on the street reacting to this push by this center, this advocacy group to stop junk food at the checkout aisles. take a listen to what one lady from houston and her daughter told us. >> the fruits and vegetables is healthy. you got to live a longer life. the candy, you got a lot in 2011, people have a high blood pressure. >> i'm not morally opposed to lifesavers and gum at checkout counter. >> you know, there's no push in that report so far to stop the use of food stamps to buy junk food. we have amy simmons from kentucky. what do you think of this push? >> i find it kind of big brother but at the same time, i really like the idea of not being so tempted at checkout.

>> right, and by the way, amy is wearing a fitbit right now. and neil, they're doing in europe. in norway they removed junk food and replaced it with dried fish at the counter. back to you. neil: incredible. we've got police ourselves. really. don't you dare remove the reese's peanut butter cups. speaking of war, you don't pass the deal neil, it is war. that might be news to the prime minister of israel who says this deal is what brings us closer to war. who's right? after this.

. . . .

>> this deal will bring war. it will spark a nuclear arms race in the region and it would feed iran's terrorism and aggression. that would make war. perhaps the most horrific war of all, far more likely. neil: that might be what the leader of israel is saying but the leader of the united states, president barack obama, just a short time ago in washington, american university, the same venue john f. kennedy used to strike a deal with the then soviet union to rein in nuclear arms is saying just the opposite. no deal would be worse than this deal and would actually lead to war, not the opposite. we have former bush 43 defense secretary, assistant secretary, peter brookes with us right now. he agrees with the israeli

leader on this one. why? to be a cascading problem in the middle east. there is going to be an arms race. that will go on at the conventional level. even the president has talked about how he is going to have to shore up the supports of the gulf, the gcc states. secretary kerry was just there. it is likely you will see countries like turkey, saudi arabia, egypt move forward with nuclear programs. iran will get a release of a significant amount of sanction money that is frozen that will allow them to continue support hezbollah, hamas, syrian regime. perhaps even what they're doing in yemen. so i think there is a lot of problems here. none of us can predict the future but i think that the argument that this is going to make thing more dangerous has merit. neil: you know the one thing i didn't understand, peter, maybe you can help me with this, when the president made remarks, i'm reading bulletins or flashes, i

apologize, i might have misinterpreted him, those against this only will hurt u.s. business interests because sanctions they would call for would hurt u.s. business. i'm thinking, wait a minute we have no business with iran or shouldn't, and haven't for decade. so how can you hurt what is not there? >> i think he is talking more about the global economy. in other words, not just the united states but our partners. he made the case, and i'm not sure i agree with it but he made the case if i recall correctly many countries had stopped buying iranian oil. it cost them billions and billions of dollars by not doing trade with iran. so his view was is that if we don't do something about iran through this weak deal, that is one of the problems, the president, we have a deal but we have a weak deal. he doesn't want to admit that. neil: but he still says, whatever you call it weak or not, i understand, my friend, he says weak or not it is better than no deal.

that is the argument he has been using. what do you make of that? >> right. i don't think that is the case. the other options certainly is, i think you will even hear administration people will say this, they will come as close to the president's argumentthent'sh can if you ask them candidly we could have continued with sanctions regime. president said it wasn't sustainable. i'm not so sure. if you cut off iran from american banking system, anybody who does business with iran can't have access to american banking system it will hurt them significantly. what you could have done put pressure on iran to get better deal in place like vienna instead of the weak deal. we've gotten a dale, it's a weak deal, that is what everybody is concerned about, and that is something the president won't admit. it's a weak deal and we could have gotten a better deal. neil: despite your very lucid argument, i think it will go the president's way. he will survive all of this to get this thing passed. doesn't mean congress won't reject it but just not by a

margin that can override a veto. >> should be interesting much. neil: thank you, peter brookes. you heard debate about planned parenthood and video you have not seen and will not get to see. many in the party argued, including donald trump that this is worth fighting for a government shutdown. this is worth showing your mettle and the moral right to sand up for this. i had rick perry saying no, no, this has gone way too far but mitch mcconnell has already said in the senate, no more government shut downs but is this one worth doing just that, after this.

you focus on making great burgers, or building the best houses in town. or becoming the next highly-unlikely do sup right there with y, helping with the questions you need answered to get your brand new business started. we're legalzoom and we've already partnered with over a million new business owners to do just that. check us out today to see how you can become one of them.

legalzoom. legal help is here. >> time for your fox business brief. i'm connell mcshane, back here with it. we've been talking a lot about media and entertainment stocks. certainly in focus. charles payne made the point about disney and netflix a minute ago. look at netflix by 2%. cord cutters are driving company to new heights but making things difficult for cable tv business over at disney. we saw that in the earnings and when you talk cable tv and disney you're talking about espn. even with all the live sports, espn vulnerable as well to the cord cutting phenomenon. fewer people with cable subscriptions. profit growth in this part of the business lower than first thought. the disney stock is certainly getting hit today. that is unwith stocks media entertainment, down by 9%. others are also feeling pain so to speak.

dream works with a loss. even our parent company foxes, time warner, all entertainment media stocks are down. more "cavuto: coast to coast" coming up. can a business have a mind?

a subconscious. a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive? neil: angry as a lot of republicans are failing to stop taxpayer funding for planned parenthood, a number of them say we should take it to the next

level to for a government shutdown. donald trump has been for that. not all republicans share the view. among those in power to sway that argument, mitch mcconnell republican leader agrees with donald trump, or does not agree with donald trump. he does not think it is worth ever attempting government shutdowns. that is bad policy. gina lowden, speaks for libertarian or conservative part of that party. you heard, mr. mcconnell says, no, no, no more shutdowns and this will not compel him to change. you say what? >> it is like winnie the pooh gop and mcconnell is eyore. looks like center for medical progress has this beautiful, fully wrapped present for the gop include inside of it how to win in 2016. mcconnell, oh, we might not be able to figure out how to unwrap it. negotiations, 101, obviously

hasn't raid trumps book, art of the deal. you won't say shutting down government is off the table. the we won't go that far. please one over us again. neil: i guess what a lot of republicans, fear, gina, it will go too far and republicans look petulent over government shutdowns. they paid dearly what that happens. you say what? >> not that look petulent, childish. neil: were to, were to, infiniti. >> you know, what the problem is, neil, is that the gop is never willing to sprout a backbone and be courageous like ted cruz, like donald trump. we, they're all standing there, scratching their gray heads, wondering why in the world it is that cruz and trump, who thought were going down are soaring. because they do precisely what the gop elite have never been willing to do and that is stand for something. neil: well-put. gina, good seeing you again. gina loud done.

we were mentions donald trump. trish regan on that and phenomena that endures. what do you think, trish? trish: we're asking him self. "the intelligence report," 2:00 p.m. top of the hour. we'll ask him how he is preparing for the big, big night tomorrow. whether or not he gets nervous. lots of questions. we'll, neil, introducing him to a big supporter of his, a the 2-year-old woman in knoxville, tennessee, neil, who never voted before -- 92. she registered to vote because she wanted to cast her first ballot at 92 years old for donald trump. he may have some nice words for her. neil: good for you. i look forward to that. trish regan with donald trump and woman out of nowhere. like a lot of women. people coming out of the woodwork, this guy, unorthodox he may be we like him. i look forward to that, trish, very, very much. thank you. >> thank you. neil: you heard about netflix stock being on fire. have you heard the one that happens now maybe because the

stock is on fire, you will be extra generous when you have all this extra cash. how about, how about parental leave that goes on for a full year? how about applying that to moms, and new dads as well, for a year? ♪ i'm only in my 60's.

i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay.

and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations.

remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. neil: how about unlimited paternity leave? >> no, no. neil: this particular child not a fan of dad, it is connell. unlimited. microsoft has followed suit right now, saying it is taking eight-week leave policy, extending to 12 weeks. no one tops netflix on unlimited offer, you can take in chunks. i believe microsoft can do the same. feeling pressure to keep their workers happy. i have gerri willis, connell

mcshane, ashley webster. the argument for this on the part of netflix is tony kranz, their chief talent officer, netflix hinges on keeping most talented individuals in the field. experience shows people perform better at work when they're not worried about home. >> i think that is true. i think it is important a work life balance. most important silicon valley battling each other for what kind of benefits they offer and a, to keep top talent and attract others this will go on and on. microsoft upping their ante as well. i don't think this will spread across the country. this is silicon valley thing. a big tech company, but i don't see how the company other companies jumping on board. neil: what if it catches on? >> government talks about work life balance, companies need to pay more money. i don't think that is the way to do it. just like i don't think government should impose higher minimum wage.

neil: you're callous through and through. >> give them better benefits they will stay. population boom coming. >> does show though these types of policies have helped with retention rates. i saw one of the google executives quoted saying when they did something similar, not quite as generous of netflix, when they upped benefits, they noticed new mothers were likely to stay with the company longer. neil: they found out too they don't take the full time, knowing they can. >> i think that is true, sick days they found out in the past, if you put limit on things, people will bo up to the limit. >> yes, connell, we know that. surprised you're here today. >> make them unlimited -- give me a minute. make them unlimited people won't take as many. that is true for a lot of different things. neil: you argued ashley, this is silicon valley -- >> i do. i don't see other big companies unless they feel pressure to do so. neil: about keeping talent. >> so competitive. neil: what if you're in industry where that is not as pressing?

>> i don't think so. they will say they're doing it here. i don't think they will find sympathetic ears. neil: i always talk about retaining talent, taking up a year off -- >> how important could they be? >> very good question. >> my sister-in-law manage as company in canada, they have similar policies. they said it is a real pain to fill the gaps when people go on maternity leave because they're gone for months. neil: but the argument gets back to what you were saying, connell. if it does, you know, get more loyal workers on board and other workers see it and see how well it is, but isn't it will lead to resentment. >> it has in the past. that has been back and forth between i think people who are married and people who are not in the workforce have been studies done that. people with personal experience. men and women in the workforce over the years said they looked at that people who, have resentment. but i think, times have changed obviously. we do it in our own families we're balancing with husband and

wife, between work and life and home. and, this gets talked about in the prism of women all the time but important to a lot of men. they want to spend time with their kids. if their wives work a lot they're out of -- >> could go to sweden. sweden gives mom and dad 480 days off for the first eight years of the child's life. they can take that in any way they want. but that is the law. neil: learn how -- superpower. they are blonde and george just. you're right about that. >> blonde and george just. neil: want to switch gears and get your reaction, we're learning from malaysia's leaders, they determined the wing fragments on the beach are indeed the remains of the missing malaysia air flight 370. the question more than a year after the fact, gerri, whether we get any sense what happened on the jet, where the rest of it is, what do they do? >> the families. every headline you put out on this just another emotional burden for them.

that's what i hear of when i hear of these stores. we like to know the details and want to know the details to prevent it from happening again. neil: only closure to those who clung to the possibility some of their loved ones are on island. >> there is conspiracy theories floating around, these things are put to rest by this type of confirmation which, maybe to your point is good for the families, i don't know. neil: i'm wondering in the case, it has had a tough time certainly nothing to do with getting a plane shot down over ukraine. but back-to-back tragedies, never righted itself. >> never has. pictures of flights taking off with essentially no one on board. it will be a long time, if ever. neil: thank you very much. connell, breaking news as well as this company leave policy here. i do want to let you know, all those shrapnel that turned out, some of parts that turned up, they discovered more parts linking back to this flight were indeed those from malaysia air

flight 370, more than a year after the fact. the only sure thing we know from any of this, those who held to the hope, maybe the dream that their loved ones were still alive, this has pretty much erased that. we'll have more after this.

neil: welcome back, everybody, i'm neil cavuto. you're watching "coast to coast." we're learning right you no, now, that wing that came up onshore in the pacific, at least french authorities taking over this investigation that it was indeed the missing fragments from that boeing 777, the infamous malaysian air flight 370. the malaysian prime minister will be holding a statement later on or announcing a statement later on where french authorities will be detailing what they can tell us at this point. that these are the only remnants or relics that have come from this plane that crashed a little over a year ago.

239 souls taken with it. but this was a long debate here for a lot of people whether this plane was shot down, whether it had mechanical difficulties, what really occurred. remember a couple months later another malaysian plane was shot down over the ukraine. led to concerns the carrier whether it was bad omen, bad luck. bad places at bad time but we are waiting to hear from malaysian authorities and others about what is happening and what they can tell us from this and where they suspect other wreckage might be. trish regan, you might be touching on in in the next hour, for families or victims it provides closure. trish: thank you very much, neil. yes, some closure indeed. very sad, malaysia's prime minister saying experts have determined that the wing fragment recently found off the coast of reunion island is in fact from the malaysia airlines flight 370.

of course 239 people were onboard that flight. it was about 18 months ago, back in march of 2014. you will recall the media frenzy that ensued as people tried to find the whereabouts of that plane. there is news conference we're monitoring right now in paris. we're hearing from some officials there, including the french, the french investigator. deputy paris prosecutor who is holding news conference and bringing forth new details exactly what may have transpired there with that malaysian flight. but again confirming here from the malaysian prime minister that the debris found on reunion island did in fact belong to that flight where 239 souls were onboard. we'll continue monitoring this, the press conference going on overseas in paris. we'll bring you headlines as they come.