other side of the coin of course, online seller amazon. look at this, amazon, not way down, down eight bucks, holding at $900 per share. not seen that recently. bricks and mortar up, amazon down. how about that? how about that, neil cavuto? it's yours. neil: i was thinking about what you and peter talking about, machines and computers doing investing for us. matter of time before they're doing our job. stuart: speak for yourself. they need an english accent. neil: my would be italian, saying i don't think so, i don't think so. thank you very much. great show as always. we're following up on what stuart has been hammering home here, this so-called "nuclear option" about to be detonated today. i can drag you through all the parcel men temporary details. we're hear from mitch mcconnell shortly, explaining how that will be implemented here effectively the

senate rules will be changed because the gorsuch vote was blocked, 60 votes necessary blocked. republicans say they have no other choice, simple majority, changing the rules, going nuclear, as it were. a development behind the scenes could have you going nuclear. talk about bodies agreement not only to proceed on health care, by greater extension with the tax cuts. we're getting late word the president is very keen on marrying infrastructure, talking of building more roads and bridges what he can do elsewhere when it comes to getting health care reworked through. mitch mcconnell in the meantime talking about this measure, to get a simple majority vote goingnd soo neil gorsuch. >> i raised a point of order vote on cloture on precedent set on november 21st, 2013, is majority vote on all nominations. >> the precedent of

november 21st, 2013, did not apply to nominations to the supreme court. those nominations are considered under the plain language, rule 22. the point of order is not sustained. >> i appeal the ruling of the chair. >> madam president. >> the democratic leader. >> parliamentary inquiry. >> the democratic leader will state the parliamentary inquiry. >> did the senate precedent established on november 21st, 2013, on how nominations are considered in the senate change the cloture threshold for nominations to the supreme court? >> consideration of nominees to the supreme court of the united states was unaffected by the precedent of november 21st, 2013, and is as under rule 22. >> madam president, a second parliamentary inquiry? >> the democratic leader will

state the parliamentary inquiry. >> in the history of the senate, have there been any instances where a nomination to the supreme court was withdrawn after cloture was not invoked on the nomination? >> the secretary of the senate's office has confirmed that such a withdrawal has taken place. >> thank you, madam president. madam president, parliamentary inquiry? >> the democratic leader will state the parliamentary inquiry. >> of the last 26 nominations of juic confirmed to e supreme court going back to 1954, how many were confirmed without a roll call vote or, received more than 60 votes in support of their nomination, either on cloture, or on confirmation? >> the secretary of the senate's office confirms that 25 of 26 nominees were confirmed in one or another of the manners so described. >> madam president, i move to

adjourn until 5:00 p.m. i ask for the yeas and nays. >> is there sufficient second? >> there is. >> there is? the clerk will call the roll. >> mr. alexander,. >> no. [roll call vote. >> mr. booker? >> mr. bozeman. >> no. >> mr. brown? mr. brrr!. neil: this might seem like procedural gobbledygook to you. chuck schumer is asking for delay getting ball rolling on this "nuclear option," or at least setting stage for it, pushing back until at least 5:00 p.m. republicans would seem to have votes to avoid that. blake burman, with the with latest, they're redaying the

clock and obviously the process which republicans would go ahead on simple majority sometime tomorrow for neil gorsuch, right? reporter: right this is tit-for-tat -- neil: what about today? reporter: well, then you will have this presumably this vote, or at least theyill pick this up back again at 5:00 p.m. later today, we believe. the end result of all of this, you talk about the procedural gobbledygook, at some point friday night, there will be end-all vote on neil gorsuch, which he will only need, "nuclear option" will be invoked, 51 votes. there are 52 republicans in the senate. appears tomorrow night neil gorsuch will have his confirmation. he will sail through but all of this what you're watching right now think well far past neil gorsuch. this set as brand new precedent of united states senate, relates to confirmation of supreme court judges this lays marker down how everything is going to happen, it appears in the years

following, potentially decades following after this. neil, i was speak, i asked white house press secretary sean spicer the other day are they comfortable with everything you are watching on your screen right now, with republicans invoking "the nuclear option" and the white house's position on this was basically, putting this on mitch mcconnell from the beginning. i've asked spicer about this a couple different times. they say look, the senate runs how they run. mitch mcconnell runs his show over there. so however the senate wants to act it is in their court. the bottom line with this going forward, you have heard president trump talk about it, when you look at the grander scheme of things, as he will be the president of the united states for the next 45, 6 months, he believes potentially two or three more picks for him to make. if it does get to that point, which is a big if, battle line drawn from here on out there would on need to be 51 ves.

republicans as it stands have 52 senators. that is the long-term picture of this. the short term is that neil gorsuch, you're watching the, you're watching the sausage being made parliamentarywise, neil. this has big implications come tomorrow night. neil: we also know you're in florida, getting ready where the president will be hosting the chinese premier, xi xinping. obviously they want other more immediate concerns how to extract better trade deals, get chinese working with us on north korea. but obviously the president's very cognizant what you said, blake. if it is just a simple majority that will decide future supreme court justices, no matter who is in charge they would pick someone extreme to their liking, right? if republicans charge, the mon conservative nominee. if democrats in charge the more liberal nominee, right? >> what goes around comes around. go back to 2013 when democrats invoked "nuclear option" related

to federal judges, not the supreme court. that set barrier. fast forward some four years or so, republicans who are, we can guarranty you this, at some points democrats being in control, beck to democrats, future of history as it relates to politics, what you're watching right now, sets this precedent that for whoever the president is going here on out, donald trump over next 45 months, whoever his successor, whether four years or eight years down the line, it is going to be a 51 threshold majority. the point you make is a correct one. if a side, whether it is the democrats or republicans, has 51 or more votes, they can pick whoever they want. that plays to their base because they would not need that 60-vote threshold normally would kind of bring folks more to the center to try at least get a justice that isn't on either side right or left, neil. neil: blake burman, thank you, very, very much. we're going through fine-tuning of this.

i do want to raise a little of how this will play out timewise. they get a 30-hour clock running after this. which means sometime late tomorrow, the vote on neil gorsuch for simple majority, will likely include at least, three, maybe four democrats, will commence, meaning that sometime tomorrow evening, late tomorrow afternoon, likely evening, neil gorsuch will be confirmed by the united states senate. oddly enough will pick up more votes than clarence thomas did back in the el 1990s. that was one occasion, a supreme court justice did not get a minimum 60 votes or voice acclamation. it was commonplace during the eisenhower years and jf kennedy years and for a while, early lbj years, nominee approved by voice acclamation. inadvertent allly unanimous on -- virtually on both sides of the aisle. that was the environment then. different now.

25 or 26 didn't have to go through that. clarence thomas is the one standout who was dragged through a bitter, bitter partisan battle but ultimately approved as supreme court justice. we're keeping track of this. the reason why the markets are up, has a lot to do with this because it would be deemed through all the sausage making a w, a big win for donald trump. he has not had legislative victory, despite executive orders, executive memoranda, whatever you want to call them, very business at all that, not a win or legislative achievement he could take home. this would certainly be that. the markets are buoyed by that how inevitable that looks, occurring at same time we're getting distressing news to some in the same markets who are worried about where tax reform is going. i want to explore both these issues with congressman mark sanford. he is the on the budget committee, state of south carolina. first off, on what you seeeing

played out,ongressman, on capitol hill right now with neil gorsuch? chuck schumer says look what republicans unleashed here. but it was the democrats who unleashed this back in 2013, right, by pushing this notion that you needed a simple majority to approve cabinet appointments. they at the time said it was because of republican obstinance. be that as it may, here is where we stand right now. what do you think of this poisoned well argument that he has been raising? >> i mean we are where we are. the demons have already been unleashed. i don't know that you will put them back in the barn. and we have hyper partisan environment as it relates to court appointments these days. i n'thinit is necessarily good. i think era of johnson and kennedy where there was actually a voice vote of all things. neil: right. >> is a better place to be. but we are where we are. i think it is essential that this nination mo forward. i think, if i was a liberal, i'm

not, but if i was, i would frankly be comforted by his vote because he is a strict constitutionalist. he is strictly interprets it, not as one might want it to be, but just right down the middle. so i think whether from the right or the left, this ought to be appealing candidate. i'm glad he will go through. neil: to what blake burman was saying, congressman, about how this administration could conceivably looking at pigpicking a number of other supreme court justices. three justices are into their 80s already, one or two into the late 70s. it is conceivable donald trump could take look of the court and complexion of thatourt andts political views and legal posture well into the, into the next few decades, right? >> yeah, but i think one of the things that i think a lot of folks, from both sides of the political perspective are worried about is the way in which the executive branch has

got into the role of legislating, and to a great degree the court system has done as well. the idea of going back to the original mission, and having a court that certainties a law and right down the middle, rather than coming up with fairly wild and broad interpretations would be good for each political perspective. in that regard, i don't think would be a radical change in the court, frankly going back to what it is traditionally all about. neil: as you and i chatted in the past, picks can change. in other words what you think is going to be a sure-fire conservative or sure-fire liberal, david souter comes to mind. and a st of others. having said that, congressman, the markets are liking what appears to be a win for president trump here by an extension, they are concerned that tax cut thing and other issues, health care rework, the president indicated he might

want to marry that kind of vote with a vote on infrastructure spending, how do you feel, that gets to be dicey, that pushed the clock back a little bit? what do you think? >> i think that could well happen. i don't particularly like it. i like voting one subject at a time. when you marry specific subjects it gives everybody a reason to vote for it or frankly against it. i think, you know, it would be something that probably bring a number of democrats on board. i don't think it is go policy. but i think you know, you will see tax reform move forward. i think the whole hyper vent lanes we've seen -- hyper ventilation we've seen on whole health care slowed up is just that. this is the whole legislative process in motion. i would make one last quick point here. the bill we were going to vote on prior to that friday had seen 17 legislative days. in contrast the affordable care

act saw 186 legislative days. medicare part-d, which president bush pushed saw 166 legislative days, they were trying to jam too much into too short of a time. i think you will see a health care bill. i think you will see a tax bill. neil: if we don't see one relatively soon, the health care thing, i mean it is very possible, congressman, that the tax cut thing gets shelved into next year, which is conceivably meaning we don't see tax cuts. are you afraid that is possibility? >> it's a possibility but i believe a remote one. i think you will see something move on the health care front after coming back from the recess. i believe you will see sething on the tax front probably late summer, early fall. people originally thought it would be a summer kind of activity. i think realistically pushed back to the fall. neil: congressman, thank you for taking the time. i do appreciate it. we're watching this drama lay out. i could get involved in the weeds tell you what is going on. it is delaying, not denying judge gorsuch from becoming next

supreme court justice of the united states, an event that will play out more formally tomorrow night. beyond this sort of byzantine kabuki theater of the province of the senate. this it is this, "the nuclear on," stronglworded say the simple majority will vote for the supreme court justice,hat is going to ppen. the delay, they're putting up a lot of roadblocks cooling-off perioduntil 5:00 p.m. no guarranty that will happen. sometime tomorrow night, judge gorsuch will be on h wray to the supreme court. stick around. you're watching fox business.

neil: two developments we're following right now. president trump will leave joint base andrews to go to palm beach, mar-a-lago, where he will kick off a two-day conference with the chinese leader, xi xinping. indications are that could be a fairly frank discussion when it comes to trying to get the chinese to do what they can about north korea and all those missile tests and also about that gaping trade gap between our two countries.

$347 billion last year. the president wants that narrowed considerably. he wants the chinese to do their part. separately we're watching settlements in the united states senate where it looks like an effort to filibuster the nomination of neil gorsuch to be the next supreme court justice of the united states has failed and republicans are set now any minute to go ahead and just, go on a simple majority vote here. and if that is the case, neil gorsuch would almost invariably confirmed tomorrow some time. estimated to be sometime tomorrow night. the reason why we keep harkening back to the markets liking these developments, would be racked up, take it as you will, the first victory for donald trump in his young presidency here. a win is a win is a win and maybe those in the markets hope this will translate to similar success on the legislative front with the health care rework, infrastructures, even a big ol' tax cut plan. the president himself intimated with "the new york times" and

others he might marry two of those, infrastructure with the health care rework. the devil is in the details. in the ever-changing views from the white house how to proceed with this, even among republicans who aren't too hot to trot with the infrastructure part of this. again the focus right now getting neil gorsuch through. republicans are saying democrats forced this on them. if it were not for that move some years back with harry reid to approve cabinet appointees and subcabinet appointees by simple majority rather than 60 votes we wouldn't be here. they are upset. republicans are upset. they are not talking to each other. it is like an italian dinner table. brings me to my fell paisan. >> are they fighting? neil: what do you make of that argument, a win is a win and victory for the president who sorely needs one is on. what do you think? >> perceptionwise i think it is a positive, by the way getting that seat fiedin my view

someone who is prone to accept free markets and look at the constitution as an original document, for me personally, that is my opinion, i think it's a good thing. conservative base will be happy with that the real problem is this though. if he thinks this portends good things from democrats, getting consensus from the other party on health care and tax cuts, this shows it's not there because he is going with a simple majority without any democratic votes, even for extremely qualified candidate. i mean this guy -- neil: you're right. tempers are such that no reconciling to it but he is throwing out there an olive branch i thought this interview in the times and elsewhere and infrastructure, tying it potentially to a health care rework again. i don't know if this whole gorsuch thing and other experience before with the health care debacle is going to,

you know, calm any nerves and make people more kumbayah. what do you think of that? >> that is a function with the fact that the as send ant wing of the trump white house, there are various factions, jared kushner, gary cohn faction, nec seat gary cohn, jared kushner his n-in-law and white house advisor considered much more liberal. they are liberal. th is one faion. the other faction is nationalist faction steve bannon is downgraded. he he is off the national security commission, right? neil: to your early reporting the indications were that bannon was he wanted to quit. >> he wanted to quit, right? middle ground with reince priebus, who is the chief of staff. neil: chief of staff. >> right now the cohn, liberal kushner wing is as send ant. because of that there will be polly implications. one policy implication is in the tax cut bill.

trump talking more about infrastructure which left and democrats like, less about tax cuts. so if you're a conservative watching that faction gain steam you have to be a little worried where is the free market, tax cut, three rates on individuals. remember small businesses pay -- neil: white house itself, the staff itself is not in agreement on all issues, not agreement on value-added tax or border tax or paying a minimum. if they're not in agreement no wonder why you had speaker ryan singhing the white house. >> we're not worth 21,000 on the dow. i'm not saying it will trade off dramatically. there are a lot of technical factors people buying stocks, the fact we keep saying there are a lot less stocks listed than years ago. neil: you're right. >> i'm telling you based on

corporate earnings, one reason you need corporate earnings to go up, they go up with a big corporate tax cut, it is not worth it. neil: i hear you. all right, buddy, thank you, very, very much, charlie gasparino is the best of the best. i was expressing my opinion here, you can run the other way. given all the back and forth and nastiness happens. i don't see them remotely on the same page. if it you look at calendar, legislative calendar, it reads like the most liberal college days off here. it is ridiculous. it is not going to get done. i'm saying it is not going to get done. if i'm wrong, this tape disappears. we'll have more after this. ♪ yes? please repeat the objective. ♪ thrivent mutual funds. managed by humans, not robots. before investing, carefully read and consider

fund objectives, risks, charges and expenses in the prospectus at thriventfunds.com. that's why a cutting edgeworld. university counts on centurylink to keep their global campus connected.

and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

neil: president boarded air force one. he is on his way to from right now in the two-day summit with the leader of china, xi xinping. that could get to be sort of a intense affair of the president

wants to have the chinese do all they can, have north koreans stop launching missiles, in the case yesterday right off the korean peninsula. they come very close when they veer off course to killing people. that obviously is very unpleasant reality. president wants chinese to do what they can. chinese are reporting in their own press, good luck. we can't always control this nutcase. so there might be a thought that the chinese are simply unable to rein in north korea. of course the president, white house not buying that. other administrations haven't bought that in the past when they urged china to do the same. president will work on yawning trade gap between our two countries totaling $337 billion. but again the weather sunny, beautiful in florida. not so in the washington, d.c. metropolitan area. this on the same day the mt. has gone ahead, done something unthinkable. they call it "nuclear option." require that any supreme court

justice going forward need only simple majority of united states senators, rather than 60. it happened only once before in our history, when we didn't have this whole battle back and forth over this drama, when justice recognize thomas was approved on 52-48 vote after very acrimonious debate back and forth. but he got through. irony without this now in place, gorsuch will do better than that likely getting three or four democratic votes. so likely sometime tomorrow night, 55 or 56 votes, to the senate judiciary committee member john kennedy, republican louisiana. senator, when do we expect that vote after this implementation sometime tomorrow night, judge gorsuch confirmed? >> after the voting ends today, there will be 30 additional hours of debate. i'm assuming our friends on the democratic side of the aisle use all 30 hours.

it will be sometime tomorrow evening between 5:00 and 9:00. neil: you know, back and forth, this has been portrayed, oh it is republican resistor pea doughing a sacred --, are torpedoing a sacred tradition. republicans trying to block obama cabinet appointees, and subcabinet appointees, they said 60 vote ruling was not necessary, but a simple majority would do. they come back, senator, but we never thought of applying that to supreme court justices, this is on republicans for destroying your fine institution. what do you say? >> i don't agree with that. i did not, and will not happily cast my vote to change the rules, but i don't know that i have any choice. i don't believe we can do better thaneil gorsuch. i mean the guy is a thoroughbred. he deserves to be on the united

states supreme court and i think most reasonable people who willing to put politics aside understand that. and that is why i'm going to vote to change the rules. it will be a rule change for supreme court nominees. i won't support a rule change at this point in time for the legislative work we do. i don't think i have a choice. this man deserves to be on u.s. supreme court. forget about the talk of "nuclear option" panned cloture this is really about, do the american people deserve to have an up-or-down vote on the confirmation of judge neil gorsuch to be on the united states supreme court? i think they do. i think that is what i was sent here to do. it is not delay and stall and try to choose my words carefully. it is either vote yea or nay. i want to vote yea or nay. that is what i voted to do. let us vote.

neil: orrin hatch in role playing acting president of the senate. confirming what you said. senator, i like to get your quick thoughts, you have to go cast votes, whether this is a win for president trump and it will transce other things wants to do and maybe help him on the tax cut front, help him on the rework health care front, infrastructure front. there is talk that the president want to marry the infrastructure with a redo on the health care thing. how do you feel about all of the above? >> this is a win for the american people. it is also a win for president trump. i think he chose extremely well when he selected judge gorsuch. the guy is a thorough bred. he is not a politician, he is not a ideologue. he is a judge. his role is to interpret the law as best he understands it, not to make the law. he is whip smart.

he is a fourth generation citizen of colorado. he is a snow skier. he is a fly fisherman. neil: there you go. >> and a good guy. he will be a good justice. neil: you're a fly fisherman. there you go. >> i'm a fly fisherman too. neil: very good having you, senator, thank you very much. just confirming we were reporting as the senator was outlining here, party-line vote 52-48 senate effectively repealed the rule that allowed filibusters against supreme court nominees. this essentially clears the way for judge gorsuch to be voted on sometime tomorrow night t kicks off about 30 hours, roughly from now. 30 hours, maybe an hour from now. but suffice it to say that some time tomorrow night this position has been vacant on the supreme court for the better part of 13 months, is on its way to being filled and it would be a victory for donald trump, to read the mainstream media, sorely needs one. investors interpreting this as a sign of good things to come.

to former reagan economic visor art laffer on all of this. art, we've seen dicey supreme court appointments. we've seen ultimately fell apart. by and large they don't get to be this acrimonious. more the rule instead of exception of late. how do you think this goes and changes things in the body we're looking at. >> i saw it with bork which was acrimonious, and bork lost. clarence thomas won by a close vote. this is par for the course from time to time. i wouldn't take it too seriously. i think in year or two democrats and republicans working together. i want you to understand i'm not a fly fisherman. i don't know about any of this. neil: i was a kid, why are they fishing for plies? what are they doing. >> there you go. neil: some seized on this as proof when the president wants something and given the meager

majority he has in the senate, he can get it. and this is embedding the rules to get it. republicans come back, art, we're only doing this because democrats push this on us. >> exactly. neil: having said that, do you think it is wind at back for the president on those matters, near and dear to you, like the tax-cut package? i'm beginning to think that one looks dicey, what do you think? >> i think what you said earlier is correct. real tax package how it gets done this year. if it does get done this year, how it is made retroactive to the beginning of the year, you're talking about personal income tax. neil: i think that is out. think both are out myself. >> i do believe a corporate tax, very focused could be done this year. but i don't know if it will be. i think it could be. you're right, i don't think this year will be the one. when they do do it, neil, like we did in '81, they phased the tax in because of this pay-for nonsense. so our tax cut really didn't begin until january 1st, 1983.

so i'm not optimistic about it being done this year, but i'm very optimistic about it being done. in the long run, getting it done is far more important than the hour, the day, the month you do get it done. neil: so delayed but not denied. i hope you're right. >> it will not be denied. neil: i want to be wrong, believe me. >> if you think it is denied i don't think it ever will be denied on this one. neil: i hope you're right. left to right, our economy needs that. >> badly. neil: federal reserve is in the stimulus business. here is what worries me. if you just get corporate tax relief, which will be we welcomed, i can't see them even settling differences within the administration on issues in the tax cut. we're getting reports, "wall street journal" and others, administration can't come to agreement on boarder tax. can't come to agreement on value-added tax or millionaires should have a specific level,

buff let rule. speaker ryan, he intimated senate do things slowly. white houses hasn't given as you clear signal what they want. shouldn't they have figured all this out by now. >> not really this is very young administration with a bunch of people totally inexperiencessed just starting to work together. these people were all appointed because of political connections not because of their competence or ability to work together. this administration will evolve just like it did with us in the '80s. it you'll get bad ones out. neil: tax cut was phased in and delayed. republicans -- so i know you're right to say that -- >> i agree, we overcome these differences but i don't know if they can. >> i don't know if they can either. you don't have a choice. all the people have to learn to work together. competence has to rise. i have never seen people express this type of conflict when you have a good, smooth working administration. and it takes time to get that smooth working, it really does.

we had dick durbin, we had george bush, bob dole, baker, all the anti-reagans, $98 billion tax increase in 1982, all that stuff came through. this administration will start working together. understand what it takeses to create prosperity. we didn't get the big one until 1986, neil, where we dropped highest rate to 28%. we went down from 14raets, down to two brackets. dropped the corporate from 46 to 34%. that occurred in 1986. indexing didn't happen until 1985. give this administration time. they will be in for eight years. they will get it all done. neil: you are smoking something now. i mean -- i don't know. >> i wish. neil: i knew the reagan white house. i covered the reagan white house this is not the reagan white house. >> that's for sure but reagan white house the reagan white house wasn't the reagan white house. you remember al hague panned you will the stuff that occurred. neil: the bork thing.

>> bork and thomas. neil: a lot of things have to be just right, my friend. they don't have an art laffer guy, a supply-sider guy whispering in their ear. they have these crazy kensyians. >> we didn't get george shultz until 1982. remember that. neil: i know. >> he was single most important person in the reagan administration in the full eight years. so you know -- neil: that is interesting you say that. >> everything, everything, life is a marathon, neil. it is not a sprint. you know but my favorite -- neil: i don't like sprinting or anything to do with marathon. >> i can't do a sprint. unless it isdown hill. then i can really do a sprint. neil: you're a good man and parity man. art laffer, one of the greatest economic minds of the last century. i can say that because it is the truth. harkening back to an era in washington where they had class and won over and impressed both sides, joe lieberman right here, of course the former vice-presidential candidate.

i'm thinking of you, senator, i'm thinking of what is going on capitol hill. >> right. neil: this whole "nuclear option," all that, that it is going to sour everything forever. what do you think of that? >> yeah, well short-term, it will make things worse. it will, it is going to divide the sides. democrats are angry. republicans are angry that the democrats forced them to do this. i mean -- neil: are you surprised democrats went to the degree they did? i know the genesis for this. >> right. neil: but they didn't like the way merrick garland was treated. they say it is very different, what harry reid did about cabinet appointments that were stymied. they said under barack obama, republicans said this was very different matter. they went through with this, repercussions how likely donald trump could appoint generational justices maybe at least a couple more. >> right. practically speaking i'm

surprised senate democrats basically went through with this i understand emotion. they're not sure about judge gorsuch, but pretty hard to find something you can grab on to in his record or his testimony before the judiciary committee that leads you to say, this guy will be an awful supreme court justice. quite the opposite. neil: i think the base of each party is winning the day. when some of these democrats were told, you go ahead and vote for this guy, we'll primary you. >> that's right. neil: similar members, you know, conservative voters say if you go ahead and vote for this we're going to primary you, they have locked into these extreme position. >> this is really the heart of what is wrong with our system now. now it takes courage. because a senator has got to say, hey, you have to judge me and people of my state will judge me across the board, not on this one vote. the reason i'm surprised democrats have done this is exactly what you said.

we're down to a 51-vote requirement. so president trump, next time there is a vacancy, remainder of his presidency. neil: can go hard right. >> go hard right. up to him. he may decide not to. go for somebody like judge gorsuch. all he has to do get 51 votes among republicans and democrats are out of it. i must say conceptually i've never been a great plan of the filibuster generally. just seemed to me -- neil: we're told the senate loses its unique cachet, it is unique club thing. they're essentially six-year congressman? >> talk about, filibuster is not in the constitution. it was a rule of the senate. and it became most famous when it was used for an unjust purpose, which was to perpetuate racial segregation. neil: that's right. that's right. >> so now it has become what cools the precedence down, what

needs to cool precedents down is cooler heads, sensible democrats to work across party lines to get something done for the country. neil: it is clear that democrats will valley straight the day they're in charge. >> yeah. neil: they have a president who will have the most liberal justice. >> yeah. neil: the picks we'll see, for some judgeships, right? we'll get, we'll get more extreme. >> that's probably right. and it will get more politicized. it will just be much more partisan and that is not the way it should be. neil: president wants to avoid all this partisan back and forth, he entity mated not only in interview in "new york times," elsewhere, would like to marry infrastructure with a health care rework. i guess the thinking being, get enough democrats to support me on infrastructure stuff, help me on the fixing the health care thing, lead the way to a tax cut progress, what do you think about that? >> hey, it is worth a try. if you ask me one of the things that i think president trump

really needs around him is somebody who really can work with congress and has some experience. i don't have, i'm not making a suggestion but, i will tell you that most productive two years whether you agree or not was produced of the obama administration was first two years. mostly because it was the first two years. there is another reason i think, because rahm emanuel was the chief of staff to president obama. rahm emanuel came out of congress. he knew everybody. he was a get great negotiator. he would swear at you, laugh at you. neil: i think two years were more productive than that. >> you do? >> i think years bill clinton had to work with newt gingrich. that is t best. i'm talking about the eight years of the obama administration. this was, and this gives you some hope that it can happen again. when you think about it the original gap between president clinton and speaker gingrich seemed impossible to bridge, yet

they did. they were both -- neil: do you think these two sides can talk an cooperate? >> it is possible but right now you have to be pessimistic about it. they have got to be able to compromise, and i like what president trump is saying about reaching out to democrats. we've got a group called the problem solvers caucus in the house i've been working with. 44 members, 22 republicans, 22 democrats. they will work together on big issues. white house needs to work with them. neil: no labels. >> no labels. neil: it's a brilliant idea. brilliant idea. no one will get everything they want. ronald reagan famously said. >> tedd kennedy the great liberal line, would come up with these compromises with conservatives like orrin hatch, mike enzi, et cetera, he basically, i heard him describe it once, we decided 50% on this bill, if we negotiate we can agree 50% we'll never agree. forget that 50% and let's get this 50% done.

and he and his republican peers got a lot done as a result. neil: look at ted kennedy, george bush, got a lot done together. >> it can be done, for the country, for the country. labels, no bull. joseph lieberman. we'll have more after this. >> thanks, neil.

>> make sure this is not distraction from very important investigation. he wants to clear himself while the investigation continues on without any kinds of distractions. >> do you feel confident for him over the committee overall? >> i do. i do. neil: speaker ryan earlier today backing house intelligence committee chairman devin nunes stepping aside from the russian probe for the time-being. calls for susan rice to get her heinie up to capitol hill to testify. gregg jarrett, our legal eagle on all of this and what is going to happen now. how does this whole investigation proceed now gregg. >> a lot of people want to know what susan rice did. she -- there are calls for her to testify before the intelligence committee. i'm skeptical that she will we'll do it. she would have to raise her right hand and that means, you know, if she is not telling the

truth, she could be prosecuted. look, she's the one who now admits she put in requests to unmask names. there is only one reason under the law she can do that is, if she read the surveillance document, says, okay, there is a national security interest here, unmask the names. what if, neil, that document on its face clearly shows there is no national security interest? what if the conversation was all about policy and politics? then a crime has been committed, because it is a felony to make a false statement as a government official. upon conviction, five years behind bars. neil: let's say she, that she didn't necessarily unmask, that she didn't do anything for political purposes. that gives her wide cover, assuming she did indeed unmask the name of one individual and in so doing, might have have led to a chain reaction of event but that none of this was

politically motivated. does that give her cover because then it's her word against whomever? >> she thinks it is broad cover. i think it is actually legally narrow cover because again the documents upon which she relied lawyers call self-proving. they may demonstrate that, for example, if "the wall street journal" is reporting that some of the unmasked documents have to do with trump team transition meetings, and polys that were being discussed, not anything to do with russia or foreign intelligence or national security. if that is the case, whoever requested the unmasking has arguably committed a felony. neil: gregg, as a lawyer i want to get thoughts on supreme court battle back and forth. looks like gorsuch is confirmed late tomorrow night. everyone is talking about a tainted well. everything is bad, bad. but it seems to me, a given, that however we proceed from here, we're going to have more extreme picks in the future,

right? republicans, more conservative nominee would be placed under democrats, a more liberal one. that is the way it will be? >> given increased polarization on capitol hill, i think that is inexorable. maybe this is opening a door to get rid of the filibuster rule in its entirety, not just for judicial appointments and supreme court nominees and legislation in ernest. it is not in the constitution. neil: that's right. >> if you look at the federalist papers, the founders would have been horrified at the filibuster rule. neil: goes way beyond what it was originally intended. gregg jarrett, thank you, my friend. good have you on all the time. health care deal that could be falling apart with a lot of other stuff after this.

why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, i'm not -- .. sting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.

usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life.

i realize that ah, that $100k is notwella 103a fortune. yeah103. well, let me ask you guys. how long did itake you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. well, i'm sure you talk to people all the time who think $100k is just pocket change.

right now we're just talking to you. i told you we had a fortune. yes, you did. getting closer to your investment goals starts with a conversation. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today. neil: albury. the president moments ago from washington d.c. on florida where he will be having a two-day powwow with the chinese president. all of this at a time north korea is typing the international attention with all these missiles. the supreme court showdown now has been looking more and more likely by a majority vote is tomorrow at this time or later, certainly tomorrow night, neil gorsuch will be on his latest supreme court. 13 months ago. other drama we are following on capitol hill concerned health

care rework that might not be so forthcoming. in fact, nowhere near forthcoming. take a look at with speaker ryan was saying about that. >> everyone else in the insurance market can get lower premiums, affordable choices and more choice, more competition. i'm not going to go into details and particulars, but these are debates were having. this is a step in the right direction. it's closer towards the final goal in agreement and we will keep working on it until he get it right. >> what he's talking about is it's not going to happen anytime soon. the president hasn't been given details, but it's going to be glacial. we are again name indications that this pushes that lasted late in the year and that is just on the corporate tax reform side. the president has already intervened to say he thinks they should go ahead and narrow the infrastructure with a health care rework by winning ov

democratic foes still have their support for health care repeal. it might be dicey and friendly on the tax cut run. everything scott to go fine and i mean everything. editor in chief, bob keyes that. gerri willis and former bush for three deputy assistant brad blakeman. jerry, you first. you can following back and forth on this. the speaker ryan is saying, we will do this, but it's not going to happen fast. that's on the health care front. if he's right on that come about pushes everything back. >> absolutely. not only would it take weeks and months, but tax reform would take longer than health care. by the way, here is the amendment right here, for pages they talked about today. what they want to do is put together high risk tools for people who are really sick will get help for the federal government. $15 billion over eight years.

will that work? we've got to wait and see. everything going in the cattle here. every idea of being thrown in the pot. we don't know how they will interact. >> as i was saying, first in this "new york times" interview and elsewhere that he would love to get health care rework attempt married in other words to get democratic support that would fly in the face of obviously the very partisan with alaska around and what happened today with judge gorsuch. how likely is that. >> it's a nonstarter for democrats. anything that repels obamacare. you could mix transportation infrastructure on tax reform and giving them and that is beneficial for districts.

the transportation chairman shuster said listen, these highways go through multiple districts and can help democrats and republicans. if you tie tax reform to transportation, maybe you can get that done. i don't than mixing it with health care. democrats are like now, i don't think that's possible. these are all heavy lift. these will take a long time. neil: i could be wrong, but i just don't see it happening. i don't see, for example, the tax cut thing happening at all. it is contingent and for the time being it does appear to be contingent on settling differences in approving this rework on health care. that is well past the late summer. forget about anything is. i wonder if there's anything retroactive on tax cuts at all this year. what do you think? >> i think it has to. neil: i'm just not so sure of so sure about peer >> 2017 has to be a year of

action. 2018 gets us right >> in the midterepublicans had o show for giving them the keys to the kingdom, we will have a sorrow for event happening in 2018. i happen to agree with. if you want democratic support, tight infrastructure to taxes. you are more likely to have a better time of seeking democratic and republican opportunities. health care is something that is a must. we have to get it done. if i were betting, i was a health care needs to be done in 2017. the question is hopeful the president do with infrastructure in taxes? that can also be done this year. the clock is ticking. once we get past january 2018, people in reelection mode. this town seems to shut down and shut down and nothing would get done. neil: they are already taking two weeks off here. i was out of my growth in college, she had more time when

she went to school. neither here nor there. i'm looking at this and i'm thinking everything it's got to go right. the trump administration is going to come as it probably should, and getting gorsuch through and confirmed as a supreme court justice by maturity. they need a win. how much does that provide for some of this other stuff? >> i think it continues to be hard because they need conservative republicans to go along with moderate republicans. these folks are getting more close together in my mind. i've talked to moderate republicans who are part of the original health care bill. they're mad as heck about the latest is preceded at the club for growth is involved. they don't like any of this. the closer you get to conservatives, the further away the moderates go. it doesn't seem possible to get together. i don't see the way forward. not right now. >> what do you think on this and how this victory to president

get arguably one of his greatest achievements early on in his presidency and that it does have residual value. >> it is a win for the president. no doubt about it. it's also a winner for senator mcconnell who blocked garland, who has had none uneasy relationship. they are plotting him for what he's done. democrats are very upset. at the same time, if he could have had gorsuch and health care, remember health care was supposed to be done by today and tomorrow. he would have so much momentum and he doesn't because he really only has gorsuch and killing regulations. neil: thank you all very, very much for the president is on route to florida and he will have the big meeting right now with his chinese counterpart. you know, for as many years as i've known donald trump, china has been marcus turned that russia otherwise there could eat come along before talk about the last election. donald trump hasn't worried so much about russia.

he is always, always worried and have suspicions about china. let's go back in time. >> china wouldn't exist without us. if they don't start behaving they are killing us on trade. that is give a quick. the chinese do not respect us. >> china will destroy our country. neil: will he put the pressure on and will he continue that tough talk. first on dealing with north korea and secondly the gaping trade back $347 billion last year. jeff flock in west palm beach florida with the latest on that. what are you hearing? >> where the clouds are gathering as we speak, i think they may have heard what you just played their. i hope the president by the time he gets here it's a little nicer.

e president ha moderating that town were recently. he backeoff on taiwan afr taking a called the taiwan president in terms of the currency manipulation. he said he was going to label china a currency manipulator right away. didn't do that. i think it's fair to say as they said today on our sister folks, "fox and friends," a much more measured i think we collect, measure tone. >> that's going to be very interesting. nobody knows where we have not been treated fairly on trade or many years. no president has taken care that the way they should have. we have a big problem with north korea and we'll see what happens. >> this is sort of different as he pointed out for what he had been saying. as far back as 2011. china, neither am allies or friends. they want to beat us, on our country after he got elected, he

got a little bit calmer tone. this meeting will be difficult if he said to "fox and friends" and we could no longer have massive trade deficits to job loss. that he has stuck to it. or imbalance coming here is the side of that. the trade surplus does not necessarily mean about 40% they claim that the trade surplus china has over the u.s. is generated by com needs, u.s. companies doing business in china. i point out and i know you know if you want to do business over there, you have to do it with a chinese partner. the chinese company wants to do business they don't have any such requirement. maybe you'll take some action on that. i guess we'll find out in the next 24-48 hours. neil: you are close to this than i am, the xi jinping does his homework whenever it comes to this country or any country and he knows that what is key for donald trump is having a treatable victory.

the chinese compared bearing gifts or investment in the united states plans to hire american workers, i don't know what it would be. they would be happy to do that. would he think of that? >> if i had to bet, one commentator said it would be od for xi jinping if they came out of this is no news. for donald trump, you're absolutely right. i bet you if i had to bet that something positive will come out on the subject of trade or economy. i would almost bet that for sure. neil: i've seen you in all sorts of horrific environment and reporting. i'm very happy. >> is starting to blow over here. neil: you're in west palm beach. >> i'm not complaining. believe me. neil: jeff, thank you my friend. jeff flock at the senate right now set the wheels in motion and disrupted tradition and that's a big deal to them. think about this. meant to propel legislation.

they spent together to make sure would apply to a lot of grander things. that tradition when it comes to supreme court justices is over. simple majority right now. look at the makeup of the court for the average age is 114. you get these fears the democrats have had a donald trump could be in a position to appoint at least a couple more supreme court justice. maybe more. that is why they are out and why republicans are salivating. that's why some are interpreting this as good news on a host of other trump led directors. we shall see. more after this.

♪ predictable. the comfort in knowing where things are headed. because as we live longer... and markets continue to rise and fall... predictable is one thing you need in retirement to help protect what you've earned and ensure it lasts.

introducing brighthouse financial. a new company established by metlife to specialize in annuities & life insurance. talk to your advisor about a brighter financial future. i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business. ways wins. especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story.

switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business. neil: did eat is essentially done here tomorrow at this time, probably tomorrow night, and neil gorsuch would be the next supreme court justice said the united states. depending on your party, affiliation commit fewer things coming to be there like better hate that. political analyst david birthday says the republicans after this by not voting on merrick garland. of course barack obama's original choice and this is a bad thing they're they are doing. attorney general ken pacelli disagrees. i wanted these two fine gentlemen to start a debate

that. you first on myth that republicans to regret thiss well, that democrats are sayin can you know, there will be a day you're not in charge and we will be ramming a plane is down your throat. >> you mean like they did when they got rid of the "nuclear option" for every other judge and presidential appointment other than supreme court appointment. this is a very small addition to a very important -- supreme court is important that a small addition to what harry reid already dennis democrats are now complaining all supported. this is an extreme partisan play on the democrats part of there will be this long in the future when republicans say gee, i wish we could filibuster this person. as a conservative who's also a republican but i don't find the non-conservative republicans but they got been fine to oppose the democrat president putin a

justice on the supreme court. conservatives aren't losing anything here. >> it's not as this does not happen before clarence thomas. these have gotten to be at cabañas but not always. vaporware over analyzing this. what you think? >> is just an extension of what we know is happening. similarly, what democrats are doing to judge gorsuch right now, there's no way this was actually going to happen. theyre trying to fd a hung base who are hungry for opposition to anytng in all things donald trump and it's not going to help them in the long term. neil: so you think both sides retreat to their base and at the liberal is in charge from a democrat you'll get a lot more liberal nominees the same with

republicans and that base appeal will just be the rule of thumb. >> that's the place we are out. we went to a place where there were 98-0 for supreme court justices. neil: we also went through day three of a popular president couldn't voice a bad pick on people. judge orc has been misinterpreted that way. i'm just saying in that there is sometimes things go south. >> two points. republicans to my knowledge and i may be wrong about this but i don't think republicans have ever filibuster a nominee for the supreme court. this is novel, new, the only one who's ever gotten is artisan. democrats. i want to take issue with something david said.

what we now call the biden rule is a bad idea. one of the great things about donald trump pic of neil gorsuch izzy put this out there almost a year ago. if they had complaints about neil gorsuch them and they should've started making making this last may. the american people, part of what they got when they voted for donald trump for president if they got that list of judges or individuals who are prospective justices. it is all very public. the most involvement of the public. >> what harm would it have done for republicans to at least grant merrick garland a hearing. they have the majority they could've shot them down. that's where a lot of this originated. water under the bridge i understand. what would've been the harm of that? >> it would've been a waste of time if you are going through the process. republicans essentially adopted democrat biden rule last year.

i don't think it is such a bad thing to hold out for presidential election and make the supreme court picks. neil: you are right. water under the bridge. your thoughts on that. >> the republicans have never filibustered anybody, yet they can't filibuster them if they don't put them through hearing process. i'd merrick garland gone through hearing process he would have been filibustered. i don't think you can figure with a straight face and feel like he would have been. >> is still at a loss. a simple majority. >> that is right. most of our history in this country, we basically had unspoken, with only a few exceptions that one of the prerogatives is for that person to pick anyone who comes on to the supreme court until january at the next turn. they are next president.

neil: bottom line, those days are gone. we'll see what happens. i wanted thank you both. the market what i can see right now and some might interpret this one up as a sign of anything to come for president trump because they which love this pic on this process of the "nuclear option" and all the others do. it's a victory. it's a win for donald trump and his yet to experience the legislative front. this is a big one and this is a time. this other agenda he has including tax cuts and health care. that's a bit of a leap. we will see after this.

kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you. stay with me, mr. parker. whenfrom the hospital, the hospital must come to the patient. stay with me, mr. parker. the at&t network is helping first responders connect with medical teams in near real time... stay with me, mr. parker. ...saving time when it matters most. stay with me, mrs. parker. that's the power of and. the market.redict but through good times and bad... ...at t. rowe price... ...we've helped our investors stay confident for over 75 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

whfight back fastts, with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue. and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum -tum -tum -tum smoothies! only from tums

neil: how likely is it that you, miss rice would be testifying, do you think? >> oh i think it would be almost inevitable. i don't know how we could have information we have right now and not have her before the committee at some point.

neil: so they want susan rice to testify. working out the details of all of that as the house intel chair devin nunes steps down from the russia probe on his part, not from the committee role, russian probe which is pretty much the only game in town. connell mcshane with what is next. reporter: nunes move is interesting point, leaving the russian investigation on temporary basis. a house committee is looking whether he disclosed classified information without authority to do so. nunes essentially made two arguments about that. number one accusations are entirely false and politically motivated. number two in terms of behind them, it is left-wing activists groups. he said all of that, he is still stepping away. as he does so leave congressman mike conaway to fill in and ranking democrat on the

committee, adam schiff. both of them spoke about this. let's listen to that. >> these charges i believe are unfounded and inappropriate but theeth micks committee will work that process out. i have confidence with devin's roll as chair and serving with him as member of the committee. >> he mentioned it is in the bests interest of the investigation. it will allow to us have a fresh start, moving forward. i look forward working with mr. conaway. this investigation i think is of such critical importance that, we need to get fully back on track. reporter: fully back on track. he did say they never really stopped the investigation. it continued to review documents and develop a witness list. as for the susan rice part of this story, there are still calls, as you were starting off with, neil, for her testify. mr. schiff added he would be happy to hear from her if it came to that. rough ard burr, chairman on the

senate side of the senate intelligence committee, the her testimony might be of interest to us. no word officially from her camp whether or not she will testify about the so-called unmasking the names. certainly pressure building for her to do so. neil: connell i think this thing goes on forever of the i don't think it ever stops. reporter: literally forever. i will be there every step of the way, neil. neil: you will be my age and still reporting on this thank you very, very much, connell mcshane. stocks at session highs. there are a lot of incometores here, including growing sentiment for donald trump. he has a very big victory here. as expected neil gorsuch is confirmed by simple majority of united states senate. as supreme court justice replacing antonin scalia. a lot has to do with comments no less speaker paul ryan was making on progress, i put that in quotations and italics on the health care front. they have agreement on some areas. more than what was the case the day before when he indicated this could be a very multi-month

long affair getting this approved. that is permeating washington. this idea they're nowhere near close to this. hope springs etern that they will make progress. market watcher joe duran on that. joe, what do you make of that, the markets continue to price for perfection on thinking they will make progress and get this stuff done? i'm thinking if it is delayed months on the health care front, health care was integral to getting tax thing done, so that is pusd back tooright? >> i think it is allnterlinked and the market is priced for perfection. i like to describe to the people the market is barometer of the president's power. when he is distracted on issues taking away from tax cuts, health care, the markets go sideways and down.

when he is back on message he is getting things done, the market is getting better. the market likes separate apart from the opinion from the president himself, the mandate he has to push three things is helpful for future earnings for the u.s. economy. the problem is, we are often distracted by things that are not relevant to that. take away from his power and ability to get this done. you're right, what you just said is true, without health care, the tax battle becomes much bigger. you take care of that, all of a sudden the tax battle becomes easier. the freedom party is concerned about deficits. it will be impossible to have a conversation about infrastructure without getting those pieces in line. again if they are closer to health care everything becomes easier. that has a big impact on future earnings and the economy is priced for perfection. optimism versus reality and where we see big drops in the market. neil: don't get me wrong, joe,

i'm not trying to be a half-empty glass guy here, pricing for perfection, i don't see they will get the sweeping tax package out the treasury secretary was outlining by august, if it is this year at all. i'm reminded by history, art laffer, ronald reagan, his tax cut were delayed. had to be phased to get passed in the fashion they ultimately enjoyed. i'm not saying delay means denied. i'm saying it could be denied this year. and that could have the markets sort of on tint irhooks waiting a hope and pray they happen next year. what do you say? >> the way to deal with it, break it into two parts. deal with the business tax which will be relatively easy, because it can be dealt with in a way that is not hurtful to the deficit. then deal with personal taxes. so if you break into two bites

quite possible they get one. quite unlikely they get health care and entire sweeping tax package. break it into bite-sized portions you might get something done. i would suggest interest rates are telling you this isn't going to come through. this would be inflationary for the economy. what you're seeing is interest rates typically smarter than the stock market and they keep drifting lower than they should be what we're seeing. neil: very good point. >> i think the market is telling you that you're right. neil: joe durant, thank you very much. united capital ceo. to joe's point, bonds would be sell being off and interest rates would be rising if they expected tax cuts would materialize and economic boom come to fruition. despite the stock market run-up, rates are coming down on a little bit on the notion that stimulus will be delayed if not denied and anyone fearing inflation need not. so again, we'll see. well elsewhere today we're learning that uber and lyft drivers failing new

massachusetts background checks. that is concerning a lot of folks. hillary vaughn has all the details. hey, hillary. reporter: hey, neil. that's right, thousands of uber and lyft drivers passed company background checks are pulled off the road in massachusetts because the records didn't pass the state's independent review. massachusetts looked at criminal and driving records of 71,000 drivers. rejected 8,000 of them. hundreds were disqualified with serious crimes. violent or sexually based offenses and driving related offenses like drunk driving. the department that conducted the review, it rejected 51 applications from sex offenders and 350 drivers had incident related to sex abuse and exploitati. but most drivers were blocked because of their drivers license status. many had suspended licenses or had not been driving long enough to qualify as driver. uber and lyft saying federal law only allows them to look at

drivers history over past seven years. some critics of ride-sharing are proof that passengers are at risk because uber and lyft drivers don't submit to the same requirements that cab drivers do. cabbies in boston have to be fingerprinted but uber and lyft drivers don't. i spoke to uber representative, no background check is perfect and you can't predict what a person will or will not do based on results. neil? neil: thank you very much, hillary vaughn. you probably know that wwe hall-of-famer, booker t. on, well, his past. he is one of the most celebrated wrestlers in history. 2006 king of the ring tournament. he wrestled stone cold steve austin, john cena, triple h. but he is most known for coming up with the term sucka. think of that. i wonder if he gets paid for every time that's said. he's next.

fund objectives, risks, charges and expenses in the prospectus at thriventfunds.com.

don't let dust and allergens and life's beautiful moments. flonase allergy relief delivers more complete relief. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances that cause all your symptoms, including nasal congestion and itchy, watery eyes. flonase is an allergy nasal spray that works even beyond the nose. so you can enjoy every beautiful moment to the fullest. flonase. 6>1 changes everything. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly.

so how old do you want uhh, i was thinking around 70. alright, and before that? you mean after that? no, i'm talking before that. do you have things you want to do before you retire? oh yeah sure... ok, like what? but i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement? we're absolutely doing that. but there's no law you can't make the most of today. what do you want to do? i'd really like to run with the bulls. wow. yea. peou're fast. i am. gea portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade.

♪ neil: sometimes you look what goes on in washington and you feel like someone should beat some sense into them. republicans says the democrats caused this, the whole "nuclear option." republicans are the one to blame for this. it is their fault. you want to throttle them, right? this is the guy to do it, booker t. this guy generated more emails and texts and responses or tweets than any guest i have the last three years. we've had very big guests. i don't know what that means for possible run of next mayor of houston. he joins us now, former wwe wrestler. 11-time wcw tag-team champion. so much more, joining us right now. booker, good to have you. >> how are you doing, neil? neil: i'm fine. are you going through with this, this mayor thing? >> hey, man, i'm in. i'm all the way in.

no turning back now. why would you ask me something like that? neil: i can ask obnoxious questions you're on remoat. i would not ask you any of these questions if you were here. are you running as republican or independent? >> still haven't decided. we're still pretty, you know far away from the actual race. november 2019. no dig reason why i should declare a party. obviously be unconventional candidate. donald trump is an unconventional candidate. how do you think he is doing? >> first 100 days has been pretty rocky. it is not as easy as i think he thought it was going to be to get certain things done, such as passing, actually repealing obamacare. and stuff like that, it is pretty hard actually in washington. the big boys play pretty rough. neil: they do and they're good

at wrestling that control back, no play on the words. wouldn't you encounter, i don't know how houston politics works, booker, donald trump has no obvious base. he was elected as populist, you drew support from independents you would running into houston but you would no have base to tall back on in the mayor's chair. how would you answer that? >> that's true. first and foremost having a good team, making sure you make the right choices first and foremost but on the other side you have to actually work with the other side. i think just like with repeal and replacing obamacare, i think if we would just took out was bad, left what was good, i think other side would be more than willing to actually work together on something like that. then again, calling it obamacare. call it affordable care act. maybe that stigma would go away, everybody would look at

different perspective. as far as their health goes. i think small things what we need to focus on as opposed to big things. neil: i think you're right. there is penalty-up rage to the system owed a lot of popularity in the ring as well. you were sort of bigger than life, anti-consensus figure and people found that very appealing, in your drawer, even down off-mentioned sucka, all of that. what do you think explains that appeal and anger? you saw it first happened in the ring. are people sort of were drawn to you. as a candidate i am sure you hope that is the same but what do you think? >> you know pretty much just like politics, you know. in the beginning i went out there and i performed, i performed at a very, very high level. i wantverybody next to me actually ao to be brought up to a certain level as well wn

we're out there getting our job done. but i know when i finally got to a certain place in my life in my career, it was time to step aside and let young guys go out there to do their thing. that is what it is like in washington. everybody wanted to keep their spot. everybody wants to play ball with only their club, as opposed to actually getting something done for the american people. i think why the wrestling business actually flourished. we are actually truly a team. we're actually a family even though we agree to disagree at certain times. neil: you were always a crowd favorite. people are big fans of yours who passed this along say he understood the audience, he understood the crowds, he understood his fans. i sometimes think a lot of politicians don't understand voters, don't understand their, their core groups, and i wonder how a guy like you would be able to take what success you've had

in wrestling to politics because they're two very different audiences, aren't they? >> you tend to get out of touch especially as you get older. when you get older you think old. neil: you think old. i like that. you're right. >> i really believe that. i think you actually have to go to the young people and actually see what they think. see what they, you know, feel like the city should look like 10 years from now. maybe they should shape the country as well as the city as opposed to a lot of old guys in office making decisions for everybody else. i think the young people is the future of america. i think we need to rely onhem a whole lot more. neil: booker, always good havi you on. i notice how much we have in common. not only we don't have an ounce of fat, i was reading you hold at least 35 championships in the wwe, wcw and tna i hold a record

of 35 declines on the part of women to my junior prom. i feel in a way, we're kind of bonding there. so it's very good seeing you, my friend. best of luck to you. >> i appreciate it. thank you, neil. i appreciate it. neil: you noticed the similarity as well. i know, i know. booker t huffman, if you think it is crazy his run. he is connecting with voters there, they like a no-nonsense guy and some of his potential opponents like the idea he can beat them up. we'll have more after this.

neil: "politico" is reporting that ivanka trump secretly met with head of planned parenthood, increasing forcing an image with trump, key players, including donald trump and himself, family members are not quite in sync with the conservative point of view, especially when it comes to these type of issues. to charlie gasparino, on a lot of stuff keeps coming up. kennedy on the trumps, they might be not quite what the conservatives that we're told but also the disproportionate influential role they have, that is, you know, jared and his wife ivanka.

>> i don't think it's rational or right to assume that every single person who works in the white house is in lockstep, not only with the president specifically but you know, on a larger scale, social conservatives. ivanka trump grew up in new york city. she has a completely different world view presumably than most of the people who voted for her dad, and majority of the people -- neil: i think the dad has a more populist type of view of the world, right? >> yeah, absolutely. that is the reason he was elected. also one of the things that frustrated so many republican around the country. neil: not conservative. >> you know what donald trump thinks and believes? he has no real core beliefs. usually white houses have a a coherent ideology. george bush was moderate fiscally and right-wing when it came to the religious right. obama was a progressive. this shows up in policy. the problem that trump has he is all over the place.

he is a democrat, he is a liberal d s a cabinet with fiefdoms. neil: isn't that populist, if -- >> let me make this point. gary cohn, jared kushner and ivanka are not populists. they are liberals. they are now the most ascendant force in the white house. steve bannon is a populist. reince priebus with the other power center a plain old republican all over the place. >> he is a establishment republican. populism is not tetheredded to a particular ideology. neil: how big -- >> look at rick santorum, rick santorum is one of most socially conservative republican. >> far left. >> mike huckabee a populist. john kasich a more of a moderate. neil: regardless of your views on this subject, by the way the chinese premier arrived in the united states? florida. they're pulling out all the stops for him here. we'll get to that. one of the things this raises, kennedy, why is ivanka meeting

with this -- in other words, same with jared kushner going off to iraq, general's invite? is that role, and are their collective roles unpaid positions a little bit too much? >> i think we're seeing some signaling across the board here, whether it's chairman nunes recusing himself from the russia investigation, steve bannon, being taken off of as permanent member of the national security council, and ivanka trump meeting with planned parenthood. i think there is definitely signaling to the left right now that you know, you have some core issues with this administration and we're going to do something subtly to bring some comfort so we can move ahead. neil: that isn't subtle bit. >> but it gets back to the lack of a coherent ideology for thefy inhe office. you couldn't d barack obama, if he was president, you couldn't do the similar opposite reaction really. it wouldn't go well. he might meet with some people right-wing. neil: maybe this is the trump's

saving grace, he won't be locked in. >> here is the problem. one way of looking at it. so incoherent you can't get legislation through or legislation is muddied. donald trump was a liberal seven years ago. he now sound sometimes conservative. the ascendant wing in his cabinet is liberal. and populism, yes, infuses the far right and the far left but let's be real clear, the far right populism of the trump, of -- neil: that talk doesn't matter who he is? >> it is not him. never been him. >> i would disagree. i would say what he he is doing, he is also sending a message he can be talked into certain things. look at seven-hour meeting with rand paul, not necessarily liberal policies but what he is saying is, he talked about his flexibility in terms of the syrian conflict and the civil war and his opposition to the red line military reaction in 2013 and seeing pictures of

dead babies have shifted. >> i got that. >> he will make a shift on certain things and can be talked into certain ideas. >> rand paul should -- >> which is not necessarily always good. >> rand paul should never be a problem for a republican president. maybe on some issues but not on most core issues the problem with donald trump, now he is moving to the left, he is signaling everybody he wants to do can deals with democrats. guess what -- neil: republicans have failed him. >> or he failed them. neil: touche. i don't know what that means. >> conservatives he failed. >> charlie is hungry for words he always gets last one. neil: chinese leader now in palm beach, florida. and again, hours away from the big meeting with donald trump. we'll have more after this. >> china. the comfort in knowing where things are headed. because as we live longer... and markets continue to rise and fall... predictable is one thing you need in retirement

to help protect what you've earned and ensure it lasts. introducing brighthouse financial. a new company established by metlife to specialize in annuities & life insurance. talk to your advisor about a brighter financial future. why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis.

latest year here and the president wants to bring that under control. in many years that i talked to donald trump, he has rarely

talked critically of the russians. in fact, this predates his run for the presidency. he has always talked about his suspicions of the chinese, he claimed brilliant deal makers but they have gotten the better of us in one trade deal after another in the republican presidents, democratic presidents and said we have to take a tougher stance with the chinese. when we raised in prior interviews the fact the chinese hold a major edge over us holding so much of our debt, he says they have the debt and the surplus because of us. we buy a lot of stuff from the chinese, and they've got to realize they need us a lot more than we need them. xi jinping apparently has done a lot of homework by donald trump and fascinated by his rise, we are told, and will come bearing some gifts right now, including talk of investment in the united states and more jobs. let's listen in. i don't know if they're having a band sale the chinese leader. let's listen. there, the

secretary of state. he is the highest-ranking administration official, in just a couple of hours, donald trump will be meeting with him. they chose this venue and thought it was conducive to more relaxed talk. the chinese president we're told is not a golfer, not as if they're hitting the links in mar-a-lago, but they do have, in the name of rex tillerson a long relationship, a business relationship that predates both of these men's rise to power, and, of course, the homework they talk about is they have gone back a long ways here to look at donald trump's career and to see what they can extract from president trump, but again by daring what they call tweetable gifts, in other words, talked that they can score deals here and investments in the united states that will get good mention by the president. that would be a good start. but of all the leaders, the president meant this is the

most crucial one and the one that has the most at stake, not only for dealing with the north korean threat but the gaping trade gap, the gap narrowed 10% in the latest month. the president says that's a sign of things to come. we shall see. trish regan to take you through the next hour. trish: thanks so much. neil. we're going to stay on the picture as we watch rex tillerson secretary of state, and premiere of china, xi jinping, as they get into -- well, looks like we'll get music here. as soon as that starts, i'm going to ask the producer to tell me so we can listen in. he'll be getting in a car headed to mar-a-lago meeting with the president there, an as neil told you, he's not a golfer, it's down to business and this president has really made china a bit of a pinata in terms of the word punching bag in much of our economic troubles, he has stated has been derived from some of china's issues and the fact