might about equal. it's a stretch. stuart: i can't believe manu is worth less than the yankees. apparently that is the case. robin, thank you very much indeed for mailing that in and trying to save my bacon. di quite work. i'm out of time. look, here is charles payne. >> thanks very much, stuart. welcome to "coast to coast." i'm charles payne in for neil caught view toe. breaking right now, secretary of state rex tillerson is meeting with russian prime minister vladmir putin. putin saying russia's relationship with the united states deteriorated under president trump as the administration gives russia stern warnings over skier i can't. secretary tillerson is set to hold a news conference. fox business exclusive. bombshell from the president how he may handle his economic policy going forward. >> i don't want to put deadlines. health care is going to happen at some point. now, if it doesn't happen fast

enough, i will start the taxes but the tax reform and the tax cuts are better if i can do health care first. >> what about infrastructure? how do you see it, when do you see it? >> very soon. insee it as part perhaps of the health care plan. >> you heard that right. health care come all the way back. now a first priority. maria, a huge interview. lots of things to discuss. health care is in front. queue critical component making everything else easier. very compelling but does it make it easier to get it done? >> it doesn't, charles. the news is this will be a fight to the end. mark meadows says they're closer on house side. there is the senate.

president was very president yesterday saying look, whatever it takes we'll get it done. whatever it takes we'll get to tax reform as well. i think there is more support and common ground when it comes to tax reform. a economic package would certainly move the needle on economic growth and job creation. having said that, there is a battle there as wells, charles. as far as infrastructure he has to lure in democrats. obviously infrastructure is one area where the democrats have been wanting a certainly poised tdo something, should they have a plan. so i think infrastructure will happen. i think though that health care first and then tax reform are remaining the president's priorities. why? the tax reform has to play hostage to health care? is beyond me because really a lot of people are questioning why not just come out with the tax cuts you promised? charles: right. >> one of the issues as he said, charles, $900 billion. you have to overturn the obamacare taxes in the affordable care act. that would raise almost a

trillion dollars. and perhaps go towards paying for some of those tax cuts. charles: that would offset any sort of negative cbo score would say, hey, this will add to our debt. of course the republicans campaigned against debt throughout the entire obama presidency saying the president pushed us near a cliff, or off the cliff spending the credit card if you will in a reckless manner. what i find really amazing with all of, this maria, republicans have little faith in supply-side econmics. in you dynamically score these lower taxes may be a short-term deficit with treasury income, long term, circulation of cash, new business startup, higher profits they will make up that money. >> that's right. a lot of people call themselves the jack kemp style republican. and they do so because jack kemp didn't care about being revenue neutral. basically, they want to just see tax cuts. they want to see taxes come down.

then hope that growth triggers and then that growth will help pay for it down the road. look, it is going to be expensive, he lowering taxes no doubt about it. it will be a battle in terms of how you can get revenue in this. i don't think a border adjustment tax, charles, will be in the offing here. it didn't sound like that was something that the president wanted. first of all he doesn't like the word adjustment. he will consider some kind of a tax at the border. it might be called import tax or reciprocal tax. the truth is other countries do tax us. china, india. harley-davidson, for example. he met with the ceo of harley-davidson, the ceo of harley-davidson sa when i sell a motorcyclento china or india, they charge me, 80, 90, 100% tax. america doesn't charge those companies any tax. that is why he is calling it a reciprocal tax. then idea of deductions. where the fight is right now, charles.

a lot of republicans say i will not support something that takes away mortgage deduction, property tax rededuction, state income deduction. that will be a fight, which deductions to get rid of. we are looking at situation where there will be a battle. hopefully all of them believe something can get done and they will come to an agreement. but we may very well see a deja vu again on taxes. charles: this is master example of "the art of the deal" in all of those front. speaking of harley-davidson, a lot is made of the fact, that ronald reagan levied tariffs against the japanese motorcycle makers because they were taking so much market share. a couple of years later, it was harley went to them, say, enough. we also want to be able to sell in these foreign countries. despite the tariffs, harley is growing market share around the world. they're kind of flat in this country. it is delicate balance even with businesses, they understand there is a big market out there. >> it's a very delicate balance.

companies will have to do something in terms of pricing if in fact they're paying more at the border. i had on the ceo of toyota, a manager at toyota the other day on the morning show. i said to him, if you were to see a border adjustment tax, what does that mean for the toyota camry? he was very clear. if we're talking about a 20% border tax, i expect the camry will bo up in price by a thousand dollars. that is real money. that is reality. if companies pay more at the border. they will raise prices at the end of the day, who gets impacted? the people. charles: first of all again, phenomenal interview. you covered some bases. you broke news on so many different topics, maria. >> thank you, charles. charles: thank you very much. appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: republicans still pushing for tax reform. housewares and means chair, tweeting time for tareform now. retweet if yougree okay, we retweet. charlie gasparino has exclusive

details what that means for the white house's tax cut timeline. we know it has been pushed off. in fact maybe there is no timeline. >> you know what is interesting, in an interview we did, my producer did with sean spicer yesterday we got more detail what type of tax reform might come out out of the trump white house than trump was willing to give up during that interview. for example, sean spicer said simply this, this is where it is really interesting, we don't have a plan. by the way, my story is on foxbusiness.com. you can read the whole thing. we don't have a plan. we are right now talking to people. charles: on a listening tour. >> we're on a listening tour. now think about that. he campaigned on pretty specific stuff, 15% corporate tax rate down from 35%, lowering, taking seven brackets pushing them into three and lowering the top rate other rate reductions. now he is on a listening tour.

that should tell you something where tax reform is with this white house. it is almost, charles, you can -- we could be optimistic which i am sure kevin mccarthy, whoever just tweeted, kevin brady, whoever his name is, wants to be optimistic, but there is no tax reform plan white house has now, none. charles: this is not a read my lips scenario. the president didn't necessarily mislead the public. the swamp is murky and delicate. >> he said i'm going to cut taxes -- charles: i think that is still on the agenda but just how to do it and make everyone happy is different. isn't that different? >> charles, no, he campaigned specifically on 15% corporate tax rate or something near there seven brackets from three brackets. charles: if the miest rate goes from 39% to 25%, he fulfilled promise of lowering taxes. >> 33 by the way, not 25. charles: that is the highest. >> yes. okay, i got you talking about

corporate taxes. myoint is this, he campaigned on specifics. he is now saying, sean spicer told us and, you infer through his interview with maria, he is now saying i'm back to the drawing board and by the way, don't even start talking to me about this until i get health care done. that is a dramatic shift. why since march 1st, stock market is down over 500 points, since the beginning of the year. it is up tremendously. excuse me, since he got elected it is up tremendously. that is what is going on here. there is not -- that doesn't mean he will not do it. i hope he does it. there is no tax cut plan right now. charles: there is to your point, a lot of anxiety, the week of the 24th when the whole health care thing imploded investors dumped equity mutual funds and bought bonds. >> as you were reporting decline -- yield started to go down big time. charles: charlie, stay there, as

we were just saying president trump giving fbn new he details how he can sell all of these tax ideas. listen. >> when you say i will charge a 10% or 20% border tax everyone goes crazy because they like free trade. when you say reciprocal tax, i'm not saying that is what i'm doing but there has to be certain reciprocal nature to it. when you say reciprocal tax, nobody can get angry. even the other countries charging 50% tax, okay whatever you charge we're charging. >> like china and india. >> they may not like it but they can't get angry because they can't win that battle. charles: want to bring in former cbo director douglas holtz-eakin if renaming the tax will make any difference. douglas, maybe the pr around this thing, it is complicated, when you talk about adjusting taxes, and currency manipulation to offset impact to the lower middle class, you can't sell it that way for sure?

>> well i think there is no question that those who wanted to defeat tax reform are winning the messaging battle at moment. it is a shame. what has been proposed meets all the criteria the president laid t. it is reciprocal. 160 countries do exactly what is being proposed. it is not an additional tax. it is part of a broad reform that would cut taxes over $2 trillion. it is fundamentally pro-growth and lead to ininvestment and innovation in the united states. so the substance, you know, a-plus. the messaging? not so much. >> doug, it is charlie gasparino. why doesn't the white house -- >> hey, charlie. >> how are you? you and i kind of drink from the same cut when it comes to tax cuts and supply-side econmics. even someone like you has to be a little bit concerned. why isn't there a plan or outline on the table the white house has? they had something during the campaign written by larry kudlow, steve moore,

laffer, art laffer. we're back to the drawing board,wer don't have legislation, doesn't that concern you as someone who advocates tax cuts? >> concern is a nice way to put it. you know, i believe that the fundamental reading of history is that without strong white house leadership and the president himself being in favor of tax reform, it doesn't happen. we haven't had it for 30 years for a reason. and so, whether they write it themselves or take something in discussion with the house or senate, the white house needs to say, this is what we want, this is what we think is good for the u.s. economy and middle class and -- >> why haven't they said it? >> they're not doing it. charles: listen, they had a major defeat with this obamacare defeat. i think everything, quite back went to the drawing board, how to present it, how to get it done because there are so many different factions on capitol hill. douglas, if you start talking about border adjustment tax in any name, any euphemism aren't

we talking about taxes very people that are hurting and propelled president trump to the white house in the first place? >> no. that is fundamental misstep. this characterized as border adjustment. this is not about border adjustment. it is about 20% rate and expensing. eliminating multinationals to cheat. putting production in the united states instead of abroad. border adjustment is moons to an end. it is not an end to itself. they should never talk about. shou be about pro-american, pro-growth tax policy. should be about it quick. quick. >> i agree with you, but are the liberals -- maybe we're missing something. are the liberals like jared kushner an gary cohn, former number two at goldman sachs, are they winning over conservative supply-siders, i guess you could consider steve bannon a supply-sider, he wants to cut taxes but are the liberals winning? are they infusing trump's brain right now? >> i have no idea.

the west wing operations are as much a mystery to me as most people. i know what i see. i see the historic opportunity to push a strong conservative agenda, and inability to execute and thus far even an attempt on taxes. charles: all right. >> that is concerning. it is something that we really don't want to have happen. charles: it really is. that's why the market has been moving sort of sideways, drifting around a little bit, why everyone is on pins and needles. douglas holtz-eakin, always appreciate when you come on. >> thank you. charles: rex tillerson is meeting with russian president vladmir putin, and the meeting is going on about an hour. tillerson will address the press. that is coming up. something president trump told fbn, signals where we stand on syria. all that, after this. ♪ but when family members forget,

trust angie's list to help. [ barks ] visit angieslist.com today.

charles: secretary of state rex tillerson meeting with president, russian president vladmir putin right now. fbn is getting new clarity what president trump's syria strategy is. blake burman at the white house with the very latest. blake. reporter: as we believe it, this meeting with between vladmir putin and rex tillerson, the secretary of state in moscow still ongoing.

if that is the case the meeting would have been going on for at least an hour plus. this comes as the kremlin said yesterday such a meeting between the nation's top diplomat in the u.s. and leader of russia would not take place but very clearly clear something caught the attention of vladmir putin which he wants to have this meeting with rex tillerson. putin gave a very interesting quote here, charles, on russian television earlier today. court e according to reuters, as it relates to the relationship between the united states and russia, quoting from putin, quote, one could say the level of trust on a working level, especially on the military level, has not improved but rather deteriorated, end quote, that being the level during this administration versus the past administration. tillerson was only supposed to meet with his counterpart in russia, sergey lavrov, the foreign minister there. they did speak earlier today, this start for tillerson has

gotten off to icy footing in russia, charles. russians are pushing back on the narrative of the trump administration in relation to russia's involvement in syria and as it relates to the strike that the trump administration levied a few days ago. sergey lavrov, describing the missile strike as troubling actions. president trump spoke maria bartiromo here at white house. he described the parameters they would operate from here on out. >> just so you understand, we're not going into syria. but when i see people using horrible, horrible, chemical weapons which they agreed not to use under the obama administration but they violated it. >> they said they got rid of them. >> look what i did should have been done by the obama administration a long time before i did it. you would have had a much better, i think syria would be a lot better off right now than it has been.

reporter: charles, while vladmir putin, sergey lavrov are making comments, we should note president trump escalated his rhetoric as well in the past day or so describing bashar al-assad as evil, as an animal, a butcher and barbarian. clearly the russians are taking exceptions with that. charles? charles: blake, thank you very much. the russia is warning u.s. against future strikes. trump team blaming russia for the chemical attacks the russian relationship is getting rockier. lt. general richard newt son. general, the accusation and fingerpointing intensifying ahead of meeting. the russia would like to get clarity what our real intentions were with respect to the bombings, calling them ambiguous and contradictory. president trump saying assad is all of the above we just heard and perhaps russia knew a lot

more about the extent of chemicals being used in the heinous attack. >> charles, good afternoon. it is good to be with you. i don't think there is really any misinformation from president trump. in other words we have president and administration, president says we will do what we say and we will act according to our national security interests as well. that is what we saw last week with the 59 tomahawk attack launches if you will, against a syrian airbase. so on the other end, with secretary tillerson meeting with putin and so forth, putin only understands power. he only understands and respects power and certainly tenacity. so i think what is going on behind closed doors is certainly secretary tillerson explaining the u.s., our national security interests and our way ahead and moving forward with any relationship that we want to, although it looks to be a rocky relationship from this point on for the near term with russia. it will stand on principle.

it will stand on the united states again, speaking and acting from strength. charles: russia has, major investments in syria. it's a warm water port to the mediterranean. it is at t crossroadof east meeting west. it is historically been where the place many sieges and world conquerors found a need to be there. how would they give that up or something need to be done for the things they want and still with a new plan getting rid of assad? could that be negotiated between these two? >> i'm sure there will be ongoing negotiations. hopefully that is an out come from secretary tillerson's visit to russia. again our military strikes are only part of the means to an overall u.s. national security and diplomatic effort. keep that in mind. russia has its own national security interests in syria. we're trying to leverage these strikes. with a new strong national security team in place, to messaging, clearly communicate

to putin that the u.s. also has national security interests in the region as well. charles: right. >> we're going to assure our allies, we're going to make sure, not only in the region but on a global basis as well, that the u.s. again, we mean what we say. and therefore, we're going to see diplomatic solutions. however, if you look at the past eight years, diplomatic effort have failed. therefore these strikes again are to bolster u.s. national security aims as well as to support a stronger diplomatic effort that i'm sure secretary tillerson is taking on now. charles: bottom line, there is certainly a new sheriff in town. that changes the dynamics in the room, doesn't it, sir? >> charles if i may on comment. charles: sure. >> i wouldn't say new sheriff. new leadership in town. charles: that is better way to put it. >> frankly we'll exert our influence and protect our national security interests and when those red lines are crossed, we're going to counter that with effective u.s. capabilities. charles: thank you very much for your expertise. we're still on somewhat pins and needles.

it's a dicey situation. everything is at stake. we really appreciate it, thank you. >> thank you, charles. charles: is boeing emboldening iran? next a congressman who has very harsh words. noco set to go nuclear or loco again? that's next. now on the next page you'll see a breakdown of costs. what? it's just... we were going to ask about it but we weren't sure when. so thanks. being upfront is how edward jones makes sense of investing.

charles: boeing under fire for its 3 billion-dollar deal to sell planes to iran. congressman peter roskam explaining his worries to neil. >> on the day of the chemical weapons attack boeing makes announcement that they plan to sell to an iranian airliner more planes. this is just, it is completely incongruous. makes no sense at all. it comes down to jobs argument. what is more important than jobs is obviously lives.

charles: iran could get boeing's new jetliner next month. we'll keep you updated. boeing is the biggest loser on the dow jones industrial average right now. north korea meanwhile threatening a nuclear attack on the united states. president trump giving fbn into what he asked china to do to help get a handle on the situation. >> i think china can help us. i hope china can help us. we talked about trade. i can tell you china will do much better on trade if they help us with north korea. >> you think he knows that? >> i think he knows that. i told him that, yeah. charles: meanwhile we're hearing the chinese president telling president trump he wants to keep military force out of this. how do we keep kim jong-un in check? to former navy seal david sears. we have got the armada headed toward north korea. centerpiece is the aircraft carrier, the carl vinson, a lot of other capable ships that can do a lot of individual damage, but, keels like, i don't know if

this is for preemptive strike or cautionary strike or all of the above, but feels likes we're dealing with a unknown character kim jong-un. how do you reason with him and is it even possible? >> that is a great question, charles. it is possible for china to exert a lot of influence. this is why president trump's meeting was so important with xi xinping. what we'll need is china and china has come to the realization we are stepping toward a precipe especially with trump's strikes with syria. that given them, they have to recalculate everything they believed they knew. there was a recent article published out of the china military, state-run military in english, they say we are headed towards war in north korea does not give up its nuclear weapons and missiles program. that is it china's position. what they believe, at least some analysts do. charles: when you say we, who are the combatants? north korea, america, south korea?

where does china stand? are they an observer to this? by the way also hearing they deployed 150,000 troops, china did, on the north korean border. >> that's right. whether that is confirmed or not, i can't speak to the 150,000 troops up there. that is certainly deterrent. the we though is the region. china news it as they're involved. this will really be their problem in their backyard. it would be the u.s., north korea, south korea, japan would likely have some piece in there depending on how north korea drags them into it. interestingly enough also china published since april 7th, the strikes on syria, they published three different commentaries on the situation there, and they're sending a message to north korea they have also triggers for war with north korea. that's china published that. and one of those is nuclear pollution. so some kind of a pollution of their land, waters or anything that comes from, from north korea testing that could

affect the northeast region of china. that is very interesting and kind of new piece in the puzzle. charles: apparently another message, china turning back coal shipments from north korea. their number one source of revenue outside perhaps of some of this nuclear technology they sell here and there. that has to be sending a loud and clear message to north korea, it gets back to whether kim jong-un will listen or not. >> that's right. is he going to listen? the next step could be also -- now china claims they reached the limit under sanctions of the coal coming. that is why they turned them back. but what they have also done in the past they turned off the oil pipeline to north korea. if they shut that down you have an indication that china will keep upping the sanctions and enforcement of them. i think we'll see, china is calculating north korea, you need to stop these antics. april as well, charles, let me add real quick. april is a big month. april 15th is the kim son's

birthday. north korea could do something miscalculation. april 25th is the anniversary of the north korean army. those are dates to watch. china is sending a message to north korea, don't miscalcuate. charles: this generational madness has been going on for a long time in north korea, boiling to a head real soon. dave sears, very much appreciate it. >> thanks, charles. charles: united in a pr mess is an understatement. ceo is making comments on the forceful removal of that passenger. that's next. ♪ their experience is coveted. their leadership is instinctive. they're experts in things you haven't heard of -

researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team.

♪ ♪ welcome to holiday inn! ♪ ♪

thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! ♪ ♪ making every stay a special stay. holiday inn, smiles ahead. whether for big meetings or little getaways, member always save more at holidayinn.com 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. hope you're fast. i am. get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade.

charles: tesla trying to topple general motors and ford as the top u.s. automaker. all this as automakers are unveiling new models at the new york auto show. jeff flock of course is there with reaction from auto ceos after president trump addressed the border tax issue on fbn. jeff?

reporter: going to get to that too, charles. first, take a look at this. this you are looking at the jeep grand cherokee track hawk. the only the most powerful suv ever built. first on fox with a look at it, first on fox business with the ceo worldwide ceo of the jeep brand, mike manly. 707-horsepower? >> yes, 707. reporter: could you show me engine? this is the hellcat engine, right. >> 707-horsepower. reporter: goes 180 miles an hour. >> 180 miles an hour. reporter: made here in the usa. >> made in. usa. zero to 60 in 4.5 seconds. >> reporter: incredible. trump was on the fbn with maria bartiromo, you're worldwide ceo of jeep. talking about border adjustment tax. you make jeeps all over the world? >> we do.

reporter: what would impact be of border adjustment tax. he doesn't like the name but likes the concept. >> we don't want to speculate because we have no idea what that may be. most important for any oem is clarity. we need to ustand what the environmenwe work in. we'll adjust when we know. reporter: you have the most powerful suv in the world though right now, whether they tax it or don't. >> whether they tax it or don't we do. i'm very, very proud of it. you like it? reporter: i like jeeps to start with. you're not the only ones. everybody is on suvs. we have toyota today with a concept for an suv, aimed at millenials, something, sort of like the old fj cruiser. >> yeah. reporter: they're copying jeep on that one. you guys at fca, fiat chrysler dominating the show. last night that the demon. >> demon. reporter: oh my god. >> you enjoyed that too? reporter: that was a good one. >> we have credibility and history. why not. reporter: that is car, these are

two vehicles for this age. president in the white house who says, i want bigger, faster, better, these are trump cars. >> it would be nice. if he wants to call me, i'm sure we could fix one for him. [laughter]. reporter: mr. president, if you're watching, want to go 707-horsepower, mike manly is your man. charles? you too. charles: put a good word for me too, jeff, all right, buddy? reporter: very good, sir. charles: talk to you soon. outrage over united still coming fast and furiously. lauren simonetti reports its ceo trying desperately to stop the backlash. lauren? reporter: it's a nightmare, charles. you have the ceo of united on "good morning america" this morning saying how deeply sorry he is. >> our family at united is and you saw us at a bad moment. this can never, will never happen again on a united airlines flight.

that is my premise and that is my promise. reporter: there he is. he is showing he is not only sorry, he is trying to make right his previous comments on this issue as the company tries to reverse its losses. the big question is, does this affect the stock? well take a look at that one-week chart. it is not down that much. i was just talking to traders. volu is ge. 2 1/2 times the average volume today halfway into session. if you look at entire week, for a 22 billion-dollar company, on the week, $250 million in market value wiped out. that is not tremendous. that is putting it in perspective for you. also it's a winner this year. it is up 30% in the past year. the number two, southwest, is up about 20%. so united has been an outperformer. a lot of people saying despite this if i as coy which was bad, it will continue to be an outperformer. we have new video. want you to look at it, charles. i want you to listen to it.

offer as fresh perspective what happened to dr. dao, the passenger remove frommed flight. listen to this. >> i am not going. i am not going. [inaudible] reporter: he seems calm. how did the situation get so bad? i have a theory. it is so rare for a passenger to be involuntarily denied a flight. happens one out of every 10,000 cases last year. you united didn't offer up enough money. they can offer $1350 to get someone off of a flight. they didn't do that. they only went up to a thousand. delta had major issue storms the last week. so generous with the perks. keep the passengers happy. show me the money, charles, right? charles: first rule we all thought existed existed in the e world the customer is always right. they treated this guy like he was completely wrong. had no reason to be fighting back at all. reporter: exactly. they're paying for it a little bit right now. but they will probably be okay in the end.

charles: they will. it helps when four companies control 75% of the market share. reporter: right. charles: thanks a lot. bottom line this is full-blown crisis for the united airlines. how does it dig out of this mess? crisis communication expert karen leland on united's next move. karen i was shocked with the initial reaction for the company which initially called the passenger disruptive and belligerent. that was a mistake. >> it was completely a mistake. they handled this badly the pre-part, and post. united coming out saying we were react accommodating passengers and what he said about the passenger was difficult. those always add salt to the wounds. united is operating already at a low level of goodwill with their passengers because they often come in, quite frankly in some of the lowest-rated spots for customer service. they didn't have all that much goodwill to begin with.

this isn't helping it any. charles: to your point, this unleashed a social media avalanche. not just because after response to this everyeveryone shared horror stories dealing with the airline over the years. is it ol' only three major competitors, four airlines sliced up this country because they're tone deaf and trend overall in corporate america? >> this is factor with united. i think there is a factor where you have only three or four major competitors. i will say, by the way i'm a million-mile flyer on united. i encountered lots of problems with them over the years as customer myself. what you have in unite adopter culture very focused on operations. they're focused on doing things as efficiently as possible and as cheaply as possible. while that is admirable to some degree, what is getting left out of that is the customer service. so the changes, the culture is really what needs to happen. however to your point, i noticed

a definite downward trend as branding expert in service over all across the board in many industries of the we all thought technology would make things easier, better, smoother, but in some ways it dehumanized a lot of these experiences. things like flying are essentially an emotional experience. and so the quality of service has a big impact. you are seeing a downward trend in that. unfortunately with some airlines. you also have other airlines such as american, virgin america and singapore airlines where they still made the emotional experience of flying very high customer service experience. charles: you know, it was a such a thrill years ago to go flying. in fact people got dressed up. the crew was also dressed up. they gave you the all the goodies. when i was a kid, got playing cards, pin, cologne, postcard. it is all about dollars and cents. it feels like there is disingenuous aspect airline

industry getting out of the gate. they herd you in. get out, check the box and sit on the tarmac for four hours. >> the other thing what is starting to happen on airlines a lot, you joked about getting cards, you have to beg them for a pillow, even in business class. overall lowering of a standard is a problem of the issue united will have quite frankly, because they didn't have a lot of goodwill to start with, united will have issue they will not solve this typical which with policy change and personnel change. they will not be able to use a slogan to get out of this. they have to take a good look at culture of the company. the ceo of united said this isn't who they are. i think culturally that is who they are. that is what they will need to be change. charles: they did have a culture change. they changed song from rhapsody in blue to rhapsody in black and blue. >> thank you. charles: from a pr crisis to

retirement crisis. we'll lay out how you can make sure you're prepared for your future right 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. there's nothing more important than your health. so if you're on medicare or will be soon, you may want more than parts a and b here's why.

medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. you might want to consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any medicare supplement insurance plan, these help pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and, these plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you could stay with the doctor or specialist you trust... or go with someone new. you're not stuck in a network... because there aren't any. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. there's a range to choose from, depending on your needs and your budget. rates are competitive. and they're the ly plans of thr kind endorsed by aarp.

like any of these types of plans, they let you apply whenever you want. there's no enrollment window... no waiting to apply. so call now. remember, medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. you'll be able to choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. whether you're on medicare now or turning 65 soon, it's a good time to get your ducks in a row. duck: quack! call to request your free decision guide now. because the time to think about tomorrow is today. charles: secretary of state rex tillerson and russia's foreign minister set to hold a joint

news conference at any moment. tillerson meeting with russian president vladmir putin ahead of that news conference. we'll bring it to you live as soon as it begins. meanwhile we have a retirement crisis brewing. "usa today" survey remany americans plan to delay retirement and keep working after they retire. bankrate.com and chief financial analyst greg mcbride how they can get a handle on their retirement. everyone says, i know i have to do this. something people readily admit and very few have a gameplan. >> that is exactly right. you have to automate it. if you wait until the end of the month to wait until what is left over, nothing will be left over. take advantage of the work place retirement savings plan where money comes out with payroll deduct uns open up an ira with automatic deductions on your checking account. if you live first and what is left over that is the path of financial security. charles: i see happening in some

of the work that i have looked at, ople are living more in the moment, that they save less to retire, less for college, less for college degree. more for emergencies which you get probably after two market crashes in a decade. also though, to buy something. you know what? that purse costs a grand. i will save a few checks or that bowling ball, whatever it is, we buy stuff and live life now. that dynamic, what does that mean for people long run? it they will not be. >> they're not. you know we've got kind of this frugal fatigue, right, a few years after the recession people did tighten the belt on some discretionary spending. charles: right. >> but those days seem to be in the rear view mirror, people falling back into familiar habits. people know they have to save. they haven't done it. there is real lack of action on that front. this is something that catches up with people. when we ask americans what is your biggest financial regret? they didn't start saving retirement early enough. charles: what age is that? any age?

>> across the population but that regret, it becomes more prevalent the older you get. not sure pryingly, right? the more closer to retirement more you wish you started earlier. charles: by the same tone someone 40 years old 45 years old, they saw the market crash in 2000, saw it crash again. saw housing market implode. hardly get anything back from the bank right now. they're sort of at their wits end, there is a lack of trust and lack of opportunity at least from their vantage point. >> one of the things i give presentations for 401(k), showing market performance over much longer period of time, a multidecade horizon. in that context you see the financial crisis or the dot-com bust, that the market redown and moves higher from those type of events. and in that con ticks, kind of an eye-opener for people, you can see their eyebrows go up, oh, if i keep contribute, if i hang in there for the long run, keep my investment expenses low, that is really the pathway i need.

charles: weather the storm. all day long, every day on the internet someone is predict the next crash, they will wait. they think they buy after the crash the bottom. if you were afraid to buy when market gone up you will be worse. re quick, "usa today," number one thing people want to do travel, spend more time with money. that costs money. if you want golden years to be golden, start saving now. >> you need to save 15% being income. stair step it up to 15%. charles: greg, you guys have some the best work out there. i have a minute. gave me an extra minute. on that note, are there other options? what if your company doesn't have 401(k) or something like that? a lot of people tell me that as well. >> that is a big hindrance to retirement savings not having a work place plan. if you have earned income or a spouse with earned income you are eligible for an ira. something like a roth ira are you have the ability to put money away. let that grow on tax advantaged basis, tax-free withdrawals in retirement.

charles: you guys are the best. right now secretary of state rex tillerson speaking with putin. going on for a long time. as soon as it is done he will tell us what happened. fox business with exclusive interview with president trump. a lot of reveal being, eye-opening things. we'll be right back. 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. arbreak through your allergies. try new flonase sensimist instead of allergy pills.

it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new onase sensim ♪

think your large cap equity fund

has exposure to energy infrastructure mlps? think again. it's time to shake up your lineup. the alerian mlp etf can diversify your equity portfolio and add potential income. bring amlp into the game. before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. read the prospectus carefully at alpsfunds.com/amlp

>> welcome back i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. very busy ahead for coast to coast. secretary of state rex tillerson meeting with putin at this very moment. we're going to bring in his news conference it starts. but first, president trump speaking exclusively with fbn and dropping this bombshell on health care. trump: health care's going to happen at some point. now, if it doesn't happen fast enough, i'll start the taxes. but the tax reform and tax cuts are better if i can do health care first. >> what about infrastructure? how do you see it? >> 100%. very soon. i see it as part perhaps of the health care plan. charles: now, the white house may be having trouble getting conservative republicans onboard with health care but the president signaling to fbn that he could combine health care and infrastructure to perhaps get democrats onboard. but will democrats sign onto that? to the wall street journal shelby holiday, democratic strategist tom bear and former trump new york campaign co-chair. shelly, let me start with you.

the idea is that everyone loves infrastructure. perhaps bring over some dems on that, give them some things they want and get them to sign onto maybe the ryan health care plan and make those votes in the freedom caucus. >> it's an interesting idea. infrastructure is supported by democrats but to combine infrastructure and health care is wishful thinking at this point. it is not something democrats are willing to sacrifice on the health care front. charles: what would then sack fifing? >> well, they don't want to real and replacebamacare. they want to strengthen obamacare in some ways but they do not agree with pau ryan or any of the republicans when they say tear up obamacare, remove subsidies, change the structure of how health care is sold. so i don't see them negotiating on this point. i don't think that that brings them over. but health care only 4% of americans according to a wall street journal poll say health care is working. so it's a priority to change it. charles: a higher perjury have now said they would only like to see tweaks with obamacare, not full repeal.

>> it's true. it's a tricky subject because everyone wants to change it. they just can't agree on how. charles: democrats are in transit. what about the freedom caucus. you know, of the 32 members of the freedom caucus, 29 out did president trump on the election. people in the districts love them, they sent them to washington, dc specifically with their own mandates including full repeal of obamacare. but i'm hearing that maybe they're willing to negotiate. is that true? >> well, right you had mark meadows on radio and television interviews over the past couple of days saying le think on the health care bill that the freedom caucus will support. i think we need to be clear. there is no scenario where the gop could have any excuse for not repealing and in many cases replace obamacare. this is the sole driver that put nearly every member of the house republican caucus in congress. failure's not an option. charles: could this be a compromise allowing states

whether or not to go with preexisting conditions. >> yeah. that's some of the things that are paul ryan has been speaking about, and that's some of the debate you're seeing in the states. at the state level for adjusting to any proposed change. >> it's tricky, though. charles: that's why we're talking about it. tom, the democrats have become the party of "no." is there anything they're willing to do to negotiate and move along the economic needle? >> absolutely i think what you're seeing in this interview, which i conjoin in my mind with the bannon interview that he gave to mike goodwin, what you're seeing here is the need for the president and what i would call the second hundred days to have a legislative accomplishment. and as we know from the primaries and as we know from his history, president trump is not really a republican. and taking a leaf out of the book of president clinton and president reagan, there's every reason to suppose he's

going to reach out to the democrats and the phrase i think of, you know, a spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down. charles: those guys have counterparts from the opposite party that did come to bill. they did come to get things done. it wasn't always about obstructionism. that is the case and you're right. president trump has already said he's going to be nimble. he wants to get things done. he wants to have accomplishments. but can he find anything that the democrats are willing to negotiate on? >> absolutely. charles: what? >> well, first of all, there is no reason to suppose even though the councilman would disagree with me, there's no reason to suppose there has to be a full repeal and replacement in a deal that would be made. and if you take moderate republicans and centered democrats and lop off the ends, there is no reason why this cannot be legislative accomplishment. the democrats are not going to

be the party of no if they're asked. and remember, in this entire health care legislation matter, nobody ever came to them. nobody ever spoke to them. they brought it up and that's it. charles: well, ryan made a big mistake not talking to anyone. whether it was the freedom caucus, the tuesday group. >> i don't know what you think but ryan seems to me even though he's very executive is showing what i -- the wisconsin version. this guy cannot get anything done and the president knows that. there has to be change. charles: what do you see on change? >> well, there's two paths paul ryan can take. you can do something using budget reconciliation, which means you can get it done with just republicans. >> not infrastructure. >> or with taxes. or you could gwith the rou you were mentioning get some support from republicans and democrats. it's very tricky to do both, and i think at this point trump has shown willingness to democrats. he's floating the idea of

saying tax cuts for the middle class, we don't necessarily have to tax cuts for everyone. he is starting to hedge that way. charles: we did hear spicer say that too when blake was asking next year people filling out their tax form, he says i hope we have middle tax cuts. nothing for rich people. that's something people rejoice. the clock is ticking and anxiety is building. >> yeah. and i think sweeten the pot for democrats at this point. i don't think no matter what the president offers, even after he has offered some sweeteners for them, you're going to see some compromise. people like joe mansion are the exceptions of the democratic party. they're nothing norm. the party is entrenching it's as a opposition party who will do anything to sort of dissuade the public from the trump agenda. charles: let's hold it there for a moment. fbn is getting new details on the president's corporate tax plan and charlie gasparino has the latest. charlie. >> yeah. and this segues into the health care infrastructure tax cut conversation.

this is what we do hear from sources inside the white house. the white house is not denying this. the corporate tax cut plan that he has proposed taking it down from 35% to 15%, we hear from white house aids is influx and that trump is considered adeemed repatriation of offshore profits instead. that means you bring in your offprofits, they get taxed at a lower rate, something like 10%, and that would help pay for infrastructure. a portion of that would help pay for infrastructure. so what we understand is that the repatriation, again, will be cut -- taxed at 10%, it would be -- at least this is one of the talking points and the proposals that the white house is looking at. it would be an alternative to the big corporate tax rate plan that trump proposed during the campaign and has been talking about until recently. now, here's the rub here. the markets like taking the corporate tax cuts down from -- tax rates from 35 to 15. but trump has competing agendas. he wants to build infrastructure, and he does

need money for that. one way to do that -- and he doesn't have a lot of money to do it; right? because he's saying that without the health care savings, i have to roll back my expectations on tax cuts. so this is one way they believe, an interesting way, a creative way to get somewhat of a corporate tax cut, even though the market will know that it's not a corporate tax cut and help pay for infrastructure. you deemed repatriation, you basically force repatriation of corporate profits overseas, tax it at not 35% but 10%, and a portion of that money is used, particularly the savings from what i understand to fund some sort of infrastructure fund where they would build roads and bridges and almost kill two birds with one stone. two trump birds with one stone. charles: so where would that leave corporate taxes? the rates be unchanged? >> from this proposal. now, we should talk about this is a talking point. again, this goes to our earlier conversationhey don't have a plan.

but from what i understand, is would replace, at least in one of the scenarios, this would replace that dramatic corporate tax cut plan that he had. the 35 to 15 and instead would settle for something marginal, adeemed repatriation, you can bring back the money, you don't get taxed at 35%, you get taxed at 10%. plus some of those savings go in there to pay for his infrastructure plan. this is one of the things on the table. we'll have to see what happens as you know this would have massive market repercussions. the markets like the big corporate tax cut, that's why we have dow 21,000, also serve some political issues for trump, infrastructure and, yes, some bow to -- let's begin to cut corporate tax. charles: charlie, thank you very much for that breaking news, and 15% would be 12% boost to the bottom line instantly. 20% would be a 9% boost and that's why charlie says wall street wants it. it's instant growth. health care, still a struggle, the timing of tax reform is clear. i want to go to senator george

allen who says if major tax cuts don't happen this year, the gop may see major backlash, senator, thanks for joining. >> good to be here, charles. charles: same here, this obamacare replacement going down in flames has had major revervations to the point that they're scrambling behind the scenes. how do you think this is going to play out? >> well, i look at this as a major disappointment. i think everyone across the country who expected the republicans who have a advantage starting off the stanley cup playoffs now and the republicans have a power play. they have a advantage in the house, senate, and the white house. and why can't they get their act together. they ought to get in a huddle, determine what play they want to run, and then run it. and it has to happen on the health care issue because that matters a lot, especially to small businesses and the taxes they're in. the president's right in saying he would like to get that done then get to tax

reform. charlie gasparino's piece right before us, people will be disappointed if there isn't a tax reform. when the president who was for the national association of manufacturs about ten days ago, and they had all of this optimism about the future, that is predicated on action. regulatory reform, which is being done. energy, productive energy, that's being done. tax reform is part of it, and we have the highest, worst tax in the world on businesses that are incorporated. and whether it's 15% or if they get it to 20%, or even 25%, which is the international average, that's going to really spur the economy and jobs. and the trump campaign if there was a focus on anything, it was american jobs. so let's get a government that has a tax policy that allows us to compete internationally and keep more of what we're he didn't. charles: senator, this is the way i keep envisioning the ultimate plan. to your point, the corporate

tax rate would be between 20 and 25%. offsetting some of the concerns of the cbo and their static scoring, the repatriation, less than 10%. i would get rid of it, to be quite frank with you. but if you do a deal less than 10%, you have a six-month window, bring in your cash, public, private partnership. avoid a border adjustment tax. i'm not sure where you are on that. >> i agree. charles: i think it's a tax on low-he didn't americans who just can't handle it since they haven't had a raise in a decade or two. and i don't see why it's so hard for all the members to get behind that? i don't see why that would be so complicated? >> because you have common sense, charles. and common sense is not all that common in washington. i agree with you 100% and on the repatriation of profits and use it for infrastructure, i would make that part of the broader tax reform plan because that's the way you'll get some democrats. because there is some -- i think coalitions that could be built on infrastructure and on

energy with some of the energy-producing states that have democrat senators. so i would put them all together like that. the other thing is on the offshore, and the president has talked about offshore drilling along the atlanta coast and alaska. i would dedicate those revenues that the federal government gets from it also dedicate that to roads and infrastructure. and i thk that's another way of getting a good compromise. revenue without raising taxes, make our country more competitive for manufacturing, and allow people to keep more of what they earn. and what your prescription is, charles, i hope the president meets with you because i hope he'll listen to you. and if he does, i think he would find most americans saying turn right, get the job done, you have the advantage. that's what we elected you to do. keep your promises and execute. charles: well, you know, next time they have the huddle, they better get everyone, and maybe i can sneak in there and get an ear in there too. senator, thank you very much.

>> great being with you, charles. charles: same here, thanks a lot. rex tillerson meeting with putin has ended after nearly two hours. we're going to take you to the news conference, as you can see there it's going to happen very shortly. that's the white house. by the way, president trump meeting soon with the head of nato. the president expected to stress that the united states is fully committed to the alliance. we're going to take you to their joint news conference as well live here on fbn at 4:00 p.m. eastern. we have a lot for you, so don't move. right after this [phone ring]

hey dad. hey sweetie, how was your first week? long. it'll get better. i'm at the edward jones office, like sue suggested. thanks for doing this, dad. so i thought it might be time to talk about a financial strategy. you mean pay him back? knowing your future is about more than just you. so let's start talking about your long-term goals. multiplied by 14,000 financial advisors,

it's a big deal. and it's how edward jones makes sense of investing. so you'rhow nice.a party? i'll be right there. and the butchery begins. what am i gonna wear? this party is super fancy. let's go. i'm ready. are you my uber? [ horn honks ] hold on. n't wait for watchathon week to return. [ doorbell rings ] who's that? show me netflix.

sign up for netflix on x1 today and keep watching all year long. trump: frankly, putin is backing a person that's truly an evil person, and i think it's very bad for russia. i think it's very bad for mankind. it's very bad for this world. charles: well, right now you're looking live at moscow. secretary of state state tillerson is about to address his meeting with putin in a joint news conference. so is there any hope right now of making russia change his mind with respect to assad? former deputy defense secretary peter brooks. president has laid it out there pretty tough. he underscored the fact that this is a man who is a menace and a danger to all of

humanity, and it makes sense that that would supersede any plans with syria or their control over assad. so is it going to work? >> well, i would hope so, but i'm very pessimistic, charles. russia has a lot of long-standing and strong interests in the regime in syria. the relationship goes back to the cold war, the father of the current president of syria, they've been selling arms there for years. the russians have had a naval base at tartus, which is on the mediterranean sea, which allows ships to station outside of the black sea, it doesn't have to transit the turkish straights to get there. now they have an airfield. syria has long been russia's window of influence into the middle east. and russia lost a lot of influence in the middle east after the fall of the soviet union, and i think they've

regained it since 2015 when they intervened in there. so i don't think they're willing to throw bashar al-assad over the side, although i would be happy to be wrong on that. bui ju see it the russian interests are pretty strong in continuing to see bashar al-assad or an ally of him stay in power. charles: right and rex tillerson did allude to the fact that the assad family. so saying, you know, the power can't be transferred and also, i think the issue that everyone's got to realize is the fact that assad is part of it, they're only 20% of the population there, so i guess that's another dynamic. i'm not sure what russia's relationship is with sunnis, but i would think that if there's a real regime ch they would like to have a greater say in which their country 80% majority is run. >> yeah. absolutely, but we also didn't mention iran.

iran is more closely related to shi'aism than sunniism. so the iranians are heavily involved there and backing the regime. have made syria's closest ally. hezbollah, a shi'a terrorist group from lebanon is also there. this is a very complicated thing. we haven't even talked about al-qaeda or isis or turkey or the kurds. so this is very, very complex. and to -- the tide has changed. many years ago think about what filled the space after the fall of the regime? it's very heavy lifting for any diplomat to let russia let go of the bashar al-assad regime. charles: peter, to your point looking at a map of syria and the way it's carved up, turkey rather the kurds have taken a chunk there, isis of course has a big chunk and then assad. could there ultimately be some sort of resolution that sees

maybe a kurdish state and could we be comfortable enough with them to maybe let them be the peace keepers of the region? i know that creates another problem with turkey, though. >> yeah. that's a big problem for turkey. and they're a major player in that part of the world because the pkk, a terrorist group that has operated in turkey has often operated outside of -- out of northern syria. so the turks are very, very concerned about that. so there's a lot of peace-making and reconciliation that needs to be done in that country. so tremendous challenges for any diplomat to try to see change. i mean, they've been trying to get peace talks going, and it's been very difficult. charles: president trump says he inherited a mess in syria. that was an understatement. peter, thank you very much. >> thank you. charles: so did president trump just adjust his stance on the border adjustment tax? we've got new details that you're only going to hear on fbn, and they're next. 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. this is judy. judy is 63 years old. her mortgage payment is $728 a month. that's almost 9 thousand dollars a year. now judy doesn't think that she'll be able to retire until her mortgage is fully paid off. this is mike. mike is also 63 years old.

his mortgage payment was $728 a month. mike thought he would have to work for another 12 years until his mortgage was paid off... and then mike heard about a reverse mortgage and how that might help him. he called one reverse mortgage to get the details. mike retired immediately after getting his one reverse mortgage loan. maybe you too can benefit from a reverse mortgage. call one reverse mortgage now and find out if you qualify. they'll send you an information kit that includes all the details and the stories of mike and others. a reverse mortgage... is a mortgage with no required monthly payments. it was created for homeowners 62 or older so they can continue to afford and own the home they love. many one reverse mortgage clients find they can retire sooner, do more the things they love, or simply put more money in the bank.

a reverse mortgage could change your retirement, and your life. i examined my finances and i said, there is no reason why i shouldn't retire today. 10, 12 years earlier than i had anticipated. in the first year, mike's cash flow savings totaled $8,736. after 5 years, it will be over $40,000. it really is worth a call to find out if a reverse mortgage can help you too. call one reverse mortgage now and ask for your free information kit. my frii say not if you this protect yourself.ary. what is scary? pneumococcal pneumonia. it's a serious disease. my doctor said the risk is greater now 'm over ! yeah...ya-ha... just one dose of the prevnar 13®

vaccine can help protect you from pneumococcal pneumonia- an illness that can cause coughing, chest pain, difficulty breathing, and may even put you in the hospital. prevnar 13® is approved for adults 18 and older to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. get this one done! ask about prevnar 13® at your next visit to your doctor's office or pharmacy.

charles: well, look who's back. running for president yet again, iran will hold its presidential election on may 19th. meanwhile signs that north korea is gettingancy and warning a nuclear attack on any united states aggression. nick, we sent an armada into the area with a aircraft carrier, we're showing a tremendous amount of strength in the region, but what's the next move? >> i think the next move right now should be something more along the political side. we need to start putting pressure on china. their big brother and having them take care of it. i don't think america is -- right now is currently ready for another trillion, multi-trillion-dollar war. we're supposed to be a nation that's going through some type of financial healing right now, and i don't think america's ready for that.

neither are the keyboard warriors who pressure the guys like us to go in and fight. are we really ready see a 18, 21-year-old kid face plastered up on the news station and then that name many years later becomes a ticker and then bumper sticker deep right after that. i don't think america is ready for that. we need to handle this politically. charles: nick, there's no doubt that americans in general have a distaste for these wars, particularly these wars with no conclusion and the lost lives of our great young men and women. having said that, i think the world is also obviously concerned about this wild card kim jong-un who is either -- has nuclear weapons capabilities right now or is propelling quickly toward them and with the ability to be able to send them to where he wants to. do we roll the dice and allow him to get this capability and ultimately perhaps use it? and what happens if china doesn't do much more than

they've done already, which is apply some economic pressure but not enough to dissuade them so far? >> it's a double-edged sword. no one ends on the nuclear war. the war after that will be fought with sticks and stones. i think we need to do everything we can to avoid anything nuclear. whether that be sanctions, whether that be, you know, nato getting involved and putting more sanctions and more pressure on north korea, syria, you know, our nations' enemies at this point in time. america's not ready for that. and if nuclear weapons do get involved, who wins that? charles: so, nick, on the campaign trail, talked about a lot of these countries pulling their own weight, particularly when it comes to the economics of keeping the world peaceful. after world war ii we forced japan into a pacifist constitution. should we urge them to start rebuilding their military? do we need to see an arms race in asia to counterbalance north korea and to be quite frank with you, to counterbalance china as well? >> i would agree in standing

up for your own self. i was bullied a lot in high school. there came a time -- charles: that was before the beard? >> before the beard and about 90 pounds of muscle. but it was definitely before that but i think once nations start getting pressured into for their own selfs, maybe that's where the difference will be made. america cannot be -- or continue to be the police force and worrying about everybody else at this point in time because what's the endgame? we leave that country and then the bad guys stand back up and continue to do bad things to good people. what's the endgame? charles: yeah, there's no doubt too these places that people have been brutalized for so long leaves a vacuum; right? no one's willing to stand up for themselves. so you get rid of one evil dictator and another one fills that void. we do know the clock's ticking. apparently china is saying -- at least publicly they don't want to see military force, and they would like to see peaceful resolution. so we hope that comes into play here. and if not, maybe we can just use sanctions. but, again, you know, i guess

we're dealing with someone who is unpredictable, and that's the wild card no one can really game plan for, model for. >> i agree 100%, but i think you spank them a few times, he'll learn his lesson. i don't think it needs to go up, you know, nuclear or anything like that. i think no one wins that. but if you spank them a few more times a little bit harder and harder, he'll learn. charles: yeah. well, nick, thank you very much. first of all, i want to say thank you for your service. we really appreciate that and your expertise this afternoon. thank you. >> thank you. charles: new jersey governor ris christie weighing in on the united airline controversy and what he wants the trump administration to do about it. that's next.

. .

charles: secretary of state rex tillerson and russian foreign minister sergey lavrov holding a joint news conference. tillerson just finished meeting

with vladmir putin. let's listen in. >> translator: we have a long conversation with president vladmir putin of russia. negotiations have proved to be substantial and very frank. they have comprised the whole gamut of issues of importance to our bilateral relations and international arena. we have taken of the fact of the current stage of our relation as well as the international situation as we -- of the most calm ones. there are certain issues that have been inherently as time bombs from the previous administration, the obama administration -- the previous administration, the obama administration, we are being realistic. we do understand that to

overcome these obstacles we have to make efforts and we seek to do that. we understand that our american counterparts are going to move towards us as well and our president as reaffirmed our will to do that. we see that an attempt at presenting our cooperation. there are even attempts escalating the confrontation but we do not believe that this is an astute approach. we do understand that if moscow and washington cooperate this is for the benefit not just of, just of our nation but also for the sake of the whole world. we have reaffirmed we both seek the sides without any compromise to international terrorism. this issue has been raised by our presidents in the course of their telephone conversations and during their telephone conversation on april the

4th in the night when president trump called president putin in order to expose his condolence on the terrorist attack that had taken place in st. petersburg and context of fighting international terrorism. we talked about syria. we have touched upon the incident that took place after april 4th when -- in syria chemical weapons were used. we have talked about the ensuing missile attack of the u.s. against the airbase on april the 7th. we have stated our position on many occasions. today we have said that there needs to be a very thorough investigation into this incident which has become the subject of many speculations. russia has spoken in favor of joining the attention of the

acpw and to this incident saying that the apcw has all the necessary competences and powers to look into this incident. there has been an official letter by the syrian government to the u.n. and to the opcdw with a request to dispatch as soon as possible a group of experts in order to conduct an unbiased and frank investigation both in airport and airbase that was struck. we, are taking note of the american counterparts willingness to support such an investigation. we do hope that the powers, the u.n. and the opcw have the will be resorted to as soon as possible. if this context we believe it is going to be counterproductive to try to adopt a resolution at the u.n. security council which

would be not, dedicated to investigating the incident but more legitimatizing the accusations against damascus. we do have some arguments but we're not trying to pose anyone on anyone. we want there to be a frank investigation. we have also talked about the state of affairs and interaction of our airspace sources as well as the coalition headed by the u.s. and the context of the memorandum we have on preventing incidents as well as insuring the safety of air traffic over syria. as you know, we have suspended the memorandum but today the russian president reaffirmed that we're willing to put it back into force on the condition that the primary force is going

to be reaffirmed of both the american coalition and the russian airspace forces that is the objective of fighting al nusra and as well as the associated terrorist organizations. we assume as well that the publicly stated position of both russia and the u.s. on there being no intention to interfere within the domestic affairs of syria or any are still in force. we do hope that iraq's example as well as that of libya and other countries is going to be an admonition against trying to recreate the similar sense anywhere else in northern africa. let me say once again we are willing to achieve an absolute defeat of isis as well as all the other terrorists. this is our common objective. it is still in force and we have

seen this has been reaffirmed today as well, apart from syria and fighting terrorism in the region. we also have another political challenge, common challenge that is to seek a political solution to the syrian crisis. the u.s. and russia have been at the forefront of recent years of international efforts finding solutions at rallying all the parties concerned, both parties to the syrian conflict and external players, bringing them together. engaging at the table under the u.n. today we agreed to continue to work bilaterally to facilitate this process, to push the multilateral process forward. we appreciate apart from the geneva process we're full-fledged together with the our american counterparts. we have the voice tan that platform. in this platform the american

counterparts are represented as observers. russia and the u.s. have other opportunity to help the international community settle the conflicts in libya, yemen and last but not lst but try to find common approaches to break the stalemate around the israeli-palestinian settlement. i do hope that our ongoing contacts to that end are going to be fruitful. we also have another matter now on our agenda and that is of afghanistan. as you know over the last two years there have been -- resorted to seeking to it rally an external support for the afghan settlement. one of those attempts, one of those avenues we pursue is going to take place on april the 14th in moscow. a meeting has been scheduled for the so-called moscow format

which is going to be attended by afghanistan as neighbors including central asian republics, the american counterparts, representatives have also been invited to this meeting which we hope they're going to be able to participate in these meetings. we have also touched upon the ukrainian crisis. we've got a common approach to the minsk agreements of 2015 are to be observed and respected. we have also record how under the previous u.s. administration a bilateral consultation channel had been fostered between moscow and washington to supplement the and four and we felt the interests of the current administration and resuming bilateral contacts and this dimension to help find practical solutions to implementing the

minsk agreements to the full. we have talked about the korean peninsula which is sort of a concern for all of us, both russia and the u.s. speak in favor of rigorous observance of the u.n. security council resolutions to that end. we also have discussed how we can find a way out of the confrontation spiral which would allow to us create the necessary conditions for negotiating process to settle the nuclear issue of the korean peninsula through diplomatic and political efforts. it has been pointed out that russia and the u.s. have a particular responsibility for the military and political security both at the original and international levels. we have compared notes with

regards to implementing the strategic stability treaty such as the arms reduction treaties which are in force between our countries. we have agreed to overcome, sort of a pause there. we have been witnessing in these processes. while the scene as change and it is quite natural we do have our contacts on strategic stability and arms control are going to be resumed. they're going to be held in a business-like manner, pragmatically, with a view to observing rigorously the agreements we have reached. we have touched upon our economic ties. we see, there is an interest among business circles on both sides to build up our cooperation, to buck the negative trend which we have been witnessing and trade and

investment due to objective and subjective reasons. we for one have promiseed to support the business initiatives on both sides. we'd like these efforts to get the support of both the russian government and the u.s. administration. there is another agreement. we have agreed to designate special envoys both from the state department of the u.s. and the russian foreign ministry. these envoys are going to have a pragmatic conversation about the the -- that have so to speak piled up under our relations under the obama administration primarily. should both sides demonstrate a pragmatic approach to this avenue, then it is going to

yield results and will help improve our relations as well. on the whole i believe we all understand how difficult as the association in our relations as in the world as a whole there are many who would like to give a try at using the current communication technologies and cyberspace and the virtual reality. we know that there are people who abuse the opportunities presented by the modern technologies. they are trying to use these technologies to their advantage, to pursue their goals which are far from december but luckily both in the u.s. and in russia there are enough people who will be a i believe to separate right from wrong and who will be guided by the fundamental interest, not just short-term

interests of both our peoples but as the international community as a whole. we belve this might our take from the negotiations that have taken place despite all the issues both objective and artificially created we're still have many prospects for cooperation. russia is willing to cooperate with the u.s. to be engaged in dialogue, not just dialogue but also common approaches and common actions to pursue the interests of both countries. we will look forward to the u.s. reciprocating our approach and i do hope that the many hours that we spent with rex tillerson together as well as with the president of russia have not been spent in vain. we understand each other better after the talks today. we do hope these contacts will

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

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

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

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

>> translator: now we get down to questions. russia 24, please. good afternoon, about russia 24, a question to mr. tillerson. over the last days from washington we've been hearing contradictory and aggressive statements like mr. trump's calling mr. assad an animal as well as mr. spicer's saying, who compared mr. assad to mr. hitler, who said that mr. hitler never used the chemical weapons. do you think the rhetoric can change? is it helping the diplomacy? thank you. >> well i think the perspective from the united states supported by the facts that we have are conclusive. that the recent chemical weapons

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

into the scene. u.s. and russia initiated the elimination of syria's chemical weapons and record terms we prepared the necessary agreements. in the ocpw in the haig and as well as the security council of the u.n. there have been reports from the opcw which state the progress that has been achieved in eliminating the full stock of chemical weapons the syrian regime has. the reports also state that the number of places where the chemical weapons were stored were under control of extremists. so, the process between damascus and the haig has been on going. there have been some difficulties. yet we use our relations with the syrian government to encourage them to cooperate fully with the ocpw. we are fully committed to

finalizing this work. we're going to seek its completion. as for the investigation into the incident, there is a fact-finding mission of the opcw. there is mechanism for an investigations set up together by the ocpw of the united nations. we've got some questions. we want to be answered by these mechanisms, all the accusations against the syrian arab republic's government are of having the chemical weapons, all these accusations are based on the so-called remote evidence provided by some npos. i'm not going to point out the wide task helmets that discredited themselves on many occasions. they have been found to be

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

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

unbiased experts has to be dispatched to the place where chemical weapons were used as well as to the airport where our american partners say, was used. as the starting point from which to took off the plane delivering the chemical weapons. we are not convinced that this was the case, nor are we convinced by the tv images or by the statements of people who were at the airport. there were no signs that would support the statement, the allegation, that chemical agent were used there at all. i'm sorry for taking so long to comment but i would like to underline that we are