[laughter] >> you get that feeling? >> don't have you sunglasses that blocks uv, isn't it dangerous to look at the sun because of the uv, how can it be the color of the year? stuart: we're over the head of our skis. >> i think we are. stuart: turn it over to neil cavuto. >> i was fascinated by the back and forth, doing something about this. i was surprised there wasn't more reaction to that. probably will be when people thinking that could happen, it could cut both ways. thank you very much for very news-making few hours. we'll follow up on this, stuart, from the interview with stuart varney, an interesting investigation maybe back and forth with gary cohn that the white house would be open to lowering the top rate maybe as far down as 35%. that's just coming from a negotiating standpoint where they want to trade a lot of things back and forth where, they are going address not only what's happening with the economy firing on all cylinders, given the latest

unemployment report but the idea they can goose it, everybody gets a tax cut, we're exploring that now with charlie gasparino, mike murphy and last but not least dagen mcdowell. is this thrown out there, dagen, lower the top right. i don't know how likely that is. the senate plan would bring it to 38.5%, what do you think? >> because i'm a nerd, i carry this around. this is an editorial in the "wall street journal" from the other day how to help the high-tax states, about that very thing, calling for lowering of the top tax rate. in the senate bill, it's 38.5%. in the house bill, it's 39.6%, but actually because of that onerous additional rate for those making north of 1.2 million dollars, it's 35.6%. >> there is the gap, we climb to that. >> exactly. how do you offset taking away the state and local tax

deduction without truly punishing higher income workers. you lower the top rate. that's how you do it. if you take away the major deduction for them. how about the republicans not punish work? how about the republicans not give into the class warfare language of the left. >> they're always captive of the revenue targets, right? so the argument against doing something like that is what do they do to get that revenue? >> the argument is they need to balance things, but dagen has been saying this for a very long time. i don't know they agreed with her initially, i agree with her now. >> she does talk a lot about this. >> but she's correct. it is going to be a tax hike for a lot of high earners. >> not just high earners. >> not just high earners. >> not just high earners. the fraud of tax reform is being exposed here, and i think you and i have been talking about this for weeks. tax reform is taking down the rates and not taking it down from 39 to 38.5. taking it down substantially.

that's called tax reform. plugging all the loopholes. what they've done essentially is this. raised taxes on not just upper income people, middle-class people who live in new york state, in california, in places that you make about 200,000, 250. you are going to get hosed by the state and local deduction being removed. they've raised your taxes, essentially to give a tiny income tax cut to working-class people, and a massive tax cut to corporations. now, i'm all for getting rid of the state and local tax deduction, i think anybody that wants tax reform is for it. i'm for lowering the corporate tax rate to make us competitive. don't tell us the individual side, mr. kohn and mr. mnuchin is tax reform. this is garbage. >> the selling point has been, dagen, as you know, something is better than nothing. that's not always the case. i understand what they're saying about this, but i also understand that sometimes republicans have been managing

to grab defeat from the jaws of victory, and there's already balking behind the scenes of key players who if their promises are not kept, promises made to them, they could be no votes when this happens. >> like susan collins. >> marco rubio. >> who wanted the welfare for the children. the children. and to charlie's point, listen, they should have done corporate tax reform earlier in the year. >> by itself. >> i totally agree this was a steve moore idea thinking before the inauguration. they weren't listening, they had to doed individual side to raise revenue, getting rid of the state and local tax deduction -- >> all of a sudden in the senate they have the reconciliation presser. i understand the constraints you're working with. in the end, to charlie's point, doesn't amount to as big a deal. >> they should be honest about. this is a we are raising taxes on everybody that makes --

people that make about 200,000 a year and up, which is essentially what obama did. >> they argue that's not the case. we're auditing his taxes. >> let me make this point. they're raising taxes on high income earners particularly in new york and other high-tax states. let me make the point. raising the taxes to pay for a big corporate tax cut. >> what do you think it is? >> ultimately if we get a give-and-take on this where it does help everybody out there, because like charlie is saying, should be a tax cut for all people. >> as it stands now, mike, what downing of it? >> i do not think it's a tax cut for me, not a tax cut for a lot of people in new york. >> but net net, better than what we've got. that's how it's sold now. it beats what we've got? >> net net, if you look at the corporate tax cut, that's a win, a definite win. >> win for guys like you? that's the argument, that the wealthy who don't get a rate

cut of their own will benefit. >> they should. >> stocks go up more -- >> i'm trying not to be in the new york double. you get doubling of standard deduction, child income tax credit. if they get rid of the amt, alternative minimum tax on the individual and corporate side. on the corporate side it's a win. the senate slid. >> working class, middle-class people don't pay high federal income tax. they get hosed on the payroll tax, they don't -- you are giving people that don't pay a lot of taxes a marginal tax cut. >> and i've argued that, i want a broader base, people paying into the system. half the country doesn't pay the income. >> one of the things i heard is that 47% do not pay any income taxes. that doesn't mean they don't pay payroll taxes, when all is

said and done, it's going climb to 50%. that's a smaller and smaller pool of people you are relying to keep government on. >> i completely disagree with that side. i hope the corporate tax cut will spur the economy. >> do you think companies, then, will take that money, and beside reinvested in their stock, reinvest it in their people or hire more people. >> that's the question or will the ceo's take more money. >> there will be more hiring. seeing jobs into the country, there will be more hiring which will trickle down throughout the economy. >> you realize that corporations and the average viewer should know this. ceos and boards do not have a fiduciary responsibility to the average american and the worker. fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. not saying they won't do the good stuff, they have to do good stock buybacks. >> this is in this countly with it comes to taxes paid, it's

through smaller pass-through entities. >> they're cutting there. not much. >> but it's a tax cut, period. i don't care how much. it's not marginal dependent on the bill. >> do you think it willas? . >> absolutely. >> no, no, not 25%. >> you can imagine if they don't? >> if they don't, if we discuss this eight months ago, neil, and you said we might be at christmas and won't be talking about whether or not this gets passed. we'd be betting a 20% correction. >> you are right. >> let's be clear about the small business tax cut, 35.9 to 25? it's a formula where you get the tax cut on 30% of income. >> it is skewing your negative attitude that you are not getting anything out of this. >> i am so p'd off. you know who came to my help now? susan collins, looking to put back the state and local tax deduction. i'm going to send her flowers.

>> poor, in the words of -- >> i liked her before. >> a wall street titan and never about him. he goes on and thinks about humanity. not you. >> susan collins is my hero. >> in the words of tony soprano's mother, poor you. >> i want to thank you very, very much. good having all of you. we have senator tim scott with us of south carolina. not only a senate finance committee member but will sit on the conference panel that will iron this all out. senator, good to see you. thanks for coming. >> good morning, neil. >> you heard all of them trashing your wonderful tax plan. way to go, way to go. >> are you concerned about that? when they poll people on the subject what is right or wrong, perception is the reality. a lot of americans feel they're getting the short end of the stick, the tax cuts aren't permanent if they get them, corporations are. they say republicans let me down, what do you say?

>> i say that anyone that is on the individual side of the code which is all americans, the tax cut over the eight years is over a trillion dollars for all folks on the individual side. that's real money that they spend it or save it or plan for education. there are real benefits in every single bracket. number two, you guys are talking about the corporate tax coming down from 35 to 20 will make our companies more competitive in a global economy. >> you said to 20, senator. you are not in the camp that says raise it or delay. now the senate plan calls for delaying that to 2019. where do you stand on that? >> i do like the delay. i think that it gives companies one more year to expense at 35% which will be a spur, a little bit of a boost, and goes to a permanent 20% rate. that is a good plan, and

permanence is my number one objective. it is stimulative in the economy long-term, it provides us with certainty, and competitive edge and a global economy. i mean looka pass-throughs, small businesses, a 23% cut overall in the rate, on their qualified business income is a real cut that will benefit a lot of small businesses. look at groups like the nfib, they have come out enthusiastically for our bill. this is a good place for us to be. we're going to continue to work, by the way, i'm sure in the conference that will start here shortly, in addressing the issues that i heard you guys talking about. >> one of the issues that's come up and gary cohn raised it here is the idea that maybe they'll tinker with the top rate. so many at the top rate are going to be paying more because losing the deduction from state and local taxes especially from high-tax states. are you open to that? i know senate calls for

lowering 39.6% to 38.5%. would you be open to lowering it some more? >> well, yeah, the real question we're trying to answer is when you look at the distributional tables, the folks at the top end of the economic bracket see a tax increase in some of the blue states because they're already having to pay really high state taxes. i wish that would change by the way. we're trying to change that in a couple of ways. i assume it would be to beef up the salt provisions that were stuck into our bill that is a part of the house conversation as well. we're going to also have to take a look at the bracket structure. i'm not sure where we go on the rate. there is without any question, there's a laser focus on making sure that the benefits of tax reform is in every single bracket and not barely in each bracket, but there's meaningful change and that will require us to have a long conversation about how we treat the salt deduction and perhaps what the top rate should be. >> the state and local tax

deduction would allow for up to $10,000. writeoff on the property taxes. >> yes. >> and proviso where maybe that would extend to maybe local and state taxes as well. so is that just allowing people to switch back and forth or taking another 10,000? what are you talking about? >> so if you think about it, in the universe of those blue states that have high taxes. for some folks the $10,000 property tax deduction will satisfy their need. other areas you may have to have a combination between income and property taxes in order to meet the threshold of making sure that the cuts are universal across the country. for us to do that, adding the income as -- i call it the hybrid on the salt, the income component would increase the cost of the bill by 90 to $100 billion. something we're going to have to address. and then when you add in any

conversation about lowering the top rate, it's 90 to $100 billion per point that you're talking about. so you're going from 38.5 to something lower, the question is where do you find the resources or the revenues to pay for it? >> that's right, you always forget, whatever you give, you have to find somewhere else. senator, thank you very much, good seeing you again. >> absolutely. >> in the meantime, telling you about concerns we had long before people were talking about the 2018 olympics about the feasibility of doing olympics in this environment where north korea is threatening global panic, and you have the russians pushed out after the nhl said we're not sending any of our players there, and growing thoughts that maybe we don't send our players there. it's a mess. after this.

♪ (news anchor) downtown traffic is still bad. expect massive delays. (radio channel changing) (news anchor 2) all lanes on highway 50 remain closed at this hour. (news anchor 3) the stats are in and this city leads with some of the worst traffic, with the average driver sitting in gridlock the equivalent of three days a year. for every hour that you're idling in your car, you're sending about half a gallon of gasoline

up in the air. that amounts, over the course of the week, to about 10 pounds of carbon dioxide. growth is good, but when it starts impacting our quality of air and quality of life, that's a problem. so forward-thinking cities like sacramento are investing in streets that are smarter and greener. the solution was right under our feet. asphalt. or to be more precise, intelligent asphalt. by embedding sensors into the pavement, as well as installing cameras on traffic lights, we will be able to study and analyze the flow of traffic. then, we will take all of that data and we use it to optimize the timing of lights, so that traffic flows easier and travel times are shorter. and sacramento is just the beginning. with advances in cameras, sensors, and network speeds, we have the ability to make cities smarter, and happier. what excites me about this technology

is that we're using some of the most cutting-edge machine-learning, and ai, to help solve the most fundamental challenges that cities face around the world. who knew asphalt could help save the environment? (lani) and the possibilities are endless. retail. under pressure like never before.

and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver. . neil: all right, we are monitoring, that's not a big deal right now, u.s. ambassador nikki haley addressing the united nations outlining the view of addressing jerusalem not only as the capital of israel but the home of the u.s. embassy moving it from tel aviv. something it will take years, this administration acting on what has been verbal policy expressed by a number of u.s. presidents before this one. democrat and republican.

but, of course, she made news not too long ago talking about the possibility of our maybe not participating in the winter olympics, what, with growing security concerns, having nothing do with the ioc, the international olympic committee, kicking the russians out. there is drama around this and lauren simonetti is following it. there is fear the games could be splintering away? >> who's going to show up? the question. whether u.s. athletes end up participates in the olympics in february is still uncertain. the main reason is the location. the games are in pyeongchang, south korea, the venues are 60 miles from the korean border, countries are worried about a flare-up with the north including the u.s. u.s. ambassador to the u.n. nikki haley raising eyebrows saying u.s. involvement in the olympic games is an open question. white house press secretary sarah sanders clarifying. this is what she tweeted --

there's also the question of russia. that nation is banned from the games over accusations of doping. clean athletes can partake, so long as they do so under a neutral flag, but there is also concern that president vladimir putin will pressure athletes against participating, and persuade allied countries not to participate over this doping ban. all of this coming as the national hockey league is not sending players for the first time since 1994. nhl had a dispute with the international olympic committee over cost as well as potential player injuries. so neil, nothing is set in stone here. neil: can you imagine if it all fritters away? i can myself. you never know. lauren, thank you very, very much. >> you never know.

neil: we have dan bongino following this fear, domino thing that gets on the stage here. i think that you're too young, i'm not, i can remember the tit-for-tat with the russians in 1980 when we opted not to go russia for the olympics. they returned the favor and wouldn't go to los angeles for the 84 olympics, and led to a long back and forth among countries loyal to each, not participating and sort of taking the oomph out of the significance of medals won by other countries, our own included where. do you see this going? >> well, neil, how young do you think i am? i was 10 when that happened. neil: you were 10? >> i deeply appreciate the compliment, maybe it's the florida air. neil: rub it in, who knows? >> we should definitely show up to south korea. i have a pretty unique perspective on this, because i've worked with the south

korean security forces during my time in the secret service when we traveled over there. neil, i can tell you with no doubt and no reservation, they are top tier. top one or two i've worked with. they are terrific. along the first line, they can absolutely secure this venue on the standard security model. here's the problem here. it is a viable security concern, though, on another track, that kim jong-un, is he a reasonable, rational person? that's seriously up for dispute in the international community. and although it's extremely low probability likelihood or event he would lobartillery shells over to the olympics, it's not zero. there are reasonable people who say is that safe? and that's entirely a different security area. neil: that's the wild card issue, one of the concerns before the ioc kicked the russians out is the bellicose talk out of north korea, and

even the new south korean leader when he came in wanted to make overtures to the north and say look, maybe we can share the olympics together, happened at north korean venues and shot down by the north, which leads me to believe that this is a guy who will bend over backwards to make these a horrific olympics for the south. what do you think? >> yeah, you're darn right. and i have a unique perspective because i was a secret service agent at the olympics in salt lake city, i'm intimately familiar with the big security model. neil: how could that be? you would only be 12 years old? >> i love you, neil. i'm going to tell my wife you said i was 21, still, she will love that. i remember being at the salt lake olympics. the secret service equivalent in south korea can secure the event, but along the second line, is this guy a reasonable actor in north korea? the best security in the world,

fencing, tactical mitigation, s.w.a.t. teams is not going to stop 100,000 rounds of artillery coming over the dmz in the city north of it. that is an extremely low likelihood event, but again, given kim jong-un's history, it's not zero and no one can say it. is that is giving a lot of people headaches. neil: real quickly looks like vladimir putin wants to sign up for another six-year term. very little doubt he would get re-elected to do that, and incensed over the ioc decision, so he'll not so subtly twist arms of allied countries or those he's done business or lent money to pull out as well. do you see that escalateing? >> yeah, it very well could and the viability of the olympics goes down hill. you want to see the world's best compete against the world's best. if it's just a bunch of countries without the united states and russia, it's like playing the world series without the two teams who won the pennants.

it doesn't work. neil: you might be up to speed on this despite your age. thank you very much, always good seeing you. >> you too, buddy. neil: thank you very much. we got lot more coming up. in case you had any doubts where the president was coming from on the alabama senate contest, he simply tweeted vote roy moore. that removed all doubt. he'll be at a rally tonight very near alabama, not technically in alabama, but i think within inches of it. after this.

neil: is it in the water on capitol hill? my goodness, congressman trent franks now the third lawmaker in as many days amid harassment allegations. adam shapiro following all of it. >> reporter: and it was kind of a shock yesterday, late afternoon when we got word that trent franks, neil, was going to possibly resign.

apparently, he had gone to speaker ryan in the morning to discuss some complaints that had been brought to speaker ryan's attention. and this, of course, was passed on to the ethics committee. here in a nutshell is what representative frankings said, he's going to leave office on january 31st and that there had been two complaints to the ethics committee, but he had been approaching his staff about possibly being surrogates for he and his wife. he said, quote, but in the midst of this current culture and media climate, i am deeply convinced i would be unable to complete a fair house ethics investigation before distorted and sensationalized versions of the story would put me, my family, my staff and my noble colleagues in the house of representatives through public excoriation. is so he says he will leave office january 31st. now, this is counter to what we heard yesterday from senator franken who said he was going to

leave, to resign in a matter of weeks but has still not put a date on when his departure will take place. and, of course, then there's john conyers who is already out. he has retired, as he says. there's one other person though, there is pressure mounting but he's still in his seat, blake farenthold from texas when's going to repay the $84,000 which was part of a settlement of taxpayer funds used for that. yes, you mentioned it might be in the water on capitol hill which is why most people drink bottled. back to you. [laughter] neil: adam, thank you very much. meanwhile, speaking of scandals that just keep coming, this one changed a little bit. roy moore's accuser beverly young nelson admits to abc news that she sadded to that infamous -- she added to that infamous yearbook inscription by judge moore. might not be what it appears to be. to "u.s. news & world report" contributor ashley pratt.

ashley, what do you make of this. >> yeah. i think we're going to keep seeing things like this happen. obviously, it doesn't discount the allegations brought against roy moore, but it does detract from some of her argument, and i think as these things are developing, this is something to be looking at. when we're looking at these allegations to congressional members on the hill, some of the arguments have been made should it go through the ethics full investigation before any action is taken. but it seems as though if there's more than one woman or more than one accuser who has come forward, that this behavior might have a perpetual problem rather than it being a one-off situation. while the moore campaign may celebrate this as a victory, i think we really need to look seriously at the allegations that have been brought forward against him. neil: you know what always happens, and i don't know who has it right, corporate america with the first accusation you're out, or in congress where, you know, it can drag on for months,

maybe even years in the case of conyers when these revelations come out much later, john conyers who will be leaving. and i don't know what that happy middle ground is or if there is such a thing. your thoughts? >> right. i think it's an apolitical situation that involves bipartisan support from members both female and male on the hill. and i think, you know, you brought up a great point. in the corporate world, we're seeing very swift action taken, but we've also seen it be not just a one-off thing, again, multiple allegations against some of these very powerful men in the entertainment industry. we saw it in hollywood, now we're seeing it happen in the halls of congress. and i do think what's most troubling about the congressional allegations is the fact that, you know, we're seeing not much transparency coming from the hill in this situation. we're seeing, you know, actually these hush funds sort of being done where, to the tune of $17 million. now, not all of that are going to pay, you know, victims off, but at the same time personal offices, it's coming out of

their budgets. i think taxpayers deserve an explanation. i think behavior needs to change, and i do think overall there needs to be a policy that's developed. and whether or not that means everything goes to an ethics investigation that happens fully until a decision is made, i don't know. but i'm guessing there's more than enough reason for these gentlemen to step aside whether it be embarrassment or the hurt that they have caused the multiple victims in these situations. neil: all right. ashley pratt, thank you very, very much. again, we'll keep you up-to-date on these roy moore developments where an original accuser on that infamous signing in a yearbook said a lot of that was staged, added after the fact, and a lot of what we thought was the case around him just fell apart at least with that particular woman and the timing of all of this. we'll have more after this. brea, i go with anoro. ♪go your own way copd tries to say, "go this way." i say, "i'll go my own way" with anoro.

♪go your own way once-daily anoro contains two medicines called bronchodilators, that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. anoro is not for asthma . it contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. the risk is unknown in copd. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder, or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if you have worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. ask your doctor about anoro. ♪go your own way get your first prescription free at anoro.com. that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. nah. not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help.

huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call to save $500 off bath walls with your walk-in bath, or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info.

neil: at least three killed amid clashes, more details coming up

right now, a lot of this promised after the united states said that it would recognize jerusalem as israel's capital and, further more, would build it its embassy there, even though it would take years to do. this day of rage, many would argue, was going to happen anyway, but more to come from hamas and other groups organizing it. meanwhile, more wildfires continue to erupt in southern california, now 440,000 plus acres scorched, the president declaring an emergency, quickly approving federal funds to make its way to the area and fast. meanwhile, it looks like job creators proor the folks doing -- or the folks doing the hire willing a little optimistic over tax reform or something. robert murray says the senate plan at least won't do much to encourage hiring in his field, in the coal area. and for a lot of his colleaguings. he joins us right now. robert, good to see you. >> it's good to see you, neil.

thank you for having me. yes, this -- neil: go ahead. what's in the senate plan that worries you? >> the leaving of the alternative minimum tax in the plan along with deleting the net interest expense as a cost of business will cost murray energy 50, $60 million a year more in increased taxes, will eliminate 65,000 high paying, well-benefited jobs in our company that we account for in our, in the actual mining jobs and in the spin-off jobs. 60 million a year additional cost, 65,000 jobs in our company alone. and, neil, i suspect that this applies to a lot of highly leveraged, capital-intensive companies. this is not tax reform, this is elimination of our business.

neil: all right. let me first understand, now, the house plan doesn't even address the amt, they removed that. the senate added it back this at a higher level for individuals than corporations, but you're quite right, it's still in there. if it were removed, and that's anyone's guess, would it be okay? >> yes, it would be all right. the house of representatives' version of tax reform is fine, neil, in this regard. and we have every indication that the senate is realizing their mistake and that in conference the house legislation relative to the alternative minimum tax and the deduction of the net interest expense will prevail, sir. neil: you know, a lot of people have sort of weighed this whole tax cut thing, and the amt stuff not withstanding, robert, is it in your case, certainly, you get the amt thing out of there and i have no idea whether they do, that this will goose the

economy, that this will do the trick? because the market's certainly been running up in anticipation of this. you could argue a lot of hiring presupposes this. what do you think? >> i think that president trump has done a wonderful job in stimulating our economy. he has done tremendously well in eliminating voluminous regulations on the coal industry. you know, this man deeply cares about working people. he must have met with those pipe layers and those plumbers and those steeple jacks and gotten to know them. he cares about working people, that i know. and i believe this will stimulate the country. i believe what happened in the senate was a terrible mistake, but i believe it will be rectified in the conference. they're only looking for $40 billion in pay-fors -- neil: yeah. >> -- to fix it. and i'm sure they can find it, sir. neil: yeah, they're right. robert, another thing we're just

learning and gary cohn had talked to my buddy, stuart varney, about the possibility of lowering the top rate from the 38.5% that the senate has, i think it's 39.6, the high rate that already is for wealthy guys like you, but maybe bringing it down to 35. how do you feel about that? >> oh, i think it'd be wonderful for all of us. but my concern right now is my employees. job creation in this country, reliable low cost electricity for all americans. neil: but, robert, how do you come to -- >> that is my primary concern. neil: how do you come to that figure, i think you use 65,000 whose jobs could be in jeopardy as a result of just the amt? how do you come to that? >> i have 6,500 employees right now, sir -- neil: okay, i misspoke. >> i had 8,400 before the obama administration and the democrats eliminated them. i'm back to 6,500. university studies show that in their communities there are 11 jobs created for every coal

mining, that is 65,000 jobs, neil. neil: all right. always good talking to you, robert. be well, have a merry christmas. >> and to you, sir. neil: all right. bitcoin, have you followed this? it swung within a 40% range. imagine an investment swinging within 40%, 4-0% in two hours. not for the faint of heart, after this. ♪

♪ ♪ neil: all right, so if the stock isn't sort of crazy enough for you, how about futures on the sock? they're set to go live on sunday for bitcoin, this after spiking as high as the stock. $17,000, then got as low as $13,000 within a two hour period. so are these fears justified around all of that? deirdre bolton's been following this. i can't keep up with this. >> it's amazing, neil. i mean, take a look at this chart. you referenced this, this is a three month chart. but this year alone, and you were going through some of these numbers, more than a 1,000% increase. now, just to spin forward there's many experts saying the next evolution in this step is the fact that futures trading based on bitcoin actually go

live on sunday at the cboe and then the cme to follow two weeks later. there are a lot of people saying, you know what? this is a natural evolution for people who want to participate buying bitcoin trading futures, well, it'll allow people to participate by taking less risk. these past 16 hours we've seen it up, i don't know, 40%, right? in 40 hours alone. and then you have it kind of crashing through five separate $1,000 marks, again, measured by u.s. dollars. and, of course, as we mentioned, more than 1,000% return for the year. there are, there's a mixed reaction, i will tell you, on wall street. you know, jpmorgan's jamie dimon, of course, saying that bitcoin is a fraud, and he would fire any of his employees who are trading in bitcoin. other banks are a little more mixed, morgan stanley saying it is going to wait and see, a french bank, again, a wait and

see kind of bank. however, goldman sachs is saying they will process trades in the futures that are beginning to trade on sunday on a case-by-case basis for some clients. but as far as the volatility goes, that doesn't go away. there are numerous experts, even people involved in the business, neil, who say, listen, you don't know if this is going to correct by 20,000 or by 100,000 within a 24-hour period. worth noting, that has happened, an 80% drop, more than five times by our count since bitcoin's inception in 2009. so volatility is the name of the game. the futures contracts may be one way to participate with a little bit less muted volatility, we'll call it, but it's there nonetheless. and, by the way, you have to put a lot more money down on bitcoin trading futures than you would for any other product in those chicago exchanges. neil: you think the more volume that comes, the more stability would come to it, but it's anyone's guess. >> it's such a new product, and even jpmorgan is saying if we

ever do process this, it will be treated almost as an emerging markets asset class and not as a currency. neil: yeah. they've been skeptical all the way up. thank you very much. in the meantime, fears surrounding justified, sort of, to deirdre's point, such an unknown commodity to leap into this is obviously not for the faint of heart but maybe not for the financially wise? to market watch's kathryn rooney and david nelson. david, what do you think? >> look, investors have experienced volatility, but it's mostly been to the upside, and i think futures are going to add some validity to this security. like it or noting neil, we have a new asset class here. and i think the ones who are worried the most are central banks and governments because for the first time they have a currency they can't control. this is a decentralized asset class that exists on computers literally all around the planet, so they can't control that. i think it bothers them a lot. neil: yeah.

we were talking -- that's a very good point, david, because we were talking about jpmorgan, morgan stanley as well, you know, circling this sort of critically but also hedging their bets. one of the things that comes to mind, this would upset the entire world apple cart here if we have an alternative to established currencies, not the least of which the u.s. dollar, the ringleader of the world. so that's a big fear, right? >> it is, neil. but also the volatility's intentionless. bitcoin started this year under 1,000, and now it broke 17,000. i'll add one thing to what deirdre mentioned, neil, and that is sunday night when the futures open, it also opens the opportunity for short selling. let's not forget that. there's a lot of guys or that are going to try to be in front of the short selling of this asset class, or this asset. i mean, there's really no intrinsic value to bitcoin. so a lot of people see, as i do, as a massive bubble, probably one of the biggest we've seen in financial history who will want

to get in front of the short selling and be shorting the futures of bitcoin. neil: you know, everyone wants in on a party, i guess, and taking advantage of that volatility, david. but when people come up to me and they're not even asking about the general market, but it's always about bitcoin, bitcoin, bitcoin, because they want in on this. they see a swing and a downdraft as i'm going to jump in even when in the course of the hour or two hours they are, the stock is exponentially moving. as someone who's very good at these waves, bubbles, whatever you want to call them -- some justified, some not -- where to you stand on this as a phenomenon that is justified? >> look, i'm going to take the other side of the argument here, you know? anybody can look at the chart and say that this is in a bubble. that's clear, it is in a bubble. but i go back to the dot.com era, we were counting eyeballs on companies like amazon which is today one of the -- neil: yeah, but amazon was an exception, amazon and ebay. when you talk about that bubble,

the reason why it was called a bubble is 95 plus percent were bubbles, right in. >> i understand that, but the biggest risk is the initial coin offering. some of these are frauds, ponzi schemes, but it's only as valid as the ecosystem that supports it. facebook was a social media play. the ecosystem supported it. we used it, therefore, it became valuable. myspace was clearly the opposite of that, and nobody supported that. there will be busts here, but right now this is something that central banks, governments cannot control, and i think it's a viable entity. i think it's actually a digital check with checks and balances out there. there are minors out there that are processing these transactions in much the same way you process a check, except it's not banks and people processing the signature. neil: katherine, do you think we're going to regret the time we delegitimized this or dismissed it? what do you say? >> right. it's really important that the

viewers realize 40% of bitcoin is owned by about a thousand investors. information sharing is still legal. so if you get block movement or trades by what they call them, these whales, that hold a ton of bitcoin, then you're going to see even more volatility which i will contend that on sunday night and monday when these futures start trading, you're going to get -- neil: to your point, doesn't that take away that fear? >> well, bitcoin is priced on what? it has no intrinsic value, neil. it's priced on whatever guys want to pay for it. >> you could say that about almost every fiat currency in the world. you could say that about the u.s. dollar. >> right, but the u.s. dollar is the reserve currency, it's the world's global, sovereign reserve -- >> i think respectfully we're discounting it too much. this is something new, and a lot of people really don't understand it. you know, i was on your side of the fence as little as three months ago, and when i started

to delve into this, i realized, you know what? there's something going on here. neil: all right, we'll watch it closely. gt, finish that thought. >> no, i think it's important, this underlying block chain valuesome yeah, people have to learn to understand it, but there is no intrinsic value here -- >> [inaudible] is going to change the financial -- >> a small amount of investors that it's very -- i would advise people to be very cautious -- >> we're going to be clearing trades with block chain as little as three years from now. neil: we'll watch it closely. that's the pro and cautious argument on this. [laughter] it all seems incredibly fast to me, but it is what it is. market cycles have started on a lot less. after this. the smart ones look to fidelity to find them. we give you research and data-visualization tools to help identify potential opportunities. so, you can do it this way... or get everything you need to help capture investment ideas

and make smarter trading decisions with fidelity for just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. : open an account today. ♪

♪ for every hour that you're idling in your car, you're sending about half a gallon of gasoline up in the air. that amounts, over the course of the week, to about 10 pounds of carbon dioxide. growth is good, but when it starts impacting our quality of air and quality of life, that's a problem. so forward-thinking cities like sacramento are investing in streets that are smarter and greener. the solution was right under our feet. asphalt. or to be more precise, intelligent asphalt. by embedding sensors into the pavement, as well as installing cameras on traffic lights, we will be able to analyze the flow of traffic. that data runs across our network and we use it to optimize the timing of lights, so that traffic flows easier

and travel times are shorter. who knew asphalt could help save the environment? . neil: all right. the economy continues chugging along, 280 new jobs, the unemployment rate steady at 4.1%, the relative concern hourly average earnings up 2.5%, not budging that much. the hope is with tax cuts and the like it will start moving dramatically. bottom line is that the debt crisis is the one thing that can't be reflected in numbers like this yet but ken langone telling me, the home depot co-founder that it should be. >> is the tax plan out of box? >> i don't know. i know this much. there are two dragons out there we better be worried about, the deficit and the federal debt.

we're going to pay a hell of a price. we at some point are going to be confronted with serious economic recession. i don't know when, two years, three years. who knows? can't keep doing with 1%, 2%, 3% interest. look what's happening with the state pension funds. why? no return. neil: that's something that my next guest has been bemoaning for the better part of a decade. for me, longer than that, obviously with his life, talking about former u.s. controller david walker. david, he's singing you're tune, this debt is a big issue, we tend to focus on the federal government, when you add unfunded obligations across the board and with everybody, closing in at 85 trillion, but what do you make of what ken langone was saying? this is a ticking time bomb. >> neil, first it's good to be back with you. i think we have to recognize the reality that there's not a party of fiscal responsibility anymore.

really, we need to think about how we're keeping score, because how you keep score matters. what matters to me is not deficits per se and not debt per se, about what you does matter tremendously is how much debt do we have as percentage of the economy? right now if you count public debt, it's 80% of the gdp. if you count total debt, including trust fund debt, it's over 100% of gdp. we need to get it down to 60% by 2040, and when you look at this tax reform plan, debt to gdp is expected to go up, not down. and what we've got to do is recognize that we've got to start dealing with the 70% of spending that's on auto pilot. you want to grow the economy through pro-growth tax reform. you need to constrain spending, including the 70% of spending on auto pilot, and until we do that, we're increasing our risk of serious adverse effect in

the future. neil: we don't do that, right? you talk about addressing spending, and all that, even when we try to address the growth in spending, the growth in entitlement spending and just shade the growth a little bit, it creates like a nuclear reaction. on both sides. and i'm wondering where that's going? >> well, let me tell you what we need to do. the process is broken. we've only had timely appropriations bills four times in the last 66 years, and the debt ceiling limit doesn't work, tell you what we need to do, we need to get rid of the mechanisms we now have that could potentially cause a shutdown and ought to say, look, if you haven't passed a timely budget and all the appropriations bills by the beginning of the fiscal year, 10-1. there is no way to do it. based upon last year's spending level eliminating nonrecurring

spending from that. thirdly, get rid of the debt ceiling limit, it hasn't worked. we need to go specific triggers and targets for debt to gdp if they don't work. we need to separate. neil: we don't do anything about it automatic mechanisms, right? we have automatic agreements that we kept to at the 2011 accord between president obama and the republican congress, and they're always trying to find a way, both sides to wiggle out of that. in fact, as we speak now. >> we're addicted to deficits and debt, and as i said, neither party is fiscally responsible. too few members that care about fiscal responsibility. we're mortgaging the future of our kids and grandkids at record rates at a time they're going to face a lot tougher competition in the future. look, but as i said, the process is broken, how you keep score matters. if we focus on debt to gdp and we have automatic mechanisms that if you don't hit these targets, we're mandatory and

discretionary spending is hit as well as revenues. all three, all three have to be impacted. if we do that, then i think we have a much better chance of having fiscal discipline and ultimately forcing onto the table the 70% of spending that has not been addressed, that must be addressed. neil: can you imagine, rates have been historically low, what a slight uptick, you know, rates would have, on $20 trillion in the existing federal government debt? >> well, as it is, neil, the congressional budget office projects that for the next ten years, the highest and fastest growing expense in the federal budget is interest. what do you get for interest? nothing, the issues at the federal level are faced by a number of states, including my state of connecticut. budget is out of control. too much of the budget is mandatory spending.

unfunded retirement obligations at the federal level and the state level are -- are the cancer that we've got to come to grips with in an equitable and sustainable way in order to create a better future. neil: all right, david, you are ahead of a lot of folks talking about it. welcome. the u.s. comptroller general, and talking about this and lambasting republicans and democrats. in the meantime, who takes a vow for economic surge, the market surge as of late. not surprisingly, this president of the united states. not surprisingly, giving a speech this week, the former president of the united states. senator robert wolf the former obama economic council chair, great to see. >> you great to see you, great conversation. neil: who gets the bow on what's going on in the markets? >> i think obama had a much better eight years than he's getting credit for from today's

administration. and i think some of the concerns that you were just talking about, the deficit, let's be clear, he cut the deficit from north of 10% to under 3%. this new tax reform is going to blow up the deficit again. for all the fiscal hawks. neil: he did increase the total debt entry -- a lot of other people there, right? >> there's no question that if we separate debt and deficit, i'm just talking deficit. neil: the gdp. >> paid for two wars, got us out of a recession, but there's no question that people should be concerned about the debt. neil: let's take president obama, he sees the surge in the markets and all. let me ask you. do you think the markets would be doing what they're doing. the economy growing, the 3%+ clip, if president obama were in a ninth year, for example, in office right now? >> i'm not going to predict what would have happened. but i certainly think you cannot take away what president

trump has done with consumer confidence. his approach to regulation, there's a lot of things i don't agree with him on. neil: sure. >> but would be nervous to all people in the marketplace. market does not necessarily dictate where the economy is. neil: very good point. you are a very straight shooter. >> you know, you and i have talked. under 50% of the county is in the stock market. neil: right. >> look at today's economic numbers, jobs report. wages were not good. neil: right. >> they're up 2.5%. for ten straight years. neil: do you think, and i know you're not a fan of this particular tax cut. do you think there's a possibility that wages will grow now? a little bit more flexibility built into what bosses is do for the workers and given the tax cut will do for the workers? >> here's my biggest concern and talked about it a lot the last nth years. corporate ceos don't hire based on taxes.

they hire based on growth and the global markets. >> and what competitors are doing? >> with technology innovation, it doesn't necessarily relate to wage increases. we need to build on skilling and training. neil: who represents that view the best of the democrats? you've seen who might be harboring white house thoughts. >> you know, i think there's a lot of -- the republican party did it really well with the group of young guns, with ryan and hansar ling and mccarthy and got the balance, mcconnell and boehner. i would say the democrats equally have that type of group, with tim ryan and seth molton and joe kennedy and hakim jefferies, we need to do a better job making sure they're in the balance. neil: not the top, top. >> not the top. neil: it's the cocoon of the party.

the closer i get on cocoon, the more i support cocoons, you know what i'm saying? that's what's necessary of saying, democrats are getting cocky right now. they look at the polls. >> i don't buy the polls at all. polls mean nothing, i think we need to be as a party more aspirational. being the party of anti-trump is not a winning solution. being the party of for something. we're all americans, we like to go in and vote for someone that's for something not because they're against something. in the rain, people aren't going to the voting booth if it's raining and they are against something. if they are for something, they'll be voting, voting, voting. we need to change our narrative. we need to be as a democratic party, a pro-growth party. we can't just look the the entitlement side. neil: real quickly, bitcoin. >> a couple days ago, listen, i was six months ago, eight months ago, not a believer. i studied a lot of block chain and understood what it is. i think block chain validates

this whole idea of cryptocurrency. neil: that there is an alternative? >> there is an alternative, and two things, not to belabor the point. two things, one, not whether bitcoin is going to go up or down, i think actually has a better chance of going higher than lower over the next year, but it is asset class and cryptocurrency is asset class and i would say post equifax, there are more and more people getting more comfortable with looking at this in an asset class and they're nervous about -- neil: as a tool to buy and sell? >> as a tool to buy and sell. we're working companies, selling to a cryptocompany to be a commerce platform. neil: really? >> we think a lot of the millennials don't want to give private information, and trust me, i say this lightly, amazon is amazing, there could be another platform that you don't have to give your private information, you don't have to pay credit card fees. you don't have to pay bank fees and maybe sitting across from a person who thinks that's a good

idea for all guys like you and i. neil: that's very good. that's a very good point. >> i think equifax changed how people feel about the whole cryptocurrency. neil: you raised compelling point, it's not subject to the vagaries that can be leveraged and taken advantage of? >> i think a lot of wealthy people are going to say, this is an interesting asset class for me to play in. neil: so is the mob? >> i like to say wealthy people -- neil: i'm not saying i know about the mob. i read these stories. >> come on, neil. neil: thank you very much. very, very good seeing you. we have a lot more. the dow up about 8 points right now. and then the roy moore developments. the woman who said he signed her year book and wrote all the lovey dovey notes. not quite. she's taking back some of that and republicans are saying media? are you reporting that?

after this.

retail. under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver. . neil: all right, so much for dialing back, donald trump doubling down in his full support for roy moore in that alabama race, ahead of a big rally in nearby pensacola.

sabrina schafer, john jordan and heather kagel. heather, begin with you on the significance of this event in pensacola. it is not accidental, its location or proximity to alabama, right? >> i'm originally from alabama, i know where pensacola is. it's pretty close. i think some alabama voters have been receiving robocalls telling them to cross the state lines and go to the rally. you'll probably see a fair amount of alabama voters cheering on trump and watching what he says about roy moore. neil: what about the new developments, john, from the accuser, not that donald trump didn't sign a year book -- wham i saying? roy moore. sorry, america, friday and i'm tired. roy moore didn't sign the year book, the other stuff that came with it, she added. does that change this? >> well, it's a piece that fits into a broader puzzle. when this scandal first broke,

you know, this is before what had happened with al franken and john conyers, this is in a vacuum. now voters in alabama and electorate deeply hostile to not just democrats but the establishment in general including senator mcconnell. now they're starting to see since all of the elites, all of the politicians are doing these sorts of things, starting to see the mueller investigation fall apart, and then they see this today. so this is now starting to look more and more to them as if there will have a witch-hunt. this particular complainant is a party to a divorce case and ruled against by judge noor 1999 and this hadn't come to light. it's all lost and alabama v. the establishment. roy moore is going to win this for better or worse by three to six points. neil: you might be right, and sabrina, there is the conundrum that republicans are in.

do you accept him? do you move to get him thrown out in light of al franken quitting? no accident to the timing of these -- john conyers leaving and al franken leaving that they want to clear the deck so they can say, look what the republicans do? >> yeah, look, neil, i don't think it's a conundrum. i think that the republican party is so deeply confused right now. of course, you turn your back on this guy because at some point, principle has to trump policy, has to trump the idea we get one more senate seat or one more judge. neil: sabrina, what if we're wrong on it? this is a distinction in the year book thing that seemed to indicate, you know, he was writing all these notes and added things in the year book when, in fact, he signed his name and other things were added by this woman. the reason i mention is there's so much we don't know, i know how it goes here, that automatically accept the charge of women because they seem very, very credible.

they might in the end be quite credible, quite real, being quite honest, but we could be jumping to conclusions here? >> i think it is a noisy time right now. there are certainly more people who will jump on the bandwagon. i had a problem also, and you know that for years, i have worked on these issues and talked about how i think we have to be careful, unfairly blame men who have not done things. i think in this instance there is plenty of evidence to suggest he wasn't the most upstanding of men, and if the republican party has long-term interest in attracting women to the policy principles, they need to say enough is enough, and look, from a base political strategy, the democrats are doing it. they're getting rid of people. for republicans to stand by this guy. >> slow and half heartedly. neil: i can't keep up with it. the allegations that come out, the corporate developments and certainly what we see in the

media. i'm in a big glass house at fox, i know what you're saying, i'm just the person saying that. heather, where is all this going is there a sense congress is slow to address these things, while in corporate america, say what you will, it's pretty rapid fire? >> i think what we're seeing on capitol hill is a reckoning. congressional leaders know that a current process for addressing the issues is not only slow but very flawed, and so that's why i think you see leaders moving fast to try to take as much action as they can, and they're kind of stumbling their way through it in the long-term. trying to figure out how do we address this in the future. neil: and they don't know how. john, one of the things the president mentioned to keep this fairly simple is. do you want another, as he's caled it a tax, nancy pelosi, chuck schumer liberal in there or guy dealing with charges

decades old, can't be proven, if we were tweeting and adding today, revelations notwithstanding the argument coming out today. >> here's how it plays out. the president supported luther strange who lost the primary by nine points. here's how it plays out. mr. moore will probably win. he'll go to washington. mcconnell and trump will sit him down and say congratulations on your win. they'll make him feel good. saying you are vindicated, make him feel good and big, now is the right thing, now is the time to render an even bigger service to the conservative cause. that is to resign. and that allows to the interim. neil: that's not going to happen, that will so -- and i'd like to just be a lot thinner, but it's not going to happen. so i don't see it sabrina. i understand, i've heard the talk, but i don't see it, do you? >> neil, the thing that is most

bothersome about this whole discussion is that we've become so divided as a nation people are digging their heels in deeper because they can't stand the idea of a tax-and-spend liberal. i am wildly supportive of government policies, that's why i think the principle has to trump policy and decide what kind of country we want to be and who we want as leaders. neil: watch closely, guys, thank you very much. in the meantime, we are worked up about the budget, how they're going to iron that out, eventually with the two week extension to get the ducks in order and tax cuts and whether a conference committee will get something to the president's desk by christmas, but has anybody been focusing on the administration's next big goals? infrastructure? it's going to happen. a guy with a big read on ideas, henry cisneros, after this.

. .

neil: all right. they're calling it a one-two sort of economic liftoff for the economy, if the tax cuts go through and then later next year an infrastructure plan, that could add a lot more goose to the economy as well. former housing urban development secretary under president bill clinton henry cesnaros. secretary, good to have you. >> good to be with you again, best of the holidays to you. neil: to you as well, sir. on the infrastructure goals the administration has and hopes to have a lot of bipartisan support there, there is so much we don't know but, this much we do. that kind of stuff can be stimulative if properly channeled. what do you think of what the president wants to do? >> well it would be hugely stimulative. it should have a lot of bipartisan support. our country not only needs the roads and power stations and airports and seaports and deepening of river channels and so much things. some estimates are $1.5 trillion

deficit in terms of infrastructure needs. that's unmet needs. and we know that we're dealing with, you know, slower broadband than other countries, seaports that need to be deepened for arrival of new big ships coming through the panama canal. issues related to road congestion. power stations that need to be transitioned from traditional to -- all kinds of projects. neil: there are a lot of projects out there. the idea bandied about, secretary, the so-called infrastructure bonds, companies, individuals could take advantage of them, sounds a lot like war bond back in early days of world war ii, to facilitate our rebuilding effort. what do you make of that? so much we don't know. devil in the details. this would be a way to encourage people to invest in this? >> well it is a way we saw it in

2008 when there was something called build america bonds. we saw a boom in infrastructure improvements needed to get the country out of that great recession i suspect there will be some aspect of that. president called for a trillion dollars in infrastructure. maybe 1/5 will be federal funding and perhaps ways to draw private capital of all kind, through the bond system, through pension systems and private commitments to infrastructure to deal with a trillion dollars of infrastructure needs. there is carry over to tax reform, in the sense, in the senate bill, the allow ounce what is called private activity bond, but not in the house bill. i would implore to private activity bonds to continue and another category very important

to the economy and americans generally, that is, of a fordable house. we have all over the country massive short fall in availability of affordable housing. these private activity bond are needed for that. i'm very hopeful when conferees get together that is something needed in the final tax reform bill. neil: many in the real estate industry, you mentioned, housing, sir, are concerned about idea especially high-taxed states, they will not be able to deduct state and local taxes up to 10,000, i guess. they're rejiggering that, something could change. housing industry fears that, they fear it a lot and that it could be damaging. do you? >> in something like a tax reform bill there, is immense complication, many moving parts. so easy tweaking something to have unintended effect. i think we'll see a lot going forward. what you mentioned in real estate is one of those possibilities. in the my -- municipal field,

cutting off advanced refundings, makes it possible for municipalities to save when interest rates drop. it's a problem. it can not be fixed in the conference because it was both in the house and senate measures but timing of it can be influenced. so the interconnection, neil, between what's in the tax bill, what matters in the public sector, in the municipal field, for example, and then when happens in corporations, in product activity, in competitiveness, as our infrastructure improves is very key. these things are all tied together. neil: they are tied together. can i ask you this. >> hope after tax reform the administration will transition to infrastructure bill. secretary of transportation elaine chao said it is the next priority. neil: understood. we have the craziness going on, seems every day someone in congress is resigning over harrassment issues.

al franken yesterday. trent franks, of course indicating he too will be stepping down. more revelations come out in corporate america as well. it wasn't too long ago, sir that colleague of yours, democratic senator kristin gillibrand had been saying, keep in mind, bill and hillary clinton made her career, came out against bill clinton saying this. >> is it your view that the president could and should have stepped down at that time given the allegations? >> i will -- yes, i think that is the appropriate response. neil: what did you think of that? >> we, neil, this is, this issue is very sad, very complex and it's somewhat generational. things that people thought they could do or were acceptable, women who felt that they had to be silent, all of that is changing. so it is very difficult to sort of roll back the clock, say, this applied in an earlier period and tried to apply

today's mores. clear many poem have been hurt in this process. women were abused in the office place, et cetera. and it's very important that we take action. so some of the things that are happening todayprobably in the realm of appropriate. this behavior has to stop. there is no place for it, but i don't think it ought to be politicized, and roll back the clock to apply 20 years ago. i would say that we do need to keep our eye on the country's business. these things need to be addressed but, in the meantime, there is some very important things, like this tax reform bill, and like the infrastructure bill, that will follow, that are critically important. i am hopeful, because i believe in miracles, yesterday there was two inches of snow in san antonio, neil, christmas snow. miracles are possible. neil: there is that. there is that. henry cesnaros, great seeing you again. >> great to talk to you. neil: meantime, the dow up about 89 points, almost 90 points, in

and out of cycle highs today, employment report, latest catalyst shows economy doing pretty well, pretax cuts of the president arguing, imagine what happens after tax cuts. after this. it's a race against time. and keeping it in the right conditions is the best way to get that fish to your plate safely. sometimes the product arrives and the cold chain has been interrupted, and we need to be able to identify where in the cold chain that occurred. we took our world class network and we developed devices to track environmental conditions. this device allows people to understand what's happening with the location, but also if it's too hot, if it's too cold, if it's been dropped... it's completely unique. if you have a sensor that can keep track of your product, it keeps everybody kind of honest that way. who knew a tiny sensor

could help keep the food chain safe?

♪ neil: boy, this has been one long dance, right? united kingdom and european union reaching a deal on "brexit" and how the brits go through with it. ashley webster, what does it mean. we didn't choose ashley because he has british exit. he knows a lot. he travels the world. what can you tell us? >> i'm really from iowa, neil. this is just phase one. this is supposed to be the easy part before they get to the difficult part talking about trade. this first phase took 18 months t has been painful this is the divorce that certainly strung out for some time. here's what has been agreed to between london and brussels. let's get to it.

firstly no hard border between the republic of ireland and northern ireland. they don't want those border control, checkpoints. they want free flow of trade. that could prove a little bit test at this down the road. northern ireland wants to be treated the same as the uk. for now no hard border in ireland. financial settlement, divorce payments will be anywhere from 47 to $52 billion. that is a very high amount. some critics not happy with that thirdly, what about the rights of eu citizens living in the uk? there are four million of them, three to four million, and vice versus, those uk citizens living in the eu? they will be protected. however, there is still a lot of questions about how freely they will be able to move around the eu, especially uk citizens living on the continent. so a lot of questions. there are those that said what happened to "brexit" means "brexit"? what happened to no deal better than a bad deal? a lot of critics of theresa may,

british prime minister, who if she didn't get this done would be politically in a lot of trouble but have the e uconn seeded on anything? it appears not. there will be a two-year transition, neil, between when the uk is officially out, which is in march of 2019. there will still be a couple of years, the uk wants what they call a transition period. the question is what does that mean? how does it affect trade? will the uk be able to freely trade with the united states and other countries around the world? in other words it's a big mess. it is getting drawn out. for those people who wanted a hard, hard "brexit," good biand so long to brussels they're not very happy about this tonight. by the way the european court of justice will still have a say over some of the legal issues in the uk, another very thorny subject for those who want "brexit" now and hard. neil: ashley, people go to britain they never got into the european currency. >> right. neil: they hung on to the pound and all. could you make the argument they

were well-prepared for this, just brits alone. what's your sense? >> well, yes, but i think there was, as the eu developed, i think it was a great sense, they enjoyed the fact they could go and live and work anywhere without getting permits or visas. that was a big attraction. of course as we know the vote, the problem has been immigration. this was key unfettered immigration of people coming into the united kingdom. those said we lost our sovereignty, we lost our self-control. that is still a key issue. by the way, that still sneads to be resolved. yes, we are still a member of europe but we don't have the euro, still have the british pound. it is convoluted and it will be difficult to get a firm deal. neil: thank you, my friend. good weekend, ashley webster. >> you too. neil: the president with all the hounds sniffing at administration who knew what and when, bob mueller summering around general flynn, trying to

get bigger fish you might think everything is moving closer and closer to the oval office. then again the president hearing that is not the case, and that it could be going the other way. that it is wrapping up, not barreling down. charlie gasparino, with the latest. >> not saying i endorse this. get this stuff on twitter you are saying this. i'm reporting essentially what we're maring from team trump, the legal team of team trump led by ty cobb, his attorney. we should point out last week i believe it was where flynn entered his plea deal -- neil: lying to the fbi. >> we reported that day, it was earlier that day that even as this was coming down the pike, president trump was telling advisors, excuse me, friends and advisors that he believes he was is going to get off. this whole thing will be wrapped up the russian side of this probe, his involvement will be wrapped up by end of the year. he will be clear. neil: where is he getting that? >> we should point out that sentiment still is coming from

the white house. what we understand is that trump's lawyers, including ty cobb continuing to tell trump that they believe the mueller probe will end, possibly by the end of the year. that all the -- neil: next couple weeks. >> all the conflicts, the plea agreements, the subpoenas, that being sent to who, wherever they're being sent to, there is huge debate over who got what type of subpoena about what, apparently a subpoena sent to deutsche bank, the bank that did a lot of work with president trump that all this is noise. what trump's legal team -- neil: when they say noise, the deutsche bank, back and forth rumor, is that true? >> deutsche bank did get a subpoena. now the question is, i understood it initially a request for information not necessarily a subpoena. but they did get a subpoena, the question is, what is it about? trump's lawyers are denying specifically about him. there are other reports it is

about business entities tied to him. clearly they got a subpoena. neil: deutsche bank did do a lot of business with donald trump. >> did a lot of business with paul manafort, another trump aide indicted and others. we should point it the smoke looks like it is heating up. neil: he has been told otherwise? >> his lawyers are continuing to say this thing is getting wrapped up. that he -- neil: trying to say things to calm the boss down or is it true? >> now we're in speculation. neil: understand. >> there are people close to trump, friends of his who actually trump has spoken to and told this to that i am being advised this thing is over, who believe that it is wishful thinking. that ty cobb and others don't want to anger a volatile guy, which he is. and there is others who think, donald trump, including friends of his, you know, sometimes operates in another realm. there are people who basically is a, he may be okay on the

narrow russian question. he has been advised by certain people of this. okay, you may be off on the narrow russian question, but as you know, mueller is expanding. neil: other things come up. >> there could be something else. neil: thanks, buddy. so much we don't know. but we'll wait it out. you heard about the day of rage protests, a lot in response to the administration and its position on jerusalem that it is the capital as it sees it of israel and we'll build our embassy there. they promised it would be rain, and it is rage they have got, after this. [gunfire] [shouting] often reveals a better path forward. at wells fargo, it's our expertise in finding this kind of insight that has lead us to become one of the largest investment and wealth management firms in the country.

discover how we can help find your unlock.

approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs.

you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything.

the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide and start gathering the information you need to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪ neil: the white house. president swearing in the new homeland security secretary, kirstjen nielsen. we're looking into anything else he might be saying. some of the developments here, we have not. if that happens, and he is going to say anything, we'll pass that along. again, she is the new homeland security secretary, just sworn in moments ago. an issue do doubt be on her radar, the ongoing day of rage. protest turning deadly, at least three killed, when protests of unrest over the president's embassy decision to move our

embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem, thereby recognizing jerusalem as the capitol of israel. that is not going down well in the middle east, certainly among palestinians organizing day of rage. evener germany and france, and the pope saying not time to push this. even though democrats and republicans advocate it. fred fleitz, what do you think of all this response? >> neil this is what the palestinians do. they burn things, throw rocks. a couple weeks they will calm down. then it will be another excuse to burn things and throw rocks. what we have here, is a president who said to europe and u.n., foreign policy establishment, time's up. time's up. the palestinians don't want peace. we're not longer putting off the important decision of moving our embassy to israel. that send a decisive sign to rogue states around the world as well as china and russia. neil: one thing i found, you

know this stuff better than i, when i heard people complaining this would interrupt the peace process. i was looking around i don't think we have a peace process but fine, but what do you make of that? no that is exactly right. the israelis have made multiple, very generous offers to the palestinians for peace. the palestinians never take it. they won't recognize israel's right to exist. what is interesting about the president's decision is that he now has a bargaining chip if the palestinians really don't want us to move our embassy to jerusalem before status is negotiated through talks, they can come to the bargaining table now and negotiate in good faith and recognize israel's right to exist. i don't think that is going to happen. neil: if you don't mind me hodgepodging here, skipping over to other developments, the olympics first and foremost, our ambassador to the u.n., nikki haley was addressing what is happening there and concerned that it could be dangerous and withholding whether we should

send our athletes there. how do you feel about that? >> i think we have to go. i think we have to be on alert. i don't think we should give in to intimidation from north korea. if north korea was to choose to attack the south during the olympics we were flatten the country. i think the north koreans know that. i understand what ambassador haley is saying. we need to stand with our allies in south korea and make it clear we're going to attend the winter olympics. >> with the russians not there for different reasons, ioc doesn't want them there, kicking them out. the nhl is not sending players there. so there is an argument that now with vladmir putin, looking at another six-year term he could exert a great deal of pressure on athletes in his country not going at all even under individual efforts. and compel other countries to follow along where going might just be deemed a waste of time.

what do you think of that? >> well look this is a very important event for south korea. south korea is one of our closest allies. we need to support south korea here. if putin will convince other nations not to go. wouldn't surprise me, putin likes to pull things like that. for me there is no question. we send our olympians to the olympics in south korea but we have our military forces on high alert in case north korea tries something. neil: what do you make in the meantime how we deal with some of these pressures in and out of north korea, and the time presumably running out? the south koreans, for example, have offered, and had offered in the past to share some olympic venues with the north koreans that was slapped down, which leads me to believe the north koreans are trying to plan something or being disruptive during the olympics. i'm not saying militarily crash the party but i'm saying to do something. what do you make of that? >> i wouldn't be surprised if

the nor koreans test a missile during the olympics just to, you know, engage in some type of gesture to disrupt things. i don't know whether they would test an underground nuclear device, but maybe that is a possibility. beyond that, i think that is as far as the north koreans would go. neil: but that would scare off a lot of countries, right? >> well, i think that we simply have to be strong and say to the world we're not going to let the north koreans intimidate us. neil: good point. you're right about that. fred, very good seeing you. thank you very much. >> good to be here. neil: look at dow, we're up about 86 points. strong jobs data helped. growing optimism as well tax cuts are looking more like a gimme and talk as well that the upper income could see some tax relief after all. we're on all of that after this.

:

. neil: all right, before handing things off to my colleague trish regan, a couple of updates for you. president will be having a big rally in pensacola. not too far from alabama. he said roy moore is his guy and controversy notwithstanding, better than the democratic guy and republicans as well. focusing on that race as we'll be on this channel next tuesday beginning at 8:00 p.m. until whenever, as the votes come, in we're monitoring it. means a lot to you and your money as well, could make a difference between 52-48 senate

in favor of republicans, we'll be following all of that and looking at bitcoin and plans for it to get more acceptance even futures trading on that. the guy who is handling that will be our special guest as well on monday. to trish regan now. trish: hey, neil, a lot going on right now. the labor department releasing november jobs report, and i'll tell you, you know what? these numbers don't lie. this is very, very good news for all of us and our economy. we are experiencing, everyone, the strongest job market in over a decade, and i'll tell you it's only going to get better if tax reform actually happens. i'm trish regan, welcome, everyone, to "the intelligence report." the u.s. economy adding 228,000 jobs, beating wall street estimates as the unemployment rate holds steady at 17-year low. 4.1%. markets are trading higher as investors express confidence over the latest batch of strong