okay. we have the dow industrials right now down exactly 100 points. a little unusual for a monday morning at any point in the last 18 months. normally we go up most days. normally go up most mondays but not today. neil, it's yours. neil: stuart, thank you very, very much we're keeping an eye on that. what would be the tipping point, what would get you stock investor look at alternative investment like bonds? the idea goes something like that, the more you find a reason to be in safety of bonds where you have uncle sam backing your investment up, the less you look at a market run far very, very fast. now is the tipping point 2.7%. could it be 2.8%? could it be up to 3%? hard to say. usually consensus is wrong. they say 3% could be the tipping point. we heard from a number of top tier investment managers say that will not do it.

will confirm the economy is growing up at a nice clip. when interest race back up it is reflection underlying economy. we'll look at the pros and cons in the next couple hours. we'll take a look at some data that supports stocks continuing to run up. as i just said, investors seeking out safe alternative like bonds. whether this is the day to do that, hard to say. this much is not. enough to weigh on stocks. a backup in rates enough to say for a lot of folks to say, maybe, maybe, we should step back a little bit from this party. but every time they have done that, they have regretted doing so, because people pounce right back in. record number of individuals pouring money into this market. better than $32 billion solely into equity fund. if you want to include etfs and the like, that much is north of $60 billion. obviously individuals are coming in. there is contrarian argument, when individual come into the market they miss the party. that is not always true by the way.

a lot of individuals come in early to a party like this. as the case with this one. just much, much more over the last few weeks and months. let's get a read of that. the president will, despite today no doubt be crowing about the economy, the markets, this uptick in activity and excitement that he experienced first-hand when he was in davos, seemed like everybody and his proverbial corporate uncle was sucking up to him get part of that american financial juggernaut. so the president will talk up that. he will talk up infrastructure. shared ideas how republicans and democrats can work together. hope springs eternal ahead of a big speech tomorrow night. blake burman at the white house. what he is hearing. hi, blake. reporter: pretty light load for the president. that is normal leading into the state of the union. that will allow him to spend time working on the speech. white house aide told me the president spent bulk of this weekend gearing up for tomorrow night's speech. the president had a dry run in opening weeks of his

administration, then it was coin ad joint address to congress. there will be a handful of items to get into tomorrow night. among them jobs, economy, national security. but also two main ones that are being watched heading into this speech. immigration and infrastructure. so much so, that at an event at white house moments ago, one of the two public events, swearing in of new hhs secretary alex azar. the president was asked about his speech and the very first topic he brought up is immigration. the president acknowledged if a deal is going to get done, something on daca, something on immigration in general, he is going to need and republicans will need the support of democrats. >> going to be bipartisan. republicans really don't have the votes to get it done in any other way so it has to be bipartisan. hopefully the democrats will do it, enough of them will join us. we can do something great for daca and immigration. reporter: neil we expect to hear

the president outline some of his infrastructure principles t remains uncertain leading up to this exactly what this white house or exactly what this administration wants. on one hand, you have president, some within his administration, talking about $1.7 trillion infrastructure package. others talking about a one trillion dollar infrastructure package. pretty big gap there. at heart of it, $200 billion of direct federal money. they want the rest leveraged by incentives through public/private partnerships. remains to be seen with this immigration and daca deal needs to be struck, if that sort of taints the waters heading into an infrastructure package. neil. neil: thank you, buddy, very, very much. as blake was talking we got a confirmation from political landscape, an institution, congressional legend is stepping down. the 6th prominent committee chair indicating to do so, house appropriations committee and

new jersey congressman rodney burring. his family is long steeped in history. his father was a congressman, senator. his relatives go back to the formation of this country. they are actively involved in government. a lot of people are interpreting down, a lot of incumbents anxious about their own fortunes in this environment. that makes 33 prominent republicans stepping down. a good many of them heads of many committees. mr. four he was facing a battle, everyone, his uncle, young single mom, background in the military, dedicated war hero challenging him on democratic side, polling quite well in largely republican district of his. he is stepping down, in other words, not seeking re-election. he will serve out his term. -- fray.

we have hadley heath manning. "u.s. news & world report" contributor ashley pratte. don't mind me pouncing on this news, new jersey republican, top republican opting not to seek re-election. what do you make of this? >> this will be a big problem for republicans moving forward, neil. i do think this will have serious implications not just for 2018 but for 2020. we're already seeing reports from the koch industries and all these different groups traditionally have these different pacs, koch has been pretty much a huge republican donor, supporter, lifeblood, so to speak for the republican party, fearing they will lose these majorities in the house and senate. these types of races, these people that are stepping down who have been strongholds or have been institutionalized in some ways in the senate and in the house stepping down does have some concerns i think at this point because they do fear what ends up happening if one, the president continues to poll

as low as he does, doesn't get out of the slump. what is the future of the republican party? it is very factionized. a lot of people wonder what the future of it is. a lot of these people who have been in office for some time making kind of hard decisions at this point. is it beneficial to myself and my family to continue serving if i don't know where exactly the direction of my party is going? neil: in other words, he had a good run. leave on top. that would be the case. fray link haasen. one thing for good names to leave, ins case of a lot of prominent republicans. republican national committee can't find republicans to replace them, big names. we saw that, you know certainly in a number of high stake races recruiting big names to replace the big names who are leaving is proving very, very difficult. what do you make of that? >> it would be great for both parties to get a fresh stable of

new faces i'm afraid. many times we talk about who is going to run in 2020, we're recycling a lot of same names in politics and americans get kind of tired of this. but if you're a republican, you're looking conflicting signals politically. on one hand you look at president trump's approval rating, doesn't seem to be very popular as an individual, as a politician, yet you look at some of his policies, for example, the tax reform legislation which is gaining popularity. consumer confidence is good. all of our economic indicators are looking pretty good. americans are feeling better about the direction of the country. whether or not that translates to support for republicans or they warm up to the idea keeping majority parties in 2018 and 2020. overall americans weighing how they feel about the economy and president trump in the next election cycle. neil: looking at investment outlook, rewarded as investor go

against the consensus or prevailing view. the prevailing view on the house republicans will lose it on midterm elections. i have no doubts they will lose seats. i just don't see them losing it. i based that on improving sentiment towards the tax cuts, better and higher expectation on the part of corporations that share the loot so to speak. we're a couple weeks a way companies showing that to their workers. improved net pay. i think a lot of that resonates with people or will register with people. they will start feeling better. i'm not saying the number is enough to boost republican majorities. i think that will stave off the day. what do you think? >> well there is no denying that the tax plan really helped republicans especially in some of those districts where it was looking maybe hillary clinton won or they were very close. that tax plan is coming. it is showing up in people's pocketbooks and republicans are really hoping that rides out. what there is concern about, this is in some of little bit

more conservative districts is the base turnout. is tax reform enough to get the base that put donald trump over the top out? especially if something like immigration they might give citizenship or legal protections which is something that conservatives in the far right of the party tend to be against, will they show up? there is concern about base. there is no denying that the tax plan really helped republicans. neil: no, no, you raise a very good point. ashley, that usually these midterm elections it is other side brings out the vote because they're galvanized or angry enough to come out and do so. not so if you're feeling pleased with everything, which shows up more in presidential election i suspect. play that out. what do you think? >> this is going back to the point of the republican party being so factioned right now. that, i think is the greatest problem here. you have the base at first very happy with their decision to elect president trump, who came out to support him. wanted the change. wanted the swamp drained.

they get very upset now we see this sort of bipartisan push to move toward a deal on immigration. that is one of the core tenets of trump's political agenda when he was running as a candidate. you will feel a lot of tension. as you mentioned, neil, the midterm elections typically does not favor the party that is the current officeholder of presidency which at this point is republican. so i do think this spell as bit of disaster for republicans moving forward. to hadley's point, tax reform is proving to be very successful. we're seeing a lot of corporations over the weekend giving thousands of dollars of bonuses to workers who are hourly workers. i think we'll start seeing some benefits toward that and some people rethinking what a republican economic agenda can look like and how that it can benefit the country. neil: i know i'm old enough, a lot older than all of you ladies, i do remember there was disconnect between the mainstream media, even "wall street journal" at the time attacked ronald reagan's

tax cuts too big, too risky, too dangerous to quote a journal editorial at the time. when people saw them, companies saw them, individuals saw what was changing in their net that was whole another thing. in other words people heard berating, seen for themselves, i like this. they might down the road worried about the debt or all this other stuff going to be a problem but, there was a delayed response. individuals felt not listening to media reports disparaging those cuts, but, their own experience, do you think, hadley, that is one factor we just can't appreciate it maybe because it is still too early? >> oh absolutely. i mean in america we have two side and people generally vote the party line but in the middle we have a lot of voters who decide elections. they're basing their decisions how have i experienced this? what does this mean to me personally? there is no factor more important than any governing party or any challenger. neil, that will be the deciding

factor in nip future elections. neil: eliza, how about the markets themselves? do though provide on any wind for the republicans? >> they're certainly doing very well and that is something president trump rightfully keeps talking b if you're an investor, right now you're feeling pretty good. neil: yeah, well-put. ladies thank you all very much. i do want to harken back, for what it is worth, 1992 presidential election, very true. everyone was afraid to challenge george bush, sr., who at the time early on had 89% approval rating. who would be foolish enough to challenge him. they called the eight dwarfs going to challenge him, the tallest guy who was this guy named bill clinton. he had no chance in hell. you know how that turned out. we have a lot more after this. building a website in under an hour is easy with gocentral...

...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy.

>> if you're not going to pay for the tax cut, if you're just going to borrow the $3 trillion, that it would take to pay for it, then it is perfectly appropriate -- neil: you guys never paid for all the spending you did, austan. you guys never paid for all the spending you did. added 10 trillion to the debt. >> that is not correct. that is not correct. neil: did the debt go up? did the debt go up? yes it did. >> i told you perfectly well we were concerned how to get the

deficit down once we got out of recession which we did. neil: i have to respectfully disagree. we have two different memories of this. part of the fun if you're not missing my live weaken -- level weekend show. someone said the "cavuto live" logo looks like the turbotax logo. maybe they're right. if you find the public officials taxing. you have to watch. former cbo director, douglas holtz-eakin on that. it is interesting to go back and forth. i find it odd a party in power bemoans spending or tax cuts, is a little rich, having said that his point was, and is that it's way too early to say these tax cuts are the great elixir. what do you think? >> i think it is true it is too early to see how big the impact will be. we know the direction of the business tax reforms. they're exactly for what the

doctor ordered for a country bleeding headquarters and bleeding intellectual property overseas and having earnings parked offshore. i'm quite confident it will go in the right direction. the larger point you did the math. the obama administration left behind a budget where spending was growing faster than the economy ever possibly could. the result was $10 trillion in projected deficits over next 10 years. in that situation they didn't address. indeed the only thing they really did was these caps on discretionary spending if you notice every couple years we raised. they don't actually work. neil: we can't even stick to that. that backup financial backbone as you and i gotten into in the past. let me ask you a little bit what the president wants to do as the we look debt piled up under administrations here. one of the things i noticed, that the president really is going to go as far as he is certainly gone thus far overtures to the other side

particularly on infrastructure, calling for a trillion dollars in added infrastructure spending over the next 10 years. 200 million up front from uncle sam. where is the money from that coming from? >> i don't know. i think that this is not in line with the genuine problems that face is looking forward. i know they want to leverage as much private capital they possibly can. if you get into bipartisan negotiations and bring into democrats, turns into bidding war, i don't think that end wall. we have targeted infrastructure program. use existing resources to do that. you know, i think, we know the major drivers of the debt in the future. they are the large spending programs, medicare, medicaid, social security, affordable care act. we saw one run at those. the house bill last year, for example, did major reforms to the affordable care act and medicaid. that is something that is going to happen. the only question is when.

neil: the only question is when is right. douglas holtz-eakin. thank you my friend. good seeing you. you might remember white -- i will get it right, whitewater investigator ken starr saying that the president could be in a pickle if it turns out he is lying, that lying is absolutely ground for a president to be impeached. he was referring to the possibility, the president was looking to fire mueller. now of course he never did. mueller is still in that capacity but the read from robert ray, another whitewater independent counsel who might have slightly difficult take on all of this. hi, i'm mindy kearns. it's great to finally meet you.

nice to meet you too. your parents have been talking about you for years. sorry about that. they're all about me saving for a house, or starting a college fund for my son. actually, i want to know what you're thinking. have a seat. yeah. knowing that the most important goals are yours. with 15,000 financial advisors, it's a big deal. and it's how edward jones makes sense of investing.

neil: did you guys see the ratings on the grammys last night? record low 30% viewership from 2017. wasn't that hot in 2017. so maybe it was all the heavy-handed politics or whatever. maybe the acts. people didn't hear or know a lot of songs, they weren't really into it. there you go, grammys getting slam mid. lawmakers divided over legislation that protects bob mueller. this comes at a time where people wonder, when the president says one thing he never really wanted to fire bob mueller that might alone show a lie. depends how you look at it. ken starr who was handling the investigation of bill clinton some years back, saying that lying a absolutely grounds for a president to be impeached. looking at the president as role what he said in public and what he did. keep in mind whether the president advocated this or not,

he says he didn't, this was something others argued batted around in the white house but obviously never acted on it, well, mueller is still there. former whitewater independent counsel robert ray what to make of this. always good to have you, robert. >> thanks. neil: what is the legality here? if a president talks about firing a special prosecutor but denies every en10 teared it, if starr is saying that is impeachable event? >> if he is is, shouldn't be. neil: starr, correct? >> starr i respectfully disagree with him. i didn't agree at the time 20 years ago, and i don't agree now. your role aspects counsel or independent counsel to uncover facts to decide whether criminal proceedings are warranted. you are not supposed to make judgments about what the american people do or think whether it's a good idea to be lying to the american people.

that is not to say i'm in favor of that. obviously it is a serious issue but in my judgment that is not obstruction issue, as a matter of criminal law, nor an impeachable offense. neil: if the president was interested in firing bob mueller, obviously one of his chief counsel you do this, i'm outta here, we don't know what happened. we do know mueller is still there. >> right. which should be the story, seven months later there is all this news, this has now been dumped into the public domain by somebody for some reason. neil: maybe to incite mueller's wrath more inclined to go after him? >> i have no idea. i never found it productive in washington where leaks are coming from. neil: i don't know whether bill clinton wanted you fired. he didn't like. >> you sure he wasn't happy about me. he wrote in his book i was another independent counsel trying to extract a pound of flesh. no president likes to be investigated. neil: would it have surprised you even behind the scenes, president, a food lawyer in his

own right, battling it out with aides if i fired him. >> vying to actively get rid of me. neil: it wouldn't surprise you? >> wouldn't surprise me not affect the way i conduct my office. neil: really? if mueller is hearing talk that president wanted to fire him. >> i don't think it should affect a professional doing a professional's job as a professional prosecutor. neil: do you think bob mueller is professional? >> i do. neil: you don't think something like this if true, we don't know, will go after the president. >> i don't think it will have any effect about his judgments. neil: lindsey graham, said you do something like that -- >> that is different question. neil: i understand, he is saying that would be nuclear. >> well it may very well be nuclear in the political process, which is to say everybody understands whatever the president's powers are and he can fire anybody he wants within the executive branch, that does have political consequences. neil: the president had the power, richard nixon, fired a bald cox, famous "saturday night massacre." >> that is not a crime. neil: realization from the fallout which is political.

>> political realization, it has aspects to it may constitute abuse of power but it is not a crime. nobody suggested duke the water gate era, for example, that richard nixon's act firing archibald cox was a crime. for some reason in the current environment people are contending an effort or an endeavor to fire special counsel mueller would constitute the crime of a obstruction of justice. my view that is baloney. that is just wrong. neil: the president said he is open, this president, to being interrogated or interviewed. >> right. neil: more to the point by mueller. what do you think of that? >> i think they have made a political calculation way certainly in place as early as ty cobb joining the president's legal team they can survive this there is no evidence of collusion. no provable evidence in a criminal case, no provable evidence of obstruction of justice. the president should outlast the investigation. the fastest way to get that accomplished, otherwise you prolonging thing agony, submit o

the interview at appropriate time, would signal end of investigation, and hope is, you and i talked about this for months. neil: right. >> the goal has got to be in the political process to get the investigation to a conclusion before it has adverse impact on midterm elections. neil: did you interview president clinton? >> i did. neil: how did that go. >> first it was done under oath by predecessors in my office, what was then ken starr's office under oath as a substitute for a grand jury proceeding. i spoke to him about the resolution of the case before he left office. that part went well t was a hard covers. neil: it was tense, right? >> sure. it is adversarial. as it should be. i have a job to do. and so does the president. neil: i'm told by people in the know that guys like you, are really shrewd and can get people into a corner. the argument against the president's supporters, even our own legal analysts have no axe to grind, say it would be a mistake for donald trump to do that because he could be setting

himself up for -- >> ask martha stewart. if it were only about the legal issues, no white-collar defense lawyer would make their client available to investigators, so investigators make out of what current state the situation is a crime when none exists previously, right? you don't want to give your client an opportunity to lie under oath or false statement subject to penalty for prosecution. on other hand there is not exclusively a legal judgment. there is political aspect. that the president and administration can not make this investigation go away until he is shown to be someone who cooperated fully, including he personally cooperated by making himself available. neil: have all our presidents in these kind of situations eventually talked to a prosecutor? there weren't that many. >> richard nixon didn't and he was almost impeached as result of it, and resigned. neil: wouldn't have matter? >> wouldn't have matter. bill clinton certainly did an survived it. that is the best precedent here. donald trump has made the

calculated judgment he will make himself available. it may be contrary and strictly to legal advice he needs to do that he will do it in a setting where it is under oath and that there is transcript. so there is no dispute what the questions were. neil: what do you think mueller would do after that? you were asking short to the point questions. you didn't speak in legalese. almost disarming the way you handled things. i wonder if that is the mueller approach. don't go on with long-winded questions, with gotcha moments. trip people up unintentionally? >> i think bob mueller learned from experience. i certainly did. when president clinton was examined under oath in that grand jury appearance that went on for far too long. prosecutors spend way too much time in the weeds. he was very good at parrying the blow. neil: almost had monosill lab i can answers. >> that is answer. you either have it or don't have it. pointed questions. resolve it, gather the facts.

do i think there is any chance under the sun as a result of the president's testimony under oath that there is going to be an indictment or a charge against a sitting president? no, i do not. neil: wouldn't mueller look more to the point for any sign of obstruction of justice? >> i think he is trying to gather information. it will be included in a report. that report will be delivered to rod rosenstein and in turn release it to the congress and congress released it to the public. neil: hard to pin the president's exact or direct role if any at all with the russians but they might prove through comments, hey, go light on this guy, that is the best they have. even that might be specious argument? >> that is subject to interpretation. my view you could never prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously that carried with it corrupt intent to violate the obstruction statutes. i don't think you will ever going to show, even be able to show, in the event the president left office you decided to

charge name that constitute ad obstruction of justice. he has a whole host innocent reasons why he took personal action -- neil: the president is going to be coming straight from a meeting. i did want to get did the politics environment ever influence you? bill clinton was popular president even through -- >> neil this, is subtle distinction. any prosecutor in that situation who is not mindful of fact your decisions are in a political environment and doesn't pay attention to the politics much it is a fool but that doesn't mean that i made decisions based upon what the outcome would be in the political domain. my job was to make a decision as a prosecutor about what was appropriate to do. neil: do you think ken starr thought of that when his investigation morphed into a relationship with an intern and the president lying about that, that he lost people, whatever the merits of that, that he lost people because it veered off course. >> it veered off course, because once you travel out of your

appropriate role -- neil: that is what happens, right? >> it can happen you have to be very careful. neil: how did you avoid about that. >> be careful about making statements lying to the american people warrant investigation by congress i that is not my role. it is based on set of facts there is proof of a criminal case. neil: if mueller thought that, that would be bad. >> in my judgment that is bad, out of role, sort of thing what happened to jim comey. when you travel out of role you lose the confidence of the american people to accept your judgments. neil: all right. thank you very much, my friend. we'll have more on this here. we're getting word fbi director mccabe has teched down. we don't know details. fbi director mccabe, maybe this will come up in the spray of this meeting. [laughter]

>> thank you very much, everyone. i'm honored to be joined by secretary tillerson and ambassador haley, general kelly and general mcmaster to host a very distinguished group of united nations security council am ambassadors from all around the world. we'll discuss a cooperation, range of security challenges including the north korea, very importantly. countering iran's destabilization activities in the middle east. ending syrian conflict. confronting terrorism. the success of the united nations depends on independent strength of its members. these are very strong members. some are new to the counsel. we're leading on the global stage to renew this founding principle of sovereignty. the united states has done a lot over the last year. we've, i appreciate all of the congratulations, on a economic front, on a financial front it

has been incredible what's happened. it is like a whole different place. it's booming and it is going to continue as we have a long way to go, but it is really doing well. i appreciate it. we're taking the world along with us. we're helping the world. why some of the country, even many countries throughout the world are doing much better. that's what we're doing. my administration proud to work with you. we've already done a tremendous number of coalition buildings and united nations security council in particular is very important to us. the power and respect that it has all over the world is very, very excellent. there is much work we have to do. earlier today the ambassadors viewed a display of iranian missiles and arms that the regime transferred to its militant allies in yemen and later today, they are going to view syria atrocities exhibited at the holocaust museum.

they have seen the missiles from iran they're looking at some of the atrocities taking place in syria. we'll also discuss what more we can do to defeat the taliban. i don't see any talking taking place. i don't think we're prepared to talk right now. it's a whole different fight over there. they're killing people left and right, innocent people are being killed left and right. bombing in the middle of children, in the middle of families, bombing, killing all over afghanistan. so we don't want to talk with the taliban. there may be a time but it will be a long time. we're, we're all out and that is taking place right now. and it is a whole new front and, it is a whole new set of principles we're being governed by. when we see what they're doing, atrocities they're committing and killing their own people and those people are women and children, many many, many, women and children that are totally

innocent, it is, it is horrible. so there is no talking to the taliban. we don't want to talk to the taliban. we'll finish what we have to finish, what nobody else is able to finish we'll be able to do it. thank you all very much. we appreciate it. we're going to have a tremendous discussion about that and other subjects. thank you. >> thank you all. >> did you know mccabe is resigning. >> thank you. thank you. >> thank you. thank you. thank you. neil: we thought we would get more on that. fbi deputy director andrew mccabe has stepped down as the number two player at fbi. nbc news is reporting, now "the new york times" and "washington post" as well. we just confirmed that as fox news. we don't know the impetus for this. he had been odd man out, of course a obama administration selection. then again when president trump fired fbi director james comey he met briefly with mccabe in

the oval office asked him who he voted for. we are told, "washington post" in the 2016 election. the president denied that there are a lot of ins and outs as we get into. what we don't know the exact reason for this. he will stay on, using his extended vacation days continue to serving on fbi payroll but not in number two capacity. former whitewater independent counsel robert ray still with us. he was kind enough to stay with us. i'm asking you to react to story details which we really don't know, with what do you make of this? >> i think last where we were, the president had spoken to the attorney general and asked the attorney general to have the fbi director terminate mccabe. and the word back was, that if you know, christopher wray, the fbi director's view on that, if you're asking me to do that -- neil: then i will leave. >> i will resign. that was the end of it. now the story seems to suggest

that mccabe is voluntarily stepping aside which is probably if the country's best interest. i don't know how he could effectively continue to serve in that capacity. that is probably the right call. i'm, in the political process people will make call kinds of suggestions how this all happened, who was pushing and so on and so forth i think that is all we know at the moment. neil: now he of course is a obama holdover. the president had his new team, oddly enough, after comey left and we had new director, the irony was, that you bring back bob mueller who served on both democrat and republican president and was well-recorded by both sides. this politics, does it come into which president you answer to? >> if the public domain of course it does. there are appearance issues. mccabe is fairly well-respected. he found himself in a situation being a principle in connection

with the investigation of hillary clinton and her, you know this question of the emails with the state department and the fact she is presidential candidate, he has his own apparent political leans. neil: he was supporting and his wife was running as a democrat. 2015 virginia state senate bid. it shouldn't matter. >> it shouldn't matter but at that level when it goes really beyond that to, a spouse running for office and campaign contributions and terry mcauliffe, the fact you're leading investigation on behalf of the fbi with regard to something of obviously paramount national interest was whether or not hillary clinton committed a crime, you know, it is not an irrelevant factor. we saw, for example, special counsel mueller act quickly to remove people who were politically-biased with regard to the fbi. the president has right to unbiased investigation. neil: does he have the right to ask the question who mccabe voted for if that is true?

that is according to "the washington post"? >> that gets closer to the line of the hatch act. neil: did anyone ask you who you voted for? >> no. and they shouldn't. but the point is the president of the united states is sue -- sue which generous he getto side who remains and. neil: might be unseemly but still legal? >> it is not illegal, no. neil: thank you my friend. thanks for sorting this out. andy mccabe out as the fbi number two. only middle of the day. more after. let's get started. show of hands. who wants customizable options chains? ones that make it fast and easy to analyze and take action?

how about some of the lowest options fees? are you raising your hand? good then it's time for power e*trade the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. alright one quick game of rock, paper, scissors. 1, 2, 3, go. e*trade. the original place to invest online. today, the new new york is ready for take-off. we're invested in creating the world's first state-of-the-art drone testing facility in central new york and the mohawk valley, which marks the start of our nation's first 50-mile unmanned flight corridor. and allows us to attract the world's top drone talent. all across new york state, we're building the new new york. to grow your business with us in new york state, visit esd.ny.gov.

to grow your business with us in new york state, we use so why do we pay touters thave a phone connected. when we're already paying for internet? shouldn't it all just be one thing? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you can get 5 lines of talk and text included at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. choose by the gig or unlimited. and now, get a $200 prepaid card when you buy an iphone. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfnitymobile.com.

neil: mccabe is stepping down. i don't know all the reasons for that. but how does this change the environment there. let's ask former deputy assistant attorney general tom dupree. hitting you with a lot on very little. what do you think happened here? >> well i think it became pretty much impossible for andrew mccabe to do is job, neil. law enforcement, in general, fbi in particular. these folks really pride themselves not being news story. they like to focus on their jobs, not be the subject of chatter on cable news all the time. clearly the spotlight for better or worse gone on mccabe.

i strongly suspect he ultimately concluded he couldn't function. do his day-to-day job in the way he really should be able to do it, given political pressures coming down on him. neil: eric holder, former attorney general responded to this, fbi deputy director andrew mccabe has been a dedicated public servant who served his country well. distract attention from legitimate criminal inquiry does long-term unnecessary damage to these foundation of our government. i guess we'll hear things along party lines to that effect. what do you make of it? >> what i make, neil, on one hand, you obviously want as much transparency as you canoe the law enforcement process, the decision-making process particularly pertained to the russian investigation. clinton email investigation, you want to get as much transparry send -- transparency. separate people who might have

acted with improper political moat activities. we saw texts people on mueller's team. you want to separate people who really acted from improper political motives from the rank-and-file, day-to-day, fbi law enforcement agents. it is my view if there is a problem over at the justice department it is not widespread, it is not endemic. i think what we need to focus on going forward, identified individuals that might have played improper political role. doing so does a way doesn't tarnish the fbi and law enforcement as a whole. those institutions are critical to the safety of our nation. neil: we're learning from john roberts, our white house correspondent, that the white house were taken by surprise by this announcement, had no idea it was coming. what do you make of that? >> if that is true, it is heartening we saw chris wray gave push back according to media reports that the white house was pressuring him to fire mccabe, thank you very much, i will make my own personnel decisions. i thought that was the right

stand for director wray to take. neil: he said forced on him, reports were he would quit. >> absolutely right. so if the reports that the white house was caught off-guard are true, then at least that is some evidence that this was not something that was really forced on the bureau but that it was mccabe's own decision to retire under his own circumstances, at a time of his own choosing. neil: we're learning from this "washington post" story, this might be a "washington post" story, that the president was curious to find out when he met with mccabe, for whom he voted in the election. first of all, what do you think of that? secondly is that legal? >> well, i don't think, you know, as general matter you should be asking people those sorts of questions. particularly people who are, acting in a non-partisan, non-political law enforcement role. so if white house was enforcing any sort of litmus test and looking into the voting backgrounds of people for these positions i don't think that is the right way to go. i don't think anyone in this country wants to see law

enforcement get politicized in that sense. neil: did anyone ask you, tom when you were there who you voted for? >> no. neil: while i have you, who did you -- no kidding. tom, thank you very much. smart guy to have on a day like this. "barron's" editor-at-large, jack otter a lot to get into. if the markets are panicked about this. have funny way to showing it back to where they were the what do you think of this. >> not a big surprise. sessions was putting pressure on wray to get rid of mccabe. we've seen comey pushed out, now that the number two is pushed out -- neil: what if there are hints there was a force out? >> hints? if you don't think he was forced out i have an awesome bridge a little bit downtown would tell you. neil: that alone would give people pause, to think -- >> i don't think it's a big surprise. i think markets have accepted that we're in this strange atmosphere and we still don't yet have a constitutional

crisis. a lot of weird things are going on but everything seems to be working more or less like it is supposed to. until we see a change there, i think markets march on and look at growth and dollar and interest rates, all those things markets are supposed to look at. neil: how do markets feel about the intelligence agencies getting questioned? gets back to number of people say never question them, never question good people that work there. yet if you held to that view, think about it, jack, during the pentagon papers release, accepted everything the pentagon was saying about body counts and all that stuff you would have been snookered. this is very different situation here but what is wrong with that? do the markets sense it is healthy to have these back and forths? >> i think there are many quotes, i will not get exactly right, democracy or capitalism are the very worst system except for every other one. the reason it works you have a free press revealing the pentagon papers. you have democrats, republicans,

far left democrats, far right republicans everyone pushing against each other. neil: question everything and everyone. >> i don't think the president should be asking civil servants, especially with an independent agency might be investigating the previous president, almost president or current president, should be asking basically for political loyalty. imagine if obama was asking fbi people, are they on his side or not? we would be up in arms. i think -- neil: there is a lot we don't know. that is the charge that the president has denied. let me ask you a little bit about these markets. there is this feeling that interest rates are backing up. so maybe, maybe, people are getting nervous about this because, whether it is 2.7 on a 10-year note, maybe 2.8, could be three, at what point do investors say, you know what if i go to that, i might get lower return, it is backed by the government, markets look toppy, what? >> at some point interest rates

will rise enough it gets scary for the market. right now everything is going right for the stock market. and that is a dangerous situation. when you want to buy stocks when everything is terrible. right now what is the new great thing that could happen? maybe it will turn out that the consumer ends up with more money in his or her pockets as a result of tags cut. earnings will continue surprise. revenues will continue to surprise on the upside. you have global synchronized growth. you have tax cut, all these things, weak dollar, immense help to anybody selling overseas. what is the new force powering market for another leg. tough worry about that. as you say suddenly bonds offer a little bit of attractive return, i think people start saying maybe i ought to take a little money off the table. or not chase stocks any higher. neil: do you think, that the markets factored in resigned themselves to republican losing the house? do you think it is too soon to say that? >> i think it is too soon to say

that. there was a great column in the "times," democrats go for the jugular, their own. david brooks. he said, obviously unpopular incumbent of one party, what happens historically? the opposing party does very well. average is 32 seats in the house. neil: right. which would more than tip. >> the democrats are doing everything they can to shoot themselves in feet. market playing that maybe they won't win. neil: jack otter, "barron's" editor-at-large. dow down7 -- 87 points. andrew mccabe resigning as number two at the fbi. the fallout on stocks? zilch.

: . : . hi i'm joan lunden.

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. hi, i'm the internet! you knoarmless bowling.lt? ahhhhhhhh!

you know what's easy? building your website with godaddy. get your domain today and get a free trial of gocentral. build a better website in under an hour. all right, did he just say goodbye on his own, andrew mcquaide is stepping down as the fbi director. the white house briefing is coming up. i imagine one or two questions might pop up on this is you. blake is at the white house. we are told he didn't see this one coming. is that surprise. >> we reached out to medication folks and there wasn't anything ready at that time. he was asked about his reaction to the news and he did not respond. it remains to be seen whether or not this caught president trump himself by surprise as well. we will ask sarah sanders 15

minutes or so from the white house. this comes from the reporting of jake gibson at the department of justice. it's safe to say he was removed from his post. it was known that have been widely reported that he was set to retire, he had 30 years on the job at the fbi in march and, from what we are being told, it is called terminal leave that he was just put on. basically cash out your unused time whether it's vacation, sick time, i don't know but he was told to cash out his time. admin that mccabe was removed from his post as the number two at the fbi. it also remains a big question at this hour is the timing and all of this secondarily because it is the reporting of our colleagues at fox that the fbi director chris ray went down to the capital yesterday to view the four-page memo

that devon nunez compiled. whether this has anything to do with that, i don't know. the timing, nonetheless, incredibly interesting. the president has been harshly critical of andrew mccabe for months. in fact, his latest tweets were about a month ago in which he question the timing and all this. mccabe's retirement in which he also took direct aim by saying how can the fbi director, andrew mccabe, the man in charge be given $700,000 for the campaign by clinton puppets during investigation for the president has been no fan very publicly of mccabe. now mccabe, the number two at the fbi, no longer on the job. >> thank you very much. the fbi -- when the white house has its briefing concerning a good chunk of

this will be back. we have a former fbi director on the phone. chris, what do you think of all the. >> some of this is speculative and never but he knows that and only chris, ray and andy mccabe know for sure, but it sure does look compelling that if chris ray saw the information in the memo yesterday and now he steps down today and gets on the glide path to retirement for summary with 30 years, that memo likely had something to do with it or it could've been plans, but i don't think so. i think this is an intervening event, that being the reading of the memo yesterday. >> if it was the president who kind of force this issue by saying what he had said in conveying, how does that play out in an ongoing investigation involving bob

muller. i know where it's supposed to b be, above the politics of the back-and-forth but what are your thoughts on that. >> i know that chris ray, from the very beginning since he took over at the fbi has been very careful to dispel the notion that he will do the president's bidding. i believed him on that. i work with chris ray and he is my counterpart at the department of justice and i believe that. i think this has no impact on the special counsel investigation. to some people it will lend criticism to the fbi and i think those have been unfair because they stem from the bad judgment of a couple of people at the bureau under james comey. i don't think this has any impact on the special counsel. i think the removes a very controversial issue and i think chris is happy to have this past him. >> years will go into what's legal or not versus what doesn't look good, this washington post story where the president had asked mccabe in 2016, what you think of

that? >> highly inappropriate of course, politics, we know that this president doesn't really have filters. i'm not making a political statement, we just know that whatever is in his brain is coming out his mouth. i can see him asking that question, i can see anything i'm not going to answer that question is none of your business. >> if the fbi director is supposed to be taken at face value for saying he was forced to get out, that he would leave, or even with the case of muller, trying to anticipate that, obviously muller is still in his job. mccabe, no longer, where do we stand right now? on the investigation, on whether of this influences about bob muller and pursuit of what he has to do, we are all human beings at our core. what you think.

>> knowing robert muller he will go full speed ahead on his mandate and that is to turn over every rock and see what happened. if criminal activity was afoot. >> but the criminal activity, i just want to be clear from what i heard from investigators, especially if you are the president your clinging to obstruction of justice. proving anything else might be more problematic. do you agree? >> i actually think the interview, the act of giving the president a chance to get his statement on the record, i'm one of those people who believes the president is not the actual target. i think they are getting ready for an indictment of some kind. i don't it will get to the level of the president.

he's been giving statements every day on twitter and there's really no need to interview him. and it's just something that has to do an investigation like the. >> i've heard from those legally advising the president , some feel it's a trap. you say. >> i say he's been giving interviews every day to the fbi, every time he put the statement on twitter, every time he says something to somebody. >> that's a very good point. you're probably right about that. >> he's on the record. he's just rounding things out. doesn't make any difference but he won't incriminate himself with five lawyers present. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. let's get the read on all this. new york city minority. [inaudible] the white house was taken by surprise by this. they have not been fans of

mccabe and the president is not a fan of mccabe. does any of this move the needle one way or another. >> i think it makes it very difficult for democrats to try to dissuade the public that these conspiracy theories are something more substantial. they been telling us that this memo is something that we shouldn't be paying attention too, but you can't ignore the fact that on sunday christopher wray goes in views the memo alleged to be about andrew mccabe and then the very next day mccabe resigns. these two things are too coincidental to be ignored and they can't be dismissed. >> charlie, the markets don't seem to care. what you make of that. >> as well they shouldn't. this is, i would decouple the russian nonsense from the trump russian nonsense from the trump economic record which has been pretty dang good. i'm not in favor of everything

in that tax bill, i think the personal side is pretty crummy but he did some really good things with business taxes. >> so all this other stuff is noise? >> yes. unless it becomes an access dental threat to president trump himself and then you will see the markets trade-off. what i mean? he has to leave office or he may get indicted but if you listen to a lot of people, this is where, when you peel back on all the process layers, the russian stuff seems not focused necessarily on him. it seems to be he may be under investigation but the bad stuff occurred under him. the markets are saying that. that's why they are trading off barely. >> fair enough. let me ask you, the state of the union address tomorrow night and it might provide new drama for the white house briefing. to think the president, given

the receptors he received and growing talk about cooperation with democrats on in the structure, that they can work on derails? >> can you hear me? >> i'm sorry, i didn't know you were talking to me. >> i do that all the time. i'm in my own little world. do you think all this political can work together in the president can set that up. >> you know, i think he will have a hard time. you continue to talk conspiracy theories and have this back-and-forth, these jabs at one another that he does, it's going to be hard for the american public to swallow that trump is going to reach across the aisle and really get things done. and the gop tax plan is a great example of this, we were supposed to be promise long-term wages and instead it's just giving taxes to the rich. >> be careful with that.

>> i'm not afraid to speak the truth about that. >> i think some people are getting surprised by the fallout. >> first off, let me set the record straight. the rich people didn't get a tax break. a lot of people are paying a lot more taxes. corporations got a tax break, small business got a tax break guess who corporations and small businesses higher. the higher average americans. and so, you can see already in the numbers. >> but that's not a fact. >> hang on to that thought. i want to get, i want to squeeze the thin. varney marcus was on and he was ripping democrats for downplaying all this corporate , i want you to react. >> i can tell you that a thousand dollars is more than meaningful. they could be paying the mortgage, it could be paying for a car repair. it could be paying a past-due bill. these are things that the pelosi, schumer group don't

have a clue about. that's why they lost the election. it's as simple as that. they are so busy with their elitist in san francisco in hollywood and new york city and all these money deals that they go into, week after week after week and clinton never knew about the real people out there. that's why they lost the election and that's why they're going to lose the next election for the same reason. >> what you're saying is that democrats don't realize when they say things like chump change or crumbs that their sounding elitist themselves and they might. [inaudible] >> there's a lot of unexpected consequences of this, companies providing upwards of 4 million americans and you don't appreciate. >> i think the real truth is that what they were saying is that a thousand dollars is significant, but these are bonuses that were expected to be paid out anyway. >> no-no, no. >> i have no political ax to

grind but i have to tell you. [inaudible] >> you are not seeing long time wage increases. >> i have no political ax to grind. i don't even flip over myself so joe, i'm telling you, this was not expected. companies doing what they're doing right now, they have their own reasons. they are sharing it. i don't think the magnitude of that was forecast even by the white house. >> look, my father-in-law is a home depot employee at the middletown branch in new jersey. i'm thrilled about this thousand dollars and it is actually something that is meaningful to my family. as was the extra $50 i got in my paycheck over the weekend. democrats have spent four months trying to tell us that this was crumbs. they essentially become characters of modern marie

antoinette's that trying to tell people the tangible benefits they are seeing in their paychecks do not matter. then you have some like varney marcus who is proving them all wrong. >> no offense neil, no offense karen i should say, you like to hand out the crumbs. that's the difference. what's gotten the democrats all up in arms is that capitalism is actually working where the private sector is handing out the benefits of lower taxes to average people, not "big brother" governments which you love which, by the way, never really comes through. the crumbs that you would rather hand out, your crumbs to welfare and everything else and have varney marcus who's actually created jobs make people richer. just admit it. >> the one thing i must say, some of these companies are simultaneously laying off workers, simultaneously closing stores. you can amid that, you can see

that, we can pull the facts up you have bonuses that were expected to be paid out so my point is i would rather have a job than a thousand dollars. [inaudible] they're going to get laid off anyway it just doesn't make any sense. >> if they stick to this message they're going to lose. >> the bottom line is, obviously if they do this, the other thing against it is if they stop at this and people then look their paychecks beginning next month and see a little more money, the hope in the administration is that that will compel more people who are inclined to vote against the party to be less inclined to do so. you see a situation where republicans, because of this hang on to the house. >> look, the generic ballot may say one thing but start looking at some of the seats they want to flip. you have i was first district,

four or five seats in pennsylvania that the democrats are targeting, you will go into those areas and try to convince people that the actual benefits they are getting from the republican party is not real. the party of resist has become the party of no credibility and i hope karen stays with the dnc because this is a message i hope to hear from them. >> i don't work for the dnc. >> i think the tax plan is a little more collocated than that. listen, this is pretty good for americans, the average americans are getting bonuses and the government is not handing out peanuts to them. that's great. here's where it gets weird. some of those blue states have republicans, there's going to be tax increases there. we will watch closely. karen, you're right, charlie you're right but it's too early to tell. right now the administration is seizing on this. we will see how it sorts out. the dow is down 69 points. more after this.

oh, and there's the closing bell. (sighs) i hate missing out missing out after hours. not anymore, td ameritrade lets you trade select securities 24 hours a day, five days a week. that's amazing. it's a pretty big deal. so i can trade all night long? ♪ ♪ all night long... is that lionel richie? let's reopen the market. mr. richie, would you ring the 24/5 bell? sure can, jim. ♪ trade 24/5, only with td ameritrade. when heartburn hits fight back fast with tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum tums chewy bites.

they always refer to me as master sergeant. they really appreciate the military family, and it really shows. we've got auto insurance, homeowners insurance. had an accident with a vehicle, i actually called usaa before we called the police. usaa was there hands-on very quick very prompt. i feel like we're being handled as people that actually have a genuine need. we're the webber family and we are usaa members for life. usaa, get your insurance quote today.

>> the white house briefing is minutes away. it's running a little behind schedule probably the sudden resignation from andy. they say the white house wasn't prepared for this. it could be a big set up for tomorrow state of the union address.

adam is on capitol hill with the latest. >> there has been some movement on capitol hill from a group that calls itself the problem solvers caucus. this is a group of bipartisan, democrats and republicans who have proposed a solution not only for spending caps to fund the government, but also on immigration and the daca deal. we will show you two pictures of the cochairs of this caucus. this morning they released their proposal which is different than what the president had originally said that he wanted. for instance, they are calling for the daca student's, what the president said would be 1.8 million, the original numbers about a hundred thousand, they would he allowed to earn citizenship under the proposal but you have to have entered the program prior to june 15, 2012. they are also suggesting a down payment on border wall security and building a wall

of $1.615 million to hire more border guards. remember, the president wants $25 billion for the border wall. then, on chain migration, the president wants to end chain migration where immigrant can send for relatives to come to the united states for this proposal would allow for that immigrant to have a wife or husband come as well as children who are not married below the age of 21. homeland security secretary kiersten pearson was talking about this, she will be meeting with people in the hell. the democrat negotiating the immigration issues in the senate. here's what she said about this moment in time and getting to a deal. >> we cannot let them set the way. now is the time, we cannot afford to kick the can down the road any further and we can't allow partisan politics of either party to prevail over principle and what is best for our country. >> she is expected to possibly meet with republic and leadership on the house side

of the capital, but the bottom line is there are different versions of potential immigration bills. whether you can sell it to the more hard-line members of the different political parties, that has yet to be seen, but even the president is saying there has to be bipartisan deal on immigration. >> meanwhile nancy pelosi is taking a little heat over saying that the immigration plan is a way to make america white again. it's hard to move forward with remarks like that. do you see a deal cobbled together between the two sides? their political rhetoric notwithstanding. >> i've been pessimistic about this for a while. there there should be a way to do this because a deal actually makes sense. you amnesty the people who signed up for daca because that program is illegal but that's on obama, not on them.

they came forward and gave information. legalize those people but, like every amnesty, it would cause more illegal immigration and have downstream chain migration as people started sponsoring their relatives a few years down the road so you have to deal with both of those pieces. that's what the enforcement stuff is for. that's what ending chain migration is for. it's all one piece. it should be able to work with the democrats seem to be willing to throw daca under the bus to keep the pipeline of future chain migration open. >> or to prevent the wall and not something when i talk to conservative republicans on this issue, they are not too keen on doing that without something on a wall or more security at the border, but that's one thing that makes him democrats on coil. where's all this going. >> interestingly, remember, during the shutdown both chuck schumer and luis gutierrez

both said they would reluctantly. [inaudible] >> ben schumer took that out. sure, but the point is that they are willing to cave on, i think. it's future immigration that is key to their political prospects as they freely admit to import more voters and more clients. >> but any self-respecting democrat on this issue is going to have a hard time saying how he or she voted against something that is going to secure potential citizenship down the road to 1.8 million people. >> if the price is the long-term reduction in the importation of their new voting base, then yes, i guarantee you they will vote against it even if it is amnesty. >> when that be suicidal for them? then we would be facing something on them and they would have to explain that or are they so trapped to their party base that they've got to do what they've got to do.

>> i think that maybe what plan b is in the white house because i get the sense they really do want to get this through, but if they don't, if the democrats kill it, i think the talking point for the white house is to say look, we did this, we met them more than halfway and they through the dreamers under the bus in order to keep chain migration going. >> i'm wondering, in this environment, how does this logo. i don't want to be that crass about it, but they see a president making these overtures, these efforts, some might believe nancy pelosi does, he still intent on making america white again, do you see it moving the particle needle? >> i'm skeptical. i'm willing to be proven wrong, but look, why do the democrats surrender during the government shutdown? because the issue of the daca in the dreamers isn't all that important to most people read when you do a survey, a large

majority of people, and i would answer the same way if i were surveyed say sure, they came here as kids and grew appear and i'm okay with amnesty for them. but how important is that most people. it's not very important. i don't know one way or a another will have much particle effect for the white house. >> i think advocating it it's not worth shutting down the government. >> exactly. >> weird stuff. mark, thank you very much for clarifying a couple things. speaking of clarifying, we're waiting some sort of input on andrew mccabe firing at the white house. while largely unexpected we are told the white house was stunned by this development and the relationship with gabe has been chilly at a minimum. they report that the president had asked mccabe who he voted for in the last election.

the president has denied that, but the back-and-forth is undeniable. it's a mess there at the fbi and now growing concerns about who could be next. what's coming next and how does all this affect the bob muller investigation. i'm thinking... i'd like to retire early. let's talk about this when we meet next week. we came to manage a trillion dollars in assets under care, by focusing our mind on whatever's on yours. after a day like this, most people would just order delivery. but you have a recipe for redemption. with blue apron, any night is a chance to see what cooking can do.

i cannot imagine managing my diabetes without my dexcom. this is the dexcom g5 mobile continuous glucose monitoring system. a small, wearable sensor measures your glucose every 5 minutes and sends the data to a dexcom receiver. dexcom helps lower a1c and improves quality of life. if you're over 65 and you have diabetes, you should have a dexcom. if you get a dexcom, you're going to be very glad that you did. visit dexcomnow.com to learn more.

you're going to be very glad that you did. ...from godaddy! in fact, 68% of people who have built their... ...website using gocentral, did it in under an hour, and you can too. build a better website - in under an hour. with gocentral from godaddy. the white house briefing any moment, big news that sort of turn this day upside down on what was to be the discussion about the president's state of the union address tomorrow, making overtures to democrats and news that the number two of the fbi, andrew mccabe has stepped down. that will likely dominate events. still, the president and sarah sanders will kick things off

talking about the good news that the president will do a little crowing about. market watchers join us backstage. all these different reads that the market can't sustain itself and now interest rates are backing up, another reason for investors to look out, that's the latest concern. what you think. >> is nothing wrong with the economy that would cause a crash but there was an in 2000 or 2000 either and there wasn't in 1929 or 1987, but the bottom line is the market is up a lot. do you think the music will stop? it up a lot and everyone knows that and you think it won't take a whole lot for people to start running for the doors and they will look for something to blame. it would probably be, if short-term rates keep going up, those are the rates that you set auto loans on an adjustable rate mortgages and credit card rate spread they're going up right now.

it gone up a lot compared to long-term rates. it could lead to a slowdown in the economy that corporate tax rate cuts would not fix because there won't be any corporate earnings or corporate earnings will be going down of people stop buying. >> the other argument, to keep this going, is that these companies that are sharing the wealth with their investors and their customers and workers is going to give another leg to this. what do you think? >> dislikes not over yet and i think it will take more than just a day or two parts to end it. this is a generational move. not and how much we are appreciating, but in the fact that there's been literally no volatility since february of 2016. markets like this don't to stop overnight. here at this point where its strength against strength. the long-term economic impact

in the long-term fundamental factors don't matter in a very short term momentum driven market. we haven't had a 5% decline and was two years. you will have to get some sort of rally first. even a thousand point decline which used to be a huge move is not even 4% today. it will take time to really kill this leg let alone the whole market. >> you mentioned something that i found intriguing and that's the idea that at the moment there's nothing on paper that says the correction or hit is coming. we learn after the fact to.the eyes across cities after that but one thing that comes up, despite the interest rate backup we've alluded to is the fact that individuals are pouring into this market. normally when you see that, the average folks are the last to join the party and the first to get drunk. what do you think of that? >> is more important than valuation. stocks are expensive and they could tank but with the

average investor puts money is toward the end of a party. if you look at neutral fund flows going all the way back to me you would rather be investing into a market where people are pulling money out of stock funds like in 2009, all the way through those years. you don't want to be in the hot market that everybody wants to find a tech funds are value funds so when you see investor enthusiasm and speculation, it's not the levels it was in those years but it's definitely not, you're near the end of the party. there's no more money left to come into the game when you see signs of speculation in startups and tech stocks and in this crypto currency bubble which is almost as big as a sub prime bubble which could cause a crash in the economy. >> you can also say timing is everything. if you been looking at a nine year double market and you're concerned you're getting in at

the top, perhaps it doesn't matter. what are your thoughts on that? >> i think it definitely matters. think about it. there are many legs to a bull market. valuation, or how expensive the market is is a horrible timing tool. markets get expensive in the '90s in 95 and 96 and that lasted another for five years. sentiment certainly used to be a very powerful sign that when the market gets to you for it, people get too excited, stocks pull back. you are at the point where the market has steamrolled every single short-term sentiment study for the past 18 months. again, is generational. so even if i agree that valuation is a whole market killer, you still have price which is the final arbiter. it has done nothing wrong and market leadership have done nothing wrong so even if two

legs of the market have been crab, you still have these two powerful legs left and until markets begin to stop going up or they begin to form cracks in the pavement, you have to buy weakness. >> okay, i want to thank you both very much. they are there in the white house briefing room which is running a little bit behind. while some say it's not shocking, we are told the white house was caught off guard. we will have more after this.

♪ take off for mexico with expedia. ♪ one click gives you access to discounts on thousands of hotels, cars and things to do. like the royalton riviera cancun for 54% off. ♪ everything you need to go. ♪

expedia.

♪ hey, what are you guys doing here? we're voya. we stay with you to and through retirement. so you'll still be here to help me make smart choices? well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement. >> were still waiting for the briefing. it is running way behind schedule maybe having to do with this prize revelation that andy mccabe, the number two at the fbi is leaving. we are there when they're there. in the meantime let's go to philip wegman. before any of this mccabe news, talk was about what the

president was going to talk about tomorrow night, the economy going his way, more bipartisanship, what you think happens now. >> i think andrew mccabe is gone but he's not going to be forgotten. he is expected to be named in the memo that house republicans are pushing to be released so it wouldn't surprise me if the administration or republican critics of the department of justice would point to his early retirement and say it's tantamount to some sort of admission that he got wrapped up in the wrong thing. i think this is more evidence that the administration is going to used to bolster their case that there is something that needs to be looked at more closely at the fbi. >> i suspect as well that this is going to be, for the white house, a distraction it does not want. whatever the thoughts are mccabe, this takes the attention away from many of

the things that the president wanted to crow about tomorrow night. >> i think that's why we are not seeing this white house press briefing. they are getting ready to figure out how they are going to handle this curveball. honestly the president wanted mccabe gone but whether or not the administration wanted to drug list right now, i'm not certain. look, the president has the propensity to go after individuals, even to his own detriment when he distracts from pushing his agenda. we will see how it plays out tomorrow night. if you are a speechwriter in the white house right now, you have to be scrambling because this is something the president will have to address. how that changes the entire speech will remain to be seen. - the temptation would be to tweet something about this but i hope not because economically, he does have something to probe out. even his credits with a can take all the credit but it is happening. we certainly. [inaudible] is not getting lost here? >> i think the goal for the president, obviously it needs to be to plug his accomplishments during the first year end pitch what he wants to achieve going

forward. the scandal is something he wants to put behind him. if he dwells on this he will be taking away oxygen from the argument that he wants to push. this puts them in a very difficult situation and it will be interesting. does trump ignore this or does he lean in and take swipes at his naysayers. >> some of this other stuff that is beginning to resonate with voters which was the tax-cut in the media, but a lot of people are thinking more favorably about, and the wind at his back that he got where number of foreign companies are eager to invest, how much of a selling point is that going to be for him? >> i think you hit the nail on the head. this is a 60 minute speech that he has scheduled for tomorrow but he can only cover so much. if you are a voter in indiana, missouri, west virginia, one of these red states with blue

senators, you're probably more interested in what's going to happen to your paycheck than this ongoing drama in washington. the president has got to address this but if he leans in it will be to his detriment because the thing that matters right now is the check that people are getting from their employer, whether or not the economy is benefiting them currently. i think you could make the calculation, even though he probably wants to take a swipe, i think you might see this finally as a distraction and let it go. >> let me ask you real quickly, the reaction about what corporations are doing. some of them are for their own selfish interest but some acknowledge they're doing it because they got such a sweet deal from this tax-cut that they almost have to go beyond sharing it with their shareholders. it does have a pay it forward theme that has benefited up to 4 million americans. hasn't resonated? all of this is happening prior to individual seeing it in their paycheck.

>> so, republican suddenly have their work cut out. they need to sell that tax-cut. it's a little bit of column a and a little bit of column b. yes, they got a sweet deal and so they kind of need to show their gratitude. that is the cynical way of looking at it. the other thing is, the economy is doing better and wages, if your worker and your wages are not increase increasing, i think you will start looking around. it's a market affect and apolitical effect in right now there seems to be enthusiasm for what the economy is doing and more optimism moving forward. >> you had recently written that the president have given democrats everything they wanted and i guess it would be risky to him turning -- to them turning on him. >> if you look at the deal put forward, democrat said they were willing to compromise on the wall.

and now the administration is asking for just about that much, and you also have president trump who seems to be waffling on one of his core campaign issues when it came to immigration. he is willing to let into million dreamers for amnesty if democrats move away, especially when you see all of the heat that trump is getting from his own base in his own right wing, i don't think they're going to get a better deal. i don't think they will have a better opportunity to negotiate than right now. >> they can't take yes for an answer so the have to play on his reverse. >> thank you so much. it's good to see you. >> we are waiting for thatac white house briefing. some of the issues may not even make the light of day. more after this. edy nasal swabs shorten colds with a snap, and reduce symptom severity by 45%. shorten your cold with a snap, with zicam.

let's join the press room. >> they will invest their extra money from the trump tax-cut into their daughter's education savings. evelyn rodriguez, these two couples are the parents of two beautiful young girls who were brutally murdered by ms 13 gang members. corporal matthew bradford, in 2007, he stepped on an ied

while the ploidy in iraq. he was blinded by the blast and lost both of his legs. after multiple surgeries in therapy he became the first blind double amputee to reenlist in the marines. john bridgers, mr. bridgers founded the cajun navy in 2016, nonprofit rescue and recovery organization that responded in 2016 to flooding in south louisiana and in 2017 to hurricane harvey in texas. he and his team have helped thousands of people across the south. david dahlberg, mr. dahlberg is a fire technician who saved 62 children and staff members from a raging wildfire that encircled their camp in southern california. officer ryan served as a police officer in albuquerque new mexico. in his six years on the force, he has been shot twice and experienced several near-death encounters. he and his wife adopted a baby from parents who suffered from opioid addiction. breaking down walls between drug addicts and police

officers to help save lives. ashley leopard rescued dozens of americans during last year's devastating hurricane season. agency j martinez is a special agent for homeland security investigation unit. his investigations have led to more than 100 arrests of ms 13 gang members were prosecuted for crimes including homicide, assault and narcotics and weapons trafficking. staff sergeant justin pack was part of a team clearing ied's from territory previously controlled by isis. when one of his compatriots was struck by a blast he rushed to their side, saving their life while risking his own. preston shark has organize the placement of more than 40000 american flags and red carnations on soldiers graves as part of his goal to honor veterans in all 50 states and

to challenge others to join the flag and flour challenge. these siblings started saw manufacturing solutions 20 years ago. thanks to the trump bump in the economy they were able to grow to new heights in 2017 and thanks to the trump tax-cut they were able to give all of their employees larger christmas bonuses. some of these individual stories are heroic, some are patriotic, others are tragic. but all of them represent the unbreakable american spirit and will inspire our nation to continue growing stronger, prouder and more prosperous. with that, i will take your questions. >> in the last hour it was announced that andrew k this up and down. will we get reaction from the white house? at the end of the december, the president was tweeting about andrew mccabe in a less than praise manner. what he is he thinking about?

>> we have seen the numerous reports as all of you have and any specific, i can tell you none of this decision was made by that of the white house or any. [inaudible] i will refer you to the fbi who will be making a statement later today. >> you said they were not involved in the decision but the president seem to be involved in a public relations against campaign. >> the president stands by his previous comments but in terms of the situation today, as i just said, we've seen the reports just as all of you have. we don't have any specific comments and i would refer you to the fbi for any specific on the things that are taking place today. >> does that mean the president was not informed by anyone that this was happening? >> no, he has not. >> can you say definitively that the president did not play a role in andrew mccabe stepping down. >> yes, i can say he was not part of this decision-making

process and we would refer you to the fbi where christopher wray serves as the director, which as i said last week and i will trea repeat again today that the president has full confidence in him and has put the decision of the fbi in his hands. >> does the president convey that he wanted to fire robert muller. >> not that i'm aware of. >> thank you. so, just to fina finish this loop, no one at the white house contacted the fbi about mccabe, no one had any discussions about his tenure at the fbi? >> not that i'm aware of. nothing specific to mccabe in his stepping down as of today. that is was being reported. >> sir, what would you say to critics who believe that this white house and this president had almost a study pressure put on the justice department, put on the fbi since the

president came into office on the special counsel investigation. whether it's conversations with jeff sessions office about recusal or about the desire for robert muller to go away and now with indicate, there are even reports that rod rosenstein was feeling pressure from the white house. it sound like there are multiple officials at multiple levels being pressured by the white house, by the president. what would you say in response. >> i will say what i've said probably 100 times before and continue to say hundred times today, the white house has been fully cooperative and will continue to be fully cooperative. in fact, we have gone above and beyond many times, and certainly we have done every thing we could. the way white house has. >> whatthis notion the president has been applying pressure for

months? >> the only president applied pressure to get it resolved so you guys and everyone else focus on things americans actually care about. that is, making sure everybody gets the russia fever out of your system once and for all. you're reminded once again there is no collusion and move forward to focus on things like national security, the economy and solving the immigration crisis we have here in our country. reporter: no obstruction, nothing improper when he came into the office about this investigation? >> no, we've been very clear on that. reporter: president continues to have confidence in the man he appointed deputy attorney general rod rosenstein? >> when i said, you guys asked question about number of individuals when the president no longer has confidence in someone you will know. on the memo. reporter: i do have another question on the memo. the house intelligence committee could vote as early as today to release the memo chairman nunez

reportedly crafted. the house rules contemplate the president would get five days to determine whether he has any cause to object to its public release. has, what is the current thinking, what is the current level of white house involvement in this cities? can you shed any light on the process between this white house and capitol hill with this question? >> no one at the white house has actually seen the memo. it would be hard for to us make a decision, or to speak about it before. that it would take place right now. we'll let the house process play out. if and when it is time for the white house to weigh in, we'll do that through the proper protocol, making sure we follow legal process and but again, we're not to that point in the process yet. reporter: sarah, two questions, following up on that, is the white house, you said you have to wait and see, but is the white house open to the idea of release of this memo to the public? can you say in the state of the union address the president will io