right? if my boss is happy, then i'm happy. charles: yep. neil: i don't know where i'm going with that -- [laughter] a little bit of friday wisdom. thank you very much, my friend. let's take a look at what we've got going here. the president is having this powwow right now with automakers and, you know, this has gotten to be, actually, a tense relationship because he has gone e over backwards for them to ease cafe standards and the like, fuel requirements, ease regulations. and the word is from the white house, and it's been espoused in "the wall street journal," elsewhere, that they haven't shown a lot of gratitude. and right now they're juggling with the president how to handle the new standards which aren't going to be that really onerous for them with california that wants to keep them quite onerous, or at least in their eyes, to keep very stiff fuel requirements going even if it is at variance with the 49 other states in this country. they want a little bit of help from the administration, and it's gotten to be a bit of a tension convention because the

president is saying, you know, you guys are making money hand over fist because i've sort of unshackled you, freed you to do whatever you want, to sell, and this is the thanks i get. i'm kind of trivializing it, but it is not warm and cozy. you can see that if you read some of the comments that come out of these meetings. we'll see. it's way too early, but we're monitoring that, because he's meeting with them. he's also going to be making it very clear when he talks with drug industry ceos that drug prices are too high. so two republican cottage industry benchmarks, if you will. by and large, the auto industry, and you could talk about the biotech, the drug industry, they are coming under his sights today. so that's gown to be interesting -- going to be interesting, how it plays out. wall street doesn't seem to care if it's a corporate civil war, the dow up about 54 points. we're on route to what will be one of the best weeks we've seen in the market since march. of course, the big theme this

week has been pretty much the big theme over the last couple of weeks, energy-related issues, oil and, obviously, by walking away from that iran accord, oil prices moving up. not so much today, but certainly week over week. gas prices moving up as we get into the busy memorial day and, after that, summer driving season. and oil and related issues moving up. so where are we going with all of this? we have the former deputy assistant secretary of the army, van hipp. all right. and erin is here. i'm told you might not be here, so i'm glad you're here. >> oh, good. thanks. neil: let me go to you, van, first and get your read of the reaction of the fact that the markets are pretty sanguine about, all right, if this means we're going to get nasty with iran and it means higher oil prices, we can deal with that, investors seem to be able to deal with that. so maybe some of the shock and

awe response some feared hasn't materialized. what do you make of that? >> yeah, the dollar's up and, look, i think they're seeing that american leadership is back, and america's back. neil, i've got to tell you this, a little more optimism, i just got off the phone with governor david beasley and the world food program. they just got out of north korea this morning. he told me that, quite frankly, he was very surprised that they saw more transparency, they had greater access than they've ever had before, there was a sense of optimism in pyongyang that they want to turn the page. the governor said now, look, proof is in the pudding. and this is not a u.n. bureaucrat, neil, this is someone who president trump recommended to the united nations. he told me, man, i was surprised they let me go where i went. neil: very interesting. >> this is a big deal. neil: all right, rich, for the markets it's not been a worrisome deal so far. what do you make of that? >> oh, i agree with everything that's been said so far. i think it'll turn out that north korea could be a

dynanic -- dynamic emerging market. a few decades ago nobody would have imagined southeast asia would have boomed the way they have, so countries can make turn arounds. i'm kind of optimistic about that. but i think you're seeing the big tech companies that seemed to be under siege a month ago are back, they are a disproportionate part of this market. and perhaps what the market is also saying, is that the -- it's not a sure thing that the democrats are going to take the house in november. neil: i don't know, that's an interesting -- >> -- republican majority in the house. neil: that's an interesting development. maybe they're getting ahead of themselves, and it's still early. there's no consensus either way, but that view that the blue wave was a slam cung, maybe not. -- slam dunk, what are you hearing? >> democrats are more pessimistic more about 2020 than they are about 2018. what you're hearing is they're still pretty confident that they will get the house, maybe by a

smaller margin than predicted a couple of months ago. obviously, what we're hearing more is on the senate side of things they probably aren't going to be able to flip is the senate, but it could be close. there are races that the democrats could lose -- neil: we'll see. it depends on what this guy says meeting with i auto executives at the white house. >> thank you very much. we have at this table the biggest car manufacturers in the world. all represented by their top people. and it's nice to see you again. we have probably my first meeting was with you and a group, and we've made a lot of progress in the last period of a year and a half. we're working on cafe standards, environmental controls, we're working on how to build more cars in the united states. we have a great capacity for building. we're importing a lot of cars, and we want a lot of those cars to be made in the united states. i think what we'll do just very quickly, because we're represented by so much media,

we'll just run around the room real quickly, and you can introduce yourself and the company. we'll talk for a couple of minutes, and then we're going to talk privately. but we are going to, again for the media, we're really talking about environmental control, cafe standards and manufacturing of millions of more cars within the united states. for michigan, for ohio, f pennsylvania -- for pennsylvania, all of the different places. south carolina, north carolina. so larry kudlow everybody knows. go ahead, elaine? >> elaine chao, secretary of transportation. >> i'm scott becker with nissan north america. >> great company. >> i'm -- [inaudible] volkswagen group of america. >> very good. thank you. >> bob -- [inaudible] >> [inaudible] >> by the way, thank you. you're moving to michigan. >> yep. >> from mexico. >> yep. >> that's what we like. isn't that great? he's my favorite man in the

room. [laughter] big announcement. i tell you, the people in michigan very much appreciate it. it's a big deal, leaving mexico, going to michigan. that was very well received. i appreciate it, thank you. >> [inaudible] from bmw. >> mary barra from general motors. >> yes. >> [inaudible] >> rick -- honda, north america. >> [inaudible] alliance of automobile manufacturers representing -- [inaudible] >> sean bozzella with -- [inaudible] >> mr. president, brian smith -- [inaudible] >> yes. >> scott pruitt, epa. >> mr. president, thanks for having us, jim hackett, ford motor company. >> we know you well. so these are the biggest in the world, and we're going to be talking to them, and we want hem to build more cars in the united states and also build them here and ship them overseas. we're doing a reverse act, and that's going to be something, i think, that's happening. and we see it happening. a lot of it has to do with the

great tax cuts and tax incentives that people have been given. and we have other incentives coming. so we appreciate you all being here: thank you very much, everybody. thank you. >> [inaudible] >> do you have confidence in mr. pruitt, mr. president? >> yes, i do. thank you very much, everybody. thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> are you concerned that nafta may adversely affect -- >> we'll see what happens. we're negotiating nafta right now. i've never been a nafta fan, as you know, nafta's been a terrible deal for the united states, and one of the worst bad deals in this country. we have some bad deal. we can look at any deal, bad deals, but now we're going to good deals. nafta has been a terrible deal. we're renegotiating it now. we'll see what happens. mexico and canada have -- look, they don't like to the lose the golden goose, but i'm representing the united states. i'm not representing mexico, and i'm not representing canada.

but nafta has been a horrible, horrible disaster for this country, and we'll see if we can make it reasonable. thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] neil: all right. looking at this meeting, harry kudlow probably no doubt -- larry kudlow probably no doubt saying i just wanted you to be a little clearer on that. what the president was saying on nafta, he doesn't like it. there had been hints that he was negotiating something that would be closer to what he wants. but if you've been reading the mexican press and the canadian press right now, they think they're far, far, far apart. in fact, a very telling, you know, article in the toronto press that they don't think a nafta accord will be had this year, a new one. so a lot of them are going their own way here. the president, of course, indicating that that's a deal that is damaging the united states. he doesn't like it. he made a quick reference, one

shouted a question about scott pruitt, still supports him, epa administrator. he is there with the auto guys, of course, because deals with environmental issues, cafe standards, all the rest. the president has been very good to this industry and, no doubt, reminding them of that. but the biggest thing he's done for them besides reversing a lot of obama-era fuel industry standards that were supposed to bring the average fuel economy up to 50 miles a gallon by the year 2025, he's taken away a lot of other rules and regulations and other standards that they say actually cost them more money. i don't know if the gist of this is, you know, you guys, you know, have to stand behind me on some of this stuff, and i haven't been seeing a lot of that whether he was reading them the riot act behind closed doors, anyone's guess. we do know things sometimes can get pretty nasty when he can be very frank with the participants in that cabinet room. in the meantime, let's go back to vanhipp, erin and rich.

the president will let you know if he's not happy. all these reports about getting testy with cabinet members, even more in the last 24 hours of that. we're going to get into that later, but the fact that he will be talking to these auto guys and later addressing the drug industry guys as if there's a feeling of "kumbaya" with the republican president and corporations, it is not a guarantee with this president, is it? >> well, no. he's a populist republican, and that's different than being a strictly market-based republican. but, you know, i think the stock market and i think a lot of people in the united states and around the world are getting used to his negotiating style. he likes to open big, he likes to open sometimes very outrageously, but then behind the scenes things get worked out a little more calmly than people feared at first. that's one of the reasons why i think the markets are taking a

lot of trump pronouncements with a grape of salt -- grain of salt. neil: you know, i was thinking of that van hipp, we're told the back and forth yesterday with the president, you know, it got pretty heated, and frustration he was showing with the homeland security secretary on more isn't being done to contain incursions over our border. so he'll let them know how he feels. he has done that, of course, repeatedly with jeff sessions and a host of others. what do you think of that leadership style? i understand you're equally tough on your people, so maybe this isn't news. [laughter] >> depends on who you talk to. neil: what do you make of that? >> he's a ceo who wants results, and he campaigned on it. he's a commander and chief who wants to secure the borders. we saw it with automakers, it's very similar to what he's done in foreign policy. it's that energy level combined with that style of one-on-one diplomacy and personal engagement. he hosted 16 world leaders last

year at the white house, not counting mar-a-lago. they feel like there's a connection. they know this president. and it's making a difference, it's making a difference in foreign policy all over the world. the prime minister of norway, she never met president obama one-on-one. he had her at the white house. when she left, she said the united states is our most important ally. that sends a message to russia. this style of his of what i call one-on-one diplomacy, personal engagement whether they're foreign leaders or they're domestic ceos, they feel a connection. they feel they can talk to this president. it's making a difference. neil: you know, erin, it's too early to tell whether it will -- that style, that approach, ultimately, will achieve the success the president hopes to get with the leader of north korea or, you know, in maybe a new iranian agreement, but it does catch the world's attention, that's for sure. >> well, yeah. you know, let's go back to that for a second because the secretary of homeland security is not the first one who has

been dressed down in front of colleague. neil: absolutely. >> and has said that she has thought about resigning. john kelly, of course, a couple of weeks ago we were reading the same thing about him. and i do think itdistracts if these things continue to leak out. and if you have bad morale among some of your top leaders in some of these top posts. neil: but i think, erin, he wanted it to get out. i know it sounds kooky to say i work for the american people, i'm not here to assuage your ego. loyalty and the rest, it can be humiliating, i much prefer when you take someone aside and chew them out rather than embarrass them in front of a large group. but having said that, i think this is by design. i might be over, you know, analyzing this, you know? >> but i thought it was kind of strange for a sort of nuanced reason which is that kirsten nielsen is actually a cybersecurity expert. that's how she rose throughout

dhs as opposed to some of the stuff on the border. neil: well, that's her job now. >> correct. neil: she might be, he kept referring to her as a george bush, you know, candidate, you know? >> but what's interesting, what's interesting though is that, actually, more could be done, a lot more could be done on the cybersecurity front. and that's what dhs really needs to get a handle on going into the midterm elections. neil: all right. >> you know, i know that immigration and the border is something that is a pet issue to donald trump in a way. but, you know, i thought that the story in many ways was kind of strange, and i don't know what else to do about that other than, you know, i do think that he needs to be a little more careful and to try to stem these leaks some. and i hear what you're saying -- neil: yeah. >> but the berating actually doesn't look good particularly because it was a female in his cabinet. neil: reaction is very sad, very, very sad. that's all i can say. sad, sad, sad. all right, that was it, my

impression of the president. obviously, not a very good one. all right. when we come back here, the president is also now targeting the drug industry. another one of his promises, you might recall, is why are prescription drug prices, related drug prices so high? the highest in the world? there is something to be considered about research and development and recouping the cost of all of that, but right now the president's poised to say these guys have gone too far. i think he's close to saying a lot of them are thieves. get ready, i think he's only getting started. ♪ ♪ man: i got scar tissue there.

same thing with any dent or dings on this truck. they all got a story about what happened to 'em. man 2: it was raining, there was only one way out. i could feel the barb wire was just digging into the paint. man: two bulls were fighting, (thud) bam hit the truck. try explaining that to your insurance company. woman: another ding, another scratch.

it'll just be another chapter in the story. every scar tells a story, and you can tell a lot more stories when your truck is a chevy silverado. the most dependable, longest-lasting, full-size pickups on the road.

if you're approaching 65, now's the time to get your ducks in a row. to learn about medicare, and the options you have. you see, medicare doesn't cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so if 65 is around the corner, think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. so don't wait. call to request your free decision guide. and gather the information now to help you choose a plan later. these types of plans let you pick any doctor or hospital that takes medicare patients. and there's a range of plans to choose from, depending on you needs and your budget.

so if you're turning 65 soon, call now and get started. because the time to think about tomorrow...is today. go long. >> the president promised that he s going to put american patients first, and that is exactly what he is doing today. he will be rolling out the singlemost comprehensive approach to making prescription drugs affordable of any president in the history of the united states. neil: all right, that was from health and human services secretary alex azar, he's talking up the president's plan to curb prescription drug pricing. it's a delicate dance because you really can't overly intrude in commerce. a lot of other ceos are noticing this too as he finds the price of my good or service offensive, is he going to rein in on me too. it's causing a lot of dust-up here, but again, he is going to say these are life and death issues and a reason why a lot of

people sort of don't take all their medications, because they can't afford them, so they spread it out. he says that can't be tolerated. he wants to break a stereotype certainly among republican presidents that they're so pro-business and so friendly to business that they would look the other way. that isn't always true, and remember those who championed going after corporations that were getting too greed city. a lot of them were -- greedy, a lot of them were famous republicans. teddy roosevelt comes to mind. turning to candace owens, who's been in the news a lot, i'm very happy to have you, candace. first off on your reaction to this, i mean, what the president seems to be saying, you know, i leave laissez-faire and free enterprise and unfettered capitalism is and lower regulations and all that, but i don't want you to be sticking it to the american people, or in this case, those who need vital medications. what do you think of what he's proposing? >> i think it's on point with his message. he's all about americans first,

and for far too long the pharmaceutical industry has been rigged against the american people. these companies have been in bed with regulators, they've been in bed with the government. and honestly, we need to reach a point where we're talking about deregulation, allowing fair market competition again to bring these prices down. we've also been taken advantage of overseas via these socialized health care systems which are demanding unfairly low prices from our drugmakers overseas. so i am completely onboard with this message, and i can't wait to see what he rolls out. neil: you know, it is a delicate dance for republican governors, congressmen and women and, obviously, the president, isn't it? i mean, because they like unfettered capitalism, they espouse that, you know? in most cases it does a lot of good, but in extreme cases it can lead to companies taking advantage of that which he clearly seems to be stating drug companies have. how does he handle that especially with other ceos and other industries who might be saying, gosh, he's worried about the price of the drug industry's

products. what if he sets his sights on mine? i'm thinking of jeff bezos not too long ago and how he maybe is taking advantage of the u.s. post office. you know this theme has come up a lot. >> right, absolutely. i think that this is not something that donald trump is not aware of. i'm sure we have to hear what he has to say. i'm sure they have thought this through thoroughly, that he has a plan to attack that as well. what it comes down to is he has always said that he was going to do when he got in office, take out the government, make the government smaller, allow people to compete again, make it fair again for other people to get into the industry. i think it's going to be largely positive. we always see this, people start to freak out in the beginning until we see that his plan always ends up being tremendously successful. i have full faith in the president on this one as well. neil: you know, candace, just because you have said things like that in the past -- and they seem to be very rationally thought out whether you like the president or not -- you've gotten on a heap of controversy, and you've thrown it right back

at people who say that you as a prominent african-american woman shouldn't be saying nice things about this president. how have you reacted to that? because unlike others who sort of just take it in stride, you're going on offense. >> i'm definitely going on the offense when we're talking about smear and libelous claims suggesting that because i support my president, i also defend nazis or promote white supremacy. i think for far too long conservatives have allowed this to go on. we have seen reputations ruined with these sorts of smears when you google someone's name. they're trying to use fear tactics, and i think it's high time we punch back, and that's exactly what i'm going to start to do. i'm not going to allow my reputation or my character to be attacked because i support the president and because i love america. neil: more to the point, you're going after media outlets that do it. could you explain? >> correct. because media outlets, as i said, i'm fortunate that i've gotten ahead as a public figure,

but they smear anyone that suggests they promote capitalism, that they like president trump, and ultimately that harms their reputations. we have to take a stand as conservatives. for far too long the liberal media has been losing -- using these terms like white supremacy when they can't even define the term anymore, the net has gotten far too wide, and it's time to reel it in and put some pressure on these companies. neil: all right. it's a fascinating thing to watch, and it's something you don't typically see. normally someone's taking heat, maybe the gawker situation, but this is a little different because it's a little bit more mainstream here. candace, we'll watch it very closely. thank you very much for joining us. >> thank you for having me. neil: in the meantime, the jerusalem embassy opening up on monday. and all of this as we have severed this agreement completely with iran. a case of bad or fortuitous

timing? after this. ♪ ansparency. trust that we do what's right for our clients, without the constraints imposed by the traditional brokerage houses. transparency in the way we're compensated. our philosophy is one of service, not sales... that's why i'm independent. charles schwab is proud to support more independent financial advisors and their clients than anyone else. visit findyourindependentadvisor.com

used for batteries frome teexpired oil wells. mgx's new - pilot plant aims to produce lithium-carbonate one hundred times faster than from conventional lithium brine.

mgx minerals

neil: all right, it is official on monday, unofficially it's been almost the kind of read of things for decades with the u.s. embassy in tel aviv formally moving to jerusalem then. tensions rising between israel and iran, of course, post our walking away from that iran deal. to the israeli ambassador to the united nations. ambassador, very good to see you. >> thank you for having me. neil: how do you think things are going to go monday especially in light of everything happening with iran? >> we're optimistic. we are grateful for president trump for taking that bold decision and finally moving the american embassy from tel aviv to our capital, jerusalem. we acknowledge that it is a great, historical move for the people of israel, and other countries follow the united states. neil: well, are they -- i was going to ask you that, because a lot of them maintain offices in tel aviv. will they follow the united states into jerusalem, before do

they not -- or do they not want to stir the pot? >> when you want to meet the prime minister or the president, you come to jerusalem. and everyone is doing it de facto, but other countries will move their 'em embassies. we'll open the guatemalan embassy, and we know other leaders that will do the same. so we think it was a bold decision, but in the future people will say why we didn't do it for 70 years? neil: right. when you review the tapes and hear from democratic and republican presidents in the past, they all talked about it. so i guess i didn't understand the shock of president trump's decision to act on it. >> you take a bold decision, you will find somebody telling you don't do it now, it's not the right timing. even with established people from the state department came to the white house and say, no, it's not the right timing to recognize. let's wait. you don't wait when you support your allies, you don't wait when

you recognize israel, and when you recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel. i think we'll see more and more countries following that bold move of the president. neil: and the argument for waiting goes back to the clinton administration, both bush administrations and, of course, the obama administration was that there was always something going on or could be ignited by this. now the latest fear seems to be what's happened post walking away from this iran deal, that all of this is happening at a complicated time. what do you say to that? >> it is always complicated. i spoke with the prime minister of defense, and you always have assessments and threats. but you don't want your foreign policy or your domestic policy according to threats of your adversaries. you take the right decision. it was the right decision of the president to recognize jerusalem. it was the right decision of the president to pull out from this bad iran agreement. and i think in the future we will acknowledge that it actually helped the middle east. it even helped israel. when you speak with arab leaders in our region, they are grateful

to the president. neil: well, you raise a good point, ambassador. we obviously talk about the five other signees to this agreement, they say they're not going to change their policy, they'll still honor this accord with iran. but you're quite right to point out that at least in your neighborhood around israel and all the middle east, not a one signed on to that. so they must have had serious reservations about it. what are you hearing now about whether the possibility any of these other countries coming on board? >> well, you know, we just heard yesterday from bahrain. actually acknowledging the right of israel to defend itself publicly. so today the real threat is iran. they support terrorism in yemen, in syria, in lebanon. that's why i think we all come together, sometimes we do it quietly, but we all face the same threat which comes from iran. so they are grateful for the american president, for the american administration. and i think the challenge now is to see what will happen with the european countries who signed

this agreement, what they will do. they will have to choose whether to walk with the american economy, the thriving, strong american economy, or to continue to do business with iran. i think they will have to choose the right decision which is to walk with the american economy. neil: the iranians have claimed that the israelis have taken advantage of this iran situation to blame the iranians for an increase in violence in syria and use that as an excuse to hit iranian, you know, sites in syria. what do you say to that? >> neil, i have warned the security council and the u.n. for the haas year about the iranians -- last year about the iranians' presence in syria are. and i ask why they're bringing so many militants, 82,000 into syria, why they're putting so much funds and ammunition into syria. what is the end game? they are doing it in order to take over syria, to threaten israel, and we have red lines. we will not allow them to put those bases, airfields next to our border.

a few weeks ago they sent a uav, with explosive, into israel. they want to build another front with their proxy in syria. we saw what happened in lebanon, we don't want to see another remember on the non-- lebanon in syria. neil: ambassador, very good seeing you. >> thank you very much. neil: be well. well, the ceo of at&t took to writing an e-mail to all his workers, better than 225,000, about the dust-up with michael cohen and those payments. it was the closest thing to a mea culpa we've seen out of a corporate ceo in quite some time. after this. ♪ ♪ , mr. stevens. your testimony will save lives. mr. stevens? this is your new name. this is your new house. and a perfectly inconspicuous suv. you must become invisible. [hero] i'll take my chances.

anna and a little nervous. into retirement... but not so much about what market volatility may do to their retirement savings. that's because they have a shield annuity from brighthouse financial, which allows them to take advantage of growth opportunities in up markets, while maintaining a level of protection in down markets. so they can focus on new things like exotic snacks. talk with your advisor about shield annuities from brighthouse financial- established by metlife. neil: ah, retiring, the golden years. as if! there's a new study out that says about half of retirees between the ages of 75, well,

and over 75, they've got debt. they've got outstanding lopes. to jack otter on that very real reality and how, and how they can improve their lot. he's 74 himself, but anyway, he thought he'd just prepare for it. good to see you, my friend. >> thanks, and i look pretty good for 74. neil: you do, indeed. i didn't realize so many were dealing with debt that late in life. not that it's late, but presumably, you're supposed to be as close to debt-free as possible. >> and it gets worse, boston college center for retirement said that this generation of retirees is in slightly better shape than the ones who are coming. the good news is those younger people have time, but, yeah, it is a real problem. i would say that you need to look at the different types of debt. so if you're still carrying a mortgage, it's visible, you've got a few years left, your cash flow is enough to pay off that mortgage over the remaining life of it, that's fine. the thing you shouldn't be

doing, of course, is, say, buying stuff with your credit card because you know what your income is, right? that's why they call it fixed income, and it's not as if you're going to get a raise in a couple years. so that's not a good idea to be adding debt liabilities. but paying off the last few in retirement because, you know, we're starting families later in life these days. neil: what if you're taking on a new mortgage, you're buying a place, let's say you're going to retire somewhere, but you're not buying it outright. you're getting a new mortgage, hopefully smaller than the place you're leaving, but what do you make of that? >> that all depends on cash flow, and whatever age you are if you haven't done it, you need the sit down, figure out -- not everything is knowable, but there are some knowns. for instance, probably what your income stream is especially if you're retired. you know, social security, maybe a pension, maybe your savings, whatever else is coming in, that's a number. then look at the number of that mortgage payment, and is it substantially below the others because, of course, you've got other costs too. and then you've got the unknowns

like medical expenses and so forth. neil: and that's a biggie. people don't appreciate how expensive that is. >> and what's scary is it's variable. you can estimate food, clothing, mortgage, whatever. the medical isn't. so look at your insurance company, find out what the deductibles are and that sort of thing. but anyway, back to the debt, if you are looking at that new mortgage and it's not a heck of a lot less than your income, that's not a purchase you want to make. neil: right. >> and the report from boston college talks about downsizing. a reverse mortgage is another option. i don't like that unless it's an absolute necessity. neil: yeah. home equity in that. >> yeah. you have to get good advice. annuities are an option for income. they can be pricey, but at least they're guaranteed. neil: your assessment of how ready this latest generation is then for their golden years. >> well, the problem, the biggest problem is that pensions are going away. that was, obviously, a very important leg of the stool. so now -- neil: the defined benefit one,

the good old days where you got a set amount. >> right. so now it's up to us to save in our 401(k)s. there are people advising you on how to invest it. generally what happens is most people are either too conservative, it's all in bonds which is a bad idea, or they're too risky. the crash comes and they sell in a panic, so that's a bad idea. neil: and a lot of them still have kids they're taking care of and handling them. >> yeah, exactly. paying for college while at the same time trying to pay for your retirement. neil: i tell my kids your mother and i are telling everything. first of all, they don't listen to anything i say, so the dog will get it before you guys, because the dog does everything i say, you know? what do you think? >> well, we are putting money in 529 plans for the kids, but we told them that they will be working summers as they get a little older to help pay for college. i'd rather not have them borrow any money for college, but who knows? a friend i used to work with, her daughter is starting at wellesley in the fall, $73,000 a

year for tuition and board. neil: is that right? >> it's a big number. neil: this survey came out from boston college -- [laughter] not exactly one of the cheaper schools out there. >> exactly. neil: all right. i'm going to still be very tough with my kids. >> i have one bit of good news, barron's is free all weekend, an advertiser is sponsoring an open door, so anyone can get past the pay wall and read our site. neil: is that right? >> indeed. neil: so do you get a pay cut when that happens? [laughter] >> luckily, i don't. neil: good. one of the finest financial minds i know, jack otter. very good, practical advice. even i understand it. all right, meanwhile, this i understand right now, there's a lot of outrage in the garden state not just on an upcoming tax presumably on millionaires, but quite a few others. but on the navy using some of that to pay some bills for illegals. i'll explain after this. ♪

neil: you know, all is not coming up roses in the garden state. right now the governor ticking off a lot of wealthy folks

because he is angling in on a surtax for them. he says it will help the state, but they doesn't expect it would help illegal immigrants get access to student financial aid. christina on the backlash. what's going on here? >> well, that's right. right now you have illegal immigrants within new jersey that can a apply for financial aid. they must have gone to a school in new jersey, that is the catch. but now they're going to be eligible. this is an extension of what chris christie put in place in 2013. he had said that all of these undocumented immigrants can actually get in-state tuition so they don't have to pay out-of-state tuition. but now you have the governor of new jersey taking it one step forward, signing a bill into law that's what you're seeing on your screen saying, yes, all of these unauthorized immigrants can apply for financial aid. however, he's not provided how much this will cost taxpayers. there is, though, one stat. an assemblyman who's sponsoring this legislation, he estimates that there's going to be roughly

600 illegals that will be allowed to join this program and apply for financial aid and estimating the cost around $5 million which would pretty much result -- and this is according to him -- to 17 cents for each taxpayer. so that would be the extra add-on for taxpayers in new jersey. if you're looking at stats though, according to homeland security there are about 480,000 undocumented immigrants within the state. the problem is we don't have a breakdown for age, and these stats are actually coming from 2014 right now. and you have, of course, so many people that are upset about this not only because they have to pay from their tax dollars, but also it's putting -- this is according to complaints online and the radio stations -- that's putting them one step higher. we, too, can't afford to send our children to school, and now you're allowing unauthorized immigrants to also amy for financial aid. however -- apply for financial aid. the governor has retaliated and

said this is america, we need to allow these children who have gone through the school system just like other americans the chance to further their education. he's, this quote, he said i'd invite any of those folks who have that attitude, beginning with our president, to come on into this room and allow me or any of us to say this is the united states of america. so, again, these unauthorized students can apply for state, but they can't apply for federal financial aid. neil: it is the united states of america, but whatever your view on this, it's granting a right afforded u.s. citizens to those who are not. i'm not -- that seems to be making new jersey a sanctuary state in the process. >> well, new jersey's not the only one that's doing this. yeah, there are at least nine other states total -- neil: like you said, chris christie, it started there. >> right, right. but he didn't want to take it one step further to actually put it into as a bill. neil: all right.

christina, thank you. >> thank you. neil: very, very much. anyway, at&t's ceo, randall stephenson, is owning up to what he says was a big old mistake ever hiring michael cohen to handle some matters and address some issues that would get to the president's attention. to charlie gasparino and a former prosecutor. charlie, what is he saying? he sent out this e-mail to 200,000 plus -- >> we've got it. we should put it up. listen, we made a mistake bringing in michael cohen, mea culpa. michael cohen -- neil: what happened? 600,000 to cohen -- >> michael cohen was the guy who cut the deal for stormy daniels on the payment, he did it through a company he created. that company also became a semi not official lobby, but companies were hiring him, funneling the money through that same stormy daniels conduit

company and basically hiring him for, you know, insight into the trump administration. because michael cohen was the long-term -- neil: was this to facilitate or help facilitate the purchase of time warner? >> here is the thing, i think this is a non-story. john can speak to the legality -- neil: even the judge says there doesn't appear to be anything illegal. >> here's the thing. there are -- when all these big company like at&t hire a gazillion lobbyists to get insight on what's going on in washington, they have the establishment covered. so all of a sudden comes this guy who's, like, it's trump, and he's unique, and i'm saying that's a mild way of explaining trump. and there's not a lot of guys that work for him that have insight into him. and i don't mean to soft pedal this because maybe michael cohen did other bad things, but at&t handing him $50,000 a month for insight, not lobbying. remember, they just talked to him about how to approach trump. $50,000 a month seems like

that's what you're supposed to do, and he could clearly provide that service as long as he didn't actually go and lobby. neil: so, john, where does it cross -- potentially -- the legal line? >> yeah. and you raised all the good points, right? what we don't know is what mr. cohen promised at&t and novartis in exchange for this money, whether it was written or oral. let's step back just for a second. when you talk about the law of impeachment, the prosecution of the president, the body of law that's out there is not all that extensive. when you talk about lobbying and the jack abramoff case, every state has a body of law that deals with lobbying and influence peddling, and so does the federal government. so there's lots of regs and lots of precedent. what we don't know is what did michael cohen promise in exchange for this contract. if it was just, look, i'm going to tell you how the guy thinks, i think charlie's right. there's not much of a case here. if it's i can make things happen, i can influence the decision, then you cross the

line over into lobbying, and he should have been registered, and there's a whole host of things -- neil: and in the case of novartis, which is a foreign company, there are other issues. we don't know, to both of your points, but where is the line drawn according to you? >> i don't john could answer ths better. suppose he offered i can talk to trump for you. is that -- you have to register if you're just talking to trump. >> i think if you asked any lobbyist they would say if that's what you're representing, then absolutely. look, both of these companies had interests before the federal government, so you'd be crazy not to. >> here's one -- neil: in other words, you know very well that michael cohen has influence and access to the president. >> here's one flow three in the -- fly in the ointment, you have to know about donald trump to understand and appreciate it. donald trump's a really cheap guy. i know that for -- i've dealt with a lot of people that have dealt with him. he screws his contractors over a lot, and he hates when people make money off of him.

and this is why i doubt that michael cohen actually approached trump on any of this stuff, because i think -- neil: but the president might not even know it, right? i can give you a picture, an audience with the president, and the president would be -- you know, their schedules are packed. >> i don't think -- neil: it got that far. >> here's what i wonder if this is illegal, suppose be michael cohen told novartis and at&t, hey, i can get you this stuff, i can get you an audience and then never delivered, would that be illegal? john? >> that might be, but you raised the critical point, does this implicate or cause problems for the president? not from what i'm seeing. it creates another leverage point for muler but not necessarily for the president right now. i'll make one last comment and that is -- neil: i do want, i wish we had more time, but my producers are yelling. they always do. we'll have more after this. >> no worries.

♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all in one place. ♪

my secret visitors. hallucinations and delusions. the unknown parts of living with parkinson's. what plots they unfold, but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's will experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. if your loved one is experiencing these symptoms, talk to your parkinson's specialist. there are treatment options that can help. my visitors should be the ones i want to see.

>> neil: a who's who of auto industry executives, now unveiling a plan that would target all the drug industry guy giants by saying you're charging way too much for your products. so what happens? we'll find out in about an hour. blake berman with the latest from the white house. >> reporter: the auto execs are at the white house, getting face time with top members of president trump's traffic. it's the leaders of ge, ford, fiat, chrysler, nissan, i can go down the list, about a dozen of them discussing fuel efficiency

standards and california threatening a lawsuit if the trump administration rolls back those standards. the automakers for the most part are in favor of somewhat of a rollback. they just have to find a sweet spot that they agree on with the administration and something that wouldn't essentially create two different marketplaces between the 49 other states, the degrees trick o -- district of a and california. this comes as the nafta negotiations are ongoing. some of the discrepancies deal with autos. for example, the u.s. wants higher pay for those who build automobiles. and the u.s. also wants 75% of a car to be made in the u.s., to fall under free trade. right now, that number is at 62.5%. alongside the automakers, a little while ago the president once again railed against nafta as it stands now. >> mexico and canada have -- look, they don't like to lose the golden goose. but i'm representing the united

states. i'm not representing mexico. and i'm not representing canada. but nafta has been a horrible, horrible disaster for this country and we'll see if we can make it reasonable. >> reporter: so if the meeting hasn't ended just yet, it should within minutes here because next hour, 2:00, in the rose garden the president will unveil his plan to try to lower the cost of prescription drug prices. among the ideas that the president will roll out include more medicare rebates applied at the point of sale. he'll address or the administration will address foreign subsidies for prescription drugs. they want to get generic you drugdrugsto the the market fasto offer incentives for lower list prices, some of the ideas as they move toward the 2019 budget. >> neil: thank you, my friend. we have a pharmacist in congress, a pharmacist by training and we've got him right now, republican congressman early buddy carter from the state of georgia.

sir, very good to have you. >> thank you. >> neil: what do you make of what the president wants to do? >> well, first of all, just attacking this problem, i'm proud of the president for doing this. this was one of his campaign promises. he said we've got to do something about high prescription drug prices and he's absolutely right. what i've seen and what has been released thus far, he's got four major points that he's talking about. i think he's spot on. admittedly the devil's in the details so we've got to see exactly what he's talking about, how he's going to deliver on these four topics that he has identified. my hope is that he's going to make the system more transparent. right now, the drug pricing system is opaque. it needs transparency. we need to know where the rebates are going. i can assure you, they're not going to the patient right now. >> neil: you know, we do have a system, though, in our country, it's why a lot of people even those who come to the united states, because we have the best

doctors, the best medicine around, they can get the best type of treatment they can and i wonder if the impetus behind that is the fact that we allow companies to charge reflecting all the money they spend on research and development for those drugs. because they come back and say take that away or force our prices down, you're also inhibiting our ability to come up with these life-saving drugs. what do you say? >> well, what i've witnessed in my years of practicing pharmacy, research and development has produced drugs that are just phenomenal. i mean, the progress that we've made is nothing short offence o phenomenal. i understand the need for research and development. if have you a life-saving medication that you can't aa ford, what good does it do you? itit's got to be affordable as well. the main problem, the most

immediate, the most significant impact that we can have on prescription drug prices is to have transparency and is to have transparency within the pharmacy benefit managers, the middlemen that are causing the prices to go up so much. >> neil: it's also an insurance issue too, right? a lot of people know this already. i have progressive m.s., multiple sclerosis, and because i have a good plan and i earn a pretty good buck, i can afford a lot of the therapies that are out there that aren't available to others who are in worse off shape than i am with a lesser type of my disease. that isn't right. there's something very, very wrong with that picture. >> that is not right, neil. i will tell you, that's going to get worse before it gets better because as we get more into precision medicine, that is going to limit the pool of patients that you have. right now, the pharmaceutical manufacturers are concentrating on specialty drugs. those drugs are used for a

specific population and the price can't be spread out among a lot of people like it can with, say, a cholesterol drug. >> neil: what if the companies figure out i can gouge neil have viecavuto but i can't gouge a je smith. if that's the way the system is going, and increasingly i see for myself that it is, the president's right to want to correct that. is he going to go too far where the life-saving or improving therapies that are out there actually compromise for the rich and non-rich alike? >> you bring up a good point. we in congress, we in government, we don't have a tendency to overreact. we do overreact. we swing the pendulum too far the other way. that's a fear that i have. >> neil: do you think drug companies, and you know better than anyone as a licensed pharmacist, do gouge people, that they gouge them? >> well, you know, that's a pretty strong word, but if i'm

having to pay half of my salary on a drug that's saving my life, then i'm probably going to use that word. you're right. >> neil: so if the president is saying or wants to set a fixed level for some drugs, that isn't much better than a lot of socialist countries and the flip side of that is that you worry about the quality of care down the road in this country. so what is the balance here? >> the balance is difficult, but it is there and it can be done. we've got to have cooperation. there's not one simple answer to this. it's got to be a team effort. i applaud what the president and the executive branch are doing. we need to help him in congress. i'm working to do just that. we've got a number of pieces of legislation. i've got a piece of legislation that addresses the gag cause. do you know your pharmacist cannot tell you if you pay cash for a medication that it would be cheaper than your insurance plan? how ridiculous is that? how ridiculous us that? there are plans out there that if a pharmacist offers to you that you can pay cash and it's

cheaper than your copay, they'll either be kicked out of the plan or penalized out of the plan. i have legislation that will end that ludicrous plan. >> neil: that plan alone is brilliant. that strategy alone is one of those that you don't have to move heaven and earth for that congressman, thank you very, very much. >> thank you. >> neil: it's not a fair or right system. right or left, republican or democrat, we can't live in a country that disproportionately benefit those that have the means to get quality care versus those that don't. that is just not right. the secretary of state is going to be holding his first press conference as secretary of state. a lot of issues will no doubt be coming up. edward norris joins us now. >> it's going to be with the south korean foreign minister and likely secretary of state mike pompeo's trip to north korea will come up during this news conference. pompeo says that he didn't know exactly who he was going to meet

with in north korea. in fact, it was put together so quickly, this trip, that he didn't know exactly what would happen when the plane landed in north korea. his time in country was only 13 hours. there was no prior request to get the three american hostages back. the north koreans say they granted amnesty to the americans and it was a very tough decision for them, according to north korea. the state department says it was the right decision. >> the north koreans have made some good faith calls. it was certainly a good faith effort in letting our -- releasing our american prisoners earlier this week. we were tremendously proud to bring those folks home. look, we are realistic and clear-eyed about this. it doesn't mean we aren't going to make every effort and every attempt to fulfill president trump's policy of denuclearization of the korean peninsula. >> and the north korean or the trump add medicine strags has been uniform in saying they want the denuclearization of north korea and specifically they want

verifyable denuclearization of this. so that's a very important point for them. neil. >> neil: thank you, my friend. the house is signaling that it wants to see what they call a phase two of these tax cuts. the only problem is they're not as keen about it in the senate. we'll tell you why and what that means for the prospects of a phase two. don't hold your breath. polident is specifically designed to clean a denture.

the wonderful thing about polident is the fact that it's very, very tough on bacteria, yet it's very gentle on the denture itself. polident's 4 in 1 cleaning system consists of 4 powerful ingredients that work together to deep clean your denture in hard to reach places. it kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria and it helps to remove stains. polident should be the first choice of every person that wears a denture, to clean their denture.

let's go ahead and be serious about making these permanent. i'm going to tell you, we're going to push for that here in the house and there will be a vote on making those tax cuts permanent and also making sure that -- >> neil: has speaker ryan told you that? >> the speaker has told us that. we reminded him of that commitment. >> neil: as things stand now, the tax cuts for individuals start phasing out or a variety of them because they have sunset provisions around 2024, 2025, and they just want to make them permanent through the plan as they are for corporations. easier said than done. where the house thinks they can get something going but in the senate it's dicey, they need 60 votes. mitch mcconnell says there the complication of giving democrats in battleground states an opportunity to vote yes on something they regret voting no

for. it's confusing. it looks like a huge effort to get a phase two through at all. kris wilson is with us now. chris, i don't see it being a battle to attempt in the house but the senate might be done. what do you think? >> we'll see. people like tax cuts. it's a great campaign issue. the fact that we did pass tax cuts took us from definitely losing the house to wow, it's really tough but that's no small thing. now we're back in the game. people don't really vote to say thank you. they vote for something they've been promised or they vote to achieve something or to prevent losing something. and i'll tell you what, that's the one thing. nancy pelosi is the gift that keeps on giving. the fact she said if democrats get the house they will repeal tax cuts. if republicans are able to make a push for a new set of tax cuts, making the tax cuts term perm negligentpermanent, that ge

opportunity to hold the house and pick up seats in the senate. if those in the house can make the argument that the senate is too old and stodgy, let us keep the house and give us more votes in the senate, i think that's a solid campaign message moving into november of 2018. >> neil: what do you think of the political fear this have in the senate, the republican side, that it would give those democrats in multiple states a chance to sort of shore up their support by voting for something they didn't vote for in the first go-round? >> i would hate to think that's why we didn't give the american people tax cuts. that to me seems fairly cynical. if we had the opportunity to pass tax cuts and show what happens when you give republicans the house and the senate, then i think that's a solid argument we can still run on in states like north g northa with kevin cramer and montana and west virginia against joe mansion and in wisconsin, against tammy baldwin, those are states where tax cuts have been proven to work.

those are all great pick-up opportunities for us. there's 10 trump democrats or trump states that democrat versus to run for re-election. if we had the opportunity to contrast republican success on tax cuts against democrats and nancy pelosi saying they're going to repeal them, i like that fight. >> neil: what are your sense of the midterms. the widely held views are a lot of times wrong. the view was that republicans would get hammered and there was a good chance the senate could fall as well as the house. now it looks like if anything, republicans could pick up seats in the senate and i don't think that it's going to be a turnover in the house. but again, i could be wrong. but your thoughts? >> you're right, the generic ballot is the best it's been since january of 2013. that's no small feat. you've seen it close. republicans are closer right now

than they've ever been. whici wouldcredit tax cuts for . leading up to tuesday there was depression in republican votes in primary and special elections. that reversed itself on tuesday in indiana, west virginia and ohio. we saw republican turnout up substantially, double digits over where it had been in 2014, the last off-year election. in west virginia we saw it way up over what it was for -- democrats had a slight increase and republicans were up multiple times over that. i predict patrick morrisey will be the next senator from west virginia. i feel good about republicans picking up multiple seats in the senate. i feel good about their opportunity to hold the house. the me a message of tax cuts ane message of democrats saying we're going to take away your tax cuts, versus the republican message, it's pretty on target. >> neil: apple is the stock that's on fire and could be the first to get to a market cap of

a trillion dollars. can you imagine that? i know i bored you with this story yesterday. i can remember when it was a big deal when microsoft hit 100 billion market cap. now it's something 10 times that. my, how time flies with you kids.

if you'd have told me three years ago... that we'd be downloading in seconds, what used to take... minutes. that guests would compliment our wifi. that we could video conference... and do it like that. (snaps) if you'd have told me that i could afford... a gig-speed. a gig-speed network. it's like 20 times faster than what most people have. i'd of said... i'd of said you're dreaming. dreaming! definitely dreaming. then again, dreaming is how i got this far. now more businesses in more places can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network.

now more businesses in more places can afford to dream gig. termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger. hey rick, all good?

oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

>> neil: the guy over at at&t behind the michael cohen contract is leaving. adam shapiro has the latest on all of the above. >> that man's name is bob quinn. he was the man in charge of at at&t's office for lobbying in washington, d.c. he has resigned, although sources with the wall street journal are saying that he was forced out. so what's been going on here? he is the man who authorized the $600,000 payment to michael quinn's consulting firm, central consultants, and quinn, by the

way, not only approved that but michael cohen was not allowed to lobby on behalf of at&t unless he notified at&t. well, randall stephenson, the ceo of at&t, issued a letter, a memo to all at&t employees in which he said, first, our reputation has been damaged. there is no other way to say it. at&t hiring michael cohen as a political consultant was a big mistake. he goes on in that letter to say, everything we did was done according to the law and entirely legitimate. but the fact is, our past association with cohen was a serious misjudgment. in this instance, our washington, d.c.'s vetting process clearly failed and i take responsibility for that. we also know from mr. stephenson, the ceo, that at&t was contacted by special council robert mueller's office in november and december of last year to provide all kinds of information about these transactions with mr. cohen and

at&t says it has fully cooperated with all of the requested information. the key question, though, is when did randall stephenson know? we reached out to several at&t press officers. they have not responded to this question. one responded by saying you have the information before you. randall stephenson said he takes full responsibility for this. we don't know what the consequences of his failure, because they failed to vet michael cohen, will be. neil. >> neil: you think about it, how could they have known so much that has since transpired on michael cohen back then? >> that's a very good question. but they're not answering the questions. the key question is when did randall stephenson know they would be paying michael cohen $600,000 and then for what. >> neil: thank you, my friend. keeping an eye on apple, they're down a little bit today. the big search for that $1 trillion quest to get up to the most valued company on the planet. the tech watch extraordinaire

gene munster on this. i know when you get close to something like that it's in fits and starts. i just think it's a matter of when, not if. what about you? >> yeah, it's a matter of when. i think when is probably sooner versus later. just want to put some context on that, what the near term catalyst is, neil, is that investors typically historically have thought about the apple story related to product cycles. they get really excited going into a product cycle, apple's multiple expands and the stock goes up. after the product goes out they get anxious about what the demand will be and the stock pulls back a little bit. i think that's going to work well to approach and break this trillion dollar mark. there's probably three new iphones coming out this september and the stock will move up in anticipation. to answerer question, i think that's more near term versus long terp. i do want to mention that this story is going to move beyond this idea of always being -- having anxiety around product cycles. we think there's a new paradigm

around how investors will think of the store ribs and we think of apple as a service. that's our big picture. >> neil: i think you're right to look at something. they make a lot of money on the services, a lot of their apps that automatically renew if you're not policing it aggressively enough and of course on i-tunes. forget about that part of their business. at what level will the stock have to hit? >> $196, so about 4% away from that. >> neil: we've seen that done in a day. i guess it would depend on that. what kind of a leader would apple be? in other words, does alphabet follow? do some of these other issues that have been part of this group follow in unison? >> i think some of the issues, it's the other fang stocks in particular, hitting around

privacy and data and that piece. apple really stays away from that. this paradigm shift around apple as a service, this isn't just a services business. this is even owning the hardware as a service, this idea that we're going to keep upgrading our phones every few years. that is a very unique opportunity relative to the other fang stocks. in other words, i think the issues that have hit the other fang stocks, apple seems somewhat insulated to those issues. >> neil: you know what this reminds of? i know a lot of people are talking about new things they're getting into, like streaming, subscriptions, and all the rest, for apple tv. but what if what happens to traditional p cs happens to apple -- pcs happens to apple phones, you know the constant upgrading. and people just say enough, i don't need to keep upgrading like this. we haven't hit that point, i know, in the smartphones but to

some we have. what do you think of that? >> that's the negative story on apple. 65% of their business comes from the iphone. we're reaching a point of saturation on the smartphone market. the features are becoming incrementally less exciting so people are going to hold onto their phones longer. that's the bear case. i don't buy that case. the reason is that the value that you get out of your phone is exponentially, and while a pc was nice and important and you had to do work on it, it wasn't as critical as your phone is today. this is something that most people on earth can't live without. and so i think that that uniqueness -- tim cook defined it as the greatest consumer electronic product of all time and i think it is. i believe that there is still a lot of innovation also ahead around the phone, and particularly around what's going to happen in augmented reality, the ability to use your phone to kind of capture more of what's going on around you. and so i think that there's room for innovation, continuing to

pull people forward. if that doesn't happen, too bad. people still need to upgrade their phones every few years, just for the battery life alone, to keep that fresh. >> neil: you're right about that. very good seeing you. thank you very much. >> thanks, neil. >> neil: infrastructure, the roads and bridges commitment that the administration was going to make, did sarah sanders just signal maybe not? take a look. >> certainly the administration as you mentioned secured some funding for infrastructure projects. we also laid out priorities that we wanted to see in an infrastructure legislation package. we're going to continue to look at ways to improve the nation's infrastructure but in terms of a specific piece of legislation, i'm not aware that that will happen by the end of the year. >> neil: not aware that will happen by the end of the year. charlie, what do you make of that? >> i think it's a little more extended shalextended-- existenn

that. they say the infrastructure plan would be multi billion dollars of infrastructure spending, the president's political advisors were touting this as a way to secure trump's base, expand it to the you middle class. they're saying this whole plan is basically on life support right now and may never come back on -- to full health. one of the problems apparently is that the ability to create these public/private partnerships was never well spelled out by the administration, by anybody in his economic team from the national economic council, from the treasury department, so the mow does on presbyteriamodus r flushed out. that's one problem. if the republicans control congress, maybe they can resuscitate it. republicans are very, very hesitant to spend any sort of additional money on infrastructure after a big tax cut and deficits that we're

getting right now before the supply side kicks in. but if the democrats control congress, this thing is all but dead. they would like to do a straight infrastructure bill but then the republicans, if they control the senate, would probably block that if it's not with public/private partnerships. this thing's a mess. when i talk to my congressional sources, they're saying this thing may not be dead but it's on serious life support and if you're holding your breath until next year, you might want to be able to hold your breath until the year after that, maybe the year after that. it will be very difficult to get this off the ground. >> neil: certainly this calendar year but we'll watch it. the dow is up about 39.5 points. stay with us. you are watching fox. m 85 yearse i have to wear a giant hot dog suit. what? where's that coming from? i don't know. i started my 401k early, i diversified... i'm not a big spender.

sounds like you're doing a lot. but i still feel like i'm not gonna have enough for retirement. like there's something else i should be doing. with the right conversation, you might find you're doing okay. so, no hot dog suit? not unless you want to. no. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade®. copd makes it hard to breathe. so to breathe better, 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. get your first prescription free just another day on the farm. or is it? this farmer's morning starts in outer space. where satellites feed infrared images of his land into a system built with ai. he uses watson to analyze his data with millions of weather forecasts from the cloud, and iot sensors down here, for precise monitoring of irrigation. it's a smart way to help increase yields, all before the rest of us get out of bed.

>> neil: you know, the government captured five isis leaders, prominent ones behind

attacks on american soldiers. it's getting very little attention. to be fair, a lot else is going on here, including the north korea thing, the iran thing. lieutenant general jerry boyken, good to have you back. how you doing? >> i'm well. it's good to be with you. >> neil: when i was looking at the five guys captured, they're the baddest of the bad. i mean, it's a big deal. >> these are bad people, neil. there's a lot of evidence that all of these guys have been shown in beheading videos and videos of other atrocities that were committed by isis. so this is a big win and i tell you, if i was al bagdadi, i would either head to can don car make sure my life insurance is

up-to-date, because he's next. >> neil: we get relieved that we stop them or slow their advance, then another more gruesome terror group evolves. what keeps you up at night? what worries you? >> well, this global jihad. what we failed to understand i think collectively is that this is a global movement. it's not just isis and al-qaida, they're are entities all over the world that consider themselves to be part of this global jihad and we have to deal with this on a global basis, not just on a regional basis, and that is something that our previous administration really had trouble with. i think donald trump is doing much better but this is tough for diplomats. >> neil: you know, that old cockroach theory seems to apply. i know we've gotten into this in the past, that you get rid of them in one area, they pop up in another area. we thought if we were to try to get them in pakistan, with the

old al-qaida, taliban elements, it popped up in other forms in other countries, syria among them. how do you get a handle on this? or is it the kind of thing we always have to be aware of, this will always be with us? >> well, there's not a strict military solution to this. you're right, i mean, they moved out of the pakistan, afghan border regions there and they moved down into africa. that's why we've got a huge problem in africa now with isis-like, al-qaida-like organizations there. in fact, that's part of those soldiers that were killed, i mean, that was al-qaida associates that killed them over there. so we need to understand that it is like -- you can't kill them all. but i will say this. if we look at this from a global perspective and recognize that there's an ideology that is associated with this global jihad, we can deal with it a whole lot more effectively than if we think we're just going to go out and fight a war of

attrition and kill all the tear terrorists that are fighting because of an ideology that's 1400 years old. >> neil: that's a long time of hate. much has been made that the president has torn up the iran deal, wants to start from scratch. much of the european press, it was a horrific thing to do. what i took interest in in seeing is that no one in the neighborhood affected, in the middle east itself, not a one country of those -- all those countries, not a one signed on to this. so they're there and they know the danger of iran and wanted no party to it. and we tried to get them to be a party to it. what does that tell you? >> well, with the possible exception of baharain, all of the gulf countries as well as israel and egypt, i might add, are all delighted that president trump has taken the global

leadership on this issue and backed out of this treaty. and i think that it's only a matter of time until you're going to see more positives coming out about what he's done here, because this was a bad deal from the start and it hasn't gotten any better. >> neil: general, thank you very much. >> thank you, neil. >> neil: in the meantime, the president now i think about 20 minutes away from announcing he's going to slash prescription drug prices. what's got his goat is the fact that whether you're left or right on this issue, there is something very, very wrong in this country if a lot of people who need medication are spreading it out because they can't aa ford what they've got. some are also looking at what the president wants to do with reining in free markets and preventing companies that spend a lot of money to come up with these life-saving therapies from realizing a profit off their hard work. where do you find the balance? because not just drug industry and pharmaceutical industry and biotech industry ceos are

watching. so is virtually every other ceo and affected company investor in the world. after this. man: i got scar tissue there. same thing with any dent or dings on this truck. they all got a story about what happened to 'em. man 2: it was raining, there was only one way out. i could feel the barb wire was just digging into the paint. man: two bulls were fighting, (thud) bam hit the truck. try explaining that to your insurance company. woman: another ding, another scratch. it'll just be another chapter in the story. every scar tells a story, and you can tell a lot more stories when your truck is a chevy silverado. the most dependable, longest-lasting, full-size pickups on the road.

mr. elliot, what's your wiwifi?ssword? wifi's ordinary. basic. do i look basic? nope! which is why i have xfinity xfi.

it's super fast and you can control every device in the house. hey! let's basement. [ grunting ] and thanks to these xfi pods, the signal reaches down here too. so sophie, i have an xfi password. and it's "daditude". simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome. 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. i'm 85 years old in a job where. i have to wear a giant hot dog suit. what? where's that coming from?

i don't know. i started my 401k early, i diversified... i'm not a big spender. sounds like you're doing a lot. but i still feel like i'm not gonna have enough for retirement. like there's something else i should be doing. with the right conversation, you might find you're doing okay. so, no hot dog suit? not unless you want to. no. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade®.

>> neil: the trade war is on. you might not see it but some are. to hillary vaughn in bakersfield california with one in particular. hey, hillary. >> reporter: i talked to four different almond growers in kern county, the largest exporter of almonds in the world. they say these almond tariffs are not only bad for the us but they're bad for china. they're already causing some disruption between chinese suppliers and buyers. >> we are seeing some disruptions in trade. almonds were on the water when the tariff went up and the question becomes who is going to pay for it. i think that's going to be the question, will this affect the ability to compete with other countries. >> reporter: it's increasing food costs in china and installing the $21 billion -- stalling the $21 billion industry here in california. the tariffs are great for

australia. the country worked out a 0% tariff agreement with china, giving them a huge advantage in price over growers here in california. one grower i talked to, mike young, sends 195 million pounds of almonds over to china every year. he says australia can't fill china's demand without pulling product from other markets, so to adapt to the changing trade dynamic, growers here are eyeing new markets overseas including indonesia and korea. neil. >> neil: hillary vaughn, thank you very, very much. all right. by the way, the president's going to be announcing this whole effort to lower prescription drug prices. that could come in the next 10, 15 minutes or so. we have connell mcshane here and elizabeth i can do it all mcdonnell. what the president is doing is a delicate line. you don't want to look like you're going to stomp on industry and name what their prices should be.

at the same token you have to help folks who can't afford the off-the-chart prescriptions. >> the one thing people will contest is why is the president not going to let medicare negotiate drug prices lower. medicaid does it. >> neil: good point. >> the v.a. does it, the defense department does it. why not have medicare do it. >> neil: do we know he won't do it? >> he'll go after the middlemen guys, like express scrips. >> that's why we see a lot of the -- i guess it's a relief of sorts, a lot of the drug makers are higher, the stocks. >> neil: dodging a bullet. >> a lot of people in the weeks or months leading up to this, especially after listening to the president talk about it on the campaign trail, many thought he would allow medicare negotiations. now that there's a report that

he's not, a lot of the stocks are up today. >> neil: for a lot of people there's this free market notion, who let companies do what companies do for the most part, it works out just fine. we have seen occasions where it doesn't work out just fine. this might be a perfect example of that. a lot of people are spreading out medications because they can't afford them. so what does the president do about that without looking like he is preventing life-saving therapies and the investments that go into them and the company toscompanies to recoup ? >> the challenge is how do you thread this needle. the biggest thing the drug makers were concerned about was the idea of direct negotiation. that is not on the table despite the campaign rhetoric. then it goes to things like regulatory reform, how do we get more generics to the marketplace more quickly, how do we stimulate competition in the generic marketplace and you have biosimilars for more complicated

biological formulations. the other issue the president will try to get at is why are other countries able to essentially charge a lot less for these drugs than the united states. so getting at some of those foreign competition issues, that's going to be very, very difficult but rhetorically the president can say look, it's not right that these drugs cost so much less in countries like canada and the u.k. versus in the united states. >> neil: even in the united states there can be a wide variance, depending on your insurance, or your wealth. where do you see it going? >> what always struck me about the drug debate, drug cost debate, was remember louisiana republican billy townsend in the dead of night last decade he put in at 3:00 a.m. in the morning medicare will not negotiate drug prices and they will not be reimportation from places like canada of cheaper drugs back into the united states and then as soon as he -- within days he went over and ran the drug lobby

and got millions of dollars a year. the drug lobby is extremely powerful here. i don't know if the president can push back on the powerful drug lobby and say you know what, can the drug lobby all say to socialist countries, stop with price controls. you need to have a free market in the drug market. >> neil: wouldn't they get more money from more customers paying for their drugs, conceivably. >> i think you brought this up earlier this hour, interviewing a congressman about this, this fine line, and this will always be the debate here as you go more and more left politically or more towards helping people would be thement, what do you do -- the argument, what do you do about research and development and the big american drug companies have been traditionally always the best at that. in other words, we're charging a lot but we also have the best products. >> what i meant to say was there's indication in the trump administration they'll make it part of trade disputes, drug prices with other countries. >> neil: how so? >> i'm not sure. they mentioned it this morning.

>> neil: stay tuned. >> there's a lot we don't know about what he's going to say here. >> neil: i don't know what the acceptable middle ground it. i don't like just as a human being, not a republican view, democrat view, or conservative view, i disclosed this many times, i have progressive m.s. there's no reason why given the fact i might have more money than the average person or better insurance, that my prospects with this disease are better than someone who has the same disease, that's not right. it is not even humane. >> we have significant inequitys in our health care system. beyond prescription drugs, you look at the level of access for medicaid patients, the low income government run program, you look at the fact that they have access to 20% of the doctors that you or i might have access to. that's a big problem we have. but really the issue of biopharmaceutical innovation is a significant problem because we do subsidize r&d for the rest of

the world. we subsidize it through the drug prices we pay. we subsidize it as taxpayers and nih funding, so all sorts of inequities have to be addressed. >> neil: states police how much utilities can raise prices for their customers. are we going to go that route? >> massachusetts said in their medicaid program we're not going to say to expensive drugs you're going to be in our medicaid program. we're going to knock out expensive drugs and go towards generics. will other states follow, in medicaid programs to say we'll have cheaper drugs in our system. >> neil: wouldn't you be leery of that as well? they're taking out of the system potential life-saving drugs for which there is not a generic equivalent. >> that's true. it's mandating competition in some way as well. we want to have the market be as quote, unquote, open as possible and we want everybody to have free markets and open

competition but we're doing it almost by kind of executive chaos, making them do that. when you mix the formulas together economically, i'm not sure how that all turns out in ge.>> i think that's why this regulatory piece is important. people tend to overlook it. we have an fda that was designed in the 1970s for 1970 era drug developments. to bring that into the future, to say we need to get generics to market faster, we have to figure out a way to stimulate competition in the marketplace, for which there are medical conditions, for which there are very few cures, how do we get more cure intuse the marketplace. -- cures into the marketplace. i think there's an argument to be made that having some reform will impact drug prices, will bring them down. >> neil: this is not going to be part of the president's announcement today, but to provide for those with a fatal

disease, you sign off on trying a experimental drug, the fda allowing it for those who have no other point. >> we saw that with aids drug in the '80s. there was a bottleneck to get the life-saving drugs into the market. they revolutionized the process via the fda process. >> neil: we won't sue anyone, just give me a shot. >> there's innovative ways. how aggressive will the president be in pushing back against the drug lobby. >> it's a complicated issue. the numbers are overwhelming when you think about how many people can't afford or say they can't aa ford the drugs that they -- afford the drugs they really need. 20% of all the prescriptions that are written out go unfilled. somebody did a recent survey that showed it was almost 14% of people say that they don't take medications that their doctor tells them they need because they can't afford them. that's a lot of people.

>> that is a lot of people. >> neil: thank you very very much. lonnie, thank you for taking the time out of your schedule as well. we'll get an idea what the president is proposing, a lot we don't know. this much we do, the whole world will be paying attention, for obvious reasons. it's great to finally meet you. your parents have been talking about you for years. 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. knowing that the most important goals are yours, is how edward jones makes sense of investing. . . mgx minerals' disruptive technology can extract lithium -

used for batteries from expired oil wells. mgx's new pilot plant aims to produce lithium-carbonate one hundred times faster than from conventional lithium brine. mgx minerals

neil: waiting for plus from the president, what he will do about drug prices in the country that

have gotten out of control. talk about costs, how you pay for stuff with the office of management and budget director mick mulvaney, special before the live on 10:00 to 12, fox news. don't forget to watch that. meantime trish regan to take you through the president's remarks. >> hello, neil. you're looking at live picture where the president any moment will unveil his plan to lower soaring drug prices. i'm trick -- trish regan, welcome to "the intelligence report." he wants to bring relief to millions of americans who he says are paying way too much. many americans are for prescription drugs. he is set to unveil a plan that will lower drug prices, induce competition and pressure foreign companies. that is all part of the president's america first policy that they are effectively freeloading off