it is good. you didn't vote for tax cuts that helped lift everybody's vote in this country. find something else to complain about. maria: i wonder if people remember that, in midterm elections, not one dem voted. >> not one. maria: seize the day. dagen mcdowell, jon hilsenrath >> i'm charles payne for stuart. he is taking extended vacation. we have a ton of stories. including confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. kavanaugh will give the opening statement this morning. he will say he will be a impartial pro-law judge. big corporate news. nike picks colin kaepernick in the frontman, just do it campaign, 30-year anniversary. kaepernick is still controversial figure. he is still not signed.

nike see shares down in premarket trading. president trump calling eight afl-cio boss richard trumka, after he blasted the president saying we didn't need canada in a nafta deal. a whole mower on "varney & company" that starts right now charles: we have report profits in the second quarter emac what have we got. liz: largest year-over-year gain in six years. taxes paid by companies down over a third, year-over-year. looking out friday, 190,000 jobs

the look see there. this is the most hated economic recovery ever. the question is wage growth. we'll see possibly flat year-over-year wage growth. people forget corporate benefits are on the up tick and rise. growth in the middle class according to "washington post" is record levels around the world. so the middle class is growing. charles: you said the most hated. liz: rodney dangerfield economic recovery. gets no respect. charles: ashley is with us, "wall street journal" james freeman. real quick, when will the recovery get some respect? >> i think people want to see more on the wage gains. give some respect. markets have given it a great deal of respect. when you see the wage surges that, we have very tight labor market. i think they should be on the way. charles: funny, guys, real quick, last week there was survey people being happy at work. like a multidecade high. there is 23 components of it.

when i look at components. people were thrilled with the people they work with, commute to work, interest of work, at very problem, promotional policy, bonus plans. liz: people are happy to go to work after labor day? whoo. charles: another great topic. still no deal with canada. those talks will resume. joining us fox news contributor james freeman, the official introduction. also on "the wall street journal" editorial board. author of a book, be booms, busts, bailouts at citi. thank you, james. even when they said there was no deal the tone of the conversations seemed to have changed. it is much more positive tone. lends folks to believe maybe something will happen. >> i think you were going to get a deal friday if not for the leaked off the record comments from president trump. whether he can't trust someone on his staff or can't trust bloomberg, we don't know.

i think you were headed toward a deal. there is all the reason in the world to get a deal. we talked about 75% of canadian exports are bought by the u.s. canada is the biggest export market for most american states. a lot to say we should stay in nafta. charles: that is interesting, because their trade representative has no problem along with justin trudeau to say we're protecting canada. for empty trump to get pushback for the conments, i thought he was being honest with his assessment. wasn't same bombast woe might see in a tweet. the irony he said i can't kill canada, i thought that was interesting that it derailed this. >> politicians on both sides eventually need to get reelected. neither one can go back to their citizens saying we can't get run

over in this deal. on the specific issue of canada wanted dispute resolution procedures, they worry about him putting new tariffs on, he should be happy to give on that point once he gets the trade deal he wants. he doesn't need to threaten tariffs anymore. charles: if he gets the trade deal he wants. because those trade deals historically, the way the panels are set up, we feel like as representative we lost a lot of them. big corporate news this morning. nike selected former 49ers quarterback colin kaepernick to be the face of the just do it campaign. we have fox news's kevin jackson. they knew what they were getting into, they just did it. >> they did. i think the stock market will do it to them. i think backlash will be tremendous. you can't take a fake narrative which is what kaepernick has done, it was a self-indulgent move on his part think america will go for this. charles: what is the fake

narrative? >> the fake narrative that blacks are being killed in outrageous numbers. the fact he kneeled during the anthem, which goes against the complete american spirit. that colin kaepernick says he thinks the cops are pigs, wears socks to that effect. there is no upside for nike doing this, when you look into all the elements into play. charles: do you have an issue saying there is police brutality at all, being able to protest that? >> absolutely there is police brutality. i have a film coming out, bleeding blue. we deal with that we talk about crooked cops. we talk about the very issues that colin kaepernick is talking about. the problem they make it sound like it is an epidemic. randy moss, got inducted into the nfl hall of fame. had 12 names on a tie that span a decade of blacks killed by police officers. charles: from the business point of view, last three years, adidas stock is up 221%.

nike up only 49%. adidas taken a lot of market share. i think of business perspective this is their way of trying to get street cred back. we have one year. i like a three-year. >> terrible miscalculation. charles: brett kavanaugh, democrats will put up all kinds of a fight. do you think he will make it through this? >> we won. america is saying, if donald trump posted the people that he was going to pick. by the way we're not just winning in the supreme court. we're winning in federal courts, an winning in districts courts as well. we won. america finally wants to see us act like winners. i think kavanaugh is one of those lines in the sand. it will not be easy confirmation. charles: what about potential democrats on the fence, susan collins, do you think he resolved the issue of roe v. wade? >> look every time we talk about when a conservative talks on the

court we talk about the very same issues, what will be the ruling on that. donald trump will end up getting the 5-4. some people believe it will end up being 7-2 by end of his presidency which will make some people lose their minds. whether ajudicating roe v. wade, whatever may be, the ancillary, what would be the other side be doing? would they battling down the hatches on other side of the issue? of course they want someone they know will protect what they believe is a woman's right to choose. only fair donald trump appoints who he wants. charles: kevin, appreciate it. >> my pleasure. charles: union leader richard trumka weighing in on the canadian trade talks. roll tapes. >> our economies are integrated, three countries in north america the economy is pretty integrated. it is pretty hard to see how that would work without having canada in the deal. charles: as you might imagine president trump fired back with a tweet. quote, richard trumka, head of

afl-cio represented his union poorly on television this weekend. some. things he said were so against the working men and women of our country and success of the u.s. itself. that, it is, that easy to see why unions are doing so poorly, a emdid. james freeman, richard trumka, what do you make of his comments? we should say it is easy to google all the democratic opposition to nafta. you know. >> right. charles: and particularly teamsters, who really came out on the shortened when they allowed mexican truck drivers to bring all the way through this country, last part of nafta pushed through under president obama. what do you make of this? >> just, to your point, it is confusing for a lot of people, probably listening to those richard trumka comments which i agree with. i don't normally agree with him, that was right on the money, but labor unions tend to like protection. they tend to like trade barriers. in particular this redone nafta

on the auto parts should be pleasing to unions because it is basically protecting canadian and american union labor jobs. charles: higher percentage of autos made in north america. >> we'll pay more for cars. mexico will be marginally less competitive this is good if you're a union worker. liz: was trump accurate congress needs to sign off on the deal. congress needs to sign off. charles: he forced revamp of nafta, until you had a republican that pushed it through, now he is against it. interesting how the bedfellows change or opinions change. >> i think, as i said there is a lot of reason to get a deal. i think they will get a deal. think if they don't get a deal, mr. trumka may have a problem, where leadership gets away from membership in the united states. charles: i think it already happened a long time ago. look at number on union enrollment, it has been slipping

under his leadership. check on futures this morning. we'll open down. down 80. down as much as 90. pressure after string of successful weeks here. amazon closing in on the one trillion dollar market cap. now the company is eyeing nearly 90 billion-dollar all online ad market. should facebook and google be concerned about that? controversy surrounding the new movie about the moon landing. the outrage growing over the american man flap in the "first man." on "varney & company," we're just now getting started. 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

charles: can't for get about the tesla saga. it goes on. opened significantly lower, breaking $300 support point. there is always an amazon story,

reportedly the company setting sights on 88 billion-dollar on line ad market. author of the book on amazon, nyu business professor scott galloway. scott, let's start with facebook and google being concerned because amazon, every time announced they're even thinking about answering someone else's turf, we see the market sell-off and their would be rivals. >> it hasn't happened. these guys don't scare easily. it finally getting into the point where it may eat in its duopoly. it may become a triopoly. you're on amazon buying huggies and they can sell you an ad for pampers which is incredibly attractive proposition. more data, more exposure to people in the check outline. you know the most valuable shelf space in the grocery store. charles: impulse buying. >> right there. so amazon has the largest check

out shopping says in the world and they're monetizing. morgan stanley thought they would do 2 1/2 billion dollars this year, amazon media group. looks like they will blow through 10. charles: are you applauding this move or worried about this move, potentially if they move into this area? you talk about three major companies versus two. is that typically better for the consumer ultimately? >> i think it is good to break up the duopoly of facebook and google. they're getting so powerful, any other company in the respective sectors, media, retail, having oxygen checked out of the room. no one ever thought about amazon media group. it was categorized on business sector under other, other grew 110% year on year, charles. charles: you're not a big fan of amazon or the big tech names per se. amazon you thought would be the first trillion dollar market

cap. apple pete them to the punch. companies breeneath the service, omni channel models learn how to compete. coulded amazon threat be overblown? >> i don't think so. so, retail you have a perfect storm of good things. you have supply taken out. a lot of stores closed down, the economy is really strong, so you have seen some retailers come back. we like to think we're in era of innovation. new business formation is cut in half. more businesses being started when jimmy carter was president than they are today. difficult for getting a e-commerce company, difficult to start media, research company. they have so much power, so much capital, very difficult to compete in my view. if you're a shareholder you love amazon media group. i'm a shareholder. as consumer i love amazon. as a citizen worried about the

growth of our economy and new jobs for young people, i think big tech represents a real threat. charles: talk more about the big tech, folks. a lot of guys heading to capitol hill, tomorrow they testify in part with the russian meddling. this will give both sides in the aisle capitol hill to take their shots, ask different questions on myriad of issues. these sort of shows, like the mark zuckerberg show, i thought was a farce to a degree where i don't know we get anything out of them, ultimately, i believe, at some point, you're going to see, pushback against these companies from capitol hill. maybe the, you know, trying to break them up? >> yeah, so far the only thing we've seen, only in terms of regulations been out of europe, with gdpr, which by the way doesn't look to slowed down spending and slowed down revenues. i don't know if you see anything come out of d.c., charles. i think it has become such a partisan issue. it could have been a bipartisan

moment, i think in weird way trump goes after them, inoculates them from regulation. the left could have been an ally. it will be a partisan fight. 88 full time lobbyists for amazon and 50 full-time lobbyists for google will do a good job on few situation. you could see an attorney general in the red state, brightest blue line path between the ag's mansion and governor's mansion is populisted target against big techs. you might see it but will not come out of d.c. charles: thank you. big guest on fox business tomorrow. uber ceo sitting down with our very own susan li, "first on fox business" interview. the market cap went from 62 to $72 billion. another check on futures.

when you use the green arrows you get a little antsy. this is the week to be apt sy. more "varney" after this.

charles: toyota sales down 2% in august versus a year ago. ford sales up 4% compared to

august of last year. tropical storm gordon is moving quickly across the eastern gulf of mexico. janice dean is in the fox news weather center with the latest. janice? >> hi, charles. we get a new advisory out at 11:00 a.m. we are tracking the storm system. as you can see the gulf coast is on alert for the potential of showers and thunderstorms and we will see a landfall, we think sometime between seven p.m. and 9:00 p.m. hour. there is the hurricane warnings in effect here along the coast of louisiana, mississippi, alabama. expecting landfall overnight tonight. some rainfall. three to six is, maybe even 10-inches of rain this is a quick-mover. that is the good news. but we'll see potential not only heavy rain but tropical storm force winds, maybe hurricane gusts, perhaps large storms and tornadoes and damaging winds as well with the landfalling systems. we'll watch for the threat of severe storms and heavy

rainfall. close to the center of the storm. once it makes landfall. over next couple days it will move into a trough, be picked up, potential for more rainfall across central u.s. we'll keep you posted. back to you. charles: janice dean. thank you very, very much. we're five minutes away from the opening bell. the market has been on an absolute tear. we bottomed march 23rd. ironically that was the day after the first round of tariffs actually went into effect against china. ever since then, despite volatility the bias shifted to the upside. and these sort of sessions are great. i love these days when we open down like this, to test the resolve of the market. now the motion that everybody was coming back after labor day not necessarily true. we won't have all the key players here but this is the big week. by friday everyone will be positioned for the jobs report. remember between now and then we have trade issue. canada, u.s. we have potentially another $200 billion in tariffs going into effect.

we have the kavanaugh hearings. we have whole lot of stuff going on. opening down 64 points, to me the perfect test for a tuesday morning. varney and cap will be right back. so i got an offer on the business, and now i'm thinking... i'd like to retire early. oh, that's great sarah. let's talk about this when we meet next week. how did edward jones come to manage a trillion dollars in assets under care? jay. sarah. so i have a few thoughts on that early retirement... by focusing our mind on whatever's on yours.

charles: folks the opening bell will ring in about 20 seconds.

remember it's a short week, but it is going to be an amazing week. we have scheduled events. [opening bell rings] some maybe potentially impacting the $200 billion in chinese goods. hopefully we get a deal with canada this week. that help ad lot when we announced it this week with mexico. let's get a quick check of the big board. we're populating. big losers, nike might not surprise a lot of people. controversial move. initially the stock paying a serious price for alienating a lot of customers. chevron and exxon, crude oil, west texas interimmediate broken through 7 77 -- 70. crude oil coming on real strong. apple with a new price target, by one of the major firms, $250 a share.

mice picture on the big board, although more red and green. s&p 500, down six points. again not a big, big deal. you want to see the market tested. see the rally tested, on a day like today, it is perfect time. check on the nike stock. it's a stock of the moment. for those who are not aware. nike decided to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the just do it campaign featuring colin kaepernick, suggesting he sacrificed everything. it has gotten attention they wanted. not necessarily sure if it will work. wall street seem as little bit concerned. there are the big tech names we check for you every single day, they are absolute juggernauts. they dominate every facet of our lives, including that one that is green. amazon up another 11 bucks today, 224. apple as i mentioned earlier, upgrade and new share price target at $250 a share. joining us market watcher, d.r. barton, ashley webster, liz macdonald, the company all here. much we're starting with corporate profits.

ashley: impressive. charles: impressive. over $2 trillion. up 2.4%. 47 billion above a year ago. the only thing i would say, there were some estimates that thought those numbers could be even higher. what are your thoughts on this? >> i think they still have some more upside, charles, as we head into the end of the year. i think we'll see continued, continued good earnings. 76 percent of the companies beat earnings expectations this last quarter. so i think there is a lot of momentum here. they are going to continue to play on that here in the u.s. ashley: is the bar being set too low? is that an easy beat in that is the question. you can beat anything if the bar is set low. 76% of what? charles: the management of these companies they set is the bar low. then the analysts take that as their base assumption. then they make the bar a little bit lower, a lot easier to explain it was a beat on the upside as a beat on downside.

liz: get so low a caterpillar could walk over it? charles: here is the having thing. our growth of profits grows at 2.4%. undistributed profits grew at a.1%. what are these corporations doing with this cash? are they putting it to work? we haven't seen any evidence they are putting it towards wages? >> they haven't put it toward wages, one thing to watch out for in the fourth quarter, if the wages fear raises its ugly head. they are sitting back to wait and see if it will be real. there are seeing it is. we want them in new plants, new investment, instead of financial engineering. not just buying back shares. that will be the kicker. charles: we saw forecast for capital spending explode, right? they did a survey in decent and did another one in may. it was up over 200%.

they are putting towards large invests which is good because they create great paying jobs. again sort of interesting to se them, we don't want necessarily seeing them sit on profits. want to see them work beyond buybacks? >> beyond buybacks. we'll see continued dividend growth as well. people look at yields with low interest rates out there, with the yield chase going on. but i think one of the places to be coming up is going to be buying companies that make things that hurt when you drop them on your foot. industrial companies, will have a renaissance. charles: industrial material names and industrial names certainly have been lagging. i've been looking for them to come on. every time i think they will do well they sort of stumble. let me ask you real quick here, you mentioned wage inflation. that is sort of wall street speak, main street is finally getting paid. the folks at home are saying what the hell is going on? remember february 2nd, we saw january jobs report, median

wages up 2.9%. everyone had their hair on fire. shows the disconnect. 2.9% to the average person. hey, that is way overdo? when will it be 4%? it used to be 4%. can we have a market that goes up and main street paid at the same time? ashley: good question. >> the bugaboo, when we finally see that tick up, the fed will have to have, november, charles, that is the employment number to -- charles: by the way, folks i have to point out to you as well. brett kavanaugh, he has arrived as you can see. his family is there. he is all smiles. this is a huge day. i have a feeling from time to time, some of the questions posed to him may be slightly offensive to him. obviously he has to take it. he is potentially a key component of court and tilt legal rulings in this country for decade to come. this is critical, without a doubt. charles: folks, look at nike

shares here again. this is the big controversial stock of the morning. of course we know the company selected former 49ers quarterback colin kaepernick to be the face of its just do it campaign. the controversy, getting attention they want, ultimately what does it do for the company? does it pick up sales? do they retake market share? does it help the stock? >> i believe you said in the last segment. they're trying to go after some streed credibility, some street cred. the problem with this, why the market is reacting negatively, how will they sell more shoes and apparel because colin kaepernick is the face? they're alienating some people out there. the new kid are not looking up to watch him play, saying yeah, i want those news. i think it's a difficult sell from a business perspective. >> i find it fascinating, someone, powers that be at nike

sat around the table. they bought in the pr gurus. they said you know what we need to do, we need to hook on to colin kaepernick. they all sat around on the table, said great idea. i don't get it. i don't see what you gain. maybe some street cred. ultimately could hurt them, more than help them. charles: young americans identify with colin kaepernick more than older americans. ashley: maybe. >> when you go to the fly club in new york city, i don't know where they get the money from, those are the kids buying 700-dollar yee-zys. liz: nike is known to being a address sieve in this space. they are basically saying, you know what? , this backlash is worth it. any boycott is worth it. they stuck by tiger woods through tiger woods scandal when everybody dropped tiger woods. they have been known to be pretty aggressive. charles: what bothers people, beyond the protests, colin

kaepernick that he sacrificed everything. his career had been on a downfall. not a modern day muhammad ali or tommy smith. >> he has been on the nike roster since 2011. charles: amazon, every day there is news there. we have the big story of the day because this is huge. there are reports out there saying the company is setting sights on $88 billion online ad market. d-r, how worried should google and facebook be? >> they should be worried because of the eyeballs amazon gets. more importantly the targeted eyeballs they can get. they can do much better targeted marketing. therefore charge a higher per click, per click fee for the ads that they're running on their site. i think they are going to chew into google and facebook have about half of that 88 billion. so that is a big market. yet another place for amazon. liz: annualized.

amazon is one 10th of that 88 million. charles: does this ultimately push amazon toward some regulatory issues in terms of -- do they ever say, hey, these guys are in everything, we have to break them up because they are an impediment to competition in i see at some point -- ashley: talking about antitrust, right? charles: right. ashley: don't you have to have consumers paying more because one company is, that is the not case. charles: if you prevent competition, then -- liz: talking about breaking up an ecosystem which is rare for antitrust gang in d.c. to do. platform of thousands of small businesses to come into it. charles: i don't think it would happen under a republican administration but i think it could happen be at the pace the company is going. might be better news that brick-and-mortar retail are doing better. >> i think they're doing a great job -- charles: hold on, folks. we will listen to this?

cory booker. >> talk about time and time again the ideals we should have. what is the rush, what are we trying to hide without the documents out front? what are we hiding by not letting documents come out? this committee is violation of the values we as committee striven for, transparency. we're rushing in a process a way that is unnecessary. i appeal for the motion, at least be voted on. >> mr. chairman? >> at least have a vote. when we wrote you a letter august 24th, asking to have a meeting on this issue you denied us the right to meet. here we are having a meeting. let's at least deit bat issue. call this for a vote. i appeal to the sense of fairness, decency, the commitment you made to transparency. this violates what you have even said and called for, sir. you called for documents. you yourself, limited documents. we thought there should be more. we have not received documents you even called for.

sir, based upon your own principles, your own values i call for at least to have us a debate or a vote on these issues, not for us to rush through this process. [applause] >> mr. chairman? >> mr. chairman. senator. >> i would like to respond to senator booker. senator booker, i think that, i respect very much a lot of things you do but you spoke about my decency and, you spoke about my decency and integrity. and i think, you are taking advantage of my decency and integrity. [shouting]

>> so order, it is regular order for us to receive, all the documents. to receive all the documents that this committee is entitled to. [shouting] >> mr. chairman, it is also, mr. chairman it is not regular order for the majority to require the minority to pre-clear our questions, our documents and videos we would like to use at this hearing. that is unprecedented. that is not regular order. since when do we have to submit the questions and the process that we wish to follow. the questions as this nominee? i would like your clarification. i would like why are you are questioning regular order -- >> i ask that you stop so we can

conduct this hearing the way we have planned it. maybe it isn't going exactly the way that the minority would like to have it go. but we have, we have said for a long period of time that we were going to proceed on this very day. and i think we ought to give the american people the opportunity to hear whether judge kavanaugh should be on the supreme court or not. and, you have heard my side of the aisle call for regular order. and i think we ought to proceed in regular order. there will be plenty of opportunities to respond to the questions that the minority has legitimate. [shouting] >> legitimately raising. we will, we will proceed accordingly. >> mr. chairman? under, under regular order, may i ask a point of order, which is, that we are now presented

with a situation in which somebody is has decided that there are 100,000 documents protected by second is tiff privilege. yet there has not been an assertion of executive privilege before the committee. how are we to determine whether executive privilege has been properly asserted if this hearing goes by without the committee ever considering that question? why is it not in regular order for us to determine before the hearing at which the documents would be necessary, whether or not the assertion of privilege, that prevents us from getting those documents is legitimate or indeed is even an actual assertion of executive privilege? i do not understand why that is not a legitimate point of order at this point because at the end of this hearing it is to late to consider it. >> mr. chairman, if i might add to this, on integrity of the documents we received, there is really no integrity.

they have alterations. they have audits, attachments are missing. emails are cut off halfway through a chain. many are of interest to this committee but it is cut off. we, national archives hasn't had a chance to get us all that we want even though that you said on your website the national archives would act as a check against any political interference. i, i check, after the hearing is over is no check. i think we ought to at least have the national archive finish it, and to have for the first time, certainly in my 44 years here, to have somebody say there is a claim of executive privilege when the president hasn't made such a claim just puts everything under doubt. what are we trying to hide? why are we rushing?

>> i can answer all the questions that have been raised but i think if i answer those questions it is going to fit into the effort of the minority to continue to obstruct and i don't think that that's fair to our judge. it is not fair to our constitutional process. but let me, let me respond to those that now, and then maybe we can proceed. [shouting] my colleagues on the other side are accusing administration using executive privilege to hide documents from the committee. i want to say why they're wrong. unlike president obama's assertion of executive privilege during "fast & furious" is one example, this assertion is not legitimate. judge kavanaugh was a senior lawyer in the white house.

he advised the president on judicial nominations. provided legal advice on -- charles: folks, you see senator grassley there. just to go back, we cut into these proceedings with cory booker passionately pleaing to senator grassley for more documents, more time to review them. they need to debate, or at least asking what was the rush to vote. grassley's initial response cory booker was taking advantage of his decency and integrity. you can see it is calming down, a very heated matter. overnight the second is tiff branch i think released 42,000 documents. liz: it was bush team. charles: want to bring in -- ashley: just in time. charles: judge andrew napolitano. you look great. hope you're well-rested. we will need you big time this week. tell us what happened. this morning the complaint was

you gave us 42,000 document as. the complaint now is there is more documents, we want more. >> 42,000 documents were released last night. these are documents that were written by judge kavanaugh when he worked as a young lawyer in the white house. these were documents that were originally held by the national archives that president george w. bush, who was president and for whom, at the time and for whom then mr. kavanaugh worked signed off on them. president trump did not sign on off them. changed his mind earns decided to release them last night. complaint number one from the democrats who woe review 42,000 pages of doubts given to us labor day weekend, at 6:00 p.m., when the hearing is to start the next day. complaint number two, there are 100,000 documents that the president trump won't sign off on and president bush did sign off on. these are documents of memos

that a young brett kavanaugh wrote to the president of the united states for whom he worked. the then president signed off on. president trump is claiming executive privilege on those. the democrats are saying, how can the present president claim a privilege that is the ability to withhold documents on documents that were written 12 and 15 years ago? the democrats are arguing, we must raise this issue now before the hearing starts or we will forever lose the opportunity to address this issue. i think they have been ruled out of order by judge, by senator grassley. charles: but president trump had to sign off on them? >> under the law, yes. it requires two presidents -- charles: that is his prerogative then. >> yes. i think he cited the wrong privilege. that is in the weeds. he has the aability under the law to hold back these documents. democrats suspect in these documents are references to torture, probably in favor of torture which would animate, with i would disturb senator

rand paul, and antipathy towards reverse -- roe vs. wade. they don't know but suspect why the documents are being held back. charles: the republican response might be, you gotten 480,000 documents. >> yes. charles: more than the last five nominees combined this is a stall tactic. everything you're doing is a tactic to stall the inevitable or at least to try to get this, maybe even through the midterms? >> the better republican argument is, this judge has written 309 opinions on every subject conceivable under the constitution. if that doesn't tell you enough about his present thinking, not his thinking when he was 25-year-old lawyer but his present thinking as a 55-year-old life tenured judge on the second highest court in the land what more do you need? charles: judge, i'm glad you're back. glad you're back.

oh, boy. folks get another check on markets. what not sure exactly went down, maybe the fireworks we saw here. market sort of collapse ad little bit. we're looking at the session lows. down 158 points. more "varney" after this. choice? well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement. 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.

charles: all right, folks, the market, we opened under pressure but not this kind of pressure. the bottom fell out as we watched fireworks down out in capitol hill. not sure if there is connection. in six minutes we get a big economic report out. we'll keep you focused there, the new gee whiz feature in the new bmw, making their cars harder to drive. joining us foxnews.com automotive editor gary gastelu. what is that all about, gary. >> maybe funner to drive. new sedan, 600 pores power. they harness the power stability drive, they almost become too easy to drive. bmw set it make it a two wheel drive, rear wheel drive, no stability control, no traction control, expect purpose, drifting with it, burn out and

doughnuts with it. charles: right. i love the idea. so getting back to driving, right? while you can before the robots take over, because it will be tough. is this a particular market they're looking at this? is this for younger drivers maybe or? >> 105,000-dollar performance car. you want it to be perfect on the track. now you want to get it crazy. ford started a couple things. ford started that with a focus rs with a drift mode. this is next level, as far as executive cars. charles: you have the coolest job in the building. gary, thank you very much. appreciate it. conservative organization "freedom watch" filing a lawsuit against some of the biggest names in tech accusing them of violate antitrust. we have the founder of the lawsuit, larry claman. more "varney" after this. i had a coach. math.

ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, ... education to take your trading to the next level. only with td ameritrade. and butch.aura. and tank. and tiny. and this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace. laura can clean up a retriever that rolled in foxtails, but she's not much on "articles of organization." articles of what? so, she turned to legalzoom. they helped me out. she means we helped with her llc, trademark, and a lot of other legal stuff that's a part of running a business. so laura can get back to the dogs. would you sit still? this is laura's mobile dog grooming palace and this is where life meets legal.

charles: 10:00 a.m., 7:00 a.m. out west and fireworks continue

on day capitol hill. democrats bowing to push for a delay. cory booker is back up. >> senator feinstein has asked for the floor. >> chairman, i asked to respond - mr. chairman. >> senator booker, using a standard set by two members of your political party in the caucus and i will phrase because i don't have the exact quotes in front of me but recently senator schumer said from the floor, the best judge of whether or not someone should be on the supreme court is decisions that they made at lower courts. senator leahy said something similar to that when senator so the mayor was before us and we know how many we know what you

have done in the lower court and that's the best basis whether you are to be on the supreme court. we have 307 cases that this nominee has written decisions on as a basis for that. we have 488,000 other pages and maybe senators have not read them but their staff is fully informed because last night before 11:00 o'clock, on the 42000 pages that come to our attention, the staff on the republican side has gone through them. >> but sir, why did you ask for the white house counsel documents connected they were not germane to the hearing. >> for the record that 7000 pages an hour. that superhuman. >> they are amazing. >> mr. chairman. if i may - i have been there

nine supreme court hearings. >> is a short opening statement? >> it's a part of it. >> would you make your opening statement? >> shall i? >> mr. chairman, i asked for an opportunity to respond because he's directly challenge - the mac i said you are out of order. >> i asked in the process with due order an opportunity to respond to what i believe was a personal attack. >> i would like to have you give senator feinstein the courtesy of listening to her opening statement. >> well, i was just going to say something. you heard this is my ninth hearing. i think we got to look at this. these are unique circumstances. not only is the country deeply divided politically but we also find yourself with a president who faces his own serious problems. over a dozen cabinet members and

senior aides to president trump have resigned, then fired or failed their confirmations. a cloud of corruption, scandal and suspicion. the president's personal lawyer, campaign manager, deputy campaign manager in several campaign advisers have been entangled by indictments, guilty pleas and criminal convictions. is this backdrop that this nominee comes into. when what we are looking at is heat within the mainstream of american legal opinion and will he do the right thing by the constitution. we are also expressing the vetting process that has cast aside tradition in favor of speed. when justice scalia died republicans refused to even me

meet, even a meeting in her office, with president obama's nominee and held the seat open for one year. now with a republican in the white house they have changed their position. the majority rest into the searing and is refusing to even look at the nominees for record. in fact, 90% of the records from brett cavanaugh's tenure in the white house as counsel and staff secretary have not been provided to the senate. 96% have not been given to the public. we do know what the white house thinks of this nominee and don can - the white house counsel spoke to the federal society and made clear brett cavanaugh is exactly the kind of comity the president wanted. in his speech he discussed president trump's to list of

potential supreme court nomine nominees. one, he said was filled with mainstream candidates. the other list included candidates that are too hot for prime time. the kind that would be really hot in the senate. probably people who have written a lot. we get a sense of their views. the kind of people that make people nervous. that is a quote. i am saying this is the backdrop into which we come in to the situation so yes, there is frustration on the side. we know what happened with the prior nominee and the last one president obama presented to us. he never even got a hearing and never got a vote. and now the rush to judgment and the inability to have a civil and positive process.

i regret this but i think the frustration on the side of the aisle. everyone on the side of the aisle wants to do a good job. they want to consider what the findings are in there are tens of thousands of pages of e-mails and other items which could constitute findings on a whole host of major subjects that this nominee may be faced with and they are serious. the torture issues. all of the enron issues he's been through and all the kinds of things we want to ask questions about. so, i mean, understand where we are coming from. it's not to create a disruption and not to make this a bad process but it is to say majority, give us a time to do

our work so that we can have a positive incompetence of hearing on the man who may well be the deciding vote for many of america's teachers. >> mr. chairman, i renew my motion and i asked for a second. >> second the motion. >> i asked for a vote. i ask that we convene - >> i have to explain to were having a hearing and it's out of order. we are not in executive session. that would be the proper forum for entertaining motions. >> i asked that we reconvene in executive session. >> well, we won't vote on senator blumenthal's exertion or follow your suggestion. >> the motion - >> motions would not be - mr. chairman, it's a pending motion before the committee.

>> mr. chairman, if there is no vote on this motion which has been properly seconded and which could be, given about, in executive session this process will be tainted and stained forever. i am asking is a member of the committee and it's my right to do so, that we vote on my motion to adjourn and senator harrises motion to postpone and that we do it in executive session which can be easily and quickly convened right now. >> no, the motion is out of order. >> sir, i make a clear visible motion to move into executive session so that senator blumenthal motion may be considered. >> the motion is out of order. >> they are not out of order, mr. chairman. the probably before this committee. simply saying so, with all due respect and i have great perspective chairman, doesn't make them so.

does not make them out of order because the german roles they are out of order. the number of excellent lawyers in this room and ask that this body now do what it is responsible he is. to have an executive session so we can vote on a motion to adjourn and then we can deliberately and thoughtfully consider the documents that have been presented and also review the committee documents that are marked confidential without any reason or rationale. >> the motion is denied. >> how long will that take? ten minutes to have a motion and vote on this process. i don't understand what the rush is that we can't even let senators vote on what is a very important motion germane to our constitutional duties before this body and before we proceed. i don't understand. take the time. what are we afraid of? >> mr. chairman.

mr. chairman. senator kennedy. >> thank you mr. chairman. i have a question about the process. i understand my colleagues want and i understand they feel strongly about this. what are going to be the ground rules today? are we going to be allowed to interrupt each other, interrupt the witness, will be should be seek recognition from the chair? i want to understand the ground rules. >> proper respect and decorum, plus, how we normally have done business in a hearing like this, we would not be having his motions. you are new to the senate so this is something i've never gone through before and 15 supreme court nominations that i have been since i've been on here. every member and i was interrupted before i got a chance to say the agenda for today but every member is going

to get ten minutes to make their remarks and then we will go to the introducers of judge, and there will be three of those and then we will have the swearing-in of judge cavanaugh and then we will have his opening remarks and we will adjourn for today and we convene at 930 on wednesday and thursday and each member will have 30 minutes to ask questions or make all these points or they are making right now. then there will be a second round of 20 minutes each so every member will get 50 minutes to ask all the questions or make all the statements they want to make in regard to anything about this candidate or anything about how this meeting is being conducted. then we will go late into

wednesday night or thursday night so we get done with questioning of judge cavanaugh and then on thursday we will have three panels of six each, evenly divided, for people to think judge cavanaugh should be on the supreme court and people that think he should not be on supreme court and we hopefully get that done friday but we have to go saturday and sunday we will go saturday and sunday so we get it all done. >> mr. chairman how we could we possibly - >> does that answer your question, senator kennedy? >> yes, and i appreciate that. but if i wanted to say something, do i need to be recognized by the chair? >> that would be the way that it is handled. i tried to explain to you i want to be patient because sometimes if you aren't patient and you argue why something should be done it takes longer than it

does just to listen to people. i don't think we should have to listen to the same thing three or four times. >> patients is good, mr. chairman. but i want to understand the rules. >> yeah, you should be recognized. you can understand that i have been patient and listen to people not be recognized and speak anyway because i would like to have this be a peaceful session. >> before i try your patience, i am done. >> mr. chairman, i have a question about ground rules. >> go ahead. >> the question is before we can proceed and let you know whether the majority is still requiring of all of the democratic members of this committee to precleared the question documents and videos that we would like to use at this hearing? >> i was hoping that on the subject that you just brought up that we would have some clarification of what you want to approach that and i'm not

prepared to answer that question because i don't know what the answer has been and i don't want you to give me what you think the answer has been a discussion between our staff on the subje subject. mr. chairman, i don't think it's been the case in a hearing like this that members of this committee had to precleared what we propose to query the nominee about. that is totally unprecedented. if we don't - >> how. [inaudible conversations] >> i would like to respond. the reason for having that discussion is at least in my time on the committee and for 50 nominations we never had a request for a video. it seems to me to be courteous to all the members of the committee to be nice to know the purpose and what it might contain. any questions you want to ask you can ask questions but it's not about what questions you are going to ask what about the presentation of something that is never been a part of this up in court hearing in the past.

who wanted - >> mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman. >> i think i will go back and forth. >> mr. chairman, i'm confused because i heard earlier that this was a reaction to the document released last night but i'm reviewing a tweet from nbc that said democrats plotted coordinated protest strategy over the holiday weekend and all agreed to disrupt the protest hearing and sources tell me. subsequent democratic leader chuck schumer led a phone call it committee members are activating now. i want to be clear, the members on when he participated in a phone call or strategy before the documents were released yesterday. are you suggesting that this allegation is false? >> there was a phone conference yesterday and i can tell you at

the time many issues were raised in one of the issues was at the fact that over a hundred thousand dockets related to judge kavanaugh have been characterized by the chairman of the committee is committee confidential. i've been a member of the committee for number of years and committee confidential documents have been limited to its ordinary circumstances as an example, someone is accused of taking drugs during the course of an investigation and i'm not making suggesting that the case were close to here but it was done in a confidential setting. in fairness to the nominee. the same thing with duis in the like. we used an extremely rare circumstances where we would meet evans committee hearing and sit down and it usually related to a handful of pages or handle of document references. instead, we found now is missing hundreds of thousands of documents characterized committee, mitchell unilaterally and is not done in a bipartisan basis but done by the chairman. one of the discussions yesterday was this whole question of whether this committee is going to hear a nominee for lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land without access to

basic information about his record, public record is secretary to the united states that secretary. thirty-five months of public service and we been told to not even be considered in the document cannot be considered so i ask to the gentleman there was a conversation yesterday about these documents and i have no idea that 11:00 o'clock last night 42000 more documents will be part on top of us and will be asked to take them up today. adding insult to injury. mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman. i asked to be reckoned is under rule four. it states that the chairman shall entertain a non- debatable motion to bring the matter before the committee to evoke. if there is objection to bring the matter to a vote without further debate a rollcall of the committee shall be taken in debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate

passes with 11 votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority. i ask for a vote on my motion to adjourn under rule four. mr. chairman, these are rules that we are obligated to follow. the chairman has no right, with all due respect, to simply override them by fear. >> we are obligated - we are obligated by that rule in executive session. were not in executive session. i would respond - i would respond to the issues brought up by senator durbin by confidential document. i was criticized for my decision to receive some documents on committee confidential but i'm doing exactly what i did during judge for stitches and what

chairman like he did during justice kagan's and this is another example of treating regular committee practices somehow out of the ordinary. presidential records we receive often contain highly sensitive advice to the president, as well as personal privacy information like full names, date of birth and social security numbers and bank account numbers and like my predecessor i agreed to receive some presidential records as committee confidential so that both democrats and republicans can begin reviewing judge kavanaugh's materials much earlier. i don't know why my democratic colleagues reject to receiving documents faster. not all presidential records remain confidential. in fact, nearly two thirds already became public. these records are posted on the committee public website and

available to the american people. as a result, we provided unprecedented public access to a record number of presidential records and do it and did it in record time. the most sensitive presidential records remain committee confidential under federal law and just as they were during the nomination of kagan or judge gorsuch but we've expanded access to these documents also instead of just providing access to committee members we have provided access to all 100 senators. instead of just providing access to a very few committee aides we have provided access to all committee aides and instead of just providing access to physical binders a paper we provided digital seven access. this is on president access i'd

like to add to my staff set up work stations and have been available 247 to help senators who were not on committee confidential members. but not once but not once senator showed up. i guess senators complaining about lack of access to continued confidential documents are only interested in seeing them in the first place but i want to incise more documents are - >> there you have been going to the rules and some of the decision making behind some of his in the way he's trying to approach this year the fireworks are continuing in the back. during us, just as gorgeous comedic asian strategist. democrats brought up in this contentiousness that they are together and had a meeting and plan to make this a disruptive, unruly situation. i'm not sure how they will this

will help them block the nomination but what you make of what were seen so far? >> thank you. this is an exercise in frustration. they know that the votes are not on their site. judge kavanaugh is likely to be confirmed and this is their last stand. it is to protest, delay the game from a claim that they have not seen enough documents to look through his record. anything to slow down the process. it is also meant to brand a nominee and brand this process as somewhat, somehow out of the norm. this has been remanded through. when in fact a senator grassley was just saying it is not. democrats have had lots of time to review hundreds of thousands of documents. charles: certainly, to me it is interesting but i want hand leading to the weekend the idea

that they did not have documents when they got the 42000 they had too many and not enough time. nancy pelosi said don't worry about it, read it later. ron, two-point when feinstein says to cavanaugh that they want see if he was in a mainstream legal american opinion, how does that show you how they view the supreme court role? >> it is absolutely right. thinking that - what they're worried about is the fact that justice kennedy retiring and being the same boat on the court and having that vacancy will be replaced by judge kavanaugh and i can leading the court to the right. however, judge kavanaugh has ruled on the dc supreme court for 12 years and has over 300 opinions to look through. he has been rated by the american bar association as well qualified and he is a fair and

impartial judge. will he rule exactly the way kennedy has done? probably not. it'll be different. but we don't know that it will take every case as is done at the dc circuit court and look at it on its merit. that is why he is here. it's one of the best legal minds that our country has to offer. charles: i'm a new jersey resident so that's how i got on corey booker's e-mail train but i did get an e-mail and the empty interesting line that stood out is president trump should not be able to handpick a judge who could effectively serve as his quote, get out of jail free card. what you make of that? >> first of all, it's very duplicitous and hypocrite goal. president clinton was being investigated he nominated

stephen breyer to this up in court. breyer was confirmed. by 87 votes, i believe, overwhelmingly. what they are trying to do is cloud this hearing and try to make this process or make cavanaugh tainted, so to speak, to politicize the court to say that president trump. >> are simply out of the mainstream and it will tilt to the right and benefit somehow should some investigation board i just simply disagree. charles: ron, i thought senator feinstein did bring up an interesting point. for the non- legal folks out there who will wonder why republicans were able to delay the democrat, president obama. >> , and yet there's a great sense of urgency this time around. what the answer? >> senator majority mitch mcconnell made the determination that judge mayor garland would

not be confirmed because it was during a presidential lection. this is a midterm election and they believe that the stakes are different than the presidential election. >> were talking to nomination to go. the party done judge gorsuch and we are now race with the hearing so it's a little late for that type of - i understand. charles: but they're throwing everything but the kitchen sink out there. some will wonder the same thing. you made a great point and we appreciate your expertise. it's been a crazy day. thank you so much. >> thank you very much. charles: confirmation hearing is underway at capitol hill. ryan comedic is next and face with twitter apple and google will hit or will be hit with class-action lawsuits. the question is are they censoring conservatives. we will talk to the man behind those lawsuits, next.

♪ you shouldn't be rushed into booking a hotel. with expedia's add-on advantage, booking a flight unlocks discounts on select hotels until the day you leave for your trip. add-on advantage. only when you book with expedia.

jardiance asked: when it comes to managing your type 2 diabetes, what matters to you? you got a1c, heart, diet, and exercise. slide 'em up or slide 'em down. so let's see. for most of you, it's lower a1c. but only a few of you are thinking about your heart. fact is, even though it helps to manage a1c, type 2 diabetes still increases your risk of a fatal heart attack or stroke. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease, significantly reducing the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event and lowering a1c, along with diet and exercise. this really changes things. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration.

this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. man: ask your doctor about jardiance and get to the heart of what matters. takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest.

i call it my "comfortable future plan," and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org. charles: were down 144 down points and then the number came up with were down 50 but now were back about were restarted and a fair amount of pressure put the off the lows of the session. let's look at the big tech names is one. amazon perhaps entering the turf of facebook and google. the only green on the screen. then there is nike. at one point was indicating it would be down is $3 for the open after the news they're making colin cap next the face of its

new ad campaign and there's goldman sachs putting a sell rating on the stock you can see breaking 300 according to goldman it could go to $200 a share. colin kaepernick bases its anniversary of the just do a campaign and we want to bring in colonel brian searcy, sir, your take on all of this. >> i tell you what. it's been a busy day and the divisiveness that we just saw with what we had with judge kavanaugh's hearing is what we are seeing with colin kaepernick and what nike has done with the new campaign. my concern is it will cause even more divisiveness and we seen that twitter exploded, shoes being burned, socks being cut in my concern as a veteran and someone that served and vetted this country and is a full and fervent supporter of unfortunate and ems and all the fire men and women out there is that we are

not showing that you respect that they need and we are committing to the devices of in the country. charles: i think we will continue down this path because the nfl an opportunity to deal with this in an entire off-season. then they blinked. this will continue and we have it up on the screen. believe in something even if it means sacrificing everything. how bad does this have to get, though, colonel searcy and - worthy both sides of this seem to be firmly planted in their beliefs and no one is budging. i don't see a bridge between either. >> that's an absolute crackling. that's one of the problems i have seen in our country. one of the main reasons i founded mainstream pilot. trying to talk about how to allow the tools that are necessary to develop the skills so people can get back to understanding what our republic

is founded upon. the fact that they're allowed to have their own opinion we can have conversations about those opinions and make decisions that would better for a country so we can continue to ensure that our economy and republic remains the best in the world. i'm very proud american, having served many other veterans and that's the big concerns i have is the divisiveness is causing a breakaway of the american public is being proud about america and about being a patriot and wanting to serve her country and espousing that with everything we do. this divisiveness is clogging up. we need to have the ability to have conversations as we can get back to how things were 25-30 years ago where you have a conversation, have different opinions but figure out the best way forward so we remain the best country on the planet. charles: colonel, stay on. we will bring in adam shapiro who is more. adam. >> yeah, okay, i'm on this camera. there we go.

pull up the - pull up the nike stock and you can see it there. nike is a global company and had $34.5 billion in sales in fiscal 2018 and we will report the first quarter 2019 earnings on september 25. remember they control something like 27 and half% of the sports apparel market globally. this play could be much more than the red states but a global play to increase their sales overseas. in the united states there the one number one athletic footwear maker and they are losing a little bit too adidas but they still have more than 10% gain over adidas in the market. one last thing, nike in march of this year actually renew the contract with the nfl. they supply the uniforms. that contract takes them through 2025, as of this point.

they will provide all the undervalued forms with the nike swoosh and we are busily reached out starting yesterday to both nike and to the nfl and they have said not a word to the nfl, if you are watching, even calling you and reached out to you but let's talk. charles: i think if you drill down - forget about the apparel but just with sneakers in america the jordan brand nike is made significant inroads. the last two years adidas stock is up 221% and nike shares are 49%. i think adidas did something interesting because they were with nonathletes. kanye west has been amazing for them and his shoes go for 70 700-$1000. could they found a better way even to go after the global market than this? is an interesting gambit on their part. >> if you go to the # making boycott on twitter you will see people who are very upset with nike's decision. an equal number of people who support the decision. charles: again, the point i

think is will it help them in terms of sales or is this something - i think it gives them regret but i don't know if >> in united it might backfire but globally there it betting it won't. charles: will they get global market share? >> we would ask nike if they would respond. charles: thank you, brian, colonel searcy and adam, thank you very much. we want to bring in the man himself, brian kilmeade. first, senate confirmation hearings already explosions and crazy and the dems are going out all of the way. they said they would disrupt the thing and they been extremely successful so far but what you make of it? >> circus, embarrassing, knowing that people are watching around the world. if this was seventh-grade and if this was seventh-grade would be lab and how to conduct a hearing

i would be upset. if this was a lunchroom in junior high school, i'd be upset. let alone men and women in their 60s and 70s who'd been down this thing ten or 12 times and brett kavanaugh is not involved in this yet. they are yelling at each other and interrupting in the clouds to go into the gallery and get up and scream every time a republic and talks and they are thrown out they get their moment and cnn make sure to show it but we are not just like we have streakers across the field, you don't show it. that gives you more streakers now i predict they will get up and walk out of this hearing. i don't think they will sit for it. charles: you think democrats will get up and walk out as a protest? >> yes you've seen it already. it's unbelievable. they sit there and say we don't have documents or enough time in america garland did not get his chance. senator grassley of iowa has done this a million times before

and they are just doing this because they had their shot in many running for president like camilla harris and they have their shot in the sun with a country will be watching and clips could be played so they will have their shot to do it. a lot of people are bringing up maybe the fact this is on television is part of it. and how they have to stand up and take on brett kavanaugh and all the pressure from the left to take on caps off, there are rules. you can't take him on. you can say what you have to say to questioning but he has the votes. charles: it is interesting because an e-mail came out from cory booker saying president trump should not be able to hand-picked a judge who could effectively serve as his coat, get out of jail free card so you know there will be opposition but this is a pretty low blow for cap not in his career. >> not from booker. cory booker is the biggest letdown because i knew him when he was mayor and i thought he would get things done by an ivy league grad with options but chose to make a lot of money to do a lot more good for other

people but now that he got there he only does - he acts like a would be minister and going in, remember in july, when he had his chance to talk about kavanaugh he said a boat for kavanaugh was a boat for evil. really? a vote for evil? are you kidding? charles: you are pumped up about this one. >> open up the phone, charles. charles: coming up, california democratic party chair saying nevermind. don't boycott the burger chain in and out. it was all over the fact that remember there's evidence the company has donated money to the gop. they also donated money to the democrats. we will talk about the first president trump ready to ramp up the trade war with china. remember this week, another 200 billion in tariffs on goods go into effect officially. our next guest just got back from china. he met with officials there and

will give us the lay of the land from over there, next.

charles: >> were keeping an eye on the senate commission hearing for brett kavanaugh for the sprinkler justice. let's jump back and we heard

from camilla harris and let's jump back in here but they are discussing right now. >> the chairman said earlier that he has never been through a confirmation process like this one. the reason is that no administration in the past has engaged in this kind of concealment. that is the reason. very simply. it is not the chairman doing necessarily but this administration that is concealed and hidden documents from us and from the american people. i renew my motion that we adjourn so we can access the documents we need, review them in a deliberate and thoughtful way, much has been done for colleagues in the past when they have requested and is required under rule four of our rules that there is no requirement that we be in executive session

to follow this rule, mr. chairman. i respectfully ask that we follow our rules that we proceed in accordance with those norms and i know the chairman has great respect for open government or whistleblowers or sunlight as of the best disinfectant. we need sunlight in this process thank you mr. chairman. i again renew my motion to adjourn which has been seconded by senator white house. >> tonight because were not in a state of session. i will proceed - >> i like to make one correction and there is a misconception as to what white house staff secretary do. to past secretaries wrote an op-ed in july 30, 2018 washington post title that secretaries aren't traffic cops. stop treating kavanaugh like he was judge kavanaugh himself has

acknowledged the importance of the time that he was white house staff secretary so why, mr. chairman, do you and the others underside keep saying this is a nothing job nothing could be further from the truth. this is why we are so adamant about requesting these documents that the judge himself nominee himself has said we are among the most formative time of his adult life. >> of course that is why we have this hearing. judge kavanaugh - >> we do not document. >> judge kavanaugh will have an opportunity to answer every question about his role in almost anything is done in his lifetime. >> mr. chairman have you guys? >> will you be the last one or do you want to go all on after afternoon? >> i can't speak for my colleagues . charles: cory booker back again and he's been pushing hard that senator blumenthal asked for an

adjournment and since then several democratic senators have tried different tactics, if you will to persuade senator grassley to adjourn this meeting. we will listen to cory booker? >> we've only had 2% of his record to evaluate in 90% of it has been withheld from senators, 90% of his records over asking to evaluate a candidate and to have intelligent questions and insights into his record for we only have 10% of that record. we can go on and on about the numbers of documents the fact is we are about to proceed with a historic hearing. we about to proceed towards having a hearing on someone having a lifetime appointment on the important court in the land that will effectually so many of the areas of american life. from civil rights to women's rights to access to healthcare and all of this is being decided were going in with only having 10%, access to 10% of the body

of work of this man's career. that seems to me common sense, 90% is missing right now but just common sense says we should have access to thoroughly evaluate this person were not asking for anything out of the ordinary and other have said before people can talk about a hundred thousand here but we've gotten far more for every subpoena for justice that is the mentioned here far more than 1 10%. my colleagues talk about what our duty to the work in public is in our duty to make public is to evaluate the candidate on their bodywork but were not getting the least that, why? get some political person, not a person who hold public office it is unprecedented to think that this committee has ceded its role to a partisan of a lawyer. here we are about to go forward with just 10% of the persons record to evaluate and to base our questions on and to investigate, 90% is being

withheld just common sense would say that is not fair or right and undermines our ability to do her job and it is just plain wrong. >> one of the senate's most solemn constitutional duties is provided vice and consent to the president on the nomination of supreme court justices. we are here this week to hear from brett kavanaugh. to hear about his exceptional qualifications, his record of dedication to the rule of law and is demonstrated independence for . charles: it's a dramatic most soap opera typesetting with the yelling in the background but cory booker passionately asking for the delay saying that the

body of work only 90% of kavanaugh's body of work is still out there although i think he acknowledges that those up in court nominee has ever given up this much documents before in history and that will continue and so are the tariff issues this week. president trump is ready to go ahead with the additional tariffs on $200 billion worth of chinese good this week. i will bring in michael pillsbury. author of the hundred year marathon, china's cheap secret strategy to replace america as global superpower. michael, welcome to the show. >> good morning. charles: it's not a secret anymore. they made it public. to make china 2025 is an announcement that we want to do this. i find it interesting since the trade war has ratcheted up. president xi has told the media in china they don't talk about that and put that on the back burner and it was a belligerent

stance in both stance from his point of view but i think he sees it as detrimental particularly as it tries to garner global sympathy for the situation. you just came back, what is going on? >> they started a propaganda campaign against president trump. it's the opposite of president trump's approach which as you know has been to give this a piece of praise to his friend, president xi and call some great president xi. instead the chinese are activating the number of what they call their old friends, channels into the white house and have had a summit yesterday with african leaders offering them $60 million and praising the trade relations they have with africa. the chinese strategy seems to be quite new just the last couple of weeks or maybe the last couple days as is propaganda offensive. the two elements. one is we've done nothing wrong and we never stole technology or forced any american companies to give up the trade secrets. number one, number two, we made

a decent offer. the implied they've offered $70 billion to buy new american exports in one year. they say it's close to the hundred billion the president trump asked for in early may. this is part of their activation of old friends, as they call it. this includes corporate ceos. frankie, charles, they're upset at you. you've given a number of shows we talked about china's secret strategy and it's not secret because you've exposed it. they brought up your name. there's a number of reporters and they don't like in beijing. they say are defaming china's strategic policy. one of them was you. congratulations be one are you serious? i thought you were joking around. i should cancel my trip to chi china? >> no, you should go but have your food taster with you. charles: i did not know that. [laughter]

i'm paying attention. a reader stuff everyday and i've been reading the stuff and listen, i understand the coming from. michael, we have to get you on the show tonight but we have so much breaking news we have to go. facebook, twitter, apple, google all hit with class action lawsuits. this reportedly surrounding the censoring of conservatives. we talked to the man and the person behind that next alerts -- wouldn't you like one from the market when it might be time to buy or sell? with fidelity's real-time analytics, you'll get clear, actionable alerts about potential investment opportunities in real time. fidelity. open an account today. fidelity. 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

♪ as moms, we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10-25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait. ♪

charles: google, facebook and twitter and apple facing a class-action lawsuit for conspiring to censor conservatives for joining us larry clayman, freda much better one who filed the suit. your evidence on this censorsh censorship. >> evidence is in terms of we know that some things have been happening to other conservative groups. our youtube account on google never gets about 49000 goes up and goes down and goes up and goes down. that's been going on for six months we been strong defenders of president trump and conservative principles and were part of this termination. i'm a former antitrust lawyer.

i hope break up at&t when it was a young justice department lawyer during the reagan in ministration. there's a concept of conscious power level of them when companies move in tandem and parallel passion to do the same thing that can be restraint of trade. there's an actual agreement between these leftist own media giants like google, twitter, youtube et cetera or its conscious pluralism, antitrust defense. we hope other interests will join our lawsuit and find that lawsuit freedom watch .-dot usa .org. to see if they'd like to join us for the class. charles: we have breaking news so unfortunately we will have to duck the interview short. conscious parallelism. i love the term. we will delve into this further because a lot of people agree with what you're saying. thank you very much. >> you are welcome. thank you. charles: fireworks happening on capitol hill and already brett kavanaugh hearing is underway. judge napolitano broke it down for us. senator grassley almost echoed those very terms.

we want to get a follow-up because there's been a lot of new information, the judge is here in the next hour.

11:00 a.m. in new york, starting out with your money. the big board, off 40 points now. i want to bring in joel shulman, ceo of entrepreneur share. joel, despite all the turmoil in d.c. and the headlines we have seen with emerging markets, argentina, turkey, a whole lot of others, the stock market continues to march higher and higher. the question is, can they co-exist much longer? can our markets and economy continue at this breakneck speed while it seems like the rest of the world is stumbling? >> well, that's a great question. the thing is, you mentioned all these countries that are really suffering. it goes on and on.

it's been a long time since we have seen so many suffering like this, like brazil, like india, like argentina. argentina has 60% interest rates. venezuela has one million, one million inflation rate. it seems like the u.s. markets are winning by default. we are way off this year in small cap growth, way off in large cap growth. this is true across the board. you are looking at double digit returns across the board. it seems like if this continues, and the contagion in these markets continue, we are seeing new information coming up on argentina and even the south africa nch african -- and even countries like nicaragua, you don't even hear about those. those aren't even in the top 15 in world problems. charles: do we have a multiple, because to your point, when you see countries like india passing laws that prohibit foreign ownership, listen, that makes our tariff squabble look puny and looks like they're shooting

themselves in the foot. wouldn't be the first time. how long does it hold up? >> i think it continues through the year. we are going to see certainly hiccups. we had extraordinary appreciation last year, small cap stocks are way up, up over 40% in many cases. in the last two years, we are up 40% to 60% for many stocks, many funds. some funds are up much higher. we have seen extraordinary appreciation but again, we are winning because much of the money that's coming out of these markets, we have seen billions of dollars in flows from international markets and it's largely benefiting the u.s. and our u.s. dollars. our dollar's getting stronger, our markets are receiving and i think we are viewed as a safe haven. if there is a contagion and there certainly could be with the problems in turkey and latin america and so forth, i didn't even mention mexico. that's another place with problems. we continue to strengthen relative to these markets. i think we will see volatility going forward but we are still

staying high. charles: stay right there. i want to take a look at the headline from foxnews.com. yes, the trump recovery really can keep going. the author of that headline joins us now. professor marisi, lot of folks are saying no, it's a sugar high, it's temporary, don't get used to it. we have hit the high water mark and brace for it to start to slow down rapidly. >> i don't think that's right. i don't know that we will have more 4% growth quarters in a row. we will get a good 3%, 3.5% over the next two quarters and for the year we will average 3%. that's a darned sight better than the last two decades. moreover, a lot of this is going to be driven by investment. don't look for huge investment numbers but rather, big productivity growth. simply, american companies are using capital much more efficiently than they did in the past. by lowering the cost of capital we are going to see investment in making workers more productive and retraining

workers. we are already starting to see signs that companies are investing very heavily in worker retraining. when they get a new machine, to replace a rudimentary skill, rudimentary activity, they are taking that lower skilled worker and retraining them and their wages go up. charles: we saw where these profits of 2% to $2 trillion, $47 billion almost in profits but undistributed profits are up 5%. dividends up only less than 1%. you wonder what corporate america is doing with the money now. we know a lot of it goes to buy-backs. is corporate america in danger, though, of focus ing so much on share price and buy-backs they allow the political echo chamber to say capitalism is working fine for one niche of our economy. could it backfire? >> it could, but my feeling is they are doing the right thing with buy-backs because let's face it, capital gains, when you buy back, you are pushing capital gains on to shareholders. you only pay tax on those when

they are realized and those taxes are lower than when you pay dividends. they are doing what the tax law requires of them. until we get away from the double taxation of corporate profits and the high taxes on dividends, we can expect companies to do this. this isn't a matter of the failure of capitalism. it's the failure of our tax structure. my feeling is they are doing the smart thing and they are investing. we are seeing investment growth and seeing productivity growth. you know, these are people with sour grapes. for two decades, the economy didn't grow very rapidly. now it is. let's be thankful for that. charles: peter, i have another one for you. we have seen some fireworks on capitol hill. the confirmation hearing for supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh under way. you think that he would be a great addition, his addition to the supreme court would be great for our economy. how would that work? >> well, over the years, a number of precedents have come down from the supreme court that

give regulatory agencies wide range to do whatever they wish to do under very vague statutes. for example, the co2 emission controls on electric utilities and so forth. judge kavanaugh is very skeptical of those legal precedents and their constitutionality. they go back to decisions as early as the 1930s and the new deal. everybody is so focused on roe v wade and that precedent going out the window. he's not going to vote to send that out the window. rather, i think this notion that congress can write very general legislation and the bureaucracy goes into business for itself and writes whatever regulations it wants, and when it gets a liberal president, goes into steroid overdrive, i think those days are over if this man is on the court. we'll have a conservative majority that will require congress to write what it this is and so forth and not to just boot it to a regulatory agency to do whatever they please. charles: thank you very much. always great talking to you.

it's been too long. want to bring back joel shulman. amazon now closing on the trillion dollar market cap. you actually think google can pick it up and actually be the next trillion dollar company? >> well, that's right. we've got two contenders for that next trillion dollar club membership, microsoft at $862 billion or $861 billion, we've got google at $851 billion, both within 20% of the trillion dollar mark. both are legitimate contenders for the trillion dollar club. they are both growing very strongly so there are a number of reasons why i think google will be the next entrant, not microsoft. charles: what about microsoft? do you like it? listen, the next entrant in the trillion dollar club is cute, it's fun to talk about, and full disclosure, are you a shareholder in any of these companies? >> i'm not a shareholder in

microsoft. haven't been for a long time. i am a shareholder in google. it's important to disclose that. with microsoft, look, it's had 50% plus appreciation year-to-date. it's got double the profit margins of google in terms of profit growth and so forth the last three to five years. google, microsoft has done a great job. they have strong revenue growth. but the revenue growth for google is four times that of microsoft. the r & d growth is more than double microsoft. you look at m & a activity which is much stronger for microsoft than google and when i look at leadership, the thing is, when i look at microsoft, the ceo was making $10 million a few years ago. one of the things i do, i'm also a professor like your last guest, but i also manage money. the thing i look at are traits and i monitor compensation and ownership closely among other things. so the thing that i would be

skeptical of microsoft, the ceo has done a great job, has been there 25 plus years, right out of college. he's a relatively young ceo of 51. but he's cut his ownership by a third in the last month. it's down to 47 million, it was 60 something million. his compensation has tripled the last few years. charles: got to let you go. sorry. i have some breaking news. thank you very much. great stuff. i want to bring in a tweet from president trump about the media, just went out, nbc fake news which is under intense scrutiny over their killing of the harvey weinstein story, is now fumbling around making excuses for their probably highly unethical conduct. i have long criticized nbc and their journalistic standards. worse than even cnn. look at their license, question mark. all right, folks. now this. technology revolutionizing everything, including the way we buy and sell homes. up next, we will talk to noah black, one of new york's premier

brokers. of course, the key we want to know, how the tech tools can actually be used to make more money. as the california democrat is walking back his call for a boycott of in n out burger because he says the company donated to republicans, some say he's still got his message out and still received a lot of donations. maybe that was the real goal. president trump says there's no political necessity to keep canada in the new nafta deal. up next, we talk with the former u.s. ambassador to canada and find out if he agrees with the president. stay tuned.

charles: amazon hitting a new all time high as it marches toward the trillion dollar mark.

i think it's got another four bucks and it will be there. we will keep an eye on that for you as well. richard trumka going after president trump's policies over the weekend. take a listen to what he had to say about which party is better for workers. roll tape. >> it's not about democrats or republicans. it's about electing people who will support working people in this country. we put those together, we will put them in front of candidates, those candidates that support the issues that our members say they want, need and should have are the candidates that we'll support. it probably will be democrats, because unfortunately, democrats support working people more than republicans have. charles: trumka would back a democrat. tell me how president trump reacted. >> with a tweet, go figure this one. this is the tweet after president trump watched mr. trumka on sunday morning news. this is what he said.

richard trumka, head of the afl-cio represented his union poorly on television this weekend. some of the things he said were so against the working men and women of our country and the success of the u.s. itself that it is easy to see why unions are doing so poorly. a dem. a democrat because mr. trumka said union members will vote for a democrat. what he was saying is yes, unemployment is down but so are wages. gas prices are up. where is the infrastructure program that could put workers to work. his claim was we do need nafta. lot of issues he was disagreeing with the president, said his membership will more likely vote democrat than republican. charles: the number that will hurt him is 400,000. >> yes. correct. charles: 400,000 new manufacturing jobs since president trump came into office. >> can't deny the economy is booming. charles: back to trade. the u.s. and canada yet to reach an agreement. here is what the president tweeted about on this. there's no political necessity to keep canada in the new nafta deal if we don't make a fair

deal for the u.s. after decades of abuse. canada will be out. congress should not interfere with these negotiations or i will simply terminate nafta entirely and we will be far better off. joining us now, former u.s. ambassador to canada, david wilkins. welcome to the show. >> thank you very much. great to be on. charles: good to have you, ambassador, because last week, it felt going into the week and as the week went on that maybe something was going to happen that certainly the tone, the body language from both sides got a lot better and it felt more sincere and it felt like they had a united goal, both sides, of coming to an agreement. so we head into this week a little more skeptical. what are your thoughts? >> well, i agree with that assessment. but in retrospect, canada really only had four days to negotiate with the u.s. after mexico/u.s. agreement was reached. so they had a lot of catching up to do. they had to look at the text of agreements already reached, for example, sunset clause.

so it was, you know, it would have been possible, almost a miracle if an agreement could have been reached only on four days. the good news is this. nobody's walking. they're still talking. they meet again tomorrow to begin negotiation. now, the time limit, we are in the last minute or so of the fourth quarter. we got until the end of september when canada has to be in or out because that's when the text of the agreement with canada, if canada's in, with mexico, has to be published by ustr. charles: it's hard to imagine that canada would be upset with a greater percentage of automobiles being assembled in north america. it's hard to believe they would be upset with most aspects of this. but i did find it somewhat interesting because you've got the protection of their dairy industry which is a small percentage of gdp, but i guess plays bigger politically, and the dispute issues as well. i also heard some rumblings that

maybe mexico is getting a better deal here and maybe canada is worried about that. >> well, they may be, but i agree with you, i think the sunset clause, the u.s. basically gave on that to some extent. there's going to be a revision and the president's sunset clause is not going to be 16 years, reviewed every six years instead of a hard and fast every five years that terminates as the u.s. initially proposed. the origin of content for automobiles has been agreed to. i think canada, that certainly meets canada's objective. the two sticking points i think are the dairy protection by canada under their supply management system, i think it's going to be some give there by canada, then the dispute resolution of chapter 19. you know, the mexicans haven't really said whether they agree to that or not. the u.s. is thinking mexico has agreed to do away with that. that's still a sticking point. those i think are the two main

issues. charles: let's hope that's a moot point, if they come up with an agreement there should be far fewer trade disagreements in the near term. thank you very much, ambassador. let's check fiat chrysler. 10% rise in their august auto sales. you can see the stock, there we go, up fractionally. volkswagen also had an increase but a much smaller increase. those shares i think, we will get those up in a moment. meanwhile, there's volkswagen down. nissan, 4% rise in sales from a year ago. these monthly auto sales numbers will continue to come out. most of them are right around the same, either slightly up or slightly lower. check this out. carnival unveils its largest cruise ship ever. >> it's a beast. charles: it's 1100 feet long, 20 decks, 6600 people. it is literally a city, 17 restaurants, 23 bars, casino, water park, climbing wall,

miniature golf course. why not a full golf course? it sets sail in december for the canary islands. go figure. i don't even know where to park that bad boy. it is impressive. huge. then there's this controversial story of the morning. nike teaming up with colin kaepernick for its 30th anniversary of the "just do it" campaign. is it smart for a big company like nike to join with such a controversial person? we're on it next. - why are drivers 50 and over switching to the

aarp auto insurance program from the hartford? let's hear what actual customers are saying. - the hartford's integrity is something that's very important to us folks over 50. we like talking to real people and getting the straight answers when we ask questions, and they've done a wonderful job doing that. - [matt] in fact, the hartford's been named one of the world's most ethical companies ten times. - i get the highest levels of coverage, i get the highest levels of service, low premiums, but when it comes time to deliver the hartford's been there and that's what value's about for me. - [matt] only the hartford offers lifetime renewability.

it's their promise not to drop you, even if you're in an accident. - it's a great feeling to know that the hartford will not drop me because of an accident. and i don't have to worry, because a company that's been in business for 200 years must be doing something right. - [announcer] to find out more about the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford, call the hartford at... or go to.... you could save hundreds of dollars when you switch. - [matt] did you know that the hartford is the only national car insurance program endorsed by aarp? in fact, they've been working together for over 30 years. not an aarp member? the hartford can help you join in minutes. - you have a lot of companies that just try to be a mill, to get a whole of business. but to have somebody that still has that personal touch, that takes time out to talk to you, i think that's really important. - [matt] see for yourself why customers rate the hartford 4.8 out of five stars for their claims experience.

- [announcer] to learn more about the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford, call the hartford at... for a free quote, that's... or go to...

charles: amazon, $2 billion away. it is a horse race. are you looking at an all-time high for that stock. now there's this. nike has made former 49ers quarterback colin kaepernick their face. the 30th anniversary of the "just do it" campaign, he's their man. >> yeah, the "just do it" campaign, basically their headline is saying that, you know, he sacrificed all so to stand up for what he believed in, essentially. that's where the debate lies. did he sacrifice all? he is to your point, he is suing

the nfl, charging collusion. is he a modern day muhammad ali who truly did sacrifice all? it's a very debatable point. this is a controversial new move by nike and it's hitting shares of foot locker which gets two-thirds of its sales from nike products. charles: great point. >> i don't think the word sacrifice comes into this at all. does he get money, is he compensated for this? charles: sure. >> how much? a lot of money? charles: more than 99.9% of the people watching this show. >> yeah. i don't know. to that point, he is suing. he's not sacrificing. he believes the owners are -- charles: all this is ironically enough taking away from the key issue that they say they are protesting. i think this pulls eyeballs and attention and opinion away. all right, folks. the kavanaugh confirmation hearings are under way right now. democrats are going after him with everything they've got. the judge has given great insight.

we need more. we are watching your money. concerns on trade weighing on the market this morning.

charles: amazon, just $1 billion away. it is racing toward that $1 trillion mark. we got an eye on it for you. also got an eye on the big board for you. the majority down. home depot leading the way. nike your biggest loser. now a confirmation hearing for president trump's supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh under way. democrats calling for a delay ft take a listen to what democratic senator cory booker said in the hearing. roll tape. >> 10% of his record we have been able to evaluate. 90% of it has been withheld from senators. 90% of his record. we are asking to evaluate a candidate, to have intelligent questions and insights into his record but we only have 10% of that record. charles: all rise, judge andrew napolitano is back with us. judge, you were here earlier this morning and essentially talked about the idea that as a judge, by the way, senator

grassley echoed the comments right after you left, saying the standard set by democrats, by the way, was to best judge the nominee for the supreme court based on decisions they made from the bench in the lower court. >> which in this case are extensive. yes. charles: extensive. but cory booker, senator booker seems to want everything. they sort of suggested that even though he might have been 25 when he wrote some of these things or had certain opinions, it's all relevant today. >> i think that the democrats in the senate have decided to use their membership on the senate judiciary committee to attempt to tarnish the process, because they know the end result is not going to be to their liking. stated differently, if they can make a case that the process is unfair, that president trump and this nominee, judge kavanaugh, are holding something back, they can use that as a political weapon in the midterms and beyond. the reason they are doing that

is because they don't have the numbers to block him. now, they are probably hoping, and i don't know if it's a realistic hope, that somewhere in those documents is something that reflects his views on torture and his views on roe versus wade, at a time that he never expected that those views might interfere with his nomination to the supreme court. if they can find that, then they can start driving a wedge between his nomination and certain members of the senate. charles: i think senator feinstein also brought up enron issues. not sure what those are. someone on the democratic side also brought that up as potentially something that could hurt this nomination. >> i can tell you what those are if you want to go there. it's a little bit in the weeds. the ceo and chairman of enron, boyhood friend of george w. bush, was under president bush that he was prosecuted and convicted. then he died before the conviction was even perfected. there technically is no conviction. the issue was should he be pardoned.

and if then young lawyer kavanaugh weighed in on that, ken wllay was the personificati of corporate villainy in that era, that would be another wedge they could drive in. charles: senator feinstein said something that struck me as interesting. there is always this debate over the interpretation of the constitution, saying that kavanaugh may be out of the mainstream or is he of the mainstream of american legal opinion. is there some sort of mechanism for judging someone's qualification if they are in the mainstream? >> the mechanism is do i agree or disagree with you. he is from the heart and soul of the washington establishment on the republican side. about as mainstream as you can possibly get. look, the thing that has animated the democrats, as much as the fact that they don't have a majority in the senate, is that the republicans refused to consider president obama's

nomination of merrick garland to replace the then recently deceased antonin burr in the saddle that continues to animate the democrats and they just aren't going to get over it until they either have a president in the white house or majority in the senate. right now, they have neither. charles: an e-mail went out from cory booker's office stating that kavanaugh, there's a line i want to ask you about, president trump should not be able to hand-pick a judge who could effectively serve as his quote, get out of jail free card. what do you make of that? >> well, that is so disrespectful to judge kavanaugh. so disrespectful to the process. but senator booker, in full disclosure, friend of mine for 20 years, we are both guys from essex county, new jersey, senator booker is suggesting that the issues, bob mueller's investigation of president trump may make its way to the supreme court and that a justice

kavanaugh would pay back the president who nominated him by voting in his favor. there is simply no basis to believe that whatsoever. in clinton versus jones, that's the case in which the supreme court unanimously ordered president clinton to participate in the lawsuit by paula jones. two of those justices that were in the unanimous opinion had been appointed by bill clinton. charles: we know supreme court justices are also known for, you know, they don't always necessarily do what -- listen, the first case, roberts, on the obamacare. we saw an example of that. i want to ask you about this colin kaepernick situation. from a legal point of view, it seems an easy first amendment sort of situation but could there be some other legal ramifications? >> okay. there's two issues with kaepernick. one is liability. was he unjustly harmed by a conspiracy amongst owners of nfl teams to keep him from playing

football because of his political views and the way he manifested them. so he first would have to show that to a jury. then he would have to show what his damages were. if he can show what his damages were, that is the loss of compensation because of this agreement, then the nfl would say wait a minute, you made more from nike than you would have made as a backup quarterback for the san francisco 49ers. that is a very legitimate defense by the nfl, and a jury will have to decide whether or not they believe it. charles: judge, thanks. appreciate it. now this. investing in real estate technology on the rise. want to bring in our expert. i'm thinking drones but it's more than that, right? >> it's pretty much things day to day that help us do our job better. it can be anything from floor plan apps, from aggregation sites, things to help brokers educate buyers.

it's not necessarily high level big things. it's things that make your day-to-day real estate search or our job easier, more effective. charles: is this expediting the process? do you see quicker turnover? does it help with the decision making process at all? >> both, right? sometimes people are quicker because they see everything and are more efficient. sometimes people have more options and spend more time going over everything. charles: we have been hearing, you know, seeing some signs that real estate across the country may be in a little bit of trouble. i'm not sure why that is. everything else in the economy is firing on all cylinders here in new york. it could be a blip. looks like they built a city within a city at the rail yard. is there something we should take? we look at the macro picture for our audience. is there something we can take from real estate that we should be concerned about with the overall u.s. economy? >> i really don't think so. certainly i follow new york more than any other part of the country but everything i hear from my colleagues in l.a. and miami, florida, even in new york, real estate is still very solid.

i think you have seen at least in new york and other places, prices went up so quickly, there's a bit of a breather that fundamentally there's nothing that's really problematic with the industry. people still want to buy, people still want to sell. that will always be the case. charles: i will circle back as we button this up to technology and the impact it could have on your job. because we hear how at some point we don't need stockbrokers. will we always need noble black to find the best apartment in new york city? >> you always need noble black. you will. look, if somebody wants to do the job of finding something or selling something, they can do that alone but you will never get the intangible, the psychological aspect of it, the experience frankly that a good broker would have. charles: i believe you. folks, let's check on the big board here. we have had our trading range, mostly we were down 150, now down 50, so we came back a lot after some economic data came out but there's still so many things the market is anxious about and most of it won't be resolved today. meanwhile, we have monthly

sales figures for auto makers beginning with toyota. their sales were down 2% in august. this is from a year earlier. meanwhile, ford's sales are actually up 4% year over year. a programming alert for you. tomorrow, fox business will have an interview with the ceo of uber. the interview will be tomorrow. it will be a fun discussion. also, california, you guys remember this last week, a democrat, lawmaker, was calling for the boycott of in n out burger. well, walking those back but is still upset about the company's donation to the gop. really, is this an example of just how hostile the democrats have become to business? we are asking the question next.

charles: move over, apple. you've got company. amazon has just joined the trillion dollar club. you see the stock rocketing, at an all-time high up 2%. this in part because it's taking on google potentially in the billion dollar online ad market. it's an unparalleled juggernaut, growing at a rate of growth in the last few years unseen by a lot of people. want to go straight to the new

york stock exchange. nicole petallides, big milestone there. nicole: huge milestone. it's only on august 2nd we saw apple cross the trillion dollar mark. now it's amazon. if you remember, it was the race, everybody was saying will it be aup ipplapple, amazon or microsoft. when it crossed the level of 2050.268, it moved beyond that level. there was talk that maybe it would be microsoft or maybe it would be amazon if they did some sort of stock split. look at this. amazon has been killing it in the numbers. it's had a great run year-to-date, up about 75% and makes it to this trillion dollar mark. in fact, the hundred billion mark, the way it ran through the hundred billions in the market cap, in fact, this last run from the 900 to the one trillion mark, that just took about 28 days. we are seeing that, the number of trading days it took to break through. it's just going through the

hundred billions like it's nothing. but it did manage to break through. now this day also goes down in history to see a u.s. company over the trillion dollars. back to you. charles: exciting stuff. thank you very much. ashley, 2050.27, we crossed it, pulled back, the milestone has been established. >> what's going to derail this thing? it's into every aspect of our lives and continues to do so. the data it collects as it goes along, appetizing data is unsurpassed. they can really with accuracy pinpoint where to place ads. that's a huge thing if i have a product to sell. amazon will look very attractive because of how pointed they can be with targeting. >> that's the thing. it's not because, the core retail, what they do, is important but ash makes an important point. that is whether they can leverage off of that with advertising. i think this has always been a

momentum stock. profits have been always the final frontier for amazon for years, and i think what wall street is looking at, now it's got earnings, solid earnings, that are there. it was joked about as the most profitable nonprofit in the retail space. so does it have room to run? yes, it likely does. >> in the last earnings report, it wasn't the cloud. for awhile it was just the cloud and accounting gimmicks. now it's other parts of the business that are thriving to the bottom line. it's amazing. >> nicole brought up an interesting point. what about a stock split? i know you have thoughts on this. does it give more people opportunity to get in if it goes down to a thousand? >> then create higher momentum where it stays above the $1 trillion mark in value. charles: glad you brought this up. i'm working on a book and just did my segment on stock splits. i think people make a huge mistake waiting for a stock to split, obviously. i buy one share of a stock, it goes up 100%, i'm up 100%.

so many investors want to buy 10,000 shares of a $1 stock or 50 cent stock thinking they have -- >> you also have to mention regulatory threats because the president doesn't like jeff bezos. that would be unprecedented to go after an echo system of a platform with thousands of small business on it and not go after consumer pricing. >> that's probably not going to happen. we have our buddy stock watcher, stock market analyst extraordinaire, scott martin, on the phone. scott, second member of the trillion dollar club, not on a closing basis. we hit it, amazon pulled back a little bit. not unusual to see that sort of sell on the news dhivekind of t but this juggernaut does not look like it's going to stop. >> it doesn't at all. you pointed out all morning this is a company that has really, let's say, improved its stripes. you talk about the marketing part that's coming on to the company now where the massive

margin they see on the advertising side of things. amazon prime, don't forget, they raised the price on amazon prime a few months ago by 20 bucks and found a couple additional billion dollars in revenue just from that. it remains the gateway drug to massive internet spending because it's one of the best deals on the planet for those who use it. so it just goes to show you amazon is one of these companies that can just adapt to the current environment so well and create so much margin ability to just completely increase what they are doing on their bottom line, that i don't think this stock will be stopped. you saw price targets recently pop up to 2500 and therefore, higher, too so even though it is up so much this year, if you have some cash on the sideline, you got to jump in. charles: you don't care about share price right now. you can buy one share, buy one share, just be part owner of this thing? >> yeah. interesting thing, it kind of has a little bit of exclusivity

to the name and leaves institutional investors that are looking at high priced stocks that does discourage a little bit of day trading because the high price when you are trading a high priced stock tends to discourage as much day trading as it does with other lower price stocks where volatility will get sucked out of the name a little bit in amazon's case so that's not a bad deal either. amazon, when you look at the valuation, naturally what we should be looking at, not just the stock price and the fact it joins another great name in apple which we own as well, amazon and apple, that's another reason that's why we should be heralding this name, not just the $2,000 price. charles: thanks for hopping on the phone with us. always appreciate it. all right, folks. moving on to that huge story last week. the california burger chain in n out, they got a tremendous amount of backlash. it was discovered they donated $25,000 to the republican party. you actually had the democratic party chairman out there who took to twitter. he urged, urged a boycott of the

chain that because they had donated to republicans. here now to discuss, fatburger's ceo. andy, it seems the company that donates to gop almost always gets heat for it. turns out this company donated to both. >> well, look, i just don't think there's anyplace for politics, for customers choosing where to get their burgers, shakes and fries. doesn't make any sense to me. there's a lot of other causes like children's organizations but to take a stand like that, you are leading with your chin. charles: again, i think the democrats took a long labor day weekend to figure that one out. it's too divisive. people work there, people who are trying to get into the labor force working at these places, and it's just unfortunate but it is what it is. i will say if i'm the ceo of fatburger, i'm a little frustrated because all i saw were pictures of in n out burgers last week. i have never had one but i want to give it a shot now.

>> i understand. remember the chick-fil-a mess a few years ago? same thing. i don't know as an organization you put your franchisees or customers, employees, at odds with one oh. we already know there's a lot of different opinions. we want to be inclusive with everyone. charles: how do you avoid that these days? the biggest story this morning is nike chose colin kaepernick to help celebrate its 30th and versus anniversary of "just do it." how do you avoid accidentally offended anyone? >> you have to be really thoughtful about it. there have been times we had to discuss when we were going to run a marketing campaign or someone else runs something and we want to respond to it, are we putting our employees, customers or franchisees at odds with each other and is that worth it. are we just trying to generate publicity or do the right thing. that's our focus. charles: you on the plastic straws?

you still using plastic straws? >> know what, we're going across our system, we are going to a corn starch straw which is like a plastic straw but biodegradable. paper straws just suck, right? they are terrible. going to a corn starch biodegradable straw is a great answer. same with plastic lids. corn starch lids. that's our approach. charles: maybe the next one will be edible. andy, thanks a lot. really appreciate it. >> good to see you. charles: quick check of the big board. again, we have been in a very tight trading race but off the lows of the session. there was a big story over the weekend. the giant chinese tech firm, their ceo was arrested in the united states on suspicion of criminal sexual misconduct. later released and is back in china but people still wondering what's going on with that. president trump reportedly considering tariffs on up to $200 billion worth of chinese goods. remember, the timetable's this week.

we will talk to someone who says it's about time we stood up to china. fact is, there are over ninety-six hundred roads named 'park' in the u.s. it's america's most popular street name. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands?

takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest. i call it my "comfortable future plan," and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org.

charles: breaking news. rahm emanuel saying he will not run for re-election. now to the tariffs. president trump reportedly ready to go this week. tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of goods from china. with us, steve mosser, author of "bully of asia." you say we will never have a better opportunity to deal with china than we have right now? >> oh, absolutely. we've got the american economy firing on all cylinders. we've got real companies making real products and providing real services like amazon, that we have been talking about this morning. china's economy is in one sense, a house of cards. they have out of control government debt, they keep printing money, there's off the books debt, of course, then there's the one-time privatization of private property, government property, to private property in china. the government has over the last 15 years dispossessed about 70, 80 million poor farmers, taking their land and selling it to private developers. that's something you can only do

once. the only sector of the economy in china that really operates according to market principles is the export sector, and of course, that's exactly what's being hit by the trump tariffs. i think the chinese government's going to head to the negotiating table very quick and settle this thing before it goes too much further down the road. charles: let me hit you with all the economic purists hit me with, okay? you must be against the american consumer and those cheaper goods. what do you say about that? >> well, i'm against american companies being ripped off of their intellectual property. i'm against the theft of what the fbi estimates is $600 billion of intellectual property, everything from the latest fashion designs to the latest hollywood movies, by china. i'm against the trade barriers in china. china is the most ruthless practitioner of -- charles: let me ask you a couple more. >> -- i think the planet has ever seen. we have to right that ship. now is the time to do it. if not now, when? if not trump, who? charles: i don't disagree with

you. but again, this is where the orthodox, the "wall street journal" crowd will want to ask you, want to know, why are you trying to pick winners and losers, why do you want more expensive things and why are you against free markets? >> well, you know, i'm not against free markets. i think free markets work wonderfully. i think in the english-speaking world and negotiating with countries that share our values and institutions, our respect for the rule of law, our understanding of contract law, that's absolutely the way to go. china has a very, very different economic system. it doesn't play by the rules that it agreed to when it joined the world trade organization, and now's the time to bring it to heel. the chinese economy is shakier than most people imagine, and the chinese communist party is above all, afraid of instability. in 2010, they had 180,000 demonstrations by workers who weren't being paid, by farmers

who had their land taken from them. after that, the chinese state did what it always does when threatened. it stopped publishing statistics. so there are hundreds of thousands of institutes of unrest in china. charles: got to leave it there. thanks very much. great stuff. i will borrow a lot of it. more after this.

. . . is

charles: folks, checking the big board. we were down as much as 150. rallied back to down 130. a lot of things hanging over our heads in the session. the big news, amazon hitting the one trillion dollar mark. instantly we saw selling on the news. ashley: 2050. liz: apple hit five weeks ago

the trillion mark. charles: the race is on. thanks a lot, folks. neil, handing over the show with a lot of great news for you. neil: you do, thank you very much my friend. we keeping an eye on amazon, dipped under a trillion dollars. some say the trillion dollars companies are lining up planes at la guard -- laguardia right now. that is a reference to traffic. microsoft is not far behind, $870 billion. alphabet, not all that behind, $841 billion. of course with amazon and apple, in and out of the trillion dollar market cap a lot of people say who's next, what's next? to put this in perspective we're on the 10-year anniversary of the financial meltdown. it covered a lot of weeks. back then around this time 10 years ago you could have scooped up amazon for 79 bucks a share. i'm sure