the website says social media made it easier than ever to share rumors, false stories and hate speech as straight reporting. the definition of misinformation, false information that is spread regardless whether there is intent to mislead. got that? >> good choice. i like that one. stuart: we're done. time's up. neil it is yours. neil: stuart, thank you. good luck today. we're focusing on the record $7.9 billion spent online on cyber monday. no thank you cards from my wife who single-handedly made that possible. it's a joke. we looking for some sort of resolution between the president and xi xinping of china and their meeting. president says i will get tough before we make progress, citing we could see 10% tariffs on laptops, you name it. blake burman at white house on all of that. hey, blake.

reporter: 10 days before the meeting with president trump and xi xinping of china the g20 at buenos aires. president trump seems to lay down a marker where things potentially go if talks do not go as smooth as he would like. that first tranche of $200 billion of tariffs already in place. in an interview with the wj, the president said he is willing to still ramp those up to 25% come january 1. right now 10% is scheduled to go up. president says he doesn't see any reason why it wouldn't go up. secondly the possibility of an even bigger tranche, which would be $267 billion or remainder of the trade deficit between the united states and china. so the president sort of throwing that market out there, ahead of the g20. here is what i will tell you in speaking with many people over the last couple days as close to these trade negotiations as you can possibly get. there are some who feel that the structural issues here are just

simply too big. when you're talking about i.p. theft, forced technology transfer, et cetera. we've been over these for a while now. some feel it is too big. we've been talking about this for too many years. why will it change now? there are others who are optimistic who say never bet against this president. this is something he wants to get done and something he will get done. obviously we'll hear more from the president and how all of this unfolds four or five days from now. neil, about an hour from now, we'll get a press briefing here at the white house, the first we've had in a while. though we hear from the president quite often these days. i would pay attention to the top of this briefing, with the g20 around the corner, i suspect we'll get some details from members of the president's top team as what they expect, how this might potentially play out later this weekend, neil. neil: buddy, thank you very much. blake burman. much apple was falling on the suggestion that a lot of laptops, particularly those made in china, a good many of them are, could be facing a 10%

tariff. there is the flipside to all of that, even though weighing on apple's stock. people might buy a lot of these goods ahead of that. at least holiday season, robust sales for all the electronic manufacturers and the like. that might be wishful thinking especially if it is reversed in the new year with tariffs that could make things worse. let's get things ready from "wall street journal" editor john bussey. also jim awad, i notice he has not aged. i don't appreciate that. so he will get a lot of nasty questions. >> neither have you. neil: i wish that were true. last but not least, deirdre bolton who is just young period. not an issue there. deirdre, i'm curious about how this trade friction plays out. half-full glass says it well help a lot of these sales ahead of increased tariffs or new tariffs. the flip side is, well, it is also going to hurt longer term? >> i think the market is showing concern for apple.

we had three downgrades from goldman sachs in the past four weeks. today rbc says there will be softer demand for iphones. we have to remember from 450 to roughly $1500 what consumers pay for already. that is the range of iphones in the u.s. president trump suggesting consumers can absorb at least another 10%. seems if apple is at a pivotal moment in its own growth, to place where they want us completely addicted to hardware, to put us gently into more consumption of services. i personally think if it happens, apple as stock will have a little bit of a rough ride, i guess say 90 days. neil: how off rougher of a ride could it have, jim? >> you never know until you get there. depends on context of larger trade negotiations what is going on in the economy and markets. the other side of the coin, i agree with everything you said. the other side of the coin it is become an indispensable part of

our life. difficult to function without it. neil: 10% more critical? >> yeah. the point is at what price? will you pay, at, in terms of the stock. neil: right. >> whatever the 10% takes off from the revenue in earnings of the company, there are certain price the stock becomes, gets priced in. neil: yes. >> my inclination is be more bullish long term on apple, rather than bearish because i think they will invent their way out of this. they will continue to make the -- neil: do you like apple at these levels? if you're looking out for a few years, absolutely. i don't know what it will do next 60 days, 90 days. it is such an ingenius company, so ingrained into the american behavior pattern that, at a certain price, not too far from current prices. with the engine -- engine newt and important things into the product -- >> they signed a deal with oprah. they're moving in to challenge

amazon prime and netflix. they have longer term plans. just in the short term there may be a little coughing spurt. >> they know all the issues. industrial survival depends them addressing them. there is a lot of time and brain power going through the transition period. neil: think about this, all of it is on the trade stuff. sounded to me the president threw as an add in there the 10% tax, tariff, whatever you want to call it on the electronic items, particularly laptops. what did you make of that? >> this is interview with bob davis of the journal yesterday. it is sabre-rattling. we're going into the final stages of negotiations. the problem with these negotiations. there hasn't been a prenegotiation. there weren't talks going on leading up to the g20. so the question -- neil: do you think that was calculated, shared with others, certainly his economic team? by the way, this is and a addendum? >> well, 10% being -- he was

talking yesterday about, well the tariff could land anywhere. neil: right. >> totally willing now to go up to 25. that is sabre-rattling, unless we get a deal at g20. maybe it is 10% for apple. heck, you know, these companies overseas, they shouldn't complain. they could be making their stuff in the united states so it's a signal to both. to china you have to step up in the negotiations, to companies we want you to manufacture more in the u.s. the white house has to be worried about the rule of untended consequences. companies whose manufacturing base in china is threatened, they will find another place around the world that may not be the united states. they move out of china, they move to vietnam, they move to sri lanka, someplace elsewhere wage rates are low, manufacturing costs are low, they get the quality they need. it may not mean they bring jobs back to the united states. >> apple did an experiment, in india, brazil.

they are trying out other pockets of the world for manufacturing, to your point. we may end up with the g20 with a mushy agreement where there is, chinese will buy more lng from us or buy a few more planes, whatever it may be. the correspondent's point is well-taken, the key issues here, the structural changes that the united states is asking china to make in its economy, its way of doing business, not forcing tech transfers. not, stealing tech, not subsidizing their own companies, those are long-range negotiations that take a long time. neil: by the way it is a long-term problem. >> for decades. neil: back to '92 with president bush and later on bill clinton. this is going on a long, long time. jim, is it your sense they have got to come out of argentina, this g20 meeting with something? might be to john's point, even fig leaf after deal or promise to buy more from the u.s.? avoiding all of that, or failing

in all of that, there will be problems? >> well, rational person would say, look what is trump focused on? neil: you don't have time for rational people. >> you could always be wrong, the unintended consequences are a risk. he want as good economy. he want as good stock market because he is running for re-election. if he goes to the brink, come back with nafta, i won, i love the chinese this is great for america and we don't suffer through all the disruptions. neil: i disagree with that. >> okay. neil: here is why. if the strategy would pay off in the industrial states most sympathetic, republican was have better performance in midterms but they didn't. >> it is still a work in progress. he said i wasn't on the ticket. where i did campaign he won. he must have a strong economy in the midwest in 2020 to win for, to win electoral college. i don't think he wants to see

disruptive effect of tariffs and loss of confidence -- neil: he may not like it but he unleashed the genie from the bottle. >> that is the risk. neil: absolutely. deirdre, speaking of midwest and industrial belt and gm move to let go up to 15,000 workers in ohio and michigan, the president is not pleased with the mary barra's news on this. wants some other commitment here. she is saying, this is really tariffs. >> it is tariffs but also gms that to reinvent itself. it is not just facing competition from other carmakers. it is facing competition from uber. neil: why do it now at the height of everything going well? >> to your point, last quarter looks pretty good for gm, right? we're not selling as many cars, but the cars we are selling are actually more expensive. they are luxury vehicles. they are suvs. it is not that big of a surprise. ford said in april basically

we're not making sedans anymore. in some ways gm is acting more or less in concert with the traditional competitors. with the whole new raft of uber, google, tesla, there is more electric cars. more going towards a longer goal of self-driving cars and self-driving electric cars. neil: true. >> i think at some point as a leader she has to see the future and act on it. neil: i did warn but the chevy volt, didn't i? small people like you fit in it fine. john, i wonder where the trade thing goes. more companies are feeling emboldened or retailers blaming weather for bat sales, it seems to be a catch-all for them and signaled this would an a problem. >> i agree politics will drive a lot of this. is president trump going to want prices rising for consumers, companies complaining about their supply chains being disrupted, prices going up for those companies of raw materials, as we go into the

election process? we're in the election process now, right? so he -- my, my presumption is that without there having been a lot of discussion going on, look how long it took to get to tpp? that was an agreement meant to address these struck usual issues. it addressed countries for southeast asia, not china, it wasn't a member. the point we're talking to china all of this. china will eventually have to join and change the way they behave to join. without the discussions having gone on, my presumption is you will not get a big deal out of the g20. there will -- neil: what would markets do with that? >> it could be the beginning of a process so that the markets and companies believe there is a negotiated way through this, even though it might take several years. >> even though the president has been talking about $200 billion, going up 25%. china so far is pretty muted. china is expressing hope for a positive outcome which i found

interesting because president trump is going gangbusters. china at this moment, it could change in ten minutes, showing a lot of rhetorical restraint. >> china is doing always what it does, it play as rope-a-dope. hoping it will outlast the guy. 5000 years of history stacked up against our shorter. that is the way they're thinking. guess what? it has worked for them. neil: it has worked for them. guys, thank you very much. we're waiting for white house briefing set for one p.m. the first one since october 29th. a lot could come up. how will they treat acosta. how will they treat blake burman. that is what we want to know. all that after this. place, the xfinity xfi gateway.

and it's strengthened by xfi pods, which plug in to extend the wifi even farther, past anything that stands in its way. ...well almost anything. leave no room behind with xfi pods. simple. easy. awesome. click or visit a retail store today.

neil: they say it shouldn't be a contest but it is. mississippi senate election with cindy hyde-smith taking on mike espy, former reagan advisor. why is that at bale? besides obvious and ill timed comments on her part is there something going on in mississippi like alabama we don't appreciate it? >> there is always about race in mississippi. 38% of the population is african-american. 33% of the vote is african-american. they voted higher and 91% went

for espy, former secretary of agriculture on jimmy carter. she got 60 plus percent of white vote. my assumption she should win it fairly easily, four or five points. we'll see. never can tell. hard to get a vote out second time after a runoff. who knows. it has been a nasty election. neil: if she does win it would be 53-47, which net pick up of two seats for the republicans. >> right. neil: what do you make of what difference that would make, whether it is 53-47, 42-48? >> biggest difference we need more women. we got slaughtered by women. she is impressive conservative. to a certain extent she would add to the before we need. when you lose women by 25%. 20% plus. neil: if she is the woman to carry that? >> in the south maybe she is. maybe she fits the trump

republican woman premise. she is articulate, smart, a state senator. mississippi has changed dramatically. when i started the game, stennis had been there forever. they were giants. you see these two candidates today, if you had none of the above on the ballot probably neither one of them would win. neil: last time the seat went democratic '82, during reagan's presidency. a lot of people are talking about anecdotal signs of the south, certainly not going, painting purple, whatever you call it, not as beet red. >> it used to be democrat, but changed over civil rights. the last person who ran against serious race, john stennis was haley barbour. haley barbour was young -- he went to work for me after that. i brought him from mississippi. became the national chairman.

became governor. was one of the significant party chairman we ever had, was a great, great guy. reality, if democrats become socialist, they will not do well in the south. if they get back to being conservative, then stennis, as i mentioned earlier were very conservative democrats, civil rights being the big dividing issue. stennis was chairman of the armed services committee forever. chairman of the appropriations committee of the eastman was chairman of the judiciary committee for 20 years. they were the epitome of the old south that is not there anymore. neil: i'm wondering, we in the media focus on makeup of who controls the house, who controls the senate and white house. ronald reagan dealt with split government as well. what pressure does it put on the president when you have a situation like that? >> ronald reagan had a great ability to do to sit down, he saw himself as a negotiator and he would always say if i get 80% of what i want i am always to

take that. neil: in other words, it wasn't all or nothing? >> it couldn't be all or nothing. obviously democrats control the house overwhelmingly. what gave us our margin the first two years, '81, '82, we have the southern conservatives,. neil: bo weevils. >> many of them left. they're all republican seats today. he was more than happy to sit down, say, what is it you need? perfect example, took five years to get the immigration bill. he said get it done. i want it. neil: do you think in retrospect he would be happy with that? >> he would have been happy with the immigration bill? he would have been happy with the immigration bill done the second part with enforcement part of it. neil: they never did. >> they never do it. every time you pass something immigration part, new people coming in always occur but enforcement part always gets dropped. neil: donald trump wants to do enforcement part first? >> for that particular reason.

neil: do you agree with that? >> if he doesn't get the enforcement part first i don't see immigration getting through. neil: my producer will kill me. markets, the president likes to talk about when they're up who can blame him. not so much when they are volatile, going down. ronald reagan eschewed discussion of the markets period. even after the '87 crash. why is that. >> he says presidents get too much credit or too much blame. a lot goes into the economy. he had the tax cuts which were very severe, when he came in. it put a big boom on the economy. he was consistent with that. >> was he obsessed how the markets were doing early days. >> no. neil: even a little bit? >> watched everything a little bit. one obsessed was don reagan. former wall street guy. had a board on his desk, watched it all day long. come in to say to reagan, here is what the market did. neil: i lied. it is not my last question. you mentioned donald reagan.

he came to blows with nancy reagan who was not a fan. melania trump exercising her power as first lady, make it clear someone she doesn't like in the administration, they disappear, go away. what do you make of the role of first lady? >> the role been in couple white houses worked for couple first ladies, when the first lady wants something you pay attention, period. neil: good advice. >> last person that sleeps on the pillow next to him at night. neil: ed, always a pleasure. ed rollins, former reagan campaign manager. fox news contributor. we have signs here that the housing boom could be sort of, well going bust. not quite but what a new number signals, that could trickle down for the rest of the country, after this. 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.

>> lauren simonetti on floor of the new york stock exchange where we're seeing more signs of the housing market is slowing down. take a look at the case-shiller home price index. if you look at 20-city index it is up 5.1% versus last december. why is that important? it is slower growth, but double the pace of wage gains that we've seen. if you couple that with mortgage rates, freddie mac has 30-year fixed at 4.8%, almost a full percentage point from last year. builders are taking notice. builders sentiment at nearly a two-year low. existing home sales falling eight months in a row. mixed reaction from homebuilders. these names are all lower. in fact the sector is down about 30% this year. neil i will leave you a final question you can ponder. is this a sign of the housing market coming into balance or perhaps a sign tougher times are

ahead? maybe there is a collapse yet to be seen. neil: that is amazing. anything more than a buck 50, that is outrageous. thank you very much, lauren simonetti. it is not often the president of the united states is on the same page with his nemesis, john kasich, the outgoing governor of ohio. they're mutually ticked off at general motors and job cuts disproportionately coming to states like ohio and by the way, michigan, 15,000 over the next few weeks. jonathan hoenig says trade is the reason, nothing more, nothing less. what do you mean? >> neil this is really frustrating. the expectation that because the united states bailed out general motors, donald trump for better or for worse was for those bailouts, they somehow owe the american worker. reminds me of the old saying who writes the checks being makes the rules. gm like any other business needs to make money. that is the dangerous precedent set. what worries me, moving forward, you mentioned potentially hard

times coming ahead. the bailouts are still haunting us. general motors is the best example why. neil: did they prematurely put the blame on trade stuff or simply making lousy stuff, the volt and other cars of questionable appeal? >> this is self-inflicted wound by the president and our own government. gm says the tariffs cost them a billion dollars, one billion dollars. that is just gm. ford told the president, the u.s. has highest cost steel in the nation. because of tariffs. the market is mixed today. but look at stocks at 52-week lows. look where the trend is down. steel stocks, neil, alcoa, ak steel. if tariffs are helping the companies why are they all at 52-week lows? neil: president said he had a phone conversation with mary barra, the executive at gm. that he was not happy.

what she would do to open a new plant or do something about this. what do you think she does? >> well you know, that it is worrisome, neil. you have very often as we saw during the obama administration, businesses trying to do what is best for their shareholders, trying to make money but influence from government. the chevy volt and the chevy cruze the best example. obama called the chevy cruze the car of the future six years ago. they're literally pulling the plug on it today. an ideal system, neil, ideal of society, you would have anticipate race between the government and economy. not president trump or any other president influence companies to open plants here, manufacture widgets here. even today, apple computer, apple, down on threats not because they will sell less iphones, because of threats from the president on mayor tariffs from china. this is hurting the bottom line, hurting consumers at the same time. neil: i wonder if next year consumers are prepared for that?

a lot of this, if you want to buy a apple laptop, now might be the time to do it ahead of this sort of stuff could be inflicted on people next year. but already, these tariffs are in full effect for shoppers who can't find a way around them? >> yeah. i mean already, neil. we've seen it throughout the course of the year. something as benign or innocuous as washing machines. that is one of the president's first tariffs, on imported washing machines, those prices are up across the board. we know tariffs are destructive. they're destructive for the very companies they were supposed to help. ford and gm's stock, neil, the stock and the stock market down well over double digits over the last 52 weeks. these taxes, that is what tariffs are, they are taxes on americans, helps no one. it ends up being a political showdown between two authoritarian leaders rather than anything to do with free trade and free economy. neil: you are so going to get some trump tweets. >> yeah. neil: having said that, are you

surprised that the christmas, holiday sales, are strong as they are, even in areas where tariffs are full effect? >> i'm glad to see, neil. i'm not a hater on the economy. i'm glad to see black friday i believe the strongest ever. same thing with black friday and same thing with cyber monday. people are out there shopping. what worries me, i have to say it, the price action we saw in the stock market over the week of thanksgiving. neil, that was the worst week for stocks in 80 years, worst thanksgiving for stocks in 80 years. i'm looking at high yield and corporate bonds ticking down sharply. i feel this, despite the fact the consumer bullish, the market is forecasting i don't know whether a recession, credit crisis, whatever, i fear the stock market is forecasting tougher times moving ahead in 2019. neil: yikes! we'll pick this up in another conversation, neil. >> be well. neil: just when you think, all right, we're going to hell in a hand basket, right?

along comes a remarkable story, a new nasa lander on mars, very captivating. it is actually going to dig into the soil, upwards, eight or upwards of 15 feet to find signs, if any, of life. it's a remarkable story. and it is an american one. after this. we're in memphis, tennessee, a city with one of the highest increases of women-owned businesses in the u.s. it's really this constant juxtaposition when you're a mom and an entrepreneur. with more businesses starting every day, how do they plan for their financial wellness? i am very mindful of the sacrifices that i make. so i have to manage my time wisely. plan your financial life with prudential. bring your challenges.

that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath.n. my name is ken, how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellen[ pop ] happy to help. huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra wide opening and a low step-in at three inches. which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders. kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler's walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler, america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call to save $500 off bath walls with your walk in bath or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info. so lionel, what does 24/5 mean to you?rade

well, it means i can trade after the market closes. it's true. so all... evening long. ooh, so close. yes, but also all... night through its entirety. come on, all... the time from sunset to sunrise. right. but you can trade... from, from... from darkness to light. ♪ you're not gonna say it are you? neil: this is going to be big. a white house briefing coming up at the top of the hour. this will be the first one since the whole dust-up with acosta at the white house and taking his press credentials away. it is all back on in less than 20 minutes or so we'll see how that goes. in the meantime some good news in the middle of political battles and all. these things are just awe-inspiring. we landed on mars again but the nasa lander there has a very

different mission. it will dig into the soil of mars quite deep to determine if there is life there, or at least signs there might have been. it is endless pursuit has likes of former nasa astronaut tom jones no doubt salivating. good to have you. what do you make of this mission? we've been there so many times, i would imagine the neighborhood is getting crowded but this is different one. explain? >> this lander is doing something no other spacecraft on mars has ever done before. it won't move around. not a rover. will sit tight on the flat plane to look at interior of mars, has two big instruments. to study interior and core and man tell of crust are, and composition of interior of mars is? it has the job of looking at the activity of mars. so the two instruments help it do that, are size momter, to measure mars quakes and asteroid impacts, any volcanic activity and it has a heat probe to

measure the heat flow out of mars. tells you how the planet evolved and how active it is, whether it generates mountain-building and volcanoes. it is taking interior pulse of mars. neil: elon musk came in saying, truth be told a lot of people that will make it to mars will probably die. i'm paraphrasing there. that is a bit of a debbie downer there, what do you make of that? >> in one sense he is being realistic. if you look back at 500 years, sir couple navigating the globe started out 500 people and 20 came back. this is the limit of how we build in hauer environments means you will take losses along the way. that is fact of life in deep space exploration. nasa tries to strive in ultimate of senate safety. that is the goal we should shoot

for. i think it is realistic to explore mars or the moon, for example, some people might be lost in the endeavor. on the other hand mr. musk is perhaps premature he will push the state of the envelope in next 10 years to get to mars. i think he will have to wait until he is part of a larger effort where the technology matures and we don't commit going to mars until the robots cleared us and gotten rid of many hazards before we plan out. you don't want to take losses, you want to plan as safe as possible recognizing there is risk. neil: not talking about the risk of going too and from mars or those colonizing mars, or was he? >> he is visionary. he puts great, tough goals out there for his people to aspire to. neil: but it will dry up his pool of potential volunteers. >> no way, neil. there will be thousands of people who would volunteer for a one-way trip to mars no matter what the risks were. if you're part of a nasa effort

you have high safety standards. if it is done privately, i don't think it is feasible to do, nobody has deep enough pocket. if somebody tries privately. they can take more risks, look whether or not it was a gamble too far. neil: with mars the fixation it is closest to our solar system potential earth like, right? at what point can we look beyond mars? >> i think strategy nasa is pursue something good one. it is in parallel. mars is close by, the next planet out from the earth. it has reasonably decent environment. the atmosphere is toxic. almost no air there. it is very cold. the most earth-like place in the solar system. there are moons of jupiter and saturn that have interior subsurface oceans it might be warm and wet enough with an energy source where life can thrive there. it's a tougher job to get down to the surface of the moons and

get beneath the crust to tap this ocean. that is really tough technological job. we'll get to mars first. neil: amazing what we can do with unmanned vehicles. our attention is always on the manned front but on the unmanned side, go back to pioneer, viking, everything else, we have been the envy of the word. >> there is no other country can do the kind of work we can do robotically on mars with couple of rovers. we have a fleet of orbiting spacecraft as well. we had a pretty good success rate of late. mars is humbling place. it will humiliate you if you're careless. before humans can go there we'll have increasingly smart robots get there ahead of us, build habitats, set up production plants to make rocket fuel and oxygen. so when the humans get there they can work in partnership with the robots to insure highest level of safety. like an antarctic base.

neil: tom, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. neil: speaking of out of this world possibilities, democrats and republicans coming together on a new tax plan? the outgoing chief of the house ways and means committee on a plan he says already has bipartisan support, after this. ♪

comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.

neil: this is interesting, kevin brady, outgoing chairman of the house ways and means committee looking at year-end tax package with democratic support as well. talks about the new congress could cobble something together in bipartisan fashion. hope springs eternal but is it really doable. edward lawrence. reporter: the bill has additional tax cuts not just for retirement savings but also energy efficient homes and fuel cell cars. it is 300 pages and redesigns the irs. in a statement kevin brady says quote, i look forward to swift action in the house to send meese measures to the senate. it is likely to pass the house. there is bipartisan support

there. the senate, that is where there is going to be a problem. they need 60 votes in order to pass it through the senate. at the moment it does not have enough democratic support from democratic senator the here. during the lame-duck session congress will have to pass a partial funding bill so the government does not shut down on december 7th. there is also renewed calls from the president for a bothered wall. he would like to see that happen during the lame-duck session. the congress could basically end 115th congress on december 7th, when the funding bill is due. the lobbying in the senate on this for democrats will have to start soon. neil. neil: thank you, buddy, very much. to edward's point we'll talk to steve scalise at 4:00 p.m. eastern time. to my buddy charlie gasparino. i miss him very much when i am out. i miss these great stories like his conversation, with the president calling him on his own phone. and all these latest machinations on the hill,

bipartisan support for tax package. breaking news you're looking at a possibility that maybe democrats go slow on investigations? >> by the way, i missed you so much, i expedited your christmas present. knowing what a fashionista you are, this is the latest in fashion. everybody's got one. neil: that looks fantastic. >> it's a man's body, hoodie. neil: yeah. what is on the back of it? >> lots of hair. neil: excellent. if they prephotographed me. >> by the way, i bought that for you. neil: that is very nice. >> [laughter]. smells like a dad bod. has original scent. i paid extra for that. neil: what do you make of all this other stuff going on? they might go slow to get other stuff done? >> kind of interesting kevin brady doing the tax package. a gasp of a party that knows it is almost irrelevant in the

house. neil: he thinks there is common ground. issues like revising the tax code. maybe not providing as much tax benefits to retirement account. >> revising tax code. this is never going to happen. it is fantasy. i mean the republicans have to set themselves up as a change party for when the democrats take over because they obviously want to get the house back at some point, right? maybe this is the first step towards doing this this is theater. it will never happen. the other side, is pelosi going slow? from the democratic sources. there is dichotomy between the leadership and rabble-rousers. alexandria ocasio-cortez, rabble-rouser base, elizabeth warren base. you know, she is in the senate but you get my drift here. neil: i understand. >> they, the base wants to just roast donald trump and anything associated with donald trump. they want hearings. they want to get his tax returns. they want to do all that sort of

stuff. not saying -- neil: now the latest ties to saudi arabia, right? >> whatever. the establishment, nancy pelosi, jerry nadler -- neil: how can you dismiss that, whatever? >> if they can get a hearing out of it, they would love to do it. the establishment is in the mode let's not overstep our hand. neil: yeah. >> they have to feed red meat to the base, because the base is demanding a slow roasting of the president or a fast roasting. they're demanding his tax returns. that is a big thing. they're demanding certain things. neil: they're not giving up on that. >> it is her job to sort of thread that needle. that is what, pelosi's job. neil: okay. >> that is what you're seeing here. neil: you think this comes up with sarah sanders, the first briefing since october. >> have you missed her? i haven't. i think she does a good job you by don't care. neil: we're covering it live. >> okay, sorry about that.

neil: you know, one thing i give her credit for. i think she is very effective pr woman. she can stonewall with the best of them. neil: yeah. by the way -- >> unflappable. neil: as are you, but so unflappable you get the president of the united states to call you. >> he called me on thanksgiving night. for once in my life i had my phone off. he was having dinner at mar-a-lago with his family. my friend was there. my friend was talking about him something or another, my name came up, he tried me three or four times. neil: how did he have your number? >> my buddy gave it to him. they dialed it at mar-a-lago. it was interesting, allegedly he said -- neil: did leave any messages? >> he didn't leave any message. neil: hi, charlie. >> i saw scrambled number 202. i know donald trump a long time, longer than anybody here i covered him. neil: known him 30 years?

>> 25. neil: i known him 30 years. just saying -- >> he was okay. i always got along with him personally, what did he want to talk to you about? i think you don't want to share it. >> i will give you the conversation. it involved, he retweeted a report i did on your show. a friend of mine said, i saw you retweeted charlie's thing on comcast and american cable association beginning investigation into their monopolistic practices. they were discussing that issue. and he asked, he asked my friend, what do you think of charlie? and my friend says, well he is very influential with business reporting. neil: and you are. >> i like him. according to, i have not confirmed it -- neil: do you think he likes you? >> i known him a long time. we always got along. neil: that's not what i asked. >> i think he thinks could be better to him. i could be better. i'm not a hater.

i try to call balls and strikes. neil: a lot of journalist, whether preaching on the left, preaching on the right, we're all textured souls. >> you and i call balls and strikes. neil: is that baseball? >> yes. we're only in the fifth inning of this baseball game, trump presidency. i say i will not stop doing that. neil: right. >> if he wants to yell at me. i don't think he will, that is what i will tell him. you know, i'm not a vicious guy. i don't, you know, i do his voice every now and then. that is the worst -- neil: very good. >> very good. excellent. charlie's the best. neil: that is pretty wild, do you know the gap or space between phone calls? >> they were minutes apart. he kept trying. neil: wow. >> chris, my friend emailed me and, my phone was off though. it was 9:30. i just came back from long island. neil: i tried to reach you a number of times. >> sounds like you. i email you, i hear two months, funny when i email you i get

emails back two months later. neil: because it occurs to me. >> this guy. i know him. who else gave you something. neil: nothing like this. >> the hair. because -- neil: our people made that look. >> by the way ralph was saying got to go. neil: ralph is getting annoyed. he always getting annoyed. >> he is mad i didn't get him one of those. neil: he is having a temper tantrum. more after this ..

neil: all right come atop of the hour, white house briefing should start any moment. we might get a clue as to what could or could not come down to cheat on a summit this weekend. xi jinping mayor is hoping the markets and these can gather a deal to south dakota republican senator mike brown. you think they can? >> in the upper midwest right now i know it doesn't sound like a real exciting topic. we produce 240 million bushels on south dakota we are down over $2 a bushel. we've got more than half a billion dollars since march 1st. producers and south dakota are concerned about it but ill supported the president. they still want to see him succeed and understand china has

not been a good trading partner and recognize while they're in the tip of the spear, and this is a big deal for our country. neil: we are told the president will up the ante in suggesting your tariffs are my leg char neck items. it would hike their prices by 10%. do you think that's going too far or good negotiating? >> i think he is putting a line in the sand and trying to make it a deep line in the sand talking about $200 billion in goods over there that he wants about 25% tariff on right now. he is still saying that, but that is the mark of a negotiator at this stage of the game. tree into doing it by coming out, whatever occurs to him? >> so far that hasn't been the case. each time he said he is going to do it, he's done it. >> a lot of time there caught off guard. whatever he's doing, he's doing so low.

>> i can't dispute that with you. i can tell you look, and he's moving its own direction. i think it impacts our economy. the sooner we get these trade words and highness, the better off we are. the president is right when he says they've not been a very trading partner. we are kind of stuck in the high place where we've got to fix it in intellectual property as are critical. the chinese have got to understand how serious that is. they need our soybeans right now. they can't get them for the rest of the world. not the numbers they need. our producers would sure like to see a deal cut. turning to you now, saudi arabia, on the republican colleagues have joined not accepting the khashoggi report that the saudi prince framed it and run cia saying they were behind it. how do you feel about all that? my suspicion is, and this is only based upon so far that nbs is probably directly involved. i can't prove it, but that's my

suspicion. i've met with him. i think he's one of these guys who's really trying to figure out his way in the world in trying to decide whether the united states is the ally he wants or whether he needs to play for your list and the united states. neil: is any amount of money really worth it if this guy is a murderous thug? >> i don't think that the case. i don't think he is simply a murderous thug. i think is a man -- neil: it might not matter in the scheme of things in their source leaders who dealt with in the past stalin, we can go on and on. it is what it is. you can pick and choose them, but you think we should? >> i'm not going and make excuses for what happened because i think it was wrong. the real question is how do we get past the come and send a powerful message that it's wrong and should not have been. but at the same time --

[inaudible] >> i think they're probably has to be a penalty. i guess that's where i'm at. the penalty cannot be the elimination of a relationship with saudi arabia appeared there is a penalty or even among allies there has to be an understanding that there is a right and a wrong and if they want to be a part of the western part of the world come and these things are simply not acceptable. we can't go to mr. putin and say what you've done in britain is wrong and not do the same thing when it comes to saudi arabia appeared to have to be consistent in that message. neil: senator, waiting for sarah sanders to take questions from reporters, since october 29th with the dustup with the cnn and credentials revolt and we can't do that. how do you think these things should be handled -- and mark don't televise them and add fire to the fury here.

>> i like the idea of having an open discussion, but you have to recognize that the java controversial statement made by the president or his press secretary. that becomes a discussion point for penance for the next two days. if he wants to control the news he assist up in front of the cameras in for the next through four days of discussions. it's a lovely relationship between the president and the press. both of them reliant on the other. neil: do think the president right now with what is been taken off guard by the gm decisions to let go of 50,000 workers and blame it on trade, apparently he wasn't pleased blaming it all on trade. what did you think of it?

>> my first thought was trade had something to do with it, but it also had to do with the change in the types of vehicles that americans in the united states are buying. the traditional vehicle that gm is working on those plans. certainly not in demand the way the vehicles are in the suburbans, pickups and so forth. and so, there may keep her decision in cells. this is my own personal opinion. if this has happened in my state when i was governor, i'd be saying look, i'm not trying to tell you how to do business, but this is hurting some real people. how are you going to soften the blow in what can we do to perhaps convince you that there might be some alternatives on it? i've tried publicly saying that the president said i'm not happy with what you're doing. behind the scenes i say how can we make this work for people who are getting hurt and what about the next steps? you don't want to simply shut down production. can you look at the same locations and are these folks

giving them an opportunity to be able to go back to work in a very short period of time. what's your plan? i'd be pushing really hard that there is the human element involved in these organizations have to respect that. neil: you mentioned saudi arabia and i'd be remiss if i didn't ask you very quickly about an effort on the part of the house to look at the president's ties to saudi arabia, financial and otherwise. would there be support for that in the republican senate? >> you know, the house is going to do with they want to do. they have to do a lot of investigations. the president because he simply hasn't disclosed a lot of stuff is going to have them pry into everything they can. i think rob assigned to that fact. we will focus on nominations and that is something we can do without crossing over to the house. there's got to be working hard in the appropriations process defines a middle ground. infrastructure is an area we might find some common ground

with the new house leadership on. i'm not totally saying that there's nothing done, but i think the house is going to be focused on one investigation after another for an extended period of time and it will take more effort and probably leadership would like it to take. in order to satisfy their base i'm afraid we're in for a lot more discussions in a lot more investigations. neil: senator mike rounds in the beautiful state of south dakota. thank you for taking the time. >> thank you. neil: the president wasn't pleased with it nor was john casey, outgoing governor of ohio. he and the president are rarely on the same page but they're both outraged by this and excuses given, most of them in ohio, a state the president one by a comfortable margin in the 2016 race. let's get to read on this from gary b. smith come a business is. what's interesting about this is

mary barra blaming it on trade and doing it at the top of her game or gm's game and not waiting until a recession or worse. >> yeah. i mean, i get this made when the politicians like you just had on say, you know, when he was governor he would've gone to them and got them involved as if there should be a private public partnership. i think the job of the government quite honestly is to keep the light on, defend our borders and get out of the way. it is sad. don't get me wrong for the workers and everyone involved that gm is doing this. in the long run, it is probably hopefully a good decision for gm. if they kept those factory opens, they would no doubt be losing money, squandering resources that could be diverted into, as they say, creating new better jobs elsewhere.

it is tough, but that's the way businesses. neil: without politicizing this, i don't know if i would want a ceo balance in the south the president of the united states. that would have been achy feeling to it, too. >> i totally agree. it's as if the government should somehow direct gm's resources. gm knows what the resources are. gm i'm sure didn't comment to the holidays. luscious cut 15,000 people. i'm sure they thought about this. they know there is going to be a public backlash. neil: the only thing i worry about is the politics of this and i think this is a business decision. but if xi is trained as a $6 in cost, what issue bracing for? what is it saying about the economy or one savvy ceos view of an economy?

>> you absolutely hit the nail on the head of all the business news i've read or looked out over the past few weeks. this one coming in now, really had my goal mentality the most spirit i understand what they're saying. but people are buying the city and spirit we to move the resources. that just seems like they not see this coming at all? that tells me, yes, if your implication is there could be an economic downturn. this was the one straw baby that i saw that said maybe the economy is not as good as i've been hawking it. >> i wonder what the effect would be if other ceos, maybe i should retrench a little bit and it becomes sort of like a self-serving problem for the economy. >> well, at a minimum i'm sure these others eeo start again barra is not dumb.

she seen something where the. exactly. they are going to do their due diligence and make sure gm is one off or there is economic factors out there that they need to take into account. neil: well put, gary. thank you very, very much. we are waiting on things pushed back a little bit there. that is a significant development. when we take is that given the federal reserve is likely to raise interest rates at least one more time this year to address an economy that is doing well were firing on all proverbial cylinders. here's a company that knows a lot about fired on cylinders thing we don't see the same economy. whatever the politics i miss, this is a multibillion dollars conglomerate saying we don't see the same economy the president

does. we don't see the same economy even the federal reserve does. at great personal risk to herself that cannot understand the rationale behind jettisoning 15,000 people. the question then becomes, why is gm doing this now and what are we missing now? after this. the hard work you put into lowering your very high triglycerides with diet and exercise deserves the hard work that went into the science behind vascepa. prescription vascepa. vascepa, along with diet and exercise, has proven results in multiple clinical trials. vascepa looks different because it is different. over a decade of extensive research and development

achieved proven results. that's the prescription power of vascepa. vascepa is not right for everyone. do not take vascepa if you are allergic to icosapent ethyl or any inactive ingredient in vascepa. tell your doctor if you are allergic to fish, have liver problems or other medical conditions and about any medications you take, especially those that may affect blood clotting. 2.3% of patients reported joint pain. ask your doctor about what the science behind prescription vascepa can mean to you. amarin thanks the clinicians and patients who participated in the vascepa clinical trials. amarin thanks the clinicians and patients who participated our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest.

holiday inn express. book now for at least 20% off during our annual sale.

i am a techie dad.n. i believe the best technology should feel effortless. like magic. at comcast, it's my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience. my name is mike, i'm in product development at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

neil: of this is an interesting acoustic with god through $313.29 is the average amount meant by shoppers over the thanksgiving weekend. imagine if every household could bear no for $13.29 two. gerri willis, keith fitzgerald. that's a pretty heavy number on that server very limited period of time. they could telegraph a pretty strong holiday shopping season. what are your thoughts? >> not to throw some cold water on this, but i worry about how much of that is really dead. credit is pretty loose right

now. neil: what you make of that? >> i was shocked by that number like you. that was way higher than i expected. it is pretty much most of the budget, the most people will spent for the holiday shopping season. do they have that right? i'm not sure. at the end of the day consumers have a very good right now. the employment market, fabulous fire again on all cylinders. forget the stuff that the dow companies have to worry about. american consumers are doing very well. we've seen sentiment a little bit here, but i've got to tell you, bottom line this looks pretty good. neil: the fact they're resilient to the way they are, maybe being selective in what they buy. speaking of which, larry kudlow was commenting on the state of the approaching g20 talks

especially were xi jinping of china in argentina saying that the president means what he says. there's no further breakthrough in the talks. he went on to say they may not conclude with a formal statement and the chinese response on trade thus far is we can't find much change in their close. what do you think? >> i think he is telegraphing low expectations. it's also telegraphing hardball and rightfully so. the danger here is china can't survive an awful lot more and we haven't yet found the right pressure points. that's the real message here having spent a lot of time in asia. trying to kudlow is sandi g20 no way of telling. if we didn't get one there would be no tears shed. particularly on the trade front, wouldn't the market be

disappointed in not? not that they expect an agreement, but no communiqué to hinder progress towards one. >> at the end of the day the statement that she read from kudlow, everybody raised their hand. nobody has their hands up. the traders i talked to are not expect gain a lot. they're not expecting anything in fact. do they want him agreement? of course they do. they have traded in their most recent release with the sec. companies are talking about the effects of trade on their businesses and of course the dow industrials deadhead mightily by this. it is a big deal. expectations i believe are low. neil: they are deliberately keeping them low. to that point, kudlow was saying any formal meetings with his chinese counterpart in buenos aires delay the groundwork for a

dinner, no guarantees of that for the chance to change the tone and substance of these talks. very low expectations of that. they really are going out of their way to lowball this, which generally means even if they get a commitment to continue talks, and that will be greeted favorably because expectations are so low. >> i've got to believe that's the case. how low can you set the limbo bar? the answer is they've got a pretty low to the ground. anything to bring up a flood of capital back in. if for no other reason than trying to get ahead of an agreement might look like. neil: on a thank you all very much. we will sneak in a commercial. then it should be time to take questions from the press that includes coming out, jim acosta and cnn. first opportunity with his press credentials on revoked and now

an opportunity for him to ask questions and for the white house to do without. we don't know if there'll be other players they are talking about traitor host of other issues that could come up, but it could be quite an event. after this.

neil: alright, so we have a white house briefing. persons of the whole dustup with acosta over at cnn. how do they handle that? how could this go with the back-and-forth but judge napolitano. you can always decide not to pick acosta. >> when this kerfuffle happen a couple weeks ago, happened to be on dana perino, former press secretary, president george w. bush. how did he handle it? very easily. no fireworks, no throwing them out. no naming by name. is there an obligation to call

an specific individuals? absolutely not. there is an obligation for the president to hold these press conferences. this president and you and i both know him from outside this judeo views this as sports and enjoys doing it. [inaudible] provides oxygen. the mac right i don't know what happened today. >> you were revoking the press pass. that's dangerous. >> sitting right here looking you in the eye i predicted the president would lose in a cost to the press pass your neil: you did indeed. neil: there are ways to do this without creating a crisis and maybe that's one. >> either way, the judge had ordered the press pass returned. once to refer to federal judges by the name of the president who appointed them.

>> teesside dustups with john roberts and others, the supreme court. what is going on here? >> i was disappointed i wrote my column about it this week when chief justice roberts entered the political fray. in return for the court having the last day on the meaning of the laws and from life tenure, dishes to edit the political fray. otherwise they'll be viewed with politicians. >> president made a claim about obama judges that he was stating -- >> a colonel of truth to that. bruce pater ginsberg view this ruling, and that she can't stop them from coming over the border the same way sam alito would. justices are appointed because the president has confidence. >> the president who appointed them. >> on the other hand what a court rules against you, i think you should address the merits,

rather than the background of the appointment process. judges change. the most significant pro-choice justice on the supreme court of the united states, an irish catholic daily communicant appointed by ronald reagan named anthony kennedy. who would've predicted that. sometimes your attitude changes about public policy and the people that help to get there. >> was going to come out today is out today is the care of it in the violence at the border and the president saying it's dangerous, threat to our security and our criminal elements there. what you think of all that? >> i don't know. i've a lot of respect for secretary nelson. she's got a tough boss. i don't know how her people know that their 600 criminals. criminals are criminals.

people commit did and did their time and are just trying to flee oppression themselves. they may have committed crimes in guatemala but are not crimes here. >> they don't have any paperwork. how would you know if they're criminals or not? >> i don't know how she would know that. i do know that the burden is on the migraine. the person trying to entered to prove their worthiness for asylum. if they show up with no idea and no paperwork, i don't know how to prove their case. neil: there is talk that the mexicans will house these migrants or whatever during this asylum process. that would be unprecedented and they would be not -- not believe in the united states. >> a weird be unprecedented event in my federal judge because it's inconsistent with

federal law. once they are here, they stay. the other standard tension -- neil: what if they never get here? they stand tijuana. >> they can only make their application in the 90s date than they have the right to knock on that door if it's a bona fide asylum claim. the initial interview -- neil: what is a bona fide asylum claim? >> repression in their targeting you or your group or the failure of the government in the home country to enforce basic human rights and property rights. in other words are building games kill and rob and steal. that would be enough to justify. neil: that's a big problem in ecuador. >> rate. noneconomic good law and order. neil: guatemala were many are coming from as well, abject poverty is not meant to guarantee you asylum. >> under the law that's correct. neil: lost in the sauce is the fact we have a record number of foreigners becoming legal citizens in this country. green cards but have you around

1 million. so we lose sight of that. they might argue what's wrong with the american system that we are going through this process, sometimes for years and we are being denied some and that is granted to people in the flash make their presence known and sometimes violently to get asylum. >> that is a defect in the system. if i'm coming from southern italy and there is no repression, i see them on a long line until my quota, whether my lawyer or a ditch digger, but if i am coming from ecuador or there is repression i can get to the head of the line. the system was built in order to provide a refuge for those who had to escape oppressive evidence. that is why contrary to what the president wants coming you could knock on the door anywhere. if you have a bona fide asylum claim you don't even have to go to a portal. you can enter the country at any border whether it's a border patrol person there or not.

neil: we've granted asylum in the past to those fleeing cuba, but we slowed down mightily with the cuban boat people during jimmy carter's knee. is there a rule of thumb on that or no? >> the old rule of thumb was if you step foot in the united states the united states for certain due process which is why scenario boat lift, in my view president carter did the right thing. they stop them before they came to the three-mile limit. not all of them. literally unlimited jails and mental institutions just to rid themselves to this day. jimmy carter succeeded in keeping many of them from coming here. it had a step foot onto key west beach, they would have steered the application. by the way, the application takes six to eight months to be heard during the course of which they were guess to the united

states. they have 368 immigration judges. they go 24/7. they don't take saturdays or sundays off. just such a huge line. it could take two hours or two days per hearing. neil: but wouldn't you think that the way to go if you don't want to wait an additional five to seven likely years. neil: real quickly on the other new story of the day, saying he heard several times the present of times the president of the united states in lingo voicemail. >> i looked at his cell phone and i pressed reply. nothing happened. it was the strangest phone number i ever saw. neil: at that make sense of it was the president of the united states. when you call people you can't call back. i say this with deference and love for my brother, gasparino. i think the president was hoping he wouldn't answer. neil: that's very interesting. >> why did charlie have that

cell phone locked -- not locked, but in a kitchen cabinet. neil: it makes you wonder whether he's telling the truth at all. neil: judge coming you are the best my friend. one of the best human beings around. we are going to be following this. not only will this likely come out, what to do about the caravan in the whole g20 summit coming up. the administration bending over backwards and now talk about the possibility that some it might not go well. sara sanders right now. >> later this week the president and first lady will travel to argentina for the g20 summit. president transfer dissipation in the g20 summit is a key opportunity to reiterate his commitment to domestic and global economic growth and prosperity. relations with other world leaders in advance of global economic stems they sound their economic competition and free, fair and reciprocal trade. all at the g20, the president and delegation will interact

with many leaders, including bilateral meetings with the president of argentina, the president of russia, prime minister of japan and the chancellor of germany and working in room with the president of china. more about the g20 what the president plans to accomplish her director of national economic council, larry kudlow and following his national security adviser, ambassador john bolton. after their marks both will be available to take your questions on the g20 and other foreign policies of the day and i'll be back to take other questions on the news of the day. >> thank you, sarah. thanks, everybody. let me just walk through some quick things and then i want to mention some things the president talked to s. just a little while ago. i sarah said, g20, not actually the g20 one recounted that

properly as ambassador bolton points out. much more than the g20. in terms of the u.s. positions, we are going to use this as an opportunity to talk about our measures of tax cuts and the regulations and rescaling on job training and so forth that generated significant economic growth and prosperity of. that includes women's economic empowerment. is there mention free, fair and reciprocal trade and trade reform. there'll be discussions of infrastructure finance and all though the u.s. emergence as the dominant energy power in the world today. in terms of the much discussed meeting that's going to be a dinner meeting between president trump and president xi and representatives from both sides, the bilateral, i want to just mention what the president told us a short while ago. and that is in his view there is

a good possibility that a deal can be made in that he is open to god. having said that, some caveats as always, certain conditions have to be met with respect to fairness and reciprocity as we've said many times. for example, issues of intellectual property theft must be solved for some technology transfers must be solved. significant tariffs and non-tariff barriers must be solved. issues of ownership has to be solved. the president will probably reiterate his view and we want a world ideally for zero tariffs come to zero non-tariff barriers and zero subsidies.

now, whether they can get through all that remains to be seen, but that's the president's point of view as i said just a little while ago. u.s. is coming to the summit very good shape. our economy is quite strong. it's growing at 3% over the past year. second quarter was for .2. third quarter was 3.5. perhaps be revised upwards. very strong holiday season, so-called black friday very strong. we've had tremendous investment, business investment, energy investments, oil prices and gasoline prices coming down helps consumers of course. we are in very good shape. china not so good. i'm not here to critique or second-guess the chinese economy, but most observers believe china to be in a slump whereas the united states is in a very strong solid position going into this summit. however, tend to repeat, the president said there is a good

possibility of that we can make a deal and he is open to it. on the other hand of these conditions i mentioned a few moments ago are not that, not dealt with, the president has said, look, he is perfectly happy to stand on his tariff policies, which 10% last $200 billion scheduled to go to 25%. that's on the certainty, but that's a schedule and he has said as recently as yesterday, the day before, if need be, if things don't work out in this u.s.-china summit meeting, he will invoke another 267.my billion dollars in tariffs. that may not be the first choice. i'm just saying that is his view. if we can't get something done and things have been moving very slowly between the two countries, until the president

himself called president xi and said let's restart. let's get this going again. and since then he's made positive comments about that. so, we will see. as i said, around growth and prosperity in our economy is in good shape. theirs is not. i'll just leave it right there. john, do you want me to take some questions? okay, good. let me take some questions and try to help out on this. neil: as i could address some concerns recently from representatives in italy, france and germany say that we are actually backing away from the national stage in a further russia will be in europe in the middle east in the coming years. could you address those concerns and could you tell us a little bit if you can about the layoffs at gm. >> regarding the russian story i will leave that to my long-time friend and colleague, john

bolton. i met with mary barra yesterday and we had a lengthy conversation about the layoffs were the cause of the layoffs. it's a great disappointment not to say. the president indicated his own disappointment. he believes, as frankly the prime minister of canada, trudeau, believes is the usmc a deal was a great help to the automobile industry into autoworkers. by the way, they made those statements effortlessly. and yet, gm comes in right after the deal. that deal will be signed in argentina with the u.s. and canadian representative. there is great disappointment they are. there is disappointment that it seems like gm would rather build up electric cars in china rather than the united states. we are going to be lucky not

certain subsidies regarding electric cars and others, whether they should apply or not. can't say anything final about that, but we are looking into it. that reflects the president's own disappointment regarding his actions. ms. barra told me on the other hand, to be completely fair, it may be possible to transfer workers to other plans in texas and michigan. i'm not an expert on general motors. but that is what she said. obviously there is a lot of disappointment, even anger. i've heard it again for mr. trudeau, president trump, democrats and republicans. >> you think you'll inversely affect our economy coming into the christmas season after? >> no, look, i don't want anyone to be laid off. i walk worker wages to do well and they are. that is one of the great things. you know, the same amount of pessimism i am reading about maybe has to do with really a

mild stock market correction. let's not forget a couple weeks ago on this very point. we had 250,000 new jobs, which was a block buster number. the 3.1% yearly gain in wages and a three-point 7% unemployment rate. those are very spacey numbers by any benchmark in any metric. holiday season layoffs spread gm brutal, brutal. very disappointing. will it affect the overall economy? i don't think so. i do not think so. >> back to the question of the tariffs, if these talks with president xi go nowhere and we've moved forward with the escalation of the tariffs, which correct me if i'm wrong with you the biggest addition of tariffs we've seen in your lifetime, but will the impact be on the u.s.

economy? >> a long period of time you've mentioned. >> a traitor for almost all of those years. will be the impact of u.s. economy if we see tariffs go up as you just described? >> you know, we will see what happens. i do want to presuppose anything. the president will make up his mind after the meeting. i will say this. our economy is in very good shape right now. when you multiply them through whatever numbers you want to use, 250 billion for attack on another tranche, which may or may not have been at a 10% tariff rate for more, it is really just a fraction of our economy. it is just a fraction of our economy. i'm not suggesting that there are winners and losers in that game, complicated game. on the other hand, we are in far better shape to weather this day

the chinese are and i also want to say one thing. i appreciate your characterization. i am a free trader. but you have to ask yourself, this is what president trump has been talking about. is free trade when there's clear evidence of unfair wto illegal trading practices by china for several decades, is that fair? is that free? is it free when intellectual property theft occurs or when chinese ownership of american companies force transference of technology from american companies to the chinese companies? is that fair or high tariffs on agriculture and industrial supplies. is that fair? president trump is the first president and i don't know at least 20 years and i'm including democrats and republicans who

not only has made this case, but continues to take this case and actions to defend american workers and their overall economy. other presidents in both economies have raised the issue of and then walked away from a peer president trump obviously doesn't intend to. you know, this is under the heading i think for him of promises made, promises kept, something talked about for several years and he now continues. if china will come to the table or in this case the dinner table with some new ideas since a new attitude since the new cooperation, as the president said, there's a good possibility they could make a deal. he's open to it. nothing is written in cement or stone. again, for a free trader, where is the free trade? for several now since i've been here, the president and i talked

about this. we'd love to see a world of zero tariffs and zero not tariff barriers and zero subsidies. we'd love to see that world. unfortunately, we don't have that world particularly with respect to china. not only with china. he is taking actions that he thinks will get us closer to that world. yes, please. >> just another question. when the president said yesterday they better well open a new planter quickly, does he have some consequences in mind if they don't? >> you know, i'm going to leave that to him. you may find additional announcements coming on that topic. in the back. yes, ma'am. >> i wanted to ask you about what was said recently on "the wall street journal," the chinese ambassador to the united date, his thought was that there would be a real threat to the global market if there wasn't a deal, that they could become fragmented as well.

how big are the states if you can't reach a deal? >> well, the ambassador makes the point. now if he would do his part for the government would do their part, then we can all make a much better point. that is what president trump is saying. i'll redo the quote again. there's a good possibility we could make the deal in these open to it. certain conditions have to be met. certain things have to be changed. the president again in the spirit of promises made, promises kept is going to defend the interest of the american workers and ranchers and small businesses and the economy writ large. let me just add one other point to this. the rest of the world agrees with us. i mean, we signed the u.n., for example, a trilateral agreement

with the e.u. and the united states and japan. worth looking at that document, which outlines what they call nonmarket abuses. just recently before the shanghai conference where president xi was to give an important speech. in any case, just before that conference, with no pride for the u.s.a., the ambassadors come the french and german ambassadors to china, french and german ambassadors to china wrote a very tough piece going up there again nonmarket unfair nonreciprocal trading practices. there is rod a's support for the american position here, which is china should change its

practices in coming to the community of responsible trading nations. they can do that. they are a major economy right now. it's not like they were 25 or 30 years ago. we would welcome it. the president has said he's happy to make a deal that they have to take certain actions and give certain assurances. >> getting that support around the position of the g20. >> just a couple more. yes, please. >> thank you. tariffs are in effect a tax on imported products being paid for by the consumer. these escalated tasks by tears will be paid for by the american citizens. >> look, he realizes the ratification. as we said earlier, given the strength of our connie, given the size of our economy, we are

in a position to deal with this and handle this very well. that is the key point. i'm not so sure about china, but i'll leave that to china experts and so forth and so on. the benefits -- let me just look to the other side of the ledger. the benefits of true free trade globally would be enormous. if we go back to the idea is zero tariffs in zero not tariff barriers in zero subsidies, china plays by the rules, even the wto rules and all that answer forming in our judgment that they are violating those rules. if we do have a free trading system or move in the direction of the true free trading system, we will benefit enormously and frankly we will benefit, they will benefit in the rest of the world will benefit. free trade throws off enormous

benefits when it done properly and consistency and in a reciprocal manner. that's the key point. so you now, i think of it as possibly along rainbow here and at the end of the rainbow is a pot of gold. you have press area for the rest of the word, but you've got to get through the long rainbow. we are not there yet. we can get there. the president is reaching now. but we will see how that works. [inaudible] >> yes, go ahead. >> thank you, sir. earlier you mentioned oil and gas prices as evidence the president's economic policy is working. you mentioned the u.s. becoming the global dominant energy player. but days ago the president said it was necessary to let saudi arabia and its crown prince get

away with the murder of a "washington post" or less because saudi arabia has gas prices. which one is it, sir? arlette ambassador bolton handled that question. i am trying so hard to swim in my online indexing john will help out with that whole discussion. sitting there much to calmly and quietly. look at the map here. you're on, john. >> i'm delighted to be here. sarah gave you less than bilaterals, updated a little bit because we are trying to fill every minute of the president's schedule. she said he's going to meet with president macri, the host government of argentina. he'll meet with president clinton south korea, president

erdogan. that will change into a meeting and then a sarah said, the president will meet with president putin and have a working dinner with president xi. [inaudible] >> thank you, sir. are there any plans in the works -- [inaudible] >> the bilateral schedule is full to overflowing at this point. so those are the ones i've listed. yes, ma'am. >> i have a question about border tensions right now at the u.s. and mexico. the u.s. launched and i'm wondering if mexico has given the go-ahead before that

happened in what is the u.s. doing to mitigate any tensions right now with the incoming administration? >> i don't think that's really a subject of the g20, but i can say secretary of state pompeo will be attending the g20 and therefore will not be accompanying vice president and to deny duration on saturday the first. secretary pompeo will fly overnight from argentina to mexico and will meet with the new foreign minister of mexico on sunday the second and the home a full conversation about all the issues in connection with the border. >> would you expect to be on the agenda for the president's meeting with putin? >> i think all of the issues we have on security issues, arms control issues, regional issues including the middle east, i think it will be a full agenda,

a continuation of their discussion in >> two questions about the meeting with the new president of brazil. i know trade is one of the priorities. for the past few years, brazil had a trade surplus with brazil. >> united states had a trade surplus. >> complain about the brazilian protection. -- [inaudible]. what should we expect related to trade relationship with brazil with the new brazilian government? should we expect more cooperation or more tariffs like those on steel and aluminum? another one on venezuela i know is another priority of the meeting. what kind of cooperation are you expecting with the new brazilian government? are you guys going to cut sanctions? >> the meeting with

president-elect bolsonaro came as a result of president trump's call on election night in brazil toe congratulate to congratulate president-elect bolsonaro. they had an outstanding phone call. developed a personal relationship even remotely. the president trump was the first foreign leader to call president-elect bolsonaro. so following up on this we thought it would be useful and certainly very helpful to the united states to hear from the president-elect whoo -- what his priorities are. what he is looking for relationship with respect to the united states. we see this as historic opportunity for brazil and the united states to work together in a whole host of areas, economics, security, a range of others. so i'm really looking forward to hearing what the president elect's priorities are trying to

respond to him, trying to tell him a little bit what president trump's views are. and hopefully when, president elect bolsonaro is inaugurated on january the 1st, that the two leaders can get off to a running start. i'm just really there to prepare the ground for them. reporter: ambassador bolton you tweeted earlier today about a case involving american families being held in china is the president -- have you talked to the president about this case? what has he told you and will he bring this up directly with the meeting with xi xinping. expected the family allowed to deal before any trade deal -- >> i have discussed the question of american hostages people wrongfully held with a range of subjects. i don't want to get into what his reaction was because i don't think those conversations should be public. this is a matter of real concern to us, i think given that the range of issues that president xi and president trump will be covering it is entirely

possible that would come up. yeah? reporter: meeting with president putin and president trump, will president trump condemn russian aggression in ukraine? does the president consider it an act of war and has he spoken with president putin and poroshenko about what happened? >> ambassador haley, spoke for the united states at the security council. we'll stand on that statement. reporter: question, you mentioned the bilateral with the turkish leader, very critical of the -- [inaudible] are you concerned about that that will affect the relationship with the a u.s. ally? want to follow up, audio intelligence of killing of jamal khashoggi, have you heard that tape and does it conclusively point to the crown prince as wanting to kill jamal khashoggi and one final one. >> i'm supposed to remember all these. reporter: i will prompt you.