ashley: very creepy. much very creepy. we were up 300. now essentially right where we started. flat at 22,860. that is the nature, david asman. where it finishes we have no idea. neil cavuto knows. neil: if that were so. if that were so. dow slipping into negative territory. nasdaq in and out of bear market territory. did not close at that level, but as our resident genius stocks editor charlie brady we would have in other words falling 20% from highs reached a little more than a few months ago, a couple months ago. the concern seems to be the same issue it was yesterday, before that. the federal reserve whether it is doing enough to combat what seems to be market jitters. the expectation the federal reserve is poised to cut rates,

i'm sorry, hike rates next year, versus three times before that meeting. many had hoped it would indicate a much more cautious stance than that. so we're still not very sure what will happen on that front. we'll still not very sure looking at long or short-term, government shutdown. looks increasingly likely we'll see some form of a shutdown. the president is jawboning a lot of republican leaders, including mitch mcconnell who runs the senate, we do away 2/3 requirement on major pieces of legislation with simple majority. with republicans in control, would allow a measure to pass the republican house and go ahead to force the border wall funding to get the thing resolved but there is no indication that the senate leader is going to do that. blake burman with the latest white house. hi, blake. reporter: neil this time yesterday we were talking about a meeting taking place between

president trump and members of the house. here we are a day later. we still believe the meeting is going on between president trump and members of the senate. it is now the responsibility of the senate to take up the measure passed by the house late last night which would keep the government funded but would include nearly $6 billion for the border wall and border security. the senate is not going to pass that they do not have the votes to pass that. do not have enough democratic support. there is meeting on going here at the white house just to figure out the way going forward, especially considering the president said yesterday he would not sign the bill that the house, that the senate put forward the other day which would keep the government funded through february 8th, seven weeks, but not include his worder wall money. so two big questions here. first, what is going to happen? how do they work their way out of this mess, they being the president, leadership up on capitol hill, but also if there is a government shutdown,

partial government shutdown which now seems more likely than not, how long could that potentially last? listen here to the exchange i had with sarah huckabee sanders press secretary here today. >> if nothing changeses in washington, president and white house, republicans controlling the senate, democrats controlling the house, could this go on for months potentially? >> again let's hope that doesn't have to happen. we'll see if democrats are willing to do and do their jobs. the american people elected them to do something, not be obstructionist to go against the president. reporter: talking about hope, hope is not at this point a deal or legislation. one piece of the puzzle, the president is now urging this is the hands of senate, to get rid of the filibuster rule, there aren't 60 votes needed to keep a

majority rather, 50 plus one. that is not going to happen. mitch mcconnell is not supporting it. the president is urging mcconnell to do so. he tweeted out the following. mitch, use "the nuclear option, get it done, our country is counting on you. mcconnell is here at the white house today. a spokesperson for mcconnell sent out the following statement. the leader says the votes are not there in the conference to use "the nuclear option. this morning several senators put out statements confirming their opposition. confirming there is not a majority in the conference to to down that road. a host of issues in play here, trying to figure out a way forward, if not, how long might this shutdown happen. as the president pushes for "the nuclear option. we await possibly the senators to come out, potentially here to speak to us shortly. neil. neil: blake, thank you very much. blake burman. so what happens on this whole nuclear option. it is a real hail mary pass.

"real clear politics" tom bevin is here. as mitch mcconnell said, tom, very often, be careful what you wish for, democrats, eventually, when they control the party will do the same thing. others in the republican party said, well it started with harry reid doing this. we built on this. they are going to do this once they get a majority. so we might as well do it first. what is the sentiment that is building you think? >> yeah. i mean you're right. democrats now rue the fact that harry reid was the one who nuked the judicial filibuster. neil: right. >> given how confirmation process has gone. trump is urging to do the same with legislative filibuster. that is holy grail for senators especially to protect minority. some people say that is good thing. that is how it should operate. most senators feel like the legislative filibuster is something that shouldn't be

touched. we've seen lamar alexander, orrin hatch, jeff flake, say they will not vote for this. it is not going to happen. looks like we're headed for shutdown midnight tonight. how long that lasts will remain to be seen. both sides worked themselves into a corner. there is no easy or obvious way out. neil: it could conceivably last a while, right? >> yes. neil: they're far apart on that. no sense this would have any draconian effect. any shutdown would not be advisable. 75% of government is still running that spills over into a new congress before it would have any measureable impact politically. i'm wondering if there is no such thing as a good time to do something like this. but both parties figure they can roll the dice and just see this happen? >> they do. you know ironically a broad majority of the public don't

want to see the government shut down. they never do. they want to see washington functioning. it is about two to one, three to one, depending on poll loser for republicans to shut down the government or to have the government shut down. polls show most people will blame republicans more than democrats anywhere 10 to 12 points. republicans look to be on the losing end of this. but that said, to your point, donald trump has said, i invite the shutdown. i will take credit for it, border security is that important. likewise, nancy pelosi, chuck schumer their base is making them hold solid on this they which not given or a penny. both sides are dug in. it could last for a very, very long time. neil: thank you very much, tom bevin. let's go to gary b. smith. there is a silver lining for this for the markets. look gary to find a financial pay to profit off the shutdown. i get the gist what you're

discussing here. a government not able to do at 100%, operating at 75%, markets in a weird way like that, don't they? >> exactly. i think, i don't know how many shutdowns both of us have lived through, probably what a half dozen at this point? and i think the more that the people live through it the more they almost become inoculated. i remember the last shutdown we had just a few years ago it, was a big shoulder shrug. really? we can survive with, quote, unquote essential personnel? now it is going to be even less people affected in the government by this i think market has become used to it. hopefully when they go back to the polls next time, maybe shrinking government isn't a bad idea. that would be my wish anyway. neil: what is interesting, gary, maybe we're in different camps as interesting and tick by tick movement on this shut don possibility is, i don't think it weighs on stocks nearly as much as the federal reserve's

thinking is. why every federal reserve official talks to the media, including john williams the new york fed president was talking to cnbc and saying there is a possibility we could reassess our stance on all of this and interest rates come next year that gets distorted and maybe unusual attention because it's the fed, it is the slow-down fear. it is this idea that we're losing momentum or could that seems to dictate the direcon of stocks. what do you think? >> we're in 100% agreement. it is funny, interest rates now are so low, even if the fed moves another two rate increases of quarter basis point, it is really in the big scheme of thing it is really almost nothing but we're so used to these some would say artificially low rates, even moving that quarter percent, oh, my gosh, that is 10% of the fed funds rate. it feels like a lot. and you're right, i think people are placing too much faith in the fed having a better crystal ball than any of us where it's

not. they have admitted we're human. we're going to just look at things, just like you and i would. neil: right. >> that is the faith and trust we place in the fed, unduly so, i think. but be maybe eventually it could work toward advantage if the market drops a lot lower than it should, it could be a good buying time for stocks. neil: how do you decide, that gary, nasdaq is in and out of bear market territory? transports already there, russell 2000 largely made up of small company stocks well into bear market and 2/3 of the s&p 500 stocks well into bear market territory, google inching below 1000 bucks a share, what catches your interest and tells you, wait, this is a domino thing happening here? >> well, you know, there is really two things. most people have to make that decision way ahead of time. look, am i long-term investor. will i be in the market for another 20, 30 years. then you don't worry about it.

if you're short term trying to catch it, i look if a stock is down 20% from the highs. if it is down 20% from the highs. then i start to get interested. then i still go back to the ones i use every day. amazon is a food case. amazon is not going out of business if it goes down 20% buy, 30% you're hurting but buy a little more. i wish there was the one way to do it. i haven't found it. neil: all right, so if you have a nasdaq that today does close in bear market territory, over 20% from its october highs now, what is the normal pattern here? this would be the first of prominent averages, russell 2000 and dow transports notwithstanding to get into bear market territory. is it a matter of time before the dow and s&p follow or is that not always the case? >> i think it is in this case. because those have been the market leaders. i think, my feel, neil, this is one of the self-perpetuating

markets. people look at market leaders, amazons, netflix, for example, oh, my gosh the rest of the market is going down. i better sell my proctor & gambles and my at&ts and you know, my krogers, if you will, where they really don't need to. and it really depends. this is a 2018 kind of market where these stocks could drop 75%? or is this like a 2011, 12, it was down and back? to me honestly at this point i was a little more bullish a few weeks ago. it feels like we could go down 25% from the highs. look at the very long-term trend line which is about do you 20,000, call it. neil: gary we'll watch closely. hope you have a merry christmas regardless, my friend. >> you too. neil: gary b. smith following this. it is not a consistent axiom in the markets when all three major

averages go 20% in the highs, they usually add 5 to 7%, down 25 to 27% before recouping that. not all the time. in the '70s experience they went down 20%. held down 202%, before we knew it, we were looking at skyrocketing oil prices. we were down 50%. that is then. traders hope that is not the case now. a lot depend happens on interest rates. what happens in washington and what happens in this sort of revolving door exodus of the top officials in the trump administration. the latest of course, the defense secretary of united states. we're waiting to hear from chuck schumer on the senate floor what democrats will do responding to the growing pressure sure to have a vote in the senate on house measure almost doomed to fail millions the republicans are able to force a simple majority, do away with 2/3 votes

necessary, 60 votes necessary for major legislation. that doesn't look like it is happening. looks like they're working for quite a while. let's listen to this. >> this may have been the most chaotic week of undoubtedly the most chaotic presidency in the history of the united states. the stock market is in tum melt and in decline of the secretary of defense, one of the only pairs of steady hands in our government, is resigning from the administration in protest. and the united states is pulling out of syria and likely afghanistan. abandoning our coalitions allies in the kurds and surrendering the field to putin, iran, hezbollah, isis, the taliban and bash sherr al-assad. the position of defense secretary of a attorney general, of ambassador it united nations, of interior secretary, and even

chief of staff, even chief of staff to the president are all in flux. the institutions of our government lack steady and experienced leadership. with all of these departures, it is about to get even more unsteady. the president is making decisions without counsel, without preparation, and even without communication between relevant departments and relevant agencies. all of this turmoil is causing chaos in the markets. chaos abroad, and it is making the united states less prosperous and less secure. >> senate will be in order, please. >> and to top it all off, president trump has thrown a temper tantrum and now has cause reasoning toward as trump shutdown over christmas.

in a short time the senate will take part in a pointless exercise to demonstrate to our house colleagues and the president what everyone here already knows. there are not the votes in the senate for an expensive taxpayer-funded border wall. so, president trump, you will not get your wall. abandon your shutdown strategy. you're not getting the wall today, next week, or on january 3rd when democrats take control of the house. just two days ago the senate came together to support a proposal by leader mcconnell unanimously, every democrat, every republican, to extend government funding through february without partisan demands. what it would accomplish would be that the government would not shut down. the fights that we're having

would be postponed to a later day, and millions of americans would not be hurt this christmas week. so let me repeat that. the senate, every democrat, every republican, has already unanimously supported a clean extension of government funding. democrats accorded the measure because we do not want to see the government shut down. we have no demands other than that. we had every indication that the president would sign the legislation. as did our friends the republicans on the other side of the aisle in the senate. but yesterday president trump hounded by the radical voices of the hard right threw another temper tantrum and here we are, once again. on the brink of what the president has spent months saying he wanted a trump shutdown. the president will try to do his

best to blame democrats but it is flatly absurd. president trump called for a shutdown no less than 25 times. in our meeting in the oval office president trump said, quote, if we don't get what we want, i, president trump, will shut down the government. he am proud to shut it down said president trump. i'm not going to blame you, meaning democrats. i will take the man tell of shutting it down. those are president trump's words. nothing he says or does today than undo that. no democrat has called for shutting the government down. we are all working to avoid it. the president seems to relish it. he seems to feel it will throw a bone to his base. the problem being his base is less than one quarter of america. mr. president, president trump, you cannot erase months of video

of you saying you want ad shutdown and you wanted the responsibility and blame for a shutdown. president trump, you own the shutdown. you said so in your own words. and president trump may get his wish unfortunately. but it doesn't have to be this way. democrats have offered two alternatives and republicans, leader mcconnell has offered one. democrats have offered to pass the six bipartisan approach operations bills, plus a one year continuing resolution for homeland security. we have also offered a one year continuing resolution for all the remaining bills. republicans have offered to pass a short-term continuing resolution through early february. each one of those proposals would pass the house, pass the senate.

each one of those proposals contains $1.3 billion of real border security, not a wall. there is no wall in those proposals. democrats support real border security, not a wall. and by the way, that is in addition, in addition to the $1.3 billion in border security congress allocated last year. the vast majority of which the trump administration has not yet spent. they're asking for loads of money they haven't even spent last year's money. it is clearly a political gambit by president trump to appease his never-happy base. on the other hand, a trump shut down would result in zero dollars for the department of homeland security over the express mass holiday. so, there are several ways for president trump and congressional republicans to avoid a shutdown over christmas.

i mentioned three. but there is only one way we will have a trump shutdown. if president trump clings to his position for an unnecessary, ineffective, tax-payer funded border wall that he promised mexico would pay for. i yield the floor. neil: all right, you heard from chuck schumer, mr. president, you own this smutdown. the president saying one way or the other we're going to get a wall. both side are very, very far apart on this issue. the senate is going to probably take up the house measure that was approved, and still republican house. it will flip on january 3rd when democrats officially take over, but the message from chuck schumer is that we're not bending. the message from the president of the united states, we're not bending. mitch mcconnell saying after meeting with the president it is looking more likely that the government will be facing at least a partial shutdown.

75% of the government will remain open. 380,000 federal workers will be furloughed during that time. let's go to fox news military analyst colonel david hunt. there are not any defense appropriations at risk here for the time-being. a lot of this is about security. the president labeled this as a matter of national security at our border. is that ringing true to you? >> yeah there is absolute truth saying that the border security has direct relationship to the national security absolutely. the issue is the application of it. do you want a wall or do you want a combination of technology and soldiers and fencing? i mean it seems -- look i'm way over my skis on talking politics but from a security standpoint the way to secure the 2,000 length border is combination of technology and people and intelligence and some means to stop people from coming in.

but just the money could be better spent and better secured. we also have to do a lot better job getting these people that want to come north stopped way further away than mexico. so, but from a security standpoint, yes, it is important. it is always about the application. neil: you know, you're a good student of military history and history period over the years i've known you, colonel. and i'm wondering the president, those who espouse a wall or something like that, history proves it works. those countries that have them, for example, israel, even for a while in china, going back centuries, it has worked for them. and that it will work for us. is that militarily accurate? >> certainly with israel, the size of the country they're protecting the area, they have seen a massive reduction in terrorism hits. they still have tunnel problems. there is still a terrorism threat. still on high alert. israel is a great country.

china, china's, 3,000 miles of wall built by slaves for hundreds of years stopped some, sure. neil: right. >> the problem on our end is the time. it is not done in a vacuum. that we we have advanced technology. i don't argue that we don't have to close the border to make everyone come in the right way. the issue for me, how to best do that i'm of the proponent that is, i have to have a combination of technology and people and some fencing, not, i think money is better spent, but the principle is very applicable which is, we have to have that from a drug, from a terrorism standpoint, from humanitarian standpoint, we have to have secure borders. just a manner how we do it. neil: you know, you've been very patient what has been largely political questions, colonel, but i did want you to respond to some of that breaking news but another thing maybe showing itself in the market, not not ti want to throw stock questions that you, the concern that the

wheels might be coming off this white house wagon. >> okay. neil: that might be an overstatement. with the defense secretary stepping down, at odds with the administration position to pull the troops out of syria, now out of afghanistan, he is losing some key, reliable, calming voices and that worries folks. does it worry you? >> no. first of all mattis is a good man. know him. served with him a year. not leaving until february. what, i promised everyone that what is alive and well in the department of defense is a massive bureaucracy that doesn't move very well. general mattis, secretary mattis, did a very good job because a lot of experience and kind of man he is. we have very, very good people in all the services and privates civilians, who could, can step in and do that job. dod is a savagely powerful operation and massive intelligence gathering operation. it is very, very important. i do not believe, again, he is

not leaving today. he is leaving in february. neil: right. >> and we, the country is safe. i like the fact mattis was sec-def, the problem these hirings, firings gone all the time. they can't be discussed in vacuum. general kelly is gone. we walked out syria, which seemed whimsical, getting out of afghanistan is a good idea but we have to keep much smaller force that can do terrorism missions and -- neil: now, colonel, given, this i get a little nervous, i don't know near as much own these military matters as you do, but what vladmir putin is happy, and virtually he have defense entity in this country on the record or off the record is worried, actually panicky worried? >> yeah. smarter guys than me, how putin

calls our president don, that relationship is going to be figured out by guy like mueller. but, yeah. neil: just sorry to jump on you, colonel. mitch mcconnell is talking right now about this potential shutdown that would affect some. issues you just addressed. >> necessary resources to operate into the new year. this legislation also provides much-needed investments in disaster relief for hard-hit communities and in our national security, particularly the integrity of our borders. in my view this legislation that would be quite uncon controversial. quite uncontroversial in a more normal political moment. in a moment when both parties put the obvious national interests ahead of any personal spite for the president. i support the additional border security and disaster aid that

the house added to the bill and i'm proud to vote for it. now, mr. president, it is not a radical concept that the american people's government should be able to control the people and the goods that flow into our country. it is not a radical concept that physical barriers play an important role in achieving security, unless there is a caucus of lawmakers who go to bed at night with their front doors white open that i'm not aware of. what is radical? , mr. president, what is way out of the mainstream? is this absurd premise of the open borders, far left, that achieving basic stability and law enforcement on our southern border is somehow in itself without compassion? or discriminatory? or immoral?

fairness and compassion don't mean only enforcing some of our laws halfheartedly. fairness and compassion mean we fulfill the governing duties for the american people. if we continue to throw up our hands and tolerate a status quo allowing too many drugs and dangerous criminals to travel freely into our land, they were this federal government is doing its duty. the facts are clear on this. the need for greater security on our southern border is not some partisan invention. it is an empirical fact. and the need is only growing. apprehensions along the border have nearly doubled in the past year. the men and women of the border patrol are encountering greater numbers of gang members and individuals with criminal histories. more family units, more seizures of cocaine and fentanyl.

this is a crisis, a real crisis. the implications for american communities or vulnerable children and for border patrol units are already stretched thin are very real. so, mr. president, there is no bright line of principle that set this is request for border funding apart from similar requests that many democrats have supported in the past. a lot of them have supported this in the past. there is no sharp distinction between the proposal my friends across the aisle have decided to oppose today and proposals they have been happy to endorse in the past. the only thing that really changed are the political winds, way over, way over on the far left. that is what changed. so let's not end this year the way we began it, with another shutdown over the issue of illegal immigration. remember this, back in january?

all because the democrats are unwilling to support common sense measures to address it. let's advance this legislation, mr. president. let's pass it. let's fin in our work for this year. let's secure our country. so, mr. president, i asked the chair to lay before the senate the house message to accompany hr 695, and ask for the yeas and nays. >> is there sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. [roll call vote. >> mr. barrasso, aye. >> mr. ben net. neil: this might be wasted effort but they're going through some of the perfunctory procedure here, a measure almost certainly deemed for defeat here. that will not avoid a government

shutdown late tonight. chad pergram will give details what is at stake. chad. >> this is procedural vote in the senate to call u was passed in the house last night. this is the interim spending bill to fund the government. $5 billion for wall funding this need as simple parliamentary majority. the key you need 60 votes to cut off debate. if they get a simple majority they can consider what the house did to that piece of legislation f they don't get a simple majority well the gig is up. mitch mcconnell just returned to the capitol moments ago after meeting with the president. he appears standing foursquare behind the president of the united states. keep in mind we are less than 11 hours away from a government shut down. there is almost no way this piece of legislation can get 60 votes and not to mention the time. if you do things by the book, that would have that procedural vote not happen until sunday. we're well past the government shut down deadline at this point. what we were waiting for mitch mcconnell to return to the capitol we talked with a

couple of senators from both sides of the aisle, dick durbin, democratic whip from illinois. he was asked whether or not this is any different than other shut dows before. he said it is no different than the other 30 shutdowns he has seen over the years. he was also asked if congress would stay in session over the holidays if there is government shutdown? hehe said, quote we'll certainly not going to go to florida to play golf. what bob corker said was more intriguing. corker retiring in a week 1/2, he said that the president is facing right now the tyranny of talk radio. he called out by name rush limbaugh and sean hannity. he also commented that, you know, should mitch mcconnell and should other republicans trust the president of the united states? mitch mcconnell put that interim spending bill, neil, on the floor a couple of nights ago. it passed by a voice vote. this was under under the that the president would sign it as it moved to the house of

representatives. woke up wednesday morning said he would veto it. there is question whether republicans trust the president of the united states. right now mitch mcconnell he is in the president's court. neil: but he is also not doing all the president's bidding. this push, the president has with the so-called "nuclear option," in other words, to make a vote by simple majority, not the 60 votes normally be required, we forget mitch mcconnell is a creature of the system that's in place. and a lot of people go back to the days of harry reid when he broke that to get judicial appointments through for barack obama with a simple majority, rather than 2/3 vote. mitch mcconnell is leery to break that. one of the things come up, mcconnell fierce that democrats are in charge of the senate, they rue the day they were granted in power. others say in the party, wait a minute they will do it any way, the day they come back and running that show and it worries them. >> just not that. two things would have to happen.

first of all if you are going to do "the nuclear option, lower the filibuster threshold from 60 votes to simple majority for legislation, you would have to do two things. you would have to be backed into parliamentarian certain cul-de-sac. something non-debatable. i will not get much into the weed. they're nowhere near that particular parliamentary posture. number two, this would be subject to budget point of order. you have to get 60 votes to waive the budget act. it wouldn't work there. you don't have a simple majority to establish a new precedent this is not a rules change. the senate has a very small rule book. the book of precedents is about like that. they do a lot on precedent. that is what happened with harry reid establishing a new precedent on executive branch nominations mitch mcconnell for supreme court. but here is the other point. not just when the senate might flip back to democratic control. here is the problem. could you have a bill right you no, there is a bill in the

senate right now to protect robert mueller, the special counsel. there is a majority, its believed in the senate of republicans and democrats to move that bill through. you could do that under "the nuclear option if you did that for legislation. i have asked mitch mcconnell repeatedly over the past year whether or not he would go for the "nuclear option" and each time he said no. neil: i regret asking that question. no, i'm kidding. you're a genius. what do they do, chad, real quickly? the president obviously would not be leaving for mar-a-lago. do others then stay in town just in case? what are they going to physically do? >> if they get to impasse we suspect lawmakers would be put on call to come back at anytime. the house and senate would meet regular intervals every couple days so they're not completely out of session. you might have scrambling around around to see if there is some way to break impasse. 11 hours there is no obvious way out. there is not like back room negotiations. there is not offers being traded

of the that is not where we are. the president has thrown down the gauntlet said he won't sign anything that is short of that border wall. that is why these offers aren't being traded. so this is a little bit different than other shutdowns we've seen. you also have a lot of members of congress who are retiring or who lost. they might shoot out of washington and never ever return. that is unclear. here is the other point here. even if they're not really meeting in session, i can imagine that every day that there is a government shutdown democrats will be here shouting from the top of capitol hill unpaid federal workers, people not getting government assistance and so on through the holidays, most critical time of the year. democrats will definitely be here shouting from the mountaintops. neil: amazing stuff. chad, thank you very, very much. chad pergram, 11 hours from a government shut down seems increasingly unavoidable. the president says it is on the democrats. the democrats say it is on the president. there we be. the markets down 107 points.

charlie gasparino after this. what do you look for when you trade? i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade.

♪

neil: i'm passing along news concerning u.s. supreme court justice. ruth of ruth bader ginsberg. she had two cancerous nodules removed from her left lung. no mention of any further disease. she is 85 years old. she has had some medical boughts in the past. she is supposedly resting comfortably, doing okay. if we find out more we'll pass it along. also passing along, drama on capitol hill, a very likely government shutdown, we heard from every principal player save the president of the united states, pointing the finger at democrats saying they are stubborn. same democrats led by chuck schumer, said the president bragged about his government shut down. happily embraced that.

charlie gasparino here on the fallout from all of this, sir? >> the fallout is mainly baked into the market. i mean, of all the things i think the traders are worried about this is kind of like on the lower level. neil: i agree. >> this sense they're worried about interest rates or i would put trade up top. worried about interest rates, particularly raising rates on the short end and at the same time unwinding the balance sheet which means long-term rates go up. worried about that with a trade war, with a tariff war. neil: this is the kind of stuff they have sadly gotten used to, unless it drags on. >> trump sort of volatility factor is something they're getting sick of. the president who likes to tout the market and should take a deep breath and realize he is now a threat to the market in his behavior. if you're going to do some of the things he does, you know, listen, he has, every right to pick his own defense secretary, let's be real clear. i'm sure obama went through a

bunch of them right? neil: three. >> leon panetta was one of them. but the way you do it. and what happened here wasn't like he just fired the guy. the guy found out in the middle of the night there was a major change in foreign policy involving troops he wasn't really consulted on. he says i'm out. that is -- neil: talking about the president's decision to withdraw troops from syria. after he goes ahead and meets with mattis, getting our troops out of afghanistan. >> it is volatile. it is not way you're supposed to run government. you know, listen, you could be a trumpian and say i love this, this is great because he is mixing things up. okay. but there is a lot of people that don't think it is great because they worry suppose we run into something really bad, does this guy have the fortitude to deal with that if he is this volatile on the little things? that is what markets are saying. i will get a million emails from these dopes, you're this, that,

never-trumper, what markets say -- neil: their concern is the volatility and the fact that is the president is all over the map on some of these issues. it is part of the noise out there. he is not reassuring them. >> he is not reassuring markets, particularly people who liked his policies going in. listen, i don't think any investor is saying we need, that his corporate tax cut was a problem. i think they love that. gives companies more money. they can do stock buybacks. i don't think any investor sitting out there saying deregulation is bad. what they don't like, they don't like trade wars, i don't care how many times on this network people will say tariffs don't have a cost, they do, i don't care who the person is, ignore them, don't take market advice it is bad. bad for markets, generally bad are to the economy, according to recent history like the last 200 years. that's bad -- neil: unless you win your point, right? >> it is just, i'm just saying it's bad. his volatility is not good either because it makes it sound

like he is crazy. he can't handle a real situation. and, mattis is probably one of the last guys you want to leave the administration as well. neil: yeah. >> he is a pretty, not an ideologue. he is never, doesn't talk out of turn. he does his job. he does it well. you want people like that in major positions and we lost him. neil: that dog has gone away. you are our mad dog. >> the market -- i talked up the market. neil: you cut those losses in half. we'll be exploring that here. in the middle of this to charlie's point, the underlying economy there is some gyrations and all that. that is what is pretty good. compared to the rest of the world we're herculean by comparison. where the strength is happening certainly during the holiday season. a lot of retail sales. particularly a lot of toy sales. i'm not kidding, kidding? kids, kidding? former toys "r" us ceo is next.

expedia introduces add on advantage, a new way to save on travel. now when you book a flight you unlock discounts on select hotels that you can use up until your trip starts. so whether you want to go out, stay in, or be in the middle of it all... add the perfect hotel when you're ready, and save. add on advantage. only with expedia. hi, i'm joan lunden. when my mother began forgetting things,

we didn't know where to turn for more information. that's why i recommend a free service called a place for mom. we have local senior living advisors who can answer your questions about dementia or memory care and, if necessary, help you find the right place for your mom or dad. we all want what's best for our parents, so call today. ♪ there's no place likargh!e ♪ i'm trying... ♪ yippiekiyay. ♪ mom. ♪

neil: consumer confidence record december. 110 billion spent online during the holiday season. we have the former toys "r" us ceo, larry store much. whether consumers particularly the storefront, whether they

lead the parade what is expected to be a robust holiday season. good to see you. >> good to see you. neil: how are things looking on the retail front from your perspective. >> very strong. consumers are strong all year. they carried that into the holiday. i expect this weekend to be phenomenal. this is super saturday, tomorrow. the calendar is perfect a retailer dreams off. this is what you wait for. doesn't happen very often. christmas on tuesday. longest period of time between thanksgiving an christmas. this weekend will be huge. neil: even in tough times, parents, adults don't skimp on kids, you reminded me about that. talked about recessions bull markets and the like. the bigger question what happens after this holiday though? everyone seems to be pointing to a slower economy, not a recession. but slower. what do you see? >> well the consumer doesn't know that. consumers tend to spend, based on what is in their wallet now. consumers are now, now. the market is forward-looking.

we have a little bit of disconnect going on. there. employment is high. wages are high. outside of luxury goods which are impacted by the market, there is kind of a wealth effect as rich people see their net worth decline. neil: tiffany? >> tiffany was that. what is going on with big exposure the chinese are soft, partially with the whole thing going on with the tariffs and the trade war. but regardless, the basic consumer is very strong. the economy is very strong on that fundamental level. now whether or not, you know this, follow us. whether or not there is recession next year. the consumer won't have money in the pocket remains to be seen. right now they do. they are spending it and spending it on christmas. they don't care about the government shut down. neil: they really don't. we in the media, let me ask you about toys. your lifeblood. and the dynamics has changed since your old company fell into bankruptcy long after you left i

might point out. >> thank you. neil: the concern online dominated walmart, dominated this. are there as many toys out there or what? what happened? >> it isn't so much on line. all channel model is working. as you point out the walmart is the market share leader. neil: target. >> target is very strong in toys and amazon is very strong in toys. you can win multiple ways. with the huge capacity taken off-line with denies of toys "r" us, 18% of the market supply side disappeared. you didn't find that replaced easily. people that went into toys that didn't before they will be so sorry. they will lose their shirt it is complex business. if you back the wrong things, it will be writeoffs in january, nobody buys toys in january. walmart, target, amazon, they all bought more but didn't buy enough more to make up what

happened with toys "r" us. neil: when you say not enough, what is in short supply. >> hot toys, many are out of stock on shelves of many of these other retailers. one thing toys "r" us tried to do have them in stock all the way to christmas. neil: if you had to make a bet, had a good gut, go back to cabbage patch dates, bottom line you are playing a little bit of russian roulette. >> toys "r" us was integral to the market. it was part and parcel. market. difficult where vendors began and toys "r" us began. they can make it up over a period of years but not in one year. amount added by walmart, target, amazon in the marketplace is insufficient. we saw that in toy data that was down pretty sharply in start of holiday season in terms of sales. doesn't mean kids won't have toys eventually. markets will reset. new entrants in the markets. maybe toys "r" us will come back, who knows. neil: a lot of toymakers open up

their own sites you buy directly from them. i wonder where you see it all going? >> i eventually think the market will reach equalibrium. i think it will be at lower level than it could have been. we studied economics in school. the supply curve, demand church. less supply the equalibrium will be at lower place. that is simply what could happen. neil: shut down in the store midtown manhattan, albeit reopened a smaller un. there is chance, something as iconic toys "r" us -- >> 850 stores are closed, toys "r" us, babies 'r us, $8 billion of sales. that is not recently replaced. over time the market will reset. in the short term it is quite disruptive to have something like that occur. you can't make up for it in a flash. it helps to have specialist category killer. electronics with best buy. have that other categories and other segments. market. home and building supply you

have two, lowers and home depot. helps to build a market. consumers will spend for christmas i emphasize that. christmas sales are up. holiday sales are strong. consumer has come to play. neil: could they have limped through the christmas season though, then reassessed themselves? >> demise of toys "r" us has more to do with high leverage of the company and specific situation with individual creditors and what they wanted and how they felt they could get the most money than it had to do with inability to compete in the marketplace. neil: scores of industries. you and i were talking about in the break. better than some money than no money. >> will be a lot more with sears bankruptcy. not going to be good. gymboree filed for bankruptcy. lbos will not be good. retail requires too much capital. in order to invest in internet and stores at the same time in order to build a perfect model. neil: takes passion. have to be passionate about the product. storch, former hudson y

es, toys r us, mr. toy. looking at government shut down 11 hours from now. seems unavoidable. we might get a sense with meetings with the president that seems unavoidable. president made it clear. he put off his trip to florida, i don't know how long. politicians are debating that as we speak. why stick around town if there is nothing going on around town? after this.

our dad was in the hospital. because of smoking. but we still had to have a cigarette. had to. but then, we were like. what are we doing? the nicodermcq patch helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. nicodermcq. you know why, we know how. ♪ ♪ this holiday season, families near you need your help. visit redcross.org now to donate.

neil: all right. well, the president, the last person really hoping to hear from in this drama is expected to either address the press, maybe put out another tweet. he has said this shutdown that looks inevitable by late tonight is on the democrats, even though he said he would own it by forcing this $5 billion fwaunlding. be that as it may, we are waiting to hear from him on this. to utah republican congressman chris stewart for the time being. congressman, isn't this on the president, though? he freely volunteered that. isn't that the case? >> yeah. i think he may regret using those exact words. look, no one wants to see a shutdown. it is disruptive. i would maybe correct two phrases we use all the time. one is a wall and it's not going to be a physical wall. it's border security is what we are talking about. the second thing is government shutdown. it's not a government shutdown. it's a partial shutdown and something that again, i know

it's disruptive but we want to avoid, but it's not the end of the world. i don't think people really care whose it is, whether it's the schumer shutdown or the president's. i think they want to know why. when most americans understand the reason why, they think that's nuts. why in the world would the democrats not support border security and just that fundamental responsibility of knowing who is entering our country. neil: well, they obviously both sides have different versions of border security, to your point. you have obviously taken a different look. it's not a wall, per se. i think we get caught up in semantics. the president himself seems to be talking now about steel beams and a structure that wouldn't necessarily be along the 2,000 mile border and i understand that, but it sounds like he is trying to reposition this as well. too little, too late? what do you think? >> no. it's never too little, too late in government, for heaven's sakes. we have been here every year, every other year. i can make this point.

there's a way to fix this. it's something i have argued on your show and others for a couple years. that is get rid of the filibuster rule in the senate for appropriations bills. if we're doing a piece of legislation that will last forever, i get that 60 votes, i respect that, if that's what they choose to do. but for annual appropriations bills, which fund our government from one year to the next, why in the world we continue to find ourselves every december in this threat of a shutdown. why can't we do what we do in the house, have 51 votes, fund the government for that year and not have all this drama? i think the president is right when he called on mr. mcconnell to at least consider that option. neil: you mentioned the drama, congressman. i'm wondering whether the president provides a little of it, maybe not by design, or that wasn't his original intent, but between the revolving door at the white house right now and another key cabinet member leaving, talking about the defense secretary, there is a concern that maybe the wheels are off the administration's wagon here. that might be an overstatement and it might be, for example, the markets overreacting to

this, but are you concerned that a lot of this rests with the president? >> well, some of it certainly does, to be fair. and i support the president, i respect the policies and i really mean that, the things he's been able to accomplish are remarkable, but sometimes he makes it harder for himself and frankly harder for me and others than it needs to be. i use the word drama, talking about the shutdown, not necessarily referring to the president, but general mattis is someone i have tremendous respect for, and we're going to miss him. i hope we can find someone equally as good. i disagree with the president on syria right now. so look, in a give and take of government, there are positions which i will agree or disagree with the president, be he republican or democrat, but once again, i don't think we want to make it harder and sometimes we have done that to ourselves. neil: we have, sir. we have done just that. thank you very, very much. i hope you still have a good christmas. thank you.

all right. some volatility at the corner of wall and broad. the dow down 145 points. the nasdaq into bear market territory, down better than 20% from its highs right now. what counts is where you close, not where you are intraday. having said that, let's get a read of this with payne capital management president ryan payne. ryan, let's say the nasdaq closes in bear market territory. is that significant to you, it would follow the russell 2000, a small cap aggregate, it would follow what's been happening in dow transportation stocks, sort of like a good barometer for the economy? what would you say? >> i think first off, got to remember that the markets' ability to forecast recession is pretty spotty. the last of the nine corrections we had in the market that were forecasting a recession, only five actually came true. so it's not always a great indicator what's going to happen. i think we're already there in terms of everything's already selling off. if the nasdaq actually hits that bear market territory per se, i

don't think that really changes things. i think we're already seeing capitulation in terms of selling. the cat's already out of the bag, per se. neil: so what is driving this? i hear a lot of different excuses, the federal reserve and whether they are really going to slow down an interest rate hike given the fact that right now they have only removed possibly one of the three expected next year. the president, the government shutdown issue, china slowing, europe slowing. where are you on this? what's driving this? >> no, i think it's more technical than anything else. you have a lot of different things, lot of things that are kind of happening at the same time. number one, you have like 150 hedge funds liquidating at the end of the year, closing down, so that's a lot of selling that's going on. last week you had $81 billion of retail money go to money market funds so the retail investor started to panic. i think more it's the technicals than the actual fundamentals because let's face it, we're at record employment, unemployment

is 3.7%, the best in 50 years. if you look at the small business optimism index, it's very, very positive. it's one of the highest records we have ever seen which says to me that business owners like myself are forecasting very good things in the next year. so i think there's a dislocation between what the market's doing and what the economy's doing right now. i think it's really important to think about that as you're investing your hard-earned cash. neil: so at this point going into the new year, do you think this is overdone or do you think this is about right? >> i think it's way overdone at this point. i think it's more emotional, more technical. what you want to think about right now is any time you have a 10% to 20% correction when you're in bear market territory, the next 12 months, you get a rebound of about 35%. i think at this point, valuations are cheap around the world. globally you got the whole world on sale right now. like anything else with markets, they usually get overbought or oversold. you are definitely getting into oversold territory. neil: all right. thank you very much.

hope you're right on that. ryan, always good seeing you. appreciate it. we have the dow down 181 points. we have 10 of the 11 s&p 500 sectors down right now. and we have the nasdaq well into correction territory, down 20% from its highs. normally when that happens or closes down to that extent, the other averages, it's just a matter of time. but even with that, it doesn't necessarily mean a significant or long-lasting selloff. it can stop at around 23% or 24% and oftentimes, comes back. sometimes not. in the case of the '70s bear market, it ultimately sliced half the market's value. that was then. they're praying it's not now. stay with us. 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. they seem to be the very foundation of your typical bank. capital one is anything but typical. that's why we designed capital one cafes. you can get savings and checking accounts with no fees or minimums. and one of america's best savings rates. to top it off, you can open one from anywhere in 5 minutes. this isn't a typical bank. this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet?

neil: senator lindsey graham wants to know exactly what's going on with the president's decision to take american troops out of syria, now afghanistan. he's calling for hearings on all of this. so the bloom could be off the rose between those two fellows. let's get the read on all of this a day after we learned that the defense secretary of the united states, jim mattis, is stepping down, or will in february. the former state department senior adviser in the trump and bush administrations, christian

wyden. obviously this is not sitting well with a lot of republicans and democrats. where do you think this is going? >> well, i think you'll see from the senate what senators do best. they talk and they preen and of course, they're right to have hearings. that's what the senate's about, after all. i would actually push back on the idea that lindsey graham speaks for most republicans, though. certainly not most republicans across the country. they don't want nation building in syria. they actually do want withdrawal from afghanistan, which is something that also has graham alarmed with so he speaks for the absolute most hawkish, most kn neoconservative elements of the party which are diminishing. neil: the president has talked about this as a candidate, our presidents many, many years, almost two decades, in afghanistan and syria, was overdone and we had to do something about that. nothing new there. but i guess what was behind mattis' resignation is that he

didn't get a heads-up on it. neither did a lot of other military commanders. the fact that they are to a man or woman opposed to this and vladimir putin is delighted with this, what does that tell you? >> i don't know if putin is delighted with it. frankly, now he and assad have to worry about the jihadists. our primary mission was isis. isis is dead, we're gone. if our criteria is stabilizing syria or ending russian influence in iran, even syria, that's a huge order of magnitude larger than just killing isis. we would have to invade the country big-time, take down assad. neil: i guess what all those guys are saying, sorry to jump on you there because we are waiting, some of these guys might speak leaving the white house, but i'm wondering what you make of the fact that a lot of people say you know, isis ain't dead yet. so be careful saying they are. >> isis is totally dead and kaput as an organized military

and political force that can hold territory. of course there are holdouts. there were japanese holdouts leaving the jungle two decades after world war ii ended. when we defeated the german army, there were still german soldiers around. we aren't going to shoot all of these guys, but defeating them as a force that can hold territory -- neil: al qaeda morphed into something else, you know what i'm saying? i think their concern was that the enemy as we knew them, and know them, might not be the same, but it will morph into something even more dangerous and more likely now without our troops there. that is the rap the president has been getting. do you agree with that? >> no. i think we can always go back in. the french do this in africa. if we need to go back in with military force in the future, we can. but what we don't want to do is have these massively costly, if you add afghanistan and iraq and syria, $50 billion plus a year. if we take that money and put it into the pacific, we can deter a war with china. we can buy the ships we need. our navy is still shrinking. our air force is still shrinking despite the plus-up in the

military. if we are stuck playing cowboys and indians in the middle east which made sense after 9/11 but no longer does, we can't do everything everywhere and fight everyone's battle for everyone. we have to pick and choose. our main primary adversary is china, not sort of miscellaneous jihadists in the middle east. neil: christian, thank you very much. good catching up with you. you're looking outside the north portico of the white house. the president has been meeting with a number of folks on how to proceed right now with the government all but certain to have a shutdown. we should be getting a tape playback from a meeting he's had with some of the senators. as soon as we get that into our hot little hands, we will share it with you, after this.

neil: white house event, we are going to dip into. this was a few minutes ago, the president wrapping up this criminal justice legislation he's signing into law, talking about maybe the shutdown as well. let's listen. >> thank you very much. i appreciate everybody being here. we've had a very busy two or three days. it's been very positive.

things are happening that haven't happened in our government for a long time. the other night as you know, we had a vote on border security and i think we want to discuss this just for a second. but the house of representatives voted 217-185 approving strong border security, and the money necessary to take care of the barrier wall or steel slats, whatever you want to call it, it's all the same. and it was a tremendous evening for the republicans, to be honest with you, because the level of spirit, the level of happiness, a lot of people came out, they said they had never seen one man in particular, he's been there for over 20 years, said i've never seen spirit or enthusiasm like this. they came from all parts of the country, a couple of them came from other parts outside. so i say all parts of the world, in order to vote.

and they voted and it was an incredible vote. we were told that you would never get the house to vote. well, we were able to get the house to vote. and it wasn't that we did it. they did it. they were incredible. i want to thank in this case, house republicans, because what they did was rather incredible. and now the senate is looking at it. we just had a meeting with some of our great senators, republicans, and lasted for a long time. tremendous enthusiasm for border security. i think i can speak for them very strongly when i say they want to see something happen on border security. they want the security of safety. they want safety for our country. drugs are pouring in and we've done an incredible job considering we have no barrier but drugs are pouring into our country, human trafficking is at the all-time worst in history because of the internet and the human trafficking problem is a

problem that has gone on through the ages but it's never been worse because of the internet all over the world. this isn't the united states. this is all over the world. so we need border security. and the republicans and the senators you know are taking it up today and it's really up to the democrats. totally up to the democrats as to whether or not we have a shutdown. it's possible that we'll have a shutdown. i would say the chances are probably very good because i don't think democrats care so much about maybe this issue but this is a very big issue. it's an issue of crime. it's an issue of safety. it's an issue of least importantly, dollars. $285 billion a year on illegal immigration. we have to finally do it. the wall will pay for itself on a monthly basis. literally, every month it pays for itself. so we're talking about small amounts of money. we approved and we got good

democrat support, military last year, $700 million. recently, $716 billion for the military. here we're talking about $5 billion. so it's a tiny fraction but unfortunately, they've devoted their lives to making sure it doesn't happen and that wasn't for what should happen, that was for political reasons. so we are going to be working very hard to get something passed in the senate. there's a very good chance it won't get passed. it's up to the democrats. so it's really the democrat shutdown because we've done our thing. when nancy pelosi said you'll never get the votes in the house, we got them and we got them by a big margin, 217-185. so now it's up to the democrats as to whether or not we have a shutdown tonight. i hope we don't, but we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown. and this is our only chance that we'll ever have in our opinion,

because of the world and the way it breaks out to get great border security. ronald reagan tried many years a ago, got to know a member of his family, many years ago tried to get a wall and he fought for a long time during his entire term and he was never able to get a wall. and i consider him to be a great president. he knew what he was doing. we are going to one way or the other, we are going to get a wall, we're going to get a barrier, we're going to get anything you want to name it. you can name it anything you want. but we cannot let what's been going on in this country over the last ten years, we just can't let it happen. now to a very positive note. criminal justice reform. everybody said it couldn't be done. they said that conservatives won't approve it. they said -- neil: all right. we will dip back into this if the president addresses again the government shutdown, the

fact that he is now saying it's on the democrats, he said before when he was pushing this to the brink that it would be on him and he would happily take the heat for that. but again, it does look apparently inevitable. we are going to have a shutdown and by the president's own acknowledgment, it could drag on awhile. let's get the read from the former chief of staff for the outgoing speaker of the house, paul ryan. dave, we're here now. i don't know if it really solves anything or means anything to point a finger at either the president, who was happy to accept the responsibility for shutting the government down, or democrats who argue it's on the president. having said all of that, no one technically wins in these sort of things. does it worry you where this could go and that shutting down the government has again proven the means by which parties will settle their differences? >> neil, we are really at the point right now of getting the

best civics lesson we can get. the house last night did what the house was supposed to do, vote for a continuation to keep the government open. they voted opposite of the way nancy pelosi said they would. i hope she's counting votes better for her speakership than she did last night. but they voted for that. now the senate is going to take it up. if they can get 50 votes in the senate, for this proposal, then it shifts back on to senator schumer who is shutting down the government even though there is a majority for this. we don't know if they will get 50 in the senate. they are working on that right now. neil: they would need 60, wouldn't they? >> but the question is there's a realistic situation here. if they are able to get 50, then that could pass it. that's enough to pass this bill and keep the government open. at that point, the realistic situation is not what was said last week or what the president said here or there, but senator schumer and the democrats are closing down the government. now, that is -- neil: the rules are the rules, right? with the senate the way it is? i understand what you're saying -- >> no, no, no. neil: you're right, with the

majority, but i'm wondering where this goes. >> but this is regular order. this is the way it ought to work. the house and the senate ought to figure out where they are, get something they can both pass and send that to the white house for the white house to make a decision. but up to this point they haven't done that. it is now the responsibility of the senate which they are moving toward. senator mcconnell is moving toward doing this today, to have a vote on the house-passed measure. if they get 50 votes for that, no, it won't pass because the question is if they don't get to the vote, they only need 50 to pass it, but senator schumer at that point takes on the responsibility for shutting down the government. this is in fact the way our government ought to work. the legislative branch of government ought to decide -- neil: i respect the heck out of you but the rules are what the rules are. they can change those rules and again, i don't mean to be badgering to you about again, unless they change that, the majority would do it. what i want to ask -- i

understand what you're saying. i do. i do. let me ask you this. mitch mcconnell is loathe to change rules to get a simple majority and i understand where he's coming from, because careful what you wish for. the day will come when democrats dominate the senate and they will do the same. many conservative members of the senate say well, they're going to do it anyway so we might as well do it now. i understand the frustration on both sides. what do you think of that? >> the worst thing that could possibly do, change the rules in the senate on the filibuster. the worst thing. it would fundamentally change our government in a way that we haven't seen since the beginning, since the founders set up the senate as a place where minority rights are protected. that should never happen. but the question of who is responsible for a shutdown changes if republicans can get 50 votes in the senate for a proposal. i don't want to change the filibuster at all. it would be the wrong thing to do. i think the president is absolutely wrong on that. senator mcconnell is absolutely right. in fact, we functioned for well

over 200 years and it has worked pretty well over time. what we need to do now, though, is move forward with the senate figuring out where they are and what they can pass and then they have to work it back and forth with the house to get this decision made. this really is the way the government ought to work to be funded, and it's slow and messy, but in fact, it is the right thing to do. the house makes a decision, the senate makes a decision, they reconcile those decisions and then the president gets to make his decision as to whether he will support what they've done. neil: you know, you are way too smart to be a stock market wonk. if you indulge me, i talked to a lot of market traders who say their sense of what's going on in washington is just bedlam and circus-like. they point to democrats and republicans, they point to revolving door of key cabinet officials who leave the administration and a president who willy-nilly changes his positions on everything from the wall and whether there would be a middle ground settlement to keep the government lights on to, you know, how he's going to

be dealing with china trade. they're saying he's killing the very market and economic recovery he should take a bow for. do you agree with that, that the president is the one who is to blame for this anxiety? >> this has certainly been a curious and sort of fractured route over the past couple of days, ten days or so, but i think as much as anything, the markets are a little concerned about where the fed is going. the fed has told us that there will be at least two increases next year and maybe more. and that's scaring people. because they have seen that the fed seems to be trying to control growth and keep it bottled up, and that's not what the people want. they like the fact that there's full employment right now. they like the fact that their wages are going up and the fed seems to be saying well, not so fast. we aren't sure we want this much growth. this may be too much growth. although there's no sign of

inflation at all. so i think the fed has to be watched very carefully. yes, it's an independent agency and it ought to be and remain so but i think they're watching some of the wrong things, because the people of this country want more growth, deserve more growth, and there is more growth that could be done without inflation in our economy right now. neil: you are kind of stealing my nerdy thunder there. let me do that. that's the only thing i'm hanging my hat on. you're right about all that. anxiety about the federal reserve is alive and well. very good seeing you, my friend. hope you have a merry, merry christmas. >> you, too, neil. neil: meantime we are focusing on the markets that have been between all of these developments as dave was pointing out. the nasdaq well into correction territory itself. doesn't count if you do it intraday. i know there are a lot of firms, people remind me of that, investment banks, that do count it intraday but it really doesn't count because what's the final money, the final say is how things close. right now, we have the dow continuing to slide and the nasdaq down about 21% from highs

reached back only a couple months ago. more after this. i'm snow. and just like you, the further into winter we go, the heavier i get. and while your pants struggle to support the heavier you, your roof struggles to support the heavier me. [laughter] whoo. [crash] and your cut-rate insurance might not pay for this. so get allstate, you could save money and be better protected from mayhem like me. mayhem is everywhere. so get an allstate agent. are you in good hands? metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i'm relentless too. mbc doesn't take a day off, and neither will i. and i treat my mbc with new everyday verzenio- the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. in fact, verzenio is a cdk4 & 6 inhibitor for postmenopausal women with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer, approved, with hormonal therapy, as an everyday treatment

for a relentless disease. verzenio + an ai is proven to help women have significantly more time without disease progression, and more than half of women saw their tumors shrink vs an ai. diarrhea is common, may be severe, and may cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms may include tiredness, loss of appetite, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising more easily than normal. blood clots that can lead to death have also occurred. talk to your doctor right away if you notice pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain or rapid breathing or heart rate. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include nausea, infections, low red and white blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. i'm relentless. and my doctor and i choose to treat my metastatic breast cancer with verzenio.

be relentless. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio.

neil: all right. we told you the nasdaq is right now in bear market territory, down better than 21% from its all-time highs. amazon isn't helping matters, any. this stock is slip-sliding away, down about 35% from its highs. that despite the fact that apparently shoppers are going ga-ga and nuts on amazon buying everything. it's helping revenue and all the works but now a lot of concerns about going forward, i guess. international council of shopping center ceo tom mcgee, what's going on here? >> well, i think first of all, we're going to have a very strong holiday season, as you suggested. and this, we are headed into our busiest time of the year. super saturday, despite a lot of people thinking that black friday is the busiest shopping day of the year, super saturday is actually the biggest shopping day of the year. we expect 111 million people to go out shopping.

we have -- neil: 111 million people are going to go shopping tomorrow? >> absolutely. that's exactly right. about 4.5% increase year over year. neil: that explains why it's called super saturday. >> you got it. you got it. neil: i understand. all right. so how are we in terms of other saturdays? this is an unusual year, of course, the time we have between thanksgiving, christmas, of course christmas itself on a tuesday. lot of things have been working in retailers' favor here but the strong consumer is another thing, right? >> yeah. we have a very strong consumer sentiment obviously, a new reading came out this morning indicating that consumer sentiment went up month over month, and the way the holiday fits this year as well speaks to a very strong saturday, with christmas on tuesday. those folks that are going to go traveling or have other responsibilities around the holiday gives you really an extra day of shopping. so i expect the stores to be very crowded this weekend. it's been a very, very strong holiday season and that's going to continue.

neil: you know, there must be something to what you say because anecdotally, when i pass shopping malls, as far as i go on a highway, zipping past them, there's not a parking space to be had. traffic galore. i'm wondering about all these people who are singing the depth of traditional shopping malls or brick and mortar establishments, what did they get wrong? >> i think there was certainly this narrative around a retail apocalypse that is absolutely incorrect. we are living in a retail renaissance. malls are strong. there are certainly very high-performing malls, others that may be in the period of transition but when you look at brick and mortar retail holistically, it is in a strong position. changing, yes, the mix of retail moving more towards hospitality and entertainment as a bigger percentage of the total retail footprint, but we're in a strong position and of course, you have a strong economy. so i think that narrative was incorrect. we're living in a period of convergence with the physical and digital worlds coming together, and i think those

retailers that are doing a good job of investing in their store network are those that are going to be the biggest winners this holiday season and in the future, for that matter. neil: i still see the economy quite strong. i know people are debating that now. there is some smattering of data that maybe gives the federal reserve pause, i guess, to hike only twice next year rather than the expected three times. but the underlying economy looks, you separate all the soap opera stuff in washington and cabinet shufflings around and all that, it still looks pretty strong out there. >> i agree with that, neil. all of our reporting, all of our surveys, statistics, suggest a very strong economy. when you look at even the holiday, when you look at kind of the diversity of spend, you have a lot more spent this holiday season on high ticket items which suggests the consumer's more confident than in the past. things like appliances and jewelry. it's also broad-based. all demographic groups are participating in this holiday season and when you look

forward, obviously there are macro events that can impact the economy and have in the past, but as we look at our statistics, it points to a strong consumer. neil: all right. thank you, tom. hope you have a merry christmas. >> same to you. neil: tom mcgee. another reminder, what's happening in the retail establishment, you can see it even in the record number of folks flying and taking nice vacations at the same time. they are setting some records as we speak. even though a lot of their flights might be delayed getting out because of the wicked storm. fact of the matter is, there's nothing wicked about what's going on in the economy and certainly the underlying issues it's been raising. see that's funny, i thought you traded options. i'm not really a wall street guy. what's the hesitation? eh, it just feels too complicated, you know? well sure, at first, but jj can help you with that. jj, will you break it down for this gentleman? hey, ian. you know, at td ameritrade, we can walk you through your options trades step by step until you're comfortable. i could be up for that. that's taking options trading from wall st. to main st. hey guys, wanna play some pool?

eh, i'm not really a pool guy. what's the hesitation? it's just complicated. step-by-step options trading support from td ameritrade and all thro' the house. 'twas the night before christmas, not a creature was stirring, but everywhere else... there are chefs, bakers and food order takers. doctors and surgeons and all the life savers. the world is alive as you can see, this time of the year is so much more than a bow and a tree. (morgan vo) those who give their best, deserve the best. get up to a $1,250 credit on select models now during the season of audi sales event. ♪ ...i just got my ancestrydna results: 74% italian. and i found out that i'm from the big toe of that sexy italian boot! calabria. it even shows the migration path from south italia all the way to exotico new jersey!

so this holiday season it's ancestrydna per tutti! order your kit now at ancestry.com unstopand it's strengthenedting place, the by xfi pods,gateway. 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: all right. this is the busiest travel week of the year, and in the middle of it all we have a government shutdown. not that that's affecting those that want to travel, save maybe thousands of federal workers who could be furloughed in all of this, hillary vaughn is at lax with the latest on the hustle and bustle. reporter: this is probably the worst time to be at the airport, if you want to travel somewhere, because it's the busiest time for airlines across the country. they're expecting three million people to fly somewhere today, heading out for the christmas holiday. one out of every three americans will travel this season, whether it's by plane, by train, by car.

that's up over 4% from last year and the highest number ever since aaa began tracking travel. a record-breaking travel time during what could be a government shutdown, that includes workers at the tsa, as many as 53,000 of them could be working without pay on one of the busiest times during their careers, but they are focused on getting travelers to their final destination safe and happy and spreading a little christmas cheer along the way. neil: okay. i thought we had some -- go ahead, i'm sorry. reporter: yeah. sorry. what you would have heard is a group of tsa workers singing christmas carols to people in line as they wait, but i talked to the tsa today. they said there will be no christmas carolling happening today because they need everyone processing passengers to get everyone to their destinations on time. neil: all right.

what we missed was christmas carolling. that's the gist of it. all right. that could be a plus or minus depending on their voices. hillary, thank you very, very much. merry christmas to you. the major indexes on track right now to be down this year in one of the worst years this market's experienced since the meltdown. certainly one of the worst decembers we have experienced since 1931. they still have time to turn that around. it would be a herculean effort. it has been done before but would be an uphill battle.

neil: all right. there's really very few places to hide these days when it comes to alternatives to stocks. you got a little bit in bonds, you don't get a lot of bang for your buck there. to phil flynn, who choreographed oil and oil related stuff selling before anyone else did. that continued to sell and is dragging down a lot of commodities with it. what's going on? >> i think it's a really basic fear. if you look back, people don't like high oil prices, it's usually bad for the economy, but if you really look at what's happened on this oil move, when oil was at $70 a barrel, the stock market was near record highs. everything was hunky-dory and it was when president trump pulled the plug on the iranian sanctions, oil prices started to go down. it seemed like it brought down the entire stock market along with it. now, is it because the oil market is signaling a slowdown in demand? is it because of overproduction

in the u.s. and other places? but whatever it is, it seems like that oil was the leading economic indicator of a potential slowdown in the market. now, what's funny about this, is if you look at the actual oil numbers, they're through the roof. we're not seeing a slowdown in demand and that's what has this market kind of off balance here and that's where we saw such a dramatic drop because the numbers we're seeing on the screen doesn't necessarily equate to the strength we're seeing in the economy. so it really is based more on fear i think than reality. neil: the fear being the global slowdown, right? >> exactly. they're looking at china, looking at, you know, their data for example on their manufacturing. they're looking at softer data here in the u.s. and really, it's a lack of confidence that we're hearing from american ceos. what's going to happen with this trade war, you know, are we going to be able to trade. are we going to have to cut back in the new year. and it's the unanswered

questions that are playing into this fear trade, you know. it's not so much what's happening today. they're afraid of what could happen tomorrow and tomorrow is a scary place because of all these unanswered questions. neil: all right, my friend. thank you very, very much. phil flynn. all the major averages are down for the month and for the year. in the case of the nasdaq, it's getting special scrutiny today, down more than 21% from its highs which would count as a bear market. it would be the first of the big three, this being the dow and s&p 500, to enter bear market territory. the question is, does it stay there after the close of trading today. we shall see. other averages like the russell 2000 mimic the performance of smaller stocks, more company stocks, to say nothing of the dow transportation average, which sort of telegraphs, some say, the economy, are well into bear market. that's the kind of insight you get with what he was just pointing out on fbn but long before we became this juggernaut, there was a guy who was trying to make sure you tuned to it to find out how great we would be. take a look.

>> you don't get fox business. >> you got to demand it. are you the guy that gives them the business? frankie, start bringing the business in. we're going to bring the business in. if you order tonight, the next 15 minutes, neil and i will come to your house and make you dinner. neil: look what our cameras caught earlier in our green room. ♪ >> there we go. there you go. eat your heart out there, ipad. neil: how long were you working on that? >> since yesterday morning. >> we're going to see if he can finish it before the end of the segment. the sandwich weighs more than he does. it does not weigh more than i do. >> i'm going to tell you right now, i'm putting in my bid to run for president. there will be a pineapple in every pot. everyone, pay no attention to

the man behind the curtain. lord have mercy. ♪ >> open the doors! i have to get in. i have to demand it. i have to demand it. >> you seem upset. you want a hug? you seem like it's getting to you today. neil: you think? i don't want to deprive people of information they can only get here. >> i know. neil: don't. don't. really. i want you to stop. there's no hug. >> you sure? neil: yes. all right. >> love you. neil: love you, too. good-bye. you know, you know him well, and he and i were exploring ways to promote fox business, right, and we came up with the idea if you don't get it, demand it. a lot of people weren't getting

it, and a couple demanded it and it started with you and those funny bits. now, now deion was, besides being a very funny guy and very good human being, he's now an author. i used to wonder if you even read books. >> if i even worked here. i just hung out here. neil: the book is "blood in the streets" and it has a lot of bad words. >> it does. neil: it has a very dark theme. it reads like a screenplay for a movie which is i think your intent. >> yeah. it was originally written as a screenplay. i wrote it back in 2003 to about 2005, then after not being able to get it into anybody's hands, i ended up converting it into a book in 2012, then it took another couple years to get it into the right hands to get it actually published. neil: you're a young guy but you have a fixation, dion knows trivia from decades ago, old television shows that were on long before you were born. but the '70s particularly

interest you. talking the 1970s. why? >> particularly for this book, i was fascinated at the time when i came up with the screenplay of that cinema. i went to film school, i graduated, then i was really into '70s cop movies and crime movies. and growing up in the early '80s -- neil: you like telly savalas. >> this book is almost a greaty homage to '70s police films. it's a dirty era that a lot of people gloss over, kind of forget about the ins and outs of -- neil: i lived through that. >> there's a lot of -- neil: have you redacted it? >> ci could have. i didn't realize i gave you the r-rated version. neil: it's interesting because that period enthralls you. a lot of this old '70s stuff has come back on tv, some of the music, some of the old shows. what's going on? >> i think it's fascinating. i'm a music guy, i love music, i

love cinema, i love movies. what gravitates me also to the '70s was the music of the era. i love it. then for me, watching a movie kind of encapsulates everything. that's why this has a very big emphasis on music and on the non-fictional aspects of the time, where the story takes place. it was just a remarkable decade and growing up in the early '80s to me, you were kind of still living in that era, the analog, the rotary phones. neil: don't get me going. >> lot of people forget that. in this era, what we came from and how much of a leap now, it's insane. neil: when you look back at that, i don't want to give it away because even mentioning the main characters -- >> he's a homicide detective. neil: battling a lot of demons himself. >> yes. three years sobriety. neil: he's trying to address who was behind a murder. >> yeah. what ends up happening is his best friend's daughter is murdered. that kind of is the straw that

breaks the camel's back and topples him over the edge. i feel like a lot of people, especially in this day and age, we have so much pressure on us that you may not think that there's something there. neil: but you do this thing, this is a little ahead of its time. you started with the trauma, then what led to it. >> then he goes back into time and you start getting flashbacks of what got him to that, this one week this book takes place in 1976. you find out what led him up and what is the background to getting him there. like i said, it takes place in new haven in the '70s. it's a non-fictional aspect of the urban renewal at the time and how that devastated -- neil: you make a couple of zinger statements that it was well intended. >> people living in the neighborhoods bulldozed or eminent domain. there was a rift between the haves and have-nots and bureaucracy and little people

how some people were completely spared. new york in the '40s and '50s, robert moses what he did. new haven became the novel city, showed what they could do with urban renewal and rest of the america and all over the world. neil: you make an indictment about do-gooders saying this is the long term best interests of the community but we lose -- you you were doing that times square, gentrification times square, you don't like that sort of stuff? >> no, i think it has its value. look at here in the '90s what happened, how bad the crime in new york city was, how we came out of that. neil: which is it? in your book you bemoan it? >> the people in ground zero were directly affected. a homicide detective is interacting with the community a lot time for better or worse, law enforcement is the first wall. so if anybody, if you're mad about this, mad about that, first person you may take it out on a first responder or law

enforcement because they're symbol of the man say. so in this you have a homicide detective who is already kind of. neil: you have a sympathetic view ever law enforcement officials in general? >> yes. neil: that is something that has changed. >> certainly in this book nowadays there is a lot of controversy behind that. neil: but a lot of people who know you, laugh at you, your funny stories, your i am -- i am pressure shuns, they will be disappointed in that respect,. >> i like realities i can ending. neil: i don't find it realistic. it is brilliantly written and very clever but you bummed me out. >> i am always making you laugh. there are some funny moments in it, kind of, no? neil: made me wonder what happened to you? that is a their pip session for another day. neil: fair to say fbn, would not

be we would still be a success. come on. he and i worked very hard. if you don't get it, demand it. that was long before charlie gasparino came along. he saw those bits, that is the place i want to be. now the rest is history. >> you are scraping the bottom of the barrel with me and deion at the end of the show. want you to know that. neil: we had some time. what is going on? this government shutdown still happening? that is something that didn't happen in the '70s i might point out? >> no. we just had stagflation and lots of job losses and rampant crime. you know, listen we should all put this in perspective. it is the end of the year. the economy is pretty good. we had a nice run-up in the stock market under president trump. he has done some absurd stuff we get that but he has done some good stuff too and i think -- neil: you're not saying it is all over. everyone has become dion now. what is so depressing? it is not over?

>> it might be over if we go into a trade war. might be over if the fed overshoots, the interest rates hikes. i mean, there is a lot of, it might be over if the president continues to act volatile. you know then we're going to have a problem with these markets next year but we should be -- neil: lessen, last trading day before christmas. we're thankful we're still here. great country. great economy. the president net-net hasn't done that bad of a job. he has done a pretty damn good job. i'm in the christmas spirit, neil. neil: wait a minute this is you in the christmas spirit? >> i mean i will have a pumpkin spiced latte think of you. neil: there we go. >> i got dion's book. starting to read it. it's a great read. great read. neil: thank you. all right. that is high praise. >> thank you very much. no one gets that pumpkin latte joke. that is deep dive. neil: yeah. >> neil likes pumpkin lattes.

neil: is there a problem? >> not at all. i like them too because of that. whatever you like. neil: connell mcshane likes pumpkin lattes. connell: we don't get half of gasparrino's jokes. >> it's a thriller. connell: thank you one and all. good afternoon. i'm connell mcshane filling in for charles payne. we're on "making money." tough environment to make any money. 10 hours until the government shut down timeline. at this point seems all but certain the shutdown is colling. president will not give democrats border funding he wants. the question now, if the government shuts down, how long will that shutdown last? certainly that is one factor at play in markets today. stocks are down again after a early rally on hopes for a flexible fed. only five trading days left now in 2018. if you do want good