internal conversation, they don't want us, plenty of others do? stuart: maybe they want supporters to come out in force. come on, please. we love you. we want you. a little lure. that is it what they want. time's up for the friday show but neil, it is yours. neil: i'm not all surprised at amazon move. the mayor is second-guessing, complaining about it. governor, supposedly cobbled together the deal. now amazon, says if you don't like it, we're out of here. imagine that. stuart: why not? it is their money. neil: thank you very much. speaking of amazon, the guy that runs the company, right now the world's richest man is in a battle with the magazine conglomerate linked to the world's most powerful man, that they have let's say a tight relationship here. that relationship that is at play here in a dramatic story, that combines it all. jeff bezos saying that he wants to get to the bottom how it is "the national enquirer" was able to get details on texts, rather

questionable pictures, even releasing the texts themself and questionable pictures to get to his point. that same publication coming back to say, you know, if you want to delink us to all this stuff you're saying, that might be a god idea. back and forth and legal ramifications of this are sweeping. deirdre bolton with the ticktock on all of this. >> neil, exactly right. this story essentially started about a month ago in january, "the national enquirer" published and expose's with affair with jeff bezos and news anchor and helicopter pilot, lauren sanchez. bezos is the world's richest man. hired a private vet to find out how the magazine got those texts. bezos claims that the "national enquirer" got to ainge sure about the investigation, that began to threaten him, which

includes according to bezos blackmail and extortion strategs published everything. a list of all the racy photos the magazine claims to have, tons of emails. the emails look like from lawyers representing "the national enquirer," magazine execs, bezos says the ones sent to him. he says in my position, if i can't stand up to this kind of extortion how many people can? now american media incorporated has responded today, saying american media believes fervently it acted lawfully in the reporting of the story of mr. bezos. nonetheless, in light of the nature of the allegations published by mr. bezos, the board hasne pro claims. e company will thoroughly investigate these extortion claims. to your point, there is a lot for our eagles to talk about. neil: indeed.

>> at least some back and forth, could be extruded as we're ls, hacked or gotten illegale tr way. neil: that is not easy thing to do. it has been done, but, all that easy to do. let's get the read on this. does jeffs bezos have a case? he is putting reputation on the line and personal embarassment when he releases pictures and texts. keep in mind "the national enquirer" committed to do a story and released the story two days before formally separated from his wife of 25 years. they will argue this was already baked into the cake. be that as it may, let's get the legal read on it with emily campano, our own charlie gasparino. deirdre helping us as well. deirdre, the line stood out to me, the line quoting "the

enquirerer" editor, i will deal with you, emailing to the bezos team. it would give us no pleasure to send this email. i hope common sense can prevail and quickly about saying that unless you exonerate us and say this is not, you know, nothing untoward going on here with the stories we're doing, more hell will come? that sounds like a threat. >> it does sound like a threat. when you said common sense, when we distill this down, do we want to have legal, aggressive tactic threatening the publish, publication of stolen nude photographs for someone? absolutely not. also pretty clear that, value ami saw clearly not only investigation itself but it was uncovering. there was potentially large threat to them in that capacity. although they are likely engaging in criminal conduct opens the door for a tremendous

amount of ramifications for them with the doj and southern district of new york. neil: brad, the core here, did american media, through "the enquirer," no full well if was going to release still more threatening material after already having done so, to let jeff bezos know it was serious and hold over the possibility we won't release that, if you do this? isn't that a threat? >> i don't think so. i think this just like the super bowl of billionaires. ami versus the post. trump versus bezos. but if you look -- neil: you think president is involved here by that? >> there has been comments back and forth between president trump and potential divorce of the bezos. neil: do you think it leads to any government entity that might be able to get their hands on these? >> i think how they intercepted, if they intercepted messages or communications very different. the letter sent i don't think rises to the level of extortion. >> how could it not? look at it this way. a crime was committed, we think

by someone breaking into bezos', girlfriend, somebody's phone, right? that's a crime, right? >> if that is what happened. >> if someone breaks in, that's a crime. bezos hire as private investigator to figure out who committed the crime. amid investigating that said crime, he gets a letter from ami saying if you keep investigating, did i read this right, if you keep investigating, we're going to release penis pictures of you. neil: they already had them on, listen, january 9th, jeff bezos and his wife mckenzie reveal they will divorce after 25 years, two days after "the enquirer" he informed him this was coming out with the texts, with the questionable pictures. they simply had more. i wonder if at that stage, deirdre is there more -- >> what i'm wondering too, the source of text and photos from january, some people said, oh, maybe it was like her brother? can the brother be charged?

neil: michael sanchez denied any involvement. a california pr type. he is connected to, this gets even more -- >> you're saying -- neil: he is connected to roger stone, carter page. >> right. neil: it gets wacky. >> you're saying, i think the point our trying to make there is no damages to bezos on the release of pictures themselves which have not been released, by the way. i tell you -- neil: he already had, the story is coming out. he knows it is coming out. >> no, they never said they would release the pictures. neil: he went ahead and tried to jump the gun before release of story to announce he was separating from has wife. >> i know that but the embarrassing part i think to bezos is the pictures. and they're holding over his head are the release of more stuff and pictures. neil: but they're not all in the "enquirer" story. >> they head them back. neil: he didn't. enough there you could argue, gee, what have i got to lose? >> absolutely. a couple points, number one doesn't matter for the crime of

extortion how the threat was obtained. so you can, you know, embarrassing thing or threat of force or fear or violence or intimidation, that is a separate thing than obtaining of the item, that is number one. number two, this is extreme show of force and power on bezos' part. i'm richest guy in the world. here is this. you're trying to strong arm me, how about this? he is absolutely throwing the curtains wide open -- neil: he risk as lot doing. he acknowledged that. brad, you can help me with this. he said, of course i don't want personal photos published but i also don't want to participate in their well-known practice, referring to "the enquirer" of blackmail, political statements, political attacks, corruption, a clear reference to the association to the president. >> i think that is what is trying to go for, tying this all together. neil: that is a leap there? that is a leap. >> that is all a leap. everybody assuming what was intended -- >> the letter. >> ami had the right to keep the

pictures or publish them. neil: this is the world's richest man, would be a big story anyway. this is a tawdry one, at that would already get a lot of -- >> i don't understand why there is any disagreement about this. they sent him a letter. if you don't do this, we will do that. >> didn't really say that. >> i think in new york, you know this better than i do, in new york you cannot publish something with an attempt to kind of create contempt or ridicule. that is new york law, right? >> also "the national enquirer" we're talking about. >> they do function in new york. >> absolutely. when we get mired in these details, the bigger picture is so clear. someone was threatened to stop doing an activity with something embarrassing. the threat of something humiliating -- neil: made it very clear, they said, literally "the enquirerer," this is editor involved in this, no scmo, dylan howard, said very clearly would

publish additional photos of jeff bezos and miss sanchez if ami's terms were not met. i go to the quote, email there, it would give no he hadder pleasure to send this email. i hope common sense can prevail and quickly. that is a threat. >> what if american media engaged you to defend them, what would you say, legally. >> as criminal matter you can't tell anything from the statement what was being requested. neil: editor getting involved. >> it doesn't say give me this. doesn't say i'm going to do that. cooler heads will prevail. neil: absolve "the enquirer." >> i don't think the letter says anything. >> absolve "the enquirerer" or we'll show you private parts. that is called extortion. >> no. i don't read -- neil: emily? >> i think the plot thickens, given allegations that bezos put forth that the investigation was uncovering in terms of saudi relationship, to me, it thickens the plot. neil: we should explain he owns

"the washington post." "washington post" reporter was killed. there were a lot of stories that, obviously, "enquirer" had done, talking up the saudi prince, new visionary leader all of that there are a lot of weird things going on that level, but what if this investigation tries to get to the bottom of a government entity that could have gotten those texts all bets are off, right? >> you're saying if the government -- neil: he wants to find out how the hell did this get out there. >> absolutely. neil: he is obviously saying there were other elements here that had, found ways to get access to these, that might not just be "the enquirer." >> absolutely. ramifications from that would be tremendous too. and i think -- neil: clearly inferring here this is linked to trump. >> saying he is part of it. >> yes. neil: no one, that's a leap there. >> but he is taking the power into his hands, essentially and against throwing open the curtains, saying if you are

insinuating this or you are going to threaten me then i will put everything out there. neil: he hurt himself, charlie, if you think about this, amazon is a big -- think about his family-friendly company, delivers all over the world. >> right. neil: could it taint the company and he is in the middle of this divorce? >> i will say this, a couple things. if ami, "national enquirer" said, listen, we think you engaging in type of behavior is bad for the company, we'll publish the story, they were on firm ground with that. the minute they sent a letter, said that quid pro quo, you leave us alone, or else we do this, they get in trouble. one other thing, neil, i will say this, southern district when it went after ami on the initial michael cohen stuff, went after them not as journalistic, they dropped first amendment protections. they couldn't get that. they will get it on this too. not treated as journalism entity -- neil: but if they violated this three-year agreement they had --

>> they're really screwed. neil: they're going -- >> renders them vulnerable to perjury and obstruction of justice in the agreement. it is quoted. prosecution of any subsequent crime. neil: before the latest lawyer clarifications, ami attorney said, we emphatically reject any assertion that it is reporting, "the enquirer" was instigated influenced in any manner by external forces political or otherwise. clearly saying here -- >> they're not doing it for trump. neil: didn't come from trump. they went overboard to say that, didn't they. >> i don't know. i think this still is more bezos attempt to manage public perception. his role as leader of amazon. neil: you don't think he was strong-armed here? i don't leave -- >> i think it may have been a foolish letter but don't think it was criminal one. >> american media was already in the timeout chair? >> what do you mean? >> well the fact is, as emily has been reporting that

essentially they got in trouble for run-up to coverage, catch and kill stories that obviously they bought material, instead of running, buried story. got in trouble. got a slap on the wrist for that. so they have some three-year amnesty, right. if they do anything slightly shady or suspect within that three-year period then they are able to -- >> if it's a crime, violate the agreement they're subject to be prosecuted for. >> that is what i'm saying, as media organization i already know i have one slap on the wrist wouldn't i be more careful than going forward? >> more reason to suspect that this letter isn't extortion. neil: you're clearly telling jeff bezos, wouldn't it be a pity if these photos came out on your southern region and, questionable photos they are, wouldn't it be a pity somehow get out again? i don't know, i'm reading all that. >> but it is the truth. didn't say i will damage your

reputation. neil: they have not denied any of these images. >> of course not. they're his. bigger issue -- he should be more concerned with, how did they get them. >> he is. that is why he hired to the investigator. >> attack was on ami, wasn't where the pictures came from. they didn't come from ami. they got the pictures. neil: someone helped them get it. >> this is classic quid pro quo. >> that is contract. >> it is not a contract. neil: guys, i, i do think it -- you can talk during commercials. i want to end on final line from bezos that is very, very clear in this very long and unusual presentation on this medium side i guess it is equaled. i prefer to stand up roll this log over and see what crawls out. it is starting to crawl out. >> i love that. >> we'll have more after this.

♪ the first-of-its-kind lexus ux and ux f sport, with the latest safety system standard, best-in-class turn radius and best-in-class mpg. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest.

do i use a toothpaste that whitens my teeth, or one that's good for my teeth? now i don't have to choose. from crest 3d white, the whitening therapy collection

with new spearmint and peppermint oil. it gently whitens, plus it has a fortifying formula to protect your enamel. crest. healthy, beautiful smiles for life. this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.

neil: all right. so what is going on with jeff bezos or at least his company amazon.com is down right now. there is concern about real estate appetite, more interesting in the new york metropolitan area, a "washington post" story broke that the company might be reconsidering the new york headquarters because of local opposition including from the very folks that championed deal right afterwards, but picking it apart we'll extract more concessions from amazon. must have bounced back to jeff bezos clearly in a fighting mood on other matters to say, to hell with you. that they are not coming to long island city, just across the river here in new york, but if they do, man, oh, man, reminder to politicians, once you get them, don't criticize

them. meantime, in the meantime, signs lawmakers are getting closer to a bothered deal. edward lawrence has the latest. edward, what is going on? reporter: marine one, i hear on the north lawn, the president is getting ready for his yearly fiscal and the conference committee what is happening on capitol hill, members of the committee said they're close to deal, possibly on monday. senator richard shelby was here at white house monday. updated president exactly where they were. any money for the border wall would be less than $5 billion, but more than zero which is what the democrats were talking about. republicans, democratic members say this is give-and-take in these negotiations. one democratic member said would like to see more humanitarian aid. a republican said this could all be worked out. >> so, yes, we need more i.c.e. beds, more money for the new barrier, for the new wall and that is where the negotiation i think is. i think that is where it is

going. that is where the deal is going to be made. reporter: white house spokesman says that democrats should come to the table and make a deal because if the government shuts down next friday because it is on them. >> outlined his plan. we understand that many people from the conference had conversations with our staffs here at the white house. so president yesterday said he was optimistic. based on what we're hearing in those meetings and hopefully we'll come to a conclusion here pretty soon. reporter: if a deal comes through on monday, we're told that could be enough time to have a package much deals done by next friday, have the government reopen back to you, neil. neil: thank you my friend. optimism of a deal could be bipartisan in nature. who would have thunk? are we overthinking it? former trump campaign member, ken blackwell. ken what do you think. >> i think he did an excellent

job framing negotiations in his state of the union address. he moved, he moved the framework from, a discussion of, his, his misdeeds, alleged misdeeds, and, meanness, to an issue of law and order, to a discussion about law and order, public safety, and a defense of capitalism. and, at that moment, he in fact gained the upper hand in these negotiations. he can play the clock on this. he can legally build the wall with a national emergency. i think it will stand the legal challenge. but if folks want a broader immigration reform package, then it is on them to negotiate. i think he is in a good position now as he plays the clock over this weekend. there is going to be a gathering

at camp david, some of the appropriators will be there. i'm sure while the conference committee is working tirelessly, they will be discussing this among other things, with the president this weekend. i think we probably will get a deal. the president will get his wall, which will be new wall, new physical barrier, and then we will also see more technology and more personnel. neil: wait a minute. ken i love you to death, you and i looking at the same proposed deal? because it stands about four billion less than the president wanted. you're getting that, i understand that, or some semblance thereof, but that is a long way down from what he wanted, right? >> no, look, neil, let me use two sports analogies and, let's use muhammad ali. the president went to a rope-a-dope strategy over the last two weeks.

he just let the democrats -- neil: come on. they took him to the cleaners. rope-a-dope. they took him to the cleaners. >> no. look, no they didn't, because he in fact repositioned at the point of the state -- neil: i have great respect for but you got to admit in the end even republicans are concerned, mr. president you went too far on this issue. no one want as shutdown. he doesn't want a shutdown. democrats don't want a shutdown. >> there is not going to be a smutdown. neil: let's be really love you to death, we always argue this. i will tell you, he was majorly hosed on the first deal. he doesn't want it to happen again. will settle calls for funding of a wall whatever, four billion less than he thought, so be it, but come on? >> it is not going to be four billion less than he thought. neil: we'll see, mr. smarty pants. >> in the final analysis, in the final analysis he understands when he broaden the ring on

democrats in the state of the union, he got back control of the battle. he playing the clock. he will get more than a billion dollars worth of wall. but the democrats, if they play it straight, will get more of what they, more of what they want, to the chagrin of many of us on the right. neil: all right. we shall see. that is not exactly rope-a-dope. >> that is, that is a compromise. he went into rope-a-dope. he did it brilliantly. neil: all right. you there in this interview danced a like a butterfly but you stung a little like a bee. thank you very, very much, my friend. >> [laughter]. good to be with you, brother. neil: meantime the president seems to be complicating, maybe deliberately so, maybe there is a rope-a-dope strategy going on here with the chinese by saying, you know, when it comes to the new technology everyone is talking about, i don't want the chinese to be able to offer any

equipment to any u.s. company. the battle for 5g that the president wants to make non-chinese. after this. y shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today.

neil: that is a great show, that "bulls & bears" show, by the way. i digress. we're just promoting that fine show here. but there is an interesting development going on in trade circles here might be adding to the selloff. we told you how china trade dictates the course of the markets. better looks the deal, better markets are doing, multinationals, caterpillar, boeings, less likely it looks, or more looks delayed obviously the worse it looks for stocks. today is a good example of that but there is an interesting development that might have complicated or exacerbated this, the president expecting to ban chinese telecom equipment, all chinese telecom equipment, on any u.s. networks when it comes

to 5g. which is next big thing. what is it now? 4g. it would naturally be five. joe durant, that is extent of my technology knowledge. what do you think of that, i understand the chinese do have a significant leap in all facets of this technology, whether we like it or not, they might be a big player regardless but is this move complicating a deal and could that be a problem for the markets? >> it is definitely a problem for the market. there are really three battle lines in technology right now. data, 5g and ai and china is quite a far ahead in 5g and a.i. as well. i think what you're seeing here, not just about our country. about trying to establish the standards for the rest of the world. and, i think, when you look at the china trade situation, us doing something with their telephone technology, telefonic

technology, means they can retaliate with some form of technology we can try to get into china. it just escalates the noise. few people expected something done by march 1st. all we want to make sure they just punted again for another three months because it is unlikely we'll get to the finish line. i mentioned that last time i was on the show last week that -- neil: i'm sorry, my friend, if we're criticizing the chinese for dictating through their government everything that american companies there do and everything that their companies do, we don't like that, we don't like them inserting themselves, giving their companies a big ol' government blessed advantage on the global stage, here we are now, telling the world, when it comes to china, we don't want you to have anything to do with our telecom in this 5g push, i don't know, it seems like a little weird? >> it is weird but it is what we have to do. you know, i grew up in zimbabwe. i go back there to africa quite

frequently. what the chinese do, we will give you funds but you have to use our energy plants. they come in the chinese go to emerging world countryies and never operators like ge or ibm going in alone. they come in with a package of solutions. you want cheap oil? here is what you take from us as well. we're not negotiating on level playing field with the rest of the world, that's for sure. the chinese operate like the world's biggest company with multiple different brands and difficult channels, they work to do multiple solutions for one single country. we don't operate that way. so i think we're trying to level the playing field. we're also letting the chinese know that we're not going to be pushed over. and again i just think we're going to see march 1, nothing gets resolved. they punt it for another three months. maybe something gets resolved but there is a big standoff right now. neil: there is. thank you very, very much on that, joe.

by the way adding to the standoff a firm no out of u.s. officials we will not extend the deadline. technically it is 12:01 a.m. on march 2nd. why split hairs hire. that is when 25% tariffs kick in on more than $250 billion worth of chinese goods. governments don't pay that. the chinese would in their retaliatory efforts, we would. not governments paying for it, you are. we'll have more after this. ♪ ♪

did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes? using multiple cleaners on grease can be expensive, and sometimes ineffective. for better value, tackle grease with dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. it provides 3x more grease cleaning power per drop, which cuts through tough kitchen messes, pre-treats laundry stains, and even tackles grease build-up on car rims. tackle tough greasy messes around your home, and save money with dawn ultra. brand power. helping you better. ♪ neil: you know, outside virginia, outside new york, long island city, amazon said this will be our future. these two cities will be expanded upon. in new york they greeted it with like practically palms in the

street. then politicians started picking it apart. we know it is not ideal. that we hire right people. new york mayor was complaining about it. amazon now has come back, if you don't like it, if you're not keen on it, we'll not do it. we might not set up shop in new york at all. i am just waiting for the politicians who were clamoring around making sure we'll get the best deal after they signed off on a deal, what happens now? bank rate economic analyst mark hamrick. what do you think, mark? >> neil, i don't know if this surprises me more than the initial decision to base operations there in long island city in the first place. i thought it was dicey decision anyway. low cost of way of doing business? i don't think so. the political environment is cost of doing business. do you think it is negotiating tactic or a threat than realistic -- neil: jeff bezos, suing ami, "national enquirer."

i have a feeling he is in a bad mood but i also suspect you don't look look a gift horse in the mouth. you can question how many jobs we get over the years, the deal was scored, tax revenue was counted and they weighed that against whatever concessions were made. they started complaining about the it after the fact, even the governor. amazon i'm sure saying why the hell did we go there? why dewe dine a deal with you? they have a half dozen other cities to consider, across the hudson river into newark, what do you think the lesson would be? >> first of all you need to know who you're doing business with. the political environment in new york is obviously different than the political environment in nashville, the third city that was involved. neil: very good point. very good point. >> in the three-way decision. i'm sure tennessee would be happy to take the whole thing if they want to --

neil: lowest of all options there for residents of the company itself. meantime we're getting a reminder how politicians who lambast and rip wall street, you know, they miss the money, when it goes. in new york, all of a sudden the mayor finds himself, billion dollars shy in the budget because of the wall street downdraft, particularly from december. it is, it is the lifeblood of this city but, now he is surprised. what do you think of that? >> i don't think it is just the stock market, right? there is some concern about the strength of the housing market. neil: absolutely. >> state and local taxes you know that -- neil: i'm glad you mentioned that, mark. i should have explained it. happy that you did. sales from high-end properties in new york are down 67%. obviously that means less money coming into the covers here but go ahead. >> well, yeah. so i think governor cuomo this week basically said there are at least five states right now, high-taxed states, taking

essentially billion dollar tax hits right now, from diminished revenues because of the decision to limit that state and local deductibility to $10,000. now it is very interesting to me, neil, in the last 24 hours, asked about the question, president trump said he would be willing to revisit that. of course on the hill senator grassley of the finance committee basically saying no way. but of course you have the house ways and means committee controlled by the democrats where they're going like this, saying you know what? this is very politically unpopular in these blue states. this is something to watch, neil. neil: all right. thank you, very, very much, mark hamrick, bank rate economic analyst. we'll keep a close eye on these developments here, if amazon would make good what appears to be an option, that is could not set up in long island city in new york at all, and move elsewhere. meantime, 2020 democrats embracing a green new deal. now you have close to two dozen

prominent democrats who like the idea, even though the details are sketchy. what it could mean after this. trips to mars. $4.95. hydroponic farms. robotic arms. ♪ $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade.

no matter what you trade, at fidelity and the army taught me a lot about commitment. which i apply to my life and my work.

at comcast we're commited to delivering the best experience possible, by being on time everytime. and if we are ever late, we'll give you a automatic twenty dollar credit. my name is antonio and i'm a technician at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

♪ neil: used to be only bernie sanders, now a growing number of democrats including quite a few

want to be next president of the united states are in big pushing a green agenda a lot of republicans say will cost a lot of green. democratic strategist kristin hahn, marjorie clifton and adriana cohen. marjorie, what do you make of this? this hughesed to be dismissed out of hand, almost everyone of the prominent candidates embraces idea of a green deal? not necessarily go the extent for example, that congresswoman cortez is advocating but we need one. what do you think? >> i don't think a lot of people know exactly what it means at this point. neil: i don't think the congresswoman does either. i don't mean to criticize her. >> right. neil: an overall goal with not a lot of numbers attached to it. >> i seen a lot things around mass transit, creating jobs,

minimum minimum you canning the new deal post depression. a talking point for the next presidential election cycle but the devil is in the details. spending will be one of the most important things. there are economic solutions mean they drive market forces, can answer the budget issues. then it's a conversation. the idea we'll pay for all these things with no real return on it, i don't know that is going to yield a lot of winning hands with especially the moderate democrats. neil: i did look into this, because it did have a lot of pie-in-the-sky stuff and all that. any big initiative will at the outset, but if you're going to make a big initiative launch, you best not scare people when you talk about the stuff that we won't be using jets anymore. you know, we're going to change the way we go about our daily transportation. people are confused. they scratch their heads, wonder how will i get around? none of that is adequately

explained. >> that's right. i mean just goes to show you that how far the democrat party has swung to the left because these are radical ideas. talk about, you know, destroying air travel. destroying cars. getting fossil fueled cars off roads. impact to the economy, neil, is, incredible. i mean these are trillion dollar industries. it would upend the cargo, entire transportation industry. not to mention they want to go after green new deal wants to go after flat you lant cows. are we banning hamburgers? americans will never have a barbecue again? neil: what if you have a a a flatulence cow. when you tell people you want to get rid of cars, get rid of planes, without quickly offering alternative, i know you want to get rid of fossil fuels, solar, new technologies, but unless you

give americans a clear alternative what they can look forward, more cheaper, better, when it comes to, planes, i don't know, none of that was done. i thought that was surprising? >> i totally agree that this is something, this green new deal, is much like how the candidates, devil is in the details, and there are no details that i've seen. you have, it is not bad to have big ideas, right? we wanted to go to the moon. we want to do these things. let's have big ideas. neil: no, that is a very good point. when john kennedy said we want to land a man on the moon before the decade out, we were in no position given our experience to do that. go ahead. >> it is good to have big ideas but the devil is in the details. just like this medicare for all with the candidates, i think a lot of them are adopting their own version. so what is a green new deal? i would point out there is climate change committee was built out in the house, it filled out with number of moderates. so, there is idea that -- being

a business nerd here, guys. i say present it like a business plan. i will look at it. i won't dismiss it but you have to present a business plan. if i can change gears. kevin brady was on with us. used to run house ways and means committee. now he is is ranking member because democrats took control. more specifically yesterday to chase down the president's tax returns. this is kevin brady yesterday. they think they have a rationale for getting taxes that they have not been able to get up to now. what is it? >> yeah, they don't. this isn't about whether the president should voluntarily release his tax returns. you can say yes or no to that. this about abuse of power by congress. the law today protects individual taxpayers from congress examining them, making them public for purely partisan reasons. if democrats twist law, weaponize the tax code for

purely partisan reasons, they set a very dangerous precedent. neil: what do you think of all this, marjorie? i mean the president's tax -- i am surprised they haven't come out. there was middle of campaign, one page of one return did come out, people extrapolate ad large loss, could have meant ever since donald trump has not been paying taxes because he could write off losses in future years we'll never know. what do you think of this? >> i think the effort is is almost kind of unspoken law. you have had every modern president reveal many years of their tax reruns, typically 10 years of tax returns. part of that is about transparency, about honesty, ethics keeping with morality of our country. trump does not play by those rules. there is not willingness or even in his, i think in his behind a need to be able to show anything. he plays by his own rules. by i think where the question is, has he been playing ethically? there is a lot of questions

obviously about his ethics, business practices, about ties with russia. there are all the unknowns -- neil: do you think getting tax returns out, irs required, it is law, once you're president, vice president, or closely scrutinized on any transaction they have, any deal they have so ared that might be, you know, hazardous to the u.s., not in the u.s.'s interest, that is screwed noised as president. what good would it do now digging through returns or decades old? >> i again think they're trying to find patterns behavior. neil: they're trying to embarass him, right? >> neil, i will say, sure. i think there is politics involved, absolutely. neil: don't get me wrong. i think a president, campaigned should release returns. i don't care how rich you are. you put yourself own the line. your returns should be out there. andrea, i wonder constant resistance will encourage other candidates i won't release my returns either.

what do you think of it, andrea? >> i think, there is no question that democrats are abusing their power. they're misusing the department of justice, via, to go after political opponents. that is what is going on here. the level of attacks and investigations against democrats will be launching against president trump is unprecedented. and so, we're not supposed to have the doj get weepized -- weaponized to go after political opponents. that is what countries like north korea do. we're entering a very dangerous time and i find it funny -- neil: refusing to do what everyone else has done running for the highest office in the land,. >> transparency is two-way street. neil: no, it isn't. transparency is transparency. each side can play games. if you run for president, you put them out there. >> when i was congressional staffer, i had to disclose any financial transactions i had. i was making well under what --

had far less responsibility. neil: i knew you were in trump territory. we should have more time. it's a great subject. i want to get you back. we're following amazon thing. we're looking at markets coming off a little bit after this. and every time we move, things change. apartments become houses, cars become mini vans. as we upgrade and downsize, an allstate agent will do the same for our protection. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands?

neil: all right. the world's richest billionaire, the world's richest human being, being forced into acknowledging something or forced into not doing something at the hands of the "national enquirer." he calls it extortion. they say it's just general reporting investigation. in the middle of this, you have a battle royale that is on and the implications are humongous. the "wall street journal" assistant editorial page editor and "usa today" congressional report

reporters. essentially, you have, elijah, with this story jeff bezos embarrassed and humiliated by texts of his and pictures that came to light and the company, how they got the stuff they did, threatening again more stuff will come out unless he were to say -- lot of people reading into this that it sounds a heck of a lot like extortion. what do you think? >> i don't know if it's extortion or not but as a reporter, that is not how i gather my news, nor my colleagues at both "usa today" or other outlets. that's not real news gathering. that's problematic here for them. i think that bezos took a risk in publishing the full letters that detail what some of these photos were but also, the "enquirer" already came out with a story that had sort of scandalous text messages and he's already divorcing his wife. so i think that he took the risk

and said that he's willing to take the next step, publish these letters and see what happens. neil: what do you think, james? >> i guess i would affirm that. for anyone who is inclined to think the worst about the media, this isn't standard practice to threaten targets or sources of stories that you will put out details of their personal life if they don't do things for you. but i guess i would say -- neil: but that sounds a heck of a lot like extortion to me. >> on the other hand, we should note that what he's publishing here are e-mails from american media, the "national enquirer's" executives and lawyers to him after he hired investigators and obviously from his note, hired lawyers, so we're not seeing and he hasn't published what his camp was saying to them.

neil: that's fair. that's fair. >> it's not clear that this, while on its own, might appear appalling, is part of a negotiation that could have had pretty sharp elbows on both sides. neil: ami saying it believes it acted lawfully, that this was treated as the big story it was and there's nothing sinister going on, but i don't know, eliza, about you, but it's the role of the editor here, this "enquirer" editor, dylan howard, and his comments that take this beyond the lawyers. this is the editor e-mailing. it would give no editor pleasure to send this e-mail. i hope common sense can prevail and quickly. advising, in other words, if the company said, you know, essentially sinister intentions to what the "enquirer" was doing

or nefarious methods. that certainly sounds like a lot of strong-arm from the editor. >> that is a lot of strong-arm. you're right, we have not seen what bezos' team is sending back. there could be sharp elbows on both sides but that does sound like a threat, right? he's saying if you do not say these things, we have these photos that we will publish. that doesn't look good. neil: yeah. when i further read, the company, continuing this theme, emphatically rejects any assertion, james, that its reporting was instigated, dictated or influenced in any manner by external forces, political or otherwise. you know, obviously inference there with this, given the company's ceo, american media's ceo, david pecker's close friendship with the president, that this was somehow strings were being pulled behind the scenes by someone at the white house. but, but that close relationship exists even though mr. pecker has had his hand slapped for

three years on this whole coverage of stories and payments to former "playboy" models and porn stars and you've got to wonder if any of this is true, not only has he violated that agreement, but his company could be in a heap of trouble. >> well, i think what mr. bezos says there in the note is that he would not agree as part of a potential settlement to say that he sees no political influence or, you know, inappropriate conduct at american media, and he says look, i don't believe that so i wasn't willing to say it as part of a political settlement. okay, fair enough. i think we can respect that if he's willing to -- i shouldn't say as part of a legal settlement, if he's not willing to say something he doesn't believe. but part of the bezos message is he thinks it's wrong for the owner of a media outlet to have a political axe to grind, if i read him correctly, and i guess

this gets back to sort of first amendment questions. i think the owner can publish what he wants and consumers can take it or leave it. i also think that there are natural questions about why does jeff bezos own "the washington post." he describes it -- neil: that's not the issue here, though. that's not the issue here. [ speaking simultaneously ] neil: what was interesting here is that it's very clear to me that the "enquirer" had that over his head, more or less look what we got here. >> i'm not saying there's anything wrong with him owning "the washington post." what i am saying is i think people can own publications and publish things for lots of reasons and it's not necessarily wrong if they do it because they want to articulate a point of view. neil: okay. we'll see.

we might politely disagree on this. i do want to turn to attorney andrew saltman. this is going to be bad news for jeff bezos. the argument, he took a big leap challenging this, most settle or try to avoid the legal spotlight, but maybe he thinks look, this was out there, the original story came out, to beat it to the punch, my wife and i formally announced our separation and then this comes after me. but you're saying what, that it will damage him regardless? >> well, yeah, look it, obviously it isn't a good look for the world's wealthiest man but i think he's trying to send a message to other media outlets out there that look, i am a fighter and if you do this, if you put me in this trick box, if you ruin my marriage and expose what i'm doing, i'm coming after you. and i kind of analogize it a little to the gawker/hulk hogan sex tape issue. we'll see what's next but make no mistake about it, this is

criminal extortion and it's just a question whether prosecutors are going to go after them. neil: normally, companies, ceos, big stars, have a team of lawyers who settle things. they got a lot of money to do that. some call those nuisance suits, others say it's just part of doing business. jeff bezos could easily have afforded something like that to avoid this here, but it would be with a recognized journalistic entity and it would have been shall we say awkward. so that wasn't the issue, as much as it was the threat that if he didn't cease and desist in this investigation into how the newspaper got their hands on all this stuff, he wasn't going to stop. there's a difference there, right? >> there is, and it also raises the issue of whether this is a de facto proxy war between the world's wealthiest man and the world's most powerful man, president trump. obviously the "national

enquirer" goes far, far back with president trump. mr. pecker had agreed to an immunity deal that he killed stories that were not advantageous to president trump. neil: by the way, if this proves he violated that, what happens? the immunity deal goes away, right? >> huge problem. that's why i can't believe pecker was so careless in allegedly doing this, because if that immunity deal goes away, both him and the company are even more legal trouble than what they are currently in. neil: this seems, you are the lawyer and a good one at that, but when i hear words like from this editor, howard, i want to describe to you the photos obtained during our news gathering. goes on to say we have a below-the-belt selfie. it would give -- common sense would prevail -- he goes on to say here's a preview of our coming attractions. man, i don't know. it sounds like tony soprano

here. >> it does. a lot of times we are used to mob movies and extortion claims where there's a threat of physical force. we don't have that here. but what we do have is a very clear threat to expose something extraordinarily embarrassing and -- neil: you can help me with this. he's already admitted he's embarrassed so now he says he has nothing else to lose. more texts are coming out, more stuff is coming out. i just got to go out there and say enough is enough. his argument has always been i think he said if in my position i can't stand up to this kind of extortion, how many people can. he does raise a good point. >> he does, and i think the "national enquirer" is used to doing this with johnny carson and burt reynolds but now when they are going up against the world's wealthiest man, i think they have bitten off a little bit more than they can chew. i think bezos is going to bury them. it's already a struggling company. he's trying to get criminal charges and i would be shocked if a civil suit like the gawker suit isn't coming next.

neil: oh, wow. now, i know my producer will kill me, we are going long, is it your sense that it could affect amazon? that that is a family sort of oriented company, retail conglomerate respected the world over, lot of people use it, and maybe fewer people will if they read all this tawdry stuff and follow it, that it could hurt, to say nothing of the ongoing divorce between he and his wife of 25 years. >> what price do you put on the reputation of your company and having the owner, the primary owner and the biggest shareholder appearing naked below the waist in a selfie isn't good for the company, it certainly isn't good for mr. bezos and i think that's why he took a shotgun to finish this thing off. neil: all right. we will watch very, very closely. the company has issued multiple statements today but the one that stands out in this entire back-and-forth on this is from

mr. bezos himself. of course, i don't want personal photos published but i also don't want to participate in their well-known practice of blackmail, political favors, political attacks and corruption. that is essentially the world's richest man saying i've got the money to fight this, and i'm fighting this. to hell. 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.

♪

the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome.

neil: all right. a border deal might be getting closer than you think. to fox news capitol hill producer chad pergram. what's the latest? reporter: i just talked to a senior source who was rather skeptical. they indicated they were more optimistic yesterday than today. now, what we are told is over the weekend, staff is going to continue to try to assemble this

border security conference report, as it's called, where you blend what the house and senate agree to, then send it back to the house and senate to vote. what are going to be the trade-offs here? i'm told president trump is not going to get $5 billion for the wall. it is going to be more than $1.3 billion. lucille allard from california, she says quote, like in any negotiation, republicans want some sort of physical barriers. it's what do we get, meaning democrats, in exchange for them. kevin mccarthy, the house minority leader, also spoke a few moments ago and said this weekend will tell us a lot about where this is all going. there's going to be a meeting at camp david not per se with the conferees but a couple are going. i know tom greaves and henry cuellar are meeting with mick mulvaney, the chief of staff there. cuellar said his words are pay attention to the details. that's going to count. keep in mind that this is more than just dealing with the border wall.

th as they plus up what's going for the border wall or fencing or a barrier, does it start to hurt other areas in homeland security and that's the concern. when i talk to mes con these co there is a rising fear that even if they were to come to an agreement, president trump still might not sign it. that said, he could approve an interim spending bill for the rest of the fiscal year and then declare a national emergency. that's one way out of having the government shutdown at the end of next week. but there is a palpable fear the president might not sign the bill despite what happened yesterday when richard shelby, chair of the appropriations committee, went to the white house and said he had the most positive meeting he had ever had with the president. neil: that's what happened at the outset, in the very beginning before all this started. mitch mcconnell thought he had a deal, and an understanding, then the president, that was it, right? reporter: you can understand why lawmakers are so skeptical. the reason is because they have seen this president go back and

forth on things he agreed to, things he didn't agree to. the real start of this as it came to spending bills started last march where they passed the big omnibus bill. his administration negotiated that bill. mulvaney, then just the budget director, went to the white house briefing room and basically said here's why members should vote for this and then the president woke up the next morning after they had passed the bill and said he might veto it. so they don't really know precisely what he's going to be for or against. i would suspect next week is going to be a lot of machinations especially if they get this into fine print. can they get the votes and will the president sign it. when it comes to congress, it's always my mantra, it's about the math, it's about the math, it's about the math. you can see a combination of a lot of republicans and many democrats coming together in the house of representatives to vote on something, but the people at the margin, the most conservative republicans, the most liberal democrats, they don't get what they want. if you get that big middle, that's the key. that's precisely why some folks think the president wouldn't sign it.

neil: wow. that brings us up to date. thank you. you're the best. chad pergram. i want to get john layfield in on this. two deals we are talking about. if chad's right, they both look a little dicey. obviously the fear of another government shutdown if we don't get a border deal and of course, the china trade thing that looks like it's getting pushed back or concerns that the tough talk has resumed with the president saying, for example, he wants all chinese telecom companies out of our 5g push in this country. a lot of nastiness developing all of a sudden again. what do you think? >> yeah. i think the problem is you don't know what defines success. when you go into any negotiation, you have to be able to say this is what we get if we win. the president constantly has a moving target. i'm not sure the government shutdown is not going to cut back or the national emergency isn't going to be declared. the president had two years of white house, senate and house control. i think this is a manufactured crisis. the problem with china, the chinese, it's up to them if we

will get a deal or not. if they can get the president to declare victory, we get a deal, we are not going to get everything we want with china. it's preposterous to believe that. neil: the president is in a no-win situation because people will pick it apart, what did he do about intellectual property and all that. so even if they make tremendous concessions in buying more goods from us, soybeans, whatever, it will never be good enough. i understand how that works and his trepidation and concern, but is there a sense that you have that put it all aside for the markets, that any deal beats no deal? >> absolutely. 100%. that's what the market wants. we're not going to get a great deal. the chinese recently said they are going to negotiate sincerely. that denotes in the past they weren't negotiating sincerely. i don't think they will do it this time. they are down about 13 to 15 million metric tons of soybeans. they offered to buy about two million. very short on the shortfall.

they weren't getting enough from argentina down in south america. we are losing these contracts forever. i think if the chinese can come out and say they wiare buying se goods, they will try to close the trade deficit, the president can declare victory and move on. i think all the market wants is any kind of deal because that way at least you have some certainty. neil: you know, it is amazing, we talked about this so many times, the tenor and tone of these markets almost follows the pattern of these talks or what people think is going on. none of us really know. but the more promising talk is that a deal was imminent, the better the markets do. this kind of stuff today rattles them. unless and until this is resolved, this is standard operating procedure, huh? >> i think so. we will have incredible volatility going forward. we also have brexit which no one knows over there exactly what's going to happen. we have two huge global events and domestic event with the shutdown and wall argument going on that no one knows how to

handicap this. i think the market generally wants to go up. we have 19% corporate earnings growth this quarter. it was projected to be at 7.8, over double what the projection was. have a really good economy, the market wants to go up but there's so much uncertainty out there, it's hard to do that. neil: john layfield, thank you very much, following all of this. meantime, family members of u.s. hostages in venezuela, speaking exclusively. why that crisis is growing. ♪

did you know you can save money by using dish soap to clean grease on more than dishes? using multiple cleaners on grease can be expensive, and sometimes ineffective. for better value, tackle grease with dawn ultra. dawn is for more than just dishes. it provides 3x more grease cleaning power per drop, which cuts through tough kitchen messes, pre-treats laundry stains, and even tackles grease build-up on car rims. tackle tough greasy messes around your home, and save money with dawn ultra. brand power. helping you better.

you have two children. these are your dad's grandchildren, ages 5 and 3. what do you tell them? >> this is the hardest thing for me, because they are being robbed of creating childhood memories with my dad and my

3-year-old, you know, 14 months is a long chunk of her life so i show her pictures of my dad so that she won't forget him and my 5-year-old gets mad because she can't facetime with her grandfather and she doesn't understand why he doesn't have a cell phone. neil: this is another side of the venezuelan mess we don't appreciate. family members of u.s. hostages in venezuela who can't get out. they were speaking exclusively to trish on this fine network. venezuelan native, former bush 41 economic adviser, welcome to both of you. thank you for the time. it doesn't look like the government there budges until there's a change in the government, that's not budging. so where is this going? >> thank you. it looks like the revolution is going well but slow. the problem is if it stalls. i just got on my phone about 60 seconds ago, an announcement from the supreme court in venezuela, the illegal supreme court, the one that supports maduro, saying that they will

automatically investigate all of these ambassadors that have just been named. one of my best friends is one of those ambassadors and she works with me for the last year. she has been named to brazil. they are ramping up the pressure and they're not leaving. we're looking for -- we are hoping that with the greater international pressure and the strangling of the financing through pdvsa, the military would come back into line and support the constitution which is guaido but they're resisting. this might be a longer process than we had hoped, unfortunately. neil: our position is we're not going to do anything militarily. there are hints of that with the famous 5,000 troops on john bolton's ipad to colombia or pad, legal pad. we have the roads and bridges, a lot of them blocked to foreign aid that might or might not be able to come in, it capitcan't

right now. should we force the issue? >> the people of venezuela have to force the issue, neil. back in 1989, there was the velvet revolution in chec czechoslovakia. people power overthrew ferdinand marcos in the philippine. venezuela is a banana republic without bananas. its oil production has fallen by two thirds. neil: you are saying don't do anything to intervene at this time, it would only complicate matters? >> i think it would complicate matters. i think we have to show our support and most of the world has. the only countries that haven't are members of what i would call the coup club. countries like syria and iran -- neil: do venezuelans know about all this food, medicine and aid that can't get in? are they aware of that? >> it's hard to tell, really, because what happens is the

media is censored. a lot of the way this gets out, we hit what i like to call the what's app wall which is most messages and information gets through on what's app groups but you have to have a certain type of telephone which is an expensive telephone in order for that to work. neil: but all that food and medicine out there, it's not reaching them. they are going to be pretty annoyed. >> yeah, exactly. i think that is true. i think this is part of the strategy here to ramp it up, as you have the military on one side and the trucks and then the food on the other side and a bunch of angry people that should definitely get them much angrier with their government that's starving them, and cause them to rise up and change the government. that is actually starving them. but we don't know. that hasn't happened yet. we think there's a lot of fear and perhaps guaido has been spreading the word that the humanitarian aid is there, that it's coming, and there's more, there's another distribution point being set up.

so we're kind of waiting to see where this goes, if the people stand up for themselves. neil: i know in the case of marcos in the philippines, he negotiated a settlement, i think we sent him to hawaii and we avoided any bloodbath or problems. he was happy with it because hawaii looked a lot like the philippines. >> and his wife got to keep her shoes. neil: absolutely. have we explored that option of where we go? >> i don't think we have done enough of that. hey, i think we ought to offer maduro a speaking slot at the 2020 democratic convention. maybe that would help. but maduro has to leave but let's face it, his predecessor, hugo chavez, had spent decades whipping up the venezuelan republic or venezuelan citizens into a frenzy about u.s. imperialism and it's taking awhile to undo that. there's not too much militarily the u.s. should do at this point

except what we have done, offer aid. i would like to see jeff bezos from amazon offer some drones of humanitarian aid and let's see whether maduro shoots down bezos' drones. neil: he's a little busy. guys, thank you both very, very much. we will keep watching. to both their points, all that food and aid is there, hundreds of millions of dollars, just can't get in. the dow is down about 174 points. but if you are looking for a house or looking to finance one or remortgage the one you're in or refinance the one you're in, rates just hit a ten-month low on the 30-year. also letting you know that now new yorkers are responding to what appears to be a threat from amaz amazon. if you don't want us in long island city, new york, then we'll go. apparently responding to a lot of criticism in the press that a lot of local officials aren't happy with amazon coming in. you might have heard that the governor rephrased it and said

we will extract some other concessions. the new york mayor said the same. amazon, maybe because jeff bezos is in a fighting mood dealing with the "national enquirer" said the hell with it. maybe we will up and leave. they haven't done that. just the threat they will has those politicians responding. wait until you hear what they're saying. great news, liberty mutual customizes- uh uh - i deliver the news around here. ♪ sources say liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. over to you, logo. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

welcome back. i'm gerri willis live from the floor of the new york stock exchange. beware app makers, that's the message apple is sending to makers of smartphone apps whose products can record a user's screen activity. the feature must either be removed from the app's code or properly disclosed to users that their actions may be recorded. if no action is taken by the developer, apple says the app will be booted from the app store. it's not clear why apple was caught unaware of the privacy breaches since they appear to be so prevalent. expedia, hotels.com are both companies that can record what

you do on your phone, including passwords, credit card numbers. now, the company did not respond to our request for a response on that topic and the stock as you can see hes dois down marginall today. apple rewarding the 14-year-old teenager for finding the flaw in the software last week. the bug allowed one facetime user calling another in a group chat to listen in or even take video while the recipient's device was still ringing. apple didn't say how it would compensate the teenager, a high school freshman, other than to say it will make a gift towards his education. they pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to researchers to spot problems with apple's hardware and software. neil? neil: some good news to report. jeff flock is outside a sears in

north riverside, illinois, where i guess it's cold. reporter: you heard of the retail ice age, neil? yeah. i think i'm in it right now. but sears, little bit of warming, as you report. yes, the bankruptcy judge did okay eddie lampert's plan to buy the bankrupt retailer that he ran, some say ran into the ground. and it's funny, his own attorney in the bankruptcy proceedings said, lamented actually that eddie lampert had been compared in this to everyone from that gilded age of robber baron to jake gould to barney fife. the judge, recognizing that, said now mr. lampert has the opportunity not to be a cartoon character but to take action that in fact could be of great meaning. that's the judge in the case. we will see if that comes true. i'm in front of one of the lucky sears stores that will remain open. there are about 400 plus of them now. you know, when lampert took

over, not long after he took over, there were more than 1,000 sears stores. just after, it was a little less than 1,000. when we are talking full-up sears stores, department stores, not just home centers and all the rest, we got down to 482 before the bankruptcy. now we are lower than that, probably around 425. in response to the critics who say eddie lampert did in fact run this company into the ground, here's the response. the hedge fund has worked tirelessly to help sears reemerge from bank superintende departmenbankruptce we believe the store can be viable. this was a huge sears store, almost 2,000 square feet. they cut it in half and leased the rest of it out to someone else and consolidated it into smaller space. some people say that will be the

future for sears, being smaller, keeping the profitable stores. i will point out sears doesn't own this store anymore. it was sold off to eddie lampert's real estate firm, the one he controls. this is part of the reason that people say he has looted the company. but now he owns the company. neil: i hope it works out. even i can remember the sears catalog. that was a great iconic -- of course, the catalog went years ago. i would order as a 7-year-old office supplies and that sort of thing. what about you? reporter: yeah. i would order -- well, i didn't order anything because we couldn't afford anything. when your dad's a bartender, you don't order a whole lot of things from a catalog. neil: look at the times. reporter: cash business. neil: got you. jeff, in the cold, talking about what will hopefully be a warming trend for sears. it is an iconic name. hope it makes it. we shall see. meantime, a tale of toy

makers. hasbro stock falling, mattel's not. what's going on? two different reads, two different stocks, both in the toy business. after this.

comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems.

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

neil: all right. president leaving a little early today for his annual physical. i think he's still there. this goes on awhile, about four or five hours. it's pretty exhaustive. we might find out something about the details of it but how much we get and how little is really kind of up to the administrati administration. doctor, good to have you back. >> good to be here, neil. neil: last year, we got glowing praise, the physical, most presidents, everything is excellent but some things are hidden from us. we didn't know john kennedy, despite his young spry image was dealing with addison's disease, a host of other ailments. we don't get that detail. why is that? what are the obligations? do you know? >> well, technically, just like everyone else, we are protected by hipaa. it's personal information but it is nice for us to know what our president's health is. it's concerning if there is any

underlying serious medical conditions that could affect judgment and decision making. it would be nice to know that. but legally, he is not required to -- it's protected under hipaa and not required to disclose that information. it is a very controversial issue but i think it's good to be open and honest with americans and let them know what's going on. nldz neil: we do get the basics. what do you look for, like all doctors? you have to check blood pressure, weight, all that stuff. what do you do? >> absolutely. first of all, vital signs. one of the biggest issues is blood pressure. that can affect your heart and can cause heart attack and heart disease which is the number one killer in the united states. in addition to that, based on your age group, for example, if you are 45 and up, that's when you start having colonoscopies. based on your age group will determine what other preventive tests you will need. blood work as well to check for cholesterol, to check for diabetes, which affects millions of americans, to check what we

call the a1c. in addition to that, we look for in our president's situation, he will probably have a prostate examination as well and might be due for his colono scopy. we look for risk factors and check your family history, see what medications you're on. if you are on a blood pressure medicine, is that blood pressure medicine working for you. if you are on a cholesterol medicine, is it working. we will do blood work to check where you were last year compared to this year or the following year, just check for patterns and it's important to get your yearly physical because doctors are here to keep you healthy, help prevent disease, not just treat you when you're sick. neil: you just like to lecture us. i think you really enjoy it. are you going to eat that meal? i always say yes, i am. >> we want you healthy so you can live long. neil: thank you very, very much. we might get those results later today. how much we get, how much we learn, anyone's guess. more after this. did you know with vanishing deductible,

you can earn $100 off your deductible for every year of safe driving? sing that. ♪ vanishing deductible, you can... ♪ ♪ earn $100... ♪ earn $100 off... ♪ off your deductible. ♪ deductible. ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ ♪ for every-- for every-- ♪ ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ what are you-- what key are you in? "e." no, no, go to "g." "g" will be too high. not for me. ♪ vanishing deductible. oh, gosh. sweet, sweet. that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. nah. not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please... [ finger snaps ] hmm. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly, while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders.

kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler- america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. call... and ask about saving $1000 on a walk-in bath, or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info.

now's the really fun part:m car. choosing the color, the wheels, the interior. everything exactly how i want it. here's the thing, just because i configured this car online doesn't mean it really exists at a dealership. but with truecar, i get real pricing on actual cars in my area, i see what others paid for them . . .

>> our nation's 22 trillion-dollar death is threaten the economic future. politicians on the left are proposing massive new programs without any realistic plans how to pay for them. >> for everyone dollar we spend on infrastructure, we get return on that investment. for everyone dollar we spend on tax cuts, we get less than a dollar back. this is about making smart investments. this is about making investments that actually generate returns. neil: all right. you had competing views what should be kind of the soul of the party right now. howard schultz is persona non grata with his ideas about deficits and debts. by the way, equally alien idea to some republicans. to charlie gasparino, what he is hearing about all of this stuff. >> it is interesting, i've been speaking with the schultz campaign they will decide by the

summer -- neil: to make independent run. not running as a democrat. >> said they can get on ballots in every state. neil: that is almost perfunctory. >> they're cool with that the three states they have to be sure they are competitive in, maybe not win, but be competitive to win, arizona, texas, indiana. interesting they threw in indiana. they think if they're competitive in those states they will go for it. it is all about polling. neil: that will not get you 270 electoral votes. >> they think that for shadows ability to get there. that is why they're in the states. neil: he is a billionaire. >> a billionaire. neil: do not understate -- >> i'm starting to agree with you maybe there is a path there. i never thought a third party could do it, conventional wisdom. neil: i covered the 1860 election with lincoln. they were technically outside party.

>> there were two parties. neil: there actual four. >> there were four? >> it can happen. ross perot, got 19% of the vote in '92. didn't get any electoral votes. the appetite is there. >> what they say extremes are controlling both parties. neil: they're right about that. >> in many ways. democrats extreme in their own ways. they will say, they both agree on one concept, and that is to keep spending, spending, spending, not dealing with the deficit. he thinks that being extreme, that people are worried about deficits, he might be able to strike a bill clintonesque radical middle. neil: yeah, yeah. >> dick morris used to speak about all the time. that is what he is aiming for. he would run like bill clinton ran. would be interesting to see who he picks supreme court judges. recommended by brookings or

heritage? neil: he is liberal guy, schultz, but fiscally conservative. >> what he feels about in terms of size, scope, power of government over individuals and institutions? neil: yes. >> that will be a key thing whether he gets republican votes. neil: push to go far left, ben stein was not a fan. i was speaking to him. >> he can't stand cortez. neil: this is pro yesterday, ben stein speaks for a passionate wing of party, right? >> green new deal is another way to control american people. ways of socialist thinking are ways to control american people and take away their freedom to choose what they want to do with their lives. socialism is about maintaining government control over people. green new deal would add another dimension of that. neil: not a fan. >> not a fan. we have to go back again to see what schultz -- schultz has legitimate shot at winning he has to pull from both parties.

his people say he is getting republicans -- neil: he will not get rabid, the green deal. >> you can't get the trumpkins, right? you need middle of both sides. now where he may not be able to get the middle of the republican, the right of centers types, in his judicial philosophy. ben makes a good point, socialism controlling people's lives. a lot of that comes from the courts. if he says, listen, i'm an avowed guy i'm not going to listen to heritage. i am not going to point originalists -- neil: as long you avoid sweeping terms -- here is the problem people criticize cortez, call her that, when you leave out things she is talking about, dirty little secret, people support that, as long as they are not picking up the bill. i think they understate --

>> have schultz saying she will blow you up. neil: maybe. the fear he could divide votes. that is traditional -- >> depend -- neil: could argue he could take from republicans. >> he can. i think republicans, he will have to say that he will be for more conservative judges. he is a big government guy when it comes down to it. i wonder if he could take from republicans. it is interesting. he is a smart guy. he is running like bill clinton. remember bill clinton packed the supreme court -- neil: lattes, pumpkin spice. >> listen, i want to tell viewers out there, he should not be covering howard schultz -- neil: i have a conflict. >> conflict of interest. pumpkin spice latte fanatic. neil: how about you? >> not fair, against journalism ethics, almost as bad as "the national enquirer" he extorting jeff bezos. neil: when i walk into

starbucks, -- neil, pick up for neil. thank you very much, charlie gasparino. we're waiting for the president to come back from the annual physical. don't know how that will go. hope it goes well. charles payne take us through that. charles: have a great weekend. love your tie. don't leave it around anywhere in the building. neil: i don't think people will pick it up but go ahead. charles: i'm charles payne. this is "making money." coming up jeff bezos versus "the national enquirer." the amazon ceo claiming blackmail and extortion but is this a distraction from the company's much bigger problems? stocks down third day in a row as traders fret about the u.s.-china deadline. that is the not the only deadline looming. we have brexit, government shutdown, what is the impact of all the deadly deadlines. plus, did a member of the federal reserve admit the

centra b