stuart: the market loved it. at no point throughout the entire statement and press conference did the dow drop? it briefly dropped one point below 300 points. now we're up 360 points. what a day. connell mcshane in for neil. it is yours. connell: what a day. what a rally. we'll try to pick up where you left off. welcome to "cavuto: coast to coast." i'm connell mcshane filling in for neil. you're right president trump at the news conference stuart was talking about hitting a whole range of different issues, border trade, even our national debt at one point but the biggest news what he started off with, what he was there to talk about was signing the spending bill, and then declaring a national emergency in order to build the border wall. so let's get to blake burman at the white house. blake of course was in the rose garden for a news conference. asked a couple questions as usual. got to two newsworthy topics,

china and i mentioned national debt. talk about the national emergency. go through that for us. reporter: i couldn't help but think, connell, as we were standing in the rose garden a little while ago, this is not what we heard from president trump, not for days but weeks, when we were in the news guarden he was talking up the need for a national emergency. what changed today he actually declared it. he signed the paperwork so the president says, declareing a national emergency on the southern border. the president walking through the reasons why he had to go down that road t was very clear that the president didn't necessarily like a lot of things that were in this spending bill that were signed. didn't necessarily get all the money that he wants. and at this point, he plans to attempt to supplement all of that with extra monies from other portions of the government. the administration saying there could be some $8 billion eventually could go to a physical barrier. when you break down all the

money, the administration believes 4 1/2 billion could be tapped in the near term though there will be as we heard from the president lots of legal challenges to much of all of this, especially the national emergency as the president said, as he laid out before, he thinks this will go to the ninth circuit court of appeal. he will lose there, lose in another court. it will go to the supreme court. at that point he will see what the supreme court, we'll awe see what the supreme court decides with it. the president went back to the same few points as to why a national emergency was needed. the president is saying it is simple. watch here. >> it is not like it is complicated. it's very simple. we want to stop drugs from coming into our country. we want to stop criminals and gangs from coming into our country. nobody has done the job we ever done. nobody has done the job we've done on the border. reporter: so where do we stand at this moment? well a second government

shutdown this year has been averted. folks on capitol hill overwhelmingly spent a spending bill. the president has gone forward with the national emergency on the southern border as his administration is saying that they will potentially try to get as much as $8 billion down the southern border to build the wall. the legal challenges are already mounting, as the new york attorney general essentially threatened a lawsuit coming soon. connell: we'll talk about some of the legal challenges, blake in a few minutes. let's talk about china. big topic for us and our viewers as robert lighthizer and steve mnuchin are over in china. the president said the talks went well. but when asked a request you turned to the 1st of march about the deadline coming up. reporter: my notes, the very first thing the president said talking about china. it is going well you about who

knows what that means. i guess he is right. there is no real definition for going well. one of the questions whether or the no the administration will loosen the march 1st deed line, by administration i mean the president who it all comes back to. the white house put out a statement on the talks involving the treasury secretary about the talks. they described it as a march 1st deadline. you remember last week i believe the president said maybe he could let that slip a little bit if the talks are going well. so i asked president trump whether or not there could be a 30 or maybe even a 60 day extension. this was his response. >> there is a possibility that i will extend the date, and if i do that, if i see we're close to a deal, the deal is going in the right direction, i would do that at the same tariffs we're charging now. i would not increase the tariffs. reporter: the president certainly keeping the door open there. the president said when it gets to a point of another meeting,

presumably i believe with president xi on china, he floated the idea of bringing nancy pelosi and chuck schumer into the room because the president says that if he gets the best deal on the planet he would still be criticized by democrats. he wants the top two democrats at some point in the room. he is openly inviting them to be in the room, whenever the discussions take place. what i found interesting of that connell, chuck schumer for the most part has been supportive of the china stance. he and some democrats said they believe president trump has gone after china in the correct manner more so than president obama in the past. the president at this point clearly extending a invitation to the top two democracy well. connell: not making a tough enough deal with china heading into 2020. neil would be proud bringing up the national debt. reporter: i had kneel in mind, i promise you that.

i hope neil is watching somewhere. connell: i don't know. if i was off would i be watching. he talks about the national debt. we got over 22 trillion as a headline this week. i did not get the sense that the president was happy to get that question. be that as it may, it is an important one. reporter: one word growth. we heard from it larry kudlow, yesterday or two days ago. when he was asked a form of this question and he said, you know, that there is growth. of course the administration talks about growth paying for taxes. we hear a lot about growth, growth. when i asked president trump today about the debt which you laid out gone up $2 trillion under his watch, the congressional budget office says unsustainable at this point going forward the president once again talked about growth. here he was. do we have that? connell: come on, mr. president.

i guess not. reporter: i have a translation, i think we got it. here it is. watch. >> but growth will straighten it out. you saw last month the trade deficit went way down. everybody said what happened? well what is happening is growth. but before i can focus too much on that, a very big expense is military and we have no choice but to straighten out our military. reporter: you heard me try to follow up, is growth the only way to get out of this? entitlement reform, anyone says that is the first thing tough tackle. the president is saying there, that part of his defense is, he had to build up the military. but i believes connell, even if you wouldn't fund the military a single dollar they would still be running deficits. shows this hole this country is fiscally. the administration continues to grow. i wish, wish, i wish, i don't know your thoughts i would have

loved to ask him about amazon. we only got a couple in there. connell: there is a lot going on. good job, bud. we'll take to you later on. blake burman live from the white house we have republican strategist eric beach with us. democratic strategist, antjuan seawright. let me start with you. nancy pelosi came out for example we could have a emergency about guns. is that what goes through your head in terms of setting precedent, that there are a whole host of other emergencies out there? which ones are you thinking about. >> couple things go through my head. the first thing the real national emergency we have in this country is the president of the united states. clearly i think people saw that on display today. secondly this is again a manufactured crisis, a crisis of

convenience for the president and quite frankly just a political move. democrats and republicans have warned this president against using this, this method to -- connell: do you think of other issues? >> of course i do. connell: democratic president would declare other types of emergencies? >> when the democrats take over the white house likely in 2020, you will see them use, have the ability to use the same precedent. i don't think the president wants that. connell: eric what do you think of that? that this argument will split the republican party somehow, because other republicans the president is setting what they have described as a dangerous precedent? >> what splits the republican party there is ruling class versus grassroots of the republican party. this is his number one issue. they are not setting precedents here. there were 39 national emergencies by previous three presidents, 36 in existence today. congress gave the president power in 1976.

connell: most are sanctions. >> but real national emergencies. >> when president obama allocated funds for obamacare because republican congress wouldn't give him funds eo, even national emergency, there weren't no complaints. and that was his version after national crisis. there was no -- connell: actual declaration for national emergency. >> it was eo. eo. no way congress is going to give this president, they will not give this president, no way they give him money for the wall. this is the number one, in his mind, many of his supporters mind the constitutional crisis and national crisis that we have. connell: in his supporter's minds, that is what he is doing to his supporters, i'm fighting for you, i will do what i said i will do. even if it gets held up in the courts. defeated in the courts by the way.

>> this is the problem. not let me do this for my supporters issue. what is in the best interest of the american people. his opening line, i did not have to do this but i did it to build the wall faster. republicans and democrats came together in bipartisan way, what 70% of the american people want to solve our short term crisis, keeping our government open and deal with immigration. it is his party that agrees to this. so the president should not be able to use this argument and justify his tom-foolery today. connell: last point to eric, whether or not if this is defeated in the courts, just on a hypothetical, it is still gets the job done politically for this president, what do you think? >> but i don't think it's a political move. the. >> what? >> it is not a political move. number one issue he ran on. >> that makes it political. >> ai agree, there are lot of ruling class republicans don't want to build the wall because

beneficial to the donors in the republican party. i agree with antwan to that point. president ran against as number one issue. he is delivering. >> there lies the political point. that makes it political. connell: this debate will continue. we have to run because we'll get back to the market rally, talk of a budget deal, declaration of a emergency, really china i think driving things up. 360 on the dow, which is 1.4% as the dow tries to make it eight straight weekly gains. back to talk about that in a moment. we'll have it, melissa and i when the market closes this afternoon. more perspective with the great steve forbes right back "after the bell." right back here on "coast to coast." ♪

♪ 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. for people as experienced as you and me, careful driving just comes naturally. all that experience should be worth something, and it is with the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford. switching saved me hundreds. in fact, four out of five aarp members age 50 and over who switched to the hartford from companies like allstate, state farm, and geico got a lower rate with the hartford.

- with the hartford not only did i get a better policy and better coverage, but i got a better rate as well. - of course drivers 50 and over like to save money, but it's great when it comes with coverage and benefits designed for us. that's real value. call the hartford for your free quote. not an aarp member? the hartford helps you join in minutes. here's an insurance company that respects its customers enough to do the right thing. like with new car replacement. if your new car is totaled in an accident, the hartford will pay the full replacement cost for your car. that's pretty cool, huh? - sometimes life happens, and when it does it's important to know that the company you're doing business with has your back. the hartford has my back. - they even prove their loyalty by offering lifetime renewability. that's the hartford's promise not to drop you even if you've had an accident. - it's a great feeling, and a very comfortable feeling, to know that i'm not gonna get dropped for that reason. i feel like i have a partner in the hartford,

and that i can trust them when and if i need them. - [announcer] you could save hundreds of dollars when you switch, and get other incredible benefits like new car replacement, and lifetime renewability. - i would recommend the hartford to friends, relatives, anybody. - and certainly when we needed them, they were right there for us. it was pretty impressive. - [announcer] call the hartford at. to request your free quote. that's. or go to.

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.

>> i i love them to negotiate. right now china is paying billions of dollars a year in tariffs and i haven't even started. here's the thing. if we make a deal, we won't have to pay. it will be a whole different story. they won't be paying that but we'll have a fair deal. connell: stocks are certainly rising today after all that. we saw it in the rose garden. the president talking about the u.s. china trade situation, closer than every, he figures to a trade deal. the dow is up 368 right now as we bring in "wall street journal" chief economics commentator greg ip. some people call the president tariff man, greg. he called himself tariff man. we saw that on display today but he also talked about the progress being made to go what is your sense where we are in all of this? >> they have made progress in a

couple key areas. apparently what my colleagues have been reporting they have made progress in terms of china agreeing to purchase u.s. exports, things like semiconductors for example. apparently progress better enforcing intellectual property protection in china. and progress in terms of opening up some sectors like banking, manufacturing, which have long been limited to american companies but i think that there is still significant room to go on the really, really difficult issues of forced technology transfer. it is not clear at all that the chinese have even conceded the point it's a problem. to suggest we're across the finish line is premature. connell: seems like the best we can hope for, blake burman was getting at this when he was on a few minutes ago, get to march 1st, the president agrees to extended line for some amount of time but doesn't raise tariffs from 10% to 25%. as you look at our economy, the u.s., how much effect on the economy would that increase have

going from 10 to 25% on those tariffs. >> it would be negative. i don't think it would be a body blow. we have seen a lot of uncertainty and negative sentiment in the stock market related to the first round of tariffs. i think likeliest scenario at this point is not a final deal on march 1st, but essentially agreeing to keep talking. in the scenario the president implied, they will role back tariffs on 10% on $200 billion worth. they will not extend them further and extend to remaining $250 billion of imports. that is a out come the markets would like. connell: we're up again today. when all of this ends, you know, if and when, there is some sort of a deal signed is there assumption that the tariffs come off, or some stay on as part of the enforcement mechanism everybody keeps wondering about? >> that is a great question. i haven't seen any good answers on it, in terms of reporting out of the negotiations, possibly

because, they still have not even reached a point where they're sure they won't have to expand the tariffs. if you look at the pattern of the president in the past, if you look, for example, the aluminum steel tariffs, he essentially imposed those on a lot of u.s. allies like canada, like mexico, japan, like the european union and threatened to go further on autos. used the threat of going further into the bargaining table into talks. while that, sort of like staved off the threat of an expansion of tariffs, didn't roll back existing ones. connell: never took off the steel ones. >> no. connell: everybody was assuming that would happen. even today he is talking about the great steel business and profits rolling in for the steel companies. largely because of the tariffs, they're being propped up by the government in many ways you could argue and those tariffs never came off. maybe these won't either, you know. >> it was a real disappointment. the canadians and mexicans were

hopeful one outcome of the new nafta deal would be end of those tariffs. it didn't happen. a number of top republicans like toomey in senate of a mind not pass new nafta until the tariffs come off. when there are happy steel cop, steelmaker, there are 10 unhappy steel importers and users out there. if we look at the template for the china talks, possibly a long-term scenario the current 10% tariff stays in place, subject to enforcement mechanism that essentially certifies china is agreeing to the letter and spirit of what comes out of these negotiations. connell: greg, always good to talk to you. greg ip from "the wall street journal" with us from washington. on the dow we're up 350 plus. on track for the eighth straight week of gains which would be the longest we've had since 2017. the president truthing market

gains at his rose garden news conference. this is what he said. >> the market is getting close to the new highs he created. we have all the records. we have every record but we're getting close to the point where we create new records. so our country is doing very well economically. connell: bring in ed mills from raymond james. he is a policy analyst. i wonder, ed, how much of that, what i was trying to talk to greg a little bit of with, market is pricing in some sort of success or progress with regard to the china trade talks, we will all what happens to stocks once we get the progress, you know. >> that is absolutely right. when i talk to clients, i think most are betting there is probably zero to 10% chance that we get those new round of tariffs. and all of the kind of happy talk coming out of the white house, the positive signs coming out of the trade talks in beijing. xi showing up. things look like they are going well.

but then you have to ask yourself, what has china really offered? when i check in with folks, it doesn't seem like they offered up very much. we think that they are slow-walking these talks, thinking if they get trump an xi in the room, trump will agree to a deal not as much as what lighthizer is asking for in beijing. connell: so from the u.s. perspective, the idea is try to avoid the meeting, that face-to-face meeting as long as possible, is that what you're kind of getting at between trump and xi xinping? >> yes. i think trump wants to have the meeting. he wanted to have the meeting before the march 1st deadline but seems as if folks within the administration are more hard-liners on china trade that is trying to do everything possible to prevent having that meeting take place until china offers up more. that included having the next summit with north korea as late as possible in this month so it wasn't even possible to do this by march 1st. connell: that's interesting. now on that other point that

greg and i were talking about, what happens after there is some sort of an agreement in place, especially if it is not a broad-based agreement on everything talked about, or even if it is lighthizer keeps coming back to this enforcement mechanism, is it the tariffs? as greg says we stay at 10%, don't go to 25% and they don't come back off? that would be an interesting question to see how markets would react to that, or investors assuming there is a deal in place tear riffs come off, that is what they're pricing in, you know? >> what i think the market is pricing in, the 10% tariffs remain. connell: okay. >> that the kind of as we move to the trust but verify phase, that enforcement phase i think there's going to be optimism. i think there is going to be a sense this could be over. i would advise folks as we go into the trust but verify phase, there is always the opportunity for this to fall apart. look at the usmca. we have signed a deal with mexico and canada but that has

not stopped the president from putting pressure on mexico. connell: that's true too. >> so you have, a lot of this, with china probably will not have to go through congress. so there might not be that dynamic there. it will be much more done through the executive powers of the president. a lot of changes being sought, are changes by the chinese side. but we are one tweet away even after this is done, from reengagement of a 10, 25% tariff or expansion of tariffs on all chinese goods coming into the united states. connell: that's our world. >> this is not going away anytime soon. connell: we're always one tweet away. thanks for coming on. good analysis. ed mills from raymond james. connell: as we continue, property owner investing a million dollars expecting amazon to come to new york, what he wants now since they, amazon, are backing out. coming up next.

i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ ♪ ♪ i can do more to lower my a1c. because my body can still make its own insulin. and i take trulicity once a week to activate my body to release it, like it's supposed to. trulicity is not insulin. it starts acting in my body from the first dose and continues to work when i need it, 24/7. trulicity is an injection

to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. don't use it as the first medicine to treat diabetes, or if you have type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, you're allergic to trulicity, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of a serious allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your low blood sugar risk. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite. these can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

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

>> this is incredible. it shows that everyday americans still have the power to organize and fight for their communities and, they can have more say in this country than the richest man in the world. connell: how you slice it. >> whether we will eat the first marshmallow or eat the second marshmallow. invest the money in local economy, talent pool already here. instead of supporting a monopoly designed to destroy competitions. local businesses can create better long term jobs that will hire locally. connell: we heard a lot of yesterday from democrats, for the most part rejoicing really in the move, lack of move from amazon. the state already facing a tax exodus. the story we covered separate from amazon. talk more about this, julie samuels is with us, welcome to you both.

julie, start with you, representative kim out with me in long island city, i thought was making this argument, this is a boatload of money we would hand amazon, we being, new york city, now that money can be given to a local business. that is not how it works. >> that is fundamental misunderstanding how -- connell: i heard it a lot yesterday. >> we heard it a lot for the last couple months. it has been a huge failure of the debate. the money isn't sitting in a checking account. there is not like $3 billion we'll otherwise on really needed projects. the city needs -- connell: just the way it works from tax incentives. >> right. connell: that is not an argument, i don't know what you think, that is not necessarily advocate argument in favor of tax incentives. you can make an argument those are wrong, you should at least know what they are to start with. what do you think of what we saw yesterday? >> the whole thing was messaged so poorly. what happened, a lot of people took the $3 billion, richest company in the world is getting a 3 billion-dollar tax cut, it is ridiculous.

no one mentions the amount of tax generated from companies employees that would come. that was the wrong headline in the first place. i think people thought the deal was done. this was grandstanding to get political points. i do not think they would -- connell: you're 100%. by the way some of those people worked for amazon. people were really surprised, not pulled the trigger, unpulled the trigger. >> i work in tech in new york. yeah, absolutely. we've been saying from the beginning all that was there a mou, a memorandum of understanding. connell: yeah. >> there was at least an 18-month process ahead of to us hammer out final details. no, the deal is done. no it is not. obviously yesterday -- connell: i will start with you on this as you say you work in tech in new york. not like amazon was the first technology company to come here. there is a technology industry thriving in many ways, google, facebook, on and on here in new york city already. what is effect effect of amazon

not coming? it is not like it is going away. >> tech sector in new york is doing great. we have well over 300 tech jobs. google is huge here. all the companies founded here. that will continue. particularly, think about all of the companies you don't think of as tech companies that are increasingly becoming tech companies. every financial institution. connell: okay. >> hiring tons of engineers, tech tall -- talent, that growth will continue. i was very bullish about that. talking about tens of thousands of jobs essentially at once. that is a big boost to the ecosystem. connell: multiplier effect. >> multiplier effect. connell: do you agree with that? >> no, i totally agree. there are fair arguments that have nothing to do with this, we need better infrastructure, potentially a lot of things the congestion would cause. that is part of a growing city. they keep growing vertically.

there is more pressure to do something. the bigger lesson, here, there was really bad deal done. it was a bunch of our top political leadership jamming it down the throats. they tried to steamroll the whole thing. the local people said you didn't consult us. connell: they didn't sell it right. >> didn't sell it right at the beginning. same thing happening on the southern border. people trying to emigrate. amazon is trying to emigrate. no one is getting on the same day of the deal. arguably these emergencies are not even of the same caliber. people don't care as much as some of the few people on social media make a lot of noise. connell: that was the deal, a very call minority. >> vocal ma minority, polling should time and again majority wanted amazon to come. connell: by large numbers. all those polls, you know in minority communities, for example, which is some of the complaints on the other side the polling was very strong.

thank you. appreciate it, good discussion. speaking of tech, apple facing resistance this time from publishers and we'll talk about that when we return on "cavuto: coast to coast." be right back. nah. not gonna happen. that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. 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.

woi felt completely helpless. trashed online, my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender. they were able to restore my good name. if you're under attack, i recommend calling reputation defender. and consider joining their groundbreaking campaign to give every american the right to remove old, inaccurate search results by going to righttobeforgotten.org. vo: if you have search results that are wrong or unfair, call reputation defender at 1-877-492-6705.

♪ >> welcome back to "cavuto: coast to coast." i'm dagen mcdowell at the daytona international speedway, next to seven-time champion, jimmie johnson. >> good to see you. >> 17 years, lowe's went away. was it hard to find a new sponsor? how did you work to find another sponsor? >> we had a lot of options. my 48 car is a good sports property to go after. we wanted the right fight. ally bank has been a right

partner. we kicked off the season with a win. and looking forward with two years for them. >> you new chief. seven championships with your last crew chief. you went winless last year. is it possible to say you're an underdog? mentally does that put you in a better position in terms of your confidence? >> mentally, nothing like success. it breeds the right form of confidence, momentum moving in the right way. last year was challenging for myself, team, even as hendrick motorsports, we haven't had a down year. daytona we had success in the two short races and qualifying event of the we feel like we righted the ship. we're looking forward to a successful 2019. >> you're an athlete in every way. folks who don't know you run a half-marathon on sunday before qualifying. you run the boston marathon. how does that help the mental toughness? a lot of people in garage area

and outside looking how does he devote energy getting behind the wheel? does it help your mental toughness? >> without a doubt. that is one of tools make me stronger mentally. we can't test and practice like i first started. there is a mental component that endurance sports makes me stronger with my day job. >> in terms of integration and involvement in other sporting pursuits, we were talking before the break about skiing, cycling, running, does that help market the sport? you think that would help turn around what has been a pretty long slow slide overall in the sports ratings, attendance, things like that? >> we have a lot of difficult personalities in the sport. every driver is into different things. i tap into the fitness side. i won ap male athlete of the years a few years ago. for myself, a lot of great victories. with the 39 other drivers and other interests it makes nascar

very interesting to a lot of people. >> you're seven-time, if you're eight-time, that would be a record, eight championships. you would top richard petty, dale earnhardt. will you literally be driving until you're 70 to get the 8th championship. because that would make you, tom brady, julian edelman waving green flag, that would make you period, tom brady of nascar? >> it would. i didn't get into this chasing stats. i got into it love to compete. as long as the love and compassion is there to drive. i hope i get eight nine, 10 whatever it might be. we'll see how long the fire stays in me. >> you did, i notice on instagram, i was a instagram stalker, you posted a photo of the mid 90s, doing pit road reporting for an off-road racing series. you said you always wanted to be in the sport. is this a hint jimmy wants to work in tv? do you see yourself doing that? >> i will help host the saturday

race in atlanta. doing color commentary. >> that is a good key. you're made for television. >> i love to challenge myself. i love to work at doing different things. i feel like it. v could be an option for me post driving. there is no need to worry about it now. i have a few years left -- [inaudible]. >> yeah. in, and you. connell: not now? we're just getting started. wow. just broke up. see they were just planning the dagen and jimmy show. did you guys catch that? tv show in the future. the shot breaks up. dagen mcdowell special coverage of daytona 500 leading up to the race, 2:30 eastern time on sunday on the fox broadcast network. more from dagen later on in the day. get to apple now. looking beyond the iphone, facing resistance in doing so. deirdre bolton is here in the studio with something more on that. something we brought up the

earth day. >> march 25th there is apple event out in california, saying two new streaming services will be announced. one is for video, one is for newspapers. if we look to video, apparently apple invite ad bunch of hollywood stars, going down the guest list, jennifer aniston, reese witherspoon, jennifer garner, j.j. abrams. we know apple is working with a couple content creators. connell: this is netflix challenge. >> oprah is one. steven spielberg is another decided to collaborate with apple. no real details on pricing. tried to get that from the company of the nothing, nothing. connell: wonder if they undercut, apple is not known to be chief but they might cut netflix on price. >> netflix is 10.99 per month base kick. premium 13.99. humanly plus, 7.99. we have to assume it will be in the range somewhere. but the other interesting thing, i talked about some of the

original content. one of the big questions still remains, is that original content going to be free? we have apple phones, is that free for us because we have the phones? other people are trying to figure out what services will be able to make a deal with apple. hbo is one of the biggest ones. apple offered 85/15 split. apple 85, 15 for hbo. no thanks we get better terms with amazon prime. don't know if hbo will be on platform. rich greenfield, bgit, he thinks netflix is no for sure on apple -- connell: netflix would be on the apple platform. >> he is saying definitely not. in fairness to him, if he ends up being right, he made that call september last year. >> ahead of the game. that is great. what is the second service? >> so the second service is in theory apple wants to save newspapers. cynics save newspaper business you will not offer a 50/50 split. other people are saying that is

the beginning entry. connell: apple wants to take 50%? >> of any newspaper that agrees to be published on this new newspaper platform. connell: that will be interesting negotiation. >> it will. connell: some newspapers, big ones, "new york times," "wall street journal," "washington post" -- >> they already have their digital model and they're successful. connell: many smaller newspapers are not. could be a lifeline. >> there are people who say listen, the newspaper industry is shrinking so fast that 50/50 is just fine. so we stay in business and get distribution. connell: we got to run. anyway, where i read my papers on independent pad, those three i mentioned. deirdre, good stuff. we'll be back with more "cavuto: coast to coast". y. voya helps them to and through retirement... ...dealing with today's expenses... ...like college... ...while helping plan, invest and protect for the future. so they'll be okay... without me? um... and when we knock out this wall...

imagine the closet space. yes! oh hey, son. yeah, i think they'll be fine. voya. helping you to and through retirement.

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.

and our shirts from custom ink help bring us together. we just upload our logo, and if we have any questions, customer service is there to help. - [male] custom ink has hundreds of products to help you look and feel like a team. get started today at customink.com.

♪ connell: new report from the treasury that shows the government collected record individual income taxes as the debt continues to climb. committee for responsible federal budget senior vp mark gold wine. what does this with record money coming in,. >> we don't have record revenue level. the numbers you're citing don't include inflation. they exclude tax payments, drop in corporate income taxes. revenue is adjusted basis down

4%. share of economy it is lowest it ever been. connell: lowest number on income tax, 1.67 trillion, that is still a huge number, right, we still can't seem to balance things out, the problem is simply a spending problem, is that your analysis? the president talked about growing our way out of debt and deficits today, but what about the spending side? >> revenue is lowest share of gdp with economy this strong. but we clearly also have a spending problem. we passed a huge 150 billion-dollar a year spending increase recently. we're on course to do another one this year. on top of that, our largest spending programs, social security, medicare, medicaid, growing basically uncrowably. connell: give me an idea, give me an idea. sometimes we struggle with it, even on the network, the show and others, how do you make people care about the issues? we've been talking about them forever and ever? what is bumper sticker line says you need to care about this because? >> i can't give you a bumper sticker. next year the federal government

spends more on interest than everything it spends on children. think about it this way, spending more on servicing the past, than investing in the future. that is totally bonkers. that is not what a representative democracy should do. connell: that is not bad. put it on a hat. >> a t-shirt. connell: people go on to the next thing. thankthank you, marc. charlie gasparino, you may hear him piping in, coming up next to talk a little politics with us. and joe biden. you've been reporting on whether or not the former vice president will run. i saw a lot of reporting in other places that he is. >> i want to be clear for the last year i have been reporting he is likely to run, he is leaning towards running. how do i know this? i've been spoking with his don't in? he is very close with people on wall street i have sources, not saying who, but close, they speak almost every day or over other day and they will be his framework for raising money going forward if he goes into it. so i asked him after i saw,

there has been people piping up that he is definitely running now. 99% sure. connell: yeah. >> i asked one of those folks in that inner circle for biden, what is he saying? this person told me that he has, is not fully committed and he is not saying if he is going to be fully committed at any point. it got me thinking that he is really doing a gut check right now. connell: whether he really wants it? >> there is more than a theoretical possibility that he decides not to do this. connell: now the idea last time, we know this, i'm sure most people believe this the reason he didn't run because of his son. >> it clearly was his reason. connell: but now he is, he really is an older guy. it's a tough job. i know the current president, his early 70s. joe biden in the first term would be 80 years old. >> what we reported, about six months ago, that is what he was telling people he would only run if trump ran, because the age wouldn't be an issue. so now we know trump, unless he

gets itch -- impeached or something is not going to happen. connell: he is running. >> he is running. looks like the age issue is not what is holding him back but clearly something else. my guess what is going on in the democratic party. connell: they're going too far left. >> they're going too far left for a liberal like joe biden. that tells you. you have to look at sort of cheering section of the progressive wing of the democratic party. connell: yeah. >> on amazon pulling out of new york. connell: wouldn't have heard that from biden. not like he is conservative guy or not very moderate. moderate on some issues? centrist on foreign policy or and no doubt he is liberal. he has a liberal voting record. connell: being in any way connected to wall street is not a positive in a democratic primary. >> but i don't think, his policies, he didn't stop

dodd-frank from happening, just so you know. dodd-frank happened under biden-obama administration. so remember he has, he has, yes, he has a lot of friends on wall street like him, think he is more centrist than anybody else, he is affable guy, he is not crazy. connell: people support him see him as someone who could win. >> that too. he has friends on wall street that would raise money for him. here is the other interesting thing, bloomberg is weighing whether to run. he is the other moderate. if biden runs my guess bloomberg doesn't run. connell: i spends half a billion dollars on other things? >> i have heard, listen, our friend noelle nikpour tweeted this out yesterday, i heard it as well, that he is telling people that if he doesn't run, his checkbook will be open. we're talking sizable amounts of money. connell: we got to run. that is nothing to mike bloomberg to spend half a billion impact. he has bigger impact.

>> mike bloomberg is liquid at 46 billion. liquid. that he can pull it out -- connell: cavuto money. >> cavuto money. connell: we got to run. right back on "cavuto: coast to coast." thank you, charlie. really helped me up my game. i had a coach. math. ooh. so, why don't traders have coaches? who says they don't? coach mcadoo! you know, at td ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum- just to help you improve your skills. boom! mad skills. education to take your trading to the next level. only with td ameritrade.

state of the art technologyt makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2019 nx 300 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

connell: lot going on today. stocks are up big. higher by 1.3%. the dow, 342 points to the upside. a lot of it seems to be optimism about china trade but we also had that wide-ranging news conference held by the president earlier, where he talked about china, talked about our national debt and talked most of all about national emergency, one he is declaring. the president acknowledging in doing so that there's an uphill battle to come in the courts. >> we will have a national emergency and we will then be sued and they will sue us in the ninth circuit, even though it shouldn't be there, and we will possibly get a bad ruling and then we'll get another bad ruling and then we'll end up in the supreme court and hopefully

we'll get a fair shake. connell: all right. let's bring in steve mulroy, a constitutional law professor. sounds from that we don't even need you. that's the whole timeline laid out by the president. is he right? how do you see this whole thing playing out? >> well, the president isn't very wrong on that and it probably will be challenged in court rather quickly, if he does invoke his emergency powers and it probably will end up before the supreme court. the u.s. supreme court, this supreme court has been very deferential to the president's invocation of his presidential powers on immigration issues, as we can see from the travel ban case. on the other hand, the case law is pretty clear that when the president is acting over the objection of congress, or with congress's lack of approval, his powers are at his lowest. so there's going to be some very fine-tuned looking at the statutes in question to see whether they really do authorize the kind of emergency power that he's claiming. connell: all right.

let's talk about that a little bit. i want to, though, ask you about something the president said fairly early on in the news conference when he was taking questions about this particular topic. he said something to the effect of hey, listen, i don't have to do this, meaning declare a national emergency, i just wanted to get it done faster, wanted to do this faster, meaning get -- i suppose get the money to build the wall faster and i think one of the things that's come up since then is whether or not that hurts his legal argument, that the emergency was necessary. what do you think? >> it does undercut the claim that this is a true emergency. so it would have been better for him legally if he had not said that. on the other hand, i'm not sure it's necessarily fatal because courts are going to be i think deferential to his characterization of the situation as an emergency. i think the true legal battle will be on whether he can use funds that haven't been appropriated for that purpose for this kind of construction

project pursuant to the statutes in question. so for example, there's one statute that does say in an emergency, the president can redirect military construction projects, but it requires that it be essential for the national defense. and there's another that says the construction must be necessary to support the military efforts or you know, necessary to help with the military construction. and i think an adroit lawyer would be able to argue that using this money to build a wall for domestic immigration issue doesn't really meet the language of those statutes. connell: even if you support the policy in place here, from a purely legal basis, even though the president talks about precedent, there is other national emergencies having been declared, many of them still in effect, for this particular use, this particular type of emergency declaration, it doesn't seem, correct me if i'm wrong, as if there is that much

precedent. >> no, i think you are exactly right. the president is correct that there have been many emergencies that have been declared by many different presidents over the last 30 or 40 years since the national emergencies act was passed. president obama declared an emergency about the hn1 swine flu epidemic. president bush declared an emergency after 9/11. but this would be a completely novel use of that power to redirect money to build a wall for domestic immigration issues where congress has already considered and rejected funding that wall. this would be a completely new way of using the emergency powers. connell: we will all watch it in the courts together. thank you, sir. thank you for coming on. >> thank you. connell: one other comment here from the president, talking about how a thriving economy plays into all of this. >> creating such a strong economy, you just look at your

televisions, you see what's going on today, it's through the roof. what happens is more people want to come. so we have far more people trying to get into our country today than probably we've ever had before. connell: bush 43 deputy chief of staff karl rove joins us on this declaration of a national emergency. the president signs the bill that was agreed to in congress, that's one thing, but the actual declaration of a national emergency is another. what do you make of him going this far today? >> well, i think we've got to differentiate on the monies that he's attempting to reprogram and spend on the wall. there are three buckets he's drawing from. 3.6 billion out of what's called military construction, the d.o.d. budget. $2.5 billion out of counternarcotics programs. again, inside the defense budget. then $600 million from the asset forfeiture fund which is held at treasury. now, as professor mulroy pointed

out just now, this is the big problem right here. because it's a big chunk of change, $3.6 billion, and under the law, under the statute, the president can take money for military construction projects that have been approved and use it to spend on military construction projects that are necessary to support the national defense and our military, and that's going to be an issue. i think you put it right. can you say that building a wall to stop immigrants from coming into the country fits the definition of what the statute has. these other two are going to be challenged but the president is on firmer ground. he's taking money from a counternarcotics program and saying i'm going to spend it on the wall and do that in a way that justifies, you know, stopping narcotics coming across the border. then the asset forfeiture fund is allowed for a wide variety of purposes. again, it will be challenged but i think he's on pretty firm footing on those two. the big one is going to be the $3.5 billion out of the military construction budget. connell: let me dig a dill

leapleap little deeper into the defense question. as you brought up, there are legal questions here. i also want to ask about the politics of that. it seemed like that's what john roberts was getting at. help the fir he had the first question in the news conference today. he said mr. president, you are taking this money from the defense department so what do you say to members of the military, military families about redirecting money that was intended to go to other projects. is that a political issue as well as a legal one, do you think? >> well i think that's going to be an issue but look, just the general principle of the president taking money that there's a question about his authority to take it from one bucket and put it into another bucket. we have the u.s. chamber of commerce has now come out against this. we had the "wall street journal" raising questions about it in an editorial today. national review, the leading conservative magazine, has come out against it. a number of members of -- republican members of congress have said we don't like stretching the law. we objected with president obama when he took money and spent it that was not appropriated by

congress. again, the authorities differ so the president is going to, in my opinion, get the $600 billion from forfeiture, he will get the $2.5 billion from the counternarcotics program. the big question will be is he stretching the authority to say building the wall supports our military when clearly, the purpose of the statute is a little bit different than that. after 9/11, on 9/14, president bush signed a national emergency declaration in order to allow monies to be moved within the military budget from less important, less essential tasks to that of removing al qaeda from afghanistan and if need be, removing the taliban from afghanistan, responding to the attack of 9/11. there was no challenge to that because it was clearly any monies that were going to be moved around within the defense budget were going to be spent on the war on terror. but this is another question entirely. connell: say hypothetically, the president doesn't win this battle long run, as it goes

through the courts. wouldn't be the first time he's gone against the chamber of commerce, "wall street journal" editorial page. in fact, many would argue he likes going against those groups, appealing to the people he says put him in office, his base. so does he still win politically, do you think, whether he wins or loses in the courts? >> well, his base likes it but remember, the president can't win alone by his base. in the 2016 presidential election, about 38% of the electorate said i like donald trump and i'm voting for him. 9% said i don't like him but i hate her worse and i'm voting for him. he's got to at least start by getting that 9% who said i don't like him but i hate her worse. he's got to expand that base. every president, he's the only president who has never gotten to 50% in the gallup poll on his favorable ratings. you have to expand your base in order to guarantee re-election. you can't just count on duplicating the miracle of last time around and winning pennsylvania --

connell: there's no riches than reward here is what you're saying? >> that's my view. that's my view. connell: always good to see you. we will see how it plays out in the courts. karl rove. back to the markets. 334 to the upside on the dow. looking for eight strait weeghts of gains. investors are optimistic about china. that's what we have been hearing from a number of them today. we will talk about the odds of a deal getting done and whether china can be trusted if a deal is reached. after the bell, steve forbes will join us 4:00 p.m. on fox business. we'll be right back. this is loma linda, a place with one of the highest life expectancies in the country. you see so many people walking around here in their hundreds. so how do you stay financially well

for all those extra years? well, you have to start planning as early as possible. we all need to plan, for 18 years or more, of retirement. i don't have a whole lot saved up, but i'm working on it now. i will do whatever i need to do. plan your financial life with prudential. bring your challenges.

it's a revolution in sleep. the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now, from $899, during the ultimate sleep number event. it senses your movement, and automatically adjusts

to keep you both comfortable. it even helps with this. so you wake up ready to hit the ground running. only at a sleep number store. during our presidents day weekend special, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 36-month financing. ends monday. sleep number... proven quality sleep very much working very

closely with china and president xi, who i respect a lot. very good relationship that we have. and we're a lot closer than we ever were in this country with having a real trade deal. connell: you heard the president say close to a real trade deal with china. to edward lawrence. who knows more than anybody those participating in the talks in china trade, he's been so deep in it. what's the latest? reporter: my invitation was lost in the mail. right now, the u.s. trade delegation is on a plane back to washington, d.c. both sides describe progress but not enough to finalize a deal. xi jinping joined the talks today, saying he's willing to resolve the issues through cooperation and make an agreement that's acceptable to the u.s. and china. >> translator: i think that so far the trade teams from both countries are working towards this road of consensus.

reporter: this represents an important sign for the talks next week, when the chinese delegation comes here. u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer says some very difficult issues remain. our sources say like how to protect intellectual property and reciprocal market access. trade sources also saying that china is offering non-impactful changes right now. still, lighthizer told president xi that the u.s. is hopeful, because they have made headway on some other issues. president donald trump adding today that a fair deal with china will stop stealing intellectual property. >> we are going to be levelling the playing field. the tariffs are hurting china very badly. they don't want them and frankly, if we can make the deal, it would be my honor to remove them but otherwise, we are having many billions of dollars pouring into our treasury. we have never had that before with china. it's been very much of a one-way street. reporter: and president donald trump adding that he would slide the tariff increase deadline if it appears we're close to a deal. right now, we're not.

but both president trump and president xi today alluded that we could be next week. connell? connell: thank you, edward. edward lawrence live for us in d.c. certainly investors, if you look at the market today, are optimistic about all this. so we will talk about it a little more whether china can be trusted to follow through on anything it commits to here in the next few weeks or months. the coming collapse of china author, gordon chang is with us, market watcher heather zumaraga joins us as well. this is just her warmup. she will be at "bulls & bears" later today with david asman on 5:00 p.m. why don't you lead us off on this idea that edward was using the word hopeful, how people are characterizing the talks. that seems to be how investors are characterizing it, what we are seeing in the stock market. is that kind of the right read, do you think? >> sure. this is a pivotal week for global trade. i think hopeful's a great word. the markets are certainly hopeful. the dow is up over 300 points

right now. industrials are doing very well today. i think technology will also get a boost. the fact that chinese trade officials are also coming to washington next wednesday tells me they are trying to get something done before that march 1st deadline. although an extension is likely, i'm not just hopeful but i'm optimistic that something will get done before the march 1st deadline. connell: gordon, probably the extension is the best bet mere. of course, things could change. what do you think happens before march 1st? >> sure. there's going to be some more discussions next week and they probably will get close to a deal. but the real issue here is whether you can craft an arrangement that stops the chinese from stealing hundreds of billions of dollars of u.s. intellectual property each year, whether you can craft an arrangement that stops them from other predatory trade practices. that's pretty unlikely. connell: you don't think you can, right? you think there's a risk of a deal getting done that doesn't have any teeth to it? >> there's a 99.999% risk of

that happening. connell: that's very high. >> that's very high. okay. so gordon's view, heather, obviously, i talked to him about this a lot. i think it's interesting, yeah, we might get a deal but if it's not worth the paper it's written on, then what? i mean, that's legit. how do we verify this stuff? what do you think? >> here's the problem. tariffs on one hand are helping some companies like they are protecting our steel and aluminum manufacturers. u.s. steel is reopening an alabama plant, committing $215 million and i believe 150 full-time workers. connell: that's a little misleading because the price is going up, other manufacturers are getting hurt by that. >> john deere reported this morning that they were being hurt by the higher prices of tariffs. that's the other side. our farmers and agricultural sector are being hurt by the tariffs. we want those to go away

ultimately. connell: a question of how long this all goes on for. the president talks about billions coming into the treasury. what he very rarely if ever points out is where that is coming from. it's coming from u.s. companies. to heather's point, not from the chinese, it's coming from u.s. companies who often have to raise prices, pass it along to u.s. consumers. as much trouble as china's economy appears to be in, we see it from the data, i wonder how long we can stand it for. what's your timetable until we get to something real? >> well, i think that probably we will only get to an acceptable trading relationship with china when the communist party no longer rules. unfortunately -- connell: you're killing us with this stuff. first the 99.99, then something that doesn't seem promising, either. >> i'm sorry that realism probably is not going to drive wall street higher but you know, we have to realize this has been going on for decades. we've got to realize we have been talking to the chinese -- connell: the market is ahead of itself?

>> absolutely. this is not good for the long-term interests of the united states. you know, we are going to be going through this again and again and again. by the way, connell, most of those tariffs, over 80%, are being absorbed by the chinese exporters. now, that number is going to go down when those tariffs go up to 25% or whatever, but at the present time, trump is actually right. we are only absorbing 20% of the tariffs. the chinese are taking the bulk of it. connell: the chinese in terms of how much money, how many products they are bringing our way, so it's hurting -- they are getting hurt more than we are. >> certainly. connell: the ones that are coming in are paid by u.s. exporters, those taxes. i get your point. we will see how this plays out. gordon says we are overly optimistic. keep that in mind, heather. have fun tonight with david and the crew. thanks for coming on. good to see you, gordon. in a moment, to long island city and a story about amazon. there's a property owner in queens, new york, says amazon

stood him up and now he wants, believe it or not, a nationwide boycott. we will talk about how that would work when we come back. my car insurance so i only pay for what i need. oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no... only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ state of the art technologyt makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2019 nx 300 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

25,000 direct jobs, entrepreneurial opportunities for new york city and new york state businesses, so the idea that anybody in their right mind could think this is a win to scare amazon away, what it's saying is new york city and new york state is no longer open for business. connell: don peebles, the real estate developer earlier on fox business talking about amazon's changing plans and how it will hurt in his view new york, certainly more than it will hurt amazon. anti-business tone is what he was referring to and whether that's growing here in new york city and could cause bigger worries down the line. let's get to kristina partsinevelos over in long island city with more on how the story is developing.

reporter: connell, it was a stunning reversal by amazon. amazon citing most of the reason they didn't decide to open up their second headquarters here was because of the political backlash from local politicians. in their statement they said there was a lack of positive collaborative relationship so speaking of local politicians, earlier this morning i spoke with councilman williams of brooklyn. he has a vote and he said that too many politicians were left in the dark when it came to negotiating the deal. listen in. >> it sounds like don't look at the man behind the curtain. look at the shiny object. we had questions about where the jobs were coming from, what was going to be the average salary of the actual jobs that were created for the people for here. we still had questions like it's great, because people in queens bridge deserve economic opportunity. it's one thing to tell them there are going to be jobs there. it's another thing when you start to dig. reporter: his major concern he told me was the fact that does

this mean you are hiring people that are living here, working here, or do you believe there's going to be an influx of foreigners coming over here to work at amazon. he claims that he is in the best interest of the people that live in brooklyn, live in new york, and as well as long island city. however, yesterday evening, you had mayor de blasio put the blame on amazon for leaving. listen in. >> new york city gave amazon a real opportunity here, and all we asked was that they be a good neighbor and be part of the community and clearly, they weren't ready to do that. it's very disappointing. there was no dialogue, there was no effort to work together. i don't understand it. reporter: you have a situation various politicians giving their take on why amazon left and why it's a win or a loss for the area. what we do know is not only is there going to be no 25,000 jobs, no $2.5 billion in investment, but don't forget, the tax revenue that could have been accrued over the past 25 years was to the tune of about $27 billion. nonetheless, amazon said they

are going to move forward with virginia and work on their space in nashville as well. back to you. logic . connell: kristina partsinevelos, in long island city. with regards to new yorkers who already made plans for amazon to come because that's what had been announced by the company, one already invested over $1 million in his own property and was anticipating amazon coming in. now he joins us in studio. good to see you. is calling for protests and maybe some sort of boycott of amazon, it sounds like you are saying especially what the mayor of new york is saying, this decision is on amazon. why do you blame the company as opposed to the politicians? >> well, basically, amazon had a deal with new york city and looks like they backed out. usually the mayor and governor

cuomo never agree on anything, but they did agree on this, amazon coming to long island city. you know it's a good deal. i'm just upset, i have invested, i borrowed over $1 million, i put into my building thinking amazon's going to come in -- connell: you own a building in long island city? >> right. connell: what was your plan, so to speak? what were you thinking was going to happen? >> i was working on the infrastructure and i'm in the restaurant business. i own two restaurants so i was working on that, and when amazon announced they are coming to long island city, i start toed work on my properties over there. connell: because of amazon. >> because of amazon. connell: property prices went up, right? >> i started putting all my capital into long island city and now i'm left holding the bi bill. connell: you get the sense those prices go down right away? >> absolutely. we expect like 25% decrease in

value. we will have vacancies, the tax revenue would have been billions. that small amount they were giving amazon, we would have got it back every year and for years to come. connell: you think the quote unquote investment, these tax incentives, to you that was 100% worth it? it wasn't given away, corporate welfare and all that, you were all for it? >> you have to leave this to the business people to handle. politicians getting involved trying to make a name for themselves. connell: that was my first point. why blame the company? no one was forcing amazon to come here. one of the largest companies in the world run by the richest person in the world, can go wherever they want. they said we don't need this nonsense, all this red tape in new york. we are out of here. maybe it's on the politicians. >> i think you got a great point. you got to leave this to the businessmen to handle this. de blasio and cuomo know what they're doing. they made a great deal for new york city and just 100 jobs lost is a lot.

25,000 jobs that we're not going to have, all this for the restaurant industry, vacancies. connell: it's not just the people there. boy. some day. it surprised a lot of people. good luck obviously with the restaurant business and what's going on in queens. thanks for coming in today. >> thank you for having me. hopefully they can resolve this and we can get them back on the table. amazon, come back to long island city. connell: you never know. you never know. never say never, right? thanks for coming in. more in a moment. we will talk about facebook and whether or not they could face some big-time fines. record u.s. fine over privacy. that stock is down more than 1% today. we'll be right back. [nondescript dialogue]

what would it look like if we listened more? could the right voice - the right set of words - bring us all just a little closer, get us to open up,

even push us further? it could, if we took the time to listen. the most inspiring minds, the most compelling stories. download audible and listen for a change.

gerri: welcome back to "cavuto coast to coast." i'm gerri willis.

samsung in a samsung's fit and galaxy fit-e, two fitness bands with watchband rubber straps, inadvertently leaked. the actual unveil comes february 20th when the company unveils its tenth anniversary galaxy s-10 phone which was also leaked, by the way. big news from pepsico. the company plans to shed jobs and close plants over the next few years as the company restructures. the maker of mountain dew, quaker oats and tropicana orange juice forecasting revenue for 2019 that will rise 4% but earnings will fall by 3%, they say. finally, the new york stock exchange slapping the securities and exchange commission with a lawsuit over the regulator's plan to test market maker rebates to customers. in an editorial today in "wall street journal" the nyse president wrote the pilot program amounts to an

unnecessary exercise in government price setting and na the pilot will undermine the ability of market forces to drive capital formation. the s.e.c. gave us a no comment today but the regulator has reported large [ inaudible ] had complained about the rebates. back to you. connell: gerri, thanks. interesting. meantime, "the washington post" is reporting facebook could be facing a record fine in the u.s. over privacy. lauren simonetti joins us from the newsroom with the latest on that. reporter: good to see you. "the washington post" is reporting that facebook could be facing a record u.s. fine over privacy and are negotiating with the federal trade commission now. this is for their privacy misconduct. they are not commenting on the report. they are cooperating with officials in the u.s., the uk and beyond, have provided public testimony, answered questions

and pledged to continue our assistance as the work continues. basically the same statement they have been giving for about a year. the paper says the fine could top $2 billion. for perspective, the largest fine the ftc has imposed on a tech company, $22.5 million with an "m" penalty against google, seven years ago. this latest potential settlement comes at a pretty critical moment. the ftc waging war against silicon valley to protect user privacy and facebook is working to do the same while saving its own reputation in the process. investors seem worried about the potential scope of all this. you have an up market today, you have facebook shares down 1.5%. they are down 6% since march. that's when the ftc began probing how facebook harvested data on some 87 million users for the political consultancy, cambridge analytica. so these are the options for facebook. they could pay this fine and

probably make some changes to the way they do business. they could fight the fine, likely ending up in court and putting their top brass on the witness stand. you know how those awkward moments go. but either way, facebook has known that any potential violation of a previous privacy deal, 2011 deal reached with the ftc, they could see fines of up to $40,000 per user per day. that gets you to wore manmore t billion. connell: i thought that was random how you stopped in the middle, like you know how those awkward moments ago. you talking to me directly? reporter: to you directly, connell mcshane. connell: this is awkward. lauren simonetti -- by the way, looking at the dow, as we go to break, apple is down in a big-time up market. up 327 on the dow. when we come back, are the democrats in shape to maybe defeat president trump in 2020?

new data on that. we will talk about what the latest fox polls are showing, next. this is decision tech. it's screening technology that helps you find a stock based on what's trending or an investing goal. it's real-time insights and information, in your own customized view of the market. it's smarter trading technology, for smarter trading decisions. and it's only from fidelity. open an account with no minimums today.

and it's only from 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.

they want to try and win an election which it looks like they're not going to be able to do, and this is one of the ways they think they can possibly win

is by obstruction and a lot of other nonsense. connell: president trump a little bit of everything today in what turned out to be a news conference in the rose garden, there sizing up his chances for re-election in 2020, talking about optimism surrounding the economy, but is it enough to boost mr. trump into a second term? let's go to some data in terms of what voters have been telling fox. the polling shows a majority think democrats have a chance to beat him. the big question is, who would that democrat be who has the best chance? democratic strategist jessica tardoff joins us. she's not running for president, i don't believe. james freeman maybe, he's "wall street journal" assistant editorial page editor. >> i turn 35 next month, though. connell: so there's optimism, this date is always interesting. like yeah, he can be beaten but you will have 20, 25 candidates onstage.

what type of candidate are we going to get? it looks like if you are just looking at the democrats, how we are sizing them up now, the risk is they go too far to the left. isn't that fair? >> the primary is definitely going to be conducted on the left. it's where the general election is fought. those numbers are going to come into play. i would ask on the fox news poll, trump supporters, 15% said they would like to see someone else besides trump at the top of the republican ticket. definitely the fringe is where it's at for fighting in the primary. connell: who can beat him? >> i think joe biden can beat him. kamala harris can beat him. i'm a huge sherrod brown fan. amy klobuchar has huge ideas that will satisfy a general election base. elizabeth warren has ideas that the american public likes. they might not necessarily like her as much as they like the ideas she's putting forward. connell: we had some data, we were talking about it the other

day, one of those candidates the president actually speaks about, when i say speaks, tweets about the most, is elizabeth warren. that tells me he wants to run against her. >> i think he does. i think the nicknames, the taunting, he sees that as a good matchup. she basically needs to update the message. she sort of has an argument about the economy circa three, four years ago, and doesn't really fit our current prosperity. but i have been thinking for awhile he's going to get re-elected not because he's suddenly going to become highly popular, but because the democratic nomination process is kind of built to produce a candidate who is unacceptable to most people in the middle of the country. >> it did produce hillary clinton out of the bernie sanders primary, and -- connell: she lost. >> she did lose -- well, she lost by 77,000 votes in three states. jill stein got more votes in each of those states. i understand. i'm saying there is a way to have a candidate who is more moderate that comes out of this

primary that can win, because people were also taking a chance on donald trump. now that they know what these last few years have been like, there are a number of people who are not interested. connell: the data shows he's beatable. the question is who do they nominate. want to talk about howard schultz and how he plays into all of this. we have data on the former starbucks ceo. it's not good from his perspective. over 60% of voters either never heard of him, have no idea who he is, or don't have any opinion about him. i know it's early but if he does decide to run, looks like uphill battle here. what do you think? >> i would disagree. because those numbers, you normally would say that's a big problem, he has no name i.d. he has the money to rectify that. so what he doesn't have, looking at the good side, because he has the money to introduce himself to the american people, is he does not have a lot of people hardened against him. he has a lot of gettable voters if he decides he's willing to accept this intense scrutiny and

a lot of criticism from people on the left, he can introduce himself to a lot of people who might be open to him. connell: it's interesting to see how this all plays out, just from watching some of the comments he's made himself, howard schultz, trying to read between the lines, it seems like if he runs right now, you know, the polling's not there for him. he wouldn't really have much of an impact. but say to james' point he spends a lot of his money and gets to the point where he is having impact, if that's the case, he might not run because he doesn't want to hand the election to donald trump. >> that's the concern. i used to work for doug schoen, michael bloomberg's pollster for a long time. connell: you don't work with him anymore? >> i love everything about you. no. i have a great job now. but the point is, michael bloomberg, if he does get in, is getting in as a democrat for exactly this reason. because he doesn't want to throw the election to donald trump. there's a fallacy in american political discourse about what being an independent means. independents are less

left-leaning, more right-leaning. he is left-leaning but he is going to a town hall saying i don't see color which is certainly something that the progressive base of the democratic party has no interest in hearing. a lot of left-leaning independents aren't interested in that either. i understand the idea he was trying to get at, we should live in a society where we don't judge people based on color, but it seemed he was denying the systemic challenges that face people of color. for someone who actually grew up in the projects, that was incredibly surprising. >> we'll see. i don't want to let a political segment go by without talking about aoc. i think we are required -- >> we already did. connell: brought it up at the beginning. since we have been focused on data, look at some numbers for alexandria ocasio-cortez, the freshman congresswoman from new york. speaking of uphill battles, for as popular as you think she is, 26% or as you hear she is, 26% favorability rating, jessica. so i know the energy's there. the social media energy is

there. but that's a low, low number. i was a little surprised by that, for all we hear about her. >> politicians are not popular generally speaking. but it doesn't seem to be commensurate with the level of influence that she has and the impact between the green new deal and what just happened with the amazon deal which we can also look at our state senators here in new york. for killing that. she is focusing on one track which is to get as many progressive policies in front of the caucus as possible. i don't know what she's going to do in terms of supporting the democrats in primary, more moderate democrats in 2020. i hope she doesn't get in on that. connell: i thought on the amazon thing, for someone who is said to have her pulse or finger kind of on the pulse of what's going on, that she seemed a little off base numbers wise. this is a highly popular deal whatever you think of it on a personal level. she was out there against many of her constituents, at least by the data, who actually support it. i don't know. >> the amazon debacle, the poll numbers, they may be a wake-up call for democrats just like the

schultz candidacy is, i think. but this green new deal that she's pushing, i mean, this seems almost designed to alienate swing voters in the industrial midwest that democrats keep telling each other they have to talk to. they're not listening. connell: yeah. good segment, guys. thanks for coming on. >> have a good weekend. connell: good luck with the run. >> i'm raising money if you want to send it to my twitter account. connell: all right. consumer sentiment rising in february. we talk about that and more. we'll be right back. each day our planet awakens with signs of opportunity. but with opportunity comes risk. and to manage this risk, the world turns to cme group. we help farmers lock in future prices, banks manage interest rate changes and airlines hedge fuel costs. all so they can manage their risks and move forward. it's simply a matter of following the signs.

they all lead here. cme group - how the world advances. onmillionth order.r. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order? ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪

opportunity. what we deliver by delivering. make us better people.istening has the power to change us, with audible, you get more. two audible originals- exclusive titles you can't find anywhere else. plus a credit good for any audiobook and exclusive fitness and wellness programs. all with our commitment free guarantee and always ad free. the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories. . . .

>> what i'm thinking of doing. is getting chuck schumer, getting nancy pelosi, having them bring two or three of their brilliant representatives and we'll all go down together and what we'll do, we'll negotiate, i will put them in the room, let them speak up. because any deal i make with

china, if it is, it will be better than any deal ever dreamt possible. connell: sounds like a party, right? president earlier today call for nancy pelosi, chuck schumer to join him, hypothetically in a china trade negotiation. let's bring in lee speakerman to talk a little bit about that. that would be quite the scene, right, lee, mar-a-lago, wherever this ends up happening but brings up a serious point on this china trade deal, what is the risk for the president? not getting a deal or not getting a deal tough enough where a chuck schumer or democrats could go after him in 2020, what do you think? >> i'm a lot more worried about the country than i am whether schumer or pelosi goes after the president. there is a huge risk we can make a huge deal. china is stalling for time. we need the march 1st tariff increase to go into effect. that is crucial. that is when they will get

serious. connell: seems like the president is hinting at an extension. did you hear him today? blake berman asked him the question, if we're close maybe i won't go to 25% the 1st of march? >> i hope that doesn't happen. i hope we do have the tariffs go into effect. as bringing nancy pelosi and chuck schumer in, maybe sherrod brown, democratic senator from ohio, i like that idea. number one it ends the blame game. we need united front on trade with china. number two, probably means we won't have a deal, which i think would be much better for our country, why is that? >> there is no way we can sort out the industrial policies, subsidies, currency manipulation, at that is impossible to police. we need permanent tariff, i recommend 15% on all inports of china. that would yield over next 10 years, trillion dollars for the treasury. a trillion dollars is enough --

connell: problem with that, is that it is not, it is not coming from china. we talked about this a million times. it would yield money because u.s. companies pay a tax on that. essentially at some point consumers would pay a tax on that? >> gordon kang in one of your previous segments pointed out, 80% of the tariffs have been paid by -- connell: he is saying absorbed by because the chinese are not exporting as much. >> less profit. connell: less profit for the chinese companies. >> that means less profits to chinese companies. >> my point we're shooting ourselves in the foot. >> no, he means they are not passing 80% of them along. they are eating them in china. the reason, connell that is so important is, that our trade deficit with china is funding chinese military, funding research they're doing on a.i., artificial intelligence to overtake the united states. we are literally sewing the leads of our own destruction. why in the world would we use a

trade deficit to fund the chinese military. connell: thanks a lot. >> okay. connell: million things we could have talked about there. anyway we'll see how talks go throughout the next few weeks or months. if the deadline is extended. charles payne. it is yours. charles: i thought you did talk about a million things. connell: i got to you exactly on time. charles: you're the professional. when they say how to hand it off, bring up connell mcshane. connell: in the little book. have a good show. charles: good afternoon, i'm charles payne. this is "making money." the market flourishing as art of the deals begin to work magic and bear fruit. major progress with trade talk with china. president trump says the negotiations are going very well. the president sign as compromise spending bill that avoids a government shut down, but gives him far less funds than he wants for the border wall, which the white house says they will address using national emergency powers. will that hold up in court? we're get being you