we've been up and down a little bit today. bottom line we're at 25,600. we're down just two points. with any luck we'll go absolutely dead flat by the time i head to my colleague neil cavuto. almost there, neil. it is yours. neil: the pricing around lyft, if you think $72 share range, even at that you would valuation higher than unite the continental and host of others coming out of the gate. we'll keep a close out on that as they sort of dot the independents, cross the ts, can you do that with numbers any just said they did. that is something everyone wants to focus on because that goes well, or at least debuts without any glitches, all this backlog of other ideas delayed because of the government shutdown can continue. whether theriault -- theriault

bustly received. president will be going off to michigan tonight, another campaign event a rally. keeping in theme with other rallies. we've been following the president's scheduling where he goes. interesting report in "the new york times" today that those this president spent about 82% of his time at the white house, he has visited 38 states but the lion's share have been these so-called maga rallies, make america great rallies, in some 40 locations last couple years that included nine visits to missouri, nine visits to west virginia, eight to texas, eight to north carolina, very strong bases of support for the president. he likes to sort of whip up the crowds. the crowds are fired up for these events. the backdrop of course is the president saying essentially he got a reprieve from the mueller investigation in the past. no collusion and no obstruction

of justice. on that latter point a number of key democrats are disagreeing on added confusion to that, whether the attorney general barr recommendations or outlines of that report, 300 page plus report was accurate. so until that report ultimately comes out, you're going to see this back and forth continuing. to 2020 campaign strategic communications director for donald trump mark later, and "washington examiner"'s kelly jane torrence. this is chance for the president tonight as he often does, to rally the base. but is rallying the base enough? you get a sense very good at this, getting rip-roaring crowds at that but not branching outlined that base, beyond it? >> that is a great question, neil. i do think he needs more than that president trump should be

riding high right now. he should be happy. it doesn't seem like he had a plan for what he was going to do if and when, he knows his campaign did nothing wrong the report was going to exonerate him. i'm not seeing the president, white house at large has a plan what to do next. they can't keep talking saying no colouis. now the american people want the president and republicans, working with the democrats, perhaps, to get something done. the only thing i've really seen donald trump mention policywise since the mueller report was sent to bill barr, is health care. and i, personally i think that is a big mistake. the republicans had a huge failure on health care. it is one of the reasons a lot of people think they lost the house. they spent years campaigning to repeal and replace obamacare. not only did they not do it, they didn't have a plan in all those years what they were going to replace it with. now donald trump wants to be the party of health care. i'm hearing they still don't have any sort of plan of what

the republican was want to see in the health care sphere. neil: you're right about that. maybe health care was way to put pressure for republicans to come up with something and history a little spotty. marc, do you think that is mistake? this president says they come up with something better, easier to do since he is not a fan of the obamacare health initiative, if you don't have something ready, that is best not to talk about it or -- >> i think there are two things here. first the president campaigned on repealing and replacing obamacare. came up one vote short in congress a few years ago but there are still these legal challenges. and so there is the opportunity to get the burden of obamacare gone and replace it with something better but you should also keep an eye on what is going on from the administration doing what they can do. last year the average price of prescription drugs fell in this country for the first time in 46 years.

so the president is delivering on the promise to lower prescription drug prices. he is going to protect preexisting conditions. he has been absolutely clear on that. now we need to get, if we can't get it done in congress, the courts will do what they should have done in the beginning, get rid of this unconstitutional program to be replaced with something -- neil: you get rid of it 20 million people would be without insurance. i'm sure there are protections set up for them whatever is set up out there, but are democrats you talk to willing to help in that regard? >> not necessarily. my sense is, this is really a gift from the president who had an opportunity to be owning a message this week, but for whatever reason he hopscotching on to a message something the democrats have been successful on including 2018. overall people are pretty happy with the state of the healthcare although it needs a lot of additional improvements.

even mow my colleague says the president would protect preexisting conditions but administration is striking down the entire law. i don't think a move politically for the president to take on right now when he could be talking about the issues like the economy. neil: kelly, the president's trip to michigan, a state he won, talking to a friendly crowd, by and large, presidents like to see friendly crowds not all the time now. the fact this president travels so much, so often to states that tip the scales for him, is there any risk in not going into the lion's den or states locales where they might not flip for you, to take them on, state your case? is there a risk just preaching to the proverbial choir? >> there is, neil. face it donald trump won by a pretty small margin in 2016. i know he talks about it being the greatest victory, but it was

relatively close. you can't just stick with what you have because of course he is probably lost some people due to many so of his performances in the white house. here was a great opportunity, right, with the mueller report apparently, saying that there was no collusion. said it according to bill barr. here is an opportunity for the president to reach out, a lot of people who actually might have liked a lot of republican policies, liked a lot of president trump's policies but they were nervous they were hearing for years evidence of collusion. that didn't happen. this is great opportunity to reach out. neil: i might do something about that. marc, obviously the president is planning additionally a trip to california. he will talk up the wall and borders that work in california, particularly southern california. he will raise a lot of money. all presidents do but i'm wondering how you see the message shifting now, especially when a lot of americans polled on the subject think that the mueller probe was fair, it

started out in their perception kind of mirrored the president it was a witch-hunt. not as strongly as his view, but we don't know entirely about the obstruction of justice thing. i guess that could be in the eyes of the beholder. how he handles it and addresses it with crowds, how do you think he should do that? >> he is going to state the facts, there was no obstruction, no collusion, basically the american people had been lied to by many democrats and their allies in the mainstream media for two years. but he will also run on his record, going to michigan tonight, just in the past few weeks you had 7,000 auto jobs being announced in that state. remember, under the previous administration they thought those manufacturing jobs were going away, they were gone forever. it would take a magic wand. president would bring manufacturing back to michigan, back to pennsylvania. he is also taking a victory lap on that. he is taking that message to people in michigan, in pennsylvania, in wisconsin and other places and when it comes to speaking out on other issues

he will also go to go, talk to the republican jewish coalition and leaders there. he will branch out. while the democrats destroy each other for the next year or so among their 20 candidates, the president will be talking about his record, basically unchallenged for the next year-and-a-half right through election. neil: you know, i'm wondering, zach, what your take is on that? there is confusing response on part of the democrats post the mueller report release. now we don't know that, we're just going on attorney general barr's, sort of points taken but, they don't know how aggressively to pursue impeachment, if at all, certainly holding hearings, that is a given. i'm wondering whether the party itself will heed the advice of some leaders like nancy pelosi and steny hoyer, host of others who said, go on to big issues you were alluding to earlier? if they're stuck on mueller, stuck on russia, and stuck on maybe obstruction of justice

which might or might not be in the final report, apparently there is not enough to swing it either way convincingly we're told, so how do you think they respond? >> i think it is, that is an absolutely fair question to ask. i think congress has oversight role. i understand why it is congressman schiff and others doing what they're doing realistically, the mueller report hadn't moved any votes either way. i haven't met a democrat saying they are waiting for mueller report to change their mind on trump and a base voter. this election is will be won in the industrial midwest. i think it is smart to be in michigan and wisconsin, pennsylvania, couple other state in that area. if democrats want the white house in 2020, they should talk to voters in that area much less than the president. they are more focused more on their own economic interest than

what the president is doing. now that the report is done, we haven't tale seen it, until something is turned in, time to focus on big ticket issues. the reason i think which won in 2018 and the reason we will win in 2020 if we elect to take it. neil: the dow is down 28 points. nothing is rattling them, ongoing trade talks. they resumed today in china. chinese vice premier comes to the united states to go return the favor, put a capper on it next week. meantime, the president as i say getting ready to head out to michigan later on. speaking out on the not only mueller matter but jussie smollett saying it's a national embarassment. now the feds are involved. where is all of this going? after this. i'm working to keep the fire going

for another 150 years. ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪

i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

we're on the move. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. terminix. defenders of home.

i can customize each line for soeach family member?e yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers, and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need, and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. and now get $250 back when you buy a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today.

neil: all right, the president is outraged, not about the long mueller saga hopes is finally resolved right now but the jussie smollett case. he calls it outrageous. it just seems over the top. the host of "the liberty file" on "fox nation," judge andrew napolitano on that. if the feds are involved, judge what does that mean? what is the next step? >> there are two probably federal investigations. the easier one, mr. smollett, himself, did he engage in mail fraud? did he put a fraudulent instrument, a fake threat in the mail? chicago police said yes he did, he basically mailed the letter to himself. federal prosecutors is this type of thing to prosecute? is it a state crime with federal window-dressing. that is the judgment call the federal prosecutors do make. if they prosecute him, he will

face 20 years. he will not get a deal like he got from the state's attorney. the second federal investigation is of the state's attorney herself. now yes, it was out ridge just, yes, it was unorthodox but outrage and unorthodox sy are not the legal standard. the legal standard is, was it corrupt? meaning did she receive something of value from someone in return for exercising her discretion to have this crazy ending of the case? something of value, means something of monetary value, not a political favor. i don't think that investigation will go anywhere. we'll see what the feds come up with. the president's comment that it is outrageous is one shared by almost everybody in the country. i will add to that, profoundly unjust but i'm not surprised. the political system in illinois where prosecutors and judges run for office, where they compete for campaign funds from the same lawyers, where they regularly trade favors with each other, where this type of seminole --

smollett event happens all the time because we don't know it because the defendant is celebrity. neil: last time i talked with you made a little bit of news talking about the president who is already saying he has been exonerated on everything from collusion to obstruction of justice. it was on the latter that you were not entirely convinced? >> i'm actually not convinced on either, neil. if you read the attorney general's letter carefully, he is a very bright lawyer, he carefully chose his words, he said bob mueller, was quote, unable to establish a conspiracy. to prove the existence of conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. he must have found some evidence of a conspiracy, if he found none, that would have made its way into bill barr's letter. neil: could could conspiracy is all contacts with russia, that is the unprovable part right? >> correct.

the issue of obstruction of justice which mueller kicked the case upstairs which prosecutors do, when the target is a public official, here the most public of officials, the president, there is obviously evidence of obstruction of justice and there is evidence of no obstruction of justice and mueller wanted barr to make the judgment call which he did. now the question comes, what will the attorney general reveal? will he reveal the entire report, or will he as the federal rules of criminal procedure say he should, hold back evidence for people who are not prosecuted? that means the president. when jim comey went on national television three summers ago and said we're not going to indict mrs. clinton but we have very serious evidence against her, here is the evidence, he broke those rules. you don't reveal evidence about a person not being prosecuted. will bill barr do the same thing, will he in the interest of this rapacious appetite everybody has for what's in there, reveal it all? the president says he wants it

all out. the president should look at it, i think some of his opponents will have a feast on some of the things that's in there. neil: you mentioned the attorney general and nancy pelosi said that the whole barr memo where he outlined i guess in three or four pages what we now know 300 plus page report, that he was condescending. that the house doesn't need his interpretation. so let me ask you a dumb question. was it necessary for him to do that? it goes to him. did it have to go to him and did he have to give the bullet points as he did? >> first i didn't find it condescending at all. second his job is to interpret the law. it is not binding interpretation. he is the not the court but chief federal law enforcement officer. neil: if mueller took offense to any characterizations i we would hear from it. >> i would think so. yes it did go to him. report written for attorney, not for the congress, not for the president, not for the public. the attorney general under the court rules, federal rules of

criminal procedure decides what to do with the report. he -- neil: democrats, i actually knew that, i asked you a question i knew, i do that sometimes. >> that's a good lawyer. never ask a question unless you know the answer already. neil: that is the extent of it. i don't know the answer but i will say why were democrats surprised at that or feigning surprise that is what he was going to do, right? >> some people interpreted the report to say there is no evidence of collusion and no evidence of obstruction of justice. that is political interpretation, not a legal one. the democrats are looking for what evidence is there so that they can, as they are permitted to do under the constitution, second-guess mueller and second-guess barr as to the meaning and value and quality of that evidence. neil: so if you don't have enough evidence, either way, you know, you make comments like, the president is neither exonerated on this or not, it makes you wonder about the

report itself when all said an done. both side will leap on stuff that might not be there? >> yes. if both sides don't like what's in the report, however long it is, guess what is below it? that is the millions of pages of actual raw evidence which, by the way is never revealed publicly when there is no prosecution. you're going to see pressure to have that revealed. neil: let me just get your take on this. when this comes out, when adam schiff was making the statement he still convinced of collusion, paraphrasing here, that prompted republicans on panel to say you have to go, you got to resign, he is not resigning. just taking him at his word, would he be aware of something that mueller wasn't? >> i don't know the answer to that but i think that congressman schiff is correct in that report will be evidence of the existence of a conspiracy, not enough evidence to prove the existence beyond a reasonable doubt. in that report will be evidence of obstruction of justice,

interfering with an fbi investigation for a personal gain but not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. congressman schiff wants to dwell on that. if he has other sources since he is the chair of the house intelligence committee, he has to decide when and under what circumstances to reveal those sources. neil: so on the collusion part, we do know that the russians were very interested in mucking around with our election. >> no question about that. neil: they had a number of meetings with trump personnel back in the day but that the, the quid pro quo, where trump people had to work with them to get what they wanted to do, that did not evidence itself, right? >> we have seen no evidence of that. what's in the report, what's in the raw evidence remains to be revealed. neil: that is a page by page deal that, that is a long day, right there? >> yes it is. i'm ready for it, neil. neil: i know you are. i know you are. judge, thank you, very, very much. in the meantime brexit just got

messier. think of what she's doing? the prime minister is saying i'll leave, i'll leave if you do this one thing for me. they want her to leave, they hate her. they want her to go. they're not ceding to that. by doing that, not ceding to changes they want, they don't like her, they don't like the way she is and a navigating thee waters. she want win for love money on. it is getting weird. after this.

reporter: welcome back to "cavuto: coast to coast" i'm gerri willis from the floor of the new york stock exchange. the tech sector up 18% and on pace for its best quarter in

seven years. facebook, amazon, ranking as best performers for the three months with netflix leading the way as original content push gathers steam in streaming. "bird box" drew oscars. steady drip batched news, mostly surrounding privacy. facebook came in number with 26% feign. apple, google microsoft posted strong quarters. apple shares up 19% despite worries about iphone sales. all of this as nasdaq led all major averages coming in 15% higher for the quarter as the dow posted a 9% gain and the s&p was up 11%. neil, back to you. neil: gerri, thank you very, very much. you heard the trade talks are back up in china. edward lawrence with the latest from washington.

hey, edward. reporter: neil, u.s. trade representative and u.s. treasury secretary trying to revitalize a trade agreement. they lad a working dinner with the chinese on thursday and full date of meetings on friday. reuters is reporting that the chinese put more on the table and went farther than it has in the past. we were the first to tell you about the new foreign investment law that goes into effect on january 1st. it makes it legal for agencies and employees to demand intellectual property. at issue in the law how it will be enforced. that is not the been spelled out exactly although the chinese premier says fines will be doubled for stealing intellectual property. white house economic advisor larry kudlow speaking today in washington says the u.s. would remove some tariffs on the chinese while leaving other tariffs in place as an enforcement mechanism to make sure the chinese follow through. keeping the chinese to their word is the goal of u.s. trade

representative robert lighthizer. he testified a number of times that enforcement will be a big part of that trade deal. neil? neil: thank you, edward lawrence. charles payne the host of "making money," so much more. everything kind of hinges on this trade deal of late it seems. the better it looks, worst stocks look. what do you think? >> not so much. it does, what i like about this whole thing, it is taking, i don't mind it takes longer, right? neil: you want a good deal. >> exactly. irony, folks are saying hey, don't rush it and now they're saying, what is taking so long? neil: the view from a lot of wall street, get something signed because they don't like that. >> my view personally, wake me up when it is done. really i'm being honest. there are some other thing going on right now i think sort of sucks the oxygen out of the room especially for investors we should be focused on. i don't like when the guys keep

talking. i love larry kudlow, but please don't talk about the china deal. ross, don't talk about it. you have principles over there. let them do it. open scuttlebutt and conjecture means nothing. neil: you do live for wilbur ross holding a can? >> i love wilbur about anything, especially the slippers that he wore one time. neil: that scares me. the sense of the latest economic data. you get the view maybe housing is slowing down a little bit. gdp in the latest quarter was a little less than we thought. it wasn't 3% growth as some would hope for the year. where are you on this? do we have anything to worry about or we were just getting ahead of our skis? >> i'm optimistic, even today with the revision in the gdp. if you looked at the revision, government spending was up .4. this time it was down .4. i think you hit the nail on the head. the fragility in our economy is still housing. residential investment in the quarter was down 4%.

4.7%. but if you look at the business side, which is important because, remember, a lot of people were saying that this china trade deal has stopped businesses from investing. so we saw dip in the third quarter, but nice improvement in the fourth quarter. a very strong improvement. now what we're seeing in the first quarter of this year, at least, you know, listen, this could be all over the place but yesterday the atlanta fed was 1 1/2% for the quarter. two weeks ago they were at .2 of 1%. so as -- neil: they're like the rodney dangerfield, right? they're nuts. they are all over the map. >> i think the idea though is the trend, is that the economic data that's coming in, you know, it has been much better than we anticipated and some of that could be pent up stuff missing from the fourth quarter. that is how this works sometimes. neil: so you don't dwell on it too much. sense of inverted yield curve, regailing me yesterday, so happy you were, oh, no, neil, not 10 days, yet, but it is weird how interest rates across the globe

are dropping. you know, they were down a little bit here, still very, very low, considering the strength of the economy, that could presage something down the road. are you worried about that? >> i'm just not right now. we benefit to a large degree of all this money coming from around the world to our treasurys. that is pushing safe haven down. not necessarily a indictment or harbinger of bad things to come here. i think as much of the fact we're so attractive, when you borrow money from germany, tough give them money to borrow money. neil: that's weird. >> why not, if you can get a few extra bucks in america. neil: is it telling to you, i mean of a 3-month bill, yielding more than a 10-year note, if you know the drill on that, saying something about angst? >> i think it does say something about angst, more about the angst outside of this country than necessarily inside of this country. neil: pattern of that previewing a slow down or worse you don't buy that? it is just different? >> it is not, hasn't hit those

areas yet. typically has been the two versus the 10, and it has got, certain things have got to happen. neil: you don't see that? >> it hasn't happened yet. i really caution -- neil: hasn't been 10 days. >> it hasn't been 10 days. here is the thing i like to caution investors on, if you're a long term investor you have to be very careful making moves on something that could, might, perhaps, you know, let it happen. the recession won't happen the next day. in other words, if this is a sign, this is a signal, and you believe, okay, you know what, perhaps next 311 days there could be recession you -- neil: we had -- not as if they're not going up? >> right. they come and they go. i think more -- neil: hold them long. don't go day day by day gyratio. i am still believing in the market. will stick with this long term what is the long term to charles payne? >> long term is, could be the

next three months to the next 10 years. neil: wow. depends, for me what is important is, is that, for instance, today, hottest stocks in the market are all consumer driven. lululemon up big. neil: phillip van heusen is up big, five below is big. 2/3 of our economy. seven months in a row blue-collar wages are up. more than five months in a row more than 3%. that is the magic number, i think the most important thing happened in the last couple weeks that jay powell making distinction that wage inflation is not price inflation. that is something the fed always acted on. as soon as inflation went up, put the speed bums out there, derailed the economy. they're the ones triggering recessions. not necessarily inverted yield curve but the fed and others acting on the data. i really love where joy powell is going. let it run. let it run. we're seeing something remarkable right now. maybe some of the old rules

don't apply. maybe some of the old rules in the 1970s and 1980s don't apply. there are forces pushing prices down. it is called the amazon effect. we have a company going public tomorrow, losing billions of dollars. it is hottest stock in the market. neil: that is incredible. >> they're all pushing prices down. dynamics are changing. neil: none of that is frothy to you? >> on an individual level, i'm going to talk about that today. i'm not sure i would chase lyft out the gate. just like i wouldn't have chased snap and i didn't chase snap out of the gate. even facebook fell apart the first six months. still, to distinguish that from other things that i'm seeing, i just don't see it it is in overbought situation. i see the economy in a place where it hasn't been in a long time. i think it can continue. i hope no one derails it. neil: good words. you and i differ definition of long term.

long term is lunch to me. >> no. the data changes tomorrow, long term was right now, yes. neil: i hear it. charles payne, thank you, my friend. >> thank you. neil: not only a close friend a good human being he is scary smart. i mean scary smart. he gets emersed in these details, a lot of us remind him, you know -- go for a walk. no, not charles. we'll have more after this. what's the hesitation? eh, it just feels too complicated, you know? well sure, at first, but jj can help you with that. jj, will you break it down for this gentleman? hey, ian. you know, at td ameritrade, we can walk you through your options trades step by step until you're comfortable. i could be up for that. that's taking options trading from wall st. to main st. hey guys, wanna play some pool? eh, i'm not really a pool guy. what's the hesitation? it's just complicated. step-by-step options trading support from td ameritrade

neil: boeing releasing software update, a patch it is called for the 737 max 8 airline. we have faa commercial airline pilot anthony roman what this could mean. what will this address, anthony, could you explain it to me? >> sure it addresses five fundamental things that are critically important to the safety of the aircraft. there are two critical attack indicators on the outside of

fuselage and the back the plane. they measure angle of the plane in relations to air it is passing through. if one of those sensors malfunction, the mcas previously activated the knows down pitch, if the pilot fought with it, trying to regain control, it automatically reset itself in the background and pitched down again. both of those problems have been fixed. now the mcas is connected to both angle of attack indicators and if there is a discrepancy between the two, one fails, one is operating normally, the mcas system will not engage itself. in addition to which they softened the recovery that the mcas system is designed to help with. basically, the pitch of the aircraft will be much easier, much less of anion gel. so, the mcas system will now allow the pilots to recover at a more reasonable rate without

struggling with it. neil: so, anthony, do they have to scramble, read a manuel while this is happening or us did the software fix, you know, remove that? >> well, those failures that we have encountered so far are fixed and remediated if the software fix has been done properly, got it. >> in addition to which the manuel in the aircraft is much more robust describing the mcas system, and the emergency procedures to recover from any malfunction. most importantly what pilots have been screaming about all across the country is computer-based scenario training on the mcas system, followed by practical chaining for emergency recovery. absolutely essential. neil: i got you. anthony, thanks as always, i appreciate it. facebook by the way in the news again, charged by the government not over what it is doing about privacy, but what it

did to interfere with housing? after this. i'm working to keep the fire going

for another 150 years. ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

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. neil: facebook has another government issue to deal with, not over privacy, but over housing, specifically housing discrimination. i know it sounds weird. hillary vaughn to sort out the details. reporter: hey, neil.

sources at the department of housing and urban development that are bringing this case tells me facebook is not the only platform they're looking at to make sure tech companies are not using user data to help advertisers discriminate against entire classes of people. sources familiar with the case, changes facebook made to their site in the last week do not adequately address the full scope of the problem. hud secretary ben carson telling fox business's maria bartiromo this morning that they are pressing charges because facebook allowed housing advertisers to exclude users by drawing a red line around entire neighborhoods that they did not want to see their ads, even letting them discriminate based on gender, blocking men or blocking women from seeing certain posts. >> to use this in an advertising forum and a platform where you can discriminate against people, you know, advertisers had the ability to say, i only want to advertise to women. i only want to advertise to

non-christians. you know, this kind of information, most people don't know has been gathered on them. reporter: facebook says they are surprised and disappointed by the charges because up to today they have been negotiating with hud in good faith to settle the issue, saying in a statement, quote, we've been working with them to address their concerns and have taken significant steps to prevent addition crime nation. while we were eager to find a solution, hud insisted access to sensitive user data information without adequate safeguards. sources familiar with talks say these charges come at opportune moment for secretary carson. he is headed to the meeting to the hill with lawmakers. they think carson wants to hold this up, what he has been doing at the agency, cracking down on discrimination. neil: interesting. he has been criticized for not doing much. i see where that comes. whoever is right, this will be a

front burner issue. hillary, thank you very much. i want to talk about freddie mac and fannie mae that kind of thing but get the read on this from charlie gasparino and tim rood, the former fannie mae executive. charlie to you, going after facebook with housing this could get very messy. >> going after social media is bipartisan i guess, is good for both parties. i mean the elizabeth warren types will go after them on the privacy side. trump and the administration will go after them on different issues, this is kind of right in ben carson's wheelhouse. you have to realize on the right, people really believe these companies like facebook are discriminating against conservative voices. any way you can go at them they want it to be done. that is why he is doing this in my view. on the left, it is privacy stuff. you will see that happen. if you own these stocks, i mean one of the things you have to, put in into the equation of owning these stocks is political risk. the powers that be on both sides, both the trump people

and -- neil: to your point. >> they want to get them. neil: i do want to move on, tim, if you let me, former fannie mae executive and latest executives to take fannie mae and federal reserve chairman janet yellen out of conservatorship, get them running again, the devil is in the details of course, where do you think this is going? >> i think this is going in the right direction. i hope this is step forward getting fannie mae and freddie mac out of conservativeship. this is due time. president gave a directive to the treasury department to come up with a plan to get them out of conservativeship to invite competition. this is nuanced topic. how to build capital, how to get the treasury out, settle multibillion dollars lawsuits, you have to leave and clear the deck for congressman to get a long-term plan. neil: they dodged anyp punishment from the meltdown. >> governor put them into

conservatorship. fannie and freddie they are involved in a business, that no private business wants to do, extend, make sure working-class people can get 30 year mortgages. remember that. that is what they do. they are public companies -- neil: they don't do 15 year? >> not really. they buy mortgages from the banks, doing that, creating liquidity, package them and allows banks to make 30 year mortgages to people that wouldn't get them otherwise. neil: they're more viable entities than people selling mortgages. >> but here is the thing you have to ask yourself. how, from a public policy standpoint, is it good to have two companies that are publicly traded, their profit oriented companies, that have this sort of government, sort of welfare state mission? and that is what got them in trouble the last time. i know what tim is going to say. make them like utilities, like con-ed, they have so much capital, all the other stuff. just remember, that was the initial case to making fannie

and freddie they were like utilities but then activists get involved. henry cesnaros, andrew cuomo, forcing fannie and freddie to essentially expand homeownership to the world. that helped cause the financial crisis. there is no doubt about it. i don't know how -- neil: do we even need them, tim? >> mark calabria, the new fha chief says we don't need them. >> what do you think of that? what would the word like? >> i think fannie mae and freddie mac would be perfectly happy getting government out of their pocket? >> no government takenty? who would buy the their bonds? >> think about this, four years ago, one the billionaire investors in fannie mae and freddie mac has a lawsuit, enough already. i will give you $50 billion for these companies. i don't want your guarranty. give me enterprises. government's position, if smart money is willing to buy, we're not willing to sell. >> who is going to buy the bonds of a company that run as business that no one else will

run? neil: housing needed, do you think housing needs it? >> that is whole another story. neil: is it fundamental to strength of housing in this country particularly with hiccupping of late? >> here is the issue. there is plenty of competition. there was tons of competition for freddie mac and fannie mae leading up to the housing market. 40% of the market was private capital. now that the government has taken them over, juiced their credit fees twice, basically doubled credit fees there is no competition. you're looking basically, a red herring. the issue is not government. dodd-frank act. neil: charlie, tim, thank you both. i wrapped because of charlie speaking. commercial break. okay. .. so, jardiance asks...

when it comes to type 2 diabetes, are you thinking about your heart? well, i'm managing my a1c, so i should be all set. right. actually, you're still at risk for a fatal heart attack or stroke. even if i'm taking heart medicine, like statins or blood thinners? yep! that's why i asked my doctor what else i could do... she told me about jardiance. that's right. jardiance significantly reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event for adults who have type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. that's why the american diabetes association recommends the active ingredient in jardiance. and it lowers a1c?

yeah- with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. a rare, but life-threatening, bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, what do you think? now i feel i can do more to go beyond lowering a1c. ask your doctor about jardiance today. so they say that ai will put the future in the palm of our hands. that's great. but right now you've got your hands full with your global supply chain. okay, france wants 50,000 front fenders by friday. that's why you work with watson. i analyzed thousands of contracts and detected a discrepancy. it works with procurement systems you already use to help speed up distribution without slowing down your team.

frank, tell fred full force on those french fenders. fine. fine. fantastic. for ai that knows your industry, choose watson. hello! the best ai for the job.

neil: the president is off to michigan. some colony of the three lap for him post the mueller report that seems to have exonerated the president when it comes to

pollution. democrats differ when it comes to things like obstruction of justice that of justice through the back and forth on that continues. editorial director with us on these developments. ship was not satisfied with the full report saying he thinks it still pollution. republicans on his panel say that alone is the latest example of why you should go. where is this all going? >> well, depends on whether or not the president keeps talking about this and specifically if democrats keep talking about this. earlier this week nancy pelosi urging her caucus to move on to policy. stop talking about collusion that this is over. that's where we need to maintain our focus in a clear sign she clear sign chinos going into 2020 and two presidential elections that the last thing her party needs is to be distracted by something the american people made their mind up on what is one that collusion is not there appeared we found that from bob mueller and they agree it's a witchhunt. you saw the recent polling here

from "usa today" showing how the country, 50% agree with the assessment is with a witchhunt. cbs and they believe this was politically motivated the mueller investigation. as long as democrats talk about it it's going to hurt them going into the election. trade do not think cbs poll shows three out of four americans show is a fair process. i'm wondering if that part maybe can get delivered to some democrats who summer fearing even within the party that nancy pelosi and steny hoyer are worried about this and they can move on. you could go of her conclusions come et cetera but she's to move on. >> in the end here, and the push to make this report go public as something of a field of landmines for democrats that they were not expecting. the reason of course they want to report to go public as they are looking for vulnerabilities for the president. they want to find a sentence that suggest there is some form

of collusion or need to spend more time looking at. the problem is americans have made up their mind. this is all nonsense even the democrats make it out chasing down the rabbit hole it will be to their own detriment and that's where the president's going to keep focusing on this. you see this tonight in michigan he will litigate this before the american public and his supporters. nancy pelosi and democrats looking at the long wednesday we need to get away from collusion. they don't even care what's inside this report. >> democrats doing that right now, but a lot of people among the republican party say the president might have overplayed that with this it to relax and out of the blue may be a gift by addressing health care. maybe a meritorious goal but reminding folks republicans are big on getting rid of obamacare but not coming up with a replacement.

>> there's no question. democrats are happy to have a health care conversation. the president bring it up earlier this week. democrats are quick to seize because they realize that the territory they feel safest in. indication in the 2018 that they felt like there were bolstered with the reclaim the house. so those who are looking up is strategically about what it means an electoral victory for them want to talk about policies and not trump and collusion. tree into thank you very, very much. adam schiff defending his stance on collusion. take a look. >> i do not think that conduct criminal or not it's okay. the day we do think that's okay as the day we will look back and say that is the day america lost its way. i don't think it's okay that during a presidential campaign mr. trump sought to consummate a real estate deal in moscow that would make him a fortune.

i don't think it's okay that his attorney like to work committee. there's a different word for that than collusion and it's called compromise. neil: but to be fair yesterday he tried to dial that not in a wave of criticism that such he sort of went way beyond this issue. and maybe it wasn't being a fair arbiter. republicans urging that he resigned. of course that's not going to happen. i do want to get to read from u.s.a. communications your josh. very good to have you. >> thanks for having me. >> where do you think this goes. it was not it was nice if republicans are urging us unanimously on the committee that adam schiff resigned that he would. the politics of this still plays out and will help to improve the reading of the formal report. >> there's no way the shift is going to resign in a shed and

then republicans know that. this is an attempt to put tanks on the sidelines that is a very effective investigator. neil: do you think you should? >> no i don't. the clip you showed he goes on to say there is a difference and i'm paraphrasing here, evidence of collusion which judge napolitano just said on your show agrees that existence proof of conspiracy. those are two different things and part of why we do need to see this report because it does probably include evidence of collusion and definitely has more to say on the question of obstruction which it did not exonerate the president on. >> are the same token on the collusion that there was indeed to go after the president on collusion with a look at conspiracy, collusion would have you, apparently not enough air for mueller to take action which is why some top democrats are singing -- they're not saying

that specifically, but we ought to just reprioritize your focus on some of these economic issues and maybe take advantage of this gift the president actually gave us on health care but move on and cool it on hearing an impeachment otherwise. what do you think? >> i think it's a bit of a false choice. it is 100% true we need to talk about the economy can be focused on health care. that has been our message to voters for the past two years. it is to continue to be our message to voters through the next year. neil: would you argue there were some rabid members in your party who do not subscribe to that? >> i don't think anyone who says we should not talk about the economy to her voters. congress also has a constitutional duty to continue oversight of the executive branch and that includes the mueller report and launching new investigations and the more corruption -- >> a lot of people polled showed half of them think it was a witchhunt and dr. foster still

pushed down in the face of public sentiment that is weary of it, is not risky? >> i think republicans are riskier. they're very much at risk of overplayed their hand and looking like they are struck and any oversight of the president. one of the big factors in the 2018 election was voters want to check on donald trump and that's one of the reasons why they voted for a democratic majority in the house. neil: democrat shrewdly pushed health care when republicans thought that was a wasted effort. i think that is what got the most of those 40 seats. so i'm asking about getting sidetracked. we don't know what's in that report. we don't know how it will be interpreted. it's very clear nancy pelosi's take on that it was condescending. do you buy that, do you agree with that? >> i think it is not the attorney general's.

it's not up to him to interpret what mueller found. the 300 page report sitting there with a lot more information than we've seen which could -- neil: if it goes to him first in the road is chomping at the bit to find out what's in there, who else would give those bullet points? mueller would have corrected him, right? >> have not seen the bullet parts are wrong. we don't know. especially in the instance of obstruction for mueller was acting under the current doj guidelines of the president cannot be indicted. we don't know whether he intended the attorney general to make the determination or congress. it's up to congress if you believe the department of defense cannot indict the president. only congress can do that. congress needs to see the underlining evidence to make that judgment. neil: if congress finds that they do not and if you think they find something in the report and were to pursue

impeachment based on what they read into that report has been an impeachable offense, do you think that would be a constructive development? >> it depends what's in the report. if mueller found this beyond a reasonable doubt that he couldn't do anything with it, that is very different than here some evidence for come evidence against, you make a determination. trent dickey made that determination. i don't have enough to go after it appeared that kind of like a jump ball is in it? >> you're ready. it is sort of almost no matter what is in the report, our plan before the report was going to talk about the economy. her plan after the report is talk about the economy. neil: have you ever seen a case for either party can do that? >> yes, this week. house democrats straight in the affordable care if a lawsuit

demanding the full mueller report be released. they are doing both. last cycle there was a regular push on investigating the president talking about health care and the economy. neil: you don't think you'll tipped too far the other way but the focus and everything else will be on hearings that might yield something, might not when the party wants to be known for pursuing some of these answers to america's problems and that never gets addressed. >> now. most voters are not like you and i sitting and watching cable news are sitting on twitter. they are looking at what's happening in their community and they'll hear headlines about what's happening in d.c. it's different than what candidates on the ground are talking about the the local news is covering. neil: when you see the people who think enough already. >> in the polar don't remember the president is lying about this stuff. very much mixed results.

we want to continue this investigation and see what comes of it. we can't lose sight of the fact and democrats have not lost sight of the fact we need to be a primary focus for we talk to voters about the economy, how donald trump's policies have hurt american families economically and what we can do to improve their lives. neil: who's going to be the democratic nominee? >> no idea. neil: someone who's a more moderate influencers who are more hard left. >> that's why we have a primary. but it's what the voters decide. neil: that's a brilliant answer. thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. the case but has the feds involved in the president of the united states speaking out.

itso chantix can help you quit "slow turkey." along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix. you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life- threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.

ifor another 150 years. the fire going ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

who we are as people and making everybody feel welcome. ordering custom ink t-shirts has been a really smart decision for our business. - [narrator] custom ink has hundreds of products and free shipping. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com.

neil: i wanted to shift a little bit from pollution to cash because the house oversight committee is already moving in that direction, seeking tenures of the president's financial directors to chat pergram and where all this is going. >> cave bear. you have a lot of committees looking at this because they believe that might've fallen outside the specter of the mueller report. if you look at the president's business dealings there might be things they are the outside the scope mueller was looking at. that is something that can go on for a while. or shoot up to leave and al green, they have been talking about impeachment. they were introduced this idea at a press conference yesterday. they went to the judiciary committee to look into this. what they're talking about is the emoluments clause that prohibits the president during a public official in the united states government from taking gifts or favors from foreign governments. they kind of framed it around

now. al green said the president does not have to be convicted of a crime. that might play a little bit in the face of some portions of the constitution. but al green insane if we think there's something they did wrong we can still go after him and i specifically went to al green inside doesn't the mueller report undercut which are trying to do right now and he said, quote, not one scintilla. neil: wow. no matter what they get on this. chad, thank you very much. chad pergram. lyft is already getting ready to be priced. the company in the last year about a billion dollars. you don't see that often with a big initial public offering. everyone is on this one and everyone wants a piece. what does it mean after this. from the start, the c-class was ahead of its time.

still, we never stopped making it stronger. faster. smarter. because to be the best, is to never ever stop making it better. the new 2019 c-class family. visit your local mercedes-benz dealer for

exceptional lease & financing offers during the mercedes-benz spring event. going on now.

neil: are right, but if things right, a lot of things going on

right now including china trade talks in beijing. economic adviser larry kudlow say the u.s. would remove some tariffs while leaving others in place. the read for market watcher gregg on all of this. what do you think? >> i think we've got a long way to go. i've been arguing the last few weeks the markets have been too euphoric about getting a deal. we didn't have a mar-a-lago ceremony at the end of march. i think it's going to take until june before we get a final deal over going to get one. neil: obviously the longer you wait the more substantive you hope that dealers. we are getting word the chinese are open to making offers on foreign technology firms in transferring not, some say stealing not been getting more access to the chinese market. that would include investment, banks, what have you. they kind of have to use this in the past, but it's got to be part of a final deal, right? >> absolutely. there was a story overnight on the reuters website and they

think they're getting closer. you press up to and lighthizer. i think the final sticking point is going to be to you have a mechanism whereby you certified compliance. that is going to be a tough one. neil: it's interesting. i do know she think of it that i read a lot of the european press as well. foreign firms, any firms trying to do business in china by what the president is doing right now with his team in china. the irony is they been critical of his approach say that they strong-arm approach that they'll benefit from it. >> although i would doubt they are still apprehensive about an auto tariffs. trump has not dismissed the idea of a 25% tariff which the germans in particular would really be unnerved by it. the president has to realize most of these cars are made in south carolina and tennessee and a 25% tariff would be very

unfortunate. neil: that's his threat and he never intends to deliver that. but if you were -- let's say this gets pushed back to june, july. what do you think? >> i think as long as there are still signs of progress with the north koreans the north koreans come at the markets will be patient. the markets may realize that trump might want a china deal just as he begins his reelection campaign. i would argue by labor day he'll be in reelection mode. a deal later in the summer would make some political sense. neil: that's interesting. good chatting with you. thank you. we are written initial public offering mode here and the biggest one being lyft. an ipo in the 70s remember when they were first talking about this is in the 30s, 40s and then last week may be in the 60s. 62 to 68. whatever the case, we are looking at something with the

value north of $20 billion this is for a ride sharing company that over the last year of lost a billion dollars. the idea being that it can make a lot on the road. revenues can be easily doubled. $2 billion has great potential but great risk, too. david mccabe on not. you understand better than nine standing room only crowds, people very jazzed about it. what is it about this that's creating? >> what you know, obviously there's been a lot of attention and hype around the rideshare space for the last several years. services have gone from curiosity to the tax industry in the cities where a lot of people live. i think that lyft is trying to tell a story about being focused and ready to get on the path to profitability. tree into there was a mixed rate on how you play these things.

good luck at your average investor getting in on the offer itself. we learned in the case of facebook when it collapsed after its offering that it sometimes can behoove you to get it a little later after the dust settles. how do you think investors ultimately play it? >> you know i think that sort of remains to be seen as you said in the lead up to this. but i do think obviously investors are looking very quickly to see how the company moves towards profitability on significant losses for their whole existence. and they're both counting on this idea that they can get to some sort of scale and they can get to autonomous vehicles fast enough to turn it into a profitable business. neil: someone referred to it as another amazon in the week country making but only with wheels. as i'm losing money was beefing

up its operations, put a lot into its infrastructure to get ready for what it is today, abc mess. the leaf seems to be shorter on a lot of these offering. nevertheless they're going to be rolling out a host of others. how do you see it all sorting out? >> you know, the big question people are asking now is does it tell some sort of bubble among ipos bubble among ipos. unprofitable tech companies are going to rates that match 1999 in 2000. we all remember what happened. more broadly to cover up uber "businessweek" today was about whether or not this sort of ipo highs this time will proceed market top for signal a market top which is what we've seen in the past. that is the accent are here. uber, to interest go public. the question is does it herald a darker time for the economy. tree into or the contingent people feel look at what these

guys are worth now. but what they're doing. i may be better go public myself. we will see. david, thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. neil: brexit, debray quite that can break away right now. deirdre bolton has the greatest details they can get this thing done. >> the very latest on this just happened 15 minutes ago. theresa may essentially split the two key components of her plan into two and so parliament is going to vote tomorrow on one part of that. the part of that is officially the divorce from e.u. the part that i don't know when anyone is going to vote is on trade so we'll come back to that at a future date. tomorrow there will be a vote just confirming the uk's divorce from e.u. one kind of trivia fact to note here is that tomorrow, march 29th, was actually the original brexit date before the

extension was offered until the 12th of april. last night we were following us. members of parliament basically seized control from her to try to find a solution and they didn't find anything. they came up with the suggestions. not one of them got enough votes to pass. there was one that was close an oddly enough it was pretty close to what she's been proposing all along and it was essentially about trade. however it didn't pass we've got to move forward on it. teresa may have suffered this kind of sweetener of sort when she said no matter whose plan is put into place i'm going to step down. with that in place a lot of pundits say there were some politicians who were resisting her plan because of their own political ambition and now the fact she said fine am going to step aside to those who want to go for being prime minister can go for it like lots have been speaking about boris johnson said he would love the job and

incidentally a. worst-case scenario tomorrow the u.k. either toward the crusher for a no deal brexit on april 12th and most economists say this to be the worst-case scenario because trading agreements can the u.k. come e.u. citizens travel, medical supply shortages are very possible and likely. it does seem after yesterday's exercise for all that alternative plans failed that teresa may may have a little bit of luck and tomorrow's vote. neil: will watch it closely. thank you very much. now you know things are getting worrisome when the fbi is involved. they are reviewing this whole trend for case and the prosecutor to the case still defending it. after this.

metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i'm relentless too. mbc doesn't take a day off, and neither will i. i treat my mbc with everyday verzenio, the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. verzenio is the only cdk4 & 6 inhibitor approved with hormonal therapy that can be taken every day for post menopausal women with hr+, her2 negative mbc. verzenio plus an ai helped women have significantly more time without disease progression, and more than half of women saw their tumors shrink vs an ai. diarrhea is common, may be severe, or cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms include tiredness, appetite loss, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising. blood clots that can lead to death have occurred.

tell your doctor if you have pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain, rapid breathing or heart rate, or if you are pregnant, nursing, or plan to be pregnant. common side effects include nausea, infections, low blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. i'm relentless. and my doctor and i choose to treat my metastatic breast cancer with verzenio. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio.

but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?

i think there was a legal expert who is putting at well over $100,000 worth of manpower just to investigate the claims of jussie smollett. let's get the rate on this firm attorney katie czajkowski. judy, good to have you. with the feds involved now, that obviously changes this case. so for the prosecutor what does that mean? >> well, it doesn't change the case in the sense that chicago is done with the prosecution. they said they are not blaming for it. there was originally an ongoing fbi investigation. now there is a doj investigation into potential corruption in the states attorneys office. so there are potential outcomes that we don't know yet.

practically speaking, i don't think that jussie smollett is going to face any consequences. neil: if these charges are all drop and asserted his innocence and although rats in the prosecutor's office is not her dream not as much as stating that he can move on. does he have grounds himself to sue the city? >> you could try to move forward with the lawsuit against the city. i think i would be very ill-advised at this point as we've seen fox has maintained the prosecutors have sufficient evidence he couldn't move forward a trial. a grand jury issued 16 felony indictments against him. i don't think he has any real possibility of prevailing in that sense. to the extent that the prosecutor's office are on different pages, they would've been lullabies to get everyone in the same page before issuing this kind of deal.

neil: maybe you can help me with this and i'm sure you asked this a lot, how this could happen but more to the point how it could happen without the chicago police or the mayor's office knowing that it was going to happen. i mean come and take out when does this by all accounts by the press conference that was planned. >> exactly. this is a completely unprecedented sort of situation and that's where a lot of the anger comes from it's very understandable. to a great extent, america is seeing what my clients in the criminal defense will have seen for years. there is no accountability for making false allegations in a lot of respects. the prosecutors do have discretion to move forward with cases are not going to enter into different types of plea bargains and deals. but when you have a prosecutors say we have enough evidence to prosecute, the right thing to do is to put before a jury and maybe dream for would have been acquitted and vindicated at that point but that would've been the

proper way to go through the process and this is a real slap in the face to a lot of people who've gone through the system and happened to nice i allegations for example. neil: if the argument is in the cook county prosecutors didn't exonerate him, the 16 charges crucial and raised by the police department are dropped, that sure sounds like exonerating someone. kim fox we decided that we don't need to do anything about this. we could've wanted to. that's just not how people are treated across the board. to the extent that this decision was supposedly based on the fact mr. jussie smollett does not do history. he does have a history during a dui address years ago. one class for felony time 16. the kind of justifications that are offered are not satisfying

because they are not genuine. i think that this is just simply a case of privilege. it's simply a case of getting something no one else is entitled to in the real slap in the face to the dems in other people in the system that want to believe there's some sort of fairness out there. neil: can there be federal charges when all is said and done? just dodged a bullet when in fact you're looking at something far bigger. >> he can face federal charges. when the doj decides to investigate, theoretically they're going to investigate. we have mail fraud for supposedly sending hate mail to himself, which could constitute crimes. will he face any thing for that? i don't know. i don't think it's going to be some that typically rise to the level doj would be interested in or because of the notoriety of the case potentially. more importantly the state attorney's office in a corruption investigation will be much more interesting to see what happens in that realm.

neil: katie, we will watch it closely. attorney joining us out of vermont, california. joe biden is in a worry of controversy over the hearings he was chairing back in the early 1990s. regrets what was said and done and that anita hill didn't get to hear and she deserves. now many democrats are saying that's a problem. you're the problem. the problems that keep popping up for joe biden. after this. our grandparents checked their smartphones

zero times a day. times change. eyes haven't. that's why there's ocuvite. screen light... sunlight... longer hours... eyes today are stressed. but ocuvite has vital nutrients... ...to help protect them. ocuvite. eye nutrition for today. ifor another 150 years. the fire going ♪ to inspire confidence through style. ♪ i'm working to make connections of a different kind. ♪ i'm working for beauty that begins with nature. ♪ to treat every car like i treat mine. ♪ at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for. ♪

neil: alright come easter. we are told around easter, which i think is the third weekend in april by which time we are told that joe biden will be formally making it official and announcing he's going to run for the presidency. again, this keeps getting pushed back in the interim things.com to haunt him include in his own words going back to the days he was chairing the clarence thomas hearings and he regretted in retrospect the treatment of anita hill. that prompted some pretty sharp reporting. i just want to quote from danielle -- she was hanging

guess you could have done something. he spotted this problem in 2017 and then again during the brett kavanaugh. she goes on to say he truly refers to joe biden wants to apologize. he needs to take responsibility for his past actions. if he doesn't, voters have to believe he's not a same person that facilitated anita hill's torment in 1991. in other words, a base is sane enough of the words of apology coming from you. >> age has always been a challenge for joe biden. neil: more territory to cover. >> it will come up whenever he gets in the campaign over and over just to record on issues. at a time when the norms in society were much different.

neil: but you're right, and age is an issue. my very young producer reminded me i shouted in my ear, you've got these other people here. i'm wondering, obviously joe biden is the one everyone talks about. the one who can close the deal. more and more stuff like this comes out. i regret saying that vice president pence is a different guy. i wonder if this would implode on them. >> i don't think it's going to implode on them and they made most of the candidates who are running then i spoke to device president recently. the democratic party has a bunch of different issues that everyone has before we can go through check box and climate change and health care and then reform and immigration reform in

income inequality. but the number one topic is going to be who can be president term. all of these things decide they check all the boxes. all 15 candidates somewhere in the spectrum. someone like joe biden today is the front runner in today's quinnipiac poll because he's deemed the one with the best recognition, but more importantly deemed the one who can beat the president. neil: that's hillary clinton in 2016. >> am only responding because were 300 days away from iowa. almost 600 from the presidential election and you're right in 2007 when i was backing barack obama at 2%, hillary was that extra 5%. so you're right, things will change. today he's been a pretty good position because name recognition when you have people running. neil: but i wonder to what degree because of the more focus on what you've done through the trouble being an older candidate is there's nothing wrong with old by the way.

it's a record that goes back to times when they were very commit very different. >> unfortunately all those positives can be negative. people can say he has a lot of experience. he knows what he's doing. you can flip them and say he's old and there's all these things he may have said or done in the past spanning back much further than candidates you connected. he is seen as a front runner and does have the most name recognition. he has to face tougher media recognition as new stars that people like to write profiles. mayor pete, check him out. that's the perfect kind of candidate for someone to write a about that's nice and more creative rather than trying to take someone down. neil: he's gone through the controversial thing seaside. today wanted to talk about anita hill and how you handle that and make an apology for that.

and if they were to believe this one left-leaning writer, you're being patronizing. >> it will still come out still come up in every debate in just about every interview he does will have to keep answering over and over. whoever it is doesn't have those issues. and the other thing that is interesting and robert is obviously right that the number show at the last fox national poll is 47 and that matches up better than any of the other candidates. >> nationwide? >> i don't know how much value but when you compare it to everybody else is in a much better shape. we are looking backwards and a lot of democrats may be one of them would say biden is the guy that couldn't be trump the last time around. well day one of his campaign whenever that is be the best. neil: he can raise a lot of money, but he wants to out someone. >> i don't think that's going to happen. i don't think anyone will raise

more money than someone or bernie sanders because what they're doing online which never seen. that being said there is at least a candidate and no one is ever front runner. joe was at 20% so when we talk about front runners, he's really in many ways the placeholder. >> a lot of polls he has the largest share of the vote, those don't have an undecided option. the number of the share of the vote diaz goes down. >> pubis at my office last week. they're like dick clark. our party pics done in

aspirational. >> there hasn't been a president since over the age of 53 cents before john f. kennedy. >> and then you come in and that is where you are. >> we have no clue. barack obama is concerned enough for getting a message out to some of those are the candidates. the big goals are great, but you've got to pay for them. >> you still have to win the blue wall. my gut tells me they're not supporting the greener deal or some of the other issues. we have seen with president trump would have to be a lot of takeback wisconsin and pennsylvania and michigan like we did in the midterms. neil: we'll see. those are three key states won and provided to the electoral but terry. when they come back here, the battle against targeting the rich right now. a popular saying they don't pay

enough in improving and rapidly rising percentage of americans agree we do not esteem that they are rich. after this. style, ♪ ♪ but to fit in those shoes gonna take awhile. ♪ ♪ today life's got you runnin'. ♪ ♪ tomorrow big things are comin'. ♪ ♪ that's why nationwide is on your side. ♪ ♪

. .

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. neil: you know the crowded democratic field, what issues will galvanize the field, one of the consistent issues, taxing rich more. higher individual income tax just a wealth tax, name it. in the latest fox poll this seems to be gathering steam and certainly more than it did a couple years ago. back with connell mcshane and kat timpf and robert wolf. i wonder if republicans ignore that at their peril? >> we live now socialism is not a scary word. particularly a lot of people around my age, they like this idea. they think it is mean not to want the rich to pay more.

rich are evil, demonized having more money. this is actual something scares me personally because the redistribution of wealth idea is not something that scares people anymore. neil: that is pretty clear lately. when you take socialism out of it, talking about paying for college, robert, helping with "medicare for all," all of sudden not nearly as controversial. those sound like great things, that is something candidates are espousing. >> neil, you and i may be only one here during the '80s with reagan-nomics. neil: amazing you made that assumption. >> supply side economics is not working, trickle down is not trickling down. no disrespect to the great tax cuts. it has not worked. the middle class don't feel wealthier. neil: they are wealthier than during the obama administration. >> i don't feel they benefited

from the tax cut. neil: you feel given the record low, unemployment levels among key demographics groups that something president has democrats can't argue? >> i think low unemployment is great thing. we should be clear i want wages to go up. but we're talking about public policy agenda. neil: that frustration will turn to democrats? >> that frustration is real. we cannot ignore it. so my opinion is trickle down is not working. it hasn't worked president polls well generally on economy, questions of the economy. handling the economy. those are the probably numbers. internal numbers, poll referenced taxing the rich. trend is not his friend to surprising degree. if you think, look at president's success in the economy, he talks all the time about deregulation and tax cuts. year ago, march of 2018, he was plus two on taxes, approval, 48-46. now he is under water, minus six

on that issue of taxes. >> connell that is not surprising because the republicans ran away from the tax cuts in the midterms. >> you're right. >> they did not support it because -- neil: they also ran away from issue health care. risking doing that again by the way. >> absolutely. donald trump said that republicans will be the party of health care but they kind of had a shot to do that already. neil: repealing and replacing. >> you should have done that with control of everything. now you have to work even harder. neil: don't have something to replace it with. >> you can't just repeal and nothing to replace it with. ii want to know show me something. show me something. neil: you seem impatient. >> i am impatient. i'm paying them with my tax dollars. show me something. >> i agree with kat on that one. neil: hope springs etern that we can get together. we'll exploring a lot more at 4:00 p.m. on fox news show, lindsey graham. get his take on president and

his views, whether he could stomp on what is otherwise positive message. mccain comments all of that. coming up with the dow up 52 points. turn to my buddy charles payne. hey, charles. charles: good afternoon, everyone, this is charles payne. they continue to proceed with caution. trending water, still looking for a catalyst. we open higher on combination of stronger earnings and positive reports about the latest round of trade talks with beijing. since then scuttlebutt is on tis mick and pessimistic. facebook making headlines, for all wrong reasons. social media giant is facing charges of housing discrimination while google is accused of being too cozy with the chinese. we're all over tech companies behaving badly. all that and more on