right at this desk. they should have never allowed that to happen. so it will bring a lot of things back. i think it will be great for the united states. i think it's going to be hopefully really good for china, too. it's going to be good for everybody. yeah. [ inaudible question ] >> we have things. we're talking intellectual property protection and theft, talking about certain tariffs. it's very important that certain elements of the tariff threat is in discussion right now. we have a number of things but we also have agreed to far more than we have left to agree to. and in fact, i would say, i think i can say that some of the toughest things have been agreed to. we have some things that are actually easier right now that we're doing. but it's a very, very, using a word i don't like using too often but it's a very, very comprehensive deal.

it's very complete. we discuss everything, we talk about everything. when we first started people said well, you'll never talk about intellectual property, or you'll never talk about a vast array of elements. every one of them is not only talked about but highly negotiated and whether it's our farmers or our technology people, all of them will be really happy and i think china is going to be very happy, too. reporter: what's your plan right now on tariffs? what would you like to see happen with tariffs? >> i don't want to say that to you but i will be discussing that with the vice premier in about five minutes, as soon as you leave. but a lot of good things are happening. a lot of really great things are happening. i think very important is the relationship with china is very strong, probably the strongest it's ever been, yet we are negotiating a strong deal but i think our relationship is at a point that's about at the highest it's been. that's not a bad thing. that's a very good thing.

[ inaudible question ] >> well, when you say negotiation, he's a very tough negotiator and so is president xi. it's so nice when i see the fentanyl because that's been so -- we lost 77,000 people due to fentanyl and that was a very important thing and i really appreciate it. and this is before the deal is done. this is something that china's doing before the deal is done. i think you're going to see a big impact, a tremendous impact. reporter: what kind of benefit will it bring for both countries? >> say it again? reporter: if there is a deal, what kind of benefit will it bring for both countries? >> well, i think it's going to be great for china in that china will continue to trade with the united states. otherwise it would be very tough for us to allow that to happen. we are by far china's biggest

trading partner. they are a tremendous trading partner the other way, too, from our standpoint. but it will be a great deal for china because we are going to continue to deal, we are going to continue to have a relationship in terms of trade. otherwise it would be very tough to do that in a large way, as we have in the past. because it was a very one-sided thing. from our standpoint, we love dealing with them. they have certain products that are tremendous. they have certain pricing advantages that we take advantage of. lot of advantages. and i think just the relationships between the two countries, you know, it's very strong and that's an important element of what we're doing, maintaining the great relationship which perhaps we would maintain anyway, but certainly we maintain that with a deal like this. this will be a really terrific, very unique -- this is an epic deal, historic. if it happens. we'll see what happens. [ inaudible question ]

>> i recommended herman cain. he's a very terrific man, a terrific person. he's a friend of mine. i have recommended him highly for the fed. i told my folks that that's the man and he's doing [ inaudible ] now. i find herman to be an outstanding person, a truly outstanding individual. i would think he would do very well there. yes. reporter: is there still an imminent threat of you potentially closing the border? >> well, you know, mexico has been doing a very good job the last three or four days since we talked about closing the border which is very real, but what's more real initially is tariffs on the cars coming in, 25% tariff on the cars being made in mexico coming in. you know, mexico prior to my becoming president took close to 30% of our car business. that's a lot. it's a big, big chunk. they did that under nafta.

i for years have been talking about it. i think nafta's one of the worst deals ever made, one of the worst trade deals ever made, maybe the worst, and mexico took a big chunk of our car business which i don't like, and i haven't liked and i have spoken about it long and hard, long before i became president, when i was a civilian, so to speak and i will say this, that mexico in the last four days has really done a great job on their southern border with honduras, with guatemala, with el salva r salvador, of grabbing and taking and bringing people back to their countries because they're not going to come to our country, we're not going to allow it. what's happened on our southern border is a disgrace. mexico has brought people back. they've told people you can't come in. and that's happened really, as i understand it, over a thousand

today, over a thousand people yesterday, over a thousand people the day before. before that, they never did anything. so if we -- and they have the strongest immigration laws, as strong as there is anywhere in the world. they can do it if they want to do it. they've never really wanted to do it for many, many years. and we've told them if you don't do that, we're going to close the border but before we close the border, we will put the tariffs on the cars. i don't think we will have to close the border because the penalty of tariffs on cars coming into the united states from mexico at 25% will be massive. [ inaudible question ] >> no, i didn't say that. we would start with the tariffs and see what happens. but they are removing people out of mexico on the way up to the united states. if you take a look, you'll see a big difference. now maybe by the end of this news conference or maybe tomorrow, that will stop, and if that stops, we're doing a big tariff deal and that will be fine with me, too, because you know i like tariffs.

i'm one of the people that really likes tariffs. okay? go ahead. reporter: this year marks the anniversary of china relations. [ inaudible ] >> you have to speak louder. louder. reporter: oh, sorry. what's your comment? >> my comment is 40 years. it's a lot but not that much. again, i think i can just say what i have already said. the relationship is strong. we hope it's going to get stronger. i think we can do a lot of things militarily also. for instance, they are making a lot of weapons, tremendous weapons, and so are we.

we just had $716 billion approved for military last year. now we're possibly going to do more this year. and between russia and china and us, we're all making hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons, including nuclear, which is ridiculous and i would say that china will come along and i would say russia will come along. it doesn't really make sense that we're all doing this. i think we're the leader. i think we're always going to be the leader. we have to be the leader. i think it's much better if we all got together and we didn't make these weapons. so i think that's something that could be a phase two after this is done, but as you know, china is spending a lot of money on military, so are we, so is russia, and those three countries i think can come together and stop the spending and spend on things that maybe are more productive toward long-term peace. i don't know. i'm speaking out of turn. we haven't discussed this very much. but i feel that, you know, the

military expenditure of you, russia, us, it's a lot. a lot of money could be put in other things. would you like to respond to that? >> i think it is a very good idea. reporter: the summit with president xi, are you committed to that happening and when will it happen? >> well, if we have a deal, there will be a summit. i would say we'll know over the next four weeks but i think that's correct, wouldn't you say? >> yes, sir. >> i look forward to seeing president xi. it will be here and if we have a deal, then we're going to have a summit. if we don't have a deal, we're not going to have a summit. there's a very good chance we'll have a summit. one more. one more. jeff, you have one? reporter: i would like to follow up, mr. president. is enforcement one of the -- >> yeah, enforcement. we have to make sure there's enforcement. i think we'll get that done. we have discussed it at length.

i think we are going to get that done. just to finish, the deal is coming along really well. we will probably know over the next four weeks. it may take two weeks after that to get it papered but i really think that over the next fairly short period of time, we are going to know and it's looking very good. lot of really good things have been negotiate and agreed to. i would really say and i say it again, a lot of the most difficult points, points that we didn't think we could ever do or we wouldn't agree to on both sides, have been agreed to. we have negotiated out some of the toughest -- really the tougher points, and -- but we have some ways to go and i think we have a very good chance of getting there. i want to thank everybody for being here and in particular, i want to thank the vice premier and his entire group of very, very talented representatives. thank you very much. thank you, everybody.

[ inaudible ] >> i will take a look at it. [ inaudible question ] >> i think there's truth to that. a global responsibility. who did you say said that? who said that? who said it? who said it? well, i think it's true. i think the word global responsibility, those are two nice words. frankly, maybe we do have a global responsibility between the united states and china. i think it's actually -- actually, it's well brought up. it's true. we do have responsibility to the

world, both countries. that's what i think is maybe to a certain extent, that's a big reason we're here. this will be a tremendous thing for the world. forget about china, forget about the united states. this will be a tremendous thing for the world if we get it done. let's see what happens. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you very much. [ inaudible question ] >> none whatsoever. he's a highly respected man. he's a friend of mine. he's somebody that gets it and i hope everything goes well. herman cain is a very good guy. thank you very much. thank you. david: that seems to be it. you never know with this president. breaking tonight, president trump just wrapping up a meeting with china's vice premier. good evening. this is "bulls & bears." i'm david asman. joining me, we have john layfield, susan li, liz peek and gary kaltbaum.

the last person you heard listening to the president asking him a question was our own blake burman, who was just in the oval office with the president. blake, we did not hear the question but repeat it. reporter: the question was whether or not the president is sending a signal to the fed by putting up steve moore and herman cain. you heard the president respond there. he said no, that he is not and he went on to tout herman cain, who the president confirmed in that pool spray with the chinese delegation that is there to discuss trade issues that indeed, he has put forward herman cain for the last open spot on the federal reserve board of governors so there is a clearance process that needs to take place, so that is still a long way down the line. as it relates to what we just heard from president trump, you heard from most of us there. the headline being i think that the president says within four weeks or so, he thinks they will know whether or not they have a trade deal. the president also saying he's

not certain whether or not there will be a meeting with president xi because he's not certain whether or not there will be a deal but if there is a deal, it would even take two weeks after that, he believes, to put it all on to paper. the bottom line here is while there is still some optimism, while the president and his team feel as if they are moving in the right direction, there is still some time here before a potential trade deal between the united states and china. one thing i do want to bring up because i do not believe it was played, what you saw there was the question and answer session, but before that, the president was speaking as well, made some comments, went around the table and asked his team to give their thoughts as to what was ongoing and at one point, robert lighthizer, who of course is the top trade representative and negotiating this deal with steve mnuchin said quote, there are still some major, major issues left. some optimism moving forward but major issues left as well. >> but then you heard the president saying the toughest parts have been negotiated already.

so i'm just wondering what that last piece might be. is this about the non-retaliatory mechanism, leaving tariffs in place to ensure china is keeping its promises? reporter: interesting you bring that up. while the president did say that when he went around the room as well, he also asked the thoughts of peter navarro. we know peter navarro's thoughts on china and trade in general. peter navarro said, he's quoting someone else who said the last mile of a marathon is the toughest part of the marathon. so at least from the viewpoint of peter navarro, he still thinks this could potentially be the toughest part. as it relates to your question, susan, the president talked about i.p. theft, certain tariffs, though he did say quote, this will be an epic deal if it happens. >> blake, liz peek. it does seem like everybody wants this to happen. reporter: right. >> i guess the question is do we know, is there an appointment on his book at mar-a-lago for a summit? do they have to actually sketch

out the calendar? reporter: it doesn't seem like it, because as we heard from the president, you know, he said there needs to be a deal first and he thinks there is potentially four weeks until they can even get to that point. you know, there were some headlines today that the president could announce a summit at that very meeting. i was told repeatedly throughout the day that that was not likely to happen but you never know with this president. and now we see potentially one of the reasons why is because there are still some negotiations ongoing including, even though the president is going to california tomorrow, liu he and his team are staying here tomorrow to keep the negotiations with the u.s. side ongoing. >> john layfield here. i want to ask how the administration will define success, because is it going to be -- the president talks about trade deficits and you talk to economists, the stronger economy generally has trade deficits and the tax cuts, just like the reagan tax cuts, have led us to the biggest deficit we have had with china in our history.

is the president defining the success, if we get it, the take on wall street is we will get a deal, probably not a good deal, but a deal, that's all we want, is it a matter of the trade deficit being cut down or a matter of i.p.? reporter: major structural issues. that's what the administration wants here. there are different i don't want to say factions but different groups within the president's trade team. some of them want stronger structural protection. the president we have talked about purchases, how he wants to see china step up purchases. i think you got to have if not all of that add up, a lot of that add up and at the end of the day, enforcement because without enforcement i don't think you will see a deal. >> blake, gary kaltbaum. that's the exact question i was going to ask you. there is no deal without enforcement, and china has not been a very good partner throughout the years on rules and regulations. what kind of things do you think the u.s. is putting into this deal that really put some meat and some teeth into enforcement? reporter: you know, it was

interesting, i think it all comes down to tariffs and how long the tariffs might stay on and which kind of tariffs and the president was asked about it and said i don't want to talk about that right now, we are going to be discussing this when you guys leave the room. i think there still might be negotiations ongoing in the oval office, but that is potentially, you know, one of the enforcement mechanisms that could be in play here in a potential final deal. david: very quickly, there is some talk about fighter jets, that we might be selling to taiwan and how that might be a fly in the ointment that might stop proceedings dead cold, because of the chinese hatred for what's going into taiwan. any word on that at all? reporter: no, i didn't hear that from the president but -- or really, folks in the administration, but it was interesting hearing the president talking about the military footprint of the united states, russia and china and how ideally he would like to bring that all down and the president, i think the words he used were i'm speaking out of turn here because we really haven't

discussed this, and liu he was asked about it, do you agree with that. i believe he said yes. david: we heard him say yes. reporter: yeah. it was tough to hear it in the room. but that is certainly notable. the president who has talked about the need to build up the department of defense and when he's in the room with the number two of china talking about maybe we should just sort of lower this, the military budget. david: i have never seen one man play good cop and bad cop at the same time. so many times. blake, great stuff. thank you very much. appreciate it. democrats are resurrecting an old rallying cry, demanding that the irs release six years of the president's tax returns, saying they have a right to see them. do they? more on this new fight heating up, coming next. 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. 2,000 fence posts. 900 acres. 48 bales. all before lunch, which we caught last saturday. we earn our scars. we wear our work ethic. we work until the work's done. and when it is, a few hours of shuteye to rest up for tomorrow,

the day we'll finally get something done. ( ♪ ) the day we'll finally get something done. ...that's why i've got the power of 1-2-3 medicines with trelegy. the only fda-approved 3-in-1 copd treatment. ♪ trelegy. the power of 1-2-3 ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 trelegy with trelegy and the power of 1-2-3, i'm breathing better. trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,...

...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,.. ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1-2-3. ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com.

david: democrats are once again

demanding the irs release president trump's tax returns, an issue that first began during the 2016 election. >> by law, we have a right to ask that the president's tax returns for six years be made available, not just to the committee but to the american people. >> the last eight presidents have released their tax forms and we think here that there is a mechanism where these forms could be reviewed in a nonpartisan basis, and then we would have a chance to decide from there what to do with them. >> this is really a joke. this is really getting pretty pathetic. just the nonstop political and partisan attacks. why don't we actually govern? david: there's a novel idea. democrats say the american people deserve to see six years of the president's tax returns. do we or not?

gary, what do you think? >> look, i say put them out there. i want to see them. i think the people should see them. look, this is a partisan political move on the democrats' part because the only thing they got in their game is to raise taxes and all kinds of other u you-know-what but the president needs to go on the offense. it's just his tax returns. what could possibly be in there? maybe he didn't pay too much taxes. that's the job of an individual is use the law to pay less taxes, simple as that. just put them out there, go on the offense. i want to see them. >> i'm with you on this. every president for the last eight presidents has released it. you can't say they can't release under audit because richard nixon of all people did that. the president himself said in 2016 before the election he would release them. there's no reason for him not to. this is partisan also. there's no mistaking that. they want to find out how much he gives to charity, is he really worth $10 billion so they

can embarrass him because the income, does it show income of a person that's worth $10 billion, where does all this money come from. this is a fishing expedition by the democrats but i do think the president should release his tax returns. >> isn't it a waste of political capital as well, especially after the mueller report, for the democrats? they criticize the republicans and president trump for trying to waste time and reinitiate this debate on health care. why waste time on the tax code and work towards 2020 instead? >> look, i think the worst thing the democrats can do is continue to harass this president. it makes them whiney, makes them complain about democrats, complain about their partisanship. here's a poll that should make everyone take pause on the left side of the aisle. 54% of the american people think the mueller investigation which we all think really should have taken place was politically motivated and that poll has been steady throughout. if they think mueller's investigation was politically motivated, what are they going to think about hounding about his taxes?

david: but something else that makes some americans, me, anyway, is the way the irs was weaponized during the obama years. remember the woman who was accused of targeting conservatives? it sort of brings up a lot of ghosts that maybe the democrats don't want to bring up. >> i agree with that. i agree what you're saying, it's a partisan politics that's going on here but i also think the president himself said he would release them. just release them. if there's nothing in there, this is going to be so much bigger than the mueller report that there was basically nothing in there. if there's nothing in there, this kills the democrats. >> just realize, none of this is unexpected. the democrats are going to be throwing the kitchen sink at him for the next couple of years. they are going to go after every little thing in his life going backwards. they are going to go after the family. they talk about ivanka and her businesses, jared and all that stuff. that's where you just got to take the step to get in front of it.

so for the life of me, i don't understand why he doesn't put out, again, let me repeat, it's just tax returns. the irs already has their hands on it. if there was something really bad in it, they would be coming after him left and right. just do it and if there's nothing in it, you're in front of it and putting another little bogey away. >> although to john's point, if he stalls and stalls and stalls and finally, let's say six months from now, releases them and there's nothing really bad in them, they look incredibly stupid. maybe there is some purpose to this. david: just for the record, the irs examines every president's tax returns. every president's tax returns, as a matter of policy. that happens every year. what they want is something a lot more invasive. we will see what happens. meanwhile, joe biden facing more accusations of inappropriate behavior. is his 2020 presidential run over before it even begins? we will be asking new hampshire political reporter paul steinhouser, next.

how do you determine the durable value of a business in the transportation industry without knowing firsthand the unique challenges in that sector. coming out here, seeing the infrastructure firsthand, talking with the people behind the numbers creates a different picture. once i know what a business is truly worth, we can make better informed investment decisions. that's why i go beyond the numbers. ♪ car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana.

might mean a trip back to the doctor's office just for a shot. but why go back there when you can stay home with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

david: joe biden facing three more accusations of unwanted touching, bringing the total number of female accusers to seven now, but karl rove in a "wall street journal" op-ed today says despite all these accusations, quote, don't count joe biden out. if he stands firm and stops apologizing, this issue could fade away and he may be a stronger candidate for it. joining us now, a new hampshire political reporter who contributes to fox news, paul steinhauser. paul, is karl rove right or is biden's presidential campaign finished even before it begins? >> no, i think karl rove has a point there. you know, biden put out that video yesterday explaining his position, not apologizing but definitely saying he needs to recognize that times have changed when it comes to his inappropriate touching. those allegations from as you said, seven women. i spoke to some top people close to the biden camp and they said that it's still all systems go, that one source told me that

this strengthens his resolve, this whole crisis over the last week has strengthened the vice president's resolve as he moves towards what we think will be a launch probably after easter, late april, maybe early may. you know, asked if these developments have slowed down the thought process and timetable, that person said absolutely not. i think biden and his team are moving forward. this crisis has not gone away. i think that's pretty clear. with more women coming out every day, it's something the vice president is going to have to continue to deal with. >> is there a chance that actually people become sort of sympathetic to joe biden, that he gets sort of a wave of oh, poor joe, he's being beaten up by all these women? is that a possible outcome of all of this and all these accusations? >> by some of his supporters, yes. you have seen people like nancy pelosi come out and say it didn't disqualify joe biden from running. but there's also plenty of people out there that say joe biden has yet to apologize to any of these alleged victims and that he needs to do more. if he runs, which seems

extremely likely he will be doing it in the next few weeks, he will start doing interviews, this is not going away. he needs a better answer, guys. >> what about the obama silence from the president who has called biden a brother? how come he hasn't stepped in to protect his brother? >> you know, the former president is staying neutral right now, when it comes to the 2020 race. he's got a lot of his former friends, people who were in his cabinet, julian castro and others who are running right now and others who may run, like the former vice president. he's staying neutral, staying out of this. of course, he will back the eventual nominee but for now, no, he's not going to be in the crossfire. >> shouldn't biden maybe have announced yesterday and every day that goes by is a bad day because of so many other people talking about all these announcements? >> you know, the former vice president sure gave a hint yesterday that he was going to run in that video. he said he will soon be talking about a lot of other issues. that was his strongest hint yet that that announcement will be

coming but you make a great point. right now he doesn't have the full campaign structure behind him to deal with this me too controversy. if he had that, it would be easier for him to deal with and he would have a lot more press availability and you know, media exposure on this to get his message out. he doesn't have that yet because he doesn't have a campaign yet. >> i want to talk about the veracity of the claims but i want to ask about the political ramifications. the president when he was a candidate had 23 women come out and accuse him of some type of sexual misconduct. his former wife accused him of rape. not saying any of this was true. the president didn't apologize or address it. why is mr. biden having to handle this in a different way than candidate trump handled it before the presidential election? >> great point. a lot of biden supporters are saying wait a minute, why are we talking about this when the president has all these allegations not just of inappropriate touching but harassment and sexual assault. times have changed. remember, that was 2016. that was before the start of the me too movement in 2017.

much, much has changed since 2016 when then candidate trump was dealing with all this. >> as biden waits, we have another candidate going into the race. ohio's democratic congressman tim ryan announcing his 2020 campaign on "the view" take. take a listen. >> i believe in the free enterprise system. i believe that we need to government. we can't just go ask people to pay more in taxes and dump them into these old systems. so i'm a reform-minded democrat that believes if we are going to green the economy, you need the innovation and the power of the free market to do that. >> tim disguised himself as a progressive who knows how to talk to the working class. really, you think? >> right. >> it's all about location, location, location. for almost two decades he represented northeast ohio. he's a rust belt guy, as you just said. that's his whole argument. that he, if he runs and wins the nomination, he can win back those rust belt states that went for donald trump and helped vault trump into the white house in 2016.

that's his big argument going forward. like you said, he says he's a progressive because that's where the energy is now with the democrats but he says also he knows how to talk to working class people and kind of insinuating a lot of the others who are running for the white house on the democratic side can't. remember, he's only one of three midwesterners in the race. him, pete buttigieg and amy klobuchar from minnesota. david: gary? >> my main question is who is tim ryan? the question is so many people involved, it feels like he's just going to be trying to get his name out there at this point in time. i don't think he polls 1%. am i correct about that? >> you're probably right. he's probably right down at the bottom at 1% but you know what? 1% will get you into those debates, the democratic presidential debates would start in late june. you're also right that a lot of people are thinking wait, that's paul ryan, former house speaker? no. no. he does have some problems. he's going up against people with a lot bigger name i.d. and a lot bigger bank accounts and

much more campaign cash. but again, he's going to make that argument that he is a little bit different than the rest of the field. he's not as far to the left, he will say, as a lot of the people running and he's going to tout his roots in the working class parts of america. >> paul, you wrote a great article on foxnews.com today about howard schultz and how the democrats are very worried that he could take votes away from them if he runs and of course, howard schultz is going to be on foxnews.com tonight. you think any chance of an announcement there? >> i think fox news would love it if he announces at that town hall tonight. if he wanted to, it would be a great venue. he would get a lot of eyeballs. i don't think it will happen. when he announced way back in last january that he was going to seriously consider a race for the white house, he said it was going to take a couple of months to crisscross the nation, talk to voters, talk to others to see if an independent bid was realistic. nobody's done this. no independent has won the white house since george washington way back in the 1780s and '90s.

so it is a hard task. look at ross perot, the last independent to really run. he got 20% of the vote back in the 1992 election and won zero electoral votes. the system is pretty much stacked against a third party or independent candidate. david: he did, going back to perot, he did prevent president bush from getting re-elected. they can be a spoiler. i'm wondering if biden doesn't run and there are no moderates the democrats put up a far left candidate, then who does schultz take votes away from? the democrats or trump? >> that's a great point. that's what democrats are concerned about. that if there isn't a strong moderate, a lot of those centrists, moderates, independents make up about 40% of the electorate in this country. they are concerned that well, he could slice votes away from the democrats, enough so to allow donald trump to be re-elected. that's why you are seeing some top pro-democratic groups like priorities usa and american bridge, they are gathering

evidence, they will target schultz and target him hard if he does go through with this and runs as an independent. david: you are an encyclopedia. we will hear straight from howard schultz tonight in a fox news town hall starting at 6:30 p.m. eastern time. you might want to tune in. meanwhile, president trump backing off his threat to close the southern border any day now but he's not letting mexico off the hook. we will have reaction from texas republican congressman brian babbin on what the president is demanding of mexico right now.

you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist. but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers.

fisher investments. clearly better money management.

mexico in the last four days has really done a great job on their southern border with honduras, with guatemala, with el salvador, of grabbing and taking and bringing people back to their countries, because they're not going to come to our country. we're not going to allow it. what's happened on our southern border is a disgrace. and mexico has brought people back. they've told people you can't come in, and that's happened really over -- they've done as i understand it over a thousand today, over a thousand people yesterday, over a thousand

people the day before. before that, they never did anything. david: president trump surprisingly praising mexico, something you don't often hear from this president. meanwhile, also backing off from his threat to close the u.s./mexico border immediately and adding a new deadline of one year and a new threat of auto tariffs, if mexico doesn't help out more with border security. texas republican congressman brian babin joins us now. congressman, are you relieved that the president is backing away from closing the border? >> i really am, because i think closing that border would have been a severe blow to the economy and the state of texas and really to the country in general. but i'll tell you, giving mexico a reprieve of one year, if it doesn't stop, one year means about a million more illegal aliens come in swamping our system, and so i hope that he holds their feet to the fire and they keep their promises and i appreciate what the president is trying to do. he's a negotiator. and i appreciate that very much. >> congressman, john layfield.

great to have a fellow texan on the show. i have my boots on which david asman commented on when i came in. i want to ask you, sir, what exactly do you want from mexico? what is it the mexican government can do to help this situation specifically? >> just exactly as president trump just said. they need to turn these folks back on their southern -- they need to secure their southern border, because we are completely overwhelmed up here. we are actually not even processing -- there's so many, there are so many overwhelming numbers of illegals coming across our southern border that we can't even process them. they're just being turned loose at bus stations and it really puts our citizens and our country in a great dangerous position and we just cannot tolerate this any longer. we've got to have the resources, and this is what we have been trying to get the democrats to do. give the president -- not the president, give our

professionals down there on the border the resources because there are some terrible things going on. they are recycling children. they are using kids to get in as family units and passing them back across the border south into mexico, they are coming in with other groups. the human traffickers and narco folks are having a field day down there. this cannot be tolerated, so the mexican government can absolutely secure their southern border and help us. >> congressman, this is gary kaltbaum. thanks for being with us. outwardly, we keep hearing from the democrats there isn't any crisis, yet we see these videos and we are seeing all these numbers about how many. inwardly behind closed doors, are you getting any movement whatsoever from the democrats recognizing that there is a serious issue and something has to be done, or are we going to be playing politics for the next couple of years? >> i hate to say it but i'm not

seeing movement on the part of the leadership of the democratic party. i have talked to some democrats who i work across the aisle with, i think they are quite aware of the situation down there and how terrible it is, but you know, unless we get the leadership on board, mr. schumer, miss pelosi, we are going to have a hard time getting anything done. the resources have got to be given to our professionals so that they can start processing these illegals. tens of thousands of them. we've got over 900,000 pending immigration hearings. we don't have enough hearing officers. and now these immigrants, illegals, have figured out if they can swamp our system and overwhelm us, they know that they're not even going to be processed. they're going to come in, give themselves up and be released indefinitely into the united states. and all that does is hang out a welcome sign, come on up here, come in, if you get up here you're going to be able to get

in and then once you're allowed in, you don't show up for your immigration hearing and you're here indefinitely and that's how we wound up with millions of people that we have to educate and medicate and incarcerate. we have got too many folks. >> congressman, it seemed as though for awhile we were working with mexico to establish sites in mexico where people seeking asylum could make their application not in the united states but in mexico. that seemed like a reasonable partnership to me. has that movement made any progress? are we doing that, do you know? is that on the table? >> that ois tis on the table an was my understanding they were in the process of implementing this, but yet we are getting hit and swamped and invaded by tens of thousands of people. 76,000 in february, 100,000 in march and on track for a million by year's end. this has to be done. i don't know if that -- i don't know where that is but i can tell you that is an absolute

necessity and again, we've got to get our professionals the resources so that they can protect our nation. david: congressman, thank you very much for coming in. good to see you again. we will always try to have a texan here for you whenever you come. >> all right. thank you, david. david: jeff bezos' divorce finally over. we will tell you what that means for the amazon mogul next. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter]

(vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! 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. ♪ and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study,

brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor, since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported. tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. a cockroach can survive submergede guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah, wow. not getting in today.

not on my watch. pests never stop trying to get in. we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

david: well the ongoing divorce between jeff bezos and his former wife mckenzie has officially come to an end, mckenzie tweeting out "grateful to have finished the process of dissolving my marriage with jeff with support from each other and everyone who reached out to us looking forward to the next phase as co-parents and friends ." isn't that nice into mckenzie also announced she's giving all of her interest in the washington post and blue origin as well as 75% of their amazon

stock plus voting shares. joining us is trial attorney misty mares. >> look i think this absolutely could have been a knock down drag outfit that could have gone on for years but we have to remember the public persona here having that litigation out there could ultimately impact the investors, shareholders, and amazon so my guess they came to this agreement because they don't want shareholders to get skiddish. >> that's fine she got $35 billion, great, i'm happy for her but why did she go for 50, giving the voting control away. david: wow. >> it doesn't matter, right? >> well what's so interesting about your point is that she really had all of the best legal arguments to go for that 50%. >> yes. >> they were in washington state so that's a community property state. >> how about as a woman? >> yes, and then also no pre-nu p. without a pre-nup, that's what

the law would have ultimately said if she pushed it would have been 50/50 division but look that's going to be a legal battle and i think there's a strategic decision. >> i think she had terrible legal counsel. my mean, my gosh, yes it's very nice, very amicable and wow is very underrepresented i don't know, maybe i'm totally wrong. it sounds to me like this was in the works for some time. is that a possible explanation? >> i absolutely agree with you. i think their divorce was announced in january. this would be a lightning speed agreement when you're talking about the astro tammy bruce it call amount of assets at play so my guess is before they made that announcement they already had something in the works for how this was going to be handled as far as amazon is concerned. >> missy, i met my wife on this set on this show 15 years ago and it absolutely scares me that

a divorce lawyer is here today. david: no worries. >> is this final? this seems crazy to me she would give up so much. >> look ultimately it's going to be ordered the court that's when a divorce becomes final but to the extent that parties agree courts do not step in and say this isn't fair or something else especially when they're both represented, so this is going to be it, presumably, unless hey, look, anything can happen, but as far as we know this will be the ultimate result this is the agreement they've entered. >> misty this is gary kaltbaum, nothing personal but i never want to meet you in your office, so my question is is that we have seen so many other divorces turn so bad for so long with so much money involved and i really do believe this one, well they thought about it years and years and years ago. what do you think is in her mind i know you've represented them what do you think is in her mind

that she would give up on literally $37 billion is just a matter of get it donald i'm never going to spend this amount of money in a lifetime? >> yeah, because you know what? a lot of divorces are actually litigated on principles rather than practicality. there's raw emotion and just so much that's just because of all of the acrimony that's there so the fact that this ended so quickly and there was so much other money that could have been recouped and voting rights and all sorts of other things like she could have demanded a position on the board board of amazon there was a lot at stake here i think it's really a situation where look, we want amazon to be successful. we know public perception anthropology and a public company, shareholders and investors it's important for this to be finished as quickly as possible and i just want to put it behind me. david: we only have 15 seconds how much, what percent does a lawyer get in a situation like this? >> oh, well look usually divorce lawyers bill by the hour

so the lawyers probably thought it would be a lot more. david: yeah, i bet they were voting for more. they would have been with susan li right here. >> fight a little more. david: misty thank you so much that does it for bulls & bears we'll see you next time. >> liz: president trump set to announce a summit with china amid signs that the u.s. is in the final innings of a trade deal. we've got the fresh sound, that story, coming up and the president heads to the border tomorrow. he did give mexico a one year warning saying stop the flow of migrants and drugs or you, mexico will be hit with tariffs and mexico is on the hot seat right now this as obama's own border chief now says the southern border is "wide open", as both texas and arizona buckle under the migrant surge, we got this story tonight and also tonight, we'll blow up and take on the conventional wisdom with the facts we're going to show you the roadmap for exactly how and why president trump can ba