dow industrials are moving closer to 100 points. i have to believe that has some connection to the no collusion and vindication of obstruction of justice from our president. market likes it. left-hand side of the screen, zoom up 72ers from the offering. pinter es up 25. neil, it is yours. neil: thank you, stuart. or that the attorney general somehow missed, sort of spoke when he talked about exonerating president or getting a pass on obstruction of justice, the market seems to have bet money that was not the case. again they are not worried about this report. or possibility that all this goes aside. that the political battles back and forth on this then there is the debut of these incredible offerings today, pinterest and zoom soaring well above their initial offering prices. we'll get to that. markets have funny way of saying

it. they worry about something reflect, that chill for a while or value goes down as briefly it did after the report's emergence after the opening bell. they digest what they seem to be hearing as day ensues, people read through the entire report, include there are some embarrassing incidents in there for donald trump nothing that could be legal jeopardy for him going forward. what democrats do in the house is quite another matter but edward lawrence has been pouring through all of this. he joins us in washington with the very latested. ed? reporter: narrowing down on obstruction of justice. the report itself said if they could clearly state the president did not commit obstruction of justice they would have put that in the report. mueller report said they could not go that far. democrats zeroed in on the obstruction of justice issue. he and deputy attorney general rod rosenstein disagreed with some of the special counsel legal theories to that. they said some of the eppose did

not amount to obstruction of justice. the attorney general said they used mueller's framework. no obstruction. listen. >> there was relentless speculation in the news media about the president's personal culpability. as the special counsel's report acknowledges there is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by his sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, nonetheless, the white house fully cooperated with the special counsel's investigation. providing unfettered access to campaign and white house documents. reporter: the attorney general also says that this report was important in determining the level at which the russians tried to affect our presidential elections. seven times he repeated that there was no collusion with the president or anyone in his campaign or any american. >> thanks to the special counsel's thorough investigation we now know that the russian

operatives who perpetrated these schemes did not have the cooperation of president trump or the trump campaign. or the knowing assistance of any other american for that matter. that is something that all-americans can and should be greatful to have confirmed. reporter: house intelligence committee also wanting robert mueller to testify in front of them. the attorney general is set to testify before the senate judiciary committee on may 1st. he will appear before the house side of that committee on may 2nd. neil? neil: edward, thank you very much the president was happy with this today. take a look. >> they're having a good day. i'm having a good day too. it was called no collusion, no obstruction. [cheers and applause] should never happen to another president again. this hoax, this should never happen to another president again. thank you. neil: meanwhile hillary vaughn is engaging reaction on capitol

hill. hillary, what have you got? reporter: neil, we're outside the house judiciary committee hearing room they laid out redacted versions of the report inside on hearing room table right after the compact disk arrived to the committee and both leading democrats on the hill today are getting their hearing rooms ready for special counsel robert mueller because house judiciary chairman jerry nadler, house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff both requesting mueller's testimony before their committees. nadler tweeting this morning it is clear congress and american people must hear from special counsel robert mueller in person to better understand his findings. we're asking mueller to appear before house judiciary as soon as possible. head of the house, speaker nancy pelosi taking aim at barr's credibility, reacting to the public press conference this morning tweeting, ag barr confirmed the staggering partisan effort by the trump administration to spin the public's view of the mueller report complete with

acknowledgement that the trump team received a sneak preview. it is more urgent than ever that special counsel mueller testify before congress. president trump's long time ally, republican congressman mark meadows hitting back at his democratic colleagues in the house tweeting, what you're see something unprecedented der per race from the left. they went all in on a collusion conspiracy never existed, didn't get the results they wanted and now they're throwing manufactured controversies at the wall to see if it anything sticks. it won't work. in the senate, leading democrats say the full report will speak for itself. minority leader chuck schumer tweeting, now that president donald trump's campaign press conference is over, now time for the congress and american public to see the mueller report. we're expecting fresh reaction from house democrats. judiciary committee chairman jerry nadler will hold a press conference at 2:30 p.m. reacting to the mueller report in new york. one thing democrats are really jumping on today, neil, the

report stated they could not prove president trump committed a crime but the report also did not exonerate him. neil. neil: thank you very much. hillary vaughn. attorney general of the united states bill barr got a lot of criticism, democrats said taking leaps that weren't there from the report. if the report seems to, it is very, very early, but seems to vindicate pretty much his consensus read on this whole thing, now what, what happens? former whitewater independent counsel robert ray on all of that. what do you think, robert? >> not pretty much. seems to vindicate what the attorney general said would be in the report. you are not hearing anything from democrats now, wait a minute, we want to see the whole report. they're actually going to get the whole report with the exception of 6-e material everybody exceeds can't be released unless a court order to do so. democrats will be forced into position generating momentum toward impeachment proceeding if

they want to see anymore of the mueller report which i don't think they're prepared to do. at the end of the day the president is right, it's game over. it's over. over means over. doesn't mean it will continue on. neil: hearings will go on. >> they can do whatever they want. they can try to have mueller as a witness of the as president said they can subpoena rest of 13 angry democrats until they fill out the mueller staff until they fine somebody that -- neil: seizing on nuances on part of the report where mueller and his people could not -- >> prosecutors deal in nuances. is that a news flash? neil: right i hear but they were unable to say that no criminal conduct occurred but again, had they had even a sense of that, they would have put it in there. >> i deal in the real world. what does that mean to you? that means that they can't exclude the hypothesis that the president might have obstructed justice, really? i mean the point is, as the judge i clerked for long ago

told me it is not enough that god knows okay? prosecutors deal in evidence about whether or not either they have sufficient evidence to bring a case or they don't. this is the determination now as the result of the mueller investigation and attorney general's findings. we now have the answer. the answer is, it's over with regard to criminal conduct involving president of the united states. neil: so -- >> period. neil: open-ended thing you hear from number of democrats saying you know on this obstruction thing it is not a slam-dunk. they will keep pursuing that. almost invite of mueller in the report to say that is up to congress to go beyond this. is it? >> no one is trying to carve the house judiciary committee away from its constitutional prerogative. they have a decision to make, whether they will beat a dead horse or not. we now have despite what senate minority leader chuck schumer says, we now have the benefit of the report and the american people will decide. but, preliminary indications,

initial review of the report suggests quite clearly they were exhaustive in their investigation. they looked at the president's conduct. they made an evaluation of his intent. they did so in context. now both bob mueller and the attorney general have spoken. and as far as that is concerned that is over. what house judiciary committee decides to do in their infinite wisdom, have at it but -- neil: you can't, base your report on conjecture, what might have been certain things happened. one thing got a lot of attention within the report, i want to make sure i'm quoting accurately here is that the president was very, very concerned about how far this probe was going in the early days, going back to june of 2017, when he directed the white house counsel don mcgahn call acting attorney general to say bob mueller should be ousted because he had conflicts interest. mcgahn decided he would rather

resign than what would be another "saturday night massacre" and and attorney general finished his report. >> the attorney general said no act was taken. in cosmic world what might be obstructive conduct the president might have have intended it if he didn't carry it out. neil: the proof is in the pudding? no. might it have been considered? a lot of things are considered. >> would we expectpy in the depend on advise of his lawyers, personal counsel, department of justice. neil: this whole thing with the special counsel and all that -- >> given his conduct is completely understandable. neil: you dealt with that with bill clinton. >> absolutely. neil: they don't like guys like you breathing up their you know what, they are frustrated. >> i go back to what jim comey said early on in the administration. the fbi snuck people into the white house to interview michael flynn. if i would have found out about

that and i was president i would be none too pleased. if i was angered by that, take action to prevent that from happening that constitutes of obstruction of justice? really? that is standard of obstruction conduct? i don't think so. i think that is practical, reasonable analysis of the facts and the law and -- neil: what happens now? a lot of democrats say we want to get to the bottom of that. want people come up to the hill. >> i guess what's going to happen there is going to be, there is going to be, that's right word. there is going to be team to relitigate. the question whether american people will stand for this. neil: will the american people stand for what a lot of republicans want to see, go back and how the investigation started or everyone sees it? >> your latter point has to be carefully done. i'm not suggesting or calling as some have for separate special counsel television into get into but i do think it is important for the department of justice after issuance of ig michael horowitz's report to take a look

at that, to find out the origins what became the russia collusion investigation. i'm not saying we belabor the issue. i think it is important, mostly from the standpoint of what just the president said, understanding how this is not supposed to happen to a president of the united states or any president of the united states. and if things need to be looked at, they should be looked at. neil: i'm surprised how little was redacted in the end. >> well there you go. mountain out of a molehill, right? so at the end of the day congress is going to see everything. neil: that barr, whatever you make of him, wisdom having a press conference beforehand, how he characterized this report, i haven't read the whole thing seems to be in line with the report's findings. >> that is the judgment the public is going to have to make. i'm entirely the confident that the public will come to reasonable conclusion it was an accurate rescitation, valuation of the mueller investigation and and attorney general did in fact what he said he was going to do. which is to be as transparent as

he could be, consistent, consistent with the law. neil: his duties. >> nobody said this was going to be an easy job but he is attempting to do it. and you know, all this other nonsense that you've heard about, oh, the real collusion here is the collusion between donald trump and his hand-picked attorney general william barr. seems like what has happened here, the attorney general is doing his job. neil: everything is going by how this should be done. you can argue whether he should do the presser, a lot of people said he was doing president's bidding, characterization source of all anger from the left seems unjustified. >> i wanted to understand myself personally the context under which the attorney general made the decision about obstruction of justice. i think that a question separate from the text of the report. i think that's important for the american people to know and i believe that explains why the attorney general came forward first before the report was issued to explain to the american people why he made that

determination. then that -- neil: whether it conflicted with mueller's explanation? >> correct. neil: so far appears not to be but we don't know. >> in certain instances attorney general said this morning on law and the facts he had a different view, he and deputy attorney general than mueller with regard -- neil: rod rosenstein also had a different view of this. >> right. after they consulted with the office of legal counsel. isn't that what, isn't that what the attorney general is supposed to do? yes. neil: you lawyers can never agree on anything. you would argue on ham sandwich. >> we can agree on the bottom line. ultimately the attorney general's determination as a matter of fact, law, ultimately policy to resolve the end of the investigation as far as the department of justice is concerned. what the house of representatives decide to do, that is now up to them. they will be evaluated on that conduct just as much as the attorney general evaluated on how he concluded this investigation. neil: which is maybe why, sorry,

nancy pelosi a couple days ago was saying we should be sticking democrats to the kitchen table issues. all the same when it comes to this stuff, move on. >> if they don't move on the public is going to perceive this in context of presidential election which is automatically suspect. neil: i hear you. thank you, robert ray. we're looking at through the prism what happens now, whether you like the president, whether you dislike the president, whatever, we'll try very hard in this broadcast to avoid all passions on the right and the left. like the dragnet guy, just the facts for me. the facts are this, corner of wall and broad people bet money what they think is going on, collect tiffly the report is out, don't appear any bomb shells, something that could compromise the president of united states or the constitution and create a crisis for us. whether they like him or not they have deemed all right, crisis avoided. constitutional mayhem slowed, if not stopped.

and now it is on to important things like initial public offerings where people greedily want to make money and easily if they can, with two big ones today, pin per -- pinterest, and zoom, not a one of them is mentioning the name bob mueller. we'll have more after this. 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. ( ♪ )

i can customize eachy line for each family member?

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 $100 back when you buy a new lg. click, call, or visit a store today.

>> what do you say to people on both sides of the aisle that you're trying to protect the president? >> actually the statements about his sincere beliefs are recognized in the report, that there was substantial evidence for that. so i'm not sure what your basis is for saying that i am being generous to the president. reporter: unprecedented situation. it seems like -- acknowledge how this -- >> is there another precedent for it? >> reporter: no but -- >> unprecedented is accurate description, isn't it? neil: bill barr getting no pretty heated questions from some members of the press who wondered whether he was essentially doing the president's bidding. from all we can see, still early. we're combing through the report as am i. characterizations, bullet points, including the fact that there could be no conclusion of obstruction of justice, either for or against the president pretty much panned out as he laid them out.

to great america alliance co-chairman eric beach, democratic strategist marjorie clifton, "washington examiner," kelly jane torrence. kelly, begin with you, what happens now? >> everybody, neil, combing through the report. it is interesting that bill barr set up the press conference before the report was released. people were angry by the fact he was speakinging to the press and taking questions before the report was released. i actually heard reporters what are we going to ask him about? we don't have the report? they found plenty to ask him about. they will be comparing what they're seeing with what he said. i thought the exchange plated was my favorite. it was clear that reporters had difficult questions and bill barr came, he came in to fight. he was not going to take it. it seems he was in a bit of a fighting mood. and he certainly pushed back on any allegations that he was just

doing, was carrying president trump's water there. i thought it was very interesting, reporters pointing to his choice of words. he said, well, they're in the report. part of that was his own fault for deciding to do the press conference before people can see the report. there were plenty of questions to be asked about the process. how he went through, decided what needed to be redacted, all of these things. it was fair to have the press conference. he had to expect then people were going to question some of his motivations for doing so. neil: marjorie, what they're seizing on in the report, a number of democrats, critics of the president, those who want to see key players testify on capitol hill is this charge over obstruction of justice, not being a charge, open-ended question. one of the things that comes up in the report again and again is that bob mueller would have exonerated trump on obstruction if the evidence supported it but he could not. what do you make of that? >> well, as you said a lot of people are still combing through it. honestly i think what democrats

and what republicans are going to take away from the report is what they want to hear. neil: i think you're right. i think you're right. >> the press conference, there is something to find on both sides. trump's message, no collusion, no obstruction of justice. he has been saying that now since the initial findings of the report came out. and what democrats and a lot of others are holding on, wait a minute, there is a lot of stuff in here that is right up to the line. there is a lot of questions still here. unfortunately a sign of the types. people hold on to what they want to hear. ultimately comes down to the what is personal ethics values, morality of the reader. what do them speaks to the values they want in a president. so you know, we can guess all day about you know, what are they going to find. as you know the law is highly complicateed what to have the proof. from my understanding you cannot commit the president of a crime. why did they not subpoena him? allow written testimony.

neil: they felt that would added time. given it was long investigation to begin with. it -- >> right. neil: be that as it may, eric, i'm looking at all of this, all right, we know there are a lot of revel races in the report, for those that want to know that president was frustrated with jeff sessions and counsel was established he was lamenting end of his presidency, what president upon hearing he was investigated wouldn't feel the same way. later on getting so frustrated with the mueller process he was looking at firing the guy. we know in retrospect it didn't happen. we can go back, look at the would have, could have should have things but is it your sense this ends? even the republicans push to go and get to the source of what got this investigation going might be faulty? in other words, just move on? >> no, i don't think so. i think the republicans should see how this all started.

full transparency we have to go back and remember general barr didn't need to release the report publicly of the his process summarizing i thought he did quite well, characterized this report quite well with limited redactions. he did not need to release the report. it was at his discretion. neil: it would be holy hell if he didn't. >> for two years of media and democrats come out saying you ought to do this, they owe both him and president -- neil: his characterizations be seemed to mirror the report accurately. >> right. neil: which could explain why if mueller was offended the way he was interpreting his findings he certainly would have said something. rod rosenstein also agreeing with bill barr on the look at obstruction issues and awe all that, he agreed with barr, that may have been a bit of a leap. i'm paraphrasing here. the report by and large echoes what the original sentiment was. do you think for republicans they go back to investigate the

investigation or do you fear that the american voters is now saying enough already? >> no i don't think so. we're going to see the democrats go and do hearings. the republicans should do exactly that as president trump mentioned in the press conference, this should not happen to our elected leaders again. remember bob mueller was not elected. he is an honorable man, he is not elected. we let this undercut the president's agenda for two years. last point, neil, you mentioned earlier about the obstruction. it was investigated, 10 instances potential obstruction has been investigated as part of this report. even you in the opening said oh, he was charged mistakenly but of course not. it has been investigated. so there might be a different kind of interpretation. that was part of this report that those potential instances or situations have been investigated. that -- neil: it was characterized two different ways. donald trump clearly did not commit obstruction we would have said so unequivocally. we did not subpoena donald trump

because it would have delayed the investigation, referring to pursuing this obstruction matter more. again, essentially punting to the house to deal with that. but, kelly, in the end here, people are going to point fingers about a president whose behavior might be deemed unethical but not criminal. is that where this is going to go? >> you can find things in the report, both sides can find thinks they are going to point to, bob mueller's team found instances could be argued for obstruction and they decided they couldn't rule on it. of course. it is interesting, barr made a couple of points in his press conference this morning i think kind of speak to that. he used the word knowingly couple times, that mueller did not find any american knowingly assisted russians, i find the fact that he said knowingly was interesting. he said it wasn't illegal for an american to help disseminate

information from wikileaks, for example. there are people, people may have done untoward things, they weren't illegal. if that is the case both side will argue this for some time to come. i think the american public you say is little sick of it. it has been over two years. let's get congress working on leg shun to help the american people but they will be wringly about think, i know my producer will kill me, i'm way over. marjorie you said something interesting we'll see things through our own particular viewpoints or biases, i'm paraphrasing but is it your sense the democrats to look back to the 2016 campaign and say, this guy is a false president, he is an illegitimate president, not everyone but they harbor that, does that end or does that remain? >> oh, gosh. obviously will be people who will carry that as their position. look, this is not necessarily a new idea that other party wants

to fight why the sitting president -- think back to hanging chads. we've been through versions of this before, with other presidents by the way on both sides of the aisle. we were fighting obama's birth certificate through half of his presidency. there is politics at play. there is a reason we do a press conference to frame the report before it comes out, not even knowing what's in it. that's politics. neil: fair enough. it goes on and on. i want to thank you all. great guests. we have the dow up 116 points. has funny way showing any angst over this. that is only prism we'll look through this no bias on the left or right, just pointing that out. having to did with relief over the report but initial public offerings are going off with a bang. pinterest and zoom both well above their initial prices and continue to move northward. we'll have more after this. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job

from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. state of the art technology makes it brilliant. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2019 nx 300 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. [ sigh ] not gonna happen. my name is ken. how may i help you? hi, i'm calling about kohler's walk-in bath. excellent! happy to help. huh? hold one moment please. hmm. it's soft. the kohler walk-in bath features an extra-wide opening and a low step-in at three inches, which is 25 to 60% lower than some leading competitors. the bath fills and drains quickly. and the door ensures a watertight seal, so you never have to worry about leaks. kohler's walk-in bath was designed with convenient handrails for added stability and safety. the wide, ergonomic seat is tilted back for comfort and stability. it has a channel so water won't pool on it. and it positions you perfectly by the controls. while the heated seat soothes your back, neck and shoulders, warming up your body before, during and after the bath.

kohler is an expert in bathing, so you can count on a deep soaking experience. honey, are you seeing this? the kohler walk-in bath comes with powerful, fully adjustable hydrotherapy jets and our exclusive bubblemassage. oh yeah, that's the stuff. everything is installed in as little as a day by a kohler-certified installer. and it's made by kohler, america's leading plumbing brand. we need this bath. yes. yes you do. a kohler walk-in bath provides independence with peace of mind. would you mind passing my book there. whoooo. did you know the exact same hotel room...

...can have many different prices? that's why tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the lowest price on the hotel you want. your perfect hotel room for the perfect price!

neil: that didn't take long. already presidential candidate eric swalwell, democratic congressman from the state of california said it is high time now for bill barr to resign, tweeting, russia attacks us, details multiplicity of contacts between russia and the trump team and that trump and his team materially impaired the investigation, yet our attorney general acts a trump's defense attorney. he can't represent both. barr must resign. here we go. fox news senior capitol hill producer on the cross back and forth on this, chad pergram. what do you think? reporter: as you might expect this is the first shot fired in the 2020 presidential election where republicans are going to the mat defending the president, saying this exonerates him. look at comments came out the past hour, from kevin mccarthy the house minority leader time to move on. steve scalise republican whip,

democrats, nancy pelosi liberal lieutenants need to apologize to the public and also to the attorney general and others. the democrats are taking the other side of the coin here. they think that there are undefined issues in this report. that is why they want robert mueller to come up to testify before both the house judiciary and the intelligence committees. i spoke just a few moments ago with roy blunt. he is the republican senator from missouri. he seems to be the only person who is here on capitol hill from the senate side. they had a pro-forma session where they gavel in, gavel out. he presided. i caught up with him in the hall a few moments ago when he said mueller should testify, he was agnostic on that point. what we'll learn more this afternoon, jerry nadler, chairman of judiciary committee, will hold a press conference. point you to something that is very interesting where robert mueller punted things back into the realm of capitol hill. the conclusion congress may

apply obstruction laws to the president's corrupt exercise of powers of office accord with our own constitutional system of checks and balance and the principle no person is above the law. so, neil, this might be an avenue that democrats try to explore where they say there was no collusion there but leave it as a political question for maybe democrats, for that matter republicans in congress to decide. back to you, neil. neil: thank you, my friend. i think we'll be seeing a lot of hearings. meantime, we're up about 115 points in the markets. unusually strong session for two new companies debuting today, pinterest and zoom helping that. susan li following zoom, for example, on nasdaq. what is going on there, susan? susan: neil, today was very important test for ipo markets and their appetite for unicorns like pinterest and zoom. both above their indicated range for the i ipos.

it took a while. takes a while to match up the buy and sell orders on the first day of trade. both companies had pretty stellar first day of trading, first few hours of trade. pinterest larger of two companies, raising a billion dollars or so in their offering. still not profitable. in fact they lost $63 million. they have 250 million monthly active users. they have been around 10 years. pinterest seeing the stock price gain 25% in the opening hours. here at nasdaq today it was about zoom, highly hyped. guess what, this is a unicorn that makes money. that is the rarest of unicorns you find in the tech space. that there was interest here. the stock rocketed up 80% first hour of trade. it looks like will be the second best debut so far of 2019. it is not just one day of trade. what happens with day two, day three, a month later? lyft we saw a pop on day one,

but down 22% since its debut. yes, you can do well on the first day but as they say, the long term is a test. back to you. neil: indeed. certainly found that out with lyft. thank you very much, susan li. let's get a read on all of this from mike murphy, rose cliff capital founder. so far they're not following the example of lyft so far, that could change but what do you think? >> hey, neil. how are you? neil: very good. >> look back to when lyft came public, they're exactly following lyft. it popped. neil: you're right. day later it was another story. >> traded up to 87 on first day. you and i were live on air. i said do not chase this for people watching at home. no reason to buy lyft at 87. i echo that on pinterest and zoom. if you're home watching the cavuto show do not go out to buy the hot ipos. wait, there will abettor entry point if you want to own them. >> look at people who didn't jump on facebook immediately.

it tumbled. people came in 15, 16, 17 a share came in hand over fist by not rushing into it. >> absolutely. neil: other companies are waiting on the runway what do we do, how do we time this, what do you tell them. >> this is awesome for the markets. a lot of companies in the private sector will come to the public markets. that is liquidity for founders. it is liquidity for employees. it is liquidity for people running venture capital fund. a lot of that money gets recirculated back into the system backing other early stage technology companies. the fact that the markets open up there is appetite for companies like zoom, pinterest, lyft, it is great for the over all market. think it speak to the strength of the underlying economy. neil: people emailing that i was making a political statement about the mueller report that markets like it. i hasten to add, markets are not

red or blue, they just like green. they made money on the bill clinton in typical republican bastion. they thought he should not resign or be impeached in face of monica lewinsky thing. i think markets abhor uncertainty. i don't know what constitutional crisis. this looks averted with the report today. what do you think? >> absolutely. you hit the nail on the head. the market doesn't want to see what would happen if more people are attacking. whether they love or hate president trump isn't the issue. what happens if there was something here that would upset the presidential seat, most important seat in the land. the fact that is kind of behind us for the time-being is positive for the markets. we're not taking out old highs yet on the dow. give it a few days, i think we will be. neil: the markets digested a lot of scary stuff. if you think about better than two years of this ongoing investigation, to say nothing of

trade accords, threatened and not signed and then you know, agitations, pretty much everywhere, and up, up throughout. you have that mind set back in december, seemed all to be unraveling. a lot of people are in your camp, saying we're optimistic too. i mentioned this with famed investor ken fisher yesterday. do you worry, being a bit of a contrarian yourself, when you're not such a contrarian, the rest of the world is starting to join you? >> a little bit to be honest. when i look at the fundamentals they support a higher stock market. i think they support great growth companies and great technology companies. even in the financial sector. i think there is more room to run as the economy continues to strengthen. barring any unforeseen geopolitical event or something that we, we can't predict, market should and i think will trade higher. so it is, you don't want it to get crowded. i think we're very far away from

crowded. i think there is still a lot of money on the sidelines that will come in here, push the s&p through 3,000 in the very near future. neil: you've been prescient young man. i will catch you that one time you're wrong. i will be relentless. until then, mike always a pleasure. thank you very, very much. >> thank you. neil: we have a flash coming in from ap out of paris looking at origins of that fire, the notre dame cathedral. the latest seems to be it might have been caused by an electrical short-circuit. french judicial police say investigators are looking at the electrical system both in and outside of the cathedral citing no terrorism but something as simple as a short-circuit. more after this. ♪

(vo) i know what you're thinking. electric, it's not for you. and, you're probably right. electric just doesn't have enough range. it will never survive the winter. charging stations? good luck finding one of those. so, maybe an electric car isn't for you after all. or, is it? ♪ 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. ♪ mno kidding.rd. but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.

>> that's the bottom line. after nearly two years of investigation, thousands of subpoenas, hundreds of warrants and witness interviews the special counsel confirmed that the russian government sponsored efforts to illegally interfere with the 2016 presidential election but did not find that the trump campaign or other americans colluded in those efforts. neil: all right. so, what he is saying is, the

russians tried their darnedest to influence the election and to tap into trump folks to try to help them out but they were not received well by the trump folks. in fact they didn't return the favor. in other words they didn't dance with them. that is the gist of the report here. now how to go about handling russia, how to go about dealing with vladmir putin. i remember when the president met with vladmir putin a little over a year ago, he had taken the leader at his word had nothing to do with any of these investigations or efforts to get involved in the u.s. campaign. retired u.s. army lieutenant colonel danny davis on all of that. colonel. assuming this report is right, that russia most certainly was involved, did try to get involved but the trump folks didn't reciprocate or take him up on it, i'm overly simplifying, we have a problem with russia, bottom line. we have a big problem with them and they might be poised to do

it all over again, right? >> i think certainly russia will do anything they can to influence the united states in any number of spheres. i take a different view. i don't think it is as strong a situation many think it is because i put a lot of confidence in the american populace and political system and our election system, somebody can try to influence us, but we make our decisions based on candidates and conditions involved. whether russia tries to influence i don't think they will succeed. neil: agree with you on that. colonel what worries me, i'm stickler for wording in reports, one of the things that stood out, no evidence u.s. persons knowlying coordinated with russia. i'm not a lawyer but did they unknowingly, unwittingly do this? what is the implication going forward when a foreign operative says hey, what campaign wouldn't pass up dirt on his or her

opponent, right? i'm wondering is that solved here? is that still a very big worry we have to address? >> i think it is always a possibility. no matter what it was, whether we were, they succeeded or didn't have much influence, it is critically important we defend the integrity of our election system, whether russia, anybody else, we should be very diligent. neil: we didn't there. >> we didn't hear. neil: that didn't tip the election we can safely say that people call me, no. i wonder whether this signals they will up the ante think about the states that donald trump won by some 70,000 votes. it wouldn't have taken much to tip those the other way if they had other ideas. i'm not saying they were the reason for 70,000 but you understand in a close election they could be. how do we stop that going forward. >> that is exactly where i was

going. it is incumbent to make sure that doesn't happen to any degree. we can do that with sigher abilities our abilities to see out on internet. our diplomat sphere. we know what happened, we're watching to make sure that it doesn't happen again. one thing i want to point out, we don't go too far where it impacts our ability to conduct effective negotiations and relations with russia across the board. that is far more important to us than this election. it need to be dealt with. we need to keep it in per speck i have. neil: well-put, colonel, thank you for your great service to this country. >> always my pleasure. neil: charlie gasparino is here right now. this isn't over but quite literally, there are lot of other investigations going on. >> i thought we would get a tip of the hat, i read through pieces of it, what is going on with the southern district of new york. neil: that is the big one, right?

>> that involves business business with involves michael cohen his fixer. they gave it to them while they focused on this. i wonder if any of that is redacted, what he jettisoned. this will come out in days and weeks ahead how serious that probe is. because that probe is more about his business dealings. deutsche bank lent money came from different places. where did the money come from? did it come from russia? did it get funneled through deutsche bank through the trump organization for real estate. neil: can they go after that level a sitting president? >> yes. that doesn't mean they could indict him. we're learning a lot -- neil: a lot stuff happened before -- if it happened. >> some may be tied up in statute of limitations. what i find fascinate about the report basically what i'm reading it is a classic white-collar wall street crime report. the level -- people are conflating collusion and

illegalities. there is no doubt there was some collusion between the russians and the trump campaign. the russians presented evidence to the trump campaign. they kind of wanted it. whether they accepted it or not is a question. they didn't pay for it. that's where you get into problems. when you pay for somebody to do something illegal, if you knowingly help them dot illegal thing, that's where you get in the ringer. neil: but on far bigger issue, if you think of the people who have been indicted gone off to jail, most of it is for lying to investigators. had very little to do with russia per se. having said that though, i'm wondering what do your money guys tell you about, the markets today, breathing a sigh of relief with successful ipos, relief this is going away. this is not a given it is going away? >> money guys that i talk to -- roger stone, never got him on

collusion. roger was nailed for lying about something that may or may not happened. neil: business dealings that go back decades. >> as soon as you saw particularly roger, most people thought this collusion is baloney. the obstruction again, harder, hard case to prove but more obviously more evidence there. clearly -- neil: do they think in new york and i think in -- >> they think, right up there in trump tower. everybody thought, it has been bandied about. people close to donald trump told them that. donald trump a year ago -- neil: chris christie argued that. far bigger worry. >> even people told trump, remember trump about a year ago said this is over, i'm not getting indicted. there is no collusion. my lawyers telling me. ty cobb before rudy came on, don't count your chicken before they hatch, don. they will look at your business dealings. that stuff could get really nasty. donald trump business dealings were never really examined that

heavily. his taxes and things of that nature. no one really got into his charitable contributions if there were any. neil: that had nothing to do, has nothing to do with russian collusion. irony will be, thing you have to worry about stuff nothing to do with russia. >> that he opened his, the russia collusion thing and very stupid act of firing james comey when he did, very dumb. steve bannon, not just me who said it. steve bannon said it. it was absurdly dumb. he should have fired him when everybody said fire him, day one. james comey, didn't handle himself in the campaign of the get rid of him. he kept him, because this guy helped me win the election. that is why he kept him. let's face it. neil: i see wall street likes, divided government. they love that. they can deal with that. also means that nothing gets done period? >> yeah. listen i think people will digest this report. they will watch the southern district but they will digest this report to see how much

political damage it does on the president. i think it will have some political damage. i don't know why people around here are doing cartwheels that this exonerated -- neil: you can say about those on other networks. i watched them all. like watching a funeral at other networks. >> that is not right. neil: there is no middle ground here. what is your sense where this goes? >> the middle ground we have very ethically challenged president who did not commit a crime involving colluding with russia, who did not commit a crime, or there wasn't enough evidence to show a crime about him obstructing whatever investigation they were doing. and has still a liability involving what's up there, namely trump tower but down there. neil: couldn't you say democrats who seize on this for whatever reasons, maybe nancy pelosi was right a couple days ago when she was saying we focus and should be focusing on kitchen table issues? >> yeah. probably. that is probably a smart thing but remember, you know, people

doesn't like sleeze in the white house. there is some -- neil: we dealt with it before. >> nixon, clinton. economy was doing great under clinton. neil: fillmore. >> nixon gets thrown out. economy wasn't doing so well. neil: clinton didn't because economy was. >> economy is was. that should help. neil: that is the backdrop. thank you, buddy, very, very much. >> anytime. neil: charlie gasparino. we're up 112 points. the two new offerings are doing just fine. we're getting word more are being considered. keep in mind the with the offerings, lyft had a great debut. it didn't couple laters. we're watch closely, fair and balanced bull, bear, conservative liberal. ♪ now...

grandpa, what about your dream car? this is my dream now. principal we can help you plan for that . 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. ( ♪ )

neil: all right. markets are not too worried by the developments with this release of the mueller report, redacted though some parts are, though not as many as people had feared or worried or accused. more buoyed by better than expected earnings and two much better than expected initial public offerings today, pinterest and zoom. we will get into all of that. in the meantime, we are talking about no evidence for the time being of collusion. they are going back and forth on this report as to whether there's any evidence of obstruction of justice. it's in the eye of the beholder, i guess. edward lawrence with more on that. reporter: yes, seven times the attorney general today said there was no collusion. in fact, the mueller report said it found no coordination between

the president and the russians over the election. it went on to say about trump campaign officials, quote, based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination, and the report says the special counsel tried for a year to get a sit-down interview with the president, and he said no. it adds that mueller believes he has the legal right to issue a subpoena for the president, but chose not to do so. attorney general william barr says he and deputy attorney general rod rosenstein disagreed with some of the special counsel's legal theories concerning the obstruction of justice. they said some of the 11 episodes examined did not amount to obstruction of justice. the attorney general said that the mueller framework, they used the mueller's framework and still found no criminal intent. >> the white house fully cooperated with the special counsel's investigation, providing unfetterred access to campaign and white house documents, directing senior aides to testify freely and

asserting no privilege claims. and at the same time, the president took no act that in fact deprived the special counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation. reporter: but the report does push back a little bit on this. on page 98, mueller writes that by june of 2017, the president became aware of e-mails setting up the june 9th, 2016 meeting in trump tower. the report goes on to say the president in july of 2017 directed aides to not publicly disclose the e-mails to anyone. still, all 11 instances in the mueller report look for possible obstruction of justice. it did not clearly rise to the level of indictment. the attorney general putting to rest that the russia probe, at least this chapter, is closed. neil: now blake burman with the latest on how the white house is taking this in. hey, blake. reporter: still no official reaction from the white house. there are some 400 plus pages to go through. from the white house side of things, they did have somewhat

of a road map at least to prepare for this, as we know there was the four-page barr summary that came out a few weeks ago, then the attorney general also went up to capitol hill earlier this month to testify as well. as far as the entirety of the 400 pages presumably, they are still digging through all of that right now. we did, though, very briefly hear from president trump as he was hosting an event in the east room of the white house earlier today, and the president stuck to the script that we have heard him stick to for many, many months. watch here. >> i'm having a good day, too. it was called no collusion, no obstruction. this should never happen to another president again, this hoax. this should never happen to another president again. reporter: one of the many interesting things, neil, in this mueller report as we are finally getting a look at president trump's answers to the

questions that he gave to special counsel bob mueller. however, the special counsel report also goes on to essentially criticize some of those questions, saying that they were inadequate, as many at the time. the president responds in one form or another saying he could not recall. the president's attorney, personal attorney or one of them, rudy giuliani, was on the air waves this morning on fox news and defended the president's responses. >> have you looked at the questions? they're like a law school exam. one of them is an entire page. they are asking questions about 2016, and in 2016, he was working 12 to 16 hours a day and his mind wasn't on these subjects. in part because what they were asking about didn't happen. reporter: we do have fresh reaction from president trump's re-election campaign coming from his campaign manager, who ends his statement with the following, saying quote, now that the collusion and

obstruction conspiracy theories have been exposed for the pathetic hoaxes they always were, the obama era doj and fbi must answer for their misdeeds and the scam that they perpetrated against the american people. justice will be served. just a little slice from the campaign. as far as the president for the rest of the day, he is scheduled to leave the white house later this afternoon to head down to mar-a-lago which means potentially, we could get him out on camera there on the south lawn before he heads on to marine one and if we do, that should be interesting. neil: absolutely. blake, thank you very, very much. we have the host of "liberty file," judge andrew napolitano. he's done every show. judge, you have been great through this whole process. help me understand this. democrats saying that bill barr, first off, looked like a trump

sycophant, eric swalwell going so far as to say this guy should resign. why? >> why? because they are not happy with the outcome and because they want to continue their mantra that there's enough evidence here to indict him. i myself believe that the attorney general's behavior was well within acceptable standards both with respect to his judgment calls, is there enough evidence to prove obstruction of justice beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the summaries he made this morning. however, there's a lot of damning things in here, as charlie gasparino was just discussing with you, about donald trump, the person, and of donald trump, the businessman. so damning, they show such a pattern of deception and instruction to underlings to deceive, i think this will gin up the investigation in the southern district of new york. so the president is out of the cross-hairs of bob mueller.

that's the legal issue that's behind him. he's still in the cross-hairs of federal prosecutors here in new york city and they have a little bit more ammunition now than they had yesterday. he goes into the cross-hairs, this is political, not legal, of the democrats in the house of representatives who want to gin up an impeachment investigation which might backfire on them, based upon all these acts of deception that he instructed his aides to engage in. neil: so if the next issue is whatever happens here in new york, and maybe some of these other courts, this thing is going to go on and on and on and on. >> yes. yes. if you will forgive the silly phrase, it's not the beginning of the end, it's the end of the beginning. we are just turning a page. special counsel, done. impeachment, probably, it's a political judgment mrs. pelosi has to make. beginning legal worries in new york city, getting more serious.

look, the view of obstruction of justice, there's two. one is, you must succeed. you must so obstruct that the investigation stops. the other end you must try to obstruct. here's the classic law school example. neil, i'm about to go into a courthouse to testify against you. you tackle me and break my leg. i'm late for the testimony but i still give it. you have committed obstruction of justice, even though you didn't succeed. i still gave that testimony. so if the president told people to lie and if they didn't, if the president told them to hide documents and they didn't, that's an attempt to obstruct. it rarely succeeds. in bob mueller's view, that's bad and we can probably prosecute for that. in bill barr's view, and he's the decider, that's not enough to prosecute the president on. neil: interesting. very interesting. as are you. judge, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. neil: all right. the markets already moving on from this, but at their own

peril, if the judge is right and there are certain other developments that could happen down the road. the "wall street journal" associate editor john bussey, and real clear markets editor john tamney. is it your sense, john tamney, the markets are getting ahead of themselves or is this largely done, at least with the mueller report, the collusion stuff, maybe even obstruction of justice, time to move on? what do you think? >> i think the markets were ahead of themselves long ago, as in they priced this outcome many, many months ago, maybe a year ago. it just was never serious, this notion that trump and his underlings got together with the russians and were able to cook up a campaign victory. billions are spent on presidential campaigns, yet we were expected to believe the legendarily incompetent russians decided to work with him to bend

the outcome. it never made sense. i think markets have long known this. neil: we always say markets are the prism, although they are largely run by conservative republican guys, but of course, they were very concerned about bill clinton possibly getting impeached because they were having booming times during his presidency, and it's probably no coincidence that he survived all that because the backdrop of the economy and the markets was so sound. it is similarly twhat way for this president right now. will that help him dodge any of this more controversial stuff that some might be cooking up? what do you think? >> great to have a strong economy behind you. it's great to have strong corporate earnings behind you. those are all tailwinds. so it depends, neil, on how much the market is based on volatility in the economy, volatility in earnings, or volatility in the political affairs of the united states. if it's the latter, this is not a closed chapter. the mueller report opens up lots of different doors.

he decided not to move ahead with the prosecution because he believed that the rules of the justice department are that you don't prosecute a sitting president. but he punted it down the road. he did not punt it to bill barr. he punted it to congress. so now congress is going to decide whether or not it wishes to proceed with some kind of additional investigation, additional prosecution. what that means for stability in government, for projects getting moved ahead, for policies moving ahead, you know, you tell me. the market may just decide that that's simply not as important as earnings and the economy, both of which are moving along just fine. neil: yeah. i think on that latter point, you are probably right. john tamney, on that, then, if you go back to what wall street is doing for these major averages within a percent or two of record highs, a far cry from where we were at the end of last year, are you buying this? >> i'm buying just in general that markets over time tend to

go up and what i think is interesting here is that markets of course are a forward-looking indicator. they move in major ways based on surprise, so one thing i think you can say about today's report is that there was no surprise to it. and there's no expectation at least for now that something is in the offing. it would appear that we are going to move on from this. i think john's right, there's going to be attempts to bring this back in the news but it doesn't sound like there's a lot of there, there and markets are reflecting that. neil: you know, so many are now bullish, just the contrarian view is that we hold fire here a little bit because everyone sound so bullish. it's still a good plurality that is concerned and anxious. what are you hearing on that front, whether the markets are priced to perfection or justifiably so? >> well, what you are seeing in the markets moving sideways many days but now approaching highs

again. and feeling pretty robust about the economic prospects for the united states. i would disagree that there were no surprises in the report today. they had considerable depth in the allegations of obstruction of justice, that mueller was examining. that's going to add fuel to the fire, a lot of discussion of his efforts to get his white house counsel, mcgahn, to fire the special prosecutor. the various instances that they explored of obstruction of justice will be now pursued by one or the other of panels, judiciary, oversight, somebody in congress. that keeps it in the news and keeps it volatile, keeps the president distracted. it's not whether policies are going to move ahead in congress. it's whether or not you have a president that's able to stay on message going into the political season as well. neil: to that point, the report said we are unable to

unequivocally say there was no criminal conduct that occurred. it lets it out there for anyone, obviously we have a jump ball here, see what they get. gentlemen, thank you both very, very much. more on pinterest and zoom. both are public and are making their founders and original investors very, very rich. so, too, was the case with lyft when it debuted and a couple days later, it was falling fast. what happens now? after this.

a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast.

xfinity watchathon week has sadly come to an end. what, what, what! no! but don't let that stop you from watching the best shows and movies from showtime, hbo, epix... jesus, what happened? ...and more. it's just the tip of the iceberg. upgrade now to get more into what you're into. thanks! just say "watchathon" into your x1 voice remote to upgrade and keep getting more of what you love.

neil: all right. democratic congressman eric swalwell is the first out of the gate saying the attorney general of the united states, bill barr, should resign, because he's all but acting as donald trump's lawyer, not the attorney general of the united states. the very democratic congressman emanuel cleaver, good to have you. what do you think of that? >> good to be with you. well, i think that that question was dropped on my colleague, congressman swalwell, and probably, you know, he had not had a chance to do any deep thinking about it but i'm sure he felt like i do, which is that attorney general barr actually puts himself in a situation, you know, you can't serve two

masters and i think one master would be the american public, another would be the president. i think what swalwell was saying is he's serving, it seems to me and probably a lot of other people, including republicans, that the a.g. is more in tune with serving as a counsel to the president. now, i'm not ready to ask attorney general barr to resign. i don't think that you are going to see nancy pelosi, steny hoyer or hakim jeffries, the three top democrats, asking for that. i don't think senator schumer is going to ask for that. but i think what attorney general barr did today was create a situation that we did not need, and that is if you make this presentation in a shady fashion, there -- neil: what was shady about it, congressman? he had to outline, the color code and all that, and then let everyone read it, right? >> i agree with the latter part, let everyone read it.

i think what the attorney general did today, the part that bothered me, i'm not a lawyer, but the part that bothered me was when he said well, you know, the president was under a lot of emotional stress and so forth, and may have done things out of the fact that the press was on him after he actually came to office. i'm not sure many prosecutors are going to want to do that in a courtroom, and while this was not a courtroom, you know, he's getting into the feelings of the president and he did so without even interviewing the president, but mueller never interviewed the president in person. neil: yeah. he answered questions and all that. congressman, i'm wondering, you talk about mueller and his role. it turns out, and i haven't read the whole report, maybe you have, that his characterization, his bullet points, are down to no conclusions on obstruction of justice one way or the other,

were accurate. i'm wondering, people who -- i'm not saying you, but maybe your party suspect him of sinister intentions or he misrepresented the report, turns out that he didn't. >> well, i think essentially, he's right that the obstruction of justice issues are still out there. keep in mind that mueller did say in the report that but for the fact that many people around the president consistently lied, that the outcome might have been different. neil: you're right about that. but you know, i just wonder where it goes from here because a lot of your colleagues want lots of hearings over lots of days with lots of folks, republicans who want to get their own investigations going as to how this investigation started in the first place, where do you think this goes? >> well, it's not going to go -- it's going to go to an ugly place. look, 35% of the population is

either not going to believe the report that talked about obstruction of justice and some other parts, actually, that talked about collusion, or they just don't care. so i think ultimately, because we are a nation of laws, the committees of jurisdiction, judiciary, oversight and so forth, they probably need to conduct whatever hearings they might need to do to fulfill their oversight responsibilities constitutionally. however, i think my concern is that the nation's already divided deeply divided, and perhaps becoming more and more divided by the day. we've got -- i've got problems. i've got farmers that are in trouble. we've got not only floods, but we've got these tariffs that are wiping farmers out. right here in missouri, nebraska and kansas. my fear is you know, in the midst of all this, the president seems to be distracted to the

point where we're not moving on infrastructure, potholes everywhere all over the country, we are spending less on gdp, a lot less, spending about 3%, they are spending almost 10%. neil: i know there is this old adage you can walk and chew gum at the same time, but i'm wondering, maybe with the exception of your fine self, sir, whether that's possible in washington. >> it may not be. i certainly hope it is. because look, there are things we have got to get done as a nation. my hope, i believe it can happen, is maybe these two committees or three committees, rather, can do their work and some of the other committees can continue to do its work as it relates to the american public. because if we don't, we are going to end up having all four years and that's four years behind that we are going to get from a situation where we are

already behind when president trump's two years began. so you know, i think there's been all kinds of arguing back and forth, i haven't completed the report, and i think most people will have to read it more than once. maybe i'm the only one that will have to read it more than once. nonetheless, i think we will get various things from the report and we ought to leave it to the committees. nancy pelosi is ultimately going to have the call over what we do over this. i don't want to speak for her. i cannot speak for her. i'm not qualified. i doubt seriously based on what i do know about her that she will want to spend all of our legislative time talking about impeachment. she wants to get some things done. neil: all right. it's very clear you do as well. >> that's where i am. neil: i hear you. good thing to have a minister on on a day like this. comes in handy. congressman, thank you very, very much. back to the corner of wall and broad. up about 118 points. two new issues are doing very

well today. we will tell you about financial issues also doing well. doesn't hurt right now when the big premier financial names like travelers and american express handily beat street estimates. they love that. they love that a lot. more after this. 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. there's never been a better time to become part of the mercedes-benz family. visit the mercedes-benz spring event before april 30th for exceptional lease and financing offers on the 2019 c 300.

the nation's largest senior-living referral service. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care. best of all, it's a free service. there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

neil: all right. the mueller report is out. we told you among its key findings that mueller and his team really couldn't find any evidence of collusion and when it came to obstruction of justice, not enough there to support that, not enough there to say it didn't happen. well, apparently jerry nadler, the guy who runs the house judiciary committee, feels otherwise, saying that the report outlines what he calls disturbing evidence that the president engaged in obstruction and other misconduct. you have an idea where this is going to go with hearings that are being proposed. we will keep you posted on that. meantime, keeping you posted on some big public offerings today. pinterest among them debuting on the new york stock exchange. gerri willis with more on that.

gerri: that's right, it was exciting down here this morning at pinterest came to market. the stock up 27%. they traded as high as $24.89. that's above the expected range of $15 to $17 a share. they floated 75 million shares and raised $1.4 billion and all of this with no earnings. that's right. the company is not making a profit right now but they are narrowing their losses, their revenues, year to year 60%. starting next week we are looking at 80 companies trying to come to market and raising $27 billion. i spoke to stacy cunningham, president of the new york stock exchange, about the ipo market appear h and how strong it is. >> investor demand has remained strong as additional ipos have come to market over the past few weeks. we were certainly seeing a slowdown in the beginning of the first quarter, with the government shutdown and others, but now we have momentum, there are a lot of companies coming and investors seem to be ready and waiting.

gerri: big question is will there be too much product out there and not enough demand. from what we are seeing down here, people, very interested in these stocks. i got to tell you, the very best part of ipo season, i think it's the food. take a look at this. neil: they do give a lot of goodies. a lot of goodies. gerri: you would like it. come down. neil: any pasta? provolone? gerri: not today. neil: got it. that's fine. between pinterest and zoom going public, one profitable, the other not. wall street doesn't care to distinguish one way or the other. the appetite for these things still strong. we will see how the next few days ago. let's get the read from deirdre bolton, maureen starr and dave rumson. dave, the reception of these stocks, these offerings today, what do you think of it? >> we continue to have a real small float amount they are selling in the primary issue, very small.

helps keep it higher. then you have to kind of watch the thing play out. look, the lyft ipo is not a good story. you don't want the thing -- neil: it had a strong first day. >> strong first day, then you dropped 25% after that. that's my point. i'm presupposing when i say we are talking about investors, not first day people. so i think that that kind of culture of the '90s is so far over, it's been a long time over, and i talked when lyft came out, i spent many, many years at morgan stanley as managing director there and i remember like it was yesterday, the facebook ipo, them begging us take more shares at the final minute and so forth. if you have a lot of access to it, it means you don't want it. if you really want it, it means you're not going to get akccess to it. neil: facebook tumbled, if you got into that just a couple of months later you would be richly rewarded. timing is everything. i grant you. what do you think of the appetite for this stuff? a lot of these were delayed because of the government

shutdown and a lost companies we were holding off. would this encourage to follow? >> for sure. the appetite is voracious. lyft has stumbled but there's a question of pricing, a lot of questions around it. today's performance, pinterest, they priced it above the range. neil: i was surprised by that. i thought they would be cautious but they weren't. >> i think pinterest, we saw, has tried to say we are really not like a social media company, we are not like snap, you should think of us more like google. neil: what are they, by the way? >> i would say it's like a kind of digital board. if you are interested in recipes, you pin recipes. if you are interested in fashion, you pin fashion. sort of like an old-fashioned look book you would go through digitally pinning. one big change which is earning them a lot of money, if you see something you like, you can put your finger on it and buy it immediately. now they have relationships with retailers. neil: obviously, there is demand

for it. dave, if i can switch and go back into this mueller report with you, if wall street were worried about what's in it and they digested it and shrugged their shoulders, are they doing it at their own peril? especially when you hear people like jerry nadler talking up i think there's obstruction of justice? in other words, were they more or less getting relieved but for no reason? >> i'm not worried about wall street thinking that way because i know wall street was not thinking that way. i'm worried about regular investors that might have thought that. there's been absolutely no interest from wall street in this entire investigation from the day after the special counsel was announced. the day that it was announced, market dropped 300 points and since then, there hasn't been an iota of movement in the market related to this, up or down. so the idea that it's over now, it isn't a big relief to markets because the markets never cared to begin with. it was never going to be an earnings impacting event and the fact of the matter was we have known for some time that this whole thing was going to sort of

fizzle. there's a political story, there's reason for people that are really, really partisan to kind of dive in on either side, but as far as market actors that are efficient and profit-driven, this is a total nothingburger. neil: the reason why i raise it is i know wall street typically loves an environment where they are at loggerheads and nothing's getting done, the government, i get that, but there are a couple big things to be decided relatively soon, like what happens on the trade front, whether congress can pass mexican and canada deals, and that's stymied or interrupted by all this other stuff. that could be a problem, couldn't it? >> it could be. what i think has been fascinating is how much everything has been shrugged off. all these macro economic worries, global concerns, there's just this fear of missing out whether it's on the ipos, whether it's the stock market. that seems to be driving things, investors, much more than --

neil: that's the classic bull market sign, right? >> yeah. potentially. there are many elements that look very bull market and maybe bubbly on a lot of levels. >> investors are actually now suing lyft and there's two class action lawsuits filed in san francisco saying you overhyped your offering. but that i feel like is boo-hoo. let the buyer beware. you don't have to participate if you don't want to. neil: how is uber going to go? >> that's the thing. it's casting a long shad oh. >> what's interesting with lyft and uber especially, these are new generation ipos. an awful lot of individual investors already own it. you had goldman sachs make it available to their clients for two or three years as a private placement. we did not have that back in the day. people were not able to get these things, so you had down rounds and already with these companies, i mean, the lyft issue was heavily democratized. people were able to access that a year and a half ago. i think the uber issue will probably bounce same day. depends how they price it.

lyft r lyft, they got a ridiculous pricing. with pinterest, it's the opposite. they were down kicking expectations, 15, 17, it goes 24 first day, that's not what you hire your investment bank to do. >> they had something in common. they had sales and no earnings. at least zoom has earnings. zoom is a profitable company. >> zoom is, that's right. you're right, none of the others have earnings. i don't know that they really even have sales, when you talk about lyft. neil: what i admire about them, they were so below expectations. not only will they make money near term, they might never make money. >> you don't see that. >> trying to get the average up. neil: thank you very much. the dow up 109 points right now. the real proof in the pudding will be what happens after the initial trading day. that can be a bumpy ride or continuation of a good ride. we don't know yet. more after this. rather than worry about how to pay for long-term care.

brighthouse smartcare℠ is a hybrid life insurance and long-term care product. it protects your family while providing long-term care coverage, should you need it. so you can explore all the amazing things ahead. talk to your advisor about brighthouse smartcare. brighthouse financial. build for what's ahead℠ 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. ( ♪ )

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? neil: all right. we just got a joint statement from nancy pelosi and chuck

schumer on the mueller report. particularly taking issue with the attorney general, saying the difference is stark between attorney general barr said on obstruction and what special counsel mueller said on obstruction. as we continue to review the report, one thing is clear. attorney general barr presented a conclusion that the president did not obstruct justice while mueller's report appears to undercut that finding. technically, barr was right on that. he said the report neither exonerated the president nor was there enough there not to do that. he just spoke of exoneration on the collusion part, but that it was open-ended on the obstruction of justice part, just to be technical about it. anyway, hillary vaughn is catching up with many on capitol hill getting their reaction to all of this. hillary? reporter: hey, neil. house democrat eric swalwell also putting attorney general barr under scrutiny for his press conference today, saying he is unfit to serve and calling him quote, an imbedded trump ally. fox news caught up with swalwell moments ago in new hampshire. here's what he had to say.

>> the attorney general can represent the united states or he can be donald trump's defense attorney. he can't be both. as we saw at this press conference today, the way that he mischaracterized the mueller report, he is seeking to help donald trump. he should resign. reporter: we will hear from house judiciary chairman jerry nadler give a press conference detailing his full reaction to the mueller report but we already have an idea of what he is going to say because he tweeted out this photo of the mueller report and highlighted a key passage in which the report says that they could not prove that president trump committed a crime, but it also says that they, this report does not exonerate president trump. nadler tweeting this caption above the picture, saying this is exactly why we need to hear directly from special counsel mueller and receive the full unredacted report with the underlying evidence. but republican lawmakers on the hill say they are happy that the report is out because the american public finally gets a chance to take a look at it and judge it for themselves. senator roy blunt telling fox news that he thinks people are ready to move on.

>> and i think the attorney general and the deputy attorney general have done a good job so far of explaining what they've done and why they've done it and now that report's available for everybody to look at at a level that any reasonable person should accept. reporter: but not every senator is happy that the report is out. senator cory booker tweeting out criticism that the white house's version of the report was not searchable for people, accusing the white house of trying to make it harder for people to read the report. neil? neil: all right. hillary, thank you very, very much. just to be clear from the barr findings, the bullet points on that report, he said the president was not exonerated on obstruction of justice, just that he wasn't vindicated one way or the other. we will get into that a little bit later here. but the fallout now with the white house reporter for real clear politics. they will start arguing over semantics pretty soon. if i remember correctly, i'm just looking it up now, barr did not say the president got a pass

on this. he did say on collusion, he was exonerated but on this, it was open-ended. so i don't know where the heated debate is there. what do you think? >> that's absolutely right. i think what's so interesting is that it's important for us to remember that it is a 400-page report. so i would be very skeptical of any pundit who says x or any politician who says y definitively. this is a large report. there's a lot of information there. it's going to take some time to go through it. but what we know right now is that it seems that the attorney general in his initial summary was accurate that he did correctly summarize that report that there was no collusion. that's a huge win for the president, and i think we are going to see a lot of victory laps from the white house in the days to come on that front. neil: you think there's any lasting damage, personal damage, from these stories that they are digging up again that the president was apoplectic when the special counsel was chosen to look into this in the first

place? he used the "f" word and whathave you. that wouldn't surprise me but we are seeing a lot of that, and what white house aides, you know, talking to mueller's folks, whether they lied or not, whether they misrepresented themselves, but that's the extent of it. in other words, just death by a thousands cuts, you know, and a thousand aides and a thousand people who might have gone to mueller's folks and talked, and that's what this comes down to. a lot of embarrassing stuff that just gets dragged on for months and months. >> if it's going to be death by a thousand cuts, i don't think that we have seen a lot of blood so far. there have been a lot of embarrassing stories but i don't think that those have necessarily caused the president's poll numbers to drop when it comes to the russia investigation. at this point, i think that the white house strategy is going to be to call it a day now that there's no evidence of collusion. but what i think is really interesting here is that if you look at the report, on the obstruction of justice front, obviously nadler and others are going to try and make a lot of hay on that issue but it seems

that the president was really saved by a disobedient staff. for instance, don mcgahn never followed through to tell rosenstein to dismiss the special counsel, and jeff sessions never followed through to limit the investigation to future electoral meddling by the russians so it seems that the president surrounded himself with, in his words, the best people, and they kept him from perhaps some of his worst inclinations. neil: could you imagine if mcgahn had done that and gotten rid of mueller. >> certainly. certainly. what's interesting here, and i think we are going to see is democrats are really going to zero in and they are doing it already, you saw with some of the comments from capitol hill just a second ago, they are going to focus on the disparities between what barr says, that the president cooperated fully and turned over documents, and it was actually in the report where mueller says the president actually worked to curtail the investigation but

honestly, when i talk to voters in iowa, when i have been out there in indiana and west virginia, even in this last electoral cycle, i don't think voters are necessarily that interested at this point. i think they are ready to say there's no collusion, obstruction, that's another issue, and i think that this is going to take a lesser priority moving forward. neil: we just have to go back in history. he might have wanted to get rid of mueller, he didn't. he might have had ideas about shutting down the whole investigation, he couldn't. none of that happened. you are left with what happened. we will watch it closely. thank you. good seeing you. >> thank you, sir. neil: herman cain, remember him? he still wants to be on the federal reserve even though it's looking increasingly likely he will not be. he and steve moore having a devil of a time trying to drum up the votes they will need from republicans, let alone democrats, in the united states senate. herman cain is my special guest at 4:00 p.m. eastern time on how he's going to continue the fight and how much backing he has at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. more after this. ♪

when heartburn hits, fight back fast with tums smoothies. it neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪tum tum tum tum smoothies. also available tums sugar-free.

whoooo. did you know the exact same hotel room... ...can have many different prices? that's why tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the lowest price on the hotel you want. your perfect hotel room for the perfect price! comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers.

"activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.

neil: all right. herman cain and steve moore, both in it to win it, that is get appointments to the federal reserve although it looks, certainly in herman cain's case, increasingly doubtful. he will be my guest at 4:00 p.m. on fox news to discuss that.

just as steve moore, he's saying he's in this all the way, very confident he will survive a vote. charlie gasparino on what he's hearing about these two crucial appointments. what do you hear? >> this is per the fed board. by the way, not as crucial as you think. the fed could basically do its job without filling these seats. just keep that in the back of your mind as this thing gets contentious. neil: first time in history we have not had all 12 members. >> absolutely. here's what we know. the administration officials are pressing the senate gop and the banking committee members to try to get these two through, or at least gauge the sentiment about their ability to pass, as of now. who knows a week from now. but as of now, here's what the sentiment is being relayed back to the trump administration. that there's almost no support for cain, little support. you can ask herman about this later on. the word coming back from gop, from the gop is that this thing is not going to happen. there's some support for moore. moore has some people in there that like him, that know him, that there is some support among

the gop banking committee but clearly, both of these cases, more so cain than moore but it's clearly both of them, are clearly in jeopardy. it comes as both cain and moore have been doing pretty much a lot of lobbying lately. neil: sure. >> moore has become -- that was the tell for a lot of people that it was in deep doo-doo, so to speak. neil: i'm surprised the white house hasn't backed away from them. >> no, listen, they got other things on the plate right now. i will say this. there's a lot of discussion about just how much trump's going to go to bat for either of these guys and here's why. they're not essential positions. the government will still run, the fed will still run if these guys are not out. neil: look at all the acting secretaries and assistant secretaries. >> right. by the way, this little mueller thing he has to deal with. not only that, i think he made his point. i mean, the theory is here that

he told jerome powell and steve mnuchin, jerome powell, the current fed chairman, and mnuchin, who helped push -- neil: treasury secretary. >> i'm not going to put up with a fed that is recalcitrant. i may do stuff like this and put up guys that are not from -- neil: some china shop bulls. >> not from the economic policy establishment, outsiders, steve moore is a polemcist, herman cain is a businessman. speaking of, just changing subjects -- neil: real quick. >> doesn't barr sound like dr. evil just a little bit? neil: no. >> he is exonerated. no collusion. the president did not do anything wrong. really. he sounds like dr. evil. neil: he does not sound like dr. evil. >> i'm noit nt saying he is. he sounds that way. neil: .

. .

neil: you know, since this mueller report came out i've been flipping around looking at coverage elsewhere. either all hellacious for donald trump or totally vindicated. we try not to pay political stripes here. there is a little bit of both, growing evidence that bob mueller couldn't find evidence of that. bill barr quoted him to that extent on the obstruction of justice issue. more wiggle room there. democrats are pouncing on that. some good things in that report, for donald trump. some worrisome things for

political nitpicking quite some time months of hearings and the like. markets are interpreting it as crisis that passed. other important things like earnings and good initial public offerings. to charles payne on all of that. hey, charles. charles: neil, a strong economy as well. you're absolutely right. good afternoon, folks. i'm charles payne. this is "making money." a lot of coming up. the latest on the mueller report it it is out. also pinterest and zoom going public. it is rainbows and dollar signs on wall street as unicorns make magical debuts. shift the attention from d.c. and mueller to making money. now the investigation into russian collusion is complete, what's next for robert mueller and the media in the white house. all that and so much more on "making money." ♪ charles: so the redacted mueller