i know we teased that. we didn't get to it. i was blabbing too long. connell: priorities. although that is a funny story. a lot going on here. we will have that tomorrow. melissa: "bulls & bears" starts right now. i met virtually every world leader in my role as vice president and foreign relations chairman over the last 30 years. that's not hyperbole. >> china is going to eat our lunch? come on, man. they're not competition for us. david: not competition. former vp and 2020 contender joe biden facing a lot of harsh criticism from both republicans and democrats for drastically downplaying the economic threat to the u.s. from the world's second largest economy. hi, everybody. this is "bulls & bears." i'm david asman. joining me, carol ross, kristina partsinevelos, jonathan hoenig, gary kaltbaum and a packed show. senators mitt romney and bernie sanders seemingly two

opposites, both agreeing and slamming biden. sanders tweeting this out. quote, since the china trade deal, i voted against, america has lost over three million manufacturing jobs. it's wrong to pretend that china isn't one of our major economic competitors. when we are in the white house, we will win that competition by fixing our trade policies. mitt romney saying biden will regret these comments as well. why is biden minimizing the china threat? maybe to make a preelection trade deal seem less monumental? what do you think? >> maybe he's just absolutely insane. think about it. back in the 1960s, china's gdp was $60 billion. today they are number two with $13 trillion and growing. they have stated initiatives like made in china 2025 and belt and road saying we are trying to come to get you and they have four times as many people as us.

to downplay this as a threat means either joe biden is a complete dolt, that he has some sort of conflict of interest or he's trying to undermine what the president's doing or maybe it's a mixture of all of the above. >> well, look, i think we have a new hat, make america naive again, and you know, look, the bottom line is when you have both parties coming after you, you know you're having a bad day. a little message to joe. china's aggressive. they do not play nice-nice in the sandbox. estimates for the last 17 years is that because of the trade deficits, we have lost 3.4 million jobs. they are growing leaps and bounds across europe with pipelines and all kinds of other stuff. i gather in the next few days, you are going to be hearing joe say i mentant albania, not chin because he will have to roll this one back. >> i agree. i think he will roll this one back. this is a sentiment he has been

talking about since 2017. he spoke exactly the same thing that china is not going to eat our lunch at a chicago event so this is an ongoing story with biden. i think he will roll it back. i think it's naive like everybody else has been saying for him to say that china is not a threat when they contribute 15% of the global economy. the united states is 24%. you have five of the largest telecom companies in the world, two of them are chinese. huawei up there. so that's concerning. they got there with partly because of the theft of i.p. technology coming from the u.s. david: jonathan, i heard you. go ahead. >> yeah. i never thought i would say this but joe biden is right. you guys are all wrong. >> wow. >> what? >> listen, you are talking about economic competition. economic competition benefits the united states. it allows for more specialization of labor. it allows for more trade. you are all talking falsely like there's some fixed amount of pie, fixed amount of jobs. china wins or we win.

just not the case. david: even if that involves out and out theft of our intellectual property, which is happening time and time again? we know now that's one thing trump has revealed more than any other president, how much thievery was going on. you can't let that go on, can you? >> david, that's always the red herring used out there to justify -- david: big red herring, my friend. >> this is not a new one. this has been going on since the 1990s when the chinese were ripping off dvds and you treat it like a property crime. the real threat is harvard and nyu, not china in this country. >> what? >> jonathan, i'm not complaining that china's a competitor. competition is great. it makes us work harder, think harder and do better things. all i'm just saying is they do matter. as we move forward, they are not going to just sit and let us, you know, move forward without them or them being better than us. that's all we're saying here. we're not saying they are not a competitor. >> i want to talk for a second

about the i.p. issues and the espionage. fbi director christopher wray addressed this. let's take a listen to what he had to say. >> no country poses a broader, more severe intelligence collection threat than china. china has pioneered a societal approach to stealing innovation in any way it can from a wide array of businesses, universities and organizations. >> yeah. you have to remember that china's not a leader in innovation like we are. they do replication, and $400 billion worth of goods around the world every year come from china in the way of knock-offs, not to mention all of this i.p. theft, not to mention espionage. so i don't think that we should be downplaying that aspect either. david: by the way, not to mention the belt and road initiative, where they go into all these countries around the world, bribe their leaders like crazy, then take as much as they

can out of there. it's very easy to find corrupt leaders in this world, unfortunately, that you can bribe and get your footprint in there. that's a pretty big footprint. >> that raises the question as to why we aren't talking about why the united states isn't addressing this. you have the belt and road -- david: president trump is. >> not long-term. the belt and road initiative, they are talking about going into 2020, 2050. they are investing heavily, even infrastructure is triple the amount we invested. to jonathan's point, competition -- competition is great. let me finish my sentence. competition is great. however, for the united states, we are not addressing the fact that maybe the u.s. needs to step it up or else you are going to have china continue to encroach on our market share across the globe. >> step it up? we have our own belt and road initiative. it's called infrastructure. it's called $2 trillion in infrastructure spending that the president wants to spend. look, it's no secret here what makes a country prosperous is

that it is free. you talked about china -- >> what does that have to do with anything right now? we are talking about the dynamics between china and the united states. make america great. >> that's what makes us prosperous. as china continues to, for example, survey their own people, become less and less free, you will see all the gains they have achieved since the 1970s -- what happened to china? they were always poor for hundreds and hundreds of years. they started to free their economy in the '70s and '80s. that's why they are an economic threat. >> jonathan, i'm going to actually disagree with that. i think china has been opening up more free markets at the same time when we have been going more towards central planning. i think that's the crux of the issue. we have the threat of democratic socialism that is more central planning and they are moving more towards free market at the same time. that makes them an even bigger threat because we do know that free markets are the path to prosperity. >> you guys both said the exact same thing, china is opening up itself to free markets which is a good thing in order to grow

and it shows that that's what works for china. what worked for the united states. i'm bringing it back to why aren't we talking more about the solutions as to how we will overcome it but i do think the back and forth with the trade war and discussing how to forcefully stop china from doing it, but i still don't see enough -- david: the first part of solving any problem is exposing it. frankly, it's been shoved under the rug for generations in the united states now. we have known that they have been up to this no-good stuff for awhile. one thing, jonathan, i would mention to you that i think was a mistake a lot of free marketeers made was as china becomes more free market, as it has, it will become more democratic. this current president says he wants to be president for life. it's becoming less democratic. it doesn't necessarily follow that as you follow the free market war, you become more democratic. >> by the way, i watch hong kong closely. china, which now runs hong kong, they are not being so democratic with the people there. they are jailing people, they are starting to take over in a

very big way. look, for me, it's going to be very important about this deal that trump is doing for the last 12 years with china and hopefully it gets done in this decade, i'm hoping it is a real deal and not just a little truce. i'm worried about being told that everything is great but china is going to be the same old same old, and we will just know that in time. >> there's this whole faulty fixed pie mentality. limited number of jobs, limited number of wealth. a lot of chinese who become wealthy buy american real estate, buy american products, trade with america. trade is always win-win. this whole conception of either china wins or we win, it's collectivist, it's faulty economics and doesn't play out in the real world in either economy. >> i don't think we are -- go ahead, david. david: i was just going to say, we ran out of time. carol, we will give you more time in the next one. we leave with the libertarian view of jonathan. the uprising in venezuela continues for the third day. one u.s. congresswoman says the

u.s. is to blame for what's going on there. her comments and the reactions coming next. every considered.. improved. one stitch. one load. one breakthrough at a time. everything that matters, made better. you know them by their work. they know us by ours. everything, built for those who are on to bigger things. my body is truly powerful. i have the power to lower

my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity.

the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store.

a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. david: in venezuela, the tense standoff between opposition leader juan guaido and the man in power, nicholas maduro, continues after yesterday's

violent clashes. steve harrigan has been there for all of it and has the latest from caracas. hi, steve. reporter: david, nicholas maduro controls state tv here and if you turn that channel on, you will see him. over the past 48 hours, you saw a lot of him, with soldiers, meeting with the generals, meeting with the troops, really surrounded by green uniforms wherever he goes. he's trying to show that the military remains loyal to him, loyal after a failed military uprising just two days ago. now maduro has vowed to punish those responsible for the uprising. he's issued an arrest for leopoldo lopez, one of the key opposition leaders. the real question this raises is if he arrests lopez, could the man the u.s. recognizes as interim president of venezuela, juan guaido, be next. u.s. officials have warned any attempt to harm or imprison guaido could lead to serious consequences. during this week, we have seen violent protests. more than 70 people injured on tuesday, 20 people shot on

wednesday, four of them killed, at least one of those four a small child. we have seen the violence. it's not clear what's going to come next. right now the streets are quiet but guaido says he's going to escalate a series of nationwide strikes, he's going to try and bring this government to a halt. david, back to you. david: steve, great reporting, thank you very much. back at home, not everyone is blaming socialist dictator nicholas maduro for the devastation in venezuela. freshman congresswoman ilhan omar appears to be blaming the united states. for the horrible conditions in the country. listen. >> a lot of the policies that we have put in place has kind of helped lead the devastation in venezuela, and we have sort of set the stage for where we are arriving today. david: wow. so have u.s. sanctions damaged venezuela more than the socialists who control it? >> yeah, it's all our fault, it

has nothing to do with chavez's expropriating the oil industry when he couldn't run a lemonade stand. production has crashed. took over all kinds of businesses, they crashed. then believe it or not, this new guys comes in and makes chavez look like a picnic and destroys not only the wealth and plunders the wealth but destroys all hope, leading to this. yes, that's our fault. the amazing part about this congresswoman is she wants sanctions on israel and netanyahu but not on maduro and venezuela. go figure that one out. >> i think with congressman omar, her attitude is too short-sighted. these issues have been going on for decades. we know even in 2003, there were price controls, for example, they would control the price of flour and businesses couldn't -- they would have to cap it so businesses didn't want to make the flour, sell it, because it wasn't profitable. or the currency manipulations

and the black market to get dollars. those are issues that have been going on for quite some time. so that's the reason why i believe it is very short-sighted to put the blame solely on u.s. sanctions. yes, it did exasperate the situation but we already saw this coming for quite some time. this has to do with chavez as well as maduro. >> 100% to do with chavez, kristina. don't say well, u.s. is a little bit to do with this. look, it's not like the water is fundamentally different in caracas than it is in miami. this is all to do with ideas, this is all to do with politics. look, at one point, venezuela was even more prosperous than the united states. this is the net result of socialist policies. for this congresswoman to allude to the united states as being the cause of this, this is classic democratic blame america first. it's reprehensible. >> yeah, this is the hallmark of all socialism. this is what happens every single time. this is the calling card. this is what happens every single time it's tried.

for them to try to blame the united states, for her to stand up, it is absolutely reprehensible and i just -- i'm flabbergasted that she's even able to say that with a straight face. david: let's bring in congressman steve watkins. he's with us. he's an army veteran. he's also a member of the house foreign affairs committee on which ilhan omar sits. so she is there on that committee. should she be, congressman? what do you think? >> well, thanks, david. once again, my colleague ilhan omar is on the wrong side of history and common sense and even decency. the u.s. is on the side of peace, prosperity and democracy. maduro has wrecked this country, it's destroying its institutions, its natural resources, its humanity. president-elect juan guaido enjoys the support of basically all of latin america community of nations, over 50 countries in the world, and most importantly, the venezuelan people, which oh,

by the way, are why this is so important. listen, those people are suffering. i spent eight years in conflicts and post-conflict environments. these people are fleeing the country. three million, that's out of 30 million, so 10%, estimates say it could go up to five million, are fleeing the country. let's face it, this is a commentary on socialism versus capitalism, on dictatorship versus democracy. >> congressman, thank you for being with us. thank you especially for your service to the country. a lot of folks are worried, is there any reason under which american troops would get involved in this terrible conflict in venezuela? would you anticipate, could we see any american troops get involved for any reason? >> i talked with the department of state as well as the u.s. southern command, and all options are on the table. >> congressman, it's carol ross. in terms of maduro being removed, let's say he's removed peacefully or non-peacefully. we obvious know there is some

depth in terms of the corruption in the country. there is mafia, there's drug lords, cartels and the like, and it's going to take some time to sort through that. do you think if there is a transition, the u.s. would get involved in supporting guaido in terms of making sure that that transition is done peacefully and that they can return to a democratic state? >> absolutely. the focus and mission of the department of state and u.s. southern command is that there's a peaceful transition to guaido and that there's an off-ramp for the two million government employees and generals so they understand that the u.s. strongly prefers the peaceful resolution. >> congressman, kristina partsinevelos here. i want to continue on that thought. you are talking about peacefulness. if you have the u.s. military invade venezuela, how do we assure it won't be a similar outcome to the u.s. going into afghanistan and then trying to stabilize the environment there? it's easy to get maduro out. i know that i'm just hypothetically speaking, but the

aftermath of that is what is so difficult. how do you overcome that? >> the mission would be to work by, with and through our partners in the area, which we have several. we have had special forces operatives training colombian military personnel for quite some time. we also, there's dutch and french forces in the area and we've got friends and our mission would be to work with them. >> congressman, gary kaltbaum here. putin in russia, the last thing we are hearing is they talked maduro out of leaving and i gather it has to do with the fact that russia has a ton of money involved with venezuela. is there any talking to russia, negotiating with russia, trying to induce them to maybe do the right thing for once and back away and get this guy out? >> listen, i'm a huge fan of pompeo. he's our guy. he's giving it a full court press on this. again, just, you know, look who's behind maduro. you've got cuba, russia, china. that alone should tell you.

we are going to continue to work diplomatic solutions in hopes of a peaceful outcome. david: we mentioned russia, and you just mentioned cuba. the cubans, thousands of them literally, a lot of them masquerading as doctors and such, have penetrated the government organizational structures so that some people say they are running secret intelligence which spies on all the people of venezuela. how do you root them out? >> well, i have heard estimates from 5,000 to 20,000, perhaps even more. as this transition, as this peaceful transition ensues, there will be a special place for them. david: well, that indicates the use of military force to get rid of them. what are you saying? >> listen, our goal is for a peaceful transition. we are going to work towards that end, all in support of president-elect juan guaido. david: let's hope it happens sooner rather than later. thank you for being with us. really appreciate it. the attorney general was a no-show at the house judiciary committee hearing today as house

speaker nancy pelosi is claiming that he lied to congress. we'll debate that, next. the matters.ar... introducing the all-new 2019 ford ranger,

it's the right gear. with a terrain management system for... this. a bash plate for... that. an electronic locking rear differential for... yeah... this. heading to the supermarket? get any truck. heading out here? get the ford ranger. the only adventure gear built ford tough. going back to the doctor just for a shot. with neulasta onpro...

...patients get their day back... ...to be with... ... family... ...or just to sleep in. 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. ask your doctor... ...about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

he lied to congress. and anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime. >> should he go to jail for it? >> there's a process involved here, and as i said, i'll say it again, the committee will act upon how we will proceed. david: speaker nancy pelosi accusing attorney general william barr of lying to congress in his testimony yesterday to the senate over his handling of the mueller report that was released last month. barr was a no-show at today's house judiciary committee. some democrats are calling for barr to resign while others are threatening to hold the attorney general in contempt for ignoring a subpoena to provide the unredacted mueller report to congress. joining us now is federal

criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, doug burns, who knows all the answers. doug, first of all, what do you make of pelosi's charge? by the way, she was not questioned by any of the journalists -- nobody said which lie did he make specifically. what do you make of her charge? >> it's the same thing over and over, over the top every minute by everybody involved. this undermines our entire society, he lied to congress. let me break it down. i have been a defense lawyer for 20 years, after being a prosecutor for nine. if i were a defense lawyer on this, it's very simple. number one, he said very calmly that i was asked about staff members on the mueller team and my interaction with them. the letter was from the special counsel himself. oh, that's too cute but in a courtroom, no, it isn't. that's number one. number two, ten times more importantly, it was all cured because he spoke to him the next day and if you credit the account of the conversation between the attorney general barr and the special counsel, he said do you find anything

inaccurate in my four-page letter and he said no. what i'm concerned about is that the media has taken it and pitched it incorrectly. so the point is with those two facts, there's no -- david: very quick followup here. what you're saying essentially is that the staff wrote this little, what did he say snitty letter about barr's memo and he sign off on it and barr called mueller and said what's this, and mueller said don't worry about it, we were talking about the press, not you? >> the back story, when history books are written, you will see there was tension between many members of the special counsel's staff and the special counsel himself, and to use sort of a street term, they got to him on some level a little bit on certain things, honestly. >> it's carol ross here. this entire thing plays out like some very bad community theater. the theater is so bad i'm not even sure the local community center would take it on. today we had a congressman with a bucket of kentucky fried

chicken. it's completely ridiculous. so what are the democrats hoping to accomplish here, because to me, i can't really figure it out. >> it's the difference between criminal law and politics. they don't mix. i said it a hundred times. seriously, two completely different topics, okay? you know, imagine the old joke, like you're in the prison yard, what are you in for, murder, what about you, rape. what about you? i lied about a memo. it's the criminalization of politics. you have heard others, most notably professor dershowitz say that. i'm of the same school of thought. you can't criminalize politics. the point is, this one lied and that one lied and david teed it up at the outset. it's over the top. as far as the chicken thing, i don't really have any comment about that. pure theatrics. >> just so i can understand better, it hasn't proven the letter was written by staff members and that they -- david: nothing has been proven. >> just so we can put that out there. david: can't prove that he lied and can't prove -- >> there's a conversation also

between barr and mueller after his letter came out. that still, we don't know 100% either. david: he said he took notes but he's not going to give up the notes. >> what we are doing is just contributing to the hearsay. we are just going on with that. >> what happened was, david was sort of reading my mind. in other words, mueller was in discussions, doing a little sherlock holmes here which is fine, it's what i do. he said you know what, i'm going to call the attorney general. no, no, mr. special counsel, you should put it in writing, put it in a letter and they went back and forth. he ultimately caved in and did. he put it in a letter. causing a lot of liberal commentators to jump in, that is so serious he would commit it to writing. you heard all that rhetoric. the reality is that he expressed some relatively minor concerns, not an editorial, then they spoke the next day and said there's nothing inaccurate. >> gary kaltbaum here. this is actually a serious question. >> sure. >> the man was called a liar, in contempt, bribery, in trump's pocket, a stooge, jail time,

felonious, criminal, crooked and perjurer. all i know is if i'm called all that, i'm taking action. i doubt this man will, but should he? >> well, no, that's an interesting point. but what happens is, you know, again, a little out of my area, more into the politics, you see pivot after pivot after pivot, so the point is, you know, they were locked into their idea that bob mueller is an impeccable figure, he's phenomenal so when he came out with a result they didn't like politically, they had to pivot. now barr is the bad guy. so they just go down that road. you just see a series of pivots. to your point real quick, the fact that he is maligned and impugned, i think he kind of lets it roll off of him, honestly. working on what i saw yesterday. >> we have come a long way. we have gone from i cannot tell a lie to oh, well, these were just some small lies or insignificant lies. it's a pretty, you know, unfortunate and deplorable state

of affairs. it might not be impeachable, as you said, but from the political angle, can the president and his minions be trusted? can they govern, given the fact this raised so many questions about their credibility under oath? >> again, you have two discussions. legally they came out with the conclusions they came out with, put that aside. politically, sure, you take the material that's in the report, most notably volume two, obviously, and you turn around and you say look, he did this, he did that. that's all fair game politically. as far as whether he can be trusted, that's above my pay grade. my own opinion, by the way, they lost on the collusion charge. they lost entirely on the collusion so they are focusing on obstruction but they are out to discredit him, to your question, why would they do this to barr, they are out to discredit barr because they know he's now investigating the origins of the russian investigation which might embarrass a lot of democrats. >> let me make a quick point, then break this down. their argument is incredibly weak, actually, just from a legal point of view, which is your summary of this report's inaccurate.

wait a minute. the entire report is now out. hold on. you can see it. so the next argument, let's be fair, is well, three weeks went by where the only thing that was out was the summary. that's also a bit weak. you see what i mean? but those are, you know, what's the old cliche? you play the cards that are dealt. david: doug burns, great to see you. facebook says they are now permanently banning some high profile far right leaders, calling their speech dangerous. but is facebook going too far? that's next. all money managers might seem the same, 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. 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. 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. 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. ♪ david: we've got some breaking news from the president. president trump just tweeting this out. quote, congrats to u.s. steel for investing one plus billion dollars in america's most innovative steel mill, 232 tariffs make pennsylvania usa more prosperous, secure, by

bringing steel and aluminum industries back. tariffs are working. pittsburgh is again the steel city, usa economy is booming. i know jonathan has a mouthful to say about this but we have to move on to facebook. which is now permanently banning far right extremists and anti-semitic political leaders. people they have designated as quote, dangerous. those banned today include louis farrakhan, alex jones and mi miloyannopolous, facebook saying we have always banned individuals and organizations which have engaged in hate regardless of ideology. is facebook going too far? >> i'm delighted to see this. they are taking out the trash, these awful people, in many cases encouraging violence, sanctioning violence. you have no right to speak on someone else's platform. let milo go to myspace or something. he can't go on facebook.

the fact is, what they need more than anything is clear objective rules. people need to understand what are the guidelines, what are the laws. this is a positive thing because facebook has been under attack for months now about not doing enough to clean up some of the trash that's on its site. i applaud it. >> i am so happy i went after jonathan on this one. you know what? look, i just think facebook has every right to deal with their platform and how they want to do it. the question is, is who is the arbiter, what's their background, what are their beliefs, and are they going to be down the middle. that is going to be a question going forward. i really have no problem with doing it. i don't like hate speech. i don't like anything that incites violence. i'm hoping they get it right. >> to your point, facebook has listed out several factors they use to check. they are not just going after alt-right extremists. these people have to check off boxes, either eliciting hate, or flat-out lies.

like we know alex jones has done with sandy hook, lying and saying that entire travesty was a fraud. to that point, though, facebook, i think i agree a lot with both of you, facebook is a company, right, we don't like regulations and it should regulate itself, it should go forward, especially considering how much it's been involved with the [ inaudible ] genocide. it elicited a bidding war and facebook owns whatsapp, there was a rumor on there and that led to the burning of two men in mexico. facebook needs to step in. >> no, no, no, no, no. you guys are all dead wrong on this one. i will first say that i hate louis farrakhan with every fiber of my being. i'm a facebook shareholder, an avid user of twitter. i do not think any of these people should leave the platform because i believe in free speech as a concept. i'm not saying legally.

legally they have the right to do whatever they want. but as a principle of free speech, unless you are directly inciting violence or breaking a law, when you start to go this is hate speech or this is distasteful, that becomes a very slippery slope. where does that go? does that go -- [ speaking simultaneously ] david: hold on a minute. >> let me finish. does that go to your isp, to mastercard and visa, as has been happening to people? this is a slippery slope when you let a few people with power decide what is acceptable speech. i don't like it at all. >> are you suggesting -- i hate disagreeing with carol on anything. >> no. i said no regulations. i said as a principle. >> when i hear somebody saying they want to eradicate jews off the face of the earth, i'm good with them going bye-bye. it's pretty much simple as that. that goes for anybody -- >> here's the problem. here's the problem. you know i'm jewish and i hate it, too, but we counteract bad speech with reason. we want to know who our enemies

are and what happens when we speak out against palestine and then they say well, i'm sorry, you're being hateful toward palestine, guess what, jews, you're off the platform, too. gary, it cuts both ways. david: by the way, the first amendment is not about protecting safe speech. the first amendment has a dangerous element in it and i see jonathan nodding yes. you know what i'm talking about, right? >> well, also, the first amendment does not apply to private companies. this is not, carol, i'm sorry, this is not a first amendment issue. david: that's true. facebook -- >> i do not -- >> carol, if you own a restaurant -- >> i said on principle. i'm saying on principle. >> there's a difference between free speech -- there's a difference between being objectionable which you brought up palestine, and a difference between hate. like jonathan just said -- >> who makes that decision? a bunch of people on facebook. we are going to all end up -- david: by the way, we know,

excuse me, we know who they are using to make those judgments. some of those people have very curious ways of defining it. for example, louis farrakhan is described as a right winger in the listing or the announcement that they were going to cut him out. i don't think he's a right winger. maybe he's, you know, not a socialist per se, but the point is that people make judgments and you have to know who those people are and it's a brave new world. >> therein lies the worry. who's the arbiter? >> and they run a risk, if facebook gets a reputation for excluding right winger, left wing or anything else, really prohibiting political speech, they run a risk to their own viability. david: you are getting very good at the last word, i must say. congratulations. former vice president joe biden repeating claims on the campaign trail this week that the middle class is not reaping rewards from trump's tax cuts. but is he right? we will be asking how small business community member ross

spanno on how small businesses are faring, next.

we should be rewarding work, not wealth. the first step is to revise trump's tax cuts.

folks, i know all of you, you really felt the stimulus in that tax cut, haven't you? it really has helped you a great deal. david: 2020 frontrunner joe biden obviously sarcastically questioning the benefits of trump's tax cuts, claiming that middle america isn't doing any better since they passed. small business is the engine of our economy. congressman ross spano serves on the house small business committee. thank you for being here, congressman. so have the middle class and in particular, small businesses, benefited from trump's tax cuts and if so, how? >> well, absolutely. it's good to be with you. thank you for having me, david. i'm not sure what universe, maybe a parallel universe, that joe biden lives in. but he's not living on main street. it is apparent even anecdotally that small businesses are benefiting. for goodness sakes, we got 3.2% growth in gdp across the board, wages are up, new business

growth -- new businesses that are coming on board just are flourishing. we've got just in florida alone 209,000 new jobs. across the country, over five million jobs. 99% of the businesses in our nation or more are small businesses. half of the people that they employ. so how can you say that the growth, the overall growth in gdp and the improvement and the success of the economy is not benefiting small businesses and those some 47 million people that are employed by them. >> congressman, it's carol. i'm a long-time advocate for small business. i'm thrilled that you're here. one of the issues that small businesses tend to face is that every time somebody wants to throw out a regulation to penalize one of the fewer than 20,000 very big businesses in this country in amazon or walmart, it always ends up handicapping the 30.2 million small businesses that we have in this country. have you given any thought to exempting small business from regulation, whether it's things

like the minimum wage or other types of regulations that would handicap them in the market? >> absolutely. i think that's something we've got to do. in my experience, in the florida legislature and even so far in the u.s. house, is that generally speaking, there are some considerations given to small businesses, not enough. i think particularly from a regulatory standpoint, as agencies begin to make rules that they really don't know how they're really going to come down, it happens all the time. so i think really more from a rule-making perspective than i think from a legislative perspective but that, too, obviously if you have never worked for a small business, if you have never owned a small business, you just don't understand what agency rules and consequences, well-intended sometimes legislation, those impacts they have on small businesses. look, we're just trying to make payroll, trying to keep our heads down and keep our people working. you know, we need help doing that, we don't need the government to be a hindrance in doing that. >> amen.

>> kristina partsinevelos here. i want tolg ba go back to the statement originally, joe biden making a sweeping statement that tax cuts didn't help which i think is wrong. you think you mid a similar sweeping statement saying small businesses have been benefited by the tax cuts. that's not the case. it's a mixed situation for a lot of these small businesses. i encourage viewers to check out foxbusiness.com. there's a great article on it because not everybody is benefiting. you factor in the tariffs, it pretty much offsets any type of gains. >> well, i mean, apparently we have got a differing opinion on that. my experience personally at least in my district, we are made up almost exclusively of small businesses. the chambers of commerce are bustling. there's a buzz on the street. people are excited. new businesses are opening, people are employing people. i'm just telling you from a practical matter, what i'm seeing in the real world is that businesses are benefiting, they are excited. whether you want to call it as a result of the tax cuts or just a general optimism about where we're headed as a nation under

president trump, call it what you will, i'm telling you it's having a positive impact. >> congressman, gary kaltbaum. there's one thing i really loved what trump has done, it's on the regulatory front. for eight years we saw regulations skyrocket and now it's plunging. how much of that has been an effect on small business over the last couple of years? >> oh, incredibly positive impact. there have been 12 pieces of regulation that have been ended with every new piece of regulation under president trump. his goal was to get rid of two for every one. it's actually, the practical matter, been 12 for every single new regulation. that's a big deal. especially in our ag industry in florida, it's very, very important and some of the things that we're trying to do to streamline the process to help them and just generally speaking, not only from a federal standpoint, but we're doing it on a state level, too, in florida, is having a positive impact. we're very grateful.

look, the last thing we can do at this point is head in a different direction. let's stay the course, let's stay the course towards reduced regulation, positive tax policy, and we will see our economy continue to grow. we can do it. david: congressman, we love small business, we love your take on small business. thank you. please come back and see us again. we need more on this. appreciate it. >> will do it. it's been an honor. david: there is more to the college admissions scandal. this time it doesn't involve felicity huffman or lori loughlin. next, we tell you just how much a chinese billionaire was willing to pay for a spot for his kid at stanford. stay with us. . what's up? hey! so listen, i was taking another look at your overall financial strategy. you still thinking about opening your own shop? every day. i think there are some ways to help keep you on track. and closer to home. i'm all ears.

how did edward jones grow to a trillion dollars in assets under care? thanks. by thinking about your goals as much as you do. the doctor's office might mejust for a shot.o 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: new developments in the college admissions scandal. the family of a chinese student admitted to stanford reportedly paid 6.5 million dollars to the man at the heart of the scandal, rick singer. prosecutors haven't determined whether the payment and the daughter's admission are coincidence but given what we know it doesn't look good. stanford university for its part is saying they don't know anything about it. they claim they were never part of the scam. but should they have known? what do you think? >> 6 million dollars? they might as well -- it's a stunning amount. david, they have done irreparable damage to their own brand at stanford. all these colleges have. what's so troubling is this doesn't help that young person at all, you know, faking a value

doesn't help anyone achieve a value. unfortunately all these parents have done their children a real irreparable harm by buying their way into schools they could never get into otherwise >> the only thing i can think of is if i was that child, i would say dad, i will take the 6 1/2 million. david: any day of the week. >> make a quarter a million a year on the muni bonds. move and see you in a few years. >> is 6 1/2 million is the going rate for a fancy degree? i have a degree from wharton. if anyone would like to purchase it from me for 6 1/2 million dollars, call me. it is ready available. you can have my old identity and the whole thing with it. the interesting thing is that this is a chinese family. it seems like the u.s. has become a luxury good for the chinese, whether it's tourism, whether it is buying their way into fancy universities or properties, our brand, it is something we should keep an eye on and also capitalize on. >> i think the big issue is the price of these schools and the

lack of educational mobility. it is in serious decline. this highlights it. how dare they? 6 1/2 million. david: a lot of money for a college degree. >> i wish i had that amount of money. david: me too. that's it for bulls & bears. see you next time. liz: well, we told you it's coming. it is here. d.c. trench warfare. bringing legislation and policy fixes to a total stand still. it is total historic gridlock. the do nothing congress spending more time playing for the cameras and not fixing the country's problems. now this. a big democrat push to side line attorney general william barr so the democrats can flat out continue probes, but the democrats had to cut short a hearing today because william barr refused to testify. republicans and critics now saying nancy pelosi, you're flat-out wrong. trying to now claim william barr perjured