bounceback this morning. we're halfway back. down 600 yesterday. >> not bad. stuart: now we're up 322 points. there you have it. that is the tuesday morning bounceback, not that strong. but we'll take it. neil it is yours. neil: thank you very much. to stuart's point. 29 of the dow 30 stocks are in the green. number was mirror opposite 24 hours ago after i was taking to the air after stuart. a little bit after comeback even among trade sensitive issues that got disproportionally bashed yesterday. we're all over this, because the president intimated he might up the ante still doing so with a velvet glove. we'll deal with that with ed lawrence at white house. lauren simonetti the effect that could come sooner than you think with average folks. later on, iowa senator chuck grassley is worried about farmers who could be in the trade cross-hairs. former hewlett-packard ceo

carly fiorina makes of this. she ran against the president. one of the few prominent republicans who have not folded in with the president on a lot of stuff he is doing. she still calls him out on a lot of stuff that sometimes earns her wrath within the party but respect from a lot of folks who follow her business acumen. so do we. let's read what is happening on the trade front with edward lawrence at white house. edward? reporter: neil what the president is doing or the white house they're trying to put together a package to help farmers. putting back concessions in the trade deal, they're trying to put pressure on the white house in order to sign a lesser deal. the president will take some tariff money that we're putting in. he will turn it around, buy agriculture from the farmers, sell it or give it to other countries for humanitarian aid. in a flury of tweets today the president called our farmers patriots. he went on to say, when the time is right we will signal or sign

a good deal with china. so far the president has support in congress. snort john thune who thinks trade wars nobody wins but he says that we have to keep a harder stance on china to get a good deal. listen. hopefully this additional pressure will have the desired effect and we negotiate a good deal, something that will be beneficial to our farmers and businesses. reporter: u.s. trade representative it's office. that is $300 billion worth of items. this is in addition to the $200 billion worth of stuff that the president has already raised 25% tariff on of the president says, we will always win. listen. >> we have all the advantage. very small factor for us and we have a much bigger economy now. since my election we've gone up so much, we have a much bigger economy than china but if you

take a look, 600 million versus 100 million. it's a different world. reporter: on the everything else that could possibly be tariffed from china at 25% there is a public hearing on june 17th. after that date, the report could be finished. then after that report is finished, the president then has that in his back pocket if he wants to tariff everything that china imports at 25%. back to you, neil. stuart: edward lawrence at the white house thank you very, very much. june 1st, you might want to circle the date, that is the about the time we expect our own tariffs on $200 billion plus worth of chinese goods to kick in. chinese tariffs up to 25% on $60 billion worth of foods supposedly kick in. so around that time, you will be seeing a higher prices for thousands of items. lauren simonetti here to break down what those items might be. lauren? reporter: we're talking about if the u.s. follows through on

about $300 billion of items edward is talking about, getting a higher tariff that would basically be everything that comes into the u.s. from china, would be slapped with a tariff. this latest round would be about 4,000 items. products that read quite honestly like a shopping list. stuff you would buy at walmart, target, cell phones, laptops. those are the most expensive products for consumers. shoppers shell out $45 billion on phone as year, 37 billion on laptops. mattresses also included. clothing, did you know a third of everything that we wear hear in the u.s. comes from china? other items, motorcycles, musical instruments, toys, christmas decorations, alcohol. what would be exempt would be drugs and pharmaceuticals. regardless of what actually happens, this cost is everything basically has a tariff, would cost the average family of four about $2,000 a year. money coming out of their pocketbook because of these

higher prices. as to when this might all happen or not happen, there is a public hearing apa public comment period set for all of this, at the end of june a few days after that is when president trump meets with president xi of china at the g20 in japan. so we'll see then if they have a deal. maybe he doesn't pull the trigger, but then again, maybe he does hold their feet to the fire, neil. neil: all right. lauren simonetti thank you very much. i want to pass a comment made in the chinese media referring to what has been going on. a chinese statement that touts, let me quote here, 5000 years of trials and tribulations. that is the strongest hint yet that they're in it for the long haul, 5,000 years tends to be a little longer, well, a lot of people live. it is stepping back to show that the messages we're getting from both sides of the blown are not quite consistent. the market though looking at a half full glass, arguing that

yesterday was a bill of overreach and oversell. we have dave maney. we have veer ron cook -- rear ron nokia day rougegy. the chinese are individual ral of our, they have added to it by talking about the long term big picture in trade. that is not to say that the they're still knot hopeful for more trade talks down the road. none much it is scheduled. they are getting more fiery, what do you make of that. >> i think this is a hard to contain it just to trade. i mean there are much more things at play here, more importantly, in a lot of ways, this is also political issue with the chinese people and here with the american people. in fact you see it with mr. trump's tweet where staples

you feel that he is mostly talking to his base, no matterq. so the chinese have to navigate this while, you know, trying to placate the americans and not losing faith in the u.s. they are, in china. sorry. so they're all these things coming together. i hope by now we understood that trade wars are not good. they're not easy to win. but precisely for these reasons. and, no one will win because our economies are so interconnected, if they loose, we lose too. and meanwhile, there is all these uncertainty. we're giving up potential growth and even though we can brag that you know, the chinese are being hit much more, i mean, this is sad for us. this is sad for us, sad for us and consumers who will be hit with higher prices. it is sad for investors who don't know where to invest. i mean we this tax cut and this was supposed to be uphill and,

you know, rainbow and sunshine and -- neil: didn't have the tax cut, obviously threat of all this trade stuff retrospect could have been a lot more impactful. >> yes. neil: dave, let me ask you about that. president has been saying he is tariff guy, loves tariffs, loves tens of billions that come in. uses 100 billion-dollar figure. that is ridiculous. 35 billion tops i think is the actual number. the issue comes back to this idea that we will be able to absorb the punishment. but the fact of the matter is, absorbing, you know, $50 billion worth of tariffs on, you know, whacked to 10 percent is very, very different than $200 billion plus at 25%. that's going to be hard to avoid, isn't it? >> well, i'm not sure it is. i mean, if i think about what the president, how he has dealt with these trade discussions, he

always seems to me a little bit of a charging elephant, charging elephants rarely trample. they charge to see what kind of reaction they are going to get on the other side. if you look, on the nafta agreement and the, the discussions with the european union, it does strike me that, it is not, i'm not saying that the president trump is all bluster. what i am saying that he is combination of bluster and willingness to go a little ways. that is what it seems like to me. neil: no doubt. i agree with you on that, the strategy there. i guess what i'm asking you is, should he be preparing for the possibility, end he argues will justify the means and the short-term pain, there will be short-term pain? if these tariffs kick in around june 1st it, will be hard to avoid them. maybe you can avoid them at 25% but it will be hard to avoid them? >> my honest view that he

doesn't think that's going to happen. neil: right. >> and that, what he is not taking into account is the fact that you don't control the poker player at the other side of the table. it's real people with a different culture and a different society and a different set of values. so he is, i think in some ways exactly what you're saying, neil. there could be a kind of a nasty surprise if the chinese player flips over a pair of kings. neil: we'll watch closely, guys. we have so much breaking news. i appreciate what you're offering. you heard about what is going on half a world away, going on in iran as we built up our military presence. reports of still more targeted attacks on opec related oil vessels and the like. it affected saudi arabia, united arab emirates. also affect ad norwegian vessel. we'll give you more on the impact of that. senator chuck grassley how we not only deal with that but tariffs that could hit his home state really badly. in fact they already have, after

this.

at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment.

beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. neil: you don't have to tell farmers there is a trade war on. they have been on the receiving end for better part of a year, since all of this first started. the president is promising aid to farmers with all the tariff

dough he is getting. big chunk may be up to $15 billion will come via agriculture support. iowa senator chuck grassley joins us right now. senator, good to have you. what do you think of the idea the president had to help farmers in your state and elsewhere to help absorb the tariff body blows? >> farmers will prefer the market over the aid the president is talking about. if the aid comes, farmers will take advantage of it but, because they support they support what the president is trying to do in regard to china. our farmers know that the theft of intellectual property, trade secrets, particularly manipulating the currency that china does, all of that is very harmful to the entire united states economy but particularly when they make it difficult for to us import into their country

by the manipulation of their currency. we need farmers, want that changed and they are going to stand behind the strong position that the president's taken. i compliment the president because they know that china has to live by the rules of international trade, just like the united states and almost the rest of the world does. and they know that china is in the wto, that there are a mature nation, they're the second largest economy in the world they ought to live like an adult in that international world. neil: we're not there, are we? he use as figure that have been -- tariffs have been good to us. that we got $100 billion from the chinese. do you know where he got that figure? >> i suppose he took the additional tariffs against the amount they import into us.

i assume that that's where he got it. i'm taking him at his word and -- neil: i don't think he said that senator. who are we to quibble over details like this billion here, billion there, i could go 35, maybe up to 39, maybe $40 million. but when you're lumping that together with items we sell abroad to china, you're lying? >> well, i'm going to have to take your word for that. i'm not going to be able to comment on that -- neil: let's ask where the money goes then. assuming that the president has found it to be accurate, i will check this, i keep trying to get the real skinny on that. i can't. it is tough, but our deficit is only getting worse, right? where does that money go, do you know, senator? >> well, obviously all tariffs go into the general fund of the united states government. there is no doubt about that but if you're talking about deficits

i know you know that we don't have a taxing problem. we have more money coming in this year than last year, even though we had the tax cuts. neil: you're right about that. i'm wondering even with the billions we're getting of all of this, it is not putting a dent in the deficits, you have got to wonder what happens when it stops, okay? >> that gets back to what you and i agree on. we don't have a taxing problem. we have a spending problem. neil: that is argument, you're quite right for another day, sir. i wanted to get your read on political developments lately. attorney general bill barr is tapping a federal prosecutor to look into what got the russia probe going into the first place. do you support that move? >> well, absolutely and i applaud barr for following through. and let's say, if some, if somebody violated the law, obviously they ought to be prosecuted. but even if there is no prosecution, don't you think it does a great deal of good to

have the sunshine in on all that went in to the pre-mueller hearings, whether the intelligence committee, the fbi, the, are not the committee, the central intelligence agency, the fbi, if there was collusion and conspiracy, to make a big thing out of nothing? because it ended up being a big thing out of nothing because you have mueller, well-respected, you have 19 lawyers he hired and a lot of them had contributed to hillary campaign. neil: right. >> when they all come back and say there was no collusion, no crime, then we ought to find out what led to this conspiracy in the first place? neil: senator, donald trump, jr. has been asked by the intelligence committee in the senate to appear before them. they actually subpoenaed him because he wouldn't go voluntarily. the president made it very clear he thinks donald trump, jr. has done enough. do you think he should go before your colleagues on the intelligence committee?

>> you're going to accuse me of ignoring your question when i answer it this way but you got to respect that a person that has never been on the intelligence committee and it is very private and very secret what goes on there, as it ought to be secret. all i can tell you i'm going to have to respect senator burr's judgment why he is doing it. whether i approve of it or not approve of it and there was some explanation in our caucus and those sorts of conversations i can't repeat. only what i say and i didn't say anything in that caucus. neil: all right. >> so i know a little bit more than i'm telling but i can't tell you, i can't tell that to you. neil: i understand that your colleague lindsey graham said donald trump, jr. should go. so move on. >> well i'm, i'm chairman of a committee. i wouldn't want other chairman telling me how to run my committee. i will not tell chairman graham whether he should give advice to

burr or not. neil: senator, always a pleasure. thank you for taking the time. >> glad to be with you. i will be with you anytime you want me. neil: excellent. thank you, sir. we have a trade war going on here. it is actually implemented in a big way on june 1. carly fiorina, who ran against the president the for the republican nomination says be careful what you wish for. trade tariffs, longer term are not necessarily the solution. she has a book out where she lays a lot of things out, that go way beyond politics. after this. 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? ato be eye-catchingly we mabeautiful.ehicle we make them to be exhilaratingly agile. we make them to be meticulously engineered. and for the cla, we also made it for this. the 2019 cla. lease the cla 250 coupe for just $299 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

you wouldn't accept 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.

>> i think we're winning it. we'll be collecting over $100 billion in tariffs. our people, if they want, they can buy from someplace else other than china. really the ideal, is make their product in the usa that is what i really want. we're winning it. neil: president is very clear there, saying that we already collected $100 billion in

tariffs, we're using the present tense, we are collecting $100 billion in tariffs from china. simply not the case. it might be in the 35 to 39 billion-dollar range, since all of this started going after china. he was not talking about the goods we sell to china. just want to clarify that. former ceo of hewlett-packard, author after great book, "finding your way." carly fiorina joins us right now. carley, as a successful businesswoman, you ran hewlett-packard. the first woman to run a fortune 50 concern. you're a free trader. you're leery of tariffs. many in your party are but they seem to have gone along with this approach because the president wants to go along with this. how do you feel about it? >> well, i have done a lot of deals and i have done a lot of deals in china, actually, over decades and there is no question

that we are dealing with a series of unfair trade practices that china has been indulging in for quite a long time, particularly around intellectual property and so i applaud the trump administration for taking it on. the problem with tariffs is that over time they not only hurt the chinese, they hurt us as well. because we actually buy more from china than they buy from us, which the president has pointed out, it hurts our economy more over time than the chinese economy. neil: so is that your worry, once these higher tariffs on more goods kick in we'll feel the impact? he leaves people thinking that china's going to pay for this but your argument is the accurate one that ultimately american, you know, consumers do? >> that's right. i mean ultimately tariffs are either paid for by producers, american producers, who are bringing in supplies for

example, from china. neil: right. >> or tariffs are paid by consumers. who are buying products, which are now more expensive. and so ultimately that hurts our producers and consumers. not to mention the fact, you just had senator grassley on, not to mention the fact we're one of the largest pork producers and exporters in the world to china and china made it very clear they will retaliate putting additional higher tariffs on our agricultural products and that hurts our producers as well. so the concern with tariffs it hurts us over time. i believe more than it will hurt the chinese. my other concern is this, neil, having done a lot of deals is, if you're going to have a successful deal both sides need to feel that they have won something. that is particularly true in china. but doesn't china makes a difference this. has gotten ratcheted up in terms of pressure very quickly.

president xi is personally invested in this, he can't be seep as in his own country as a loser. behind the scenes i hope trade negotiators thinking carefully what is our win? equally importantly, what is the chinese win? neil: if it turns out that the president miscalculated on this, many republicans are in line with him on this, you stand out, ccarly you have not disparaged him you criticized how he relates and treats women, how he relates and treats a lot of people to be fair, why, i don't know any other way to put this, why have you not sort of done with others in your party, let's get in line, he is the president, he is the guy, swallow our differences, whatever, you chose not to? >> well you know it is interesting, i think in america

we believe we're founded on then principle that citizens are sovereign, not a president, not the government. political parties shouldn't define who we are. george washington warned us about this. he said in 1789, the problem with political parties they come to only care about winning. politics may be all about winning and losing, it certainly feels that way. winning and losing doesn't necessarily solve a problem or advance a goal or change the order of things for the better. it is one of the reasons i wrote this book, find your way. look, we can't count on politicians solving problems. neil: but you also wrote about the fact that -- >> -- in washington. neil: i apologize, carly. you also write in the book admit ad mistake. one thing to admit we made a mistake. one thing another to stick around to make things right. if it doesn't turn out on the

trade front doesn't end up the way the president wanted or my way or the highway approach didn't work out, would it be his i screwed up on this, he is not known for doing this. 2 worked for him to get president of the united states, in your sense his failure to do that? you left me hanging, you were not talking about politicians or presidents of the united states, you were making a reference how you grow as a person, man or woman, what do you make of it? >> i think there is a difference between establishing a goal to solve a problem and establishing a goal to win an election. so if president trump's goal is actually to solve the problem, the long-standing problem of unfair trade practices with china, then, yes, i think he should and hopefully will recalibrate his approach when

this approach doesn't work. if his goal on the other hand is to win an election, then maybe he doesn't feel he needs to recalibrate his approach. neil: finally, you have seen the crowded democratic field. you were an early pioneer, certainly among republicans, sole woman running for presidency of the united states. now, my gosh, seems like we have dozens who are doing that in the democratic party. i don't know where your allegiances lie but you have been criticizing the democratic party for you know, saying disparaging things about capitalism, that it goes too far, that that message isn't going to win them an election. does that mean if given nominee who might be of that ilk you would vote for donald trump? >> yes, absolutely. you know, if truly the democrat party allows the left-wing of its party to hijack the entire

party around an agenda, a socialist agenda, that is clearly, demonstrably a failure everywhere it has been tried, then they deserve to lose and they will lose. neil: finally, when you said leaders look different but leadership is always the same, what did you mean by that? >> well, i do think we get confused about leadership. it is another reason i wrote this book. we think that leadership is about position, title, fame, power, wealth and so sometimes people with position and title and fame and power and wealth all look a certain way. it is just leadership has nothing to do with those things. leadership has to do with problem solving. and changing the order of things for the better and courage and character and collaboration, humility, empathy, all those things vital to leadership. no matter what a human looks like, no matter where they come from, no matter the circumstances in which they find

themselves, courage always looks the same. humility always looks the same. problem-solving always looks the same. neil: very good. find your way, unleash your power and highest potential, carly fiorina. i believe this is her third book, this is personal favorite of mine because it cuts to the core of who we are as people. very good seeing you, thank you. connell mcshane meanwhile in louisiana. he is awaiting the president's speech on capitalism, on economic growth and on the trend, he says that are his friend and people who will be listening to it, their friend too. connell? >> it is interesting, neil, coming to this state at this time, given all the issues you were talking about with carly fiorina and others is curious timing but interesting timing because you could have a debate on both sides about the trump economic policy in the state of louisiana. we're in cameron parish, liquified natural gas export

facility. company called sempra energy is adding workers. they expect with the construction they have underway at the facility, they expect to create 10,000 local jobs, 10,000 jobs, nothing to sneeze at. that is terrific growth for the local economy. they say deregulation has a lot to do with it. the president signed a couple of executive orders back in april that cut red tape around energy production. that certainly helped out. i'm sure 3:00 eastern time, when he arrives here you will hear him talk a lot about that. this is a good place to have an economic debate. on the flipside the trade war is hitting the state of louisiana. look what china just as an example they did this week retaliating against the tariffs put in place by the united states. one of the areas they hit lng, liquified natural gas, raising the tariff from 10% to 25%. interesting, neil, about that, 10% they were already getting hit. i was looking at numbers, cargos going from the united states to

china, first half of the year they had 25 ships going over. that was down to eight by the second half of the year. just three so far this year with no others planned. that was at 10%. you go to 25%. not like it gets much worse than that but what analysts are worried about, long-term, fastest-growing market in the world, china for liquified natural gas, you want to be involved if you're the u.s. the businesses made it up, made it up in spades in other countries, japan, europe, business is still booming here, but if you look at the state of louisiana, we'll talk more about it at 4:00 hour on "after the bell" when melissa joins me from new york, we have a soybean farmer coming on, the soybean farmers have been hit hard by tariffs coming out of louisiana and now the energy side as well. both sides of the trump economic agenda. neil: that is interesting. thank you very much, connell. connell mcshane ahead of the president's big speech a few hours from now. secretary of state mike pompeo is saying we're not looking to go to war with iran. try telling the oil markets that

is the case because they're acting like we are. after this. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there?

that's it. i'm calling kohler about their walk-in bath. nah. 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... [ finger snaps ] 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. call... for a free kohler touchless soap dispenser with in-home quote or visit kohlerwalkinbath.com for more info. would you mind passing my book there.

once again, that's... and financing is available for qualified purchasers. neil: all right. the secretary of state mike pompeo is saying that the u.s. will not be seeking a war with iran. but will respond to attacks as we beef up our presence in the region. this as a lot of ships, tankers, you name it has been targeted what we're told is iranian sympathizers or actual lieutenants. tray angst with the latest. reporter: neil, although the president is calling this fake news, reports overnight indicate that the trump administration may send up to 120,000 u.s. troops to the middle east. this as u.s. officials believe iran or iranian backed proxies are responsible for a string of attacks across the middle east targeting key oil infrastructure.

a report in "the new york times" overnight said acting defense secretary patrick shanihan briefed the white house on the plan last thursday. it will reportedly be implemented if iran escalates the nuclear program or decides to attack u.s. forces. the u.s. military sent two warships to the persian gulf and is flying missions with b-52 bombers as well as f-15 and f-35 fighters jets. drones reportedly attacked a saudi oil pipeline as iranian-backed rebels in yemen claim responsibility. saudi arabia noted pumping stations were target. officials say iran or iranian backed proxies that used explosives to blow holes in oil tankers last sunday. the ambassador is surging a response he calls short of war, what the kingdom of saudi arabia is calling a terrorist attack. meanwhile iran's foreign minister spoke and tried to tie the united states to the attacks on oil tankers and pipelines

saying they were looking to provoke an escalation. neil it is important to remember that the united states currently has more than 5000 u.s. troops stationed in neighboring iraq. these troops could be a target of the iranians but they also could be an asset to the united states who is looking to posture in the region. neil. neil: trey angst in jerusalem. be safe. let's bring in fox military analyst colonel david hunt, what he makes of the latest sabre-rattling back and forth. where do you think this is going, colonel? >> we have to remember the backdrop of this, neil, we've been at war, in the global war on terror for 18 years, iraq and afghanistan. are we really talking about a third war in the middle east? what i think about emirates have not said a word about an attack that happened off their coast. we don't know yet. what we're hearing is, iran probably may have, could have been. we are moving a lot of stuff into qatar. a lot, aircraft carrier why, b 5

5 -- b-52s all of that, we ought to take a deep breath, understand, again we're in the middle of something with afghanistan and iraq for 18 years. are we really think about a third war in the middle east? without verified intel? certainly we're not getting it public. i believe if we had it we would be hearing for sure it was the iranians. i'm saying, we ought to be very sanguine about this and understand that this 1% of our population already has been fighting for 18 years. we better be very, very sure what we want to do, what is the outcome of this and what it is going to cost for us in american soldiers lives and of course the money that will be spent. neil: you know, colonel, it is odd that if iran knew we were building up this arsenal and this armada, is coming to the persian gulf, that they wouldn't tempt their fate. these reports of drone attacks from iranian-backed insurgents

on saudi oil facilities, similarly two ships from the united arab emirates. we've seen a norwegian tanker, reportedly hit with fire. obviously that -- oil prices but it would seem incredible to me that you know, iran would tempt such a fate knowing knowing that we have the massive armada on the way and a good chunk of it already there? >> who benefit from this? who else could be playing games besides iran? how about russia? china? a lot of other players this could be a false flag. so many people trying to get iran get their butts kicked from us. again this whole operation, whatever we do tomorrow will depend on our great intelligence service can come up with answers about who did it and who paid to have it done and i don't think we have those answers yet. we'll get them but i think we're way ahead of ourselves talking about sending 120,000 soldiers

and how big it was for the first gulf war. this, overview of this is that we're already up to our eyeballs in afghanistan, iraq, syria. and iran is, that will be the, that will be the third major war. it would be a major, not small deal. and we ought to be really concerned and sanguine how we do this. neil: thanks for that reminder, colonel. we all needed that especially coming from a guy like you who knows what war is like all too well. colonel hunt. thank you, my friend. >> you're welcome. neil: sad news i want to pass along, probably the world's favorite second banana, tim conway died at the age of 85. you remember him from the carol burnett shows, so many other shows, harvey korman, carol burnett, vicki lawrence, they owned saturday nights in the 1970s. a favorite stop can remember for those who remembers mrs. wig begins. tim conway, gone at 85.

we'll have more after this. il m. and gold markets. ok. i'm plugged into equities. trade confirmed. and i have global access 24/7. meaning, i can do what i need to do. then i can focus on what i want to do. visit your online broker today, to learn more.

neil: who says amazon should have all the fun. walmart taking aim at amazon with one-day shipping. can you brief that? kristina partsinevelos on this. reporter: you have it right. one week after amazon announced

one day shipping, walmart announced we'll do it and do it cheaper. spend $35 online, they will deliver next day. starting out in phoenix, arizona, and las vegas. they plan to roll out across the country, to hit 75% of the population by the end of the year. when i said walmart taking a hit at amazon, even today in the newsletter they did highlight you can get this without a membership. for amazon you need to be a prime member and spend $119 per year to qualify for one day shipping. you wonder this must cost walmart a lot to get all the goods out? they say no. the statement from the president and ceo, e-commerce division at walmart, contrary what you might think, will cost us less, not more, because eligible items come from a single fulfillment center located closest to the customer. putting all items in one box, one location, because they have shipment hubs across the

country, neil. they have 4700 stores across the country. something amazon doesn't. they're saying that is our strength. you have amazon though, really ramping up the one-day delivery. they said they're spending $800 million this quarter to do so. the vans you're seeing on the screen is the latest thing they're doing. they're trying to incentivize employees to quit a job at amazon, open up a delivery service in the end to help amazon deliver goods every single day. if you're wondering stock reaction with walmart, it is relatively muted but the timing is perfect. you have walmart releasing their earnings on thursday. so the war continues between massive retail giants, neil? >> they are that. kristina, thanks very much. meanwhile congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez and former vice president joe biden, they're duking it out over climate action. take a look. >> i will be damned if the same politicians who refused to act

then will try to come back today and say we need a middle of the road approach to save our lives. that is too much for me. >> we do need to finish this green revolution in a way that is rational and we can do it, get it done now. neil: charlie gasparino loves to get into the middle of a fight and this is a fight. what do you think? >> it's a fight and it's a fight for the soul of the democratic party. it is interesting, when i was at the salt conference last week, anthony scaramucci's investment conference i ran into guy named harmed ford, jr., former tennessee congressman wall street investment advisor. neil: sure. >> i asked him what is your party es obsession with the far left stuff? listen to what he had to say. >> the question for democrats heading into 2020, the economy will be strong, if it continues rate it is. there may be inequalities but the economy is moving in the right direction. everyone running for election

for president, they generally win. i'm 48 years old. in my adult life we've had more two-term presidents than one term president. before a two termer was unlikely. we want a message not just spends more, not pandering message but more realistic one. neil: hmmm. >> income inequality. this wasn't in the sot i thought it was. we have banners for it. we thought bernie sanders. bernie sanders would have beat trump last time. he thought he was a much better candidate. his whole campaign was around income inequality. where the democrat come from there is interesting scuttlebutt, that nikki haley would replace pence as vice president. i don't see that. neil: do you like anyone in the field? most moderate is biden. >> it is interesting. he likes biden. he is a capitalist.

he is one of the wall street democrats. he likes biden but but they know that the issue that is, only issue that can really resonate if the economy stays strong, is the notion of haves and have-nots. people are one step away, one paycheck away from going broke. it is not, that it is not essentially the economy that they're proposing. that is a risky gambit. listen, if the economy is growing 3% and you're out there saying that well, you know, don't you feel bad? you kind of don't, it is a risky gambit. they really believe, when you talk to joe, talk to them, plenty of democrat which i do, particularly on economic issues, they really believe that americans have an anxiety about inequality that is not -- neil: is that enough to give them the votes? >> i -- neil: usually in a good economy it is tough -- >> i don't think so. this is the biden, harold ford

was signaling the biden message. i'm not donald trump. i'm not staying up all night tweeting stupid stuff. on top of that -- neil: if the economy is strong, maybe people don't care? >> that is how i feel. i'm telling you what they're saying. that there needs to be more equality in income. haves, people one check away. neil: yeah. >> that is, the message they will be throwing out there. i'm not saying i agree with it. i understand. people out in twitter. i'm never-trumper. neil: it will be big. gaspo, thank you very. charlie gasparino. market still holding on to pretty heavy think gains, under 300 point advance. half the ground we lost yesterday. more on how we can sustain that if we sustain that after this. -driverless cars... -all ground personnel...

...or trips to mars. $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. $4.95. no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade.

neil: all right. we have recovered about half the ground, little less than that, of the amount we lost yesterday on the dow. we are going to get sort of an under the hood here, get to all dow 30 stocks, what's moving and what's not. blake burman on the president's next steps. he seemed to innovate before hopping on marine one leaving for this event that, you know, he's readying a next wave of moves against the chinese. we're watching that closely, as is gerri willis at the new york stock exchange on why that could be a big worry for investors if it materializes. then the president's choice to be his trade development director, darrell issa on the impact of all this if it drags on. meanwhile, a look at how the

national retail federation is looking. already its numbers, i'm told we are expecting a storm. cover up. blake burman at the white house with the latest, right now from the white house. reporter: we heard from president trump just a little while ago. he described what is happening between the u.s. and china not as a trade war but as a quote, little squabble. the president said the talks have not collapsed. he said he was not surprised when china retaliated and also says that china is not winning this so-called trade war, as many see it. here was the president from just a little while ago. >> we're winning it. we're going to be collecting over $100 billion in tariffs. our people, if they want, they can buy from some place else other than china or they can really, the ideal is make their products in the usa. that's what i really want. we're winning it. you know what? you want to know something? you want to know something? we always win. reporter: the president

continues to build out this argument that companies can sidestep the tariffs if they do business or if they don't do business, rather, inside of china. but there's also a growing unease from republican senators, especially in ag states, that individuals are going to be impacted by this trade war as it drags out days into weeks into months. listen here to the number two republican in the senate. >> obviously it has an impact. obviously the costs get passed on to consumers so there are impacts there. there are impacts on the ag economy and they are feeling that in farm country. reporter: when you take a look at the calendar, it could very well tell where we go from here, as we stand in the middle of may, because at the end of june, is the g-20 summit in which president trump says he is going to meet in japan with the chinese president xi jinping. there is also this issue of potentially $300 billion worth of tariffs that are coming down the line.

the process of that means a final decision on that is set to be at the end of june. add it all up, we very much could be in a holding pattern for the next six weeks or so. neil: thank you very, very much. at the corner of wall and broad, certainly a better day than yesterday, at this time. gerri willis is at the new york stock exchange with what investors are focusing on. reporter: that's right. we are in a snap-back rally. the very stocks that led the way lower yesterday, higher today. the dow making up about half the ground we lost, 617 points, we are right on the cusp of 300 points higher. here's what's going on. the trade-sensitive stocks we talk so much about, caterpillar, boeing, united technologies, apple, all these stocks doing better today. as investors and traders really reconsider what's going on. the being move came on the president's comments. he said today the dispute with china was little more than a squabble and a deal can still happen. that's what traders focused on today as they listed these stocks higher.

sectors leading the way, infotech doing much better as we see companies like apple, again, microsoft, amazon, all higher. one sector that you might not have focused on but is critically important to the overall tech climate, that would be the stocks like intel, chip stocks, these stocks are higher. intel, qualcomm, skyworks, micro, all doing better today as we start to think about maybe this problem with china to go away. that's what the president is telling us. the worst sector today, utilities. back to you. neil: that was the only one that was up yesterday. gerri, thank you very, very much. june 1st, we will kind of know. what is roughly the time we know that tariffs will likely kick in here on chinese goods. the tariffs will kick in in china on american goods over there. former congressman darrell issa, nominee for the u.s. trade and development director, joins us now.

congressman, good to have you. >> good to be on. you're covering this well. the one challenge i think the people are facing is they just don't understand that for every company that is saying it hurts because i can't sell to china, there's two companies or three companies that say it hurts because i've been buying my product from china. the challenge is with almost half of our trade deficit, $419 billion last year, being this unequal trade with china, it doesn't matter whether you're being hurt on the buy side or hurt on the sell side, america's being hurt by having that much of our money leaving the country without china's willingness to be a fair trader and buy more of our product. neil: all right. of course, they're that way with everybody, right? china has been very territorial and runs surpluses with everyone on the planet. so do you worry that whatever the president's intentions and they are meritorious,

congressman, but companies will find another way to get goods from vietnam or other points in asia? i think steve madden is going to maybe open up a production facility in mexico, that they will find alternatives and those alternatives will just mean we run deficits with more countries now, just not a big, big one with china? >> well, china's deficit is more than the next four countries combined by double. in other words, mexico, germany, japan and canada combined are only $200 billion some and the president has already negotiated with canada and mexico, two of those four major trade changes that are going to tend to make our trade more even and less china-based indirectly. so there's a lot of positive there. but look -- neil: you think that's going to happen, though? only reason why i mention it, the chinese obviously as you know, you are a frequent world traveler, you were a businessman

before you came to congress, they look at the big, big picture, long-term picture, and their state media put out a comment today that touts 5,000 years of trials and tribulations, more or less saying we can wait this out. what did you make of that? >> well, i think that's good posturing but the reality is i have been going to china since the '70s and '80s, throughout i have watched that country develop both coastally and now even in the interior. they have a problem which is they have been promising their people prosperity and growth, and they have been delivering it, if they have to be a fair and free trader, they know they can't deliver it as well. their economy is slowing down. but if they want to take on the president who is willing to say we'll buy from the rest of the world and have a less good relationship with china because it's in the entire world's best

interests, understand that if a job moves from china to vietnam or china to south korea, it's moving to a place that does not mandate that they take our technology, they monetize and quite frankly weaponize some of it. that's an advantage to the american people. it may be a zero sum game for the company that's moving, but it's a loss for china. over the weekend, when larry kudlow said that it's a shared pain, yes, there's some short-term challenges for the united states, import and export, but in the long run, china has to lose exactly what they agreed to in the late '90s when they became part of the wto and then they haven't played by the rules. the one thing i think your viewers have to understand, i travel around the world, i meet with all these leaders, they all want us to succeed because those countries i mentioned and others, they want to piggyback what we accomplish. neil: i don't think the american people are ready for a potential sticker shock.

it could be substantial. it might be the whole 25%, congressman. but unless they are re-educated on this, a lot of people seem to think the governments are going to pay these tariffs. it's folks like you and me. >> there's no question at all there is a short-term challenge and disruption, but our economy is doing extremely well. it's the best time to get china to change its practices, if we can. if we fail, then the world will continue to see china taking advantage in a way that is unsustainable. neil: thank you, sir, very much. we'll see what happens. by the way, i might have mentioned the wrong company that moved to mexico. that was go pro, moved some of its production facilities to mexico. steve madden had moved some of its, largely the shoe maker and moved to cambodia, just to be clear. other companies have been doing that as well. let's go to john lonsky.

let's say june 1 all these ta s tariffs kick in on both sides of the globe. what are we looking at in your eyes? >> we are going to look at some disruptions and see profit margins in some cases narrow. i would like to mention, this trade war, trade friction or squabble, began about a year ago, june of 2018. believe it or not, for the year ended april 2019, core import prices declined by 1% from a year ago. so it remains to be seen the extent to which new tariffs will actually put considerable upward pressure on u.s. consumer prices. it might well be that the retailers will be forced to go ahead and swallow some of these cost increases resulting from tariffs and the consumer, as has been the case for the past year, will hardly notice it. neil: you know, there is the argument, to your point, i think the president agrees or hopes it

pans out this way, that a lot of americans will seek out american alternatives to those chinese products, in some situations you can only do that so much. even if they, that is businesses, absorb this 25% hike, it's not like absorbing a 10% hike or getting your chinese distributors to eat the cost of that so that it's not a big impact. 25% is going to be kind of difficult, right? and trying to find alternatives to all the thousands of products that are being targeted, that's going to be difficult, too, right? >> it's not going to be easy. i wouldn't be surprised if the chinese decide to go ahead and again, absorb some of these tariffs. that's a centrally planned economy for the most part. neil: you are absorbing a 25% tariff, you are really gouging us to begin with. >> this is going to be a subsidy for their export industry. we don't know exactly how this is going to play out. but i would be very much surprised if this latest

proposed increase in tariffs has the effect of pushing u.s. price inflation discernibly higher. neil: unless it leads the a slowdown. >> it led to a slowdown last year. i would say if it wasn't for trade frictions we would have had growth in excess of 3%. if it wasn't for higher interest rates, we would have done even better. neil: where does the president get this $100 billion in tariffs collected? >> okay. well, you know, they have done the math some place there. we'll see how this plays out. when you're looking at a budget deficit that approaches $1 trillion, what's $100 billion? it's only going to provide a short term fix. neil: i'm just telling you that's not true. at most, if you really want to go back to the beginning of last year when all this started, you could make a case for $35 billion to $39 billion, round it up to $40 billion. not $100 billion. i'm just wondering, we had

senator grassley, wonderful guy, wonderful human being, trying to support the president, to say maybe he was including the $100 billion worth of goods we sell to china, when in fact that was not the case. he was saying $100 billion in tariffs. if i'm china, and i'm hearing he's going to make a deal with me and he's mad at china for revoking or doing a 180 on an agreement and he's just making stuff up, the chinese are going to say who's zooming whom, right? >> that's true. but i still think ultimately the most important factor in this dispute would be china's ability to take a very long view. the president, if he wants to be re-elected, doesn't have that luxury. doesn't have the luxury of time. the chinese leadership can wait forever if they want to, it seems, and if that's going to be the case, trump could find himself in a position where he has to scale back his ambitions regarding the ultimate trade agreement. neil: we'll watch closely. john lonski, thank you very,

very much. >> my pleasure. neil: the chinese long-term view is again expressed by state media, speaking in terms of not weeks or months or even years in typical sense of it, but 5,000 years, they say, of trials and tribulations. which might be beijing's way of saying yeah, we can wait this out. we've got 5,000 years. that's incredible. more after this.

neil: the effect will be real and palpable when it does hit. there's only so much you can do to absorb what can be an upwards of 25% tariff on close to 6,000 goods. >> i'm not an expert on it but i can tell you it's certainly not good for the customer in the short-term but i truly believe this is going to be short term. i think that the reaction of the market today is really dramatic. neil: that apparently is the real thorny issue for the chinese. us policing them. they don't like that. but ultimately, the two countries need each other. they need us right now more than we need them because they are a large consumer market. but fundamentally, we can do fine without them. yes, it will have a small impact on the gdp and yes, some

consumer prices may go up but i think the panic and hand-wringing over this has gone too far. neil: so these gentlemen, talking about the jc penney former ceo alan questrom and bill johnson are not worried. but the national retail federation head of government affairs says maybe you should be. do i have that right? your worry is what? >> i think if the tariffs that were announced or put forward yesterday come into force at the end of june, the average family of four could see $2300 more in costs as a result of those tariffs. we are talking about everything that americans buy in any retail store on any given day, could be subject to tariffs. that will be painful. neil: you know, the president said the pain is way overstated because a lot of americans will seek out alternative goods from countries that aren't china, like the united states, for example, and that even the

notion that the full 25% tariff would be passed along, a lot of these companies and concerns will eat the cost, or as much as possible, to mitigate the damage. what do you think of that? >> all of that is true to a certain extent. supply chains are constantly looking for new places to produce, including bringing some of those productions, production facilities back to the united states. when it makes sense, that's exactly what they'll do. but no other country in the world can replace the capacity in china. china's just a huge market, it has a huge manufacturing capacity, it has the logistics facilities, the deepwater ports, the energy supplies. nowhere else matches up to that. i think supply chains will shift over time but we're talking about it will take many years. neil: you know, there's an argument that a lot of u.s. manufacturers, say apple, for example, would have to

significantly increase the cost of its products to compensate for the impact of higher tariffs, and they're not going to do that. what are we looking at? >> i think everybody is trying to figure out how to make the pain on the consumer less and i think but there's only so much margin that a retailer can absorb before they have to pass that cost forward. neil: david french, national retail federation, very good seeing you. >> thanks very much. neil: if you noticed, we are looking at the pro and con side, of this debate. there's no political agenda here. we are fast and furious trying to keep up with the facts at hand here. the fact of the matter is a lot of these tariffs formally don't kick in, the latest wave of them from china and ourselves, until june 1st. the impact on money raised, those are figures we do know. they're not the $100 billion the president said. $35 billion to $39 billion, more

likely. that might be very, very generous. having said that, it is that money that the president hopes to tap to help farmers to the tune of $15 billion. we'll see what that does on a day wall street seems to think that cooler heads might just prevail after all. all this on uber having its first positive day. 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.

what do all these people have in common, limu?oug [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton.

you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

neil: all right. in the middle of this trade back and forth, there's a hearing going on on 5g technology and china's huawei security concerns because huawei is doing business with pretty much all our allies right now and that is a concern here. hillary vaughn on capitol hill with the latest. reporter: well, the transfer from 4g technology to 5g technology would make 4g networks kind of like an obsolete flip phone but that powerful technology is raising alarms here on the hill. senator ben sasse warning of a digital pearl harbor if huawei

is given access to u.s. companies here. >> it's a plausible worst case scenario that we would face from the 5g huawei risk. >> i think a worst case scenario is part of a global conflict. china is able to completely control the internet and fundamentally cripple our ability to do command and control in major combat operations. reporter: out of the u.s. is just part of the threat that u.s. cyberskoort teaecurity tea against. allies opening the door to huawei could force the u.s. to give an ultimatum, if you do business with huawei you are siding with our adversary. >> pretty clear to me as long as china is china, we feel threatened in this space. we are telling our allies don't make us -- don't go down this road, don't make us pick between doing business with you and having to compromise our systems, seems to me this should

be a national security economic priority of the congress and the trump administration. reporter: secretary of state mike pompeo says it is his top priority to convince european allies to back away from this technology, but they argue that they don't have a choice. they say huawei offers something that is cheaper and better and they don't want to be left in the dark from a technology standpoint, but all four telephone carriers in the u.s. say they will stay away from huawei. today we have heard that nokia, samsung and ericcson have 5g technology in the works that will help the u.s. build a stronger, better and more secure network than anything china could offer. neil? neil: it's still early on in this battle. we'll see. thank you. spending hitting a new record last month. a lot of the 2020 democrats are pushing costly programs and a lot of republicans saying we can't afford that. of course, democrats like to point out you guys piled up some deficits when you were running the show and the back and forth continues. we have american enterprise institute president, arthur

brooks, yale university economic professor john romer on who is going to pay for this. professor, i will begin with you. it's always this battle back and forth, socialism/capitalism. i always find if you don't say the word socialism, and you say things like helping kids pay for their college education or providing health care for all, medicare for all, that gets more support than the socialism stigma. is it registering? what do you think? >> i think the policies that you have mentioned and that are being advocated by a lot of democrats, including most prominently alexandria ocasio-cortez, the new flash, very flashy person, and i think a wonderful politician on the scene, are not essential aspects of socialism. they have been adopted by most of the european will fair states which are capitalist countries. neil: you would welcome that? >> i would certainly welcome that. i would also welcome socialism which is a more radical

reallocation of property rights which would have the effect of equalizing to some extent the distribution of both wealth and income which i think is necessary to really equalize opportunities that people have in this country. neil: the goals always sound, you know, good to me, until you realize you run out of money. i look theat venezuela and what happened, starting with good intentions, one of the richest per capita countries on earth and we know what's going on. that is the reality. or is it? >> i don't think we have much danger of becoming like venezuela in this country but i do think we can run out of money and one of the terrific problems we have is when we look at these programs, you say would you like free college education, would you like to have debt forgiveness, people say yes, and it turns into something most americans actually don't want. every country gets to decide for themselves whether, if they are danish they can do it that way. in the united states we do it a different way. we wind up going down a path

choosing something we actually don't like. it's not the country we actually built. neil: have we already started that process? you know, you could argue social security, medicare, medicaid, obamacare, bit by bit we have been. >> there's nothing wrong with the welfare state. i actually believe the free enterprise system created the ability for us to create a welfare state. the problem is we created a welfare state that doesn't serve our moral purposes. every person in this country deserves to be needed. that's a basic essence of human dignity. a big part of a welfare state objeviated the need for certain people, making them into charity cases and made them dependent. that's a real problem. neil: socialism direction, you think would be dangerous? >> it's dangerous because it doesn't reflect our values as a country and fundamentally, the professor and i would probably agree that the economic system we have fundamentally is an expression of our values as a nation. neil: all right. where do you see we have our values wrong, professor? >> i think the main value that's

important to me as far as the debate between socialism and capitalism is concerned, is equality of opportunity. i say that because 70% of the wealth in this country is owned by the top 10% of households, that prevents opportunities from being equalized because children, the main form of inequality of opportunity they face is the different chances that they have for succeeding economic economically. neil: how do you rectify that? >> i'll tell you, by virtue of the families into which they're born which have massively different resources with which they can educate their children. neil: how do you fix it? >> expose them to social connections, so on. so the socialist solution to that has been to redistribute income from capital and to redistribute ownership from capital. i would say the state, the government, should start

purchasing shares in the large corporations of the united states so that eventually, the state which represents the people as a whole, will own a substantial fraction of our wealth. the wealth which is now owned as i said by the top -- neil: let me switch it around to you. do you trust the government to have that big a role? >> i don't. i appreciate very much the sentiment we are hearing but i have much more of a more enthusiasm for the free enterprise solution. one of the things -- i agree completely we need more equality of opportunity but we need more equality of dignity in this country. we have a much larger government solution in which we consign certain people to be effectively wards of the state we strip people of their dignity. that's not right. we have to be our brother's keeper much more so. the reason the cavutos came to this country is because, you know what they were? they were ambitious riff-raff. we have to copy keep in mind -- sorry, neil.

i'm assuming they were ambitious. we are proud of that in this country. neil: you think that would -- >> i think that's the sacrifice we would get. that's a very dangerous business for our country. neil: do you think a nominee of the democratic party espousing those views, cortez is too young to run but she lambasted joe biden for being weak on this new green deal thing, that that's a prescription for disaster? >> i said a prescription for disaster -- neil: if they nominate someone of that view. >> biden's view? i think biden would be a mediocre candidate. i prefer him to bush but i certainly wouldn't vote for him if i had a choice. i would prefer somebody who really wants to make a bigger transformation of our welfare state such as elizabeth warren or bernie sanders. neil: okay. this is a great debate. i want to get into this more and we will, all this week on fox business. we will periodically bring it up. thank you, gentlemen. you did that without hitting each other. >> what's to hit?

this is america. neil: ivy league decency. saudi arabia, as my gentlemen were talking, is saying again oil infrastructure sites are being consistently targeted by drones early today, by attack ships in the persian gulf yesterday. it's on the heels of the united arab emirates saying the same thing is happening to them. all this as we are building up our military presence in the region and the president is talking, we are told, about 120,000 additional troops in the region. now he denied that today and called it fake news. what's the real deal? after this. what if numbers tell only half the story? at t. rowe price, hundreds of our experts go beyond the numbers to examine investment opportunities firsthand. like a biotech firm that engineers a patient's own cells to fight cancer. this is strategic investing. because your investments deserve the full story.

t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

metastatic breast cancer is relentless, but i'm relentless too. mbc doesn't take a day off, and neither will i. and i treat my mbc with everyday verzenio- the only one of its kind that can be taken every day. in fact, verzenio is a cdk4 & 6 inhibitor for postmenopausal women with hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer, approved, with hormonal therapy,

as an everyday treatment for a relentless disease. verzenio + an ai is proven to help women have significantly more time without disease progression, and more than half of women saw their tumors shrink vs an ai. diarrhea is common, may be severe, and may cause dehydration or infection. before taking verzenio, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection. verzenio may cause low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infection that can lead to death. serious liver problems can occur. symptoms may include tiredness, loss of appetite, stomach pain, and bleeding or bruising more easily than normal. blood clots that can lead to death have also occurred. talk to your doctor right away if you notice pain or swelling in your arms or legs, shortness of breath, chest pain or rapid breathing or heart rate. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include nausea, infections, low red and white blood cells and platelets, decreased appetite, headache, abdominal pain, tiredness, vomiting, and hair thinning or loss. i'm relentless. and my doctor and i choose to treat my metastatic breast cancer with verzenio.

be relentless. ask your doctor about everyday verzenio. it's either the assurance of a 165-pointor it isn't.on proces. it's either testing an array of advanced safety systems. or it isn't. it's either the peace of mind of a standard 5-year unlimited mileage warranty. or it isn't. for those who never settle, it's either mercedes-benz certified pre-owned. or it isn't. the mercedes-benz certified pre-owned sales event. now through may 31st. only at your authorized mercedes-benz dealer. neil: all right. the saudis are saying once again, i think this is the third day running, some of their infrastructure and oil sites are being targeted early this morning by drones, yesterday a couple of their tankers in the strait of hormuz, we're told, and the united arab emirates saying a lot of similar things, a norwegian ship was hit, we are

gaining from intelligence on the ground there or at least from these countries, from iranian sources or those sympathetic to iran. that might be a leap there. that's the charge and one of the reasons why we have a beefed-up and plan to have a much more beefed-up military presence in the persian gulf. the effect on oil prices today has been on the upside. larry, how real is this threat? i look at iran and i look at how glaring it would look to do something like this in the face of the military buildup. i guess it's possible but what do you make of this and the effect it's going to have? >> yeah, well, what i make of it is that we are up, what, 1.5% today on some really bad stories, some potentially bad news. 18.5 million barrels a day is run through the strait of hormuz every day, and if these stories were real, if they were credible, i think we would be up

a lot more than 1.5%. we basically just erased the last three days of losses and were basically slightly positive for the last five days. maybe we are just drowning in stories and news flow. who knows. maybe it is real but the fact that we're maybe compromising that strait, that's worrisome. neil: yeah. obviously it affects a lot of oil, i believe a third of the world's oil passes through there. >> yes. neil: i understand the anxiety. but offsetting it is supposedly this china/u.s. trade tiff that can turn into a war that we are told will slow the global economy down enough to cancel out whatever is going on in the persian gulf. it seems a little too neat and packaged and tied in a bow for me. your thoughts? >> yeah, i agree with you 100%. i look at oil prices, i look at the ten-year treasury. not trading too far away from effective fund rates. i mean, i personally think that this trade tariff tension, this trade war, is going to take a long time and i think no one's going to be happy for awhile.

if they were, if this thing was going to be resolved, i think we would see oil prices in a different spot, we would see ten-year yields somewhere else. the stock market, great, it's up 300 points today but it's a bounce-back from a lot of programmed trading yesterday. neil: know what's interesting even with the runup today, since this trade tiff or whatever you want to call it started, in the early part of last year, while we are putting in a good year to date, the major averages well off the december lows, the fact of the matter is in that period of time we have lost about 1,000 points on the dow since this all started. i don't know if the two are connected. what do you think of that? >> i think they definitely are connected. a lot of talking heads continue to talk about earnings per share valuations, how the stock market's undervalued. i'm one of them, by the way. i also recognize that earnings per share is not written in stone. if this thing is protracted, if it continues to be a laborious

project, yes, 2020 earnings per share could drop. maybe 2850 in the s&p 500 is the new 2950. i hope not, i don't think so, but it could be, because if revenues start to decline, guess what, that $181 per share that people are projecting for 2020 will go back to $168 a share which was estimated back in the fourth quarter of 2018. neil: interesting point. larry, always good chatting. thank you, my friend. >> thank you. neil: all right. interest rates have been stable if not coming down. obviously people get nervous and there's a flight to quality, you know the drill with that, and that leads to bond prices going up, the yield coming down. it's been in lockstep with this entire runup we have been seeing in stocks and the rundown, that interest rates have been a constant. bankrate senior economic analyst mark hamrich on that. you know what's interesting when i was looking at this, you could make an argument that in the middle of this trade meltdown or whatever you're calling it, it

got more affordable to buy a house, it got more affordable to refinance the one you're in. so there is that. how does that impact the overall market economic equation to you? >> when there's a perception that times are getting tougher, things go on sale, right? so we're seeing probably a move down in mortgage interest rates this week. let's remember that of course, the financing of a mortgage or the financing of a home purchase is one of many factors that goes into that transaction and just today, we heard from the national association of realtors that year over year, the national average for home prices is up about nearly 4%, but between those numbers, we had a lot of things on the downside. we're seeing some of those red-hot markets cool off and there are a lot of markets you might not have paid attention to before seeing double digit price increases. so i do think that we basically had a run of maybe five years plus of 5% year over year home

price increases and of course, tariffs play into the cost of building materials and the construction industry has been complaining about rising materials costs, rising labor, mortgage interest rates having risen at least up until let's say late last year. there's a lot that goes into this. i don't know that we will necessarily see the housing market very significantly rejuvenated here. neil: it might be anecdotal and you're the expert, but i have noticed homes for sale, they hang on the market a long time, and it seems to be a multiple price point. when you hear that, at the high high end here in new york city where i am right now, these penthouses that go begging or their prices are cut, that was unheard of little more than a year ago. i'm not calling that a housing meltdown or anything of the sort, but i will call it a slowdown. how do you describe it? >> well, i think you do, you are right on there, it's really what segment of the market you're looking at. i think if you are a home

builder and you were to build truly affordably priced homes in the right locations, you would have significant demand. it's the luxury segment that is going to be at risk here and we know the change of the tax law was one of the big culprits there. neil: all right. mark, i always learn something. real quick, though, do you think this 2.42, 2.40 level, that's going to be the range for the ten-year for awhile? >> i think it really matters with resolution of all these issues you just enumerated recently, to the extent that we don't think those are going to be resolved any time soon, it seems like i wouldn't be looking for a big move up in yields, no. neil: mark hamrick, thank you very, very much. also want to pass along that tensions between ourselves and the north koreans are rising. remember the time we took that cargo ship loaded with coal that was headed to north korea? we seized that because it violated international sanctions that were in place. now the seizure of this ship was

announced by the justice department in what justice officials called at the time the first ever seizure of a north korean cargo vessel for violating these international sanctions. now we are hearing from north korea they want it back, they called the seizure unlawful and outrageous and so it goes. more after this. ad earnings rep, looked at chart patterns. i've even built my own historic trading model. and you're still not sure if you want to make the trade? exactly. sounds like a case of analysis paralysis. is there a cure? td ameritrade's trade desk. they can help gut check your strategies and answer all your toughest questions. sounds perfect. see, your stress level was here and i got you down to here, i've done my job. call for a strategy gut check with td ameritrade. ♪ 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.

let's not blame the former director for being angry. i would be, too, if i were in his shoes. but now the former director seems to be acting as a partisan pundit, selling books, earning speaking fees while speculating about the strength of my character and the fate of my immortal soul. i kid you not. that is disappointing. neil: all right. i don't know about you, i didn't expect that from rod rosenstein, the former deputy attorney general of the united states, taking aim at the former fbi director, james comey. obviously a lot of bad blood there. to fox nation's liberty file host, judge andrew napolitano. what happened here? >> look, i guess they were never really the best of friends. it appears to me from reading the mueller report that when the president wanted to fire jim comey, he wanted rod rosenstein to write the reasons for it,

that the true reason for firing jim comey is because he wouldn't lay off michael flynn and he wouldn't stop the russia investigation. i'm using the president's terminology. the stated reason that rosenstein came up with was we didn't like the way he handled the hillary clinton investigation. that was ancient history by then. so i think the fact that he was forced into being the instrument by which the public reason was given for firing comey caused bad blood between them. but man, if he had called me up, he doesn't want my advice, but did and said you think i should give the speech, i would say no way. there's nothing to be gained. he might be testifying about this stuff some day, and some day soon. neil: i'm not saying you started it but comey said some awful things about him. >> comey's a tough guy. what are you going to do? he's got to protect himself. neil: it's not the italian way. never forget a point. where do you see all of this going? attorney general barr wants to look into, has already looked at counsel to look into what

started the investigation in the first place. >> i have been arguing for a long time, what started the investigation is the existence of fisa with its lower unconstitutional standard, with its reputation for granting 99.97% of all surveillance applications requested. it seduced and corrupted fbi agents, so they can't get a search warrant from a judge like i was because there isn't probable cause of crime. they go to fisa and get the same search warrant to surveil the same person -- neil: are the percentages that high? >> yes. yes. because they know they are going to get that search warrant and they use that to start what appears to be a national security investigation, but morphs into a criminal investigation. you go to a regular judge, get a search warrant, that person is indicted, you have to tell the defense lawyer everything you told the judge. you go to a fisa court and get a search warrant, and that person is indicted, you can't tell defense counsel what fisa knows because fisa is so secret.

so it's the belly of secrets. they know they can get away with telling the fisa judges anything they want. neil: it's worth exploring here. worth investigating? >> absolutely worth investigating. neil: here's a dumb question for you. can't the inspector general handle that? >> the answer is yes, he can. but he doesn't have the threat of indictment. and he can only examine people that are still in the justice department. and most of these folks that need to be examined, strzok and page and mccabe and comey, don't work for the doj anymore. they don't have to answer the inspector general's phone calls. look, this guy in connecticut they picked to do the investigation, he's very much establishment. he found that there were no cia torture, no cia abuses, in other words, nothing wrong with destroying all the evidence of torture. what? that was the last time they asked him to do an investigation. now he's doing another one. neil: whatever the merits of doing this, as you said, you are for launching this, whatever, does it make the attorney

general, even though it might not be his intention, like he's doing the president's bidding here? he can't win? >> i don't think so, because i think there's enormous public interest on both sides of the aisle to find out how the heck this started. did the british spy on him, did american intelligence -- neil: you think the democrats want to know the origins of this report? >> they might fear the origin but there's that curiosity. you have to ask the democrats which i am not one. neil: i found it very interesting, lindsey graham coming out and recommending that donald trump jr. not testify to the intelligence committee. what did you make of that? >> i'm personally very fond of senator graham. i have known him since he was one of the prosecutors in the clinton impeachment. but i never heard of a senator saying disobey a valid lawful subpoena issued by the chairman of another senate committee. the subpoena just like the one bill barr is presumed valid. if you can't or don't want to comply with it, you have to challenge it in court. you can't just sit on it and you can't not show.

somebody will show up with handcuffs. neil: no matter who you are. >> no matter who your father is. neil: thank you very much. judge making friends left and right here. all right. investors are finding a friendly corner at wall and broad. the dow up 355 points. all components are up, minus united health group for the time being. . . early.

neil: a lot of issues hammered yesterday are back in the green

today. up 150 point. my buddy charles payne was on that, predicted all of that. at very beginning of the year, beginning of bull market. apparently it is still just that. charles payne to take you through the next hour. charles? charles: neil, thank you very much, i appreciate that. good afternoon, everyone i'm charles payne this is "making money." breaking now the dow hitting a session high after monday's steep selloff. president trump making it clear that the united states is in the strongest positions for the china trade dispute, despite beijing vowing to fight to the end. plus why congress needs to put usmca to the vote if they want to help our farmers. secretary of state mike pompeo sitting down with vladmir putin amid growing tensions with iran. iran says the united states is playing, quote a very dangerous game but what needs to be done to rain in that regime? broke immigrant in