join us friday morning, 6:00 a.m. for that. great show this morning, guys. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> great being with you. maria: have a great day. markets are down about 200 points right now. we will keep following this uncertainty around the trade deal with china and markets' reaction. "varney & company" takes it now. stuart, over to you. stuart: good to see you again, maria. good morning everyone. why are interest rates down so much? that's a good question. it's confounded wall street. let there be no doubt, the sharp fall in the cost of borrowing money has had a profound influence on stocks. let's start with this. the yield on the ten-year treasury, look at that, 2.23%, lowest in a couple years. is this a flight to safety? that is investors buying safe treasuries, pushing yields down, or is it a signal of slowing economies around the world and maybe even a recession in the future? now look at this. the profound effect on the markets. there's a selloff coming in a

half hour. china is threatening to keep their supply of rare earth off the market. rare earth metals are vital for technology products. that is a negative. and short-term interest rates are above long-term which is sometimes a recession signal. the dow is going to be down about 180 points. by the way, it is 5% below its record high. the s&p's coming down by 17 points. look at that nasdaq, down almost 1%. that's premarket. one more market to check and that is oil. it, too, way down today. it's back to $57 a barrel. why? because american frackers are pumping out a lot of oil and there is a glut. the good news here is that gas prices will be coming down this summer. all right. politics. we got a poll for you. read this and wonder why democrats are so worried about a trump win in 2020. 56% rate their financial situation as excellent or good. that overall positive rating is

up ten points from 2015 and it's at the highest level since 2002. better yet, 57% say their financial situation is improving. meanwhile, make that 56%. presidential candidate tulsi gabbard says the expanding economy and low unemployment do not tell the whole story. she says quote, many americans continue to struggle, to make ends meet and get by. got it. that's money. that's politics. that's what we do. "varney & company" is about to begin. the thing is huge! huge tornado! absolutely huge! stuart: there you have it. storm spotters' reaction to a

huge tornado outside kansas city. the u.s. is clearly getting slammed. tell me. ashley: yeah, we have had 11 consecutive days. in fact, yesterday will be the twelfth once they have confirmed more tornadoes. 12 days in a row with at least eight tornadoes. that hasn't happened in almost 40 years. why is this happening? you have an area of cold air over the rockies and warm, moist air to the east over these states and you have this warm air hitting up against the cold air and day after day, it's the same thing. tornadoes get spawned from the clash of air masses. you know, we have had 934 tornado reports so far this year. last year we had 743 for the entire year. this is very, very unusual. ten of those tornadoes have killed 38 people so far since the beginning of the year. and more today, by the way. stuart: i would expect to hear people say this is severe, extreme weather and it's the result of climate change. ashley: yes. we already had guests and that's

been notated. stuart: we will discuss it later in the program. let's get to your money. big news coming out this morning. that is, a sharp stock market sell-off. we are going to be down 180 on the dow industrials. why? in large part because interest rates are tumbling. again, the yield on the ten-year treasury back to i think it's a couple year low here. susan: december 2017. stuart: thank you, susan. that's a long time since we saw 2.23%. susan: almost two years. stuart: former reagan economist art laffer with us today in new york. let's get right at it. why are interest rates down? >> all sorts of reasons but i think they are not selling off the bonds anymore. that's one of the biggest. stuart: who is not? >> the fed. i don't think the feds are getting rid of the bonds they have been holding in their portfolios so that's tightened, you know -- stuart: does that push the yield on the ten-year treasury up if they're not selling them? >> i would say it would push it down. they are keeping those rates down. it's like selling bonds in the open market. also, you have foreign bonds

being negative yields. all around the world, you have problems there. you have the president very harsh on interest rate increases. stuart: is it a signal a recession is coming? >> i don't think so. i don't see any other signs that tell me a recession is coming. stuart: there is the sign that three-month yields, you get more money lending the government for three months than you do if you lend for ten years. isn't that a traditional sign -- >> well, it is a traditional sign in the last say 50 years but if you go back, we had the accord, before the accord in 1951, interest rates were almost zero in the u.s. and we had a booming economy throughout that period. stuart: i've got nothing to worry about? >> i didn't say that. stuart: what have i got to worry about? frj nothi >> nothing to worry about in the economy. the only thing that worries me, i'm always worried about it, trade. whenever you get trade problems, you have a market disruption and you do get real problems in the economy. i think china and the u.s. will come to a deal, but during this

negotiation period, it's got one clash or another, now it's rare earth they are not going to sell to us. stuart: okay. >> it's all part of the negotiations. i think that's what's hitting the market and causing -- stuart: i'm going to get back to that in a second. thank you for dealing with interest rates. thank you for coming to new york to be with us today. >> a real pleasure to be with you. stuart: hold on. we're not done yet. i have big retailers reporting their numbers this morning. let me go through some of them. first off, abercrombie and fitch, their sales fell short. they didn't give a rosy forecast. look at that, taken to the cleaner's. the stock down 18%. meanwhile, dick's sporting goods. i think that stock is up 2%. tell me why. susan: up as much as 6% in premarket. we call this an okay report card, not bad, shall we say, because dick's has been looking at falling sales and revenue and profit after they said they would stop selling guns after the parkland shooting last year. dick's, let's just say they have turned a corner.

they have raised full year guidance. sales were flat, they didn't fall. that was important for the quarter. they forecast growing sales for the rest of this year and the stock is up 18% so far in 2019 but a recovery from a down, shall we say decline in the last 18 months or so. stuart: the key to retailers seems to be their outlook. susan: guidance very important. stuart: if it's not positive, down goes the stock. if it is positive, up goes the stock. seems like that's the way it is. susan: another theme is that dick's stopped selling guns but also have competition from amazon. stuart: who would have thought. everybody's got competition from amazon these days. that's for sure. let me get back to the economy, tax law and politics. some democrats are calling for significant, shall we say, tax law changes. here is hawaii democrat tulsi gabbard. roll tape. >> i think we need to overhaul our whole tax system. i think the president's tax cuts overwhelmingly benefited the

rich and powerful, leaving behind the vast majority of hard-working americans in this country. stuart: okay. leaving behind the vast majority of working people in this country and she says many americans are still struggling. art laffer with us now. democrats seem to be appealing not to the hard numbers on growth and unemployment, but to your feelings. to the emotion side of things. >> i have always been such a huge fan of tulsi gabbard. i thought she was just wonderful before. now that she's running for president, that was just nonsense she just said. just total nonsense. number one, tax revenues are up. these people aren't getting tax breaks. they are getting tax breaks because if there were any, because of economic growth. economic growth has benefited clearly primarily the lowest income groups in this country, the poor, minorities, disenfranchised. we have added enormously and she's saying these people aren't being benefited, she will rehaul the tax bill and get rid of it. what nonsense. stuart: she says many americans are struggling to get by. >> well, they always are.

stuart: there is always going to be a portion of the population which struggles paycheck to paycheck. that's always the case. >> that's part of growing up. when you are young you don't have a house, you've got all these bills, you are struggling. when you get old, you get to live a little nicer life. stuart: what are the effect of rolling back some or all -- >> a crash. stuart: a crash? the economy or the market? >> both. stuart: really. >> the market, you are talking about how everyone's announcement of what their future looks like, stock prices respond to that. that's what stock prices are. they are people's reflection of what's going to happen, what will be, not what is or what has been. so you always look at markets as a harbinger of the future. the market would crash badly if we got rid of this tax bill. stuart: before we end it, i have to ask you this. we have, what is it, 16, 17 months to the election, something like that. are we going to get a recession or significant downturn for america's economy before the

election? >> i don't think so. i don't see any signs of it right now. obviously the one thing that bothers me, not bothers me, i'm just focused on like a laser, is the trade negotiations. if we got a trade deal with china and japan, this market would be 5,000, 6,000 points higher than it is. stuart: i'm going to quote you on that. >> you may quote me on that. stuart: any kind of deal with china? >> not any kind. a good deal. if you got a good deal with china or with japan, he was just over there with abe. if they got a good deal with japan like getting rid of non-tariff barriers and other stuff they're doing, have truly freer trade, that would be huge for the u.s. think about it. without china, there's no walmart. without walmart, there is no middle class or lower class prosperity in america. we need china very, very much. they give us great quality products at low cost and they need us desperately. it's a natural to cut a deal with them. during negotiations they threaten and puff and all this stuff. i just hope it doesn't go a step further but if it doesn't, and i certainly expect a deal to be done and that would be huge for

the president coming into the election. stuart: i'm looking for that headline and i'm looking for that reaction on the market. >> now, if i'm wrong on that 5,000 and it's 8,000 or 9,000, you aren't going to criticize me. stuart: art laffer, everyone. good man. >> thank you very much, stuart. stuart: again, check futures. we are going to be down sharply, off about 170 points for the dow industrials. now take a look at amazon. we have an analyst who predicts the stock is going to hit $3,000 within the next two years. that analyst is on our show later this hour. then there's baltimore wants money from the feds after hackers broke into the city's security system. the crooks demand thousands of dollars to be paid in bitcoin as ransom and the mayor may give in to their demands. how about that? it's quite a story. we've got it. james comey says president trump tells quote, dumb lies to attack the fbi and investigations of his 2016

campaign. congressman jim jordan will join us shortly. i want to know what the investigators are going to find. i think he's going to tell me. "varney & company" just getting started.

stuart: happening now, listen to this. u.s. intelligence agencies say russia has likely been carrying out nuclear tests. hold on, ash. was this a computer simulation? ashley: no, it's believed, intelligence suggests they are carrying out low yield nuclear tests to upgrade the nuclear arsenal. normally they do their testing in an area above the arctic circle but it's the first time the u.s. has accused the kremlin of not observing the commitments under the nuclear ban or nuclear test ban treaty which russia maintains it has adhered to strictly. the u.s. now saying their intelligence shows that perhaps that's not the case. stuart: got it. thank you, ashley. now let's get to a different subject. former fbi director james comey wrote an opinion piece in "the

washington post" that addresses allegations of spying. here's the key quote. there was no corruption. there was no treason. there was no attempted coup. those are lies and dumb lies, at that. there were just good people trying to figure out what was true under unprecedented circumstances. on the phone with us now, congressman jim jordan, republican, ohio. and member of the house judiciary committee, by the way. what are we going to find from investigating the investigators? can you tell us without getting into the weeds? >> well, stuart, good to be with you. i think that the interesting thing is how much these guys have been talking here in the last two weeks, ever since bill barr announced he was going to check this whole thing out. first it was jim comey and loretta lynch getting into it. remember loretta lynch said i really didn't [ inaudible ] when comey said she did. then comey said brennan told me to include the dossier in the intelligence assessment. brennan said no, no, it was

comey who did. they are all pointing at each other because they are nervous bill barr is going to get to the bottom of this. that's exactly what we need. because again, i think all the evidence points to the fact that they used one party's oppo research to go after the other party's candidate. stuart: i think you are beginning to enjoy politics. i really do. i think you are going to have a good summer. before we leave you, i know you are on the phone and on your way to look at the storm damage in ohio. i have to bring this to you, jim. it was one of your republican colleagues who is holding up the funding for disaster relief. what's your reaction to that? >> well, i think congressman massey said this yesterday. if this was so critical, why didn't nancy pelosi bring this up last thursday when we were all there? we could have stayed an extra day and done it friday but no, no, no, everyone had these codels and trips they wanted to do. when you are sending $19 billion, seems to me you should probably have a vote on it.

so i appreciate what thomas did. we want to get money to people who had disasters in their area, who need help, but we got to remember this is taxpayer money. we should look for ways to offset it. we should have looked also to put frankly the border security money in there that the president wanted. so we will get back, we will vote on it i think next monday or tuesday and i assume it will pass and people will get the money they need. stuart: good stuff. jim, we don't want to hold you up. i know you are on your way to survey the disaster damage. we won't hold you up any further. thanks very much for spending time with us this morning. we appreciate it. >> you bet. thanks, stuart. take care. stuart: again, we have to get back to the futures market, check out how we are going to open this wednesday morning. we will be down across the board. we will be down. joe biden has rolled out his new education plan. it includes more money for universal pre-k, pay raises for teachers. sounds like he's in lockstep with the teachers union.

i believe he is. full story, next.

stuart: in his first policy platform, joe biden has laid out his plan for education, and he's going right after charter schools. roll tape. >> i do not support any federal

money, private money, for for-profit charter schools, period. some charter schools work but the truth of the matter is that i don't think any charter school system that does not allow for total enrollment should be in a position where they make those kind of choices. stuart: doing the bidding of the teachers union, perhaps. let's be joined by charlie kirk, founder at turning point usa. whoa. you are going to clamp down on the most successful innovation in education in a generation, charter schools? >> immediately i think if charter schools were such a bad experiment, why are there minority families lining up around the block, why are the waiting lists to get into these charter schools 10 times, 20 times the size of the actual capacity for enrollment, why is it that these communities are demanding better options and choice in education. here's the most telling thing. the entire democrat party seems to be all against special

interests, money in politics. we can't be bought. that is the special interest of special interests. the american federation of teachers and national education association. they have done more damage to this country than any corporation ever could. stuart: bernie sanders is doing the same thing. >> exactly right. stuart: he's putting the teachers union above the interests of minority parents who are choosing charter schools in vast numbers. >> we know market forces work, no matter where they are implemented. the reason why public education has been such a disaster is it's against market forces. you can't pay good teachers more. you can't fire bad teachers. you can't reward innovative practices such as maybe starting school a little bit later, maybe experimenting on different recess practices. this is where charter schools come in. you have these entrepreneurial focus education innovators that say well, let's disrupt this, this hasn't been working. i'll tell you, it's immoral what happened to our inner cities the last 40 years. the public sector teacher unions are to blame.

biden and bernie want their endorsement, their money. i call them a cartel. the damage they have done to this country is unforgiveable. stuart: good note to go out on there. unforgiveable. charlie, you're all right. see you soon. thank you. check out that market, how we are going to open. way, way down. worry about china trade, interest rates are tumbling, that's sometimes a negative symbol. we will open lower, five minutes from now. we'll be right back.

stuart: the investment firm jaffery has an analyst, mike olson, who says the amazon stock could go to $3,000 in two years. he joins us now on the phone. mike, make your case. >> good morning. we are using a sum of the parts valuation analysis, basically splitting amazon into three components which are core retail, advertising and aws. we are conservatively modeling for each of those segments to show decelerating growth but it will still grow materially faster than their comparative group averages. even using that decelerating revenue growth in our model and applying variables in line with each segment's comparative group

average, we see $3,000 in the next two years. stuart: that will be about 60% above where it is now. that would continue some extraordinary growth for amazon. i am going to repeat this. you are saying $3,000 on amazon within two years, right? that's it? >> that's correct. you got it. stuart: thanks for joining us, mike. we just got the market opening up now. i shouldn't say opening up. we are opening down. we are off 150 points from the get-go. it's a sea of red on the left-hand side of the screen. that means the dow 30 stocks, almost all of them, every single one that's opened so far has opened down. the dow is off 164 points as we speak. that's two-thirds of one percent. check out the s&p. what's the decline like there? pretty much the same. down about two-thirds of one percent. as for the nasdaq, same story. down about two-thirds of one percent. you've got an across the board drop. here's one of the reasons. look at this. the yield on the ten-year treasury at 2.23%.

susan, that's the lowest in a couple years? susan: since december 2017 so almost two years. ashley: dow at a four-month low now. stuart: we have opened lower and right now, we are down 186 points. okay. this market needs analysis. jeff sica, david dietze, susan li and ashley webster here to do just that. i will start with the sharp decline in interest rates. 2.23% on the ten-year treasury. why is it coming down so sharply, jeff? >> because of the shattered expectations of investors who felt that we have a trade deal, now we don't have a trade deal. people are running to the bond market. the 2% yield is a whisper away. we could get to it very soon and yields across the world, all over the world, are hitting historic lows. this is a sign of what's to come. stuart: it's a flight to safety. >> yes. stuart: primarily a flight to safety. okay. >> definitely. stuart: david? >> i think it's a little more than the trade deal. across the globe, we are seeing signs of global weakness. in europe, of course, they had

some election results which are now calling into question the profligacy of italian spending. people think there's a ripple effect there. weak numbers coming out of china. that is being coupled with now corporations coming out and reducing forecasts, basically partly because of the trade dispute. susan: also, where are you going to get positive yields? it's negative in germany, in japan. all that money is rotating and chasing some sort of yield here in the u.s. i should point out, morgan stanley says there are recessionary signs for the u.s. economy. this is the strategist that has been the most accurate in 2018. so you have some currency, and his concern is the trade tensions and also by the way, some economic signs and data in the u.s. that's pointing to slowing. in particular, the ihs market manufacturing number that came in at the lowest in nine years in may. that showed a slowdown in services which makes up 75% of

the u.s. economy. ashley: we have also seen a massive slowdown in capital expenditure and rightly so. it's very difficult to predict the future right now but if we do get a deal within the next two, three months, i don't know, four months, all of that changes. where do we go from there? that's the interesting question. if you take away the doubt, businesses can start spending on solid ground. it could be a very significant turnaround. stuart: a lot depends on a china trade deal. ashley: yes. stuart: yes or no, one way or the other. okay. i see it. let's have a look at some -- well, the overall market right now shows a loss of 200 points for the dow industrials. did you say that was a four-month low? ashley: yeah. stuart: okay. down 200 as we speak. is this the start of a new leg down for the overall markets? >> let's put it into context. we are still up 13% on the market coming into today. we are down 5%. i mean, that's what markets do here. on the other hand, i have to tell you for slightly longer term investors, i would much rather have pessimism and low

interest rates as opposed to exuberance and high interest rates. stuart: okay. so should i sell? >> you know, i think you should be selectively buying. what would you sell? stuart: selectively buying? >> if you sold stocks, what would you go into? 2.23 on the ten-year treasury? stuart: what would you buy, if anything? >> if i had anything, if i was forced -- stuart: if you had to. >> if i had to, i would buy bank stocks right now. ashley: such a low interest environment? why? >> i believe there's a play here. i think the reduction in regulation has made them a lot more likely -- ashley: we have been saying this for a long time. stuart: it hasn't happened. >> i'm in. i'm in. i'm in. susan: to jeff's point, i would say banks have done well because of the expectation of a better economy. that's when people take out loans, that's when they spend, that's when they trade. volumes are down 10% since april so i would call that a thin volume selloff we have seen. stuart: i'm going to move on.

all good information. good stuff. netflix is getting political about georgia's abortion law. netflix says it will rethink its investment in that state if the law goes into effect. this is a big company getting into politics. could it backfire? >> not only is it going to backfire, i have been peripherally involved with the film business for a long time. this shows that they are completely, completely clueless when it comes to how to deal with georgia. georgia has given the film industry some of the best subsidies of all. hollywood was making movies all over the world. georgia stepped up. now netflix relies, i love netflix, they rely on margins. they were getting a very good deal from georgia. they are shooting themselves in the foot. they should reconsider this and think of their shareholders and know that this is not going to bode well for them. stuart: okay. got it. let's have a look at the overall

market. we are five minutes into the session and we are down about 170 points. there you have it. as we said, at the opening bell, down two-thirds of one percent. where's the price of oil this morning? $57 a barrel. where's the price of gold this morning? $1288 per ounce. where's bitcoin this morning? oh, good question. $8,700. up just $37 at $8,700 a coin. abercrombie and fitch, their sales missed the mark, gave a not so rosy forecast and it's plunging, down 22%. how's that. dick's sporting goods, they posted better sales. they had a decent forecast of the future and now they have turned ever so slightly lower. how about canada goose? revenue growth slowed, gave a weak outlook. the stock is falling out of bed, down the best part of 20%. gets you every time with those down jackets.

two items going meatless. one analyst says that beyond meats' stock price could go up another 30% if it partners with mcdonald's. second story, burger king stores that sell the impossible whopper, that's meatless, saw traffic increase 18%. are meatless burgers here to stay? >> i think so. you can't argue with results. burger king has seen in the st. louis area, huge increase in traffic versus the rest of the country. i'm not a vegetarian. members of my family are. if we are going to go out together to mcdonald's or burger king, we have to go to the one with a vegetarian option. stuart: really. the kids call the shots in your family? >> of course. when my wife's not. stuart: what have you got, susan? susan: i would call beyond meats the stock of the year, up 200% since its ipo. a study said it could be up $25 more if they partner with mcdonald's. some of their metrics are very interesting. if they tap just 1% of mcdonald's beef sales in the u.s., that would generate $48

million more in revenue for beyond meat. talking about big numbers if they get in. stuart: didn't mcdonald's say we are not going to go that route? >> that's a sign of the apocalypse if they start serving vegetarian hamburger in mcdonald's. i did my research. i ate them. i had to eat three to feel like i could actually function for the day. this stock baffles me. i would not be owning this. susan: jpmorgan agrees, saying they will partner up with mcdonald's at some point, especially with the health kick and the health trend. stuart: hold on, i've just got some breaking news. sorry to interrupt you, susan. this could affect the market. robert mueller will be making a public statement on the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election. he will be speaking live. that will be at 11:00 eastern time this morning. he will be speaking from the department of justice. you will see it. it will happen right here.

whether that has market impact or not, i don't know. it certainly has political impact. we will run it for you. all right. back to the market. look at airlines. some people predicting a summer of hell for air travel. susan: great. stuart: you got the grounding of the boeing max 737 jets and the loss of some tsa staffers down to the mexico border. but i think it's going to be good news for airline stock. bad news for passengers, travelers. ashley: that's where the hell comes in. 2.8 million people traveling by air every day from june 1st to the end of august. susan: 274 million in total. stuart: murder for passengers, people lined up at tsa, but for the stock prices -- >> absolutely. plus very low energy prices. it reflects a great economy, great labor market. people's confidence is up. they want to travel by air. there's nothing on the highways in terms of congestion that makes them want to drive. stuart: well said. well said. this is a good one. new patent from amazon for the

echo devices. they want this thing to listen and record everything you say all the time, not just when you say alexa to wake it up. oh, no, it's always on. always listening. >> i just feel like it is already. stuart: it will be. they have a switch for the echo -- susan: bloomberg came out with the report that alexa development teams record and listen to your conversations already. it's already stored somewhere. stuart: yeah. but nobody cares. who cares? who is going to say i'm not buying amazon stock, i'm going to sell amazon stock because of this gross intrusion to my living room? >> it's such a minor feature. people can say alexa, it's not a hard thing to say alexa and activate this thing. it's a minor feature to give up privacy for this. i think it makes no sense at all. >> the key thing is consumers need to know whether they are being recorded and what they are doing with that information. as long as it's transparent, people can do what they want.

susan: don't buy one. just don't buy one. it's an easy choice. yes, no. stuart: you've got to have one. susan: no, you don't. i don't have one. ashley: i don't have one. susan: why do you need one? you need amazon to buy your milk? stuart: for the weather. i was in a house this past weekend that has one. it's very useful. >> now people demand to have it. in our apartments, they demand it as a feature for their apartments. >> home delivery of your meatless burgers. stuart: alexa, put writing paper on my list. susan: okay. i'll put it on. stuart: that's how they do it. okay. it's that time. 9:41. we have run over. thanks very much. check the big board. we are down about 200 points. let me move on fast here. repeat that news. robert mueller will be making a public statement on the investigation into the russian activity in 2016. speaking live, 11:00 eastern today. from the justice department.

you are going to see it. we will carry it right here. after days of heavy rain, strong storms, tornadoes, every county in oklahoma is under a state of emergency. next, we will talk to the state's governor. i want to know if he blames climate change for this extreme weather. we're on it. i switched to liberty mutual, because they let me customize my insurance. and as a fitness junkie, i customize everything, like my bike, and my calves. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase sensimist relieves all your worst symptoms, including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel. flonase sensimist.

stuart: we are holding with a loss of about 200 points for the dow jones industrial average. let me turn quickly to what are truly devastating storms and tornadoes in oklahoma. the state's governor joins us now. governor, do violent storms like this make you think that climate change may be responsible? >> you know, i don't think so. i don't think it's a climate

change issue but really, the focus right now is just taking care of our people. we've had decades worth of infrastructure into our levee system and so proud of what's happening as our communities come together with what's just devastating floods all across our state. so right now we are just kind of focusing on them. i'm so proud of our emergency management folks, what they have done to keep people safe across our state. stuart: now, the disaster relief federal aid disaster relief has been blocked twice in congress, both times by republicans. what's your reaction to that? >> well, you know, we don't really get involved with what's happening on the federal level. we've got all the resources we need right now in the state of oklahoma. our emergency management team has been doing a fantastic job. you know, we have all 77 counties are disaster area right now. president trump has engaged fema with ten of our counties so we are getting the federal assistance we need.

not sure what's happening with the bill that they're blocking for next year but i'm sure they will get worked out on a federal level. stuart: can you give us some indication of the extent of the damage? i know you said all 77 counties have a state of emergency declared. what is it, flooding just about everywhere and structural damage from the tornadoes, too? >> yeah, you know, in the western part of our state, some of our farmers have lost crops. the eastern part of our state, we've got the arkansas river and we've got historic floods that we are having to open up the flood gates so kind of historic 1986 flood levels all the way down the arkansas. muskogee is flooded. we are watching the levee system around the tulsa area. we have had to evacuate a town so we have a lot of homes damaged right now. we are just praying the floods or the rains will stop up north and that are flowing into this keystone reservoir. stuart: have the feds given you everything you asked for? >> they really have.

i spoke with the secretary of the army, i was on the phone with fema. they said hey, if there's any red tape that we need to deal with, to get you assets on the ground, let us know. i called up our national guard, i've got them walking the levees. we are notifying the citizens. our emergency management local folks have done such a fantastic job of preparing our citizens and we have limited the loss of life. we have only had eight loss of lives across our state. el reno, you know, was hit with a tornado, we had two loss of lives there. so it's just been kind of a crazy couple of weeks but again, i am proud of our citizens, the oklahoma standard, people have come together like no other state. i can't say enough great things about oklahoma and what happens when we have these type of natural disasters. stuart: governor, you said the national guard, you've got them patrolling the levees. is it possible things could get worse? >> well, i mean, it's possible.

you know, there's a lot of pressure on those levees right now. so we are reinforcing them with different aggregates and making sure we don't have any leaks. we have dropped some additional sandbags all along those to protect it. but sure, it's possible but we think we are kind of over the hump. muskogee has peaked and is coming down now, river levels, so that's what we're monitoring. yesterday i met with the three star general from the corps of engineers. he was boots on ground in oklahoma as we were walking the levees as well. stuart: thanks very much for taking time out to be with us on what is obviously a difficult day and busy day. we would like to extend our feelings and sympathy to every member, every person in your state. clearly, it's suffering. governor stitt, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. stuart: sure thing. check that dow. we are down close to 200. 27 of the dow 30 are down. three are up. now this. the city of baltimore may pay

hackers thousands of dollars in bitcoin to fix a virus that has crippled their computers for weeks. it will be a ransom payment if they made it. how about that. what a story. we will bring it to you next. (ding) 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. ♪

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.

stuart: low of the day.

the dow is down 226. that's .9%. we are back to 25,100. four or five-month low of the dow, i do believe. now this. serious stuff. baltimore brought to a standstill by a ransomware attack. the mayor is considering paying the ransom to free up their computers. oz sultan is with us now, one of our tech watchers. first of all, why should the city of baltimore now pay the ransom? >> simply because this is a time-based ransom scenario. in most cases, when, you know, last year we had wannacry, different variants of rans ransomware. this gives you seven to ten days to pay. what i have read from some of the tech logs on this actual piece of ransomware, they are increasing the ransom by $10,000 a day. problematically that leaves baltimore with very few options. stuart: at the moment, their

computers are locked up. some of their computers. the older ones are just all locked up, can't get a water bill, for example. >> you can't get a water bill, can't pay parking tickets, can't pay your real estate taxes and city services are down. stuart: now, have the criminals got cities and towns and other organizations which have older computer systems, have they got them all over a barrel? >> absolutely. if you think back to this, people have been raising an issue about the nsa side of this which is very confusing. if you look at the reporting on this, the reporting is all over the place. the nsa had tools that were basically stolen and released about two years ago, and that's the baseline of how some of these ransomware viruses are being created. but the problem really kind of comes down to more one of i.t. and infrastructure security. so some of these, they're kind of looking at baltimore and saying baltimore may not have patched systems inside of the last year or two years. so it kind of becomes an

interesting discussion. is it the folks that would have this stolen who are responsible for this, and where is the responsibility of the cities inside of all this to just keep their systems up to date? stuart: i take it lots of researchers are now working on a patch, a fix. >> they are. stuart: for this particular kind of ransom demand. they are doing that? >> they are working on a patch which will prevent this which is what we have had with some of the other ones previously. but the challenge is that baltimore is emblematic of the type of attacks we are going to continue to see. greenville, north carolina was hit recently. that was in the news. you know, any city level infrastructure that is running older systems of windows, windows xp, windows vista, that haven't run patches in a long period of time, or just when you get the system upgrades that want to run on your computer, those things haven't been run, that leaves the entire network vulnerable. stuart: 20 seconds. who, in your opinion, is liable for all the damage this has

caused? >> i think it's two-fold. one is the city of baltimore, because they should have had -- they should have actually patched their systems in the first place. but secondarily, we have to look to, you know, what the impact of government stolen tools is and how we are assessing that liability. stuart: so is the government responsible for having their tools stolen? >> you know, i think that's going to end up in court. stuart: or is it the computer companies, the microsofts of this world, which didn't put in patches? >> well, i think again, it goes back to the information security managers, right? so who is the cio of baltimore and what are they actually doing to continue to keep this upgraded? stuart: you know what you are talking about. we appreciate that. thanks very much. >> thanks. stuart: yes, sir. big news out of d.c. this morning. special counsel robert mueller will make a statement on the investigation into the 2016 election. it's going to happen at 11:00 eastern time this morning. as soon as he starts talking, you will see it here, whether it has market implications or not,

we don't know at this point. then there's this. 11 people have died trying to climb mt. everest this season. overcrowding on the mountain, big concern. in our next hour, we will talk to a mountaineer who has reached the summit before and he's there or pretty close to it right now. more "varney" after this. termites, feasting on homes 24/7.

we're on the move. 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. . .

stuart: it is 10 here in new york city. it is 7:00 in the morning in california. we have two big stories we're following for you. left-hand side of your screen, dow jones industrial average, not quite at the low of the day. but it is way down there off 205 points. right-hand side of the screen special robert mueller he will make a statement own russia investigation coming at top of the hour, 11:00 eastern time. blake burman at the white house. any reaction from the president so far on mueller's approaching statement?

reporter: not from the president just yet, stuart. let me break down what we know and what we don't know. white house was advised last night robert mueller might be making a statement today, according to a senior white house official. robert mueller indeed will go forward with the statement in one hour's time at the department of justice. this is a statement only. according to doj, if you expect reporters asking questions to the special counsel, with the special counsel answering those questions, don't think that is going to happen. of course what we don't know at this point, is really what this is all about. according to the press release from the department of justice, the special counsel robert mueller will be discussing the russia investigation. as you know, stuart, there are, there were two parts of the mueller investigation. first off, the russia component, whether or not there was any coordination between members of the trump campaign and russian government. also obstruction of justice,

whether or not the president himself engaged in obstruction of justice. will robert mueller talk about part one of the mueller report and not part two? will he talk about both of those? will he talk about something potentially else, maybe his future, we don't know. we're going to hear from robert mueller for the first time since he was announced aspects counsel march 17th, 2017. some 742 days ago. we will finally hear from robert mueller himself. stuart: going to be quite a deal. blake thank you very much indeed. i want to bring in judge andrew napolitano on this one. i guess i'm asking you to speculate, what do you think he is going to say? >> this is strange development. i can give you two pieces of information, the attorney general will not be with him. the attorney general in alaska, as far as away from washington, d.c., as you can get on a pre-planned trip. without ginning up -- it is not

unusual for him to visit field offices of the department of justice. he chose to visit this one in alaska. bob mueller is making a statement while there. he is making a statement in coordination with the attorney general, probably? stuart: attorney general barr is the boss of robert mueller. >> secondly the new information is troublesome tosome people come out in the past 48 hours is that bob woodward's insistence that he has seen copies of a draft indictment of the president of the united states, drafted by mueller's team and never approved by the attorney general, therefore, never presented to a grand jury. mueller's spokesperson denied the existence of this document. woodward said his sources are impeccable, been accurate in the past. he has seen the document. he has no reason to deny its existence or doubt its authenticity. maybe bob mueller is going to address that before it gets too

far out there. stuart: sounds like most likely option here. you have had people saying, i've seen these documents. >> yes. stuart: they are a written indictment, written up by the mueller report people, indictment of the president, for obstruction of justice. they have seen it. >> yes. stuart: but a spokesperson for mueller says no such document exist. >> correct. stuart: so odds are mueller will straighten that out at 11:00? >> i would think so. there is an old phrase, this will be a little painful to say. a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if you ask it to. write out the indictment, hand it to the grand jury, they have heard any evidence, they are going to indict. this document was never presented to the grand jury, if the document. existed, a because i think bob mueller did not want the country to be in turmoil if it would be in if a sitting indictment would be indicted, b, the boss wouldn't permit him. was it written when jeff sessions with the attorney general. when mat whitaker was acting

attorney general? was it written when bill barr is attorney general. that is probably unlikely, he would not permitted a existence after document to be made nope. stuart: in your opinion, robert mueller will straighten things out today, whether or not there was written piece of paper document, that says indictment him? >> you know why i'm smiling. judge, i'm ask asking you to speculate. continuing to speculate, yes, that is what i think. stuart: you're on solid grounds bearing what woodward is saying. >> intrepid blake burman informs us, no q&a. it about i'm leaving the doj. unlikely he would go on national television, 11:00 in the morning with all of us watching to say good-bye. stuart: i think you're very right. thank you very much. >> in 55 minutes we will know. stuart: we'll all know at that point. judge, thank you very much

indeed. liz peek is with me. the judge handles legal angle here. can you handle political angles, bearing in mind we don't know exactly what he is going to say? >> with that in mind, building pressure for robert mueller to testify, be questioned by congress over his report. it would be great politically for the country everybody else if he came out and said it is over, these are the findings. i have nothing further to add. everything i had to say was in the report. the country would be so relieved. frankly if robert mueller has a conscience he should do exactly that. the reason is this. apparently month into this, two year investigation he knew there was no collusion. so why take two years? why go through the 2018 midterm elections with this still dangling over the white house, really suppressing enthusiasm for the new president, agenda that he wanted to put forward, et cetera? that was politically so

damaging. now mueller has a chance in my view to make amends to the country, i don't mean really to the trump administration, i mean to the country. this has been so damaging to the united states. stuart: this is interesting, both the judge and yourself are on the right track, it would seem to me. why should mueller not explain why he waited so long after he found out that there was no collusion? that has been questioned. what were you up to for all that time. you could have helped the country out. >> we're embroiled again because michael wolfe came out with another book has been out there in the headlines, making headlines about this very issue that robert mueller may or may not talk about, this supposed effort, possibly on the way to actually indicting president trump. so you know what? he needs to put that to bed. one of his spokespeople tried to do that. it was virtually ignored by the mainstream media. they cannot ignore robert mueller. this is the chance to set this

right. stuart: if that is what he is going to say? >> maybe, put a call into him. this is what you should be saying to the american people. liz peak says -- >> exactly. stuart: i think that is solid analysis, an hour in advance what we will know for sure at 11:00 this morning both on the right track. >> we'll see. stuart: let's get back to the market. we hit the low of the day i believe. now we're down 225 points, .9 0% we're at 25,123 on the dow. that is a four-month low. the dow is 5%, nearly 6%, below its all-time record high. we're down all across the board. let me bring you latest on interest rates, that is one of the causes of this market selloff. we're at 2.23%. that is the yield on the 10-year treasury.

that is way, way down there. it means that mortgage rates are probably going to drop below 4% on 30-year fixed. it brings into question -- susan: i have 2.22. stuart: dropped a little bit more. ashley: more money going into bonds. stuart: tell you what. jack hough joins us now. is my analysis correct, this market is selling off in part because interest rates have hit a low, not quite the historic low but the low of the last two years, and there is worries that we're going into recession. is that it? >> i think market is selling off on concerns about the china trade war. concerns about the impact on the economy. investors are buying bonds as safe haven, that is pushing yields lower. the low bond yields have flattering effect on stocks. they look better by comparison.

how bad is the economic news really? is this buying opportunity. or real bad. i don't think it is so bad. i think economy is in pretty decent shape right now. stuart: every indicator comes across the transom. they are all pointing towards really solid economy. >> you look at china trade, what is the offer case scenario. s&p 500 for underlying earnings per share. we're looking $170 in a great scenario. $155 in a worst-case scenario. i don't think that is enough to change anyone's mind about u.s. stocks. the longer this conversation goes on, more people come around the view there is something to the president's actions here. he might be, this china trade push, china has been following this business plan for the longest time of you invite multinationals in, steal their

technology. put a homegrown favorite. take market share. we've seen it happen in appliance, chips, gas turbines. how long do we want our country's technology stolen by chinese. stuart: hold on jack. liz peek with us. you follow not just politics but heavy dose of money. why has the market turned down? >> i think jack is right about the origins of it. i mentioned something which is consumer sentiment. the consumer drives the economy. if they are tuning out trade wars, everything that on successes us. that is great. the result, a lot of things i look at hooked up. surveys that copscompanies are talking much more bullish ily.

i think you're write. i think economy is in pretty good shape. one headline, positive headline about china trade. i think things will be different. i'm not expecting the statement or expecting the headline but if it happens? >> stuart we talk about all the tariffs paid for by consumers, there is zero inflation, folks. look at import price inflation. if we. >> if we take on the fight, a lot of people think we should, this is the time. >> the consumer has good things going on and no inflation. that is exactly right. stuart: liz, jack, ladies and gentlemen, all good stuff. bring you up to state on the market. we've have more rather than any after this.

♪♪

stuart: did something just happen in the last few sections? i don't know. we came back from minus 210 to minus 172. bottom line we're still down, we're down 2/3 of 1%. news of the morning. special counsel robert mueller will make a statement on the russia probe at 11:00 this morning eastern time. kris kobach joins us now. former kansas secretary of state. you're at the border. i will get to that in just a moment. i want to know what you think robert mueller is going to say at 11:00 this morning. any idea? >> no, i don't have any idea but i would say this, stuart, it is pretty unusual for a special counsel to, after delivering to the report add to the report, making comments in press conference or some sort of a speech. so, it strikes me i'm very curious. i want to know what it is. robert mueller is not one who

normally seeks the spotlight or needlessly goes on tv. i think it is really curious. i think a lot of people will be watching, wondering what it is all about. stuart: kris, he may deal with the latest argument about supposed existence after document by the mueller team which said we're going to indict the president. now mueller spokesman says there is no such document but journalist woodward says he has seen it. maybe mr. mueller will straighten it out, what do you think? >> that could be it. that is certainly a possibility. but whatever it is it's a pretty important, it must be important for him to come on and supplement what he already has written in the report with a statement like this. stuart: i didn't mean to ask you to speculate but nobody knows what he is going to say but it's a big news item, i wanted your comment. >> it is. stuart: i think you're at the border, at el paso as we speak?

>> i am. stuart: i understand 2000 migrants were apprehended in el paso on memorial day, one day, what does el paso look like with all the people there? >> it is extraordinary. this is one of the most heavily trafficked sections of the southern border. there is actually, el paso does have a wall that separates it from juarez. there is a gap on west side of it, half mile wide open. that is where my organization, we build the wall came in, you know what? we have private money. there is private land and landowner wants a border wall there. so we put a half mile border wall. >> we're 80% of complete in that gap to stop the human smuggling and drug smuggling come through that gap every night. stuart: have they stopped construction on that section by your group? >> we just stopped last night. we'll be providing some more information to the city this morning. we're hoping to continue very

shortly. stuart: are they pouring through that gap, right there? >> actually the, the portion that is completed of our wall, is lower portion where the people are brought through. so, no they are not pouring through anymore. the wall appears to have stopped that. otherwise they have to bring people across the paths that the drug smugglers use which higher up on the mountain, 300 feet on valley. that is probably not going to happen. stuart: what are we doing with the 2000 people who crossed right there on el paso on memorial day? put them on flight to california, what are we doing with them? >> most of them i believe are being brought to the el paso sector station, which is the border patrol station, they are being processed. at that point they are being told, claiming asylum, many of them are, 90% of claims will be denied, but unfortunately they're being told, here is the

hearing date for the asylum claim. it is in six years. come back and see us in six years. they are being turned loose. that is outrageous. we should have a hearing right there while in custody. if it is denied, send back to home country. horrible ause of asylum system. stuart: thank you very much for being on the show to point out what is clearly ard bother crisis. crows kobach. >> thank you. stuart: to repeat, everyone, we have two big stories we're following for you. first of all there is a big selloff on wall street, still in progress, although we come back a little. we were down over 200. now we're down 140. robert mueller will make a statement on the russia investigation at 11:00 eastern time this morning. that could move the markets. not sure what he is going to say, but it could be a market mover. stuart: we do have a strong economy under president trump. some democrat just can't accept that.

tulsi gabbard the latest candidate to deny the economic boom. she says numbers don't tell the whole story. we're on to that. we'll be back. ♪

stuart: it is still a down day on wall street. it is not as bad as it was. the dow down 166 points, 25,180. that is where the dow is now. you've been hearing a lot about this, the death toll on mount everest, the climbing season, it is now at 11. the problem here, look at that picture, that is overcrowding on the mountain in the extreme. look at them lined up to get to

the top. come on in please, alan arnette. i know you climbed everest recently. did you see a similar line to get to the top? >> stuart, i was not. i was fourth person to summit in 2011. there were 100 people that day. we never experienced crowds like that. stuart: what will we do about that? that picture is real. you may not see the same crowds. there is a line of people, this can't go on, what will we do about it? >> two factors are happening right now. there were few weather windows when the winds were low enough to allow for summits this year. only three during the main push. last year there were 11. second that nepal, a very poor country, won't turn down money, issued a record number of permit, a requirement that everybody has to hire a sherpa guide. only way to solve this, you have to have a lot more experience to climb the mountain than what is currently required.

stuart: that will not fix it, if you have the same number of people. >> actually it will go real long way of helping it because a lot of inexperienced guides. right now everest is being offered basically half price sale, $30,000, instead of the normal 60 by a lot of entry level operators. that is attracting a level of clientele that simply doesn't have the spence to navigate the steep slopes. that is 80% of the problem that we're seeing there. this year was really combination of multiple factors. you had limited number of days, record number of permits and too many inexperienced people on the mountain. stuart: alan, let me get this right, if i front up 60,000 bucks to a tour operator, i get to the top of everest or get my shot at going to the top, 60,000 bucks. >> you get a shot. not a guarranty. stuart: what do you think, if you made it $200,000, would that improve things? >> you know, i don't know, i don't think so, because then it

would become simply a rich person's marketplace. i would strongly believe that mountains are for everybody. you have to earn the right to get to the top of the world. you have to qualify for the boston marathon but there is sear re requirements to get a permit to climb mount everest. there in lies the problem. stuart: that is a interesting idea, you have to qualify to get on to that line. interesting, alan arnette. thanks for joining us. it is short notice. we appreciate it. >> appreciate it, stuart. stuart: i want to get to this "jeopardy" host alex trebek, this is real good stuff, his cancer is nearing remission? ashley: nearing remission. responding well to chemotherapy, he says doctors are shocked how well his tumors are responding to the treatment. and they have never seen this kind of positive result in recent memory. some of the tumors already shrunk by more than 50%. he cried happy tears but he has advantage over many people.

i have more than two million people wishing me good thoughts and prayers. susan: 14-year high in rating. 13 million people watch every night to james holtz hauser is 300,000 from being all time winner on "jeopardy." stuart: big news today coming, robert mueller will make his first public statement since he was announced aspects counsel that would have been what, 742 days ago. he will make a live presentation 11:00 this morning. you will see it too. check the big board. we're down 150, whatever mueller says that could move the markets. it's a busy day in news. we're all over it of course. more "varney" after this. ♪

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.

stuart: you're looking at pea yum where robert mueller will speak 11:00 eastern time. the press will be there. reporters are standing in front of him. we understand there will not be a q&a session. robert mueller appears, makes a statement. i believe that's it. don't know what he will say. now this, steven rattner, the car czar under obama? he wrote, trump's formidable 2020 tailwind, copy, incumbency drive presidential election outcomes. he thinks trump wins in 2020. i have a poll from gallup, 56%

rate their financial situation good or excellent. now that is a huge improvement. listen to what democratic presidential candidate tulsi gabbard, listen what she had to say about the economy. roll tape. >> you can see how gdp has gone up. unemployment has gone down, but those numbers don't tell the whole story. we have to look at quality of life of american people, many who are continuing to strug bell just to make ends meet and get by. stuart: ed connard wrote a great book, the up side of inequality. you heard what tulsi gabbard had to say. democrat rely on emotion, way people feel about things, rather than actuality of the boom. what do you say? >> they are feeling pretty darn good at 3.6% unemployment. democrats have to try to rain on the parade, they recognize that this kind of performance, relative performance of the obama administration produced, the slowest recovery since the

great depression, they have to, they have to criticize this performance. stuart: there is always going to be a aproportion of your population which struggles paycheck to paycheck or all kinds of reasons. >> no doubt. stuart: you will never ever get to the situation where every single person has all wishes fulfilled economically. it is never going to happen. >> i try to look at data that shows you how americans perform relative to europeans at all level of capabilities, bottom 10%, middle 50, top 90. even our bottom 10% is performing 20% better than europe's bottom 10%. stuart: you say performing? >> earning per hour 20% more for similar levels of capability. stuart: standard of living, disposable income. >> yes. stuart: much higher here, even amongst poor people here. >> carefully measured by the most credible organization. purchasing power adjusted, real, not inflated incomes, looking attest scores of individuals who are trying to adjust for their capabilities. if you look at 50th

percentile, it is 20% more. look at 90th percentile it is 50% more. above the 90th percentile is much higher. stuart: we're much better off than the pseudo socialists in europe. >> we're becoming better off since the early 1990s. i think america was at about 18% higher median income than germans were in the early 1990s today. they're almost 30% better. stuart: that is the exact opposite of this inequality, income inequality, is an absolutely terrible thing. you're saying the exact opposite of that. saying exact opposite of the democrats main economic plank in their campaign? >> if it was the case that more equal distribution made the middle class more prosperous we should see a more prosperous middle class in europe, especially northern europe, than we see in the united states. we simply don't see that we see not only higher earnings per hour for similar capabilities,

we see substantially more hours per worker in the united states as well. stuart: your book is called, the upside of inequality. i hope it is selling well. >> well, thank you. it came out a couple years ago at the last election. stuart: reissue the thing. thank you very much indeed. want to bring in brian kilmeade, host of the "brian kilmeade show." he is with us. robert mueller make as first public statement, 11:00 this morning on the russia probe. you want to speculate on what he is going to say? >> if it was right after the probe came out, the probe came out, he would want to give his definition what we read, give us a few days ago. now it has been a few weeks. the big talk, does he want to speak? the answer was yes. he will speak behind closed doors if you need him. that wasn't good enough for a lot of people. speculation continued. next thing happen, michael wolff book, half fiction, half

nonfiction, you make call for, one. revelations on "the drudge report" that says that they had obstruction an obstruction indictment all written out but decided not to release it, they said absolutely is not true. so my sense is, no questions, we know that. the other thing is, no congress is in town. that is interesting. we know that. he is already spoken that if need be he will go behind closed doors. my sense he is upset about the furor, after, during when this report was commissioned. he wants to do his best to remove himself from it. i would love this. i would love for him to say no collusion, obstruction is up to the investigation or the attorney general. stop asking. and move on. because he sees how much damage the country has gone through and is goings through. he. he sees definitive report didn't yield any solace to almost

either side. so my sense is, he wants to correct it. that is what it will be. i think it is important, no questions. stuart: yes indeed. no probing questions. left-hand side of your screen, that is the podium. robert mueller appears there in approximately 25 minutes time. before you go i have to talk about the nfl players union. i'm told they are peeping to go on strike because collective bargaining season ends during 2020 season. that would be disasterous for everybody? >> the owners lose. the owners owned this players union, last time they had a strike, last time they hired scabs to replace everyone of their players and some of the players started breaking the line. then they ended up joining the teams, they ended with a, owners basically winning the whole thing. what the nfl players want is

medical care, join the club. number two, they want guaranteed contracts. they want the cap lifted more to give more money all around. they want a debate on how many games. 18 games, more after pounding. 17 games is what the players union want. to say we will strike in a year, that is coming out, at opening bell trying to throw the best punch right away. i wonder what message do you want to say. only major sport doesn't give guaranteed contracts. you see all the guaranteed contracts. the mets are still paying bobby bonilla to play baseball. he is in his 50s. those are guaranteed contracts. if any league deserves it, it is the most physical league in sports today. that is football. stuart: i'm with you. >> what owners don't want is to pay these guys, because the average lifespan of a player, i think it's a year-and-a-half.

so they don't want to guarranty players when they don't play. stuart: got it. i do understand it. what a situation is developing there. brian, thanks for joining us. i'm joining you, you joining us. >> together we joined each other. stuart: great to be together, brian, and that's a fact. >> see you in the hall, stuart. stuart: got to remind everybody again. robert mueller will make a statement on the russia investigation. that will be at 11:00 this morning. you will see it here. they are getting a podium ready. the press is assembling. next, charlie gasparino, breaking news for us. a big nfl stadium selling its naming rights. you might be surprised when you find out who it is going to be named for. gasparino has the scoop and he is next. ♪ 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. ♪

stuart: we have to wait 15 minutes, then you will see robert mueller making his first statement in 742 days. we don't know what he will say but it's a live statement. no q&a from the press in the audience. 11:00 eastern time. you will see it right here. now this, so far, a financial technology company is in negotiations with the nfl for the naming rights to the new stadium in los angeles. look who got the story? stranger to the show. his name is charlie gasparino. >> not quite a stranger. i come on here. pop in, pop out. break news, move stocks. i'm just waiting for varney stadium. we know how rich you are. guys with a lot of money. stuart: nice try. >> in old days we were talking about this before, they name stadiums after the teams. or benefactors, che stadium was bill shea, brought baseball back

to new york after giants left. there are 350 corporations named to stadiums in the u.s. stuart: really? >> everything from mr. bo jangles stadium, to some very obscure names. sofi is interesting. this is vine of the times. stuart: i never heard of them. >> they're a fintech company. they are new. they have been in existence since 2011. they're run by pretty famous guy, anthony noto, number two guy at twitter. almost became the ceo. big-time guy at goldman sachs, banker, analyst i covered for many years, i covered him in the tech boom years, also worked for the nfl. he was cfo of the nfl. what i understand they are in late-stage negotiations with sofi an nfl put the name on biggest stadium in the u.s. the stadium built both to house the rams and chargers. stan kroenke, the owners of the rams is leading the charge.

they're spending $5 billion on this. compare that to the 1.3 billion jerry jones got, spent on at&t stadium which is a dallas stadium, it is sponsored. that is what you got here in order to defray costs you turn to corporate america. that is what they have here. this is fascinating. sofi, if you're not fintech you don't know about it. this just happened, i hear late-stage, $20 million a year deal. i'm hearing could be 10 years or longer than that. stuart: that is the important number. $20 million goes to the stadium from sofi. >> yes. stuart: because they have got nair nail on the stadium. >> it is instant name recognition, branding. look at this way, not only people see the games, go to the games see sofi. you have to look up the stadium. it is insane. it's a huge stadium. it has office parks on the side. it has other stuff over here. it has incredible infrastructure

around it. this is a unwho thing. roger goodell is putting a lot of, making this a big deal. this is the return home, basically l.a. coming back into the envelope with two major teams. by the way, two teams could be in super bowl. rams were in it last year. chargers, they lost in the division. this is a big thing. stuart: also, if you're a sports reporter for a -- >> i beat all the sports reporters on the story. stuart: congratulations, young man. but if you are, you can't say l.a. stadium right now, you can't say that. you have to say citi field in new york. you have to say it, sofi field. >> it kills me to say citi field. i was old met fan. stuart: you were a mets fan? >> i was back in the day. stuart: you don't have to admit everything on this program. >> we're in a cathartic mood here. i will say this, this is somewhat controversial in this stuff. city group spent $20 million a year, i can't remember exact

terms, right in the financial crisis getting bailed out for the naming rights. people were like what the hell. sofi is still a start it up. susan: raised $500 million today. >> that is the whole thing, they have a 200 million-dollar a greer piggybank for marketing. ashley: i have to bring this to add to the conversation, james hill, one of our viewers said varney stadium. wow, nothing but cheap seats. [laughter]. stuart: end of interview. ashley: that is very clever. stuart: you got the story. sofi, probably getting the naming right to the stadium in los angeles. >> that is the story. right when i hit the button there was website put it out. i don't have it that they got it. i have it they're likely to get it. stuart: well-done, young man. thank you, charlie. good stuff. check the big board, we're back down again. we come back to a loss of 150. we're back down over 200 points. the big news of this morning is

coming up in just a couple minutes. >> not my story? stuart: no. special counsel robert mueller making a public statement from the podium moments from now. the first time we heard from him since he took the job. you're going to see it. next, we'll see what fox news's martha mack thinks about the prize mueller statement. more "varney" after this. ♪

stuart: you have seven minutes to wait. that podium will be occupied by robert mueller who will give his first statement publicly live and in living color since he was appointed to the job. don't know what he is going to say. come on in martha maccallum -- >> that is how you should say. >> the whiskey i believe. >> exactly. stuart: host host of "the storyn fox news channel. what do you think robert mueller will address? >> he chose to not speak and not have his moment in congress.

he seems to want to avoid that moment. does he want to talk about retiring. talking about the end of the probe? potentially those things come up. the other thing he may address this michael wolff book which suggested there was obstruction indictment that was written up. he may want to address that as well. the only other time we heard from the special counsel when another story came out about michael cohen. they wanted to shoot that down. they said that wasn't true. there is opportunity to maybe address this michael wolff, she said, revelation about the indictment. however, there are a couple of key differences that robert mueller may want to suggest his own feelings about. one is the barr summary which he said did not accurately reflect, fully capture the content, nature and substance of the report. does he want to say anything about that? perhaps. also the fact in the report they did not exonerate the president on the question of obstruction. does robert mueller want to have

his peace? he will probably not work again on any of these projects. been around a long time. served the country admirably in the military and washington. maybe he want to say something before he leaves. stuart: i think it is important there will be no questions. the press is there but they're not taking questions. make the statement, say what he has got to say. exit the field. >> he does not want to answer questions it is very clear. stuart: we have only a minute left. you have special coverage of the 75th anniversary of d-day. i have an interest in that. i want you to tell us what you're doing. >> we'll be there from june 4th, to june 6th. covering the president's speech from the cemetery. we're set up in the amazing space where so many americans are buried and we're going to, there is a lot of recreekses going on. we'll talk to world war ii veterans there on that day. your father was one of those. stuart: my father was. >> just amazing incredible stories. i really feel honored to be doing this coverage. it is quite something. stuart: i will be watching.

i do have a connection. i'm absolutely going to watch it -- >> talk about your dad's story. stuart: for the audience perhaps doesn't know this. my father was on a minesweeper in the english channel on the evening of june the 5th, 1944. they swept the channel for mines. he headed back to england. they went right through the invading armada. literally thousands of ships. >> amazing. stuart: i shared this, very personal thing, my mother did not like my father talking about the war. so he never really got into it with me, explain what he had done, all rest of it. she didn't like it. >> usually most cases it is veteran who doesn't like to talk about it. ashley: right. >> every single week i interviewed a world war ii veteran, most in their 90s for the past several weeks. now they say once they hit the mark, 90, they just wanted to talk about it. stuart: is that right?

>> many have not talked about it for 60 years. a lot of kids say i never heard my father tell the stories he told on your show. for some reason, age, wisdom, they want to leave people with at this point. they're talking now. which makes the coverage really extraordinary. stuart: fascinating. >> living history. stuart: i'm glad you're going. i will be watching that. that is really, really something. martha, thank you very much indeed. >> thank you. stuart: okay. you can see on the left-hand side of the screen, podium, robert mueller approaches that podium moments from now. reporter: yeah, we're right outside. this is an interesting note. attorney general william barr is traveling today. he's in alaska actually. we are told from sources, though, the attorney general knows this statement is going to happen. he was told this statement's going to happen. he's also told what was in the statement. we don't know what it is but the attorney general does know what's in this statement. we are also told from white house press secretary sarah sanders that the white house,

the president may make a statement after the special counsel robert mueller speaks here. there will be a brief -- they are going to go into a strategy session right after this. this is interesting. it's on the heels of "the washington post" op-ed piece that former fbi director james comey put in. in that op-ed piece, the former fbi director defended himself. he then said they did not spy on the campaign. he said they never collected campaign strategy. they were just trying to see if there was a russian connection within the campaign. so defending himself going after the president in that op-ed. should be very interesting to hear what robert mueller says. as he was told or as we were told, he's not going to take any questions on this. this is purely a statement. from the special counsel. back to you. stuart: edward, i just want to repeat one thing which you said. the president may make a statement from the white house of his own? reporter: of course -- stuart: after the mueller statement? reporter: exactly. according to sarah sanders, the press secretary, the president may choose to speak after this. they are going to go into a

strategy session after the president hears exactly what the special counsel has to say. stuart: significant. there's real significance here, political significance. i don't know whether it's going to affect the market or not but there is certainly political significance, because it's the first time that robert mueller has spoken publicly since he was appointed to the special counsel job 742 days ago. right, edward? reporter: exactly. this actually could have some ramifications outside of politics here. you know, i cover trade and china was waiting to see if the mueller report would actually affect the president here before they went forward with more of their negotiations here. that's according to chinese sources. so you know, if this does somehow affect the president, that could then affect trade negotiations going on between china and the united states. so there are some ramifications outside of just the political sphere related to this. it depends on what the special counsel has to say. clearly, he wants to speak not in front of congress, he wants to speak here and make a statement to the american

people. stuart: got it. edward lawrence, thank you very much indeed. any moment now, literally, we are seconds away from the special counsel robert mueller, he will make a statement about the investigation into the russian interference of 2016 election. this will be a statement only. no q & a even though the media is arrayed in front of him. the market as of right now, the dow jones average shows a loss of over 220 points. you are way, way down there at this point. we are waiting for robert mueller to appear out of that curtain and approach the podium. as soon as he starts to speak, you will hear it. there he is. ladies and gentlemen, robert mueller. >> good morning, everyone. thank you for being here. two years ago, the acting attorney general asked me to serve as special counsel and he created the special counsel's office. the appointment order directed

the office to investigate russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. this included investigating any links or coordination between the russian government and individuals associated with the trump campaign. i have not spoken publicly during our investigation. i'm speaking out today because our investigation is complete. the attorney general has made the report on our investigation largely public. we are formally closing the special counsel's office and as well, i'm resigning from the department of justice to return to private life. i will make a few remarks about the results of our work, but beyond these few remarks, it is important that the office's written works speak for itself. let me begin where the appointment order begins, and

that is interference in the 2016 presidential election. as alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, russian intelligence officers who are part of the russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system. the indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the clinton campaign. they stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization wikileaks. the releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate. and at the same time as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private russian entity engaged in a social media operation where russian citizens posed as americans in order to

influence an election. these indictments contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or the innocence of any specific defendant. every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. the indictments allege and the other activities in our report describe efforts to interfere in our political system. they needed to be investigated and understood and that is among the reasons why the department of justice established our office. that is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. the matters we investigated were of paramount importance. it was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. when a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation, or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of their government's effort to find the truth and

hold wrongdoers accountable. let me say a word about the report. the report has two parts. addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate. the first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from russia to influence the election. this volume includes a discussion of the trump campaign's response to this activity as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy. in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the president. the order appointing me special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. we conducted that investigation and we kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised

of the progress of our work. and as set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. we did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. the introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. it explains that under long-standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. that is unconstitutional. even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that, too, is prohibited. the special counsel's office is part of the department of justice and by regulation, it was bound by that department's policy. charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider.

the department's written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. those points are summarized in our report and i will describe two of them for you. first, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now. and second, the opinion says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. and beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. it would be unfair to potentially -- it would be

unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. so that was justice department policy. those were the principles under which we operated and from them, we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. that is, the office -- that is the office's final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president. we conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the attorney general, as required by department regulations. the attorney general then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to congress and to the american people. at one point in time, i requested that certain portions of the report be released. the attorney general preferred

to make the entire report public all at once and we appreciate that the attorney general made the report largely public, and i certainly do not question the attorney general's good faith in that decision. i hope and expect this to be the only time that i will speak to you in this manner. i am making that decision myself. no one has told me whether i can or should testify or speak further about this matter. there has been discussion about an appearance before congress. any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. it contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. we chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. and the report is my testimony. i would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before

congress. in addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office. so beyond what i have said here today, and what is contained in our written work, i do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the justice department or congress and it's for that reason i will not be taking questions today as well. now, before i step away, i want to thank the attorneys, the fbi agents, the analysts, the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner. these individuals who spent nearly two years with the special counsel's office were of the highest integrity. i will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments, that there were

multiple systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every american. thank you. thank you for being here today. stuart: and there you have it. robert mueller is done with the mueller report. he will make no further statement about it. now, how to sum up what he just said. seems to me it was neutral. he did not imply that the president was guilty of anything or innocent. he simply said that the report speaks for itself and it has spoken. that's what i believe he was saying. liz: what he also said is the report is my testimony so even if house democrats or senate democrats want him to testify in private, he's not going to speak beyond what is already in the report. ashley: he says look, charging the president with a crime was not an option for the special counsel to consider. therefore, it would be unfair,

he said, to potentially accuse someone of a crime when there could be no court resolution of that charge. liz: that's right. stuart: it seems like the market regards it as can i say a trump win. that's going a bit far. but we were down well over 200 points. as he was speaking, we dropped to minus 170. now we are coming back to minus 200 points. i need more expert political commentary and who better for that than pete hegseth, the co-host of "fox & friends weekends." my judgment is it was a neutral statement. what do you say? >> i think you're right. we saw the definitive end of the mueller report. if you're looking for more, you're looking in the wrong place. he made that very clear. but i think both sides are going to take what they want from this statement. you will have the president rightfully saying no collusion, no obstruction, i'm exonerated, let's move on. the coded language in the second part though i think is what democrats will seize on, which is department policy is such that we are not able to charge a

sitting president with obstruction, therefore, we didn't. he didn't say he didn't obstruct. he said we're not -- it would be unfair to bring charges against a sitting president where there's no place to adjudicate it. i think that's what you will see on late night television on the other networks obsessing over the fact bob mueller's hands were tied by the trump justice department and therefore, he didn't bring obstruction charges. but i think the bigger narrative will be the president can go to the voters which will be the ultimate decision on this in 2020 and say they dragged me through the mud for two and a half years, i was exonerated, let's do something big with the next four years. liz: not exonerated, just not enough evidence to prosecute a crime. that's what mueller is just now saying. ashley: insufficient evidence to support a broader conspiracy when it came to russian interference. stuart: yeah, okay. there were two points which we thought he might address and he didn't. point number one, if he knew relatively soon after the investigation began that there

was no collusion, why did he keep it going for a full two years. he did not address that at all. number two, why didn't he -- there is this -- the wolfe book and the journalist woodward, they say they have seen a draft document indicting the president. robert mueller did not address that. >> because the only thing they ever commented on during the investigation was to correct the record on misinformation in the public. so we all speculated that might be part of correcting the record but it's clear, bob mueller wants to be above and beyond all the wins and loses, balls and strikes underneath. our report, i think you're right, i don't need to testify, that is my testimony, and as a result, the political pundits will do what they want with it to spin it in that direction. i think what you saw is a guy who felt like he had a job to do, delivered on that job, doesn't want to be involved in the politics, let it all hash out. stuart: as he said, not going to hear from me again if i can avoid it and he's returning to private life. he's closing the special

counsel's office, returning to private life. that's it. he's done. you're right, that is the official end of the robert mueller report. >> it won't be for house democrats and presidential candidates, who will still say, because what they are going to say is okay, there's no process by which you charge a sitting president but there is a process called impeachment where if you turn it into a political process, where you can bring it against the president. i think this may, it's amazing to think about it, it will actually ramp up house democrat pressure for impeachment. they don't see anything coming from testimony, they are so obsessed with undermining the president and for republicans it will harden support for the president to say if you want to impeach the president, better impeach him at the ballot box in november 2020. liz: the democratic debates are a month away. the elections are 18 months away. robert mueller coming out now speaking sets the stage for how this will be going forward. ashley: what does joe biden say is a big question. if you are the front-runner seen as the top dog, he hasn't been asked these questions. he's run a very sheltered, hidden campaign.

if he decides to go with impeachment that throws gasoline on that individual. if he walks back from it, does that make him unpopular with the base and turn down the heat for impeachment. a lot at stake in june. stuart: we want to hear from joe biden. >> you can't hide forever if you are running for president. stuart: there is speculation the president will make a comment. he will issue a statement. that was just mooted. there's a possibility of this. very interesting what he's got to say after we have heard what robert mueller's got to say. i might add that the markets have gone back down again. when robert mueller started to speak the dow was down 210 points, i think it was, 209, something like that. as he was speaking, the market came back to minus 170 or maybe even 160 at one point. now we have gone all the way back down again to minus 233. ashley: the market digested it. it was neutral and both sides will get out of it what they want to get out of it.

it's kind of as you were, almost, with this statement. stuart: you are also right in saying house democrats will now ramp up their demands for impeachment. >> i think that's true. they will say we are the extension of justice, of a trump conspiracy that bob mueller was not allowed to bring forward so now it's time for impeachment proceedings. this shows you how divided we are as a country. republicans will say move on, it's over, rightfully so, in my mind. stuart: i think voters will say -- liz: cbs monmouth polls are saying move on. but here's the sentence. if he had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so. that's the opening for the democrats to launch an impeachment based on obstruction. stuart: say that again. liz: if we had confidence the president did not commit a crime we would have said so. stuart: if he had confidence. >> which is why they will say it's still a coverup of the justice department. nancy pelosi holds a lot of

cards. she has presidential candidates and upstarts in her caucus pressuring her. she knows it's terrible politics, impeaching trump at this point only throws gasoline on the fire of his ability to get re-elected. it's a bad idea, brings empathy to him, wrongly charged by the house would be the perception. she's got a big choice to make. with the campaign going starting in june with those debates, i don't know if she can resist. i don't know. stuart: listen to what you had to say and repeating that sentence, the market's hit a new low. liz: here's the lay of the land for the democrats, to pete's excellent point. they are going into the debates with just 17 laws enacted. they did pass 150 bills out of the house, dead on arrival in the senate because mitch mcconnell says they are insufficient to make laws out of. so just 17 versus 440 laws in the prior congress. stuart: so i want that sentence again. that was the key sentence, wasn't it. that's what the house democrats are going to jump on. say it again. liz: if we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so.

in the mueller report. >> you mentioned 17 bills. if they did impeachment that would be the only thing this congress is remembered for forever. stuart: again, session lows on the dow industrials. i have to believe there was a little bit of market reaction to this. not that much. by any means. but a little of it. there are other factors in the market this morning. troubles with china trade, there's very low interest rates and people wonder why have we gone down to such a low level. throw all that into the mix and now the statement from, the sentence again, please? liz: if we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so in our report, in the mueller report. that was robert mueller moments ago on obstruction. on that part of the volume. stuart: looking at other net works, fox news in particular, that's the sentence they have got banner across the bottom. that is the all-important sentence. you picked it out well. that was good. you jumped on that very well there. my goodness me. well done indeed. now, look, the market reaction

is mooted. that's a fact. once we are trying to get judge na p napolitano to give us the legal aspects of what robert mueller just said. can you give me the board with all the big tech stocks, please? can i see that? i want a sense of what's up, what's down in this marketplace. have you got a chance to show me big techs, please? i can look them up on my phone if not otherwise. if i can get to it quickly. takes me awhile. got it? got it? got it? yeah. look at that. look at that. excellent. excellent. well done. big tech is down across the board. we have apple back to 177. google is down 20 bucks. amazon is down 15 bucks. facebook is down two. microsoft down a buck at $125. big techs are all part of this significant market pullback. we are down 230 points. blake burman right there in the middle of it all. what do you have to report for us, blake? reporter: so far, it should be

noted at least that there is no reaction from the white house. no reaction from the president as they watched this unfold live with all of us here in the last 10 to 15 minutes or so. we did tell you in the leadup to this that the white house was made aware last night that what just unfolded could very well be happening today. you sort of went through the headlines of it all in which we await the official word of how the white house is going to react to this, but you can imagine that it will be something along the lines of potentially, at least, that robert mueller laid out that there was no conspiracy or at least no charge that they could find a conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. and that the special counsel's work is done and over with. and that robert mueller won't be testifying so it should be case closed at this point. however, robert mueller also laid out that his office essentially could not go after a sitting president. they could investigate whether or not the president obstructed

justice to preserve that evidence, maybe look into other folks who might be obstructing as well, but that the legal requirements of this for the moment at least stipulated that you cannot indict a sitting president and robert mueller said at one point quote, charging the president with a crime was not an option that we could consider. the white house has been saying all along that there was no collusion, no obstruction and very clearly from robert mueller, we heard no collusion. they will make the case, the white house will most likely still, that the president did not obstruct although we did not hear that definitively from robert mueller himself. stuart: blake burman right in the middle of it. thank you very much. by the way, left-hand side of the screen, that's a new low for the dow as of this day. we are barely above 25,000. the market is headed south since robert mueller said what he had to say. 1% lower as we speak. fortunately, we have judge napolitano back with us to give

us the legal aspects of this. before you launch into this, lizzie, would you again read what to me, i think you will agree, this is to me the key sentence. liz: if we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so. that is in the mueller report. stuart: if we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so. >> boy, i could not agree with lizzie any more than i do. that opens the door for the democrats to pounce, effectively what bob mueller said is we had evidence that he committed a crime but we couldn't charge him because he's the president of the united states. this is even stronger than the language in his report. this is also a parting shot at his soon-to-be former boss, the attorney general, because this statement is 180 degrees from the four-page statement that bill barr issued at the time he first saw the report. stuart: is it that bad? >> i think so. i think so. basically he's saying the president can't be indicted, otherwise we would have indicted

him and we're not going to charge him with a crime because there's no forum for him to refute the charges, but we could not say that he didn't commit a crime, fill in the blank, because we believe he did. stuart: this is about the obstruction of justice. >> yes. stuart: side of -- >> i also think there is fodder for the democrats on the conspiracy side. he didn't say there was no conspiracy. he just said we were not able to establish it beyond a reasonable doubt. there is some evidence of it, 127 communications between russian agents and trump campaign officials from november -- from july of '15 to november of '16, but not enough for us to make a criminal case out of it. i think this is hurtful to the president, hurtful to bill barr, fodder for the democrats. but i also think that the language in here is such that there's something in here for everybody. liz: but robert mueller also said, he also said we did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did

commit a crime. so that indicates they couldn't prosecute anything because they didn't have the evidence of it. that it wasn't there. >> the evidence that they laid out -- liz: i know there were 11 instances. i understand that. but that's a political decision to impeach. not a prosecutable one. >> correct. but the evidence he laid out is remarkably similar to the impeachment charges against richard nixon and bill clinton. richard nixon, haulldemann and ehrlichman lied to the fbi. bill clinton, tell betty curry to lie to the fbi. donald trump, tell k.t. mcfarland about a false document in a file that you know is going to be subpoenaed. these facts that he laid out are so substantially similar to the nixon and clinton, it's clear where he was going. he didn't have to stir this hornet's nest this morning.

by the way, we were wrong when we said he's not going to go on national television and resign, because in fact, he did. he could have simply submitted a letter saying i resign, i'm going back into private practice. instead he took a shot at his boss who is 10,000 miles away. stuart: judge, thank you very much indeed. look at the markets. i think the market's been listening and devouring what robert mueller had to say. they don't care for it. the dow is at a low of the day. now we are down 290 points. barely above 25,000 on the dow. coming up, stephen moore. we will get his reaction to this news from mueller. i want to pick his brain about the fed as well. why are interest rates so low and heading south? why on earth? we'll be back with that in just a moment.

dear tech, let's talk. you blaze trails... but you have the power to do so much more. let's not just develop apps, let's develop apps that help save lives. let's make open source software the standard. let's create new plastics that are highly recyclable. it's going to take input from everyone. so let's do it all, together. ♪ ♪ let's expect more from technology.

let's put smart to work. ♪ ♪

stuart: there is a lot of news this morning. special counsel robert mueller announced yes, he's closing his office department of justice. he says the investigation is over, but my opinion is, having listened to him, i think he's opened the door for the democrats to pursue an obstruction of justice charge related to impeachment.

ashley: he says charging the president was not an option we could consider. what does that say? stuart: it means maybe they had the goods to charge. ashley: but we just couldn't. stuart: that's pure speculation on my part but the market is taking it and running with it, because the dow is now down 285 points. back to the 25,000 level. that's a better than 1% decline. now, there's a lot more going on here. let me break away from the mueller/market scenario for a second. look at beyond meat. the meat alternative guys, okay. big week for them. there are some analysts saying that stock can really go up some more if they partner with a big hamburger chain like mcdonald's even though mcdonald's says they're not going to do that yet. they have signed a deal to produce their fake meat, if i can call it that, in europe next year. our next guest is not buying the hype. andrew left is with us, founder of citron research. i read your stuff. did you say it's not beyond meat, it's beyond stupid? did you say that?

>> no, no, no. the stock price is beyond stupid. actually tried one yesterday for the first time. it was okay. it was decent for the first few bites. after five, i wasn't a huge fan. but that being said, it's unfortunate that the stock market has taken this story and gone so far that an investor cannot buy the stock right now, hoping for growth at the company over the next few years. the market has gobbled all the potential growth and put it in the first two months since ipo. it's probably more of a reflection of the media than of the current underlying demand of that product. stuart: i think you've got a point. you've got a point there. we have made a point on this program of talking a lot about beyond meat and the impossible people, i forget the full name. we made a point of talking about it because it really did seem to be catching on. so maybe we in the media have gone too far on this one. let me talk to you also about self-driving taxis.

robotaxis. ford, gm, tesla are all trying to get skin in this game. ubs says it will be a $2 trillion a year industry by 2030. but that's again something you are not buying. am i right? >> it's not not buying. it's very difficult for any investor to handicap the future of the technology, the regulation, who's going to be disrupted, how many years, what's the r & d that's needed to finish this robotaxis. analysts have to create news. what i look at is what is investable. unfortunately, that's just not an investable idea right now. it's saying i'm going to go make a bet on the future of robotaxis. stuart: would you say the same thing for uber, lyft, airbnb? >> not at all. uber, you see it in front of your eyes right now. i think the amount of rides, they have a ride sharing, might go to 10% in the next four to five years from where they are now at 1%. you are watching uber and watching lyft revolution happen

in front of your eyes. not the future of robotaxis and regulation in technology. that, you are seeing happening. people are actually just caring about profitability right now. that's why you are watching the ubers and lyfts go down and the hot money is maybe going to be on meats. this is just a game in the stock market right now. it's probably not reflecting the underlying future of uber or lyft, in my opinion. stuart: you would not touch this stuff until things have settled down? >> i like uber. personally, i like uber and lyft. i think these are disruptive companies that the next 10, 15 years are going to change the way we look at driving, whether it's done with a real driver or whether it's done autonomous. they both have skin in that game. but i like both those companies long term. but i like them understanding the fact that these are not moonshot companies. you have to be patient. these are four, five, six years out. we will start seeing better monetization. stuart: tell me about wayfair,

the online furniture sellers. i ask because i just discovered them this past weekend. i understand they are really a big operation, online furniture. but you don't like them. >> they are a big operation. they are not a profitable operation. if you look at them, they have been around for years, talking about we'll make profits next year, we'll make profits next year. there are just no profits here. i think that as the market is focused on profits and disruptive and interesting companies, self-driving cars, that's exciting. selling furniture online, amazon does it, everyone does it, they are a middleman for furniture. i think it might be a $12 billion, $13 billion company and the only people who have ever made any profits here are the executives who have probably sold maybe $300 million to $400 million worth of stock personally without the company ever having one dime of profit. stuart: okay. we take your point. i know that you look at individual stocks but i'm just going to ask you a question

about the overall market for a second. why is it down so much? we are off nearly 300 points on the dow. big drop, the s&p. what's your reasoning here? why are we down? >> why are you looking at the glass half empty when it's really half full? why are we up so much over the past three years? we had a spectacular recovery since december. the market still has great stocks that are trading at great levels. and it's not down so much. we can't expect the market to go up every day. you wouldn't have a show if that was the case. you need the market to go down. especially if you are an investor, you take these opportunities to say i'm not going to buy wayfair, maybe i will short wayfair or sell it if i own it but look at facebook, growing 23 times next year, you know, 23% next year trading at maybe ten times. or look at apple right now, who you say might be -- come out even if there's a trade war, you believe in the apple ecosystem. it's a good opportunity right now as an investor to say maybe

what's been unfairly beaten down. but this is what makes the market. stuart: you are a smart guy. we really appreciate your alternative way of looking at things. why is the glass considered half empty, not half full. very interesting. andrew, i hope you can come back and see us again real soon. we like your stuff. >> most definitely. stuart: you can answer if you like. thank you very much indeed. see you soon. got it. on a completely different story now. big news from jeep. they are rolling out their first pickup truck in 30 years. people are going crazy for it. we are taking a drive in it. it's called i think, what is it, the gladiator. tell me more. >> it's essentially a wrangler pickup although there is more to it than that. the back end actually has got more ram 1500 pickup in it than you might imagine. jeep has been working on this for a long time, not just 30

years but in recent years. it's a very important vehicle. deep hands have been dying to get their hands on this. it's just hitting showrooms now. it's so popular that they are seeing 10, 15, $20,000 markups on this at some dealers. this isn't a $100,000 sports car. this is a $35,000 to $65,000 truck that's going for $55,000 to $85,000 right now, at least until demand catches up. you know, the first day they put these on sale, they had a special launch edition, they made 4,591 of them. they sold all of them in one day, $60,000 a pop. that's $250 million worth of trucks in one day for jeep. wouldn't expect them to keep selling at that rate but this is going to be a big seller this year. part of a billion dollar investment, multi-billion dollar

investment across the brand over the next couple years. stuart: okay. we got the message. i kind of like those things. the look of it. gary drives off into the sunset in what looks like a glorified tank. good stuff. good stuff. good stuff. back to the story of the day which really is reaction to what robert mueller had to say. it's beginning to come in. congressman amash, the first to respond. what did -- now, amash is the republican saying you could indict, you could impeach the guy. what's he saying after mueller? liz: tweeting out the ball is in our court, congress. in other words, the obstruction, there's a tweet that will the congress -- stuart: he's republican. liz: -- pick up the ten instances of alleged obstruction of justice, can they go with it. stuart: well, he's a republican. liz: that's right. stuart: he's opening the door to an impeachment process. i think that's what he's doing. ashley: yes. i've just got donald trump.

this is what we have been waiting for. here we go, from the president. nothing changes from the mueller report. there was insufficient evidence and therefore, in our country, a person is innocent. the case is closed. thank you. stuart: case is closed, thank you. liz: that's an interesting measured tweet from the president because he's flat out prior to that said it exonerated me but this is more measured. stuart: carefully sorted out. now, i might add that the dow has just gone down some more. we are off now 318 points. i have to believe it's a response to what robert mueller had to say and in my opinion, robert mueller opened the door to the democrats to pursue an impeachment charge of obstruction of justice. he seemed to do that. the wording, that key sentence which liz put out there very clearly, that sentence in my opinion opened the door. the market doesn't like it. liz: the footnote that analysts on wall street need to take note of is this.

robert mueller also said this. we did not, however, make determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. so you can't just hang it on the first part of the sentence -- ashley: but they will. stuart: low of the day, minus 331 points. next, stephen moore. we are talking mueller and interest rates.

stuart: got to keep an eye on your money today. low of the day for the dow, we are minus 374 points. that's 1.5%. look at that nasdaq, down 1.25%. you are down all across the board today. in part, this is a reaction to

what robert mueller had to say in his announcement 43 minutes ago. i want to bring in stephen moore, heritage foundation guy, knows a lot about this. my interpretation of what mueller had to say was that he had opened the door to house democrats to pursue an impeachment charge based on obstruction of justice. that's my reading. that's why the market's down so much. what say you? >> well, that wasn't exactly my reading. i'm not a lawyer, and i'm not familiar with all the legal mumbo-jumbo but i watched the whole statement by robert mueller and i had a two-word response to it. not guilty. there is no evidence of a crime here and i think the democrats, you know, pursue impeachment because i heard you all talking about impeachment earlier, at their own peril. i don't think the american people want that. i think they do want to move on, so i think it's to their own detriment if they pursue that course. stuart: is there a china trade angle here? as to why the market's down?

i ask that question because if china believes that mr. trump is facing possible impeachment in the house, then their position is strengthened. they are much less likely to come to a comprehensive trade agreement with this president if he really is facing impeachment. that's another reason why the market's down. what do you say to that? >> i think there's something to that. i think there is. you know, i'm with most i think of the american people that this is the right fight to fight against china. we are up against -- we are in a very abusive relationship and we can't continue with the relationship we have, so it's the right fight. the question is, is this the right time for this fight. and you know, we are 18 months away from an election and there's a real worry, in my mind, as a trump supporter, i think it's so important the country and our economy, that trump be re-elected that the chinese may simply say we will just wait this guy out, he's weakened potentially because of

the mueller report and it's interesting. one other thing about this. listen to what joe biden is saying. joe biden is a pacifist when it comes to china. who do you think the chinese want as president in 2021? donald trump, a hard liner, or you know, or biden. i think that does put trump in a difficult situation. stuart: hold on for a second, stephen. we are getting reaction coming in to what robert mueller had to say. we heard from the president in a very measured tweet. now we've got jerrold nadler, chair of the house judiciary committee. what's he saying? ashley: lengthy statement but in part, basically says that look, the mueller report found substantial evidence that russia attacked our political system and that the president sought to obstruct mueller's investigation over and over again. he then goes on to say the report shows obstruction of justice is a serious crime that strikes at the core and did not

exonerate the president of the united states of obstruction of justice. stuart: which does open the door. he's chairing the judiciary committee and is conducting all these probes and investigations and is gung-ho to get going. ashley: just walked through the door. stuart: let's move away from what robert mueller had to say. let me ask you about interest rates. i have seen the yield on the ten-year treasury drop this morning to 2.22. i can't explain it other than a flight to safety. because i don't see a recession coming. what's your explanation? >> i have a slightly different explanation on this, and i have been saying it for a year. not only do we have the low interest rate on the ten-year but we also i think now have an inverted yield curve in some portions of the terms of these interest rates. now, the question's why is that happening. i'm going to go back to what i have been saying for a year. we have deflationary environment out there right now. look what's happened to commodity prices. look at the oil price today. it's falling.

why would people buy a bond at a lower interest rate over ten years, say, than over five years or two years? the answer to that is because they think when we have deflation, not inflation, the interest rates go up as inflation goes up. if you think deflation is happening and the dollar will be strong stronger, then you are going to demand a lower interest rate for those bonds. what i'm saying, i hope the fed is listening to me loud and clear, right now, you have to lower interest rates and lower the interest on the reserves, bank reserves, and that will get the dollar liquidity in the economy that we need to grow. stuart: you are not going to be on the federal reserve board. why should they listen to you? >> i don't think it's going to happen. i'm not going to be on the federal reserve board but i think my point still holds. i'm not with trump, i don't want a 100 basis point decline but i think the fed made a major error in december when they raised rates. they should erase that error. that means a quarter percentage point reduction in interest rates.

look, my whole line when i was running for the fed, when i was nominat nominated, was growth does not cause inflation. we have a healthy economy. i don't see recession on the horizon although i am worried about the trade war. that's knocked about half a percentage point off our economic growth and is hurting the stock market. go back to what i said. right fight. the question the president has to ask, does he have an exit strategy. can he get this done before the end of the year. can he get a deal done with china because i think if he does, i think the economy and the stock market explode. if he doesn't, and we go into 2020 with a trade war, boy, that's a tough scenario for donald trump to be re-elected in. stuart: yeah. understood. steven, thank you very much for being with us today on a very important day, with a jumping news background. thanks for being here. good stuff indeed. hold on. ashley: very quickly, at the end of the nadler statement, it says it falls to congress to respond to the crimes, lies and other wrongdoing of president trump and we will do so. stuart: yeah, okay.

ashley: hurts the market. stuart: so far, the market is down about 360 points. that's the better part of 1.5% roughly speaking. so far, we have had reaction from congressman jerry nadler which we just heard from ashley, justin amash, he is a republican and he is pushing forward with impeachment in the house. most unusual. he's the lone republican on that side of that issue. we have also had a very measured tweet coming in from the president. not his usual style. i use the word measured because it was indeed measured. everything's coming in thick and fast. cory booker and elizabeth warren just responded. in a moment we will tell you what they had to say. let me leave you with this. we are down 360 on the dow. back in a moment. this is not a bed.

it's a revolution in sleep. the sleep number 360 smart bed is on sale now during our memorial day sale. it senses your movement, and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. it even helps with this. so you wake up ready to hit the ground running. only at a sleep number store. don't miss the final days to save $1000 on the new queen sleep number 360 special edition smart bed, now only $1,799. ends sunday. sleep number. proven, quality sleep.

. stuart: all right. we have a new low for the dow. now we're off over 400 points. the reason seems to me to be that the door is now open a little wider towards impeachment of the president in the house. we have responses to

robert mueller's statement coming in. liz bet warren. liz: mueller's statement makes clear what those that read the report to know it is impeachment referral. it is up to congress to act. they should. stuart: cory booker. another presidential candidate. >> robert mueller's statement makes it clear. congress has the legal and mosh moral obligation to begin impeachment proceedings. stuart: this is a political situation let loose by robert mueller 55 minutes ago, he said the most important sentence, ask you to read it again. this is key to me? >> if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so. stuart: if he had confidence he did not commit a crime he said so. >> we did not make a determination whether the president committed a crime. stuart: because he couldn't be charged as a sitting president. >> constitution doesn't allow

it. stuart: alan dershowitz with us on the phone. straighten us out, professor. your take what robert mueller had to say. >> absolute inappropriate statement he never should have said it. exactly we criticized comey saying he went after hillary clinton will not prosecute but she was extremely careless. a prosecutor should not go beyond the statement that we didn't indict. that is absolutely inappropriate for him to say that if we had evidence or concluded that he hadn't committed a crime we would have said so. he could have easily said we had evidence he committed a crime he could have said so. he was trying to put his thumb on the scale of justice against the president in absolutely inappropriate way. stuart: granted it was inappropriate. he did it. does indeed what he had to say open up the door to house democrat to pursue impeachment? >> well the house democrat will

have to make their own political decision. i don't believe that there is a high crime and misdemeanor but, he has certainly opened the possibility that there may arguably be a high crime and misdemeanor, obstruction of justice. so it will certainly encourage the democrats. now special counsels should not be giving partisan advantage to one side. he did that. he, i think will regret having made that statement because it completely politicizes his report and gives tremendous ammunition to those who say that the report was politically biased. until today, i never thought that mueller had a partisan bias. today i have changed my mind on that decision. stuart: okay. professor, dershowitz, thank you very much for your expert opinion. we really appreciate it. i'm sorry it is so short that we had you on the phone but we appreciate you being with us. we have the loss on the dow of

385 point, just a few moments ago, we were down more than 400. but the market at this moment seems to be focusing what robert mueller had to say. i keep saying it. professor dershowitz says he shouldn't have said it but he said it. he opened up the door for the house democrats to pursue impeachment. jerrold nadler is going down that road vigorously. so is senator warren. so is senator cory booker. they are both presidential candidates. i believe mr. swalwell, another presidential candidate is saying same thing. liz: nancy pelosi still silent. stuart: the ball is in her court because she runs the house. the house runs any impeachment proceeding. she has to decide, does she go with impeachment, listen to the base, the hard-charging left which really wants impeachment? >> up to now is there too much pressure now, that is the question?

stuart: the market is saying if you're going to impeach this president nothing will get done for next 20 months, however long it is, it could inclues china -- influence china. will they want to go with a chaired trade deal. we have statement from jay sekulow. >> announcement by special counsel mueller, special counsel is closing resigning to you were are to private life, puts period on two year investigation that found no findings of collusion or obstruction of judgment. the attorney general concluded there were no obstruction by president. report identifies no. stuart: alan dershowitz said on this program, robert mueller should not have said what he

said 59 minutes ago. liz: here is the problem for this country as bill mcgurn also argued. the special counsel's office sits outside the constitution. it is extra constitutional. what is going on in this country? stuart: division is going on. time's up. neil, it is yours. neil: let's get to the point where all this started. we were sliding on concerns trade pact with china is getting delayed and delayed. mr. mueller came to the microphones as you know and essentially threw out all these imuponnerrables, there is no way to say that the president committed a crime, no way to say he did not. if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so, clearly implying he did not, there is apple room for the house to take the baton to do something. the markets further slid on that, uncertainty of that brings a summer-long hearings of