somewhere? >> my goodness. stuart: manchester united. tottenham hotspurs. we some would say wasted two minutes. i think we entertained our viewers. is that not right, neil cavuto? it is yours now. neil: just knowing that you don't have guests is pretty much all i need to know. stuart: you knew that. you knew that. neil: by the way, which home? which home? stuart: oh. neil: thank you, my friend. we have a lot going home. we're waiting here for the president of the united states. he is meeting with his cabinet amid focus on his tweets that some disparage as racists. if this is buffeting stocks. they have a funny way to show it. blake burman and connell mcshane filling in my absence. did not have the opportunity to talk to peter thiel. new signs that the white house could follow him. what is on thiel's mind here. the readout on that. the cryptocurrency crackdown. steve moore is on defense

because he kind of got this ball rolling. earlier on we got stocks hitting new highs as earnings season kicks off. iting still very early. 5% of the s&p 500 companies have reported. of never less in small pool of names. they handily beat expectations. they were after cheted down. you know how they. "fbn:am"'s lauren lawyer simonetti. >> ceo jamie dimon said this, we continue to see positive mope momentum with the u.s. consumers. rising wages reflected in our consumer and banking results. the bank's credit card sales that division saw double-digit growth. that stock is up today. different picture at

goldman sachs. stock trading revenue rose, highest level in four years by the way. goldman has been investing in the trading technologies, algorithms, but the effort to bulge up the consumer fell short. the stock is up 1.1%. johnson & johnson down 1 1/2% now. the company raised its sales forecast for the year, investors are weighing sales of cancer drugs looking good against legal issues related to talcum powder and opioid marketing that can get very expensive for the company. we're seeing corporate profits are holding up. so is the consumer. real good news this morning on retail sales for june. they gained .4 of 1%, suggesting that the second quarter gdp number will be solid. the big question mark is, what does the federal reserve do with all this information later this month? we have no idea. more clues today perhaps, neil.

fed chair jay powell speaks in about an hour. they will look at extent of his dovishness. neil: he is in paris. >> 1:00 our time. neil: wonder if he speaks french? >> he is pretty smart. neil: as are you, lauren, thank you very much back to the meeting president is having with his cabinet, the tweets, defense of them will come up, blake burman. i say safely ensconced at white house after doing such a great job in my absence, why i came quickly back to new york. what is going on in the building behind you, do we know? reporter: neil it, was fun to fill in for you. the cabinet meeting is going on right now. the president's remarks, the first batch, is has not addressed on going controversy. we'll wait what the president says about it. we have a bit of a read, his

thinking he took to twitter to defend himself, talk about this resolution that will be taking place on the hill later today to condemn those comments. the president saying i will pick out a couple points. those tweets were not racist. he went to say about the resolution. it's a democrat con game. move forward to the second tweet which the president said, he ended, writing speaking of the democrats, quote, see you in 2020. there will be this resolution in democratic-controlled house later today that will condemn those comments. speaker of the house, nancy pelosi in advance met with her caucus today. we are told she said to her caucus at one point the following, said, quote, so this is a resolution based in who we are as a people, as well as a recognition of the unacceptability of what his goals were. other people will have other manifestations of their concern. some of the defense we're seeing from the white house, from the president is, and republicans is

that they say the tweets were not racist. instead the focus should be on the policies of those four progressive house democrats. the policies what they stand for, how they see it are erroneous policies and policies not good for the people of the united states. here though was the take of democratic congressman tim ryan, who is also running for president, watch. >> the president attacked them, brian. he went after them in a racist kind of way. that canned be tolerated. and so i support them speaking back out to defend themselves. these are sitting members of the united states congress. quite frankly i think people are tired of racism. reporter: tough to simplify, neil. essentially the argument from the president, tweets were not racist. by and large the arguments from democrats, the tweets and comments were racist. we'll have this resolution, probably hear from the president soon. neil? neil: blake, you're doing a good

job in washington. i would like you to stay right there. reporter: it's a lovely city. neil: it's a lovely city. thanks, my friend, for all your hard work, blake burman there. we want to find out why stocks went from negative. i'm making a leap here. we're getting comments that the president is making at the cabinet meeting. we're getting tape back. it is not tape. whatever, it is going to come our way soon, but the president is commenting on china saying it is supposed to be buying u.s. farm products. we'll see if they do, referring to the chinese. with very a long way to go with china on trade. we put tariffs on another $325 billion of goods if we want. that bellicose talk took some of the wind out of sales of the markets here. that is a quick read on that. there could be other factors for the time-being that seems only would turn buyers into sellers. iona college political college

professor and a market watcher extraordinaire, gary b. smith. i start with you. the president is low balling chances of an iminent deal with the chinese that could affect traders. we seem to think such a deal is in the offing. we don't know when. what do you think? >> i agree with you. i think market is running on two things. the first, elephant, if you will, neil, is the fed cutting once, twice, by some estimates up to five times this year, that's number one. number two is china. i say they're 80-20, in that order. if it doesn't happen, well we live with the existing tariffs so far, it is not that bad. the big one will be what happens with the fed if they cut again and then they give indications that they will further cut, if it is the latter that they will not cut anymore, then you could see the market really sinking.

neil: that is obviously the multigazillion dollar question i guess, if china does come to the table, make some concessions there are two-ways to read some weak data coming out of that country. one that it would force them to the table, make some deal happen. others could argue, they will continue to try to stimulate their economy, to see maybe that will do the trick. where do you stand on that? >> absolutely. when you look at this, it explains an awful lot about the president who is a master at playing the media, as we've seen, over and over again. distracting attention from what he does not know. he is very, very concerned about the fed and what they're going to do about the interest rates. he is very concerned about what is going on in china, what happens with the tariffs. we're seeing live the market responding to that and yet 99% of what we hear in the popular media is about the president's tweets, which serve to distract from what are those really

important occurrences that will impact the economy. if those economic numbers start to fall as we get into next summer, next spring, next summer, the president's re-election can be in trouble. at this point the economy is so strong that he is likely good shape regardless of what he tweets or not. the tweets are a major distraction from all of this. neil: gary, we're getting more comments out of the president. the china had not broken the deal, he referred to the original one where he pulled a 180. stealing $300 million in intellectual property a year. now we're doing something about it. now we picked up close to $20 trillion in wealth in the stock market t went wild after i was elected. 401(k)s are up 50 to 60%, claiming in other words, china is more reason i guess, saying to have to come to the table than we do. do you agree with that? >> i do but you know, i think the big part of china's slowing

down if you will, just the inevitability of them, they have already made their big move from a geirian to an industrial society. -- agrarian. this country is still largely stayed-controlled. you saw how well that worked out for the soviet union. you talk about 25 year plan, it is tough for governments to plan one year in the future. tariffs are part of their slowdown. i don't think it's a big part of their slowdown. i don't think it is a big part of our success. i think we can live with them or without them to be honest. neil: interesting to look at china, the economy is slowing. i don't know what numbers you rely on to come to a conclusion. i think they're almost too incredible to believe anyway, economy growing at 6% clip, and considered to be a disappointment. be that as it may, does that help or hinder the possibilities of a deal? >> most people agreed when the president came in something had

to be done about intellectual property and other issues involving china, how fast it was growing and still is growing, even though we've seen a slow down. whichever numbers you look at or not, the president was right to take on china. but the problem for the president is he is coming up for a re-election. so he has got to manage both or try with his team to manage both the economy and also win a re-election while those numbers remain strong. so this is what he is battling and you know, he has to win in those state where farmers have depended an awful lot on china and those tariffs have impacted those people. so he is trying to measure both of those and trying to distract attention while he does that. neil: all right. final word on the subject. i want to thank you both. jeanne, gary, thank you very much. the dow is down about 60 points. it comes on heels of remarks

that came from the white house, we'll see them verbatim when we get the pool spray out of that meeting, he talks about having a long way to go with china on trade. he is open to additional $325 billion worth of chinese tariffs on those goods, quote, if we want. let's say the markets don't want that. after this. r trips to mars. $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. $4.95. no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. no matter what you trade, at fidelity 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. but how do i know if i'm i'm getting a good deal? i tell truecar my zip and which car i want and truecar shows the range of prices people in my area actually paid for the same car so i know if i'm getting a great price. this is how car buying was always meant to be. this is truecar.

neil: all right. this cryptocurrency thing is raising a lot of fears, particularly facebook's plan with libra. edward lawrence live on capitol hill, getting to the bottom of it. edward. reporter: facebook on the hot seat at the senate banking committee. the hearing is going on as we speak, the head of colibra,

david marcus, getting grilled by senators. this is facebook's cryptocurrency arm that will create facebook the currency. david marcus says facebook agrees this is not a sprint to implement libra. >> we will take the time to get this right. let me be clear and unambiguous, facebook will not offer libra digital currency until we have fully addressed regulators concerns and received appropriate approvals. reporter: he is getting a lot of questions about privacy and going forward with what the company has done in the past. through libra, facebook wants to easily and move money cheaply throughout the world. they say the market will have stability and low inflation and wide usability. libra will be pegged on reserves which hosts cash balances, short term securities from three different currencies around the world, the u.s. dollar, british it pound, japanese yen. some senators not buying what

facebook is selling at all? >> facebook is dangerous. facebook might not intend to be dangerous, but sure think they don't respect the powers of the technologies they're playing with, like a toddler who got his hands on a book of matches. facebook has burned down the house over and over and called every arson a learning experience. reporter: we heard comments from both republicans and democrats. there was a democrat sherrod brown. facebook says libra is not intended to compete with other currencies around the globe. it will be managed by a consortium of companies, 100 different companies, no one having the majority over this currency. back to you. neil: thank you, edward. meantime former trump economic advisor steve moore is working at what they call a crypto centric bank. he joins us now. he will be on later on "bulls & bears." a busy fellow. let me get your take, why they're targeting facebook's

offering here, what could portend for the cryptocurrency industry if you will? knot just folks in washington, federal reserve, treasury what is it going on? >> if you listen to what sherrod brown said, the senator from ohio, the congress and central government, federal government is afraid of these new cryptocurrencies because they believe it is a, it is a threat to the monopoly currencies run by central banks. by the way, that is one of the things i like about it, neil. these are currencies that will not be controlled by government. government feels threatened by it. i think, by the way, people ask me, is this going to destroy the dollar, euro? no. i think it will actually provide some competition and force these central bankers to maintain stability in their currency or else people will move to other countries. by the way look what has happened in the last number of months to bitcoin, neil? its price has gone way up. there is real demand for this

around the globe. neil: but the thinking was, all would benefit here, including bitcoin. lately it is more of a bumpy ride which is typical of these issues but i'm wondering what the fear is? that is the dollar is eclipsed? that competition isn't a good thing? that it will lead to alternative currencies, basket of currencies? how often we heard the saudis were entertaining something like this. that this is a threat. what do you make of it? >> i'm libertarian. i like private sector competition with government. i don't like government all over the world having control of currencies. private currencies are as old as gold is. the fact this is nothing really new. the way these cryptocurrencies are developed, not just libra. i represent a company d-central, probably a dozen others, what this remind me a little bit of the first days of the internet where everybody is trying to

figure it out. last thing you want, in my opinion, neil, for the government to stamp it out. it will be a healthy thing. one of the things with our currency, dramatically reduce cost and speed of transactions. so i view it as positive thing. there will be some regulation. i have to tell you, neil. the commodities future trading corporation wants to regulate it as commodity. fed wants to regulate it as currency. securities & exchange commission wants to regulate it as a security. you put enough regulations on these, these cryptos they may not survive. neil: maybe that is what authorities hope? >> exactly. neil: real quickly, the market is at such lows right now. apparently having a lot to do with what the president is saying in his cabinet meeting with the possibility he will slap additional tariffs on china. that is deal isn't imminent. all of sudden we're reminded what the market giveth, the president taketh away. does the president like to keep

people guessing? >> i think he likes to keep the chinese guessing. i don't think the chinese are bargaining in good faith. i talked to the trade negotiators. one day the beijing government agrees on one thing and next day they move off and don't keep their word. president is frustrated with the president xi and chinese negotiators. this is trump. he plays good cap, bad cop all in one when it comes to trade negotiations. i said i do think there will be a trade deal before the end of this year. it will be a good deal. it won't be a great deal, but he has got to get that done, because, as i see it, neil, it is the only dark cloud on the economy right now is this trade dispute with china. if he gets it thing settled, you're looking at blockbuster for the economy. record low interest rates, high wages, big gains. neil: all right. >> the only thing investors, don't you agree, they're only nervous about the china situation? neil: you could be right but i

ask the questions here. >> i like your opinion, my friend. thank you, neil. neil: look at corner of wall and broad. we're down about 58 points. those chinese comments are certainly rattling folks, after this.

>> there is this very peculiar background where google is working with the chinese communist government and not with the u.s. military. so the project maven decision was a decision not to work a.i. with the u.s. military but they're working with the come night chinese. so the question is, from the out side, what in the world is going on there? neil: president trump saw that exchange. he wants to look into it, whether these charges that google is being infiltrated by chinese intelligence is true. google's response was we don't know what the heck he is talking about. no such thing is going on. charlie gasparino on that. >> i really like peter thiel.

smart guy. he is libertarian on economics which i agree with. we have to put his comments somewhat context. he is on the board of facebook. there is a theory out there, including inside google he is looking to throw shade on google to get emphasis off facebook coming under scrutiny in this broad crackdown. as we reported yesterday, before the president came out with his tweet, google is going to get special attention from the trump administration. we hear that from sources close to the white house. that they are looking at them from a number of venues, whether it be antitrust, ftc. whether they play fair. it is all coming down to the fact that trump and the administration really believes that google as the election gets close custodies crime nate against conservative voices in their search. how, what the mechanism to go after them i can't tell you exactly. whether that of itself is not quite an antitrust violation.

you could make a case they're too big. maybe that sort of allows them to control so much of trump white house, they are worried about that as 2020 comes. they also think it's a really good issue politically. they think the democrats are there. they don't want the democrats to steal thunder of crackdown on social media. most are afraid of them from a privacy standpoint. most pub opinions think they're -- republicans think they're biased. neil: what about this is not based on any fact here? maybe this is a ruse to get after them because they are biased if that is the case and there is no truth to this? >> i'm just saying i lay out what know to be the background, could be that peter is just mouthing off. he is not that type of guy. he is a more measured guy. i don't know him that well. based on what i know about him i don't think he would lie overtly but there is tremendous

amount -- neil: google is not allowed in china, right? you can't use google in china? >> i think you can. i think there are restrictions on it. neil: really? >> they restrict speech. here is the thing, neil, the bigger point, there is a growing chorus inside of the white house to crack down on tech, particularly google. they think google politically, not just a business story, if you own the stock you have to be worried about this, right? it is also a political story where it bleeds together. they believe google is bad, too big, too powerful, they control the debate through search. they want to crack down on it, you hear it from my sources close to the white house, obviously hearing from peter thiel who is plugged in to the trump white house. this is political business story, if you own the stock, i keep seeing green on the stock. it was green yesterday today, although it took a little dip on our report yesterday they're watching it. this is something you should be worried about. neil: how was sun valley? >> we did not get thrown out.

by the way the police presence there, it is kind of a police state, sun valley. neil: but when you're there. >> everybody, they were so nice to us, the guy that i had my run-in with the last time, couldn't have been nicer. he and i are friends now. listen, i feel badly for him this way, not because he get as good check on this, i think allen company is so loony tune. neil: they host this conference. plenty of bigwig. >> i think they ratchet up pressure on these cops to not let anything happen. he is a great guy. brian cog lynn. a big time new york city. this guy is the real thing. he and i are friends. neil: glad to hear that. >> by the way did you hear the story we broke, lauren sanchez was out there with jeff bezos? neil: that's great. wish we had more time to explain that. very good to see you. >> they are out and about, lovers.

neil: absolutely. thank you, my friend. always good seeing you. corner of wall and broad. up 48 points. we had record after record. only thing that could move this south, looking at yet another record, the comment president made in a cabinet meeting, talking about china, that a deal might not be close, i guess it is anyone's guess. he is still in there. they're still running the cameras. eventually we'll get that tape back or digital, whatever it is, we'll let you interpret as you will. because that's what we do. more after this. ♪ limu emu & doug what do all these people have in common, limu? [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing.

they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros

even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪

neil: tesla is cutting the price of its model 3. doing a factorywide shakeup there. wills wills with the latest -- gerri willis from the new york city -- new york stock exchange. >> the company is streamlining its product line and reducing prices on entry level model 3 to $38,998. the stock is down 1%. the move comes a week after federal tax credit is cut in half. investors worry that whether they could sustain sales with less support from the federal government. that credit is $1875. in addition the company is limiting variance of model s and model x cars, boosting starts prices to 84,990 for the model x, and 79,990 for the

model s. this comes days after the company reported record deliveries. call it the beyond meat coattails. blue apron shares are jumping and dilly. up 49% after the meal kit company announced seasonal recipes that will include plant based proteins from beyond meat. this stock is up 576% since the may launch. with ross piece available on the blue apron website and the mobile app. so good stuff there. fine eating without cals. neil: i'm suspicious. gerri, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. neil: meanwhile white house is looking at another trillion dollar deficit. maya mack begin necessary is concerned. >> this is nothing the politicians seem to be intent on

improving at all. if we're likely to see anything in the coming months it will be to make tremendously bad situation even worse. neil: so i begin to wonder then, with this debt ceiling agreement they hope to have before everyone leaves before the august recess, because apparently treasury secretary steve mnuchin is saying we could technically run out of dough much earlier than thought, that won't necessarily solve the problem, right? >> oh, not at all. unfortunately the reality is that they may end up having a debt ceiling deal that makes the problem worse, if that is not irony, i don't know what is. first rule on debt ceiling that there is one must, we have to lift it. we should have lifted months ago. the fact we're juggling government funds is highly irresponsible. neil: there is number of advocates, editorial in today's "new york times" and separately "wall street journal" story talking about this debt ceiling kabuki theater we go through is

a waste of time but if you think about it, it is only quasi-discipline we show. i know what you're saying about punting here but if we drop that -- >> no, i'm kind of with you on that. we shouldn't get rid of the debt ceiling in that it is the only budgetary constraint that exists on our fiscal situation. clearly it doesn't work. because we're on an unsustainable record-setting debt borrowing bing but you do want to be careful not to hit the debt ceiling and default. some people talk about can you get around it? we shouldn't have that discussion. it is way too dangerous we're flirting with, however, where you and i completely agree. you can't get rid of it with a lot of people calling for. we need to replace it or reform. when they lift the debt ceiling this time, should include debt reducing measures with it. the debt ceiling tells us we're borrowing too much. we are. the concern they will borrow more when they lift it. they should put a place in plan

to put the debt on down ward path from where it currently is. neil: good luck with that as you point out. especially if they come to a agreement on two-year budget deal. >> that is where the biggest risk is. spending path. neil: spending military, non-military items by the same amount. what does that prove? >> we should be offsetting costs. if you want to raise spending areas where do you cut spending somewhere else. that used to be the deal. nobody is talking about where we should do this that does not increase deficit. we are talking about amounts that could hit the tax cuts if we're talking about the amounts. neil: maya, you have been a voice of reason through democratic and republican administrations alike. you can't keep spending more than you make year in, year out. eventually something catches up with you, i don't care if you're a republican or democrat, red or blue. you eventually run out of green. president's comments are

speaking about north korea saying we already made tremendous progress there. time is not of the essence even though we have separate reports that the north koreans are getting frustrated with the process and might resume nuclear tests. so jump ball. more after this. and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ can't see what it is yet.re? what is that? that's a blazer? that's a chevy blazer? aww, this is dope. this thing is beautiful. i love the lights. oh man, it's got a mean face on it. it looks like a piece of candy. look at the interior. this is nice.

this is my sexy mom car. i would feel like a cool dad. it's just really chic. i love this thing. it's gorgeous. i would pull up in this in a heartbeat. i want one of these. that is sharp. the all-new chevy blazer. speaks for itself. i don't know who they got to design this but give them a cookie and a star.

neil: the president says, you know, don't hold your breath for a deal with china anytime soon, that a deal could be also in his back pocket remove the slip of paper that says you can slap tariffs on an additional $325 billion worth of chinese goods. that would be pretty much everything that comes to our shores from china. gordon chang, best-selling author what all of this could mean. gordon, what do you think? >> i think as the chinese economy flirts zero, that is really where they're going, neil, it becomes more and more difficult for xi xinping, the chinese ruler, to make a deal. remember he owns the trade war

politically. he owns the problems in the chinese economy. if he comes to a deal with the u.s. which isn't 100% win for china it makes it very difficult for him to survive politically. so i think, president trump is absolutely right. we're a very long way from a trade deal with china. neil: we were just showing numbers in latest quarter, china growing at 6.2% annual clip. that is the slowest growth we've seen apparently in decades. i never know how to trust numbers like that but if you accept at face value it is going, slowing, rather than, rather than down digit growth china experienced years ago, what does that mean? >> it means that, for the communist party it is issue of legitimacy. china showed numbers of june, manufacturing sector, purchasing managers indices are showing contraction. bellwether car sales were down 9.6% for the month. these are numbers that show that

the chinese economy is close to 0%. could be a little bit above, a little bit below. this will cause discontent throughout chinese society. we saw last year, investor problems, people not getting paid back. we're also starting to witness some corporate bond defaults, more than in the past. for beijing these are problems they have never seen basically in 20, 30 years. neil: what do you think of peter thiel saying that google is in particular is helping the chinese intelligence apparatus? he offered no proof. the president, it was good enough for him to look into it, take a close look at google. what did you think of that? >> neil in broad outline is correct. google has three partnerships which are suspicious.

chinwa university, peking university and trying to establish a partnership with chinese university of science and technology. and those are problems, because those are high-tech, in china's system there is civil military fusion, which means that everything is done for civilian purposes is available to the military. that last partnership they're trying to put together actually has the chinese military as an investor in the same operation. which is a quantum lab in onwei province. this is legal. neil -- thiel is essentially right. this is traitorous. neil: what can we do? if this is american company, turns out to be true, be careful what you wish for, right? >> issue here, what google is doing is legal. if we want to stop it, we need to criminalize it. we need to put restrictions on tech cooperation. of course this is going to hurt u.s. companies but on the other

hand it is absolutely essential what google is doing, helping the chinese military. by the way google is not willing to cooperate with a.i., cloud computing projections with the pentagon. this looks especially bad for google. neil: going back to china for a second, gordon, the president apparently in white house pool spray right now, upping ante, extending tariffs to $325 billion of chinese goods that have not been targeted yet. what is likely the reaction or fallout from such a move? >> the fallout would be american consumers would pay a big share of the tariffs. in the first tranche of tariffs basically they were absorbed by china. about 80% of them were essentially paid by chinese parties. once you tariff all chinese goods coming in, then american consumers are going to pay more but i think we actually have to do this and the reason is, china is stealing u.s. intellectual

property. these tariffs are meant to be a remedy for i.p. theft. china is taking perhaps 3 to $400 billion of u.s. ip a year. we have to do something, neil, because we're bleeding. neil: the coming collapse of china, best-selling author, gordon chang much more on all things that have to do with this superpower, whether we strike a deal with them. kamala harris wants federal government to set prices. they're two out of whack, too extreme. the government will fix it. really? let's take a look at some numbers:

4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom... is a stroke. 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease? preventable. and 149 dollars is all it takes to get screened and help take control of your health. we're life line screening... and if you're over 50... call this number, to schedule an appointment... for five painless screenings that go beyond regular check-ups. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries... for plaque which builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease. and by getting them through this package, you're saving over 50%. so call today and consider these numbers: for just $149 you'll receive five screenings that could reveal what your body isn't telling you.

i'm gonna tell you that was the best $150 i ever spent in my life. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now to learn more. neil: this was expected, imf chief kristen lagarde announced her resignation.

now the job is to find a replacement at imf that could be easier said than done. kamala harris wants the government to set prices on certain drugs, especially more expensive once. we have visor from president bush 43, what michael barnes. what do you think, michael? >> she is looking directly from the bernie sanders european playbook, nationalized health care, taking away private insurance from 250 million americans. if you look at price controls, in countries in europe, that means patients are not getting access to cures they're getting into the united states. of 2011, of medication came to market, in united states 90% are available. in canada, 46% available. in france 64% are available. medications sit on shells in those countries while the government tries to dictate to the manufacturer, the cover the

cost of manufacturer's research, development and production this system is disasterous for consumers in nation. we're creating innovations and cures to conditions like hepatitis-c. the u.s. is close to finding a vaccine for hiv, potentially a cure for hiv. if you set these price controls and dictate, you're allowed to have this amount of profit, no more. the incentive to do research is significantly you know mined. the race to the cure for condition for hiv is slowed and perhaps stagnated and stopped. neil: even the president is open to doing something like this. i believe his plan is to try to make sure the same drugs and treatments available across the globe or sold in europe, asia, latin america, sometimes pennies on the dollar, we be afforded residents of this country the same price breaks. what do you think of that? >> because those countries have price controls. they would be more in line with the president's position for him to require those countries pay

their fair share towards research and development so the united states does not have the subsidized the rest of the developed world creating conditions for diseases like hepatitis-c. he should use his trade authority to make sure they are paying fair prices so united states consumers pay lower prices to stop subsidizing those countries. neil: if you have serious diseases, people in this country go abroad to get same treatment so costly here. how do we address that, short of telling them not to support or provide price breaks for the big players? >> we need to make sure that the pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies get together to do the types of things like they have done in louisiana, where hepatitis-c medications are made available through the state on netflix-like subscription plan, that allows the pharmaceutical company to recover its costs but assures that the state has a set budget and won't exceed that. these industries have to work

together so they are not eliminated by the plans of bernie sanders, kamala harris and other democrats running for president because they're at risk of that, if they don't get their acts together to figure out ways to innovate. the key point make the prices to consumers more accessible so they are not paying as much out-of-pocket. neil: right. >> otherwise the details behind the scenes, with the rebates and need for transparency, they need to work that out so consumers pay less at the counter. neil: good luck on that front. michael, this comes at a where bernie sanders was touting his own health care plan that would be a version for "medicare for all." joe biden with slimmed down, same goal. i want you to react to this. joe biden earlier. >> give people the option, if you like your health care plan, employer-based plan you can keep it. if in fact you have private insurance, you can keep it. neil: what dud think of that? >> i think that is the

reasonable solution to the problems of health care and affordability in the united states that i heard from any democratic candidates for president. i think it is essential that these 250 million americans who have private health insurance have choice in the market. that they be able to keep that the americans do not want comprehensive change, nationalization of health care, european style price controls. they want lower out-of-pocket costs that can be done with reasonable regulation and -- neil: they also want, one thing to say you can keep your private health plan, like your doctor, keep your doctor. we know that did not pan out the way president obama outlined. i'm wondering if he is giving himself, joe biden, wiggle room on this front? >> i think that in terms of the wiggle room about keeping private health insurance and keep your doctor, as one who lost his insurance plan three different times i understand the need for stability in the market. that is what he is providing now. look we've gone through massive

transformation of the affordable care act. we need to stablize the market. the way to do that is not eliminate private insurance for 250 million americans. but make tweaks to systems like pharmacy benefit managers as well as the drug companies themselves, insurance companies. all of those can have subtle regulatory changes so we can get to a point where consumers pay less and all the behind the scenes drug pricing stuff is done between the companies but the ultimate result is that americans are paying less out of their pocket at the counter. neil: how likely is that? >> i think that it depend on whether someone like joe biden is able to become the nominee versus one of the more extreme candidates like bernie sanders or kamala harris. he will be able to narrow the date as to whether or not we're going to modify the affordable care act in a way that is needed or take the trump approach. neil: thank you, michael. good catching up with you. michael barns, former white house office of drug policy advisor under president

bush. jerome powell, the fed chief is making remarks in paris today. this is the 75th anniversary of bretton woods. everyone is eager to find out what he said after this. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. you need decision tech. in an emergency, who do you want by your side? a new proposal in congress wants to put the insurance companies and the government in charge of your healthcare by price fixing. letting the government set prices means fewer doctors and a race to the bottom when it comes to quality care... insurance companies and the federal government getting in between you and your doctor. call congress. make sure doctors and patients are making the most important medical decisions and keep the insurance companies and government out of it. paid for by market institute.

i comparison shop for everything to get the best deal. gas is 6 cents cheaper here. sale rack! no! and, for loans, i go to lendingtree.com. i wanted to consolidate my credit cards in to a personal loan to pay them off faster. lending tree made lenders compete for my business and i ended up with a loan that saved me over $9000 and no more

credit card debt. i mean $9000! it's a lot of money. lending tree, may the best loan win. ♪ all right brad, once again i have revolutionized the songwriting process. oh, here we go. i know i can't play an instrument, but this... this is my forte. obviously, for auto insurance, we've got the wheel route. obviously. retirement, we're going with a long-term play.

makes sense. pet insurance, wait, let me guess... flea flicker. yes! how'd you know? studying my playbook? yeah, actually. neil: stocks barely moving right now. any gain today would be another record today. we will follow it closely. bob doll on why the federal reserve might be facilitating a melt up. we will explain. and then you have a lot of candidates who are getting a lot of money into their campaigns. the top five responsible for $100 million haul. who is benefiting and who is not? abigail disney going undercover at the happiest place on earth to say a lot of those workers aren't happy. in fact, they are getting gouged. all of that and 75 years after post-world war ii countries pegged their currencies at that time to the dollar, what is the

message all these decades later? jerome powell is speaking in paris on this very issue. of course, on interest rates so obviously everyone waiting on that. jennif jennifer, what's in that speech? reporter: fed chair powell speaking in paris ahead of the g7 which gets under way wednesday. powell yet again appears to be laying out the case for a rate cut. he highlights risks to the economy, particularly trade tensions and slowing global growth. he reiterates that growth has moderated in the second quarter and says business investment has quote, slowed notably. powell says the fed is carefully watching these developments and will act as appropriate to sustain the expansion, so language we have heard before. he also reiterated that many fed members thought in june the case for somewhat more accommodative policy had strengthened at that time. in particular, powell also pointed to weakness in inflation and said that the fed's concerned inflation could

continue to fall short of their 2% target longer than thought. he says long term factors like demographics, globalization are weighing on inflation and are likely to persist. powell speaking just about two weeks before the fed's next meeting, where they are widely expected to cut interest rates. neil? neil: thank you very, very much. let's get the read on all this with jackie deangelis and david monson and hitha herzog. obviously everyone wants to hear you will cut rates at least by a quarter point, though a good many want to see half a point. he's not going to be so black and white. what do you expect? >> this has happened over the course of s&p 17 times. it's been within the s&p has been at all-time highs, it's happened seven times since s&p has been at its all-time high. neil: what's happened? >> they cut rates. neil: there's history to this.

>> exactly. what is also interesting is that every time they cut the rates, the s&p has surpassed itself. so i don't think this is going to be a big deal. i think people are having, they are getting very upset over it but i think at the end of the day, this happens. this is just something -- neil: i guess i don't see the need for it. i'm not the expert, you guys are. we are doing okay, aren't we? >> i think the reason to be upset about it is the reasons they are offering. when i hear that language of we are so disappointed we're not creating 2% inflation, we are so disappointed we're not having the value of your money every 36 years, that's what they're saying. that's the math of it. neil: very good point. >> we are not supposed to target a positive inflation number when your mandate is sound money. i understand they are trying to get to an average place that fights off deflationary pressures. the bottom line is there isn't a need for it, they're stuck with this one. we're looking to september and december. that's really what's going to matter for markets. >> i have to agree. i have been watching the bank

earnings really closely. the banks are doing pretty well. low interest rates can be a little bit of a problem, exposure to china can be a problem as well, but overall the numbers look really good. you have that retail sales figure come in pretty strong, which indicates maybe we will see higher inflation. neil: four times stronger than we thought. >> right. when you put all these factors together, the fed, a 50 basis point cut would be very severe. i don't think the market needs it, just because investors want something doesn't mean you necessarily have to give it to them, or at least you can put the pause pedal on and wait until later in the year and see what happens with china trade. when i hear the president say he's a little, you know, we are far apart again, i get a little nervous about that. neil: you wonder which is going to win out, right? if you have uncertainty of the china deal, i guess the flipside of that is the federal reserve would come to the rescue and do what it can on the rate front, but if you have a deal, just the opposite, right? >> also, i have been watching retail for the last 13 years,

and even if these talks about, you know, potential trade issues, it is not having an effect on the consumer. that's what we look at. with the consumer, look at what we just mentioned, the retail sales numbers. the consumer is not impacted by that. neil: not at all. does that surprise you? >> none of the tariffs yet have targeted the consumer. they have purposely not targeted the consumer. neil: only a fraction of them are here because a lot of them were delayed. >> the $300 billion they're threatening is almost entirely direct. >> even just discussion about potentially impacting the consumer would have some sort of halo effect and it has not. the consumer remains strong. i mean, there's been a gain of 2.6% year over year on retail sales. >> wage growth is 3.1%. what would consumer spending be without the tariff factor there? i agree it's minimal but there's no doubt that at some point, tariffs impact spending. neil: what do we know about a china deal?

>> i think we have demonstrated we are a nation that doesn't really save that much. people will continue to buy what they need even if the prices are marginally higher. neil: now, now, now. >> the bottom line is, i look at it like gas prices, whether they are $3 or $2.50, if it's fourth of july and you want to take the family on vacation, you will figure out a way to do it. the same with buying a shirt at walmart or wherever. neil: i don't know. one of the things i look at is the way the president seems to be positioning this china argument. going so far as to say they are open to another $325 billion worth of goods being targeted, and now, maybe with an idea like peter thiel to look into whether china is mucking around with google and security types are working too closely. in other words, this doesn't end, this back and forth. >> that's the greatest thing for the markets is for it to not end. just continue looking like it's about to end but never actually end. just sort of keep it extended. it's probably what's best for the president politically, too.

because this enables him to continue using the china posturing as a political point which i think his base really loves. neil: you need a deal in the end politically. >> at some point you do. you can't let it go all the way the way it's threatened to go a couple times but this limbo mode, markets seem to like, the consumer seems to like. i think really his voters like. but you need an ending. i think they will get it. the question is when you bring up those other issues that he's pulling into it and what peter brought up the other night, i wonder how comprehensive this deal will end up being. i think that's going to make a big difference in the outcome. neil: there was concern about whether the fed is fostering a melt-up. in other words, we can keep going up, up, up, up, up. we are only less than 10% from 30,000 on the dow. what do you make of that? >> i think that's what everyone would essentially want. you know, who wouldn't want to see the dow continue to rise. neil: is it expensive here at these levels? >> 18 times forward earnings,

almost 18 times. so the reality is it's expensive versus historical but nowhere near the -- not like you saw in 2000 and 2007. neil: what do you make of that? >> there's certainly a point to. i think that, you know, what's the aftereffect. are we going to have a complete meltdown, then we go back to, what, 25,000? neil: i don't see the frothy craziness like we had right before the meltdown and all those issues. >> it's selective frothiness. that's the issue i would be concerned about, so the whole market is trading at 18 times but what are some of the big tech, cool tech, new tech companies trading at. neil: would you avoid them? >> i am avoiding them. neil: what are you buying? >> we are dividend growth people. we are buying companies that make money, give it to us, things like that. neil: like goldman sachs. >> amazing what happens when regulators start letting you distribute capital to shareholders. neil: they are the first of many that are expanding on that.

guys, thank you all very, very much. they will be back with us later on. we will talk more about that peter thiel thing and google. google is heatedly denying these accusations, that they are in cahoots with chinese intelligence. the president is facing some new backlash but a lot of big cash continues to come into his campaign. what's interesting about this phenomenon is the more controversy that he seems to engender, the more money he seems to raise. we're on it after this. my insurance rates are probably gonna double. but dad, you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands? ♪ corey is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body.

she's also taking ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women or for men with hr+/ her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breast feeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side-effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. corey calls it her new normal, because a lot has changed. but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance, the number-one prescribed, fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc.

and is the fastest growing place to buy a car in the nation. carvana is six years old this year it's because we have thousands of people working hard to make our customers' experiences the best. it's because we have tens of thousands of cars ready to be delivered to your doorstep. and it's why hundreds of thousands of happy customers have ditched the dealership and bought their car online, earning us an average 4.7 stars in the process. so if you didn't know about us before, you do now. we're carvana, and we want to give you the car buying experience you deserve. neil: we are ready to go to the white house very, very soon where the president has just taken on a lot of questions that dealt with a lot of issues when meeting with his cabinet today, including what to do about north korea, there sounding increasingly bellicose they might go nuclear but he's not worried, says the same about what's going on with iran, that there have been promising developments there even though we are told he didn't delineate or specify what's happening on

that front and separately, the issue of china that at first rattled the market, took us off our highs of the day, well into record territory for awhile. any gain from yesterday would be a record. talking about the fact that it's tough sledding, the deal with china, and that it could get tough tougher, he is looking at the possibility of extending the tariffs to additional $325 billion worth of goods from china. now the president of the united states with his cabinet. >> thank you very much, everybody. i appreciate it. thank you. reporter: the democrat [ inaudible ] where should she go? >> it's up to them. they should love our country. they shouldn't hate our country. i have clips right here, the most vile, horrible statements about our country, about israel, about others. it's up to them. they can do what they want.

they can leave, they can stay but they should love our country and they should work for the good of our country. thank you very much. reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> i've had a very good relationship and frankly, it's a very complex situation. the obama administration would not sell them patriot missiles. they need the patriot missiles for defense. they would not sell them under any circumstance. and turkey tried very hard to buy them and they wouldn't sell them. this went on for a long period of time. and it was as soon as they found out that they were going to have to buy the missiles, comparable missile, not as good a missile, but comparable almost missile from russia, all of a sudden everybody started rushing and saying to turkey okay, we'll sell you the patriot missile. it was only when they found out

they couldn't get it, they said let's go, we'll sell tu payou t patriot missile. by that time, turkey had signed and paid a lot of money to russia for the missile system that they were not allowed to buy here foolishly because turkey is a nato member. they also ordered over 100 f-35 planes. substantially more. and they have plans to order more. because they have a system of missiles that's made in russia, they are now prohibited from buying over 100 planes. i would say lockheed isn't exactly happy. it's a lot of jobs. frankly, i have always had a very good relationship, we have pastor brunson came back at my request, what i called pastor brunson was going to be in jail for 25 years and i called president erdogan and said listen, he's an innocent man, he's a pastor, he's a religious man, he's not a spy, he's not the things they said, and we had a couple of conversations and i

was able to get him back, along with many other people, i was able to get back, the press doesn't want to write about it, our ambassador for hostage negotiations said trump is the greatest of all time. i only tell you that because you'll never say it. but i guess we had 21 back, i got 21 back. i don't pay, either. unlike the $1.8 billion that was paid by the obama administration to get hostages back. i don't pay. once you pay, it doesn't work out. so what happens is we have a situation where turkey is very good with us, very good, and we are now telling turkey that because you have really been forced to buy another missile system, we're not going to sell you the f-35 fighter jets. it's a very tough situation that they're in and it's a very tough situation that we've been placed in, the united states. with all of that being said, we're working through it.

we'll see what happens but it's not really fair. they wanted to buy -- i don't stick up for countries, i don't stick up for turkey, i don't stick up other than i've got a good relationship with president erdogan. he wanted to buy our patriot missile. we wouldn't sell it. then when he made -- and he really wanted to buy it. then when he made a deal with another country, russia, to buy their system that he didn't even want, then all of a sudden we say oh, okay, we'll now sell you the patriot. because of the fact he bought a russian missile, we're not allowed to sell him billions of dollars worth of aircraft. it's not a fair situation. you have something to add to that? >> i think you explained it well. >> i think so. you said the right thing. reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> dealing with china, first of all, peter thiel is a friend of mine. he's a tremendous contributor. he's a big -- he spoke at our convention, the republican national convention. peter is a brilliant young man,

one of the most successful people in silicon valley. i guess he was an original investor in some of these previous biggest companies including facebook, i understand. yeah. he made a very strong charge. he's one of the top, maybe the top expert on all of those things, and he made a very big statement about google and i would like to recommend to the various agencies, including perhaps our attorney general who is with us to maybe take a look. it's a big statement, when you say that, you know, google is involved with china in not a very positive way for our country. so i think we're all look at that. i know that our other agencies will be looking at it and we'll see if there's any truth to it but that's a very big statement made by somebody who is highly respected. we'll certainly take a look at that. reporter: at least two central american companies said they are not going to play ball with your

new asylum plan. what are you going to do? >> we'll see what happens. we were sending hundreds of millions of dollars to are you talking about guatemala and honduras? we were sending hundreds of millions of dollars to guatemala and honduras. we're not going to send it anymore. we haven't been sending it for the last year because they weren't doing anything for us. they were forming caravans and they were sending them up and in those caravans, you had some very bad actors. you had some people that are not people that we want in our country so i realized that in the middle of their city or towns, when you form a caravan, if a government is at all a government, they don't have to allow that caravan to come up. so if they're not going to play ball, that's okay with me. we're not going to play ball with them. we don't give them any more money. they have been ripping us off for years. i'm not a fan. so until they shape up, now all of a sudden they came down supposedly with a supreme court

ruling that they're not allowed to do an agreement with us. i sort of wonder, did it come down because they wanted that ruling to come down, but we were giving them hundreds of millions of dollars like fools for years and all they did was send us up lot of people caused a lot of problems. a lot of the people in those caravans were criminals, hardened criminals, dangerous people, and why not. why would honduras or guatemala or el salvador, why would they keep their criminals when you can put them into the caravan, lose them in a caravan and send them up to the united states, we take everybody, because the democrats don't allow immigration laws that mean anything. it's horrible. it's horrible. how they are -- how they are taking -- just that one situation which could be taken care very easily, how they won't even give us a vote on that.

we've had many interviews of the people in those caravans, some of them are very bad players. you had interviews. one of the folks that was perhaps in this room, i think might be in this room, said what was your crime. the man said murder. the reporter looks, murder. that's a very famous clip. well, what was your crime. they were interviewing to show how wonderful the people are in the caravan. you, sir, what was your crime. murder. the young woman goes well, i'm surprised they didn't cut it. must have been live. otherwise you would have cut it. must have been a live shot. but pretty famous shot. you have a lot of that. and so as far as those countries, we were supposed to have that, we didn't. now, mexico, because of tariffs but that doesn't matter because they have really been doing a job. they have only had one week in june and june was down 28%. one week.

2,000 sold jriers they started with, now they have 6,000 soldiers on the southern border. they used to have three soldiers. they had nobody. they wouldn't do it. for 45 years, 50 years, people have tried in the state department, one of mike's people said, the woman that we respect who has been in charge of mexico for 20 years, she laughed when we said we were going to ask for these things. she said they've been trying to get -- she was there for 20 years, but they have been trying to get it for 45 or 50 years. the things that i asked for. they all laughed. i got it done in one day. because i said if you don't do it we are going to put tariffs on and every car that comes through that used to be made in the united states, now mexico has 30% of our car business. but that's not going to happen anymore. no more -- no more companies are going to leave because we have reasons that they can't leave anymore. there's just no reason for them to leave anymore. in fact, just the opposite.

they're all coming back. but now we have 21,000 soldiers, 6,000 on the guatemala border, which is, you know, obviously that makes the safe third much less important, you understand, it's very hard to get from guatemala to the united states, and we'll have about 16,000 or so, maybe more, on our southern border. we're using the mexican immigration laws because that's mexico and those laws say you can actually tell a person i'm sorry, you can't come in, get out. or they can take them back to a point of origin. so we're doing very well but we have no help whatsoever from the democrats. just the opposite. they want open borders. they obviously don't mind crime and drugs and human trafficking, which is a tremendous problem. and it's human trafficking mostly in women. and you know, democrats with

their big wonderful hearts. human trafficking with women, three, four, five women are put in the back of a van or the back of a car and they go through areas where there will soon be wall but there's no wall right now because you can't obviously come through ports of entry, but we're really doing well on the border considering we have absolutely no help from the democrats. not only no help, just the opposite. we won a big lawsuit against nancy pelosi and congress having to do with the wall. you saw that two weeks ago. but we also have one that we're appealing to the supreme court, i think it was just put into the supreme court, and i hope we're going to be successful on that. but we're building a lot of wall right now. but it's being met with force. there's no question about it. the democrats are fighting us on a wall. the people can come through but now what's happening with mexico, 21,000 soldiers, we are hearing that even the cartels

are saying wow, this is hard to get through, because the cartels were bringing tremendous numbers of people into our country through diversion or other tactics and money. so we are doing well on the border considering we have no help. i think we're doing well even if we did have help and i want to thank mexico because they really have gone above and beyond what we thought. we didn't ever expect 21,000 soldiers. we expected a smaller number than that. at the same time they are helping themselves a lot because they were having a lot of crime and the border was really -- the borders were run by the cartels and mexico is taking back its country. i give the president a tremendous amount of credit for that. because that's been going on for a long time. thank you all very much. >> thank you, guys. >> we're doing well with china but we'll see whether or not -- we are talking to china about a

deal. we'll see what happens but we're doing very well economically because they're paying us billions and billions and billions of dollars. reporter: -- go back to your country to citizens and women of color who were born in this country? >> i think it's terrible when people speak so badly about our country, when people speak so horribly. i have a list of things here, i'm not going to bore you with you because you would be bored. you wouldn't write it anyway but i have a list of things here said by the congresswomen that is so bad, so horrible, that i almost don't want to read it. it's so bad. i think what you do is you have the same list i did. you should repeat some of that. when the democrats didn't want to mention the name of the congresswoman, not so long ago, and what they did and the way they're treating israel is a

disgrace. but not only, it's what they say about our country. it's my opinion they hate our country. and that's not good. it's not acceptable. thank you very much, everybody. thank you very much. >> thank you, guys. right this way. neil: all right. you always want to make sure we were out of there, not a second too soon. the president made a lot of news there talking again about these four congresswomen, the so-called squad that consists of alexandria ocasio-cortez, rashida tlaib, ilhan omar and ayanna pressley. the president saying, doubling, tripling, quadrupling down on comments he had made over the last couple of days that their own remarks are offensive and

that people should be paying, that is the media, attention to those remarks and not so much to what he's been saying. to a.b. stoddard on that. he's not letting go. what do you make of that? >> i think the president is doing this intentionally. he did not like the reaction that he got, he didn't like the fact that republicans joined in democrats, it took 24 hours to do so but several republicans came out and criticized his remarks. but he does want and you can see this in all of his subsequent tweets, to try to tie these four to the democratic party. what i don't think he understands is that these four and their radical proposals and their sort of insurgent fighting attitude and their anti-establishment fervor, are going to fight with the democratic establishment again. the democrats in congress are rushing to their defense right now, but they are not going to become the face of the democratic party. they are not -- nancy pelosi as speaker is not going to embrace

them and there are plenty of fights ahead that they will be having with leadership. so this, you can see in the president's, all his comments and all of his tweets, that he's trying to say this is the democratic party and i understand that, but i think he probably did himself a little more harm than good. he does have a minority percent of the country, though, that thinks this is terrific. and he gets a good response to it from, again, not a majority but a minority, but he thinks it excites his supporters. i don't know that it gets new ones. but i do think he does this, he stays on offense on purpose and i think we will see a lot more of it between now and november of 2020. neil: well, he's going to be meeting with republican leaders at 4:00 p.m. eastern time today, two and a half hours from now at the white house. few and far between are actually criticizing him. i know senator tim scott said the remarks were unacceptable and racially offensive -- >> the leaders are not. neil: the leaders are not. mitt romney, susan collins is between a rock and a hard place

on this, trying to campaign for re-election in a state hillary clinton won. but where do you think this goes with the republicans? >> well, i think the republicans by and large have decide thatd they are going to put up with this no matter what. we have seen this time and time again. they are not looking for a new nominee. you mentioned earlier in the show, you know, donations are pouring in to try to keep president trump in office. they know he has a big fight on his hands and donors and party members are very invested in keeping trump at the majority level so that he can win next year. and they know he has a real race on his hands. but in terms of what we're seeing from electeds in congress, this is the same as usual. i saw rob portman, senator from ohio, straining to be critical about this today. but also trying to criticize the four members. you see this in all of their comments. i think they are hoping it's going to go away. they have a very rough election next year on their hands. their majority in the senate is

not assured. there are some very very tough races for republicans next year. with a very agitated and energized democratic electorate. this is the kind of thing that obviously fuels the opposition to president trump and it's difficult for them but every time they come out and try to say on the one hand, on the other hand, i think they are perfectly aware he is going to continue this offense and this fight and it's going to make it harder for them. neil: i always like, what he meant to say. a.b., thank you very, very much. by the way, as we were chatting here, we were noticing oil is dropping, not free-falling, down about 3%. apparently the catalyst for that was secretary of state mike pompeo saying that iran is indeed ready to negotiate about its missile program. mere hours after the north koreans had hinted they are going to rev it up again. i don't know what the truth is but here we be. more after this. hi i'm joan lunden.

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. ...or trips to mars. $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. $4.95.

no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. neil: all right. little bit but that's all you need, right, after yesterday's record and the fact that we're soaring along here, just the thought that maybe if this continues unabated and we get a meltup thanks to the federal reserve, what is that, less than 10% to get to 30,000 on the dow? to a degree, taking on this meltup issue, right? >> yeah, to a degree. if you go back to the christmas eve low, you can make the case

from there we have already melted up. we have come a long way in just six months, well over 20%. it's been wonderful. neil: what do you tell your clients who obviously they like stocks going up rather than down, your portfolio increasing in value than decreasing in value, but does the market seem expensive to you or is this within an acceptable range? >> we're arguing the market is fully valued. that is to say, the good news of earnings being okay, the fed's going to cut rates the end of this month, we're making progress on issues. that's in the market. a substantial up leg in here, i think we need better earnings and earnings estimates for next year are up 11%. we think that's a little bit on the high side. we do these ten predictions every year and our phrase for this year was choppy and frustrating, but no recession. if we have no recession, choppy and frustrating may turn out to

be too conservative. neil: we are very early on, i know, in the second quarter earnings parade, i guess 5% or so of the s&p 500 companies have reported. they are beating expectations by and large. but it is still expected to be a quarter in which earnings contracted from the year ago period. do you still buy that? >> i think, look, the expectation is minus a percent or two. normal surprises as you know are plus three. that will bring us into positive territory. i think more important than the numbers will be what's the outlook for the balance of the year. how much has the trade issue caused people to bring back their capital spending horns, et cetera, et cetera. meantime, the consumer in the u.s. is doing really well. new jobs, better wages, you know that story. neil: yeah. four straight months better than expected retail sales growth across the board, most retail establishments were up, four times stronger consumer spending than we thought would be the case at retail establishments

this latest month. now we are in the middle of a two-day amazon prime sale. obviously the consumer is undeterred by these worries. what do you make of that? >> it's pretty amazing. so resilient. a lot of the reason is we are a more isolated economy than most countries. we trade, texas trades with new york and california trades with pennsylvania. we do far more of that, less dependent on imports and exports. they're important to us, but not as important. they are for the u.s. consumer am i working, does my neighbor have a job, i'm finally getting a raise, i think i will spend some money. that's why consumer strength continues to spike the manufacturing and trade issues. they're not horrible problems. they're just slowing. neil: the president said a couple of weeks ago that if he were replaced or if he were voted out of office, you could anticipate a market crash, saying that the principles he put in place have really gotten

us to these hyper levels. as you indicated, they're not necessarily hyper as much as a little generous. what do you think of that? the election itself could change this? >> obviously it depends on who replaces him. look, markets loved the tax cuts, markets loved that regulation rollback. if the next president messes with those two things, the market's not going to like it. they have been fuel for this wonderful fire. nlz neil: so you don't see anything approaching the froth from 1999, early 2000 before everything fell out of bed? i still see there's a good number of bears out there, good number of people who are skeptical. normally you need that to keep the markets doing what they're doing, right? >> exactly. markets love to climb the proverbial walls of worry. look, i am not pounding the table. you got to go chase stocks. i would wait for pullbacks but on the other hand, i don't see

an economy that's going to go off the cliff and therefore, we have to worry about some sort of recession. back to these predictions. choppy and frustrating. i think twhahat's what we're in now. neil: good seeing you, bob doll. meantime, is the dollar under real threat with all these cryptocurrencies gaining steam? why that could explain the government's unusual effort to slap it down. after this. under this buttonwood tree, is where people first gathered to form the stock exchange which brought people together to invest in all the things that move us forward. every day, invesco combines ideas with technology, data with inspiration, investors with solutions. because the possibilities of life and investing are greater when we come together. ♪

while managing your type 2 diabetes- why think about your heart? lower a1c helps, but type 2 diabetes still increases my risk of a fatal cardiovascular event. and that's why there's jardiance- the first type 2 diabetes pill that offers a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit for adults who also have known heart disease. it can significantly reduce my risk of dying from a cardiovascular event. and it lowers my a1c, with diet and exercise. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast or urinary tract infections, and sudden kidney problems. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal.

a rare, but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, ketoacidosis, or an allergic reaction. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. so, now what do you think? while my a1c is important, there's so much more to think about. ask your doctor about jardiance today.

neil: facebook's libra is facing a bipartisan pushback on the hill, concern that the latest cryptocurrency idea is going to be a dollar killer, or potentially one. that's why the federal reserve is worried about it, treasury's worried about it. whole bunch of congress worried about it. cryptocurrency investing for dummies author joins us now. you know, i'm wondering, it's interesting how everyone has

joined forces to say this is something we should worry about. should they? >> i actually don't think so. i mean, the thing is the u.s. dollar as the reserve currency, it already is cracking up and has nothing to do with cryptocurrency. it's been 50 years since [ inaudible ] emerged and president nixon kind of put it off but saudi arabia can bail, we have now china, iran and russia, everybody trying to really switch away from the u.s. dollar being the world's reserve currency so it already has cracks in it and has nothing to do with libra or cryptocurrencies. that's a reason why actually people around the world are seeking -- one of the reasons, an alternative currency that is decentralized that cannot be manipulated by governments around the world. neil: how do we know that it

can't? >> well, if you are talking about libra, that is a whole different topic because libra does operate on blockchain, it technically is a cryptocurrency but it takes away from the ideology of bitcoin, for example, which is being decentralized and not backed by a monopoly or entity. facebook is actually trying to become a central bank which to me is not a cryptocurrency. if you are talking about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, i believe the government should jump on it because that is really working for the people and letting them having the ability to not be manipulated by profiteering and corruption. a lot of central banks that have been pushing us into recessions and unemployment. neil: who is going to police it, or do you need someone to police it? the rap against it is that nefarious elements, the mob, whathave you, black market types, could take full advantage of this and do whatever the heck they want to do.

>> that is -- i don't think that is the case at all. of course, it is taking time, libra, one good thing that it did is that it did bring the spotlight back to cryptocurrencies but if you are fearful of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin just because you think that is going to be used by money laundering or by criminals, then you should stop using the internet, stop using airplanes and cars, because all of them -- neil: that's a very good point. that's a very good point. >> yeah. all of these can lead to criminals and there are good people and bad people that can have access to good technology and use it. neil: but i wonder if we lose our status and stature as a reserve currency or the world's default currency, that can't be good for the united states, can it? >> well, it depends how you define good and who you are defining it to. the world is leaning towards globalization, no matter how hard you try.

i know that right now, we have, you know, nationalism and all these things going on about people not wanting to go global, but the fact of the matter is we are moving to that direction and cryptocurrencies, i mean, you can consider it in a way that yes, it could be good for the u.s. because then you can actually trade with underbanked people in india and other places that people really don't have access to banks, but with cryptocurrency, you can actually create a completely brand new economical cycle. so that's a reason why cryptocurrency could be good. but will it hurt the u.s. dollar? the u.s. dollar is already hurting. that should not be the reason why it's stopping you to going towards the cryptocurrency revolution. neil: this might be the catalyst for that. thank you so much. good seeing you. can we have another big blackout in new york city or most any city in the path of what will be another record heat wave this weekend? remember the last one, the

temperatures were in the 80s. that wasn't the issue. now could heat be this weekend? we're the slowskys.

we like drip coffee, layovers- -and waiting on hold. what we don't like is relying on fancy technology for help. snail mail! we were invited to a y2k party... uh, didn't that happen, like, 20 years ago? oh, look, karolyn, we've got a mathematician on our hands! check it out! now you can schedule a callback or reschedule an appointment, even on nights and weekends. today's xfinity service. simple. easy. awesome. i'd rather not.

neil: all right. oil out of nowhere just dropped 3% after we got wind that secretary of state mike pompeo, that iran now is ready to negotiate about its missile program. we are back with jackie deangelis, david, and hitha. what do you think? all of a sudden because we were just on the ledge, now someone jumped off the ledge. >> i love this whole administration, because it's just based on things that are tweeted, said, perceived, so i think -- i guess we're in a new sort of era where markets move according to when something like

this is said and these bombshells are dropped. so you know, as much as we were seeing markets reacting and oil prices drop, i think it's almost like a hurry up and wait sort of situation. you see what they have to say, wait until a little bit before anyone makes any rash decisions, then see what falls out from that. neil: i misstated before. i apologize for that. obviously looking at this, you do have to wonder about north korea because that too was looking kind of antsy. >> i agree about the stock market, that you've gotten more jumpy in markets around some of these tweets and things and they last very short-lived. with oil markets, jackie would know this better than i would, i bet you it's a third of the time in the last four years that we have had 2% and 3% movement up and down, on much less news than secretary of state saying something. neil: the idea that if things intensify it doesn't rattle the markets. >> if we move down wti3% in 2015

on any given day it would have been a light volatility day. >> that is true. the moves definitely haven't been as extreme as we have seen them throughout history because there is so much more supply on the market. but i do think what pompeo said, if it is indeed true, that the iranians are willing to negotiate, it is really a huge step in this whole thing. our sanctions on them were completely crippling and you saw over the course of the last couple of months the bad behavior, trying to threaten us, trying to up the ante and the rhetoric, it didn't work. neil: i think it's a reflection on weak demand. >> look, oil has gone from $59 to $57 on some modest optimism things will get better with iran, $59 was not exactly pricing that we were about to go to war with iran. neil: very good point. >> i think there's traders involved, there's a lot of speculative activity that is jumpy. neil: let me switch gears to disney. abigail disney, part of the founding family, i guess she went undercover at disneyland to

see how workers were being treated. not well, to her. it's a bad reflection on the company she says disproportionately pays its honchos, including bob iger, too much. >> she really beat up on bob iger. he's paid more than $65 million, more than 1,000 times what the average worker at a theme park, for example, is getting paid. abigail disney is really saying this should be about sort of the human rights and good conditions. we are hearing the same kind of stories from workers at amazon as well. this is a conversation that's ongoing. we do step up to the plate and say this is the best country in the world to live in, yet there definitely could be more that is done when it comes to corporations -- neil: they are already paying $15. >> they are paying it. >> they said they are paying their workers $15 and they have programs where people can have continuing education and really get involved, you know, move towards, you know, have multiple promotions towards upper management. think about where disney's stock

is now. under iger's tenure, it's gone up five times. neil: it's made abigail rich. >> was that iger or the market? >> he was the first one to have all that content on, you know, netflix and hulu. he did a strategic deal with lucas films, a strategic deal with fox, which is this network, owned by this network. neil: they can still charge $10 for a turkey leg. it's outrageous but they can do it. let me get your reaction to fears of another power outage in manhattan this weekend, maybe elsewhere because of the heat wave coming. the last one wasn't a heat wave related issue. this could get the whole grid discussion back on the grid, couldn't it? >> it definitely will. it was actually a defect in the technology. that's what con ed is saying. neil: the supplier for manhattan. >> right. as it gets hotter it's definitely something to think about, but the broader

conversation here i think is how susceptible is our power grid to not only technological defects but also cyberwarfare and you know, potentially even terrorism. if this could happen from a small technological defect, we talk about china, for example, you know, being able to access a grid like this and having such an impact -- neil: you worry about the bad guys get the idea. >> yeah, you do. >> it seems to me this is one of those things where you could think about it a lot but i don't know what any one of us can do about it. it definitely is something we are susceptible to and i think there's a lot of smart people working on it but it's important that with de blasio's commentary on this is actually very discouraging. it makes you think that maybe there isn't as much behind the scenes in preparation for events like this. >> definitely not. >> i was in the blackout for three hours this weekend. we had a party at our house. thank god no one got into that elevator prior to the blackout

happening. what i found was really interesting is that even our building was based on this sort of power grid. so we couldn't even call downstairs. it got that local and we couldn't get help from upstairs. i can't imagine what would happen if it was a city-wide or eastern seaboard-wide or even countrywide -- neil: 15 years ago we had something where one grid after another was shut down, a third of the country. >> i covered the hurricanes, we have always talked about how technology has actually enhanced the grid and made it easier to find out when there are outages or potential problems that could lead to an outage and it's supposed to make things more efficient, yet at the same time when the technology fails, then you have a problem also. neil: yeah. we are live this weekend, by the way. i hope that doesn't happen. i don't do well in heat. more after this. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard.

with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. . .

♪

neil: amazing if you think about it. , apollo 11 blasted off from cape canaveral and cape kennedy 50 years ago. saturday marks the 50th anniversary since neil armstrong and buzz aldrin walked on the lunar surface. wow. charles payne was too young to remember that. charles: neil, great to see you back. good afternoon, everyone, i'm charles payne and this is "making money." stocks more or less hugging the flat line, trying to move further into record territory. investors digesting a mix of earnings, you always hear that, but we had a blockbuster retail sales numbers. i have a great lesson for you. president trump vowing to take a look at google after billionaire investor peter thiel warns of potential treasonous acts. a house subcommittee is holding a hearing on the power of technology in