because it's just a word that the -- certain people, i'm going to be kind, certain people and the media are trying to build up because they'd love to see a recession and we're very far from a recession. in fact, if the fed would do its job, i think we'd have a tremendous spurt of growth, a tremendous spurt. the fed is psychologically very important. less so actually, but very psychologically important. and if the fed would do its job, which it's really done very poorly over the last year and a half, you would see a burst of growth like you've never seen before. and that would be lowering interest rates and maybe putting so some, if you look at what china's doing, if you look at what germany's doing, if you look at what so many countries are doing, putting some money in because we want to compete with these other countries. so i think that we actually are set for a tremendous surge of growth if the fed would do its job. that's a big if, frankly.

they should, the fed should be cutting and i would say they should say at a minimum, 100 basis points over a period of time, not at one time, but over a period of time. reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> well, i'm not talking about doing anything at this moment. but indexing is something that a lot of people have liked for a long time and it's something that would be very easy to do, and a lot of people have been talking about indexing for many years and it's something that i am certainly thinking about. i can say that a majority of the people in the white house at the level that does this kind of thing, they like indexing so it is something i'm thinking about. payroll taxes, i have been thinking about payroll taxes for a long time. whether or not we do it now or not is -- it's not being done because of recession, because we are legitimately, if we had a

cut in interest rates by the fed, if they would do their job properly, and if they would do a meaningful cut, because they raised too fast, you would see growth like you've not seen ever in this country. now, if you go from the election, that great november 8th date, if you go from november 9th to present, you're talking about almost a 60% increase in the stock market. you're talking about unemployment numbers that are the lowest in history in many categories, and overall, almost the lowest ever in the history of our country, i think it was 1969, and we are set to surpass that number. i mean, our country's doing very well. when i spoke to the president, we were just walking in and he said congratulations on the great success of your economy, your country, and i appreciated it. our country is doing very well.

reporter: -- military forces in romania? >> that's one of the things we will be talking about today. i assume you might be bringing that up. it's something we'll talk about. reporter: would you like to have vladimir putin back in the g7, make it the g8 again? >> so it was the g8 for a long time and now it's the g7, and a lot of the time, we talk about, we talk about russia, we talk about russia because i've gone to numerous g7 meetings and i guess president obama, because putin outsmarted him, president obama thought it wasn't a good thing to have russia in so he wanted russia out, but i think it's much more appropriate to have russia in. it should be the g8 because a lot of the things we talk about have to do with russia. so i could certainly see it being the g8 again and if somebody would make that motion, i would certainly be disposed to think about it very favorably. but as you know, for most of the time, it was the g8, it included

russia, and president obama didn't want russia in, because he got outsmarted. well, that's not the way it really should work. reporter: -- including romania [ inaudible ]? >> we spent a lot of time on it. we spent a lot of time discussing it already. our countries have been discussing it and we're going to -- we're taking it up today in a very important meeting right after this. do you like the idea? sounds like you like the idea, right? the waiver, do you like the idea? okay. it's something we're thinking about. reporter: on venezuela, has someone contacted the maduro regime? >> yes. well, we are in touch. we're talking to various representatives of venezuela. we are helping venezuela as much as we can. we're staying out of it but we are helping it. it needs a lot of help.

it's an incredible tribute to something bad happening and that something bad is socialism. it's amazing because 15 years ago it was one of the wealthiest countries, now it's one of the poorest countries. it has oil reserves, has a lot of things going but it's a very sad thing what's happened. they don't have water, they don't have food and we are helping a lot. we are talking to the representatives at different levels of venezuela. yes. i don't want to say who. but we are lkg a very high level. reporter: with regard to the trade deal you want to seal with boris john sson. >> i spoke with boris johnson. i think he's going to be a great prime minister. i think he's going to do a fantastic job. i've known him. lot of people know that we have a very good relationship. i think he'll be far superior. i think he'll do something that will be -- i think he's going to be very important for the uk. i think he's going to be very important. dealing with the european union, i hate to say this to you, but dealing with the european union

is very difficult. they drive a hard bargain. they are represented by jean-claude, who is a friend of mine but he's a tough man. he's a very very tough man. he's a great negotiator. and we have all the cards in this country because all we'd have to do is tax their cars and they would give us anything they wanted because they sent millions of mercedes over, they sent millions of bmws over. but we're talking to the european union. we're going to see if we can work something out but i will say this. dealing with the uk, they have not treated the uk very well. that's a very tough bargain they're driving, the european union. that's a very tough bargain. and i think that uk has the right man in charge right now, the right person in charge in the form of boris. reporter: with regard to afghanistan, what i your current stance on pulling the united states out?

>> we are talking to the government of afghanistan, we are talking to the taliban and others and we're looking at different things. we've been there for 18 years. it's ridiculous. we have taken it down a notch. we're at about 13,000 people right now. 13,000 americans. nato has some troops there, too, by the way. and we're having good discussions. we'll see what happens. we'll see what happens. look, it's 18 years. we're not really fighting, we're almost more of a police force over there. it's been so my but we're like a police force. and we're not supposed to be a police force. as i've said and i'll say it any number of times, this is not using nuclear, we could win that war in a week if we wanted to fight it but i'm not looking to kill ten million people. i'm not looking to kill ten million afghan because that's what would have to happen and i'm not looking to do that.

but it's a war that has been going on for almost 19 years now and frankly, it's ridiculous. but with that being said, it's a dangerou place and we have to always keep an eye on it. reporter: sounds like you'd like to pull completely out if you could. >> i would like to look at various alternatives. one of the alternatives is going on right now. we're talking about a plan. i don't know whether or not the plan will be acceptable to me. maybe it's not going to be acceptable to them. but we are talking. we have good talks going. we'll see what happens. this is more than other presidents have done but we have brought it down. we are bringing some of our troops back but we have to have a presence. reporter: mr. president, could you clarify your position on enhanced background checks? after el paso and dayton you seemed to be fully in support of enhanced measures, when you were leaving bedminster you seemed to suggest we already do have strong background laws which a lot of people read as you dialing back. >> i'm not doing that to be

cute. we have very very strong background checks right now. but we have sort of missing areas and areas that don't complete the whole circle and we're looking at different things, and i have to tell you that it is a mental problem and i've said it a hundred times, it's not the gun that pulls the trigger, it's the person that pulls the trigger. these are sick people and it is also that kind of a problem, and we're looking at mental institutions which we used to have like as an example, where i come from in new york, they closed up almost all of their mental institutions, or many of them, and those people just went on to the streets and they did it for budgetary reasons. well, new york is not unique. they've done that in many places. reporter: would you support either of the house bills that are passed? >> i'm not going to get into that. but we are in very meaningful discussions with the democrats and i think the republicans are very unified. we are very strong in our second amendment. the democrats are not strong at

all in the second amendment. i would say they're weak in the second amendment and we have to be careful of that. the democrats would, i believe, i think they would give up the second amendment. the people that -- a lot of the people that put me where i am are strong believers in the second amendment and i am also. and we have to be very careful about that. you know, they call at this tit ri slope and all of a sudden everything gets taken away. we're not going to let that happen. go ahead, please. reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> well, i hope so, because we have good results and i want to share those with president trump. >> what is your question? so nice to have a question about romania. reporter: i ask you will you

fight corruption? >> sure i will. of course i will. i think this is a man that can solve the corruption problem in romania. he's made big strides, from what i hear. i haven't been there recently. but he's made very big strides. i think he's the man that can solve the corruption problem. there are a number of really terrific countries like romania but they have a tremendous corruption problem and i've heard you made tremendous progress. >> we did. >> yeah. reporter: what is the status of your foreign aid package? do you still support cutting -- >> well, we're looking at it and we're looking at it in different ways and we're talking to republicans and democrats about it and certain things we can say, but certain things it probably could be, you know, penny wise, maybe it's a penny wise. we'll see. but we are looking at it. we have some things that are on the table very much and we'll let you know over the next probably sooner than a week. reporter: mr. president, your administration has been taking steps to make it easier to

discriminate against lgbtq people in the work force. are you okay with that? >> you know, i just got an award and an endorsement yesterday from the exact group, a group, you saw that, they gave me the endorsement yesterday and i was very honored to -- log cabin, the log cabin group, i was very honored to receive it. no, i've done very well with that community. some of my biggest supporters are of that community and i think -- and i talk to them a lot about it. i think i have done very well with that community. as you know, peter thiel and so many others there, they are with me all the way. they like the job i'm doing. i just got a big endorsement from the log cabin group. yeah. reporter: you keep insisting the trade war with china is not affecting the u.s. economy but a lot of economists disagree with that. >> well, okay, let me tell you something. number one, we're doing very well as an economy.

but somebody had to take china on. you know, i read and i see so much and i read so much and i'll see these economists saying oh, give up, give up on china, give up. china's been ripping this country off for 25 years, for longer than that, and it's about time, whether it's good for our country or bad for our country short term, long term it's imperative that somebody does this, because our country cannot continue to pay china $500 billion a year because stupid people are running it. so i don't mind this question. whether tvit's good or bad shor term is irrelevant. we have to solve the problem with china because they are taking our $500 billion a year plus and that doesn't include intellectual property theft and other things. also national security. so i am doing this whether it's good or bad for your statement about oh, will we fall into a recession for two months. the fact is somebody had to take

china on. my life would be a lot easier if i didn't take china on but i like doing it because i have to do it and we're getting great results. china's had the worst year they've had in 27 years. lot of people are saying the worst year they've had in 54 years, okay? and frankly, i don't want that to happen, but it does put us in a good negotiating position, doesn't it. and china wants to make a deal. and that's good. but they have to make a deal that's fair to us. it can't be a deal that's not fair to us. and you should be happy that i'm fighting this and i'm fighting this battle, because somebody had to do it. we couldn't let this -- i don't even think it's sustainable to let go on what was happening. they were stealing all of our intellectual property, ideas, the theft was incredible. they call it intellectual property theft. and they value it at $300 billion a year. who knows how they value it. i know how to value dollars. i don't know how to value intellectual property theft. but they have experts that say it's at least $300 billion a

year, where they steal it. somebody had to do something with china. obama should have done it. bush should have done it. clinton should have done it. they all should have done it. nobody did it. i'm doing it. so what do you say oh, my trade deals are causing -- my trade deals aren't causing a problem. this is something that had to be done. the only difference is i'm doing it. i could be sitting here right now with the stock market that would be up 10,000 points higher if i didn't want to do it. but i think we have no choice but to do it. and a lot of people that really know, people that love our country, they are saying thank you very much for taking it on and we're winning, because they're having the worst year they've had in decades and it's only going to get worse. china has lost two million jobs in the last month and a half because they are moving the people, the companies are moving to non-tariff countries. they have lost over two million jobs in a very short period of time. they are going to lose a lot more jobs.

and if i didn't help certain companies, american companies like apple, for a very short period of time, i might help them, only until they do what they have to do which is probably move from china, this would be very short term, if i didn't help them, they would -- i mean, they would be -- they would have a big problem. here's the thing. somebody had to take on what china was doing to the united states economically. we're winning big. i took it on and it should have been done by previous presidents but i took it on and i'm happy to do it because it had to be done, and the smart people say thank you very much, and the dumb people have no idea and then you have the political people, and they go with the wind. but they all know, even senator schumer said wow, trump's doing a great job with china, i couldn't believe that. but schumer thinks i'm doing the right thing and he's doing the right thing by saying it, because he knows that china was

a big economic threat. and they were taking all of that money that they were making from us and they were building planes and ships and lots of other things and we can't let that happen. reporter: there is a new study out of australia that suggests with the current chinese military posture in the south china sea, indo-pacific region, it could wipe out most u.s. bases within a number of hours. is that something that keeps you up at night? >> well, nothing keeps me up at night. i'll tell you, we could wipe out anything -- we have the most powerful in the world and when i came in two and a half years ago, we were in a very bad position. now we're in a very strong position. we've got $700 billion, then $716 billion, and then $738 billion. we have the strongest military in the world right now. and we're getting very close to finishing that whole rebuilding. we have rebuilt the military. right now, there's nobody that's even close to us militarily. not even close.

reporter: does it concern you at all, the chinese military? >> no, because they would pay a price they don't want to pay. reporter: -- choice for u.s. ambassador? >> somebody that's being put up and respected very much. to russia? reporter: yes, sir. >> yeah. very respected. i know that mike pompeo likes him very much. and he's very respected. he could very well be. yeah. reporter: do you think romania should look into [ inaudible ]? >> they are doing that. romania is doing that. reporter: the taliban are talking to the u.s. but not the afghan government. if the taliban went on the offensive, would the u.s. come and -- >> well, the taliban does not respect the government, the afghan government. they have no respect for the afghan government. and i understand that and i know that. and they haven't been exactly getting along for a long period of time. but we have been a peacekeeper

there in a way for 19 years and at a certain point you have to say that's long enough. i go to walter reed and i see young men that stepped on a bomb and they lose their legs, they lose their arms and in some cases they lose both and their face on top of it, and they are living. and again, we could win that but you know, i don't want to do what we would have to do to win it. i think most people agree with me on that. right now, what we're doing is we're negotiating with the government and we're negotiating with the taliban and we'll see what happens from it, what's coming from it. i will say this. the taliban would like to stop fighting us. they would like to stop fighting us. they have lost a lot. but we'll see what happens. remember, it's a tough place. the soviet union became russia because of afghanistan. that's what happened. very simple. they became russia because of afghanistan.

somebody would say oh, well would russia go in. i said if they want, let them. i think they tried that before. however, didn't work out too well. reporter: can the taliban be trusted? >> nobody can be trusted. nobody can be trusted. this world i think nobody can be trusted. reporter: could we be back to where we were pre-9/11 with the taliban in complete control? >> that's what we have to watch. we will always h intelligence and always have somebody there. but you can say that about a lot of places, john. doesn't have to be that. but that does seem to be the harvard university of terrorism, okay. it seems to be. and we'll always have somebody there. if the tealiban were really rigt in what they're saying, they would stop that from happening because they could stop that from happening very easily. reporter: india and pakistan, i know you had discussions, is that solvable? >> well, they have been having

these talks for hundreds of years, even under different names, but it's kashmir, and kashmir is a very complicated place. you have the hindus and the muslims and i wouldn't say they get along so great. that's what you have right now. and you have millions of people that want to be ruled by others and maybe on both sides and you have two countries that haven't gotten along well for a long time, and frankly, it's a very explosive situation. i spoke to the prime minister, i spoke with yesterday also prime minister modi, they are both friends of mine, they're great people, they're great people, and they love their countries, and they're in a very tough situation. kashmir is a very tough situation. you know, we're talking about this has been going on for decades and decades. shooting, i don't mean shooting like shooting a rifle. i mean like major shooting of howitzers, of heavy arms, and

it's been going on for a long period of time. but i get along really well with both of them, as you know. prime minister khan was here just recently and i'm going to be with prime minister modi. i'll be with him over the weekend in france. i think we're helping the situation but there's tremendous problems between those two countries, as you know. and i will do the best i can to mediate or do something. great relationship with both of them. but they are not exactly friends at this moment. complicated situation. a lot has to do with religion. religion's a complicated subject. reporter: on israel, wo congresswoman ilhan omar said the united states should rethink its aid to israel after she and congresswoman tlaib were denied entry. congresswoman tlaib was later

allowed in but decided not to. should there be any change in aid to israel? >> no, and you should see the horrible things tlaib has said about israel. aoc plus 3. that's what i call it. just take aoc plus 3. and you should see the things that the four of them have said about israel over the last couple of years. i mean, omar is a disaster for jewish people. i can't imagine if she has any jewish people in her district that they could possibly vote for her. but what omar has said, what tlaib has said and yesterday i noticed for the first time, tlaib with the tears. all of a sudden, she starts with tears, tears. and i don't buy it. i don't buy it. i don't buy it for a second. because i've seen her in a very vicious mood at campaign rallies, my campaign rallies, before she was a congresswoman. i said who is that.

i saw a woman that was violent and vicious and out of control and all of a sudden, i see this person who is crying because she can't see her grandmother. she can see her grandmother. they gave her permission to see her grandmother but she grandstanded and didn't want to do it. that's a decision of israel. lot of people are saying that was my decision. that's a decision of israel. they can let them in if they want but i don't think they want to. when you read the things that they've said about israel, how bad, and if you look at their itinerary before they found out, you take a look at their itinerary, that was all going to be a propaganda tour against israel. so i don't blame israel for doing what they did. i have nothing to do with it but i don't blame them for doing what they did. i think it would have been very bad to let them in, including the four. i'm talking about all four. but these two that wanted to get in, omar and tlaib, and i think it would be a very bad thing for israel but israel has to do what they want to do. but i would not cut off aid to

israel. and i can't even believe that we are having this conversation. five years ago, the concept of even talking about this, even three years ago, of cutting off aid to israel because of two people that hate israel and hate jewish people, i can't believe we're even having this conversation. where is the democratic party gone? where have they gone where they are defending these two people over the state of israel? i think any jewish people that vote for a democrat, i think it shows either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty. all right? thank you very much. liz: breaking news. breaking news. after multiple white house denials and then a maybe from a white house spokesperson just before noon eastern, president trump now just confirming that he is indeed eyeing a payroll tax cut to stimulate an economy he describes as quote, the best

in history. the president taking questions from the media in the oval office. during his meeting with the president of romania, folks, this is why you watch fox business. the first questions from the press were right up our alley which means it's right up our viewers' alley, all business. why the sudden focus on another tax cut, because there had been a report in "the washington post" today that the trump administration was having discussions about whether to pursue a cut in the payroll tax. now, the last time we had such a cut was i believe about 2011, when president obama imposed a temporary cut of about 2% to the payroll tax during the very worst moments of the financial crisis, and he did so to stabilize the economy. president trump just now saying he's not only quote, always looking at a payroll tax cut which would help middle income earners, but also a cut in the capital gains tax which is pretty much targeted at investors and the stock market. the question does arise here, if the economy is the best ever, why resort to what is usually

reserved for a very rainy day? let's show what the markets did or perhaps more pointedly, what they haven't done. that is spike back close to the green line. you can see intraday, we have actually only moved slightly lower, right after he began speaking. we did try and move up just a bit, then you can see with the dow jones industrials we are heading back down to session lows, dow down about 110 points. it is not a huge drop by any means. s&p, same thing. we just hit session lows, down about 17 points. the nasdaq is also lower at the moment by 39 points. to blake burman, who was in the oval office for all the breaking news of which for our viewers, payroll tax cut normally, if a president were to call for that, i would imagine you would see the stock market move higher. reporter: everything that i have been told, liz, privately over the last day or so since this story broke that the white house was mulling a payroll tax cut was this was a very low level

conversation among the white house, some individuals within the white house, and that this really wasn't under any serious consideration. we even heard publicly today from one of the top spokespeople here at the white house that no, this isn't really under consideration. fast forward to the president in the oval office there and he certainly gave the impression that maybe a cut to payroll taxes could potentially be under consideration. two different things we're hearing. you heard from the president there himself, at one point he said quote, payroll taxes, i have been thinking about payroll taxes a long time. whether or not we do it now or not, it's not being done because of a recession. the president speaking of a recession, staring down a potential recession, which now has gained steam over the last week or so, the president set that aside, really downplayed that as well saying talks of a quote unquote recession are quote, inappropriate. the president wants to make the distinction that even though they may or may not be

considering this, something that he's thought about at some point, it's not because there's a recession. so that payroll taxes, whether there could be a payroll tax cut, then there's also indexing capital gains which the president was asked about, and he said quote, i'm not talking about doing anything at this moment but indexing is something that a lot of people have liked for a long time and it's something that would be very easy to do. whether or not it's actually very easy to do would be up for debate. the president seems to think he can do this by executive order or some sort of executive action. there are others who would point to an office of legal counsel opinion from back in 1992 that might suggest otherwise. either way, when you talk about tax cuts, one thing to keep in mind at least certainly with the payroll tax cut, the other end of pennsylvania avenue would have a say. you know the makeup in the house of representatives. you would have to think if the president wants to go down that line, he would have to have some buy-in from democrats and the other flip to that is what

exactly would the white house be willing to give up. in any event, you've got the president talking about tax cuts today potentially. by the way, there were a flurry of china headlines. i don't know if you want to get to that. liz: also, don't forget the 100 basis point cut he's encouraging, nudging the federal reserve to really go for. he did say, however, with that 100 basis point cut, not all at once. over a period of time. but blake, you know that we have had all kinds of reports that over the past week, the president has had that conference call with a bunch of banking ceos. he's been speaking to business people. suddenly he delayed half of what would be tariffs starting september 1st. he's listening to business people so suddenly, i'm just wondering if there isn't some type of contingency plan that he feels needs to take place. he can talk all he wants about no recession, i'm just doing it, but these are all let's pull out the rainy day fund type of

moves. reporter: here's what i think is notable from that 100 basis points at least comment that the president made. i asked him about it on the south lawn the other day before he left for bedminster about ten days ago. we have never gotten a number from the president. talking about the need to cut rates. finally at that point he said at least 100 basis points which i believe was the first time he had ever commented on it. the reason why i bring it up is because that was before everything that happened on wall street last week, and before he decided to, you know, put a hold to some of the next batch of tariffs. he said at least a hundred basis points. then all of last week happened, now he still feels at least a hundred basis points. liz: exactly. these are all one thing you do when there's a crisis pending or we are in the middle of it and apparently, we are not at the moment. so that's why thankfully, up next, we've got one of the most respected voices from wall street to main street. dianne swonk, top economist in

america. we will get into the president's comments on the payroll tax cuts and what about a recession? does she see it, taking all the emotion out of it, all the politics? what does she see? that's next on "the claman countdown." you can't miss it. managingaudrey's on it.s? eating right? on it! staying active? on it. audrey thinks she's doing all she can to manage her type 2 diabetes and heart disease but is her treatment doing enough to lower her heart risk? [sfx: crash of football players colliding off-camera.] maybe not. jardiance is the number 1 prescribed pill in its class. jardiance can reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults who also have known heart disease. that means jardiance can help save your life from a heart attack or stroke. plus, jardiance lowers a1c and it could help you lose some weight. 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. lower a1c and lower risk of a fatal heart attack? on it with jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. the type 2 diabetes pill that's on it. learn more at jardiance.com announcer: fidelity is redefining value with zero account fees for brokerage accounts. and zero minimums to open an account. at fidelity those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win ♪ saved by zero their medicare options...ere people go to learn about before they're on medicare. come on in. you're turning 65 soon? yep. and you're retiring at 67?

that's the plan! well, you've come to the right place. it's also a great time to learn about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. here's why... medicare part b doesn't pay for everything. only about 80% of your medical costs. this part is up to you... yeah, everyone's a little surprised to learn that one. a medicare supplement plan helps pay for some of what medicare doesn't. that could help cut down on those out-of-your-pocket medical costs. call unitedhealthcare insurance company today... to request this free, and very helpful, decision guide. and learn about the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. selected for meeting their high standards of quality and service. this type of plan lets you say "yes" to any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. there are no networks or referrals to worry about. do you accept medicare patients?

i sure do! see? you're able to stick with him. like to travel? this kind of plan goes with you anywhere you travel in the country. so go ahead, spend winter somewhere warm. if you're turning 65 soon or over 65 and planning to retire, find out more about the plans that live up to their name. thumbs up to that! remember, the time to prepare is before you go on medicare! don't wait. get started today. call unitedhealthcare and ask for your free decision guide. learn more about aarp medicare supplement plan options and rates to fit your needs oh, and happy birthday... or retirement... in advance. liz: well, that was a major headline out moments ago during president trump's impromptu news

conference. the talk of a payroll tax cut. the president just brought that up. he said i'm always thinking about a payroll tax cut, but actually, it is the first time we've heard him speak about it. this after a "washington post" reporter yesterday reports that they are talking about this in order to stimulate the economy. we've got a big economic headline coming out of there. just moments ago. so let's get to top economist dian diane swonk. she's joining us live. let me let you give your gut reaction to what the president just said and your thought on what shape the economy really is in if he's talking about a payroll tax cut and is considering a capital gains tax cut. >> i think it's always prudent to sort of hedge yourself against a recession and i am worried about the snowballing effect of what we are seeing abroad in both trade tensions,

trade war, the un certainty unce facing in a recession coming in 2020. i hope we avert it and stop some of the policies we are doing to get there because you never wish a recession on the economy because of the indiscriminate carnage it creates. liz: do you see a recession coming? >> i think it's highly probable. i do have a recession in 2020 because i'm worried about the snowballing effect of what we are seeing and what happens with trade wars, it's not just the u.s., it's brexit, there's a lot of them going on. they are contagious. japan is now mimicking the u.s. and now in a trade war with south korea. these things take a toll on the overall size of the global economic pie and as long as the storm is going on abroad, you worry about what will wash up on our shores and how we will weather that and i worry we don't have all the tools necessary when the economy falters and the ship goes down to right the ship. liz: we just had peter navarro on the show last week saying there is no recession on the way.

larry kudlow said absolutely not. the president has said no recession, not at all, it's the best economy ever. now, let me just support some of what they said. we've got july retail sales numbers, up .7%. that was way better than the expectation of .3% higher. we got internet retailers seeing a spike of 2.8%. inflation is relatively in check here. so why do you see a recession? i'm going to have to push you on this. >> it's a great question and you are absolutely right, the u.s. consumer is atlas shouldering the burden of the u.s. economy even as investment has contracted and manufacturing sector has contracted. hours worked are down and several plants closed for good in michigan and ohio in the end of july and we have also seen layoffs in the steel sector now so it's rippling through the manufacturing sector. something's got to give. either we've got to see

businesses step up with more conviction instead of caution and place more bets on the future and ramp up hiring and wages, or the u.s. consumer is going to not be able to shoulder that burden anymore. you are going to see weakness in payroll. now, the good news is the consumer has played that atlas but fear factor is real and their confidence fell quite dramatically in reaction to the trade war in august. we have already seen a cautionary tale. consumers pulled back and disappeared in december in response to the chaos we saw in the financial markets and fears over a trade war. liz: when you see that something like computers and the prices have gone up 2.8% and by the way, that's the most they have ever gone up since the bureau of labor statistics, bls, the u.s. government, the trump administration, since they have been keeping records back in the early 2000s. that means that i mean, i'm triangulating, i'm thinking it's understandable why he's delaying the tariffs on laptops and smartphones because those are big holiday gifts. i do have to ask you about the fed because you know the federal

reserve, you have advised the federal reserve. he just said that he thinks the fed absolutely quote, at a minimum should cut by a hundred basis points, not all at once, but we've got jackson hole coming up starting thursday and friday, powell will speak on friday. >> i'll be there. liz: exactly. the president has showered verbal grenades all over jay powell. what will jay powell do with the meeting in september? >> well, i think we are going to see a rate cut in september and likely one before that. my fear is that, my own forecast has a lot more rate cuts in it but for the wrong reasons because we do actually slip into recession. remember, the fed has to be very strategic, they don't have a lot of leeway in rate cuts right now. they have have been-tto be very and are hedging against where the head winds of trade wars, of weaker growth abroad, of the uncertainty tax and the president actually accurately said that the fed's trying to work on confidence. trying to offset the uncertainty created by the administration in

trade policy by lowering interest rates and in fact, one of the most important things jay powell said in his last press conference which wasn't his best, was that listen, we thought the economy would be where we're at right now with two rate hikes, not with rate cuts. we've gotten here because the fed has provided support and that's because the trade wars and weakness abroad, not just the trade wars but weakness abroad and trade wars elsewhere have taken a much larger toll than anyone expected on the global economy. liz: diane swonk, calling recession for 2020 likely. don't have yield curve inversion. at least for the moment, that's in a cave. good to see you. thank you very much. >> thank you, liz. liz: meanwhile, president trump sounds like he is doubling down on the trade war in china, saying he is not ready to make a trade deal witthat country. that's not good for my next guest, who runs a 3,600 acre farm with 300 mother cows as

they're called, plus their calves. they are right at the beginning of the beef supply chain. his ranch caught not only in the china trade war stampede but also being left out to pasture due to the lack of movement on ratifying the usmca, u.s. mexico canada trade deal. as well as the lack of a filler for the u.s. withdrawal from the tpp or trans-pacific partnership. james henderson, manager of the 7-eleven ranch here exclusively via skype. good to see you. i don't know if you got to hear what the president said but he's still standing tough on a. he's willing to help companies like apple, he said for a short period of time, but he's standing pretty firm on anything that would affect you. what is your thought on that? >> i think as i listen to the president speak, he's doubling down like you said. i'm curious about why he keeps using the phrase winning. we are not winning in

agriculture right now with the ongoing trade wars. on my farm over the past 18 months since the trade wars have started, i have lost between $35,000 and $40,000 worth of market value in the products that i produce. to me, that's losing. that has broad implications across the rural economy. liz: sounds like you are hurting. what about your other colleagues in the farming world, not necessarily cattle, but do you speak to others? we understand soy farmers, even though they are getting some type of stimulus which of course is paid for by tax dollars so again, americans are pay for all of this, what are they saying? what are you hearing from them? >> you know, as i talk to our local farmers, the young guys, they are scared and i think your previous guest kind of put her finger on it, when it's about confidence. there's not a lot of confidence in agriculture right now. as a result of the ongoing trade wars. so i don't think it matters if you're in the midwest or if

you're in colorado or somewhere else, all of the ag economy is one economy and what happens in one sector affects another sector. that confidence is just not there. i really feel like we are running short on time and i don't think we can run out the clock until the president's ready. liz: may i ask, were you a president trump voter? >> i did not find a candidate in the last election that i felt i could vote for. liz: what about now? do you see anybody who is speaking to the heart of the farmers out there? >> you know, i don't think that president trump is anti-agriculture. liz: oh, he's not. but i get it. >> he is not exactly helping us out and i think there's going to be long-term implications from that. i don't see anybody that's in the field right now that's -- that i see my friends and

neighbors voting for that represents their values. liz: it's great to have you. please come back. this is the type of perspective our viewers need. good to see you, james. >> thank you. liz: james henderson. cattle rancher. we are coming right back.

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.

liz: well, multi-millionaire jeffrey epstein's death officially ruled a suicide, but the questions surrounding the actual circumstances of his passing still looming large. fox business is learning that a key piece of evidence worn by the disgraced financier could be the key to understanding exactly what happened in his new york city jail cell just over a week ago.

charlie gasparino is here. >> you know, this is serious stuff. it's somewhat comical when you see slippers like that. he would show up to palm beach parties with those slippers on after he left jail -- liz: describe them. we have fm sirius radio listeners. >> high end black velvet slippers. he would go to these parties with his significant other or insignificant, whoever she was, it was a very young, one party was a very young woman. people were questioning her age. one slipper, the right one, as you see there, would have, this is just how it was described to me, would have like a monogrammed screw on it and the other one had a u on it. liz: the letter u. >> the letter u. liz: $525. >> this is when he was -- after he was released from jail. the question really becomes this. we have been speaking with a lot of people about jeffrey epstein, what made him tick, what made him think he might be able to get away with stuff, what made him, you know, be able to

ingratiate himself with top players. let's be real clear here. we have done some reporting on this. we asked -- through the grapevine, everybody is talking about this, a lot of speculation about the relationship between bill gates, the microsoft founder, and epstein, okay. there's others but him in particular, we keep hearing about. we have asked gates' spokespeople several times about this. they will -- they told us unequivocally no personal relationship, no business relationship, no charitable relationship, no social relationship. however, gates' name apparently was on flight logs on one of his jets in 2013. they will not explain why he was on those flight logs to us. so the question becomes, not saying jeffrey epstein was palling around with bill gates, but how was he able even post-prison ingratiate himself, hang out with bill gates, leon

black of the apollo group, basically jeffrey epstein was his wealth manager post-jail, have a relationship with barclays, a big bank, have a relationship with jpmorgan, les wexner dumped him, according to wexner, but a lot of other people didn't. how was he able to maintain these relationships. i think, there's a story on foxbusiness.com, i have done a lot of reporting, part of it was his attitude. it was a screw you attitude. never admitted guilt, he would say that he wasn't a pedophile. remember he described to me what happened to him was not much different than what happened to the patriots owner, robert kraft, who was busted in a prostitution ring. let's be clear, robert kraft -- liz: massage. >> -- had a massage with adults, not massages with children. you know, it was an attitude that allowed him to push forward. it basically allowed him to basically live his life as he wanted to in his palm beach set.

again, that palm beach party i'm describing was in 2015. well after, just a couple years ago, so well after he left jail. until recently. i think that gets to the heart of why he killed himself. how could someone this arrogant and self-confident, why would they kill themselves? one reason may be, you know, the con was over. no one believed him, he wasn't getting out of jail. liz: nobody was standing up for him. >> he had no friends. his business relationships. it was done. then he did himself. that i think is a much more plausible explanation than, you know, bill clinton paid someone to kill him, as you are seeing in the conspiracy theories. liz: charlie, thank you very much. charlie gasparino. dow jones industrials down 110 points right now. we are coming right back. don't go away. eight minutes before that closing bell rings on a wild news day. fely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast...

...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? dexperience thrillingn operformance.o now at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. get 0.9% apr for 60 months on all 2019 models. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go. expedia. - in the last year, of cybercrime every second. when a criminal has your personal information, they can do all sorts of things in your name. criminals can use ransomware, spyware, or malware

to gain access to information like your name, your birthday, and even your social security number. - [announcer] that's why norton and lifelock are now part of one company, providing an all in one membership for your cyber safety that gives you identify theft protection, device security, a vpn for online privacy, and more. and if you have an identity theft problem, we'll work to fix it with our million dollar protection package. - there are new cyber threats out there everyday, so protecting yourself isn't a one time job, it's an ongoing need. now is the time to make sure that you have the right plan in place. don't wait. - [announcer] norton 360 with lifelock. use promo code get25 to save 25% off your first year and get a free shredder with annual membership. call now to start your membership or visit lifelock.com/tv

(past them because she didn't sknow they were talking to her.g and she would just walk right (deborah) i just could not hea i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair, but nobody even sees them. (avo) our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader for over 70 years. (deborah) when i finally could hear for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. (avo) call 1-800-miracle to start your 30 day risk-free trial and schedule your free hearing evaluation today.

liz: jerry, thank you very much. mixed messages on retail.

situation going on with president trump. look at the dow. we're now at session lows. down 164 points. >> it's a little oxymoron i can. fanning stocks are rolling over. all the economic data. we think it is miserable. time to play defense. liz: you don't like the "fang" stocks. >> sell fang, facebook, amazon, netflix, google. by diamondback energy. what is on sale. future of energy business with when at these lows. liz: why not. doesn't seem, people have been bullish on energy. doesn't seem like you're concerned about oversupply? >> i am. i think it is in the price.

the thing is, good stocks, good prices. you can have good companies, facebook, amazon, netflix, great companies. we think their prices are too high. we like the diamondback price today. liz: we know what you're selling. we know you like some energy. do you feel the economy is going in the right direction? when i say direction, think about momentum itself. the president says it is. all of is had people say it is. yet he is ready to throw everything at it. he has been talking to business people all last week. makes you wonder if some type of contingency plan is talked about? >> shakespeare said it best. clearly trade wars are a problem. all indicators say we're very close to recession. we may already be in a recession. back in 2001, it took four quarters of denying it before they went back, said, we were in a recession the end of 2001. liz: so good to see you.

mark, one of our favorites here at "countdown." [closing bell rings] we look to be at session lows. the dow down 180 points. s&p lower by 23. nasdaq down 53. as president talks about mulling stimulus. melissa: we may already be in a recession? what was that guy smoking? broad retreat on wall street. all three major averages ending the day in the red on gains of economic slowdown fears. what is going on here. investors digest another day of earnings as well. the dow ending down 170 points. how do you like that negative nellies? the s&p 500, tech-heavy nasdaq also ending in negative territory. i'm melissa francis. people are talking this whole then down. connell: we're talking ourselves into it? melissa: i do. connell: is that the idea? melissa: i do. connell: i'm connell mcshane. this is "after the bell." president did a lot of talking. here is what