we kind of needed that. connell: we needed it. melissa: can you imagine today without twitter? connell: one twitter password and all things would have been different but we were down. melissa: bulls & bears now. david: wall street rocked today 's president trump issues new orders for u.s. companies in china. the dow plunging 623 points, and response was down 745 points at the low. the president is saying he would be responding some time this afternoon to china's new tariffs on $75 billion in u.s. goods, if he speaks on camera, he hasn't yet, we will bring you his comments live. welcome, everybody what a day, ha? this is bulls & bears thank you for joining us i'm david asman joining me on the panel jonas max ferris, and adam lashinsky. so, here is what started all of the tweet storms was sparked off by this one from the president.

"our country has lost stupidly, trillions of dollars with china over many years, they've stolen our intellectual property at a rate of hundreds of billions of dollars a year and they want to continue and i won't let that happen. we don't need china, and frankly , would be far better off without them. the vast amounts of money made and stolen by china from the u.s. year after year for decades will and must stop." our great american companies are hereby ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to china, including bringing your companies home and making your products in the usa. i will be responding to china's tariffs this afternoon. this is a great opportunity for the united states. also, i am ordering all carriers , including fedex, amazon, ups, and the post office , to search for and refusal deliveries, of fentanyl from china, or anywhere else. fentanyl kills 100,000 americans

a year. president xi said this would stop. it didn't. our economy because of our gains in the last two and a half years is much larger than that of china. we will keep it that way. so, what do you make of this tough talk from the president, heather? >> well, i think that this tough talk from the president, it definitely sent the markets a lot lower down over 700 points on the dow. the markets want a deal with china. the markets want some sort of resolution but the problem is that a trade truce may be far away if you're asking china to change things like their policies on state-owned enterprises which goes further than just the intellectual property issue. david: jonas? >> i think the market doesn't like tough talk any more with china at the end of the day. i think the voters probably do. i think these are fair points the president is raising, if they were raised in a previous administration, before china got

so large that it's difficult to be this tough with them. i don't know if these companies are going to leave especially if they could just wait it out. i'm not saying they shouldn't. i just don't think it's feasible given the supply chains and infrastructure that have been built up over the last three decades in china so i think it is a difficult path. that said, and more importantly, i don't know. china's not going to keep drugs out of our country. that's going to have to be our job. these are things that i don't see a path to fruition so to say >> so you asked david, what do we think of the president's comments. they're completely irresponsible is what they are, and he first of all, he can't order these things to be done. even if he thought they were reasonable things. david: we're going to talk about that in another segment. we've got a special legal guest whose going to address that issue, but i want to bring in former trump campaign senior trade and jobs advisor, curtis e llis. cart us, did the president go too far with these remarks?

>> no this is a wakeup call. it's about time everybody puts this in perspective here, all this talk about tariffs and how much it costs. everybody knows the price of everything, but the value of nothing. we are in a battle for the continued existence of the free enterprise system for america itself. he talks about the fentanyl killing 100,000 americans a year this is real. about the destruction of our industries, this is very real. there may be some short-term pain here, but we need to maintain our way of life, our economy. we cannot continue to have an economy based on free enterprise principles when the second largest economy in our trading partner doesn't respect any of that. >> curtis, i think a lot of market participants would agree in terms of the long term strategy, short-term as they are experiencing this volatility, it hurts when americans look at their 401 (k) balances it hurts on a day when the dow closes down more than 600 points. >> sure. >> there are a lot of people

looking at peter navarro saying he's the problem in terms of advising the president. what are your thoughts? >> the problem is xi-jinping. the problem is the chinese communist party that wants to exterminate our industries. long term, i will tell those people who are worried what my financial advise or tells me. look at the long curve. david: curtis i'm sorry i've got to break in and i'm sure you would approve because it's from the president of the united states. president trump tweeting right now, for many years, china and many other countries has been taking advantage of the united states on trade, intellectual property theft, and much more. our country has been losing hundreds of billions of dollars a year to china with no end in sight. it continues. sadly, past administrations have allowed china to get so far ahead of fair and balanced trade that it has become a great burden to the american taxpayer. as president, i can no longer allow this to happen. in the spirit of achieving fair trade, we must balance this very

unfair trading relationship. china should not have put new tariffs on $75 billion of u.s. product, politically motivated, starting on october 1 the $250 billion of goods and products from china currently being taxed at 25% will be taxed at 30%. additionally, the remaining $300 billion of goods and products from china that was being taxed from september 1 at 10% will now be taxed at 15%. thank you for your attention to this matter. so curtis, he is up the ante. >> that's right look previous generations have sacrificed far more to defend our country. this is a very small price to pay to protect our way of life and our country, because that is what is at stake here. there's a new movie out called american factory that shows what it's like to work under chinese masters. it is not a pretty picture, and that's exactly what china has in mind for all of us.

>> curtis, i have a question for you. go ahead, adam. >> so i have a question. so let's leave the chinese aside for a moment because we know what they've done wrong. do you think it's part of the free enterprise system for the president of the united states to tell american companies where they can make their products by tweet? >> he is telling, well look. the u.s. congress and -- >> that's part of the free enterprise system that you started your comment. that's really my question. is this an example of free enterprise here? >> well here is a question to you as part of the free enterprise system to invest in a communist dictatorship that doesn't respect private property >> well you just asked two questions rather than one, but the fact is -- >> yeah, yeah, right so should you be investing, should you as an investor, you as the head of a company, be investing in a place that does not respect private property, that rips off

intellectual property, and that has as its goal the ex termination of private enterprise? >> curtis let me ask you a broader question because as we've seen the ante was just up ped a little bit 5% by the president. he promised he was going to be making a statement and that was it before he leaves for the g7 meeting. a lot of people are asking particularly on wall street, are we interested in getting a deal with china or are we more interested right now in isolat ing china as a country that you simply can't do business with. sounds like that's where you're going. >> we never did business with the soviet union on the same terms we did business with western germany, france and great britain. we should not be doing business with china the same way that we do business with our allies. i mean, because they don't do business the same way. they have government, china has government supported enterprises they subsidize their exports. they do not adhere to the rules of the world trade organization.

they violated every agreement they signed on to. >> let me ask you this. >> the market doesn't agree with you curtis. >> do you think the president should be having a fight publicly like this on twitter attacking the president of china just raising the stakes here, for example, the market wasn't open it's 5:09 but if it were i could only imagine how it would have reacted to this today or should these be conversations that are, you know, had behind the scenes, between the leaders, between the two negotiating groups. >> well we've seen these negotiations been going on for months, and then when it's close to an agreement, china pulls back, and then backtracks on all of the progress that was made. this is typical business for china. spoken with many people who have made many deals in china, and they get everybody excited about ready to sign on the bottom line , and then they renig so everybody is so invested in a deal they say okay we'll make a deal anyway, so this is the way they do business, and the president sat down with his trade advisors all day today before he put out these tweets. it's not like he just fired this

off without thinking about it. >> it's about time that the markets and everybody else understand clearly what's at stake here. this is not about the price of tube socks. david: go ahead jonathan. >> this is the long term viability of the american system >> trump said specifically the unfair tariffs increased i want to talk about the recent tweet. do you think the chinese are and to some extent other partners are specifically tariffing products from other states the president needs to win re-election to keep the trade war going? >> absolutely. >> whether it's whiskey or to go into europe, i see cars for exports and china come out of the south. other products, the farm belt, there's not like taxing movies and financial services flows coming out. >> you bring up a very good point, jonas. you're exactly right. chinese are using tariffs as economic sanctions targeting politically sensitive areas. our tariffs on china came after

a long investigation which found specific products were being unfairly subsidized, illegally subsidized and are in accordance with world trade organization standards for imposing tariffs. china retaliated with political ly targeted tariffs, not under world trade organization, not according to the guidelines that allow them, so they are using their tariffs as economic sanctions to create regime change in the united states. completely wrong. david: curtis, this whole china stuff has come out on a day when the fed came out with a report, they're meeting in jackson, the head of the federal reserve, the chairman came out and said that the thing that would make them more interested in lowering rates is if there was more trade problems with china. it's then, when we saw the tweet s from the president bringing china up to the floor. do you think there's any connection there?

was the president trying to force the hand of the fed by creating more problems for china that would force the fed to lower rates even more? >> well it certainly will be a message that jerome powell is listening to. david: so that's a partial yes. >> that is a partial yes on my part. i think that he's made it very clear as have the markets that the fed made a mistake by raising rates earlier this year. david: okay, i just want to reiterate what has happened here , gang, because we'd heard earlier today that the president was going to make some remark about china with a retaliatory trade tariffs on our goods, and in fact, he just did that in a tweet that he issued i won't read the entire tweet, but starting on october 1, the $250 billion worth of goods from china that we're getting taxed at 25%, it'll go up to 30%. additionally, the remaining $300 billion that are getting taxed and i say taxed it's a tariff, but tax/tariff is basically the same thing, at 10%

, will go up to 15%, so a 5% increase on the tariffs that are going to be imposed on all chinese products. we want to thank curtis for joining us in this first segment >> thank you very much. david: a lot of questions over the language trump used in his tweets today. we just talked about it but can he legally follow through with his demands on u.s. companies? we're going to be asking former bush 43 advisor and attorney brad blakeman coming next. what might seem like a small cough can be a big bad problem for your grandchildren. babies too young to be vaccinated against whooping cough are the most at risk for severe illness. help prevent this! talk to your doctor or pharmacist today about getting vaccinated against whooping cough. talk to your doctor or pharmacist today dear tech, let's talk. we have a pretty good relationship. you've done a lot of good for the world. but i feel like you have the potential to do so much more.

can we build ai without bias? how do we bake security into everything we do? we need tech that helps people understand each other. that understands my business. we've got some work to do. and we need your help. we need your support. let's expect more from technology. let's put smart to work. ♪ ♪ a cockroach can survive submergede guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah, wow. not getting in today. not on my watch. pests never stop trying to get in. we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

david: well president trump ordering u.s. companies to leave china also calling for carriers like fedex, amazon, ups and the post office to search for and refuse deliveries, of fentanyl from china. fedex responding they already search for illegal drugs and just moments ago there was a tweet put out by the president

where he announced new heighten ing tariffs, not new tariffs but raising the tariffs from 10% to 15% in one case, and 25% to 30% in another, so up in the ante all across-the-board with our trade in china let's bring in attorney and former gw bush advisor brad blakeman to talk specifically about whether the president can actually order companies, u.s. companies, to get out of china. can he legally do this, brad? >> i think it would be extraordinary for the president to do it. i think obviously, whatever the president did would be tested. the president has broad powers in times of emergency under the emergency powers act, but he also has great breadth with regard to the powers that he has in the executive branch and those executive branch agencies that have jurisdiction over trade, like the commerce department, like the trade representatives office, like the justice department. i don't think the president was

speaking directly as an order to these companies. what he was was sounding the alarm, that if they were smart they would think once, twice, three times with doing business inside china and look to other places that are more favorable to not only the treatment of their companies but also to america broadly. david: heather go ahead. >> yes, brad, hi this is heather. so i've heard of this china plus one strategy which is basically you're shifting some of your production to southeast asia countries and other countries around the world that keeping your manufacturing base in china , is that something that is that maybe the president is talking about where at least you're limiting some of their exposure away from china. he's warned you and warned you again, so now companies are implementing this china plus one strategy. >> right and i think each company has to look to their own interests as to what their business interests are in china, how they can diversify putting your eggs in one basket is not the smartest thing and i think that's part of the president's

message as well. this is a game of chess not chicken. the chinese don't know what to make of donald trump because he's never fit the kind of model that they're used to and that's a good thing. the fact that the president has kept them off their stride and has tested them and has not put up with their nonsense is ultimately good for america's short-term pain, long term pain, china thinks 100 years we think by news cycles. >> brad i just want to ask you it's not like companies haven't necessarily been looking at this trade war and rostrate squeezing and moving their manufacturing bases they have been doing this and there is evidence of it but at a certain point some of the other companies that they're moving to, vietnam, for example, doesn't necessarily have the infrastructure or the power or the tools to be able to support the kind of manufacturing that happens in china. some experts that i've spoken to have said you can move some of it out. you're just not going to be able to move all of it out, so he can tweet something like this all he wants, but putting more pressure on companies to do something

that they can't necessarily do puts them in a difficult spot. >> well, i happen to believe that just the rhetoric alone is a strict message to china, that we are looking at this on all fronts. we are going to be prepared, if necessary, to play real hard ball with you. something that no administration in recent memory has even dared attempt to do but china has got a bigger problem than we do. they have had aggressive growth that they can't keep up with and they have 300 million people they have to feed, house, clothe and put to work, so they're not going to continue to build their economies based on cheating everybody else's including ours. david: brad what about those comments about fedex and ups and everything. can he really force them to have government oversight of their packages? >> yes, i think that's probably where the presidents powers are probably more direct, because you're talking about companies that are being used for the

transfer of narcotics to our country. if that's not a national crisis i don't know what is, but those companies have the ability to use manpower as well as technology to prevent that kind of export of poison to our country, we're killing our kids. >> brad this is adam lashinsky with fortune. i just want to try to elevate the conversation a little bit. you're an attorney. you said earlier that you didn't think the president was exactly telling anybody what to do as opposed to suggesting. i don't have his tweet in front of me but i believe it was something along the lines of i here by order. would you just address that as a lawyer, please and as a lawyer who works for a president. does the president have the ability to say, i order you, apple, to move your factory. >> again for the president to give a direct order to an american company would be extraordinary. could it be done? i would think if the facts and

circumstances justified it, as a crisis to america, as something that would empower him to do that, of course it would be tested in the courts, but i would have to say that the president would have the power to do that. do i think he's doing that in his tweet even though it may say that literally no i do not believe that. david: brad we have to leave it at that but i just want to read directly from the 1977 international emergency economic powers act. it is to your question, adam. it authorizes the president, i'm quoting here, to declare an unusual and extraordinary threat to national security or the economy. it further authorizes the president after the declaration to block transactions and freeze assets to deal with that threat. i don't know if that answers your question, but it's directly from the law. we've got to leave, is the housing market about to take a nose dive? new data flashing some warning signs, how concerned should you be, details coming next. all money managers might seem the same,

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. i come face-to-face with a lot of behinds. so i know there's a big need for new gas-x maximum strength. it relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort fast. so no one needs to know you've got gas. gas-x.

that a handle is just a handle. chair is just a chair. so no one needs to know you've got gas. or... that you can't be both inside and outside. most people haven't driven a lincoln. it's the final days of the lincoln summer invitation event. right now get 0% apr on all lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer.

from the 5am wakers, to the 6am sleepers. everyone uses their phone differently and in different places. that's why xfinity mobile created a wireless network that auto connects you to millions of secure wifi hot spots. and the best lte everywhere else. xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. click, call or visit a store today.

david: breaking news folks if you're just joining us, president trump tweeting his response to china's new threat of terrorist this hour. he said he was going to do it and he just did in a series of tweets he said the planned $250 billion in tariffs for september 1, they were at 25%, well now, they're going to be up to 30% the remaining 300 billion , on october 1, will be at 15% that's an increase of 5 from 10%. this could have a big impact on markets on monday, already down over 600 points today. we will bring you any new developments as they rollout here in realtime. meanwhile, with mortgage rates at historic lows you might think that homes sales could be booming but u.s. home sales dropped like a stone in july badly missing expectations,

according to new figures in fact the july numbers were the biggest monthly decline since july of 2013 so is this just a blip or the beginning of a major decline in housing? >> well it's a little too soon to tell, frankly. it's not a good sign. in fact, we're right at this kind of area in the market in the economy where we're either going to go into a recession is what the bond market says or these low rates create a new boom in housing in the stock market and we'll have a really hot year but nobody really knows where we'll go in the housing area is one of the key areas to watch because that's where consumers will behave differently now that rates are lower. some of the slow down was from a hot economy, lack of land availability, the builders it was prices are high, consumer s the home prices have been going up the] few years and houses were getting affordable and with the rates coming down in theory people should jump back into the market. we've seen a lot of refinance activity, we've not seen a lot of new home purchases yet and if it doesn't improve soon it's kind of a chipping the way of a possible recession not a new

boom coming. >> jonas i'm a little disappointed because i expected you'd tell us the answer. i say that because i'm confused here. consumer confidence remains high you'd think that given low rates and high confidence that home action would be high as well, so i have to conclude that if we have a recession, which looks more likely by the tweet, you shouldn't expect anything, i'm referring to the president's tweet, you shouldn't expect anything positive in the housing market. >> you know we had an expert earlier on today on a panel i was sitting on who mentioned a problem of inventory saying it wasn't really about the new buyers not being out there or the consumers not being willing to but that there wasn't enough inventory out there and i wonder if that means in terms of building that that's where your problem is that it's not really about the consumer to speak to adam's point. david: heather? >> yeah, so mortgage rates hitting three-year lows you'd think would feed into the demand for people to buy new homes, that if there's no inventory out there, or lower weak inventory

out there for people to buy, then that is a major issue, but adam, i'm surprised you rightful ly pointed out that the consumer is very strong. that's the flip side of this one negative data point, wages are going up, unemployment is on a 50 year low. so despite this new home sales. david: let's just end on the good news if you were to buy a $400,000 house right now with a 30 year mortgage you'd be paying $2,000 a month. that is so low, $2,000 a month for a $400,000 house? it's a great opportunity for millennials looking for a new home. anyway white house economic advisor larry kudlow breaking news on bulls & bears yesterday, about a possible policy announcement, before the election. if you missed it, you missed some great new news. is it a good campaign strategy? >> we don't believe in the recession talks. i think the economy is very strong. i think the consumers are

leading it. great riches will find you when liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

we are developing, again, tax cuts 2.0. david: but larry it seems that the president took 2.0 off the table yesterday. >> well he didn't. david: might we see more tax cuts before the election? >> before the election? yes. david: wow that was news, white house economic advisor larry kudlow breaking big news, i thought, on bulls & bears yesterday.

kudlow saying the white house is working on new tax cuts for small business and the middle class, it could come right before the election, so is this a good campaign strategy? >> oh, absolutely, david. i think this is a great campaign strategy. unfortunately, though, we have to address the first round of tax cuts, the debt, and deficit that is added. the spending that is added 1.5 trillion and the way to do that is that we've got to cut spending if we can't increase revenue, and once we then address the spending side of the equation, and you want to cut taxes, i'm all in favor of that as you know under ronald regan when we cut taxes from a much higher marginal tax base we did increase revenue so first address the 1.5 trillion we've added and then cut taxes for the middle class which desperately need it the most. >> i'll add to heather's point and say i think why larry came back and added this could come down the line is because the administration also wants people to know that depending on how this china situation plays out, that they are going to help stimulate the economy, help the

consumer to get out there and spend remember consumer spending is two-thirds of the u.s. economy and obviously there's a lot of pressure on the fed but there's other mechanisms , other means and strategies they can employ to help this along if the president 's trade strategy doesn't pan out exactly the way he was hoping. >> well, to heather's point about all we need to do is cut spending, i think we also should have ferries and leprechauns dancing down the middle of broad way. david: now, now, now. >> no, but come on. we failed and failed and failed. david will back me up on that. so is it a good political strategy, no, because it's insulting to the voters and they're not stupid. they know that the administration already has done that, and to just do it again. >> i don't think it's insulting >> take into account the debt that you accurately point out, healther. it doesn't make any political sensor fiscal sense. >> i think experts care about

the debt that are having this kind of conversation. i don't think the average person who would receive the benefit of a payroll tax cut really cares about it. david: well jonas has the answer. >> yeah, i'm going to avoid the whole, i'm not sure anyone didn't get elected by not insulting the voters enough. i don't really want to go there. i also don't want to talk about the reality of our budget, deficit and other problems. let's just talk in pure terms to get re-elected to stop the rise of socialism this is poorly executed. what you'd want to do, not announce your tax cutting plans, in fact talk about spending cuts which is kind of drives the economy, push the fed into cutting rates significantly. then change the trade war to be more like tit-for-tat unless of a tariff thing and then blowout the tax cut before election. that's how you get re-elected. pre-announcing it actually, let me just finish. the fed raised rates because of the tax cuts partially because they're doing a counter balance of the fiscal stimulus so if you want the fed to lower rates do

not have them think you're going to cut taxes as well. >> okay well how about this meantime 2020 front runner joe biden calling to nearly double the capital gains tax, here is what he said in iowa. >> i believe we should in fact a capital gains tax should be with the highest minimum tax should be which we should raise the tax back to 39.6% instead of 20%. >> just do it. >> i mean, [laughter] jonas what do you think doubling the capital gains tax would do to these markets? >> i think he also wants to do something crazy as the payroll tax but he's running against extreme tax policies. i personally think capital gains rates should be the same as income taxes which is a large in all rate system so lower income people wouldn't pay a very high capital gain. i personally think if you make $100 million selling stock you shouldn't be paying a lower rate than somebody who needs $1 million of income. >> if we want to talk politics

this is a good political move. >> not to have a 39.6 for everybody though. david: there are a lot of americans out there who do have capital gains, and who are concerned about a doubling of not to mention, heather, the markets. >> and they're not super super rich people there are a lot of people in the lower part of the 1% working really hard and they don't have hundreds of millions of dollars but the capital gains tax would impact that. >> but their federal tax rate is very low so they match that rate if you matched it to marginal income rate. david: got to leave it. i still think if you tell voters would you rather have lower or higher taxes they go for the lower taxes. meanwhile democrat congresswoman rashida tlaib and illham omar are facing backlash from the leaders of their party could this spell doom for their political careers we'll be asking the man running against congresswoman omar. his name is lace it lee johnson and he is here, next. 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. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? what might seem like a small cough can be a big bad problem for your grandchildren. babies too young to be vaccinated against whooping cough are the most at risk for severe illness. help prevent this! talk to your doctor or pharmacist today about getting vaccinated against whooping cough. 2,000 fence posts. 900 acres. 48 bales. all before lunch, which we caught last saturday. we earn our scars. we wear our work ethic. we work until the work's done.

and when it is, a few hours of shuteye to rest up for tomorrow, the day we'll finally get something done. ( ♪ )

david: a top house democrat directly calling out the president and members of his own party over the rise in anti- semetic rhetoric and house judiciary committee jerry nadler the chairman of the committee tweeted out the growing aunt anti-semitism and our political dialogue is repugnant, and the cartoon forwarded by rashida tlaib and illham omar can surely be read for its underlying message. do you see what he's doing trying to hit on both sides our next guest sees all this controversy as an opportunity. his republican challenger lacey lee johnson hoping to beat congresswoman omar, great to have you here. >> glad to be here. david: big question because there's a lot about the current congresswoman in the news since she's taken office . how are the people in the district taking to that news as they find out more about her? >> well of course you have

those die hard liberal democrats , they are going to basically support her in whatever she does. of course you have republicans that we're calling it for what it is, anti-israel, socialistic, those type of policies, and then you have the swing voters and i think most of the swing voters are getting very uncomfortable with the fact that they have a person in congress whose doing those types. david: even some of whom voted for her in the last election. >> exactly. i'm quite sure they are because minnesota is a pretty decent people and they don't like what they are seeing. >> my question, hi this is adam lashinsky with fortune in san francisco. my question is similar to what david was asking i assume like many americans, i wasn't familiar with the dynamics of your district before the congresswoman was elected. could you give us a quick analysis of who did vote for her , how she was able to, what her support was in the last election? >> well her support once again, minnesota is a very heavily

demographically liberal democrat district. i think it's about 70% of something just off the top of my head and so given the anti-trump -type of campaign that they were in, given that they were making people afraid, and lying about eliminating pre- conditioning the health insurance, she got a vast majority of the votes. i think that's about 700,000 people in our district. i think about 80,000 i've seen numbers from 50,000 to 80,000 but once again, you've got the liberal democrats, and you've got the minority population where they're constantly reminding them that republicans are racists and bigots. david: are you a racist? >> no i'm not. david: but you're a republican. >> i know and that's one of the reasons i'm running because it's going to be hard to use that strategy on me. and you're going to be forced to talk about issues and what your solutions are, because one of the problems that's happening, these problems go on for decades

and decades because the democrat s figured out a simple formula. just bring up race, and get people to vote and sexism and you know all of the other buzzwords, we don't have to talk about issues. we just appeal to your emotion, you vote for us and then we go away for four, five years until the next election and nothing will change. >> and they've gotten a lot of traction doing that by the way. i look to you making this kind of a challenge like somebody trying to challenge aoc here but what you're trying to do at least in your campaign video speaking out to your base and trying to be elected you talk about values. you talk about diligence. you talk about personal responsibility. tell us a little bit more about the platform and how it's so anti what illham omar is representing. >> once again it's just a focused platform and solution- focused and i look at it like the issues that i look at is family first and foremost and especially in a district that i live in, the family has been just torn apart and we think we're going to get a handle on these issues facing

these communities. we're going to have to talk family. the other thing is education. when you look at the educational results within our district, and things like that, it's just horrible. this is achievement gaps and by the way whenever you look at any of these issues whether they're at the state or city level or district level, democrats are normally in charge, and i've just come to the conclusion as longs as they are in charge these issues exist and we need to do something about it so we've got family, education and economics. a lot of the issues that we want to place on race or whatever and distract, have race distract us is really economic issues so i've been talking about going with, get rid of the government- based programs. get rid or not get rid of but phase them out and focus more on for-profit type of businesses and we should mention by the way -- david: you're a businessman, an engineer. >> yeah, and ideal with data and logic and things like that not so much with emotions and i think we'll solve some of these problems we have to look at them

from the standpoint and then it's also what i call a spiritual component and it's not necessarily religion. it's more like i'm a part of a bigger whole. i'm a part of a family. i'm a part of a community. i'm a part of a state. it's not just about me and start looking at it from that standpoint, and so those are the type of things that i'm talking about within our district as far as issues. now once again as an engineer and one of the issues i have with the democratic party, when they look at solving issues in our community, they don't look at the human capital. they look at it as poor victims and they pity us. no we're not poor victims. we've got bill gates in our community. we've got steven jobs in our community. and once again, if you start looking at us like that, then you come up with different solutions, but once again, all their solution is based on the fact that they think we can't do what they did. david: you've got a great message. lacey lee johnson we've got to leave it at that because it takes a while to put out your platform there but it's a strong one. >> oh, yeah. david: it's a very strong one. we thank you very much for being

here. >> i'm dedicated to making a difference. david: please come back and see us again. president trump ordering u.s. companies to move out of china, but how easy is it for companies to do that? we're going to be asking the expert on u.s. manufacturing in the region, coming next. in my line of work, i come face-to-face with a lot of behinds. so i know there's a big need for new gas-x maximum strength. it relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort fast. so no one needs to know you've got gas. gas-x. there's a company that's talked than me: jd power.people 448,134 to be exact. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across

cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room.

david: breaking news, and more on the president's plan to raise tariffs on china. our white house reporter telling us the delayed tariffs set to kick in on december 15 for goods like electronics and other consumer products will still be delayed until that date. the president did it for christmas sales this as the president now says he will raise the october 1 tariffs from 25% to 30% and the september 1 tariffs will now be at 15% up from 10% keep an eye on the markets on monday big time, and

president trump, i believe, of course all these tweets on china , that's what set the markets down including the one we just mentioned, ordering american companies to start immediately looking for an alternative to working in china. joining us now is harvard business school professor willie xi. professor you specialize in manufacturing so you're the perfect person to ask. how difficult is it for companies who have been in china for a while to move out? >> the supply chain is all of the incoming materials, so for somebody like apple, and you have your iphones being assembled there, the batteries, and the metal cases, it's a company like apple -- david: i hope you're not using a huawei phone, we're having a little bit of difficulty hearing you but go ahead. >> [laughter] no, no, no, i'm using an iphone,

but what you have to do is you have to get all of the component s and so when you move your factory -- david: oh, boy. >> you have to bring all of those components. david: let me move on to jackie and again professor maybe you can move a little closer to the window as we're talking, because you're going in-n-out. jackie go ahead. >> one of the experts that i've spoken to i just flatly asked the question can vietnam for example, ever be the next china, i'm curious what your response was, the person i was speaking to said "no", impossible. >> well they don't have the population base. one of the things about china over the last 15 years is they have virtually unlimited supply of labor, and they also invested a lot of infrastructure and moved some of their supplier base and you have some customer base that is moving into vietnam , but vietnam is only

going to be able to absorb so much and then it's just going to get saturated and costs go up, so i don't think it's in the same league. david: professor i'm so sorry to do this, but next time we got to get you on a landline, because the phone is going in-n-out i'm afraid it's a terrible connection. again -- >> i apologize. david: it's quite all right this happens from time to time it's live tv and never can make a guarantee on electronics but we thank you very much. we'll get you back professor on a land line. so amid all of this president trump is heading to the g7 summit to meet with world leader s in france tonight. it was expected to be contentious, but how will the president be received after what happened today? of our clients

come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. ..

david: president trump is expected to depart for the g-7

and it's expected to be contentious. joint leaders are not expected to offer a joint statement. >> i'm surprised this is the first time we haven't received a joint statement. the president of france emmanuel macron says he'll not issue a statement of unity. usually we see something come out on trade, climate change, foreign policy. but i think the president may get a lot of heat on the trade war with china. that's what's important to the markets. will he step back. back down or delay some of these tariffs if he gets pressure the other six leaders in the world. david: jonas? >> i don't think we can expect a lot. he might leave early like he did before. i think what would possibly

work. if he's going to win the trade war he'll have to power up with the j7. to some extent everybody has the issue ofs we deal with. there are other issue ofs as well with parts coming in. that's the only way the tariff strategy will work. otherwise he has to go like a california model. because there is such a big buyer. a lot of countries like to meet those rules. you need to see a direction on what's the plan. >> the unfortunate thing is he does not have good rip rip -- gd relationships with our allies in europe so don't expect them to be jumping up and down to help. >> he may take strides to meet

with boris johnson. david: gang, thank you very much. we appreciate you folks watching. have you a wonderful weekend. that does it for bulls and bears. we'll see you next time. liz: the president playing hardball, increasing usmght s. tariffs -- increasing u.s. tariffs on chinese goods. the president flies with the first lady to the g-7 meeting. we debate what the white house is saying china started this fight, it's been playing dirty for decades. and saying china is a economic and it in threat. if china