6-year-olds. >> we talked about boys and girls. >> i'm pretty impressed with him. >> i would too. >> have a great saturday. >> we will see you tomorrow, everybody. neil: some very harsh words from the north koreans that might make you vomit. did kim jong-un pull a fast one? we have the very latest. it doesn't look like either side is letting up in the trade war. china slapping tariffs on 545 u.s. goods. president trump is contemplating additional tariffs of his own. american farmers are worried. american investors not so much. former restaurant giant here to chew on that and why he thinks the chinese will be the first to blink on this. and a top supreme court pick who

could get bushwhacked because of his ties to bush? what we are hearing about that. and if this is a weekend, well, there must be another march, but this one isn't about icing i.c.e., more like ramming rahm as in rahm emanuel. crime out of control. residents expected to protest by the thousands in chicago. we will take you there live. and the president is in new jersey this weekend hunkering down. then to pat buchanan who is in washington and man is he ever fired up. not over democrats what he calls trump derangement syndrome, but how what they are saying now this summer sounds very much like what they were saying 50 years ago this summer. we compare. you decide. we've got you covered, america. time to get to it, america.

regrettable, what the north koreans are now saying about a certain visit on the part of the secretary of state to their country. uh-oh. to rich edson in tokyo with the latest. >> the secretary of state just arrived here in tokyo a short while ago. he said he had productive meetings with north korea in pyongyang. he left north korea a short while before landing here in tokyo. and now the north korean foreign ministry is saying the conversations that they had with the secretary of state were regrettable and that the demands from the united states regarding north korea surrendering its nuclear weapons program are very concerning. now, the secretary of state said that he had productive meetings, that they were making progress. he said they were complicated issues, all of the central issues, though, that there was some progress made when he met over the last two days in

pyongyang with top north korean officials. he says there's some places of great deal of progress but other places there's still more work to be done. the state department said after the pyongyang meetings that the united states and north korea would establish some working groups to try to get through these very difficult issues. but it gets to the heart of this issue with the administration saying that kim jong-un and president trump were on the same page with wanting to get rid of nuclear weapons in north korea, though there are real questions as to how north korea defines that, how it's going to surrender these nuclear weapons and what it is going to get in return. the secretary of state did say months ago that it expected throughout these negotiations there would be peaks and valleys of these discussions but they are coming pretty close to one another here. neil, back to you. neil: thank you very much. the read from washington right now, that's where you will find gillian turner. this sort of came out of the blue. we got more happy talk out of the administration more to the point the secretary of state.

what happened? >> neil, we have this statement that mike pompeo made just before his departure. it was only a couple of hours after he wrapped up his last round of talks with some of im -- kim jong-un's top deputies and he said we made progress on almost all of the central issues. this is a different tone coming out of the north koreans at the very same meetings. as rich was talking about, the disconnect i think comes to the heart of the sources that have been telling me the last few weeks is that the u.s. and the north are not in agreement on what the term denuclearization actually entails and what it means. and i think that is finally coming to bear now. we're seeing that in the day after these two historic talks wrapped up. neil: what's a little weird is whatever difference in the language, denuclearization means less of the nuclear, by in

large. they have been increasing nuclear activity. that's quite clear at a couple of these facilities. so they are not on the same page here. i'm just wondering what our official response is likely to be. >> well, so president trump came out of this june summit in singapore and he said kim jong-un had made a direct commitment to him to denuclearize, but now what the north is saying that the united states, the pompeo delegation was unilaterally putting too much pressure on them to abandon their nuclear weapons. what that tells us is they don't see denuclearization as necessarily entailing them giving up their programs, which is why they're continuing with them. we don't necessarily know that they are increasing, but we do know that at a minimum they are continuing. they are continuing to pursue improvements at least one uranium enrichment facility and probably two others as well. they are also continuing to build up a nuclear capable submarine on their east coast.

so the sort of aggressive hostile activity has been at a minimum continuing all along during these negotiations. neil: gillian, thank you very much. by the way, that nuclear facility was apparently not on the table of issues that they were talking about when they were meeting with the president of the united states when kim jong-un was meeting with him. that's their argument that this is much to do about nothing and the united states is backing them into a corner. separately we are learning right now that two navy guided missile destroyers have been sailing through the taiwan strait that's what separates china from the island of taiwan. some interpreted of that being a provocative move on our part. let's get the read on all of that from the former uss commander. a lot going on this morning. what do you make of it? >> good morning, neil. i think first the two destroyers sailing through the taiwan strait is nothing to be excited

about. we have a right just like the chinese and every other nation in that area to sail in international waters and while many people given the tensions with the trade conflict that's starting up, given what's going on in north korea, people may be inclined to read into this more than that. neil: we haven't done this in a while, commander. that's why i'm asking. why now are you doing this? >> routine operation. i would say there's nothing to be really read into it. we should operate anywhere at any time in any part of the ocean that have international waters. we have a right to go innocent passage through territorial waters to get from point a to point b. while many people want to interpret this as a signal, it may be one, but it is very loco -- it is very low key and i wouldn't make very much out of it. neil: were the north koreans

were just caught cheating? >> i don't think they were cheating. when you look at the language, they say it is regrettable. think about how low key that language is compared to what they have said before. i think on their side they are saying this is the negotiation procession. as they have said, it is going to be difficult, there will be a lot of details. we have to figure out what do they have? where do they have it? how are we going to verify that that is in fact accurate? then we have to go through the detailed process of how do we in fact get them to denuclearize? we've been very clear on what denuclearization means. the north koreans know what we mean. they may try to dance on the head of a pin, but we will walk through that process. it is going to be a detailed process that is going to require negotiations. but the bottom line is, neil, we have to hold the line.

they denuclearize and this will be the reward, economically and otherwise, what they are going to get in order to reap the benefits of giving up what they perceive as a security guarantee for the survival of their regime. neil: all right, commander, thank you very much. always good chatting even on the phone. separately to the commander's point we have a trade war going on right now. it is in full throttle effect here, and both sides now at the point where they seem to want to throttle each other at least economically. remember this started with aluminium and steel. it's grown now to include better than 800 products including 545 just from the chinese. fox business network on all of that. >> good morning, yes, a top china official in eastern europe telling nations today that they are open for business as the u.s. puts the screws on. the united states and china have both fired opening shots in the trade war and china has already accused the u.s. of launching quote the largest trade war in

economic history. the u.s. tariffs on 34 billion dollars in chinese goods now in effect as of midnight, july 6th, which was noon in beijing. the items from more than 800 categories of products include airplane parts and farm equipment, china's commerce ministry issuing a statement immediately following saying, quote, china promised not to fire the first shot, but to defend national core interests and the interests of the people. it has no choice but to strike back as necessary. and strike back it did. beijing placing tariffs on an equal value of almost 550 categories of u.s. products, targeting american goods, like soybeans, lobsters to pork, the state-run china daily newspaper saying, quote, the trump administration is behaving like a gang of hoodlums. president trump once again defended his strong stance on trade during a rally in montana on thursday night, right before the tariffs took effect. >> i respect china, and i

respect president xi, but they've been killing us, 507 billion dollars in trade deficits last year. 507. who can lose 500 -- then you want to do something and you get attacked. oh that's not nice. that's not free trade. >> neil, the big question is how far will this go? neil: tracy, thank you very much. that much we do not know here again to tracy's point no sign either side is blinking. still early. indication could last for months some say well into 2019. let's get a read from our panelists. for consumers, the impact won't be immediate, and they could

find ways around this buying i guess some alternative products, but they can't escape; right? >> they cant escape it but we're going to see definitely a shift towards more u.s.-based companies and consumers buying products from those companies. also, the economy is trucking along here. we saw those jobs numbers. they were pretty great. you know, along with the deregulation and some of the tax cuts that are going on, the consumer and the american, you know, public out there feels a lot better about the economy than they did -- a lot better than six months ago. neil: that's the argument that the president has made about being in a position of strength; right? that the chinese have to come to us before we even think about doing the same to them. what do you think? >> we are in a position of strength, relatively. we're the strongest economy in the world right now. and you want to be in that position if you're going to do a trade war because it's almost like a game of chicken, and these other countries will fall into recession before we would in theory. mostly a country like let's say germany or something which might come into the fray more.

the risk with that strategy with china is they don't have elections so they can have a recession just to make a point and we can't going into a two-year election cycle. as far as who is winning, you know, the chinese stock market was down, down 20%, ten year low basically levels it was at 10 years ago. we're down less than 5%, all-time highs, you know the story, more than doubled in ten years. at this stage it looks like china is losing. economists will tell you that everybody loses in a trade war, but the chinese are saying the same kind of stuff. this is not the biggest trade war of all time, relative to p gdp. this is relatively small trade war. neil: you think that cooler heads prevail? >> in my opinion it is still a bad idea but we might be moving to what's called a populist nationalist tax policy where you only tax people in hidden ways whether it's value added tax or

tariffs and we would move away from income taxes and this could be permanent. neil: we always assume the china will blink because they need us more than we need. >> theoretically. neil: 18 1/2% of their gdp. >> used to be 33%. neil: you could then make the argument well maybe not. >> here's the thing you have to look at the chinese economy. first off we should point out that part of the slowdown i believe is from basically the government induced credit crunch. they're cracking down on sort of flagrant spending. you read about h and a, this company no one ever heard before. they borrowed so much from the chinese government, they are essentially part of the chinese government to go on acquisition spree. it is now being forced to scale back. stuff like that is having an impact on their economy more than anything we're doing. so remember -- neil: in this second punch, could it drive that wedge further? >> they could stop doing that and we should point out that

exports are a small percentage of their gdp, much smaller than it was a couple years ago. neil: absolutely. >> we should also point out that they are making in-roads as we're attacking them, they are making inroads to do trade deals with the europeans. in trumpian logic he is attacking everybody even our trading partners. i would say this if you think china is going to blink, they have a bunch of bullets left and they don't as jonah said have elections. we should also point out that if you are going to do this sort of crazy trade stuff, now is the right time to do it. i will tell you our stock market has been flat since -- what traders are saying just focusing on us that as good as the numbers are, by the way, they are good, they are not great. wage growth is still lousy. i looked at employment gains during -- neil: you are a tough grader. >> employment gains -- i grade

everything on a scale. neil: a lot of it is done out of hate. >> the obama scale, look at the jobs created under obama look at what we're getting out of trump. virtually the same >> there's no denying that people are feeling a lot better about that and whether or not -- >> if their wages aren't up, how do you know that? neil: well sentiment surveys reveal that americans are feeling more upbeat. >> they might feel better. neil: i'm sorry, but your point is that could save the day and, you know, consumers can go to other places or find alternatives if possible. >> we have been in the state of frugal fatigue for the last couple of years. >> jonah was frugal long before the trade war. >> ten years ago i mean. so yeah -- any sort of up tick in sentiment, that's going to spur spending and we're going to see -- >> if your wages are not really

improving and employment is better, okay, marginally, why would people spend a lot -- >> -- country might like to see their prices going up if they think we're winning a war with china any way that they didn't mind the gas prices going up when we went into iraq. they think we could winning a war. >> when they can't pay their cable subscription, it is going to be a problem. neil: it would be a problem for us if that happens. [laughter] neil: i want to thank you all very much. we're going to explore the impact of that later in the show. also keeping on top of the president of the united states, supreme court choices here. one that has been getting a lot of consensus build up here may not be the choice in the end for no other reason than his particular connections to a president bush. we will explore that in some detail and get the read from charlie kirk at the supreme court, the fallout, after this. ) beautiful just like you.

(woman) oh, why thank you. [both scream] (burke) coupe soup. and we covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

neil: the president is set to make supreme court announcement monday night, we will be covering that live on fox business network, 8:00 p.m. through 10:00 p.m. the question is, will he have the slam-dunk choice that ultimately proved the case like neil gorsuch? ellison barber is with the president in new jersey, with the latest on what he's up to today. >> president trump says he has narrowed it down to four potential candidates who he's looking at. he says of course he will make his official announcement to the public monday evening. he says he will make a decision on those four, though, in his mind by sunday night. sources tell fox news that the white house is working on rollout packages for four candida

candidates. they are brett kavanaugh, raymond kethledge, amy barrett and thomas hardiman. the president's interview with kethledge lasted longer than the others. the president spoke with him for about 40 minutes. hardiman is said to be sort of the dark horse candidate of those four. sources say that vice president pence net with -- met with kavanaugh and also met with barrett and kethledge. the meeting with kavanaugh in d.c. on wednesday. last night president trump sat down for dinner with vice president mike pence as well as his wife. we were told the plan going into that dinner was to compare notes on the top supreme court picks. neil: thank you very much. with the president in new jersey. let's go to charlie kirk. charlie it would be hard to top the ride he got off of neil

gorsuch. it is tough for presidents to repeat back-to-back good choices, ones that avoid controversy or embarrassment. how do you think this is going to go? >> you know, it is going to be quite interesting. you look at the kind of final four list that the president has assembled. all are good picks. the most interesting is kavanaugh, comes from the d.c. circuit, kind of the popular selection choice for presidents. a lot of cases come from the d.c. circuit. he's gone to more of the back burner because of his connection to bush and that's something that the president has been very critical of the bush presidency and the administration. personally i think kethledge is one of the best if not the best candidate on the list, more of a quiet reserved candidate, not a lot of selection choice, not a lot of court choices, if you will, decisions that are controversial unlike kavanaugh who ruled on the abortion decision with illegal alien back in october and otherwise. who is the most principaled --

principled judge that can be confirmed? neil: so those meetings that are typically courtesy meetings they have with individual senators before the, you know, the hearing are going to be more crucial than normal, aren't they? >> that's correct. look, the left wants to make this all about roe versus wade, and, you know, some of these judges have already stated that as precedent law, we're not going to overturn it. there's a lot of other conversations that needs to happen around what does the supreme court composition going to really rule on moving forward. that's immigration, that's the rule of law, that's sovereignty, that's 2nd amendment issues a lot more than just that particular issue of roe versus wade. you look at barrett, for example, you know, she's very pro-life. she's ruled on that in the past. that would make it harder for confirmation especially with senate democrats. you look at some of these red state democrats, particularly manchin and donnelly, mccaskill and tester, it's going to be

very difficult for them to oppose whoever the president puts forth. they will have to look their voters in the face going up to the midterm election in november and say i either supported or i opposed the president's nominee and you saw with gorsuch -- gorsuch, you saw a couple defections come that eventually put im -- put him across the finish line. neil: charlie, thank you very much. this has been a week of the protests, the woman who climbed the statue of liberty, all the run-ins cabinet members have had with protesters. sarah sanders being escorted out of a restaurant. the i.c.e. protests where democrats are claiming i.c.e. should be shut down and return to what it was before i.c.e. came around in 03. however they may be resonating with the party's base, some are beginning to wonder whether it's alienating the party from the public.

what is the fallout of some of this? >> i know from having been in political campaigns, the temptation to pull stunts and get attention is almost irresistible for people who feel passionately, but clearly the american public, if you look at rasmussen's polling from last week, among likely voters, the american public is not on the side of those who cry out to abolish i.c.e. they actually want to see including crucially the independent voters want to see enforcement of our laws. they agree more closely with the position of the republicans and president trump. so i don't think this is going to be benefit the democrats at all. neil: the hard left is -- [inaudible] -- you think it could boomerang? >> yeah, the democrats, they have a power vacuum in terms of the messaging on the democratic side of the aisle right now.

stepping in to fill that void are some radicals on the very far left, people that are talking and have been marching on this about abolishing prisons, abolishing borders, abolishing i.c.e., and if the -- neil: that was just -- >> and if they are able to capture the democratic base's heart and energize them in a way that moderate democrats are not, this will spell doom for them in a general election. that may win primaries by activating most radical voter but it doesn't have mainstream appeal in the midterms or mainstream appeal in the 2020. neil: what do you think? >> i think everyone should calm down. my republican friends, there is a wonderful song that says sweep around your own front door before you sweep around mine. the truth of the matter is their party is in turmoil. they have to decide whether they're going to be the party of

racism, bigotry and hate or they are going to be the party of fiscal conservatives or they are going to be the party of donald trump or they are going to continue down the path of being the party with no absolute core. i think they have -- neil: 6 out of 10 americans just general americans are polled on this subject of getting rid of i.c.e. and say no. on that issue alone, do you think that the democrats risk being out of step? >> number one, i think it is a bad policy stance for democrats to say we want to abolish i.c.e. i think that we have fallen for the republican party of fooling us to jump in the air when we should stay laser focused on the failure -- neil: many of your colleagues are not. >> there's a portion of our party that are not. neil: prominent members. >> these are people who thinking about 2020. here's what i will tell you -- neil: governor cuomo -- >> no, no, some have said we should look at retooling i.c.e., managing its effectiveness and

efficiency, nothing wrong with that. neil: that's a mistake in strategy? >> i'm not saying that. i think we should always evaluate government agencies to see if they are efficient and effective. >> neil: i.c.e. to be clear. >> there is room under the tent for the democratic party including people who want to be -- neil: i don't see that. if you're a moderate democrat, i don't know. i don't know. nan, what do you think? >> to your point about communities of color, the president has made inroads into democratic support among communities of color because he is for the kind of -- >> donald trump making inroads into the community of color? >> including a bump up in his support among latino and hispanic communities in the united states, just recently that was just being -- >> let me tell you about polls. polls are a snapshot of the current past. what's happening today could be cold tomorrow in a political poll. you should know this. >> i agree with you. look at employment rates among all communities in this country,

including communities of color, employment is at record levels. more people are going to work. more people -- >> neil, those numbers were heading in the right direction, thanks to president obama. president trump has done a wonderful job of nurturing and -- >> tell me why the republicans the control the white house. they control the house. they control the senate. they control the vast majority -- >> i can tell you why. >> they control -- explain to me how that has happened if obama was a massive success. >> i'm happy to tell you why from a pure scientific standpoint. there were 100 plus million people in this country who did not vote for whatever reason. we know we have russian interference into our election. >> all roads lead back to russia. blame it on russia. when you can't make an argument -- >> the truth of the matter is democrats did not unite the way -- neil: you're ignoring polls now. the only thing you had to go on

is the sentiment of the party that has gone hard left on this whole i.c.e. -- you don't support that. so the inroads that nan was also talking about, all the president needs, all republicans need is a little bit more hispanic support and african-american support because they don't typically get that much to begin with. you would have to argue that would be worrisome for you; right? >> here's why the republican party should be holding close and be very afraid going into november. there are democrats who are not as energized as they were in 16, they are energized in 18. neil: do you think as many are energized? it will be a lot to flip the house. >> i think the temperature is a lot different than it was in 2016. >> they are not going to be responding -- the broad spectrum of democrats are not going to be responding to gillibrand and warren crying abolish i.c.e. neil: that's the battle. >> one or two people in the choir does not mean that --

neil: i wish we had more time. we do not. [laughter] neil: when we come back here, we're going to be exploring the fallout from this particular heated political summer to another one, 50 years ago this summer. we compare you to that. when my hot water heater failed it rocked our world. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they took care of everything a to z. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege.

wmust have cost a lot. a fancy hotel. actually, i got a great deal. priceline saves you up to 60% on hotels, but that's something the hotels don't really want other guests to know. i saved about 120 dollars a night! did you say you saved 120 dollars a night on a room? 120 a night on a hotel room... that's a lot of savings! i saved even more on my flight. save up to 60% on hotels with priceline.

neil: all right. heated summer of political debate of extremes americans see it playing out on tv. what do they do? if you compare what's going on this summer to what happened a certain summer 50 years ago, the summer of 1968, americans the so called silent majority at the time voted republican because they had it with some of the dust-ups and words they were seeing on tv. it hasn't got nearly as agitated as it did back then. pat buchanan is connecting some dots the best-selling author and conservative thinker is joining us from washington. what do you think of this? the americans are stepping back from this they see the rage on

i.c.e. and hear from some of the democratic party saying i.c.e. i.c.e. get rid of it. they are saying no, we like i.c.e., what it's doing at least 6 out of 10 are of that mind. is there disconnect? >> well, i think the democratic party is as it was in 1968 deeply split over the issue. you have gillibrand and others, cynthia nixon i think called i.c.e. a terrorist organization. people demanded it be shut down including the young lady who won that primary in queens. this is not 1969. frankly we lost dr. king and bobby kennedy within two months of each other. you had riots in 100 american cities. you had columbia campus shut down. all those things went on in that year. neil, i was out at the democratic convention at what we called the comrade hilton hotel with norman mailer looking out

the window when the cops went in there and beat the living daylights out of hundreds of radical demonstrators. we aren't there yet. but i will tell you there's a real sense of instability and hostility in our politics and it is not going to work to the benefit of the anti-trumpers. neil: i also wonder when folks like chuck schumer come along and try to, you know, tamp this down a little bit especially when it comes to calls of getting rid of i.c.e. or what have you, i don't know whether that's resonating. we had a democratic strategist on said when it comes to these issues very few of the party, left part of the party may speak of that but not necessarily where the party is going. the passion is there on that far left more the in your face side. i wonder how that will gel with the more moderate approach. >> you're right. the passion and the energy and the fire again as o casio lopez revealed that woman candidate up

there queens and the bronx is the more left side of the party. moreover it is these types of incidents, in your face, assaulting, attacking people in restaurants, you have cable news that puts it on 24 hours a day, we didn't have that in 68 so the face of the democratic party becomes more and more these radicals who come to dominate the media. and again, that is not good news for the democratic party, which everybody had expected to pick up the house. neil: i wonder, pat, how much of a role the economy plays into this. the party, the republicans have the run of the government right now, the economy is pretty good. you can always argue, well, the extent of the job gains, whether they should be strong or the wage gains should be more robust, but there's no denying that the backdrop is sound. that's one of the reasons the president is willing to attempt a trade war with the chinese or

anyone else who comes along. >> my view has always been when the economy is good, the economy is not the issue. when the economy is bad, it is the issue. and so i think that in this coming november, again, the issue was going to be trump i think for the democratic party and they were pretty united around rallying people against trump. but now they are raising all these issues. we're going to abolish i.c.e. i mean that's the second line of defense to prevent an invasion of the united states and to kick out people who are criminals and child molesters, ms-13 if they get past the border patrol, who else is going to run them down if not i.c.e.? and you want to abolish that. again if the democrats move the issue away from trump to immigration and border control, then you are moving it on to turf where donald trump won the election in 2016.

neil: do you think -- i think you and i have talked about this before, president, i think midterms are defined by angry voters, the more angry you are, then you are apt to come out, especially in midterm, more so than in president election year, there are a good number of angry voters i don't discount that but i don't know if they are the same numbers the democrats thought going into this, and maybe not enough to tip the house as they had hoped. still early. lots can happen. what are your thoughts? >> it is early, but no doubt about it usually in off year elections the true believers come out and the party base and who organizes best comes out and the incumbent president, i was with reagan -- of course i wasn't with him then, but in 1982, he lost 26 seats in the house. i was with him in 1986 when he was at 70%. i think we lost 10 senate seats. so when the parties and incumbent party in power, people start to look for change,

dissatisfaction moves them more than satisfaction so i think that would be true, but again, the democrats seem to have been dealt a couple of aces, and they're throwing it away reaching for something that isn't there. i think they could really damage and they may be now damaging their prospects when you've got chuck schumer and others saying stop insulting people and getting in their face. neil: but could the president risk taking the republicans and grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory, the trade war may be perfectly valid grounds but bush this to the brink? >> well, let me say this, i mean, we're running annually an 800 billion dollars trade deficit. we ran a 4 trillion dollars in the last 25 years with china alone, financing their entire defense budget. we had 12 trillion dollars in trade deficits over the last 25 years overall. we lost 6,000 -- excuse me, we lost 6 million manufacturing

jobs between 2000 and 2010, 55,000 factories. either you're going to stop this hemorrhaging of jobs and technology and factories and plants out of the united states while we consume all that stuff coming in from china, or you're going to have an america 10, is a -- 10, 15 years from now which is going to be in hellish conditions. the politicians will yell, look, prices went up here -- neil: i think what he's saying he supports the president's efforts even if prices run up in the near term. i apologize. that was not deliberate. that's that. all right. meanwhile, a lot of people were scoffing at the president a year ago, the last big nato meeting; right, when they were snickering at him as he was speaking. he is returning to europe, and i don't think they are snickering now. after this.

[beep] [beep] [beep] our members shop a little differently. so we reward every purchase. let's see what kate sent. for you. for all of us. that's for me. navy federal credit union open to the armed forces, the dod, veterans, and their families.

with tripadvisor, finding your perfect hotel at the lowest price... is as easy as dates, deals, done! simply enter your destination and dates... and see all the hotels for your stay! tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites... to show you the lowest prices... so you can get the best deal on the right hotel for you. dates, deals, done! tripadvisor. visit tripadvisor.com

>> we have 151 billion dollars in trade deficits with the eu, and on top of that, they kill us with nato. we're paying for the whole thing. so then -- by the way, i have to say this, since i came which was a year and a half, almost 33 billion dollars more is projected to be paid by those nato nations but it is not enough. do they ever tell you that? no. neil: all right. the president making very clear that's got to change, that each nato member, all 29 of them, they have to, you know, fork over 2% of their gdp towards defense, disproportionate of dealing with this, something that even president obama complained about, albeit maybe in more polite terms but the fact of the matter is these countries by in large ignored him. this president, though, sending very pointed letters to at least four of those countries leaders including merkel of germany, with a letter that started

something like this, dear cheapskate -- not really but the point is you have to pay up, it is not up to the united states to bear this burden. let's talk to retired delta force lieutenant colonel. colonel, very good to have you. what do you make of the approach he's taking? he said this before. he said it last year. they were snickering at him last year. i don't believe they are snickering this year, but they have got to pony up or he's going to take some action. what kind of action do you think it would be? >> well, you know, neil, you know, the president's a disruptor and people aren't used to this. he's challenging the status quo which i think needs to be done. we've talked for years about the other elements of nato, the other countries not really doing their share of the fight -- or the money fight really. i believe the president's correct on that. but we can't cut off our nose despite our face. they have lost people in these wars we have been in for the last 17 years. they are good friends. i will tell you something, in iraq, early on, we had one of our coalition partners join us

in our task force and they showed up with their rifles, and i said where are your vehicles? we don't have any. where's your bullets? we don't have any. where's your night vision? we don't have any. so we ended up, you know, bringing this whole task force into ours and paying millions of dollars to get them fighting capable, but we needed them, and we need this coalition. so you know, it's a difficult spot for the president, but i do agree the other countries need to pick up and pay where they need to pay. neil: you know, colonel, if i remember correctly, a big concern the president wouldn't sign off on this idea that if a nato member is attacked, all nato members respond, that an attack on one is a response by all. so a lot of them don't know where he stands. where do you think he does stand? and would we go so far as to threaten loyalty to that code? >> no, i do not think we would ever walk all the way up that line to violate that code. you know, what we need to

remember here is nato is really part of the defense of our homeland. you know, where all these issues are happening, over in the middle east, down in africa, especially with the trans-national terrorism, you know, nato and europe is a buffer to us, then we have this big ocean. but we need to control that and we do. at the end of the day, we also when we're doing some of these operations around the world, we don't want to go in unilaterally and have to do all these things we want to bring these coalitions. so i do believe what the president has to say, but i do believe, i hope that we could kind of buffer what he says sometimes and polish some of the aspects he says to our friends because like i said, at the political level, the money may not be there, but they have given up some of -- you know, they have died just like we have in afghanistan and iraq, and they are a critical part of these teams that we're over there with. neil: we have a lot of soldiers in the european continent as you

know better than any, tens of thousands in germany alone, what if the president were to withdraw some of those troops, what would happen? >> i mean, it would send a message, take germany, one, there's an economic aspect to the germans, you know, there's a lot of american soldiers over there. they spend money every day. that would make a ploy. you know, look at poland. poland -- i believe it's like 2 billion dollars to move a brigade task force or some type of element there, that to me, if that's a business move, i was a business guy, i understand those pieces, that's a negotiated piece that the president, again, as a disruptor, as someone who is going to challenge the status quo, brings to these countries that usually walk a political line. neil: colonel, always good talking to you. thank you very much for your service as well. >> thanks, neil. have a great day. neil: you too. all right i want to take you to chicago right now. a protest is warming up there. this is nothing to do with i.c.e. this has everything to do with violence and crime that is out of control in the windy city.

and these protesters, democrats, republicans, all just moms and dads, those affected by this, those not yet, and they want it to stop now. a message to rahm emanuel after this. ♪ motorcycle revving ♪motorcycle revving ♪ motorcycle revving ♪ no matter who rides point, ♪ there are over 10,000 allstate agents riding sweep. ♪♪ and just like tyrone taylor, they know what it takes to help keep you protected. are you in good hands?

crystal geyser alpine springpasses through here, and is bottled right here. at the mountain source. naturally. crystal geyser is the only major u.s spring water bottled at the mountain source. naturally.

how far does crystal geyser alpine spring water travel from its source to the bottle? less than a mile and a half. crystal geyser. always bottled at the mountain source. naturally. neil: all right. what is at the weekend protests? the weather is nice. you have a protest. this one is a little unusual, nothing to do with i.c.e., or tragically school shootings although it does have to do with shootings and violence in chicago. where thousands are gathering to say enough is enough. now because it is out of control, right now, a fox news correspondent in the middle of it all, matt, what are we looking at here? >> you are looking right now at the expressway on the city's south side. it is part of the i-90 and i-94

system. one of the busiest roadways in all of chicago. and the state of illinois. right now state police are accommodating the protesters and are beginning the early stages of shutting down the northbound lanes of this highway or at least portions of the northbound lanes. all to accommodate a march today. one of chicago's most recognized social activists, he organized this march to shut down a portion of the freeway. he says he wants to inconvenience the city and inconvenience people here in the city to raise awareness for violence on the city's south side. thousands of protesters are expected. they have a list of issues that they want corrected, including what they call common sense gun laws, more resources for education and jobs and economic improvement on the city's south side. now, initially just days ago, state police and the city police pleaded with him not to host this protest because they said there is a list of obvious dangers that can happen, including people who might step on to the freeway and they said

they might even arrest any person, any protester who steps on to the expressway. that has since changed. now as you can see, state police are accommodating this very large demonstration, but yet to see how this is going to turn out, neil, because there is -- [inaudible]. we will keep our eye on this for you, neil. the mayor has approved or given his okay to this demonstration, the governor not so much. neil: thank you very much. we will keep an eye on that. they are expecting thousands at this thing. whether anyone does cross on the highway is anyone's guess. they will police that, quite literally, comes at a time when rahm emanuel is getting a lot of criticism for not getting a better handle on the crime that's run out of control there. we will see how it builds up throughout the day. global reaction now to the north koreans apparently incensed that we're lecturing them on

denuclearization. they had very different interpretations of these talks that wrapped one the secretary of state. their version doesn't match our version. their anger doesn't match our nonanger, after this. thanks to tena intimates with proskin technology designed to absorb so fast, ...

>> i hate to interrupt this peace party with the north koreans, but right now we're getting some word from the north koreans that don't jibe with what we're saying with denewarkization. this could be more a language barrier, but the north koreans don't feel they're treated fairly in the way that we have been interpreting talks has not been deemed constructer. retired lieutenant jerry boiken on this. the read that we're getting from the talks differs from the secretary of state, to progress and moving forward. what do you think is going on

here? >> i think there are a couple of things, good morning. neil: good morning to you. >> i think there are a couple of things here. notice very carefully though that kim jong-un did not speak himself. s' kept himself out of this fray and i think setting himself up to step in later with a different message. neil: just to be clear, you don't think that he thinks that the ongoing discussions are regrettable, that that's not coming from him? we're not counting-- >> no, i don't think that -- i do think that he thinks that this whole thing is regrettable. i think that he is certainly getting himself into a situation where he's not sure he's doing the right thing, but i think there are two other possibilities. one is that china is putting pressure on kim now as part of their overall pushback on the sanctions, or the -- not the sanctions, but the trade war going on. i think that could be china's influence on this. the second thing is, i'm not sure that kim has total control over his military. remember, the north korean

military is much like the chinese military, they consider us an exessential threat and grew up believing we were the enemy, and i'm not sure that kim has total control him them any more than xi has control over the chinese military. neil: if what you're saying is correct and he doesn't have total control over what comes out of this country, that, too, could be worrisome and problematic for the president who obviously, just finished that singapore summit and high expectations after that, that they were going to move very quickly in returning u.s. servicemen remains dating back to the korean war. it looked like we were making progress there and that slowed down a bit and we ceased joint military exercises with the south koreans. what happens next? >> and the north koreans have also given some things in return. and we've got our hostages back and so forth. but we don't need to go down the

road of thinking it's all been one-sided and we've been the givers. that said, we've always said this is a process that's up and down. i don't think that the game is over. i don't think that north korea has pulled out of the talks. i think there will be additional surprises, but i also think along with those surprises we're going to see some incremental progress towards ultimately a denuclearization. that's not to say that we're going to get everything that we want out of it and it's not to say that the north koreans will give up their nukes in the end, but i think they're-- i think that there is a possibility of that and we're certainly on the right track for it. but at some point donald trump is going to slam them with additional sanctions if he feels like they're playing games. that's why i think that kim jong-un has stayed out of it so he can come in when he sees it's a critical point, he can come in

with a different message. trump has from time to time come out with a different message than closest advisors, national security advisors, secretary of state. i think that kim is playing the same game here. neil: maybe. for all we know, i know the president shared with him elton john's rocketman song. mange -- maybe he didn't like the song. thank you for being on the phone, appreciate it. >> thank you. neil: the jobs report was out for the month of june and it was a report, more jobs added to the economy and a lot has been made of the number. 601,000, that number caught my attention, i'll tell you why, those are the americans deciding to get off the catch and look for jobs. and decided to try it out themselves and ticked up the unemployment rate, but according to my next guest, that's a healthy sign. you you'll want to see that and we are seeing that. a former cke restaurant owner

who owns us on the phone. andy, that's an encouraging development. some are wondering whether a trade war gets in the middle of that, but what do you think? >> i think that number is spectacular. you know, the problem during the obama years was that while the employment-- unemployment rate was going down, the labor participation rate was going down as well. so, it's easier to keep unemployment down. if we've got labor participation going up, but we've got people coming back into the labor force and we can keep that unemployment rate under 5%, you know, that's terrific. that's wonderful for the american people. neil: you know what's interesting? and i want to get your thoughts on it. a lot of places seeing a boom in hiring establishments and the like, that can be up and down, i grant you. but it's happening in areas where it hadn't been happening in construction, in manufacturing, in health care, that's not too much of a surprise in health care, but that it does have an across the board feel to it. what do you think? >> i think that's right and i think that things to watch are construction and transportation.

if you're hiring-- if we're hiring more truck drivers and we're hiring more people to build things, that means the economy's headed in a positive direction and we're about-- we've got about 250,000 job openings in the transportation sector and like 300,000 in construction, and then another 400,000 in manufacturing. so, these are good, working class jobs that are very strong indicators that the economy is really starting to accelerate. neil: you know, i had an economist on the other day and i know that economists are dangerous to recruit, despite my own economic background, but they have been saying that we could see this problem for employers trying to hire workers improve if they'd just paid their workers more. we have not seen that part of the equation move. we saw the 2.7% wage gain, respectable. it's deemed disappointing because it's not picking up steam. do you think that would make a difference, if employers were to pony up a few more bucks, they could get workers? >> right now, you've got --

what's holding wages down somewhat is the fact that there are five million people who aren't in the labor force that want a job now. so we've got some people coming in, which has a little negative impact on wages, but the number you want to look at is for nonmanagerial employees and the increases year over year for nonmanagerial employees is 3.8%. and anecdotally when you go around, look at fast food restaurants or costco or sam's club, they've got signs up, hiring, want to hire entry, 10, 13, $15 an hour because of the demand. neil: you're right. >> so you're seeing that lower group that hasn't seen increases, they are experiencing increases. they're not seeing it at the management level. you're seeing the real demand is for workers and we're starting to see those increases. neil: and in the case of my own teenage son, 12, $13 an hour.

and first i thought they must know who you are. apparently that's despite knowing me so that's changing, you're right. the environment has changed markedly for young kids, hasn't it? >> it has, absolutely. as a matter of fact, when i talk to some of our franchisees at carl's and hardee's, they can't find enough high school kids or enough young people to fill up jobs in their restaurants and that's never happened before so this is a very dynamic market. neil: all right. and i'm suspicious of you, because you're in the fast food industry for years and always stayed thin and that makes everything you say a little bit suspicious. >> it shows you how good for you, our food actually is. neil: there you go. well-said. andy puzder, always be well. the president of the united states is not far away from picking a supreme court nominee. it's going to go down on monday night and it's a big economic issue as well. we'll be covering it live beginning at 8 p.m. on fox business network right through

10 p.m. or even gauging foreign markets. why is the business network devoting so much attention to a legal issue? because that justice on that court could sway more decisions that have to do with business than you know. that's why they're there. that's why we're there. that's why we're not on tape. that's why we're not like other business networks, showing you tupperware commercials. a little more after this. d, she was pregnant, in-laws were coming, a little bit of water, it really- it rocked our world. i had no idea the amount of damage that water could do. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they were on it. it was unbelievable. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. we're the baker's and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today.

>> you know, he was gone for two weeks in italy. it's not the same when charlie gasperino is away. you know, he's fun, he's funny, he's a great reporter. he's back here breaking news left and right. >> smelling like garlic, obviously. neil: he was in italy. [laughter]. >> now it's on the supreme court court fight and one particular candidate might be in trouble-- >> well, brett kavanaugh the judge, federal judge who served in the bush administration, george w. bush, was thought to be the frontrunner for a lot of

reasons including ties to the republican party. i've been speaking with people close to him and he's been around in political circles, so i have sources, anonymous sources by the way, who know mr. kavanaugh well and he may be the most qualified and thought he withes a front runner and the decision that president trump is going to make imminently. neil: monday. >> he's going to announce, but he's worried about ties to the bush family and george w. bush as that being the deciding factor that gets-- whacks him out of this. why is that? i can tell you this and i know from sources inside the white house and people who have spoken with president trump directly, he's extremely distrustful of anybody close to the bush family for a lot of reasons we spoke about during the campaign, his

attacks on jeb, who was-- jeb bush who was a candidate. neil: low energy jeb. >> low energy jeb, and a lot of friction with the bush family. neil: he has a lot of baggage, controversial decisions, did he go far enough, questioning obamacare on its fundamentals. >> that's a problem with some conservatives, but you could find that with anybody. i think it's the bush factor. neil: really? >> trump calls people who are associated with george w. bush or bush administration bushies. and he-- >> he also dislikes you. so if he's hearing you say this-- >> i'm basing this, ladies and gentlemen, on anonymous sources, but they're very good sources, the same sources that --. neil: and that alone would

torpedo him? >> he's worried about that. for all i know he's going to put that aside and choose him. if you're asking him today what is the one thing why you're worried about whether you're going to get this nod he would tell you, because he's openly saying to people, it's my association with george bush and trump's absolute disdain for the bush family that will whack you out. neil: with bush, sr. and mocking the points of light thing, that was kind of-- >> listen, you know, listen, we could spend all morning talking about some crazy stuff that comes out of the president's mouth, including his hatred of anonymous sources. neil: and you, and me. >> does he have a problem with you? >> i'd move on. we're not ones to dwell, just because we're italians, we're not dwellers. >> i've got a great trump story. neil: we've run out of time. we'll be back with you later. really, neil, back to you later. and a former law clerk to

justice neil gorsuch. very good to have you. have you heard this so-called thing, the connection with the bush family that could torpedo kavanaugh? >> it's kind of ridiculous as george w. bush was a very conservative president, you know, we obviously heard the president make fun of h.w. bush and the thousand points of light this past week and it's on his mind, but i don't understand how a long time federal judge who served with distinction in the executive branch and on the bench over the last decade could be by the former conservative president of the united states. neil: i'm sure there are other things that could come up. he had those decisions and the reasons he had differences with obamacare more on technical than

fundamental grounds. some of the other names, particularly amy coney barrett of indiana, her ties to notre dame, her catholocism and she's the only one, and i don't know if we get over the sexist thing we talk about her number of children. but kavanaugh, what do you make of that? >> we're watching literally a war on women and war on religion when it comes to amy coney barrett. she's got kids and a catholic, as if that would bar her from being a good judge, she's an academic, and an idea that dianne feinstein that that is a problem for a federal judge, it's not. neil: i was wondering, this is coming from the same party that had to defend john f. kennedy a catholic when he was pursuing the presidency and arguing it was unfair for conservatives to finger him saying his allegiance

or catholocism or the pope. and he could pick the most perfect candidate male or female and we're in for the fight of our lives here, right? >> it's amazing that we're seeing this happen. because you awe neil gorsuch having a fight, too, and he's obviously highly qualified with a distinguished record on the bench and now with the supreme court. the idea that we're going to fight over the nominees when they're highly qualified. people forget that elena kagan and sotomayor. neil: and i don't want to belabor this too much. long after mr. trump is a toxic memory, the supreme court on down will bear the smear of his

fingerprints, reversing the damage already done will require a much longer term commitment. that's an editorial by the newspaper itself besmirching the right of a president to pick and choose supreme court justices. that's crazy. >> it's totally crazy. the president was dually elected. he has the right to pick the nominee and they can confirm or not and they should. the judges that president trump put on the bench are exactly the people that republicans would put on the bench, george bush, george h.w. bush or potential nominees contenders for nomination. the idea that these nominees are different because they're under donald trump is ridiculous and donald trump is the president of the united states and he has a right to make the appointments. neil: thank you very much. >> thanks, neil. neil: all right. you know, everyone is talking about facebook today, never mind the stock hit an all-time high.

investors aren't concerned, but should you be? after this. ♪ motorcycle revving ♪motorcycle revving ♪ motorcycle revving ♪ no matter who rides point, ♪ there are over 10,000 allstate agents riding sweep. ♪♪ and just like tyrone taylor, they know what it takes to help keep you protected. are you in good hands?

so let's promote our summer travel deal on choicehotels.com like this. surfs up. earn a $50 gift card when you stay just twice this summer. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com

this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops.

oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. >> all right. taking you to chicago right now, this is a protest over crime, that's sort of rampant in the chicago area and sending a message to rahm emanuel that this must change and a lot of chicago residents of all political stripes, that the shootings have gone up and the government is not responsive. it's a bipartisan call for both parties to do something and get on top of it, before it's elsewhere. it hits them directly and right now, everyone feels the effect and they want it to stop and they're threatening to shut down highways, i believe that's the ryan highway. is it the ryan highway? >> i grew up there. neil: the dan ryan highway. i don't know my chicago. i know my pizza in chicago, but i don't know-- >> we used to call it the dan

ryan-- >> all of these states here, i want to bring back the democratic strategist, harlan hill, 2020 trump campaign advisor. and a lot of people have been writing, harlan my son, he is not. although your mother is very upset. [laughter] >> i know, my halloween costume. neil: your mother and i want to know, your room is a mess. and last but not least, we've not nan heyworth here. >> and i'm also not neil's son. neil: all right. let's get into this, guys. and first, antoine with you, and the dust-up over crime anding that's bedevilling a number of mayors and the latest one included rahm emanuel. nothing's done on it and people are getting frustrated. >> a quote that i often repeat, we can't solve these problems with the same things that create

them. we have to do something different. crime is not partisan, it's not a racial issue, it's not a socioeconomic issue, it i am pablths all of us whether we like it or not and i think that people are going to have to get together, not politicians, not leaders, everyday people and figure out where the root of the issues and where do they come from. the republicans will argue that this is a democratic problem because the democrats control most of the chicago politics and they have some of the strictest gun laws. neil: they talk about the city for black on black crime. >> the strictest gun laws in the country and we know the neighbors states to illinois have some of the most lax gun laws in the country and the truth of the matter, i don't think it's about gun issues, i think it's economic and social issues and-- >> there are other poor areas that don't have this problem. what do you make of that? >> i grew up across the state line in indiana, antoine, and i agree with you.

i think it's an economic issue. i think if you look -- i'm not going to absolve the democratic leadership in chicago and it's been that way for decades, their responsibility for not addressing root problems and, in fact, exacerbating them. the public sector unions in chicago run that city and they run it corruptly, and they deprive communities of color of the resources that they need, that would-- >> couldn't you make that argument in other cities, too? >> i would make that argument in other cities, but when you look at these communities and when i was growing up in the chicago area, the robert taylor homes that have now been demolished were so dangerous we worried about being on that expressway and passing those homes and our car breaking down because you'd be taking your life in your hands. it's had the most devastating

impact on the people most in need and rahm emanuel has done nothing to improve that situation. >> you can't say he hasn't done anything. i think his hands are tied and a minute ago he's doing the best he can. at the same time i'm not giving him an out. he can do more, but i think it's going to take working with other people. neil: what do you think of that, harlan. >> i just want to ask a question, what's taking so long? this isn't an issue that's precipitated over the last year or even the last decade. it's certainly gotten worse, but why is it just now that you're seeing a march like this happen? i think this is the-- >> these things happen all the time. neil: yeah, we've had protests before. >> protests happen all the time. >> this has been a part of our national consciousness. we've been talking about this since rahm emanuel has even mayor. what is it going to take? how many more die on the streets and-- >> but they have the strictest gun laws to his point. so what do you think the solution is? >> harlan, you can have that same argument about any issue we

face in this country, whether it's infrastructure, whether it's health care, education, the people have changed, but the issues remain the same. >> the fundamental failure of democracy? >> what i'm saying to you is ten years from now, neil cavuto's children or grandchildren may be sitting in this chair and having the same conversations. neil: we have one here. >> about the same issues because unfortunately there is no swoop in-- >> what makes chicago a unique problem? it does stand out. >> i think it's a number of things. part of it is failure of leadership and part of it-- >> it's been going on forever and no one has been doing anything. >> therefore, the problem has been there for while and it's not going to be solved in the blink of an eye. >> if we're going to write down on paper how are we going to fix this. >> figuring out what the root it. you can't fix any problem without figuring out what the root is. >> let's pick out one strand,

education. >> get a protest from me on that. >> if you look at the way public sector unions have disserved the children who depend on them the most and it's definitely not only the teacher's job, as we know, when they bring in children from homes that were disintegrated and-- >> back to economics, right, nan? >> i agree with you, the economics, daniel patrick moynihan, we can take it back to the programs of the 1960's. i was having this conversation with an african-american friend who said look, when moynihan e predicted that communities most disadvantaged would be further harmed by policies that, in fact, reward families that are not together with responsibility parents, that that helps to create an ongoing pattern of disruption and we see that. we see children who are--

>> and when you wake up some politicians-- >> the protests will raise or heighten the issue there and gather people's attention. that's what peaceful protests do. neil: we can only hope. we'll keep it eye on this. it has been building and accelerating here. and we hope they keep it peaceful where there's rampant crime. in the senate race, the president made it clear he prefers the republican running against john tester. we'll talk to that guy after this. my high school rethainer. oh don't... it's early 90s sitcom star dave coulier... cut...it...out! [laughing] what year is it? as long as stuff gets lost in the couch, you can count on geico saving folks money. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

>> a vote for john tester is a vote for chuck schumer, nancy pelo pelosi. and a new leader of the democrat party, maxine waters. neil: all right. i'll put the president down as a maybe on democrat ic senator jon

tester. this is a pickup the republicans are confident they can get and the president's support of the republican. can it put him over the top. and we've him on now and we have calls out to john tester and we have yet to hear back. mr. rosindale, the president is pushing hard for you. i'm surprised in such a conservative state that you're having the uphill battle you are, a popular incumbent, i understand that, this is a state that the president won handily. how is it that senator tester is as popular as he is? >> i think that that's something that's portrayed in the washington bubble, that he is popular, but, neil, if you look at the data, it shows that john tester has never been able to achieve 50% of the vote here in montana. neil: but somehow he does, right? i'm wondering what will be your

trick? what will you be pushing? >> oh, we don't have to have a trick here, what we're doing is making sure that people are aware of his liberal record. we're going to campaign on the truth, to be honest with you. the truth is that john tester shut down the government, illegal immigrants, protects sanctuary cities, supports feinstein's catch and release policies and universal background checks, all of these things are completely contrary to the basic principles and morals of the people of montana. they're not going to be fooled this time. they're much, much more aware of the facts and they know i serve the way that i campaign. i've got a very solid record of reducing spending, of reducing regulations, and of supporting prosperity across the state. >> now, this trade war could change things quickly and maybe

for all the right reasons, the president continues to push it. how do your colleagues, voters, in montana generally feel about that? 'cause it could boomerang on your state. >> you know something? we feel the way the president does. we'd like to see all subsidies and tariffs removed and the president stated that clearly. and neil, i didn't see anybody taking him up on that offer. so what he's doing is negotiating these trade agreements to make sure that the consumers and the producers of the united states and of montana benefit from it. again, we've got somebody in matt rosendale that's going to help the president achieve these good policies that are expanding our economy, that are protecting our nation and we are not going to continue to support a senator like tester. he he is adopted the techniques of

the left. i've heard it on your previous segment that they're getting aggressive and literally violent and there's independents and democrats across the nation that don't support that, they're not going to tolerate that and they're going to support the president's agenda and i feel that's going to help us carry the day. neil: were you surprised that the president singled out former president bush, sr., h.w. bush, under the thousand points of light that's already got jenna bush hager zinging back at donald trump, essentially saying she found it offensive. did you? >> i tell you, the president was really focused on the issues that are important to the people of montana, and-- >> why did he mention that? is that an important thing to mention, talking about a former president? >> well, again, when you speak for an hour ad-lib, then you're

going to have some things come out, but i will tell you that the people in that arena and the thousands and thousands of people that lined the streets that i saw as i traveled in the motorcade with the president that were there to support him, and to support his agenda, they-- that's what they came out to hear. neil: ari fleischer said this is so uncalled for going after 94-year-old former president's promotion of volunteerism. i don't mind potus being a fighter, i do mind him being rude. what do you think? >> well, as i said, the republicans and the independents across the state of montana are energized and enthusiastic about making sure that president trump's agenda moves forward. we had a 35%-- >> you don't agree with those remarks, but you're putting them in context? [laughter] >> i agree that we need to extend our economy and protect our nation, neil. neil: do you like the bushes, the bush family?

>> sure, i like-- >> bush, sr.? >> look, i like everyone. debate folks across the aisle, i debate folks across the aisle and across the nation and i have respect and consideration for all of them and i think that if we had more of that in our politics and focused on the issues instead of personalities we'd be better off, again, let's look at john tester. he took and attack with false information an admiral in the united states military and destroyed his character rather than allow someone to go through a hearing process, and the information that he put out there was proven to be false. that's not how we should be operating. neil: so you're offended by that, not as much offended by a president going after a 94-year-old president. >> i am offended by a sitting u.s. senator who release the

false information about an admiral who was going to be considered for nomination and to destroy his character because apparently party bosses told him that's what his job was. neil: all right. mr. rosendale, thank you very, very much and we'll see how you do. and again, john tester is welcomed here. we're fair and balanced with everybody. a little more after this.

>> all right. the messenger is gone, but not necessarily the message. epa's scott pruitt is out and concerns about wheeler. and joining us is charlie gasperino-- sorry, buddy, you were gone for two weeks. >> the italians are craftier with corruption. when you get piscopo in here, we get away with everything because

they don't know how to be corrupt. neil: what happens now? the concern is that this guy. he's going to continue the same policies, right? >> yes, and presumably this guy is squeakier cleaner than scott pruitt which, you know, we should point out that scott pruitt believes a lot of this is exaggerated and he should come out and explain a lot of the stuff. i will say this, the eternal problem with the trump administration, they-- they're good on policy and aggressively good on policy. i think they're aggressively good on immigration and deregulation and i think that the regulatory policies of obama really hurt industry and hurt businesses, but in implementing it, it's like they're idiots when it comes to implementing it. you don't-- you don't have zero tolerance for immigration, and not plan how to pull that off and when you don't plan, you get kids in cage pictures, okay? and that-- >> and how does this relate to

pruitt? >> a guy incredibly good at deregulating epa, defanging the most left wing part of the bureaucracy who was stupid with-- >> he was going to-- what he did-- >> he did a lot. >> none of those -- it's difficult to roll back those policies, charlie. neil: he did do a lot. >> he did it like molasses. >> that's why he was good at it. neil: i think what he's saying-- >> with all the litigation. neil: he was his own worst enemy, but he did the president's bidding here and i'm wondering, jonas, for your vantage point, they've got wheeler, and got one out of sight and maybe this one, too. >> i think he did damage with the concept. it's not going on continuing. but when you're adding new regulation business it can be shady because at the end of the day you're going after the-- >> charlie and i should be talking like that not a man named jonas max ferris.

>> under the benefit of consumers and jobs, all true, you shouldn't be looking like you're on the graph take and-- it ruins the whole thing and you can't sell, oh, yeah, i'm doing it for the little guy, where is my gold pen? you cannot do that and-- >> that's part of the problem with the trump administration is in having very good, i believe, policies on a lot of the stuff and in lousy execution. listen. neil: what about the deregulatory -- i agree with you even on the controversy, the guy doing it, he did a lot of it and then he will argue, and you've even mentioned deregulatory push greets the skids. >> one of the big parts that need to be deregulated for full better economic growth which screws businesses. >> i agree with you on that. >> and jonas is right he hurt the image of deregulation and this is systemic through the trump administration. even the tax cuts which were

pretty messy, a huge corporate tax cut because they didn't want to go full-- >> stay on message here. >> they didn't want to go full on with the personal income tax cut, it's not doing as much. neil: the regulatory repeal, got a lot of stuff done that businesses found wr wheming. do you think it changes? >> yes, because andrew wheeler was and is a washington operator, wasn't he a coal lobbyists? he knows his way around and more effective than pruitt. neil: pruitt again, i'm not pro shenanigans and all. he was very effective at doing his job. does wheeler build on that or can wheeler build on that or the ax is out for him? >> i'm more environmentalist than most people, but i don't like the cap standards with the

cars, and you can do that easier without the epa, with taxes on fuel and that was going to probably collapse and i would imagine that might have problems at this point even though it seems to be moving along anyway. the notion that that is how you clean up the environment through decree and which has been dodged since the clinton era and cars have to meet it, it couldn't work, and that's the direction that obama went with more cafe standards and-- >> this guy is gone and environmentalists are going to miss him because at least he was the devil by the allegations. >> or they got a scalp and draw a line in the sand. >> like sharks, taste blood. >> wheeler is going to pull back and i'm telling you in execution, the trump administration is often the gang that couldn't shoot straight. that's the problem. it's here, it's in the immigration, carrying out-- >> and now the guy is certainly going to be cleaner than this guy and able to get more done. >> are you sure? are you sure that--

>> he's going to be scared? >> no, i think listen, he's an operator in with a washington, he knows what he's doing and i think he knows the ropes better than pruitt. i know you all are pro-pruitt every here, but-- >> no, no, no one is talking pro pruitt, but shenanigans. if you have issues where a guy is tainted and sidetracked by the investigations which are totally justified, be careful what you wish for because the other guy won't be so faded. >> and pruitt needed a war time con significant -- consinliere, don't you think. neil: it happened to james woods on the fourth of july because he's conservative? after this. yogi is a bear. when it comes to hibernating,

nobody does it better. he also loves swiping picnic baskets. hee, hee, hee yoooogiiiiiii!! but when it comes to mortgages, he's less confident. here, yogi. thank you boo boo. fortunately, there's rocket mortgage hmmm. hey. by quicken loans. it's simple, so he can understand the details and get approved in as few as eight minutes. my kind of pic-a-nic basket. apply simply. mmm-hmmm. hee, hee. understand fully. mortgage confidently. rocket mortgage by quicken loans.

>> getting dumped by your agent on the fourth of july. it happened to the actor james woods, who, if you didn't know, is a brilliant actor, but he's also very conservative, and wondering if that had anything to do with it. the agent saying it's the fourth of july and i'm feeling patriotic, i don't want to represent you anymore. i could go on a rant, but i don't know what i'd say. i can't tell you how many similarists i got when i asked girls out for the junior prom. and finally my mother said yes, but she had to be back by 10:00. anyway (laughter) > >> one of my friends here, joe piscopo. what do you make of this?

>> inexcusable. james woods is a great guy. over a million and a half twitter followers. neil: is that right? >> and his agency took 10% of the twitter account. i'm sure that happened. neil: why did the agent choose to do it then? >> i can't figure it out, maybe to make publicity for himself. i called my agent in california, can you believe what happened to james woods? my agent said, who is this? [laughter] >> i'm the last day that can comment. neil: it is weird, very, very wired. >> there are some great agents, but i'm not on the a-list, not the b-list, not on the wait list in hood. neil: you tease us. >> last week i was in rough shape, i'll tell you. neil: you know you and i have chatted about this before. a veteran the "saturday night live," slightly skewed left, i gue guess? what is it about that? >> i don't know, i think-- >> intolerance or what?

>> it seems to come worse from the left than from the right. although both sides, you know, on the radio show, a.m. 970, thank you for your kind words. neil: you have both. >> retry to go down the middle and new jersey hall of fame, we'll nominate you next year. and who is hosting, whoopi goldberg. who is inducted, bruce vanzant. who is nominating him. bruce springsteen. governor murphy. i can't be more politically opposed to those individuals. we had the best time and whoopee and i were laughing and this is funny, everybody's got to stop and the agent to do that a james woods. james woods said riveting and true things on twitter, maybe that offended the agency. neil: and you and i chatted about this, you and i chatted and interviewing mitch mcconnell, a name dropping.

>> and mitch mcconnell, and fox titles with-- >> stop right now. anyway i always think this is like professional wrestling and everyone gets in their own point of view, but i'm watching democrats and republicans laugh and joke with each other and get before a microphone and say outlandish things, it's kabuki theater and crazy talk and yet i'm hearing your fine show, you have all sides to come on, you zing them, and they zing back and it's happening in new jersey. i think it happens in more places than we know yet we play these left-right games and it's idiotic. >> it's all games and see what happens, robert de niro agent going to drop him for what he said about donald trump? i think he should reach out to donald trump. and on the fox business show, forgive me, i think that robert o'neill should coach--

robert should coach donald trump when he meets with vladimir putin. give me all you got. neil: you mentioned de niro and you heard his comments using the f-word and all that. how does that advance the debate? >> it doesn't, matter of fact. neil: these are your friends. >> and broadway and-- >> how would you? >> i would say anything i want to say. neil: they know you're a little bit more conservative than they, which wouldn't be a huge leap, but you get along with them. they like you and how is that possible? >> if you say anything marginally nice about donald j. trump they will come after you. that's frustrating because all we want is what is a great for america. our families come from other countries. the immigrants are the mosaic of the united states of america. neil: stop, stop. you have to admit the president sometimes feeds the beast, right? >> that's a fair criticism.

neil: so when the president made a comment about president bush seniors and mocking the thousand points of light. do you think that's appropriate to do. >> i'm not on my raid no show to use that word. i got scolded-- >> what word? >> i don't want to say it because the woman would be listening. he said the s-word and he said that's a derogatory yiddish determine and i got scolded by a listener. neil: and the 94-year-old former president and mocking his military efforts. now, you seem to be afraid to take on these rabid trumpists and i wonder why you're so afraid, why? what happened? >> and i never went down and got

me down. everybody has to stop. neil: they don't stop. >> for me, i have to be-- we talked about this off air, i love the drama of the politics. we're okay. everything's great, i am promise you everything is okay. neil: it's drama, it's not based on reality. people aren't that way. >> don't get crazy because a lot of it's show business. a lot of it's negotiations. neil: when you run for governor or senator, popular in new jersey. >> here we go. neil: you always missed this, but popular. how would you run? >> you know what? i would go down the middle and i would say, i believe because i'm a union guy, a conservative guy, but a union guy. you can't take away pension and welfare from the unions. neil: so you had a he -- you'd be in the union's pocket. >> i didn't say that. say something about the italians. neil: i'm italian myself. >> everybody's got to stop the hate and vitriole. neil: and he is extremely,

extremely popular in new jersey. he's regretting not running for governor because he's being taxed up the ying-yang as we speak. that will do it here. we'll see you monday with this whole supreme court thing and we continue on fox. . >> north korea calling talks with secretary of state mike pompeo, quote, regrettable, accusing the u.s. delegation of trying to unilaterally pressure the hermit kingdom to abandon nuclear weapons. we're going live to tokyo where secretary pompeo landed earlier this morning. >> plus, the supreme court guessing game. who is on the short list for monday's announcement and what it means for the future of the courts. >> caught on video, passengers quite literally keeping the inside of their airplane together. we're going to tell you exactly what happened moments after this video was shot.