>> i'm not jumping on this. here we go. he is down! >> thanks for joining us today, join us tomorrow. >> no deal, 24 hours later no response from china after trade talks end without an agreement but we haven't update from the president of the united states. nafta tariffs are close to kicking in and stocks are still being kicked up and down. our consumers on main street next? i am neil cavuto and a trade war is putting everyone on edge. we have edward lawrence where the talks went down. allison barber of the white

house on what the president is teeing up. lauren simonetti where shoppers may be paying up and in illinois farmers are already paying a price. we begin with allison. >> the trump administration increasing tariffs on $200 billion worth of chinese goods. donald trump saying way to avoid those tariffs is simple. people should make their products in the usa, donald trump tweeting over the course of the past two days the united states and china have held candid and constructive conversations over the status of the trade relationship between both countries, the relationship between xi jinping and myself is a strong one and conversations into the future will continue. in the meantime the united states is impose tariffs from china which may or may not be removed depending on what happens with respect to future negotiations. this increase tariffs on $200

billion worth of chinese imports upping the level of terrace from 10% to 25. the ministry says countermeasures are coming, trade negotiator suggested talks have not failed but instead he says this is a small setback. >> i don't think the negotiation has broken down. it is a small setback in the talks between two countries. we are optimistic about the future. >> reporter: ambassador robert lighthizer says more tariffs are coming. he says donald trump told him to begin the process of raising tariffs on all imports from china which are valued at $300 billion. lighthizer said there will be a period for public comment, when those tariffs come again. he says it is very simple.

an easy way to avoid tariffs in the good old usa. neil: we should explain a little bit of wiggle room because there is a delay in the implementation of these tariffs for goods that have not left china yet, 2 or 3 weeks presumably. regardless foxbusiness's lauren simonetti outside macy's in new york city with what consumers might be having to deal with and those three weeks. >> reporter: this is the largest store in the nation and consumers here and everywhere are getting ready to spend $767 more this year. that is a number being put on it because of this increase in tariffs and this is being put on thousands of items you can buy in stores like macy's, everything from backpacks and handbags to furniture and

clothing, luggage, perfume, dinnerware, nuts, shampoo, all sorts of food. some folks we spoke to are willing to accept this short-term pain for the long-term gain. >> in the long run it will benefit us as consumers because someone has to be tough and hold the line with the chinese. >> it is scary. it really is. >> a lot of little people will really be affected by the fact they can't afford these things that were affordable yesterday. >> all types of different businesses. i'm in retail. if it would help i would be okay with it. i would probably just stop spending as much. >> got to play fair and that is what donald trump is trying to do. >> if i had to take a hit to improve our country and that way then i'm happy to do it. >> what happens if all the imports to this country are hit with tariffs. as the office is preparing to do.

the trade partnership, a group that studies trade policy and its impact, it will cost a family of 4 $2000 a year and that might not be so easy for americans to bear. the other thing is even if we do get a trade deal with china that doesn't mean the tariffs come off. >> there are no guarantees of anything right now. the us and china nowhere close to a deal but what is the global impact of all of this. with the markets crazy with volatility, $2 trillion of wealth evaporated over the past week. that may be quickly made up. we saw the comeback in the dow through the we can certainly yesterday when we were down 358 points. let's get a read on what investors can expect in the days ahead. we have michael lee and

foxbusiness network's jackie. when you talk to people about the mood and all that. i'm always amazed by the relative calm of investors and average folks who seem to think this too shall pass. there seems to be kind of a don't worry, everything will work out. >> is optimism in the marketplace. we ended the session on a positive note. white house and the talks have been constructive. the market so little volatility because it had priced in a deal and that didn't seem to be the right decision to make at that point so little bit of shock the president was taking a hard line but most investors i spoke to said retailers will adjust. three or four weeks, they will be able to be more number and they moved around sourcing and

trying to find new suppliers to make this work. it will hit the consumer but consumers say the president is playing a long-term game and we understand that. the market is driven by the short-term. heather: neil: walmart is in direct line of fire. even there the understanding is they were stocking up their selves to prepare for this which might explain the strength of the first quarter gdp report. a lot of people are not prepared for this. >> in to see you bring up walmart. i was going to talk about this. of the top fortune 500 companies, it is walmart. the others are chinese companies. china, natural petroleum and the chinese government, you have to remember it is state owned enterprises. many of these company's, the chinese government owns a portion of them. they support companies over there that are having a problem

whereas here it is different, companies on their own, walmart, target, amazon, the government will help walmart you understand. there is going to be pain and suffering here but this is not over by a long shot. no way is this going to be done. this is going to get much worse before it gets better and worse it gets the closer we are to a deal. when we do this or that that doesn't surprise me. the chinese want the best deal possible and to do that they will squeeze and squeeze to make sure. what has to happen? the two biggest economies in the world, two big powers, like a marriage, a husband and wife, you have to have a compromise and the problem is the us is saying we want to be more fair for a china is saying but this is the way it has been for the last however many years, what do we get? unless the trump administration

can come up with something avocado for china i don't think a deal gets done soon so they have to be creative. neil: i don't think the markets would flip over that kind of uncertainty. i could be wrong, but you are optimistic cool a heads eventually prevail. >> they have to. there is too much at stake. the chinese economy is the house of cards. we are up in arms over a deficit that is 4% of gdp, there's is 10% gdp and their current account deficit went negative for the first time. neil: they needed more than we do. >> especially more than we do. their currency, $30 trillion since 2001 so they live on dollars, euros and pounds so they need direct foreign investment but the tariffs are exports. they really hurt direct foreign

investment. you want a supply chain out of china, there will be a potential - >> a lot of them going to southeast asia. i am curious about something way back from this, whether there is a silver lining in the united states, interest rates have gone down the past few weeks and particularly this week. if you're trying to refinance the odd thing about this crisis or whatever you want to call it, it made that a lot more affordable. >> as long as rates stay low in the economy keeps chugging along, we were talking about this in the green room that 3.2% gdp, that was a huge number. that positions us to take a hard line. there hasn't been another president willing to go on the line and put everything at stake for the long-term gain and put

china in its place, something certainly that needs to be done but there will be pain to come. neil: we absorb the 10% tariff on $60 billion worth of guns and it could be 25% on everything we've got from china. you could absorb 10% with suppliers to eco-cross to that. it is much tougher. >> it could get worse, not only 25%, trump might have to threaten 50% of everything and i'm telling you from experience you have to understand the chinese culture. if you ever hear one grain of sand thing, it is the culture. and for the united states, so much more at stake because you have north korea with china.

neil: you think has more pain in the interim. >> i want to talk about the market. market is going to rebound after this but when it gets really bad the market has to sell off. neil: the president is doing the right thing by getting in china's face but it will take a while. >> the department of defense estimated china steals on average $300 billion for intellectual property a year from the us, that is $2 trillion-$3 trillion over the last decade and the business model of stealing iv has to -- neil: got to get this. >> that was the sticking point. >> got to give them something they want, that is the compromise. neil: we have a lot more on this. it is not just china but global hotspots heating up everywhere. no more so than the iranian's,

north koreans, venezuela. a scary world. we will sort it out, stay with us. my time is thin, but so is my lawn. now there's scotts thick'r lawn 3-in-1 solution. with a soil improver! seed! and fertilizer to feed!

now yard time is our time. this is a scotts yard. who used expedia to book the hotel that led to the ride ♪ which took them to the place where they discovered that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. ♪ flights, hotels, cars, activities. expedia. everything you need to go.

neil: we are focused on a potential trade war with china than any other week would have been headlines themselves, investors out of north korea, loaded with coal, that is a big no-no, what was down for cuba containing oil for cuba which would violate some agreements already in place and then the ongoing friction with iran, the response to the alleged threats iran has been making against us personnel in the region. a busy world, scary world. what do you make of this?

what is happening at the same time? >> i don't think it is a coordinated effort but these countries are taking advantage of watching the united states and how we are reacting around the world and coordinating their activities in their own governments to assure that pressure is applied, raising the ante for the united states. china is keeping busy in the south china sea, north korea continues to be a sanction, iran is continuing to target us personnel. russia is continuing with the disinformation campaign trying to undermine the us, nato and eu. a lot of these are going on all at once but at the end of the day what you're seeing is a president who unlike previous presidents on both sides of the island say we can no longer afford to allow the little small activities to go unanswered and we will take them seriously and respond. neil: how do you think he is

personally feeling about kim jong un's multiple missile projectile of the last week or so. and as many as three. under the radar and in the bounds of an agreement they will start doing long-range tests but they are pretty provocative. >> you are seeing a president who is reacting as a professional pessimist but personal optimist. he hopes to reach out and get these countries to come to a negotiating table. but he has gone out of his way to understand kim jong un and it is shelved in his face. >> for sanctions violations.

on one hand, i will keep the hand open but i will keep the hammer. for years, decades the iranian's through their proxies killed hundreds of americans and we are finally saying no more. if you do it we will hold you accountable. they ratchet things up. we respond by searching the aircraft carrier bomber group and bringing the uss arlington into the region and expedited deployment. these are actions where you cannot afford to let little things go anymore and we have to say no more. neil: the latest actions against iran with growing suspicions, planning attacks on us military personnel in iraq and elsewhere and that was the impetus? do you know anything else? >> what i heard from talking to folks at the pentagon is they have always been ratcheting up a

little bit. we are squeezing their economy once again. we pulled out of the agreement a year ago and with they are starting to feel the bite of sanctions. the money given to them by the obama administration to keep their economy propped up and continue to support their proxy organization and they are beginning to feel the bite and with that they are responding because they know their economy which may be approaching inflation of 40% cannot afford more sanctions and tougher crackdown the united states and others will begin to wait on them because they will continue with a nuclear program. that is a known fact but we cannot afford and neither can the region. neil: thank you for your service at a very scary time. we have a lot more coming up

including things you expect in washington and things you do not. the house democratic panel, to go after the president of the united states blocking witnesses from testifying. you do not expect a republican senate committee to do the same after this. let's be honest. safe drivers shouldnt have to pay as much for insurance... as not safe drivers! that's why esurance has drivesense.® the safer you drive, the more you save. although i'm not really driving right now that would be unsafe. when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless.

whoooo. did you know the exact same hotel room... ...can have many different prices? that's why tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the lowest price on the hotel you want. your perfect hotel room for the perfect price!

>> my son was totally exonerated by mueller who frankly does not like donald trump, me, this donald trump and frankly from my son after being exonerated to get a subpoena to go again and speak again after close to 20 hours of telling everybody that

would listen about a nothing, i am pretty surprised. >> if he is pursuing from the president's son, what is it you suspect he is zeroing in on? >> discrepancies. i would be willing to best one witness said the light was red, another said the light was green. he is about to publish a report that will be consumed by everyone and wants to report to be fool some. if you have witnessed discrepancy a fair thing to do is give the witnesses a chance to say i had an accurate recollection. my recollection is refreshed. the only way to do that is invite the witness to come back in voluntarily. that did not work. the next option is a subpoena. the offer to find voluntary, nothing to do with obstruction.

>> republican senate being spearheaded with a republican senator wanting more info so that raises a lot of eyebrows and if the congressman saying, testifying the subpoena to do so. insider politics reporter. and that stands out here. a republican leading this charge. >> that is why he was shocked. a long multi-year investigation only to breathe a sigh of relief. and what tray gaudi said on

friday, that has to do -- neil: voluntarily, he obviously said no. >> don junior is not going to go down willingly. basically he is tired of it. the whole trump family is ready to be done with this. >> process and rule of law -- the truth of the matter is -- neil: what do you mean they weren't? >> the pole report hasn't been released. neil: obstruction, 98%. >> it was laid on the floor, whether obstruction actually -- >> they are pursuing something different. the senate intelligence committee. >> the senate is more concerned

about learning about more information on russian interference in terms of how is russia approaching this, this is something to be concerned about. >> he was approached by kremlin leaked lawyer and he said he would love to get dirt. we don't have proof that trump junior is involved in direct contact. neil: there was nothing toward going on here or trying to clear up discrepancies at this point. >> i think they are just trying to cover their bases in terms of there are real warnings from the us intelligence committee that russia is continuing to try to interfere in us elections. >> the country is why such an effort to keep from transparency. why not let all of it out? why not take all the investigations and say they are

tired of it but tired of it doesn't cut it. neil: democrats are not tired of it. >> total transparency and one thing the administration is not known for his transparency. neil: when i hear the constitutional crisis comment, democrats are arguing the attorney general of the united states is held in contempt, republicans were arguing the same. what is good for the goose is good for the gander. >> in this case, they do, they did, the mueller report finished and basically there was -- you have to realize how this started.

neil: the conclusions of the report that concluded nothing on obstruction doesn't matter. >> the fact that it concluded nothing is the point. the process continues. neil: jerry nadler and all talking about overkill, enough is enough, leaving politics aside, that is hypocritical. >> i remember >> we're all playing politics and acting like children. what do you think, we have a process and apparently it's going to play out a long time. i think it's fair to say that democrats are a little inconsistent here, you can even see a split between 2020 democrats and house democrats. 2020 democrats are not focusing heavily on mueller or russia. some called for impeachment and others like bernie sanders-- >> they're moreover an investigation. >> you have to hand it to nancy

pelosi who has struck exactly the right tone week after week after week. >> and the constitutional crisis is somewhat hyperbolic without moving towards impeachment at the same time. neil: you know, i think it gets to be a constitutional crisis when a judge 0 are-- or a court ordered you to do something and then it's a constitution constitution constitutional process. >> and how can you-- >> maybe a process confusion, can you use that? i like that. i'm going to steal that one. >> okay. neil: forget china, by the way. i want you to meet the american ceo's as these tariffs are very much on us. i cannot stress this enough. governments don't pay for tariffs, i hate to break it to you. you do. more than half of employees across the country

bring financial stress to work. if you're stressed out financially at home, you're going to be too worried to be able to do a good job. i want to be able to offer all of the benefits that keep them satisfied. it is the people that is really the only asset that you have. put your employees on a path to financial wellness with prudential. bring your challenges.

>> if the consumer does get some pain in the pocket, yes, but you know what? we're fighting for this century's jobs. if we can get away from the political rhetoric and listen to what businesses are saying about this, we need fairness from china and this administration is asking for fairness. neil: all right. and that might work for a fortune 500 company like dow chemical. the former ceo, saying that they want to make sure there's fairness there. try telling that to small and medium sized businesses who

don't have their girth or flexibility. phil, your worry is that this will have a disproportionally damaging impact on small and medium guys, right? >> well, absolutely because we anticipated the 10% tariff and dealt with it okay and we knew that 25% might be coming, but we really got on the last few weeks with some of the talks going on, we were optimistic that it wouldn't happen, but obviously, we were wrong. neil: so, if this were to drag on a while, despite hopes that, as you know, these latest tariffs might be a couple of weeks, if not more from kicking in, then all bets are off? >> and that's the big question, is that is there an end-game to this strategy? and when dids -- when does it end? does it go on forever?

i hate to use a cliche, but she is tariffs are like taxation without representation. neil: for the small and medium business guys, you're getting hosted now and you just don't know if it if i can fix this, the big and small guys will benefit, yourselves included. you say what? >> i really do not believe that at all because started out in 1985 as a completely made in the usa made in america. because of trade deals the past several years we were forced to end up becoming a major importer, and there's no going back. we could never bring these jobs back and manufacture in the country here again, the mills are gone, the sewing machine manufacturers are gone. and we bring in blank caps from

china and add embroidery to them and we add more than half of the cost back into it about 65% of the cost of finished product is made by american workers because you couldn't gear up fast enough to bring all the baseball cap business back to america. 87% of all baseball caps, according to the commerce department in 2017, 87% of all baseball caps sold in america were made in china. neil: wow, that's the next thing, the apple pie the same thing, scary. and foxconn are the big guys are looking at alternatives to china, guadalajara, mexico, you don't have that flexibility? >> we're already importing from vietnam and looking now at bangladesh. so we're looking.

neil: so you're preparing and already been preparing for life, you know, in the non-china dominated trade world, right? >> well, it's kind of our fallback position, but our major factories that we've dealt with over 15 years and have great relationships with, we don't want to cut all ties with them either. you know, when this thing hopefully gets resolved, maybe we can go back to business as normal. neil: and that's the big wait and the big question. phil page, i wish you well, cap america ceo, bringing us via skype. >> neil. neil: go ahead. >> thank you for having me. neil: thank you for saying thank you. and the president wants to make this a permanent one, patrick shanah shanahan, he visited the u.s. border and he has a plan for the 100,000 plus a month trying to

get here any way they can. thr in our hot tub? lobster: oh, you guys. there's a jet! oh...i needed this. no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on our car insurance with geico. we could have been doing this a long time ago. so, you guys staying at the hotel? yeah, we just got married. oh ho-ho! congratulations! thank you. yeah, i'm afraid of commitment... and being boiled alive. oh, shoot. believe it. geico could save you 15% or more on car insurance. that guy's the worst.

>> it seems that you've got a crisis at the border, an emergency at the border. the president, a lot of people were criticized for stating that. it sounds like you unequivocally agree with that. >> i do unequivocally agree and it's only getting worse. and not only are we seeing riots in the family groups that are coming across and unaccompanied children. we're up 23% this year with single adults crossing the border, too. so we must maintain the ability to have a consequence to that group or those numbers will skyrocket. neil: second month in a row, more than 100,000 now trying to break into this country. and provost urging action as the number of migrants continues to surge. patrick shanahan is on the way

to the border as we speak. tom, the numbers to your point, are so staggering it almost begs what will congress do working with the president and it's still bowl -- both sides fighting tooth and nail and it's likely we could have a third month of 100,000. >> it's going to get worse. the two biggest groups are family units and children. and the family units are going to keep coming because congress doesn't fix the loopholes, if you bring a child with you, we can't detain you and 90% will lose their case and no one is making them go home. and then you have the children and back when they signed the fy bill, and the democrats added language ice can no longer take action on sponsors or parents of unaccompanied children. so, they basically opened the flood gates and say, now hard criminal organization, smuggle your child to the united states and you won't be held account.

i said it would surge and it's surged. neil: the president won a legal victory of sorts when a judge supported his stance to deal with those who are trying to get in this country to wait out adjudication in mexico, not the united states, and with the rest of, you know, fleeing. how do you feel about that? will that ease things for border patrol officials or complicate them? >> it's going to ease a little because the numbers aren't big enough for those staying in mexico, not enough space and mexico is not acting quick enough and not opening up enough spots for that. it's going to help a little bit. look, the surge is going to continue and until we take action, and i've said many times, if congress is not going to fix this legislatively, then we need to do what we can operationally to control the border, which means we need to do a national operation and because the families have final orders. if those orders don't mean anything, there's no integrity in the system. let's go ahead and open the border up, there's no consequence. you can violate the laws and no

one is going to make you leave. we need to surge the judges to the border. forget about the 800,000 backlog. put the judges on the border. i call it last in first out. let them do the groups coming in right now to get a quick order removal and remove them. let them back off set there. neil: we're watching closely. with the breaking news, we appreciate it. i want to take you to venezuela right now, this is caracas, venezuela, there's been a call for a mass protest to demand the release of jailed opposition lawmakers, come close to juan guaido, the opposition leader the man we recognize and much of the civilized world recognizes as the constitutional lly elect president of that country. and nicolas maduro made a point of arresting a lot of people around guaido and these protests are just starting and building and they're going to last all day long, we're told all weekend

long to make it clear enough is enough. more after this. when your flight gets in late, it's never too early for coffee. oh no no no. your new boss seems cool, but she might not be sweatpants cool. who is that ready this early? it's only 7 am. somebody help me. close call. not quite ready to face the day? that's why we're here with free hot breakfast and a warm welcome. book at hampton.com for our price match guarantee. hampton by hilton.

>> all right. these are some unplanned protests going on right now in caracas, venezuela. we're keeping a close eye on it and they were not being planned just a few days ago. but starting a few days ago, the government of nicolas maduro has been arresting a lot of the chief opposition lieutenants around juan guaido, the man recognized at least by most of the civilized world, including our country, pretty much most of the countries on earth, to be dually elected president of that country. anyway, nicolas maduro has been rounding up a lot of those critics. some say guaido himself could be next. we're monitoring that. with us now to read into this and what it could mean for us as

a country, the chief deputy whip or democrats and house ways and means committee member, dan kildee, this is a big deal in washington. >> that's what my mom says. >> we wonder how you got into this building. seriously. very good to see you. >> good to see you. neil: in venezuela right now, it appears this is accelerating again, what do we have to do? >> i think we have to use every tool available, but we have to be cautious about any direct intervention. this is a moment that the principles of democracy ultimately have to win. it's really important that we support-- >> they haven't and the longer they haven't, the more it seems to em boldened the president. >> not long ago, a couple of weeks ago it looked like the democr democratic forces were going to prevail. whether it's in venezuela where everyone is watching or in sudan, sadly we have a similar situation where essential

elements of democratic rule haven't been in place for decades and the. we need to use the moral authority of the u.s. carefully and i think we have ton very cautious about any sort of intervention and that's not the only way-- >> especially nancy pelosi says solo intervention, be careful about that. let me get your take. earlier this week we seized two vessels down, for cuba presumably with venezuelan oil and the black market. and venezuela is trying to get around those movements. do you support the vessels-- >> we have to enforce sanctions. we have to be careful we don't insight something, essentially a ballistic enforcement, but we have to have the sanctions. neil: and you know, sir, washington it doesn't look like anything is going to happen, and the president upping the ante

with higher tariffs on more chinese goods. could take a while to kick in. >> i have some differences with the way the president has gone at this. i wished he would have assembled our allies on one side of the table and put china on the other and did it, sort of inverted that and sort of put the canadians and europeans where they look like they're our antagonists when really, we have one thing in common, we all know that china bends the rules and cheats and we need to take that on. neil: other presidents of both parties tried it and never seemed to work. >> it's hard. but where i think the president is right and i have an obligation to say it when i think he's right because i disagree on so many things. the president is known for hold firm for structural changes. i talked to mr. lighthizer about this a couple of days ago. neil: representative lighthizer. and did he faint? >> almost. i was cynical, i thought the

president was headed down the path to accept a transactional resolution of this chinese dispute. in order a big deal to announce a new sale of whether it's soy beans or other parts and some sort of a transactional approach that obviously would help the economy in the short-term, but does not deal with the fundamental problems that we see in the way that china interacts globally. intellectual property theft and i want to encourage the president hold the line. the tariffs i'm not sure are the right approach because again, we're often hitting the wrong targets, but hold firm on this fundamental question of insisting on reform in china. neil: that's what chuck schumer said and what nancy pelosi said. is that as much about the union, the union members who by and large support the president on this tough approach. >> it's union members, but for me it's also the growers, the farmers that i represent. this is as important to them, maybe more so because they're

often collateral damage. retaliatory tariffs, for example, hit them harder than other sectors of the economy. neil: let me switch gears to the mueller report, congressman, you know i'd ask about. >> right. neil: jerry nadler has the judiciary committee, says we're in the middle of a constitutional crisis, do you agree? >> well, i do think we have to pursue the facts. i think it's important. neil: but a constitutional crisis? >> i don't think we're there yet, but i think we all sort of have to dial down the american rhetoric. the american people, at least the people i remember, they're sort of two minds. ne want to make sure the rules apply to everyone, but they would prefer that we stop hyperventilating, focus on the facts, but spend most of our time working how do we get prescription drug prices down, how do we make sure the economy infrastructure-- >> do you support from the get-go an impeachment process here? >> no at this-- i don't take it off the table because the facts may reveal the need for that and some of what i

saw in the mueller report is really concerning, but i think we have to keep the horse ahead of the cart. neil: you're one of the fru prominent democrats so far not running for president of the united states, i don't know if you want to announce. >> no news to be made today. i am neat running, just to be clearing. neil: that's what happens. so many of the presidential candidates, they're in-- you can tell they're in a tough position here. they want investigations to ensue. they're a little concerned about jumping to the i-word, impeachment. do you think that risks the party's chance ins 2020 if they keep pounding on it. >> i think there are some issues that ought never to fall into the political category, impeachment has to be one of those. so if we are going down that path, the political implications have to be set aside. in other words, we shouldn't impeach for political reasons nor should we be unwilling to pursue whatever we need to do to hold this president accountable because we're afraid of the

implications. neil: step by step. dan kildee, chief department wh deputy whip and you wouldn't believe his shoes, (laughter) >> we have more from the vice-president of the united states at liberty. and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ whoooo. did you know the exact same hotel room... ...can have many different prices? that's why tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the lowest price on the hotel you want. your perfect hotel room for the perfect price!

>> welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto. what happens now? you know, the chinese delegation leaving washington yesterday, no deal. but what's rather interesting, and so far no response, no tit-for-tat on the part of the chinese to higher tariffs that we slapped on chinese goods. people are waiting for that and the possible that the president himself to up the ante including $325 million and the last of all chinese goods that make it to the country with 25% tariffs there. there's been no escalation of the conflict here so let's get a sense right now where all of this stands with edward lawrence. right now of the united states

trade representative's office. what he's hearing. >> neil, yes, what's next, waiting on the chinese. the chinas vowed counter pressu measures. the trade representative's office say they have taken the next step. the president also ordered us to begin the process of raising tariffs on remaining imports from china valued at approximately $325 billion. it's the trade representative who decides what's going under tariff. the feeling is that china has more to lose than the u.s. if the tariffs are in place now and more in the future could cause manufacturing to leave china, further eroding their economy. now, before he left, chinese vice premier, the negotiator told us that the chinese economy can be maintained and he said that the talks will continue. and today, the senior

administration official tells me that there are no scheduled talks up in the-- coming up in the future, but they say that the talks will continue with the chinese. the talks and u.s. say they'll continue talking, but the chinese say the talks have not broken down. the chinese are calling this a complication. the u.s. trade representative's office says it's china pulled back on concessions already agreed upon and led us to this point. the trade sources say that during a dinner on thursday night, the vice-premier told the delegation there's nothing more he can do and it's up to the two world leaders to work this ought. we're expecting a phone call between president xi and president trump and it's not happened, or scheduled. neil: can you explain to me why there might be a delay in the implementation of tariffs? how does that work?

>> implementation of the u.s. tariffs on chinese goods? >> right, there's a process they have to go through and that process is four weeks. there has to be public comments on it to try to give a basis for the tariffs to go into effect. and the u.s. trade representatives will short-term with a public filing. i did tell us that trade sources told the vice premier that the chinese have four weeks until the new round of tariffs, everything else china imports, that 300 billion under a 25% tariff. so four weeks is what we're hearing. neil: thank you, my friend and thank you for coming in on a saturday. edward lawrence, our reporter extraordinare on that. another reporter extraordinare outside of our fox studios. there's concern about impact on us? >> there absolutely is, neil. with the exkalation to 25% on the tariffs in place and brought

that volatility back to wall street and invests are nervous what potentially could be next. there is an impact right now on the retailers. they absorbed that first 10%, but the big retailers are bracing for this increase which they'll see, as you said, in the next three to four weeks. it's stores like home depot, lowe's and best buy and the goods everything everything from electronics, furniture, to christmas lights. and what's more concerning, of course, what happens next? where do we go from here? china said it will retaliate and the president has said he'll pass another 25% tariff on the rest of the 325 billion dollars of imported goods that haven't been affected yet. and that will trickle down and really hit the retailers. this is what the american apparel and footwear association ceo had to say about the risk. >> our members will start rushing out of china and many of them have already left and they go into another country and they have to bump somebody out. so, there goes your product

integrity right out the door and prices go up. you bake inflation right into the system and you know what happens? prices go up, sales go down, jobs get less, and what scares us the most. >> shares of the big retailers finished lower on wall street as invests are nervous about certainly what comes next and there was a little optimism going into the close on friday because the white house had said talks were constructive. still, the trade partnership says for the average family of four, they could see an impact in one year of a little bit under $800 as a result of this and that would sort of crimp their spending power and certainly have an impact on consumers, neil. neil: all right, thank you very very much. jackie deangelus following that. wall street-- walmart stock was up and as edward with a was saying, three to four week delay before they

presumably kick in. and how are you. neil: let me get the impact, there's only so much that walmart can absorb at a 25% hike. sort of play this out if it were to come to pass? >> sure, happy to do it. walmart is a little different, but the large retailers in general are in a position to absorb some of it, but not all of it. they'll end up having to pass some of it through. walmart, you know, two-thirds of what they sell in the u.s. is made or grown in the u.s. because they're heavily a grocer as well. if you sort of take the math and follow it all the way through, while there will be some increases, cost increases on products, certain products, specific products, about 150 basis points over the 300 billion that walmart sells would be the impact, if they passed it all through.

but walmart, like most of the rest of the big retailers, got a really big tax break with the changes in the corporate tax laws. retailers were disproportionately impacted positively by that. so, that's why they were able to absorb a lot of the first round. the question is how much will they pass through this second round? i think the next three to four weeks are very, very critical. there's still time to negotiate and the pipeline of products that are on the way over here won't see those increases just yet. but it's going to be interesting. neil: yeah, to put it mildly. i was interested to find out how much is affected here, it would include seafood, handbags, cosmetics, shampoo, deodorant, that one scared me because all of a sudden the nation stops using deodorant. i don't want to fathom it. and this is now extended it over 6,000 items if it comes to pass. obviously, that's a big impact, walmart or no, right? >> no, it's a big impact and i think, as i said, the next several weeks are critical. because the longer these things

last, the more decisions will be made and your last guest talked about how many of the apparel and food wear retailers have left china and will rush out of china. as they take old and there appears to be some permanency or at least mid term permanency to the trafariffs, production and manufacturing decisions will be made and lead china and hopefully developed in the u.s. and i think we'll see that, that trend continue because it's been accelerating the last several years, but once those decisions are made, they're generational changes and that's why i think the president is so focused on getting this deal done because it will affect the next, you know, 15 to 20 years of manufacturing. neil: now, he likes to say the tariffs, likes the tariffs, talks about the 100 billion revenue we get potential from the tariff. that might be well and good. it's not made our deficits

smaller, they seem to be getting bigger. i don't know where that money is going, but the justification for tariffs, i know where he's coming from, china is doing it to us, we're now returning the favor and returning the salvo to them. do you worry about the message he's sending on tariffs, china paying them and not essentially us? >> yeah, you know, i'm like you. i don't think that he really means what he says or maybe he doesn't understand exactly what it is that's happening. nearly the consumer or the companies and passing through to consumers will pay the impact of the tariffs, in the long run, china will pay and i think maybe that's what the president is talking about with the loss of manufacturing and the shift of production to a different venue. the real challenge here, and i in a way empathize, they're negotiating to negotiating. the president is used to negotiations in private in a

back room where you can hammer out a deal and anybody who's been in a deal knows that there's ebbs and flows and you're really high one minute and really low the next minute. the problem with this is it's being played out on the global, you know, stage and media, and by the way, tweeting, which is a little bit crazy on top of it. if it were private we wouldn't know where we were going. i'm still very, very confident there will be a deal done. both sides really need a deal. china a little more than the u.s. we need one, too, politically and for the economic, continued economic growth that we'd like to see. neil: wait until you hear what he's going to tweet about you after that comment there. we'll see, bill simon. >> no doubt. neil: i'm kidding, i'm kidding. the former walmart ceo. you notice we had kildee the democratic whip in the house and the latest democrat who says support the president with

hardline approach. and chuck schumer the same, hang tough. nancy pelosi, the democratic ones who have been saying pretty much to a man or a woman, you know, we support the president standing up for the american people. why is that? karl rove after this. this is loma linda. a place with one of the highest life expectancies in the country. and you see so many people walking around here in their 100s. so how do you stay financially well for all those extra years? well, you have to start planning as early as possible. we all need to plan for 18 years or more of retirement. i don't have a whole lot saved up. but i'm working on it now. plan now for retirement income that lasts. that's financial wellness. talk to a financial advisor or get income solutions at prudential.

>> all right, well, a lot of the top democrats might be interested in a lot of hearings having to do with the mueller report. but when it comes to the president's stance on trading position with china, by and large, top leaders in that party seem to be supporting the president as we've been saying here. we had just had dan kildee, the democratic whip he supports the president's get tough strategy with the chinese and that was an opinion shared by nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. what does it all mean? let's go to the former chief of staff karl rove, it's curious to a man or woman at least they seem to be saying when it comes

to the president's get tough, get in your face of china he's doing the right stuff. what do you make of that? >> look, right now, he's advantaged in that because no democrat wants, maybe with the existential of joe biden, no democratic presidential candidate wants to be seen as soft on china so the president is hitting them hard, at times he talks about, they ought to buy more from us than they're buying today. that gets some residents, particularly among blue collar democrats. when he talks about they're stealing our intellectual property, that gets some resonance among silicon valley democrats and among national security democrats. so right now, this is helping him sort of dominate the trade issue because there's going to be no democrat, prominent democrat on the presidential said who's going to break with him coming out as a free trader. neil: and i wonder, you mentioned the former vice-president. he went so far as to say that the chinese aren't competition for us. he might have to eat those words, right? >> yeah, i wonder what he meant

by that. there are two explanations. the one that we all took said that he doesn't think they're a threat to the united states economically or politically. that might have been what he meant, he could have met we're going to eat their lunch and they're not competition if we turn on the gas and competition for us. and it may have been the first, he may take an out and say we can beat the chinese if we do the right things and here are the right things to do. he sometimes says inartful things. neil: i wonder if it was a strategy to say look, i was eight years in the obama administration, for good or ill, we weren't able to address this china threat. i'm curious stepping back from it, where you see that democratic field sort of stacking up right now. it seems from the latest polls and you often remind me, karl, they're fleeting, but right now seem to be prohibitively favoring the vice-president.

where do you think things stand? >> well, before he got into the race i wrote a column for the wall street journal. because you remember before the race he was being dissed by everybody. neil: right. >> so i wrote a piece saying he's an undervalued stock, he actually has some strength and frankly since he's gotten into the race he's by and large beaten my expectations where he would be. he's popular, well-known, strengths among african-americans critical in the south carolina and nevada primaries, got a lot of strengths and they're not fleeting. what has surprised me is how strongest' actually been. i expected him to move up, but not this much universally and expect bernie sanders to drop as much as he has. i sure as heck did not expect him, i should have thought about it, tapping the barack obama-joe biden campaign fund raising list from 2012 and raising 6.3 million in the first 24 hours. that list is old.

and in internet times, a list that was productive in 2012 during the reelection for obama and biden being valuable in 2019, seven years later, that's like several geological ages ago when they last used that list, but apparently it's still alive and active for joe biden. so he's in a strong position, but, look, we've got a long way to go and remember, if the fall of 2007, hillary clinton was 30-some odd points ahead of barack obama, who went and made a speech in iowa at the jefferson jackson dinner and he beat her at iowa and that's where he caught fire. same thing might happen here, joe biden is in a strong position today, but it is very, very early. neil: all right, were you surprised not so much what the democratic house has been doing, to subpoena witnesses and the rest, but out of the blue the senate intelligence committee demanding donald trump, jr.

testify? it might be just to clear up some discrepancies, we don't know the back story on this, but we do know enough that this was a republican committee that did so. it seemed to infuriate the president. where do you see this going? >> the intel committee has been run on a bipartisan basis, my gut tells me just to get discrepancies up. but it did come as a lightning bolt out of the blue and the timing was a little unfortunate. if they were going to do it they had to do it at some point. what's interesting is how much the democrats in the house are pushing an unnecessary constitutional battle. i don't know if i call it a crisis yet. but, i mean, we had congressman ruskin on the house judiciary committee who is a constitutional law professor, let's go back and do what they do in 1835 and maybe jail some of these cabinet members who don't -- who don't respond to

us. we'll send the capitol hill police down to the treasury secretary's office and arrest him and drag him up and put him in a cell in the capitol. the cell is no longer there. we had this new idea that's popped up that what they're going to do, they're going to start fining cabinet members who refuse to show up. now, where the authorities comes to do that, i don't know. that's going to end up in a court someplace, in the supreme court or the lower courts are going to slap that puppy down pretty darn quick. this is ow extreme they've gotten. if they believe that the president committed obstruction or as adam schiff says he has an endless supply of evidence that the president clueded with the russians, go ahead and do the impeachment and go forward. the rest makes it look stupid and the our country look bad. please, we're going to send the capitol police down and arrest the treasury secretary, and put him in a cell in the basement of the capitol? what are these people thinking?

>> you're pursue perplexed by that. thank you. >> thanks for having me into in ca caracas, venezuela, nicolas maduro started arresting opposition leaders including the closest confidantes of juan guaido, the opposition leader, the dually recognized constitutional president of that country, only he's not the president of that country and these protesters are saying, no, no, no, that's not going to fly so they're out there in the street where nicolas maduro told them you're not going to protest. they are, after this. are proy gonna double. but dad, you've got allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. are you in good hands?

. >> jerry nadler has the judiciary committee says we're in the middle of a constitutional crisis, do you agree? >> well, i think we have to pursue the facts. neil: a constitutional crisis? >> i don't think we're there yet, but i think that all sort of dial down the rhetoric. neil: all right, that's in direct opposition to jerry nadler on the house judiciary chief who says we're in a constitutional crisis. that's dan kildee, the deputy whip powerful position, third in the leadership in the house and his view is let's take a chill pill not quite a constitutional crisis. the panel is back and scott levinson and last but not least, the republican strategist extraordinare. scott had to go on that view that, the deputy whip had not a constitutional crisis? >> i love the debate. i think this is a great debate for the democratic party for us

to be day in, day out, arguing is it a crisis? is it not a crisis. it's exactly-- >> apparently not everyone is on the same page. >> that's a good thing to continue the debate whether we're in a constitutional crisis. neil: how is that constructive? >> it's not constructive for running a country and not constructive for governing, but we're setting a predicate for the beginning of 2020 and this is it a crisis or isn't it a crisis continues with republican-run committees, subpoenaing the president's family, and infrastructure, student loans, and health care reform. neil: but they're not-- >> it's an obligation for the democrats-- >> i'm not a lawyer, i'm not a lawyer, but, john, the one thing that comes up, and we could argue over semantics here, it's usually a crisis if you ignore a

judge's order or a top order or supreme court order and wean richard nixon, turn over the tapes, turn over the tapes. having said that, do democrats risk going too far on this? >> if we're going to talk about 2020? not necessarily. we're looking at trump's numbers, the whole mueller probe, the mueller investigation hasn't really hurt him one way or another. his approval rating has remained steady since mueller delivered to barr and the summary and redacted were released and voters asked the top issues for 2020. not a single one named russia. so democrats are in a position to pursue the, as nadler's called it, the road map, the 11 instances of possible-- and over the top for it to be a constitutional crisis. neil: what about you? >> this issue is not going to help them in 2020. bernie sanders, who i do not

agree with at all made a great point on a town hall fox did, saying let's not focus on the mueller report. let's focus on health care, on the issues that matter. bringing people to the polls on the d-side is not going to be the mueller report and the anger or the feeling like they, you know, got a bum-- >> and how do you feel that republicans might have said at that by going after donald trump, jr. to testify to the committee for maybe perfectly valid issues. did they muddy their own message? >> not really. i think it could have been handled a little better. i think that overall a lot of the republican supporters that i know were a little taken back that he's been, you know, subpoenaed, even though what we said earlier on the panel that he was asked to do so willingly. i mean, could many on, this is just, enough is enough. i understand like we said, you know, with--

>> and scott wanting the tax returns. >> i do want the tax returns. i think we agree this won't be the decisive issues in 2020. it will go back to the health care infrastructure. neil: and that democrats could chew gum at the same time? >> there's no doubt whether he's cost in numbers, it's suppressed his numbers. and with that as a constant, the democrats are going to have a real predicate and argument why they should change parties in 2020. >> i think this is why we're seeing candidates move away from talking about russia and trump so much. i think she's right. bernie was shrewd to say if democrats only focus on attacking trump we're going to lose. neil: and isn't it the economy stupid? and i argue that bill clinton survived impeachment because of markets were doing so well. i'm not saying it's the mirror image with donald trump, but it didn't help richard nixon that we were in the middle of an inflationary spiral and a

recession sn didn't help his chance of dodging impeachment. this president has the economic wind at list back for now. >> nobody really wants to rock the boat. if you have a good economy going and consumer spending is through the roof and you feel like, you know, you've got a job and you feel secure, a lot of people, you know, like trump and-- >> why isn't he doing better? >> it's his personaliti persona nothing to do with the economy. >> he's been a historically unpopular president. >> such a dominating personality and the media-- >> women donors, and we have trouble in the g.o.p. to try and outreach and get more women. into um one with women-- >> can he win with just his base? >> yes, i think he can because his base expanded to some of the democrat's base and meaning the working man and-- >> i don't think that the base-- >> in pennsylvania, pennsylvania. neil: and in 2016 he could do it

in 2020? >> he's enormously popular among republicans overall and his base remained strong. his approval rating is not far off from clinton and barack obama. and they need to take it seriously. >> we should fear the reelection of donald trump. neil: and not get too distracted on other stuff. the final word, guys, i want to thank you all very, very much. and then there's that trade tiff we have going on with china right now. a farmer in the middle of it all begs to differ that the impact is minimal and for him, it's substantial and he is hog-tied to talk.

whoooo. did you know the exact same hotel room... ...can have many different prices? that's why tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites to find the lowest price on the hotel you want. your perfect hotel room for the perfect price!

>> i hear that guy is a real prima donna, i don't know. welcome back, i'm neil cavuto. of course the trade war is on. we haven't heard the chinese response to it or whether the u.s. ups the ante. and making tariffs up to 25%. we sit and wait. my next guest says he doesn't have time to sit and wait because the impacts of tariffs have been reaching him for a year now. the vice-president of the illinois farm, brian duncan glad

to have you back. >> welcome to the farm again and great to visit with you. neil: the hard work you do. forget forget farmers have been taking it on the chin and chinese have got buying your stuff. it's a worry. what happens now? >> oh, i think that's anybody's guess. like we're living in a question mark right now, aren't we? the trade talks definitely did not end, as agriculture would have-- had hoped they would end on friday, we were hoping for a win and a commodity purchase that would give us a lift, all of us in agriculture. instead, here we sit much as we had a year ago when you and i visit abouted this, not knowing what the next thing will be and concerned about what the economic future is. neil: you know, the president helped out you guys saying the money we're getting from the tariffs why not, i'm quoting

here, buy agriculture products from our great farmers in large amounts. larger apartments than china ever did. what do you think of that idea? >> well, i think farmers will be welcomed to any discussion right now of help. okay. so that's-- let's put that off to the side. that being said, i need to know how that tweet turns into policy, how that -- what that looks like and then i wonder, is that really a long-term solution here, neil? farmers have worked very hard for years to generate markets and to sell our products overseas, and what we see now happening is there are other countries that will displace american farmer's goods in other countries's shelf space, if you will, and the government buying our products doesn't do anything to address that from a long-term perspective. neil: so the kind of stuff that i think the administration was doing last year with the credits and the initiatives on the part

of the agriculture department to help you out was like a drop in the bucket? some said it didn't stay close to making up for the losses, is that true? >> it didn't make us whole. i think it helped. we have bills to pay, neil and we can't just shut our factories down. we grow a biological product whether it's plants or animals and the factories are open, and we're moving product. and we're price takers with bills to pay. so those aid payments, though farmers would rather get their money from the marketplace, were necessary and helped to bridge a timeline that we thought we were coming to the end of, with china, and now it seems to have been extended. neil: now, farmers by and large have been a very rock solid group for the president. are they still? i don't want to get into the murky world of politics with you in particular, but has that sentiment changed in any way,

that you could see? >> yeah, what i can see is, yeah, there's great concern out here now. a year ago, yes, i think that assessment of the rock solid standing behind the president would have been true because we do understand there are trade issues that need to be addressed. but we also receive many promises from this president that trade wars are easy to win. that will be quick. agriculture will be huge british beneficiaries of this. quite frankly, farmers are out of economic and emotional patience, that i've been hearing from. we're hoping for a win this week that we didn't get. neil: does it fall on deaf ears then when the president, brian, says, look it's now or later, eventually, you know, china is hosing you guys and they're going to take advantage of you guys, i'm stopping that. there might be pain upfront, but

you'll be happy i did this down the road. you say? >> i think we've got an analyze, how are you putting a stop to it. in the background, neil is pretty complicated farm machinery and it breaks down from time to time and when it needs to be fixed, we try to find the root of the problem and fix it. it may feel good to beat on it with a hammer, but that doesn't solve the problem. and i think what the president did was beating on an expensive piece of equipment with a hammer. a thoughtful multilateral approach that does involve diplomacy would have been more fruitful and i think that pathway is still open, quite frankly, for the president and i think that the mca, get that done and drop the tariffs on mexico and canada.

get bilateral with japan and turn to europe and the wto and renegotiate our agreement. and turn to china, here is the ball game, the rules, are you going to play ball or be left behind. without that kind of approach, neil, i'm afraid the rest of the world is moving ahead and we run the risk of being left behind and it will be generational consequences. neil: you know, brian, you should go to washington. you made more sense in a few minute interview. i know you don't necessarily enjoy that prospect. great stuff, brian. please hang in there. >> thank you very much, neil. you're welcome on my farm anytime, my friend. neil: do i come in a suit or-- we'll talk about that later. brian, always good seeing you. >> all right. neil: thank you, very, very much. brian duncan. in the meantime, we do know that the house judiciary committee demanded bob mueller testify before them. we do know as well that bob mueller sent his regrets. he's not for now.

the read from a key republican member on that committee after this. okay, paint a picture for me. uh, well, this will be the kitchen. and we'd like to put a fire pit out there, and a dock with a boat, maybe. why haven't you started building? well, tyler's off to college... and mom's getting older... and eventually we would like to retire. yeah, it's a lot. but td ameritrade can help you build a plan for today and tomorrow. great. can you help us pour the foundation too? i think you want a house near the lake, not in it. come with a goal. leave with a plan. td ameritrade. ♪

need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel sites - even our competitors - so you can be confident you're getting the right flight

at the best price. kayak. search one and done. >> all right. well, we already know that the house judiciary committee has been working really, really hard to get bob mueller to testify about of their committee. that's not happening anytime soon, apparently, they could not agree on acceptable terms, so, they're sort of sit and wait on this, and they helped the judiciary committee andy biggs right now. thank you for taking the time, coming in on saturday, much appreciated. >> thanks, neil. >> all right, i guess that wasn't worthy of a fox news alert that mueller wouldn't appear. the other issue as a private citizen, could he? >> yeah, well, he could. and i think mr. barr has says he can. and so, mr. mueller can come in, i think, voluntarily or by, via subpoena, but that hasn't happened and i'm not surprised

it's not going to happen. neil: if you had a chance to talk to bob mueller, if it ever were to come to pass and given his report and the back and forth, what it said, what it didn't said, what it implied, what it didn't imply. what would you want to know? >> there's a plethora of things to ask mr. mueller. i think we want to get back to the krug of his team, how the russia and mueller investigations both were started, how we got there. pet pet peter strzok's role and compare with the fisa, and why he left a lot of that everythings in out on the-- out on the origins of this. and the documents he saw and why he included a whole almost 200 pages on obstruction of justice when that wasn't his mission and he decided that he couldn't indict and that seems a little bit out of the ordinary as well. neil: you know, the backup board

goes to the president's tax returns, and hands on them i guess from the last six years, multiple committees in the house are pursuing the same thing. would they add any value to you? >> not really. i'm baffled that they're so focused and on that and they just, i view it consistently as a desire to delegitimize the president, throw mud on him any way they can. so, i mean, you've got the new york times publishing, 30-year-old tax returns, good grief. it doesn't make sense to me. that's where we've come to in congress today. neil: one of the revelations of the tax returns that were released was that, you know, donald trump is a business man, might not. again, no way to qualify this, but might not have been the business sensation, the genius that he marketed himself to be. does that even matter to you at this stage or what? >> two things about that. first of all, a profit and loss statement might look completely

different than a tax return. i mean, tax returns are based on strategies to minimize your tax payment and the convolutions within the tax code as it is. but the second thing is, what does it have to do with a roaring economy today? i mean, at what he's doing as president today. it really doesn't. he's done a good job as president, we have a great economy. it's been, probably the best that i can remember since the '80s. and i just think that there's-- that it's a distraction and people don't want to talk about that. neil: do you want to talk about the senate intelligence committee wanting to hear from donald trump, jr.? how do you feel about that? >> i think that was one of the most absurd things. talk about a circular firing squad. this thing should be over and the democrats are trying to pour more gas, trying to get this, the charcoal lit. neil: that's coming from a republican chairman. >> yeah, i know. i'm trying to figure out why he decided let's pour more lighter fluid on it. don, jr. had a deal, he testified for more than 25

hours. the deal was that he come in once and testify. he said-- >> apparently there might have been some inconsistency, right? >> we don't know that, who knows why they're doing it, but it doesn't make sense to me. neil: if you were donald trump, jr.? you wouldn't go? >> yeah, i would say why, yeah. all right, congressman i hope you and your family enjoy mother's day, treat her out do something big. >> thanks, will do, neil. neil: thank you, sir. speaking of which, tomorrow is mother's day. do you know that we spend a lot more on moms than dads? i'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but what the heck is up with that? after this. let's be honest. safe drivers shouldnt have to pay as much for insurance... as not safe drivers! that's why esurance has drivesense.® the safer you drive, the more you save. although i'm not really driving right now that would be unsafe. when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless.

who used expedia to book the hotel that led to the ride ♪ which took them to the place where they discovered that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. ♪ flights, hotels, cars, activities. expedia. everything you need to go.

flights, hotels, carsthe latestes. inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome.

>> i expect the same graphic on father's day, by the way. but we spend a lot on moms and so we should. but disproportion that wially o than dads. we know it's a record amount for moms and probably should be although dads get the short end of the stick, but we're not craving attention. we've got alyssa, and the mom for the second tom time, lauren simonietty. those numbers are accurate and moms get more. >> about 10 billion more, we do. and i have a podcast on all of that we're momming today, shameless plug. moms traditionally have done more. if you layout a picture of a track and you have mom running and the dad running on the track. the dad's field of success is wide open. for the mom, there's her job,

load of laundry, the kids activity and i think that dad realizes that and spends more on mother's day. however, it is changing and changing fast. dads are doing a lot of work these days so i bet you father's day numbers are coming into higher. neil: and why it's lopsided for moms. he can't win is his answer. the technical reason is because jewelry is a higher priced item than say like a dvd or something you would get for a man, but also as a father, i don't really need that much. i've got a family that's all i need. >> aw. >> and-- >> have you ever got your mother's day gift? >> he's stressing out about it. >> some people leave is until the last minute. neil: we'll get back to you in the commercial break. no, melissa, what happens? why is that the case and it doesn't bother you on any level. >> first of all, i'm not a mother, but god bless the mothers.

but when it's father's day my dad comes to new york and spends the day with me. dads like activities and like to do stuff. mothers like the gifts, spa day and jewelry and-- >> moms are needier are what you're saying? >> no, (laughter) . >> i'm not, dads like to be active. if spend the day or week with your father then that's like a present to him. neil: there you go. >> you spend it on activities than actual gifts. neil: the background for this it's a great economy and numbers are going up. and this environment you don't have to be a mom or dad. >> i want peace and quiet, as you're saying, that's free. you don't have to spend money on me on mother's day. neil: and you have an infant. >> a three and a half-year-old daughter and one-year-old son. neil: wow. >> yes. neil: so i can understand appreciating-- >> mom's popular right now. i'm trying to absorb that because my kids want to be with me all the time. as they get older, are' not cool

anymore, mom and dad. neil: that ceased years ago for me. >> i'm constantly on. >> do you have your mother's day gift for your wife. neil: sure, who doesn't? that's tomorrow, right? you don't have to be a mom or dad to appreciate the fact that maybe we use this day to appreciate important important in our lives, but it does help that you have a nice economy going because that's sort of like a bipartisan sort of nod to, i can do stuff here. >> lock, neil, you look at the employment situation now. 1.3 million more jobs available than people looking for work and what's been interesting the last two years is the bottom 10% of wage earners, earnings are up 5%, three times the top percent. and the last two or three years, everyone are starting to benefit from this. neil: moms and dads alike and the kids. >> hope it keeps going. neil: all right, your wife is on line one and every mom have

wonderful day tomorrow. you certainly deserve that and you put up with us. and guys, even though your wife is not your mother you're obligated, just so you know, to get her something. i learned that apparently years ago. that will do it. here comes fox. life expectancies in the country. and you see so many people walking around here in their 100s. so how do you stay financially well for all those extra years? well, you have to start planning as early as possible. we all need to plan for 18 years or more of retirement. i don't have a whole lot saved up. but i'm working on it now. plan now for retirement income that lasts. that's financial wellness. talk to a financial advisor or get income solutions at prudential.

>> no deal with the chinese. president trump ordering new tariffs on 200 billion dollars worth of chinese exports. more potentially on the way. so on this saturday, get ready to pay more for everything from baseball mitts to bed sheets if they come from china. good news on this saturday, i'm leland vittert, nice to be with you. >> i'm molly line, and the tariffs, the president says, will bring far more wealth to our country, but now there are new signals that there's still a deal to potentially be made. our david spunt has the