[inaudible conversations] >> who do you think won? rachel: i definitely think pete won. he's a better shot. thank you, chip. [laughter] [laughter] in all right. here you go. pete -- [applause] ♪ >> we need one more indictment to close out this election, one more indictment, and this election is closed out. nobody has even a chance. neil: from don bring it on, but something the former president also said is setting some prosecutors off, specifically boasting on truth social you come after me, i'll come after you. and now the special counsel's office is coming after him, saying trump isn't only

threatening, he's potentially witness tampering. then there's hunter biden and the transcript from his his ex-business partner that is, shall we say, revaling. devon archer claimed it was all about selling the biden brand. but which biden? the latest on how joe biden is doing his own rebranding. then a mob seen in manhattan -- mob scene in manhattan when a social media star promised some free stuff, now he's been charged with inciting a riot and for downtown new york commuters, a travel nightmare: welcome, everybody. glad to have you, i'm neil cavuto. by the way, did to you know that that new york city bedlam actually started with the promise of free ps5 gaming consoles? i mean, i could see if they were giving away boxes of cannolis or napoleons, but a game? anyway, more of that in a bit. but first to the serious fallout from all of these presidential legal battles, and alexandria

hoff in washington where they're very much not playing games. alexandria, to you. >> reporter: yeah, neil, serious stuff. justice department special counsel jack smith is now seeking to limit what former president trump can share about the election fraud case against him. in an appeal for a protective order requested last night, smith expressed that witnesses, the case itself could be compromised if trump continues to post able -- about it. reading here from the request, quote, such a restriction is particularly important in this case because the defendant has previously issued public statements on social media regarding witnesses, judge, attorneys and others associated with legal matters pending against him. so smith used this truth social post here by trump as an example where he wrote with, quote, if you go after me, i'm coming after you. and just one day after pleading not guilty to charges stemming from his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, the former president delivered e marks at a dinner hosted by the alabama gop, and he clammed -- slammed

what he sees as unfair legal treatment. >> biden and his protectors know he cannot win this race any other way, so now they're trying something that hasn't been tried in country, election interference. >> reporter: the house republicans are questioning the timing of all of this. they feel that a more concrete connection between the president and his son's overseas business dealings was made through hunter bidenen's business associate deafen or archer's testimony on -- devon archer's testimony on monday. >> it seems to me after you learn of the real dealings behind the bidens, the next day he gets indicted. >> reporter: democrats have largely ignored or at least tried to ignore these accusations by the gop. former house speaker nancy pelosi called any talk over starting perhaps impeachment proceedings against president biden a frivolous diversionary tactic, neil. neil: all right. alexandria, thank you for that. i want to go right now to john yu, berkeley law professor,

former justice thomas' law clerk. he has the gravitas, so i'm glad he's joined us on a saturday. you know, john, jack smith is essentially saying, all right, you went a step too far, mr. president. , talking about this and all but threatening people on your truth social site. so is he now cracking down or could he crack down on the president's social media posts? >> hi, neil, good to be with you. by the way, as a philly boy, i've seen fights break out over boxes of cannoli, you don't need social media. [laughter] neil: tell me about it. >> this protective order and the request and the way it's been phrased, it shows you how unusual and unique this case is, how it brings together conflicts between the politics of the election and the politics of president trump exercising his free speech rights and what would happen in normal legal trials, normal prosecution. but this is not a normal prosecution because this is the

most important prosecution in our history. this is the prosecution of a president for trying to stop the peaceful transfer of power. the reason why it causes the conflict is that president trump normally with his free speech rights would be able to say anything he wants to about something in the political world, mig about somebody attacking him. -- anything about somebody attacking him. he could punch back as we have seen him do so many times on social media and at speeches like the clip you showed. but what's normal for a criminal trial is that you don't get to say what you learn in discovery. there's a lot of secret grand jury material that's handed over to the defense. eventually, you do get to make it public because you can present it at the trial itself. you want -- if donald trump wants to attack those witnesses against him, he'll get his chance but in court. usually in a criminal case you don't get to just disclose everything you fine out from the prosecution right up front. so that tension, this is just the beginning. it's just the beginning of

repeated examples where law and politics are going to come into conflict in this case. neil: but i think what some prosecutors across the board have been saying about the tone of the president's missive whether it was a real threat or not and, of course, that's always in the eye of the beholder, is that it could have a harmful chilling effect on potential witnesses, maybe even those here. what do you think of that? >> one thing is i think the prosecutors are also showing that they themselves have an eye to politics because i think as everyone would say, this kind of protective order is normal for a criminal trial. and it's not strange that the prosecution would ask the judge to just remind the defense, keep everything quiet, keep everything scent, it's confidential. i'm actually surprised the prosecution reacted so quickly to something donald trump said about them on social media. it is the true that, yes, a

defense could go too far by revealing what it knows, it could intimidate witnesses, it could release embarrassing information about them a which is not relevant for trial but they've said to the grand jury secretly. here's the interesting thing, usually if they did do that, if the defendant did do that, they could get sanctioned by the judge. you could easily see donald trump saying, what are you going to do, fine me? i don't care. what are you going to do, put me in jail? that's exactly what i want for my campaign. he might violate all the terms of the protective orders even if the judge grants them. neil: so let me ask you, john, there are a lot of people who kind of looked at these four latest charges in this latest indictment on what led up to january 6th and what role the former president might have had, that they were speech specious, they didn't even tie him directly to january 6th. they hearkened back to statutes and laws that were on the books

going back more than a century involving the ku klux klan that he was reaching. that got a counternarrative going, john, that, well, he must be having something else that he's ready to debut in a trial or what have you. what do you make of that? >> as you and i discussed when we watched the arraignment a few days ago, this is such a momentous part of history. this is, i think, the most serious criminal trial ever brought in the history of our country, accusing a former president of trying to stop the peaceful transfer of power. you and me, all of us want the case to be water tight, want the charges to be clear, want them to be based ontive readings of the law -- ontive readings of the law with clear facts. unfortunately, i'm disappointed. i think the critics are right that the indictment is actually based on stretches, real stretches of the facts, actually claims -- fraud that's used against government contractors, a statute used for obstruction

of congress usually used for tampering with witnesses and evidence in congressional investigations, a ku klux klan act from the reconstruction era that's never been used in situations like this. his case based on unprecedent, first of their kind stretches of the law. neil: yeah. >> the other thing that's interesting are the facts. we don't have the facts linking trump to the rioters, so we don't see charges for sedition, we don't see charges for insurrection. i would want all of this to be a lot stronger if the government was going to take in this first step ever in history in such a major criminal trial as charging a former president. neil: you know, i was thinking no charge of sedition or anything like that, nothing to upend the country, that's where a lot of them democrats with whom i've talked had hoped to bring in the 14th amendment, that the president violated that and, as such, can't serve asth president of the united states if that's the case. that doesn't seem to have

legally come up here unless he's trying, that is, to push it in there. i'm not sure. >> no, that's right, neil. disqualification from running for president has to come as a result of conviction for a crime that lists that as a possible sentence. these three crimes which are, again, stretches which are not used for political cases. in fact, that's one worry you have, that this is going to criminalize legitimate will political activity no matter how outrageous, money of those crimes has disqualification from future office as part of a possible sentence. so even if smith wins and convicts trump, this is one of the crazy things that could happen, smith could win, trump could be in jail if the trial was the fastest ever in history. i don't think this would actually happen fast enough, he could be in jail, he could still win the presidency. the constitution because not -- does not prohibit the president from being someone who's

actually in jail. the crimes that do allow for disqualification, insurrection and sedition, are not charged here. the ones the democrats have been talking about ever since january 2020 are not present, so you can't, as you say, neil, you're right, smith cannot actually get trump disqualified from becoming president again even if he wins these days -- cases. neil: why would -- wild stuff. thank you, john yoo, he was very helpful when we were following this earlier this week, not so helpful on whether the president would stop at a restaurant and treat people as he did in florida, but he's foxed on the law stuff -- focused on the law stuff. karl rove, former white house deputy chief of staff, best selling author. karl, you know, john ended with, i think, a significant insight here. if the goal all along was to sort of kneecap republicans and hurt donald trump, well, they've escalated his values in the

polls. that could be short-lived, and maybe that was the intent because he's the nominee they prefer, and you've heard that he can't win a general election. lo and behold, this past week some polls come out that show, yes, he can. i just wonder your thoughts on this and when those going after him could be going too far. what do you think? >> well, we don't know. you're right, each of the previous indictments has helped the former president many in his poll standings, and the question is, does this latest one help him. we won't know for a few weeks. but the question is what is the cumulative the impact. this was a revealing number that "politico" dug up for us. they looked at the donations to the trump campaign following his april 4th pleading guilty on the hush money case in manhattan, the sort of dubious case that everybody's been talking about. he got $ -- 80,000 donors on that day in the next 24 hours

and raised $4 million. on the other hand, on june 13th when he pled not guilty in the classify documents case, more serious and credible indictment, he had 35,000 people who contributed $1.3 million. so it'll be with interesting to see what happens. these were both, incidentally, on tuesdays. he pled not guilty on thursday of this week, but it'll be interesting to see what the impact was on how much money he raised in those, on thursday into friday compared to the other two days. the other change's interesting to me is what -- thing that's interesting to me is what does he look like in the early states. look, people in iowa and new hampshire and maybe to a lesser extent nevada and south carolina, they're paying attention to this because they realize, particularly in iowa and new hampshire, they have a big responsibility to start the process. so i'm going to be looking at this over the next couple of weeks. in iowa today 58% of the republicans say they're either

undecided or for somebody other than trump. so they're at 58% not trump. 56% in new hampshire say i'm not trump, somebody else or undecided. and south carolina, 57 percent. so i'm going to be watching this in the weeks ahead to see if there's any growth in that percentage that say i'm not trump. that might indicate at least in the place where they're paying a lot of attention to this, that it's starting to have a deleterious effect. neil: we'll watch closely. karl rove, thank you very much, my friend. thanks for coming in on a saturday. in the meantime, we are also paying attention to the border because it's become a topical issue not only becau visiting there, but what they are seeing and discovering there including drug cartels. we always knew they were playing a big role in getting migrants here. now they're in the broad light of day, guns loaded, to show the world, and they don't care whether you see them or not. ( ♪ )

can't stop adding stuff to your cart? get the bank of america customized cash rewards card, choose the online shopping category and earn 3% cash back. (bobby) my store and my design business? we're exploding. but my old internet, was not letting me run the show. so, we switched to verizon business internet. they have business grade internet, nationwide. (vo) make the switch. it's your business. it's your verizon.

i need it cool at night. you trying to ice me out of the bed? baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! save up to $500 on the new sleep number® smart bed. plus, free home delivery when you add an adjustable base. shop now only at sleep number®. it's true, though - you won't overpay for glasses if you shop at america's best. they offer two pairs and a free, quality eye exam starting at just $79.95. the exam alone is worth at least 59 bucks. i can see from your expression that you find that shocking. and you're actually speechless. ...aaaaaaaaand, you don't have ears. two pairs and a free exam for just $79.95. book an exam today at americasbest.com. it's true, though - you won't overpay for glasses if you shop at america's best.

neil: at first i thought these were system of those ufo films. that can't be right but, yeah, they are. what did you see? >> absolutely, neil. that's why it's very important to expose what's happening on the border. it's very rare to see actual muglers that are bringing illegal immigrants between the ports of entry armed with a rifle. we've had several events earlier this year where we worked with the mexican authorities to arrest smugglers armed with handguns, but to see a rifle really shows the capability, how brazen these criminals are. neil: all right. that was chris oliveras looking at and, you know, releasing some of this video and photographs that he had collected from the his men and women, himself also, about how brazen some of these drug cartels are, actually escorting migrants across the border. no no to matter how they do it. and, you know, completely fine with people being able to take pictures of them, video of them and continue along their way.

brandon judd warned about this,ed border patrol council president back with us. brandon, what do you make of this? this is pretty bold. >> it clearly shows that the cartels do not fear our justice system. they know darn good and well that even though they commit a crime in mexico, that it follows through into the united states, we still have the authority to go after those individuals even if they're not in the united states. but it clearly shows they do not fear us. they know that we have a tiered justice system right now. they understand this. they understand that prosecutors will look at race, they understand that prosecutors will look at jenner, they understand that prosecutors will look at prosperity, how rich an individual individual is, whether this is a border issue, and they know border issues are not being prosecuted. they understand this. it used to be for my entire career, 25 the years, these cartels would always operate in the shadows. they never wanted to be seen because they understood that the public backlash would be huge. they also a understood that

prosecutors would then go after them. right now the backlash isn't that big, and prosecutors won't go after them, so they are operating with impunity. it also shows that the mexican government does not have any control on what is going on right here. you know, when somebody crosses the border illegally, it's not a crime in mexico if they're coming to the united states, but it is a crime if it's tied to human smuggling. and when you have cartels and when you have guns in this, then you can clearly tie that to human smuggling, but the mexican government also is doing nothing. these cartels are generating billions of dollars because, one, the united states isn't doing anything and, two, the mexican government didn't -- isn't doing anything. this is a perfect storm to see how dangerous the border is right now, ands -- and this is why so many krill aliens and feint y'all are coming to the united states -- fentanyl. it has become a dangerous schism for all u.s. citizens. neil: it's also a message, i would assume, brandon, to the migrants themselves, don't i try

this on your own. in fact, almost a threat. you're not going to try this on your own. >> oh, absolutely. when i first joined the border patrol, it used to be there were mom and pop organizations that were doing the smuggling. it wasn't necessarily criminal cartels. now the cartels control everything. nobody crosses the border illegally. no products come into the united states whether that's drugs or counterfeit products coming to the united states without the cartel's go ahead. this is, again, there are very, very dangerous organizations, they do not care about human life. they will kill competitors, they will also kill migrants that are coming into the united states if they do not pay them. there areing -- very, very dangerous, and that's why it's so important we get a handle on this. we care about human life, but you can't care about human life if you don't properly enforce the laws, and we're not doing that right now. neil: you can't not care about human life when the other side clearly doesn't care about human

life. your point is quite correct. brandon, good seeing you again. thank you for helping us out with this. >> thank you, neil, appreciate it. neil: brandon judd. well, you heard about this new york uprising like out of nowhere, police charging the influencer for inciting what amounted to essentially a riot, unlawful assembly at the very least after after a mob converged on yesterday's union square in downtown new york. apparently, he was promising free playstations, other stuff like that. let's just say his 6.5 million followers were keen on it, and thousands of them came to sort of get a piece of it. the mayhem eni sued, soon it became a commuter nightmare for the area. that's a popular stop for those getting into and doubt -- out of downtown new york. we've got former nypd commissioner ray kelly who knows how something like this can get out of ap hand pretty fast. he has an idea to prevent this sort of thing from happening

again, maybe don't offer free gaming consoles. after this're. some lenders charge hundreds upfront for your appraisal and other fees. not at newday. a veteran shouldn't have to come up with money to get money. this isn't just freight. these aren't just shipments. they're promises. promises of all shapes and sizes. each, with a time and a place they've been promised to be. a promise is everything to old dominion, because it means everything to you. ♪ hit it ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a thing go right ♪ ♪ it takes two to make it outta sight ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a thing go right ♪ ♪ it takes two to make it outta sight ♪ ♪ one, two, get loose now ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ stay two nights and get

a $ 50 best western gift card. book now at bestwestern.com.

neil: hey, washington, well to your aa hole. still pointing fingers as investors just point to the exits. welcome, everybody, i'm neil cavuto, and investors leave us after the s&p consistent the wall street. fox on top of stocks going down, way down, and nothing, nothing getting them to move up. not even the president of the united states appearing before the nation to try and calm them down. >> we didn't need a rating agency to tell us that we need a balanced, long-term approach to deficit is reduction. neil: for all the president's talk of working with with the other side now, is he still continuing to blame the other side, and in the case of standard & poor's, grill them as well? reports this evening the senate banking committee is looking

into the s&p downgrade and how that came about. neil: all right, two quick things i notice going back in time here back a dozen years ago, a, i had a better toupee. the other was how we did this 12 years ago and learned nothing from it, and we are witnessing it again. what i was referring to was s&p at that time, in 2011, down graigd our aaa a rating. a lot of people thought it would be the end of the world and they would quickly ratchet that back up. they never have in a dozen years. along comes fitch investors to say we're going to make good on a threat that we kind of signaled back in may, that leaves moody's the only other major ratings agency that has not downgraded us. but the reasons then and the reasons now are essentially the same, our finances are a mess. and these government shutdowns, threats of shutdowns and working through them are beginning to be

a joke. it was then, is now. what is interesting to note here is we tend to get through this stuff, so you can always sound like the boy who cry wolf saying that we can't keep getting through this stuff. enter david dotson, stanford graduate school of business, what he makes of that. dave, it is interesting, right? when i was looking back over our coverage at the time, a lot of people saying, well, this will be a powerful lesson for us. we'll get our house in order, you know, we won't bring the nation's finances to a brink ever again. by my count, we have at least 30 times. so what happened? >> neil, you and i were on parallel tracks this morning, because i was doing exactly the same thing, looking back a dozen years ago. and there's something silly and serious about what happened this week. the silly thing is that it took them a dozen years to figure out what anyone who's living on this planet knows, which is that we don't take in -- we spend more money than we take in, and we have no plan. and when it happened a dozen

years ago, the stock market panicked and then went right back to normal. and that's exactly what's going to happen this time. because where are you going to take the money? take it out of treasuries and do what with it? you're not going to put it into banks. there's only two other major economies that have a aaa rating, to it's going to have, this in my mind, no effect on day-to-day investments -- neil you know, you think, dave, to that point, just to clarify, we are a haven, i understand that. we always have been, we make good on our commitments. people know when things get dicey, they park their dough here, but maybe the less they'll think of that. there are already countries that are trying to come up with an alternative for the dollar, an enticing alternative to our markets. do you think they'll ever succeed e? >> yeah, and that's where the sears part comes in. there is signaling -- serious part comes in. there is signaling when you go from aaa to aa+. the distinction is not very big, but the signaling is important.

the thing that confuses me, or neil, is why it took us a dozen years to discover for, for fitch to discover what everyone's known, which is that that we are in a mess fiscally. and what i'm hoping is that this signaling will say to politicians or say to americans that anybody who's interested in talking seriously about the debt has to put on the table either taxes, military or entitlements, social security and medical spending. if you're not willing to put that on the table, then you either are not serious about deficit reform, or you flunked third grade math. neil: but, you know, third grade math or not, it's the third rail of politics to even think about addressing entitlements that simply are not mathematically sustainable. this isn't a political point, just is. and yet the two leading candidates for president don't want them touched. i can understand politically why that makes perfectly good sense, but the american people that are being led to believe all is

right, you know, nothing to see here, move on, but all is not right. >> that's right. and that's why i'm hoping on the serious to side of what happened this week is that it brings up to the surface that we have a fundamental problem. it has nothing to do with any one administration or congress. this has been going on for 25 years. and 25 years ago it was fairly easy to address. every year that we kick the can down the alley and every year that a congressman says i'm more interested in getting elected in two years than i am of taking care of my children or grandchildren, the problem gets bigger and bigger and bigger. what i'm hoping is that in its own way the credit agency shine a light on something we have got to be paying attention to. and it's the third rail, but at our peril, neil, right? neil: it is, you're right. >> because the third rail -- right, it's when we run out of money. and these numbers that we see in the deficit are understated because the actual, true gap between the present value of what we owe and what we have currently is another $30

trillion. neil: it's staggering when you think about it, dave. we owe more than we're worth as a country. >> absolutely. neil: that is just mind-blowing. dave, thank you, i think. i think. you're right to warn us about it. in the meantime, we've got the latest on these gilgo beach murders. in fact, more victims, at least those identified. for many years now, she's simply been known as jane doe number 7. this week we found out something, she has a name. ( ♪ ) ( ♪ ) can't stop adding stuff to your cart? get the bank of america customized cash rewards card, choose the online shopping category and earn 3% cash back. lowe's knows a style refresh is even more refreshing ...when it's at the right price. that's why, we've we pull our favorite looks together in-store and in in the app. so it is easy to get the look you want for less. you got this. we got you.

neil: all right, some closure for at least one family in the gilgo beach murders, an identification on a victim from many years ago. c.b. cotton has more. c.b. >> reporter: another victim in the gilgo beach killings has been identified after nearly three decades. her name is karen vergata. >> we were able to identify fire island jane doe as karen very bat that who was 34 years old at time of her disappearance. she went missing approximately february 14th, 1996. at the time she live on west 45th street in manhattan and was believed to be working as an escort. >> reporter: prosecutors say vergata's legs and feet were town oblong island in 1996 and her skull discovered in 2011 about 20 miles away. investigators used a cheek swab there a relative to confirm the

remains were hers. now, no one has been charged in her death, and suffolk county district attorney ray tierney refused to say whether accused long island serial killer rex heuermann is linked to the case. >> we are going to continue to work this particular case as we did the gilgo four investigation. we're going to have the no comment on what, if any, suspects we develop do. >> reporter: prosecutors request a cheek swab from heuermann. according to court dock youths, they think -- documents, they think it could backfire, a prosecutor writing should the defendant's dna from the cheek swab not match the dma profile from the pizza crust and napkins. >> submitted the from rex heuermann, the defense would be presented with a potential trial defense. the manhattan architect is currently charged in the deaths of three women and the prime suspect in a fourth killing. he's currently being held without bail. neil? neil: thank you for that, c.b..

c.b. cotton on that. a good time to raise the question with bill daley, former fbi investigator. the way c.b. reported it, and and i'm it's very accurate, it would confuse the defense argument linking him to so many murders if in this case dna here doesn't match this particular woman like it has in three other cases for him. but that wouldn't mitigate the fact that it still links him to at least those three deaths and potentially a fourth and potentially others to come. so what does a mixed dna realize mean? read mean? >> well, i believe what i was hearing there in the report was the fact that they want to make sure the dna matched what was taken from the pizza box, not necessarily from around ms. vergata. there's no suggestion at at this point they actually have that evidence that has his dna associated with her remains.

i think what they're saying is they're looking to make sure they can confirm through further dna testing, and there's certainly levels, things you can get from a pizza box and one you actually get from a cheek swab which is kind of a robust environment for dna. so i think what they're saying here is that the current indictment against him is predicated on this nexus of his dna from the pizza box and the victims, the three victims'. but going forward, you'd certainly have to establish that he was actually in contact with my of the other victims including ms. vergata which at this point authorities have not indicated they have. neil: you know, it also comes at a time where they could use more dna, there's been a push to try to get a cheek swab from him. does he are to agree to that, or can it be forced on him in no, no, we're going to get a cheek swab from you. we're going to do it, like, now. >> yeah. actually, that's a very good question, neil, that from a legal standpoint i can see where

his attorneys would rebuff that. however, i do know is when people are incarcerated, right now people are currently taking dna samples put into the fbi's coder system which is kind of the dna fingerprint system the fb with i has developed which actually has hundreds of thousands of convicted, suspected, arrested and otherwise legally-obtained samples. so there's a legal process which he'll probably try to push back, but i think at the end of the day authorities may have the ability to be able to compel him to do so. neil: you know, i'm wondering where you see this going, bill, because they're obviously looking at maybe more bodies, identified along the long island area that might not be attached to him as well as trips he took to atlantic city. i believe he had a condo in las vegas, that this is widening out much as it did with the ted bundy investigation. i'm just wondering what you think of that, where where all

this might be headed. >> yeah. sure, neil. i mean, it's certainly not far to imagine minute who's been active in committing these type of horrific crimes here, that when he goes to other places where he's perhaps even less known, it may give him the ability to carry those things out. certainly the authorities are looking to see what the nexus is around some of the other remains. what they would say about the current identification of karen vergata was that her remains were found on fire island in 1996. for anyone familiar, that's an area actually that is not accessible by vehicle, so you would have to get there either by ferry or boat. fifteen years later, the skull, the r rest of her remains were found many in an area adjacent to what they're calling the gilgo area of the barrier island where we have jones beach, etc. so it's actually a different barrier island about 20 miles away and 15 years apart. so the question would be is that were there any kind of forensic

evidence left behind either on the first or second remains that give them a connection to a suspect. because that really is the whole issue here. it's very helpful to identify her remains, helpful to her family with who may be wondering what happened to her. it's helpful to authorities to try to provide that second linkage either by co-location data from cellular information or by forensic data, meaning dna, that's found on the suspect and found on the victim. neil: bill daley, thank you for this. we'll keep monitoring this case. it does get curiouser and curiouser, as they say, every day. >> it is. thank you, neil. neil: meanwhile, taking a look at ev sales. they sound cool, they are cool in many cases, but people just are not buying. and auto dealers are here to tell us, you know, it's not getting any better. these things just sit on our lots. after this. verything with just one card.

chase freedom unlimited. so, if you're off the racking... ...or crab cracking, you're cashbacking. cashback on flapjacks, baby backs, or tacos at the taco shack. nah, i'm working on my six pack. switch to a king suite- or book a silent retreat. silent retreat? hold up - yeeerp? i can't talk right now, i'm at a silent retreat. cashback on everything you buy with chase freedom unlimited with no annual fee. how do you cashback? chase. make more of what's yours. hi, i'm stacey, and i've lost 60 pounds on golo. (guitar music) i decided to try golo when i had an international flight coming up, and i realized i couldn't fly being the size that i was. my sister-in-law tried golo and had lost 50 pounds, so i thought i'd give golo a try. i didn't expect the results i got on golo. i was hopeful, but i did not expect it to be like this. golo just makes sense. this plan works. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com.

type 2 diabetes? discover the ozempic® tri-zone.

in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. join the millions already taking ozempic®. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone.

neil: well, ev iss may be all the rage at least when it comes to the to government push to get these vehicles in dealer lot ares. getting them off dealer lots, well, that's another matter. apparently, the interest just isn't there. maybe it's an an issue of high price, maybe it's an issue if we lore the prices, the automakers say that'll make a difference. apparently that's not happening either. kelly o'grady with more. >> reporter: the department of transportation just issued a proposal that would essentially force all new vehicles to be electric by 2032. that's really aggressive, especially considering electric vehicles are selling below manufacturer suggested retail price. so i want the show you this. it's a web site, i see cars.com. it notes that four evs are selling at or below msrp, of course, eating into any profits manufacturers might see, and they're arguing the current ev business model isn't sustainable. >> whether it's electric cars

piling up at dealer lots, whether it's longer time to turn for these vehicles, whether it's new manufacturers lowing -- lowering their praises to try to keep them moving, there's every indicate that we've -- indication that we've kind of hit maybe a threshold in the ev market, and all of a sudden it's become much harder to sell these vehicles. >> reporter: and on top of that, of course, the headline has always been evs are a cheaper alternative to gas cars, right? more expensive in the beginning, but over time the you would save. well, a new study challenges that. there's a number of reasons, right in that doesn't account for the cost to install a home charger or the cost to drive to the chargeer. and that may not seem like a big deal in a place like charger, but you may have to go quite out of the way in areas where charging infrastructure is lacking. i want to put some numbers behind it. this study share ised per-100 miles, gas vehicles are almost $3 cheaper than an ev counterpart while mid price were $1.50 cheaper.

you add on issues like overloading our grid, and you sit here and wonder, well, we have these deadlines, where's the transition plan to make that financially and logistically feasible for the average american back to you, neil. neil: wild stuff. kelly, thank you very much. in the meantime here, if at first you don't succeed, well, keep trying. and if at first the supreme court shuts you down, find an end run. what the administration is doing to save the student loan and the repayment plan that could make things easier for some but clearly not for all. ying for a ? the monthly payments can be expensive. with an affordable home loan from newday, you can pay cash and own the car or truck of your dreams. (christina) with verizon business unlimited, i get 5g, truly unlimited data, and unlimited hotspot data. so, no matter what, i'm running this kitchen. (vo) make the switch. it's your business.

it's your verizon.

neil: all right, that student loan forgiveness plan is hardly dead. the supreme court shut down one measure, another couldn't get off the ground politically even within the democratic party. but now the administration launching a new save student

loan repayment plan that would offer loan forgiveness to some, savings of up to $1,000 a year in loan forgiveness for others. dan geltrude and steve forbes, "forbes" immediate what chair editor in -- media editor-in-chief on the the significance of this, steve the, give 'em credit for not giving up, but where's' this going? >> well, what it's doing is two things, one, it's flouting the rule of law, the spurt of the rule of law. -- the spirit. when we have a former president getting indicted, serious allegations against this president and his son and his brother, doing this kind of end run where you know it's not constitutional, the supreme court's her knocked you down before, why do you keep doing it? it's verbose. i think it just makes the public more cynical and is not fair to students. they don't know what the rules of the game are. they're being played. they're puppets. neil: all right, i'll put you down as a maybe on this.

[laughter] dan, what do you -- where do you think this goes though? because obviously, you know, the more relief you offer students, sadly what we've come to discover, the more tuition, room and board and a lot of those fees just go up. and it's been a cycle that continues. this will only spur that, won't it? >> that's exactly it, neil. you get in this cycle where you never end the cost of higher education. so let's even say, which i'm not saying it will work, let's say this program works and you give these students relief. you have not solved the problem. so what's going on right now, in my opinion, is nothing short of predatory lending. if you want to really solve the problem here, neil, i think there's three things you have to address. one, universities have to have some skin in the game. because if students can't afford to pay back these loans,

universities don't care, doesn't impact them. second, i think that students and their parents have to complete s&p some type -- some type of educational program to show that they have an understanding of what they're getting involved with 5, 10, 20 years down the line in repayment. and third, if students don't qualify for loans, they have to be turned down no different from anyone else that gets a loan. if you can't pay it back with, or you don't get the loan. neil: you know, steve, there was another proposal pushed by some republicans, there were a couple of democrats in there too if my memory serves me right, said that maybe we have to start, you know, pruning who would be eligible for loan relief or hones period -- or loans period. if they have a promising major in a promising career that'll pay well, yes. if not, no. what do you think? >> well,, that's why lending

should be returned entirely to the private sector where banks and lenders there on the line if the loan's not paid. the idea of dan's and others to have the university have skin in the game is good, and also how about transparency? students have less transparency about what they owe in payments like that than you do on your credit card or your mortgage. there's a good documentary out from a thing called izzit.org on the whole lending thing. if you borrow $40,000, $10,000 a year for 4 years, you think you owe 40? no, the interest charges, it's 47. to dan's point, it's a good educational documentary that every parent and student should see. yes, universities have skin in the game, and i think the idea that everyone has to go to college has to be put to rest. you may want to do it later, you may want to do courses online. but you also -- there should be no stigma to the fact you might learn a skill that the market actually wants and will pay you

well for it. neil: not a crazy concept, dan. all i know is my plumber, electrician, his people have people. in other words, just getting them is like booking the pope. those careers are revered in places like germany and japan. not so much here. that's what seems kind of backwards to me. >> yeah. listen, i think the point that steve just made is spot on. what we're saying here is that college shouldn't be for everyone, ask it's not for everyone. -- and it's not for everyone. we need diversity in the work force. and part of the problems that we're having with shortages, you have people that are going to college taking out huge loans, and then they realize, well, that education i just got, well, it really wasn't a good return on investment. i could have saved a lot of money and gone into a trade and been very financially successful. so i think that goes back to we have to change the way we're

educating younger people, neil, from high school. neil: yeah. just get the priorities right to avoid this and, you know, the supreme court tells you you can't do it this way, then don't do it. guys, i want to thank you both very much. in the meantime, we're going to give you an update on the union square riots. note to self, don't promise to give away free stuff and don't think you won't have potentially something like this. can't stop adding stuff to your cart? get the bank of america customized cash rewards card, choose the online shopping category and earn 3% cash back. ...

every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food.

they're quitting the kibble. and kicking the cans. and feeding their dogs dog food that's actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood

>> all right. he has been indicted now three times. he's facing 78 different charges and the president coming out with a missive, some say a warning, if you go after me, i'm coming after you. and that's added to this whole pressure city that some people say is on the president and then he returning it on them. griff jenkins following all of these fast moving developments in washington. griff. griff: hey, neil, good morning. a lot of pressure and craz