john bussey is here from the "wall street journal." it's state laws, it's two things. >> it's interesting. not a sham, it's not a disgrace. our libel laws are here to protect and they do a pretty effective job of that speaking from a journalistic standpoint. we're very observant what has to be done not to libel some one. there are state laws of the constitution's first amendment, is what it's all about. >> shepard: good afternoon from fox news in new york. on fox televisions, fox news channel on satellite and cable. the president of the united states is holding a joint news conference with the president -- the prime minister of norway, and it has begun early. let's listen. >> president trump: brave, treacherous seas and courageous misses of exploration. centuries later during the second world war, brave norwegians escaped occupied norway to fight alongside of americans and the allies including on the beaches of normandy in 1944. our friendship builds on this proud and noble history and is rooted in our commitment to confront the proble

john bussey is here from the "wall street journal." the associate editor. a corporation with which we share common ownership. chuck schumer, come over, let's have a sit-down. >> chuck schumer, chuck schumer's chief of staff and john kelly the only ones in a white house. >> shepard: in the room at least. >> in the room with the president. in accounting there's a thing called lyfo, a cost flow accounting in. last in, first out. this is what the republicans in the senate and the house are worried about. the last word in to talk to the president will be the first decision by the president made. last person that will have influence with the president now decides. so the republican leadership is saying, now what? is there going to be a schumer-trump agreement as a result of this conversation and perhaps additional ones before midnight tonight similar to what happened in september when the president decided to reach an agreement with the democrats over the debt ceiling. much to the chagrin of republicans. so when you ask who is it that we should be watching for, w

john bussey is here from the "wall street journal,". what to make of this? >> muddies the water, doesn't it? not a clear victory in the public domain for really anybody. this whole issue is being played out in two different zones. one is public opinion. so it muddies the water that is advantageous to president trump's allies in that it's another fbi official stepping down under pressure. gee, is this an unbiassed investigation into the white house? maybe not because all these people are stepping down. from democratic standpoint and those that oppose president trump, it's another example of pressure being brought to bear perhaps unduly by a president of the united states through his tweeting, but members of congress, especially forcing a guy to step down. i'm not sure who wins in that. but there's other zone, the legal one being pursued by robert mueller who is investigating this. that will be tried by -- in front of a judge or a jury if it comes to that. if there are issues that mueller wants to take the next legal step. so far the judiciary does not report

melissa: for more, bring in john bussey associate editor at "wall street journal" he is also a fox news contributor. there are numerous statements out at this point, john. the latest coming from mr. wynne himself saying the idea that he ever assaulted anyone, any woman is preposterous. he goes on to talk about how this is motivated by his ex-wife, trying to renegotiate their settlement. does any of that make a difference in the court of public opinion? if he paid someone $7.5 million? >> curious, don't you think. melissa, you covered these things since you have covered business for years. you've seen this happen before. high level executives accused of this sort of behavior. a lot of implications here. anybody who wishes to get a sense whether they're wynn, whether his comments, sort of, in any way mitigate these claims, just needs to read the story. it is pretty extensive. there are a lot of allegations in there. i think reader will come away with their own view of that. a lot of implications for this for mr. wynne, for his company, for the rnrc as you heard, mr. wynne is finance chair

john bussey, thanks very much. the president's lawyers firing off letters to try to stop this new book from hitting the shelves. we'll speak with a justice department lawyer about the trump team's chances and why the president's lawyers may not want to file suit no matter what. have you seen the dow today? a major milestone as it tops 25,000 for the very first time. will it stay there for the closing bell? under all of the circumstances, they will be snowed in in lower manhattan. 1-3 inches they said yesterday. now talking about ten at j.f.k., 15 on the east end in boston. forget about it. smile dad. i take medication for high blood pressure and cholesterol. but they might not be enough to protect my heart. adding bayer aspirin can further reduce the risk of another heart attack. because my second chance matters. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i'm to help you park safelyball danin your garage.ring it's part of my new year's resolution: no more mayhem. making sure your car is pul

let's bring in john bussey from the "wall street journal." john is also a fox news contributor. so one of the things that i thought was interesting, he's always said there's no collusion. now a new line. the new line is if you fight back, they consider that to be obstruction. that's new. >> yeah. so he's -- >> shepard: sounds like a defense line. >> he's trying to say whatever i did was fighting back. it was politics. look, the incremental movement here is what john roberts was talking about, which is that a couple weeks ago he was saying look, if there's no collusion, why would there be an interview? he was saying i'm willing to do this, but maybe not. now he's saying i'm going to do it. there's still a little roll-back on that as you pointed out subject to my lawyers. my lawyers. >> shepard: wasn't much of that. if you listen to the whole thing, he was saying of course i'm willing to do this. unequivocal. >> that is the movement forward on this whole thing, this is a president that wants to look transparent. nothing happened that should raise questions to begin with. he wants

let's go to john bussey from the "wall street journal" and fox news contributor.going to get this done? >> who knows. political chicken. who will blink first. you got to imagine that as the average citizen, the average voter hears the back and forth, the president today saying that the democrats want to shut down the take, the success of the tax bill and the democrats saying no, it's the republican's fault, the voters have to say we want you to run things and put a budget together and operate the government. at the end of the day, it's what you saider will ier. it's a government with a republican senate, a republican house and a republican president. one has to imagine if there's a shut down, it's going to go down negatively for the republicans. >> shepard: people will say you have to have 60 votes in the senate. >> meaning you need democrats. >> shepard: there were two guys whipping for the republican, to keep the government open plan on the republican side and two tea party republicans or whatever they call themselves now, the freedom caucus republicans, whippin

, adriennealrod, former director of strategic communications for hillary clinton's campaign and john busseym the wall street journal. marc, i understand the argument that we should go to merit-base system of immigration, but i want to pick up on the discussion i had with secretary nielson because what travels a lot of people the idea that we are equating country of origin with merit and it raises the issue what's better as i said, a janitor from norway or a doctor or an engineer from haiti? >> i don't think the president is talking about making any kind of geographic or quotas based on any country. chris: but he did say that. >> he's basically saying under the current system we do have quotas, we do have random lotteries not based on skill just because they apply are allowed entry into our country. he's basically saying that let's judge the people who want to come and move to america based on who they are and not where they are from. chris: juan. i mean, forgive, doesn't seem to me that's what the president said. >> i don't think that's what the reporting indicates. chris: let me put up fir