tv Making Money With Charles Payne FOX Business July 24, 2019 2:00pm-3:00pm EDT
president already tweeted about this saying it looks like a bad day for democrats, certainly for mr. mueller. in the eyes of beholder. mr. trump will comment on the way out to west virginia for a fund-raising effort. there will be opportunity to talk to reporters about what he thinks is a good day for him. here is charles payne. charles: thank you, neil. appreciate it. good afternoon, everyone, i'm charles payne. this is "making money." breaking, the second an final hearing featuring robert mueller wrapping up after explosive questioning. >> the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely, totally exonerated him but that is not what your report said, is isn't. >> correct. it is not what the report said. >> there is a lot more where that came from. we'll have complete coverage throughout this hour. plus new all-time highs on wall street. despite disappointing earnings from big names you know like boeing. we're all over this market. because it is big, encompassing.
facebook shares are slipping. after federal regulators announcing it was punishing facebook with five billion dollar fine. many are up in arms saying that is only a slap on the wrist. we have that and so more on "making money." ♪ robert mueller is in the hot seat right now. he has been there all day long, close right now to wrapping up this marathon testimony on his russia report. this before two house committees. hillary vaughn will lead us off with a live report from capitol hill. hillary? reporter: charles, democrats on the house judiciary committee are celebrating their hearing that wrapped up earlier this morning with special counsel robert mueller because they think it convinced the american public that maybe didn't read the report but saw the testimony that they need to proceed with impeachment. >> so for people who have read the mueller report or who followed these issues, this
hearing was not surprising. for people who did not, this should have blown their minds. >> the broad consensus of caucus, is time. i think the speaker will reflect that. reporter: the special counsel is already making connections from his testimony earlier. in the appearance before the house tell defense committee happening right now, robert mueller said he needed to correct something he told congressman ted liu in response to his question. >> i want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. i want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by mr. liu, who said, and i quote, you didn't charge the president because of the olc opinion? that is not the correct way to say it. as we say in the report, and as i said at the opening we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime. reporter: republicans on both committees called into question like things like the steele dossier, fusion gps were left out of mueller's report. they asked if that was mueller's decision or someone asked him to
leave it out? >> did anyone ask you to exclude anything from your report that you felt should been in the report? >> i don't think so but, it is not a small report. >> no one asked you specifically to exclude something that you believe should have been in there? >> not that i recall, no. reporter: there was an exchange about the power to exonerate with congressman michael turner moments ago where turner pressed mueller on if the attorney general even has the power to exonerate, if they don't have that power, why mueller decided to make a point to include in his letter to attorney general bill barr that his report did not exonerate the president? >> mr. mueller, would you agree with me that the attorney general does not have the power to exonerate? >> i am going to pass on that. >> why? >> because embroils us in a legal discussion. i'm not prepared to do a legal
discussion in that arena. reporter: charles, hearings are still ongoing. we'll interrupt with the latest details. charles: hillary, thank you very much, here to react, bring in trump 2020 advisory board member, jenna he will is reeves, fox news contributors, doug schoen and deneen borelli. ted lieu seemed excited. al green sent out a message maybe democrat on the fence won't be there anymore. from what i saw today, it did not feel like somebody assistant tiff win for the democratic party, felt quite honest with you, mueller was disorganized, really, he really seemed to be fumbling along? >> that was my impression, chars, look. i am probably somebody who has been telling the democrats, move on. my view after today, or what's part of today has been transpired, move on.
no home runs. no knockouts. no real change. and bob mueller, by dint of his body language didn't convince me of anything i hadn't already believed. charles: deneen? >> i was waiting for bob mueller saying what report are you talking about? he could not respond to basic questions. the man didn't write this report, charles. i think he is a figurehead for the anti-trump lawyers that wrote this report. he could not answer basic questions. where are the elsid memes. he was a prop. he was very tired and low energy, whatever, but doesn't know what is supposed to be in his report. charles: jenna, he didn't recall names. he didn't know corey lewandoski. issues of the law itself, he had to refer to paperwork. of course he had someone sitting with him as well to help him out. from a legal perspective, did you glean anything here that was
new? >> you know, what i gleaned from this, it was very surprising that robert mueller would even engage in basic legal question, like does the attorney general have the power to exonerate? that is not something that is even debatable that is a simple legal answer. that is like saying, is the united states constitution the supreme law of the land? we don't need to debate over this. the fact he wasn't willing to answer the simple legal questions, really was surprising here. i think that all that we are going to glean from the hearing today was democrats and their circus would have been better off without mueller even in the chair. he was so confused. he clearly didn't know responses to other basic questions. but from a legal perspective, charles, we are living in the past. we're asking the same questions that we asked and answered when the report first came out and the legal conclusion, not the political one that the democrats are searching for, but the legal question here, is that president trump has the presumption of innocence. there have been no charges with him or anyone associated with
the campaign. charles: right. >> that is still the conclusion after today's hearing. >> that is something i think representative radcliffe brought up. i want to share the sound from him discussing this with robert mueller. >> you wrote 180 pages, 180 pages about decisions that weren't reached. about potential crimes that weren't charged, or decided. i agree with the chairman this morning when he said donald trump is not above the law. he is not. but he damn sure shouldn't be below the law which is where volume two of this report puts him. charles: that is another narrative coming out. you alluded to the fact, hey, people were part of this investigative team that had animosity towards president trump. there were things and inconsistencies, some people had charges filed against them. others did not. those inconsists were never resolved. we never understood the origins of this, this faulty document that started this whole thing off. why that wasn't attacked but there were other, you know,
convictions made. >> this was all part of the circus act, charles. you have people that were on the prosecutorial team that who donated to hillary clinton. some of them went to her victory party even though there wasn't a victory. so none of this is really challenged when it comes to mueller, when he was testifying today. but when you look at what the democrats are really doing here, they're trying to impeach president trump. and they were hoping to get to something that sink their teeth in today. they didn't get it. this was a no-win for them. charles: chris wallace slammed the democrats, sort of said, it was a disaster also for robert mueller. but he did condemn the democrats, president trump went on to tweet what wallace said. is there any chance this could actually hurt democrats for 2020, doug? >> it could hurt democrats in the sense that i think after today, there will be no momentum for impeachment or it will be limited to adam schiff and jerry nadler. so i don't think this will be a
fatal problem but again my advice to the democrats, move on. talk about issues. if you think you can win the election or win impeachment with what happened today, you're wrong. charles: but if you look at networks, scanning around, the tv, you might see, hey, president trump, not exonerated. you will see these headlines in the media. i'm sure that will embolden some democrats to say we got over 90 votes for impeachment this is it. let's take one more push at this thing? >> mistake if they do it. big mistake. there will be headlines, there have been those headlines before. charles, as i sit here now, my advice, move on. >> they're still saying collusion with the president. they're not listening. they're doubling down. charles: they're not listening. jenna, we're waiting at the very beginning robert mueller mentioned the fbi and justice department, what they're working on, what are your thought when it comes next legally?
>> i think that the inspector general report will definitely have some interesting legal implications. i think that the attorney general is definitely working on that. really big bombshell here as well is that comey actually had a spy now reports are saying inside the white house to spy on president trump. none of this is looking good for the democrats, for anyone that president trump very clearly exercising his article 2 authority by dismissing comey, democrats say that was something terrible, outside the scope of his authority. that wasn't. the mueller report, everything that is contained in there, that has been put to bed, but what now is going to happen, as far as the investigation, the steele dossier, ig report, all of those things that is what we need to focus on. that will scare the democrats for 2020. that is why they're so focused on impeachment. charles: many looking large. jenna, doug, deneen, very much appreciate it. we'll monitor robert mueller's testimony up to the point it wraps up. investors, they're ignoring the
political theater on capitol hill. instead it is all about earnings. we do have disappointing reports from boeing and caterpillar dragging on the dow, there are a lot of stocks breaking out. what you need to know about this market, where it's going next. ♪ hi i'm joan lunden. today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service
shutdown is still possible. so rebound in the stock gave way. we're at the lows for that one as the airplane maker posted a second-quarter loss of nearly $3 billion. it is first quarterly loss in three years. the company grappling how to deal with the grounded planes. yet nasdaq hitting an all-time high. in fact on pace for the record ninth record close. kaltbaum capital management president, gary kaltbaum joins us now. gary, you reluctantly became a bull. it paid off big time. it is interesting somebody like you knows markets inside and out. you are not happy with what catapults market higher. no disputing the fact it is going higher. >> charles, i'm not sure the question is in my purview but i will be glad to answer today. for me there is one motto in the markets. it is not the news, but how markets react to the news. best example i can give you,
texas instruments, 9% drop in sales and guidance for 11% drop in sales the stock is up $9. that defines a bullish market. in bull markets, bad news is good news and good news is fantastic news. you're seeing it in something like chipotle in bear markets it is the exact opposite. it should be evident we're still in pretty good shape, as i told you a dozen times, watch the semiconductors. i don't know what they're selling or doing, but these stocks are en fuego to the upside almost going pair roll lick. no way -- parabolic, no way the semiconductors and financials are leading again. charles: goldman sachs a really strong buy there. this morning micron got a target, new share price target significantly higher than where it is right now. so amazing to me, when wall street misses these big moves but still can come in, to start to put these recommendations on to send the stocks higher. i would love it particularly if
i'm already positioned but it is always interesting they can be so wrong but yet they help us make money? >> i have seen a stock go from 100 to 300. a buy put on them, a stock go from 300 to 100 and then a sell put on it but i get what you're saying. look for us, the fact we watch these markets, just watch price. i can't begin to tell you how many people are calling for recessions and depressions on a daily basis. there is just no chance for recessions when you have semiconductors doing this, the dow near highs and yeah, there are bad things going on, caterpillar, boeing, not all is perfect but until price changes, i go with the market, my friend, before opinion. charles: you know i also think one thing we don't cover enough in the financial media, we talk about the numbers, xyz beat by a certain amount but what management says i think what is helping to move these stocks. for instance, texas instruments
they said they're not in trouble from the tariff battle. this ising holding these stocks back. that sort of, people are breathing a sigh of relief over that. also there are momentum parts to this. there is so much money on the sidelines, gary, i'm talking professional money managers. they have got to get in there and chase these markets at some point? >> there's a ton of cash on the sideline and basically the market will mag advertise that cash to it as it keeps moving higher. as major indices break out from all time ranges it has to move in. why? because the people, big money, sitting around boardrooms, why do we have 100 million sitting in cash? we have got to put it in work. so you see what you're saying. that is definitely part of the equation at this point in time. for me, if price changes i will deal with it, right now, man, oh, man, there is 15 or 20 stocks that gapped up really strong, like autonation and that
other auto company, lad, the symbol, there is a bunch of others. northrop grumman is up like 15. some of the housewares in last couple days. so that is good news. hopeful it continues. >> full disclosure i have lad, two weeks ago in our model portfolio. loving it, gary. we ride the waves while we can. >> let us not talk too loud. charles: let us know when it gets bearish. >> it happens. charles: if it is in your purview. package delivery giant is expanding with 12,000 ups pickup locations. ups is dialing with the aggressive encroachment of amazon in its delivery business, is also seeking to use drone deliveries. the new locations are cvs, michael's, advance auto parts stores. nasdaq at all-time high
despite announcing a big antitrust review of big tech. how big of penalties can the companies see and how quickly? the blows keep coming for facebook as the ftc hits the social media giant with a record fine but is it enough? we have the details. ♪ your daily dashboard from fidelity. a visual snapshot of your investments. key portfolio events. all in one place. because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. you need decision tech. but how do i know if i'm i'm getting a good deal? i tell truecar my zip and which car i want and truecar shows the range of prices people in my area actually paid for the same car so i know if i'm getting a great price. this is how car buying was always meant to be. this is truecar.
can't see what it is yet.re? what is that? that's a blazer? that's a chevy blazer? aww, this is dope. this thing is beautiful. i love the lights. oh man, it's got a mean face on it. it looks like a piece of candy. look at the interior. this is nice. this is my sexy mom car. i would feel like a cool dad. it's just really chic. i love this thing. it's gorgeous. i would pull up in this in a heartbeat. i want one of these. that is sharp. the all-new chevy blazer. speaks for itself. i don't know who they got to design this but give them a cookie and a star.
neil: the department of justice following europe's lead following big tech. the doj announcing a sweeping antitrust investigation into the likes of google, facebook, amazon and apple. charles: the probe will look into whether giants hurt competition, depressed innovation or harmed consumers in some way. kristina partsinevelos is with us. the debates are over, whether or not you know, the antitrust
applies looks like they will find out one way or the other. on wall street they're saying this will be a good old-fashioned shakedown, sort of what europe is doing, maybe the government won't go as far as actually trying to break these companies up? >> i think this is a big deal. this is the first time antitrust regulators looking into the united states. if you're a big company in the u.s., dealing with europe, even though amazon has to go through some more investigations in the next week or investigations. what is concerning will these companies stop or halt their upcoming new ventures? they know they will have oversight, look into something they have been doing, that is concerning for medium term. facebook is only one up right now. they are all trending down lower. one trader is concerned especially in the near term, he sold apple in last 24 hours. charles: he sold his entire position? >> no, something like 70% of it.
he is looking to get back in. he believes it will go even lower. the fact they're talking about mueller and not focusing on this as much as we could as other business channels. charles: even if there is the thing, we should make sure our audience knows, each one of these companies have their own individual issue, even though we lumped them all together. >> you could seen say they're not the same? are they all tech companies or media companies. charles: some are considered communication services, amazon is considered consumer discretionary. even to that point if there was an advancement of this, it would take years of litigation. >> precisely. charles: what about long term investors, these pros you talked to about the long term investor? if you have amazon in your retirement account, do you sell it right now? >> to your point exactly. the people don't think long term they will break to push them up. why? because you would have chaos. would you have inefficiencies, would the inefficiencies outweigh the benefit dealing
with the situation at hand, notice there is not anything going on. maybe they aren't stifling competition. maybe they aren't harming consumers this is something going to be bad for the short term. it will be a headache for medium to long term but would you sell your positions? charles: absolutely not. >> no. charles: i wish they would stop amazon selling live christmas trees. that is a hustle for people around the country comes once a year. that is my only personal belief. >> no problem. charles: facebook reporting earnings after the bell today, after getting hit with that record ftc fine. plus mark zuckerberg, their ceo, now has a new rule book to insure compliance but does this order really have any teeth at all? ♪ fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely.
but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? (past them because she didn't sknow they were talking to her.g and she would just walk right (deborah) i just could not hear. i was hesitant to get the hearing aids because of my short hair, but nobody even sees them. (avo) our nearly invisible hearing aids are just one reason we've been the brand leader for over 70 years. (deborah) when i finally could hear for the first time, i started crying. i could hear everything. (avo) call 1-800-miracle to start your 30 day risk-free trial and schedule your free hearing evaluation today.
♪ charles: facebook agreed to pay a record five billion dollar fine from the ftc over privacy violations and will institute new oversight including the creation of a independent privacy committee. interesting only holding mark zuckerberg responsible in a limited fashion. all of this ahead of this afternoon's earnings report.
i want to bring in attorney misty maris. president of independent women's fellow, beverly hall berg. let me start with you, misty. there is lot of controversy. democrats on the ftc said this is slap on the wrist. we should have taken them to court. we took cambridge analytica to court. we took the founders of cambridge analytica to court. we were much tougher on them according to the democrats here. why? >> instead of doing the settlement agreement which by virtue of the terms, settlement agreement means both parties are coming to an agreement how to proceed, democrats are saying this is just a slap on the wrist even though we have a 5 billion-dollar penalty here. that is only 9% of facebook's earnings. this wasn't hashed out in court. i would say from a legal perspective you have to think strategy. it is not a slam dunk necessarily in court for the ftc. number one, number two, you will
never get a penalty like that that will deter other companies from engaging on this. part of the settlement agreement is restructure of compliance procedures to the tune of sarbanes-oxley. charles: i will get back to you. i'm not sure it has any teeth. i lived through sarbanes-oxley. i want to talk to the audience bit. beverly, on the public perspective on it. they say that facebook's facial recognition software is under fire and consent decree for creating new facial recognition models. sounds like they are condemning the company, that they are violating their users and how does that harm the public image or harm their stock? >> i'm not sure it does not harm the public image. one of the aspects of the agreement or settlement to say mark zuckerberg personally has to talk about the information he knows about the privacy policies quarterly. so he himself and not just the business is being put on the chopping block on this, putting
his credibility on line for 87 million users who did have their data sold, therefore the privacy violated i'm not sure they will look at this, say it amounts to much. yes it is the largest amount that has ever been fined by the ftc against a big tech company but for as much as facebook is worth i do agree this is more of a slap on the wrist. charles: let's get back to that. folks know sarbanes-oxley was put in place because of 2002 because of misconduct by corporations, lying went on, big tech bubble. of officers were writing, we sign off, with know that things were okay. we vouch for these financials f we don't, we'll pay a heavy penalty, even go to prison that was 2002. we had two or three, maybe any legal ramifications from this. it is hard to believe that, you know, why would this work now with mark zuckerberg if they haven't even hardly implemented
this with large corporations? >> you make a great point, charles. one thing to point out with privacy, we're not talking about legislation. that is something in the works. they're talking about legislation to work with tighter privacy rules. this is the ftc in my view shows they are serious. they are going after companies that violate privacy regulations. they are changing terrain as far as privacy is concerned by this particular agreement, creating internal properties an procedures including mark zuckerberg holding him personally responsible on signing off on the specifications. we'll see how it happens in this ever changing privacy era. charles: this is in violation after ftc from 2011. repeat offender. always news, people upset, you are not concerned it stops momentum. >> i don't think so. more than the ftc.
there was an agreement reached with the fcc. even when facebook was called out on these practices they were hiding what actually happened to the user's data, not showing the risks that were posed. what i hope comes from this even though i don't think it goes far enough with a find i hope individuals take personal responsibility how they share their information. how they take photos of themselves. whether it is done through a software program that can be used for facial recognition and other manner. i think this is really a big push for individuals be careful what you do, talk to your kids how to keep yourself safe. charles: back to the individual responsibility thing, huh? ladies thank you very much. >> thank you. >> we're watching these markets as investors prepare for another wave of earnings reports after the bell. president trump vowing to watch only a little bit of the mueller testimony. he still sounded off on the back-to-back hearings. coming up we'll have the latest from the white house on the mueller testimony. we'll be right back.
♪ is where people first gathered to form the stock exchangeee, which brought people together to invest in all the things that move us forward. every day, invesco combines ideas with technology, data with inspiration, investors with solutions. because the possibilities of life and investing are greater when we come together. ♪
charles: white house now reacting to robert mueller's marathon testimony. that's where we find blake burman with more. blake. reporter: charles, the lead-up to robert mueller going up to capitol hill today, president trump took to twitter for a preview, much of what he said over last couple years, personally attacking robert mueller and the mueller investigation as a whole. mueller sat down for a few hours before the house judiciary committee, it appears as if the president likes what he heard or at least likes what he saw from that hearing because this was his initial tweet after that first hearing. he said, quote, i would like to thank the democrats for holding this morning's hearing. now in a subsequent tweet since then the president has highlighted this exchange right
here between the top republican on the house judiciary committee, and robert mueller. much watch. >> at anytime during your investigation was your investigation curtailed or stopped or hindered? >> no. reporter: so that is part of the argument charles, that the president and some close to him, republicans all across washington are starting to build up, in their estimation that the president did not obstruct justice. here was a statement in part from the president's personal attorneys, attorney, one of them at least, jay sekulow put out the following after the first hearing, quote, the testimony revealed this probe was conducted by a small group of politically biased prosecutors, who as hard as they tried were unable to establish obstruction, conspiracy or collusion between the trump campaign and russia. it is also clear that the special counsel conducted hess two-year investigation unimpeded. the american people understand that this issue is over. so where are we right now?
there was the first hearing with robert mueller this morning before the house judiciary committee. right now, it is just past halftime i guess you could say of the second hearing before the house intelligence committee. charles, there is probably an hour, hour 1/2 left for robert mueller to testify in the second hearing. when you look at the timing how everything should play out the rest of the afternoon. that hearing should wrap up 3:30, 4:00. at hen:10 here at the white house the president is expected to walk out of the white house, get aboar marine one head to west virginia. we'll hope our first on camera reaction from the president shortly after robert mueller. charles: get your popcorn ready, my friend. reporter: exactly. charles: see you later. thanks a lot, blake. joining me to discuss all of this, former assistant to president trump, codely sadler. we start hearing it, jerry nadler gets to make a statement,
asks a question that this report does not exonerate president trump. the media took that, that is the chiron i've seen flipping channels around. after that, it has been to president trump's tweet, has been really remarkable. i don't know that this hearing laid a glove on the president? >> well it has not, if anything it proved there was no obstruction, there was no collusion, the president was exonerated even though he did not want to use, it is not a legal term. special couples sell mueller could not have used that word. there was a nice exchange with radcliffe, representative radcliffe, he said where is, our department of justice, why is president trump the only one who is not cleared from anything when there wasn't enough evidence -- charles: there is presumption of information. >> presumption of innocence always. charles: it was out of again, since mueller brought up the word for the day, purview, he should been deciding whether or not that was an opinion anyway.
i want to play for the audience, jim jordan, he had a pretty electric exchange with mueller. i want your thoughts on it. >> joseph must have sudden, the guy who told papadopoulos, the mysterious professor lives in rome and london, works and teaches at two different universities this guy told papadopoulos, he stars it all. when the fbi interviews him, he lies three times, yet you don't charge him with a crime. i'm cure why is as to why? >> i can't get into it and, it is obvious i think that we can't get into charging decisions. charles: kelly, here is what i'm wondering. after today, if the narrative changes how the republican will play this. okay, ig report is coming. we had clear examples of discrimination with respect to who charges were leveled against, who essentially was allowed to get away. the source of all this, the faulty steele dossier, this person was never charged with a crime. >> the fact that mueller went
into this testimony today, he said i'm not going to talk about the steele dossier, i will not talk about the origins of this investigation. the origins of this investigation were based on russian interference, based on gps. the fact he did not know what firm gps was, hillary clinton and dnc hired to dig up dirt, they hired a bunch of russians to dig up dirt on president is unbelievable. charles: how hard should republicans push on this? or should they sort of walk away, focus on the economy and -- >> we need to investigate the investigators because this was a deep conspiracy. it is a conspiracy that the mainstream media has ignored. when this inspector general complaint comes up this is something we need to look into. it affects future presidencies. this is not just about president trump. this was a gross abuse within the fbi and doj. charles: something to be said about our democracy and the republic itself. kelly appreciate it. a heated day on capitol hill for both sides as robert mueller
testifies in back-to-back hearing. we'll have reaction from house intelligence hearing rick crawford, why he asked this question to mueller. us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. we're the tenney's and we're usaa members for life. call usaa to start saving on insurance today.
charles: well nasdaq on pace for record close. boeing is the largest component on the dow. there are two things in addition to earnings investors waiting for. that is next week. talking about the federal reserve. they will have the big anticipated meeting. now this face-to-face trade talks with china on monday. i have to tell you treasury secretary steve mnuchin seems like he is trying to manage expectations. >> i was going to shanghai at their request. there is some symbolic
importance to them of the shanghai communique with kissinger. so i take that as an important step that they really are sincere wanting to move forward. very important to us. they're back in the markets buying agriculture. they made those commitments to us. we want to see those commitments fulfilled. my expectation there will be a few more meetings before we get a deal done. charles: a couple things were done there. mnuchin wisely set up expectations. they're going to meet. it is going to be in shanghai at the request of president xi. that's fantastic. china is doing things like buying soybeans and other things they promised to do. both sides making nice. we were here before. the markets love it. i want to bring in clear state advisors managing director jim awad to discuss. jim, we'll not be as excited this time around, right? there was a moment earlier in the year everyone figured this is just about done. we're 95% of the way. we've gone across heart break
hill. we can see the finish line. wall street will not make that assumption anymore. >> at this point wall street understands the issues are really fundamental and structural and that it is unlikely the chinese are able to meet the demand the chinese want. we're in a period of long-term economic confrontation. the question how can you manage it to minimize damage to both economic ecosystems. i think any progress will be viewed as moderately positive and as long as things are not getting worse or getting better, i don't think we will expect or get a major trade deal in the foreseeable future. charles: say if we're 90, 95% all the way there, they piecemeal, put out for public consumption, 15% what we agree on, work it out, work on the rest, will that calm the market? >> on the balance it is better
than a big disappointment. i think the market will focus back on fundamentals, the u.s. economy and corporate earnings and i don't think a deal or lack of a deal will have a positive or negative impact as much as it would a few month ago. charles: do you surprise the tariffs been in place, as long as they have been in place had not as deleterious impact on the economy and stock market as was warned? >> i think we're finding the effects are incremental over time. so far you can say the economies and companies handle it. the world would be better off in the short term. we're coming to the conclusion we can manage the process, change supply chains, not have economic catastrophe in the united states. charles: less than a minute, jim. i want to ask but the fed next week. this morning we saw purchasing managers data ugly across all of europe. the ecb meets in the morning. maybe they cut rates. where are we looking next week when the fed gets together? what have you modeled or handicapped? >> they have no choice to do at
least 25. charles: if it was 50 would you see that as good or bad? >> it depends oncommentary. if they say 50, we're likely to be done, the market wouldn't get scared the economy is collapsing. gradual system better, look we'll do 25, take a look, that would send calming issue to the market. 50, we're done, then the fed could get boxed into another bad corner. >> i don't think they want to make any announcements whether they're done or not. jim awad, always appreciate your expertise. >> pleasure, charles. charles: folk, we'll be right back.
... hi i'm joan lunden. today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.
>> can you repeat that? >> peter strzok. >> i'm sorry, can you move the microphone closer? >> sure, there's a quote attributed to peter strzok. he texted about this concern that there is "no big they're there in the trump campaign investigation. did he or anyone else who worked on the fbi's investigation tell you that around 10 months into the investigation the fbi still had no case for collusion? >> no. charles: well republican congressman crawford warned the members of the house intelligence committee grilling robert mueller today now he joins us live from capitol hill. let's look at how that went down representative thanks for joining us. your first question out of the gate was peter strzok and it feels like maybe you're trying to get a timeline here of when they knew maybe there was why perhaps they continued to spend millions of dollars of times square money to go down this hole. >> well it's a good question. you heard the answer and it
really asks another question, why are we spending north of $30 million to do something that we had an answer to already, and you know that's just not, it just doesn't seem prudent. charles: well, sir, also earlier , matt gates also had some pretty interesting going back and forth robert mueller, i want to share and get your thoughts. >> with regard to the steele that's beyond my perview. >> it is exactly your perview director mueller and here is why only one of two things is possible, right? either steele made this whole thing up and there were never any russians telling him of this vast criminal conspiracy that you didn't find or russians lied to steele. if russians were lying to steele to undermine our confidence in our duly-elected president that would seem to be precisely your pursue. charles: representative crawford , robert mueller made it clear on his initial statement that he did not want to go there he didn't want to talk about the dossier or anything else, yet
those are the big questions that seem to remain and what the public wants to know, will we really ever get the answers? >> well that's a good question. we do have an ig report forthcoming for mr. horowitz but as far as i'm concerned the mueller issue was i think put to bed here today. the idea being that of course what the democrats wanted to do was to try to get him outside the parameters of the four corners of that report that he wrote. i'm still not convinced that he actually wrote the report because he didn't show a great deal of familiarity with the report and i understand that, he is an executive. a lot of people contributed to the report but he should have been thorough in reviewing the report before he put his name on it because we call it the mueller report so we expect a lot better clearer answers and deferring to that's not in my perview. yeah, that's in your perview but the point is this. if we're going to get mueller out of the parameters of the report that opens up a whole new
area and line of questions that could take us down a road that i'm sure the dems don't want to go down that road and i think what's going to happen is the ig report will probably take us down that road. charles: well it appears that for whatever reason, robert mueller was sluggish, is at times confused, and he even had to come back and say answer to representative was misinterpret ed, getting ahead of the spend epidemic saying, what do you make of just the way this all went down? it feels like it's going to be a lot of second guessing on this whole episode. >> well i wasn't comfortable with it and i think they will probably use that to sort of discredit mr. mueller. on the other hand, everyone, almost every one of the members preface their comments with what a great patriot robert mueller was or is and his character and so on, but i don't believe they're going to be able to continue that narrative as they didn't get what they wanted out
of this report. charles: sir, thank you very much. it remains to be seen if they hold on to the impeachment dream s. in the meantime, the dow is off 97 points its gotten better. liz i'll tell you what the s&p and nasdac are really ahead of steam going into the last hour of trading. liz: liz, exactly. bingo. i can tell you i was just tweet ing that at liz claman because i was just tweeting you could see two record closes right here in this final hour of trade. thanks, charles. earnings shockwaves are rippling through the dow at least though as we head into the final hour of trade, but it's the beltway that's the epicenter of multiple legal earth quakes sending tremors coast to coast and right through the market's biggest names. the house of representatives, the scene of fire and fury, special counsel robert mueller still being put through the congressional ringer at this hour and the hearing has now extended nearly six hours. political shots flying from both sides of the aisle, we're going to take you live to capitol hill for what's being said in the