Rep. John Joyce: Impeachment inquiry is a sham


NEIL: ALL RIGHT. SO THE TWO SIDES ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT ON THIS. PENNSYLVANIA REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN, MEMBER OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY AND SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEES, JOHN DOITS IS WITH US.>> GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE IN SUCH AN IMPORTANT TIME. NEIL: WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENS WITH ALL OF THIS?>>I’LL TELL YOU, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SEEING THROUGH THIS. WHAT AMERICANS WANT IS A FAIR AND TRANSPARENT PROCESS AND THAT’S NOT WHAT’S BEEN PUT THROUGH. THIS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IS A SHAM. AND WITH THE SOVIET STYLE THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED WITH A CLAN C HAS BEEN PRESENTED WITH A CLAN A HAS BEEN PRESENTED WITH A CLAN N MEMBERS OF CONGRESS NOT BEING ABLE TO READ THE TRANSCRIPTS, AMERICANS ARE SEEING THROUGH IT AND THEY REALIZE THAT THE PRESIDENT IS NOT BEING ALLOWED DUE PROCESS. NEIL: IT’S THE EXACT SAME PROCESS, IS IT NOT, THAT REPUBLICANS UTILIZED DURING THE EARLY STAGES OF THE CLINTON IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATIONING RIGHT?>>BUT MOVING FORWARD, THE PRESIDENT WAS ALLOWED TO HAVE REPRESENTATION. AND THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED. NEIL: MOVING FORWARD IS WHEN YOU GET OUT OF THAT STAGE OF INTERVIEWING, RIGHT? AND BILL CLINTON WAS AT THAT POINT, AND THE PROMISES — MAYBE YOU’RE RIGHT TO BE SKEPTICAL, THE SAME WILL APPLY TO THE PRESIDENT HERE.>> SCHIFF IS FUNCTIONING AS WITNESS, AS PROSECUTOR, JUDGE AND JURY. WE NEED TO HAVE A FAIR AND OPEN AND TRANSPARENT PROCESS. AND WHAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE DONE IS REQUEST THAT. REQUEST THE ABILITY TO SEE WHAT’S GOING ON AND YESTERDAY ON VERY PARTISAN LINES AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY WAS VOTED THROUGH AND JUST IN MARCH NANCY PELOSI SAID WE WILL NOT PROCEED UNLESS THERE IS A BIPARTISAN VOTE. THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN YESTERDAY. THIS WAS A PARTISAN VOTE AND A CONTINUATION OF THE WITCH HUNT. WE THOUGHT HALLOWEEN ENDED YESTERDAY. THE WITCH HUNT CONTINUES.>> CONGRESSMAN, HI, JAMES FREEMAN OF THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT ISSUE, VERY DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS EFFORTS. YOU HAD A HUGE BIPARTISAN VOTE BEGINNING THE INQUIRY ON RICHARD NIXON. YOU HAD 31 DEMOCRATS VOTING ALONG WITH REPUBLICANS TO START THE INQUIRY ON BILL CLINTON. THIS CASE, AN ENTIRELY PARTISAN VOTE EXCEPT TWO DEMOCRATS VOTING WITH ALL THE REPUBLICANS AGAINST.>> THAT’S A GREAT –>>I’M JUST WONDERING, DID SPEAKER PELOSI MAKE ANY EFFORT TO SAY TO YOU AND OTHER REPUBLICANS, OKAY, WE’LL OPEN THE PROCESS, WE’LL GO WITH THE SAME RULES WE HAD WITH NIXON AND CLINTON, IN ORDER TO TRY AND GET YOU ON-BOARD FOR A AN INQUIRY OR WAS SHE SATISFIED, HAVING THIS BE A PARTISAN STATEMENT AND MAYBE UNDERSTANDING IT’S GOING TO GO NO FURTHER.>> CLEARLY, IT’S A PARTISAN STATEMENT. IT STARTED WITH A PRESS CONFERENCE AND IT’S PROCEEDED IN A PARTISAN WAY. THE ONLY BIPARTISAN VOTE WAS WHEN SOME DEMOCRATS VOTED WITH US TO TURN DOWN THIS PROCESS.>>CONGRESSMAN, DANA HUGHES% FROM DIVINE ASSET. I’M CURIOUS TO KNOW, WITH HE RESPECT TO TRANSPARENCY, WHAT IS IT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE FROM THE DEMOCRATS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY?>>FROM DAY ONE, AS A MEMBER OF THE 116th CONGRESS, I SHOULD BE A ALLOWED TO READ THE TRANSCRIPTS. I’VE GONE DOWN TO THE SKIP AND REQUESTED THAT, REQUESTED TO SEE WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED. BUT I WASN’T ALLOWED TO DO THAT. SO WE DO A VOTE WITHOUT THAT TRANS PARENT YOU SIGH, WITHOUT THAT — TRANSPARENCY, WITHOUT THAT OPEN PROCESS. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DEMAND A FAIR AND OPEN PROCESS AND WE HAVEN’T SEEN THAT. THE PRESIDENT HAS NOT BEEN ALLOWED THE DUE PROCESS THAT HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED, WHICH TRADITIONALLY AS YOU POINTED OUT DID OCCUR IN — WITH BOTH PRESIDENT NIXON AND WITH PRESIDENT CLINTON.>> HI, JOHN LONSKI OF MOODY’S. WHAT IS CONGRESS HEARING FROM CONSTITUENTS REGARDING THIS MATTER? ARE YOU GETTING A LOT OF CONSTITUENTS CLAIMING YOU HAVE TO PUSH FORWARD WITH THE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY OR ARE THEY TELLING YOU THAT THEY THINK IT’S A BIG MISTAKE?>>THAT’S A GREAT QUESTION. I HEAR FROM PHONE CALLS AND I HEAR WHEN I GO HOME EVERY WEEKEND, PROTECT THE PRESIDENT, MAKE THIS A FAIR AND OPEN PROCESS. PENNSYLVANIA 13 OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTS THE PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS ELECTED AND MY CONSTITUENTS FEEL THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IS TRYING TO REMOVE THEIR VOTE. THEY KNOW THAT THEY SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT. THEY TELL ME THEY COME TO WASHINGTON TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT AND I’LL MAKE A PREDICTION FOR YOU HERE TODAY. PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL AGAIN WIN PENNSYLVANIA AND HE WILL DO THAT BY A BIGGER MARGIN THAN WE SAW IN 2016. 2020, PRESIDENT TRUMP TAKES PENNSYLVANIA. NEIL: I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU ARE ON THE IMPEACHMENT THING. I’M CURIOUS, THE FACT THAT THE PRESIDENT DID CALL THE LEADER OF YOU UKRAINE AND DID ASK HIM TO INVESTIGATE OR GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE BIDENS’ ACTIVITIES IN UKRAINE, ON ANY LEVEL DOES THAT BOTHER YOU?>>THERE WAS NO QUID PRO QUO. NEIL: THAT’S NOT WHAT I’M ASKING. ON ANY LEVEL DOES IT BOTHER YOU THAT HE INSERTED HILL SELF IN POTENTIALLY A FOREIGN LEADER IN A U.S. ELECTION.>> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED. IT’S QUITE CONCERNING THAT SOMEONE WOULD BE PAID $50,000 A MONTH WITH NO BACKGROUND IN ENERGY, NO BACKGROUND IN — NEIL: I GET THAT, SIR. I DON’T MEAN TO BE RUDE. ON THE SURFACE OF THAT, WOULD THE PRESIDENT HAVE HAD THIS INTEREST IF IT WERE ANYBODY ELSE BUT JOE BIDEN WHO COULD BE HIS OPPONENT IN THE NEXT ELECTION, INSERTING A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT IN ANOTHER U.S. ELECTION SO SOON AFTER RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE LAST ONE.>> I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE INVESTIGATED. I THINK THIS WAS A QUESTION THAT NEEDED TO BE ASKED. NEIL: SO WHEN YOU SAY IT NEEDED TO BE ASKED, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT LOOKS, AND OBVIOUSLY YOU DON’T FIND THAT IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS WHO CLEARLY DO, LET’S ASSUME THE HOUSE GOES AHEAD AND FOLLOWS UP ON THAT AND IMPEACHES HIM. I IMAGINE IT WOULD BE A TOUGH ROAD IN THE SENATE. IS IT YOUR FEAR, THOUGH, THAT RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY, THE PRESIDENT WILL HAVE THAT BADGE ON HIM THAT HE HAS BEEN IMPEACHED IN THE HOUSE OF REP SENSES TESTIFIES, — REPRESENTATIVES. HE WOULD BE THE FIRST ONE WHO WOULD TRY TO STAND FOR RE-ELECTION AFTER SOMETHING LIKE THAT. DOES THAT WORRY YOU?>>IT DOES NOT WORRY HE ME. I THINK WHAT’S CLEAR IS THE DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO GO AFTER THE PRESIDENT WITH IMPEACHMENT BECAUSE THEY KNOW HE WILL BE RE-ELECTED AND SUCCESSFUL IN THE BALLOT BOX. NEIL: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

Rand Paul: Bolton was working against Trump


LOT TO DO WITH BIGGER ISSUES AND NO ILL WILL TOWARD THE PRESIDENT. THAT WAS THEN. THIS IS NOW. KENTUCKY REPUBLICAN SENATOR RAND PAUL, GOOD TO SEE YOU. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS?>>I THINK THE THREAT OF WAR AROUND THE WORLD IS GREATLY DIMINISHED WITH BOLTON OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE. I THINK HE HAD A NAIVE POINT OF VIEW FOR THE WORLD THAT WE SHOULD TOPPLE REGIMES EVERYWHERE AND INSTITUTE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS AND WE WOULD MAKE THE WORLD PERFECT OR REMAKE THE WORLD IN OUR IMAGE AND FRANKLY DOESN’T WORK THAT WAY. THERE’S A LOT OF HISTORY OF GETTING RID OF STRONGMEN IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND HAVING THEM REPLACED BY VACUUMS OR CHAOS. OR ACTUALLY MAKING THE PLACE MORE HOSPITABLE FOR TERRORIST TRAINING. I THINK HIS IDEA THAT THE WAY YOU DEAL WITH IRAN IS TOPPLE THE GOVERNMENT OR THE WHALE — THE WAY YOU DEAL WITH NORTH KOREA IS TOPPLE THE GOVERNMENT. THE PRESIDENT IS TALKING ABOUT NOT HAVING REGIME CHANGE AND FINDING A DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION OF SOME OF THESE CONFLICTS AROUND THE WORLD, AND I THINK THE PRESIDENT DESERVES TO HAVE SOMEBODY WHO’S HIS NATIONAL SECURITY VISOR WHO ACTUALLY WILL TRY TO FURTHER HAS POLICY AND NOT TRY TO STYMIE IT.>>Neil: CENTER, YOUR COLLEAGUE TED CRUZ DIDN’T QUITE FEEL THE SAME WAY. HE SAID I SINCERELY HOPE IS LEAVING REFERRING TO BOLTON DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE DEEP STATE FORCES AT STATE AND TREASURER WHO BEEN FIGHTING TOOTH AND NAIL TO PRESERVE THE OBAMA IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL HAVE FINALLY CONVINCED THE PRESIDENT TO GO SOFT ON IRAN. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF IT?>>I THINK IT’S MORE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN INTERVENE EVERYWHERE AND WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE REGIME CHANGE AND WHETHER WE SHOULD TRY DIPLOMACY. WHETHER WE SEE THE WORLD AS IT IS AND TRY TO WORK WITHIN THE WORLD AND ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD OR WHETHER WE SAY OH, WE MUST HAVE A PERFECT THOMAS JEFFERSON LEADER IN EVERY COUNTRY. THE PROBLEM IS IS WHEN PEOPLE LIKE BOLTON’S AND WE ARE GOING TO TOPPLE QADDAFI AND MAKE LIBYA INTO A GREAT AMERICAN-STYLE REPUBLIC, THEY DON’T ELECT THOMAS JEFFERSON. THEY ELECT ANOTHER RELIGIOUS LEADER WHO BECOMES AN AUTOCRAT IN PLACE OF ONE RELIGIOUS LEADER OR AUTOCRAT. I THINK THE MIDDLE EAST IN MANY PLACES THAT HAVE BEEN RULED BY STRONGMEN, THE ANSWER ISN’T MILITARY REGIME CHANGE AND I THINK BOLTON WAS VERY WRONG AND I EVEN AS A WORLDVIEW. I’M GLAD TO SEE THEM GONE. I HOPE THE PRESIDENT CAN FIND SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY LISTENS TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS. THIS PRESIDENT IS EXTRAORDINARY. IN HIS STATE OF THE UNION, HE’S HAD GREAT NATIONS DON’T FIGHT PERPETUAL WAR. HE’S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, BUT THAT DEFIES THE ORTHODOXY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT FOREIGN POLICY IN WASHINGTON, AND SO THE PRESIDENT REALLY NEEDS TO FIND SOMEBODY WHO HAS THE GUTS TO STAND UP TO THE ORTHODOXY, NOT SOMEONE WHO IS PART OF THE SWAMP.>>Neil: ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT IS THE PRESIDENT’S POSITION? BECAUSE HE HAS NOW GONE THROUGH THREE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORS. MICHAEL FLYNN, H.R. MCMASTER, NOW JOHN BOLTON. ALL FOR VARIOUS REASONS BUT THERE’S A HIGH TURNOVER PARTICULARLY IN THAT AREA AND FOREIGN POLICY. A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT IT AND SAY WHAT DO YOU WANT? WHAT DO YOU STAND FOR?>>THE INTERESTING THING IS IF YOU LOOK AT DONALD TRUMP OVER THE LAST DECADE OR MORE, ONE OF THE CONSISTENT THEMES THAT YOU WILL HEAR HIM SPEAK OF MAY BE FOR 20 OR 30 YEARS IS THE IDEA THAT REGIME CHANGE DOESN’T WORK. HE SAID FOR A LONG, LONG TIME THE IRAQ WAR WAS A MISTAKE AND WE EMBOLDENED AROUND BY GETTING RID OF SADDAM HUSSEIN AND THERE WAS A COUNTERBALANCE AND HAVING SADDAM HUSSEIN THERE THAT THAT VACUUM ALLOWED ISIS TO GROW AND THEN VACUUM, AND SO REALLY I THINK THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN VERY, VERY CONSISTENT.>>Neil: YOU MENTIONED ISIS, SENATOR . ISIS WAS ON THE RUN, ISIS WAS DEFEATED. FOREIGN POLICY ADVISORS URGED HIM TO COOL IT ON THAT KIND OF TALK BECAUSE IT EMBOLDENED THE ENEMY. SURE ENOUGH, ISIS POPPED UP IN OTHER LOCALES. DOES HE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH HIS WORDING?>>I WOULD SAY THAT THE PRESIDENT IS VERY AND VERY CONSISTENT BELIEVING IN A MORE REALISTIC FOREIGN POLICY AND LESS OF A NEOCONSERVATIVE FOREIGN POLICY. SOME OF THE PEOPLE HE’S PICKED HAVEN’T BEEN PEOPLE WHO’VE AGREED WITH THE PRESIDENT BUT I CAN GO BACK TO REAGAN’S ADMINISTRATION WHERE ALL OF US CONSERVATIVES LOVED RONALD REAGAN AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN HE WAS APPOINTING SOMETIMES PEOPLE WHO WE DIDN’T THINK FRANKLY WERE CONSERVATIVE OR FULFILLING REAGAN’S VISION. I THINK THIS IS TRUE IN EVERY ADMINISTRATION, BUT MY ADVICE AND MY HOPE IS THAT THE PRESIDENT WILL PICK SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY LISTENS TO WHAT HE SAYS AND WANTS TO FURTHER HIS GOALS. I THINK THE PRESIDENT COULD DO SOMETHING REALLY HEROIC AND DRAMATIC IN GETTING US OUT OF THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN AND I THINK HE WOULD IF HE DIDN’T HAVE PEOPLE WORKING FOR HIM WHO WERE CONTRADICTING AND COUNTER MANDATING HIS ORDERS AND HAVE THEIR OWN AGENDA.>>Neil: WOULD THAT INCLUDE, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE ARE TOLD MR. BOLTON RAISED HIS CONCERNS ABOUT THAT MEETING WITH THE TALIBAN AT CAMP DAVID NO LESS, AND THAT AT THE VERY LIST THE OPTICS DIDN’T LOOK GOOD AND THE TIMING SO CLOSE TO 9/11, DO YOU THINK THERE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EXPRESSING CONCERNS AND BEING DEEMED NOT A TEAM PLAYER?>>I THINK THE THING IS ABOUT THE TALIBAN, WHETHER WE NEGOTIATE WITH THEM, HOW WE LEAVE, ALL WARS ULTIMATELY END AND THERE ULTIMATELY IS A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT UNLESS YOU HAVE UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER LIKE AFTER WORLD WAR II WITH JAPAN OR GERMANY. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEIR REST OF THE WARS AND WITH NEGOTIATIONS.>>Neil: WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN FOR THOSE TALKS WITH THE TALIBAN?>>HERE’S WHAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT IT. IT’S A CONFUSING SITUATION. I THINK THE TALIBAN NEEDS TO NEGOTIATE BUT I THINK THEY SHOULD NEGOTIATE DIRECTLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF AFGHANISTAN. THEY HAVE REFUSED TO DO SO. PART OF ONE WHITE THAT WE END THE WAR AS WE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT IN A LESSENING FASHION THROUGH MONEY AND ARMS THE GOVERNMENT OF AFGHANISTAN AND WE HAVE THEM STEP UP. REALLY IT’S THE OBLIGATION OF THEM TO BE STRONG ENOUGH THAT THE TALIBAN WOULD NEGOTIATE WITH THEM. RIGHT NOW THE TALIBAN DOESN’T BELIEVE THEY ARE STRONG ENOUGH SO THEY NEGOTIATE WITH US AS A PROXY BUT THE PROBLEM IS THE TALIBAN AREN’T RELIABLE. THEY ARE VIOLENT AND, AND CONTINUE TO COMMIT VIOLENCE. THE PEOPLE NEGOTIATING WITH US MAY NOT HAVE THE STRENGTH OF ORGANIZATION TO CONTROL ALL ELEMENTS OF EVERYBODY ELSE IN AFGHANISTAN.>>Neil: SO GIVEN THOSE DYNAMICS, YOU WOULD NOT BEFORE PUTTING TALKS BACK ON? THE PRESIDENT SAID THIS ATTACK THAT KILLED A U.S. SOLDIER, THAT HE WOULD NOT ENTERTAIN IT, SAYING THE TALKS WOULD NOT HAPPEN. DO YOU AGREE?>>I THINK THE TALIBAN NEEDS TO HAVE A CEASE-FIRE NEED TO QUIT KILLING AMERICANS. HOWEVER, PEACE COMES WHEN WE MAKE THE DECISION THAT WE DECLARE VICTORY AND WE COME HOME AND SHOULDN’T BE DEPENDENT ON THE TALIBAN. I DON’T THINK THE TALIBAN FRANKLY ARE TRUSTWORTHY, NOR DO I THINK THE PEOPLE NEGOTIATING HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL THE OTHER FIGHTERS IN THE FIELD BUT NEVERTHELESS I WOULD COME HOME BECAUSE THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE TO CONTROL LAND AROUND THE WORLD TO PREVENT TERRORISM IS A FALLACY. THERE’S LAND EVERYWHERE. THERE IS CHAOS IN AFRICA. THERE IS CHAOS IN THE MIDDLE EAST. THERE’S ALL KINDS OF PLACE ARE TERRORIST TO BE. IT’S A FOOLISH NOTION TO THINK AMERICA HAS TO BE ALL THOSE PLACES POLICING ON THOSE AREAS TO PREVENT TERRORISM. WE SHOULD BE VIGILANT ABOUT WHO COMES TO THE COUNTRY. THE PEOPLE ON 9/11 CAME HERE LEGALLY. WE SHOULD PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE WHO WOULD COME TO OUR COUNTRY. WE SHOULD HAVE STRICT RULES ON WHO COMES INTO OUR COUNTRY. WE SHOULD HAVE GREAT INTELLIGENCE AROUND THE WORLD. IT DOESN’T MEAN WE HAVE TO OCCUPY EVERY ACRE.>>Neil: ‘S MAY BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD ECHO SOME CONCERNS THAT MR. BOLTON HAD THEN WE ARE LEARNING, SENATOR, THAT THERE’S BEEN AN EXPLOSION IN THE AFGHAN CAPITAL NEAR THE U.S. EMBASSY TECHNICALLY ON 9/11, THE ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11 THEIR TIME. ISN’T THAT THE SAME KIND OF THING MR. BOLTON WAS CONCERNED ABOUT AND WORRY THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT?>>IF YOU SET THE GOAL THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE NO VIOLENCE BEFORE RELIEVING THAT THERE WILL BE NO RADICAL JIHADISTS IN AFGHANISTAN, WE WILL NEVER LEAVE. YOU SHOULD ASK THE OPPOSITE QUESTION. WHAT IS THE MISSION? IS IT NATION-BUILDING AND SPEND $50 BILLION A YEAR, 45 MILLION ON GAS STATIONS, ROADS AND SCHOOLS, IS THAT OUR MISSION? IS THE MISSION TO DEFEND THE COUNTRY? WHAT’S THE MISSION? THERE’S NOT ONE GENERAL WHO CAN TELL YOU WHAT OUR MISSION IS. IS IT THE VIETNAM MISSION, TO TAKE ONE MORE VILLAGE, GET A BETTER NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT? IS THAT WITH THEIR — WE ARE THEREFORE? THERE IS NO NATIONAL SECURITY REASON TO BE THERE. THERE IS NO AL QAEDA. ALTHOUGH LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN DESTROYED. THE TALIBAN ARE FIGHTING AGAINST FOREIGN FIGHTERS. THE TALIBAN ARE INTO THIS INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION THAT’S GOING TO COME TO THE UNITED STATES. PEOPLE FIGHTING HISTORICALLY FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS EVERY TIME FOREIGN FIGHTERS COMPARED>>Neil: THE WAY THE PRESIDENT HANDLE THAT, HE’S FREE TO HIRE AND FIRE WHOEVER HE WANTS. THEY SERVE AT HIS PLEASURE. HE OFTEN DOESN’T TELL THEM DIRECTLY. MR. BOLTON SAID IT DIDN’T HAPPEN THAT WAY. REX TILLERSON WHO FOUND OUT VIA TWEET THAT HE WAS OUT, THE PRESIDENT DOESN’T DIRECTLY SEEM TO TELL THEM.>>IF YOU’RE GOING TO WORK THE PRESIDENT, YOU NEED TO WORK FOR THE PRESIDENT AND TRY TO FURTHER THE PRESIDENT’S AGENDA. MY OPINION IS THAT I SAW JOHN BOLTON WORKING AGAINST THE PRESIDENT’S AGENDA. HE HAD HIS OWN AGENDA. THE PRESIDENT WAS TRYING TO NEGOTIATE A DEAL WITH NORTH KOREA AND YOU HAD BOLTON SAYING WE SHOULD TRY THE LIBYAN SOLUTION WHICH MEANS WE SHOULD EXECUTE THEIR LEADER. THAT’S NOT VERY HELPFUL TO ANY KIND OF NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT WITH NORTH KOREA OR ANY COUNTRY.

Kudlow suggests a partial deal with China could be next step


NEIL: ALL RIGHT, WELCOME BACK, EVERYONE. THE DOW DOWN ONE AND A QUARTER POINTS. WHAT TOOK US OFF THE WORST LEVELS INDICATION BY LARRY KUDLOW, WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIC ADVISOR THAT A PARTIAL DEAL IS DOABLE AND IS NOT NECESSARILY DEAD ON ARRIVAL HERE. SO THE CHINA TRADE TALKS WHICH WE CALLED FOR STRUCTURAL REFORMS EVERYTHING IN CHINA, HOW THEY GET INFORMATION, INTELLIGENCE, ALL OF THAT, THAT MIGHT BE ON A BACKBURNER IF WE DO THIS. IF SO, IT WOULD BE A 180 FOR THIS WHITE HOUSE WHO WANT AD COMPREHENSIVE ACROSS THE BOARD DEAL. ALL THIS IS BASED ON CONJECTURE FROM LARRY KUDLOW COMMENTS. “WALL STREET JOURNAL” JON HILSENRATH ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS. WHAT DO YOU THINK?>>SO, NEIL, THERE HAS BEEN, THE CHINESE HAVE BEEN TALKING FOR SEVERAL WEEKS NOW ABOUT NARROWING THE SCOPE OF THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE U.S. THEY’RE NOT BUYING INTO THE IDEA OF MAJOR STRUCTURAL REFORM OF THEIR ECONOMY, REINING IN FOR INSTANCE, THEIR SUPPORT FOR STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE PIECES IN PLACE WHERE THE TWO SIDES MIGHT AGREE TO AT LEAST CALM THINGS DOWN A LITTLE BIT. THE CHINESE, AS WE’RE REPORTING TODAY, HAVE ALREADY BEEN INCREASING THEIR PURCHASES OF U.S. SOYBEANS. SO ONE PIECE OF A POTENTIAL AGREEMENT IS, INCREASED IMPORTS OF U.S. AGRICULTURAL GOODS. THE CHINESE HAVE ALSO SIGNALED, THAT YOU KNOW, THEY’RE WILLING TO LOOK AT CHANGING HOW THEY ENFORCE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RULES. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS GONE BACK SEVERAL MONTHS. THAT COULD BE A PIECE OF IT. YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY TAKE THE STEPS IN RETURN FOR THE U.S. BACKING OFF ON THREATENED TARIFF INCREASES. OCTOBER 15th, THERE IS ANOTHER ROUND OF TARIFF INCREASES COMING. THERE IS ANOTHER ROUND AFTER THAT IN DECEMBER. SO MAYBE THEY AGREE TO SOME KIND OF DE-ESCALATION THAT DOESN’T ESOLVE THE WHOLE CONFLICT. NEIL: THE IRONY WOULD BE, THIS IS A DEAL, PROBABLY IF IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT YOU OUTLINED THAT COULD HAVE BEEN SCORED A WHILE AGO BUT EVERYONE WAS WAITING TO SEE IF A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ONE TO THE PRESIDENT’S LIKING THAT ADDRESSES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND ALL THAT, COULD BE SCORED. NOW, IF THAT IS OUT, I KNOW THE WALL STREET VIEW, ANY DEAL IS BETTER THAN KNOW DEAL. MAYBE THAT WINS OUT FOR THE DAY. WHAT DO YOU THINK ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUCH A DEAL?>>YOU KNOW, NEIL, I DON’T KNOW IF I AGREE WITH THIS IDEA THAT ANY DEAL IS BETTER THAN NO DEAL BECAUSE FRANKLY WHAT IS HOLDING BUSINESS BACK RIGHT NOW IS THIS UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE TRADE LANDSCAPE, AND HOW IT IS GOING TO PLAY OUT. IF THEY DO SOME KIND OF A PARTIAL DEAL WHERE THERE IS STILL TARIFFS IN PLACE AND THERE MIGHT BE MORE PUT ON DOWN THE LINE, I DON’T THINK IT NECESSARILY REDUCES THAT UNCERTAINTY THAT’S HOLDING EXECUTIVES BACK FROM INVESTING. NEIL: I THINK YOU’RE RIGHT. I’M SORRY, MY FRIEND, BUT THE LATEST REMINDER THIS HOUSTON ROCKETS GENERAL MANAGER HAD TO APOLOGIZE FOR A TWEET SUPPORTING THE HONG KONG PROTESTERS AND THEN EVERYONE JUMPING UGLY ABOUT IT. DON’T OFFEND CHINA, DON’T OFFEND CHINA. WE THOUGHT WE PROGRESSED FROM THAT BUT THIS IS A CLEAR REMINDER, NO, WE HAVEN’T.>>THIS BRINGS, THIS WHOLE NEGOTIATION IT SHOWS HOW IT GOES BEYOND JUST TRADE AND REFORM OF THE CHINESE ECONOMY. THE PRESIDENT IS EMBROILED RIGHT NOW IN IMPEACHMENT PROCESS HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. HE IS ALSO BROUGHT THE CHINESE INTO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATING THE BIDEN FAMILY. THE CHINESE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THIS CRISIS ON THEIR HANDS IN HONG KONG WITH CIVIL UNREST. AND THOSE ISSUES, YOU HAVE TO THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK FOR THE NEGOTIATORS ON THE TRADE FRONT, THEY’RE TRYING TO PUT, PUT THEM OUT OF THE PICTURE BUT I THINK FOR THE TOP LEAD ES, FOR PRESIDENT XI AND PRESIDENT TRUMP, THOSE THINGS WILL WEIGH INTO THINGS. AND YOU KNOW, THERE IS A LOT OF MILESTONES IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS INCLUDING POTENTIALLY A MEETING IN NOVEMBER WHERE WE HAVE TO SEE HOW THE SIDE STORIES PLAY INTO THE OVERALL THINKING. NEIL: IT MAKES YOU WONDER, I KNOW YOU REPORTED ON THIS A LOT, U.S. INTERESTS TO DO BUSINESS IN CHINA AND CONTINUE DOING BUSINESS IN HONG KONG WHERE WE’VE HAD THESE PROTESTS THEY WILL DO ANYTHING BUT TRY TO BRING ON THE WRATH OF CHINA BECAUSE THEY ALL OF SUDDEN KNOW THEIR BUSINESS IS SCREWED, A LOT OF OTHER BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY ARE HURT. EVEN IN THE CASE OF A PROFESSIONAL BASKETBALL FRANCHISE, THAT IS HELD INTO QUESTION. SO WE STILL KIND OF SUCK UP TO THEM, DON’T WE?>>ABSOLUTELY. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT AMERICAN BUSINESS, AMERICAN MULTINATIONALS, SPENT THE LAST QUARTER CENTURY BUILDING A MANUFACTURING FOOTPRINT IN CHINA. THAT IS THEIR MAIN SOURCE OF PRODUCTION. ALSO DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO TAP CHINESE CONSUMERS WHICH IS THIS LARGE CONSUMER BASE, ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING CONSUMER BASES IN THE WORLD, FOR COUNTRIES LIKE GENERAL MOTORS, APPLE, IT’S A HUGE AIR FOR BUSINESS AND THE NBA. AMERICAN COMPANIES ARE KIND OF STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CONFLICT BETWEEN AMERICAN WORKERS WHO PRESIDENT TRUMP IS SIDING WITH AND THE CHINESE AND, YOU KNOW AMERICAN BUSINESS IS NOT IN A GOOD PLACE RIGHT NOW. NEIL: SO WE MANAGED TO GET MORE SOYBEANS SOLD, SOME OTHER THINGS, HOPEFULLY WE’LL BE GOOD BUT SOME OF THE CORE ISSUES NOT SO GOOD?>>AND ON THE SOYBEANS LET’S NOT FORGET WE WERE SELL THE CHINESE A LOT OF SOYBEANS AND THEY HAVE CUT BACK ON HOW MUCH THEY — YOU HAVE TO WONDER IF THEY WILL RAMP BACK UP THEIR AGRICULTURAL IMPORTS TO WHERE THEY WERE AND, WE MIGHT BE ASKING OURSELVES IN