tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN February 5, 2018 11:00am-12:00pm PST
it was the palestinian refugees that set off the lebanese civil war in 1975. the worry is that lebanon's delicate sectarian balance could be thrown out of whack by so many syrians in the country. wolf? >> awful situation indeed. ben, thank you for that report. that's it for me. i will be back at 5:00 p.m. eastern in the situation room for our international viewers aymanpour is next. newsroom with anderson cooper starts right now. i'm anderson cooper. we begin with a test of transparency the president is expected to face in a few hours when the house intelligence committee will meet and democrats on it likely will push for a vote to release the rebuttal to the memo that went public on friday. it alleges the fbi abused surveillance authority to monitor a former trump campaign
member carter page. republicans on the committee are expected to support the release of this counter memo, if you will. the question is if the president will allow it to come out especially since it will under mine what he tweeted about the first memo. trump tweeted this memo vindicates trump in probe but the russian witch hunt goes on. there was no collusion and no obstruction. the word now used because after one year of looking endlessly and finding nothing collusion is dead. this is an american disgrace. while the president believes the nunes memo vindicates him that's not what high level republicans are saying including trey gowdy. >> i don't think it has an impact on the russian probe. >> it doesn't? >> i was involved in the drafting of it. there is a russian investigation without a dosier. to the extent the memo deals with the dosier, it has nothing
to do with the meeting at trump tower, nothing to do with an e-mail sent by cambridge. the dossier has nothing to do with pthe meeting. there will be a probe meeting even without the dossier. >> pamela brown joins us now. what's the president say on releasing the memo? >> they will evaluate the democratic memo if it comes to the white house. it stopped short of saying the president will cle classify it. basically saying it will go through the same process the republican memo did with white house lawyers looking at it. a white house spokesman said it will go through the same mechanism as the republican memo. really won't make a decision until the process happens. as you know with the republican memo the president said he would release it 100% before it even went through that process.
if it does pass through the house which it is expected to do, it will come to the white house although the president is tweeting today, targeting the ranking democrat on the house intelligence committee calling him a liar and a leaker. adam schiff fired back mocking the president for the way he's using his executive time saying instead of tweeting false smears american people would like him to turn off the tv and focus on the funding crisis, the dreamers and so forth. the tweet from the president isn't confidence-inspiring from presidents hoping when he comes to the white house, if it comes to the white house that the president will declassify it. on the other hand, the president tweeted today praising devon nunes, a republican on the house intelligence committee saying representative nunes, a man of tremendous courage and grit, may some day be recognized as a great american hero for what he's exposed and what he's had to endure. the president tweeted that the memo has vindicated him.
ross shaw, the white house spokesman, was speaking on air force one today and tried to explain it to reporters saying basically the president was saying the memo shows that politics has played a role in the department of justice and the fbi since the campaign. it's unclear exactly how this memo does that. you heard there other republicans are backing away from an explanation that the memo vindicates the president or under mines the russian probe saying it has nothing to do with the mueller investigation. anderson? >> has the white house confirmed whether or not they had any contact with devin nunes or his staffers in the creation of this republican memo? that question has been asked several times of the white house over the last several days. sarah sanders said she didn't believe there was contact directly with devin nunes but she didn't know. she never answered if staffers had contact with the white house. >> the white house hasn't
directly answered that. we know nunes was an official during the trump administration transition. certainly raised a lot of questions. particularly you see the president tweeting directly to him today saying he should be recognized as a great american hero. but the white house has not said it worked hand in hand with devin nunes with getting the memo out. >> thank you very much. now more on the back and forth between the president and the top democrat on the intelligence committee. today in a tweet the president said little adam schiff, one of the biggest liars and leakers in washington and said schiff must be stopped. schiff responded on twitter saying, mr. president, i see you have had a busy morning of executive time. instead of tweeting false smears the american people would like it if you turned off the tv, protected dreamers, helped solve the funding crisis or really anything else. the house intelligence committee
are to vote today on releasing their own memo, a counter punch to the one released by republicans. >> we could be at the end of the day a step closer to potentially seeing that democratic memo. the house intelligence committee are meeting at 5:00 p.m. tonight where we believe they will hold a vote whether to publically release the democratic memo or not. republicans have the majority on the committee. this memo needs republican support to pass through. our capitol hill team reporting at least three republicans on the committee say they will vote in support of publically releasing the document which in essence sends that over to the white house. essentially puts the ball potentially in president trump's court when and if it is passed through tonight. it will be president trump's decision then to potentially declassify the memo, release it publically or not. as you heard pam brown report there, the white house is mum on what they'll do, saying they'll
evaluate it when and if it comes to the white house. certainly no firm word there what president trump intends to do. democrats up here on capitol hill are certainly trying to ratchet up the political pressure on president trump to do so when it goes over there to the white house. the minority leader chuck schumer over the weekend saying it's only fair, a matter of fundamental fairness to let the public see both sides. both the republicans and now potentially the democratic document. >> you may have said this, but what time is the vote expected so we can anticipate it? >> 5:00 p.m. eastern behind closed doors on capitol hill. the highly secretive house intelligence committee. we'll certainly be reporting around that vote tonight when and if they send that democratic memo. >> thank you very much. appreciate that. we'll check in later on. joining me now john dean who was white house counsel for president nixon. john cooperated with investigators during watergate. kim whaley, associate counsel
during the whitewater investigation of president clinton. you heard them talk about why the memo doesn't vindicate the president. trey gou di is not running for re-election. if there was no dossier what case do you see robert mueller having? the president says no obstruction. i don't know how he can say that? >> a case with respect to getting a fisa warrant, my presumption is there was a substantial amount of information presented to the judge. what's forgotten in this discussion is that as a matter of separation of powers this is a federal judge, an article 3 judge who made the determination. it's not for congresstosecond guess it from either side of the aisle. as far as obstruction of justice, we don't know what the mueller team has other than the president's statements that he fired comey because of the russia investigation. everybody needs to pump the brakes and let the process
continue. the investigative process continue. we have an election in the fall coming up. we don't know the extent to which the russians influenced the last election. even the hashtag # release the memo has come out this morning. it was influenced in part by the russians. broader questions of democracy are at stake here. that's what we should focus on -- not on the back and forth on the content of the memos which are irrelevant to whether the judge did the right thing. >> i wonder what you make of republicans pushing back on the president's claim? we heard from a number of republicans over the weekend. >> indeed we did. we also heard from jerry nadler, the ranking member of the house judiciary committee where he eviscerated or further eviscerated the nunes memo. i think trey gowdy who is an attorney analyzed what was there and tried to be honest about it. rather than to spin it. i think when you do that there
is no there there. this effort was a dud. >> kim, you talked about the application for fisa. can you talk about the level of information that has to be provided to a judge in order to get a warrant? the republicans seem to be alleging in the memo because it's very limited, this memo, that this steele dossier was the reason for the fisa warrant and application. >> we understand from the nunes memo that george papadopolous in june or july of 2016 kicked off the investigation. it's created by congress after watergate in order to provide sufficient oversight of the investigative process.
we don't know what's in the application for the warrant. it had a tremendous amount of information besides the dossier. there was probably data relating to information with respect to contacts with a number of people. it probably had informant information, all kinds of additional stuff we don't have access to as the american public through the nunes memo. that's why this conversation is a distortion and super, super unfortunate in terms of getting clarity and accountability. >> john, i wonder what you think are the chances that the president would not release the democratic memo. we heard the president say the night he gave the state of the union 100% he was going to release the republican memo. this was apparently before he had read it. we have heard nothing like that from the president. we have seen the president laying a foundation, attacking adam shichiff. and the white house saying,
look, not confirming one way or another whether or not this memo would be released. >> it would be extraordinary if he did not. what this president does is always unpredictable. he may want to play it politically and somehow deny the release of it. that would take it back to capitol hill where the entire house has to vote to release it then. i think it's coming out one way or the other. the president may play a game with it and make further focus on it. i don't think he's doing himself any favors by keeping the focus on this memo. it really should be time to move on. >> kim, a supervisory agent toured the fbi because of the political acts against the agency. josh campbell says they welcome and need criticism to get better but what agents require is beyond that. >> the fbi cannot do its job without support from the public.
when an fbi agent knocks on a door and they need assistance or the fbi tries to recruit an informant to provide information the only reason people will talk to us is if they trust us. i'm afraid -- myself and many of my colleagues -- is that this corrosive doubt about the agency that's been able to seep into the national discussion because of politics is something that's going to negatively impact our ability to do our job. we just want the temperature to come down. if we need an important national discussion on actions that took place in the fbi it's something we'll welcome and we can do. we want the temperature down so we can have an effective dialogue. >> josh had an op-ed in the "new york times." he's now a cnn contributor. kim, what do you make of what he's saying? he said the president is doing this to soften the blow against looming charges. >> he's spot on. i think he makes a point that every viewer should focus on. that's that we need a functioning criminal justice system that calls balls and strikes based on facts and the
law. of course there are bad apples. we have a history of problems in the fbi under the hoover administration, et cetera. that's why we have a ten-year term now for the fbi director. we don't want a situation where fbi agents worry about doing their jobs because they get political backlash and are nationally humiliated in a politicized environment. the fbi does a lot of stuff in addition to uncovering public corruption. they deal with terrorism, cyber crimes, violent crimes, all kinds of things that everyday americans want to have function so we can all be safe and have civil liberties protected. in addition to having worked on an investigation, the president, myself, bill clinton in the whie whitewater investigation, i teach constitutional law. we need a conversation around the separation of powers and how it's at stake now. if it starts to get to a situation where we don't have independent branches doing their job based on the facts and the law because they are so worried about it being politicized we
start getting away from the democracy. it's a serious situation. >> there's been silence from jeff sessions, the head of the department of justice, the attorney general. kim, john, preaappreciate it. coming up again, the threat of another government shutdown. there's breaking news. steep losses on wall street. the dow tumbling 1,000 points across two straight sessions. also happening now, los angeles detectives holding a news conference providing appses nsw the death of natalie wood. why they say robert wagner is a person of interest. we'll have a live report.
welcome back. as lawmakers push once again to reach a deal on immigration you see the president in cincinnati ohio at a manufacturing plant. he'll be speaking around 2:30. we'll bring you the president's comments live. stick around for that. the battle on immigration continues before the government shutdown deadline friday, the white house is rejecting another bipartisan compromise. republican senator john mccain and chris kuhns are introducing a bill to grant permanent legal status to dreamers. the big thing missing, it doesn't authorize the $25 billion president trump wants for the border wall and it instead funds a study of the needs. joining us, host of s.e. cupp. does it make sense to have a
study before giving the money to build a wall? >> sure. absolutely. congress has not figured out the politics of this issue at all. trump feels emboldened by what happened during the shutdown after democrats left with nothing to show for it. it's not sprie ee's not surpris blow up a deal to get what he wants. there is nothing in the bipartisan deal for republicans. there is no wall. it doesn't end chain immigration, the visa lottery program. suggesting a study is almost a joke. in exchange for daca. i imagine president trump feels like he laid out a blueprint after being slammed, rightly, for not being clear on what he would sign. he gave a blueprint out of the
white house. here's what i want. it is at least a place to start. for another group of lawmakers to come forward without really addressing the meat on the bones that trump wants, i think, is just a missed opportunity. republicans have so much advantage now. they are not using it. >> chris, talking about a study, isn't that kind of kicking the can down the road? >> yeah. no question. what it is, anderson, is an attempt to say here is a neutral judgment on how much of a wall is necessary, what kind of wall. to put the politics out of the wall at this point. it's not a bad idea from a policy perspective even if it would delay the building of the wall. but trump has from the beginning latched onto the idea that we need a wall. he's morphed a little bit in terms of what the wall needs to look like. he's not going for anything like this. he believes he has the momentum that democrats caved last time. i still am really skeptical that
democrats will give him the $25 billion for a wall. the question is how much will they give him and how much is he willing to take. to me that's where this debate begins and ends. this proposal, while bipartisan, you know, john mccain isn't exactly republicans' favorite. he's not donald trump's favorite republican. i'm not sure that's going to get anywhere other than it being introduced or proposed and going away rapidly. >> democrats are pointing to the march 5 deadline for dreamers. a federal judge delayed that deadline. so while pending various processes in court. republicans can make the argument, well, look, there isn't this march 5 deadline. >> yeah. unfortunately for democrats it was sort of the last thing they could use for leverage to get it done quickly. now republicans can say, no, no,
let's take our time and hold out for getting the things which we wanted. we've got the house, senate and the white house. the first thing we do on immigration can't be a daca deal without anything else attached. that's not why they were elected. >> i want to ask about house speaker paul ryan. in an attempt to applaud the tax bill he tweeted touting a secretary at a public high school who said she was pleasantly surprised her pay went up $1.50 a week. this is what the secretary said. >> i responded to a twitter poll, did you see a change, yes or no. i said yes and i answered four or five simple questions. i answered them honestly. when she asked what i would do with the extra money, that's the only thing i could think of is it would cover my costco membership for the year. i answered it honestly.
i really didn't expect it to go where it went. >> a lot of democrats are going after paul ryan saying he's out of touch, that $1.50 a week is only $60 a year. >> right. >> paul ryan deleted the tweet he sent. >> yeah. as someone who is occasionally counseled to delete tweets i post, i was interested in that. it almost always causes a bigger controversy than the initial controversy. you would think it's an admission that he feels as though it shouldn't have been posted in the first place. i think that the republican party is convinced this tax cut is a good thing for the american public. they are looking for ways to educate the american public on ways in which it is a good thing. the $1.50 a week is problematic in that, you know, that's not a lot of money to most people.
i think it's an unnecessary error. that said, if donald trump would talk about only the gains being made from corporations and people on this tax cut law he'd be in a lot better place. even talking about immigration, he'd be better served than continually talking about the russia memo which i don't -- it may animate a piece of his base, but it's not going to be something that they win on. you know, i think you want to talk about tax cuts. people are getting more money. this woman aside who is getting a marginal amount, they are getting more money. take the lead on immigration as he's tried to do. he continually gets sidetracked in these -- what i think to be petty fights and name calling of various members of congress. >> was it a mistake for paul ryan to tweet that? >> no. i don't think he should have taken it down. i think it is a weird look for
democrats to dunk on paul ryan and by extension a woman who is happy she got a tax break. it misses the bigger picture. people are happy with the tax reform. whether it's employees of places like walmart, boeing, at&t getting bonuses. massachusetts -- state regulators told their utility companies to lower rates as a result of the lowered corporate tax rate. that's massachusetts. tax-a-chusetts. they are missing where the energy is on this, no pun intended, and making a little bit more in their giddiness of this than the rest of the country sees. >> all right. s.e. cupp, chris cillizza, thank you very much. any minute we expect to hear from president trump live in ohio speaking about the economy and the new tax law after touring a manufacturing plant in ohio. we'll see if that's what he talks about. the speech comes as the dow is down again significantly. down nearly-- 500 points
any moment president trump will be touting the tax law and the economy at a manufacturing plant in ohio. you see the scene there. we'll bring you his comments live republicans pass the law this particular corporation gave $1,000 bonuses to employees which is why the president is there today. also now the dow plunging for the second straight day down 1,000 points since friday. down 540 now. the president is obviously taking credit for the dow's
success for the past year. so far hasn't said anything on this particular drop. joining me now is richard quest, cnn money editor at large. and global economics analyst and global business columnist and associate editor for the financial times. richard, the dow going down. what's going on? >> the dow is now off 6% from its all time high a couple weeks ago. we are off 1200 points. as you can see here we are in the low points of the day. we are getting into the part of the day that becomes rather tricky when traders don't want to go long overnight so they'll start to square the books. i would not be surprised to see some acceleration in the last hour of that. why is it happening today? why not two weeks ago or in two weeks' time? it's the ideas of inflation, rising interest rates and that which has gone up fast is coming
down fast, too. >> let's listen in on president trump in ohio. >> a man you know well who has done a great job in helping us with the massive tax cuts that are helping everybody so much and everyone has fallen in love with it. rob portman, he knows his stuff. thank you, rob. [ applause ] a terrific guy, a friend of mine from day one. he's been behind me from day one. jim ranacey, thank you. [ applause ] jim has been a great friend of mine. lieutenant governor mary taylor, secretary of state john hustin. [ applause ] another great friend of ours brad wenstrep couldn't be here. army reserve duty. that's okay, right? that's a good excuse. that's the only excuse we'd accept. great guy. i want to thank you all and i
want to thank jeff norris and everyone here for hosting us at this really incredible facility. we just toured it. i love equipment. i love workers. you have them both. but it's really something, a wonderful place. i'm here in the beautiful cincinnati. i'll tell you. you know, i was here. i worked here for a long time. most people don't know. swifton village. a long time ago. [ cheers ] >> really? you know swifton. came a long time ago and had a great success with my father. i was a young success. if i didn't have success maybe i would have gone and done something else. who knows? i spent a lot of time in this state and in cincinnati. i love it. what i really want to do is come here and give something very big back. that's tax cuts. i signed into law. your paychecks are going way up.
[ cheers and applause ] your taxes are going way down. and right now for the first time in a long time -- and you have seen it -- factories are coming back. everything is coming back. they all want to be where the action is. america is once again open for business. we have already created nearly 2.6 million jobs since the election including more than 200,000 new jobs in manufacturing. we love manufacturing. those are real jobs. not the other kind where they talk but there's nothing there. we are bringing back those four magnificent words -- made in the usa. [ cheers and applause ]
we'll count usa as one word, okay? i'll have to think about that one. unemployment claims hit a 45-year low. think of that. just think of that. and something that i have been talking about for two years -- campaigning and everyone said you'll never do it. after years of wage stagnation, wages -- so what happened two days ago and a month ago -- wages are now for the first time in many years, rising. in fact, more companies are pursuing pay increases right now than at any time in the last long period of time. they actually say in the 21st century. can you imagine that? it's amazing what people with good ideas can do. it's amazing what we have all done together. this has been an incredible
journey. but it's happening even faster. wait until you see gdp over the next year or two. wait until you see what happens to our country. people can feel it. billions and billions of dollars are being poured back into the united states. at the center of america's resurgence are the massive tax cuts that we just passed before christmas. remember two things. number one i said we'll say christmas again. and i said i would give you a christmas present. [ applause ] i don't know if you remember. i was going to sign it around january 5. then i heard one of the hating groups on television -- he promised a christmas present. here's the thing that hasn't been done in a long time, many years. really never done to this extent. you include anwar which is tremendous energy potential. you include getting rid of the individual mandate, the worst
thing there is in obamacare which leads to the repeal of obamacare. when you look at those things there hasn't been anything. but i said i want to give them a great christmas present. so january 5 -- i heard them say he didn't make it with the christmas -- i said, you know what, move up the bill a few days. it was rather inconvenient for a few people. i said we have to sign it. so we signed it just before christmas. better, right? better. [ applause ] otherwise i would have been hear i ing, rob, he did not fulfill his campaign obligation or promise, right? now they can't say it. just one more thing we check off the list. but it is the biggest tax cut and reform in american history. at the heart of our plan is tremendous relief for working families and for small businesses. a typical family of four earning $75,000 will see an income tax cut of more than $2,000 a year.
you're already seeing it. slashing their income tax bill in half. we nearly doubled the standard deduction meaning the first $24,000 earned by a married couple will be 100% tax-free. not bad. and we have doubled the child tax credit. that was complements of ivanka trump. she would press us -- right, rob? she would press us. pretty amazing. we got it done. not easy. we had, by the way, no democrats. we had nobody, not one. including your other senator voted against it. no, he voted against it. i don't care republican or democrat. they voted against it.
if they ever got in and took over your taxes would go way up. you'd see bad things happening. wouldn't be good. that, i can tell you. would not be good. when i signed the tax cut six weeks ago it set off a tidal wave of good news that continues to grow every single day. before the ink was dry companies were announcing thousands and thousands of new jobs and enormous investments to workers. apple announced a $350 billion investment in america. when i heard it i said, no, they mean $350 million. i have been saying to the head of apple, good guy, tim cook, from the beginning as soon as i first met him i said, tim, it's not complete until you start building plants in our great states. otherwise when you build them where you are building them, i'm not interested. you've got to build them. believe me, the reason it's happening is because of what we
did. i heard the number. i heard $350. i figured it was $350 million. that's a big plant. you know, it's big even for your great company it's big. so i figured they're going to build a big, beautiful plant some place. they came and said, sir, it's not $350 million. it's $350 billion. right? that's a big number. [ applause ] i would have been happy with the 350 million. i like this number slightly better. they are going to do incredible things. they'll build plants, a campus, hire 20,000 people. mobile just announced a fantastic $50 billion investment. if you look at that. exxon mobile. jobs coming back to motor city.
do you know where they are coming from? mexico. think of it. [ cheers and applause ] nothing against mexico. we are renegotiating nafta. i can tell you that. we are renegotiating. i have been telling you that for a long time. either you renegotiate or terminate. but we are renegotiating. we'll see what happens. chrysler, leaving mexico, coming back to motor city with a massive plant. i mean, you haven't heard that in -- how many years would you say, rob? 30? 25? we are reversing it. many other companies are coming back. many other car companies are coming back. a lot of them which is of most interest to you, are coming back to ohio. [ applause ] they are coming back right here. right here in cincinnati on this very beautiful factory floor the
sheffer corporation announced every single worker was getting a $1,000 tax cut bonus. you are so generous. thank you. [ applause ] >> congratulations, everybody. that's good. hardworking patriotic americans like you make this country run and run like no other. but we took away all of the pride and all of the incentive and we are losing so many companies and so many jobs. how long have i been talking about this? 10, 15, 20 years? some of you have heard me say this as a private business person. we're losing our jobs. we are losing our companies. they are coming back. pure grit. it's your pride and determination to do the job right. that's the foundation of american strength and the key to america's future. but, you know, you can work hard
but if you don't have the right leader setting the right tone -- in all fairness i'm not even saying -- i am nonbragadocious, but if i don't say you are not going to keep doing what you're doing, taking our jobs and wait for the next two, three months with what we are doing to countries that treated us so unfairly. in many cases so-called friendly countries -- i don't call them friendly. i don't call them friendly. it's all changing. those companies are coming back. and those jobs are coming back. you are among more than 3 million americans who received a tax cut bonus because of the tax cuts that we just signed into law. everywhere i go, i love to hear what people plan to do with the money. i thought we could take a few minutes to hear from some of your co-workers. you know who i'm talking about, right? i assume you like these people.
i assume it's central casting, right, boss? tyler berkshire joined sheffer corporation through an apprenticeship. come on up, tyler. six years ago. now he's a machinist and a talented one. [ applause ] they like him. okay. nice to be loved. i figured they'd only send the popular ones up here. the unpopular ones, don't worry. in addition to his $1,000 bonus, his paychecks are bigger because he's paying less taxes. tyler, you're up here. i'm going to give you a chance like maybe 30 seconds or less to explain what you're going to do with all the extra money. in this case over $1,000.
[ applause ] >> thank you, mr. president. with the tax cut and the bonus i will be trying to save up money to start a family and eventually get a bigger house. >> oh! i like that idea. that's good. [ applause ] >> i appreciate all your hard work you have been putting in and all your -- rob portman and everybody else. just want to say thank you. >> i appreciate it, tyler. that's beautiful. beautiful job, thank you. [ applause ] >> beautiful job. thank you, tyler. that's a good guy right there, jim, huh? i think he'll probably be very supportive of you. i think everybody will be supportive. we need people that are going to do a great job and keep us in the right direction. you know? we need them badly, too.
or it all goes back to where it was and worse. oh, but did we catch them in the act or what? you know what i'm talking about. oh, did we catch them in the act? they are very embarrassed. they never thought they'd get caught. we caught them. we caught them. it's so much fun. we're like the great sleuth. dina spoletti is also with us. she joined sheffer in 2012 as a customer service rep and has climbed all the way up to become a manager. dina is looking at a tax cut of $1,500 and that's on top of her $1,000 that sheffer is giving her already. that's $2,500 plus. what are you going to do with the money? how are you? >> thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> when they asked me what it
would mean to my family really what it means is the same it means to all hardworking american families now who are reaping the benefits of your tax cuts. it means we'll have more money in the bank, more money to make ends meet. for my family, my husband tim and i are in the process of buying a home. in the fall both kids will be going to college. we'll be using the money that will be a bonus. thank you, a one-time bonus but it will be a bonus in the paycheck every week to help us make ends meet. thank you very much. >> great job. thank you. [ applause ] beautiful. i'm glad she's not running against you, jim. that's very good. thank you very much. she's doing a great job? >> good. >> like tyler and dina, millions of workers are thrilled to have more money to save for their children's college or to fix their home or put aside money for a rainy day.
but believe it or not nancy pelosi and those in congress who want to raise your taxes, they want to raise your taxes. they don't want to give the money to the military you know, without the military we might not be here, or might not be here for long, believe me. believe us all. nancy pelosi, what she's doing to this country. and she's gone so far left and schumer has gone so far left. oh, i look forward to running against them. we've got to do well in '18 and i know we're going to do well in '20, but i think we're going to do well in '18. i think we're going to do well in '18. i think we're going to do very well. they have gone left. they want to raise your taxes. you know, i figure we're safe. historically when you win the presidency, you know the story, just for whatever reason it is, and i think i figured it out.
nobody really has been able to explain it properly. i think i figured -- the party wins the presidency, and now the people are happy and you see tax cuts in this case or whatever that party has got, but you see the big tax cuts, you see what we're doing, jobs are coming back. and the people that voted for us, they become complacent a little bit, they're happy. it's only two years between '16 and '20 and so it's a short time and so the people are happy and they don't get out and they don't vote like they should. maybe they go to a movie in '18. none of you are going to a movie, i hope, right? so what happens is they sort of take it for granted. they sit back and then they get clobbered because the other people are desperate and they get out and they have more energy. but i think because of what we've done, because of the tremendous success we've had, i have a feeling that we're going to do incredibly well in '18. i have to say this. history is not on our side.
but it's not because of that word, complacency. you win the presidency and you take it easy and then they come and surprise you in the midterms. they call them the midterms. we've got to get out there and win or they're going to take, and i'll say it, nancy pelosi, chuck schumer, they want to raise your taxes. they don't want to give the money to the military, which we have to because our military because of obama and even beyond obama, it's depleted. it's in bad shape. and we're going to build it stronger than it ever was before. we've already started. we've already started. so that's what happened. and that's what happens in midterms. but we're not going to let it happen to us. traditionally that's what goes on. i love that person. i knew i liked that man.
thank you. we're going to be in there fighting because we don't want that tradition to go. we want to have tremendous success. we want to get jim in it and a lot of other people in, but we have to be tremendous -- we have to have tremendous success. i know we're going to do great in '20 because by that time -- see what happens is if you did badly in '18, now you're all angry again and now '20 comes along. but we want to do great in '18 and we're going to do really well in '20. that's when we go again and we keep this great journey going, okay? so start thinking about -- start thinking about '18, start thinking about november, start finding out exactly that little slot, you're not going to a restaurant, although you could. you could go and vote and go to a restaurant. but that's what happens and we're not going to let that happen to us. in addition to the bonuses created by our tax cuts,
economists estimate that our business tax cut will raise the income of a typical family by an average of $4,000. so nancy pelosi again said that's crumbs. well, she's a rich woman who lives in a big, beautiful house in california who wants to give all of your money away. and she talked about crumbs. and i really think her statement about crumbs, pause you're getting thousands and thousands of dollars and you're getting it every year. so i think her statement crumbs will be equivalent, and i said this the other day for the first time, when i first heard the word deplorable, i thought it was a bad thing but i had no idea it was not going to be good for our opponent. it was not good because about two days after she said it, i go to a rally and everyone is wearing shirts "i am a
deplorable." we're all deplorables. i said what's going on with the word "deplorable." we had that, right? it just went pretty wild. it was not a good day for her. and i think that this is not a good day for nancy pelosi. she's our secret weapon. no, she's our secret -- i just hope they don't change her. there are a lot of people that want to run her out. she's really out there. i'm supposed to make a deal with her? but you know the other day did anybody happen to see the state of the union address? right? okay. so i got good marks. but i said you have the lowest black unemployment in the history of our country. it was like -- it was a game. you know they play games. they were told don't even make a facial movement. and i'm talking about you have
the lowest hispanic unemployment in the history of our country. this isn't me saying, this is the charts, the polls. we have the lowest in the history of our country. dead silence, not a smile. in fact there's one guy when i said the lowest african-american unemployment, he was sort of clapping like -- who was that guy? he's a nice guy. i think he was a reverend. and he was -- i wouldn't say it was exactly rousing, but he was putting his hands together and i want to find out who he is. i'm going to send you a letter of thank you. he was probably severely reprimanded, don't you think, rob? i think so because he was the only one. so that means they would rather see trump do badly, okay, than our country do well. that's what it mean. it's very selfish. and it got to a point where i really didn't even want to look
too much during the speech over to that side because honestly it was bad energy. it was bad energy. you're up there, you've got half the room going totally crazy wild, they loved everything, they want to do something great for our country. and you have the other side even on positive news, really positive news like that, they were like death and unamerican. unamerican. somebody said treasonous. i mean, yeah, i guess, why not. can we call that treason? why not. i mean they certainly didn't seem to love our country very much. but you look at that and it's really very, very sad. so we have to keep it going because this country is turning and it's turning much faster. i said i'm going to do it. but it's happening faster than i thought. and a big part of it is the fact
that the companies kicked in. nobody saw that. at&t came in, another one came in, another one, comcast. so many companies kicked in hundreds, now it's going to end up being thousands of companies. this company too. it's a little smaller than at&t, but we'll take it. for the people in this room, it's much more important than at&t, right? but great companies like this, and that's -- honestly, we said come february 1st, nobody is going to beat it because you're going to get your checks and you're going to see you have more money because they're taking a lot less taxes out of your check. and i just don't think that anybody can beat it. and senator brown voted against us and fought us like crazy, okay? just remember that. he voted against you. when you go in there, he voted against you. not good. not good. so we've gone from being one of the highest tax countries
anywhere in the world to being one of the most competitive, because when our workers have a level playing field, which they didn't have, they can compete and win against anyone in the world, and that goes for our companies. but we were forcing our companies out. now we're bringing our companies back in. and if they don't want to come in, that's okay but they're not going to be so happy, believe me. and i told you that a long time ago. th not like the old days. and when our workers win -- >> president trump speaking in a manufacturing plant in cincinnati, ohio, speaking about the tax cuts. he brought up several -- he brought up two workers to tout what they were going to be doing with the $1,000 bonus that they had been given by their employer. joining us right now is david chalian, also a cnn global economics analyst and global business columnist and financial editor of the financial times.
rona, the dow is down 753 points. what is going on? >> you know, it's really counterintuitive, anderson, one of the reason the dow is down is that wages are up. it should be a great thing that people are getting wage hikes finally after many, many years. well, the markets actually don't like wage hikes because that means that interest rates are probably going to go up at some stage, the fed is going to need to raise them to get ahead of inflation and the markets don't like that. so we're having a strange disconnect between wall street and main street where things are finally actually starting to look a bit better. >> so the president obviously has linked himself very closely to the rising dow and we should point out overall it's down just 3% from the high. >> yes. he -- you know, there's two things happening here, anderson. yes, the tax cuts, there's no doubt that they have raised animal spirits in the sea suites and in business and on wall street, but the