be sure to send me your questions or property stories at propertyman@foxnews.com. that's it for today. i'm bob massi. i'll see you next week. ♪ paul: welcome to the journal editorial report, i'm pull -- paul gigot, the heated debate over gun control took heat with retired supreme court justice stephens arguing for repeal of the second amendment, calling it relic of the 18th century. stephen's pointed to heller case writing, quote, overturning the decision via constitutional amendment to get rid of the second amendment would be simple and would do more to weaken the nra's ability to block gun

control legislation than any other available option. let's bring in wall street journal columnist and deputy editor dan henninger, columnist kim strassel and wall street journal columnist and manhattan institute senior fellow jason riley. jason, 97-year-old, retired justice, why does it matter? >> it matters, paul, because the gun control left has regularly said, listen, we are not coming after your guns, we don't want to confiscate firearms, we want reasonable protections put in place, reasonable regulations, justice stephens has let the cat out of the bag, we want to repeal the second amendment and that's why what he said matters, the problem that the gun control left comes up against after we have one of the tragedies and they want to turn it into another debate on one goal that even well gun ownership is grown in the country, violent crime including violent crime involving guns has been falling, dramatically, for decades and that is the reality out there.

paul: kim, the former justice was on the losing side in heller but it was only a 5-4 decision, his view of the second amendment is that it only applies to militias way back in 18th century. the majority of the supreme court took a different view but they didn't outlaw regulation of guns and constitutional amendment i think we all agree passing that to repeal the second amendment would be very hard, but you could -- >> not simple. >> but you could, not simple but you could have other supreme court judge rulings that eroded that at the margins, why don't you explain? >> yeah, that's why this is important, his piece even though the last line about repealing the second amendment got all the attention, he spent most of that op-ed talking about the heller decision and it was a way rfo minding people that this remains their only best shot of eroding

gun rights out there because things are not going to pass through congress any time soon, this is a very prosecond amendment house and senate and so the only option that gun controllers have is to go back to the supreme court and their goal and their hope there is to either overturn heller which could take some time but to chip away with other lawsuits and decisions that would, for instance, give officials more ability to ban certain types of guns. paul: right. >> or restrict who can have them and that's their main agenda at the moment. paul: dan, that assumes that i think they'll be a new change in the court, not going to happen any time soon. let's talk about the politics of gun control in the wake of parkland and the wake of big marchs last weekend, do you think politics of gun control changed decisively now in favor of gun controllers again? >> no, i do not, paul, at least not national level.

i don't think the senate, for instance, is eager to take this up and that includes senate democrats. bernie sanders who is the uber progressive, his position on gun control is that is an issue for the states to decide nor does he think manufacturers of gun should be held liable for crimes committed with guns. elizabeth warren says she's in favor of what she calls sensible gun control. why the reluctance? the reluctance understand that they have at least a claim on some states, senate seats now like north dakota,. [inaudible] >> west virginia which same as second amendment like stephens has will probably lose seats forever. more likely as kim is suggesting, it's going to come from below, from cities, passed laws, elevate through the supreme court. paul: ran stressed that there's

the house, suburban districts that are held by republicans where gun control is not widespread. >> right, as both kim and dan alluded to, we have a very prosecond amendment congress right now, but we have midterm elections coming up and if democrats do manage to take control of congress, you could see the gun lobbies power diluted. we don't know if that has staying power or not. the bottom line here, people who support the second amendment tend to vote on that issue. people who support gun control, don't tend to vote on the issue. paul: well, kim, there's a lot of people think that actually in suburban districts gun control in the house could be a very effective weapon, pardon the use of the word, in the fall politically work for democrats and politically in november because a lot of the suburban households, you know, they don't

own guns and maybe they now in the wake of the shootings have some more angst about gun ownership, you don't think that could work? >> i think that it could work, it cuts differently in the house where this is more a danger for republicans. they need those seats, those suburban districts that you're talking about are going to be absolutely crucial to the question of whether or not they can retain the house and they've got a lot of women voters in those districts. paul: that's right. >> a lot of nongun own nester the districts who don't necessarily subscribe to a lot of the second amendment views in the republican party. now the question for those house republicans and the recent omnibus they passed the fix nix bill, can they get out there and talk about that and can they talk about in response to these parkland students and others in the way that reassures those voters. paul: all right, i think the debate will go right through november. when we come back as republicans

gear up to defend their congressional majorities in the november midterms, some good news for the gop and some bad in the latest fox news poll. how do you win at business? stay at laquinta. where we're changing with contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. mvo: with everything that is going on around us and in the nation, we need to work together. we need to do it more often to help people that need help. ♪ ♪ i'll stand by you. (♪light musical cords)

a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home, with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection, which could lead to hospitalizations. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day, so you can stay home. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders,

serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro.

paul: four republicans gearing up to defend their congressional majority in the 2018 midterms, some good news and some bad in the latest fox news poll. the gop appears to be closing the gap in the generic congressional ballot, 46% favoring the democratic candidate in their district compared to 41% for the republican. that has narrowed significantly from the fall when 50% said they favored democrats and only 35% said republicans, but the poll also finds a large advantage for democrats when it comes to voter enthusiasm with 46% of democrats saying they are more fired up than usual about voting in november compare today just 28%

of republicans. karl rove, former senior adviser to president george w. bush, also a wall street journal columnist and fox news contributor. so welcome, karl, good to see you. >> thank you, sir. >> do you think that the politics of gun control politically and their impact on elections has changed fundamentally because of parkland and the student protest in. >> i don't think it's changed fun mentally but i think it has changed somewhat and i do think kim strassel's point about the gun control issue in suburban districts with well-educated voters particularly white women, college graduates, this issue is going to play a little bit differently in the republican candidates in those instances need to be able to point to things such as background checks and increasing the efficiency of the federal system to check people who shouldn't be receiving guns.

paul: but is that enough, you will have to go further than that because the democrats will say, you passed that but that's not enough, you're already hearing them say we need assault-rifle ban and more aggressive background checks? >> well, you know, i think the first part of that isn't going to fly, assault weapon's ban, we saw this issue litigated in past elections, but the republicans do need to do something proactively on the issue of background checks and marco rubio and others have, perhaps, provided an opportunity here with their red flag law, that's to say a law that encourages states to adopt laws that allow people to flag somebody who might be a problem. i was taken -- you put a piece on the wall street journal editorial page from i think the former superintendent of the boston police department who talked about how if the parkland shooter had been in boston, they would have been flagged to the -- by school authorities and the local law enforcement long before it got to a point that they could walk into a school with a weapon and start shooting

and that these red flag laws might be a good way for suburban republicans can do, we have to solve the problem by passing law in our state to allow us and detect and help solve the problem before it results in a shooting. paul: okay. let's look ahead to the midterm election, some of the generic ballots all over the place, fox poll says they are closing, what do you think the democratic theme is going to be, are they going to try to run, say, we will put a check on donald trump and that's about it? >> no, i don't think they are at that point, they are at the point we hate donald trump, enraged by him and angry and we are going to stop him. they have not yet begun to systemically move away from that position, there was a memo this week from one of the democratic campaign committees that was leaked that was advised to candidate saying, you ought to say, we want to look for opportunities to work with the president on problems that face our country, that's the right tone for the democrats to take,

but my sense is that in a lot of the races for the house, where the primaries are yet to be held that we are likely to see candidates who are not going to take that advice, their advice will be by god i'm going to oppose the president each and every way that i can. paul: look, that's worked for them has it not in so far in the special in pennsylvania, republican turnout was down, you know what happened in virginia, they came out of the nooks and crankies like we have never seen before to pace one onto donald trump, why wouldn't the antitrump message drive democratic enthusiasm in the way that helps them? >> well, candidates matter, in the virginia governor's race which set the tone for that state, the democratic candidate had voted for george w. bush twice, moderate liberal, moderate moderate candidate who talked about how he was going to work with president trump. democrats are not going to nominate a lot of candidates

like connor lamb u -- said he was not running against donald trump and said, i'm never going to support nancy pelosi. you said the generic ballot is all over the place. not really. if you take a look at it clear clear politics, 7.1, here are all the polls since 21st of march, 6 points, 5 points, 7 points, 7 points, if you look at it over time, january 1st, democratic advantage was 12.9, february 1st, 7.1, 9.3 by march first. something has happened since the beginning of the year and -- and -- paul: well, everybody would suspect that if the tax bill passed and the economy is doing better, that's what republicans would like to think, is that what you think happened? >> i think that's the somewhat to the degree of what happened

and they ought to keep focused on that. now, remember, though generic ballot is a rough indicater, in 2006 the democrats had a 10-point advantage and gained 31 seats, in 2008 they had a 14-point advantage and gained only 21. paul: that was there were fewer seats to be had in that election because some of that good ones had been taken in 2006. >> well, good point because that's what's going to happen this year, in my opinion. political scientists refer to this as surge and decline, what happens is typically when a president comes into office, he brings with him a large number of people of his party who win in marginal seats and in the first med terms get swept out that. was not the case in 2016, president trump ran behind most congressional candidates and as a result the republicans actually lost a handful of seats on net in the house, so there was no surge, that will minimize the decline because there are a lot fewer people vulnerable

republican who is are first-time members in marginal seats. paul: karl, we have a long way to go. we will be visiting. >> long, long way. paul: when we come back, the schumer stall, dozen trump nominees still await senate confirmation, the republicans finally break the democratic log finally break the democratic log jam, we are telli are finding themselves morin a chevroletple for the first time. trying something new can be exciting. empowering. downright exhilarating. see for yourself why chevrolet is the most awarded and fastest growing brand, the last four years overall. switch into a new chevy now. current qualified competitive owners and lessees can get this 2018 chevy equinox for around $199 a month. chevrolet. find new roads.

the next big thing in food was once a little paper box. now we can easily take out food from a restaurant. let's stay in and binge-watch the snow. genius. now, the next big thing is the capital one savor card. earn 3% cash back on dining, 2% on groceries, and 1% on all other purchases.

♪yea, you can be the greatest ♪you can be the best ♪you can be the king kong ♪bangin on your chest ♪you can beat the world you can beat the war♪ ♪you can talk to god while bangin on his door♪ ♪you can throw your hands up you can beat the clock♪ ♪you can move a mountain you can break rocks♪ ♪you can be a master don't wait for luck♪ ♪dedicate yourself and you can find yourself♪ ♪standin in the hall of fame ♪and the world's gonna know your name♪ retail. under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered.

comcast business outmaneuver. paul: one of the more underreported stories of the trump presidency, scores of nominees still awaiting senate confirmation, from ambassadors to judges, democrats are slow-walking the president's pick, sometimes insisting on 30 hours of debate for each one. press secretary sarah huckabee sanders said last week that 43% of trump's appointees are still

awaiting confirmation and the senate is currently sitting on 78 nominees who have already been vetted and passed out of committee, can't get a floor vote, this includes spokesperson richard who was nominated in september to be president trump's ambassador to germany, we are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and jason riley, kim, you've been digging at the numbers on this for us, how big a problem is it compared to previous administrations? >> it blows previous administrations away. if you look at this point in time in the past four presidencies combined, the use of cloture vote which requires 30 hours of debate on a candidate was only used 15 times for executive branch nominees. paul: for the last four presidencies at this period in their term? >> right, combined whereas for president trump that number is almost 50 alone up to this point

so far, so democrats are using this procedure which has been very rarely used on people that have been vetted, out of committee, some of them have unanimous, if not bipartisan support out of committee but all it takes is one person to object to moving ahead and then you can subject them, each of them to 30 more hours of debate. >> and these are important positions, state department, department of homeland security, department of labor, the president's ability to put his people in place is being affected here and i think it's why he hasn't made more management change or more changes in his administration. paul: what's the strategy? schumer strategy? >> to run out the clock, to run out the clock and he believes that his base, that this is what his base wants, this is part of the left's resistance. paul: run out the clock on senate time and just stall, make it harder for trump to govern? >> yes, exactly. that is why i think the republicans are coming up with a

new strategy, they want to change the rules for getting people through and there's hope that even democrats will go along with -- particularly democrats up for reelection in state that is president trump won. paul: dan, follow-up on that, a 30-hour rule, if the senate wants a debate on any nominee, they can vote cloture and have 30 hours, in the previous administration, when president obama was president, democrats controlled the senate, the republicans agreed to limit that 30-hour rule to 8 hours per nominee, that would be the max. most of the nominees don't have -- they aren't controversial, they have been vetted through committee and that's what republicans want democrats to agree to now the same eight years. >> but they won't. paul: why not? you don't share jason's optimism? >> no, i don't. i think something -- i think something else jason suggested which has to do with politics of the democratic party now, look, this is a reflection in large

part, paul, of the fact that the two parties are very politically polarized between conservatives and liberals and, you know, one name that hasn't come up here is senate majority leader mitch mcconnell who is not clearly expressed interest in getting behind senator jim lanford's idea to reduce to go only 8 hours, why would that be? i think senator connell would like to have -- be able to use this sort of process if he's in the minority to block the democrats from running the government as well. remember, when obama was president, they did a lot of imposition of things of statutes, regulations affecting energy, finance, labor laws, trump campaigns -- govern comes in and rolls all of that back and puts people in bureaucracy, push ideas that are resisted by the democrats. you come with gridlocks here with appointees to the

government. paul: kim, we have three years left on the trump presidency, he's not going to be able to fill out a government even at this kind of pace, there's one proposal that's out there, some people have suggested that is if republicans -- if democrats are saying, okay, 30 hours, mitch mcconnell should say, you want 30 hours, we will give you 30 hours, we will give it to you on friday, we will give it to you on monday and saturday and sunday and the recess you want to take for easter and the memorial day and hold you in decision and democrats will come around pretty fast to 8 hours. >> i love that idea. you know, we work on the weekends, they should work on the weekends too. [laughter] >> yeah, hold them in there. the reason he hasn't done that, republicans don't like that idea either. everyone has midterms coming up, they are all eager to be back in their states and talking to constituencies but i don't think you've necessarily have to do this very for long, just a couple of weeks of it and probably chuck schumer would

roll over and finally say yes so we could get the 8-hour rule. paul: okay, thank you, kim. president trump takes on amazon but does he really have the power to punish the online retail giant? ♪

hey, sir lose-a-lot! thou hast the patchy beard of a pre-pubescent squire! thy armor was forged by a feeble-fingered peasant woman... your mom! as long as hecklers love to heckle, you can count on geico saving folks money. boring! fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. you wouldn't accept from any one else. so why accept it from your allergy pills? most pills don't finish the job because they don't relieve nasal congestion. flonase allergy relief is different. flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. and 6 is greater than 1. start your day with flonase for more complete allergy relief. flonase. this changes everything.

paul: shares slid wednesday following report that president trump is obsessed with the online retail giant and change tax status or use antitrust law to limit its expansion, the president responding to that report thursday tweeting, i have stated my concerns with amazon long before the election unlike others they pay little or no taxes to state and local governments, use postal system as delivery boy causing tremendous loss to the u.s. and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business, we are back with dan henninger, kim strassel and wall street journal editorial page writer jillian

melchior, is donald trump obsessed with amazon and why? >> pretty clearly he's obsessed with amazon, he tweets constantly, dozens of times, it's a little odd. normally presidents don't single out private corporations for attacks like this. amazon as far as we know has broken no laws, committed no crimes. one thing we do have to point out is that amazon's founder jeff bezos is also the owner of the washington post, which is one of the president's primary critics in washington and it raises the question in people's mind whether he's going after him as he often strikes back at political enemies because of this, similarly at&t's ability to take over time warner has been sued by antitrust decision and at&t thinks it's because of cnn, another trump enemy, at least puts that idea in people's mind absent any other legitimate reason. paul: let's take the factual case, jillian, you've dug into

this for us, does amazon avoid paying state and local taxes? >> it collects taxes everywhere that it's required to, sales taxes and on top of that, with the headquarters thing in particular, you've seen state and local governments offering just crazy incentives, not great for taxpayers. paul: that's the politician's decision not amazon. >> if you're upset with this, this is something that local taxpayers should take up with officials. paul: they do pay state and local taxes. what about the post office subsidy that the president mentioned? >> this one is more complex. they do get a good deal but i think the post -- paul: to deliver packages. >> packages are one of the few places in the post office where there's a growing business that actually grew about 11%. post office is hurting, this is one of the areas that they are making money, so even if amazon gets beneficial deal it's something that the post office really needs. paul: would the post office have to raise prices or cut off reduced service without this kind of transaction?

>> it wouldn't be, you're also seeing consumers benefit in many cases sunday deliveries because of amazon. paul: okay, antitrust, kim, what do you think about the antitrust case against -- potentially against amazon, it's disrupting retailing all around the country by delivering goods online and sometimes at lower prices, what about that case? >> yeah, it's called disruptive technology changes in the way we fundamentally do things which doesn't by its own right make something illegal or a monopoly, look, i think the problem here and this is why you don't want presidents attacking companies is that -- or any individuals, one we saw what happened with president obama with the irs going after tea party groups and others that he had been critical of, you have a bureaucracy that you do not want to unleash on individuals or corporations, just to do the bidding of a presidency. the reason you don't do it as

well, even if there's a legitimate case against amazon, now if someone were to pursue it the obvious question is whether or not it's politically motivated. paul: dan, what do you think, you've seen an awful lot of presidents over the years, trump is not the first to single out a company, obama mentioned anthem, for example, when they raised insurance prices, staples for executive compensation, of course, the koch brothers, every democrats' favorite target but trump has a particular type of vitriol and focus that i guess maybe is a little different. >> well, let's try take this criticism at the level of good faith, he is upset about amazon's domination of the retail business, the hollowing out at retail level. okay, it's not the worst thing if he gets the conversation started about that, maybe we should have that conversation, recall though, paul, not too long ago in cities like new york city were blocking so-called big

box stores like cosco, wal-mart and the rest of them because they. >> going to take over jobs. now the threat is that amazon is taking retail away from them. bare -- bear in mind, amazon is platform for tens of thousands of private vendors selling tens of thousands of differentiated products, it's simply a different delivery system. if we want to talk about people who were left behind, certainly we should have that conversation , but mr. trump himself other than throwing on the table has not pushed it far forward at all. paul: all right, still ahead north korean dictator kim jong un paying a surprise visit to china this week so does the mood strengthen his hand in planned talks with president trump, we will ask this is frank. sup! this is frank's favorite record. this is frank's dog. and this is frank's record shop. frank knowns northern soul, but how to set up a limited liability company...

what's that mean? not so much. so he turned to his friends at legalzoom. yup! they hooked me up. we helped with his llc, contracts, and some other stuff that's part of running a business. so frank can focus on the beat. you hear that? this is frank's record shop. and this is where life meets legal. ♪ with expedia you could book a flight, hotel, car and activity all in one place. ♪

paul: north korean dictator kim jong un made foreign trip since

assuming power in 2011 meeting xi jinping in surprise visit to beijing. kim is expected to attend summit with moon jae-in late in april and meet with president trump is in works as well. the president tweeting wednesday, for years and through many administrations everyone said that peace and denuclearization of the korean peninsula was not even a small possibility, now there is a good chance that kim jong un will do what is right for his people and for humanity, look forward to our meeting. paul wilkowicz is an american scholar, he served in many roles in government including deputy secretary of defense for president george w. bush, welcome paul. >> good to be with you. paul: let me ask you about john bolton, you have known john bolton, how would you describe his world view? >> you know, i think in all the descriptions of john's world

view there's a confusion between strategy and tactic, strategically i think he's very clear about what our enemies and adversaries are and friends are and believes very much in pushing back at adversaries and supporting our friends, but he does so i think in a generally pragmatic way, one of the outstanding examples is what he told often in first term of george w. bush, excuse me, in early part of the century that was called proliferation security initiative, legal basis for intercepting ship that is were carrying contraband from north korea and other places without going through the impossible process of a whole revision of the nonproliferation treaty, it was very successful. i think it led to intercepting what were heading to libya.

john pulled off something that people said it was impossible was getting general assembly to raise resolutions back in 1981 when he was working for george h.w. bush. he's a person that knows how to get things done. paul: let's talk about north carolina -- north korea and xi jinping, is that play to the benefit of kim? >> well, it certainly plays to the benefit of kim, it puts him on the world stage. makes him a much bigger figure, no north korean leader has ever met with u.s. president, just take that on the surface, we know very little about anything that's going on behind the scenes. paul: right. >> i imagine quite a bit is going on and this could be just a repeat of a play we have seen over and over again of play for time, promise things later, collect payment now, relax the sanctions, that would obviously be good both for kim jong un and for xi jinping in china.

but there could be something bigger going on and i think we ought to keep our eye on that because i'm not sure it's a good thing. he talks about the idea that he would not need nuclear weapons if north korea's is assured, north korea's assurance, some kind of deal between north and south, might be unification on kim's term. unfortunately it would suit currently the south korean government which is sketchy to be charitable in its view of north korea and it just might suit president trump's agenda of getting u.s. troops out of the peninsula where there's 60 years and only because of the threat of north korea. i think we could get in a lot of trouble there.

paul: that could be -- some people look at that, that outcome, that would be the worst-case scenario, depending on the proms again from kim jong un that they were in fact, going to get rid of nuclear program when they violated how many promises over the last 25 years, so you'd have to say if we fell for that, donald trump failed for that that would be a strategic defeat. >> i think it would be. paul: yeah. >> it would cause great splits between us and japan and between us half of the south korean population that's properly skeptical about north korea. paul: we don't know where this is headed, one thing that seems obvious is the meeting with xi jinping, the planned meeting with south korean president that kim jong un has planned, this is not the diplomatic isolation that they were under for more than -- for a long time, particularly in the trump

administration where they are trying to apply so much pressure, this really does as you say put kim on the world stage and makes him appear as he's an equal with all of the leaders not just a rogue government. >> yeah, although if you look at the body language of that meeting in china it's pretty clear who is the boss and it's not kim jong un. [laughter] paul: well, true, but do you know what china is doing here? we don't know what role china is playing behind the scenes, do we? >> we don't and we do know that in the past china played a very i would say less than honest role in saying they are going to do things and them not doing them and actually assisting the nuclear program which they claim not to want to see happen. paul: all right. >> the next step should be in my view not what we are talking but real tightening of the screws, real pressure on china to really cut off north korea and really forcing major change. paul: what advice would you have

for president trump going into a summit? >> i think i would say be very careful, don't get caught up in your own rhetoric about you produced the meeting that probably no other president would have produced under conditions that are generally response to american pressure, that's a good thing, but don't feel that you have to prove being successful by something you feel pressured to agree to. paul: when we come back, protests over controversial speakers becoming common in campuses, a revealing look at what students really think about free speech.

how do you win at business? stay at laquinta. where we're changing with contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. retail. under pressure like never before.

and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver.

paul: amid protests and speakers controversial across the campuses a new survey on what students really think on free speech on campus, recently released gallup foundation poll finds that 61% of college students agree that the climate on campus prevent some students from expressing their views, up 7 points from just a year ago. the survey also finds that while 92% say political liberals can freely express their views on campus, just 69% believe that political conservatives can and although 90% of students say it is never acceptable to use violence to prevent someone from speaking, more than one-third believes shouting down speakers is acceptable at least some of the time. we are back with dan henninger, jason riley and jillian. what do you take away from this

poll? >> it's disturbing. i think one thing that we are seeing is college students seeing that they support the idea of diversity and inclusion, view that's more important than free rights, i think that really reveals a fundamental breakdown, the quality of education that the students are getting because they have received inclusion backed by rights like the first amendment, there's a fundamental misunderstanding there, you also see wide spreed supports like school policies that would punish schools that engage in hate speech or even wear costumes or clothing that people consider are offensive. paul: if you, for example, i being a white man decided to wear a sombrero on cinco de mayo they would support me being punished or ban that kind of clothing? >> university of california, university of clermont, there was last year student suggested that hoop earrings are

offensive, that's cultural appropriation, what we are talking about here is not just small events but widespread, people's freedom of expression. paul: does it jive with this survey? >> it does, it varies campus to campus. do i this at campus being more liberal, you find this and, you know, the good news is that a majority of students on campus still support free expression, the problem is the trend line, that number has been shrinking, paul, and what's also interesting is the more time a student spends on campus the less willing they think it is, less willing they feel it's okay to speak out on controversial issues, in other words, a number of freshmen feel comfortable than do seniors, that gets worse. disturbing trend line and it's unfortunate, should be a place

where you sharpen critical thinking, rules where you engaging people you disagree with and learn how to debate them and not silence them but that's not clearly what's going on in campuses today. paul: it was absolutely the appear sit from the 60's and 70's, free speech, there was the free speech movement at berkeley, the basically said, let students be able to express themselves as they want and protest this or that and students are, i guess, afraid or offended so easily that they say, please, don't get in my face with anything that i disagree with. >> well, i think one difference, paul, back then the students, proponents of free speech movement had gone through -- had an education where they were still taught the meaning of free speech. [laughter] >> even the first amendment which has been deemphasized now in favor of almost daily i would call it propaganda of the idea that speech has to be -- can't be hateful, has to be diverse and that free speech and the

first amendment should giver way to that, that's what students hear all of the time. one reason we got so way that jillian was describing, i think, is a lot of school college administrators are sympathetic to that idea and as far as the presidents go, that has got to be the biggest flock of sheep in the history of humanity. they just get ruled. paul: how much of this trend line, jillian, do you think is related to trump and the trump fen -- fen take alarmist view about free speech than two or three years ago? >> well, he's in a way put into very sharper spective the problems that already existed, if you look at it, the protest which triggered 250 protests nationwide that was before president trump became president and you got what the current political polarization and the anger, campuses have become the hot bed for this and you are

really seeing people's intolerance toward opinions. paul spaul this a good argument, jason, for spending, having off campus term in cuba and china for every single american student? >> what's ironic and you mentioned this, you have women's groups, minority groups being most intolerant. what's ironic, all the social movements were reliant on free speech. where would the civil movement be without free speech? to dan's point, we need a better education. [laughter] paul: when i know we come back hits and misses of the liberty mutual stood with me when i was too busy with the

kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. a trip back to the dthe doctor's office, mean just for a shot. but why go back there, when you can stay home with neulasta onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. neulasta helps reduce infection risk by boosting your white blood cell count, which strengthens your immune system. in a key study, neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%, a 94% decrease. applied the day of chemo, neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the next day. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to neulasta or neupogen (filgrastim). ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries, and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away.

in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. so why go back there? if you'd rather be home, ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. so, my portfolio did pretthat's great.year. but the market was up nearly twice as much. that's a tough pill to swallow. exactly. so i started trading. but with everything out there, how do you know what to buy? well, i think my friend victor has just the thing for you. check this out, td ameritrade makes it easier to find the investments that might be right for you. like our etf comparison tool it lets you see how etfs measure up to one another. analyst ratings and past performance... nice. td ameritrade also offers access to coaches and a full education curriculum to help you improve your skills. that is cool. and if you still have any questions you can always chat with us on facebook or call our experienced service team, 24/7. yep. just because you're doing it yourself doesn't mean you're on your own. that's great. you're still up. alright. you're still up. if i knew you were gonna run the table i wouldn't have invited you over.

call (866) 285-1934. act now to take advantage of commission-free trades for 90 days, plus get up to an $800 cash bonus when you open and fund a new account. ♪ at crowne plaza, we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. paul: time now for hits and misses of the week, kim, start us off. >> paul, this is a hit to abc for bringing back roseanne, the network was taking all kinds of

brief for media critics and hollywood liberals for reviving a show who star roseanne barr, 18.2 million people staggering number tuned in to watch the reboot, most watched comedy in years, roseanne was popular back in the day because it took a rare look at working class family, networks might get return. >> might as a result in undercount of people here illegally but, paul, the purpose of counting every ten years is to find out who can vote, who is here legally, for the purposes of portioning congressional districts, liberals need to get priorities straight. paul: all right. jillian. >> mine is app that you can download for android, basically what it does it figures out if

you're talking to a woman or about a woman, politically correct -- paul: by what you're typing in in. >> my girl is my little princess, might suggest my adventurer, my wife is beautiful, my wife is very smart, strong, good leader. it's a miss because i think it's really creepy when technology starts intervening into our lives and try to get us to become more politically correct. paul: dan. >> paul, i'm giving a hit to the country of ecuador, you may ask, why ecuador, because ecuador has just cut off the internet connection for julian assange who has hold up permanently in their london embassy and they did this because assange criticized united kingdom for kicking out diplomats. if jillian assange doesn't have support of ecuador, looks like he's a man without a country these days. paul: all right, thank you all very much, remember, if you have

your own hit or miss, be sure to tweet it to us jer at fnc, that's it for my show, thanks to my panel, thanks for all of you for watching, i'm lou is back monday. have a great weekend. maria: happy weekend. welcome to the program that analyzes the week that was and helps position you for the week ahead. i'coming up in a few minutes, te most respected vices on fixed income around. black box, global chief investment officer of fixed income, rick reider, $1.7 trillion in assets, my first guest. first to the fox business room with the headlines affecting wall street to main street. >> wall street's wild run of volpety continuing this week. in the end, finishing the holiday shortened trading week in the green with a