caitlin jenner followed by "the five" at 9 p.m. that's it for today. have a great week and zeal owe you -- and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." ♪ ♪ >> iran is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and is responsible for intensifying multiple conflicts and undermining u.s. interests in countries such as syria, yemen, iraq and lebanon and continuing to support attacks against israel. an unchecked iran has the potential to travel the same path as north korea and take the world along with it. paul: welcome to "the journal editorial report." i'm paul gigot. another north korea in the making? that was secretary of state rex tillerson wednesday announcing that the trump administration will conduct a comprehensive review of its policy toward iran.

warning that leaving the countrt unchecd uld lead to eater threats around the world. john bolton is the former u.s. ambassador to the united nations and a fox news contributor. ambassador, welcome back to the program. >> glad to be with you. paul: so as i look at the first few weeks of the trump administration foreign policy, it looks like there's a really concerted focus on what i would call the countries that use or are trying to get weapons of mass destruction. syria, you saw the chemical response. destr north korea, you've seen a real concerted effort to contain that. and now iran. is that a fair summary of where they're putting they are emphasis? >> no, i think that's accurate, and i think that reflects where the president himself is deeply concerned about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. and as you mentioned in the case of the syrian regime's use of chemical weapons to actually use military force in response. so i think if you put it allll together, it's a very anti-proliferation administration. paul: and that ought to be the focus, do you think?

should that be to our top foreign policy focus now? >> well, i think coupled with the obvious priority of destroying isis, the president's called for new plans from the pentagon on that score, and i think it goes along with the widely-held view -- at least in republican circles -- that proliferationing and terrorism are the two most urgent threats we face around the world. paul: let's talk about north korea, and the president's strategy seems to be, to say,, look, the era of strategic patience is over. so we're not going to anymore give you just the time you want to get the weapons you want. but also to engage china in a more aggressive way and say, look, we'll give you better deal on economic access to us and on trade, but you in return have to do something about north korea. is that a strategy that you favor? i mean, it's different than what the bush and obama administrations did. >> yeah. it's definitely different, andma it's definitely an improvement, but i don't think it's sufficient.

china has, for 25 years, talked one way about nuclear weapons and acted a different way. it says it doesn't want north korea to have a deliverable nuclear weapons capability, but it's never exerted the pressure that it could. so getting china to say, yes, we'll to more is somethingng that bn tried in the past th hast worked. i think the problem here is that north korea will never voluntarily relinquish its nuclear weapons program, and that, in effect in their minds, it's equivalent to the regime itself. paul: right. >> so looking at the bigger picture, i think it's really th end of north korea that's required to get the end of their nuclear weapons program. that means getting china onboard for reunification. and i think what president trump has done could be a step in that direction, could be a step to try and bridge that gap, but he's not there yet. paul: well, and i don't see any sign that the chinese government is anywhere close to that kind of a recognition, that they're willing to accept a unified korea.re their fear is that you'll get a

unified korea through seoul with western troops at the border of china. they don't want that. even if the united states said, look, if you can unify it, we won't move our troops anywhere, they still are unwilling to take that step. so how do you get china to make that recognition? you have to have japan go nuclear first to be able to scare them enough to make a change? >> well, that would certainlyy scare them. [laughter] i think that what you've saide about the attitude of many in the top chinese leadership is unquestionably true. it's reflecting mao tse-tung's rather unappetizing metaphor that the two communist parties are as close as lips and teeth. but we've just see in the past week the leading chinese historian of the korean war basically calling for a complete transformation of china's policy.io they see -- he and many others see north korea as a pretty ugly piece of baggage.

i don't underestimate the difficulty of this negotiation. i wish we have started ten years ago. right now north korea and the progress towards been able to hit targets on the west coast of the united states with an icy bm first raised by the commander of u.s. forces created last year. now it's widely accepted that has add new urgeto this. and when donald trump says as apparently did either you fix this or we will fix it ourselves you are risking military conduct. they could do it the hard way or they can do it the someway easier way. it's really up to them. you saw tillerson ratchet up the pressure. is still saying it's can be part of the nuclear deal and the state department said iran is honoring that agreement. it was at embarrassment to the

ministration iran has violated the parts of the deal reflected in the security counsel revolution. they have exceeded the heavy water limits. from key military installations. and on the ballistic missile front there just wait out of compliance. at least we are reviewing at the thing that the president has basically said they're not living up to the spirit of the agreement. the sooner we ditch it and make it clear clinical statements that their behavior is an acceptable not just on terrorism but on the nuclear front the better. about 100 days ago i would have gotten out of it. i don't think they can do that. i think they are afraid the allies will just say were not

going to go with you a new sanctions in the political cost of that is too high. i think they will put pressure on expansion but not pull out of a deal. >> it could be that they see the political risk is too high. honestly unless you lead the allies they will not follow. i think every day that goes by makes it more difficult to get out of this disastrous deal. still have the trump doctrine om north korea to iran the administration said the era of administration said the era of strategic patience is over. garden weeds are scoundrels. with roundup precision gel®, you can banish them without harming plants nearby. so draw the line. give the stick one click, touch the leaves and the gel stays put killing garden weeds to the root. draw the line with roundup precision gel®. ..

eteners, plus 10 grams of protein eteners, and 25 vitamins & minerals. it doesn't get better than this. boost® simply complete™.

[hessons.kbooks introduces rodney. rodney wanted to know how his business was doing... ...so he got quickbooks. it organizes all his accounts, so he can see his bottom line. ahhh...that's a profit. know where you stand instantly. visit quickbooks-dot-com.

jack knocked over a candlestick, onto the shag carpeting... ...and his pants ignited into flames, causing him to stop, drop and roll. luckily jack recently had geico help him with renters insurance. because all his belongings went up in flames. jack got full replacement and now has new pants he ordered from banana republic. visit geico.com and see how affordable renters insurance can be. >> the united states of america well always seek peace. under president trump the shield stands guard.

vice president mike pence aboard the ronald reagan and in japan on wednesday. and promising an overwhelming and effective response to any use of conventional or nuclear weapons. the demonstration making clear admin station making clear in recent weeks that the era of strategic patience is over. what does that mean for american foreign-policy. so bill, what have we learned these last two weeks do you think about the trumpet foreign-policy. there will be no coherence like a trump doctrine. but we learned is not the america first of the 1930s we also learned that donald trump was comfortable with the use of american force and

rejects the idea that the only choice the president has is a full-scale u.s. invasion with u.s. troops and doing nothing. within their it's a lot of ground. the word of choice that some people have. wary of too much foreign entanglement. does that sound right. reaching back into the 1830s strikes me as kind of a stretch. if the era of strategic patience is over i suggest what were entering into is the era strategic inpatients. whereas barack obama used to lean back on most issues donald trump's inclination is to lean and in as clearly what he has been doing in the

middle east and asia. the question is what policy comes along with that. my impression is it harkens back to the reagan years in 1988 in which we said we will work with our allies and use all the elements of american power would not seek work but we would try to prevent domination of america's interest by any particular power. what i recall from the 80s is that reagan was extremely patient and set up a policy that said work in a working at contest the soviet union across the board. we're going to try to undermine politically and internally. when i cannot rush to any engagement overseas.

arthel: fireworks, indeed. greg talcott in paris with the reaction.

47 million registered voters in france, a robust turnout at 70%, 23.7% of those votes at early count going to emmanuel macron, 39-year-old newcomer to politics, and 27.1 going to marine le pen, anti-european union. we're back with "journal report" now. tech: when your windshield needs to be fixed... trust safelite autoglass. for these parents, driving around was the only way to get their baby to sleep. so when their windshield got cracked...

customer: we can't drive this car. tech: ...they wanted it fixed right. so they scheduled with safelite. our exclusive trueseal technology means a strong, reliable bond, every time. at safelite, we stand behind our work. bye, bye. because the ones you love, sit behind it. (parents whisper jingle) safelite repair, safelite replace. come close, come close. fun in art class. i like that. [ music stops suddenly ] ah. when your pain reliever stops working,

your whole day stops. awww. try this. for minor arthritis pain, only aleve can stop pain for up to 12 straight hours with just one pill. thank you. ♪ come on everybody. you can't quit, neither should your pain reliever. stay all day strong with 12 hour aleve.

if paul: democrats came up short on tuesday on a special election to fill the house seed. with the democrat narrowly missing the 50% threshold needed to win the race outright. he will now face karen handel the top republican vote getter in a june runoff. we are back with jim. james freda munn also joints

of the panel. you wrote this week that there were democrats that were finally getting their act together. for eight years under barack obama the democrats had had this very arrogant approach in which they believed that their progressive values would resonate across the country in you sought the result was that they lost the house in the senate. in any number of seats at the local level. it was a democratic party that determined they were gonna run a candidate that fit the district and have a shot at winning. this is a guy who bragged about his national security credentials. he was a fan of cutting waste and corruption. he also held a lot of progressive views and that's probably why he won't win this

district at the end. in the end. but a lot closer to the smart democratic policy of old. in the democrats nationally poured an enormous amount of money in this and they were willing to give him a pass on some of these other issues because they realized you want that. you need to pick up a seat here at the margin these kind of swing districts. if you're gonna take back the house. are we seen a new pragmatism on the part of the democrats here. or is this just a one off. and not just among the democratic leadership. it is a far left progressive organization. despite his views on tax cuts, and his views on national security because they have come to understand unless we have a democratic majority again in congress we can achieve any of our priorities. you would think that the republicans here have a split

field. none of them could really build any momentum. nonetheless they still managed to hold off. you would think there is a lot of that among republicans and they were going to challenge the primary rent against anybody who goes it all to the center. and this looks to me like a little bit like that 2006 strategy where they took back the house by rahm emanuel who is in the house picking candidates who were more appropriate to the swing districts. >> how appropriate our those candidates to the national party what they might do. there was nothing vaguely right about his presidency. if the local voters say this guy is a reasonable guy. he seems fair and if the republicans are not enthusiastic we could see them turning up particularly there.

in some respects was a progressive libertarian. there is a sense in which i think the culture is in some sense moving leftward. on issues like women and race relations and so forth. they have got to get some momentum back and start focusing on those counties and address the phenomenon we just saw. with the districts where we have college at a kitchen -- educated . i think the democrats probably this is positive because what they're doing as a is a focusing on how to we assemble a winning coalition versus spending their time blaming fake news, russia, whatever else they want to ascribe last fall two.

w do we rebrand ourselves but i think they will find that it's really not all that moderate even on economics and i think what they've got to do is move back towards candidates in swing districts who are actually moderate not just projecting a moderate image. and throw in montana where you have another special election coming up. >> it is gonna be tough for democrats to win this district. as you set the said the republicans split it between 11 candidates very quickly gathering and united support among republicans. they have to data spent $8 million just to get where he was. you can ask whether it would've been smarter for them always to put a lot more attention into montana and the special election coming up because that is a state that has historically less democrats. if they were in a place there

but somewhere it might be a big shot. you think there can compete there as well. they want to victory. and they need to show and scare them from actually taking difficult votes in congress. they want to send a message that there is some sort of backlash to trump that they have already turned against them. some of them would say that regardless of the outcomes. they really do turn off and on local issues. if they can not up to when you can suggest that the tide is turned against donald trump and republicans must beware. republicans scramble as the deadline for tax reform slips. spring is on, so it's time to get started. but first things first- call trugreen, america's #1 professional lawn care company. millions of homeowners like you trust us to give them a lawn they can live on.

start your trugreen lawn plan today for only $29.95. what would help is simply being able to recognize a fair price. uecar s pricing data on every make and model, so all you have to do is search for the car you want, there it is. now you're an expert in less than a minute. this is truecar.

we are in very gooshape on >> as soon as health care takese care of, we are going to march very quickly. you watch, we're going to surprise you. paul: president trump sounding an optimistic note on tax reform just a day after his treasury secretary walked back expectations for how quickly an

overhaul would happen. steve mnuchin told the financial times this week that a summerhi deadline is, quote, highly aggressive to not realistic at this point. my next guest has some advice for the administration as it struggles to move forward with a plan, keep it simple. art laffer is the cofounder for the committee to up leash prosperity, he advised the trump campaign on economic policy to. good to see you again, arthur. >>ood to see you. paul: all right. i want to ask about the economy before we get to tax reform. a lot of signs of weakness in the first quarter, are we in a slow growth rut here? >> well, in the very short term, yes, we are, we're in a slow period. but in the long term, we're in the worst possible economic condition we've had in 67 years. the economy if you look at real gdp, we are at the lowest point in 67 years, paul. it's a horrible economy. and we really need something to get this thing going and bring

us back up to the norms we had in the '60s, '70s and '80s. paul: all right. and i think you think tax reform is part of that agenda. >> sure is. paul: okay. so what about this, the timing, the delay on this? i know, you know, when people, when businesses think there's going to be a tax cut around the corner, they tend not to invest right now. >> that's true. [laughter] that's the big mistake we made under reagan was we deferred the tax cuts. and if you know they're going to cut taxes next year, what do you do this year? defer all the income you possibly can to next year, and that's why we had the deep recession in '81 and '82. they shouldn't make that mistak. now. no, big reform, mega-tax reform takes time. but we could do one thing right away. we can cut that corporate tax rate from 35% to 15% just right away to get the economy jump-started, and that's what i

think they should do. get that corporate tax rate down. everyone wants it. paul: so democrats support it in theory --po >> yes, they do, of course. paul: so basically, do that corporate tax reform, but how to you get democratic votes for something like that when right now there's so much hostility to the trump administration? i mean, you've got to get 60 votes for what you're talking about in the senate. >> well, i don't know about the senate, but i do know there are a lot of democrats in the house who really want to do tax reform. i did one for darrell issa quite a while ago that would have been a radical reform, and so there's a lot of support in the house for this. and i believe in the senate too, paul. i'm not an expert on counting vos paul: right. >> it would raise revenues dramatically. the only reason the president wants to do health care first is because of this silly, silly notion of pay-for.y be which you have to find something to cut taxes if you're going to raise them.

you know, it's just ridiculous,r and i don't know who's giving him that advice. but, honestly, if we had had pay-for in the 1920s, we never would have had the roaring 20s, and goodness knows we would not have had the reagan revolution in the '80s. paul: okay, you're saying let's just cut the rate, you'll get a lot more revenues than you think coming back anyway -- >> definitely. paul: and that'll take care of itself over time as the economy ratchets up its growth rate. >> yeah, you want to have revenue neutrality with tax cuts right now and revenue three years from now. you don't want to cut welfare programs when the economy's in bad shape to pay for a tax cut because, frankly, this is the time people need welfare payments because they are having hard times. once you get the economy going, then you can cut the welfare programs because people have good, high paying jobs.ts right now you need to be warmod hearted as well as clear-eyed. paul: how low do you think the

corporate tax rate has to go? does it have to go all the way to 15, or can you settle for 20? would that be enough? >> i think it's a continuum. 20's better than 35, 5's better than 20 -- 15's better than 20. i would really love to see where we're not taxing profitable companies and subsidizing unprofitable ones. i'd love to see it go as low as possible. a lot of house republicans are worried about this. if you do corporate tax reform first you are leaving the individual taxpayer behind. and maybe even a the small business taxpayer behind. why should they pay 40% with somebody who in business is only going to pay 15. because the wage will be a doubled the whole key here is

a people who don't pay taxes because of no income are not really benefited. and you cannot balance the budget on the backs of the unemployed or people who leave your jurisdiction. it just doesn't happen. you want you can see if you do corporate tax reform first you may never get the tax rate reductions that you and i would both like to see because politically it becomes much harder if you don't attach it to something that the democrats want. they don't want individual rates cut. they have done and 80s as well. when we did our ultimate tax reform policy it wasn't until 1986 before we were finally able to bring the democrats together as of the prosperity we created. all of the democrats joined with us in 1986 to support the 86 tax act.

cut the corporate rate from 46 to 34% and i got rid of all of these deductions and have it revenue neutral. it was the best tax ever. that will happen now. the democrats will flock to our side. they would love to be with us. bigger tax reform later. a high-profile religious liberty case greets the supreme court justice neil gorsuch with his first week on the job. ..

dad likare you going to weeks be using my car? until my insurance claim goes through this is our car. mr. parker, my parents have allstate. they have this claim satisfaction guarantee. really? their claim experience is fast, fair, and hassle-free or they get their, like, money back. saraaah!!! come to prom with me!! no. -hey mr. parker. claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. it's good to be in good hands. ..