still major indices falling 2% on this first trading day or the month. [closing bell rings] no april fool's, i wish it were. that will do it for the "claman countdown." much more ahead for "after the bell." david: it was another wild ride on wall street, first trading day of the week, month and quarter, stocks fighting for gains into the close. coming well off the lows, that is good news. after getting slammed with a one-two punch much fierces of a trade war with china sending shockwaves through the market. negative headlines playing the tech sector. look at the dow closed down, about 463 points to the negative t could settle lower. it had been down over 750 points. earlier the s&p dropping more than 2% as well. dropped 2.25% but it is the tech-heavy nasdaq taking the brunt of it, ending down a lot more than 2 1/2%. now very close to correction territory. i'm david asman.

melissa: it is rough. i'm melissa francis. this is "after the bell." 28 of the dow 30 ending in the red with united health and mcdonald's the only outlyers. ashley webster is here to talk about the selloff. what are the investors saying, ashley. >> lord have mers system maybe mcdonald's was higher because everyone grabbed a big mack after a wild ride. first trading day of the second quarter. april normally a pretty historically strong month for the markets. we haven't started that way, the dow in particular, looking at that chart, paring the big losses of the day by 300 points. here are the dow losers. intel getting slammed that apple will ruse its own chips in their computers. take a look at the hases dach, david mentioned we were very close to correction territory.

we were at one point on the nasdaq in correction territory. there you have it. that little blip higher at the end of the day. a big selloff on the nasdaq. and why? big tech stocks for so long leading these markets, again another tough day. take a look at the numbers for some of these big tech stocks. netflix off 5%. amazon, continued twitter war with the president off 5%. google down two 1/3%. mike sight off 3%. -- microsoft off 3%. fear of regulation and fear that a new business model for some these big tech companies will reduce the earnings. also want to mention some items the health care sector because that is where we found just a few green shoots on a day like today. unitedhealth moving higher up 1 1/2%. jpmorgan analysts saying while competitors in this sector could

be in antitrust purgatory for the next 12 months, unitedhealth will pure on nicely they say. walmart and humana talks, walmart is thinking of expanding buying humana. investors love it for humana. love it up almost 4%. walmart investors note really down almost 4%. we did shave off as liz claman pointed out almost 300 points from the where we were on the dow. interesting to see what tomorrow brings. i don't absolutely. ashley, thank you. >> my pleasure. david: fear after global trade war with new chinese tariffs on american meat and fruit but the white house is not backing down. >> the president knows we're billions of dollars in a trade deficit with china. he is tired of us being taken advantage of, taking our intellectual property. the president will fight back

and push back. we want to be able to work with them to make sure we're getting a good deal and we're not taken at advantage of anymore. david: fox business's adam shapiro is at the white house with the very latest on all this hi, adam. reporter: david, now we're getting reaction from people who may be hit hard by the new tariffs china proposed for instance, 25% tariff immediately on pork imports from the united states. farmers hit by this we have a statement from casey guernsey, americans with farmers and families. moving forward in far-reaching tariffs result in retaliation that threaten to dismantle critical trade deals will have a crushing effect on america's ability to create jobs here at home and feed families around the world. one of the things he is alluding to the trump administration will make public later this week the potentially 1300 products that could face additional tariffs when they are imported from china. it is part of the president's again today to protect

intellectual property and stop the chinese from forcing the transfer of technology to chinese companies. this morning raj shah, press secretary, the deputy press secretary at the white house had this to say? >> the united states is going to defend our interests, going to defend american workers and businesses. if the chinese government uses that as a pretext for further unfair trade practices we think that is very unfortunate but the president is going to continue to work with china, with president xi to insure that we have a free, fair, reciprocal trade arrangement with the chinese and we're lowering our trade deficit. reporter: but the u is str, the trade representative keeping the rhetoric ratcheting up because a recent report on the national trade city. said this about china and the theft of intellectual property, quote, theft of trade secrets for the benefits of chinese company occurred both within china and outside of china. then the same report talking

about china's overcapacity and overproduction. this excess capacity led to global overproduction and supply that hurt the viability of most competitive machiners and policies like made in china to 25 call for this pattern of distortion to continue. for that the president and the administration are trying to stop. we're early this what we call a trade war, early in this battle, they hope to negotiate a solution, but that list will come out with potential new tariffs on chinese products. there will be a 30-day waiting period for u.s. comment but the ustr could take action after this. david: terrific summary, adam, appreciate it. melissa i don't let's bring in today's panel. dan hen anyone per from the ws and liz peek from the "fiscal times" and. liz, start with you, i her glut and dumping, those are music to

my ears, are good things for consumers. >> they normally are, not at the moment. doesn't sound like for producers here in the united states of pork or fruits and vegetables, apples, nuts, exporting from california. these are the people who will be hurt by these tariffs. and but you know, what else can you say, welcome to donald trump's world. he is the great disruptor. he starts and initiates something like this and figures out the strategy afterwards. my fear here the chinese have seen this coming for at least a year. they're very sophisticated players when it comes to something is like this. one can only hope that our trade rep, robert lighthizer and mr. navarro have got a strategy equal to that that the chinese obviously are going to deploy against our producers and exporters. melissa: liz, i would say the flip side of that equation the trade imbalance, i don't mean in terms of who is sending what

where, in terms they have had tariffs on our products for a long time that imbalance in the playing field has been stilted for a very long time and it was going to take something very disruptive and severe in order to reset that negotiation, right? >> i think that is exactly right. not only had higher tariffs but they have engaged in cheating on tariffs that exist and all kind of other means to keep american goods out of their markets and make it very costly for american companies to access their markets. i would view today's salvo as very tempered by the chinese. the biggest u.s. pork producer is smithfield which is owned by china. it is kind of an interesting first place to go. they are the dominant company in that industry. i don't think really their penalty today were enormous. i think they are trying to keep this very controlled and as dan said i think that is what the administration will hope for too. melissa: so, jason, there have

been some experts looking at the response saying that it does, as big as it sounds in a vacuum, that it is muted to compared to what they respond. as you read from everybody's response the signal where it will end up it does seem like everybody's signaling they want a deal and want it to end quickly. >> well, the question with any action including this one is, is this just a domino in is it this in a vacuum as you're saying, melissa? or is this a domino going to lead to bigger and better things you could say? right now we don't know. just to change topics in a sense, the huge rally at the end of the day was overdone. i think we're not out of woods yet with this trade deal. obviously donald trump knows what he is doing from a deal of making perspective. he doesn't want to wreck the economy but he is rocking the boat. the market was doing well and he is causing it to turn a little bit here. david: the real carnage in the markets was in tech where the nasdaq settled down 193 points,

actually way off the lows but still down quite a bit. the former darlings of tech, facebook, amazon, dragging it down. president putting more pressure on amazon tweeting only fools or worse are saying that our money-losing post office makes money with amazon. they lose a fortune, this will be changed. only our fully tax-paying retailers are closing stores all over the country. not a level playing field. liz, first of all, overall about a president of the united states focusing on one company? >> that's obviously a problem and it makes everyone skittish. the ceo's across america are thinking oh, lord, please let it not be me next in the cross-hairs. if there is connecting dot situation here china, amazon, et cetera, it all has to do with jobs. i think it has been clear, trump has talked about amazon for well over a year because amazon has in fact been party to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs.

clearly he is decided, people talk about antitrust. we're not going there. there is no antitrust case here but there is certainly the possibility they could change the contracts amazon has with the u.s. postal service to make them pay a fuller price. david: let me just drill down on that issue with dan henninger. because, dan, it was your newspaper, "wall street journal" in july 2017 gave donald trump his ammunition in his fight against amazon and how they're getting something from the post office. he says look, the post office has a monopoly on letter carrying. that service is about 150 million homes in the u.s. and very often they will use that taxpayer-supported monopoly to piggyback with these packages. that the packages they get money from, and therefore they essentially amazon which gets these special deals from the post office get as subsidy of about a buck 50 per package. is that true? >> certainly they're getting a subsidy, david, but one might say if it were not for amazon's

business the postal service would be falling apart, except that is a oxymoron. the postal service fell apart a long time ago. look, 90% of the mail i think that any of us get in our houses or apartments is advertising. it is subsidized. there is very little first class mail being processed by the postal service anymore. the answer is not to charge amazon more but truly start thinking about privatizing the u.s. postal service is there you go. >> get market-based pricing. david: i couldn't agree with you more. jason, with regard to amazon, we've seen the price come down quite a bit. is there a price point which you would jump in and start buying? >> right about now. i think amazon is one of the greatest companies of all time. i think dollar-cost averaging amazon is pretty much a no-brainer. melissa: meanwhile, facebook also tumbling in today's tech wreck. it closed down 2 and 3/4 of a president today. ceo mark zuckerberg telling vox

it will take a few years to fix facebook after this scandal. let's bring the panel back. liz, a few years. i think he is right but you expect the ceo to be -- >> more optimistic? melissa: more positive, other than, yuck, it will take years to work this out. >> i think he is being realistic. i said before, i really maintain, i don't know how you regulate facebook. the amount of data flowing in and off this site every day is in the ped today bytes. i don't know what it is but 10 to the 15th power. nobody can control that frankly i'm less concerned about a few russian bots showing up on facebook than i am the eu and american regulators trying to actually sort it out. i think the marketplace will take care of this. i think they need to say hands off of this thing. melissa: dan, when you see somebody hit a bad story, sometimes it's a bad week and it kind of turns the page. these guys have been taking a leg down and a leg down and then

another leg down with so many layers of bad news. it is such a dog pile on top of them, how do you see this story turning around? >> well, i mean they're, he is probably right, it will take a couple of years but one of the questions you have to ask here not just with facebook but some of these high-flying tex companies like uber, where is the adult supervision? they have great ideas. they make a lot of money quickly but how do they scale up? there is a lot about standard management practices blocking and tackling strikes a lot of people boring but doesn't it stand that facebook could use a little more traditional management practice than they have in the past? one may ask where is the chief operating officer sheryl sandberg? >> yes. >> how she fox hold in this situation is really quite striking because she contributed so much to the business model. melissa: she is somebody that is very vocal. has all the books. goes out on tour.

bidding a grassroots political campaign for herself. she largely avoided out there for this whole thing. jason, she was in fact hired to be the adult in the room. that is what everybody said when she came on board. she was supposed to be the one who is the sophisticated business person while mark zuckerberg was the idea guy. what does all this mean for her? >> well, i think her stock is going down as well as facebook's. i think, this may sound crazy, honestly there is a chance she didn't know fully 100% what was actually going on because of all that data. melissa: did you read the memo? did you read the ugly truth memo where they talked about the fact, was it okay or not? how do they feel about the fact that the business model connects people and as a result people will die? as a result people will get bullied and as a result terrorists may connect with each other. they wrote in the memo that it is defacto good because our business is about connections?

everybody was on the memo. nobody at this point, that is the exact argument, jason you would think i didn't know. >> i read that. melissa: after that memo i don't think anyone in the company can make the argument they doesn't know what was going on? >> i read that memo. that was a shocking memo. there's, listen, i think that that memo didn't necessarily directly refer to the cambridge case. obviously i don't know exactly what she knew but that memo was pretty direct and she needs to come out and say something. melissa: something. all right. david: then there was tesla. did you hear about this? ceo elon musk tweeting out an april fool's joke, so-called, writing quote, despite intense efforts to raise money including a last-ditch mass sale of easter eggs we're sad to report that tesla has gone completely and totally bankrupt. so bankrupt, you can't believe it. this is the national transportation safety board saying it is unhappy with tesla for disclosing that semiautonomous driving system was activated during that deadly

california crash in march. dan, this has got to be the dumb est fools joke, backfiring terribly on tesla and stock holders in history? >> kind of reflection what we were just saying. david: where are the adults in the room? >> where are the adults in the ram but there was a time i don't know, 25 or 30 years ago, there was no social media, no instant reaction to these things and maybe elon musk could get away with statement like this, but not today. the irony, how could someone like elon musk, who understands this environment do a statement like this? david: there will be a spacex launch today. we'll cover it in about 15 minutes, very exciting stuff he is is involved with. putting, doesn't get more complicated than putting a rocket up in space. he can do these extraordinary things yet he does these dumb management things at the same time. >> you're right.

the theme i think overall the more i ponder and think about it, with everything we're talking about today even, facebook, musk, et cetera, pride go before a fall. melissa: true. >> market gone up, people have made so much money in the corporate level maybe they need a little bit of an ego check and stay humble. david: liz, some people say it is too late. that tesla has gone beyond the point where it can recover. it is on the verge of a breakdown. maybe the spacex thing will continue as a separate operation but tesla as a car manufacturer is not tenable? >> i think this is incredibly inventive, brilliant guy, i wonder sometimes whether he has the stick taught it tiffness to to -- here is about to shoot off a rocket. he has a boring machine to tunnel under l.a. he has a million great ideas. you know what? it is not easy to scale up

automotive manufacturing. his tweet was dumbest thing in a long time. a lot of people speculate whether they have a cash flow shortage. we'll see if they ramp up enough cash to meet their means. david: sometimes a genius is not a good manager. you need a boring manager, not a wild-eyed genius. appreciate it. melissa. melissa: more on today's big market rally go on the new york stock exchange where trader teddy weisberg is standing by. david: hey. >> hey. >> you heard it off to the side. volatility is the name of the game. >> i can't help but comment on the tweets. we are surrounded by bizarre tweets. his is another in plethora of crazy tweets. i guess we can blame it on social media. melissa: yeah. >> the stock market, the low-hanging fruit has been picked. we talked about it a couple days

ago. the tax bill is long behind us. the markets like to have something positive to look at but all it seems to have to look at is a lot of uncertainty coming from all difficult quarters including our president who tweeted about amazon this morning. these tariff issues which are potentially huge, huge issues. we would like them to go away but clearly they have haven't. corporate earnings coming in a couple weeks. maybe that will save us. i think we're sort of in the soft sand for a while. down 700, down 400 and change looks like almost a rally after being down almost 700 points earlier in the day. the fact we're on the other side of the mountain. a lot of the easy money i suspect has been made. it is going to get sufficient here. melissa: having spent time on energy floor myself you get into these patches are about what the trend is. people wake up in the morning, here is how i'm going to make money today. >> yes.

melissa: we've seen so much volatility it strikes me now people are trying to make day-to-day money on volatility. so you kind of get a feel where the news is headed for the day, you will see a big move in that direction. is that totally off base? >> i think what you're saying politely the trend is your friend which is a classic way to trade commodities or asset classes that have a reputation of being somewhat, somewhat more volatile. you know, the fact is that the vast majority of folks out there, myself included, have medium to long-term horizons. though the volatility does benefit certain people, clearly benefits them a lot because you have got geniuses out there that will figure out how to play the volatility and make a lot of money especially in the dealer environment. melissa: right. >> but for most mortals and i would put, hopefully put myself in that category the volatility is very unnerving. it is not that we're all spoiled

though we might be a little bit after the last seven or eight years but the volatility really shakes you to the core and it really gets, starts second-guessing, well am i really in this for the long term? can i really hold on to these securities? i would suggest that the volatility for a long-term investor does create opportunity. the problem is, wall street has always been the same. every time they have a fear sale the public is afraid to come because they're scared to death. and it is a mistake to try to pick bottoms but the volatility certainly benefits a few but i think it is unnerving for the greater good. melissa: what do you think is the biggest concern down there? every time, everybody tries to pick the headline that goes along with the move of the day. today they were talking a lot about the tariffs. obviously the amazon tweet but what would you say? >> well, at the end of the day it will always be about corporate earnings. right along with corporate earnings will be the fed. because the fed is the 800-pound

gorilla in the room. the markets always react to the fed. the adage is never fight the fed. melissa: yeah. >> clearly the fed has completely done a 180. it has been very subtle. they handled us all with kid gloves but fact we went from a fed for seven, possibly eight years was in accommodative mode to a neutral mode and now they're in a restrictive mode, restrictive in a sense they have been telling us for almost 12 months they will raise interest rates and they have. the fact they do it slowly and not fast doesn't change the dynamic. interest rates are moving higher and we have a stock market that at the same time is trading at or near all-time highs, a large degree has been on the backs of a zero interest rate environment. so when you change that dynamic, when the fed changes their position, corporate earnings are very important but the real question is, can the corporate

earnings, i hate to use this expression, trump the fed monetary policy and i guess we'll find out in a couple weeks. melissa: i guess we'll find out. teddy, thank you. great job,. >> my pleasure. melissa: he is so smart. >> the stock market is at an all-time high. all-time high. it is at an all time again. one all-time record after another. smashed one report after another. people are appreciating what we're doing. when i came into the stock market the stock market was from a different planet. it is way up. david: how could he help us. melissa: good reminder. david: but did the president focus too much on the markets as they were climbing only to see stocks tanking ahead of the election season. here is karl rove, former senior advisor to president george w. bush and also fox news contributor. what do you think, karl, was it a mistake for the president to focus on markets? >> we'll tell you when i was in the white house i can not tell you how many times i heard a treasury secretary or director of the national economic council

say to the president when the market was going up don't talk about. markets go up and down. it was tactical mistake. speak to people's lives, paychecks are getting bigger, job ross growing, companies are strengthening, communities are more prosperous. better to focus on those things than the stock market. david: it was the elephant in the room but it was hard to avoid talking about an 8,000 point increase in the dow in one year. that is sort of thing usually happens over a period of seven or eight years, and there was a direct connection between that rise and pro-business president who deregulated businesses, who got these tax cuts in, who released domestic energy production. it was definitely those policy moves helping the market. >> i agree. i will add one thing, they

didn't get the alternative which scared people a lot. david: good point. >> immediately after the election before we started to see moves towards deregulation, before we saw the move to approve the pipelines out of the dakotas, before we saw force -- gorsuch and other qualified supreme court justices, before we got the tax cuts even moving the markets began to move. people who buy stocks and people who invest in the markets said we'll not have what we're going to get from her and we know how bad that was going to be. david: then came trade. we knew it was coming. the president has said this there was no surprise. he telegraphed this when he was running for president, he would be tough on china and all the other countries, shut down nafta or change it dramatically. but the markets didn't like it. here is where the disconnect came between what main street likes and wall street likes and that's where the problem pebegan, right? >> i think so. look, there are two-ways to go about getting at china.

there is the brute way, where you take tariffs and you slap them on the chinese and they retaliate by slapping tariffs on us or there is another way to go about doing it. china signed up for the world trade organization. which means it signed up to a list of trading practice. most people don't understand it, literally each year, for example, in 2015 the total was the u.s. filed in the world trade organization i think something like 114 or 113 challenges to various trading practices by countries around the world, won virtually he one of them. the same thing could happen here. the question did,. david: you know this very well. it is unintended consequences. we didn't see the theft of intellectual property coming the way it came. we didn't see the reverse engineering process by which the chinese began to steal our stuff. it was those things and directly related by the president to closing down of some factories as you said before, that is what

really affects main street when they see in their own communities factories shutting down. >> previous administration should have moved on this stuff. they did move in some areas but should have moving a agressively in these areas and they didn't. i'm just saying the president has a choice, use tariffs which are crude tool or use actions filed against illicit trading practices which is more precise and surgical tool. i think we fare better when we dot latter. we have more problems doing with the former. we see it today in the market. david: the other thing the previous administration didn't do, take seriously some of the direct threats of world security coming from china. you see what happened with the islands in the south china sea. >> right. david: we have dictatorship taking place, a changeover from a quasi-dictatorship, to one focused more on just one man. all of these changes threaten the united states interests either directly or indirectly. americans are aware of that as well. >> yeah. look, it is not just china.

if you look how we handled russia, we were quote leading from the behind, which the rest of the world, especially our adversaries took to mean we were not going to lead, we were not going to be in front, and advocating our interests but we'll be paying for this for years to come. you're right. this absolutely snowballed to things beyond just simply economics but into things, political and military just as well. david: finally, let me put, maybe i'm looking for some light underneath the clouds, but this is clearly good for the president, anyway. the fact that his numbers keep going up. apparently americans like what's happening. they're not as concerned about the market going down as people on wall street r they are more concerned about the changes, the fundamental changes in the economy that seem to be helping american companies? >> yeah. well, david we began to see the president's numbers improve in january and february after the tax cuts were passed. that was durable in march.

it was tied directly to the people's paychex, that they were getting bigger and with holding was tying in, my concern in four or five or six weeks are we going to see, are people's attitudes colored by markets being constantly down, down. you and i know we're back to where we were last october or november. you and i know as teddy said in the previous segment, what will really drive this whether or not corporate profits pick up or remain strong. david: yeah. >> but again, presidents are best to leave the markets to themselves and talk about the more casual things. david: one more thing i got to ask you because you're seeing a lot of reports in media while republicans have to move away from the tax cut message because most americans don't appreciate it when in fact i think as you said before americans are seeing it directly in their paycheck, et cetera. >> yeah. david: by the way, we got to take a slight break here. melissa: you are looking at live pictures of the spacex reusable

falcon 9 rocket. there we go. there it is from cape canaveral, on a mission to provide more than 5800-pound of supplies, including experiment hardware and food to the international space station. look at it go. this is the 14th resupply launch to the space station by spacex since 2012 under a multibillion-dollar contract with nasa. its company's 7th rocket flight. david: so ironic talking about tesla and problems it is having, that same company is the company that put this rocket up here. melissa: on the phone former nasa astronaut tom jones of the let's listen for one second, then we'll bring tom in. >> one minute 18 seconds after liftoff. rocket reaches its peak because of the rocket's velocity and

resistance created by earth's atmosphere. >> going supersonic. >> vehicle experiencing maximum pressure. >> confirmation of max q. one minute 30 seconds into flight. and the second is stage has begun. around 2 minutes 35 seconds into flight, the nine merlin engines will sequentially shutdown. you will hear the term meco.

which means main engine cutoff. melissa: boy, never gets old. go to former astronaut tom jones now. what is your reaction? >> melissa, that is about as beautiful a launch as i've seen except for one or two of my shuttle launches. impressive to see the rocket second flight into space with used or reused cargo capsule. spacex is putting their reputation on the line, reuse hardware lowering cost of launch to orbit. melissa: they have done a number of innovative things. we've seen them bring rockets up and land it like a pencil on its tip. what do you think of the things

they are trying to do versus the way the space program was run before maybe? >> they have built on 50 or 60 years of nasa experience to try to innovate to get to earth orbit. reusability on the first stage, we've seen dramatically, almost out of a science fiction movie. they're working on recovering the nose cone for the rockets. eventually they may try to recover the second stage. the dragon capsule will be recovered after month long use in the space station. that is great experience for spacex, that same capsule, modified version carrying them up to the space station, getting the cargo up to working toward human flight. melissa: why is this important to people out there, maybe they're in all what they're seeing, they're wonder with so many things going on why is this important to us going forward? >> visuals are terrific. the real bottom line this lowers the cost of getting a pound of cargo or supplies or science

experiments to the international space station. we tax dayers are on hook for the cargo runs, if nassda lowers cost of cargo runs, they get to spend more of their fund, $20 billion annually for the entire nasa program, they get more for exploration around the moon and outpost on the moon and return eventually astronauts there. that economizing an innovation will help us get more mileage on the way to mars. melissa: as somebody who has been a part of the space program for so long, what did you think about the private sector and competition when things like this started to happen and have your feelings changed? >> i started working on this 10 years ago advising nasa on a panel that was looking at commercial cargo launches just like this with orbit al atk, the other company besides space ex. we were skeptical at first. it was good nasa was trying a new way to lowering cost to get supplies to the space station

which is a long-run enterprise. you can't to economize over next 10 years of space station operation. i've been brought around by the persistence and technical excellence of spacex. they made the goals of reusing hardware and treating it more like using an airliner than a one-way expendable rocket. that might be useful for building landers to get humans to the moon instead of using landers instead of throwing them away. melissa: my dad was involved in nasa as engineers and both ply sons are going to space camp this summer. what would you tell my boys? >> they're in for exciting 20 years ahead and many more opportunities to participate in a space career than i had with nasa as only employer. spacex, blue origin, orbital atk and they will hire space plane

pilots and tour guides and hotels in space. a lot more opportunities to get your feet wet in this amazing, amazing enterprise. david: sign me up. melissa: there you are. my husband is going for the family weekend as well. he wants to be an astronaut too. he might be a little old though we'll not tell him. tom jones, thanks for coming on. we really appreciate night my pleasure. melissa: china pushing back on president trump's most recent trade regulations with the communist nation imposing tariffs on 128 u.s. products including pork and wine and certain fruits. joining me now is ohio congressman jim renace. sir, thank you so much for joining us. what do you think of where we are in this battle? >> trade battle, look? >> yeah. >> i think what the president is doing trying to make sure we have fair trade, not only free trade but fair trade. we expect china to retaliate. we're going to have to watch this. at the same time i know the president's looking at many of our allies making sure that all

of our trade agreements are not only free but fair trade. so we'll have to see how it continues to work out but in the end i know this president knows about this at the same time we have to protect the united states to make sure we have the free and fair trade especially with china. china is the abuser. we have to make sure we're looking at ways to make sure that is more fair in our trade with them. melissa: do you think there was another way to approach this? people argue that this was too blunt, at the same time the imbalance of power it seems like in the trade situation has gotten so far out of line, it was one of those situations where people say, you will not change it, you know? and here he really shook it up. but that makes people nervous. what do you think? was it too much, was it too disruptive? >> one thing i know about washington after being there seven years we wait, we don't do things fast enough. in business you're always moving, you're always changing, you're always making decision to make things better. i think in the end what you're seeing with this president is someone who will make big, bold

decisions. but he will listen and look and watch to see what happens. we'll make adjustments as we move forward. i'm counting on that as a businessman. i was a businessman for almost three decades as well. melissa: yeah. >> i see the president doing that. melissa: you also wrote in an op ed about infrastructure. i want to get it right. trump's infrastructure plan is badly-needed and deserves congressional approval. do you feel that has been shoved to the backburner? >> i do. it was just a couple years ago i was working on a infrastructure plan because i believe we can't keep pushing this burden on to our children and grandchildren. we have bridges built for 40 years and they are 80 years old. we have the spence bridge in cincinnati, built for 80,000 cars a day and it has 160,000. everything needs to change and infrastructure is what we move forward with. again it also spurs the economy which i think is important as well. dollars that are spent that we can get the economy moving which is very important as well.

melissa: do you think we'll see movement on daca or you know the border wall first? when we're talking about the priority of things, seems like there is always something on fire around us. china is getting attention in trade because we set off alarm bells with tariffs. you have the caravan moving up which is focusing a lot of attention on the border. what do you think happens next? what are the priorities as you see them? >> one of the problems in washington that i have learned over the last seven years we wait until an emergency before we do something. melissa: yeah. >> daca is a problem. we're waiting on daca. we'll wait for the courts. i believe we need to move on that. i think we have to quit waiting because when you wait all these things start to come together. one of the greatest frustrations that i have had, as business guy for almost 30 years coming to washington. we waist and wait and fix a problem when it becomes an emergency. we never look out two or four

year election cycles. we should look out long-term to fix these things. we continue to have things. they're all priorities because they wait too long. melissa: you're not the only businessman that went to washington frustrated with how the process went and thinking it making no sense. has anything changed meaningfully since the president took office in the way business is done? >> well i think so. you see the president doing certain things that people get a little concerned about but he is doing it as a businessman would. you throw out a big net. the one good thing throws out a big net to see what people think, brings it back just like trade, when he said originally would have tariffs and he excluded, not china, excluded canada and mexico. he is talking about companies especially mere in ohio that need thin aluminum and thin steel we have to give them exemptions. we're seeing issues. this is what we need to do. we do need to shake things up in washington. we can't continue the same old, same old and continue to pass on

the debt to our children. which seems to be the problem. melissa: congressman jim renacci, thank you. david: is john huber enough? he is a very good prosecutor. he gets accolade from all over the place but he is enough to investigate this whole slew of stuff that cropped up? >> we hope so. we don't know for sure. that coupled with the fact we think this should be an investigation outside of the department of justice all together. is why we continue to call for a special counsel. david: congressman bob goodlatte, chairman of the house judiciary committee telling me on saturday while the man sessions has hired to investigate possible fbi and doj manipulation of the fisa courts during the election we still need a special counsel. to judge andrew napolitano, fox news senior judicial analyst. goodlatte is a smart guy. he is a sober guy, doesn't get involved in extraordinarily partisan battles but he think

this is one prosecutor is not enough. that you need a special prosecutor outside of the justice department in order to get the job done. what do you think, judge? >> remember the special prosecutor, the person we call the special prosecutor must come from outside of justice department but all his or her tools come from inside of the justice department. when jeff sessions said john huber is my guy, he meant one of two things, either that mr. huber will move to washington, d.c., where he will be assigned a half dozen federal prosecutors. david: he is now in utah, isn't he. >> right. and a dozen or two fbi agents and convene a grand jury and present evidence to the grand jury and get subpoenas to the grand jury or do it remotely from utah. if he does it in washington, d.c., he is is a defacto special counsel. he will be doing the same thing that a new special counsel is doing. david: let me drill down on that for a second because i asked mr. goodlatte, look does he have subpoena power? yes. does he have power to convene a

grand jury? yes. in what way is he different? why would you need a special counsel if john huber can do the same thing? >> with respect to congressman goodlatte, if john huber stays in utah he can not subpoena someone so a grand jury and can not get subpoena from grand jury because a grand jury in utah can not have jurisdiction over fbi agents and nsa agents over their records in washington, d.c. david: is it matter of moving to washington, d.c.? >> it's a same thing as what a special counsel does. i'm suggesting that jeff sessions is playing word games on the public and congress by appointing this fellow, may be a great prosecutor for all we know from utah because he -- david: appointed by president obama and appointed by president trump. he has it from both republican and democrat. here is mr. goodlatte's point.

i interviewed him a long time. he is clear he believes there is entrenched bureaucracy. part of the problem with the whole thing that happened with mccabe and peter strzok and bruce ohr and -- >> plenty of evidence. david: trying to work together to manipulate the fisa court to keep donald trump out of the white house, that the entrenched bureaucracy is the problem. you need somebody outside of that entrenched bureaucracy in order to investigate properly. that's why jeff sessions was appointing somebody in utah to this position. >> jeff sessions who is a lawyer because he is the attorney general, must know that a grand jury in utah is toothless with respect to acquiring evidence from fbi agents and the justice department in washington, d.c. the grand jury has to sit where the documents and the witnesses are. now there are three issues being investigated. the abuse of fisa, the premature exoneration of mrs. clinton, and the premature exoneration of

president and mrs. clinton in uranium one deal. all of those documents and all of the witnesses are government employees in washington, d.c., which can not be reached by a grand jury or prosecutor in utah. david: judge, here's the problem, i know you know it well because we talked about it, you have this entrenched bureaucracy. some call it a deep state. >> yes. david: that you are going to have to draw on in order to work with you if you're a special prosecutor. is there a way to avoid that? sessions believes perhaps the way to avoid it having somebody outside of the beltway to do the work and you mentioned some of the problems there but how do you do that? how do you get an independent prosecutor who is not going to be swayed by these forces inside of the beltway? >> you bring john huber to washington, d.c. you have him find a dozen or so federal prosecutors who have no connection with the people they're investigating. you have them pick a dozen or two fbi agents who have no

connection with the people being investigated. you some mon a grand jury. then you're off to the races. david: something close to your heart. simultaneously to all this stuff you reform the fisa system, but we all know it became far too easy to spy on americans as a result of our fisa court. >> did you notice none of these abecause came out until after congress voted to extend fisa. how many members of congress sat on this? david: what do you think? >> a lot. david: the bottom line are we going to have a revision of the fisa court system in order to prevent anything like this happening again? will we have other presidential elections and chances are somebody else may try to use or manipulate the fisa zetsche in order to spy on their political opponents? >> david, i could not agree with you more. but i'm not naive. i don't expect a revision of fisa, because the justice or department does not fisa. fisa regulates them. david: scary stuff.

judge, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. melissa: retail data of thousands of -- david: saks buyers here. tell me more. >> i shouldn't be filing, i feel like every single week we're hearing a new story every week. this comes from hudson bay company, parent of lord & taylor, yes they have been compromised. they will reach out to any customers. during the time of may 2017 all the way until march 2018. that is just last month. five million customers have been hit. not all the customers have been hit. gemini a cybersecurity firm is saying a russian hacking group is behind this entire cybersecurity threat right now, they're slowly starting to sell credit card numbers on line. they haven't sold all of them just yet. this comes at a time for hb s

hudsons bay company. they are going through changes. their ceo left just last october. you're seeing the stock price right now, it has been trending lower over the last little while because they turned a profit but their earnings missed analyst expectations. you're seeing reports about the company going private just within the last year. they sold their retail space, their flagship store in manhattan for lord & taylor. retail is so important for these companies. i want to end with cybersecurity and the opportunity right now. we're talking about all these threats week after week. this could be an opportunity for several investors to get into cybersecurity stocks. right now you're seeing just an ample of how bad it is, how it has been with uber. with target in the past. with several other companies. so i have just picked three stocks right now. symantec, which is known for its cybersecurity. it is trending downward right now because they have been trying to cut costs. they have been laying off some people but they're really

focused on cybersecurity. fireeye as well provide security solutions. they focus on the behavior of people. lastly palo alto, which is the darling of cybersecurity. although this is bad for hb c it, could be a buying opportunity for people in the market. hutson bay, saks fifth avenue will be investigate into the matter. >> kristin, thank you. david: melissa, you're nervous. melissa: another day. david: we have breaking news, cb is planning to make an offer for viacom, that offers the company below the current valuation. this according to reuters. ashley webster is still at nyse for more on this. >> this would be all-stock offer, david. that would set the scene for some pretty tough negotiations. we understand cbs's independent board likely to offer a old stock option that would value viacom below market value as it

stands right now. the other proposal that is being reported by reuters is that cbs chief executive les moonves would actually propose to stay at the helm for two years if this merger or deal goes through. that is also, we understand, they're trying to get this done before each company reports its earnings in may. pretty interesting, could this bring these media companies back together, 12 years after they split up. we talked about it. agonized over it for so long. but we understand at least an offer has been made but it is below market value. we'll see where it goes from there. david: they really want moonves to stay on. ashley, thank you very much. >> my pleasure. david: melissa. melissa: an army of migrants heading towards the u.s., a caravan of over 1000 people marching from central america through mexico and straight for our southern border. so what happens when they get hear? here is now paul babeu, former

penal county sheriff. what is your take on this? what are your thoughts of video of giant group of people moving? >> it doesn't sound like a lot but 1200 as you can see by the photos it's a lot of people. more importantly when the group makes it to the border coming days, what will happen is so important. the reason being, this will send a message not only to those in central america but throughout mexico. if they are processed as asylum seekers seek being refuge here in the united states, guess what will happen next? you will not see 1200. you will see tens thousands marching towards our still unsecured border. melissa: so i mean what should americans reaction be to this? because you look at the video, and you know, on one hand, see people coming from a country where it, living conditions are horrific. there is a reason that they're willing to walk this great distance. >> absolutely. melissa: go ahead. >> we feel great compassion in

the united states. in fact is the most compassionate nation in the world. every year we accept legally, accept a million legal immigrants. that is far more than any other nation. so, america shouldn't be shamed into just opening our borders as a sovereign nation not to have a secure border and let anybody in. we should be able to determine who comes in, that benefits our nation. and so these 1200 as we've seen in the past, when we listened to democrat talking points of just open the border, what happens is you end up with 12 million. some say as high as 20 million illegals with real costs associated with that, taking away from the united states and our workers. melissa: when president trump took office and even ahead of that, border crossings were way down because people were afraid of that he wasn't going to have the same leeway that other presidents had had in the past.

so why are we seeing this now? is this in anticipation of laws changing, softening of stance? has it has been the talk of amnesty for daca adults? >> in part. and there is a lot of speculation about that i can tell you. president trump from a law enforcement perspective has done an amazing job. when he came in and with his platform of securing the border, of enforcing laws and sending resources to do that, has had a tremendous impact. we've seen 80% decrease in illegally entries since he has taken office. melissa: why this now do you think? maybe because they think the wall is actually coming? or because the stance is softening? >> one it is different. this is organized by a group. people without borders. this isn't the normal being snuck in by coy create tease -- coyotes, mex can is doing

nothing to stop them. this is highly political march that will have all kind of consequences. we have to as the president is doing, apply pressure on the mexican government to do something about this because they're traveling, within days they will reach our border. then it becomes our issue. it is happening because the border wall will be built and all this talk of daca. so a lot of these individual think that hey, we could sneak in like it happened under obama get to the border and you're home free. those days are gone under president trump. melissa: what do you think is going to happen? how do you think this plays out? will they cross the border? a lot of people have different guesses. >> listen to organizers, they believe 800 plus will either sneak across the border or actually request asylum. when we have these very liberal interpretations of asylum, if they are granted asylum because of desperate situation, guess

who else is coming? people from every other central american country can make the claim and be granted under that. we can not allow our laws to be flouted and abused as they're planning to have happen. we have to skop that from happening. put america, our country, our citizens first. we have to have a secure border. president trump is here to insure that that happens. so i'm counting on him and his cabinet to make sure this happens. melissa: we have compassion. we also all know someone else who has been trying very hard to come to this country for years and years and hasn't been able to do that it. i don't know, sheriff, thank you for coming on. we appreciate your time. >> thanks for having me. david: we also know the mexicans wouldn't allow those immigrants to stay there and work for all their complaints about the united states they have very tough immigration work laws in mexico. so a lot of hypocrisy all around on this. melissa: great point. david: speaking hypocrisy, talk

about new york city. how do you solve about problem of high taxes? with a new tax of course. melissa: obviously. david: bill de blasio is considering a tax that would not let retail landlords keep their spaces vacant. i couldn't believe you said it. you sent me an email. melissa: we have problem in new york, for those you don't live there. there is lot of empty -- david: all over, east side, west side. melissa: they say owe it is amazon and greedy landlords. the fact of the matter minimum wage is up, people run mom-and-pop businesses they go out of business. mayor de blasio is blaming the landlords. he is saying it is their fault they're, choosing to wait for people who have lot of money. they're not waiting for people

to be choosier. where no one can do business he will tax the landlord who leaves his space unrented. another tax of the answer is attack. david: the kid david: he's been killing all of the business around and then he's complaining that it's the business' fault that the businesses are dying. melissa: you're right. david: it's absolutely nuts but again this is what you get when you get a politician whose done nothing in his life but be a politician, has no idea how the market works, remember when trump was running for president, he was criticizing the stores for complaining the stores around the trump tower, he said i don't worry about tiffanies, i don't worry about these high end stores. well people work at those stores we rely on those stores to bring tourists into new york city. he doesn't understand how markets work. meanwhile speaking out markets work today was an interesting

day. we've got to talk about -- melissa: wasn't really complaining about that other thing. david: there's a lot to complain about here but also markets going down. the big question is whether the president has connected his presidency a little too closely to the markets he did that in 2017 when they went nowhere but up for about a full year, now that they're going down the question is will any stick to the president to which i will say his numbers are up. melissa: but let's look at the flip side of that. wouldn't it be great in part of his barometer of his presidency is the market because the market is neutral of free market principles and the market is saying i'm nervous about these tariffs and if we come out the other side with lower tariffs across-the-board which larry kudlow said what the goal is it's not for everybody to tax each other. it's to get them to bring there's down in unison with ours so lower tariffs across-the-board then the market will go back up. he should use the market. david: you mentioned the magic

words, larry kudlow the president appointed larry kudlow as his chief economic advisor and larry kudlow has very sensible ideas on this front and he is talking to the president today. melissa: our hour is up already i can't believe it that was fun. here is risk & rewards starts right now. >> the president knows that we're billions of dollars in a trade deficit with china. he's tired of us being taken advantage of and taking our intellectual property and the presidents going to fight back and pushback but we want to be able to work with him to make sure we're getting a good deal and not taken advantage of any more and that's exactly what people like the donald trumps that come to washington and do so we've been doing the traditional way for a long time and the only thing that that has done is created a bigger trade deficit. >> stocks falling on trade worries and tech company jitters on the first trading day of the month and the quarter, the dow dropping more than 700 points before shaving nearly half those losses, the nasdac turning