Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg Markets Americas  Bloomberg  December 3, 2019 10:00am-11:00am EST

10:00 am
10:01 am
pres. trump: and i think situation in ukraine is very important. the meetings coming up with
10:02 am
russia and ukraine are very important. there's a big possibility that very big progress can be made. i think it's very important for ukraine. i think it's very important from the standpoint of russia also to work out peace because they've been fighting a long time, too long. i think there's a really good chance that that will happen. also, with respect to nuclear weapons, i've spoken to president putin, and i've communicated with him. he very much wants to, and so do we, work out a treaty of some kind on nuclear weapons. that will probably then include china at some point, and yourselves, by the way, but it will include china and some other countries. we intend to see if we can work something out to stop the proliferation, to stop what is happening because we are making a lot, and we are renovating a lot, and frankly, the whole situation with nuclear is not a good situation.
10:03 am
we ended the treaty because it wasn't being adhered to by the other side, but they want to make a treaty, and so do we, and i think it would be great. i think it is one of the most important things we can do, frankly. we are going to be dealing with , where we areeaty focused on nuclear and nuclear weapons, like missiles, but nuclear weapons. we think something can be worked out. we think they want to do it, we know they want to do it, and we want to do it also. i spoke to china about it. during one of our negotiations, they were extremely excited about getting involved in that, so very good things can happen with respect to that. i think it is very important. the whole nuclear situation is very important. thank you all very much. thank you. vonnie: you've been watching
10:04 am
presidents trump and emmanuel macron of france conducting a news conference on the sidelines of the nato meeting, the 70th anniversary of nato. a pretty tense exchange of topics from syria to turkey to ukraine, to the relevance of nato, and of course, that threatened digital tax. running us now from washington is terry haynes, pangea policy founder. thanks for joining. president trump obviously firing the first of the cannons, threatening a tax on french luxury goods, and tomorrow, as we've learned, the french finance minister will meet with the eu trade commissioner to talk about potential responses on the part of the eu. how will this bilateral that the two leaders are going to get involved in, how will that go? that needs to produce something on this tax issue, doesn't it? terry: it does. before we get to that, though.
10:05 am
get to that, though, this exchange i think has generally been a market positive. you have, and no particular and westrength in nato, will get to the digital tax in a talk ofbut no serious how the eu is dealing with iran, which is also a subject for this alliance. positive on the future of a possiblede, and nuclear deal between the united states and russia, possibly with china becoming involved. on the tax, i expect something to ultimately be worked out either through the oecd or on a bilateral or multilateral. this is a situation where people in washington like to say that
10:06 am
if we could only leave it to the staffs, everything would be better. i've never been one of those people, and i've been staff. this is clearly an issue where principals have to start talking about this and dealing on things. i wouldn't despite some negotiations over the next few months, but ultimately, the digital tax issue and potential tariffs to be resolved pretty, can be -- pretty amicably because it is in the broader interest of both countries to do that. guy: if you think about traditionally how the publicity, military, trade would be in different buckets, they are in the same bucket right now, so could we end up in a situation where the traits that between europe and the united states impacts the military security bucket that was nato? why can't that happen? terry: in the abstract, i think it could happen. but bottom line, i think it won't, and i think it is very unlikely. that is largely because the nato
10:07 am
alliance is something that is as ingrained and cemented a part of the western alliance as there could possibly be. i don't anticipate trade leaching into that and weakening the nato alliance, in no small part because it never has, and i get no indication from presidents trump and macron that they intend to do that, and no other major alliance intends that. vonnie: thanks for joining us today. pangaea policy founder. president trump says there is no urgent need for a trade truce between the u.s. and china, casting doubt that a phase i could come within weeks. joining us now, henrietta treyz, joining us from you arlen's. we learned -- from new orleans. we learned this morning that the
10:08 am
president is quite happy to wait until after the 2020 election for a deal with china. izzy posturing, or is he serious about this? henrietta: i actually think it makes a lot of sense. one of the things i like to do is speak with the players on senate republicans and democrats, as well as understanding that if you are trying to poke holes in this, as candidatesot of the on the democratic field will do as soon as it is released, it makes sense to wait on a deal with china, phase i or other size -- or otherwise. i have always believed that the trade wars are political. it is much more about politics, particularly for this president. it would be a boon going into to not have toon explain why a do months of tariffs was worse then the pain
10:09 am
caused by the phase one trade deal. tariffs are not something that were a waste of time, that the phase i deal is in the best interest of indra buddy -- of everybody involved. i think it is better for them to do that closer to the election than a year out. vonnie: china will get more and more upset the longer this goes on as well, right? isn't there a downside to it in this out? henrietta: absolutely, and that is the conundrum president trump finds himself in. the last few weeks, the senate passing the hong kong bell, the president signing it into law, causing tensions between president trump and president xi. later tonight, the house is going to pass another bill that is a thumb in the eye to china. they wake up every morning wondering if there will be some escalation in hong kong. will impeachment.
10:10 am
put president trump back against a wall? there is a political risk in waiting until closer to the election, and i think what the president is doing here is not necessarily a plus. i think it is better for him to not engage on an education process with the american voter about why the tariffs were worse than a small phase i deal, but there is the potential for escalation, and we are seeing that play out on a daily basis essentially at the house and senate take these votes. guy: henrietta, is the base case that we get more tariffs on the 15th, or that we get tariffs on the 15th punted into next year? henrietta: my expectation is we can pretty easily kick 15th into next year. we've seen lighthizer do that numerous times already. basically exactly this week last year, we kicked out the list three tariffs, which were expected to escalate, and were
10:11 am
delayed as a result of president trump and president xi meeting. even in this exact same week, we have an example of the exact same thing happening, where we kick out tariffs by, in that case i think it was 90 days, so i could easily imagine us doing that again. let's say the december 15 date becomes february 15 or march 15. that seems distantly possible. another option would be an unlimited suspension of the tariffs, like we got with the october 15 escalation on lists 1, 2, and 3. i wouldn't expect that, but it is possible. i don't think that the date of the summer 15th is particularly important for anything other 15 is- of december particularly important for finessingther than the markets to the point that they accept a delay until some point in the first quarter.
10:12 am
the markets wouldn't really care if it got pushed into february or march. guy: is the base case a trade war with the eu? henrietta: i wouldn't say trade war because i think the tariffs are being kept to a dull roar, but there are so many extensive problems with the u.s. and eu relationship right now that i don't know anybody, whether at the usta or any other agencies, who believes that a breakthrough with the european union is likely in the next two years or beyond. the crux of it is agriculture trade. that's been a problem for 100 years, and it is not going to be resolved by imposing tit-for-tat tariffs. i think maybe trade tensions would be a better word because i don't think we are going to escalate so far that it becomes a war, but maybe my mind is warped because of the china trade war which would definitely pacify is a full-blown attack. vonnie: and we haven't even mentioned brazil, argentina. our thanks to injury trays -- to
10:13 am
vedaetta treyz of partners for joining us. coming up, michael fallon joins us with the latest on that nato summit. this is bloomberg. ♪
10:14 am
10:15 am
vonnie: live from new york, i'm vonnie quinn. guy: from london, and guy johnson. this is "bloomberg markets." let's check those markets. abigail doolittle, over to you. abigail: focusing on the u.s. first, take a look at the major averages, down sharply, more than 1%. we had been in this long streak
10:16 am
of the s&p 500 not making a 1% move up or down. the third down, day in a row on trade fears, the fears that the trade war between the u.s. and china will continue to escalate it. .hat is hitting the stocks if that breaks, look for the sox to go down to the 200 day moving average. of course, the report not so long ago on the idea that the december 15 tariffs against china will be increased on consumer goods right before the holiday around the world. taking a look at the s&p 500 over the last three days, the worst trench since october. -- the restaurant -- the worst tranche since october. as we use the bloomberg terminal, we see lots of red on the screen for the sector composition. most sectors lower, as you can see. the defensive sectors up top and
10:17 am
helped out by rising yield. on bottom, financials, energy, industrials, and tech. just to take a little more global, taking a look at cross assets, we see a big rally for bonds. the 10 year yield rallying. the german 10 year yield also rallying. the yen beating the dollar. that is certainly a haven tell. gold up more than what percent. a risk off day at this point on this tuesday on continued tra de fears. vonnie: thank you for that update. nato secretary-general jens stoltenberg criticized the very frech president emmanuel macron's characterization of nato as "brain dead." stoltenberg: i don't think that is the way i would characterize nato because nato has been doing what we have done
10:18 am
for decades. did ourandelman collective defense -- we have implement it our collective defense since the end of the cold war, since the 1990's. guy: president trump's adjusting penalties may be on the way for alliance numbers who failed to keep funding targets on defense. he made those comments moment ago during that sit down with president emmanuel macron of france. pres. trump: countries that aren't for filling their commitments will be dealt with. maybe i will be with them from a trade standpoint. maybe i will deal with them from a different way. i will work something out. they have to pay. we don't want to have people delinquent. guy: for more on this ongoing nato summit, i am pleased to welcome michael fallon, former k secretary of state for defense. -- did three nato summits former u.k. secretary of state for defense. you did three nato summits.
10:19 am
michael: nato has always changed. it's adapted over the years to new challenges. i think we need to remember that the threats we are facing are the same both sides of the atlantic, whether it is russian aggression or the threat from cyber, or whether it is any other kind of challenge. but same threat to securities on both sides of the atlantic. we do need to be working together on it. guy: is china a nato role? that conflict seems to be becoming greater and greater in everybody's consciousness. it could easily become a military conflict. rolenato have a global that could include what happens with china? michael: neto is already global. it has been operating in afghanistan, a minor role in iraq, getting into space and into cyber. inevitably, nato is going to become more global.
10:20 am
i do see neto evolving. that's the point. nato as always changed, and it is dealing with things now it didn't deal with 30 years ago. we didn't have international terrorism on the scale we are seeing now. nato has to respond to that as well. vonnie: there are obvious schisms within nato among the number countries, and clearly that is only going to continue post-brexit and so on. do you see those schisms ever going away? do you see an alliance that is stronger, or do you see another eu military popping up? is ael: first of all, it big alliance, so inevitably there are differences of views, but the threats to nato now are really three under 60 degrees. i think you will find -- are really 306 degrees. i think you will find that whatever the differences are, we have more in common.
10:21 am
nato is the only alliance that brings the united states and canada together with the european allies. there's no other forum for doing that. the eu can't do it. some of the eu countries are neutral countries. the eu does not have a military structure. in the end, i don't think there's any point sibling duplicating nato. have to keep working at nato, spend more on it, and continue to adapt it to the new threats of today. vonnie: is it fair to say that the u.s. still dominates the defense approach at nato, and does that need to change? michael: the u.s. dominates the funding of nato, and throughout my political life, american presidents have been asking the europeans to pick up more of the burden. it is also important to remember that america and the last two or three years, whatever the rhetoric, has been deploying troops in poland, assisting europe with missile-defense in romania, so i don't doubt the american commitment to european
10:22 am
security. as i was saying, these threats to our security, whether it is international terrorism or russian aggression or chinese ambition, these threats involve us all, whichever side of the atlantic we are on. guy: switch gears a little bit. this is being held in london. there's cause for concern within the conservative party that what is happening with this nato summit with the president here could impact the outcome of the election on december 12. what is your assessment on the outcome of that election? there has been a narrowing in the polls of late. do you think boris johnson and co. are heading for a working majority? michael: at the moment i think we are heading for a working majority, and that is important for the security of the country. we are fighting a labour party that for the first time in my lifetime doesn't really believe in nato. this is a very important election for our security.
10:23 am
at the moment we are ahead, but there's a long way to go. these are six-week campaigns. when i started in politics, elections only lasted three weeks. so there's another week and a bit to go, but i hope we can get a working majority. guy: what is a working majority? michael: a comfortable geordie would be 20, 30, 40 seats, enabling -- majority would be 20, 30, 40 seats, enabling us to assure the world exact where we are headed. guy: michael fallon, a pleasure. thank you for joining us. michael fallon, former u.k. secretary of state for defense. this is bloomberg. ♪
10:24 am
10:25 am
vonnie: all of the major averages are down more than 1%. we have a major deal to tell you about. cliff's is buying ak steel. cliff's is down 13%.
10:26 am
ak steel up 3.5%. as you might imagine, the typical response for an acquirer and acquiree. the 10 year yield has been bouncing around a lot. it is at 1.7 3% today. money flowing into the treasury market. guy: here in europe, we have stocks down around 0.5%. it was a little worse a little earlier on. the german 10 year yield moving lower by six basis points, so bonds getting a bid. it's been a bad day with bonds and equities, a bad few days, moving in the same direction. the euro bouncing around all over the place today, back to flat. this is bloomberg. ♪
10:27 am
10:28 am
10:29 am
♪ vonnie: live from new york, i'm vonnie quinn. guy: from london, i'm guy johnson. this is "bloomberg markets." let's check in with the first
10:30 am
word news. here with the details, viviana hurtado. viviana: president trump casting doubt on the chances of a trade deal with china anytime soon, telling reporters he has no deadline for a potential agreement. he suggested it could be better to wait until after next year's election. the president defending his plan to raise tariffs on french goods. the u.s. a slap tariffs on $2.4 billion worth of french wine, cheese, handbags, and other goods to retaliate for a french on on digital revenues company such as google, facebook, and amazon. for the first time, iran thatting last month security forces shot and killed protesters. since 1979's islamic -- it was the first
10:31 am
time since 1979's islamic revolution. a california republican and his wife accused of spending almost 215 thousand dollars in campaign funds for personal expenses. his wife previously reached a deal to help prosecutors. it is not clear if hunter will get a prison sentence. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i'm viviana hurtado. this is bloomberg. vonnie: thank you. treasuries are bid today after comments from president trump. he said he has no deadline in trade talks with china. he also said, "i like the idea of waiting until after the election for the china deal, but they want to make a deal now. we will see whether or not the deal is going to be right. it's got to be right." let's bring in our correspondent. what is the bond market
10:32 am
thinking? reporter: it's all about trade. it feels like since september, we've seen a bit of a selloff as the new music has turned more positive on trade, but the idea bet maybe this deal would delayed for a year and we might get a tariff increase in two weeks really has investors rattled. that's why you are seeing treasuries lead the way in terms of this global bond rally right now. guy: in terms of what could happen with the fed, could the fed be drawn back in to cutting rates if we don't see any rollback? at the moment, the ism manufacturing data seems to indicate that the trade war is clearly having an effect in key sectors of the economy. trump's new to timeline, with the fed may be have to bring up further rate cuts in 2020? katherine: that's a really good question. i was looking at this just before i went on, and we have a fed meeting next week, and there
10:33 am
is still nothing price for that. but if you look at 2020, there's about 35 basis points priced in right now. we don't see that first cut priced in until the september 2020 meeting. but obviously, the question on everyone's mind is, if we do get that tariff increase, if we get delayed, dragged out uncertainty, may be the bond market will start ling that cut that is priced in further -- start pulling that cut that is priced in further, or closer from 2020. vonnie: italy, 60 basis points moves. obviously, german moves, too. how much are the markets moving together, and how much are they solo? katherine: it makes sense that the treasury yield is falling the most since it has the most room to fall here, but to that point, you are seeing italy and germany move, so these big, important, developed bond
10:34 am
markets are definitely acting in sync here. at what kindking of affect the last few days have balancek funds usually what is happening in the stock market with what is happening in the bond market. the bond market and the stock market sold off reasonably aggressively together. is that becoming a more common phenomenon? how are risk parity funds trying to deal with it? katherine: if you look at the correlation between the stock market and the bond market, that correlation has been weakening. it makes sense that that would be weakening if the driver is trade. any bad news on trade, any further delay is clearly negative for equities and good for bonds as a safe haven bid. so you are kind of seeing a dynamic shift underway. it will be interesting to see how those risk parity funds deal with that. vonnie: thank you. we have to get back now to the nato summit.
10:35 am
president trump and canadian prime minister to do our speaking. here's president trump. pres. trump: i don't know that we never actually been asked to support them financially. wesomebody asks, bibby would. but we support them very seriously. the people that are protesting in iran for their pre-bump -- for their freedom, we are fully in support of them. asked tot been support them financially, which i assume is what the question was. it is an honor to be with a friend of mine who just had a big election victory. congratulations. job, and a very good we actually have a very good relationship, good relationship in terms of our countries. ,e are working on the usmca when i get nancy pelosi to put it up for about. so far she hasn't decided to do that. it is up to her. it is actually a single
10:36 am
individual, the speaker of the house. it is that person's decision, and she is the speaker of the house. it is a great deal from x ago and for canada and the united states -- deal for mexico and for canada and the united states. it releases a really bad deal, a lousy deal. i can tell you, but i would say for the united states, the deal that we have right now is terrible, nafta. it is a terrible deal for the united states. tolook forward to being able take a vote on usmca. it's taken a long time, and at some point, perhaps the president of mexico -- we have a wonderful man there, you know, they will get tired, and the prime minister will get tired, and say, let's forget this. i would understand it. it's been sitting in congress now for six or seven months. it's a great deal for everybody, so hopefully they can get it done and get it done fast.
10:37 am
it's one of the few transactions i think all three countries benefit, really as a unit, against the world. really as a unit against the world, and that's the way we looked at it right from the beginning. we hope that's the case. again, congratulations, where we are talking about a number of subjects. the military and the military presence. it is great being at nato. we had some real success, i think, and some very successful talks having to do with nato. as you know, a lot of the countries have stepped up, and they are putting in at least billion more,$131 and that is great. they have commitments for $400 billion, so it really has to come in force. as we have discussed in the go to other parts of the world, not just one
10:38 am
focus. it's a lot of focus is, and we need a lot of focuses. we will be lit another -- we will be looking at other forms of terror. we will be looking at other countries. we will be looking at countries that are aggressive, and not just one particular part of this world. i think nato has become a very big factor over the last two or three years. you've been involved. i've been involved. a lot of good things have happened, and it's great to have you here. thank you very much. thank you. it is a pleasure to be sitting down with president trump. the relationship between canada and the united states is incredibly strong. usmcark together on the as we move forward towards ratification has been really tremendous. it's been a great process working between your team and our team, working with the mexicans as well. we know that we are here for nato, its 70th anniversary,
10:39 am
extremely important. the americans drinks in ensuring that -- the american strength in ensuring that people are stepping up their military investments is certainly something we recognize in canada. we know that making sure everyone is there to step up and deliver is really important. forwardan attempt -- this is a great opportunity for me to continue the presidentth and talk about the issues on which we align together. [speaking french] pres. trump: that sounded very good. [laughter] pres. trump: any questions? >> climate change is the top
10:40 am
priority for prime minister here, as well as president macron earlier. it doesn't appear to be on your agenda. [indiscernible] pres. trump: i think about it all the time. honestly, climate change is very important to me. i've done many environmental impact savings over my life. in verye very strongly crystal-clear clean water and clean air. that's a big part of climate change. i also see what is happening with our oceans, where certain countries are dumping unlimited loads in it, and they tend to float towards the united states. nobody's ever seen anything like it. and it's gotten worse. but it's very important to me. but i want clean air and clean and numbernumber one two. very important. >> are you concerned about rising sea levels at all? pres. trump: you know, i'm concerned about everything, but i'm also concerned about nuclear proliferation, which i think it's a very important topic, and
10:41 am
it is a topic we are going to discuss today. the whole situation with nuclear to me is very important, as we've been discussing today at various meetings that we've had. i think that is something that has to be taken care of, and it has to be dealt with very strongly. [indiscernible] >> are you happy with canadian defense spending as it is right now? pres. trump: they are moving it up, and they are starting to do very well economically. that has something to do with it. they are getting get up to a level that is getting to be very acceptable. they have been under the 2%, obviously, but they are moving up. we discussed it. [indiscernible] pres. trump: excuse me? yes, we will be discussing that, yes. huawei inout using
10:42 am
the next generation network? pres. trump: we have a problem with it. i think for the united states, we have the ability to do a lot of things. we've advanced very far in 5g, much further than anyone really knows. headed it up, and he's done a very good job. we are not using huawei. are are great companies getting much involved with 5g right now. we find a trim at a security problem with perspective huawei. about talked earlier russia and china. [indiscernible] your description of those conversations doesn't really match what they said. can you elaborate? pres. trump: look, we've had
10:43 am
discussions and we've also had communications. i can tell you, they would both like to have something done with it. . does that mean they will agree? i'm the one that terminated the agreement because they were not living up to it, and we don't want to be living up to an agreement if they don't. so it wasn't fair. but it was also very obsolete. you know, it covered things that, frankly, didn't matter anymore. we are looking into doing a new agreement with russia, and looking into doing a new agreement with china, and may be the three of us will do it together. i can tell you that with china, we were in a trade meeting, and i broached the subject, and they were very excited about it. they would like to do it. we may do it with russia first and then go to china, or we may do it altogether, or it may not happen. maybe it won't happen. but we are spending a lot of money on nuclear, and we have new nuclear and we have
10:44 am
tremendous renovations of our older capability, and i have to tell you, i see the kind of damage we are talking about in the kind of power that we have, and it would be a very sad day if we ever had to use them. it would be a very good thing if we could do somebody to stop making that, fixing that. we will see what happens. there are other countries, but in terms of the world, we are number one by far. russia is number two, and china would be number three. china will be pretty even over a period of four or five years. but it is a term of this expense for them and for us, for everybody. the destructive capability is really unacceptable. so we will see if we can do something. i think russia and china would
10:45 am
like to do it very much. [indiscernible] you've called member countries and allied countries in the past delinquents for not meeting 2% standards. how would you classify canada? pres. trump: i have confidence, but just slightly delinquent. some are way below 2%, and that is undetectable. and then if something happens, we are supposed to protect them, and it is not really fair, and it never has been fair. they are paying up. we are talking to germany tomorrow. they are starting to come along. they have to. they have to. otherwise, if they don't want to, i will have to do something with respect to trade. >> but canada is ok? pres. trump: with trade, i have all the cards. we have built something in the last three years that has been incredible. we are up 21 trillion dollars, and china is down about $32
10:46 am
trillion. for years, i've been hearing that it was 2019. . and 2019, china is going to become the largest economy. well, that didn't happen. we've gone up, and they've gone down. they had their worst year in 57 years, by far. they had the worst year that they've had that they know of. we don't want that, frankly. but what they were doing was wrong. and i think they are going to stop. and they want to make a deal very badly. there isyou commit, if a country that is delinquent, as you put it, in paying defense spending, would you commit to defend them if they are attacked? pres. trump: we've been discussing that today, and it is a very interesting question, isn't it? it also depends on what your definition of delinquent is. for instance, if you have a
10:47 am
country paying only 1%, some that are paying less than 1%, and they shouldn't be, and they are wealthy countries on top of everything, now we go to a new year, and they don't pay. now we go to yet another year, and they don't pay. well, now i ask you, do they have to pay for the back years? ok. why is it that they owe us for this year, but every time a new year comes out, they don't have to pay? it's wrong. it's not right. you could go back 25 years. i won't do that with canada, of course. you could go back right from the beginning, where they were short of whatever it was at the time. it's 2% now. 2% is very low. it should be 4%. 2% is very low. you have some of the well short of that. but they were short of that the year before, the year before, the year before.
10:48 am
they are short all these years. of thatlly owe all money from the past. that's the way i look at it. ofgermany is an example paying 1%, and they are supposed to be paying 2%, you are talking about billions of dollars. that means that last year, the year before, the year before, all of those years, they owe us money. really, you're talking about trillions of dollars. nobody has ever brought that up. they just keep talking about the present. so they are short one year, and they go into the new year, they never talk about the years that they didn't pay. but they actually, in theory, os that money. it's not fair. it's not fair. >> regarding china, when you met the prime minister in june, you talked about trying to help with the two prisoners that are canadians in china. pres. trump: well, i have, and i think we've made progress.
10:49 am
i had mentioned that to president xi because it was a big subject at the time. i just hope they are being treated well. but i put in a very strong word for those two prisoners. he likes me so much anymore, potentially. >> candidate does not meet the 2% standard. should have -- canada is not meet the 2% standard. should it have a plan to meet the standard? pres. trump: well, we will have a payment plan. what is your number? about --pmked trudeau: we have talked about increasing significantly our defense spending from previous governments that cut it. pres. trump: where are you now in terms of your number?
10:50 am
1.3%. pm trudeau: 1.4%. pres. trump: they are getting there. they know it is important, and their economy is doing well. they will get there quickly, i think. it is to their benefit. pm trudeau: the president knows as well that canada has been there for every naval deployment -- every nato deployment. we have sent our troops into harm's way. we are meeting in iraq, leading in latvia. we continue to step up, like most of our allies. there are some countries that, even though they might reach the 2%, don't step up nearly as much, and i think it is important to look at what is actually being done. the united states and all nato allies know that candida is a solid, reliable partner that will continue to defend nato. pres. trump: and we do have tremendous coordination with all of the different things. we have trimming this
10:51 am
coordination between canada and the unit estates. -- and the united states. >> turning back to impeachment, what advice are you getting? pres. trump: we are winning so big. we had our biggest fundraising month ever. we had, last quarter was unbelievable. i have my best poll numbers have ever had. the impeachment hoax is going nowhere. the republican party never been so unified as it is right now. i have never seen anything like it. i used to tell you, the one thing, the republicans are better politicians, they have better policies, but the democrats stick together. the democrats like open borders, sanctuary cities. they like a lot of things that are not good, but they do stick together. well, the republican party on this holy impeachment hoax has been like blue because they know it is a hoax. it is a way of hurting the
10:52 am
republican party and a lot of great people. the people aren't standing for it. a lot of these democrats went back over the weekend and over the last week and a half, they talked about how much of an emergency everything is, and that they go back to their districts, and they are getting hammered in their districts. they see what's going on, especially the trump districts where i won by a lot. i have districts where i won by a lot. you people know it better than anybody. we had a lot of great elections recently. we had the great victories in north carolina. everything, we won but the governorship, and the by just a few votes. louisiana was a long shot, less than 1%. he came up well over 14 points. we won everything else. either way, in mississippi, we
10:53 am
won the governorship. very close race. it was tied going in. i made a speech, we had a rally, and he won by a lot. we have a wonderful coveney -- a wonderful governor in mississippi. spirit never had the that we have. i can honestly say i don't think we've ever had the spirit that we have right now in the republican party. the impeachment hoax is what's done it. so that's the way it is. honestly, i think you people know that better than i do. >> the dow is down more than 400 points right now, in part due to the comment you made earlier. pres. trump: well, let me tell you. it was at about 16,000 or 15,000, and now almost at 30,000. no, i have to tell you, if there's not going to be a good deal, i'm not going to sign a deal. we have picked up record numbers
10:54 am
in our stockmarkets, so that's ok. that's the way i feel. i have to make the right deal. i'm not going to make a deal that is not going to be great for our country. it can't be an even deal. if it is an even deal, it is no good. other presidents and leaders of our country have really led us down because they let china get away with something that should have never been allowed to happen. billions and billions of dollars a year were lost in dealing with people, or bysh people that didn't care, or that people didn't know how. we rebuilt china, and i give china great credit. i don't even blame china because our people should not have done what they did, but what they have done is we've lost 150 billion dollars, then 200 billion dollars, then $400 billion to china. they rebuilt china with the money from the united states.
10:55 am
that's where they were. that's where it is. now we are taking in billions of dollars in tariffs. remember, you used to tell me how it would cost us? they are eating that money because they don't want to lose their supply chains. i don't want them to lose their supply chains, but if it happens, and happens. that's where it is. they want to make a deal, but i like the deal that we have, and the deal that we have could get even better if i could do it all by myself. we will see what happens. we are at a critical stage. , and theyd us today called us yesterday. we are having ongoing discussions. we will see what happens. but if the stock market goes up and down, i don't watch the stock market. i watched jobs. jobs are right i watch. i watch making the proper deal. his been taken of by chuck -- --en advantage of by so we've been taken advantage of for so many years. i came in and looked at numbers.
10:56 am
ofr since the founding china's entrance into the wto, -- [no audio] vonnie: that is the president of the united states in a bilateral with the prime minister of canada, justin trudeau. a lot of subjects coming up, just as they did earlier on with the french president. here with justin trudeau, usmca was one of the major topics of conversation. the president blaming nancy pelosi. "it's that one person's decision, and she is this big grubby house." let's have a -- she is the speaker of the house." let's have a quick check of markets. u.s. stocks not taking any
10:57 am
pleasure in what that you are saying. let's get back to the present. pres. trump: this country sitting right in the middle is delinquent. they are not paying. something happens to that country, i think it is an unlikely circumstance, but i would do something having to do with trade much more so than what yours adjusting. -- then what you are suggesting. donie: do you think -- >> you think there will be a senate trial, sir? pres. trump: i don't know. i think it would be a mistake if they do it, but i don't know. i think the democrats are a disgrace. if you look at the word impeachment, there was nothing done wrong. it was a perfect conversation with a very nice gentleman, the president of ukraine. the conversation was perfect. it was two conversations. they were both perfect. they were transcribed. they were both perfect. they are going to impeach the president of the united states? the republicans have never been stronger, never been more unified.
10:58 am
the democrats have gone crazy. and you know what? they have to be careful because when the shoe is on the other foot, and someday, hopefully in the distant future, they will have a democrat president, a republican house, and they will do the same thing because somebody picked an orange out of a refrigerator, and you don't like it? let's go impeach them. that's not the way our country is supposed to be run. siteve you selected a new for the g7 summit next year? pres. trump: we really have, and it has been more or less announced. we are doing it at camp david. we will be doing very special things at camp david. it is nearby. it is close. we are getting very good access for the press. you will have great access. we will put them up in washington. but it will be at camp david. it is a place that people like.
10:59 am
[indiscernible] pres. trump: not only have we kurds, wethe are working with the kurds. we have a great relationship with the kurds, and we've taken the oil. we frankly should have done it in other locations. we've taken the oil, and that is what they lived off of. that was going to be taken away from them, but now our great soldiers are right around the oil. we've got the oil. if we didn't have it, they wouldn't be able to survive. the kurds wouldn't be able to survive. numberve maintained in a of sessions that you've done nothing wrong in your come it's with ukraine. why won't you permit the secondary of state or the acting chief of staff to testify -- permit the secretary of state or the acting chief of staff to testify? pres. trump: i would like them to testify, but these are very unfair hearings. these are unfair witchhunt hearings.
11:00 am
they have great constitutional lawyers. it is just nonsense, and they are wasting their time. nobody has to know anything about constitutional law come but they get three, and we get one. that's not sounding too good. but that's the way it is. for the hearings, we don't get a law your. we don't get any witnesses. we want biden. where is hunter? we want the son. hiff.nt sc we want to interview these people. but they say no, we can't do it. when it is fair, and it will be fair in the senate, i would love to have pompeo. i would love to have mick. i would love to have rick perry and many other people testify. but i don't want them to testify when this is a total fix. do you know what a fix is? this is a fix.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on