‘Your World’ on Biden’s energy policy, migrant surge, Russian threat

on Jun15
by | Comments Off on ‘Your World’ on Biden’s energy policy, migrant surge, Russian threat |

This is a rush transcript from “Your World with Neil Cavuto” June 14, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


President Joe Biden issuing a warning to Russia before taking questions
ahead of his Wednesday summit with Vladimir Putin, this as another threat
of China and the origins of COVID take center stage as global leaders meet.
So, how is the president handling each of these crises?

Welcome, everyone. I’m Sandra Smith, in for Neil Cavuto. And this is “Your

Benjamin Hall has been standing by. He is live from Brussels, Belgium, with
the very latest as the president just wrapped his press conference.

Benjamin, a lot to take in there. We will have our panel in just a moment.
But what did you hear?

BENJAMIN HALL, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, absolutely, Sandra, quite a
free-flowing press conference.

And I think we heard from the president much the same as we have been
hearing for the last few days, the sense of the G7 and the NATO meetings
were a message that America is back, a warning to both Russia and China
that, if they push the boundaries, President Biden will respond. And here’s
what he said on Russia:


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I shared with our allies that I
will convey to President — what I will convey to President Putin, that I’m
not looking for conflict with Russia, but that we will respond if Russia
continues its harmful activities.


HALL: There are still questions, though, about the strength of the
messaging coming so far from the meetings he’s had.

The final G7 communique, for example, made just a fleeting reference to the
situation in the East and South China Sea. It is specified China’s takeover
and militarization of the islands. Meanwhile, on economics and trade, it
says with regard to China and competition in the global economy: “We will
continue to consult on collective approaches to challenging non-market

Well, continue to consult, critics say, is hardly a forceful rejection of
China’s trade tactics. The fact is numerous European leaders are still
reluctant to put their exports at risk to China by taking too forceful of a
stance. And, in fact, Germany continues to lead a push for a trade deal
with China, while also forging ahead with the Nord Stream II pipeline.

On COVID’s origins, meanwhile, the G7 said only, “We call for a timely,
transparent, expert-led and science-based study in China.” Again, many
arguing that the time for real investigation has come and gone, with any
evidence haven’t been scrubbed clean.

And all of this comes ahead of President Biden’s much anticipated meeting
with President Putin on Wednesday, with both sides, frankly, setting pretty
low expectations. When it comes to cyberattacks, President Putin already
showing what his defense will be, deny, deny, deny.

So, as we come into day six of this first foreign trip for President Biden,
there’s a sense that he’s sending some messaging, but he’s not really
hammering home the point of what could happen, what the repercussions might
be. What he says to journalists and what we heard him said again just now
is that he won’t negotiate in front of the world’s press. The people have
to wait to see what he will say.

That’s really between him and President Biden for now. But there are
critics who say they would like to hear more forceful rhetoric from the
president — Sandra.

SMITH: We will get more reaction here in just a moment, Benjamin Hall
reporting live from Brussels for us.

Benjamin, thank you.

How did President Biden handle this press conference?

Joining us now, FOX News contributor Liz Peek is here, former State
Department official Christian Whiton, and FOX News contributor Jessica

All right, so let’s kick things off.

We have first at it,right? He started taking questions at 3:38 local time,
ended 3:54. It was 16 minutes in total.

Liz, first off, your reaction to what you heard. Was he forceful on
Vladimir Putin?

LIZ PEEK, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think he hasn’t really been
forceful on either Putin or on China.

We keep hearing about there will be severe repercussions and sort of these
veiled threats. What’s he talking about? We just had the world free — the
free world leaders meet after a year where eight million people have died,
Sandra, because China lied and covered up the emergence of this virus and
allowed it to spread around the world.

And they didn’t even address that. They didn’t even begin to punish China
for the most heinous act and have ever seen in the history of mankind. This
is unbelievable to me. Look, these press conferences are pre-scripted.
They’re safe for Joe Biden. They don’t tell us much and they certainly
don’t tell us much about what we’re actually going to do to confront our

SMITH: Jessica, I only mentioned the time because it seemed rather short.
There was such a big buildup to this press conference, and it was so highly
anticipated. Do you think he struck the right notes?


SMITH: Let me get to Jessica on that.


PEEK: I’m sorry.



TARLOV: I think he did strike the right notes with what he did get out.

I wish that it had gone on for longer. And there was this kerfuffle on
Twitter, at least, because everyone was wondering why he was so late. It
was over two hours’ late for the press conference. And it appears the
Ukrainians released a statement that made it seem like they had been
allowed into NATO, and that would be why Joe Biden was late. And then he
got asked the question, which said, we still have to see what kind of
commitments they can meet, and they need to clean up the corruption

I certainly would have loved to hear more about that, and especially the
part about what we’re going to do to help our allies, someone like Ukraine,
against Russian aggression. So there are many unanswered questions left.

I did think, though, when it comes to the G7 response to what happens in
China, I don’t know what they can say at this moment in terms of pushing
back beyond we need full access and to be able to do a thorough
investigation without the WHO into what actually happened in terms of the
origins of COVID-19 out of that Wuhan lab, if that is indeed what happened.

But I’m looking forward to Wednesday. I imagine he’s not going to stand
there next to Putin and say, he told me he didn’t meddle in the election,
so I believe him. And I think we will have a lot more answers after that.

SMITH: OK, so you’re addressing a multitude of issues. Obviously, he’s got
a lot of crises on his hand to deal with, Russia, China, the threats that
they pose.

Christian, what we did hear exact words from President Biden, as he began,
I shared with our allies, he said, that I will convey to President Putin —
quote — “that I’m not looking for conflict with Russia, but that we will
respond if Russia continues its harmful activities.”

Republicans today — I had Michael McCaul on my show earlier. He said — he
said that Biden’s all talk, no action. Was he forceful enough with his
messaging to Putin just a few moments ago?

to be forceful with your messaging, but with your actions.

I mean, Teddy Roosevelt said, speak softly and carry a big stick. Biden is
doing the exact opposite of talking a big game and delivering nothing. And
if you’re Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping, you’re looking at this and just
seeing a profoundly unserious experience.

Let me give you a specific. Earlier in this administration, the national
security adviser, Sullivan, said that we were going to retaliate against
Russia in cyberspace. He more or less said, that we would do things seen
and unseen, if we became confident that Russia was behind the SolarWinds

We have become confident that Russia was behind the SolarWinds hack. And
yet there was no apparent retaliation. And word of that thing almost always
leaks out, word of that type of cyberattack. So this is basically Biden’s
red line, the equivalent of when Obama said he would retaliate for chemical
weapons uses in Syria and then didn’t.

Biden began his presidency talking a tough game. So he’s going to go to
Geneva, meet with Putin. The atmospherics are already bad. And Putin’s
going to come away, I think, as will Xi Jinping, as will Kim Jong-un in
North Korea, realizing that this guy isn’t serious and that these
constructs left over from the 20th century, the G7, the E.U. and NATO, are
just obsolete to the problems we face in this decade.

SMITH: Liz, those are live pictures there as President Biden looks set to
depart. Obviously, this is a big few days for the president there meeting
with leaders of the E.U. tomorrow, Putin on Wednesday.

He’s going to hold a solo news conference, we’re told, on Wednesday. It
will not be a bilat alongside Putin. But he also said today in that press
conference that he will make Putin aware of our red lines. He would not
broadcast what those are exactly, Liz, because he said he did not want to
negotiate on the world stage.

PEEK: Yes. They’re not going to have a joint press conference, I’m sorry,
to say because Putin, I think, would just totally dominate and be totally
happy to do so.

I think Chris is totally right. What is our red line? If — and, by the
way, going back to this COVID issue that Jessica mentioned, it’s not all
about whether it came from the lab. It’s about the fact that the Chinese
knew months before they told anyone that it was viciously transferable,
that they allowed people to leave Wuhan even as they were trying to
basically ring-fence the city in terms of Chinese transmission and allowed
the thing to go global and cause unmitigated damage.

I mean, the Chinese — Putin is a problem. I think we can easily confront
Putin. I don’t think that’s such an issue. It’s really China that we have
to look at as a serious threat to the long-term best interests of

And the fact that the leaders of the free world basically whiffed on that,
I think it’s appalling. And, by the way, Joe Biden is much more interested
in being the non-Trump, being popular at these meetings, saying America is

What does it mean? Not much if it doesn’t amount to anything.

SMITH: We will have more on this coming up, as the president just wrapped
his remarks.

We appreciate our panel. Thank you.

PEEK: Thank you.

TARLOV: All right.

WHITON: Thank you.

SMITH: All right, Goldman Sachs, meanwhile, telling most employees to get
into the office today, while Facebook says feel free to continue to work
from home, folks.

So, which company is getting this right?

But first: Vice President Kamala Harris saying that she will visit the
border at some point, her words, 82 days after being tapped to lead the

Republican Congressman Darrell Issa says that point is now. How did he
invite her? And did he get a response?


SMITH: To the Southern border now, where the migrant surge is still
ramping up at this hour.

FOX getting an exclusive look at those border crossings today.

FOX News’ Bill Melugin is live in Mission, Texas, with the very latest from

Bill, you have been following this so closely. What are you seeing and
hearing today?

BILL MELUGIN, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Sandra, good evening to you.

What I can tell you is, it’s starting to get to that time of year where
it’s very dangerous for these migrants to make this journey and cross into
the United States. It’s brutally hot out here. It’s very humid. But that
weather, it’s just not slowing them down yet. They’re still coming. They’re
still coming in big numbers every single morning like clockwork out here in
the Rio Grande Valley.

And we will show you — we will show that to you right now. Take a look at
this video we shot in La Joya, Texas this morning about 15 minutes away
from us. This is our FOX drone crew showing border agents chasing down a
group of men who came across the border and actively tried to get away from
Border Patrol. These are the guys who are known as runners. They’re not
turning themselves in. They are trying to get away. They do not want to be

Most of these guys who we have talked to are typically from Guatemala, El
Salvador, or Honduras, those Northern Triangle countries. And the reason
why they’re trying to get away is, they know, if they get caught, they’re
likely going to be deported pretty quickly under Title 42.

But that’s not the case with everybody. Take a look at this video we shot
also this morning also in La Joya. We mentioned this is like clockwork.
This happens literally every single morning out here. These are family
units who came through the brush and gave themselves up to Border Patrol.

These folks are not trying to get away. And you will notice they look
different. These are moms with their little kids, moms with their little
toddlers. These are people who have been walking for quite some time, once
they cross the Rio. And they just give themselves up to Border Patrol.

And out live now, if you can take a look at our FOX flight team running the
drone right now, you take a look at the border wall, there are chunks of
that border wall where they’re just chunks of it missing, there’s holes.
So, once they cross the Rio Grande, they’re able to walk right through.

And then you can kind of see some of the journey they take over in that La
Joya area. There are some dirt roads, but there is thick, heavy brush out
there. And I can tell you, it is brutally hot out here. It’s only getting
hotter each day. The humidity is cranking up. It’s dangerous for these
migrants to do this.

Many of them have been asking us for water, asking Border Patrol for water
as they come through. We talked to Border Patrol and asked them, do you
think this weather, as you get deeper into the summer months, is going to
slow down this surge? They said no, but, tragically, we do expect to find
more bodies out there.

And wrapping this up, we all heard Vice President Kamala Harris say last
week that she has a message for those migrants: Don’t come to the border.
From what we have been seeing here on the ground and what our crew was
seeing in Del Rio last week, that message is either being ignored or just
wasn’t heard entirely in the first place.

We will send it back to you.

SMITH: All right, Bill, thank you.

Meantime, Vice President Harris traveling to South Carolina today, but
still no trip to the Southern border, as pressure continues to mount on

After saying that she would visit the border at some point, my next guest
extended an invitation.

With us, now California Republican Congressman Darrell Issa.

We also want to mention that we have invited the vice president to join us
at her next availability here, and we have not yet heard back.

Congressman, great to see you. Thanks for being here.

REP. DARRELL ISSA (R-CA): Thanks, Sandra.

SMITH: Obviously, you have seen the situation at our border unfolding
firsthand, and you have for quite some time.

So, what is the response you have gotten so far to the invitation you have
sent to the vice president?

ISSA: Well, so far, I haven’t gotten any response.

And,oddly enough, I went on this past Friday with four Democrat members of
Congress into Mexico. We went and visited with our consul general,
discussed the issues along the San Diego border, San Diego and Arizona
border. So there’s no reluctance by some Democrats, just not by that
particular one.

It’s sort of amazing to me that she’s conspicuous in her inability to come
to the border, when, in fact, it is clear that we are a draw, and that her
message of don’t come, it’s been rejected.

SMITH: So, let’s play what if. What if she does decide to pay a visit to
the Southern border, for instance, the portion of the border that she
visited as a U.S. senator?

What would she see in how the conditions changed?

ISSA: Well, what she will see is approximately 100 different countries
have — people from 100 different countries across the border. So it’s not
just the three countries of the Northern Triangle.

She’s going to see that the message that’s being sent, based on the
policies of this administration, are clearly saying to a young man, don’t
come here looking for a job. Bring a family and stay. And that message is,
in fact, much more of a conflict than she might realize.

If she hears that from the Border Patrol, hears their frustration, that, in
fact, we are going to continue to release people who cannot possibly
support themselves, people who are coming as family units, because coming
alone as a worker, which is historically what most people do initially,
isn’t working.

And, of course, you covered in the last segment,as the weather gets hot,
many young children are not going to make it across the border alive. This
really is a dangerous time. And it can be stopped. Returning to the
policies that would prevent families from being encouraged to come would be
a huge help.

It’d be a help to the Border Patrol and their enforcement also.

SMITH: Congressman, in addition to just showing that she sees it as a
serious issue and a serious threat, as far as this being bipartisan, the
calls for her to visit the border, your Democratic colleague Henry Cuellar
has spoken out and responded to that new interview that she did where she
said she didn’t quite understand the question from Lester Holt.

And he responded she has to understand. And he is making it out that it is
very important for her to come and visit the border.

How much longer can this go on, her not visiting the border? It’s hard to
fathom what her reason is for not doing so.

ISSA: Well, it really is hard to fathom, considering the president gave
her the portfolio, considering that she’s already made that trip to Central
America and to Mexico, and that it really is time for her to begin looking.

First of all, if you’re — if you’re in South Carolina, you know why we’re
a draw to people around the world. It’s not just what people are running
from. It’s what they’re coming to.

But if she goes to the border, she has an opportunity to learn what Henry
knows, as a border congressman, I know, as a border congressman, Juan
Vargas knows as a border congressman, which is that we have got to support
the men and women that we have asked to keep the border safe and secure, to
stop drugs from coming over, to stop human trafficking.

There’s a myriad of issues that are being complicated. So she won’t just
hear about migration. She will hear about the frustration by the men and
women of the Border Patrol in not being able to do the other parts of their
job effectively.

SMITH: And important that she acknowledge the emergency and urgency this
is for those local communities there, 180,000-plus border crossings in the
month of May, about the same in April and March, but bigger.

Henry Cuellar says somebody needs to listen to our local communities. So,
we will see. We will see what changes. We will see when that is she decides
to visit.

Congressman, appreciate your time. Thank you.

ISSA: Thank you, Sandra.

SMITH: All right.

Goldman Sachs, meanwhile, welcoming all staff back to the office today, as
Facebook tells folks they are welcome to stay at home. So, should workers
in this post-pandemic environment have the choice?

And later on, White House Democrats — while House Democrats, I should say,
remain divided after controversial comments by Congresswoman Ilhan Omar,
House Republicans moving to censure her and other members of the so-called

Why Republican Congressman Michael Waltz is leading that charge. He is here
on that and what President Biden just said on Russia.


SMITH: A warning from President Biden ahead of his big meeting with
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday.

What does Florida Republican Congressman Michael Waltz make of what he just
said? He’s coming up.


SMITH: From the couch to the quarter office, most Goldman Sachs employees
back in business today, working in person at the home office in New York

This coming with Facebook going the other direction, reportedly allowing
more employees to keep working from home.

So will more companies be following Mark Zuckerberg and Co. or going away
of Goldman Sachs?

The read from attorney Leeza Garber and Internet radio host Mike Gunzelman.

Leeza, I will start with you first.

I think this is fascinating because so many companies have major decisions
to make regarding all of this, because so many people adapted their
lifestyles to the work from home. Some like it, some don’t. So what do you
think? Do you think most companies will follow Goldman Sachs and return to
the office or do a hybrid like Facebook?

LEEZA GARBER, ATTORNEY: Hi, Sandra. Great to see you.

And I know we’re both dog people, right? So it’s really been neat to get to
work home for many people. You get to be around your dogs, your kids, your
spouse, and get to be in a more comfortable environment.

In general, I think the pandemic caught many companies off-guard and they
didn’t have their cybersecurity up to snuff. I have to think about that as
a techie and the cybersecurity lawyer. But at the same time, it’s really
brought up a great opportunity.

And Zuckerberg pointed out that it allows companies to take advantage of
talent from all over the United States, because they don’t have to come to
a major city to work in a certain office.

What’s interesting is it really depends on the company culture. We see
Chase, other financial institutions are starting to try to get more people
back in because of how they operate. But social media companies, technology
giants are excited about remote work.

It’s just you have to be proactive about cybersecurity.

SMITH: So, Mike, what do you think is going to happen here? Because in the
case of Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg, I think Mark Zuckerberg himself
leading by example. He says that he too has enjoyed the aspect of his life
where he spends more time with his wife and kids.


SMITH: He said in this memo that he expects half of his company’s 60,000
employees to work remotely within the next decade. My, how COVID changed
the work environment.

GUNZELMAN: Well, you’re exactly right.

And I think there’s no doubt that the workplace environment and the
workplace situation has definitely changed, especially in the immediate
future. I think that companies are going to now have to take this into
consideration when they’re trying to recruit new employees.

Where perhaps in the past, it was like, hey, you get two weeks paid
vacation, now it’s we might offer you the ability to work remotely. I think
companies definitely have to take that into consideration.

Now, as far as what I think we’re going to see, beginning in September, we
heard this from a lot of companies all across the country. The hybrid
schedule is going to be a thing that a lot of companies are doing, where
somebody will go on for two or three days a week and work hybrid.

I like this idea for two reasons, one, the sheer mental health and the
anxiety standpoint, where I don’t know if everybody can handle go from zero
to 100. I don’t know if everybody needs to do zero to 100 immediately. And
then also the second reason why a hybrid schedule I support is also there’s
a lot of time that’s wasted waking up early, getting ready, commuting 45
minutes, hour-and-a-half each way.

That could be better well spent. And we have all adapted and learned how to
make that work. So why do we have to go five days a week, at least in the
immediate future?

SMITH: Someone’s — speaking is from somebody doing this from home right –
– we see your bookcases behind you, right?


SMITH: I mean, Leeza, it’s amazing how so many people’s lives changed.

Here’s my question, though, is, do you easily have people who never worked
in the office or never — never learned the work culture at these places?
Like, Citigroup is going to a hybrid model just down the street from
Goldman. They’re not doing a full return. They’re giving people the option.

But those were people who were already working in an office environment.
They knew their peers. They knew their colleagues. They had team building.
And now they say they’re very productive at home.

But when it comes to hiring new people, and not having them come to the
office, I think you must run into some challenges.

GARBER: Definitely.

And this is something Zuckerberg pointed out as well. And many companies
have acknowledged this. When you have younger employees that are new to the
work force, when you have employees that have recently been hired or
transition to a new role, they really need to come in and get a feel for
their co-workers and what the M.O. is around the office.

That’s not to say that can’t be done in a hybrid model. And, realistically,
work from home is the future. As we have discussed before, it’s more
efficient. It can be more environmentally friendly and a time saver in
terms of commute.

But it’s also just with the way the world is going, with the way that
bandwidth is for the Internet, with our fancy home offices.


GARBER: All of these capabilities are here. Why not have people from all
over the United States get to work in your office?

SMITH: Well, I know New York City would be happy to have Goldman Sachs
employees back, because it’s a different feel without those big buildings
filled with those workers.

But I know they’re going to be in shock when it comes to commute times.


SMITH: Because they’re not used to it. And I don’t know what it is about
traffic around here right now, but it is crazy.

GUNZELMAN: Yes, it’s true. Yes.

SMITH: It’s great to see both of you. Thank you.

GARBER: Thank you.

GUNZELMAN: Awesome. Thanks.

SMITH: All right.

Will new rules coming for corporate boardrooms have investors paying the
price? Charlie Gasparino is on it.

And House lawmakers set to return from recess at the top of the hour, where
a tweet by Democrat Ilhan Omar has some members of both parties speaking
out. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi says it’s time to move on.

Republican Congressman Michael Waltz disagrees. He will tell us what he
plans to do.


SMITH: SEC Chairman Gary Gensler unveiling a list of what some are calling
woke reforms that the commission is planning to vote on.

If passed, the rules would include requiring companies to disclose details
on things like board diversity and climate change efforts.

So, what all will all of this mean for investors?

FOX Business’ Charlie Gasparino has been following this all very closely
for us.

So, Charlie, I know that you have got the inside scoop on so many of these
companies. Is this a bad thing? Would corporations not look forward to
this? Or perhaps it’s an excuse to tout all the woke activities they have
already engaged in.


Let’s back up a little bit. This came out on Friday. FOX Business was first
to report that he came out with his 50-item list of proposed rules. Now,
what the SEC generally does, it proposes a rule, people comment on it, and
then the commission votes. The full commission is five members. Right now,
there are three Democrats, including Gensler, right, the Biden appointee,
and two Republicans.

And all these corporate woke things will likely go down on these party-line
votes. And here’s the thing I will say. Do investors really need to know
board diversity? Maybe some want to know, but do they really need to know?
Do investors need to know just how much you are contributing to make the
environment a better place? And what are those standards anyway? Who sets
those standards?

I don’t think so. A lot of traditional people in the markets don’t believe
so, that the profits and losses have nothing to do with these soft issues.

But this is — we’re in a different territory right now. We’re — the U.S.
government is being run by progressives. Gary Gensler is very close to
Elizabeth Warren. And what this does is this. These are disclosure
mandates. Disclose to us how well you’re helping the environment. Disclose
to us your diversity efforts.

Do all this, so we can talk about it, so activist investors, who are not
the usual activist investors that just want stocks to go up — these are —
these are — there any — plenty of political activist investors in these

SMITH: I’m trying to think what — I’m trying to think like what sectors
might respond well to this and not.

I mean, the technology sector, for the most part, has already been very
vocal on climate issues, right?

GASPARINO: Well, they’re already pushing Exxon.

They forced a couple of big — big funds, like BlackRock, which is run by a
very progressive CEO, Larry Fink, pushed Exxon to essentially put on its
board an activist investor who is in favorable all of this…


SMITH: That’s right. We covered it, yes.

GASPARINO: All this climate change stuff.

On Exxon’s board — I mean, think about it. Exxon makes money drilling for


GASPARINO: They want Exxon to be more woke in terms of the climate. It’s

They do have a rationale.


SMITH: But, at the end of the day, though, let’s go back to the basics and
go back to the facts.

Can Gary Gensler push something like this, when the fiduciary
responsibility of any publicly traded company is obligation to
shareholders? So, can that be lumped into that?

GASPARINO: Barring — well, I mean, there could be lawsuits.

Pat Toomey, the senator from Pennsylvania, who is on the Banking Committee,
which has oversight over the over the SEC, has already spoken out against
it, saying just that…


GASPARINO: … that this is not part of the SEC’s mandate, it’s not part
of corporate — the mandate.

I mean, you would have to have suits. I would say this. If the Republicans
take the House and particularly the Senate, where Pat Toomey is now in the
minority. If he’s in the majority, Gensler is going to have a very hard
time getting this stuff through.

He’s got to — so, if you think about if you, if you’re worried that the
Republicans are going to take particularly the Senate, you got — he’s got
a window of about a year-and-a-half to get this through before that
happens. As you know, 2022 elections are coming.

And if Pat Toomey or somebody else — I don’t know if Pat Toomey is running
for reelection in 2022. But if the Republicans are — if they’re the people
running the Senate Banking Committee, that’s the chairman.


GASPARINO: The Senate Banking Committee is chaired by Shelby or someone
like that, you can bet that this stuff is going to — and if he tries this,
he’s going to be brought up there every three minutes.

SMITH: It’s remarkable, because, if you look at the technology industry
and how they have already sort of gone in this direction, revealing their
interests in climate change.

GASPARINO: They want more. They want…

SMITH: That’s the thing.

The employees saw that. And then they wanted more. And so be careful,

GASPARINO: They want — Gary Gensler wants…


GASPARINO: … every company to mimic the leftism of technology, of the
tech sector, every company.

SMITH: It really is fascinating to watch.

GASPARINO: That’s what he wants.

SMITH: OK, we will see what happens. Charlie, great to see you. Thank you.


SMITH: OK, looks like Vlad is glad when it comes to American energy
policy. We will tell you why.

Plus, Florida Republican Congressman and former Green Beret Michael Waltz
on President Biden’s warning for Vladimir Putin ahead of Wednesday’s
summit. So, was it strong enough?


SMITH: Well, forget getting tough on Russia.

Our next guest says President Biden is giving Russia and Vladimir Putin a
big gift, and drivers are paying the price.

Oil expert Phil Flynn joining us now.

Phil, as President Biden gets ready for his high-stakes meeting with
Vladimir Putin, explain what exactly is going on here.

And hello to you.

PHIL FLYNN, FOX BUSINESS CONTRIBUTOR: Hey. Hello, Sandra. It’s great to be
on with you again.

Hey, basically, what we’re seeing here is that the U.S. is retreating from
the energy stage, and Russia is filling that void. Under President Trump,
the United States was competing with Russia and Saudi Arabia, and became
the world’s biggest energy producer. And that put a lot of pressure on the
old foes in the OPEC cartel and our foes in Russia.

Now, since President Biden’s been in office, we have seen U.S. energy
production fall. We have seen drilling moratoriums. We have been killing
pipelines. And at the same time, President Biden is approving pipelines in
Russia, the Nord Stream pipeline, giving Vladimir Putin what he really
wants, power.

And energy production is power. I just don’t think that President Biden
gets that.

SMITH: Wow. It’s really something to look at this crude oil chart on a
year-to-date basis, now on a one-year basis. And we see the price continue
to go higher.

Talk about the real-world impact that Joe Biden’s energy policies are
having on prices, not just big picture like crude oil, but gasoline at the

FLYNN: What is happening is that he is causing prices to go higher,
because he’s telling people don’t invest in oil.

And that’s one of the things that we’re seeing. We’re seeing one of the
biggest pullbacks in energy investments in history. People are not planning
for oil tomorrow, because President Biden says we’re going to be off oil in
30 years. I don’t think Russia or OPEC believes that.

In fact, they’re going to benefit from the U.S. retraction in that. And we
are creating the blueprint for an energy shortage and an energy crisis in
the future. President Biden hasn’t thought this thing out. I think a more
smooth transition off of fossil fuels would have been a lot smarter. But to
tell everybody to stop investing in oil, that’s going to mean that we’re
going to see shortages and hurt the economy.

SMITH: Real quick, Phil — and just some background here, you and I go
back to trading floor days in Chicago.

And you used to watch for geopolitical risk in the commodities markets,
right? It was an everyday concern for any trader that was involved in those
markets. But then we became so energy-independent that what was happening
abroad wasn’t such a concern.

So what are markets watching as this summit is about to happen with Putin
on Wednesday? What will you be watching?

FLYNN: I think we’re watching to see if President Biden gets tough on
Vladimir Putin. And I don’t think he will.

And you’re absolutely right. The U.S. energy producers took the global risk
premium out of the market.


FLYNN: Because they could raise production on a dime. But guess what?
President Biden pulled back from that.

And so when the U.S. producers do not control things, Russia and OPEC does.
That means that the geopolitical risk factor is getting back into those
prices. And you and I are going to pay for it at the gas pump.

SMITH: You always make it so easy for everybody understand, my friend,
Phil Flynn, there in Chicago.

Best to all the traders there. Say hi when you see them.

Phil, great to see you.

FLYNN: I will.

SMITH: Thank you.

FLYNN: They miss you.

SMITH: All right. All right, thank you, and me as well.

Vladimir Putin approaching two decades as Russia’s president meanwhile. And
to understand how he amassed so much power, you would have to look at the
man he replaced, Boris Yeltsin, for clues.

Steve Harrigan lived in Russia and reported from there for 10 years. Steve
joins us now live from Atlanta.

Hello, Steve.

enthusiasm when Putin first came into office, in part because of simply the
physical contrast between Putin and Boris Yeltsin.


HARRIGAN (voice-over): By 1999, most Russians were ready for a change. The
hero who stood on the tank in 1991 and broke communist control over freedom
of speech, elections and private property was also blamed by those who saw
their life savings disappear, as a new class of billionaires scooped up
state factories.

Yeltsin’s lengthy disappearances from public view were blamed on heart
attacks or excessive drinking.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: To many Russians, President Boris Yeltsin felt like
an embarrassment. He was very famous for being inebriated. He was a known
alcoholic and a big drinker. He was very large just in stature.

So, the way that he behaved in these high-level public diplomacy meetings
with U.S. presidents or other heads of state embarrassed a lot of Russians
at the time.

HARRIGAN: The physical contrast with Putin was stark.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He’s fit. He’s a martial arts champion. He says he
never drinks.

And for many Russians, that also gave them a sense of stability. Mr. Putin
embodied that physically in a way that President Yeltsin absolutely did

HARRIGAN: Putin also embodied a return to an authoritarian past, shutting
down press freedom, vanishing independent oligarchs and consolidating power
in his own hands.


HARRIGAN: For journalists in Moscow during the 1990s, there was often the
sense of panic. Between Yeltsin’s four heart attacks and his drinking, he
would disappear for weeks at a time.

You had to staff the bureau every weekend because there were real concerns
Yeltsin could die at any moment — Sandra.

SMITH: That is remarkable perspective.

Steve Harrigan, thank you for your reporting on that. Appreciate that.

Some members of both parties saying, oh, my, over a controversial tweet by
Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

Why former Green Beret and Florida Republican Michael Waltz is leading the
charge to censure her and other members of the Squad. He will join us live


SMITH: House Democrats returning from recess to a House divided after a
controversial tweet by Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar sparked backlash
from within her own party.

FOX News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich has been following all of this and
the fallout on Capitol Hill.

Hi, Jacqui.


Three House Republicans are moving to censure Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and
her progressive colleagues in the House for — quote — “defending foreign
terrorist organizations and using rhetoric that contributes to anti-Semitic

Now, the GOP push to punish Omar comes after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
said the Democratic Caucus is moving on after Omar walked back her comments
appearing to equate democracies like the U.S. and Israel with terror

Appearing separately on the same program, Pelosi and AOC projected a
willingness not to let this splinter the party.

AOC, for her, part redirected blame at the media. That’s an about-face,
after she blamed — or — excuse me — her progressive colleagues, rather,
slammed her Democratic Jewish colleagues and Democratic leadership for even
so much as asking Omar to clarify.


REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): But what I’m saying is, is end of subject. She
clarified. We thanked her.

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): This whole hubbub started with
right-wing news outlets taking what she said, out of context. And when we
feed into that, it adds legitimacy to a lot of this kind of right-wing

We are putting this behind us, and I believe that we will ultimately come
together as a caucus.


HEINRICH: Republicans, though, are not going to let this go so easily.

Congressman Jim Banks said: “Actions speak louder than squishy words.
Speaker Pelosi can let members vote on our resolution or she can cover for
the Hamas caucus and their anti-Israel and anti-American rhetoric. We will

Now, it’s unclear if any Democrats support that censure resolution from the
House Republicans, although there are some simmering lingering frustrations
about the record of comments coming from Congresswoman Omar and the — what
she’s said basically over time about the U.S.-Israel relationship and U.S.
foreign policy — Sandra.

SMITH: OK, Jacqui Heinrich reporting from Capitol Hill for us.

Jacqui, thank you.


SMITH: Florida Republican Michael Waltz is one of the congressmen behind
that resolution to center the Squad. And he joins us now.

We have reached out, by the way, to Democrats that were named in this
measure. And we have not heard anything back.

Congressman, great to see you.

REP. MICHAEL WALTZ (R-FL): Yes, good to see you.

SMITH: So, start off first with Ilhan Omar and your decision to censure
her. Why?

WALTZ: Well, we’re censuring her and the Squad. We have renamed them the
Hamas caucus, because this isn’t just a one-off.

This is a series of statements. I will remind everyone that Ms. Omar was
formally censured in 2019. That did pass the House. That was voted on for
then statements.

But the bottom line is, to equate the United States, Israel with the
Taliban and Hamas and — quote, unquote — “atrocities” is personally
offensive to me. You know I’m a Green Beret that served all over the Middle
East, Africa. I have seen women personally attacked. I have seen acid
thrown on their faces, girl schools, machine gun, children with suicide
vests strapped onto them by these terrorist organizations. 
And I have visited Israeli homes, all of which, their schools and bus stops
included, have to have bunkers to defend their families against Hamas
rockets. So, enough is enough. We need to speak out. This is offensive. And
I have received outreach from a number of Jewish Americans who believe that
this rhetoric is contributing to the anti-Semitic attacks across the United
States that we have seen just in the past few months.

SMITH: Do you fear that you could be labeled the same for calling them the
Hamas caucus?

WALTZ: Well, I think that they have shown time and time again they are
willing to stand and really turn a blind eye to what these groups are

Let’s remind everyone that Hamas is not only launching rockets into cities
with the intent to kill civilians, but they’re doing so hiding behind women
and children, schools, hospitals, and other public buildings.

And, as someone who has been shot at by terrorists hiding behind women and
children, again, enough is enough. So they can throw out whatever rhetoric
they want, but I’m talking about the actions that I have personally seen
and they shouldn’t apologize for…


WALTZ: … and we need to take a stand for.

SMITH: I want to circle back on that in just a second.


SMITH: But so you’re looking to censure not just her, but the Squad. You
make that very clear.

Nancy Pelosi says, you know what, she offered a clarification, Ilhan Omar.
She’s OK with that. She says it’s time to move on.

Why was it not good enough for you?

WALTZ: Because this isn’t just a one-time incident.

I mean, we have Representative Tlaib comparing Israel to apartheid. We have
had, again, a series of incidences in 2019 that led to another censure
resolution that was voted on. This is a trend. And this is why I think
you’re seeing my Democratic colleagues of Jewish American background also
saying, enough is enough, it’s time to speak out, and it’s time to stop

SMITH: As far as division within the Democratic Party, obviously,
President Biden just took the opportunity overseas in Brussels to talk
about what he called a fractured Republican Party.


SMITH: What about the divisions in the Democratic Party? What do you see?

Real quick. I have a few seconds left, 10 seconds.

WALTZ: Well, just, you know, so much — so much for politics stopping at
the border, right?


WALTZ: I mean, we — we heard Biden and everybody else criticizing
Republican administrations.


WALTZ: And yet there he is on the world stage criticizing Republicans.
It’s a shame.

SMITH: We’re out of time.

Congressman, I appreciate you joining us. Thank you.

WALTZ: All right. Thanks so much.

SMITH: That’s it for me today.

Sorry. I will be on “Gutfeld!” tonight, by the way. You can catch me
tomorrow again 1:00 p.m. Eastern for “America Reports” with John Roberts.
He will be live from Geneva.

“The Five” starts now.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All
materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not
be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast
without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You
may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from
copies of the content.

Source link

Previous postChicago shooting leaves 4 dead, 4 injured following argument in city's South Side, police say Next post'Special Report' All-Star panel on Biden's foreign policy ahead of summit with Putin

Chicago Financial Times

Copyright © 2024 Chicago Financial Times

Updates via RSS
or Email