Defense Secretary Esper slams Turkey for military offensive in Syria

close

Video

Defense Secretary Esper slams Turkey for military offensive in Syria

Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin says it is a violation of the U.N. Charter for any NATO ally to invade a country that already has other NATO nations on the ground.

This is a rush transcript from "Your World," October 24, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: The process you're engaging in regarding the attempted impeachment of President Trump is out of bounds, is inconsistent with due process as we know it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES PAYNE, ANCHOR: A day after the sit-in, Republicans are going all in to open the doors on the Democrats' impeachment probe.

Hello, everyone. I'm Charles Payne, in for Neil Cavuto. And this is "Your World."

And Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is fed up with the House Democrats and their closed-door sessions, just firing up a resolution condemning the whole thing.

Let's get right to Mike Emanuel on Capitol Hill with the very latest -- Mike.

MIKE EMANUEL, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Charles, good afternoon.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a veteran of the Bill Clinton impeachment, says House Democrats are doing it wrong.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: What you're doing today, in my view, is unfair to the president and it's dangerous to the presidency. And I think 41 Republican senators and growing is a strong signal to our House colleagues that you're off- script here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

EMANUEL: FOX News is told private interviews are expected to wind down and public hearings are expected to start around mid-November.

Among those likely to be called back by Democrats, acting the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor and former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

And the House majority leader says the probe will be public when it counts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. STENY HOYER, D-MD: They're going to get a vote on the floor. That's the only way impeachment can happen. It has to be, and it will be a public vote. And they will have to stand up and say that they give -- either going to give a license to a president of the United States to do the things that will be asserted, if, in fact, we find those facts, or not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

EMANUEL: But Graham and others say the president and his GOP allies should have rights now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: If you believe if you have a case against the president, vote to open up an inquiry, allow Republicans to have a say, make sure the president is allowed to participate in a meaningful manner, like we did in the past. That's the way to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

EMANUEL: Graham notes he has at least 41 GOP co-sponsors for his resolution, meaning a sizable part of the Senate believes House members are doing it wrong -- Charles.

PAYNE: Mike, thank you very much.

My next guest was part of yesterday's GOP sit-in.

Ohio Republican Bill Johnson joins us now.

Congressman, thanks for joining the show.

REP. BILL JOHNSON, R-OH: Thanks, Charles. Thanks for having me.

PAYNE: It was quite a spectacle. Walk us through the genesis of the idea. And exactly what were you trying to accomplish?

JOHNSON: Well, it started out as a news conference. That's what it was, a press conference, to bring light to the fact that these hearings, interviews are going on behind closed doors.

President -- under President Nixon, a Democrat speaker gave President Nixon fairness, due process and justice. Under President Clinton, a Republican speaker gave the same to President Clinton.

Why the Democrats have decided to do it this way, nobody knows. What do they have to hide? But it is time for them to stop this secretive process and give every member of the House what we are entitled to on behalf of the 721,000 people we represent, access to that information.

And that's what yesterday started out as. It ended up going down the hallway to try and get inside the door to talk to the leadership to get into the hearing.

PAYNE: Right.

JOHNSON: And it evolved from there.

PAYNE: Your thoughts on Senator Graham now getting into the fray, so to speak, but standing up, of course, for his Republican colleagues in the House?

JOHNSON: Well, I'm very glad that Senator Graham and other Republican senators are standing up. It is time that we all stand up.

I don't -- I don't agree with The Washington Post very often, but I do agree with their masthead on the front of their newspaper: Democracy dies in darkness, Charles.

And that's what's going on here. This sham of an impeachment inquiry is going on in secret, behind closed doors. The Constitution gives the House full authority over impeachment, not the speaker, and certainly not Adam Schiff.

PAYNE: Well, to a degree, I think this is backfiring on the Democrats, because, from the outside, it does look shady.

Let's be honest. It's these secret meetings, the leaks that are fortuitous only for Democrats. You can't verify what they are.

JOHNSON: Right.

PAYNE: And, of course, the media bias seems to work with it.

But I think, for people who are looking from the outside in, we want full transparency. We actually would like to see this thing wrapped up sooner, rather than later.

JOHNSON: We need it wrapped up sooner than later.

But back to those previous impeachment inquiries under Nixon and Clinton, both the presidents had counsel that were allowed to cross-examine witnesses, examine evidence, interview witnesses. They had subpoena power. They gave subpoena power to the minority party.

We demand the same kind of due process here, so that this can be brought out into the light, because, at the end of the day, here's what we're going to find out, Charles. The president did nothing wrong.

I have read the transcript. If they don't have anything to hide, why don't they come out and show that?

PAYNE: Before I let you go, sir, some speculation that it's being drawn out, that it's a foregone conclusion that there will be an impeachment in the House, but it's being drawn out for political reasons to hit certain timing of the election process.

What do you make of that thought?

JOHNSON: Well, there is no question that this is all political.

If you remember, Speaker Pelosi has brought an impeachment vote to the House floor several times already, and it failed. My suspicion is, I'm not sure she has the votes, because a lot of the members of her party were elected in districts that supported Donald Trump in 2016.

They're going to have some strong accounting to do if they persist in this charade.

PAYNE: Representative Johnson, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Well, two men at the center of the impeachment probe of President Bill Clinton, Republican Trent Lott and Democrat Tom Daschle, writing an op-ed today saying that the Senate can indeed hold a fair impeachment trial this time around.

Can it?

Let's ask Inez Stepman from the Independent Women's Forum, Democratic strategist David Burstein, and The Wall Street Journal's James Freeman.

James, what do you think?

JAMES FREEMAN, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think -- I don't know what the senators intended, but I think that whole piece is basically an implicit rebuke of the House process.

They're talking about how they came together and settled on a big, long, open inquiry, how they looked at the traditions, the precedents, and how they came to a bipartisan agreement, not on the activity of Bill Clinton, but on how the process ought to run.

And it was basically the opposite of what we're seeing in the House right now.

PAYNE: David, I think it feels that it's -- this is something that Nancy Pelosi herself was pulled into kicking and screaming. She finally said, OK, let's go for it after a harsh weekend of AOC tweets, and now they're in the midst of something and not quite sure how to roll it out.

DAVID BURSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, I would slightly disagree with that, because I think the way this is proceeding is actually, frankly, exactly what people have asked for.

The Democrats are holding a series of hearings to understand the facts and deciding whether or not to bring impeachment articles.

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: So, would you call that a fishing expedition?

BURSTEIN: No, it's a fact-finding mission. It's an investigation. It's the beginning.

And I think it's funny, because the Republicans are saying, we should hold a vote, but then they -- but earlier this year, Republicans criticized Democrats for not looking at the evidence.

Now we're looking at the evidence and saying, after we find the evidence, we will hold the vote or not hold the vote, on the basis of what evidence is out. And then there will be public hearings.

I think Republicans are being a little bit champing at the bit here on this, because this -- these have been going on for two weeks, three weeks, just to find a little bit of information, and then actually draft articles of impeachment, which will be voted on.

That's the -- that would be the natural step. It includes public hearings. It's a process. And Republicans don't want to be involved in the process.

PAYNE: Are you buying that?

INEZ STEPMAN, INDEPENDENT WOMEN'S FORUM: No, not really.

I mean, look, this is the political process, right? And this is not a legal trial, not even on the Senate level. This is a political process. And that means that it's a battle in the court of public opinion.

And, right now, having these things mostly being behind closed doors, but having them be in the headlines day after day after day, with selective leaks that are only sort of showing the things that are in the worst light for the president, look, the president's supporters are going to want to hear from these folks actually being questioned, especially when they are members of the administrative state, and what the president calls the deep state, right?

And you see The New York Times and others showing these folks as totally neutral, apolitical. That's often not true; 95 percent of political donations in 2016 from federal employees went to Hillary Clinton.

So they want to see these folks cross-examined. They want to see them out in the public. This is a traumatic thing, impeaching a president, and the public has a right to see this evidence and to make up their mind.

BURSTEIN: But...

PAYNE: Let me bring James in, because it feels that a lot of this is just sort of a campaign against President Trump, the image of President Trump, more than anything else, where it goes from here.

If every single day, the drip, drip, drip is something negative, another bombshell from another anonymous source or someone behind closed doors, it's tough. The narrative is certainly against President Trump, and that's building up without any counter.

FREEMAN: Yes, I'm not seeing a lot of bombshells. I don't know where the...

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: Well, I'm just saying, that's the headlines.

FREEMAN: In the sense of like -- what Adam Schiff is searching for his evidence that the president unduly pressured the Ukrainian government to examine Biden activities, which the Bidens have promised never to do again.

So we got -- we got the Burisma story, the shady Ukrainian deal. Now NBC News reporting today on Hunter Biden's work in Romania with a land deal over there. Is Hunter Biden now going to tell he's an expert on Romanian real estate law and development deals?

So these -- these -- I think most people would look at this and say that should have been examined. And we could probably argue about the correct way to do it, but I don't see how you get an impeachment out of this.

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: When President Trump released the transcripts, it felt like it changed the narrative.

And, again, this is where it feels like the Democrats have become more secretive about the process, but more desperate as well. Again, we don't hear things, except leaks and innuendo.

BURSTEIN: But -- but that's what -- that's -- as Inez pointed out, it's a political process. It's not a legal process.

The president isn't entitled to anything. And that's what was so offensive about what the congressman had to say. They're not entitled to representation. In the past, they have given that representation. They are entitled to that in the trial in the Senate, but not in the House.

The House rules are actually very clear on this matter. The rules may be unfortunate and inconvenient for Republicans, but they are the rules.

STEPMAN: They're more than just inconvenient. And they're inconvenient for the American people.

As I said, I mean, I think that's the important factor here is that, again, this is a traumatic thing for a country. This is going to be the third time we have gone through this in history, and forth, if you count Nixon, who didn't -- was going to be impeached, but then resigned, right?

PAYNE: Sure.

STEPMAN: It's a traumatic thing for the country. And I think it's really important, just like with the Mueller process, right, that the public has access to the information, that they can decide for themselves, because we see the public doesn't trust the press on this.

They don't trust Congress. They don't even trust the president. They really don't trust any of the institutions that are at the center of this. They're all underwater in public approval.

And so I think the American people have a right to look at that evidence directly, like the transcript, but whatever else, and decide for themselves. They don't trust other people's opinions on this.

PAYNE: Inez, James, David, thank you all very much.

FREEMAN: Thanks, Charles.

PAYNE: We have got to leave it there because we're keeping a real close eye on Amazon shares right now.

And the stock is taking a beating, down huge, 135 points. That equates to a 7.6 percent loss. Worse-than-expected earnings from the company. We're going to have a lot more details on how this is going, and, of course, how brick-and-mortar retailers are going to do during the holiday shopping season later on in the show.

Meanwhile, Attorney General William Barr under more pressure to recuse himself from the Ukraine probe, but not from folks in Washington. Try a little farther north.

All rise. Judge Napolitano is here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: The New York City Bar Association now calling an Attorney General William Barr to recuse himself from the Ukraine probe, or resign.

Judge Andrew Napolitano is here.

Judge, what do you make of that? That's a pretty tough demand.

ANDREW NAPOLITANO, SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: It's very unusual that some entity not involved in a criminal prosecution or a criminal investigation would try and insert itself in it and say that the A.G. is conflicted.

I don't know what the conflict would be. Now, we know of two criminal investigations emanating out of the Ukraine episode, if you will. Neither of them involves the president. Both of them involve these former associates of Rudy Giuliani and their fund-raising mechanisms and whether the money came from a Russian or Ukrainian corporation.

That's the only connection to Ukraine.

PAYNE: Right.

NAPOLITANO: The argument that the New York City Bar Association the association makes is that, because the president suggested in the conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine that he have his prosecutors talk to Attorney General Barr in order to further Rudy Giuliani's efforts to find dirt about Joe Biden, somehow, the attorney general, Bill Barr, is disqualified from being involved.

The attorney general says, well, not only did I not do anything; the first I heard of it was when I saw the transcript. The president didn't even tell me that he had suggested my name.

That would tell you that there's no basis for a conflict. The conflict exists when you can't be fair, when you're drawn towards something else, and you can't -- if you're a witness in a case, you can't be the judge. If you're a witness in case, you can't be the prosecutor.

That's the level that things would rise to. When Attorney General Sessions recused himself, famously or infamously, however you want to look at it, from the -- what became the Mueller investigation, he did so because he knew he would be a witness in the case.

There's nothing like that here.

PAYNE: So, according to the New York Bar, they said the reason for this is not to focus on legality of the president's actions or even the merits of the whistle-blower complaint, I guess just the relationship between the A.G.

But it feels more like a political statement, to be quite honest with you.

NAPOLITANO: It is a political statement.

There's -- as far as I know, there's no criminal investigation. Remember, the Department of Justice investigates crimes. There's no criminal investigation that I know of the whistle-blower's complaint. This is an intelligence community investigation, which now has morphed into an impeachment proceeding in the House of Representatives.

It's hard for -- it's a head-scratcher to me what the attorney general has to do with this.

PAYNE: Let me switch gears here, because, moments ago, Senator Graham put out a resolution. He's condemning House Democrats. He says that this process has been unfair and dangerous, that they have gone repeatedly off- script, and that the president and his allies should have rights.

What do you make of this?

NAPOLITANO: Well, I'm critical of it for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, the Constitution gives the House the sole -- S-O-L-E -- power of impeachment. The Senate has no say in it whatsoever. Second, the Constitution gives the House the right to write its own rules. And they did write the rules, which are now being followed by Congressman Schiff.

They were written in 2015, when the Republicans ran the House. What Congressman Schiff and the other two committees, which includes many Republicans, are doing is the initial interview of witnesses.

No prosecutor would ever put a witness, no lawyer would ever put a witness in a public forum without interviewing that person first. Senator Graham and his staff did that in the Bill Clinton impeachment. Congressman Rodino and his staff did that in the Richard Nixon impeachment.

Congressman Schiff is choosing to do it in front of the committee, rather than just in front of investigators.

The president's due process rights will come into play when witness -- when evidence is publicly presented before the Judiciary Committee. But the preliminary investigations, the preliminary inquiries are never in public.

PAYNE: All right. Well, there's a lot of frustration, though, about the...

(CROSSTALK)

NAPOLITANO: There is.

Look, if it were up to me, I would love to be a fly on the wall. I would love to be in that committee room. I would love to know what's going on. But the House rules don't permit it at this stage.

PAYNE: I think, also, the selective leaks don't make this even -- even more appetizing.

NAPOLITANO: That's part of the system today.

PAYNE: Yes.

Judge, thank you so much.

NAPOLITANO: Pleasure, Charles. Pleasure to be with you.

PAYNE: Hey, Turkey may have made the cease-fire in Syria permanent, but Defense Secretary Mark Esper still smells trouble.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK ESPER, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We see them spinning closer into Russia's orbit than into the Western orbit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ESPER: Turkey put us all in a very terrible situation.

I mean, I think I think the incursion was unwarranted, at the direction of Turkey, with regard to the alliance, is heading in the wrong direction. On any number of issues, we see them spinning closer into Russia's orbit then into the Western orbit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PAYNE: Defense Secretary Mark Esper slamming Turkey for its military offensive into Syria, saying they're spinning closer to Russia.

So how should the U.S. handle NATO allies acting out?

Former Green Beret Commander General Jerry Boykin is here to discuss.

General, thanks for joining us.

LT. GEN. JERRY BOYKIN, RET., U.S. ARMY: Good to be with you.

Nice suit, too.

(LAUGHTER)

PAYNE: Thank you very much.

It's amazing for a lot of folks who are just watching Turkey's actions from the outside. It was amazing, because it's hard to believe that they are a NATO ally, considering how cozy their relationship has been with Russia, using and buying Russian defense weapons and systems.

How do they get away with this?

BOYKIN: Well, I will tell you, Charles, I am really disgusted with the people that keep talking about, well, America didn't want to go to war with a NATO ally.

You know what? It's a violation of the U.N. charter for any NATO ally to invade a country that already has other NATO nations on the ground, their military personnel. This -- the onus should be on Turkey here.

And I will tell you that I think it's only a matter of time until Turkey is no longer going to be a member of NATO, because Erdogan is -- really is not a representative government. He has not allowed this to be a true representative government, which is one of the fundamentals to being a member of NATO. The other is a market economy.

PAYNE: Right.

BOYKIN: They are not really a representative government. He is a despot.

PAYNE: Yes.

After the failed coup attempt, he certainly cleaned everything out and all levels of society and government, to your point, wiping out any form of opposition there.

And, sir, so the foundation, the democratic foundation has to be weakened. But now the calculus is Russia, growing power in that -- in that sphere of the world, growing influence. What does it mean for us?

BOYKIN: Well, I think Russia is a winner in this thing, along with Iran.

And it clearly means that we have got a NATO ally that has now sided with and joined forces with the very entity that NATO was created to stand against. So I think that this is -- this portends future problems for -- not only for America, but probably for NATO in general.

PAYNE: Listening to President Trump yesterday as he announced the permanent cease-fire and so many other parts of the arrangement, even you can hear him suggest trust, but verify almost every single day.

I mean, is there -- do you have any thoughts in your mind that we're going to be challenged over and over again with Turkey holding up its end of the bargain?

BOYKIN: We should never trust Recep Erdogan.

Look, the guy's objective in life is to create a caliphate and to be the caliph. He has -- he had no intentions of abiding by the provisions of the cease-fire. In fact, Charles, there never was really a cease-fire.

I just talked to a guy from Syria yesterday and -- two guys from Syria yesterday, actually. And they said, even though the bombing stopped, the ground campaign continued in certain areas. So the Turks never really started -- stopped fighting when they were in this so-called cease-fire.

I don't think Erdogan has any intention whatsoever of stopping where he is right now. He is not going to stop until he has everything he set out to get.

PAYNE: What does that mean for the Kurds?

BOYKIN: Well, it means that they're going to keep driving the Kurds further south, with not only Turkey, but America promising the Kurds a place for the Kurds to land.

And it's going to be in the desert. That's what one of the Syrians told me yesterday, that you can't drive them but just so far south. I think the Kurds are the losers in this whole thing, along with America.

And, look, as a soldier, I'm really distressed by the fact that we walked away from the Kurds. Look, the Kurds fought for their own homeland. We should never think that they were just doing it for us. But I tell you, ISIS, when they reemerge, when they resurface, we're going to have a hard time finding somebody to fight with us against ISIS.

We do have strategic interests in that part of the world, and part of it is countering the threat of ISIS.

PAYNE: Are you saying then that it's a foregone conclusion ISIS will sort of reconstitute itself here?

BOYKIN: I think it's just a matter of time until that's absolutely going to happen.

And it's not all contingent upon all of the thousands of ISIS members getting out of the detention facilities there. Look, ISIS is an ideology. We have yet to counter the ideology. And until we do that, ISIS is always going to be a threat.

There are still thousands of ISIS in the world. And, in fact, they're in probably 34 to 35 countries right now. So don't think that ISIS is gone. He destroyed the caliphate.

PAYNE: Right.

BOYKIN: Donald Trump, under his leadership, destroyed the caliphate in that part of the world.

But it can come back very quickly. And I think it's only a matter of time until it will.

PAYNE: Yes, it's tough to destroy an idea.

General Boykin, thank you very much. Always a pleasure talking with you.

BOYKIN: Good being with you.

PAYNE: Christmas shopping in October? The deals are already starting, but will you be buying?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: More Brexit drama. U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson says he will ask Parliament for a general election on December 12 to get Brexit done once and for all. You believe it?

Well, we will be back in 60 seconds.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: So we know you're going to shop online, but iconic retail Nordstrom is betting that you're still waiting -- willing to wait in line.

FOX Business Network's Jackie DeAngelis is in New York City for a huge opening day -- Jackie.

JACKIE DEANGELIS, FOX BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon to you, Charles.

That's right. Look, while a lot people will argue that brick-and-mortar is dead, there's a lot of vibrancy and life here at Nordstrom's first New York City flagship store.

Now, this is a store that's not just about retail. Obviously, there's a lot here to buy, but it's also about services and it's about experience. You're getting an all-in-one package here. At least, that's what the company is trying to do.

Now, there's a lot of competition in retail right now. People will argue online retailers, the Amazons of the world or the discount retailers, like the T.J. Maxxes, make it very hard for department stores to compete.

But what's interesting is, Nordstrom actually says that it's the online sales in New York that made it design this 320,000-square-foot store that's seven-stories tall.

Listen to what they told me.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIK NORDSTROM, CO-PRESIDENT, NORDSTROM: We have a broad range of merchandise. We're not just about the high end.

We like to say we carry from Vans to Valentino. And I really think that's how a modern customer shops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEANGELIS: So it's interesting, because Nordstrom's is saying, we came here because our online sales were so strong. So we're making this a growth experience and trying to capitalize on this captive audience, and also saying that it's not just high-end retail here. There is something for everyone, from Vans to Valentino.

The sales are pretty strong. And when you bring these services and experiences together, the consumer really will walk in here and feel the loyalty that they say they feel for the Nordstrom brand -- Charles.

PAYNE: All right, thank you very much.

Nordstrom is betting big on brick-and-mortar, as the National Retail Federation says holiday shoppers are going to spend 4 percent more this year than they did last. But more and more of that, of course, is going to online.

So just what can we expect this season?

Let's ask Vera Gibbons and Hitha Herzog.

Hitha, let me start with you.

First, this foray, right -- I mean, you were the first one years ago that told me about omnichannel.

HITHA HERZOG, RETAIL WATCHER: Right.

PAYNE: Now -- but this is crazy, seven-story tall. It's so unique. You can get blowouts and Botox injections.

(LAUGHTER)

PAYNE: And also there's seven places to get food and beverages, so they're gone for everything under one roof.

HERZOG: So it's interesting.

I was just over there, and I did a little bit of a tour. And you're right. It is seven stories.

But what I did find out is that they also shipped in their VIP shoppers. People that were spending over $50,000 a year were flown to New York in order to shop with their personal shoppers, who were also flown in.

And while you shop, you were able -- they have a stadium license at the store. You can actually get food and drink delivered to you while you're trying on your Vans and Valentinos.

PAYNE: All right.

VERA GIBBONS, SENIOR CONSUMER ANALYST: And they have got a martini bar in the shoe section.

PAYNE: A martini bar.

GIBBONS: Only for you, Charles.

PAYNE: Now, what about the -- for everyone else, though, besides these highfalutin folks? I mean, I know it's in New York City, but still...

GIBBONS: Yes. And the location is really good. I mean, that's the difference between this location and maybe like Lord & Taylor and some of the other ones that have gone belly up.

I think this one actually has hope. It's certainly driving a lot of traffic today.

PAYNE: Will it be pay for itself? Will it be a loss-leader?

GIBBONS: Eventually, probably, it could. I mean, I think the location is key. I think the services are also very good, as Hitha mentioned.

But there are also like services that are high-end that we like, we use.

HERZOG: To your point, with online retail, I mean, yes, the online sales are super strong.

GIBBONS: Right.

HERZOG: And after they came out with a study that said that -- they interviewed about 4,000 people -- 15 percent of those people are going into department stores.

So what are the rest of the -- 85 percent are doing?

PAYNE: So, they can coexist.

HERZOG: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

GIBBONS: A lot of them are buying food and drink, by the way.

You mentioned that. Like, one out of every four purchases at Nordstrom is a beverage or food.

PAYNE: After the close, Amazon reported their numbers.

It is right -- the initial reaction is an unmitigated disaster. The stock is down more than 7 percent. And they guide it lower for the fourth quarter.

Now, we might have gotten a glimpse of this with that last retail number that came out, retail sales. Interesting enough, Internet was down. Is there something going on here, Hitha?

Are we changing, perhaps, as consumers, particularly as we have more money in our pockets? Maybe we will go to the mall and kick the tires?

HERZOG: Amazon's a little bit of an outlier, because so much of their business is also determined through the Amazon Web services.

So over the past year, their business has been declining. They expected a 36 percent decrease in sales. It was actually less than 40 percent. So they are really -- that's what's making these earnings really falter.

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: So, this is not a proxy for the American consumer or online shopping?

HERZOG: No, not really.

I mean, Amazon really did spend a lot of money on making sure Prime was up and running too.

PAYNE: Right.

HERZOG: But you have to also look at the Amazon Web services as well.

GIBBONS: Hundreds of millions of dollars for same-day delivery, next-day delivery.

PAYNE: Right.

GIBBONS: So, obviously, that's going to eat into...

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: Although, remember, a few years ago, they could spend all the money on this kind of infrastructure stuff, and Wall Street was OK with it.

But they didn't make any money. Now, I guess they have to really prove themselves quarter after quarter, like anyone else.

HERZOG: Two words, WeWork.

PAYNE: Huh?

HERZOG: I said, two words, WeWork.

PAYNE: Oh.

(LAUGHTER)

PAYNE: Hey, guys, I want to switch gears a moment here, because, earlier today, Vice President Mike Pence delivered a speech on China, still talking tough, especially when it comes to companies that are doing business over there.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT: Far too many American multinational corporations have kowtowed to the lure of China's money.

Nike promotes itself as a so-called social justice champion. But when it comes to Hong Kong, it prefers checking its social conscience at the door.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PAYNE: Hitha, your thoughts?

HERZOG: Here's the thing with what is happening on the trade side of China.

I mean, you're right. Corporations can't sit there and portray themselves as social justice warriors, but yet capitalize on what is happening on the Chinese consumer, and still cry foul when trade impositions have been imposed on them.

With that said, with the customer, as we go into the holiday season, they're price-agnostic. The prices have been baked into what people are going to go out and shop for this holiday season.

PAYNE: Right. Right.

HERZOG: So you're not going to see any price fluctuations, and, therefore, the customer is not going to respond.

PAYNE: Nike hasn't paid a price for being really harsh critics of this administration. These athletes haven't.

But people are offended, at least by their knee-jerk reaction, bowing to China. I mean, could this actually have an impact on their business?

GIBBONS: I'm not in politicalnews.com. That's a good question for Hitha.

PAYNE: Right.

But, still, I mean, that's -- you're the perfect person to ask this, because I think the reaction to it -- to China and Nike cut across both political parties. It's not necessarily one party or another.

A lot of people were just simply offended that they wouldn't defend the First Amendment and some -- one of their own defending the protesters in Hong Kong.

GIBBONS: Right.

PAYNE: So, you guys don't think it's just -- it's short-term, short-lived, and won't be a long-term impact?

HERZOG: We could -- when it comes to -- I think this is going to happen a lot more.

You're going to see more corporations come out with policies about what they can and cannot do when it comes to politics and what they can and cannot say.

PAYNE: Right.

HERZOG: Right now, it's a little bit of a free-for-all. People are saying things, and then there's backlash.

But I think, in the near future, you're going to start seeing policies come out.

PAYNE: I'm getting the wrap.

But just at least tell me it's going to be a good Christmas season.

GIBBONS: Very good Christmas season. Sales are up 3.4 percent, 3.5 percent, maybe 4 percent.

PAYNE: Right.

GIBBONS: I mean, they're going to be good, because consumers have jobs, wages are up. The market is at all-time highs.

It's a good time.

(CROSSTALK)

HERZOG: And you can go shopping and drink a martini at the same time at Nordstrom's.

PAYNE: Yes, go to Nordstrom's.

Thank you both very much.

GIBBONS: Thanks, Charles.

PAYNE: Hey, speaking of spending, student loan debt and the next big bailout, and you could be on the hook for it huge, big time -- next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: A top official at the Department of Education resigning today, while endorsing a plan to cancel most of the nation's student loan debt.

Guess who would foot the bill?

Campus Reform's Eduardo Neret says that the student loan crisis is real, but plans to eliminate over a trillion dollars in student loan debt is simply insane, especially when taxpayers would be on the hook.

Eduardo, thanks for joining the show.

EDUARDO NERET, CAMPUS REFORM: Thanks for having me.

PAYNE: How surprised are you, though, that this is someone that Betsy DeVos picked to help her run the Department of Education, someone who was vehemently against these sort of things? Now he rolls out a plan that's actually more forgiving than Elizabeth Warren's.

NERET: It's shocking.

So the official who did this, Wayne Johnson, look, he got one thing right, in that it's -- the amount of student loan debt that we have in this country is insane. But what's more insane is his solution to fix it.

So Johnson thinks we should just throw billions of dollars to eliminate the student loan debt. And, as you mentioned before, that's more generous than Elizabeth Warren's plan.

But it shows that there's a great misunderstanding about how we got here in the first place. So people think, oh, we can just throw more money at education, and it'll solve our problems.

But that's the very reason why tuition, the cost of higher ed is so expensive in the first place. And it's because the government got its hands in it.

And so, as you mentioned, at the end of the day, it's going to be the taxpayers who foot this bill. And part of me wonders if Johnson is just mentioning this because he's getting ready for a Senate run. And it seems like he just wants to pander to millennial voters, who are now the largest voting bloc in the country.

PAYNE: Now, there's some speculation about him running for Isakson's seat.

NERET: Yes.

PAYNE: OK, so, college debt was not even a factor back in -- right before the Great Recession.

Then President Obama sort of took out the middleman, middlewoman, if you will, and became sort of the government, just more or less rubber-stamping these loans. And these colleges started really jacking up tuitions, and they built these amazing, wonderful campuses.

Where does responsibility come, though? Because students and graduates are saying, hey, we're the victims here. So how do we find an elegant solution and find a way to actually curb this, so it's more in line with reality and inflation?

NERET: Well, like you said, look, these colleges and universities have spent ridiculous amounts of money on their campuses, on administrators and on useless classes.

And we cover a lot of that at the Leadership Institute's Campus Reform. But when you want to talk about responsibility, the responsibility lies with the individual. And we're just not seeing that. We're telling the next generation, hey, you can -- you can live the high life, you can live with -- outside of your means, and the government will bail you out.

Look, for me personally -- and I know plenty of other students who are like this -- when I graduated high school, my parents sat me down, and I got into some great out-of-state schools. But my parents said, look, this is what it's going to cost you. This is what you're going to be on the hook for. And, frankly, we don't think it's a good idea.

So I made the financially responsible decision to go to an in-state school, and I'm better off for it. And so we should tell students, look, stay in in-state schools, pursue trade schools. There are plenty of trade jobs opening right now.

And, sometimes, that's much better than taking out thousands of dollars in debt just to go to college.

PAYNE: Yes.

Well, we're told, though, that this whole thing is gumming up the works, that millennials are getting married later, they're forming households later, and that it's hurting everything.

Eduardo, thank you very much. Really appreciate it.

NERET: Thanks for having me.

PAYNE: Hey, folks, Wayne Johnson will get a chance to respond to all this. He will be joining us this Saturday on "Cavuto Live," and he will talk and explain his plan for student debt.

Meanwhile, bosses across America may soon be hearing, take this job and shove it.

We will explain next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: Well, despite near record unemployment, a new survey shows the majority of Americans are not so happy with their jobs.

Grady Trimble has the lowdown on what has workers just simply down -- Grady.

GRADY TRIMBLE, CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Charles.

Well, just about every American who wants a job right now has one, but the authors of a new Gallup survey would say that doesn't mean everyone has the job that they want.

In fact, if you look at the numbers in this survey, most people surveyed say their job is either mediocre or just plain bad. Less than half of the people surveyed say they have a good job.

What the survey found is when it comes to work, people are looking for more than just to make a buck.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TERESA DAVIS, EMPLOYEE: Work-life balance, definitely, of course the pay, and benefits.

QUESTION: Anything else?

DAVIS: Location.

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: You didn't mention pay.

RYAN RIGGS, EMPLOYEE: Yes. That's probably third. Yes, that's probably third. I don't know. I feel like I'm willing to concede some pay if the work-life balance and culture tops it. But that's probably third on the list.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TRIMBLE: And the survey did find money does matter. Higher earners are much more likely to say they have a good job.

Only about a third of people who make less than 24 grand a year like their job. And, interestingly, millennials don't seem too happy with their jobs. Only a quarter of young adults 18 to 24 report having a good job. That number almost doubles for people in their upper 60s.

And, Charles, it's interesting. When we were talking to people outside, both the people we talked to said they like their job. But you should have seen all the people who rush past us when they saw what we were asking on camera.

(LAUGHTER)

PAYNE: I can bet. It's called wanting it all, right?

Thanks a lot, Grady. Appreciate it.

Hey, waiting to leave the office at 5:00? What if I told you that some companies are actually letting their workers check out at 1:00 every day? We report, you might deride.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PAYNE: How'd you like to work for a company half the time and still get paid full-time?

Sounds too good to be true? Well, some companies in Europe are actually trying out a five-hour workday. Now, here's the thing. They're banning the workers from using social media, personal phone calls. They are a no- no during that day.

And some of these companies in America, well, they're starting to take notice. The question, though, is, could that ever really work in this country?

FNC contributor Kat Timpf says, no way. The New York Post's Brooke Rogers says sign her up.

All right, Kat, let me start with you. Five hours, but no social media.

KATHERINE TIMPF, CONTRIBUTOR: Yes.

OK, so five hours, sounds great. But it's five hours in hell.

(LAUGHTER)

TIMPF: OK?

I'm not exaggerating. They say you're just as productive. Yes, because you have your boss breathing down your neck. You have to leave your phone and your backpack? What if there's an emergency, like, your hair looks great and you need to take a desk selfie?

That's a big thing. And what if I think of a good tweet? I can't tweet? You're going to take my Twitter away? Why don't you just kill me?

(LAUGHTER)

PAYNE: I mean, listen, I'm inclined to think Kat is right. I don't think Americans can go five hours without looking at their phones.

BROOKE ROGERS, THE NEW YORK POST: I think, if we really apply ourselves, we can.

PAYNE: Really?

ROGERS: And it's from breakfast to lunch. Go from breakfast to lunch, no social media. You get in, you do your job.

TIMPF: How you decide what you want to eat for lunch without looking at pictures of food options?

ROGERS: Print some off before you go to work. I don't know. You will be fine.

And then you can go home for lunch. You're done by 1:00 p.m.

PAYNE: And there is strict enforcement. I mean, there will be someone breathing down your neck and someone looking over your shoulder.

And they want to make sure you didn't pick -- it was born out of the idea that someone said, you know what, I'm using my phone so much, one of these business owners, and if I just leave it at home, I will be more productive.

ROGERS: And they were.

And actually every study that's been done about this has said that worker productivity increases when there's less time on the clock, and then you get to go home. You get to be with your family. You get to do whatever you want. Then you can post all the tweets you want when you get home.

TIMPF: I love my family. I prefer Candy Crush, honestly. They're great. But you know what? Also, sometimes, you need a break.

I will get writer's block, and then I will Candy Crush it up, and then I'm golden. They're the -- I wouldn't be allowed to do that here. I wouldn't be -- I mean, do they get bathroom breaks? I don't know if they even they get bathroom breaks.

PAYNE: I don't know. That's a good question.

ROGERS: I'm pretty sure they do.

TIMPF: Maybe not.

ROGERS: But once you get home, you can play all the Candy Crush you want, and better work-life balance.

And if you have kids, it helps the child care costs as well.

TIMPF: I don't have kids.

PAYNE: But, see, what's going to happen, though, if you have kids, you're going to go home.

And now you're really jonesing, and you're going to play Candy Crush. Instead of for one to two hours, it's going to be all night. I mean, and they might not even get dinner.

ROGERS: I guess that is a good point. You have to cut off your Candy Crush hours somewhere.

PAYNE: Yes. You have to make up for this at some point.

TIMPF: I just -- I don't know why being on the phone, everyone says it's a bad thing. I have met a lot of people. Many of them, maybe even most, not as interesting as my phone.

PAYNE: Right before this, we went to Grady Trimble, because there was a new poll out showing just how many people were unhappy, even though we have this booming economy.

And it's really even more so -- take a look at this screen -- the 18-to-24- year-olds. Only 26 percent of them are happy.

Now, Brooke, are you really telling me that they would be even happier with a job if they couldn't use their phones?

ROGERS: I think they'd be happier with their job if they had more life outside of their job, if they could go home, start a hobby, see their families, see their friends.

PAYNE: Their hobby is the phone.

(LAUGHTER)

ROGERS: No, but I think there are better hobbies out there.

(CROSSTALK)

PAYNE: I don't disagree. I don't disagree.

ROGERS: The argument is always, put your phone down. So maybe this is the way to do that. You get in, you do your job, you get out, you do whatever you want.

PAYNE: I don't know. I can't remember the last time I have been to a movie or anywhere where I didn't see a bunch, particularly younger people, on their phone.

TIMPF: That's why I don't go.

My phone and I share an unbreakable bond. And I will be doggoned if I will let a movie come between us or whatever they're doing in Europe. They shouldn't do that here. They better not do that here. We won the war. We don't need to follow their terrible ideas anymore.

PAYNE: I don't think it's going to happen. I really don't think it's going to happen.

I believe they will come back. I think it's like another one of these social projects they try every now and then in Europe, and they come back and say, you know what, paying people not to work didn't work.

TIMPF: People are crying at their desks.

PAYNE: It's going to just like one of those social programs.

ROGERS: But you're paying people to work quickly and productively over a course of five hours, and then go do their own thing after work.

And I think that's actually something we should apply in the United States.

PAYNE: If you look at America, and you look at these modern offices, they're designed to work at your pace, and they have got these big lounges, and you go chill out, and then you kick the soccer ball around.

ROGERS: You have cold brew on tap.

PAYNE: Huh?

ROGERS: You have cold brew on tap. Everyone's living at the office, and that's the problem.

PAYNE: Well, I mean, I would live at the office too if I had a foosball table and all this stuff, a skateboard ramp. That's why they are living there.

TIMPF: Mm-hmm. And you should be allowed to do that. I just don't think that it's worth it if -- five hours, you're going to be more miserable.

PAYNE: All right.

TIMPF: I'm anti-miserable.

PAYNE: Well, I'm with Kat on this one. I don't think this is going to work here.

Ladies, thank you both very much.

And that will do it for us.

I want to take one more look at the Big Board. It was relatively flat today, but tomorrow is going to be huge. Already, Amazon is getting absolutely crushed in the after-market.

Make sure you catch me to catch up on the market, FOX Business 2:00 p.m. Eastern on "Making Money."

"The Five" starts right now.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.