This is a rush transcript from "Your World with Neil Cavuto," January 17, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Coach, if you would like, we can take whoever wants to come to the Oval Office. We will take pictures behind the Resolute Desk. It's been there a long time, a lot of presidents, some good, some not so good.


TRUMP: But you got a good one now, even though they're trying to impeach the son of a (EXPLETIVE DELETED). Can you believe that?



NEIL CAVUTO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: President Trump laughing off Democrats' impeachment push, the very same day we are learning the legal dream he's assembled to lead his push back. Welcome, everybody. Happy Friday. I'm Neil Cavuto. And the legal fight is on. Both sides will be spending this weekend fine- tuning their arguments, as Democrats continue to make the case for more witnesses, and the president, well, lathers up on more lawyers. We have got John Roberts at the White House, where the president's tapping some well-known legal minds, and Mike Emanuel on Capitol Hill, where Democrats are hoping to change some Republican minds. We begin with John at the White House. Hey, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Neil, good afternoon to you. The president's legal team is busy. They have got some crucial papers to file over the next three days. The first one will be filed tomorrow with the House. It is basically an answer to the articles of impeachment. I'm told that that response will be -- quote -- "direct and fulsome." The other thing that they are going to file -- and it will be either Sunday or Monday. It's got to be done by Monday. So it could be either day -- is the brief to the Senate that will outline the president's case. According to sources who are working with the president's legal team -- quote -- "The way we frame it in the brief is, if you believe in the separation of powers and believe in Article 2, when the president is operating on foreign policy, he is operating at the zenith of his constitutional power." The president's legal team is now in place. There are seven members of it, though they will not all be in the Senate at the same time, like the House managers will. They will rotate in and out, depending on what legal points are being made at any given time. Two members of the president's legal team who will be there all the time, Pat Cipollone, who is the White House counsel, and Jay Sekulow, who is the president's outside counsel. The people who will rotate in and out, Ken Starr, the former independent counsel during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, of course, he was involved in the impeachment of President Clinton. Alan Dershowitz will also come in to make some constitutional arguments. Robert Ray, the former Whitewater prosecutor, Pam Bondi, the former Florida attorney general, and Jane Raskin, who is not a household name, but was really an integral member of the president's outside counsel team in dealing with the Mueller investigation. She was the one who was really the go-between between the White House and Mueller and his team. The president is the one on trial, but his legal team plans to put the articles of impeachment on trial, sources telling FOX News that the team will argue: "On their face, they're dangerous, they're unconstitutional. They don't state a violation of law much, less a high crime or misdemeanor. They, on their face, can be rejected," adding, "They are the product of a process we have never seen before in our history, completely violated all notions of fairness, violated due process and violated every historical precedent." And, Neil, as all of this is going on, the president is trying to present an atmosphere of normalcy, meeting this morning with the LSU Tigers, the winners of the college football championships. He's off to a fund-raiser tonight down at Mar-a-Lago. And then, on Monday night, he's still planning to head to the World Economic Forum in Davos. So he will be there in Switzerland as the trial, which the Democrats hope will remove him from office, will get under way, but the president saying: I'm doing the nation's work. I'm doing the work on behalf of the nation. The Democrats can do what they want. I'm not going to give legitimacy to that process by changing my plans -- Neil.

CAVUTO: John, real quickly, there's been some confusion on Dershowitz's role on the legal team. Can you clarify that?

ROBERTS: Dershowitz is now saying he's not a -- quote -- "full-fledged member of the team." I mean, neither he nor Starr nor Robert Ray are -- quote -- "full fledged members of the team." They're being brought in to make specific legal arguments. And it is true that Dershowitz will come in for a time, present a constitutional argument against the process that's going on, and then he will head back up to Cambridge, I would imagine. So to call him a full-fledged member of the team is probably incorrect. But will he be part of the team presenting the case on behalf of the president? Absolutely.

CAVUTO: Got it, my friend. Thank you very, very much, John Roberts. Great job, as always. Well, it's a good thing we are live on weekends, because both Republicans and Democrats will be working this weekend. Now, ahead of my 10:00 a.m. show tomorrow, what we're learning Democrats will be doing to prepare for the impeachment trial start on Tuesday. And with more on that, Mike Emanuel on Capitol Hill. Hey, Mike.

MIKE EMANUEL, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Neil, good afternoon. This promises to be a very busy weekend of preparation for the attorneys and House Democrats who will argue this case. Chief Justice John Roberts has been sworn in, as have all 100 senators, ahead of a critical day on Tuesday. That's when they should get to the substance of this impeachment case. Clearly, the stakes are incredibly high. But a House Intelligence Republican says senators will likely find House Democrats failed to deliver.


REP. MICHAEL TURNER (R-OH): I think they will come to the same conclusion that certainly we did on the Republican side of the House, which is, you -- they don't allege a crime, which the Constitution requires. Abuse of power would be an insufficient basis for impeachment. And, secondly, fact-based, it's all a hearsay case.


EMANUEL: We now know the lineup, of course, for President Trump's legal team. A longtime Democratic senator took this swipe at one of the attorneys:


SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D-VT): I see Kenneth Starr, a man who pushed the weakest impeachment case certainly in my lifetime, and now he's up here to defend the strongest impeachment case in my lifetime. That's their -- that's their choice. But it's a weird choice.


EMANUEL: There may be some fireworks right off the bat on Tuesday, as Republicans seek to pass a rules package governing the trial, and Democrats try to force votes on witnesses at some point in the case -- Neil.

CAVUTO: Mike Emanuel at the Capitol, thank you very much, my friend.

EMANUEL: You bet.

CAVUTO: Well, it's not exactly Lincoln's team of rivals. Think more like an Avengers A-team of just superhero lawyers? They got talent, they got an ego, but can they make big-time effective together? We have got our own legal dream team to weigh in. With me now, constitutional scholar, the president of Duquesne University, Ken Gormley, and former federal prosecutor Katie Cherkasky. Welcome to both of you. Ken, if you can help me first on having a team like this work, obviously, different angles, different approaches, some on the Constitution, others on the specific charges themselves. How will it all gel, you think?

KEN GORMLEY, PRESIDENT, DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY: Well, Neil, I know most of these folks. They are really impressive lawyers. And they have different skills in many ways. One of the things I think that, having written a book dealing with the Clinton impeachment and everything that led up to it, I know that I spent a lot of time with Ken Starr. Don't forget, he was solicitor general of the United States, one of the most prominent appellate advocates, who knows a lot of people in that Senate jury, so to speak, also knows Chief Justice John Roberts extremely well. Roberts was a young person in the Justice Department when Ken Starr was there. So you have firepower in a lot of direction. These are extremely talented lawyers.

CAVUTO: So, Katie, who is in charge when something like this happens, or do they all bifurcate?

KATIE CHERKASKY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, I'm a defense attorney. I have worked with many defense teams. And there are always egos involved and that's always going to be something to consider. It's not just the attorneys, but it's really the client too who makes some of the calls about who's doing what. In this sort of case, there's a lot of angles they have to attack from. They have to talk about the constitutional angle of this impeachment, and then they have to deal with the specific facts and argue that. So I think that Mr. Dershowitz obviously, from an academic perspective, has a great role. But for leading a huge legal team, Ken Starr has immense experience with that.

CAVUTO: You know, that experience, back to your point, Ken Gormley, is what will be -- seems to be an important focus for the Trump administration, that the constitutional basis for this impeachment is faulty, right? That's what they're really going to focus on.

GORMLEY: Yes, that's going to be a big argument. And, certainly, Neil, when it comes to the issue of witnesses, there are, as I wrote in my Politico piece yesterday, separation of powers issues abounding there. And I'm sure that that whole team -- and Jay Sekulow is a first-rate lawyer as well. And, frankly, I would think that the White House folks are going to take the lead in this. They're going to zero in on the constitutional issues that make it very difficult to show that this was an impeachable offense. Very similar, I was sitting here thinking, to the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, where the argument was, you can say all you want that Violating the Tenure of Office Act was a violation, a legal violation, but that act is unconstitutional. I think you're going to see very similar arguments.

CAVUTO: You know, Katie, I wonder, on the Democratic side, that they will have their own legal heft. And it's a little different on their approach. But can you have too many lawyers?

CHERKASKY: Sure. I think that you can run into issues with division of labor and with who's in what lane. But, in this case, I think that they probably have vast experience to deal with this sort of thing, and hopefully will get it together, because they have a busy weekend ahead of them to get brief in. So, yes, you can have too many lawyers. We will see what happens here. I think they probably have a very, very strong team at this point.

CAVUTO: And that wasn't at all, to you as well, and both of you, that there are plenty of fine lawyers out there. We're not saying anything nasty about lawyers. But I want to thank you both very, very much. Have a great weekend.


CAVUTO: Well, do any of you remember that missile strike that Iran launched against bases in Iraq that supposedly didn't hurt any Americans? Wrong. It did hurt Americans. The story you're not hearing that you should be hearing -- and you will -- after this.


CAVUTO: Iran's supreme leader blasting the president as a clown, and pretty that missile attack on coalition bases in Iraq. Now we're learning that that attack left at least 11 American troops injured, this after the Defense Department initially reported there were no such casualties in those attacks. To retired Colonel Bob Maginnis on what happens right now. Colonel, apparently, there were injuries. We don't know how severe, but what do you to make of that update?

LT. COL. BOB MAGINNIS (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Well, we sent them off to Germany and Kuwait to have them assessed about brain injury, because of the overpressure that you often get from the incoming rockets. Now, what this tells us, though, is that perhaps, as General Milley, the chairman of Joint Chiefs, said just yesterday, that they did intend to kill us, they intended to destroy our equipment in Al Asad and Irbil. And that doesn't surprise me, given the preparation they were obviously having with their air defense systems that ultimately brought down the Ukrainian jetliner. So, that, plus what happened today with the ayatollah, this is a very serious, I would argue, escalation in that situation.

CAVUTO: You know, I was thinking the same thing, but your expertise gives it a lot more clout, because I don't think they were pulling their punches. And, as you pointed out, a couple of different ways to bring down this passenger jet clearly illustrated that. So, by extension, it shows that they're still very serious. And I'm wondering whether our thinking that maybe this is all wrapped up and that they're done with the response is a bit premature. What do you think?

MAGINNIS: They are not wrapped up. They're ready for war. If you listened to the ayatollah today, Neil, and you would have gotten some very clear messages. This was carefully choreographed. You had giant pictures of Soleimani, the man we killed in Baghdad. You had soldiers wearing head scarfs that read, in Arabic, "God is great." That's a message not for Farsi-speaking Iranians, but for the entire Middle East. You had on the front row the former prime minister and also the current prime minister, Rouhani. You had the IRGC leaders on the front row, to include the Aerospace Forces commander that was in charge of downing that F -- that airliner. So, these are very strategic settings. Now, what did he say? He said things that are very worrisome, and his audience was the Shia militia, the many tens of thousands that are all over the Middle East and ready for his order. But he called for strategic patience. He called the president a clown, but he also recognized that time is not right now for us to strike. They will strike, and they will strike hard. But it could be months. It could perhaps be as much as a year.

CAVUTO: You know, I'm wondering too how that plays to a domestic audience that used to respond almost in a Pavlovian way to the United States being the great Satan. They could take people's attention away from economic troubles at home. Certainly, Ayatollah Khamenei, during the whole hostage crisis, was effective at doing that. These days, I don't see it quite as effective. But maybe the leadership doesn't care. It's a distraction, and they're going to push it.

MAGINNIS: Well, the economic sanctions President Trump put on there are having a major effect. And President Rouhani made it very clear the other day. And they are about half of what they were in their reserve cash in the last couple of years. Now, but what people don't understand, Neil, is that they skim off the top of all their proxies around the world, whether it's Hezbollah in Central and South America, or it's throughout the Middle East. They are taking all sorts of income. So this is under the table, but it's significant. And ,of course, we will brag that their economy has shrunk 7 percent over the last year. That won't stop these people. They're clearly theologically bent on the destruction of not only their enemies, death to America, they will say, but also Israel. And they will do everything they can to dominate the Middle East. We must take them seriously.

CAVUTO: Colonel, thank you. You make a compelling argument for us to do just that. Thank you, sir.

MAGINNIS: Thank you Neil.

CAVUTO: Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi says she simply doesn't trust Attorney General William Barr. He is not the first attorney general Democrats, let's say, have had issues with.



REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): If somebody like Parnas came forward, and there was evidence, there was reason to believe that there was -- some of that was factual, there would be a special prosecutor appointed. Does anybody think that the rogue attorney general is going to support a -- appoint a special prosecutor? No, because he's implicated in all of this.


CAVUTO: All right, you might want to put Nancy Pelosi down as a maybe on the attorney general, Bill Barr. It is not the first attorney general the Trump administration has gotten that kind of reaction from Congress. Take a look.


REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Can you say right now, Mr. President, Bob Mueller is honest and not conflicted?

MATTHEW WHITAKER, FORMER ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Congressman, I'm not a puppet to repeat what you're saying.

SWALWELL: Are you able to say it, or do you not believe it?

WHITAKER: I have answered -- I have answered your question as to what I believe about the special counsel. I stand by my prior statement.

SWALWELL: Can you say it to the president, though?

WHITAKER: Congressman, I am not here to be a puppet to repeat terms and words that you say that I should say.


CAVUTO: All right, that man is with us right now, former acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker. Very good to have you back with us.

WHITAKER: That was a fun day.

CAVUTO: This continues -- I bet it was for you.


CAVUTO: It continues a theme, though, that has been pretty consistent among prominent Democrats, that almost anyone representing the president legally or the nation legally is suspect. What do you think?

WHITAKER: I don't think that's the way it actually is. Listen, Mr. Barr, the attorney general of the United States, has not only served honorably in difficult times, but he is clearly not a puppet, as Nancy Pelosi suggested during that same press conference, and has not -- has not gone rogue. He is the one that provided the entire Mueller report to Congress and released as much as he could to the American people, so that they could see everything that Bob Mueller had found as the special counsel. And this idea that someone -- Lev Parnas, remember, is being prosecuted by the Southern District of New York currently. Obviously, the -- a prosecutor is pursuing that case, and there's no need for a special counsel. The -- what the speaker forgets is the Department of Justice has rules and regulations. And the attorney general's following those rules and regulations. And the requirements that trigger a special counsel haven't been met here.

CAVUTO: Do you think, though, that it might do Republicans some good to go ahead and call Democrats' bluff, get someone like a Lev Parnas on the stand, question him about that, question his credibility, reliability? Because many of your colleagues, sir, have said, in these interviews he's conducted, that there are a lot of holes in his argument.

WHITAKER: Yes, so this is going to be very interesting to see the impeachment trial play out and who is brought, if any, for a witness. Remember that both the House and the Senate have committees that can call whoever -- whomever they want to investigate, if Mr. Parnas is -- has relevant information. From what I have heard from Mr. Parnas, he looks like he is willing to sell any conspiracy theory or any what -- hearsay evidence. But as to direct evidence, evidence that would stand up in court or in the jury of public opinion or even in the Senate, I don't think he has brought anything new to the table or suggested that kind of the facts as we know them aren't the facts as they're generally understood currently.

CAVUTO: He's the guy getting all this attention this week, as you know, sir. And I hearken back to Rachel Maddow's interview with him on MSNBC, in which he seemed to implicate a variety of other individuals. I want to see your reaction to this. I apologize. I thought we had that bite. What he was trying to say is...


WHITAKER: So, I thought you were setting me up for some video, so I didn't...

CAVUTO: No, I'm very sorry for that. But it -- he was talking about the vice president at the time not going to Ukraine because they hadn't satisfactory or supposedly the government hadn't satisfactorily said that it was indeed looking for more information, a confirmation of digging up more information on Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, et cetera, and that this followed a pattern, where the administration was putting the pressure to get dirt on the Bidens, what have you. But it -- wouldn't it be an opportunity then for Republicans to say, let's get to the bottom of that, and, in conjunction with that, to get your wish, you got the Bidens to testify, unlikely though that may be?

WHITAKER: Yes. And there was -- there's a long list on both sides, Republicans and Democrats, as to who should testify or who should have testified in the House or who would be preferred in the Senate, if they call witnesses. I think, of all the people that could bring relevant information to bear, Lev Parnas is not one of them. Again, he is currently under indictment and will do and say anything to try to reduce the sentence -- sentence he is facing for unrelated charges.

CAVUTO: Stepping way back from this, the fact that Democrats, to a man or woman, seem to think the president's got to be impeached and the Senate to do its job, Republicans, to a man or woman, seem to be saying just the opposite. So how do you think -- just stepping back as a lawyer, and a pretty good one, how do you think this is all going to be digested when it goes pretty much along partisan lines? It could be a little bit different with those Republicans I know who are open to witnesses, et cetera.


CAVUTO: But, in the end, if it goes simply along party lines, as it did in the House, as it likely will in the Senate, what does that tell us?

WHITAKER: Well, we know the outcome. We just really don't know how we're going to get there or how long it's going to take. But, that being said, is, I think there will be some very interesting votes, where senators are going to have to decide where they come out, not only on the big issue, but the smaller issues, like whether or not witnesses are called. I think, at the end of the day, Mitch McConnell and even ranking member -- the minority leader, Schumer, are going to have to remember that the credibility of the Senate is also on trial here. And the American people want to see that our representatives and our elected officials conduct themselves cordially, professionally, and represent the voters, could, because ultimately, this is about the people, and it's not about the representatives in Washington, D.C.

CAVUTO: Matthew Whitaker, thank you very much. Good seeing you again.

WHITAKER: Thank you. Appreciate it, Neil.

CAVUTO: You know, this back and forth over witnesses really will decide how long this drags on. Why at least a few Democratic presidential candidates might be secretly favoring the Republican approach, no witnesses -- after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)  CAVUTO: Boeing has a new 737 MAX issue to worry about, not the software that supposedly was addressing this, but a new software glitch that could delay ever addressing this.


REP. DEBBIE DINGELL (D-MI): I think that if the Senate wants to have a fair trial, they want to make sure they're looking at all the facts. And if the president is innocent, or he thinks that there's things we didn't see when we were considering this in the House, he should want there to be witnesses.

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): If people play games with the witnesses, and all the sudden we have one side, and we have John Bolton, who has an axe to grind about being fired coming in, but we don't let the president call witnesses he wishes to call, I think all hell's going to break loose. And I think the Republican electorate will boot out any of these people who allow this to be a one-sided episode.


CAVUTO: Here they go again. Democrats and Republicans are still squaring off over witnesses, just as the Senate impeachment trial is set to resume next week. We're going to be getting into this tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. on "Cavuto Live." We will be talking to, among others, Democratic presidential candidate Senator Michael Bennet, who will serve as one of the jurors, and Arkansas Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson. You might recall he served as an impeachment manager during Bill Clinton's saga in the United States Senate. RealClearPolitics' A.B. Stoddard with us right now, FOX News political analyst Gianno Caldwell, and Democratic strategist Robert Patillo. Robert, end it with you. Let me begin with you, then, on the notion that Democrats say witnesses are important right now, that it would be in Republicans' best interests to have them. Republicans counter, then if you're up for that, we're up for getting some names that you might not like here. Where do you think is going?


ROBERT PATILLO, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I think Republicans are barking up the wrong tree on that. In the South, we have a saying, an even swap ain't no swindle. Let's understand that Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, the whistle-blower would all not be germane to the issues at hand. Whether or not the president violated the empowerment, as the GAO said, whether or not he violated federal law by requesting the assistance of a foreign national in relation to a U.S. election, whether or not he violated Congress' power to be a co-equal branch of government and having the ability to investigate and to subpoena witnesses. Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, the whistle-blower have nothing to do with that. So I think Joe Biden should take that bet and say that he should show up.

CAVUTO: Well, aren't Joe and Hunter Biden the reason why the president made the call he did?


CAVUTO: If you even want to cynically say that he did so to go after Joe Biden?

PATILLO: But he didn't have the constitutional power to say that. That's what the GAO just said this week, that the empowerment act says that the president has the right to veto legislation or veto appropriations, not to change it and add his own appropriations to that. And that's what he has already confessed to have done. So this idea of calling in non-germane...


PATILLO: ... witnesses like the witnesses has nothing do with it.


CAVUTO: Just to be clear, he has not confessed to withholding aid to extract a political concession.


CAVUTO: But, leaving that, Gianno, the one thing I just want to understand is, where does this go? Because Republicans have rightly said, we go down that avenue, we're going to want witnesses too. Now they might not get and probably will never get Joe Biden and/or Hunter Biden, but they're going to start demanding some of their own, right, and then where does this go?

GIANNO CALDWELL, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: What, you know what? I think the reason Mitch McConnell didn't want any witnesses to begin with, because the House had called a number of witnesses, so we have already heard from a number of people on this particular issue. I -- unlike some of my Republican friends, I believe that there should be witnesses called. I think that, as Ted Cruz said, maybe it's a one-for-one, one you call one, we call one. At the end of the day, beyond being a conservative or being somebody who may support the president or not, I think it's important for there to be fairness. We are talking about a presidential impeachment trial here. And for those -- for many of those folks who've used this as a political weapon, because I don't think what the president did was impeachable, although I think he shouldn't have done it, it wasn't wise, I think that we need to have fairness, and there needs to be a need for a trial with everything, all the cards on the table, so we can make sure that there's nothing -- nothing problematic that's coming out of here where someone can declare that this was just a political act, if you will.

CAVUTO: And then you woke up and realized how ridiculous that was. A.B., I don't mean to be cynical or even slap-happy about this, but I'm just wondering. This is going to be a fairly quick affair, especially if they don't have witnesses, so some say as quickly as two weeks. Will it change any minds then? People -- as I have raised this with Republicans and Democrats, if you don't like to president, you want him out. If you like the president, you don't want him out. And then -- and it's not going to change. What do you think?

A.B. STODDARD, REALCLEARPOLITICS: I don't think the outcome of the trial that we all know should determine the process. And I think it's a good point on witnesses. Having witnesses makes it look like you put on a fair trial. I think it actually redounds to the benefit of Republicans who are up for reelection in tough races this year to be able to say that they supported a fair and open process. That's why you saw some interesting remarks yesterday, after they all watched Lev Parnas the night before, because they needed the space to be able to say that their minds are open. Senator John Barrasso of leadership, Susan Collins revisiting her statement from the day before.

CAVUTO: So, his comments warrant more follow-up, right? Now, what would you think of that, Gianno?

CALDWELL: In terms of the comments warranting more follow-up?

CAVUTO: Yes, Lev Parnas, to get him up there.

CALDWELL: You know what? At the end of the day, when it comes to bringing in these different witnesses, I think that they should actually have something to do with the process. We certainly -- when it comes to Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, and I hear my colleague say that they didn't have anything to do with it, but the president definitely was looking to investigate something that seemed to be corrupt. I'm from the state of Illinois, where we have had governor after governor and politician after politician go to jail. These individuals had something to do with the process. And I think those are the folks that we need to be calling as witnesses, maybe not Joe Biden, per se, but we need to understand what really did happen, and how this all -- how this all works together, because I think the president should have worked with the attorney general on this.

CAVUTO: So, you're open to those witnesses. And therein lies the rub and the debate. Guys, thank you very, very much. In the meantime, Democrats are pushing four witnesses. Investors, well, they're just pushing stocks to new records. The disconnect that we can connect -- after this.



TRUMP: We just had another all-time high for our stock market just hit. So that will be 149 times in less than three years. That's not bad. Coach, that's good, right?


TRUMP: Steve, that's good. We will take that, coach, right?


CAVUTO: All right, the president making it very clear that he's keeping count of these records. And we had three more today, all the major market averages inching into new record territory, something that's become commonplace, despite all impeachment stuff going on. 32 Advisors founder and CEO Robert Wolf, former big cheese at UBS, well- connected in the financial community, in the Democratic Party as well. Robert, he's saying that, look, this has all happened under me. You want to impeach that, have at it. What do you think?

ROBERT WOLF, FORMER CHAIRMAN, UBS: I think you have to separate the two issues. I don't think impeachment and the markets coincide at all. We can actually chew gum and walk at the same time. Business should not be....


CAVUTO: But if he -- if the markets thought that he really was going to be impeached, would it be different?

WOLF: Yes, the markets would go down, no question about it.


WOLF: But that's not why the markets are up. The markets are up because USMCA passed, we had phase one China, we have Brexit behind us, we have...

CAVUTO: But all of this stuff has been happening throughout these three years. And the president says that's really on him, the regulatory relief, the tax cuts, the improved earnings as a result, all starts, emanates from him. You say?

WOLF: Well, I would say there's no question that he continued from the Obama economic comeback. And I know your viewers are going to start trolling me, but the truth is, that's a fact. I mean, we had incredible...

CAVUTO: They're busy just trolling me.


CAVUTO: But I'd be curious, though, what you make...

WOLF: But I have to give him due. I mean, let's be clear. There's no question the markets have done incredibly well under the president. The facts don't lie. But I don't think that is...

CAVUTO: We have seen wage growth, real wage growth, something that is not over -- off the charts, but it's moving. We have seen job growth that continues, picking up where Barack Obama left it and then some. Are you surprised by that?

WOLF: No, I'm not. We're in a low interest rate environment.

CAVUTO: No, but three years ago, would you have that pictured that recovery that you're quite right was -- had started under Barack Obama picked up on steroids under Donald Trump?

WOLF: I would have probably been less bullish than what the market has done, but I never went bearish, because...

CAVUTO: So, is this market in your eyes -- and you're a very good market read -- is this a rich market to you?

WOLF: It feels expensive to me because of the growth, steady as they come. I mean, we're not in a normal post-recession bull market that usually has 5 percent GDP. We're around 2 percent GDP. And so I get nervous that at 2 percent GDP, and we have price/earning ratio north of 18 times. We're at the toppy end of the market. That being said, the great insurance policy is the Fed. We have low interest rates for the foreseeable future because global growth is slow. You talked about on your other show China growth was slow.

CAVUTO: Right.

WOLF: So I think that, in a global growth, slow growth environment, with low inflation, you're going to see continued low rates. And I think, for the president, that's actually a good insurance policy for him.

CAVUTO: I have talked to a lot of market watchers who are of all political persuasions, Robert, and they always say any one of the Democrats right now gets in, at the very least, they're going to raise taxes, even the least among them, Joe Biden, the least among them, but still a lot. And that's not going to be received well, and markets are going to tank on just that. What do you think?

WOLF: Here's what I would say to everyone across the nation. Taxes are going up. Taxes are going up, irrespective who's the president, because we are in a fiscal situation that we cannot withstand. We're going to have the largest fiscal problem, $326 billion in the first quarter. We're on pace for north of a trillion-dollar fiscal deficit. And it's irresponsible. And the truth is, if you don't...

CAVUTO: So, you don't believe the administration saying it wants to cut taxes again, address this again? You don't think that's going to happen, whether he's reelected or not?

WOLF: I'm sure they do. And they want tax 2.0. But this thing continues to balloon, that it's going to really just cause us to say where are we getting the revenue from?

CAVUTO: So, where are you as an investor, period, though, that it would jar markets if it looked like a Democrat had a good chance to get in?

WOLF: You know, I know that that's what everyone talks about. That's just not accurate, because two of the best markets we have had was under Clinton and under Obama.

CAVUTO: No, I realize that, but that the near-term reaction to this would be?

WOLF: No, I would just say that, actually, we have outperformed the stock market under Democrats vs. Republicans. Those are just facts.

CAVUTO: No, you're right about that. You are right.

WOLF: I think the nervousness we have is the one thing if we're in a wartime environment is always taxes, ever since 1776. I can go through everyone. War and taxes align. So, I think, one, hopefully we end this endless war. And, number two, if we can do something with our deficit, then I think actually taxes would remain...


CAVUTO: Never happens. The last one to do it was Bill Clinton, and that was working with Newt Gingrich. We don't do that anymore.

WOLF: We used to have this thing called pay-go, pay as you go.


CAVUTO: Those days are gone. Those days are gone.

WOLF: Those were the good days.

CAVUTO: All right, Robert Wolf, always good seeing you, my friend.

WOLF: Thanks for having me on.

CAVUTO: Thank you very much. In the meantime, Spotify now making playlists for animals. The animals are delighted.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: U.S. Representatives for 12.

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY": One-fifty-third of California House delegation is this Intelligence Committee chairman. His name is Adam Schiff. Back to you, Veronica.



CAVUTO: All right, it got us thinking. It happens sometimes. So if "Jeopardy" brainiacs don't know who the House Intelligence chairman, Adam Schiff, is, does that mean maybe this nations is just not paying attention to impeachment? Let's ask our Gen Hexers, "Your World" audio technician author Dion Baia. We have got Internet radio host Mike Gunzelman, and last, but not least, model Elizabeth Pipko. What do you think, Elizabeth?

ELIZABETH PIPKO, MODEL: Look, this is great. Honestly, everyone that I know is so consumed by impeachment and Russia and everything in between. I'm honestly just jealous that there are people out there that are not in this bubble, and I want to be like them moving forward, honestly.

DION BAIA, FOX NEWS AUDIO TECHNICIAN: Yes, especially if you live in this world where you're seeing it every day.

PIPKO: Exactly.

BAIA: I mean, what he's going on "SpongeBob," he's going on "Sesame Street" to tell everybody about it, it is surprising and refreshing when you see people who are not just so engrossed in this that...

CAVUTO: Who is going on "SpongeBob?" Adam Schiff?

BAIA: Adam Schiff. Yes, you didn't see that episode?


BAIA: Explained to the kids what impeachment was and everything like that.


MIKE GUNZELMAN, INTERNET RADIO HOST: I just love this because this is a humbling and a burst in the political, as you mentioned, bubble that these politicians live in. You know he's upset. And anything -- if Schiffy is upset, then that's good for me. You know what I mean?


CAVUTO: I think they would have the same reaction if it were Devin Nunes, right? I mean, they're maybe not into it.

GUNZELMAN: And that's telling, though. If the three smartest people on "Jeopardy" ever don't know, then maybe people don't really care too much about this.

CAVUTO: We will see. In the meantime, 2020 Democrat Tulsi Gabbard, who a lot of people do know - - I don't know if she could score better in a "Jeopardy" contest -- winning a pushup contest at a New Hampshire town hall. Do candidates benefit from these kinds of viral Internet moments?

GUNZELMAN: No, no. This is so frustrating. It is so desperate and just -- it's just attention-seeking. It's the ultimate OK, boomer, moment from some of these older politicians. It's not working.

CAVUTO: She's not old.

GUNZELMAN: No, but it didn't work. It's pathetic.


CAVUTO: This guy challenged her, and she took him up on that.

GUNZELMAN: No, it's cringe-worthy.


BAIA: Remember, wasn't that -- happened with Dukakis with George Sr., when he put the helmet, went into the tank. And everyone was like, whoa. Remember -- or, successfully, Jack Palance at the Oscars...


CAVUTO: Would it have been better if he were doing pushups in the tank?


BAIA: If they went to the Coney Island and did the hot dog eating contest. How many hot dogs how all the candidates can eat at one time.


CAVUTO: They all do this sort of thing, where Joe Biden says I can do X number of pushups. I can take the president out behind the school and beat him up and all. I don't know what value that that has.

PIPKO: It's the beer test, right? Americans vote for the person they want to have a beer with. And some of the candidates are better at appearing likable than others. I think Tulsi does a good job compared to some people she's up there with.

BAIA: Sometimes, it just looks surreal.

GUNZELMAN: But speaking of beer, remember Elizabeth Warren, she cracked a beer for her announcement. That was cringe-worthy.


CAVUTO: You know what I admire? You guys are too young for this. Actually, I'm too young for it. But the films of the day when John Kennedy visited West Virginia and the coal mine in his suit.

BAIA: Sure.

CAVUTO: And I admired that, because he had the shirt, tie, whole thing. He's going underground. But he's talking to coal miners. And they knew he was rich. He wasn't going to pretend to be anything but.

BAIA: Yes, but that's just him visiting like potential voters, as opposed to these are gimmicks.

CAVUTO: But I just think that that says a lot. I don't know. Just embrace who you are.

GUNZELMAN: Yes, just be real.


GUNZELMAN: Just be like Gunz.

CAVUTO: Yes, just like Gunz.


CAVUTO: Meanwhile, the music streaming service Spotify is now making playlists for your pets. Would you see this, use any of this service? It apparently calms them down.

BAIA: Sure, I would use this. Yes, I have my little animals that we leave the TV on when we leave just so that they have some interaction or they hear stuff, so they don't get scared.


CAVUTO: What do you keep it on?

BAIA: "Your World With Neil Cavuto."




GUNZELMAN: But it's true, 70 percent of pet owners play music simply for their pets. So, I mean, listen, if it makes them feel better, or they feel like there's somebody alone with them, sure, why not? It's supposed to help with their - - calm them down and relieve their stress.

CAVUTO: I can see that. Apparently, they respond well to jazz.


CAVUTO: Classical music.


BAIA: It's a nice environment.

GUNZELMAN: It's better than "Who Let the Dogs Out." You know what I mean?

CAVUTO: I could see that, though.

PIPKO: I just having my mom's listening right now, or, if she is, asking my dog what he likes and making sure...


BAIA: Some Metallica or some metal.

CAVUTO: ExactlyrMDNM_. "Three Dog Night."


GUNZELMAN: You are hip. You are hip, my friend.


CAVUTO: Basic cable.


CAVUTO: Middle age and major misery. According to a new survey, when you hit 47, you're kind of at the peak of unhappiness. That is what it is for adults. It gets better from there. But at 47, you are just on the cusp of, what does it all mean? Are you surprised? None of you are even near that. Neither am I.


BAIA: So discouraging that we still have that way to go. We're so unhappy. We still go on that...

CAVUTO: I wonder what it is about that age.

PIPKO: I thought I was at my peak of misery at like 16. So, this is just bad news for me. It's all downhill.

GUNZELMAN: It's true. And if you can survive high school, I feel like you can get through anything.


PIPKO: Apparently not.


BAIA: If it's only going to get worse, I don't know what to do, just drown my sorrows in alcohol.

CAVUTO: Well, apparently, it's based on the idea that that is some sort of a point in your life where you go, this is as far as I think I'm going to go, and then you assess, is this the best it can be? And then you reassess it and the next day, the next day, apparently, you're saying, OK.


BAIA: You just get used to like, all right, it ain't getting better than this.


BAIA: Hey, honey. Put mom on. I'm not coming home.



CAVUTO: I found that kind of weird. All right. Anyway, this might explain the next story, because it looks like some folks might be drowning their misery in alcohol. There's a study that finds that Americans are drinking more now than right before prohibition was enacted. That's weird.

GUNZELMAN: No, I mean, I believe it. Have you gone outside? I mean, society is falling apart these days.

BAIA: And there's more people.

GUNZELMAN: And also, listen, here's the thing about drinking. You can drink, when you're happy, you're sad, you're poor. There's always an excuse to drink.


GUNZELMAN: So why not?

CAVUTO: That could explain a lot.

BAIA: Exactly. It steadies me, Neil.


CAVUTO: But it just doesn't jibe with everything you see. I think sometimes we -- I don't know how reliable this study -- do you buy the fact that people are drinking like crazy now? My consumption is way down.

PIPKO: If you turn on any television, you will understand why everyone's drinking. I mean, it's 24/7 like the world's going to end. That's what everyone talks about. I would be...


CAVUTO: Do you get FBN, by the way, because...

BAIA: If you don't, you should demand it.

CAVUTO: If you don't, you should sober up and demand it.


BAIA: But, I think -- in all seriousness, I can see that. There's a lot of pressure nowadays.


CAVUTO: You could see recommending FBN?


BAIA: I can clearly see recommending FBN. If you don't get it, you should demand it. But I think nowadays people will -- it's just -- it's so miserable, there's nothing -- you turn on, Trump's making a great deal with China, and then the other side is impeachment at the same time.


GUNZELMAN: Just drink tonight, everybody. Let's get through this together.


CAVUTO: All right, we will have more after this.


CAVUTO: Two years ago, we started a concept that we might get a jump on the Sunday crowd by preparing you for Monday by doing the same thing on Saturday. It continues now, as we kick off our third year. Colorado Democratic Senator Michael Bennet. We have got Louisiana Republican Bill Cassidy. Also, ahead of the impeachment trial, Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, the former impeachment manager during the Clinton trial, and one of the key players in that trade deal with China and how he sees things sorting out, Peter Navarro. All coming up 10:00 a.m. Eastern time right here on FOX News. Here comes "The Five."

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.