Netflix looks to raise prices by 2 dollars

This is a rush transcript from "Your World," January 15, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch-hunt against anybody?

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE: I don't believe Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch-hunt.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY, D-VT.: Criticized the Russian probe?

BARR: How have I criticized the Russian probe?

LEAHY: You don't have any criticism of the Russian probe?

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN, D-ILL., MINORITY WHIP: What would be your breaking point? When would you pick up and leave?

BARR: I will not be bullied into do anything I think is wrong by anybody, whether it be editorial boards or Congress or the president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEIL CAVUTO, HOST: Welcome, everybody. I'm Neil Cavuto. And this is "Your World."

William Barr seems to be on his way to heading the Justice Department. It is a little too early to make a snap judgment, but by almost everyone's judgment watching these hearings closely, he is comporting himself well, very well, by challenging the authority of those who ultimately picked him, including the president of the United States and others in the administration, even Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill who he says he will hear out, but not necessarily cater to.

Let's get the latest on all of this with Catherine Herridge following the developments on Capitol Hill -- hey, Catherine.

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, CHIEF INTELLIGENCE CORRESPONDENT: Thank you, Neil.

And good afternoon. We are nearly seven hours into the confirmation hearings. And one of the main themes from William Barr is that he is committed to protecting the Russia special counsel investigation. He says any final report, he wants to make public to the fullest extent possible. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARR: The country needs a credible resolution to these issues. And if confirmed, I will not permit partisan politics, personal interests or any other improper consideration to interfere with this or any other investigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HERRIDGE: Barr also testified that he has known the head of the special counsel, Robert Mueller, for three decades. And he says that he's a very honorable person and will give the president a fair shake in any final report.

He was also asked whether he saw any conditions under which he would terminate the special counsel investigation. Here's that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEAHY: Are there any circumstances that would cause you to terminate investigation or any component of it or significantly restrict its funding?

BARR: Under the regulations, Bob Mueller could only be terminated for good cause. And I -- frankly, it's unimaginable to me that Bob would ever do anything that gave rise to good cause.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HERRIDGE: Democrats pressed William Barr on a memo that he sent last summer to the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, where he said, based on media reports, that he felt any obstruction case targeting the president for the firing of FBI Director James Comey was not on sound legal footing.

Here's that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, D-CALIF.: If the president orders the attorney general to halt a criminal investigation for personal reasons, would that be prohibited under your theory?

BARR: I think it would be -- I think it would be a breach of the president's duties to faithfully execute the law. It would be an abuse of power.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HERRIDGE: Barr has been attorney general before under George W. Bush 1. And he also said that, at 68, he may be one of the most strongly and qualified candidates because he doesn't need the job and he doesn't necessarily want it at this stage of his life, Neil.

CAVUTO: A good position to be. Gives you a little bit of oomph.

(LAUGHTER)

(CROSSTALK)

HERRIDGE: Yes, for sure.

CAVUTO: That's right. Right. All right.

Catherine Herridge, thank you very, very much.

HERRIDGE: You're welcome.

CAVUTO: William Barr testifying today that he completely agreed with the decision to fire former FBI Director James Comey, something he discussed with me only a couple of days after that firing back in May of 2017. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: Did you believe when you heard some of these reports that what really was irking President Trump was the fact that James Comey did not appear to be loyal? That kept coming up in these reports?

BARR: No, I don't. I -- I -- my own view is that there was concern in the administration, as there has been among a lot of former people who have served in the Department of Justice, Republican and Democrat, that Jim Comey didn't seem to have regard for the traditional limits on the authority of the FBI director and was arrogating to himself powers and authorities of the attorney general.

I think that was the primary concern. And I think that what essentially may have force their hand is his refusal to acknowledge that. And he's free to do that. But, by the same token, I think that the president, we should -- it's understandable that he would want somebody at the FBI who understands his relationship to the Department of Justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: All right, I apologize. That was from 2017, May 2017, only a couple of days after the firing of James Comey.

With us now, the former federal prosecutor Jon Sale.

Jon, he seems very much to be his own man, and he could understand the fire me or Comey back then. But he seems to call them as he sees them. Or am I misinterpreting? What do you think?

JON SALE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No, I think you're not misinterpreting. And I think his confirmation is virtually done.

But when it comes to recusal, when Senator Harris tried to pin him down, he's not recusing himself. I mean, it's quite clear that what Attorney General Sessions went through, you would have to be on Mars not to realize that the president is not going to appoint somebody or nominate somebody who thinks is going to recuse.

But I thought -- the way I sum up...

CAVUTO: Although he did support at the time Sessions recusing himself, right? But this is a different circumstance.

SALE: Well, no, the president didn't.

CAVUTO: Right.

SALE: I'm talking about President Trump did not support it. And what he put Sessions through -- so he's not going to take this job -- I will give you a quick historical parallel.

I was part of the Watergate prosecution. And when Leon Jaworski decided to take the job, he was the same age as Bill Barr. And he was a very powerful lawyer. And he said, why would I want to take a job like this? And he said, well, I have had a great life. I have got nowhere to go. I have no political ambitions. So I'm going to come in and do it right.

That's very similar to what Mr. Barr did. And I wouldn't be surprised if the folks who helped him prepare took a chapter out of Mr. Jaworski's book.

CAVUTO: It's interesting. You go back in time, and to Comey recusing himself -- I'm talking about James Comey himself -- Jeff Sessions at the time recusing himself.

SALE: That's right.

CAVUTO: You had Barr saying he accepted that, agreed with that, but he did go on, in talking about this investigation, the Mueller investigation, he said, he's a good friend of mine and all that.

And he came in thinking that the investigation itself was fatally misconceived, but that he would wait for its results, and apparently do nothing to thwart the release of those results. What did you make of that?

SALE: Well, he's left himself a lot of wiggle room.

On something like that, he says, well, he didn't have the facts. He was a private citizen. It was more of a theoretical law review article type of a memo. And he said -- but he kept saying he accepts, which is correct, the ultimate responsibility to make all decisions.

So with saying all the right words, it's not a witch-hunt, no political interference, I'm not going to be bullied, we have to take him at his word. The way I sum up Bill Barr's testimony, two ways. First of all, I say it's a home run. And, secondly, I say what he is saying is, trust me.

And I think he is earning the trust of the Judiciary Committee and more importantly of the American people.

CAVUTO: So, Jon, when he says that Mueller should be allowed to complete his work, complete his investigation, you take him at face value that he would, that these fears that some have on Capitol Hill that the president will do something to derail it or even try to fire Mueller, that is something this guy would never countenance, right?

SALE: Well, again, let's go back to Elliot Richardson.

Elliot Richardson promised, pledged to the Judiciary Committee that Archibald Cox would have free independence.

CAVUTO: Right.

SALE: It turned out he didn't. And that was a political firestorm for the White House.

So I think they have learned again from history. He will let him finish his investigation. But then what? What is he going to do with the report? Well, we don't know. That's up to him.

And let me quickly say, in fairness to the president, the president has a right, through his counsel, to have his counsel see the report to determine if they're going to assert any privilege, like executive privilege, national security.

And then what? Then where do we go? So we really don't know what's going to happen with the report, despite the buzzwords like transparency -- transparency, disclosure. We really don't know. And it's going to be up to the Barr.

CAVUTO: All right, so once we do have a report out, I mean, a lot of American taxpayers will say, well, we have footed more than $25 million for this so far. We have a right to know what's in it.

Is there any possibility, from any of the comments you heard from Mr. Barr today, that would indicate he might hold a great deal back?

SALE: I think he could hold it back on a legitimate basis.

And another thing, we're all expecting the report to be a huge expose, like Ken Starr's report was. It could be very simple. All he's required to do in his report is to say who he is prosecuting, why, and who he is not prosecuting and why.

And on the latter, it may be unfair to people he's not prosecuting to have evidence out there that would defame their reputation.

CAVUTO: And regardless of what's in that, those on Capitol Hill would be aware enough to whether it's a big deal or not, let's say Democrats in the House, to seize on it and begin hearings, right?

SALE: Well, one way or another, it will be leaked, I mean, because anyone who's lived or worked in Washington knows that.

CAVUTO: Right. Right.

All right, that's news to me, Jon.

No, seriously, thank you very much, my friend. Very good seeing you. SALE: Well, thanks. Thanks for having me, Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, Jon.

In the meantime, we are monitoring these hearings as they continue here, back and forth here.

But let you know there is another big development we followed. And Shep was kind of leading you through it, the failure right now on the second attempt at the apple to try to get this Brexit thing finally done more than 18 months after Brits by a 52 to 48 percent margin voted to separate themselves from the rest of the European Union.

They simply cannot get it done. And for Theresa May, the prime minister, she put her reputation and credibility on the line to get it done, and an overwhelming defeat. A majority in her own party, to say nothing of the opposition Labor Party, ultimately shelved the deal. There will be a confidence vote on her tomorrow.

Not a given that she is out of there. But it is limping along. Britain is limping along, and there are a number of alternatives being discussed.

But I wanted to show you a little bit about our own markets. Whatever ails her majesty's kingdom have been helping, well, our markets, the belief being that if Europe is falling apart, and Britain is falling apart, and Britain can't join a club, and ultimately leave a club that isn't really firing on all cylinders, we, by comparison, look pretty good.

So this is the British way of saying, you're doing jolly well because we're not.

More after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The ayes to the right 202. The ayes to the right 202. The no's -- order!

The ayes to the right 202. The no's to the left 432. So the no's have it. The no's have it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: Yes, the no's have it.

Did you get a load of that, 432 to 202? This wasn't only shot down, an attempt to get the Brexit deal that was first voted on two-and-a-half years ago done, now itself done. And what happens after this?

Britain trying to get itself separated from the rest of the European Union.

Well, Ashley Webster, good luck with that. What happens now?

(LAUGHTER)

ASHLEY WEBSTER, CORRESPONDENT: Well, listen, don't forget, Neil, that the prime minister delayed this vote five weeks ago because she knew that she would suffer a humiliating defeat.

Well, guess what? It's five weeks later. And what happened? She suffered an extremely humiliating defeat. So, really, she just wasted five weeks of potential negotiating time because Brexit is now 73 days away.

And I just want to reemphasize those numbers again, no's 432, yes-votes 202, a 230-vote margin. Twice as many people voted no than yes, the worst result for a sitting government in a parliamentary vote since 1924 in modern U.K. political history, extremely humiliating for the prime minister.

Of course, the opposition Labor Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, jumped all over it and said now is the time to change the government. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEREMY CORBYN, LEADER, LABOR PARTY: And I'm pleased -- I'm pleased that motion will be debated tomorrow, so this house can give its verdict on the sheer incompetence of this government and pass that motion of no confidence in the government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WEBSTER: I have never seen Jeremy Corbyn so fired up. He was practically leaping out of his seat.

But, bottom line, Neil, is, I don't think he has the votes to unseat the government or at least win a vote of no confidence. It's purely symbolic.

And that leaves us pretty much back where we started, the prime minister with a deal that she can't sell to anyone. And she's going to have three days now to come up with something better, and the E.U. sitting over in Brussels saying, hey, we gave you the best we got.

It's a very, very -- political paralysis, Brexit paralysis, whatever you want to call it, but it's not good. And as regards to the markets, they don't like uncertainty. And this just gets worse and worse.

CAVUTO: Yes, and in this neck of the woods, that's a problem, but not in our neck of the woods, right? There does seem to be a prevailing wind among some that what ails Britain and much of Europe actually helps the United States as sort of like a haven in a storm.

What do you -- what are people telling you?

WEBSTER: I think that's right.

We know that China's slowing down. The E.U. can't get its act together. And the U.K. in Brexit paralysis. Where does the money go? Which economy out there seems to be humming along just fine? Well, it's the United States.

CAVUTO: All right, my friend, thank you very, very much, Ashley Webster, who just for these reports has been donning a British accent, which has come in very, very handy for these purposes.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: The same with my next guest, Heritage Foundation's Nile Gardiner, actually from Brooklyn, but for the purpose of this segment will be giving us the read from her majesty's kingdom.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: Nile, thank you for your patience, sense of humor there.

NILE GARDINER, FORMER ADVISER TO BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: My pleasure.

CAVUTO: What happens now, my friend? I mean, a lot of Americans are looking at this and say, all right, what's the big deal?

The big deal would be what? That Britain cannot extricate itself from a European Union that seems to be falling apart quite nicely on its own. What's going on?

GARDINER: Yes, I think the big news today clearly is that there's no real support in the House of Commons for Theresa May's very weak-kneed E.U. withdrawal deal.

And so that deal has been shot down in flames here. And I think the best course of action now for the British prime minister is to declare that Britain is going to move forward with a no-deal Brexit on March 29.

I don't see any real alternative to that.

CAVUTO: Why didn't they do the in the very beginning, Nile, and just -- and by now, we would have been able to sort out, I would think, a lot of the issues that keep popping up.

GARDINER: Yes. Actually, that would have been a far better approach.

Theresa May should have kicked off the negotiations with the E.U. saying that Britain is preparing for a new deal. That would have I think guaranteed a far better offer coming from the European Union.

As it is, I think the deal that was offered by the E.U. is a humiliating deal for Great Britain. And rightly I think that Parliament rejected this deal; 118 conservative M.P.s voted against it. I think the prime minister needs to do the decent thing here, which is to declare that she is going to move forward with a no deal, and also to declare that, once Brexit is implemented the end of March, that she will step down, in favor of a new Conservative prime minister, who will lead Britain into the Brexit era.

But I think this is a prime minister who is living on borrowed time in Downing Street. And clearly her support is eroding by the day. We do need to have new strong leadership in Great Britain, leadership that is fully committed to the Brexit process.

And I think a no deal Brexit will be actually a very good solution for Great Britain, under which Britain can negotiate its own free trade agreements across the world, including with the United States. A U.S.-U.K. FTA, I think, would be great for the British economy, great for the American economy as well, and great for economic freedom on the world stage.

So I very much hope that that is the course that the prime minister will take us. I expect tomorrow she's going to win the vote of no confidence in the House of Commons.

And then I think she has to pursue a realistic policy that is going to restore fully British sovereignty and self-determination, which is what the British people...

CAVUTO: All right, we had some problems there.

That what's at stake here -- and this is the ironic position Theresa May finds herself in -- two-and-a-half years ago, while an up-and-comer in her party, she was among those not favoring Britain separating itself from the European Union. She then went gung-ho after the vote, and was ultimately chosen by her party to lead that party after the former prime minister was forced to step down.

The fact of the matter is, this has bedeviled politicians in this country for the 30-some-odd months this battle back and forth has been going on.

I did show you how our stocks are responding to this, the belief thing for the time being -- could be very, very wrong -- that what is ailing them will help us and, in other words, a lot of the money that is nervous abroad will find its way here. Oftentimes, that is wrong. But the knee-jerk response today seems to be just that, that, of course, and better-than- expected earnings, not across the board, but that whatever our problems we are doing better than they are across the pond.

We will keep an eye on it for you.

Meanwhile, we're into the 25th day of this partial government shutdown, and they're trying to do everything they can to get back to business as usual. Good luck with that.

But we are getting word that the IRS is recalling 46,000 workers from furlough to start handing -- handling tax refunds without pay.

Separately, there was a move afoot today on the part of three federal government workers unions to try to make sure that their members who are getting -- forced to show up on the job and not getting paid for it could get paid. A judge slapping that down, saying there is no authority right now as things stand to grant that.

So, TSA, other federal workers who are forced to work without a paycheck must continue doing so, with the understanding being when the government does reopen, whenever that is, then and only then will they get their money.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, they're slapping down over in Britain and we're shutting down, still shut down in the U.S. of A.

Welcome back, everybody.

The scene at the United States Capitol right now, where there is still technically a government shutdown in effect in its 25th day. It'll drag on a while.

The president invited Republicans and Democrats together at the White House to see what they could do to iron out their differences. A few Republicans came, but not all the Democrats, in fact, not one single Democrat here.

What makes that rather unique in this ongoing debate is the president of the United States calls to come over to the White House, and they opt not to take him up on it. That is Democrats.

That's how divided and out polarizing this issue has become.

Let's go to Blake Burman at FOX Business Network at the White House with the very latest.

What happened?

BLAKE BURMAN, CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're told a handful or so of Democrats, Neil, were invited to come over here to have lunch earlier today with President Trump.

As you mentioned, not a single one of them decided to show up here. Steny Hoyer, who is a member of Democratic leadership in the House, suggested just a little while ago that that potentially could have been a mistake, saying if you're invited by the president to come over to the White House, sit down and meet with him, Hoyer says -- quote -- "You ought to go down."

Those congressional Republicans who did sit down and have lunch with the president today were perplexed as well.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RODNEY DAVIS, R-ILL.: How do we find a way to negotiate with Democrats? It's unfortunate. This was supposed to be a bipartisan lunch, but not a single Democrat offered to come here and negotiate how we end this partial shutdown. It's disappointing to me.

REP. SUSAN BROOKS, R-IND.: Come to the table, have a discussion, negotiate issues around border security, negotiate a way to reopen this partial shutdown.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURMAN: At one point today, the president questioned why the Democratic leader in the House continues to draw a paycheck, going on Twitter and writing the following, saying -- quote -- "Why is Nancy Pelosi getting paid, when people who are working are not?"

Pelosi saw that and responded this way -- quote -- "Stop holding the paychecks of 800,000 Americans hostage. There is no reason for them to be suffering right now. Reopen the government. #Trumpshutdown."

Meantime, Neil, on this 25th day of this partial government shutdown, members of the United States Coast Guard for the first time will not be getting paid. They are missing their mid-month paycheck.

And I just got off the phone, Neil, during the commercial break there with an IRS official who told me indeed that some 46,000 workers from the IRS currently on furlough will be -- will be pulled back to handle tax refunds, tax refunds that Americans will be filing for here as we head into tax season.

That is some 60 percent of the IRS work force -- Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, my friend, thank you very, very much.

Well, J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon is warning that the economy could take a hit if this shutdown were to continue and maybe mean no growth at all in the first quarter.

Let's get the read from FOX Business Network's Susan Li and market watcher Lindsey Bell.

No growth at all? Nothing?

SUSAN LI, CORRESPONDENT: No growth. Zero growth.

He said this to reporters before the earnings call this morning. He says someone has said that if this goes on for three months, growth could be zero. He says we just have to deal with that. It's more of a political issue.

Now, he's hedging his bets. But he did sound concerned that if this goes on, it prolongs -- and we have had economists cutting their forecasts -- that this could have a big impact on the U.S. economy.

CAVUTO: Lindsey, if he's right on that, the Federal Reserve doesn't high rates in an environment like this. It was less inclined to, given the recent string of data. What now?

LINDSEY BELL, CFRA INVESTMENT STRATEGIST: Yes.

I mean, I definitely don't think they're going to be hiking rates in this type of environment. And, interestingly enough, their first meeting of the year is at the end of January. And the second day of their meeting is the day that we're supposed to get the first release -- the fourth-quarter GDP, which we most likely will not get, because the Bureau of Economic Analysis is closed.

We're not getting economic data that the Fed needs to assess the economic slowdown that we're expecting has occurred over the last couple months.

CAVUTO: Right. Right.

BELL: So this is really important. Tomorrow's supposed to be -- we're supposed to be getting retail sales, which is a key component of GDP. Not going to get it.

CAVUTO: Yes, there's a lot of data you won't get.

LI: And what about jobs data on February 2, right, the January jobs numbers?

If we -- if you drop the 380,000 furloughed workers, we could see the end of the 99-month record expansion of jobs payrolls.

CAVUTO: But isn't this, guys, like a hurricane? And I don't mean to minimize it. But the damage done is made up for when workers return, et cetera? What do you think?

BELL: Correct. They get back pay.

But the question is, if this is a prolonged shutdown and they're not getting paid for two, three, four months, the question is, you might miss some of that payback period. But the good thing is, you mentioned at the top of the segment, is the IRS is going to be open. That means refunds are going to come.

And usually you don't see this in government shutdowns. So at the end of the month, the IRS will be open. You will be able to file your taxes. And this is the first time we're going to -- people are going to be filing for the new 2018 reform that we got last year.

CAVUTO: Yes, let's see what they do in the high-tax states, how that works out.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: But let me ask you, Susan.

We also see the effect at airports, the nation's major airports, where a number of TSA workers have not shown up.

LI: Yes.

CAVUTO: Some have called it a sick-out in Miami and elsewhere, not to the degree that it's been in prior worker outages.

But what's interesting here is, their union -- and there are three different federal unions that represent them -- petitioned a U.S. judge don't force the issue of working, see if we can get back pay.

LI: Yes.

CAVUTO: The judge slapping it down, essentially saying, I don't have the power to do that.

So they're going to continue working without pay until they get paid.

LI: Yes, and calling in sick. And that's why you're looking at these TSA line. Some are two hours.

Like Atlanta, which is a big hub for Delta, which just announced earnings today, the CEO says it's going to cost them $25 million this month because of the government shutdown.

CAVUTO: What could he base that on, by the way, the Delta CEO? Just...

LI: Not -- basically the federal workers not flying. There isn't as much business being done at this point.

CAVUTO: OK. Got it.

LI: And I would say it must have a speculation, a feedback loop, because if I'm waiting to two, three hours in an airport, do you want to travel? Do you want to take that...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Let me ask you. If this dragged on for months, then what?

BELL: Then there's going to be a major economic impact, for sure.

And the first quarter is usually statistically the weakest of the four quarters in any given year. So this will have a severe impact on the first quarter. And then we will see it continue down the line.

And, look, this economy is starting to lose momentum.

CAVUTO: All right, guys, thank you both very, very much.

Meanwhile, we are keeping a good eye on these hearings going on for William Barr, the president's choice to be his next attorney general.

One of those questioners -- and he was fairly aggressive in his questioning here -- about what -- what the future attorney general, if he gets that far, would do if the president made a demand of him.

Thom Tillis is coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: Been there, done that.

Do you ever think that Bob Mueller (sic), the president's choice to be the next attorney general, is saying, at 68 years old, I don't need this? Comporting himself very well in these confirmation hearings. What is going to happen to Bob (sic)?

After this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: All right, welcome back, everyone.

I misstated in that tease there. I apologize. It's been one of those days.

We're talking about William Barr, who, at 68 years old and a former attorney general in his own right, is probably saying, in his mind, been there, done that, at 68 years old, having gone through this drill, I don't need this.

He's very much proven to be his own man in discussing what he would do as attorney general of the United States, assuming he gets approved for that.

To a fellow who is right in on these discussions and questioning, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, a member the Judiciary Committee.

As things stand now, Senator -- and good to have you. Happy new year.

SEN. THOM TILLIS, R-N.C.: Well, no, you're right. I think he's been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

He's done an extraordinary job of answering all the questions. And in spite of the efforts to try and weave a false narrative, he's bringing people back to the facts. And I think he's done great. He's going to get confirmed.

CAVUTO: All right.

So help me with my impression of some of his remarks, that, even though he's famous for that memo that said the Bob Mueller investigation was totally misconceived, he doesn't want to do anything to Mueller. He wants him to be allowed to complete his investigation, whenever that is.

Did I read that correctly?

TILLIS: Well, you did.

And he was talking about a very narrow interpretation. He wasn't talking about the special counsel investigation writ large. He was -- and he also said repeatedly that he believes that Mueller needs to finish the investigation unimpeded, that it would be a bad idea.

And the one time that a special counsel did get removed, it didn't work out too well. So I think this -- these are all answers that perhaps my colleagues on the other side of the aisle didn't expect. But he's been straight up and done a great job.

CAVUTO: So, is it your impression, Senator, that if a President Trump were to ever tell him, I want you to fire Mueller -- that's what some of the cynical views of some of your Democratic colleagues is, even though the president has never indicated that -- he wouldn't do that?

TILLIS: Oh, I think he made it very clear that, even -- he would -- he would take a look at any for-cause arguments and think it through.

So there's no doubt in my mind that he wants to protect the integrity of this investigation. He wants it completed. He wants to report as much of it to the American people as possible within the law.

But there's no question in my mind he's not going to stand in the way of this investigation. He wants it promptly completed and the American people fully informed.

CAVUTO: How much of the investigation do you think he would release to the public?

TILLIS: I think he's going to release as much as he possibly can.

And what he can't release to the public, he may release to Congress within the rules. But he's made it very clear. It's not like he's going to go in and push the envelope. If the law calls for the disclosure of their information, he's going to disclose it. And I think that's very good.

CAVUTO: Your sense of where this goes, though? He very much is, to your point, Senator, his own man, indicating that he agreed in retrospect to then Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusing himself in this investigation, but he doesn't seem to be in that position or need to be in that position now.

What did you make of that?

TILLIS: Well, I think he's right.

And I think that people that are conjuring up the position that he took in this memo as somehow a basis for recusal, I completely disagree and. You have to be almost dishonest -- at least disingenuous -- to suggest that he should.

He did a great job of explaining that. I dedicated almost half of my time allocation to let him line it out, because some of the people on the other side of the aisle wanted to cut him short. But he had an opportunity to explain exactly what he was after in penning the memo. He only did it himself.

He shared it with a bunch of other people within the Department of Justice. And I think, if people go back and read it objectively, they will see there's no basis for recusal. And he's probably one of the best stewards to make sure that the investigation comes to a successful completion.

CAVUTO: Do you think, Senator, that his views on the presidency and the power of the presidency -- many see that he has a very powerful view of the chief executive -- and that this expansive view of the president's power, the latitude that he has given a president, is something that Democrats who are worried about it should be worried about?

TILLIS: I don't think so.

I think that -- well, first off, he is a part of the administrative branch. He has that unique role as attorney -- will have that unique role as attorney general of having to be at arm's distance, but also be an adviser.

But he's a part of the executive branch. And just like our branch is constantly looking for ways for us to assert our authority, he's a part of the executive branch. And I respect his opinion or motivation to do that.

But I don't think, in any way, I read anything that he saying that is unduly trying to protect this president. The president has to stand on his merits. And I think that he's also trying to protect the Department of Justice and the reputation of the Department of Justice.

CAVUTO: Senator, as the co-chair of this NATO observer group, are you worried about the signals the president might be sending to NATO, and more to the point eventually getting our troops out of Syria, that he is questioning the foundation of that partnership?

TILLIS: Well, I think, like everything the president's done, he's always trying to modernize concepts.

He tried to modernize NAFTA. He's looking and rightfully requesting NATO allies paying their fair share, modernizing, committing to our mutual defense.

I do believe, though, it's very important to send the message said that the NATO alliance is a strong, enduring alliance. It's very, very important for world security.

I also believe that there is a way to get out of Syria, and it's not based on a timeline. We do not want to repeat the mistake of President Obama in Iraq and creating a vacuum. It has to be based on specific conditions.

The safety of our men and women are first among them. But we also have to make sure the safety and security and stability of that region are taken into account. And those kinds of conditions, I believe, need to be worked into the Syria withdrawal.

CAVUTO: We're in the 25th day, sir, of this government shutdown.

Many are blaming it on Republicans and the president. The gap has narrowed a little bit, but it's still in favor of Americans angry at Republicans.

Are you worried?

TILLIS: I'm not right now.

I think that what we have here is an impasse that needs to be solved largely between the president, Speaker Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. When the president asked Speaker Pelosi, if I were to fund the government, will you get into a meaningful discussion with border security priorities, she said no.

That's a failure of leadership on Speaker Pelosi's part. They need to come to the table. And the Senate members, Republicans and Democrats, are prepared to work together. But we have to know that we have an honest broker, negotiator on the other side of Capitol Hill before we can move forward.

CAVUTO: Do you worry, though, that what's happening here means that a lot of other things that you do want to see get done are not going to get done, and this could be a preview to coming attractions and a shutdown that could last, some have been telling me, Senator, into the weeks or months?

TILLIS: Well, Neil, I am worried about that.

There are so many things that we can continue to work on together. We have -- I'm very concerned right now that we're doing virtually nothing and not moving forward on measures that I know we have bipartisan agreement, whether it's the opioid epidemic, whether it's serious progress on border security that go beyond just the wall component, funding our military, making sure that we're getting ready for the next round in the National Defense Authorization Act.

All of these kinds of things are very important, largely bipartisan measures, progress we can make on veterans. So, we need -- we do need to get past it.

And I'm one of these members that's willing to settle for something less than perfect to make progress. But I do believe the president is right to say that a part of this impasse only gets broken up once we figure out a viable strategy for securing the border.

CAVUTO: Or he declares an emergency. Do you think he should?

TILLIS: Right.

Well, I -- I hate the idea of an emergency, because I always worry about that abuse with future presidents. The president is right to say the billions of doses of drugs that are coming across the border every year and the tens of thousands of people that are dying of overdoses is a crisis.

He's also right to say that weapons, human trafficking, there's a humanitarian crisis. There's a -- there's a health crisis.

CAVUTO: All right.

TILLIS: There's a number of things that you could potentially use to justify it. I hope he doesn't go that far.

Let's get Congress, Speaker Pelosi, solve the problem.

CAVUTO: Senator Tillis, it's always a pleasure, sir. Thank you for taking the time.

TILLIS: You too, Neil.

CAVUTO: All right, Senator Thom Tillis.

By the way, among those questioners today were a lot of potential future, well, Democratic presidential candidates. How did that go?

After this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR, D-MINN.: What if a president told a witness not to cooperate with an investigation or hinted at a pardon?

BARR: I would have to know the specific. I would have to know the specific findings.

SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J.: Do you think, just yes or no, that this system of mass incarceration has disproportionately benefited African- American communities, yes or no, sir?

BARR: I think the reduction in crime has over -- since 1992.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF.: Let's imagine it's a judgment call, and the judgment by the career ethics officials in the agency are that you recuse yourself. Under what scenario would you not follow their recommendation?

BARR: If I disagreed with it.

HARRIS: And what would the basis of that disagreement be?

BARR: I came to a different judgment.

HARRIS: On what basis?

BARR: The facts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAVUTO: All right, there was a little bit of a separate, sub-drama to what's going on here in the Senate Judiciary Committee, where so many members -- at least three or four of them -- are considering or reportedly looking at presidential runs of their own

Let's get the read on all that from Democratic counselor to the stars, if you will, Antjuan Seawright.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: We have Jillian Melchior, and we have GOP strategist Ken Chase.

Antjuan, who comported themselves the most presidentially?

ANTJUAN SEAWRIGHT, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: I don't think you saw any separation between the candidates.

I think you saw them really focused on their role as U.S. senators and, most importantly, realizing that, in the minority party on that committee, their job was to simply ask the tough questions, but pump above their -- punch above their political weight.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: So, who did the best job of that?

SEAWRIGHT: I think it was overall a tie.

I don't think there was a real contest. But I was very surprised.

CAVUTO: That's a very wussy answer, you know that?

SEAWRIGHT: No, Neil, let me you what I was surprised at.

I was surprised at the dialogue back and forth between he and Senator Booker when he said, meaning the candidate for attorney general, said that African-Americans and whites were treated fairly under the justice system.

From a Democratic perspective, I think that caught many people's eyes and attention, the back and forth between those two.

CAVUTO: All right, Ken Chase, I still see nothing that -- those lines of questioning notwithstanding -- that would disrupt his getting approved to be the next attorney general of the United States. Your thoughts?

KEN CHASE, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL ANALYST: I completely agree with that

Bill Barr is absolutely going to be approved. He was approved by unanimous Judiciary Committee in 1991 in a voice vote in the Senate.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: These are different times, my friend. These are different times, right?

CHASE: Of course, yes.

CAVUTO: Yes.

CHASE: But even given the partisan environment here, I can't see it being that partisan of a vote here.

This is an audition. I mean, look this is an audition to be the opposition grandstander in chief. There are times during these...

SEAWRIGHT: How?

CHASE: ... confirmation hearings...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: I didn't see a whole lot of grandstanding there.

SEAWRIGHT: No.

CAVUTO: You're right. There were potential -- but, Jillian, I came away thinking that he might have -- that is Barr -- given Democrats some relief to say, well, yes, I will -- I will challenge the president, I will definitely take him on, I will let Mueller finish his investigation.

What did you make of that? Now, that's, again, stuff you would expect to hear out of an attorney general pick, but what did you make of that?

JILLIAN MELCHIOR, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, I thought he came across as very polished.

He's got a tightrope to walk in reassuring Democrats, while also sticking up for what he would do in office. But I was interested to see. I think grandstanding is the right word. We saw a lot of these 2020 candidates raising issues...

SEAWRIGHT: Oh, goodness.

MELCHIOR: ... from mass incarceration, Cory Booker, about systemic racism in the criminal justice system.

We see -- we saw a lot of things that will appeal to that deeply progressive base. And I think that was some of the more interesting moments of the hearing for me.

(CROSSTALK)

SEAWRIGHT: Cavuto, if I could just ask you a question, how....

CAVUTO: I love it when you call me Cavuto, because I feel like it's Madonna.

Yes, go ahead, Seawright.

(LAUGHTER)

SEAWRIGHT: How is asking questions that -- how is asking questions that really matter to the American people grandstanding?

As a young African-American myself...

CAVUTO: Well, they did pull their powder a little bit, didn't they? And that's fine. Maybe, after the whole Kavanaugh mess, that was a good idea.

(CROSSTALK)

MELCHIOR: We didn't have a Spartacus moment.

CAVUTO: Ken Chase, what do you make of that, they that they held their fire a little bit?

CHASE: I think they did hold their fire a little bit.

Here's what was happening over there.

There was -- this is definitely going to be a candidate that's going to be confirmed. And these -- there were some good questions asked, but in this circumstance, they should have held their fire.

SEAWRIGHT: Why?

CHASE: And when you're talking -- when you're talking 90 percent and listening 10 percent, that is grandstanding.

SEAWRIGHT: No, no, no.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: That could also make you a TV anchor, by the way.

Go ahead.

SEAWRIGHT: What was not grandstanding was asking about issues that have -- tremendously impact traditionally communities of color for a very long time, like mass incarceration, like systemic racism, which we know exists in our political system in the country.

CAVUTO: Antjuan, who is going to be your nominee?

SEAWRIGHT: Whoever Cavuto thinks will be the best person to win the nomination.

CAVUTO: No, you're not saying. You have got so many choices.

(LAUGHTER)

CAVUTO: It's going to be a crowded field, right?

SEAWRIGHT: The more the merrier. Competition is good for the marketplace.

CAVUTO: Jillian, did any of the people questioning on this Judiciary Committee, the Democrats, look like presidential timber to you?

MELCHIOR: I think they're definitely trying out for it. It's going to be up to Democrats to decide who's got the most presidential qualifications.

CAVUTO: All right.

Ken, anyone catch your attention? I know where your allegiances are, but anyone say, oh, this one could be a worry?

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: Ken first.

Ken, go ahead.

CHASE: Sure.

I think Senator Klobuchar continues to distinguish yourself. She asked questions down the middle, fair questions. Also, Senator Harris, very good questions.

SEAWRIGHT: So, they weren't grandstanding.

(CROSSTALK)

CHASE: But Senator Booker, very partisan.

(LAUGHTER)

SEAWRIGHT: So, they weren't grandstanding. Now they weren't grandstanding, but earlier they were.

CHASE: Senator Booker was grandstanding. That's for sure.

SEAWRIGHT: By asking about systemic racism? OK.

(CROSSTALK)

CHASE: It's not the subject matter. It's the manner of speaking.

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: You got a major attitude going today, Antjuan. I don't know.

But, no, seriously guys, thank you all very, very much.

SEAWRIGHT: Thank you.

CAVUTO: So, again, it's all a lot of political theater. We're on top of that.

I told you a little bit earlier about the number of Democrats -- in fact, virtually all invited -- who didn't want to join the president at the White House today as this shutdown continues.

I want you to meet the Republican Ohio congressman who did and what he makes it -- after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAVUTO: It is rare. It happens, but this one was rare, all the Democrats invited to join the president at the White House to discuss the shutdown, border security ultimately opting not to go.

This fellow did go, Ohio Republican Congressman Brad Wenstrup, at the meeting today. He joins us right now.

Congressman, thank you for taking the time.

REP. BRAD WENSTRUP, R-OH: My pleasure, Neil.

CAVUTO: How did it go?

Did the president say anything about the Democrats who didn't show up?

WENSTRUP: Yes, I think he was concerned.

He brings up the point that many of us are saying. How can you negotiate if the other side isn't showing up? You can't negotiate with yourself.

But in many regards, the president has. The president unveiled to us what he is talking about. And it seems to me, in his proposal, there are more things that are allocated for non-wall funding than for the wall itself, and such as increasing borders security agents, local law enforcement, as well as humanitarian needs.

Look, both sides agree we got a humanitarian crisis going on down at the border. The president's addressing that. That should be something that they should want to come and talk about and open up the government at the same time. That isn't taking place.

CAVUTO: They must feel that they have the political upper hand, right, sir? And they feel that the polls indicate for now -- and that could change -- they're blaming the Republicans and the president.

What do you think about that?

WENSTRUP: Well, I think that is what they are doing.

And at the same time, I think many more Americans are starting to understand this. I don't know how immigration itself got muddled up into border security. I want a legal, robust immigration system. But you can't do it without controlled access and without border security.

They talk about, well, the problem with drugs is not just at the border, but at our ports. Everyone agrees with that. We're talking about enhancing capabilities in that regard as well.

All you got to do is come to the 2nd District of Ohio and see the effects of drugs that has taken place. If you read the book "Dreamland," you know what that's been all about. Our community...

(CROSSTALK)

CAVUTO: But in your district and among your constituents, Congressman, is there concern building that they don't really care who's to blame, but this is getting to be a pain in the you know what?

WENSTRUP: Well, I think there is with some people, but I think most people understand it, because their security and safety within their communities is of paramount importance.

We have had violence committed by illegal aliens in our district. We also have a huge drug problem, and everyone knows where this is coming from. It is our ports, but it's mainly our southern border. And people want to do something about it.

CAVUTO: Do you think, in retrospect, whatever -- and I know you feel strongly about this.

WENSTRUP: Sure.

CAVUTO: That the president attaching this to keeping the government open or not might have been a tactical error, that there was another way to deal with this, as Mitch McConnell was working on, to keep the government open, et cetera, deal with homeland security and all these other issues separately, because now here we are, 25 days later, and it could be many more days after that, and nothing?

WENSTRUP: Well, if you look, in the House, we passed a bill before the end of the year...

CAVUTO: You did, indeed. You did, indeed.

WENSTRUP: ... that kept the government open and funded border security. And there seemed to be no interest in that.

CAVUTO: And Mitch McConnell didn't pass it along because he knew the president wouldn't sign it, right?

WENSTRUP: No, he would he would have signed, I think, the bill we passed out of the House.

But he didn't have enough Democrats to come along and say, yes, we will keep the government open and fund border security.

I'm talking about the bill that we passed in the House...

CAVUTO: The earlier version, right.

WENSTRUP: ... at the end of the year, but -- yes, yes. We passed that.

So they said clearly right then and there, well, we're willing to shut down the government, unless you take out border security. Yet they all say they're for border security. And, Neil, we haven't seen a thing from Democrats that tells us what that looks like.

CAVUTO: All right.

WENSTRUP: So I don't know how you address this if they're not going to tell us what -- what they have a vision of.

CAVUTO: All right.

All right, we will see, and hopefully get calmer, cooler heads to get around a table and sort this out.

Congressman, thank you very much, sir. We appreciate it.

WENSTRUP: You bet. I'm ready to sit down.

CAVUTO: All right.

And there are more common bonds here on this issue, Democrats who voted for extending the wall by 136 miles when Barack Obama was president, Republicans who were open to DACA and helping those, the children of illegals who came here, and, through no fault of their own, are in this sort of legal Twilight Zone.

So, they both have individuals on both sides who believe what the other side is doing. Right now, they're petulant, and they're forcing the issue, which means they're not resolving it.

That will do it.

"The Five" is 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.