Working. Weve made u. S. Businesses competitive against with the rest of the world. We lowered the Corporate Tax rate to 21 . We now have a Corporate Tax rate that is competitive with the rest of the world. We lowered Corporate Tax rates, and that in itself costs less than 100 billion a year to do that. But it stimulates huge economic growth. The businesses in the United States can now thrive, which means they can grow, they can go our and hire people, which weve seen. Weve seen record unemployment. Weve seen record unemployment rates down to 3. 5 . Weve seen wage goa. Weve seen 3 plus wage growth. Most importantly the tax law . Ou put this all a lot of it has to do with the tax law. It has. To weve seen higherend wage growth at the bottom pay scale than we have at the top. Weve seeing the incentives we created in the tax law by lowering the corporate rate, were seeing that happen. Brennan there is a whole debate about the contribution to the deficit. I want to put that aside and i want to focus on something, though, that is really resonating politically. And it is this broader argument that this country somehow is rigged to benefit the wealthy and disadvantage the poor. And you have even had jamie diamon, the former head of goldman sachs, theyve said that theyre all concerned about income inequality growing in this country. Are you concerned . Of course im concerned. Were all concerned. Brennan you dont think there have been contributions to that through the tax law . I think there have been contributions to the positive. If you look at the day dark you will see that we have grown wages at the bottom end of the spay scale faster than weve grown at the top. Its exactly what were trying to do. Were trying to attract more jobs back to the United States. Put more people to work. And thats what were seeing happening. Brennan Michael Bloomberg says about this tax law, nearly all the money goes to people like me who dont need it. This is a guy who knows wall street, who is a billionaire. He is saying that the tax law is only advantaging people like him. Id love to know how its advantaging him. Id love to see that, because at the end of the day, we have lowered rates. I agree that we have lowered rates. We have broadened the base meaning that we make more of your income taxable. Thats basic tax policy. Lower rates, broaden based. Meaning you get rid of more of the loopholes that people have used to deduct from their income what they pay taxes on. We got rid of a lot of the loopholes, to people are having to pay more taxes. Theyre having to pay taxes on more of their income. Yes, theyre paying it at a lower rate. Brennan are you going to endorse Michael Bloomberg, whose board i believe you sit on . I do not. I sit on one of his emerging market boards. Be v f him but that doesnt neg it does not. Brennan two of the candidates who are also vying for democratic nomination, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, constantly come back to this idea of income inequality. They have proposed taxes on billionaires, taxes on financial transations. Elizabeth warren has referred to that, people making over 50 million having an additional 2 tax. What would the impact of those policies be from your perspective . Look, our tax system in the United States is very, very progressive. We have over 50 of the population today do not pay a dollar of federal tax. So if youre going to collect more revenue, which im not against, we have to collect more revenue, its going to come from the top half of workers, in fact, its going to come from the top 10 of workers. Thats where you can find the taxable income. I think that we will end up doing that. We will potentially need to do that, but these newfangled plans were coming up with, we dont need to do things like that to collect more income from people. We have basic tax system that works. We can do some basic fundamental things. If we need to collect more money. The question is do we need to collect more money . We look at spending and we look at revenue and we dont talk about them in t sam se. We collect taxes, and then we spend, and Congress Never thinks about how much money they have to spend, they just go spend. So you wouldnt run your household like that. I wouldnt run my household like that. I would decide how much revenue i have and how much i can spend. Brennan well, youre a democrat. Yes, i am. Brennan is there a single democrat that you would consider voting for in. Ill consider voting for anyone. I vote on policy. Brennan even Elizabeth Warren . I will consider voting for anyone i said. I didnt say i would. I said i would consider voting for them. Brennan well, thats evasive. In pulling apart some of her proposal, you seem to reflect a lot of what wall street says, which is that there is deep concern over this focus on the Financial Community and corporations, et cetera. In this environment, is this peoplew on treetsee some ofhe contuing to along lines of whatever the president is putting forward, even if they dont like some of his behavior, vote for him because of what hes doing . Thats a hypothetical question. I dont know. What i do know is the economy is really strong. And the democrats have not really come up with an idea how to help the economy get even stronger. So its probably easier to talk about corporate greed and talk about wall street and talk about Technology Companies because they dont have an answer for an economy thats growing 2. 5 with 3. 5 unemployment and 3 wage growth. I havent heard their answer on that, except lets tax it to death. Brennan as you said, you identify as a democrat. You did have disagreements with the president on a number of things. I was there on trump tower the day of the charlottesville reference, find people on both sides. I remember your face that day. You were very public about some of your differences with the president. Will you vote for him . Im very supportive of the president s economic policy. Im supporteddive of what hes done on deregulation. I havent heard anyone who has y yei ot social issues, as well. So, you know, in many respects i have to balance both sides of that equation before i figure out who im going to vote for. Brennan so youre leaving the door open . Im leaving the door open, but at this point, i dont have any intention not to vote for the president. Brennan you are a frank guy. Youre usually pretty direct. Brennan yeah. Is there Anyone Around the president who can be direct with with with him right now . Is there anyone doing what you said you did when guiding him on some of these economic policies . Brennan i dont know. Ive been gone a year and a half. Im sure there are people talking to the president. Brennan when the president can say, look, ive gotten these tariffs that have helped me get these free trade deal with america, this phaseone deal with china, doesnt that encourage the president s approach, one that you have differed with him on. It may encourage his approach, but hes also got advisers that im sure cretarhin an had a lot of conversations where we agreed on tariffs. Im sure the secretary is talking to the president on tariffs and what effect theyre having and what effect theyre not having. Brennan lastly, i want to ask you about a new book, i know you havent read it, coming out, there have been excerpts released which directly reference you, which is why i want to give you chance to respond. The president is accused of calling advisers dopes and babies and the like. Is the description of the president and his management style matching your experience . I dont know what book youre referring. To i have not read it, so i wouldnt know. Brennan the management style of berating advisers . Look, the president , what you see on tv is exactly what you get in private with the president. The president is the same person behind closed doors as he is out in public, which is a unique feature. You know, its not like he turns it on or turns it off when he walks outside, so youve seen everything the president has. Thats e w youre in a private meeting. Brennan all right. Gary cohn, thank you for your time. Thank you. Brennan well be right back with our political panel. Stay with us. With esri location technology, you can see what others cant. When we see you enter through our doors. We dont see who youre against, or for. Whether tomorrow will be light or dark. All we see in you, is a spark. We see your kindness and humanity. The strength of each community. The more we look the more we find the sparks that make america shine. Johnsbut were also a cancer fighting, hiv controlling, joint replacing, and depression relieving company. From the day youre born we never stop taking care of you. Most people think as a reliable phone company. But to businesses, were a reliable partner. We Keep Companies ready for whats next. man we weave security into their business. second man virtualize their operations. woman and build ai customer experiences. second woman we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. Like 5g. Almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. woman when it comes to digital transformation. Verizon keeps business ready. Brennanurn now to our potical pal for some analysis, gerald seib, the executive washington editor for the wall street journal, ed okeefe covers the white house for cbs news. Weijia jiang is our white house correspondent, and susan page is a Washington Bureau chief with usa today. Jerry, the senate may not be giving the president everything he wants in the impeachment trial. Whats going on . I think a feeling has taken hold thats being conveyed to Senate Republicans that we would like to get this impeachment trial over as fast as possible as opposed to lets stretch it out and have the this exonerate the president. There is now a real fear, the locker this goes on, the greater the risk of unexpected and unpleasant surprises and lev parnas, who you talked about earlier, illustrated that this week. Somebody comes in out of the blue during the middle of a process and starts saying things that make republicans very nervous. Maybe that increases the chances of Senate Republicans will vote to call witnesses. Thats not where the white house wants to go. So i think youre seeing the president pressure Senate Republicans and youre seeing Senate Republicans having conversations this weekend about how can we speed this up and get to the finish line faster. Brennan susan, you heard from senator cornyn. Hes talking about the gravity of the moment. That doesnt sound like something you put on fast forward. I thought it was remarkable what we saw over the last couple days. We have been talking about impeachment since inauguration day. Its not a surprise that the president is being impeached, although maybe its a surprise that its over ukraine. But i thought that with the transmission of the articles of impeachment with the arrival of the chief justice with the senators signing the oath book that we had a sense of the importance, of the gravity of whats ahead. Im not sure thats going to hold for an impeachment trial, especially with Alan Dershowitz on the president s defense team, but for at least a moment, it seemed like a different kind, a more serious exercise than it seemed before. Brennan weijia, you spoke to Alan Dershowitz in your reporting. Hes got his own legal problems, but hes someone the public knows well from being on television. Ken starr, people know him from the clinton impeachment. What is behind this casting, if thats the right word, of these individuals . That baggage could follow them, if you believe that the company you keep says something about you. But President Trump clearly doesnt care, because he really cares about the appearance of his legal team. And he thinks that Derby Academy and starr, despite the other things that come along with them, will lend credibility to his case along with Great Television ratings according to an adviser to the white house some the president thinks that theyll make for great tv to put on a show for who he believes are the real jurors in this case, not the senators, but the people watching at home. Brennan will it be great tv, ed . This is something that is so solemn, so scripted. The senators cant even speak. Right. Brennan is Mitch Mcconnell planning for great tv . Hes hoping for a dignified process, and if that means bad tv, so be it. Remember, there are only going to be four camera angles in the room. We dont get to see the jurors necessarily during this trial. So no facial reactions from guys like jim inhofe or chris murphy. You know, its just going to be sort of whoever is speaking and the chief justice for the most part. Youll get plenty of air time. Mcconnell has four priorities here over the course of the next few weeks, manage the senate and make sure its a dignified process. But he has to manage the president and his expectations. Hes got to manage the fact that several of his colleagues, 22, are up for reelection and seven or eight are in trickier contests than they would like, and he has his o reelection back home some he has to be seen as maintaining decorum but also keeping in the back of his mind or in front of him that this could be a factor 11 months from now in elections across the country. You know what hes lucky, john mccain is not in the sphat. Could you imagine the fifth and sixth and seventh chores mcconnell could face if john mccabe was still representing the state of arizona. Does that mean mitt romney would feel more empowered to stand up in a serious way . I would argue there could be somebody who emerges if not a mccain, some republican that does step up and say, we do need to allow this to play out. We should remember that the moment that would make for great tv to your question would be if john bolton, the former National Security adviser does, in fact testify. That would be great tv. That would be a dramatic moment. I think not getting to that point is a top goal of mitch mcconnl and the white use. Nolln necessarily for the democrats, encry as for no they h rdil they hav sig up leerspeoplen thy are unhappy about this, and theyre voting with their feet and their dollars right now to some extent. By the way, one of the other groups that has to be worried about this, the 30 House Democrats who come from districts that donald trump won in 2016, and part of what the republican machinery is doing is going after those people. They voted except for one for impeachment. Republicans would like to ensure they pay a price for that politically, as well. The campaign is capitalizing on this, too. Every time there a twist and turn in the entire process, you see thatting with advertised to supporters, and they say theres a spike in the money theyre bringing in every time something significant happens. And so theyre not shying away from this, and theyre owning the fact that its helping them financially, so well continue to see sort of this campaign for more money as this process goes on. Brennan is there concern in the white house about lev parnas, Rudy Giulianis business associate. Youve heard john cornyn and others saying, not related to this. There is concern, because hes already impacting this trial. Unless senators are completely tuned out, they are absorbing what he is saying, and that are seeing what he is dropping in these document dumps some even though the president insists that he has no idea who parnas is, the problem is parnas has receipts. Not one, not two, but a whole collection that tells a story of two men who know each other over the course of years, and so the president has to add to his defense, he cant just say, i dont know who he is. Great tv maybe, but im not sure it matters in the substance of the trial in that theres not really a dispute over what happened. Aid got delayed, the president wanted an investigation of joe biden by ukraine, and now there is an argument about whether its an impeachable offense. There is an argument about the president s motives, but in a way the facts are set, and i wonder if at the end of the day when we get to election day, does any of this even matter . This is part of the president in a way, people have absorbed this idea already and made up their minds about whether they care. Brennan ed, what about that and what about some of the jurors who are running for office themselves. Four senators are running for president , Bernie Sanders, michael bennet, Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren. All of them concede this will be a problem. All of them admitting to voters, i might not be back before caucus day, sorry about that. They will send their spouses and surrogates. Theyre establishing office hours at their Campaign Offices across New Hampshire and iowa more people to come meet their sure gaza city and ask questions. They will find ways from washington if need with to campaign, whether thats Holding Skype sessions with voters or calling in to rallies and certainly doing television interview, but they all understand they could be at a huge disadvantage. If you look at the schedule in the coming days, who is spending time in iowa and New Hampshire, joe biden and Pete Buttigieg who sit up there with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. We have never seen anything like this. It will test whether being there and the facetime that voters in these early states crave is factor or whether those four senators have done enough already to bank away goodwill. Brennan jerry, what do you make of the argument that democrats need to be campaigning on issues like health care. Speaker pelosi says, how do you respond to what gary cohn laid out, which was hard to run against a strong economy. How do you turn back . I thought it was very instructive that there was almost no discussion of peach in the debate the democrats had this week. Theyre not here to talk about this out in the country. Second of all, i think gary cohn made a really good point. Where is the conversation in the democratic primary dialogue about how to create jobs and what the role of the private sector is in creating jobs. You listen in vain. There is no discussion of that. Thats the Bernie SandersElizabeth Warren effect on the field, but you wonder whether thats really reds indicating with the moderates in the party, because they would like to hear some kerr is soe conversation about job creation. The person talking about that is Michael Bloomberg, who is not competing in iowa, and who i think maybe somebody were not talking about enough in terms of the possibility he could emerge as a contender. Brennan all right. Well, thanks to all of you. We will be right back in a moment. Brennan theres a lot of news on the Supreme Court beat this week, so who better to bring in for some analysis than our own chief Legal Correspondent jan crawford. Jan, good to have you here. You know the court very well, and john roberts, chief justice, we dont hear from him very often. He will now be at the center of this Senate Impeachment trial. What do you. How is he going the shape this . Well, thats the thing. We may not hear very much from him at all during this trial, because his role in this trial is completely different than what you think of as the role of a judge. And in a sense he doesnt really have a lot of power. The estimate sets the rules. So they have first word. And that can overturn any of his rulings by a majority vote. So they have the last word. So john roberts is going to be in this really kind of weird position where he may rule on some related matters or issues, but then the senate could overrule him if it disagrees. Brennan now hes stepping into one of the most political hi heated partisan environment, staying above that is going to be tough. Brennan paragraph exactly. It will be very tough. Thats why people said this will be a nightmare for the chief justice, but its also an opportunity for him to show in this hyper partisan environment of the senate that he is above politics, that he is neutral, that hes not taking one side or the other some hes going to go there as the face of the Supreme Court and potentially see that as an opportunity to remind the American People that judges are above politics. That is his opportunity, and this is also his challenge. Brennan im going to ask you about Something Else that seemingly was historic this week. Both houses of the Virginia Legislature voted to ratify the equal rights melt. Amendment. Now, a lot of people would say, isnt that already law that you have to treat men and women equally . But actually this proposal was never amended to the constitution. You need 38 states, threefourths of the country to go ahead and due it. Why has this benchmark, why has this country flavor reached it and gone ahead and amended this in the constitution . Thats the great question, right . Because on the surface it seems really straightforward. Of course women should be treated equally in the work prais. Of course women should get the same kind of equal access that men would. That was the way it was viewed in 1972 when congress with the broad support, bipartisan supermajority of twothirds approved that resolution and sent it to the states to ratify. Threefourths of the states needed to ratify it. 38 stays. It gave the states a deadline of seven years to do so. Everyone thought its going to happen. 30 states passed it within first year. Five more got on board pretty soon after that. And then it ground to halt. And the reason is conservatives started kind of taking issue with certain things, including the issue of abortion. The Supreme Court ruled in roe v. Wade in 1973 that women had a constitutional right to abortion, and then it occurred to certain activists that this e. R. A. Could further enshrine abortion rights in the constitution. So it became controversial. And there were other issues that act vits pointed out on the right that would raise concerns potentially for women. Brennan you said something important there, a sevenyear deadline. So this means its expired. Is this just symbolic . Potentially, yes. Of this expired in 1979, congress tried to extend it to 1982 to give the states more time, and nota a so gottuck at 3 virginia now ostensibly would be the 38th state because weve had two other states recently approve it, and in the house later this month will take up a resolution to take out that deadline for any original amendment. But thats entirely questionable whether that is constitutional. Congress passed that in 1972 with twothirds vote. And now to say that theyre going to change with it the simple majority, the courts i think its pretty suspect. And theyre going to have a huge legal battle on that going back the john roberts could make its way to the Supreme Court. Brennan on to your desk. Jan crawford, thank you very much. Well be right back. s nice to y meet you in person. Youre pete nocchio . Oh, the pic . That was actually a professional headshot. Im sure thats it, yeah. I, uh, i think ive lost a few pounds recently too. Im actually doing a juice cleanse. Wait you dont. glass breaking gasp ah oh. with geico, the savings keep on going. Just like this sequel. 15 minutes could save you 15 or more on car insurance. Brennan thats it for us today. Thank you for watching. Until next week, for face the nation, im margaret brennan. Captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by Media Access Group at wgbh access. Wgbh. Org when you humble yourself under the mighty hand of god, in due time he will exalt you. Im excited about being with you every week. I hope youll tune in. Youll be inspired, youll be encouraged. Im looking forward to seeing you right here. You are fully loaded and completely equipped for the race thats been designed for you. President trump on trial. Senators get set to hear impeachment arguments as partisan battle lines are drawn over witnesses and the evidence. There is ample evidence any jury would convict him in three minutes flat. While President Trump watches from the sidelines. This has been a political hit job. Sitting on edge. Gun rights supporters along with militia members and neonazis get set for a show of force in virginias capital, as richmond fears the worst. Independence day after the queen sets her terms, Meghan Markles estranged father speaks out on the royal couples exit. Its something thats ridiculous. They shouldnt be doing this. Extradition fight. The chinese executive wanted in the u. S. Is the focus of a