Think . This is interesting because the economy has been pretty stellar since the president has been in office. This isnt anything new. I think that, like you said, it is, the poll numbers are now catching up to this but it is interesting to be watching, still very early ahead of 2020 which is a lot of people are looking to these poll numbers for a lot of people close to the president s Reelection Campaign and those working to get him reelected tell me that the economy is the big key here. Theyre worried if anything changes in the economy, that could be a key thing, a key factor ahead of the election. Neil for now, it does, still have him on defense, Strong Economy or not, when it comes to oneonone matches. You point out to me, quite right saying, so, very early in the process. Early on is he not benefiting as much as you would think an incumbent president presiding over this type of recovery would be looking at. Its a trend i would imagine that he would like . Definitely. I think something key though here, what a lot of, articles that were behind this poll pointed out was that the president , voters, especially, registered voters are very high approving of him of the result of the economy as an example. When it comes to his behavior, the his Job Performance in office, a lot of voters were not as supportive of this president. So i think, looking ahead again to the election if the election is based on results, President Trump will benefit from the economy can benefit from but more a litmus test on his behavior and performance, that he may be in trouble. Neil good catching up with you,. Thank you, neil. Neil fed chairman Jerome Powell will testify on wednesday and thursday. Everyone is waiting some sort of a signal, when, not tease days if we see another rate cut, the first in this cycle. A lot of people are hoping the end of this month. No guaranties. Ed mills and Greg Valliere are with us. Not if the fed will be so exact, greg, betting that well see quarterpoint cut at the end of the month. I dont know if a, that is such a sure thing and, b, if it is necessary. Your thoughts. I think it is likely but i agree with you, im not sure it is necessary. Well get rate cuts with the market at alltime highs, with unemployment at 3. 7 . At with the labor market this strong, with the economy at 10year growth rate . I dont understand the rationale for wasting ammunition this time around. Neil Jerome Powell, couple days of testimony, im sure they will be up on the hill, they will ask him about his relationship with the president which isnt apparently good and im just wondering how he sorts on that issue . I think Jerome Powell thinks the more important relationship is with congress. Congress ultimately gives or takes away his powers and the senate is the individuals who would approve or not approve his potential replacement. What i think on Monetary Policy i can always draw a line what else is going on in washington, d. C. And what the fed does. They seem to deteriorate. Those have stablized for now. Longer term theyre absolutely coming back. Do i think we get something in july . I think that is less certain now obviously than it was earlier about a month ago. But longer term, these issues will come up and the fed is going to want to insure that they are protecting the economy, are protecting the markets. Neil greg, the one thing you want to step back from, regardless of peoples politics on this issue the Federal Reserve is there to keep inflation at bay and the fear is when numbers are strong and the economic numbers certainly have been as strong as they are you want to keep a watchful eye on that because it could lead to wage inflation. Those who advocate that the Federal Reserve hold off and maybe reverse course saying inflation is not the problem at all. So it has room to do so, especially when the rest of the world cutting rates and puts us at a trade disadvantage. I think that is the president s rationale . I think thats right. We get two big numbers thursday and friday, ppi, cpi, wholesale, retail Inflation Numbers but go ahead. Well see what the numbers show but if we put tariffs on thousands of goods, if i have to spend more money god forbid for bottle of bored bow wine, if bordeaux, my wine goes up with wine from france, at some point this is going to lead to some inflation. Neil that is very good point. Whether the twistoff cap variety or cork. Depends on your pedigree. Exactly right. Neil ed, the fact we have been able to bear the brunt of tariffs effect already because some have not reached us yet. That first wave was imposed, you foe, while goods were still in transit, not to be affected. Only affected those leaving the various shores at this point. So, we have not really been subject to this. The longer this drags on, the more we will be. Then what . Then the consumer might start kind of impacting the debate here. What weve seen so far the Trump Administration has been very good about only putting tariffs on things that the average consumer does not get the end product for. The next wave neil other than fancy wine. Wine, stinky cheese, when it pose to sneakers, goes to clothing, goes to things people buy back to school, that was the real threat with the next 300 billion worth of tariffs from china. He held off on that. I think partly to give a pause to the china trade negotiations. If he is looking at his election, if he is putting 25 tariff on those goods, that is when the economy gets impacted. Neil it hasnt happened yet. I guess the hope, greg, that it wont happen, that a deal will be scored. The fact of the matter, i believe the chinese said remove tariffs almost as a precondition to getting talks going again. Last time i checked we have not removed tariffs, where do we stand . That is a big obstacle. That is part of the narrative. The other part that the fed has to consider, the idea of a genuine budget crisis in washington. We cried wolf before. Debt ceiling, no budget spending levels, that could be a complicating area for the fed as we go into the fall. Neil thank you, gentlemen. Were getting word as expected, iran indeed enriched uranium beyond the purity limit, a where the nuclear deal would be essentially kerplunk. Confirmed by reuters they have effectively brought it beyond what was called for in the deal. Now what do we do . After this. Hey im bill slowsky jr. , i live on my own now ive got xfinity, because i like to live life in the fast lane. Unlike my parents. You rambling about xfinity again . Youre so cute when you get excited. Anyways. Ive got their app right here, i can troubleshoot. I can schedule a time for them to call me back, its great you have our number programmed in . Ya i dont even know your phone anymore. Excuse me . what . I dont know your phone number. Aw well. He doesnt know our phone number you have our fax number, obviously. Todays xfinity service. Simple. Easy. Awesome. Ill pass. Neil all right. They have officially cheated. They have officially gone back on the deal with these latest reports iran enriched uranium beyond the purity levels set back in 2015. Blake burman, for reaction if any, from the white house. This was as expected as you reported. What is the latest . Reporter reaction came moments ago to from mike pence. He spoke to the christians related to the annual summit. Iran should not confuse american restraint with lack of american resolve. We hope for the best but the United States of america and our military are prepared to protect our interests, to protect our personnel and our citizens in the region. We will continue to oppose irans maligned influence. We will continue to bring pressure on their economy. And under President Donald Trump america will never allow iran to obtain a nuclear weapon. [cheers and applause] reporter that from the Vice President here in d. C. , neil, just moments ago. When you look at the Iran Nuclear Deal the level at which to iran could enrich uranium, uranium purity was up to 3. 67 . Now they are enriching at 4. 5 . Many experts were worried that iran could go up to 20 that is level some were eyeballing. They havent gone there just yet, as some within europe are still trying to save the deal or save certain aspects within this deal. When you talk about weaponsgrade uranium, that is all the way up to 90 . We heard pro President Trump. He said that iran better be careful. Neil . Neil blake, thank you my friend. Blake burman at the white house. Former assistant secretary of state under bush 43 robert charles, what he makes of all this. Robert, now what . What is the president is trying to do is compel diplomacy with graduated sanctions. He has a lot of tools at his fingerprints. Some are economic. Some are cyber, some are kinetic or military. I think you have to keep in mind what the stakes are here. This is an irresponsible leadership. This is a country frankly cant manage conventional weapons and promotes terrorist activity around the region and around the world. Obviously we dont want them to have Nuclear Weapons. The president made it, the Vice President , made it clear well not let that happen. There are a number of ways to manage that. One thing people need to remember, percentages are deceptive. The 3. 67 uranium 235 enrichment that was permitted that they have now broken actually, it is a little bit deceptive because it takes 60 of the overall effort just to get to 5 . Then if you get to 5 enrichment, it is not a big jump from there to 90 . So they could go to 20 enrichment within matter of days. They could go to 90 enrichment which is weaponsgrade matter of months. Some say two months, some say six months, some say a year. Well not let them get to the point where they have uranium enriched to 90 for use on nuclear weapon. It will not happen. We know where some of their centrifuges are. We would reich diplomatic solution so their economy can tradethe to world. The Oil Production is a sixth of their original number. The people are suffering because the the minute leadership wont take a diplomatic act to respond to diplomacy. Neil this is not prescient on my part but they seem to be playing us off to the europeans separately talking to the russians and chinese to see what they can salvage the deal. They are reading be this president long a critic of getting involved in longstanding mideast actions that he would take action. What do you think of that . Lets unpack that youre absolutely right on the european reluctance to give up on a failed deal. That deal was in summary a bribery for delay. The Obama Administration give them hundreds of billions of dollars to delay. But at the same time, it legitimatized them as some kind of a future nuclear state. So were not going to let that happen. We have to bring in allies behind us. Dont doubt this president s resolve. I think whatever he has to do to protect this country, our allies in the region he will do. Neil so he has got a lot more proof that those who signed on to that deal, who are now trying to, you know, still hang on to it desperately, he revealed iran to be what you long argued it is, a cheat. Yes. Neil wouldnt this in a weird way make his case more formidable . Yes. I mean i think one of the things that ought to happen is the allies ought to line up behind us now, say, yes its time to either compel secession of a Nuclear Program or negotiate out a real end to that program. Then open up their economy in full relations. Dont forget russia and china too. Russia is trying to play in this game and has been a big supporter of iran. They are really not that relevant. China, interestingly despite we have ongoing negotiations with china, china may benefit from supporting the United States here. The last thing we want is some sort of a conflict that shuts down the arabian gulf. They dont want that. That oil is also important to them. There are things vectoring towards a real diplomatic breakthrough but you have an intransigent theological leadership over there that oppressed its own people without any compunction. We have to think about how do we compel them now to come to their senses and realize there is no good that comes from pursuing Nuclear Weapons for iran. Neil wellspoken. Robert charles, good seeing you my friend. Thank you. Neil in california theyre still worried about another one after the aftershock that was more powerful than the first one. Seismologists are at a loss what happens next. One has been pretty good that is coming up next. After this. That move us forward. Every day, invesco combines ideas with technology, data with inspiration, investors with solutions. Because the possibilities of life and investing are greater when we come together. Now was i wrong two weeks ago . Somehow give the impression to people that i was men i successfully opposed time and again . Yes, i was. I regret it, and im sorry for any of the pain or misconception being [cheers and applause] neil all right, some are calling it joe bidens apology tour. There apologizing for remarks that he said might have offended those who were a little ticked off within the party that he had done deals and talked to and negotiated with socalled segregation its at the time, if for no other reason than to get stuff done. That was then, very different and chastened joe biden now. It might be too little too late. Were getting word that Billionaire Tom Steyer a very, very rich liberal, reportedly reconsidering a white house bid presumably because biden might be tripping up, one of the reasons he didnt entertain a run, he thought it was bidens to lose. Fox news contributor liz peek on all of this. What do you think . Part of this he comes in part of the reason that biden is stumbling. I think it is broader than that. It is indictment of the entire field. Obviously it is pretty early to expect that to happen, really biden was the one everyone felt would bring moderates along, that great, you know, unvolatile group in the Democratic Party that doesnt have a candidate except for joe biden. One theory is he was backing elizabeth warren, liked her economic message, even though he is a very wealthy person. Thats right. But, you know apparently he just lost faith. The real question, is this sort of vanity run and is hoping to influence the party through being out there . Lets face it. He has this pac that has 8 Million People, signatorys who are trying to impeach donald trump. If he becomes the president ial candidate he will have much more clout. Neil but will the party treat him the way they did with howard schultz, when he was suggesting a run as an independent . That just, you know, you know the grief he endured. Yeah. Neil this is different. In steyers case he would run within the Democratic Party. There has been a little bit of pushback from the left. Why doesnt he instead of spending 10 of millions of dollars promoting himself, why doesnt he get behind the candidates neil there will be a lot more of that. There will be a lot of that. His big issues are one, impeachment. He has been working for that for months and months. Democrats say that is improbable quest. Neil percentages have grown. By the way, tens of millions of dollars on those issues, that particular issue which could have gone towards supporting other kinds of candidates. I think it is interesting, the other big issue he has is Climate Change. He formerly thought jay inslee was going to be the person carrying that banner but jay inslee has gotten nowhere in this race. Tom steyer again feels combining maybe a leftleaning economic message and very strong Climate Change agenda could be his path to the white house . However improbable. Neil you know, liz, what i notice, there is a clear battle going on for the soul of the Democratic Party. This is not unprecedented. Goes on for both parties over the year but particularly nancy pelosi, in this interview referring to the fact right now the four who get the most attention, rashid talib, pressley, ilhan omar, and alexandria ocasiocortez dont represent the broader party. She said all of these people have their public hatreds and their twitter world but they didnt have any following. These four people, and that is how many votes they got. I dont know what that was a tremendous smackdown. Neil immediately she responded, told her, she responded. Something is going on here. They have taken off the gloves. I thought that was a huge smackdown of nancy pelosi. Talking about the votes for the border bill. Neil none of those four voted for night they voted against it. After complaining for months about ill treatment of people. Neil she has a point. If youre so concerned about this. A broader issue, interesting Washington Post abc poll is out trump against various candidates, basically running neckandneck although trailing biden by a sizable margin but the most interesting question, buried deep in that poll was, would you vote for donald trump over someone basically calling themselves a democratic socialist . Trump wins that by 6 points, 4943, even though 66 of the respondents are democrats and independences. I thought that was interesting. You can be sure any afternoon date, whoever it is, they will be branded by trump and campaign as a democratic socialist or a socialist. I think he wins on that. Neil you know, liz, i hadnt had a chance to talk to you about this, a comment, the tweet the president made almost two weeks ago, you think, he said i lose, markets will tank. The gist of what he was saying any one of these guys want to get rid of tax cuts or good many of them, they want to overturn a lot of regulatory relief i provided. You can kiss everything goodbye . I kind of think he is right. Neil really . Market really soared when he was elected because in fact that regulatory haze of the obama years had been a big issue. In fact it has been rolled back. I think the administration, ive told them this, sort of indirectly, not that i have any particular voice, they need to have stories of companies th