Extremely unfair the way they handled their power. Here is ken paxton. Thank you all for being here. I want to thank my fellow ags. We have 50 attorney generals across the nation who are involved in the investigation that were leading from texas and i cant tell you how much i appreciate their support and their interest in a really important issue for our time. What weve all learned is that while many consumers believe that the internet is free, certainly we know from googles province of 117 billion, that the internet is not free this is a company that company that dominates all aspects of advertising on the internet and searching on the internet, as they dominate the buyers side, the seller side, the auction side, and even the video side with youtube. This investigation is not a lawsuit. It is an investigation to determine the facts. And right now were looking at advertising but the facts will lead where the facts lead. And even as we speak up here in about a minute there will be 3. 8 million searches and a lot of advertising dollars just made in every minute that one of these people speak. Google will be in control of most of those searches. Thank you all from being here. I will let carl racine, i appreciate his involvement this. Carl, why dont you say a few words. Thank you, ken. Good afternoon, everyone. Im charles ken paxton, the attorney general of texas pointed out, all 50 states joined in to this. Many will speak. While they do that, bring in our expert, fox news senior judicial analyst, judge andrew napolitano. Ken paxton essentially says the internet is not free, witnessed by the gargantuan profits google and youtube. He said this is a akin to factfinding mission. Are you okay with this . No. You cant start an investigation because you think somebody is too rich, start an investigation. You start an investigation, if there is some evidence, some evidence of criminal activity. Now there are two antitrust pursuits. One is civil antitrust. We want the court to break this company up because it is too big. The other is criminal antitrust. Have they harmed somebody, have they done this intentionally to harm . There are two questions that are always asked at the beginning of any antitrust investigation. Has the consumer been harmed and has the defendant engaged in anticompetitive activity. Both questions have to be answered yes to justify this investigation. Charles it would seem they would have inkling whether those two are satisfied. It sounded like no, were not sure. We all do google searches every single day. Were concerned this one single company, this one entity has this much information over us. I think we could add a new paradigm to this, the ability to sway our behavior in the future . That can hardly be actionable the fact somebody is swaying our behavior. That is protected by the first amendment. Im smiling i will give you both sides. One side is the Supreme Court rule up ambiguously if single act has a violation of federal law, and a violation of state law that there is no con constitutional impediment to dual investigations dual lawsuits, dual prosecutions. Even though the fed are looking at other aspects of big tech, that is not impediment for states doing. The states have statutes which prohibited anticompetitive behavior which require people doing businesses in the state no to impair the choices and prices for consumers. Let me jump in there. Which prohibit them from impairing privacy. Charles prices though, a lot of large, megatech Communication Companies are saying hey, prices have gone down because of us. How can we be harming the consumer and where does antitrust regulation thats a defense. First of all when you and guying gell google we dont pay anything. The advertiser is paying to get his product under our eyeballs as we start the google process. If that has gone down, there is no antitrust case whatsoever. There is certainly no harm to the consumer because it doesnt cost anything. It cant cost less than nothing. And if there is no anticompetitive behavior or the cost of advertising has gone down they have a tough road to hoe which lets me make the other argument. The other argument this is a big shakedown like the same attorneys general went after big tobacco. What did they do . They extracted 200 billion from big tobacco. What did they do with it . Filled up gaps in their budgets this is the purest of the pure or the most corrupt of the corrupt. The public will decide and the courts will decide. Charles ken paxton talked about advertising. Then he talked about the rest, something akin to a factfinding mission, some might call it a witchhunt to borrow a term, to borrow a term. Right. Charles because one thing they do have, you mentioned the public, there is some form of public support behind the notion that these companies are too powerful, too large, while we dont necessarily pay they do benefit from our information, from our privacy, from our inner feelings. They make a lot of money off of that, there is some sort of violation of the public in that happens. There is probably a violation of federal and state law if they sell private information about us or offer private information about us without telling us. Usually they tell us, we dont bother reading. I click, i agree. Charles that big thing i never read at the bottom . Correct. That pretty much gets them off the hook. Think about the government complain about somebody violating privacy. What is the biggest violator of the privacy in the land . Those 50 state attorneys general and prosecutors and police work for them. Im being a little snarky but this is demonstrable. Charles i think im with you. I think this is mostly a shake down. That these companies are making a tremendous amount of money. Theyre a honey pot of cash. Right. Charles the political atmosphere is so great, we get all 50 attorneys general to agree to go after them. If from a year from now, another 200 billion has been transferred, no behavior has changed, well know the answer. Charles judge napolitano, thank you very much. A pleasure. Charles always appreciate it. Joining me now, attorney lisa garber along with our very own deirdre bolton. It is really amazing some of the comments the judge i made here i find fascinating because, im a layman and most of the folks watching and there is this sense, lisa, something is wrong. There has to be something perhaps illegal or unseeming in a sense these are giant companies and they know every single thing about us, and they profit off of it, people are concerned about that. They should be. I will disagree with some of the judges comments. Not only does our use of google or facebook any of amazon, these giants it is not freeit it is definitely not free. Not only giving up expensive, valuable data but were driving up costs of products being advertised on google and amazon, facebook, by getting eyeballs on those pages. Deirdre, you your passion for technology, you follow technology, you know it i do agree with the judge in the fact to complain a company is making so much money, even if you want to make an argument its a monopoly, that is fine, that is what lawmakers are binning to say. That is from a legal standpoint you would speak better than i would. That is an issue. Microsoft for example, suffer from that, not too strong a verb, 19992,000 eu, the company was broken up and took 10 years to refined its footing. If you own the stock, stockholders could be in trouble if there are people who say okay, these companies are monopolies and there is a argument to be made especially for google and facebook which together control more than 2 3 of the u. S. Online ad market. As far as sharing what they have and what they dont have, you know, we use it for free. Im not saying that we shouldnt be concerned but there is implicit contract between the user, maybe people can go back, i didnt realize they would have every single search i ever did, no which emails i put in spam, which emails i didnt put in spam. That is sort of crying over spilled milk. That is part of the difference. Talk about a contract. There is explicit contract, but consumers and government, we have no control, were using big four, google, amazon, facebook, apple, we really have no meaningful choice. Google controls 90 of our online searches. Facebook as acquired 70 companies. Charles we accept the terms because we have no other alternative . Exactly. We have no meaningful choice. There are other ones, if you really want to go off the grid, there are a few. Download things like that you can be a anonymous searcher. Generally public uses google, amazon, there are problems how the big four operating. They bring in a huge amount of profits. They are a great target for federal and state governments to get a piece of the pie but is that because consumers are lazy, does it mean the companys fault . I might not agree with that. I might agree, can the next generation of google come up and does it stifle competition . Charles what seems to be happening, deirdre, they made so many acquisition, if you want to use instagram you have to link to facebook. It is owned by facebook. Charles thats what im saying, google or email i will Say Something crazy out loud, i want to Say Something crazy out loud, i actually think more regulation it comes the easier for google and facebook. They have the money for the lawyers. They send people to charles put as moat around the industry . Yeah. Charles it will stifle competition even more . I disagree with that because europe is eons ahead, that they are anticompetitive because theyre americanbased. At the same time theyre looking at Consumer Privacy and data charles what is the legal remedy would be for Something Like this . Are we going as far as breaking them up . In antitrust we can talk about that field. Charles i love ken paxton, sounds like he is not even sure. Okay well get together and investigate. If we can find a crime that is part of the problem, we dont know exactly how theyre operating. Goggle, their m. O. We want to get you off the google page soon as possible. The cofounder was saying that we want to get you to the right place with the Search Engine. Most stay on the google page, you have google shopping, google travel, google air, all difficult Services Within google. Same thing for amazon. Charles lisa, deirdre, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Well continue to monitor the states attorney general, the press conference, the investigation into google. Of course its impact on the individual stock and group of stocks and overall market during this hour. Also during this hour President Trump is about to leave to North Carolina to host a rally. Well bring you any comment he may make to reporters. New data from china showing the trade fight is strongly impacting the economy. No matter how long it takes definitely a fight worth having. Reagan economist art laffer joins us next with his take. Doctor bob, what should i take for back pain . Before you take anything, i recommend applying topical relievers first. Salonpas lidocaine patch blocks pain receptors for effective, nonaddictive relief. Salonpas lidocaine. Patch, rollon or cream. Hisamitsu. Every curve, every innovation, every feeling. A product of mastery. Lease the 2019 es 350 for 379 a month for 36 months. Experience amazing at your lexus dealer. Have you lost weight . Of course i have ever since i started renting from national. Because national lets me lose the wait at the counter. And choose any car in the aisle. And i dont wait when i return, thanks to drop go. At national, i can lose the wait. And keep it off. Looking good, patrick. I know. vo go national. Go like a pro. At comcast, we didnt build the nations largest gigspeed network just to make businesses run faster. We built it to help them go beyond. Because beyond risk. Welcome to the neighborhood, guys. There is reward. Beyond work and life. Who else could he be . There is the moment. Beyond technology. There is human ingenuity. Every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. Take your business beyond. There is no question there is a considerable slowdown in the World Economy both in china and in europe but as you look at the u. S. We continue to be the bright spot of growth. Charles treasury secretary Steve Mnuchin touting the strength of the u. S. Economy over the rest of the globe, this as new trade wars woes are hitting china pretty hard but there may be light at the end of the tunnel. Steve mnuchin saying both sides are in agreement on enforcement. That is even before they meet next month. So could a deal be on the horizon . Joining me to discuss former reagan economist art laffer. Art, youre not a tariff man but you also acknowledge this could be the fight after lifetime, generational fight with respect to just not our economic relationship with china but some of their other ambitions. How do you feel now, if they do put enforcement on the table, how do you feel about a deal getting done sooner rather than later . I do, but one thing i dont like, charles is the use of the word fight. I dont think it is us versus china. I think it is china and the u. S. Both benefiting by a very good trade deal that makes the world a much smoother place. China will be a big winner here. And so are we. This is really figuring out how we both can prosper together as partners, not fight each other. So i think if we put a deal on the table this would be a huge plus for the u. S. , an even enormous increase in prosperity and it is way bigger than just the trade numbers themselves. If you look at trade it is a magnified phenomenon. The Great Depression was precipitated by the smoothawley tariff. I was in the Nixon White House when we put all the protectionist measure it led to a huge downturn in the u. S. Economy. There is much, much levered here and i think a trade deal could add hugely to the u. S. , the number i picked out of hat, 10,000 by the dow, how about that . Neil charles i love it. How about that . Charles in addition to being great economist, youre a marriage counselor. Were getting a twofer for your comments. Im looking at todays session which is sideways. U. S. Steel is up 6 . Cummins engine up 2 . These are companies caught right in the middle of it. Looks like wall street might be sharing in your optimism here, this is something that obviously not only would be beneficial but maybe were taking bigger steps towards resolution than most people believe . I think we are. I think trump is the master negotiator but i think he has got a couple of lieutenants out there. I think he has mnuchin, i think he has larry kudlow, he has got lighthizer, who know how to do the nuts and bolts of this type of deal. Im extremely optimistic something will be done. When it happens, boy, hold back the horses, this economy is going. Charles you mentioned ronald reagan. Lighthizer helped paper that deal with japan. That involved currency. China came out of the gate saying that will not be part of our deal but he knows how to paper the deals. What do you think the concessions make on their side ultimately get President Trump to sign off . You know i think intellectual property, that is one of the key elements. The transfer of technology from acquisition that is another one. Charles art, i will have to jump in here. Im sorry, buddy. There is live event in washington, d. C. , attorney general ken paxton is back at the mi this. There may be some things we cant answer because there is an investigation. Carl and i have happy to answer questions. If you have a specific question for a specific ag, just let us know. Reporter thank you so much. I understand it is early days. I understand the investigation hasnt been concluded but would you be willing to go ahead and assume that the conclusion finds monopolistic tendencies can you discuss what some possible remedies might be . Would, google for example, be required to sell off doubleclick . So i will, well both answer questions, the answer were literally just starting the investigation. This is the kickoff. That is difficult to answer a question with as little as we know. Ken has it right, it is certainly a fair question but generally speaking you have got to find liability before we get to any remedies and the remedies variable for an antitrust action are there norfolks to see. There is behavioral modification, the kind that you talked about, but i think were better off leaving remedy unless and until we get to a remedy stage. Reporter washington post. Attorney general paxton you began by saying that the initial was advertising. As i listen to all your peers i heard things about smartphones, surge, data privacy and so forth. It s. This a top to bottom antitrust review of all of alphabet google. It is not fair to say that yet. All of our questions are related to advertising. Reporter [inaudible] everything that we requested so far is related to advertising. If there are other facts that demonstrate we need to go in another direction, we will talk about it, were certainly open to doing that. Reporter dave from reuters. That means you already issued subpoenas with demands to google with regards to the advertising . Yes, thats correct. Reporter tell us one statement, that the 49 states and district of columbia. It is 48 states, district of columbia, puerto rico, and two states are missing. Reporter tell us what the two states are . You might be not surprised california where google is located and alabama. By the way they can still change their minds. Reporter even too soon to say what a possible remedy be, what is fair marketplace what do you think should be happening . Well go with both of us. In a fair market you shouldnt punish somebody for having a unique technology but when you have companies that may be preventing other entrants into the market with unfair practices and dominating a market that then ultimately hurts consumers because even though there is maybe not a direct cost of searching on internet, if advertising costs are higher, who ends up paying that . Advertisers pay it. That is all passed on to consumers. Ultimately our consumers are harmed. That is our focus. Yeah. The only thing i would touch on and emphasize again the ubiquitousness and power of the Search Engine itself. Google itself, in its initial first years talked about it being the best Search Engine to find you what it is youre looking for and let you loose on the internet. We know that over time that model has changed to where the search result invariably is laden with googlerelated goods, services and those who pay google. That is a very different model than that model with which they began and it certainly merits our scrutiny, as it has merited the scrutiny of other sovereigns. Reporter brian with cnn. Wonder if you feel there is sufficient antitrust enforcement by federal authorities to date . I wonder if a