coerce, extort or bribe an ally into conducting investigations to aid his re-election campaign and did so by withholding official acts, a white house meeting or hundreds of millions of dollars of needed military aid, must we simply get over it in. >> here we are, we're supposed to take these people at face value when they trot out a new batch of allegations. anyone familiar with the democrats' scorched earth war against president trump would not be surprised to see all the typical signs that this is a carefully orchestrated media smear campaign. it's nothing more than an impeachment process in search of a crime. paul: let's bring in "wall street journal" columnist and deputy editor dan henninger and columnist kim strassel and bill mcgurn. so, dan, the adam schiff posed those statements in the form of a question. but as i read this, his statement, the rest of it, there's no question in his mind, he's already concluded that the president is guilty of what's been, they're putting together here. >> yeah, that's right. and presumably they're holding these hearings to convince the american people of the same thing. what you normally need to do, though, is to convince the members of the other party. and there were members of the other party during the impeachments of bill clinton and richard nixon, the opposition party, who supported the articles of impeachment. in this case, this is turning out to be a wholly partisan event which is to say they're calling it an impeachment, but this is basically a political strategy to suppress the president's support out there. and i don't have any problem with democrats raising ukrainian issue as a political issue and presenting it to the american people as a reason to not vote for donald trump. but that is not what is going on here. this is the grave process of impeaching a president. it's going to go forward with virtually, so far as i can tell, with no republican support whatsoever. paul: kim, the democrats are putting together a factual argument running this shadow foreign policy on ukraine with rudy julian pny and a couple of other people trying to get the president of ukraine to start an investigation of joe and hunter biden in return, the allegation goes, for a resumption of aid which they alleged had been stalled. military aid to ukraine. and the promise of a meeting with president trump. are they making that case on that factual basis? >> well, look, what you just outlined, paul, we already know the basic elements of it because we have it, the call transcript. we know the president was interested in, to some degree, into having ukraine do an investigation into his actions in 2016 and potentially into the actions of hunter biden and burisma. we know rudy giuliani was pushing for this. he did publicly, openly on television for months as well as working with ukrainians. so they can put together additional people saying we knew this, and they're trying very hard to tie donald trump directly to the withholding of the aid, etc. i think the problem that they fundamentally have here is that in then end the aid went to ukraine, and no investigation happened. so there was no quid pro quo. and that's why you instead see democrats using new words in this like extortion and bribery and coercion. it's not clear that that call in any way amounted to that, so i don't think they're making that case. but this is where they're headed with it now. paul: yeah. the -- it is interesting, bill, the quid pro quo phrase has vanished. and i think not only because -- [laughter] it's vanishing -- >> right. paul: remember that. a lot of those the classes. but they've now gone to, apparently, they had -- according to one report in "the washington post", they had focus groups which says -- >> right. paul: -- that that doesn't work to persuade anybody, so let's roll out bribery and extortion. they sound bad. [laughter] >> right. paul: the question is, is this actually evidence of a bribe or extortion? >> right. i mean, and they have tested it, and that poll, i think, was the democratic congressional campaign committee, and they were looking in districts, battleground districts for their members who might have won in a trump district. and they found that bribery resonated more. paul: again, i think at the end of the day -- >> there's going to just be facts. no favor and no withholding -- paul: was it a bribe? >> i don't think so. i mean, i think it was -- i think a lot of this could be put in the category of mistakes, clumsy, not things i would do. but i don't see how it's an impeachable offense to overturn an election. paul: it's interesting to me, dan, they're not pointing at any statute when they say bribery x. the justice department has already written that there was no thing of value exchanged to make it, for example, a campaign finance crime. and that's also what is required by a precedence to be a bribe. what about extortion? >> well, it's the same thing. you can get into a parse this legally and get into a legal debate over whether it qualifies as extortion or as bribery, but the fact remains that it doesn't add up as we all say in these impeachment things to the smoking gun. bill clinton lied to a grand jury. that was a crime. paul: and he had to concede it. >> he had to concede it. paul: because it was right before everyone. >> and richard nixon, you had the missing parts of the white house tapes and so forth. that was the smoking gun there. none of these things add up to a clear smoking gun where everybody says, i get it, the president did something that was absolutely, clearly, a violation of a federal statute or a crime. if they don't have that, they're just not making the case for impeachment. again, they can make a political argument against donald trump every day of the week. that's legitimate. but they haven't closed the case on impeachment. paul: kim, republicans are saying that much of the testimony so far is secondhand. nobody has talked to trump directly, they heard it second or thirdhand and saying it's hearsay. but doesn't that create the risk for the president if the democrats do find a witness who actually did talk to the president and the president told them directly, yeah, let's withhold the aid until this happens? >> yeah, look, in the end, i think what they're going to have to do is pivot here and start talking about problems with what democrats are actually alleging happened and the extortion and bribery case and make the case of exonerating the president on that rather than trying to just pick holes in the witnesses. that's not necessarily the best strategy. paul: yeah. okay, kim. all right, we're going to keep talking about this in the next block. with eight more witnesses and three more days of public impeachment hearings set for next week, can democrats sustain this impeachment push, and what can we expect when a trial in the senate bumps up against the 2020 presidential race? >> well, i don't think there's any question that we have to take up the matter. the rules of impeachment are very clear, we'll have to have a trial. ♪ it was in this small little village- in connemara. right! connemara it is! there's one gift the whole family can share this holiday season, their story. give the gift of discovery, with an ancestrydna kit. (groans) hmph... (food grunting menacingly) when the food you love doesn't love you back, stay smooth and fight heartburn fast with tums smoothies. ♪ tum tum-tum tum tums with tums smoothies. you wanna see something thatamazing?ing. go to hilton instead of a travel site and you'll experience a whole new range of emotions like... the relaxing feeling of knowing you're getting the best price. these'll work. the utter delight of free wi-fi... . oh man this is the best part. isn't that you? yeah. and the magic power of unlocking your room with your phone. i can read minds too. really? book at hilton.com. if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay. expect better. expect hilton. make fast, family sized meals in the time it takes some ovens to preheat. with ninja's superheated air, you can air fry for extra crispy, guilt free, delicious results. and because it's a ninja foodi, it can do things that no other oven can. and even flip up and out of the way. the ninja foodi air fry oven, the oven that crisps and flips away. ♪ ♪ >> over the next few weeks, we're going to have more witnesses like we've had today that the democrats will parade in here, and they're all going to say this: so and so said such and such to so and so and, therefore, we've got to impeach the president. paul: public hearings in the impeachment inquiry set to continue next week with eight more witnesses scheduled to testify over three days including president trump's ambassador to the european union, gordon sondland. this as majority leader mitch mcconnell said this week that the senate will have to take up the matter and that it is, quote, impossible to predict how long an impeachment trial would last. bill, so let me go to another bit of testimony here late in the week, marie yavanovitch, pardon my ukrainian is bad if. >> right. paul: during the friday hearings was testifying, and donald trump tweeted during the hearings -- [laughter] which adam schiff immediately pointed to and read the tweet attacking her -- >> right. paul: -- and there are now intimations of witness tampering. >> right. meaning a possible article of impeachment and everything -- paul: smart move by the president? >> no, i don't think it was a smart move, but i think that everything he said is true in the tweet. i wouldn't have done it, and it just -- but i think this is a drama, and we're going to have these bursts every other day, and there'll be something tomorrow. paul: well, you know, kim, the best advice donald trump has received, i think, from anybody here so far was bill clinton. he went on cmn to say, look -- cnn, look, the way to comport yourself is to say i'm doing the work of the american people, my lawyers are handling it, and you build up credibility by behaving like a president. and so interfering like he's preoccupied with his impeachment during the hearing, i think it's just self-destructive. >> yeah. well, the other benefit of that approach too, paul, is that you remind americans in doing so that democrats are not doing the work of the american people at the moment, and you've seen some republicans trying to make that case saying, look, we've got trade deals that need to move, we've got spending bills that need to get finished, we've got, you know, possible areas of cooperation where we could be getting things done on prescription drugs or infrastructure if you folks went obsessed with impeachment. so i think he'd do himself a lot of good if that were his approach. paul: this president simply can't stop himself, and i think it's going to hurt him, dan, i really do. mitch mcconnell in the senate saying, basically, we've got to have a trial, and we don't know when that would start, december or january depending on when the house impeaches. do you think that is the right strategy, or this because he doesn't really have the votes to dismiss? >> no, i think it's probably the right strategy. i mean, you're going to have more hearings here in the house. we don't know which way they're going. president trump sent them off in his own direction on friday, so i think, ultimately, you're going to need a trial in the senate at which in that trial there's going to be an issue on the table that the democrats in the house are never going to discuss, and that was hunter biden's role in ukraine and burisma. there are some details there that need to be opened up, and that will come out of a senate trial. and that could last all the way through january, and at the end of it the american people are going to have to make a judgment about what they think about all this. but they're only getting half the story with these house hearings. paul: yeah. ing that's a risky business for some of the senate democrats who are running for president. half a dozen, i just can't remember. they're going -- they want to be out in iowa, new hampshire, south carolina. >> right. paul: they have to be in the senate sitting in their chairs -- right. now, they come out and comment for the record on tv, but, you know, i guess though how long do the republicans really want a trial to go on? in. >> i mean, that's a good question. we'll see at the end of this, you know, i presume he's going to be impeached. i think that was decided when mrs. pelosi, you know, set this inotn. so we'll see what the senate does. you mentioned we don't know when the trial will start. bigger worry for democrats is when it will finish, right? [laughter] go into iowa. i thought, by the way, that andrew weissmann of bob mueller fame -- paul: the deputy under mueller. >> he felt the first day was kind of a dud for the democrats x he said democrats have to decide what they want to leave the country thinking. and they have to make the case why the president should be impeached and removed now rather than wait for an election. it was -- i seldom find myself on the same side as andrew weissmann if, but i think that is the challenge they have. paul: kim, is gordon sondland next week, is he probably the biggest, most crucial witness here? because he has probably had more conversations than anybody else with the president. is that your view? >> yeah. look, i think what's going to be important next week is that what we've heard up until now are career diplomats. and it was obvious today had some issue with the trump administration's general approach toward the ukraine, and so they've been somewhat critical in that regard. i think next week we're going to get some more political appointees, people who were closer to the president. gordon sondland, also kurt volker, some political folks appointed in other areas of the government. and that's, i think, going to add a little more to the defense of the president if their depositions are anything to go by. paul: all right. thanks to you all. when we come back, yet another democrat jumps into the 2020 race with a till-expanding field -- still-expanding field. what it says about the fate of the democratic party a year before at this point, i don't make compromises. i want nutrition made just for me. but i also want great taste. so i drink boost for women. new boost women with key nutrients to help support thyroid, bone, hair and skin health. all with great taste. new boost women. all with great taste. when it comes to using data, which is why xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network that lets you design your own data. choose unlimited, shared data, or mix lines of each and switch any line, anytime. giving you more choice and control compared to other top wireless carriers. and now get $250 off when you buy a new samsung phone during xfinity mobile beyond black friday. plus, you can save up to $400 a year. click, call or visit a store today. ♪ ♪ paul: although just ten candidates have qualified for next wednesday's fifth presidential debate in atlanta, the democratic field is is once again expanding with former massachusetts governor deval patrick joining the race, traveling to new hampshire on thursday to file paperwork for that state's first in the nation primary. he joins former new york city mayor michael bloomberg who announced last week that he is considering a run. we're back with dan henninger, kim strassel and kyle peterson. tiel, you've been looking at deval patrick what's the rationale he's offering to get in at this late stage? >> well he, i think, sees himself as goldielocks candidate. you have bernie sanders and elizabeth warren, two candidates who are promising to fundamentally change the american capitalist system, and the candidate in fourth is pete buttigieg, the 30-something mayor who's dynamic but he's very young. so the theory is that deval patrick can come n he's 63, a two-therm governor, he's progressive, but he's a capitalist that, you know, he's worked for private enterprise, he has some experience there that he can come in and unite these factions of the party. paul: all right. kim, are you buying that rationale? do you think it's going anywhere in. >> i'm not buying at all. [laughter] here's how i see deval patrick, he is another progressive-liberal candidate among a sea of progressive-liberal candidates. and, you know, i'm just not quite sure how he would distinguish himself. look, i think one thing that he will be able to say is maybe a little bit of executive experience, right? which would, you know, put him off from some of the senators that are running. paul: right. >> but beyond that at least in terms of policy, i just don't get the rationale, and also he's late, and he's going to have a fundraising issue too. paul: mike bloomberg, he doesn't have a fundraising issue, he's going to spend money on anti-trump ads right off the bat, and he could spend a billion dollars easily, and it'd be pocket change. >> yeah, a ride on the subway for mike bloomberg, which he doesn't do. no, i think that's right. but i think -- an important issue has been raised here, if i could pick up on the goldie lox metaphor. we're looking for candidates like deval patrick who says i'm not too far left or too far right, but as kim pointed out, there's no policy vision here. and i think that's one of the problems that the non-progressive candidates, not bernie or elizabeth warren are having. the centrist democratic vision now really is no vision. it's essentially more of the same -- paul: it's kind of warren lite. >> yeah. and there's just no there there. and that's, i think, one of the reasons they're having trouble getting elevation. meanwhile, you've got elizabeth warren over there going so far left, she's just simply insulating herself if from attacks on the left and assuming that if she gets the nomination, democrats in the general party are going to have to vote for her. paul: and speaking of senator warren, we've got part of an ad here that she has rolled out this week. let's look. >> it is time for a wealth tax in america. [cheers and applause] i've heard that there are some billionaires who don't support this plan. >> the vilification of billionaires makes no sense to me. >> she would ruin what we have. >> she probably thinks more of cataclysmic change to system as opposed to tinkering. >> well, i'm most scared by elizabeth warren. paul: all right. so, kim, clearly she is using billionaires as a foil and particularizing it, personalizing it, denigrating them. smart? >> well, it's very elizabeth warren. it's pure populism. and this is what she's been running on from the start. when she first got in this race, her goal was to be the liberal version of donald trump and to generate and channel the rage of average americans against the system. i think one problem he has though is this -- she has though is there: a lot of americans want to succeed, they value achievement, they value success. that's different from the their view that government is, in fact, rigged against them. that was donald trump's message. we'll see if elizabeth warren's version of it works. paul: a little irony here in one respect, cooperman and black fine, kyle, they're democrats. i know lloyd blankfein a little, if i've been in debates with him, he's no conservative. and yet that's not sparing them from any, from these attacks. so what does that tell you about just what's going to happen to anybody who has money in a warren presidency? >> well, elizabeth warren has explained that -- [laughter] in excruciating detail in, i think, about 58 plans now. but what i think is so funny about this ad is remember in the debate a few weeks ago, she was very surprised that anyone could think of her as punitive. [laughter] now on her web site she's selling a coffee mug and the words billionaire tears, hard to get more punitive than that. paul: you and i remember -- well, we weren't alive then, fdr. you take an industrialist at that time, now a financier or somebody, and you put them up and you denigrate them, and you say that they, you know, you intimate insider trading x. you make them the targets, and you can essentially try to destroy them. >> yeah. well, unfortunately for elizabeth warren, it's not the 1940s anymore, at least i don't think it is -- paul: i'm not so sure, dan. i'm really not. i think we're going back there. >> well, yes, for progressives and left-wing democrats. the question is are people in the center who are going to decide this election going to sign on to what she's proposing. the "wall street journal" this weekend is reporting that her tax rates on multimillionaires and billionaires add up to over 100%. that is confiscation where i'm coming from -- paul: yeah, that would qualify. [laughter] >> so are the american -- at least the people in the center, independents and so forth, are they really willing to sign on to confiscating the earned income of all these people and basically taking them out of the economy? paul: i wish i felt confident about that answer, i really do. still ahead, president trump touting his economic record and making his case for 2020 in a speech to business leaders this week. so an election year tax cut on the horizon? the horizon? we'll ask white house 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, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu. (danny)'s voice) of course you don'te because you didn't!? your job isn't doing hard work... ...it's making them do hard work... ...and getting paid for it. (vo) snap and sort your expenses to save over $4,600 at tax time. quickbooks. backing you. there's a company that's talked than me: jd power.people 448,134 to be exact. they answered 410 questions in 8 categories about vehicle quality. and when they were done, chevy earned more j.d. power quality awards across cars, trucks and suvs than any other brand over the last four years. so on behalf of chevrolet, i want to say "thank you, real people." you're welcome. we're gonna need a bigger room. hi, my name is sam davis and i'm going to tell you about exciting plans available to anyone with medicare. many plans provide broad coverage and still may save you money on monthly premiums and prescription drugs. with original medicare, you're covered for hospital stays and doctor office visits, but you have to meet a deductible for each and then you're still responsible for 20% of the cost. next, let's look at a medicare supplement plan. as you can see, they cover the same things as original medicare and they also cover your medicare deductibles and co-insurance. but they often have higher monthly premiums and no prescription drug coverage. now, let's take a look at humana's medicare advantage plans. with a humana medicare plan, hospital stays, doctor office visits and medicare deductibles are covered. and, of course, most humana medicare advantage plans include prescription drug coverage. in fact, in 2018, humana medicare advantage prescription drug plan members saved an estimated $7400, on average, on their prescription costs. most humana medicare advantage plans help you stay active and keep fit by including a silver sneakers fitness program at no extra cost. and, you may be able to save on dental and vision expenses, because coverage is now included with most humana medicare advantage plans. you get all this coverage for as low as a zero dollar monthly plan premium in many areas. and your doctor and hospital may already be a part of humana's large network. if you want the facts, call right now for the free decision guide from humana. there is no obligation, so call the number on your screen right now to see if your doctor is in our network; to find out if you can save on your prescriptions and to get our free decision guide. licensed humana sales agents are standing by, so call now. do you have concerns about mild memory loss related to aging? prevagen is the number one pharmacist-recommended memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. set yourself free with fleet. gentle constipation relief in minutes. little fleet. big relief. try it. feel it. feel that fleet feeling. ♪ ♪ >> we have ended the war on american workers, we have stopped the assault on american industry, and we have launched an economic boom the likes of which we have never seen before. paul: that was president trump tuesday at the economic club of new york touting his economic record and making his case for re-election to a group of business leaders. so can he sell that same message to american voters in to 2020? earlier i spoke to white house economic adviser larry kudlow. you've had this decline in investment over the last year or so. it's pretty substantial and a real manufacturing recession and certainly in parts of manufacturing. what are you doing to try to have that pop back here in the next year? >> well, look, a couple things on that. first of all, as you well know, we have been very hard hit by severe, overly severe monetary policies in 2017 and 2018 without any inflation. so i really think the fed slamming on the brakes at exactly the wrong time, big mistake. and i think it hurt the hard goods area. it hurt other areas but not nearly as much as hard goods. the other thing most recently and the quarter just ended and maybe the fourth quarter too, you had the gm strike, you had the boeing problems with their new airplane. that should straighten itself out by the first quarter, so that's got hurt. number three, a virtual recession in europe, a virtual recession which did a lot of damage to our manufacturing exports. i'm not here to deny that the china tariff -- paul: right. >> -- more has had an impact. but as i've said a hundred times, it's a minimal impact on this country. they're the ones who have had to slash prices, they're the ones who had to the slash their currency, they're the ones who are losing supply chains left and right. their economy, i don't know if you saw the latest batch of numbers -- paul: yeah, i know, there there's no doubt about it. i want to ask you -- [inaudible conversations] >> a little optimistic, my friend? paul: okay. >> just a little optimistic, because the fed has taken its foot off the brake, so that's a very good thing. tremendous consumer spending numbers, tremendous employment numbers. i mean, with revisions and so forth almost 300,000 jobs in the last month. and one point i just have to make, we are in the midst of an american worker boom. and this is such an important point. an american worker boom where in just two and a half years average real incomes after tax up about $5,000. that's per family. and under the prior administration -- actually, let me go nonpartisan. under the prior two administrations, their numbers were flat. we're up $5,000. that's a worker boom, and that's because the president has defended our economy, and he's going to continue to do so. paul: so, dan, you heard larry kudlow. how strong a case does the president have on the economy as he runs for re-election? >> well, i think it's probably the strongest case he has along with the supreme court appointments. i mean, i have just been so struck, paul, i think we thought the tax cuts or the corporate tax rate cuts would work, deregulation would work, i would never have guessed it would create as many jobs as it has and especially bringing down the unemployment rate for black and hispanic americans, single women and wages rising for these people. that's kind of the point of politics. and donald trump, if as good a salesman as he is, has got to out and appeal directly to those people and compare that he did to the economy to what the democrats are likely to do. if that unemployment rate starts going back up for back and hispanic americans, you know, that is just going to be a big problem. paul: so when you've got the faster growth -- and, remember, in 2015 and 2016, we almost came into a recession. the recovery was long in the tooth. president trump comes in, deregulation, tax reform. basically saying business, you know, we're open for business again. you get up to 3% growth, you get really tight labor markets, and that's flowing down across the economy. >> right. look, i think -- i agree with dan. the two big issues that mobilized republican voters were judges and the economy. and he delivered. but the question is, will it still be delivering next year. we say is trump going to run on this -- he's already running on it. [laughter] every rally he talks about the unemployment, but i think he needs to pick up larry's point about growth because the criticism is it's a sugar high, this growth just helped hedge fund managers and not ordinary joes. but that figure about average income going up, that's a huge plus for the average worker out there. paul: but that point was true during the obama recovery because so much of it was rooted in monetary policy that goosed asset prices. and that was people who have assets, not people who earn income. what we've seen is wages are gone up. now, the problem in the last year or to so, six, nine months or so has been the trade policy uncertainty, in my view. and i know larry kudlow doesn't want to admit this, but i think it's affected investment, and that has got us back down to 2% growth. the question is now will it bump back up to 2.5 or maybe even 3. >> i think it would definitely drive it back up. i mean, the thing that was so surprising, every month the jobs reports come out not as strong as a year ago but, nonetheless, still exceeding economists expectations. it is an extraordinary phenomenon. paul: well, and people are coming off the sidelines. you know, people who had decided it's easier to work than take government benefits better. still ahead, the supreme court hears oral arguments in one of its biggest cases of the term with the justices weighing president trump's authority to end obama era protections for so-called dreamers. it is nice. nice? this is the most-awarded minivan three years in a row. the van just talked. sales guy, give 'em the employee price, then gimme your foot. hands-free sliding doors, stow 'n go seats, man, y'all getting a hook up and y'all don't even work here. pacificaaaaa! man 1 vo: proof of less joint pain woman 1 oc: this is my body of proof. and clearer skin. man 2 vo: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2 vo: ...with humira. woman 3 vo: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3 vo: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 4 vo: go to humira.com to see proof in action. ♪ ♪ paul: the supreme court hearing oral arguments this week in one of the most closely watched cases of the term with the justices taking up the question of when president trump can end protections for young immigrants known as dreamers. the administration is appealing lower court rulings that blocked its 2017 plan to rescind the deferred action for childhood arrivals program, also known as daca, which the obama administration created in 2012. we're back with dan henninger, or kyle peterson and "wall street journal" editorial board member alicia finley. what's the argument? >> well, they're saying that these are unsubstantive rights that the dreamers have, they have the right to legal status, work permits, and trump rescinded these rights without going through notice of comment as required under the administrative procedure act. paul: so let me understand this. president obama could, by an executive act and using prosecutorial discretion, they said, as the justification, he could do it, but trump can't rescind it? >> well, that's exactly it -- paul: why not? >> that's one of the many logical inconsistencies in their argument. they're saying that president obama used his enforcement discretion to shield these 1.7 million dreamers from deportation, and under the law -- or under rules, regulatory dhs rules, they are also allowed to get work permits. so it cites a provision of the law that grants the president wide or very broad discretion to set immigration priorities and ostensibly they'd shield dreamers because they were young, they were brought to the country before they were 16, and they don't present a criminal threat. nobody -- chief justice john roberts pointed out in the oral arguments, nobody is disputing the president's authority to on a case-by-case basis to shield someone or prevent them from being deported. it's doing it for a broad class of individuals. paul: is in any hint from the oral arguments where this is going to go? >> well, i think the solicitor general at the end of the oral arguments realized that the justices were very troubled by some of the, i mean, very sympathetic. there are, quote-own quote, real lives at interest here, but i think he gave them kind of a fallback as they try to understand, like, how square these different positions. well, you just rule that daca is unconstitutional, you don't have to decide whether president trump's order is unconstitutional -- paul so that would mean, dan, basically decide the original sin, if you will, it was president obama's tank ca decision x that would sort of wipe the whole thing clean, start over. >> start over, meaning forcing essentially the legislative branch to readdress this and come up with a solution. and this is, indeed, a public issue in search of a legislative solution. there are about 700,000 of these dreamers, 1,000 of them are serving in the military. in fact, they do pay federal taxes. they pay about $3 billion a year in federal taxes plus social security. and that has added up to a lot of sympathy for them. 65% of republicans think they ought to be given work permits. you would guess that this is something that the congress could work out at this point, and if the supreme court throws it back to the congress, then possibly we'll get a solution for the dreamers. paul: yeah. and just to add to that, to dan's point, the obama decision basically said come on out of the shadows, you know, register, you'll get the work permit. but it's only for two years. but till people who did that -- still people who did that put their trust in the federal government. and now you could get the government turning around and saying, sorry, you've got to go back to guatemala, to mexico, when they were brought here as children. so they may not even know anybody there. there's really, i think, a moral obligation to do something to legalize them, in my opinion. and when judges intervene to block trump, they basically took away the momentum that was building for a compromise. >> right. and you could get, you know, the administration turning around and then the new administration turning back around. so that was clearly weighing on the justices too. there was a lot of talk about whether president trump's move to end daca is reviewable or not by the courts. so the supreme court could say, you know, this is enforcement discretion, this is not reviewable by us, which means that the ending of daca goes into effect, and if president warren or president biden comes in, then they could rescind the rescindment and put daca back into effect. then the red states are going to sue, and you're going to have six more years of limbo. paul: yeah. this cries out for a political compromise with congress and the executive. when we come back, hong kong braces for more violence this weekend as clashes between pro-chem -- pro-democracy protesters and police escalate. the latest on the growing unrest the latest on the growing unrest and what it could mean for some farms grow food. this one grows fuel. ♪ exxonmobil is growing algae for biofuels. that could one day power planes, propel ships, and fuel trucks... and cut their greenhouse gas emissions in half. algae. its potential just keeps growing. ♪ its potential just keeps growing. that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today. that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today. paul hong kong is bracing for more violence as tensions between police and pro-democracy protesters escalate. a police officer shot an unarmed student protester at close range earlier this week as demonstrators attempted to disrupt the morning rush hour. while a man arguing with protesters was set on fire later that same day. chinese state media is warning protesters that they are, quote, on the edge of doom. "the wall street journal" editorial page writer jill january melcher has been traveling to hong kong and is with us. welcome. what is the reason for the escalation? >> i think there are two reasons. one is many protesters have a perception that the police violence is escalating. we're talking about many more casualties and much more serious casualties. paul: is that fair? >> yeah, i think that's absolutely fair. and then more high level, you know, chinese communist party official met in late october and came out with a plan for how they're going to handle hong kong, and it's greater integration into the main lan and a very aggressive plan to force through some of the things that sparked huge protests -- paul: are there any concessions at all they are considering for the protesters? are they meeting any of their demands? >> so they withdrew the extradition bill. i think that would have given an opportunity to start moving toward the status quo, but you've seen signaling they are not going to how a return to the status quo, in fact, they're going to double down, and hong kong's freedoms are going to continue to disappear. paul: there's going to be district council elections later this month, it is one of the, a sign of representation. >> yes. paul: and yet the chinese have band or the government has banned joshua wong, democracy activist, from running. there are suggestions that maybe -- and there's a threat from the chinese media -- that the elections could be canceled because of the violation. what would be the hong kong reaction to that? >> it would not be good. so we've seen a huge surge of people registering to vote. people would much rather express their discontent at the ballot box than in the streets. and i think that if the government is looking for a pretense to hut this down, it's it's -- to shut this down, it's only going to further enflame passions. paul: one of the things the communist party is talking about is they're going to focus on patriotic education for the chinese students. now, you and i both know because we lived there, students from chinese university of hong kong and hong kong university, they have liberal educations, you know, just like anywhere in the united states. >> right. paul: and that's one of the reasons that they're demonstrating -- >> right. paul: they want to retain their rights as citizens. so what, so this is essentially saying we're going to, you know, make a hong kong education propaganda exercise. >> yeah. i mean, they've been trying this for a while. hong kong was my home for ten years. it was where -- it was my first home when i was married, i became a father and so forth. i think it's doomed now. and i think -- paul: you think hong kong itself is doomed. >> it'll be a rich city, but it won't be the city of opportunity that you and i knew, the shining city there. and i think the problem, what gillian's saying, the larger problem, the police have behaved like goons in a lot of -- but the larger problem is i think the government doesn't understand the rage that people have. and the people are enraged because they're treated like criminals. if you and i -- we all know if they left hong kong alone, it wouldn't be a threat to mainland china at all, but they're insisting on this. and i think people are just tired of being presumed that they're criminals. and what i worry about now is that, you know, the communists could fix this by giving autonomy -- that's not what communists do. and i worry -- paul: giving autonomy that they promised -- >> and i worry now that the peaceful protests have yielded to more violence, i don't think young men with molotov cocktails is the path to the kind of hong kong we want. so it looks like a greek tragedy just directed on this terrible -- >> i think it's a crisis for the chinese and xi jinping. i mean, the chinese are arguing that they want to be recognized as this great power, they want respect in the world, and yet hong kong has become a global emblem of what the chinese communist system has to do to hold power. it is increasingly brutal methods to keep people in place x. i think that is really causing significant -- is going to cause significant problems going forward for xi jinping's plans for the country's future. paul: jillian, the congress is actively moving to act on this, passing a bill that would do what? >> so we treat hong kong differently than we treat china in a number of ways, customs, visas, how we deal with banking. paul: easier cooperation, basically. >> yeah. they get privileges that mainland china doesn't enjoy. paul: right. >> this would basically say if china starts to blur the distinctions, those privileges can be revoked. and in addition to that, officials who commit human rights abuses, who participate in renditions to china could face sanctions. so it's a way of putting some political accountability -- paul: and these magnitsky sanctions which have been imposed on russians and others, they limit travel, they confiscate their assets overseas. dodo you agree with that, bill? >> i agree with the sanctions part because, you know, the mischief, even carrie lam, i'm not thrilled with the substance because i think we should be trying to emphasize hong kong's difference. but what the people in hong kong are looking for is just some show from the u.s., we hear you, we're on your side. i mean, i'm hearing reports that the british might consider honoring more passports for hong kong chai nee.z i would like to see more of that -- paul: how about a quarter million -- [laughter] >> come to new york. paul: you don't think that they would bring talent here? they sure would. we have to take one more break. when we come back, hits and misses of the week. ♪ ♪ ♪ 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, non-addictive relief. salonpas lidocaine. patch, roll-on or cream. hisamitsu. so w>>i'm searching for info on options trading, and look, it feels like i'm just wasting time. wasted time is wasted opportunity. >>exactly. that's why td ameritrade designed a first-of-its-kind, personalized education center. see, you just >>oh, this is easy. yeah, and that's >>oh, just what i need. courses on options trading, webcasts, tutorials. yeah. their award-winning content is tailored to fit your investing goals and interests. and it learns with you, so as you become smarter, so do its recommendations. >>so it's like my streaming service. well exactly. well except now, you're binge learning. >>oh, i like that. thank you, i just came up with that. >>you're funny. learn fast with the td ameritrade education center. call 866-295-0908 or visit tdameritrade.com/learn. get started today, and for a limited time, get up to $800 when you open and fund an account. that's 866-295-0908, or tdameritrade.com/learn. ♪ :: paul: paul: time now for our hits and misses of the week. kim, start us off. >> paul, this is a hit to a number of studies out that are finally digging into the problems of teen marijuana use. we've got one showing that the incidence of marijuana abuse among youth is higher in states where it is legal. another showing a higher incidence of heart arrhythmia among young users and another showing that they are at higher risk of strokes. this is not an argument for or against legalization. rather it is an acknowledgment that any kid drug use is problematic and if states are going to continue rushing into legalization, we have on obligation to understand what that means for society. paul: jillian? >> my miss goes to new york city's licensing regime for mobile food cart vendors. this last week we saw a woman selling churro's a mexican dessert in the subway get handcuffed. she was crying, got taken away by police. they only give out 3,000 food vending cart licenses. so it is a way for restaurants to restrict competition, but i think it hurts small business people like this. new york should be encouraging that. paul: alicia? >> this is a miss to the new museum capitalism on display in new york. it has -- it's a retrospective look at celebrating the end of capitalism. it has edible artifacts like energy bars, cheeseburgers, souvenirs are coins stamped with property is theft and the biggest exhibit in the museum is the gift shop where you can buy tote bags and other merchandise. paul: good campaign stop for elizabeth warren. kyle? >> hit to bernie sanders defender of american property rights. he was asked this past week about a mandatory buyback for ar 15s and he said it is essentially confiscation which i think is unconstitutional means i will walk into your house and take something whether you like it or not. now, that's coming from a guy who wants an 8% wealth tax, but at least on this issue, he's the moderating force in the democratic primary. paul: you think confiscation is going to stop being an issue in the primarys? >> probably not. paul: kidding. [laughter] >> good to hear, though. paul: thanks, kyle. thank you all. remember if you have your own hit or miss tweet us it to us. that's it for this week's show. thanks to my distinguished panel and for all you watching. i'm paul gigot. hope to see you here next week. eric: now reaction pouring in from lawmakers on capitol hill to the public impeachment hearings, with more testimony coming this coming week. democrats and republicans continue to disagree on the impact of the testimony, from those three career diplomats, as president trump continues to rail against the entire process, branding it fake and phony. hello. welcome to a brand new hour of america's news headquarters. i'm eric shawn. eric: i'm arthel neville. last week the house intelligence committee heard testimony from former u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch acting ambassador to ukraine, william taylor, and deputy assistant