See You Again Chris Wallace Push Rewind
eleven:00 pm
every bit always, thanks for tuning in. you lot make the evidence possible but unfortunately that is all the time we have left and we will never eat the media mob and were e'er contained but let non your heart be troubled because laura ingram or somebody is taking over from hither. thanks again and we will meet yous monday night. kristin: i'yard chris wallace. facebook'southward independent oversight board maintains a temporary ban on donald trump simply sends the instance back to the social media giant. now, facebook has 6 months to make a concluding determination. what does information technology hateful for mr. trump's ability to become out his message and raise money as he considers some other run for president. and what does information technology mean for the push in congress to regulate big tech? >> whether it'south half dozen months or six days, what we see in this conclusion is really virtually spooky costless speech. voice communication.chris: will sit down down wih
11:01 pm
former federal judge, michael mcconnell, only on fox news lord's day. then, republican lawmakers in the firm call for new leadership. backing trump defender elise defender stefanekto replace liz. we're joined by congressman jim banks of indiana, ane of the leaders in the drive to oust cheney. it's a trick news sunday exclusive. plus -- >> our efforts are starting to work. but the climb is steep and nosotros nevertheless have a long fashion to go. chris: disappointing task numbers, even equally employers struggle to find workers many we'll ask our sunday console almost challenges to the economic recovery. and our power player of the week, the fcc chair who once called tv a vast wasteland and what he thinks of today's media
11:02 pm
landscape. all right at present on fox news dominicus. ♪ chris: howdy again and happy mother'due south twenty-four hours from play a trick on news in washington. donald trump's n flense on the republican -- influence on the republican party is being claiming i thinked on two fronts where house republicans are working to remove liz cheney equally one of their leaders and on social media where facebook's decision to ban mr. trump on their platform is now reconsidering. in a moment we'll speak with former federal gauge, michael mcconnell, i of the co-chairs of facebook's oversight board. start, let's bring in mike emanuel on where night-with more on where the trump facebook
eleven:03 pm
controversy stands correct glow the determination to uphold ban on sometime president trump for at present has led to calls to break upward big tech platforms with some arguing for anti-trust reform, after allegations of censoring conservatives. >> this is going to be a breakup of big tech. when you look at google and facebook, they have more ability over what we read and what we see than any in the media. >> there's also pregnant sure from those shut to onetime president trump, that being shut out by facebook and twitter could severely impact his fund raising ability and ability to reach his base. the trump re-ballot entrada devoted a ix figure budget to facebook. every bit for president biden -- >> the president's view is that the major platforms have a responsibility related to the health and safety of all americans to finish amplifying untrustworthy content, disinformation and misinformation. >> reporter: in congress, there's at to the lowest degree some bipartisan
11:04 pm
support for big tech reform. with some on the left pushing for section 230 reform to cut downwards on spam and conspiracy theorists. the democratic chairman of the senate intelligence commission says failure is not an option. >> we need these reforms and have not been able to go them across the finish line. >> there'due south calls to be consistent and transparent in enforcing the rules and there's the constitutional consequence regarding first subpoena spoken communication. chris. chris: mike, give thanks yous. joining u.s. now, one of the co-chairs of facebook'south oversight board, former federal judge, michael mcconnell. professor, let'due south start with facebook'south original conclusion to ban president trump based on two of his posts on the day of the capitol riot. starting time, there was this. >> this was a fraudulent election. but we can't play into the hands of these people.
11:05 pm
we have to have peace. so become home. we dearest you lot. you're very special. you lot've seen what happens. chris: later that same day, mr. trump posted this. these are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide ballot victory is so unshare money justly, viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been unfairly and desperately treated for so long. your board decided to uphold the ban for 6 months while facebook clarifies its policy. why did you decide to enforce the ban or to keep the ban during that menstruum rather than to lift it? >> well, chris, on january 6th president trump issued those statements as a mob was rampaging through the capitol, as members of congress were
11:06 pm
cowering in fear, equally the rioters were threatening vice president pence's life and at that time he issued these statements which were just egging on -- with prefunctory asking for peace, only mostly egging them on to proceed. this is a obviously violation of facebook's rules against praising a dangerous individual and organizations at a fourth dimension of violence. so mr. trump is subject to the same rules on facebook every bit anybody else and the oversight board held that this was in fact a violation and thus facebook was justified in taking them downwards. what nosotros did say, though, was they were non justified in taking them down indefinitely, that they did non provide any reasons for that, that that is not a provision in their rules. that was incorrect. and we gave them a sure
11:07 pm
amount of fourth dimension to go that -- get their house in lodge. they needed some time because their rules are a shambles. they are non transparent. they're unclear. they internally are inconsistent. so we made a series of recommendations nearly how to make their rules clearer and more consistent and the promise is that they will utilise the next few months to practice that and so when they p come up back and look at this they'll be able to apply those rules in a straightforward way. chris: every bit a ramble constabulary professor, equally a onetime federal excursion court of appeals approximate, how do yous answer concerns that facebook is violating president trump'south free spoken communication? >> well, i mean, the simple legal answer is that private companies are non bound by the first amendment and and so he has no first amendment rights. he's a customer. he's not a -- facebook is not a
eleven:08 pm
authorities and he is not a denizen of facebook. but in a broader sense, what we are trying to exercise is bring some of the most important principles of the first amendment, a complimentary expression law globally, into this operation. facebook has been -- exercises too much ability. they are capricious. they are inconsistent. and information technology is a job of the oversight board to endeavor to bring some discipline to that procedure. so what we have done is to identify ways in which facebook has been nontransparent, the ways in which they've been ash a trayly and -- arbitrary and trying to nudge them towards a more complimentary speech communication, costless expression, friendly environs. chris: i want to push back a bit on the free spoken language statement. i understand the legal argument.
11:09 pm
every bit you say, you lot think facebook is exercising likewise much dominance. listen to what republican senator josh hawley had to say about all of this. >> these platforms like facebook, like google, they censor our speech. they shut out new market entrants. they shut out competitors. why? because they've gotten to be monopolies. that'due south why i think we have to accept them on and break them up. chris: the statement is that facebook and twitter and other platforms have go so big that they can in effect silence people in the digital age and the statement is, aye, president trump is able to speak, but it's not a matter of freedom of speech with something like facebook, it'southward a matter of liberty of reach. how practise you answer to that? >> well, it's of course up to congress to decide what the anti-trust laws are going to exist but this is not a complimentary -- this
11:10 pm
is not a first amendment issue. information technology's not as if -- you can't go to court, no estimate in the country would concord that mr. trump'south costless speech rights were violated. now, if congress wants to laissez passer a new rule, similar to the must behave rules or the fairness doctrine of the past, they can do that and the courts will decide whether that comports with the kickoff amendment. the oversight board has goose egg to practice with that. our job is to provide oversight for facebook to make sure that they are applying their rules in a off-white, consistent, nonarbitrary fashion. chris: just i want to pick upwardly on exactly that point, sir. there's certainly a practical effect in the facebook ban. president trump in 2020 as mike emanuel mentioned got his message out to millions of voters through facebook. he raised millions of dollars through facebook.
xi:11 pm
i desire to -- when you were appointed the oversight lath, y'all said it was, quote, your goal that facebook act as a, quote, neutral platform, that, quote, does not determine elections couldn't one argue that what facebook is doing now, it'southward interim on bias to very much hinder president trump'due south ability to run for re-election? >> and then, there might be bias either way. remember, mr. trump is the one who issued those inflammatory posts. at the very time when rioters were invading the congress and shutting down the constitutionally process for counting electoral posts. he issued that. he is responsible for doing that. he bears a responsibility for his own state of affairs. he put himself in this bed and he can sleep in it. chris: do you thinks -- i
11:12 pm
understand this isn't a lath question, just i'yard asking you as a police force professor and former federal judge. practice you remember that these large -- these enormous platforms like facebook, like twitter, should be regulated? do yous think these enormous platforms should exist cleaved up? >> chris, that is not my job to decide. congress can determine that. you lot know, equally a co-chair of the oversight board, my job is, you know, while congress is figuring out what to do, to effort to improve matters, to attempt to bring some fairness and consistency to facebook. and permit me emphasize, fairness and consistency are accented bed rocks of freedom of expression rules. freedom of expression depends upon a lack of vagueness, it depends upon even treatment of everyone. now, if facebook only let mr.
11:xiii pm
trump off the claw completely, it would non be even treatment of everyone considering all users of the platform are subject area to the same set of rules and that includes mr. trump. chris: i take a concluding question, i've got nigh a minute left here, professor. when mark zuckerberg set the oversight board, he said he wanted to establish separation of powers, if you will, that you would human action as a kind of supreme court to oversee public policy issues involving facebook. just information technology was zuckerberg who appointed the iv co-chairs of the lath including you lot. it was zuckerberg who set up the trust that pay equally all of you. i guess the question is, how contained is the independent oversight board? >> let me tell you lot, i've gotten to know these 20 people around the earth and the danger that
11:14 pm
they are toadies for facebook is but about zero. in that location is no -- many of them have spent their careers criticizing facebook. nosotros are not appreciative to facebook. near of the decisionses then far have been overturning facebook's decisions and by the way, most of them requiring facebook to put material support. it has been a voice largely for freedom of expression and as well as clarity and consistency and transparency. chris: we're going to have to leave it there, professor mcconsistent he'll fell, cheers. thank you for your fourth dimension this weekend. information technology'south adept to talk with you, sir. up next, she was once a rising star in the gop. simply now liz cheney, the number three republican in the house, appears most to lose that position over her carve up with sometime president trump. we're joined by congressman jim banks, chair of the republican written report committee, who is one of
11:15 pm
the members of congress leading the accuse to remove her.
11:xvi pm
11:17 pm
wanna help kids get their homework washed? well, an internet connectedness's a good start. but kids also demand computers. and sometimes the hardest thing well-nigh homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers upwardly with wifi? for kids similar us, and all the amazing things we're gonna larn. over the next ten years, comcast is committing $1 billion to reach l one thousand thousand low-income americans with the tools and resource they demand to be ready for annihilation. i hope y'all're ready. 'cause we are.
xi:xviii pm
chris: house republicans meet this calendar week to decide whether to remove liz cheney as conference chair, the number 3 mail service in gop leadership. cheney says her political party is at a turning point over former president trump's claims of a stolen ballot and his role in the capitol hill anarchism. and joining us now you, the head of the business firm gop'southward biggest caucus, indiana congressman, jim banks. congressman, welcome to fox news sunday. >> hey, chris, good to be with you. chris: you are one of the
eleven:nineteen pm
republicans leading the accuse to remove liz cheney as chair of the republican conference and it looks like to replace information technology with elise stefanik, a congresswoman from upstate new york. i want to put up their voting records because it's pretty interesting. take a look. cheney has an 80% voting tape from the conservative group heritage actions, stefanik'south score is 48%. cheney voted with trump position these final four years 93% of the time. stefanik voted with trump positions 78% of the time. if cheney is being replaced and she's clearly it seems more conservative than stefanik, is it just because of the fact that she's not as loyal to donald trump? >> well, chris, permit'south kickoff with that. this competely misses the indicate nearly why we need a change in republican leadership. let me tell you, republicans are almost completely unified in a
11:twenty pm
single mission to oppose the radical, dangerous biden agenda and win dorsum the majority in the midterm election and whatever other focus other than that is a distraction from stopping the biden agenda from what it'due south already done in he 3 months, sending this any a tailspin, the -- economy in a tailspin, the crunch at the edge, making america less safe abroad from a appeasing those in iran by re-entering the iran new you lot clear deal, that's a focus as a house republican conference and any leader who is not focused on that, on pushing back against the radical, dangerous biden calendar at this signal needs to be replaced. the indicate is we are about entirely unified on that mission, except for liz cheney. chris: i understand, congressman. what is it virtually liz cheney that isn't focusing on this mission? she opposes joe biden's jen da very strongly -- calendar very strongly. >> that has not been as seen as much as almost of us in the
11:21 pm
republican conference would like to run into. as you mentioned, i'm the leader of the largest conservative caucus, the republican study commission. information technology'due south uncomfortable at times but one of my jobs is to hold my republican leadership answerable for being focused on the republican ideals that we represent and the single mission that we take to win back the bulk and at this point the reason, chris, that you and i are talking about on this important program on dominicus morn is the exact evidence that she's failed in her mission as the chief spokesperson of our party. nosotros shouldn't exist talking near liz cheney. we should exist talking virtually pushing dorsum confronting the radical biden calendar and this is all a distraction from our ability to be able to do that that's why she will likely exist replaced this week. we'll sort it out. i don't know who will replace her. that will be a discussion the firm conference volition take this calendar week, we'll take up because at this point it'due south necessary to practise so. chris: i've asked you two questions, congressman. why are you unwilling to discuss her criticism of president trump? >> i'm not. and as a rank and file fellow member of
xi:22 pm
the house republican briefing, liz cheney or anyone else in our conference can stay focused on other issues, unreap lated to us win -- unrelated to us winning back the bulk in the midterm election. i know the belief that i have, chris, that a bulk of our conference a has that she has lost focus on the single mission nosotros have to win back the majority, to push dorsum against the radical biden agenda is the reason she needs to be replaced. equally a rank and file member and make it clear to all of your viewers, chris, that nosotros're not kick her out of the republican party if she is removed from her leadership post but in her leadership mail she doesn't simply -- any member of congress doesn't just represent their district, they correspond 212 members of republican briefing and right now it'due south clear she doesn't represent the views of the majority of the conference or the focus that all of us have to win dorsum the majority. chris: all right. let me try to get at this a unlike way. is joe biden the legitimate president of the united states? >> yeah, joe biden was elected.
xi:23 pm
he was inaugurated on january 20th and he is the -- our focus as the chairman of the republican written report commission, nosotros run across on a weekly basis to counter the radical biden ayou jen da and push button back -- agenda and push dorsum with policies, talking points and the republican written report commission is filling the void and providing members with what they need to push back against the biden calendar. every day we're focused on something else means we're not focused on winning dorsum the majority. chris: reason i ask is i desire to go back to your actions after the election in november. you joined more than than 100 house republicans supporting a texas lawsuit to overturn the ballot results in other states. the supreme court refused to hear the case. then you voted on jan 6 to, quote, uphold the constitution by challenging biden victories in several states.
11:24 pm
practise yous however question whether or not joe biden won the election off-white and square and got over 270 electoral votes, off-white and square? >> yeah, chris, i stand by my vote to object on january six. i stand up by the texas lawsuit. because i have serious concerns about how the election in november was carried out. information technology's why i wrote a pecker that'southward co-sponsored by virtually 100 of my colleagues to strengthen voter identification laws at the federal level and support those measures nationwide and it's why i'm even more concerned bout hr1, the radical democrat -- their bill to nationalize and federalize elections, a very dangerous movement forward and that'due south what we should be focused on. once again, when we're focused on beating democrats, beating back the radical unsafe biden agenda, nosotros should be focused on winning dorsum the bulk in the midterm election, to relieve this country and that's where most
11:25 pm
republicans and the gop conference are unified around that single mission and goal and annihilation that distracts from it is going to hold us back from doing that. chris: congressman, y'all say anything that distracts from that. later the insurrection, subsequently unprecedented assail on the u.s. capitol by americans, y'all said that president trump was not responsible for the assault on the capitol. here is what your leader, the firm republican leader, kevin mccarthy, said on the day of the vote to impeach the president. take a look. >> the president bears responsibility for midweek'southward attack on congress by mob rioters. he should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. chris: was kevin mccarthy wrong that day? >> await, chris, every single republican in the republican conference denounced what happened on january 6th and almost all of us agree there should be a bipartisan
eleven:26 pm
commission to study what happened on that solar day to brand sure that it never happens again. chris: forgive me, sir. i'm but asking a question, was president trump -- this gets of to the primal issue here because what liz cheney did -- i understand the argument. she is distracting from going afterward joe biden. i understand that. you've made that signal conspicuously. liz cheney is saying that it is a large lie to say the ballot was stolen. liz cheney is maxim that in fact donald trump contributed to the riot. i'k asking you for your stance on those issues. is it a lie that the election was stolen? did he contribute to the insurrection on the capitol? >> chris, i've never said that the ballot was stolen. i said i had very serious concerns with how the election was conducted last november because of he covid rules that loosened voter identification laws. that'due south why i objected on jan half dozen. i'll never apologize for that.
xi:27 pm
represented my district in doing so. but the focus on this program and on other news shows about liz cheney and january half dozen and donald trump distract us from what we have to do to save this state to win dorsum the majority in the midterm election. that's what i'yard focused on. every single day that goes by that joe biden, nancy pelosi pass more than radical bills and transport this state downward a socialist path is a day that we lose in the mission to save the land. so that's why a modify in republican leadership at this level is necessary and is probable to happen this calendar week. chris: and so terminal question, i've got less than a minute here, congressman. when liz cheney says history is watching and you can't go forward until you resolve this question, the ballot was fair and square, donald trump played a negative office, you recall she's misguided, making those points? >> yep, i've called on liz cheney to rejoin the republican
11:28 pm
squad and assist us go out and win the majority in the midterm election. that's where my frustration bubbled up. i wrote a letter to leader mccarthy virtually how we keep trump voters in the republican fold. liz cheney is the but republican leader who attacked the memo about making the republican party the party of the working course. if she doesn't get that, that that's an of import function of the formula, to win the majority back in the midterm election, win the white house dorsum in 2024, then she doesn't belong in a leadership position. chris: congressman banks, thank you. cheers for talking with us. please come dorsum and i promise the flex time we're going to go -- next time we're going to get in, in depth, most making the gop the working class party. up next, we bring in our sunday group to discuss the cheney boxing in the business firm and the facebook faceoff with donald trump.
11:29 pm
11:30 pm
eleven:31 pm
11:32 pm
>> by ousting her, what nosotros're saying is we are repudiating your repudiation. chris: andy biggs is explaining why business firm republicans are most certainly going to remove liz cheney from her post this week. fourth dimension for our dominicus group, karl rove, susan page, from the usa today and jonathan swan from axios. carl, permit me start with you. what do you think of the house republicans' conclusion to oust t liz cheney this week and to tie their fortunes so strongly to president trump? >> well, the house republicans are ordering up a round of victories for everybody. at that place's not going to be a winner in this, merely losers.
11:33 pm
if liz cheney somehow prevails it will only exist because there'due south a two-thirds dominion north have to get two-thirds of the votes to remove her from office. she volition exist rebuked for a vote of conviction and for statements on the jan 6th attacks on the capitol and the untruth that at that place was massive voter fraud in half dozen states that somehow price donald trump the ballot. if she loses it will alienate republicans who like what donald trump did in office simply don't like what he did in the aftermath of the election. it will be more difficult to concenter swing voters in the 2022 election. donald trump approval was at 44%. 44% of those surveyed said they were more supporters of trump than the republican party, 50% said they were more than supporters of the republican than donald trump, the start fourth dimension information technology'south always gotten to 50% for that, shows
xi:34 pm
articulate deterioration of his position within the party since the november election. chris: jonathan, let me add something to that. if congressional republicans seem to exist tying themselves to the former president, mr. trump doesn't seem to be returning the favor. he has fabricated it pretty articulate, he's looking to set primary opponents to a number of republican incumbents including all x house republicans who voted to impeach him. just this week he launched another attack on senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. is the republican party, i'm talking about the members of congress, are they going to get it together with president trump? is this party going to be unified or still badly split going into the 2022 midterms? >> well, the house is unified. the firm and the senate are very unlike. and the fact is, liz cheney does
eleven:35 pm
non correspond the republican conference. she's a leader at that place, she doesn't represent them. she'southward non with her. she doesn't represent the voters. we have done polling comparing liz cheney'due south continuing compared to other figures in the party, she is so far underwater it's not -- you know, information technology's really sad how far nether water she is. past the way, and so is mitch mcconnell. then the fact is, the republican voters are much more on the side of donald trump than they are on her side and that'due south what the conference is responding to. every bit for how many primaries donald trump intervenes, he's certainly going to arbitrate in some. i would really exist surprised if he does aggressive primaries in all of those impeachment votes. kevin mccarthy is trying to ward him off. in some means i recollect putting liz cheney frontwards as sacrificial lamb is part of that endeavour.
eleven:36 pm
it may not work, by the way. there'south no controlling donald trump only that'south certainly part of the strategy here. chris: yeah, i want to pick up on that, susan, because there's a report this week out mar-a-lago that donald trump is even because that as loyal equally kevin mccarthy has been to him, that if republicans were to take dorsum the house t speaker is the golden position and that he might not necessarily back up mccarthy. how smart are business firm republicans to base their chances for 2022 on getting along with and the support of donald trump. >> i think that the house republicans accept adopted a risky strategy for a political political party in tying their fortunes to the defeated presidential candidate from last time around. you know, that's just never happened earlier in modern times. usually somebody gets the nomination, loses the bid for the white house equally president trump did in 2020 and then they motility on to some other figures.
xi:37 pm
we've never seen a time when the losing presidential candidate continues to dominate, continues to be the face of the political party fifty-fifty to the indicate of meddling in these primaries. at the moment, the republican party is pretty united. i don't run across a large civil war in the republican party. but if that'due south the basis for your party, that'due south the appeal that you're making, the grievances over the terminal election, information technology is difficult for me to see how that appeals to voters beyond the core trump supporters which is, as karl rove pointed out, maybe downwardly to most a third of the electorate. chris: i want to turn to the other bailiwick we've been discussing today, karl, the facebook oversight board north decided to maintain the ban on president trump for half-dozen months but said facebook doesn't really have a serious policy. they need to put one out. hither was president trump nigh these big social media platforms a couple months agone. take a await. >> large tech giants like
11:38 pm
twitter, google and facebook should be punished with major sanctions whenever they they silence conservative voices. chris: karl, will all sides keep picking on and attacking big tech or do you meet washington actually doing something? you know, there's such a split between democrats who say, you know, you've got to stop all the information, you lot've got to cease all the detest speech, and republicans who say that what big tech is doing is censoring republican voices. so is there a deal to be made, a compromise hither? >> well, i think at that place's going to continue to be a lot of talk virtually this just i'm frankly dubious that you're going to be able to detect a coming together of the minds because you've got a binary sectionalisation. it'due south far more complicated than that. even within the republicans, you lot accept some who say repeal of section 302 will solve the problems, others say reform, others say the existent problem is anti-trust, others say none of those other three proposals take
11:39 pm
anything to exercise with keeping us conservatives from being deplatformed. and so if there's that kind of disagreement within the republicans, information technology'southward likely mirrored inside inside the democratic party also. i notice it hard to believe they'll be able to find something that could draw together and get meaningful legislation passed with 218 218 votes in the house or 60 votes in the senate. then we're going to have sound and fury. i'k not certain information technology signifies legislation. chris: nosotros take to take a break here. when we come back, nosotros'll discuss april's disappointing jobs numbers and what it ways for president biden's multi trillion dollar spending plan.
eleven:twoscore pm
eleven:41 pm
which shows will you exist getting into tonight? how 'bout all of them. netflix. 'crusade xfinity gets you really into your shows. when ane burns for someone who does not experience the same. daphne, permit's switch. from live tv to sports on the go. felix at the finish! you lot tin can even watch your dvr from anywhere. okay, that'southward but showing off. you get all of this on x1. and then go along, become really into your shows. yous demand a breath mint. xfinity. it's a manner improve way to watch.
11:42 pm
11:43 pm
>> todays there'south more evidence that our economy is moving in the right direction. merely information technology's clear we have a long manner to get. >> paying unemployment benefits that are more than a person makes working doesn't create an environs that's particularly conducive to going dorsum to work. chris: president biden and republican senator pat toomey reacting to the april jobs numbers, 266,000 jobs created, falling well brusk of a projected one million new jobs for the month. we're dorsum now with the console. susan, there'southward been quite a debate ever since the numbers came out fri morning about what they hateful. president biden says that it shows the demand for that $4 trillion in additional government spending but republicans say, you know, what information technology shows is that big government and especially the enhanced unemployment benefits are the problem. did information technology of a sudden get easier or
xi:44 pm
harder for biden to pass his calendar? >> well, i call up the first debate was whether these numbers are a blip or an owe men of things to come and nosotros won't know that for a month or ii more downwards the road. manifestly, as you say, both sides seized on the disappointing numbers as prove supporting their view of how the economy should work. i call up that what we know from polling is that americans are really eager to get government help as we face the recovery from the covid pandemic and and then i think it probably makes it easier for joe biden to concord every democrat together as he needs to exercise and push through this huge package. americans have been surprisingly supportive of the idea of a stronger government safe net, at least until nosotros recover some of these millions and millions of jobs that have continued to exist lost because of the pandemic. chris: jonathan, basically same question, how much should we
11:45 pm
make of these quite disappointed jobs numbers for april and what impact do yous call up it will accept on biden's ability to pass the residuum of his agenda. >> i think we should emphasize a few things. in normal times information technology would be a adept number. it's a horrific number in the context of what was expected. in that location were -- we were expecting more a one thousand thousand jobs and we come up 800,000 short and they also downgraded march and at that place's going to be analysis as to where these jobs are, where the weak points are. part of it is at that place's certainly a question nigh the unemployment payments. there's also a question virtually people beingness hesitant to go back because of covid and also the kid intendance problem which still remains a real problem with schools not fully reopened and parents still having these actually complicated relationships. and then it can't really exist boiled downwardly to a bumper identify. the problem with tying this conceptually to what's coming
11:46 pm
next with the infrastructure, it's kind of bogus. what the white house volition tell you is this infrastructure programme is spaced out over a number of years. it's actually long-term investment and this is not going to solve some monthly employment blip. we're talking about rebuilding the nation'southward infrastructure over a really long period of time with spaced out spending. so everyone will do their political hackery and say this justifies my position. only the fact is, at that place's a pretty tenuous connection between the infrastructure part and trying to become the firsthand chore of getting americans back to piece of work and back into the workplace and just the concluding thing i'd say is the overall unemployment figure is very misleading because ane of the biggest issues is a lot of americans accept merely stopped looking for piece of work. they're just out of that picture and that's the existent trouble. chris: carl, i want -- karl, i want to pick upward exactly on jonathan's bespeak. it was the covid relief packet,
11:47 pm
the $1.ix trillion that was already passed that was supposed be the quick jump start, the boost to the economy. the next ii plans, $4 trillion more in infrastructure, in social programs, those are supposed to be as jonathan says much longer term, slower structural change. so even if the president were able to pass them, is that going to give the quick boost to unemployment? >> no. back of the envelope scratches suggest they that of the $iv trillion, more than 90% of it will be extent fiscal year 2022 through financial twelvemonth 2029. if we accept an immediate problem, information technology ain't going to do anything to solve that immediate problem information technology agree with jonathan'south point about this being the unemployment rate today is -- if you lot look at it compared to its height during covid, we've reduced that unemployment rate 80% of the mode back to the 3.5% unemployment we had when this
xi:48 pm
covid hit but the labor strength participation rate, that is the number of people who are willing to work, is back past only half that charge per unit and hi dinner last calendar week with about 8 ceos of companies from around the state. more often than not family-run, privately held companies and i said what's number one issue you're facing? every one of them said we tin can't get enough workers. this caught my ear. they said if the chore pays $50,000 or $threescore,000 or less, it's near impossible for us to notice workers. i did a little research. the federal crash-land-upwards of $600 a week that exists through november, works out to an almanac of $31,200. in fork, if you look at existing payments, new york, california, illinois, think about this. you're getting paid taxation-free $57,408, new york, actually on the kickoff 10,000, $54,600 at an annual rate in california and
11:49 pm
55,592 in illinois. why work if you can get that kind of coin and stay home and netflix? chris: i love the white board. all right. i want to plough in the time nosotros have left to another subject, susan. individual. -- he covid. there's good news and bad news. cases are down. deaths are downward. vaccination need is down. here is the cdc director, rochell walensky. >> the sooner we get more and more people vaccinated, the sooner we will all become dorsum to normal. chris: susan, is the drinking glass half total or half empty when it comes to covid these days? >> well, i hateful, it's half full compared to where nosotros were six months ago. so much more hope now and so much -- amend times ahead. but the glass is definitely non full. we go along to be vulnerable every bit a nation to the variants nosotros see devastating places like republic of india and this issue of vaccine hesitancy amongst americans is a
11:50 pm
serious one. i've talked to people. i've been surprised. people i would take assumed would of already be vaccinated who are worried almost getting vaccinated, not sure if they're going to get vaccinated. nosotros cannot be rubber equally a nation and fully out of this pandemic unless we reach -- unless nosotros double the number of people who are now fully vaccinated in this country. it's going to be a big job. chris: ka rl, that raises the he question. patently, our understanding of this virus continues to evolve but how damaging is information technology, both in terms of public attitude and particularly public mental attitude towards getting the vaccine, when the messaging about what you can do later on you're fully vaccinated is and so garbled? >> it is garbled. expect, dorsum to susan's betoken, i call back the simply way we're going to be able to solve this is by ii things happening. every american who has gotten
11:51 pm
vaccinated encouraging those that are in their sphere, their family, their friends, the people they worship with or work with, socialize with, to go vaccinated as well. nosotros're all going to take to make this a personal appeal. second of all, we've got to accept more local governments and state governments being very ambitious in their efforts to become people vaccinated. 1 of the great stories in texas was amarillo which said they would set upwards a central place in the convention center and we don't care where you're from or who you are or what historic period you are, come and get information technology. and every bit a effect, a lot of people did. and and so nosotros've got to have our governors -- our governor is sending out vaccination teams to get people in more remote parts of our state or communities that might be hesitant to footstep frontwards and become vaccinated, to get vaccinated. only this is going to be increasingly state, local and personal. chris: fifteen seconds, jonathan. how worried are they at the white business firm that they're not putting out a clear message about what people can exercise afterward they're vaccinated. >> i think everyone recognizes
eleven:52 pm
that the public health communications here have been sub-optimal to say the least. chris: that's 15 seconds and you got the word sub-optimal in. very -- give thanks you, console. you lot all adjacent lord's day. up next, our special former power player of the week, news minnow on his iconic spoken communication callin
11:53 pm
[♪♪] life is decorated, and sometimes odors can sneak upwardly on you. for a user-friendly life hack. try febreze unstopables fabric refresher. with 2 times the odour power of regular febreze, unstopables cloth finds, neutralizes and eliminates tough odors trapped in hard-to-wash fabrics, like couches or smelly sports equipment; leaving an irresistibly fresh scent. and for a tropical flare-up of freshness, try new paradise aroma. finish sneaky odors from lingering in your home, with febreze unstopables.
11:54 pm
11:55 pm
chris: it was 60 years ago today that the head of the federal communications committee made a speech that started a national contend. at present, six decades afterwards, he's however got potent views. here's our power player of the week. >> i idea that nosotros were wasting this extraordinary gift of technology and we were not using it to its total potential. chris: newt minow, president kennedy's fcc chair on why he challenged tv broadcasters in 1961. >> go along your eyes glued to that ready until the station signs off, i can clinch y'all that you will find is a vast wasteland. chris: the phrase, vast wasteland, fabricated headlines and stuck a nervus. the producer of gilligan's named
eleven:56 pm
the boat that right on the cruise, the ss minow. chris: were y'all surprised by the reaction? >> i was shocked. they made a big fuss well-nigh it. chris: it's 1 of minow's many brushes with history. working for democratic candidate adelaide stephenson in 1956, minow came up with the idea for televised debates with president eisenhower. >> they thought information technology would be perceived as a gimmick and many of them thought adelaide would not do very well and then information technology was rejected and never even proposed. chris: after stephenson lost, minow had advice for a younger pol about the next election. >> i said jack, i said if you are still interested, you probably could get the vice presidential nomination next time. and jack kennedy looked at me and he said vice president? vice president? he said i'm going to run for president. chris: kennedy won in no small
11:57 pm
part because of a televised debate with richard nixon. >> by a funny coincidence, my college roommate, eddie vanoaker turned out to be one of the panelists. chris: you lot're kind of the forest gump of the second half of the 20th century, aren't you? >> [laughter] >> i pop upward and very, very odd places. i certainly have been blessed and blessed to see a lot of american his you lot tri. >> president kennedy begins a tour of u.south. space middle. chris: while kennedy pushed to put man on the moon, earlier the russians, minow focused on communications satellites. >> one day the president said to me, why are you push sog hard on this? i said mr. president, communication satellites will communicate ideas and ideas final longer than people. chris: minow also pressed to put federal dollars into educational television. >> today nosotros have a strong public radio and public television arrangement in our land
eleven:58 pm
that didn't exist earlier. sesame street is 1 of the proudest things we've done. chris: in 1988, minow got his police force house to hire a summer intern from harvard. >> barack came to work at sidly and the supervisor was a young woman, as well a harvard constabulary graduate, named michelle robinson. and one night joe and i went to the movies and we ran into michelle and barack. they were out on their very first date. chris: now at historic period 95, minow is nevertheless a tv enthusiast. >> which channel shall nosotros scout or shall we wallow in the vast waste matter land. chris: and still a critic. do you lot run across a connection between having so many choices of television and the polarization in the country? >> yes, i do. and i particularly see it when we don't agree on facts. we must know the departure between a fact and an stance.
11:59 pm
chris: what practice you recollect a of platforms like facebook and twitter banning donald trump? >> i remember facebook was right. you cannot have the incitement of violence, even though we believe in complimentary spoken language, that crossed the line. chris: you have been at the center of so many primal events and you take dealt with so many major figures in this country. as you look back on your life, what are your thoughts? >> i'm so devoted to this country and been so fort notation have been -- fortunate to have been involved in so many of import things and every twenty-four hours i say thank god for america. chris: minow says the goal for tv set should be to serve the public involvement. back in that 1961 speech, he said history volition determine whether today's broadcasters employ their powerful voice to enrich the people or to debase them.
12:00 am
and that's it for today. to all you moms out there, happy mother'southward twenty-four hour period. have a great week. and we'll see you side by side fox news sunday. ♪ nosotros cannot allow that credo to congress from within. as long as i am sitting here and equally long as i am backside a microphone. as long equally i have a breath to exhale, they won't. join me. i hope you lot will get your copy of american marxism. i will run across you next calendar week on "life, liberty & levin". >> . steve: good evening anybody. happy mother's day. welcome to the adjacent revolution. profamily pro customs and especially from america. this week nosotros saw smart leftist out for conservatives who criticize those on the kickoff subpoena grounds the offset amendment does non apply that they pompously drawn only they don't empathise the constitution
52 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
Uploaded past Tv set Archive on
Source: https://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20210510_060000_FOX_News_Sunday_With_Chris_Wallace
0 Response to "See You Again Chris Wallace Push Rewind"
إرسال تعليق