This is a rush transcript from “Your World with Neil Cavuto” January 12, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


and scale of this investigation and these cases are really unprecedented,
not only in FBI history, but probably DOJ history, in which essentially the
Capitol grounds outside and inside are essentially a crime scene, and a
scale in which we have literally thousands of potential witnesses and a
scenario in which we’re going to have, I believe, hundreds of criminal


NEIL CAVUTO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR:  And it’s just gotten started, bigger than we
thought, more involved than we thought, much more worrisome than we
thought, an investigation where the crime scene is indeed the United States

And more than 100,000 video and pictures have already been received as
tips. Growing concerns not only about what happened last week, but what
could happen next week.

Welcome, everybody. I’m Neil Cavuto, and this is YOUR WORLD, and a
confusing and scary world, the way it was portrayed by the Justice
Department and the FBI chronicling what it called a war that was planned on
the nation’s Capitol.

The very latest from David Spunt at the Justice Department on where we
stand — David.

DAVID SPUNT, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT:  Neil, there are plenty of questions
for law enforcement officials, both local and federal, about, what did law
enforcement know and when did those members of law enforcement know that

A Washington Post report out this afternoon says the FBI in Norfolk gave
some information about an online threat using the words war and other types
of violence and sent that to officials here in Washington, D.C.

Officials held a news conference just about an hour ago. You saw part of
that. But last week, those officials said there were no specific known
threats before that melee, that chaos in and outside of Capitol Hill last

But let’s bring you up to date on where the FBI is right now. As you
mentioned, more than 100,000 images they are sifting through that was
brought together by the public. They’re also looking and identified at
least 170 people, Neil. They have charged 70 people so far.

Investigators are looking at that media. Authorities say they’re making
progress with identifications.


SHERWIN:  It’s not going to be solved within the coming weeks. It’s not
going to be solved within the coming months. This is going to be a long-
term investigation.

And rest assured the Bureau, the Department of Justice, all of U.S.
attorneys across the United States that are assisting these investigations,
everyone is in for the long haul.


SPUNT:  And that was Michael Sherwin, the U.S. attorney in D.C.

He also said to those who trespassed the Capitol and lit off those pipe
bombs, “We will find you, no matter how long it takes.”

Today, the FBI also looking at the potential of putting some of those
involved in those riots on the no-fly list. No final decisions have been
made, but the possibility is there, according to authorities, the idea
coming for many people, but most notably Senate Minority Leader Chuck

We want to show you, Neil, some new video today of the National Guard in
Washington, D.C. The Guard will have a heavy president over the next week,
even more so now that there is an internal FBI memo warning that there
won’t just be protests across the country, but armed protests slated not
just at this Capitol Building here in Washington, D.C., but capitol
buildings across all 50 states, including the Capitol Building in Olympia,

Authorities say that they’re showing up in large numbers to send a public
message that things will be under control. Neil, the Department of Homeland
Security has already started calling this a special national security
event. That designation began yesterday, not typically just a few days
before the inauguration, as in others years, but that’s going on right now.

FBI officials — we cannot put up this number enough. If you have
information, 1-800-CALL-FBI, 1-800-225-5324 — Neil.

CAVUTO:  All right, David Spunt, thank you very, very much.

An unusual letter, meantime, written by the joint commanders who make up
the Joint Chiefs of Staff in a message to our troops.

And I start — quote — “The American people have trusted the armed forces
of the United States to protect them and our Constitution for almost 250
years. As we have done throughout our history, the U.S. military will obey
lawful orders from civilian leadership, support civil authorities to
protect lives and property, ensuring public safety, in accordance with the
law. To our men and women deployed and at home safeguarding our country,
stay ready. Keep your eyes on the horizon and remain focused on the
mission. We honor your continued service in the defense of every American.”

Now to Ted Williams, a former D.C. police detective, with the sort of
reaction, certainly by our joint commanders, who are ready for anything and
everything and want to make sure men and women in the armed forces are as

Ted, what do you make of all this?

TED WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Neil, what I initially make of it is –
– and good afternoon to you — is that somebody dropped the ball.

And it looks to me like the FBI initially dropped the ball, because they
got information from their Norfolk field office on January 5, and it read
like this.

They had — the FBI in Norfolk received an Internet transmission that said
this: “Congress need to hear, breaking glass, doors being kicked in, and
blood from Black Lives Matter and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get
violent. Stop calling this a march or rally or a protest. Go there ready
for war. We get our president, or we die.”

That information was given to the Norfolk field office. And that should
have been conveyed to the Washington or FBI field office, and something
should have been done.

And when I listened to this press conference this afternoon, they were
being more reactive about what took place than proactive about what is
going to take place here in the near future — Neil.

CAVUTO:  You know what’s kind of interesting, Ted, is that was not relayed
from that Norfolk office to officials in Washington, certainly not to the
Capitol Police.

I’m not aware of the chain of command and how it would. To try to give
every possible benefit of doubt to authorities there, there are marches and
demonstrations in Washington you make an appointment with almost like you
would picking up a flash pass at Disney.

But there was certainly early signals that this was going to be big, this
crowd was going to be angry, and there were members included. The
overwhelming majority might have been peaceful and didn’t mean to do and
have anything to do with this storming of the Capitol itself, but there are
those in that crowd with a very different intent, and they were
telegraphing their preparations for authorities to see, if they only took
the time to see it and hear it.

WILLIAMS:  Well, you just said it, if they only took the time.

This is one reason why I’m calling him for a complete investigation. And I
think president-elect Biden have to appoint a commission to look into this.
Our house, the people’s house, was attacked, Neil. And we are the
laughingstock of America. Everyone thought that America was secure when it
came to its federal government agencies.

And they have now found out just unsecure we are in this country. It’s an

CAVUTO:  But this intelligence, apparently, Ted, if I was reading these
guys correctly, this was kind of outlined that they might, in fact, storm
the Capitol, the interior of the Capitol.

But, somehow, that word did not get to the right people at the right time.
And by the time we found out about it, they were out of time and it was
bedlam. Where did the slip-up, you think, occur?

WILLIAMS:  You’re absolutely right.

CAVUTO:  Or was it just a compounded event?

WILLIAMS:  No, no, I think that this was a gathering storm.

And this storm has been gathering for some time, because, as you know, on
the 20th, we have the inauguration coming on. There is a group called a
national special security event, a group that the Secret Service put in
place. And they have partners from all over the country, law enforcement
partners, as well as the military partners, as well as the National Guard,
all coming to Washington to make sure that there’s a peaceful transition of

But somebody dropped the ball here. Five people died. Or you had a
president who was still in a state of denial about his responsibilities in
regards to this, are all blaming it on an illegal election, when, in fact,
it was him that incited this right.

And so there are heads that really needs to be — to roll, but there needs
to be, Neil, a complete and thorough investigation of this matter. And what
we heard today from the FBI was just lukewarm cow manure.

CAVUTO:  Well, in the meantime, the whole Capitol is a crime scene, but
that crime scene is going to be the venue for the swearing-in of the next
president of the United States.

Do you think it’s safe?

WILLIAMS:  Well, I think it’d be a safe now, and it will be safe with all
of these various entities coming in, meaning the National Guard and the
state and local police officers from all over the country.

But the sad commentary is that the west side of the White House, where the
swearing-in takes place, is one of the areas that was breached. And it’s an

Now we’re finding out that — internally, that some police officers may
very well have been involved in this. They have put some of them on
suspension. They have — and they’re looking and conducting an
investigation to try to determine who was involved in this, who knew what,

And that’s significant and important, Neil, as we go forward.

CAVUTO:  You are right, my friend.

Ted Williams, thank you very, very much. We will be monitoring it very,
very closely.

You have heard, in the meantime, as Ted was wrapping up here, how social
media has gone after anyone with any allegiances to Donald Trump or those
who were behind the effort to overturn the election, but now setting its
sights on, of all people, Ron Paul, a frequent critic of Donald Trump?

Incredible. The big tech battle that has now ensnared no less than the
former presidential candidate and long-serving Congressman Ron Paul, who’s
here — after this.


CAVUTO:  All right, they’re already going it the big tech censorship.

And the president has railed against it, moves by the likes of Twitter,
Facebook and a host of other social media players silencing what they say
is simply conservative thought. Others are saying, at least on behalf of
the companies, violent thought that comes out of those sympathetic to the
president or any cause he espouses.

Susan Li with the financial fallout — Susan.


So, tough week so far for Twitter and Facebook, after both social media
sites banned President Trump. So, how much was Trump worth to the social
media giants? Well, if you look at Facebook, the company has lost over $45
billion in market cap so far this week, while smaller Twitter has lost $3.5
billion the week’s first two days.

Wall Street is concerned over future user growth and engagement on Twitter
after the president’s suspension. Mr. Trump’s 88 million followers was
roughly 40 percent of the number of daily active users that visit the
social media site each and every day.

Meantime, we have Twitter competitor Parler still having trouble getting
back online after being shut down by Amazon Web Services and kicked off the
Apple and Google app stores over the weekend.

Parler’s CEO says that he’s even getting personal threats.


JOHN MATZE, CEO, PARLER:  I have seen a lot of people say that this is
scary. But I have also seen a lot of people who are participating in the
five minutes of hate and kind of egging it on and cheering. And it’s
disgusting, people threatening my life.

I can’t go home tonight.


LI:  And just this morning, we have the CEO of the world’s biggest company
weighing in on the Capitol Hill violence.

Apple CEO Tim Cook was just asked if President Trump should be held


TIM COOK, CEO, APPLE:  I think no one is above the law. I mean, that’s a
great thing about our country, and we’re a rule of law country. I think
everyone that had a part in it needs to be held accountable.


LI:  Not just Tim Cook.

Some of America’s other biggest companies, including Walmart, which just
crossed the tape, now says that they will pause political donations in
light of last week’s events — Neil.

CAVUTO:  All right, Susan, thank you very much, Susan Li.

Well, after responding rather critically to Twitter shutting out the
president of the United States, Ron Paul found himself suddenly locked out
of his own Facebook page.

They have tried to patch up the differences right now. We’re going to get
into Facebook’s explanation for what happened.

But, in the meantime, the former congressman, presidential candidate joins
us right now, Ron Paul.

Congressman, good to have you.

What happened here exactly?



PAUL:  I don’t know.

Yesterday, we did our usual program. It’s a form of reaching out to the
people to promote the liberty philosophy, which I have been doing every
week since 1956, and never missed it.

But, yesterday, the report went out, and all of a sudden said, you have
overstepped the bounds. You have violated community standards. I’m baffled
by that. I didn’t know we had community standards that we had to follow.

And they said, no, you have been locked out of your Facebook. And I
thought, well, why would they do that? I follow a policy and philosophy of
nonviolence and peace.

And, oh, yes, but this — you’re dangerous. You may be supporting
terrorism. But the explanation was, I wasn’t following the community
standards, and we have warned you several times, which was not true. And,
therefore, we are temporarily — I don’t know what the word was, but it
turned out it was temporary, but that I’d be locked out of my program until
they let me know something else.

So, in the meantime…

CAVUTO:  I don’t know what it was you were saying.

They said later on that — they said later on, Congressman: “While there
were never any restrictions on Ron Paul’s page, we restricted one
administration’s ability to post by mistake. We have corrected that error.”

But I don’t understand what the error was.

PAUL:  I don’t either.

And they never told me what it was. And I would — if they’re looking for
errors, as a noninterventionist in all forms of activity in the government,
let me tell you, I know a lot of people that I think are involved in things
that they shouldn’t be doing.

So, this whole thing is a little bit bizarre. And I really wonder about it,
because when you think of it, you know, I’m not — why could I be a threat?

Neil, you have known me for a long time. And I don’t threaten people. And I
have a philosophy of nonviolence, nonintervention and nonviolence. And, all
of a sudden, I am a threat and they start using words when they talk about
locking down these programs that is a form of terrorism and all of these
other things.

There’s a lot of…


CAVUTO:  The irony is, Congressman — to your point, the irony is, you have
been critical of the president. Even though your son, Rand Paul, ran
against him, had his moments, he rallied to support the president, didn’t
support this opposition to the electoral vote effort.

But your case has been a little different, because you have been quite
critical of the president.

Do you think it was your criticism in a separate issue about Twitter
silencing the president or taking him off that somehow ignited — I don’t
even understand — these algorithms or whatever might trigger a response
like the one you got?

PAUL:  Yes. No, I really don’t think so.

I think that there’s a lot of confusion on what they are doing. I don’t —
I think — these people that run these social media network, I figure
they’re very smart and very rich and know what’s going on.

But they don’t have the vaguest idea what I’m talking about. And yet it
seems to be that, even though I have no clout — I’m not even running for
office or anything. But I — we — it’s almost like, we better be careful
with him, because, even if they can take you off and put you back on, and
even before even that happened, we have been intimidated.

I mean, we’re cautious. We don’t act as if we have freedom of speech and
First Amendment protection, because we knew that. And then, right now, for
a very pragmatic reason, we get our message of liberty out this way.

And for some reason, they saw that as a threat. But I have — I have been
taught and I have come to understand that, sometimes, if you tell the
truth, it is a threat to people. They just don’t want to hear it, because I
can’t be…


CAVUTO:  Has this ever happened in the past to you, Congressman? Has this
ever occurred to you before?

PAUL:  No.

Well, no, it’s never been. I mean, I always thought it was a possibility,
even though I didn’t understand social networks and that thing.


PAUL:  I understood my message.

And — but, as we went on, and I had staff tell me that, someday, you’re
not going to be able to broadcast. And I said, well, I sure hope there’s
some alternative. And I think — I said, libertarians are pretty smart, and
they’re into technology. Maybe they will devise a system that will be

But it doesn’t look like they will even permit even a hint of
competitiveness to the ordinary social media.

CAVUTO:  Congressman, the president says he is not to blame for anything
that happened last week, he didn’t light any candle, that this was
something that just developed.

Do you think that he bears some responsibility for this?

PAUL:  Oh, yes, I think a lot of people bear some responsibility.

But I think — I think it’s blown way out of proportion.

CAVUTO:  Does the president? Does the president, Congressman?

PAUL:  Well, I just — I just think, sometimes, policies lead to this.

You say, who’s responsible for it? A former president and our current
president have endorsed the principle that, on occasion, we can use
assassination of American citizen. And when I think of that, and going to
war without declaration, we’re not dealing with the real issue that’s going

It’s the issue of big government, and it’s authoritarian, and it’s
controlled by outsiders and people who think they have some control and
think elections are really significant.

No, it’s people who are pulling the strings behind it.

CAVUTO:  All right.

PAUL:  But that is so conspiratorial.

If I was on my Internet, I might have my program struck, that there could
be people conniving to run things out of the ordinary. So, I just don’t
think that the president thought that I had — anything to do with me.

I think social media had something to do with me. But I — it’s sort of —
it’s sort of amazing why they would bother.


PAUL:  But I just think that there’s a lot of information out there.

But, to me, we’re missing the entire thing. When you look at all the
authoritarianism and terrorism and spending and problem, it’s very, very
bipartisan. And this whole idea that, in the last three days, it’s been
turned around, and they probably say the president had a — had a
popularity rate of 70 or 80 percent or 60 percent.

And now it’s down to 2 percent. That’s how powerful this situation is.


PAUL:  And I think that it’s way overdone and it’s a real shame.

And I think we have lost our way. I don’t think — these people who are
shouting defend the Constitution, and this — protect First Amendment, and
all this shouting, especially the people that are on — on the president’s
back, I think there’s a lot of talk there.

And they’re missing the boat, because the way I, as a noninterventionist,
see it, that is the whole business of most everybody in Washington. And
that is to be an aggressive interventionist in our personal lives, spying
on us all the time, in our economic lives. They tax us to death. They
inflate us to death. They transfer wealth from the poor and the middle
class to the rich.

They go to war without declarations. And, if they’re not — they’re not
dealing with enough. If you want to really deal with some problem, that’s
what they need to deal with. But it’s almost like a distraction.

Oh, let’s talk about how we can do something really unique. We have never
impeached a president twice. Now, that’s historic. So we got to go for it,
and racing. It’s like a race to the final — to save the country, if we can
only impeach the president twice.

CAVUTO:  And that race is on. And that race is on.

PAUL:  Yes.

He has — he has a problem, there’s no doubt. And I — you stated I have
come out in opposition to the president.

CAVUTO:  All right.

PAUL:  And I do at times. But it’s 50/50.

Half the time, when he does — when he wants to bring troops home, I’m
shouting, bring them home, bring home. When he wants to send them
someplace, I say, that’s not…


CAVUTO:  No, you’re very fair and — you’re a very fair and balanced
critic, although I’m going to — I will tell you, Congressman, I’m going to
watch you a lot more closely, knowing that you’re potentially a big threat.

So, I’m keeping my eye on you.


CAVUTO:  Ron Paul, thank you very much.

PAUL:  Oh, yes. I’m a…

CAVUTO:  What an…

PAUL:  Sure thing. Nice to be with you.

CAVUTO:  What an incredible saga here.

All right, 85 years young, Ron Paul caught up in the middle of what seemed
to be a nonsensical storm that had nothing, nothing at all to do with him.

And this push for impeachment, to which he alluded, that’s going to happen
tomorrow, a single count on instigating essentially violence against the
American people. That’s it, one and done. Or is it?


CAVUTO:  All right, after last week, just call it a sign of the times, U.S.
House makers who will be screened — will be screened when they enter the
House chamber tomorrow for an historic second impeachment vote against the
president of the United States.

That’s coming from the acting sergeant at arms.


CAVUTO:  All right, Republican senator Rob Portman has a message for the
president, calling on the president to urged supporters to refrain from any
violence, says the president will bear responsibility if he does not, and
any additional violence were to occur.

No response yet from the president of the United States. We will keep you
posted on that.

Also keeping you posted on tomorrow’s historic day in the House, where
they’re screening with metal detectors all lawmakers coming in for that
historic vote on whether to try to impeach the president of the United
States yet again, this time on a single article, that is, instigating
violence against the American people.

Kevin Corke in the middle of all of that in Washington.

Hey, Kevin.


Now, this is either political revenge run amok or it is just deserts for
inciting ostensibly an insurrection at the Capitol. It all depends on your
perspective. But one thing is certain. Republicans simply want to move on
and get next to the next administration.

Let me share part of a letter from Kevin McCarthy. Of course, he is the GOP
leader in the House, this to his fellow Republicans

He said this: “Personally, I continue to believe that an impeachment at
this time would have the opposite effect of bringing our country together,
when we need to get America back on a path towards unity and civility.”

Well, the president echoing that response, but in a very sharper tone.
Listen here.


Schumer to continue on this path, I think it’s causing tremendous danger to
our country, and it’s causing tremendous anger. I want no violence.


CORKE: “I want no violence” is what the president said today.

Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Democrats both in the House and the Senate
remain convinced that he’s got to go, and right now.


SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER:  Donald Trump should not hold
office one day longer. And what we saw in his statements today is proof-
positive of that, if you needed any further proof, which I didn’t.


CORKE:  But do keep this in mind, my friend.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear he doesn’t
anticipate having the Senate do anything, even though Chuck Schumer says he
and the Senate majority leader could work together to get something done
with respect to a vote. McConnell’s made it clear he’s not going to do any
such thing.

So, the real question is, will it all matter at the end of the day? We will
find out together as we watch history unfold here in the nation’s capital –
– but for now, back to you.

CAVUTO:  All right, interesting times, my friend, Kevin Corke in the middle
of all of that.

Of course, this House vote tomorrow, that single article, that the
president’s remarks endangered Americans, that’s really the gist of it, is
that enough, especially if they don’t even have time to get to the Senate?
And then there’s this talk, as Kevin alluded, about pursuing this into a
Biden administration, in other words, going to impeach a former president.

How does that work?

Jim Trusty joins us, a former DOJ prosecutor.

Jim, how does that work? It would be unprecedented, would it not?


I mean, look, there are those that read the Constitution to say that it’s
in present tense, that you have to be presently in office to be subject to
either removal or disqualification. And that obviously would mean there’s a
hard deadline coming up on the 20th.

But there is some precedent in the role of impeachment. The secretary of
war in 1876 was about to be impeached, resigned, thinking, hey, that will
end it. And, instead, he still got impeached, and he had a trial in the
Senate, again, after he had left the high office. And in the trial in the
Senate, they acquitted.

So I suppose you will have some people pointing to 1876 and saying, this is
a perfect replay of what happened back then, where you can still have
consequences like disqualification after the person has actually left

CAVUTO:  But does the Senate or the House, for that matter, have any power
after the fact to prevent someone from running for office again?

I mean, it — that seems a stretch to me, but please explain that.

TRUSTY:  Well, I think it’s a stretch too, but the language is not all that
clear from the Constitution.

The language basically says that the impeached person faces either removal
— removal and disqualification. So, it’s that question of kind of tense.
Can you be outside of your office and still be disqualified in the future?
There’s not much there in terms of precedent.

It does seem like a stretch.

CAVUTO:  So, are you a convicted criminal, in that sense, and, just like
you can be banned from voting in some states, you can be banned from
running for office in some states?

I mean, is that what they’re hoping to do? And does that have to be in the
actual article of impeachment?

TRUSTY:  Right. It’s a rough parallel to collect the collateral
consequences we see for having a felony conviction.

And it is in the article of impeachment. At least the draft that I read
included the phrase of disqualification. So, that very much seemed to be
the intent. I have fundamental problems with the whole article in terms of
both sufficiency of the evidence, the lack of evidence, or the time to
gather evidence, and the whole concept of having a snap impeachment.

I think that’s antithetical to what we really want in our constitutional
deliberation. We don’t want to have these snap decisions, when — nobody in
a criminal trial, a criminal case, would be going to trial and being
convicted seven or eight days after the event, for good reason.

So I think we’re in that same kind of perilous territory here.

CAVUTO:  Do you get a sense, when Rob Portman was saying, Jim, that the
president will be accountable if there’s more violence, and he doesn’t urge
his supporters to disavow it and not be violent?

And the reason why I’m mentioning it in this context with where they go on
impeachment, if there’s another act that he could have prevented — well,
that’s how they see it — that that’s even more grist for the mill? What do
you think?

TRUSTY:  I mean, it seems like a clever political box, not a legal one.

It’s basically suggesting, on a morality level or a political level, that
the president controls everyone out there that supports him, and that if
you have some lunatic fringe that does anything wrong from this point
forward, that they have somehow closed the noose around him for

I don’t think that’s the way our criminal justice system normally works.
But politics is a different thing altogether. So, to me, it’s a little
overly optimistic by Portman, not really designed to protect the community,
more to somehow assert that there’s a viable impeachment case against this
president, when the language of inciting insurrection is just not met by
what he did.

CAVUTO:  Jim Trusty, thank you very, very much. Confusing times, my friend,
confusing times.

Jim Trusty, the former DOJ prosecutor,.

Speaking of this whole back-and-forth on impeachment, this is coming from
The New York Times, that Mitch McConnell has told associates that he
believes the president did indeed commit impeachable offenses and that he’s
pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him.

Now, he’s had his differences with the president and disagreed and spoke
out against the president and sympathetic followers’ challenge to the
Electoral College vote, but this is a leap beyond that to say that the
actions the president took last week were and are indeed impeachable, as
Democrats have argued.

Remember, he’s the same man who said that the soonest the Senate could take
up these impeachment matters would be January 19, the day before Joe Biden
is sworn in as president.

Nevertheless, The New York Times reporting that he finds that what the
Democrats are doing, moving to impeach him, that’s a good thing; he’s

We will have more after this.


CAVUTO:  Call it the grand old pile-on, a who’s-who list of Fortune 100
companies announcing that they are stiffing Republicans, particularly those
candidates and those sympathetic to questioning the Electoral College vote.

The list has grown to include the likes of Hallmark Cards and Amazon,
American Express, AT&T, Best Buy, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Airbnb. I could
go on and on. We have got a list of just some of the premier names.

We have also got Tom Donohue, the guy who heads the U.S. Chamber of

Boy, Tom, those are some pretty stunning names saying some pretty stunning
things to Republicans. What are we to make of that?

view is, it is a reaction to the activities of the recent week.

And all of us know that one of the reasons we were making statements is,
the media has been calling us about all of that. And we understand why
those companies are doing it. We would join them in suggesting that the
challenges that we all face now require the full attention of the new

And, at the same time, what happened last week, particularly in the role of
the president, it was — it was really unacceptable. And he did, it
appeared to us, stir up whatever was happening. He invited them all to

And — but we do believe that it’s the responsibility, the vice president,
the Cabinet and the Congress to decide whether to do the 25th Amendment or
an impeachment. And they should do so judiciously, because we have got two
things we have to do together. We have to resolve this problem, and we have
to have a smooth transition to a new — a new government.

And you and I have been around this town long enough. This is a complicated

CAVUTO:  Do you think the president should resign? A lot of even
Republicans have advised that.

DONOHUE:  Oh, yes, and there are people advising me to say that.

That’s not our role. Our role, and we — today was our State of American
Business. We have laid out a plan…

CAVUTO:  Right.

DONOHUE:  … how to continue to help with the pandemic, to continue to
drive economic growth in the part of the economy that’s really moving, and
to take steps as soon as we can, which will require some improvement in the
pandemic, to get at the other part of the economy, airplanes, hotels,
events, restaurants, all that.

CAVUTO:  Well, you’re looking at the big picture, Tom.

But I am curious. Mitch McConnell is in this New York Times piece, in which
he talks about the president having indeed committed impeachable offenses,
and that he welcomes what Democrats are doing.

What do you think of that?

DONOHUE:  You know, we put this statement out today because we’re not Mitch
McConnell. Our job is to represent the American business community here and
abroad, and to work and support our government.

And I do believe what we said. I think that some of the things that
happened were fundamentally wrong and unacceptable. And I think the
Congress has got to figure out how to do this without overstepping its
position and without screwing up the new administration coming in that has
to get very busy on a lot of stuff.

I think that most of the companies are trying to be measured. They’re not
saying we’re going to stop giving money to anybody. They’re looking at a
small group of people.

What we’re adding to it, from our perspective, is, we’re going to see what
happened, because some people were pushed along. We’re going to see what
happened before, what happens at the inauguration and all of this
conversation of problems around the country.

CAVUTO:  All right.

DONOHUE:  And we’re not going to be giving any money away for a good period
of time. And we will make our decisions when we have the benefit of all
that information.

Some people have to make them right away. We have the benefit of saying we
were never — we worked with this White House, but we supported some things
and opposed others, and we had a very balanced relationship.

CAVUTO:  All right, Tom, we will see what happens.

Tom Donohue.


CAVUTO:  Meanwhile, we’re talking about this impeachment prospect of where
it goes.

U.S. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina is against this. He says: “An
impeachment vote will only lead to more hate and deeply fractured nation. I
oppose impeaching President Trump.”

Stay with us.


CAVUTO:  So many vaccines out there, so few getting into Americans’ arms,
and a lot of governors have been criticized for the slow mo of this whole

Charlie Gasparino reports on two in particular — Charlie.

New Jersey, Governor Cuomo and Governor Murphy, respectively.

But, Neil, this is not just a local problem. I’m talking — I have been
talking to traders, investors, economists over the last couple days about
the slow rollout. And what they are really worried about is that this
thing, the slow rollout, not getting that herd immunity that we need by the
early spring to keep the economy going is not going to happen, it’s not
going to happen until much later in the summer.

And if that does happen, there is a very real possibility, according to
investors and economists, that we can hit a double-dip recession, and maybe
something worse. I mean, this is the scenario, restaurants not opening,
many more — many more closed down for good.

They default on loans. Banks have to take massive write-downs. That’s the
type of vicious circle that we’re talking about if we don’t achieve herd
immunity by some time in this spring, or maybe early summer.

If that does happen, forget about recession. You could have something close
to a depression if you don’t — if we — barring any sort of fiscal
response from the government. So, this is — we are getting into very, very
scary territory, if governors don’t get this out widely.

And, again, New York, New Jersey are big states. They carry a big load in
terms of the national economy. But I’m telling you, it’s not just them.
It’s across the board. And the bungled rollout by the big states is going
to impact the national economy as well.

So, things should be better in 2021. You and I spoke about that a lot. But
unless this vaccine gets out there and we get herd immunity, we could be
heading through some difficult economic times, according to people I speak
to — Neil, back to you.

CAVUTO:  Charlie Gasparino.

We told you, meantime, a little earlier about companies abandoning
Republicans. One of their biggest benefactors just passed away.

How do you resume business as usual when a giant is gone?


CAVUTO:  There’s an old line on Wall Street that says that billionaires
become billionaires because they zig when others zag.

So, when this rags-to-riches casino mogul story named Sheldon Adelson had
decided to pursue casinos as an avocation, and then decided to build and
expand in Las Vegas in an area that a lot of people thought was already
spent and already done, and he poured more money into still new building,
including in 1999 with something called the Venetian, and there were
gondolas and something that you find in Italy, a lot of people said, you’re
not. You’re going to lose hand over fist.

He didn’t. He passed away 87 years young, but not before leaving an
imprint, not only the casino industry, but on politics as we know it,
including optimism about right making might, including opening up in Las
Vegas a spanking new pricey hotel back in 2010, and then, earlier, in 1999,
when I caught up with him for the first time on that expansion.

Take a look.


market, I think there’s lots of room.

I think it’s a little crowded at the budget end of the market, but, at the
high end of the market, I think that the Bellagio led the way, and we’re
following them.

CAVUTO:  Yes. But, I mean, the Bellagio is no small facility. Neither will
be Mandalay Bay You could argue Circus Circus obviously competing in
between that realm, a lot of these multiroom hotels that all have to be
filled. Will they?

ADELSON:  Well, what happens is that growth begets tourism and, of course,
tourism begets growth.

So it’s been proven over the last couple of decades that, every time
there’s a spate of new growth or new properties coming online, that the
visitor volume rises — rises commensurately.

CAVUTO:  You have had a pretty stellar track record in how you have amassed
your own fortune. And I think one industry analyst had likened you to
Donald Trump without the debt, but with the shi-shi tastes. Is that true?

ADELSON:  Well, first of all, he’s taller than I am. Secondly, he’s got a
lot more hair.


ADELSON:  And, no, I don’t really like to be compared to other people.

I’m just a garden variety, plain vanilla kind of entrepreneur.

For Obama to come in here, almost hypocritically come in and say, I love
Vegas, and then leave here, and then dump on us and vilify us and do
everything he can to prevent people from coming to Vegas, people don’t like
it here.

We’re a city of two million people. This is not just the Strip. When you
drive a block away from the Strip, then you don’t even know the Strip is
there. So — but we are dependent upon tourism. We’re dependent upon

And when somebody did — somebody denigrates conventions, particularly the
president of the United States, and encourages financial firms, automobile
firms, governmental agencies from coming here, nobody understands the
reason why.


CAVUTO:  Zigging while they’re zagging, the man who said Las Vegas would
become a destination for conventions, when everyone laughed, and it did,
said that Donald Trump had a very good chance of becoming president, and
then he did.


Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  All materials
herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be
reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast
without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may
not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of
the content.

Source Article