"outfront" tonight, losing money, rewarded big time. today, jpmorgan's stock was up like a july firework. surging 6%. in fact, it brought the whole market along. for a friday the 13th surprise. it was the best day for stocks this month. and it doesn't add up. so, jpmorgan shares popped in reaction to the bank announcing that losses from that high-profile trading blunder we've been talking so much about now top $5.8 billion. now, that $5.8 billion is about three times more than the company said it would lose on this trade just weeks ago. today, the ceo of jpmorgan, jamie dimon, took questions on an earnings conference call, and he said he's earned a lesson. >> we've learned a lot. i can tell you this has shaken our company to the core. >> the truth is no one is sure if other banks have trades like this going on or whether it will happen again at jpmorgan. the truth is, we do not know very much about our banks. jamie dimon didn't know about the now infamous trade for so long that for weeks he defended media coverage of it as a tempest in a tea pot. and today, dimon said he didn't know much about something else that could cost his bank and the entire banking industry big money. that is, how wide spread is manipulation of the key interest rate that sets american mortgages and credit carts? >> all i can say, like all of these things, a lot of people will be doing exams. we're totally open to regulators. i'd be a little patient if i was you. not everything is the same. it's going to take a while. not all companies are in the same position. >> as of today, morgan stanley -- yes, i understand it's ironic banks making estimates about banks and what they're doing or not doing. anyway, analysts there estimate the so-called libor rate manipulation scandal could cost banks $14 billion. that's fines and fees on the banks. you say great, they should pay it, those jerks. here's what it means, $14 million less for those banks to lend, which will hurt the rest of us. banks are crucial for our economy. we need them to thrive. they have become so big that they seem to control our fate. just yesterday on this show, dan gross, the economics editor at yahoo! finance, suggested the u.s. economy is sort of like the titanic. i loved the image. it got us playing a little game. take a look at this little image. our economy is the titanic. it feels invincible and huge. the most amaze thing in the history of the earth. even after the financial crisis. pretty much just like the titanic was, right? we were sailing along till we hit that jpmorgan trading loss. and it jolted everybody. it jolted our ship. we said, wow, is our economy still at risk from banks? then the shaking stopped. and we went back to having a good time on our ship. the problem is, 90% of an iceberg is under water. below us at this very moment, our little ship, america, could be a massive chunk of ice. because there is so much we cannot see. there are trades that can bring banks down. and this. the top four banks in the united states of america are equivalent to 51% of our entire economy. that's pretty stunning, everybody. the entire output, all the cars we make, the computers we make, everything we do in this country, banks' assets are 51% ofhat value. they're equivalent to that. $7.7 trillion. trust us, big problems there can sink our little titanic just like that. "outfront" stephen moore, "wall street journal" editorial page. and john cowan, co-founder, president of third waya centrist think tank. good to see both of you. appreciate your taking the time. steve moore, let me start with you. obviously jpmorgan shares surge, things could be worse. the titanic image is frightening when we look at banks. if someone like jamie dimon isn't sure how big, how widespread, how significant the interest rate manipulation might be. >> we certainly learned that in 2008, erin, when two weeks before the big financial crisis, nobody thought there was a crisis. two or three weeks later, we saw major banks that basically their stocks went down to nothing. so you're right, these things can happen very quickly. where the valuation of these big banks can fall substantially. i do think what happened in the case of jp morgan is i think investors thought that there was a lot more than six billion dollars of losses. i think -- we had talked a few weeks ago -- that the losses could be $10 billion or more. it's no too surprising when they said it was closer to $6 billion, the value of the shares went up. in terms of what we do about this manipulation, apparent manipulation of the libor rates, the problem here is it's not really a market, erin, it's set by the banks, it's kind of an insider trading kind of scheme. maybe what needs to be done is anchor all these other interest rates to something like the treasury bill rate, which is set by the market, not by insider traders. >> right. that sounds like a reform that make sense. let me ask you this key question, though, that seems to come from the fact that you have banks that are bigger than they were before the financial crisis. 50% of the u.s. economy. yet trades are happening at these banks. ceos don't even know about. how much do we not know about our big banks? >> well, look, as you said, and i think it's absolutely right, banks are a central part of our economy. and they do a lot of good. and we -- we can't ever forget that. but right now it's very clear that we don't know what's going on in certain portions of our financial sector. and what happened with libor, i think stephen's dead on in this, you have a real conflict of interest. it's actually quite similar to the situation we had with the rating agencies back in the mid and late 2000s in which they were essentially self-regulating but they weren't doing it very well. we don't exactly know what's going on right now in sectors of our banking system. but let's keep in mind banksnd the financial sector play a crucial role in buying a house, insuring your life, sending your kid to college, and we can't actually even discuss or think about throwing the baby out with the bath water. >> you know, erin, that is a key point. because, remember a year or two ago, when banks were doing very well, people said, what an outrage, they got these big -- they got these big bailouts, now they're making these big profits, paying these ceos money. when we find a bank like jpmorgan that has these big losses, then we said, how could they have these big losses. we have to decide whether we want our banks to be a success or a failure. i fall on the side that they're instrumental to our economy. >> they are. >> that we want them to be successful and the question really is -- >> but they have to do -- >> -- how do they do that -- >> if you're out there watching but you get so frustrated they do these trades or they're manipulating interest rates. i mean, you can't be doing that stuff and have people rooting for you. these guys have to shape up. maybe they need to break up. >> you're totally right about that, erin. let's separate out the two issues. they're quite different. what happened to jpmorgan is there was some stuff going on. trades they shouldn't have made. dimon's acknowledged that. they made serious mistakes. the reason their stock went up today is twofold. one, markets like certainty. now there's a number. secondly, the bank still has a healthy balance sheet. that's very different than libor. libor is terrible. it's a serious crisis. it's like fixing the points spread on the super bowl. that is quite different than mistakes or bad trades at banks and we need to keep them separate. >> all right, thanks -- final word, steve. >> the reason it's a crisis, it makes people think that the -- all of these markets are being manipulated. >> that's right. >> that's another thing i find very troubling. folks, that's not the case in most cases. i think in libor that was the case. manipulation going on here. >> we all agree, we need a lot more transparency. what about gasoline prices or everything else? thanks, we appreciate it. still "outfront," mitt romney gives an afternoon of surprise interviews. in tv, we could watch them all, so i watched every single one of them, and he was sweating. and then the obama administration and marco rubio both agree a valedictorian should be allowed to stay in the united states. so why is she being told otherwise by the united states government? and george zimmerman's attorney filed a motion in court that would have major, major implications on the trial. a party? [ music plays, record skips ] hi, i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein. twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge! i bought the car because of its efficiency. i bought the car because i could eliminate gas from my budget. i don't spend money on gasoline. it's been 4,000 miles since my last trip to the gas station. it's pretty great. i get a bunch of kids waving at me... giving me the thumbs up. it's always a gratifying experience. it makes me feel good about my car. i absolutely love my chevy volt. ♪ how did the nba become the ihottest league on the planet?t. by building on the cisco intelligent network they're able to serve up live video, and instant replays, creating fans from berlin to beijing. what can we help you build? nice shot kid. the nba around the world built by the only company that could. cisco. one is for a clean, wedomestic energy future that puts us in control. our abundant natural gas is already saving us money, producing cleaner electricity, putting us to work here in america and supporting wind and solar. though all energy development comes with some risk, we're committed to safely and responsibly producing natural gas. it's not a dream. america's natural gas... putting us in control of our energy future, now. our second story "outfront," mitt romney fought back. >> if there's a difference between being a shareholder, an owner, if you will, and being a person who's running an entity. and i had no role whatsoever in managing bain capital after february of '99. >> we explained this last night. said mitt romney could have done a better job by explaining it. perhaps avoiding having to do interviews where he had to sit and ruin a friday afternoon. he ended up having to do that. responding to charges from several media outlets and the obama campaign that he was part of bain four years after he said he left. listen to him earlier this week. >> if you're responding, you're losing. >> john avlon, michael, rahmin. michael, this is kind of like mitt, he can't seem to get out of his own way sometimes. he responded. >> when you're responding badly, you're losing. that's the second tier version of it. it really was not a very effective response i didn't think. because it sounded like he was clinging to technicalities. saying, well, i owned the entity, but i wasn't managing bain capital, sounds sort of like no controlling legal authority or something like that. he should have from the perspective, my own perspective, not only as a lawyer but actually as a former campaign hand, he should sit down and answer the questions at length. but he may not want to do that because that gets to the issue of his taxes and it's hard to do that without -- >> it's hard to separate those two things, john. that was my argument yesterday. i thought i was very frustrated. he needs to sit down and do one long interview and go through details. i watched everybody and i almost fell asleep. he kept talking about the pin nokias. the rating by the fact checkers of the statement. >> that's right. he didn't have the clear simple explanation. look, this was a way for him to keep his investments while he was no longer actively involved in management. it's not as simple and clear as it should be. but it's credible. that's the key point. here's the big thing. the difference between the statement he made where he said if you're responding, you're losing, and today, that's been a significant stretch in personnel and strategy on the communications team. >> that was today, right? >> that was today. two new people brought on. we see kevin madden who came on l.a. week. all of a sudden, it's a shift in strategy. it's, let's get out front, let's play offense. even though it was a friday afternoon, which is not the best time to play offense in the political cycle. >> he said let's get out front. it's too bad they didn't. ryan, do you think he did well in his response or it was a sign of weakness to come out and respond in all these interviews on a friday afternoon? >> i think john actually makes a good point. you've seen a personnel change. when you have any campaign of this kind, it's incredibly high stake, high pressure environment. i think mitt romney -- i don't think it was the strongest interview he's ever given. i think that's part of the point. he has to do this. he has to do this more often. and one hopes from the perspective of the romney campaign, that he's going to get better each time. this is the first time out of the gate. if he's going to embrace a more out front strategy, he's going to have to get smoother, more polishes and have a more convincing story to tell. >> well, if you have an out front strategy, jim acosta pushed him on issue of tax returns here on cnn. i wanted to play what jim got him to say. >> i've already put out one year of tax returns. we'll put out the next year of tax returns as soon as the accountants have that ready. and that's what we're going to put out. i know that there will always be calls for more. we're putting out what is required, plus more that is not required. those are the two years that people are going to have. that's all that's necessary for people to understand something about my finances. >> okay. made it very clear you're only getting two years. by the way, i, everybody, have the tax returns. everything that we have. it is a big stack. but homany months does it take? the guy's running for president. it's been three months after tax day. where are they? >> also, there's a precedent actually set by his father of 12 years of tax returns to really put it all out there. kill people with kindness. put it all out there. rather than dragging the feet, two years, and it makes it look like you're hiding something. >> it's an endless mystery in campaigns and government when you know you're going to have to do something, why don't they just do it and get it over with? assuming they're being rational, that mitt romney's going to be rational, it's hard to avoid the thought that maybe they don't want people to see what's on the tax returns and they're will to accept the pain of having to answer this question. this isn't going away because he gave this interview. you can hear this over and over till november. your own father said anything less than 12 years is hiding something. why aren't you going to release it? and, you know, sooner or later he might have to but it's a real mystery as to why he isn't. >> why he would take that pain. >> yeah. >> rahim, what's your take on that, why only two years? >> i think he's trying to train the media and be very clear i'm not going to be able to give anything more than that. it's not clear that's actually going to work because frankly i think a lot of folks are bored by just talking about unemployment and the weak state of the economy and they'd much rather talk about something like this because it allows them to deep dive into it, it's very stimulating, it's a window into a lot of the ways the economy has changed. fodder for a lot of story. it's not clear when they made the right bet. i personally think it's pretty sensible of romney and the romney campaign to want to keep the focus on the economy and on unemployment but, again, they don't necessarily determine what the media's going to want from them. >> right, and plus they may want that and it may make sense. when people have an exception to something, they're going to let it go. >> part of the strategy they've been use to date, the media, saying, we're not going to talk to the media. he used the phrase "train the media." we're not domesticated pets or circus animals. >> we are sort of like cats. >> are we like cats? >> i like cats and dogs and all the bad ways about cats. >> i don't -- i have to work on that metaphor. >> scratch, ignore wha authority tell, you to do. all right. thanks to all three of you. we appreciate it. "outfront" next, a special report from miguel marquez, cold wars. shell oil one step closer to a multibillion-dollar plan to drill off the coast of alaska. does the risk of it add up? and why nerds rule, bringing one city to bended knee. you stay classy, san diego. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] what's the point of an epa estimated 42 miles per gallon if the miles aren't interesting? the lexus ct hybrid. this is the pursuit of perfection. delivering mail, medicine and packages. yet the house is considering a bill to close thousands of offices, slash service and layoff over 100,000 workers. the postal service is recording financial losses, but not for reasons you might think. the problem ? a burden no other agency or company bears. a 2006 law that drains $5 billion a year from post office revenue while the postal service is forced to overpay billions more into federal accounts. house bill 2309 is not the answer. in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones. but, through it all, we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our anniversary matter to you? because for 200 years, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. and the next great idea could be yours. ♪ the week when nerds rule. the world is finally here. i think nerds rule the world all the time. this is very particular. the doors at comic con is open. it is now a monstrous four-day event that showcases the best in comic, sci-fi, film and tv. this is an amazing set of number. every year 130,000 fans, see, descend upon the san diego convention center. in costume, many of them, as you see, for seminar, signings, sneak previews. even some of our bronies are there. sure a lot of people make fun of the attendees. but they do not see the cold hard truth. comic-con is a financial powerhouse. which brings us to tonight's number. $162 million. according to the san diego convention and visitor's bureau. that's the amount of money that comic-con generates in san diego every single year. in addition to tickets and merchandise at the convention, you' got hotel, restaurant, grocery store, airports, all benefiting from that extra 100,000 people. all told, the convention generates $3 million in tax revenues every year. which is crucial for any city i financially destitute california when organizers threatened to move the event, they offered subsidies, and it worked. the nerds have got san diego by the codpiece. it will remain a san diego event through 2015. up next, two men charged with conspiracy to smuggle items into iran, nuclear items. and why george zimmerman's lawyer wants the judge in the case removed and will he succeed?t play in the same as luxury s.u.v.s, it helps to have an interior full of hand-selected wood trim and soft premium leather... and it doesn't hurt to have a selec-terrain dial that truly performs. ♪ male spirit present.trong it's the priceline negotiator. >>what? >>sorry. he wants you to know about priceline's new express deals. it's a faster way to get a great hotel deal without bidding. pick one with a pool, a gym, a great guest rating. >>and save big. >>thanks negotiat