Skip to main content

tv   Your World With Neil Cavuto  FOX News  September 12, 2013 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT

1:00 pm
kind of makes the meter readers look like the good guys. that's it for "studio b." shep is back later for the fox report. neil cavuto and "your world" right now. >> neil: he writes it. they print it. and politicians here go nuts over it. >> i totally disagree with him. >> i was insulted. >> i can just hear reagan rolling over in his grave. >> i think he is just looking for an excuse to show off his super bowl ring. >> the height of hypocrisy for putin. >> america is an exceptional country. >> when you haven't even heard what rick santorum has to say but you will, just you wait. >> welcome everybody. i'm neal cavuto, andry below give you a wild guess what dominated the white house press
1:01 pm
conference. >> what the white house is trying to do today is put the best possible face on this op-ed. this was a blistering attack from the russian president against the american president. they have had previously frosty relations, but the administration has been putting a lot of stock in russia, a lot of stock in putin to bail the president out of this crisis in syria because all of a sudden the russians had a proposal to put on a plan. a pro pose sal that susan rice, secretary of state john kerry and other top officials on monday were saying, basically, it would never work, it's unreasonable, but by tuesday when the president addressed the nation and then the last 48 hours the administering has been pushing the proposal because right now, without votes on capitol hill to approve the use of military force, the president doesn't have another way out just yet. so, what they did at the briefing was say a number of
1:02 pm
things. number one, shot become a little at putin and said, at least there's freedom of expression and promotion of human rights here in america. that's while he ways allowed to even write the op-ed, and jay carney was trying to say that vladimir putin, by writing this, has now taken ownership of this issue and is putting russian prestige on the line. so if he doesn't follow through on getting a deal with the syrians, it's going to be a big blow to russia you. see them trying to offload the onus of the from the obama administration to the putin administration. jay carny says it's not a bad thing for the president to take a bracket. >> there's no long-term strategy. the obama strategy has changed three times in the last week. now we're sitting back and hoping that he can be bailed out by russia. and so i just look at this and i can't believe that we're -- this is taking place to be wreck
1:03 pm
tour -- lectured to by putin this morning, i can just hear reagan rolling over. >> unlike russia the united states stands up for democratic values and human rights in our own country and around the world and believe our global security is advanced when children cannot be gassed to death by a dictator. >> so you hear the stakes. the bottom line question for the white house is whether or not in the wake of this op-ed and others from putin directed at the american president, can they trust putin in these negotiations? is he really going to deliver? and i can tell you the democratic chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, bob menendez, had a simpson today when he said he read the op-ed piece and said he wanted to vomit. >> neil: thank you very much. back to the talks and james rosen with the secretary of state in geneva and the
1:04 pm
diplomatic push to avoid a rumble. james. >> good evening. expect deaths are high, said secretary of state kerry, but more so argued for the russias. just before hand kerry spoke by telephone with the leaders of the political military wings of the syrian rebel forces. kerry seeking to reassure the rebels the u.s. is not selling them out to achieve a deal on chemical weapons. quote in both calls, kerry aides said, the secretary made clear he was seeking tangible commitments the russians are interested in achieving a strong, credible, and enforceable agreement to rabidly -- rapidly identify and secure the chemical weapons, and kerry begins today's talks with the russians from a position of skepticism, and so it was in the main event, the fever in geneva,
1:05 pm
kerry using his opening statement to reject sir's six-ya's request for 30 days, and kerry warning lavrov, this is not a game. >> it has to be real. it has to be comprehensive. it has to be verifiable. it has to be credible, timely, and implemented in a timely fashion. and finally, there ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place. >> lavrov, a famously tough and sometimes sarcastic negotiator, shot back he wounds prepared to make an extended political statement, in rebuke to kerry, and lavrov add, diplomacy likes silence, and ban ki-moon released a letter from the syrian government today where
1:06 pm
say aye sad's regime has requested formal beginning of the process to join the convention signed in 1997. >> neil: thank you very much. vlad might be feeling glad but his words make rick sick. rick santorumum on the phone saying putin bashing our exceptionalism thing, he has it very wrong. senator, that putin column has everyone talking, speakly the exceptionalism comment. what did you make of that? >> i make of that, this is putin basically pointing his fixer -- poking his finger at president obama and really stepping into the world stage and lecturing the united states president, taking the position as the leader of this conflict, someone who is a peacemaker, someone who talks about human rights, and
1:07 pm
how america isn't exceptional and all people are equal and all these, none of which are true in russia or certainly by him. and so that's why i think everyone is disgusted. the thing that is most disgusting is the president put himself in a position to be look toured toy by vladimir putin and that's never a good thing. >> your open position on this, you backed tougher actions against syria, and now you say time has passed and you can't. but is that sending mixed messages? >> well, the position i took was two years ago. during the presidential campaign, during the debate. in fact there was a rather extended discussion i had about asking the president to get involved in syria, to arm the rebels, to -- we realize, i think even proved out over time, that unless the united states is actively involved with a pro-democracy, pro-western force within the middle east, that the
1:08 pm
natural inclination, whether egypt, whether it's libya, whether it's syria, iraq, afghanistan, the natural inclination, given the street in those countries throughout the middle east today, is not going to be pro-western, not going to be pro-democratic, and we have seen that in every situation within the middle east, and so we either get involved, stay involved, and make sure that our side is successful, or -- if we don't, which is exactly what the president did. he did not do that. then we have to accept the consequences that the natural inclination in those areas is not pro-western and is going to be more radical islamic, and you're seeing in syria a fight between radical sunnies and radical it shoulds. that's not a fight the united states needs to be in now. >> neil: chemical weapons seemed to warrant action in 2003, and when you were working with senator barbara boxer, trying to
1:09 pm
address this issue, here's what she said a couple dies ago. >> we passed the syria accountability act by a vote of 89 to 4. i wrote that bill with senator santorum. we had huge vote in favor of it. this is what it says. >> neil: okay. what changed, senator? >> this is what it said. it talked about syria's involvement with hezbollah, involvement with the rebels in iraq, and talked about weapons of mass destruction. and you know what the remedy was? political and economic satisfactions. we specifically -- i talk about it during the time. we were noted a advocating for military strike. we talk about using diplomatic and economic satisfactions to force syria out of lebanon, which, for the record, they moved out, and one of the reasons was the -- it was successful. i'm not against any type of
1:10 pm
military intervention in the sense of helping the rebels, which, after now two years we're beginning to do all i'm suggesting is that drawing a red line on the issue of chemical weapons and saying that somehow because someone is killed with a chemical weapon instead of a gun killing a child, is this degrees worse and requires the united states to step forward. i'm sorry, i don't see it that way when there is no national security benefit for us to go forward because it's a battle right now between al qaeda, radical sunnies and hezbollah and assad, radical it should it shoulds. >> neil: the appetite too attack
1:11 pm
syria -- >> he said this is a horrible thing, we have to act, but i'm not going to. i'm going to ask congress not to act. the mixed signals and confusion is almost stunning in its presentation day after day from this administration. now suggesting that it's russia's responsibility, not theirs. this is an administration that doesn't want these problems and i say to my colleagues, do we really want to give this president the power to strike militarily? potentially escalate this conflict and put even a tougher problem on this present table? i would plead, do not -- the president has proven he is not up to the task in telling with these issues. it's pretty clear right now that in spite of the tough rhetoric from the secretary of state, that the military option is just that, an option sitting out there. let's work on economics, work on diplomatic, let's work in arming rebels and strengthen the
1:12 pm
rebels. maybe they can begin to drive al qaeda out of syria and then again the assault against assad. right now it's not a time to be launching missiles against anybody. >> neil: remember when the former dc mayor all but chased wal-mart out of town? this mayor might have just brght them back, despite all the protests, and he is here to tell us why.
1:13 pm
1:14 pm
1:15 pm
[chanting] >> neil: unions might have been fighting back for a living wage but the washington, dc mayor said for his con sit tunes it would have been hell so he
1:16 pm
vetoed legislation that would require big retailers to pay a higher wage. mayor, very good to have you. >> thank you for having me. >> why did you do this? >> i think it's a job-killer. we systemed between 4,000 and 4500 jobs would be lost to the district of columbia as a result of this. people consider this a wal-mart bill but there's so many other retailers involved. wal-mart made it clear when the city counsell passed the bill they would not be coming to the district of columbia. the promised six stores and cancelled on three where construction wasn't started and were going to try to get another of the other three. so for those who thought they were going to require wal-mart to pay more money to pay a higher wage, they wouldn't have been available to do that. and then there's so many other
1:17 pm
retailers who fit the criteria. like cost -- costco, home depot, indicated they wouldn't come to the district of columbia or would not expand their racings -- their operations. and it's a job killer and sends the message the district of columbia is closed for business. this would have put a huge damper on things. >> neil: a lot of unions upset at you, mayor. not a big surprise, and urging the council to override your veto here. effectively that would mean getting one more vote than they managed to secure in the 8-5 decision to hike this minimum wage. are you nervous? >> you have to be when it's so close to the threshold. requires nine votes to override
1:18 pm
a veto there war five solid votes against the bill and we'll work with council members in hope they'll sustain those votes and maybe one or two will change their mind. >> neil: how you thought about what this means for businesses in d.c.? wal-mart seems to indicate that should you survive an override, -- you were talking beyond wal-mart. what were you telling the business community that might be looking at washington and saying, they're not really open for business? >> well, we tell them that, first of all, we wanted them to come to the district of columbia, and what people need to realize also is with the small geography we have, right between maryland and virginia, that people can locate stores right outside the city, within a matter of minutes of so many people who live in this city, that frankly had this bill
1:19 pm
passed the stores that were located would have paid whatever prevailing wage or minimum wage was required in those states and avoided this law that would have been passed in the strict of columbia. so we would have lost the business, probably lost a lot of the jobs and had people still going outside the city, spending their money. >> neil: a lot of the unions upset. one quoted as saying the mayor will rue this day for the rest of his life. >> i believe that i made the right decision. this decision was made in order to be able to create jobs for people who live in the district of columbia and to continue economic development. we have areas in our city, we have ward 8, the most economically challenged, which has a 22% unemployment rate. we have other areas that are 12%, 15's. we try to create jobs and opportunities for people and this is a way of being able to do that. >> mayor, very good having you.
1:20 pm
>> thank you. >> neil: by the way, a former mayor and a council member, marion berry, says this fight is far from over. an override vote it set for next week and he will be my special guest on monday. as if this wal-mart knockdown were not enough, unions are battling a healthcare law they backed but are now calling over the top. and you need it now. ladies, let's goo vegas. cute! waiter! girls' weekend here! priceline savings without the bidding.
1:21 pm
1:22 pm
they used to get really tired. until i started gellin'. i got dr. scholl's massaging gel insoles. when they're in my shoes, my feet and legs feel less tired. i'm a believer. drinsoles. i'm a believer!
1:23 pm
>> neil: they helped craft and it now they bash it. our some are seeing the afl-cio approving a resolution ripping the new healthcare law. but many ask, aren't unions the ones who pushed for these healthcare changes in the first
1:24 pm
place? labor advocate says that's not the case at all. you argue they were supportive of nationalizing or getting healthcare going for everybody but it was up to congress to work out the details and the president, and they saw the details and didn't like it. >> labor saw a situation in which americans pay far more than any other country in the world for health care, with decidedly mediocre result, and saw millions of people not insure at all so they wanted a change, as to do most americans. never been totally happy with the bill. they wanted changes made at the outset over what we're talking about right now, and they were told, i believe, that those changes would be done down the road. i don't think that labor thinks those changes have been done and that's what this is about now. >> neil: when they were championing the law and i was at the democratic national convention, they were cheerleading the law.
1:25 pm
so either they didn't read it or read and it forgot it, but some of though -- those provisions were there. so what changed? >> it's not a matter of not reading the law. this is a huge change for a sixth of the economy. a lot of things to be worked out. >> neil: how do they know their generous plans -- cadillac plans -- i don't think the analogy is fair -- would not fall under the category of excessive under this law and be taxed and charged accordingly? >> right. that's the kind of thing they hope would be worked out in the implementation. let me push back a little on the notion they were the cheerleaders for the law. labor wanted one thing above all from the president and that was to reform labor law. he cosponsored as senator a bill that would do just that. he promised his candidate so sign and it as president done little. he has bigger fish to pry, the
1:26 pm
economy and auto industry, but labor supported this because, one, it does support changes in healthcare,, two because it wanted obama to get this done so he would finely move on to their priorities. >> neil: for average folks listening to you and me, this done jibe with what -- was saying. >> we made a difference in this fight and because of that we're about to take an historic step towards our goal of providing quality health care to every american. this bill is a great step forward. it's going to give us long-term security. the congressional budget office says it's going reduce premiums. 14-20%. >> neil: i'm coming back and saying, you just sold us a bill of goods if i'm a union meter you. didn't tell us this would cost us dearly. you went ahead and signed off on something that you had to have known wasn't going to be great,
1:27 pm
and maybe you were countenancing some sort of swift changes, but you let us down. >> i think you're half right on that. i do think -- i don't think they signed off on something they knew wouldn't be good. i think they hoped the changes would be made -- >> neil: i don't know. you're a very smart guy. all i know is that i don't think you would go out on a limb and promise and extol the virtues of any subject without being fully well versed in it. i am just saying a lot of union heads didn't do that. and i'm wondering whether that strikes the union member's core, we have either lazy leadership or leadership trying to cut a deal because they didn't do their job. >> i don't subscribe to the laziy, but i think that -- and that's what was expressed at the afl-cio convention. there is a lot of concern, and would submit more broadly. one thing in my book, the union
1:28 pm
is precisely that labor has for too long been too wedded to one party and that done that party's work and this might be a result of that. >> neil: very interesting. very good having you. thank you. >> pleasure. >> neil: how many times did we hear from the white house, this law was the law of the land, a new report from the congressional research service shows the president has changed it 14 times, and these ladies usually love to argue with each other and would love to argue this, say the president has got a legal right to do. so explain, michelle. >> well, first of all the executive job is 0 to execute the laws. it's in the the president0s job to write the law. congress wrote the law, he sponsored it, pushed it past. so it's not necessarily he i i chase -- is changing. the implementation of the law is being glitched.
1:29 pm
>> neil: you just made more than immaterial changes, right? you're structurally changing, delaying key provisions for a year, you're changing working requirements. you're more than tinkering. >> it's not -- all right. maybe not tinkering, but what happens is when the law becomes -- is executed, certain provisions weren't necessarily working out the way it was -- >> neil: this i kind of -- >> i think from a procedural standpoint there's nothing wrong with laws being amended when the purpose of the amendment is to make the law function better. we want the law to be in as good a shape as possible. >> neil: a big difference between amending something and completely changing it. >> if agree. the bigger problem are these delays. it shows the federal government really is not in a position to pass a law and then have the law work as soon as it's on the books. >> neil: beginning october 1st , all these
1:30 pm
exchanges, joining and implement all of this and just said today we might not have all the is dotted and ts crossed. i don't know. that's like the day of the wedding the bride being told the priest can't make it, your parents are nowhere to be found and your catering hall is on fire but good luck. >> we might have to postpone the wedsing and if it's not exactly the way the bride wants, why to ahead? >> neil: maybe the bride comes to the realization, i don't want to marry this guy. >> no, just because the parents didn't show up. >> the laugh is totally fine. it's not about these giant sweeping changes. if i want to go back to he metaphor but the changes are not sweeping. >> neil: we're running out of people to pay for it. you're delaying provisions for people signing up, disease laying for whole industries, delaying paying for it.
1:31 pm
so then you're putting the on youus on us to fill the gap. >> about the insurance companies getting on board at the time they were supposed to get on board. >> neil: she's shaking her head. are you shaking your head at me or center. >> the federal government needs to know what a tedline means and that's a problem. i mean, congress shouldn't be passing laws that they're not ready to implement, because it doesn't make -- >> neil: they say there's precedent for it. same with medicare and social secure. my argue; they all became huge costly boondoggle. >> becomes costly, money out of people's pocks and that's not the way the legislative process was meant to work. so i don't even -- it's not even about the concept of this law. procedural live this is a bad idea. >> neil: when i refer to boondoggles, i say how too you pay for it? whatever your views on the
1:32 pm
programs, we have not come up with ways to pay for them. >> you thinking this guy is a hero for avoiding boots on the ground? syria? this commander says someone's boots are going on the ground to make sure assad is doing what putin said. of getting something "new." and now, there's a plan that lets you experience that "new" phone thrill again and again. and again. can you close your new phone box? we're picking up some feedback.
1:33 pm
introducing verizon edge. the plan that lets you upgrade to a new verizon 4glte phone when you want to. having what you want on the network you rely on. that's powerful. verizon. upgrade to the new moto x by motorola with zero down payment. there's a lot i had to do... ... watch my diet. stay active. start insulin... today, i learned there's something i don't have to do anymore. my doctor said that with novolog® flexpen, i don't have to use a syringe and a vial... or carry a cooler. flexpen® comes prefilled with fast-acting insulin used to help control high blood sugar when you eat. dial the exact does. inject by pushing a button. no drawing from a vial. you should eat a meal within 5 to 10 minutes after injecting novolog® (insulin aspart [rdna origin] injection). do not use if your blood sugar is too low, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause symptoms such as sweating, shakiness, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar c be serious and life-teatening. ask your health care provider about alcohol use,
1:34 pm
operating machinery, or driving. other possible side effects include injection site reactions and low potassium in your blood. tell your health care provider about all medicines you take and all of your medical conditions. get medical help right away if you experience serious allergic reactions such as body rash, trouble with breathing, fast heartbeat, or sweating. flexpen® is insulin delivery my way. covered by most insurance plans, including medicare. find your co-pay cost at ask your health care provider about novolog® flexpen today.
1:35 pm
>> neil: syria announced as the international community can come and get its chemical weapons, but how do we go about doing that?
1:36 pm
commander, it was only a couple of days ago the assad government said, chemical weapons? we don't have it. oh, you mean this stuff here. how do we make sure their stockpile goes to an international group? >> it's gore to be a very complicated process. the none one thing assad has to do is sign the chemical weapons convention to make sure he is in compliance with the international treaty. the next we put together quickfully coordination with the russians an international force specifically excludes iran so we can get into the country and have assad verify the location and stockpile amounts of all the chemical weapons throughout the country. >> neil: who do you believe? this is the same government that said it didn't have them, and then said we had them and didn't use them. and the russians say they didn't have. the. all right, they might have had them but didn't use them.
1:37 pm
and we're. trusting, and that look begs for boots on the ground and complicated bay civil war. >> absolutely. we have to put, and the international community has to put boots on the ground there to work with the assad regime to do that. we're going to have to rely extensively on intelligence that we have and other partners in the region, turkey, jordan, israel, to make sure we pull together, because they have sources that would indicate where some of these weapons are being stock piled, now it's a vacation very fix indication process. and assad doesn't have a vote in this anymore. he has given that us for us not to use military force. >> neil: commander, how do we go forward with this? assad could be hiding this, sending it to a lot of groups --
1:38 pm
saddam hussein had chemical weapons and had weapons that could do a lot of bad stuff. it was our search for it later that gave him a good deal of time to move move them, hide them, bury them, sell them. how do we know something like this wouldn't happen all over again? >> what we have to do is go forward into this with the russians and tell them, you're the ones that proposed this. your credible is on the line. this is not going be a game of hide and seek like with iraq. this is a deadly serious game where we have a matter of weeks, not months, not years in order for assad to show us where the weapons are, save they're there, cop victim the stockpiles and confirm it uses intel -- intelligence resources and if assad doesn't do this, we turn to russia and say, this is why you can't be trusted and assad can't be trusted. the president has to have the
1:39 pm
capability and credibility to do that as our commander in chief. otherwise, we are being backed into that corner, not only as a nation, but the international community. this is the u.n.'s treaty. it has to be enforced. >> neil: commander, thank you very very much. powerful words. you know those air force guys, the ones who pat you done, was one of them actually thinking about blowing you up? trace on the case [ man ] look how beautiful it is.
1:40 pm
♪ honey, we need to talk. i took the trash out. i know. and thank you so much for that. i think we should get a medicare supplement insurance plan. right now? [ male announcer ] whether you're new to medicare or not, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. it's up to you to pay the difference. so think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company.
1:41 pm
like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. i did a little research. with a medicare supplement plan, you'll be able to stay with your doctor. oh, you know, i love that guy. mm-hmm. [ male announcer ] these types of plans let you visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. and there are no networks. is this a one-size-fits-all kind of thing? no. there are lots of plan options. it all depends on what we need and how much we want to spend. [ male announcer ] call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find an aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. what happens when we travel? the plans go with us. anywhere in the country. i like that. you know what else? unitedhealthcare insurance company has years and years of experience. what do you say? ♪ i'm in. [ male announcer ] join the millions already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp.
1:42 pm
remember, all medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay and could really save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose your own doctor or hospital as long as they accept medicare patients. and with these plans, there could be low or no copays. you do your push-ups today? prepare to be amazed. [ male announcer ] don't wait. call today to request your free decision guide and find the aarp medicare supplement plan to go the distance with you. go long. >> neil: something that is really going to tick you off. a former tsa worker arrested for making threats against lax. los angeles international airport. trace gallagher has more. >> the former screener is actually suspended from tsa this summer for telling a 15-year-old girl to cover up. then two days ago he resigned
1:43 pm
his position and, yesterday he left a package at the tsa headquarters at lax. then he made a followup phone call saying they needed to evacuate certain terminals and that they were running out of time, and that he was watching. and he was planning to send a message to america and the world. listen. >> the defendant told them they needed to clear certain terminals. he told them they were running out of time. he told them he was watching them. and he told them that he was going to send a message to america and the whole world. >> we don't know the motivation, obviously very extreme in his views. >> neil: the package did not explode but did have a letter called the end of america, the end of satan, we were not defeated. in the letter he talked about his suspension, when cops went to his home to fine him he wasn't there, but they did find another note that said, and i'm quoting here, 9/11/2013.
1:44 pm
fire, fear, fear, and then they found another-1/2 at a church outside of los angeles. the church was evacuated. the suspect was arrested in the parking lot of that church. he claims he did not intend his letters or phone calls to be threatening and he was not planning any violence at all. we contacted tsa. they have no comment because he is no longer an employee but is now facing up to 15 years in prison. >> neil: wow. trace gallagher, thank you very much. you got to ask yourself, is it time for us to start screening the screeners? former d.c. detective rod wheeler says this won't be the last time something like this happens. how too you screen them? >> you know, neil, this has been going on for a while now. you and i have talk about case after case for the past few years where tsa screeners have been involved these situations. if you look in the history of
1:45 pm
the tsa, they had cases where agents have been involved in bringing in drugs from other countries, letting people get through the tsa line, while we're looking at little kids and old grandmothers and screening them, don't you think we need to take a closer look at these individuals? such as this individual from lax. the other thing, too, there were warning signs from this guy where this guy made comments about 15-year-old girl. why wasn't the tsa all over that? they're response is, we have no comment. >> neil: that worries me, too especially when they say it's regarding a former worker. i if you're not on top of hough that guy got hired in the first place, it does call into question the hiring procedures in general and how many others there might be like that. >> you're exactly right. the one thing we need to do -- this is startling. the tsa do not do a recurring
1:46 pm
background check. that's something they do not do right now. just verified that today. they need to do a recurring background check once a year on employees. thankfully nothing happened in this case but here is the better question. what if this guy was able to get some bombs or other type of device inside the airport area? congress needs to take a closer look at tsa and start saying to themselves, how many more incidents will it take before we start addressing this problem. >> neil: yes. tsa workers go through their own screens? who knows. rod, thank you very much. well, lois might not be talking but her tea party bashing e-mails are singing leak a could canary.
1:47 pm
was getting him to wellness. without angie's list, i don't know if we could have found all the services we needed for our riley. from contractors and doctors to dog sitters and landscapers, you can find it all on angie's list. we found riley at the shelter, and found everything he needed at angie's list. join today at
1:48 pm
1:49 pm
1:50 pm
. you think the scandal is just going to go away? take a look at these emails. you might be thinking again. the tea party is dangerous. these are the words of lois lerner and if the attorney is right, these are words that are going to come back to bite her. the woman over the division overseeing what conservatives said were deliberate hits on conservative tea party groups. how big a deal do you think these revelations are going to be? >> i think neil this changes everything. this was direct evidence partisan political targeting. it's all coming together. there were various reasons for lois lerner to take the fifth. this brought it to a head.
1:51 pm
we're looking at changing the lault. the fact she's calling the tea party cases, quote, very dangerous. then says in all caps we're not going to run these through cincinnati. june 2012 she ronds about democrats being in trouble and writes back perhaps the fbc will save the day. the fbc didn't save the deal for democrats. >> what about the federal election. i want to backtrack a little bit. you know this, but i want to say the allegations was targeting conservative groups out of washington. the original allegations these were out of cincinnati. you have lerner saying maybe we should move this back to washington. that dislodges that argument. what's going to happen now? she's going to be compelled to testify again. they've got to do some sort of
1:52 pm
deal to make that happen what do you see happening? >> there's two big dates. a hearing next week with irs acting commissioner. the question for him will be you had a 30 day review you said there's no partisan targeting. though you've got a woman, lois lerner, who takes the fifth, with allegations against her. now the government has to respond to our 41 group lawsuit. that's coming up october 7th. i think we're going to see congressional hearings. the big question i think we're at that point lerner will have to be granted immunity or stop speaking. i think the congressional investigators -- she'd sing like a bird if she has that to prevent her from criminal prosecution. when you see emails, this is somebody that could be going to jail. it would be worth it to take that immunity and testify. we know now this was all washington 100% and a complete
1:53 pm
lie about cincinnati trying to throw that on low level workers. the white house should have known. that. >> she should have thoochlt don't email it. this seems like good practical advice. thank you very much jordan. >> lois lerner is still technically off the hook as. greg hicks says he is being shoved out for speaking out. >> fast forward to sunday talk shows and ambassador susan rice that blamed this attack on a video, five different times. what was your reaction to that? >> i was stunned. my jaw dropped. i was embarrassed. i have been punished. i don't know why i was punished.
1:54 pm
i don't know why i was shunted aside, put in a closet if you will. >> it's been a year. that guy is still in limbo. mr. hicks' attorney, victoria. good to have you. >> good to be here, neil. >> what's his status now by the way? >> we don't have the position he should have. we're working on it. i'll keep you informed. we have powerful people helping us. we'll leave it at that. i think it's timely we're talking on your show about benghazi because next week darrel isis will have a public hearing testifying about the report that's supposed to answer everything. let me tell you, it has false statements and inconsistent statements in it. i want people to start focussing on this. cath lynn herig oirks did a
1:55 pm
great job pointing it out. do you know why chris stephens was in benghazi? haven't been told that? i want this story out. hillary clinton on the day he was sworn in as ambassador said i want you to make this your priority to have benghazi be a permanent outpost. he had to be there in mid september because he needed to get a report out by the end of september because that was the end of the fiscal year. >> the only place u.s. had any serious diplomatic outpost was where she had been wanting to expand to benghazi. >> she wanted to come later that year before the end of the year and take a victory march and parade about benghazi with the permanent outpost. do you know what the arb report says? it says chris stephens went to benghazi independently of washington. an absolute false statement. i know from my client from mr. hicks that the embassy had
1:56 pm
been working with washington several weeks and planning his trip so he could embark -- >> i've heard that. let's say your right on all above. i don't doubt it. how would they have been aware that something would happen to him once he did? >> they wouldn't. why is it arb is trying to hide why he went there? why is a good question for the committee to ask. why did you put a false statement in the arb report that he went there independently of washington -- >> the state department is saying that it's not punishing mr. hicks inny way. it says the letter departure was unrelated to statements he made relating to benghazi. what do you make of that? >> they speak with fork and tongue. we'll see if they make good on it. by law they can't reduce his salary. for them to say that, they can't
1:57 pm
do. that. >> amazing. >> victoria, thank you very much. we're going to keep a close eye on this. >> please do. >> victoria, that will do it here. thank you very much for joining us.
1:58 pm
1:59 pm
2:00 pm
hello everyone. i'm an drink i can't tantaros. it's 5:00 in new york city. this is the five. vladimir putin the man the white house has entrusted to disarm syria has the message for america. you're not exceptional. stop medaling. now the president ignored questions about it from reporters at white house today. jay carney said this. >> both


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on