tv The Fox News Specialists FOX News May 31, 2017 2:00pm-3:01pm PDT
>> eboni: i am eboni k. williams with eric bolling and kat timpf. we are "the fox news specialists" ." president trump is expected to deliver on one of his biggest campaign pledges to put america first by pulling out of the paris climate accord. president trump saying he will make a final decision very soon. he has long been one of the biggest critics, arguing it is full of job-killing regulations that would ruin the u.s. economy and workers. critics are -- >> that the united states does not care about the planets.
>> this is endangering the world. >> if we stand alone, it is more than reckless. we are endangering the planet, the american people, and the economy at a fragile stage. >> eboni: eric, i'm going to say for me that was a bit dramatic. but for those that want to talk about the economics, and you are a money guy. he beats it perk out -- maybe it's not damaging the world but the economy, it's a nostalgic economic model and that we should be planning forthat is m. >> eric: anyone who is surprised donald trump is debating. i'm surprised he has not come out and said we are pulling out. the man ran on anti-globalism. he said we were going to pull out of the tpp, which we did. he said we needed to renegotiate
nafta, which he is trying to do, to give america a better deal. he said he's going to make nato pay their fair share. he is an anti-globalist. this accord, this global agreement. america gets the short end of the stick. we clearly are one of the most prolific polluters in the world. china doesn't want to play ball. what they want us to do is pick up the tab for a lot of developing countries. brazil pollutes the heck out of the globe. we are picking up the tab for countries who aren't ready to, much like we do with nato. donald trump says enough is enough. >> eboni: kat, do you think he can renegotiate? maybe he doesn't like the weights been negotiated under president obama but just make better terms? >> kat: that's what i would like to see them do. i think we should have a seat at the table. it could have consequences here.
in the form of carbon tariffs, things we don't engage in. the standards under obama are ridiculous. they are job killers. environmental productions don't sound as cute as funny when you add in regulations that will kill the economy. there's a reason reason why obama didn't do it involving congress. there's got to be somewhere in the middle. >> eboni: lets me today's specialists. she was crowned miss america and 2008. she's a conservative commentator and the host of a podcast. she specializes in making millennials great again. kirsten haglund is here. he is a retired maryland law enforcement official, talk show radio host, and he is a board member of the aclu. he specializes in democratic politics. garland nixon is here. garland, i'm going to start with
you. obviously president trump, he campaigned on coming out of this. isn't he fulfilling a mandate by the american people? >> democrats don't see climate change is a political issue. the way we would see it, when you start talking about how much it's going to cost effects, from ours perspective, it's like being in a boat with a hole in it and you are surrounded by sharks. you are debating how much it will cost to fix the hole. you shouldn't. if you believe climate change is real, as most scientists do. >> eric: we may be in a boat but doesn't have a hole or leak in the sharks aren't ready to attack. what we are talking about is over centuries, hundreds of years, talking about a degree or two of which the united states of america is going to pony up the vast majority of the cost of keeping the climate down one or 2 degrees over 100 years.
>> garland: best-case scenario. worst-case scenario, as many scientists believe, is that we are in a much worse situation and we are not talking about leaving a world to our children. we are talking about leaving nothing to our children. >> eboni: let's get kirsten in here. it's a debate around economics, politics. but also, we talk about children, millennials. we are of that generation. what does it mean for us long term? >> kirsten: as a conservative and very much for limited government committee believe the market, consumers should drive these changes rather than international government body or an international treaty. i am optimistic because millennials are conscious about ways, relying on renewable sources of energy, and what's interesting. i can be optimistic in that regard, that if trump pulls out, we will see consumers driving a move toward greater energy.
just from a democratic point of view, the obama administration actually signed onto this treaty without having it ratified by two-thirds of the senate and our constitution says that in order to participate in international treaties, you have to get it ratified by two-thirds of the senate. >> kat: he branded as being a piggyback of what bill clinton got ratified, which talking about the numbers, it's not the same thing. no question the reason he didn't do it was because people wouldn't have voted for it. i think what trump should do is make it an actual treaty, get congress involved. i do think we should be tang attention to climate. i think that's important but the throwing number out there, even though we are not beholden to it, lobbyists can use it to push for regulations, strict regulations pay let's go through the proper channels and do it like an actual treaty. >> eric: will never get it through congress. he will not get it through
congress that's senate and house republican-controlled. allow me to do this. i don't want to come off as a climate denier. i am not that. we may be warming, i'm not positive, but we may be and it may be an issue. the economics of it, china and brazil are going to pull out, even if they signed the treaty, they are going to pollute. if they are polluting more than they are supposed to, there's no indication they will hold up their end of the treaty. what happens is, we will be here forking over all this money and our countries will be able to complete with the chinese or brazilians because they are being penalized in paying fees which the chinese government and the brazilian government won't make their companies pay. >> eboni: i think we all agree it's not that good. we can do a better job. when we talk about economics, and i'm concerned about this nostalgic economic model where we can benefit by moving forwar
forward. jobs in technology and solar power. there's no harm in it. no harm in moving our jobs and economic model toward a futuristic, more technology based model. >> eric: you mean away from manufacturing? as kirsten points out, driven by the market. penalizing manufacturing companies. >> garland: if you are going to argue that the market is going to fix it, if climate change is real, then it's the single greatest failure of the market. how could the market fix something that it created? >> eboni: you mean because people are still relying heavily on things yesteryear? >> garland: manufacturing has relied on fossil fuels. if it's real -- >> eric: you and i have worked together for eight years. pollution, if you are polluting in china, brazil or any developing nations, we are
breathing that pollution. it's not staying in china. we are sharing it. when you put our u.s. corporations at a financial disadvantage for the rest of the world, we are not saving the planet unless everyone, everyone. >> eboni: how do we incentivize move into the new model? >> kirsten: part of it is happening? elon musk came out and said he would possibly come off the advisory board. this agreement wouldn't even lower the temperatures. it would still go up 3 degrees, which everyone says is unnecessarily risky. this treaty, as it stands, doesn't care enough. >> eboni: people having problems with the agreement as it stands but my big question is moving to the technologically-based model, how do we incentivize? we don't want overregulation either. >> kat: it's tough. i think the younger generation is more and more interested in
climate change and that's where we also have to. other countries are, that's where other countries are moving paired we have to move there. we can't be the only country by ourselves running on coal. we can't be the people taking the lead with such strict regulations and we can't compete with china. we can't destroy ourselves economically for the sake of a couple degrees but at the same time even just speaking clinically and economically, we can't be all that we overhear on call. i think we do need something, a little bit of a hybrid. i think one was way too strict and would be disruptive to our economy but we do need to do something. >> eric: allow me to address your question. how do we incentivize? we don't incentivize by penalizing. that is never worked in any industry, but to incentivize implies that some government or body is going to pay for you to make a transition. you are a business owner, to go from manufacturing to let's say
software. you are saying, the market incentivized. i will pay more for this iphone because it's being produced in the country where the climate is being protected, that's when it happens, but it's got to start at the grassroots level, not privatizing -- penalizing or incentivizing. >> eboni: next up is wake up, america. we will be right back. ♪ say no to this because of my bladder? thanks to tena. not anymore! only new tena intimates has pro-skin technology designed to quickly wick away moisture. to help maintain your skin's natural balance.
>> eric: time to wake up, america. isis is the face of evil period, lower than any creature on the planet. when kathy griffin posted the pose with a beheaded president trump, she knew she wasn't attempting to be funny. griffin acted with hate in her heart. she hates donald trump and his supporters so much that she blew past what's acceptable in a normal society. her swan dive to new low levels occupied by the likes of isis
murderers paired her picture is almost identical to the reprehensible pictures of isis fighters holding the heads of their victims, images too graphic for this broadcast. images however which we will never forget. too harsh on kathy griffin? not a chance. the left, hollywood, music city, all of you have to stop with the trump derangement syndrome. snoop dogg pointing the gun at a trump look-alike. madonna suggesting she would bomb the white house at a rally. are you brain-dead? these acts you call art hurt real people. think about 11-year-old barron trump who reportedly saw the picture of griffin had on tv, ran to his mom, fearing his dad was dead. imagine the millions of kids watching snoop's videos. you are not funny. you are not making a statement. you are being evil and likely borderline criminal per you are showing your true colors and they certainly ain't red, white, and blue.
you can't just cite loops come i went to far. kathy griffin, you classless fool. you didn't apologize to president trump. you are not remorseful. you are fearful. fearful of losing a gig or two. how about i make you a deal? moved to another country, pick any were not america. i will pay for the flight. i have done this before, and your moving costs. nobody wants to take me up on it. a few months away, i think he would miss it. you might realize what a loser you were. the flight is a one-way ride. kirsten, outrageous celebrities continue to do this but what if it was a republican? what if it was a republican president and a celebrity? >> kirsten: it would be a different story. kathy griffin would have been called out immediately if this was president obama. makes my heart so sad. the level of political discourse
in this country has sunk so low, and i think it has a lot to do as well with social media. people get on there to be so nasty rather than constructive. that means that entertainers have to go this load to get through the noise. it is sad. it's abysmal. i think we should take a look at ourselves and say how can we be kinder? how can we achieve true tolerance? being able to disagree with them but still respect them as an individual. we need to take a step back and monitor how we connect with each other. >> eboni: i think it is vile, disgusting. kathy griffin is not funny anyway. here is -- i don't like social media. i've been a big critic of it primarily but on social media, i say a lot of liberals, the mainstream media outrage wasn't what i think it should've been. but on social media, there were a lot of left-leaning democratic, very liberal people who said this is out of control. it's ridiculous.
they did condemn it. >> eric: they cut her loose today. they did it swift. >> kat: this was disgusting. anybody would say it was disgusting. i don't think it's criminal. you have to say this woman is going for making fun of celebrities plastic surgery to willingly saying i'm going to kill presidents. that's what you have to believe for it to be criminal. it was a desperate ploy for attention from somebody whose latest career achievement was -- she said i am shocked, i am seeing the reaction. if you watch the backstage footage, she says we're not going to survive this. were going to have to go to mexico. she saw the reaction ahead of time and that's why she she wanted the attention and she got it. people are talking about her.
it was disgusting, sick but she knew what she was doing. now we are talking about her. >> eric: kat points out this was premeditated. she said this on videotape prior to posting it online, she said we do provocative things with the photographer and this one is going to create quite a stir. meanwhile, in the monologue, i said where was the apology? she was worried about losing gigs. >> garland: is a former law-enforcement officer officer, i hope they don't start assigning law enforcement to investigate stupidity. if they do, that's all we'll do. i think it does demonstrate a problem on my side of the aisle and that's exactly what people on the left, the bernie-crats call trump derangement syndrome. seeing donald trump as a problem instead of looking at the party internally and figuring out what we need to fix.
the problem is broad. >> eboni: go against the policies. fine, do that, but to basically show him decapitated. what in the world? >> eric: it's insane. can we write this office free speech? >> kat: yes, it is protected speech. >> eboni: lawyer friends of mine, when you start showing that. >> kat: a threat is knowingly and willfully threatening. saying i'm not going to be making fun of lip injections. i'm going to move into the assassination business. no one thinks that's what she is doing. >> eric: what about when kids see that? >> kat: i'm not defending it. it is disgusting, sick. she's losing a huge deal. >> eric: let's talk about barron trump, who, according to the trump family, he saw this on television, and ran to his mom
and said, his dad dead? when it starts hurting real people, has it gone beyond -- >> kat: i get death threats. people threatened to kill me on twitter. that's not knowingly and willfully. legally, doesn't stand. >> eboni: the slippery slope start somewhere. at what point are we going to say that type of thing invokes, even the imagery of that type of thing, is a problem. >> eric: you can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater. >> eboni: it gives the image that it's real. >> eric: yelling fire when there is no fire isn't harmful. it's the reaction. the reaction of something like this fool putting the picture of donald trump 'head beheaded or snoop dogg with the gun, there is a reaction that could be happening. >> kirsten: it is the same argument the left made years ago and there was a shooting and gabriel giffords was shot
because the left wanted to point to this image on sarah palin's twitter account with the target signs. you do have to look at this cascading rise and this normalization of political violence. it's not okay, people. >> kat: of course it's not okay. >> garland: it is reprehensible. this is the type of speech that is protected by the first amendment. the first amendment protects all speech, specifically unpopular speech grade you don't have to protect popular speech. >> eric: quick programming note, be sure to catch "hannity." shawn sits down with lara trump to discuss the kathy griffin controversy. next, investigation into national security. house intel committee delivering subpoenas to the three big intel
agencies with the names of top obama administration officials. they were subpoenaed. were going to tell you who they were and what they are looking for. i stood outside, assessing the situation. i knew it could rough in there, but how rough? there was no way to know for sure. hey guys.... daddy, it's pink! but hey. a new house it's a blank canvas. and we got a great one thanks to a really low mortgage rate from navy federal credit union. pink so she's a princess. you got a problem with that? oorah oorah open to the armed forces, the dod, veterans and their families. navy federal credit union. your body was made for better things than rheumatoid arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist move to another treatment, ask if xeljanz is right for you. xeljanz is a small pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well.
xeljanz can reduce joint pain and swelling in as little as two weeks, and help stop further joint damage. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. xeljanz can reduce the symptoms of ra, even without methotrexate, and is also available in a once-daily pill. ask about xeljanz xr.
in situations like this, there's no time for distractions. it's not enough to think i'm ready. i need to know i'm ready. no matter what lies ahead. get a free sample at depend.com. >> kat: fox news' james rosen reporting that three intelligence agencies received subpoenas this afternoon issued by the house intel committee. each of subpoenaed demands documents that name top officials of the obama administration. susan rice, the national security advisor, former cia director john brennan and former u.n. ambassador samantha power. all three subpoenas referenced on masking, a big signal that the house intel committee is escalating its investigation into national security leaks. i wonder what these could possibly become of the standard for unmasking is very subjective. there could be something incriminating. i don't know.
>> eric: can we point this out again? i am thrilled, the house intel committee. susan rice, national security advisor under president obama was the one who unmasked flynn's name after they said no, we don't see any need to unmask it. somehow figured out -- they asked for documents. hoping there are some emails explaining why she wanted them unmasked. my hunch is that it's purely politics. to keep plausible deniability away from president obama, she asked for the trump administration person who had dealings with the russians, unmasked against the nsa, cia, and fbi. >> eboni: you could be right. it could be politically motivated. as kat points out, the standard is loose and fast, she could
point to almost anything to legitimize it. >> eric: could it be that they missed it but susan rice founde founded? >> eboni: all she has to do is say it. >> kat: say it and have no one be able to prove otherwise. >> garland: talking about unmasking, it sounds like scary, like unmasking would have to be something that's illegal but there's not much to it. unmasking, because of her position in the administration, she could do it and nobody could really question her and thus they could find some, not just illegal -- >> eric: scary as hell. if you are an anti-trump person, are you going to say that trump's nsa could be unmasking at will? >> kirsten: even if she did unmasked for political reasons and they find this out, that is
still not finding out who leaked the information to the press. that's also an issue with the manchester bombing information. that's an important national security issue we need to get to the bottom of. >> kat: hillary clinton took some big swings at president trump. she was asked who is creating and spreading false information about her during the presidential campaign. >> we are getting more information about all of the contacts between trump campaign officials and trump associates with russians before, during, and after the election. so i hope that we will get enough information to be able to answer that question. >> you are leaning trump. >> yes. i think it's pretty hard not to. >> kat: i am shocked she said that. >> eric: it's over. you lost. 61 million people voted for
donald trump. still trying to figure out the reason she lost. because you didn't go to the rust belt states. >> eboni: and her infamous words, what difference does it make? garland, you point out, this party should be using this as a diagnostic. find corrective messages around around -- >> garland: i voted democrat as long as i have been voting and when the election cycle started, i was going to vote for hillary. i didn't vote for hillary and it wasn't because of anything that was false about her. it was things i found out that were true that i didn't agree with. i don't agree with her, the concept that she lost because of false information but i would like to know what it is. most of the progressives on the bernie people who walked away from hillary, they didn't like her policies. it wasn't about the emails. it was purely policy. >> kat: so much easier if you have everyone enabling you so you don't have to look at yourself. >> kirsten: i watch this and think, if that were made, i
would want to take spa days for the rest of my life and sip a glass of chardonnay. what's interesting, this is a key fundraising time for democrats and they are banking and money and you probably know this. cash on this russia message. makes sense from a political perspective why she is doing this. >> garland: the democratic party reported their lowest fundraising numbers in april since 2009. apparently it's not working. >> kat: and they are still going with what is not working. it's got to go away. she's got to stop. >> eboni: do you think this exam more difficult for young and upcoming democrats to get out there when old baggage from yesteryear keeps coming in the way? >> kat: you are going to get to it for that one. >> eric: thank god i didn't say that. [laughter] >> garland: if you look at the democratic party, they are going in the opposite direction. they do not agree with the
>> eboni: welcome back to "the fox news specialists." our specialists today are kirsten haglund and garland nixon. radical islamic terrorists are escalating across the globe. a massive suicide bomb rocked kabul, afghanistan, today. at least 90 people are dead and 11 american citizens are among the more than 400 injured. the attack followed twin isis suicide bombings in baghdad yesterday, one targeting an ice cream parlor full of children. dozens were killed in both attacks. meanwhile, government forces in the philippines are in fierce clashes with sizes-linked militants. attempting to retake the city. the city seized by militants last week. kirsten, i'm going to start with you, targeting children. i don't know it's a coincidence that this took place during ramadan where more children and young people report saying there were baby bottles and things like this in the debris. what's going on? >> kirsten: it is hate,
massive hate. against their own people, and as president trump said, most of the victims of terrorism around the globe are muslims. you know it's going to be interesting, to see general mattis and the general's real strategy to go after isis. there were strong words during the middle east trip but there wasn't a real divine strategy. we've been in afghanistan for more than a decade, what does a victory look like in the war against terror and in afghanistan? i think we need a clear definition and a clear look at what the trump doctrine is going to be in the middle east to solve this problem. it >> eboni: eric, what we do know, that general mattis has td us, there's going to be a different type of strategy from trump. we are going in. we are not waiting for them to come out. >> eric: here is my dilemma, and i've been consistent about this. i am against being in afghanistan. i am against being in iraq. but if we are in, i support the
effort. president obama got in trouble going into the presidency, saying we're going to get out of these conflicts, these two wars. premeditated the pullout before it was time. either you are in or out. personally i think this is a situation, you are talking about now al qaeda or isis ideology, spreading to asian countries. very, very dangerous. the term you used, whack a mole. kill them there, they are going to pop up somewhere else. it's different when we defend our south korean allies, our japanese friends. it's different than trying to put something down in the middle east. >> eboni: garland, is eric right? is this is a situation where president trump campaigned and largely one from the promise to get us out of these conflicts.
>> garland: this is bigger than president obama. if you look at president bush, president obama. what we are seeing is this hokey pokey foreign policy. we would put our left foot in, all right thought out to pending on who's president. we have to figure out, i am with eric. we need to get out because going in and out isn't working. it depends on which president we have, which policy. we are getting the same results. >> kirsten: then you leave afghanistan to the taliban. this is what life is going to look like for those people. it's a very, very hard reality, and talking about the troop levels, they are at least 1,000 troop shortage in afghanistan. at the height, it was 50000-plus there. it's a difficult quagmire. >> eboni: we have been there for 15 years. >> kat: exactly. all these years, these american lives, all of this money.
talking about our goal, what we want to see? we thought we could sell things. it's clearly not going to happen. we do need to get out of there. it's never going to be a good time. there are problems in the problems are very bad and they are so bad that we are not going to be able to solve them. we are wasting time and money at american lives trying to solve something that is not solvable. the area is so unstable. it is such a mess. people are our friends, enemies, friends peered wire redoing it? >> eric: may be, but maybe not. i am by no means, garland said we've had three presidents that were in and out. i don't think so. president bush was all in, both feet. president obama was in, out, in. we are still waiting to see what the trump doctrine is going to be. as a candidate, he said he didn't want to be involved in these foreign wars if possible. as a president, he's getting involved. we need to figure it out. he needs to be all in or all
out. >> eboni: i would wonder, what is the risk associated with being all out. we have been in so long, i'm concerned. >> kirsten: you allow these groups to metastasize in the middle east. plotting to affect americans. another way to stem it is with got to have better intelligence on the ground. so that we can combat the threats. we know, and the generals reported, that on the ground, if we pull out of afghanistan completely, it's going to be the place and a launching pad for attacks. >> eric: won't it be anyway? if not afghanistan, thailand or somewhere else. >> kirsten: but there has to be a gray area. one thing trump said is he's going to listen to the generals. general mattis has some of the best people defense wise advising him. i trust them to do a good job. it >> eboni: i hope that's what happens in that they figure something out. too expensive and too many
>> kat: today is may 31st. the fox news specialist has been on the air for one month. it's been a downpour of news and it's already generated plenty of highlights. >> eric: i am eric bolling with eboni k. williams and kat timpf and this is "the fox news specialists" ." let's meet today's specialists. he is mark cuban and he is here. >> eboni: kellyanne conway. >> eric: he specializes in riding in buffalo on stage. ted nugent is here. >> nice call. >> eric: they sold this to the president, you're going to walk over with the saudi president and put your hands on a globe. >> kat: it was late.
are you a fan of the orb? >> build the wall. build the wall with very big gates. we need a lot of people taking jalapeno peppers in southern california or oranges in miami or cleaning the toilets in miami. >> eric: a refugee family from libya. >> no, he was born in the united kingdom. >> eric: has parents were refugees. >> my mother was born abroad and i was born here. >> donald trump curtsied to the saudi king. >> eric: he didn't curtsy. >> none of this adds up to anything except more malarkey, more distractions. >> eric: time to wake up, america. >> eboni: let's continue the conversation. >> kat: it is time for our newest segment, kat on the streets. >> eboni: president trump is saying the word, speaking to moderate muslims and saying we
cannot do this successfully without you. >> a memo to nixon recommending the retirement of j. edgar hoover. >> eric: you don't think he's really going to cancel the press briefing? >> it is part of this cat-and-mouse game. >> i don't know what we mean, shut down. what is that exactly? stick we will play the rest of the game. >> regardless of what the president thinks, the american people have no appetite for this. >> eric: let's call it what it is. >> they are extremists. >> eric: extremist what? >> extremist killers. >> kat: trolling. >> eric: i have known president trump for 15 years and i said keep tweeting. you hit 100 million people. >> terrible, horrible advice. >> eric: go around the fake news.
>> eboni: everybody condemning obama right now are with her, and she also made a whole bunch of money speaking to wall street as well. why is it okay for hillary and not okay for obama? >> kat: people on twitter attacking me because i am wearing teal. i didn't have time to do laundry because i was at west point military academy watching my cousin graduate. >> what is the endgame? you will accomplish absolutely nothing. we will win. >> kat: i am mad they didn't include my lipstick on my teeth from yesterday. they should have included that and made it 3 minutes. >> eric: we should thank the producers. you do a great job. >> kat: everybody. >> eboni: that was great.
this is so much fun. every single day. "the fox news specialists" let's do this every month. you can do another package for us. >> eboni: you guys will be on the highlight reel. no one really understood the format when this went on the air but it's gotten better and better. the specialists are a special part of what we do. >> kat: special special. thank you. first people were like watt, mark cuban is hosting the show? no, this is a different kind of show. people didn't understand, and maybe they are getting it now. it's been a fun time. when we return, we are going to circle back with our specialists kirsten haglund and garland nixon. ngie's list, we believe there are certain things you can count on, like what goes down doesn't always come back up. [ toilet flushes ] so when you need a plumber, you can count on us to help you find the right person for the job.
>> eric: time to circle back with our specialists, kirsten haglund and garland nixon. can it be cool to be a conservative millennial? >> kirsten: yes. in some circles, it already is. i think conservative millennials have a chance to redefine themselves and their priorities. a lot of them grew up thinking the moral majority, the religious right, and that wing was all that conservative republicans can be but i think they are taking the time to redefine themselves. the movement, in light of trump and the party he's created, i am optimistic and hopeful that our
future is looking up. >> eboni: i will crown you all over again. garland, this is for you. as you look at the democratic party right now and all that's going on, what i think a lot of people see is chaos paid what is the right note for them? >> garland: they should be focused on policy. democratic party had a guy who gave them the formula and he filled stadiums and they ignored him and they are still ignoring them and now we are listening to someone who is talking about why she lost. >> eboni: in june. >> garland: the right thing for the democratic party. it >> eric: what do we call her earlier? >> eboni: baggage in the party. >> kat: someone got so mad when they heard the bag part. are there up-and-coming leaders in the democratic party? >> eric: we have a little bit of time. you are an aclu board member.
>> garland: national board of directors. >> kat: >> eric: what is the bit issue facing the aclu? >> garland: the immigrant issues, the travel ban, still going on in court. >> eboni: can't wait for scotus to get their hands on it. kirsten, you have a very important charity. >> kirsten: we work with families seeking treatment for primarily eating disorders. i started during my rain as miss america. we believe families should have access to good quality care. >> eric: good to go? good show? >> kirsten: thanks for having us. >> eric: we are going to leave it there and say thank you to our fox news specialists, kirsten haglund and garland nixon. we thank you for watching. make sure to follow us on social media. we are huge on social media.
specialistsfnc on twitter and facebook. remember, 5:00 will never be the same. "special report" coming up next. bret baier. >> bret: this is a fox news alert. welcome to washington, i am bret baier. breaking news on the house intelligence committee's investigation into the unmasking of american swept up in government surveillance. there are two tracks to the investigation into what the term campaign did or didn't do, and also with the obama administration did or did not do with surveillance. breaking tonight, new details on the second tract. chief washington correspondent james rosen is here with details. good evening. >> fox news has confirmed that the fbi and cia and national security agency were all served today with subpoenas issued by the house intelligence committee. sources saidac