hello, i'm dana perino, along with kimberly guilfoyle, juan williams, eric bolling and brian kilmeade. it's 5:00 in new york city and this is "the five." one of hillary clinton's closest aides went before the house select committee on benghazi. huma abedin went before congressmen. on thursday clinton will deliver public testimony. on tuesday she defended her decision to send ambassador stevens and others into harm's way. >> we did not put one single american soldier on the ground in libya. i'll say this for the libyan

people -- >> american citizens did lose their lives in benghazi. >> i'll get to that. unless you believe that the united states should not send diplomats to any place that is dangerous, then-day not, then when we send them forth there's always the potential for danger and risk. >> of course she never did get back to that question that anderson cooper asked. clinton will be questioned about her private email server next week. the fbi is investigating. and according to the "new york times," agents are reporthood i angry with president obama over trying to clear his former secretary of state of wrongdoing before they reached any conclusions. >> i don't think it posed a national security problem. i think it was a mistake that she's acknowledged. i can tell you this is not a situation in which america's national security was endangered. >> on top of all that, hillary may be finding out soon whether joe biden is going to challenge her or not. the vice president is reportedly going to make his final decision on a run within the coming days so let's bring in chief white house correspondent ed henry. now election, ed, good to see

you. i want to start with the fbi. because they saw that the interview on "60 minutes" and i think they probably had a collective intake of breath, it was shocked at the commander-in-chief, the president of the united states is getting in the way of their investigation. the white house the next day did backtrack. but today you see "the new york times" reporting that the fbi is angry about the president's interference. >> it was shocking that the president said that on "60 minutes." the person who may suffer more than him is hillary clinton. as you say in this "new york times" piece today, angry fbi agents, that's not something you want when they're taking a look. at that potential criminal charges. as they look at the security of that server. the campaign has been trying to downplay that fbi investigation. but you're right, when the president went out there on "60 minutes" and to me, it sounded like he was prejudging it. that's what they're looking at. was national security jeopardized. was classified information improperly handled? all of those big questions for the commander-in-chief to say there was no national security problem here.

that was prejudging the investigation. i'm not surprised some inside the fbi are upset. that also by the way doesn't mean that they're going to, i don't mean literally they'll take it out on hillary clinton. i think they're still going to do a fair, honest job as the fbi usually does. here's the bigger point. the fbi is supposed to be impartial. it's overseen by the obama justice department. so it's going to be a lot harder for the clinton campaign to do to the fbi if there are charges down the road, what they're doing now to the house benghazi committee. which is because of the opening from kevin mccarthy, the campaign has very effectively in brooklyn torn the republican-led benghazi committee to pieces. basically said this is all political. there's nothing to see here. we'll see what happens in the testimony. they raised serious doubts in that committee. a lot harder to do that with the fbi. >> when i saw the interview on "60 minutes," my first thought was that the president went too far 0-and didn't protect himself. they don't know what's going to happen so the president should have some caveats. we'll take it around the table.

eric bolling? >> talk about the politics of this. president obama goes on "60 minutes" and said she probably did not jeopardize national security. what's in it for him to say that? well obviously if he wanted to protect her, there's been sort of a conspiracy theory flying around. that the president wanted to take hillary clinton out and i've never bought into this. i'm carefully saying that this was a rumor going around town that oh, you know, the justice department led by the white house is going to try to take hillary clinton out because they want to pave the way for joe biden. what was interesting is he was doing just the opposite on 60 minutes. he could have said boy there's real problems here. it could have jeopardized national security. the president seemed to be defending her. he raised other questions and said the american people have to decide. by the president seeming to rush to her defense, you have to wonder how joe biden and his camp, how they were reading those comments. because he really seemed to go to bat for hillary clinton. maybe to his detriment. because as dana said it looked like the commander-in-chief was playing umpire before we know the facts. but that could help joe biden.

>>ky follow up on that? i meant if he does this and she somehow moves away from the emails and doesn't become a scandal or doesn't implicate her, then it's less of a reflection on him. that was his white house when he picked her for secretary of state. that's what i was getting at. >> sure he's being defensive about that. because he wants to make it seem like it wasn't a big deal that his secretary of state had her own server and national security wasn't jeopardized. yes, i concede your point there. but i'm saying it was interesting that in this case he seemed to be rushing to hillary clinton's defense. when the biden campaign has been wondering in previous statements from the white house and what-not. it seemed like they were fanning the flames a little bit. >> kg? >> ed, hi. as a former prosecutor i take this very seriously. think there's some certain yus concerns with respect to the espionage act and fox news telling us that the inquiry as it relates to a subsection and gross negligence. can you talk a little bit about that?

>> sure. the question being that basically people have previously talked about how the mishandling of classified information, that could be a criminal charge. that comes up. our own catherine herridge is reporting on foxnews.com that there's another criminal statute, the fbi could be looking at about criminal negligence as you say. and defense attorney who is have been involved in cases involving those kinds of charges say that even if you come up and said as we've heard the clinton camp that it wasn't marked classified, i didn't know -- that doesn't stop them from going forward with charges. that's what could be very dangerous for hillary clinton and/or people around her. was that the negligence statute suggests even if you say it wasn't marked classified, as by the way hillary clinton said again just a few moments ago on cnn, in an interview with jake tapper, it wasn't marked classified. the point of this story is suggesting the fbi might not care. >> well it doesn't be a solve her of liability. it isn't a specific intent crime. that's going to be the problem. it doesn't matter what she

intended, the fact is she was grossly negligent with highly sensitive information and that will nail her. >> i'm so glad they're finally talking about it when you're a white house staffer and you have to sign those documents, you're signing away thaw know. >> the only caveat i want to say is when you say they could nail her. a as reporter i want to be very clear, in terms of negligence, that hasn't been proven. and just as we were saying president obama shouldn't jump ahead, we don't know if it was or not. >> that's my opinion as a prosecutor of what could happen. don't worry, you're be a solved. >> by the power invested in me i'll absolve everybody. >> first off, fundamentally. people are getting caught up in the benghazi investigation. those are republicans and they have a political axe to grind and that may or may not be true. it has nothing to do with what the fbi doing. the fbi is on their own track. hillary clinton has not really answered that. she still holds to this statement. and never really answered your statement. people have done that before, this has been done before.

and in retrospect, i shouldn't have done it, because i wouldn't have these problems. has this been done before? secretary of state with a server in their house? >> not with their own server. at one time i did ask her in a news conference if she could name any other cabinet secretary, democrat or republican, treasury secretary, not just secretary of state, she didn't answer that question. and a few moments ago jake tapper asked, you keep saying secretary clinton, that this was signed off on by the state department. who signed off on it? she said nobody in particular, it was allowed. and jake pressed on that. think it's an important question, there's not a piece of paper somewhere saying you're allowed to do this. otherwise the clinton campaign would have been waving that long ago. there's official attached to their name. instead she decided she could have her own server. >> the republicans have done their own damage to the benghazi committee. they have messed that up. it will be very hard for them to have a final report that has a lot of meaning. they've twisted themselves into

a pretzel on that the fbi deal is a whole another matter. juan? >> that's right, very much, father, i appreciate that. ed, huma abedin goes to testify and what was curious to me was on this day, we find out there was another secret account. potentially having more information, more emails, or investigations, but then the committee by the way with trey gowdy absent i don't know where he is, says we're not going to ask about the emails. we're focused on benghazi. what is going on. >> that's what the scope of the committee is about. >> obviously, dana, all ha we have discussed up to now is about emails. >> but don't you realize it's because of the benghazi committee that we even have the emails. because of the -- >> that's not what it was supposed to be about. it was supposed to be the committee on benghazi. >> i think it's showing restraint and keeping within the bounds of what the committee was

set out to do. am i right, ed henry? >> of course she's right. >> i hate to go against my friend juan, who by the way does need absolving, i've been out with him a number of times. >> but i think what's going on is that the republicans have been accused of taking this investigation far afield, as dana pointed out. and now you're saying look we only want to ask huma abedin about gen ben ghazi and then you have people asking why aren't you asking about the emails. huma abedin doesn't know anything about benghazi. they're running far afield. except we've seen some emails, including one in late october 2012, wildfire huma abedin tells then-secretary of state i just talked to my friend who was in benghazi. what does that mean? did she talk to someone who witnessed the attacks? what was going on. i think it's fair for the commit examty to say let's bring her in and find out. i want to be clear, the clinton campaign is right about one

thing -- while this may have started as a legitimate investigation to get to the truth, you're right, dana, manl the final report will find some whole new things we don't know. they've been hamstrung by these charges. >> what happens next week? next week, here comes hillary clinton can they ask her about emails? is or are they going to stick to benghazi? >> i think they're going to say i've talked to chairman gowdy and he's going to focus her more on what happened before the terror attacks. and that's something very important, why it gets to her judgment potentially an commander-in-chief. why after all of these warnings and s.o.s. calls about the security situation deteriorating, why didn't the secretary of state and her top people not intervene to help. >> we just heard her answer to jake tapper. her answer is that's for the security professionals to handle. that should not be acceptable to the families who are wondering why their sons are dead. >> when you're in charge, if people below you make mistakes and don't answer, i think you're

supposed to have some accountability. >> we can't let you go. i've got to find out, what's with joe biden? >> i've got two people close to him telling me that he is finally nearing a decision. i say finally, we've heard the same thing that a decision is coming in days. we've heard for days and weeks, it's kind of ridiculous. >> it's like a woman waiting for a marriage proposal. when is it coming? >> the bottom line, i think from his reporting, not my personal opinion, the people close to me are telling me, he's leaning towards getting in. think if he had done this a month from now, hillary clinton would have been in a much different political place. look at her money, she's raised more money than anyone of either party, $33 million in the bank. that's a hard mountain for anybody to climb. >> we need to remember, a lot of people are saying, and will say that this is the push on the right is to expose some of hillary clinton's emails this was done by "the new york times," some fantastic reporting by michael schmidt. it's not a vast right-wing conspiracy to get hillary

clinton. this is journalism. >> the benghazi committee did succeed in one thing, the subpoena was march 3 of this year for the emails. and then hillary clinton had a news conference on march 10 of this year at the u.n. to deal with the fact she had a private server. how is it that there are -- we hear it from the campaign all the time -- there have been seven previous benghazi investigations, this is to say why does it need to be investigated again. in none of those seven investigations, on the hill, they never found out she had a private server. why is that? that suggests they never did the full job to completion. because how would you not get -- how did you not get the secretary of state's emails? >> or they didn't reveal it the reason they found out about it is because they were diligent. so it could be that they didn't report it forthcoming. >> peggy noonan nailed it. joe biden has a reason to run,

he's going to swoop in and save the party. you saw what the alternative was, that's not something that the democrats want. if she gets em brailled in the fbi investigation or indicted, you're going to need a credible candidate and he's more than credible. >> we could keep you here all day, election ed. donald trump and ben carson teamed up to change the terms of the next gop debate. a big development on that ahead. and if you've ever wondered what kind of dancer bernie sanders is, you're in luck.

♪ it's the final countdown! ♪ ♪ the final countdown! if you're the band europe, you love a final countdown. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. can a a subconscious. mind? a knack for predicting the future. reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive?

when you're not confident your company's data is secure, the possibility of a breach can quickly become the only thing you think about. that's where at&t can help. at at&t we monitor our network traffic so we can see things others can't. mitigating risks across your business. leaving you free to focus on what matters most.

the last gop presidential debate was three hours long and the next one was supposed to be as well. but two republican front-runners threatened to pull out if it wasn't shortened and cnbc caved. donald trump and ben carson sent a joint letter with the demand that the debate only be 120 minutes long and include opening 0 and closing statements or they wouldn't participate and they got their wish. trump took a victory lap on twitter. >> there's going to be a debate and i'm going to be there. do i want it to be three hours long? not necessarily, but i'm prepared for it. especially if it's going to be about important issues. >> i think apparently they're worried about answering questions for three hours.

for heaven's sakes, we have ten candidates on the stage i don't think three hours is a long time. and i think the american people actually like these debates. >> a victory for all of us is what dana perino just said. >> that doesn't count as her comment. >> still have reserved your speaking time. >> when you think about it, it seems a little bit reasonable, we've all watched the debate. by the end it's a little bit -- exhausting. and they start asking sort of a, what was your favorite pet growing up. the questions get a little bit crazy. >> i think that this was a good team effort by the republicans and even though they all want to take a little bit of credit for it, there was two demands, one was the 120-minute limit. the other one was that they be allowed opening and closing statements, which cnbc originally was not going to allow. so the rnc had to get involved, everybody ott a phone call. i guess it was a dramatic phone call. but think about it this was one of the first times that the gop worked together and pushed back

an nbc brand to say that's not how we're going to do it. now it's 120 minutes and opening and closing statements, everybody wins. >> let me take carly -- it's interesting that carly fiorina was push to get on the debate stage. and now her numbers are down. and the people at the top saying we want to get it condensed. once you three throe in the ads and the breaks, it comes down to 90 minutes, then you throw in the opening and closing statements and you're coming down to close to an hour. and you've got ten people on the stage. >> opening and closing statements don't take 30 minutes. >> for ten people? >> 30 seconds. >> they're not doing 30 seconds. >> juan, to your point, for one thing, i think closing statements are ridiculous. you've closed me for an hour and a half or two hours. you don't need to summarize what you said. i pretty much can figure it out. number two, is that you can no

longer complain about the amount of time that you're given, if you're complaining about the duration of the debate so either one of those, they can't complain. >> those two get time. >> they get time. i would say this i've got to take steve deucy's point that it took somebody that nbc fired to stand up to nbc about the two-hour duration and i researched it. there's been no primary debate over two hours prior to the one on cnn. so we actually had precedent in negotiated a decent deal for everybody. >> isn't that -- >> we had leverage. the leverage was, i don't show up and if trump doesn't show up, you don't have a debate. >> to the victor go the spoils. that's why it was really changed. if number knife and ten, whoever they are christie and paul if they demanded it, they likely would not get the same result. i will tell you as a political junkie, i would rather see a four-hour debate than a two-hour debate. i love it. i could watch that stuff all

night long. i love the interaction. >> i want to see somebody on a retort say would you like to comment on the fact that he insulted you? that's what hillary clinton did. that's the most astounding follow-up in the history of debating. no, i have nothing to say. >> a great answer for a spokesperson. care to expand? no. >> it's a dream answer, but not a real answer. >> the lights go on and literally, they start an answer, especially the policy question, you get 30 seconds in and the bell goes off and they -- hate the rush, i hate the rush at the end. >> like we're being rushed now? >> we have a four-hour debate. perhaps there could be a dancing competition at the end. i would like that. >> but bernie, can he dance? take a look. ♪ ♪ [ cheers and applause ] >> have you ever been in handcuffs? >> yes. i don't know exactly what you mean by that.

i was -- i take it, i take it -- you mean was i ever arrested by the police. >> well no, not necessarily. >> who has better hair, you or donald trump? >> that goes without saying. >> i mean bernie, that's cute. at least he's got some personality. that's all i can say so far that i like, because i'm not into the -- >> i adore ellen. i like the clips we see on the show. i think imagine like all night long, bernie sanders has to know, he's trying to fall asleep at night. i'm going to have to dance in front of all of those people tomorrow. not very natural. i thought he did a pretty good job. >> i'm a terrible dancer, i know my limitations, so i won't. i give him credit for doing that i want to add one more thing. ellen is one of the finest-produced talk shows around.

so relaxed, so perfect. why can't she interview one republican? put somebody, you don't have to agree with them. stephen colbert is interviewing them. seth myers is interviewing them. why wouldn't she do that? why would she shut out 50% of her audience. she bringing hillary clinton in. bernie sanders in? >> what do you think? >> it was fun. it was nice, you saw bernie, another side of bernie. it was cute. certainly wasn't hard-hitting by any means. >> i can tell that ellen was having fun with him. >> what about -- >> have you know, trump on there dancing or bush or rubio or somebody. >> trump's got the show of shows coming up on "saturday night live," nbc product and they cut him off. he's back and he's going to have some fun. i will say this about bernie, the news this week on bernie is so intriguing to me. >> why? >> in that bernie, i think clearly lost the debate, right, the democratic debate. but his fundraising has gone up. >> there's a poll out today that has him losing to hillary clinton in new hampshire for the

first time. >> i thought they were neck and neck. >> but he's 37-35. hillary is 37 and he's 35. >> heck with margin of error. >> a month ago he was 12 points ahead. >> i'm saying, i think democrats have responded well to bernie in the aftermath of the debate so you could say hey, bernie -- >> you want nine of every 10 i earn. what is will ferrell thinking? bernie sanders is number one in denmark, norway and sweden. >> what does that tell you? >> that's his mantra. that's where he wants to live if i hated my system of government that bad, i would go to the country that has the one i like. that's his mantra. next, how a group of arabic-speaking people managed to infiltrate and get their hate-filled messages aired.

at freshpet, we took a we started with fresh chicken. and turkey. and veggies too. and added antioxidant-richto presuperfoodsnutrients to make our recipes, well, super we put fresh food in the fridge... and now fresh ingredients on the shelf... with america's first dry food free of all processed meal. it's food so simple, we put our recipe right on the bag. freshpet. a fresh take on pet food.

the health care law gives us powerful tools to fight it. on medicare fraud.

to investigate it. prosecute it. and stop criminals. our senior medicare patrol volunteers are teaching seniors across the country to stop, spot and report fraud. you can help. guard your medicare card. don't give out your card number over the phone. call to report any suspected fraud. we're cracking down on medicare fraud. let's make medicare stronger for all of us.

should so-called moderate muslims be more concerned about young boys preparing to become suicide bombers than going after make-believe tv shows like "homeland"? something slipped past those of us who watched the latest episode, who don't read arabic. take a look at this scene. >> listen, if things get ugly -- >> it was quick, there was a message written on a wall next to the actors that said "homeland" is racist, written in eric. three graffiti hired by the production company to help decorate the set are claiming responsibility. maybe those guys should be concerned about real-life videos like this.

[ speaking foreign language ] >> dana, they want to be suicide bombers, killers, for god. >> that one was real. >> terrible. so if you go and you check out a bit, it's raw, it's well-produced, and it's obviously very disturbing on that one. i would say actually though, it was very subversive what the artist did with the graffiti. we could stand to do a little bit more of that in the arab world, too. >> just call for graffiti? >> subversive, like propaganda. yeah. >> dana, sometimes you have such an edge to you. >> you should do some tagging.

>> people would never suspect. >> okay, already. >> get her a spray can -- >> like a little hollister. >> yeah yeah. >> $50,000. >> talk to us about the last video. those are babies wanting to be suicide bombers. >> now a days anybody who has a cell phone has the possibility that they could be radicalized. you can reach anybody with videos and social media and the reaches. it's far now with the availability and the ease of social media. and technology and communications. and that's what we really have to start thinking about and we heard the head of the fbi talking about that as well. there's serious threats here as it relates to cyberterror. against this country and radicalizing young people and especially when you think about all of these refugees that have seen nothing but violence. they have been bred on it now. that's what they know. seeing parents or family members killed, bombs, warfare and then they glorify in their mind, who's the hero, who's the one that stands up against it?

somebody like isis. >> al qaeda, al nusra. >> hamas. >> our focus is here in america. >> it's worse than this, it's not just graffiti, it's textbooks, textbooks that demonize jewish people, demonize israel, demonize the united states and they tell a different story. the history we know in the united states is not the history they're being told about why they exist in israel for example or why it is that the united states is a prosperous powerful country. the idea that we work and earn and push our ideas, and have democratic freedoms, that's not the story being told. so i think you have to tell that story. to me it's tragic when you see kids like that, subject to that kind of propaganda. and preaching not for good, not in terms of your aspirations and growing to be great people. but that you are to go out and destroy. not create. it is tragic, but again it's not, though, eric, about i think crushing these people. because i think it just feeds

the martyrdom, the bitterness, the warm of the. >> i disagree. they do have aspirations and that is to kill us and blow themselves up. that's what they aspire to do. >> if you're doing something about the ira blowing up the british, you better use the irish. i don't love it, i'm half irish. that's not up to "homeland" do skew reality. they're doing "homeland security. don't put a russian in there you put in an islamic extremist. for moderate muslims to get upset. i love what you produced, the al nusra video from vice media. this is why the islamic state can't exist one more day. the longer they look like the strong one, the longer they continue to breed these people. you have to start taking these people out in raqqa. >> what do you want, islamic extremism. >> wipe it out? >> let them know al qaeda and isis lost. >> there hasn't been an islamic

state for 1500 years. >> the islamic extremism is at an all-time high because we've allowed it to take root. >> let's say you do the concerted effort and you've got isis, the islamic state on the run. you don't think they're going to morph into -- >> get them on the run. i don't want them celebrating their holidays in breeding schools and digging in and setting up infrastructure of a country because they're going to send these people to our shores. you put them on the run every single day. >> i agree with you 100%. we can complain about what's going on. but no one seems to want to provide a solution. >> brian does. >> i'm telling you, you got to take them out tomorrow. if something blows up in new york, you know where we're going? raqqa. what are we waiting for? we knew to go after bin laden as soon as they did 9/11. what were we waiting for? >> american kids begin to get targets. using special forces, but not the straw argument of 150,000 going to march up like the minutemen or the british in 1790.

>> this is madness, you want to militarize, you to send military souls. >> you know what we'll lose more of our people. >> go and go, we've been there 10 years, go and go? >> war coming to our shores. i could have talked about that for ten more minutes. >> she's wrapping me. >> i am. irritated. >> thanks for the commercial break. maybe we'll talk about it. one more thing, one of the rarest interviews you will ever see, a fascinating sit-down with one of the most successful businessmen on the planet, charles koch, coming up.

it takes a lot of work... to run this business. but i really love it. i'm on the move all day long... and sometimes, i just don't eat the way i should. so i drink boost® to get the nutrition that i'm missing. boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a great taste. i don't plan on slowing down any time soon. stay strong. stay active with boost®.

i found a better deal on prescriptions. we found lower co-pays... ...and a free wellness visit. new plan...same doctor. i'm happy. it's medicare open enrollment. have you compared plans yet? it's easy at medicare.gov. or you can call 1-800-medicare. medicare open enrollment. you'll never know unless you go. i did it. you can too.

♪ excellent looking below the surface, researching a hunch... and making a decision you are type e*. time for a change of menu. research and invest from any website. with e*trade's browser trading. e*trade. opportunity is everywhere. i don't really know what this means. they've been villified for years by the democrats as the evil koch brothers, president obama has even taken shots at them. listen. >> when you start seeing massive lobbying efforts, backed by

fossil fuel interests or conservative think tanks or the koch brothers, pushing for new laws to roll back renewable energy standards, or prevent new clean energy businesses from succeeding, that's a problem. >> well megyn kelly got a rare chance to sit down with charles koch of koch industries. and had a chance to ask him about that and the democrats long-time smear campaign against him and his brother. >> the opposite is true. all of our policies are based on whether it will make, enable people to improve their lives or make their lives worse. >> do you believe that the democrats, including the president, have tried to make b boggymen out of you and your brother, david? >> definitely. i get a lot of death threats, but the way i look at it is i feel i have a moral obligation to do the best i can to make the

country better for everybody. and that threatens certain people. because they're going to have much less power. >> one of those people threatened is somebody who used their names, 289 floors on the senate floor and that's harry reid. how do you think he came off in this. i think we've seen a human side to the koch brothers, who have only done two interviews. >> it's refreshing to see somebody so successful in the business who doesn't seem the limelight. one of the reasons they've been attacked viciously by the president and harry reid and others, even though it didn't work for them in the mid-term elections is that one of the things, a consequence of not speaking is that the nobody knows who you are. so then you become this faceless entity that you can always rail against the koch brothers, but if you watched charles koch last night this is a very charming person who is extremely successful. and the end of the interview was very sweet. because he talked about his father. you can see, all of us have dads, all of us have had

challenges and if you have some success you're very grateful for it, as he was. >> the reason that he's doing this is he's got a book out. but the reason people are interested is, not that he's some kind of secretive sort. he's putting huge amounts of money into the political system. huge amounts, he says right now he's going to put $1 billion into the 2016 cycle. >> no, actually if you watch the interview, he says it's about $300 million. >> and people are talking right now about is he going to give that money to marco rubio? he's obviously scott walk certificate gone. >> what's the problem? >> the problem is right now that there's such anger, first of all at the super rich in the country, and the super -- >> what about todd steyer. >> and dictating the political system and picking the winners and losers. >> what about george soros, how come they're not demonized. >> they only care when it's money not going to their side.

>> he's about criminal justice reform. >> they're not scarey, they are great americans, they do more than other people who are demonizing and, and to the poor and disenfranchised people and children's charities. how about celebrating american entrepreneurism and people who are trying to give back. there you go. it's his money. if he wants to throw it to the gop, yeah. >> he did say he started the tea party. but he didn't set their agenda. and he is not a libertarian. he's a classical will liberal-terian. >> i thought the koch brothers were libertarian. >> what's interesting over what he said, he believes in morals over talent and he put his money behind that. you may disagree with where he is politically. but anyoneuch conviction about what they believe and are willing to put their money behind it, you have to respect. if you don't like him, don't like him. but don't call him evil and horrible it doesn't fit. >> it doesn't fit.

>> unpatriotic. >> and let me end on a positive note that really jumps out from this interview. he said that he's upset about licensing regulation. and that if you look at poor people in this country, there's limited opportunities because of increased licensing demands. and i thought wow, i like that message. >> we should do a segment on that next week, that's an important issue that is actually going to be -- >> dana, talk to the producers. >> i hope they heard me. >> he's 79 years old, he works about 12 to 15 hours a day. >> i like his legs. he's got good legs. >> you're a leg man? >> i don't know if he can compete with some of the competition around here. >> absolutely. you saw eric in shorts? 15 minutes before the top of the hour. why did i say that. one state's crackdown on fantasy sports sites impact nationwide.

♪ some neighbors are energy saving superstars. how do you become a superstar? with pg&e's free online home energy checkup. in just under 5 minutes you can see how you use energy and get quick and easy tips on how to keep your monthly bill down and your energy savings up. don't let your neighbor enjoy all the savings. take the free home energy checkup. honey, we need a new refrigerator. visit pge.com/checkup and get started today.

and i am a certified arborist for pg&e.ughes i oversee the patrolling of trees near power lines and roots near pipes and underground infrastructure. at pg&e wherever we work, we work hard to protect the environment. getting the job done safely so we can keep the lights on for everybody. because i live here i have a deeper connection to the community. and i want to see the community grow and thrive. every year we work with cities and schools to plant trees in our communities. the environment is there for my kids and future generations. together, we're building a better california.

it's a multibillion-dollar industry. tens of millions of americans participate in fantasy sports leagues every year. those in nevada are going to have to find another game to play, because the state has just banned sites like draft king and fan duel from operating until

they get a gambling license. so kimberly -- >> what? >> i was talking about this with eric earlier. and we were saying well that's just the established gambling houses trying to keep out the competition what do you think? >> i don't know. people are very into this. i don't see it going away. it's like a huge business now and industry. people are really excited about it it's become a way to socially network as well. it's going to have to be dealt with i don't have any strong feelings about it because i feel i don't have skin in the game in terms of where i think it should go with regulation, but when something gets this big and it's monetized in a very effective way that it has been. it needs to be addressed. they're already a little bit late on doing that. >> the reason it needs to be addressed is because there's cheesing going on. there's people inside the game who are winning money with inside information and they're not regulated. >> they want to be regulated. i'm not a gambler, i do play fantasy football. i get paid once at the end of the season. five states along with nevada. arizona, louisiana, montana,

washington, as well as kansas have said we're banning this. mark cuban just put this up. said it's beyond stupid they're going to regulate daily fantasy football. he said it's an industry that's flourishing, leave it alone. it takes skill and research. >> meaning don't ruin it. >> i don't think they're banning fan duel and draft kings because of what that accusation was a couple of weeks ago. i think they just decided -- >> side show. >> they've decided that fantasy football is gambling and needs to be regulated in the state of nevada. you know me, i believe all gambling should be legal it doesn't matter where you are, what you want to bet on. you're a big boy, you're a big girl. you want to risk your money, knock yourself out. >> i agree. >> i'm pretty sure, i think fox sports has an investment in -- >> yeah in one of them? >> in draft kings. >> we need to clarify that. >> you know major league baseball, nba, they're all in it because you know what, it's --

they say it's not gambilling, but it is gambling. that's why all of these young people are in it. >> it's gambling, so you got to regulate it? >> if it's real gamenning, say it's gambling, they're presenting it's not gambling and going around all the regulations that pertains to gambling. >> gambling is an addictive business. dana, let me just say, the fbi is looking at this, doj is looking at it there's pressure for federal trade commission to get in on this. >> i want to do this segment because i wanted to learn from all of you. i don't really understand this issue. here's the thing -- i would tend to agree with eric. so let's just make this legal. if you try to ban it in all of those states, you'll seek out another state until there's no states left and you'll do it overseas. is that the way it works? >> they're trying to get a piece of the tax money. >> that's the way everything

works, they regulate it so they get a tax and if they overregulated then the business, whether it's gambling or making widgets, will go to another country. >> this is a conversation that will continue, we know about online poker and gambling. ♪ ♪ at mfs investment management, we believe active management can protect capital long term. active management can tap global insights. active management can seek to outperform. that's the power of active management.

time for one more thing. kg? >> i've got a great one. since i was little i was flying air lingus. so look at this amazing story. flight attendants doing a little bit of the irish jig. showing off her dancing skills, mid flight. passengers have getting along with it, clapping, having a great time. >> irish pride, baby. >> eric? >> i just want to make you aware at 8:00 tonight i'll be hosting "the o'reilly factor." a big interview with assistant director of the fbi calling out president obama for some comments he made on "60 minutes." eel talk about what fbi agents are feeling in response to president obama's outrageous claim that there's no security risk to what hillary clinton had done with emails. check it out, 8:00.

>> and "cashin' in" tomorrow. >> and "wake up america." >> with juan williams. >> this is big. >> this is a tease, please be careful. >> anyway. >> it's going to be great. mine is just my weekend reading list, i started putting it up on facebook. i don't know if you guys will like it or not. i read a lot. some of these articles are ones i send around to the team. others are ones i'm just interested in. you can check it out on our facebook page. >> another week without speaker for house republicans. tea party republicans forced out john boehner. said no to kevin mccarpety. looks like they may have scared off paul ryan. i have a piece on foxnews.com. it says why not have the tea party folks just create their own party, a third party. they can pick their own leaders, they can set their own agenda. >> wouldn't you like that. >> they can become a coalition government and start making the

deals on their own. >> that would put some kind of order in place for the congress. go congress. >> juan, very interesting. we gave you a lot of time for your one more thing. which is very generous. >> are you ready? >> yes. >> here's my one more thing. swung at it, strike three. put it in the box. the new yoorew york mets are go the national league championship series. >> one step away from the world series, first time since 2006. been a met fan since birth. i remember in 1973 when they blew it to the as, i remember that they should have beaten the dodgers in 1988 after winning all in '86. i remember they lost to the yankees, i get a sense we're not going do see a collection of young arms that are this daunting in quite some time and the cubs have had a remarkable club. >> they're coming up against the team of destiny. 1989 -- remember what they predicted?

26 years ago, that movie predicted that the cubs would win the world series this year. >> 107-year drought. >> it's going to be great. >> congratulations to the mets. set your dvr to never miss an episode of "the five." president obama calls attacks on israelis random violence as he urges israelis and palestinians to stop the heated rhetoric that leads to anger. this is "special report." good evening and welcome to washington, i'm brett baier. hamas called on all palestinians to take part in a day of rage against israel. and they got their wish. right now, it's just past 1:00 a.m. in israel and darkness has replaced the flash of firebombs, grenades and gunfire. against this backdrop president obama said today that israel has a right to prevent its citizens from being