good night from new york. . kennedy: tonight donald trump and hillary clinton each claiming victory after last night's big debate. let's face it, neither scored a tko, what does each candidate have to do to win over undecided voters? body language expert tanya ryman to tell us when the candidates look nervous, confident and how to know when either was fibbing. the tsa does an amazing job at airports, right? lawmakers want them in charge of security at bus stops and train stations too, they're going to man handle the hobos. return to your seats. it's about to get bumpy. it was the big first debate that lived up to billing, and despite having landed early effective blows, donald trump
did not emerge the victor, touted lack of preparation as a strength, but as the night wore on, answers wore thin and hillary clinton boxed him in and got the best of him when he should have been able to counterpunch and knock her out. he started out strong with responses like this. >> just go to her website, she tells you how to fight isis on her website. i don't think general douglas mac arthur would like that too much. you're telling the enemy everything you want to do. >> no, we're not. >> no wonder you've been fighting isis your entire adult life. kennedy: for the past 85 years. he had the jaded leftist media laughing in the spin room with impromptu jabs. >> she's saying russia, russia, russia, maybe it was, it could be china, it could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay? you don't know who broke into dnc. you look at the inner cities
that i just left detroit, i left philadelphia, you've seen me, i've been all over the place. you decided to stay home, and that's okay. kennedy: but he fell apart. he rambled on race, tax returns, birtherism and wandered into the personal traps hillary set for him. she's no georgia peach, neither sweet nor inviting, unless robotic lawyerisms get you off. we're not talking about her today. we're not talking about lester holt. we're talking about donald trump for all the wrong reasons. was it disastrous for him? not by a long shot but far from victory. this is what he said last night when i asked him what he would change for the next debate? >> what will do you differently in the next debate? >> i think i just want to have the same success tonight. i was very successful. am i right? i hope, right? kennedy: could have been a little more successful. freestyling is not his debate forte. he needs to hunker down, man up
and watch tape even if he carefully analyzes last night in entirety to see where he fell flat and where he could improve in st. louis. if he plays this right, he could pivot toward fact and logic and win the next two debates decisively, hell, anyone could, she's awful. but he blew opportunities like a gift wrapped moment where he could have gone after her on her server when she was talking about cybersecurity. i thought she was going to choke on that stiff irony, but he's the one who choked by not seizing on a window to hit her in the jugular. if you want the title, you got to get bloody. see who has fight in them for round two. let's put it vaseline on our faces and get taped up. i'm kennedy. all right, did the rumble in the jungle in the thrilla in manila live up to the hype? was there a winner? let me ask my gilted party
panel. dagen mcdowell from the fox business channel, executive director of global gateway alliance, anthony fisher, associate editor for reason.com and "reason" tv. welcome, everyone. >> thank you. kennedy: big night, dagen, i think the biggest blown moment for him and correct me if you will is blowing the opportunity to tie her server scandal to cybersecurity when she was talking about it, that was absolutely laughable, and the lowest weight debater would have been able to seize that moment. >> hit her and hit her hard and hit her over and over again. girlfriend, we need to take her earrings out inside to putting vaseline on her face. and didn't do it. why did you have it in the first place? you lied about it repeatedly to the american people. the people who worked for you destroyed evidence with a hammer.
he didn't use his hammer, he didn't use a pencil to go after her. what about benghazi? what about all the other corruption, dodging subpoenas during the clinton foundation, you name it, he didn't mention it. he didn't utter, he didn't say hey, honest and trustworthy are two biggest problems. he completely missed the mark on that. kennedy: let's talk about what she did right, steven, a little bit. because when he tried to go after her on stamina, let's watch a little bit. here's donald trump and hillary clinton, stamina, baby. >> you have so many different things you have to be able to do, and i don't believe that hillary has the stamina. >> let's let her respond. >> well, as soon as he travels to 112 countries and negotiates a peace deal, a cease-fire, a release of dissidents, an opening of new opportunities in nations around the world, or even spends 11 hours testifying
in front of a congressional committee, he can talk to me about stamina. >> dagen did a better job in two minute than donald trump did in an hour and a half last night. he had a bar set at two feet and he couldn't get over it. kennedy: you think it was a low bar. newt gingrich said he's the most crafted debater we've seen on the president's stage. >> that was quite clearly not the case. if that were mitt romney, john mccain, barack obama or even hillary clinton last night, we'd be asking if they had taken a blow to the head during the day. kennedy: so you think that it is impossible for him that he i unrecoverable? >> not at all. you have two debates left. the bar will still be low because of what he did. i have a hint for him, i don't want to give it away as a democratic strategist, maybe prepare a little bit. kennedy: reagan had a bad first debate, came back from that, and barack obama had a bad first debate against mitt
romney and came back from that. granted he was incumbent at the time. if he works his game, he could land blows. kennedy: last night we were talking with neil cavuto, neil pointed out the second debate, the reagan-mondale, the youth and inexperience, he was considered to have lost that debate. it was that line that people remember. i want to beat up on hillary clinton to be fair. i thought they were both lost on race. i felt like he rambled, they both made some huge errors on the constitution there. do you think that was the weakest part of the debate? >> they were both terrible on that. it's odd they're framing that entire conversation about race and spoke about police issues, police issues transcend race, but donald trump, you know, was flailing when he was talking about stop-and-frisk not being -- declaring it hadn't been declared unconstitutional as practiced by the nypd, which is not true. kennedy: and rudy giuliani
tried to say the same thing, not a question of constitutionality unless you are talking about violating someone for -- >> stop-and-frisk is constitutional as long as there is reasonable suspicion, not generalized suspicion which is why it's not practiced in new york that way anymore. hillary clinton had this on a silver platter, a chance to talk because donald trump talked about the fraternal order of police endorsing him and she could have used that as an opportunity talking about the police unions standing in the way of legitimate police reform. kennedy: i don't think she has the wherewithal to make that argument in the moment. we talk about the missed opportunities that donald trump has, i felt that she was really bland on a lot of stuff where she's known for the specifics. >> remember, they were talking to -- she was talking to undecided voters. he was talking to his base. i can't see one undecided voter think i should vote for trump, right? >> i think he started talking to his base, because he went to a comfort zone, i don't think
he was purposely doing this. >> young people not voting for him but not voting for her at the moment which is what the police discussion was about for her. kennedy: a big part of the debate circled the round who has better temperament for the job. >> i think my strongest asset, maybe by far is my temperament. i have a winning temperament. i know how to win. >> a man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes. kennedy: then he said that line is getting a little old. >> again because she's used it over and over and over again on the campaign trail. he didn't yell at her, he was the donald trump we saw repeatedly during the republican debates, that's why he got away with interrupting her that way, and didn't insult her in a way people would find universally repugnant. he stepped back from that. one thing he hit on in the first 20 minutes of the debate that was so effective is she is one of the architect was the
lousy economy and lousy situation that we live in right now in the united states, and she is of the political class who is completely ignored the american people for decades, but he couldn't follow that little yellow line for an hour and a half in. kennedy: and add to that quickly. while she's talking about job creation, he could have talked about job failure while she was united states senator from new york where she promised to bring hundreds of thousands of jobs especially to upstate new york where they subsequently lost jobs. and he also could have owned the fact not only does he have wealth, he wants others to have wealth. >> he could have also made, as the republican nominee maybe said it's not the job of government to be a job accelerator. that you can get out of the way -- >> they cannot contain themselves. they both think it's the job of government to do everything. >> when he said i have a great
temperament. room audibly laughed. that's a problem for him, right? and it's true he was using the same debate strategy he used in the republican debate. this is a very different debate. there he had 16 people, then 5, then 4. so he could hide for periods of time. in this period you are in a general election and preparing to be president of the united states. kennedy: there's a reason he didn't want to debate john kasich and ted cruz when it was just the three of them. he didn't want it to be that sort of an almost one on one. >> would have been a good debate. kennedy: yeah, and now he has to go back and really pull it apart. see what he could have done differently. you know what they could have done differently? had gary johnson on the stage at least. >> so he could do the weird tongue thing, no. kennedy: some people like that. >> you can find him in aleppo. kennedy: the party panel returns to aleppo to talk about the moderator's performance during the debate. donald trump accusing lester holt of taking sides. did he play favorites?
. kennedy: welcome back, safe to say both hillary clinton and donald trump will be reviewing the tape from last night's debate. they're going to meet again for the next one. that happens on sunday october 9th, and you can watch it right here on fbn. biggest question today is will trump be able to keep his momentum in the polls or will
hillary slow down the trump train? i've got katie pavlich, a fox news contributor and richard fowler, host of the appropriately named richard fowler show. welcome to you both. >> hello. kennedy: so nice to see you again. >> thank you. kennedy: i'm going to get to you in just a second, richard, first start with katie. let me ask you, former new york city mayor and former presidential candidate, rudy giuliani making the rounds last night, rudy saying unless donald trump can get an agreement from the next two moderators that he should skip the next two debates. what do you think about that? >> i think that's ridiculous. we've known that republican candidates going into debates for decades now are going to have a bias against them and it's up to the candidates who prepare for that, and being unprepared is not an excuse, and i think that chris wallace, fox news sunday will do a good job in the third debate moderating. i think they have credibility
to what they said about lester holt interrupting donald trump many more times than he interrupted hillary clinton, but at the same time, i'm also of the belief that moderator should provide fact checking during the debate, but i think threatening not to show up simply because you felt like you were treated unfairly is not the best way to go about things, especially since you're running for president of the united states, which you're going to face a lot more than just the tough moderator in that position in terms of negotiation and debates. kennedy: so richard, let me look forward with you for hillary clinton. she's going to take last night as a victory, and it would be very easy for her to just skate into the next debate and simply do the same thing over again. is that what she should do or does she have an opportunity here to shore things up and change her game? >> one, i think there has to be fact checking. two, what hillary clinton has to do in the next debate and i
said this over and over again, she's going to have to lay out the three things she wants americans to been her and policies before they go to the polls. she has to be forward facing or inflexing what she's going to do from this count wleechlt we saw from hillary is bait and switching donald trump, he took the bait every single time. kennedy: he did. >> she's going to have to lay out policy prescriptionses to keep america moving forward. next week when tim kaine hits the floor against mike pence, he's going to lay out what policy prescriptions are and hillary clinton will pick that up and take it to the next level at the next debate. and i think for donald, advice for the donald, i mean listen, he's no eminem so if he's going to try to freestyle it, he's got get good at freestyling. kennedy: absolutely right about that. i will say this about hillary clinton, she's not a great debater. that's the thing. she is such a beatable debater. >> i think she's a better debater than a public speaker. compare her speeches that she
gives at rallies. she's much better as a debater. the next debate is a tougher position for both of them because of the town hall style, the questions coming from the audience, not from a moderator that the trump campaign or even the hillary campaign can attack afterwards. kennedy: who is going to benefit, do you think? after last night who can do better in that setting? . >> it depends, donald trump has to put aside his habit of taking everything personally. there are real americans asking questions of him from the audience, he has to humble himself and ask the questions. we saw what happened last time hillary did a town hall style and was asked about navy veteran about private server. and pointed out to her if he had done what she did, he would be in prison. those are tough questions for both of them, when it comes to being more relatable, trump has the upper hand. kennedy: see if he can use his
. kennedy: well, as you know, libertarian presidential candidate gary johnson did not make the cut for last night's debate. because of that, we didn't hear any intrusions on our privacy, didn't hear about those or legalizing drugs or repealing the income tax or ending all of our wars, but clinton and trump are hawkish and the topic of fighting isis was one of the
testier moments of last night's debate. >> we've got to defeat isis, and we've got to do everything we can to disrupt their propaganda efforts online. >> you there were and you were secretary of state when it was a little infant. now it's in over 30 countries, and you're going to stop them? i don't think so. kennedy: that is a big man child. the fact checkers could have had a field day. julian sanchez a senior fellow at the cato institute. welcome back. >> thanks for having me. kennedy: start by talking about isis. this is one of the more disconcerting notes that both of them tend to hit when they talk about isis. they both start talking about shutting down the internet in their various ways, what did you see? >> that's not something they went into in great detail, but i think the idea that the more
censorship, convincing social media companies to shut down speech you don't like, one, creates obvious 1st amendment problems and two, seems unlikely to be productive. we can't control the entire internet. we can't stop people who say ugly things from getting them in a venue that's outside our control, and what we can do is push it outside the orbit of what our intelligence agencies can easily look at. so it's like playing whack-a-mole, you can smack in a countdown and social media companies shut down isis or other terrorist accounts regularly. they'll pop up somewhere else. if they're doing it on u.s. platforms, we have ability to track what's going on there. kennedy: yeah, to track the people you should be tracking without tracking everyone. since we're talking about the constitution, and there was not , i also took issue with what hillary clinton was saying about the 2nd amendment.
she talks about encroaching gun rights when she talks about criminal justice reform. i think it's a losing issue for her? >> one of the depressing things for me, one was the idea of essentially using these terror watch lists to deprive people of 2nd amendment rights and due process. that is problematic for one, you are depriving people of the constitutional right with due process, and it's easier to get onto some of the broader terror watch lists, a smaller no-fly list. kennedy: it's a lot harder to get off, easy to get on, hard to get off, and as you point out, unconstitutional. >> right, extremely difficult. and provides if you are talking about the broader lists, it seems unwise from a tactical perspective to create a super easy way to check whether you are the target of an fbi investigation, which is a role the fbi doesn't like to advertise. kennedy: no, they don't, but
i'm glad that you are here to talk about liberty and freedom and the dearth of debate stages. thank you. >> my pleasure. kennedy: responding to last week's bombings in new york and new jersey by pushing for more tsa agents, not only at the airports, but trains and buses. isn't your daily commute already a nightmare? this guy had the brilliant idea to light a cactus and eat it. i'm jamie foxx for verizon. in the nation's largest independent study by rootmetrics, again, verizon is the number one network. hi, i'm jamie foxx for sprint. and i'm jamie foxx for t-mobile. (both) and we're just as good. really? only verizon was ranked number one nationally in data, reliability, text and call and speed.
. kennedy: all right, was the moderator in last night's debate fair and balanced and unafraid? depends who you ask? this morning on fox and friends, democrats accused lester holt of being tough or him than hillary clinton. >> he didn't ask her about the e-mails at all. he didn't ask her about her scandals. he didn't ask her about the benghazi deal that she
destroyed. he didn't ask her about a lot of things she should have been asked about. kennedy: was it tougher for trump, and will that help him? let's bring back the party panel. dagen mcdowell, stephen sigmund and anthony fisher. stephen, start with you, the press raised holy h-e-double hockey sticks when he asked about hillary clinton's server, he had to do that because chuck todd and andrea mitchell had gone so easy on hillary clinton in the past. matt lauer had to seem like a fair journalist. lester holt is going soft or hillary clinton. don't you think he should have had one follow-up question on the server? >> i think where you stand on lester holt is where you stand politically. for me i thought he disappeared. where was he half the time, and for donald trump supporters,
they think that he pressed him too hard. donald trump said he was great and fair and this morning had a different point of view about it. i feel bad for the moderators, they cannot win. kennedy: there is nothing you can do, either you are too heavy-handed, ask you too many questions. donald trump said we don't need moderators at all, and kind of felt like that. what do you think of that approach? >> i would prefer no moderators, i would prefer them directing questions to each other and having somebody ring a bell and going next topic. >> or fire a pistol at their feet. move to the next topic. >> better and more substantive show, and ultimately, i thought lester holt did as best a job as he could. when trump flails and lies, it's easier to go, ugh, when hillary is fast with the truth -- >> she's a woman and doesn't want to look sexist.
>> these are two human beings vying to be the most powerful person on earth. challenge them, press them both. >> i lot of fact he initially got out of the way and let trump have a time with that. there are questions targeted at donald trump, the tax returns, the birth certificate and the women issues were one sided. >> donald trump should have had answers for all of that instead of giving long rambling answers on the tax return. >> the tax return thing never ended. >> whether it was for iraq or not, he kept these things going. >> the reason he couldn't get to the things he talked about, he didn't let him. >> all of the answers were like a weird goulash that you don't want to eat. kennedy: i was anticipating the birther question, finally, i'll get my answer. >> we won't have to talk about it again. >> here's what you do, you say that issue is several years old, here's what we're going to
talk about. he didn't pivot. kennedy: he didn't redirect, he did not learn the basic skills of debate. >> here's how hillary celebrated last night -- [laughter]. kennedy: and then she passed out. the next president will inherit a bunch of bureaucracies including the tsa. lawmakers in d.c. want the much maligned nation to provide security for buses and trains because they do such a great job in our airports. you call this security theater which is the best term for it. >> yes, the tsa has not stopped a single attempted terrorist attack. they have stolen a lot of our stuff, right? they have failed to at every test run that the government dares to put its employees through, shows massive amounts of failures and made everybody anger and less safe, the lines are longer and soft targets away from the security zones. to do that on the new york city
subways or amtrak is going to make life completely miserable and less safe. kennedy: you love tsa? >> no. kennedy: you have blue clothes in your blazer. >> i worked on a transportation project in new york for a number of years to make improvements of the airports including lot of recommendations for the tsa. the problem is you have to have serious security upgrades at the airports and on buses and trains. that should probably be technologically driven, based on where we live, how we live in the 21st century, but the tsa unfortunately in 15 years has not gotten better. >> everybody needs to gift tsa a break. two words. free patdowns. just ask them and can you get one. kennedy: i call it my own personal version of stop-and-fri stop-and-frisk, it is anything but unconstitutional. i like it. thank you so much. >> i love you. kennedy: love you, too. glad you're here. coming up, the fight against isis loomed large in the debate with donald trump
. kennedy: well, hello no matter who you think won the debate, the next president has their work cut out for them with isis. homeland security secretary jeh johnson said the threat at home is very real. >> we see the global terrorist threat evolving and the threat to our homeland evolving from terrorist-directed attacks to a global threat environment that now includes terrorist-inspired attacks, of the type we've seen most recently in our homeland where an actor is self-radicalized without receiving direct orders from a terrorist organization.
kennedy: seems he understands what the problem, is but what is the next president going to do about it and do either one of these people have any clue about these terror-inspired acts? k.t. mcfarland joins me now. secretary johnson made a distinction between terrorist enabled activity, the list of vague instructions, we're going to give you basic tools. go to where you live and do bad things, and the terrorist validated is maybe isis didn't have any sort of a hand in places like orlando and san bernardino and new york and new jersey, but they like to take credit for it. >> yeah, or they've inspired it and take credit for it. i think -- there are two more things. >> okay. >> one is what happens next. somehow the person hooks up
online with isis with radical islamists and not only get inspired to say go out and do bad things like you said but they have an interactive university. in other words, i'm the bomb maker in yemen and you're the terrorist wanna-be and you and i go back and forth and i say go get the following instructions, see you put it altogether and say no, no, no, put the cord here, the pressure cooker here. and unlike the many previous terrorist attacks, you have something that you know works. i think that's the next step. and finally the thing they didn't talk about is what's going to happen in the middle east if we succeed against isis. this is going to be like a giant sponge where the bad guys are in the sponge and you squeeze out the sponge and what happens is the water runs away. kennedy: that's always the problem with islamism is even if you get to the head of the tick and you pull the body off, it's going to sprout another body, and that's what i'm not hearing from either of the
candidates. they do have some vague idea where isis is and what they're doing and it would be really neat if we could help the kurds and allies with intelligence and they could destroy isis which is what naturally and logically should happen, but then what? what do you do about the motivation and the ideology? no one has the satisfactory answer and i think that is the biggest threat when you create domestic terrorists. >> trump said this in the past. he didn't say it last night and i think that was a mistake on his part. i look at this and say it's a whole lot bigger than take that city and kill that guy. it's got to be something they understand they think of is a global war against western civilization and the fact that they think it's that way means we have to respond not in kind but to be one step ahead of them. i don't think a military solution is enough. i think an economic solution, ideological solution, and if we don't a handle on
cyberrecruiting and cybertraining, they're going to be on the next step, which i think could be potentially weapons of mass destruction. kennedy: we talked about this earlier in the show. donald trump had a great opportunity to go after hillary clinton on cyber because of her server and put the country at risk. he squandered that. they will have more satisfactory answers to give on this. >> i think lives to fight another day. kennedy: we will see. thank you so much. coming up, actions speak louder than words and the candidates'
guess what guys, i switched to sprint. sprint? i'm hearing good things about the network. all the networks are great now. we're talking within a 1% difference in reliability of each other. and, sprint saves you 50% on most current national carrier rates. save money on your phone bill, invest it in your small business. wouldn't you love more customers? i would definitely love some new customers. sprint will help you add customers and cut your costs. switch your business to sprint and save 50% on most current verizon, at&t and t-mobile rates. don't let a 1% difference cost you twice as much. whoooo! for people with hearing loss, visit sprintrelay.com.
candidates themselves. the debate was a war of words and a war of body language since we got to see them the entire time. what did the candidates say without saying anything at all? joining me is body language expert tonya reiman. here to break down both candidates. welcome. >> thank you. kennedy: what was your overall impression of donald trump. >> i thought he did really well for the first time out of gate. but there were times he started to fall apart. kennedy: when did you see that? something he saw on the screen were his words crumbling. >> you could hear it in his voice and leaning over a lot mow, interrupting. kennedy: what does that say? >> he's starting to lose his patience, get frustrated which we expect from him. hillary kept her composure. kennedy: they did have their hand shake. they came together. what did the handshake show? the moments when they're touching, we don't hear a thing. >> height is power to begin
with, he's much taller, so when they come together he's slouching forward, but when he shakes her hand, he not only shakes it, he pats her. that's a dominance cue as well, what you're saying is i'm the more powerful of the two. he did it on the first and the last. he was trying give her that feeling. i have the feeling that's a natural movement for her but she pivoted away giving her frontal part to the audience, that was a powerful move. kennedy: the sniffing, people were caught up in the sniffing. >> perhaps we'll be talking about that later, hundreds of companies are doing this. they're the best ever at it. kennedy: smells like victory. what is he doing? >> when he does, that like he's taking a deep breath into get oxygen to the brain to calm himself down. kennedy: was he was in -- nervous? >> that's his adapter. he did mic stroking where he's
touching the microphone. it gives rid of excess energy, hillary didn't do that much, he clenched onto the podium, he was leaning on, it typically he's more powerful than that. kennedy: she had a big phony baloney smile on her face, was that effective and what does that say about her? >> people say she's so robotic, it's not a natural look for her, people say she's robotic and she is. she use her smile to mask every emotion. while donald trump will get annoyed. she will get annoyed, you'll see it flash and she looks phony where he looks authentic and genuine. kennedy: interesting reaction she has. wherever she's in a crisis, she seems to put this great big smile on her face, which instead of being reassuring, disconcerting.
she also did a strange shimmy. >> donald had gone on a very long rant about her. kennedy: there she is, a glass of champagne is going down so cold and bubbly. >> almost like wow not only did he give me enormous amount of ammunition, finally i get to speak. it was excitement after the long rant. i have a bunch of things to say against him. kennedy: if you were watching the debate with the sound down, who would you say won? >> hillary. kennedy: okay. and what can he do differently next time? >> you know what? it's about the president. that's the whole point. we're talking about if donald trump is authentic? yes, he is. to become presidential, you need not to wear emotion on the sleeve, you have to cover them up with the poker face, and the smile is not great either but better than eye rolling and gasping and breathing heavily. he needs to control and pull in the emotions so he looks more like a president. kennedy: poker face, we'll have
. kennedy: it is time to baby your liver and shake off the post-debate hangover, it's time to embrace the madness, maybe without those soltary drinking games that leave you guzzling fireball in the morning. this is "topical storm" topic number one, the story was sent to us by one of our favorites, t.m. freeman. if you got hot under the collar
you might have been donald trump, but you definitely weren't alone. the police department in lawrence, kansas, had to send out a tweet reminding people not to call the law when they got angry at the two blow hards on the tv. the lawrence cops tweeted we realize politics can make emotions run high but being mad at a presidential candidate in a debate is not a reason to call 911. i bet their switchboard was hopping last night, and being the fight of the century, plenty of suggested drinking games, additionally drinking games where you drink every time someone says huge leads to binge drinking, and we discourage that strongly. it also leads to cirrhosis and hair pulling and restraining ordering and meetings with human resources. allegedly.
topic number two, i said it, china, china, china! in addition to being the thorn in donald trump's -- in his wispy haired side, they were also the world leader when it comes to innovative business concepts and latest attempt in groundbreaking improvements they have devised the skyscraper drive-through. take a look. [ laughter ] >> i have an alarm clock that giggles just like that. such poise and precision, almost as impressive as the canadian drive-through, you get your tim horton coffee.
[ laughter ] >> it's oldly but goody, he was covered in cola. topic number three -- are you ready for the dumbest thing you'll see all day? a guy who's way too old to be in a fraternity has been trying to relive the glory days by eating one cactus at a time first he just ate a normal cactus, there he is, chomp, chomp, munch, munch, and had to one-up himself, there was no formal dare, neither rhyme nor reason, he needed to turn it up to 11 by setting a cactus on fire and attempting to eat it, but did he succeed? >> here we go. i can't do this. i can't. ♪
[laughter >> choke, choke, those poor, poor cacti, my only wish is his horrible shirt would catch fire. now that is anything but succulent. thank you. topic number four -- isn't it touching to see the generations coming together? yeah, at the opening of the smithsonian national museum of african-american history and culture, george bush found himself being literally touched by michelle obama. great pecs, wonderful belt. while photo shop was reserved for models and the moon ndg.
this werewolf. he transforms into jurassic terror and spreading across the land, it might explain the behavior from those at the top. he's got little tiny c lo arms, that's great. the photo footage of dino trump was sent in by alex using hashtag "topical storm." thank you for watching the show. you can follow me on twitter and instagram -- and while you're also on the internet, feel free to e-mail me -- on the show tomorrow night, there is facebook, too.
yeah. dana freeman and chris stirewalt join me along with wwe superstar dolph zigler. what a threesome. >> announcer: the following paid presentation for cooper chef is brought to you by tristar products incorporated. are your kitchen drawers starting to look like a bad garage sale -- steamers, rice cookers, roasters, slow cookers. and just how many pots and pans does one kitchen really need? and every time you cook, cleanup's a disaster. scraping, scrubbing -- what a chore. what if you could replace all this with one single, nonstick pan? and what if this pan was innovative in design and made of the highest-quality craftsmanship? and what if you could cook with it on the stove and in the oven? introducing copper chef, the nonstick, all-round square pan with ceramitech. it's a breakthrough in technology. copper chef with extra-deep sides replaces a roasting pan, a rice cooker, a steamer, a stock pot, a wok, and a baking dish.