terry was killed that his family needs answers, neil. >> neil: all right, michael. thank you very much. what a day. it started out with a victory lap by the administration on healthcare. now concern over constitutional crisis with the attorney general. here we go! >> kimberly: this is a fox news alert. we're waiting to hear if the house civil vote of contempt will be heard and what will happen to attorney general eric holder, who we just heard from moments ago regarding this contempt vote. now it would be the first time in history for an attorney general to be held in contempt. of course, that is significant. coming on the heels of a victory, what is seen as a victory for the obama administration this morning. now perhaps a turn of play. andrea? >> andrea: this is really big deal. this is historic and it should be noted for criminal proceeding, the criminal vote just happened. but the vote that the house republicans want is a civil vote. why? because they can move it along
quicker as the colleague mike emanuel pointed out. the criminal vote, it would have to kick this to a u.s. u.s. attorney. meaning, somebody who works under eric holder. it could take months or years and there is a huge conflict of interest. the civil vote as we saw when bush was in office proceeded quicker. that's what issa and the republicans want because it allows hem to go to a court on their own and try to get the documents. that's what they want to use it immediately against the administration. important stuff. i predict civil vote will pass. i'm interested to see how many democrats vote for it. if not a lot vote for it, which i think will happen, they will continue with the partisan witch hunt. if more democrats vote, it would be stronger argument than for republicans to come out and say it's not a political witch hunt. this is bipartisan concern for a cover up that resulted in the slain border agent, brian
terry. >> kimberly: how do you see it playing out? >> eric: the most important part is the civil vote. if they get a civil -- it will pass. they will get eric holder on civil contempt of congress, which means they can force a court to open up the documents they have been trying to get. which is more important than criminal proceedings, as you point out, because think about that for a second. they're going to ask a u.s. attorney to prosecute his boss who heads up the department of justice. that is uncomfortable unless they go further and say independent counsel prosecute holder. bottom line, you saw the congressional caucus, nancy pelosi holding hands leaving the house. i don't think i've seen it before. i don't think i've seen people vacating the house like that. >> greg: i was hoping that alan west would lock the doors behind them. it didn't happen. i got to say, i feel bad for bob. here we are talking about "fast and furious" and he
wants so badly to talk about the healthcare thing. i'm looking at your face while everybody is talking and i feel bad. >> bob: no, you don't. >> greg: i do. >> bob: that's a lie. first of all, they could appoint a special prosecutor to do this, as opposed to the assistant jorn general. my guess is if you take it to the court on civil matter is it not the case you can appeal that decision up to the supreme court, right? there is no way obama administration will allow it to be decided by the court, unless it's the supreme court and they're not back until october. this is a purely base political play on part of republicans and they pick the one day that obama wins on healthcare, that covers the news of this up. bad politics. >> kimberly: would you like to gloat for >> bob: i'm not going to great. great day for americans. not going to gloat. >> kimberly: you have "fast and furious," significant in terms of the implication. what's behind it. and withholding documents.
exertion of executive privilege. then you have what is seen as a great victory because the department of justice -- >> andrea: as far as the department of justice is concerned, fast and furious, i know obamacare is the issue of the day. with fastow, we sa fast "fast a" we saw the atf break every protocol they had in place. only way they would have done that is if there was coordination with the d.o.j. that's what issa is trying to find out real news of the day is obamacare. i know we have to talk about "fast and furious," but what happened today has a lot of people questioning, number one biggest issue, what was robert thinking? what does it mean? we'll get to it later. that is the news of the day. that is what the republicans will be talking about. that is how they can win. >> eric: stay on "fast and furious." we can get to obamacare. there is plenty of time to do that. "fast and furious," to go this far and have the congress walk out of the hall, or out of
cannon, that tells you there is something important they're hiding. turn over the documents. it has to be huge to have it go -- >> bob: they walked out of the house. capitol. it wasn't half. congressional black caucus -- >> eric: no, it was substantially more than the congressional black caucus. >> bob: all of the democrats should have marched out. this is political play. they got every document relating to "fast and furious furious." they want internal discussion documents. that's what the president put executive privilege on. he should have. screw them. if they want to play politics like that, we'll play politics. >> eric: they ask for a set of documents, they got 7600 documents. many were redacted. they don't have the information they want. they don't know who knew what and when. >> bob: that's what they want. they are another branch of government. executive -- >> eric: you know who else wants it? everyone wants it. everyone watching wants to
know. >> andrea: they were going to give it to them. that doesn't connect in minds of the viewers and the electorate. they were going to turn over the documents. if they canceled the contempt vote. why didn't they? why did they go back to the president and say exert executive privilege, it's not the result could be damaging. what are in the documents, eric holder, that are so damaging? >> bob: what you are talking about happened after he exerted executive privilege. if they cut back, we'll brief you on the documents, which was a mistake. because it still -- >> andrea: letter -- [over talk ] >> andrea: the letter did not come -- >> eric: you're wrong. they had a briefing and said we'll give you a briefing. >> kimberly: fair compilation. >> eric: darrell issa said no, we want more than just a fair compilation. eric holder turned over a letter with president obama. >> bob: fine.
it stand corrected. the other thing that is historic, it's historic because he's the first attorney general but how it went from the committee to the floor in a contempt vote. never before has it happened. that's purely politics. >> andrea: you don't think nancy pelosi was putting pressure on democratic members, political pressure for them to side with democrats? >> bob: sure. >> andrea: democrats would have voted for >> bob: look, the members of congress. they like to exert legislative authority, too. i understand that. the reality is it's the executive branch of government. issa playing a political move. he played a bad hand. >> kimberly: greg. >> greg: sorry think. ing about -- no, it goes back to one point i made a long time ago. until more democrats defect, doesn't mean anything. right now it's a witch hunt. if you get more, it's an intervention. it's not an intervention yet. this is one of those things that will go on for a long time. go on forever, ever. until there is a change in
november. then all of a sudden it will disappear in the ether. can i talk about john roberts, please? please? >> kimberly: we can -- >> greg: can i talk about the justices. a bigger story. >> kimberly: i'm come to you first on that. remind viewers we're waiting for the civil vote, contempt vote. that is the second portion we're waiting for. when it comes to you, we'll bring it to you live. so go to obamacare now and chief justice roberts. that was a big deal today. >> andrea: the question in republicans' mind now are how much do we talk about this? it is going to continue for months. go on and on. how much do republicans talk about this? could it motivate second amendment voters in rural districting? that's why you see the nra coming out and putting pressure. a lot of people believe this is trickery. there was something more nefarious happening at the department of justice. right? that's why they let the guns
walk. why did atf break every single protocol? it's strange. they would have had to get d.o.j. signoff. >> kimberlysignoff it could play in rural districts but mitt romney doesn't want to bring it up. >> kimberly: we'll talk about the chief justice. a lot of people left their head scratching. money lost in vegas. everyone thought he'd be on the conservative vote. he switched over and voted with bob's friends, liberals on the court. whatdy you make of it? >> greg: a small vote for man and giant step for socialism. this guy was thinking of his legacy. you like that, bob. he wanted to be known as the world's greatest punter since ray guy. he punted it. >> bob: i want to gloat about this but i said yesterday i thought it wasn't a closed deal. what roberts was doing is protecting the court. he did not want to hear people, democrats say they are hacks doing this. this is a terrific win for
obama. >> greg: that is the problem. you say it's a terrific win for obama. that will cause them to lose. because it's not a win for america. >> bob: the downside, it will stimulate the republican base and get more people to turn out. my guess is most of those are in conservative states anyway that he won't win. >> kimberly: does it give a platform for republicans to say look, we'll show leadership and talk this out? >> eric: a lot of money is going to be raised on the republican side. go to chief justice roberts. he proved there are democrats, republicans and conservatives. three parties. and the republican nominated chief justice roberts and he voted like a republican, not like a conservative. the conservative would have voted on the right. and eliminated obamacare. >> greg: to me, president obama handed in an awful term paper. instead of grading it, and rejecting it, the teacher rewrote it. under the commerce clause he
would have got an "f" but he turned it in an "a," turning it in a tax. is the justice supposed to rewrite the term paper? >> andrea: that was exactly the dissent the scalia came out with. >> kimberly: yeah. scalia's dissent was excellent. >> andrea: a lot of people were thinking what was roberts thinking? i think he was thinking two things. one, what bob said. he may have been thinking to protect the court, right? he knew axelrod and others would demonize the court democrat is not his job. >> andrea: if he was thinking let's get the liberal justices to come with me. he got them to defend the commerce clause. we have a quote which is important. i don't know if we can put it up. he says, "we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments" and he goes on to say "it's not our job the court to protect people from consequences of their political choices." he said i'll rule in judicial
deview on the commerce clause, but what i won't do, if you don't like the law, anything else, get obama out. he kicked it back to the people. >> bob: listen, you can argue that all you want. justices do change interpretation of the law. mandate remains. conservatives got the medicaid. that is significant because small businesses could have dumped people to medicaid. the reality is that we can go toward with this and start to set up exchanges. conservative states like florida and texas who have been holding back politically because the governors decide they don't like obamacare will get to work now. get these things put together. >> kimberly: we are looking at the house floor and waiting civil contempt vote for eric holder. >> eric: how in the world -- there we go. >> kimberly: we'll toss it to our colleague bret baier from "special report." to report. electronic devices in 15-minute vote.
>> this is a fox news alert. i'm bret baier. we're jumping in a "the five" a bit to bring you an alert. quite a day. as you have been hearing there. in washington, the u.s. supreme court voting to uphold the president's healthcare law and voting by majority 5-4 the individual mandate should be seen as a tax. now, another historic moment. house of representatives voted to hold the attorney general eric holder in contempt of congress. holder is now the first sitting cabinet member to be held in contempt of congress. criminal contempt was 255-67. 17 democrats voting for the resolution to hold holder in contempt. two republicans voting against it. dozens of democrats walked out of the chamber in refusing to vote on the resolution. republicans say they move it forward because holder failed to comply completely with the subpoena for documents and information in the investigation in the gun walking operation "fast and furious." and as you heard, guns from that operation were found at the scene of the murder of the
border patrol agent brian terry and could be linked to another agent murder in mexico. as you look live now, we're getting ready on the house floor preparing for a second contempt vote. this is the vote on civil contempt. to sort all of this out for us as the historic day rolls on, chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel has been following this unfolding story for months. he is up on capitol hill with the latest. mike, where are we with the votes? >> as you mentioned, they are going to go forward a civil contempt vote. they believe they have votes for to pass. some look at this as insurance. they are asking attorney general to go after the boss, the attorney general. it may be an easier path to get the "fast and furious" documents by essentially if it passes going to a court and saying to a judge here, we have a contempt of congress resolution. we need documents from the department of justice. and then the judge looks at
the department of justice and says start handing over the documents. or give me very good reasons why the documents cannot be handed over. with civil contempt resolution you see paperwork move in a hurry. house members are moving forward with that. dramatic afternoon on capitol hill, as we have seen the first criminal contempt resolution, historic moment you mention, of course, we saw the democrats walk out in protest. protesting the effort against the attorney general. bret? >> bret: we're standing by for the vote. this another vote, a place-holder, waiting on the civil contempt vote. i should point out and mike mentioned dozens of democrats that walked out, who walked out of the chamber when the criminal contempt vote started. you can see the pictures here. it's not unprecedented. back in 2008, republicans boycotted another vote. that vote was for contempt
charges against two bush administration advisors. you may remember. josh ballton and harriet meyers, the former chief of staff and white house counsel. there was a vote there. and then the leader, the house minority leader john boehner led his caucus, saying we will not stand idly by and watch the house floor be abused for pure political grand standing. it has happened before. as you see, the democrats walking out there earlier. we're looking live at the house floor. we are now getting in to the civil contempt vote. chief white house correspondent ed henry is standing by live at the white house with the response or the early response from the obama administration and the attorney general. ed? >> that's right. the attorney general was down in new orleans for previously scheduled event and he called this a political stunt. said he is sticking with his job. and his agenda. moving forward. dan pfeiffer, the white house communications director is backing the attorney general up. just put out a written statement, ripping republicans on capitol hill for moving forward on this, saying that
the white house cooperated and turned over 7600 pages of documents related to fast and furious. of course, republicans want thousands more. that is what the fight has been about. the president taking the extraordinary step of invoking executive privilege to shield more documents going to the hill. dan pfeiffer saying in part that the republicans should be working with the president on the economy, but he said, "politically motivated agenda prevailed and instead of engaging with the president in efforts to create jobs and grow the economy today, we saw the house of representatives perform a transparently political stunt." that is from dan pfeiffer, the president communication director. extraordinary day at the white house and in washington. as you know, bret, the president's healthcare law surviving. you can imagine how much different the vote might look if the president's health law had gone down at 10:00 a.m. this morning. then the attorney general, the first sitting cabinet member to face criminal contempt charges have it go through the house, it would have looked
more like the white house was under siege. they got a big victory this morning, but the attorney general is taking a hit this afternoon. >> bret: we'll check in later. bring in the special extended panel tonight. tucker carlson, editor of the dailycaller.com. stoddard, associate editor of the still. chris stirewalt, fox news politics editor digital and syndicated columnist charles krauthammer. hard to put in words, manage any tuesday of news day -- magnitude of news day like this. put this in perspective. >> the obama administration as ed indicated wins the day. what is going to be remembered and has a direct impact on the eselection the victory that the democrats claim on healthcare reform. a huge issue. the signature piece of legislation of this administration. had it gone down, i think it would have been a psychological catastrophe for the administration. i think conservatives can argue that there is something in that decision, that they
can celebrate. roberts citing with the conservatives you can't justify the obamacare individual mandate on the grounds of expansion of the power of government on the commerce clause, which is the central argument. ans in, the fact is -- nonetheless, they t fact is they won on this. the contempt charge, doesn't have a lot of traction. because it will end up with a judge now, and it could be a very long drawn-out process, it could etch go way beyond election day. again, i think what remains is the supreme court decision and this will be probably footnote. >> bret: chris, congressman issa who heads up the house oversight committee and brought this forward released a statement touting as you might imagine the bipartisan nature of the criminal contempt vote. as the civil contempt vote is ongoing live now. he said it's bipartisan.
he pointed to 17 democrats who voted for it. he said that this was not "the outcome i had sought. it could have been avoided had attorney general eric holder produced the subpoenaed documents he said he could provide." he goes on to say "unless president obama relents to the bipartisan call for transparency and end to the coverup, our fights will move to the court where we will prevail getting the documents that the justice department and president obama's flawed assertion of the executive privilege denied the american people." this is a sticky political issue for republicans as well. it is come on this day. and probably will be overshadowed largely by the healthcare decision. >> well, i'm sure that was just a coincidence. i'm sure the republicans didn't think for a second they'd like air cover today that while they were doing a controversial thing, it's a big thing to do. but is it a controversial thing. it's tagged with potential peril for the republicans. darrell issa doesn't have a
ounce to bounce back. he is doing this. they wouldn't able to stop him and grassley in the senate. republicans worry, as charles says, if this plays out over month after month after month it looks distracting or it looks like a witch hunt. we should point out if the documents ever do get out, for goodness sakes, if there is something in there, this is the scand that really could rock a presidency. >> bret: a.b., i should point out as we look at the numbers ticking up, 218 is the majority needed to pass something in the house of representatives. you are at 108 right now. your thoughts? >> i agree, republicans scheduled this vote on the day with the healthcare knowing it would be overshadowed. that was intentional. they are not afraid of the vote. they want to have it and they think it ends here today. they are moving on to other headlines. they will grapple with the new strategy on healthcare. the decision from the supreme court. how to use it in the campaign. how to get back the jobs. happy for this to go to the court but they don't want
anything else on the floor or in the committee. we had an interesting piece yesterday how senate republicans didn't want to talk about it. the contempt vote hadn't been followed closely. they knew everything about senator grassley's investigation over there, it wasn't something they wanted to get tied up in. in conversations. so i think we will see them move quickly pass this. a vote they had to have. but i don't think in what happened today it's a bad news day for the obama administration. >> bret: tucker, the vote is 135. the attorney general calls it a crass effort. how do you think it plays? >> remarkable statement. this is attorney general of the united states. arguably the second most powerful person in the united states. i thought it was nixonian. his response. he looked rattled and part didn't make sense. the defense was not germane to the question of the gunwalking, at the core of this. he bragged about creating government jobs, blamed unnamed special interest for persecuting him.
it really was picture of a man rattled. i would say in contrast to a lot of scandals i have seen in washington in 25 years there is something real at the core of this. this isn't about a bob novack column, like the valley plame scandal. core of this is 1300 firearms unaccounted for today that resulted in the death of a lot of people, including at least one as you pointed out, american border patrol agent. this is a real scandal. we know already at this point that the attorney general misled congress about it in a specific way. he said among other things he didn't know about this until the spring, april of 2011. documents prove that he knew about it year before. i don't think it's going away. there is something real here. >> bret: at least 129 house members, four u.s. senators, two governors and presidential candidate mitt romney demanded holder's resignation. or removal. he is the first sitting cabinet member held in contempt. does he make it to november in the administration?
>> look at the support he has on the hill. the entire congressional black caucus, the walk-out started at the cdc. there is a constituency on the left on the hill that supports eric holder in a die-hard way. the president, himself, apparently a close friend of his, giving support to holder. i would be shocked. >> bret: let's bring in republican florida congressman john micah, member of the house oversight committee. good evening, congressman. your thoughts on this day. you pushed for this. now it's happening. obviously, we're still waiting for civil contempt vote. >> sad day for the department of justice and the chief prosecutorial officer of the united states. this could have been avoided. all he had to do is provide with us the documents that we requested. he hurt his name and the name of one of the most important judicial offices in the nation. it could have been avoided, should have been avoided.
there must be damaging information in what he has withheld from the committee. >> bret: what about that, congressman? the attorney general saying they were negotiating and negotiatinnegotiating in good fd they came forward with several documents even in a last-ditch effort to make it go away. what is the truth behind closed doors, sir? >> that was almost a joke. it was very disappointing. first, from june -- sorry, february 4 of 2011, they denied they were involved. we know from a march document that they knew and they stonewalled us. we went through 11 months without supplying documentation. we then subpoenaed and we waited eight months, and again, they failed to respond. then he came in, the night before, we held a committee,
the committee contempt vote. he offered to up some documents, limit the documents. so far, they have given us seven to 8%. they offered a limited amount. if we would close down the investigation, which is to me totally offensive. i mean, that is just horrible that again, a chief prosecutorial officer of the united states would try to limit an investigation in which a department of justice program went totally awry. a federal agent was killed. hundreds others were killed. we can't get even basic information from the department of justice. >> bret: on the politics of this, sir, do you sense a vulnerability for republicans? you have statements coming out left and right from democrats saying they are focused on jo
jobs. senator reid said instead of focusing on jobs this is a political witch hunt. this is a chorus from the left. you saw the democrats walk out and hold a press conference outside. do you sense vulnerability on going down this road that may be a long road if you go to court on this issue? >> i'm so disappointed. i mean democrats and republicans should be calling for justice. just like the terry family who came for us. and all they said is we want a thorough investigation. we want justice, because our loved one was killed by a program, concocted by the department of justice, funded by the department of justice. executed by the department of justice. where weapons were distributed to drug dealers and murders. and we can't get to the core of it. i'm very disappointed that people would say there is any type of politics involved in this. this is not october pre-election surprise or
anything. this is not against eric holder, you know, you know, probably a respected individual in my quarters. this is trying to get basic information on who was responsible, what went wrong. make certain that this doesn't happen again. >> bret: congressman, last thing. how long do you think it will last? you criminally held him in contempt and will likely hold him civilly in contempt. what is next? what can voters expect? >> the committee has some options. obvious, there are two contempt charges here. one is a possible criminal. and the other one is civil. both within the jurisdiction of the committee to act and congress to act. given that people in fact died as a result of this program. the other thing is just basic
investigatory power of the congress to an agency which it created. a program which it has funded. we can't get especially basic information. so, it does need to be pursued. i hope it can be done in an expeditious and responsible manner. bring the matter to a close. finding and holding those responsible, accountable. that is what this is all about. it should not have happened. we should not even have to vote. an attorney general, chief prosecutorial officer of the united states in contempt. it's a sad day for justice in america. >> bret: congressman mica, thank you for your time. we should note that the vote for civil contempt holding attorney general eric holder civilly in contempt of congress has passed the 217 threshold. it's now 232-82. you can see it's not official until they announce it but it looks like they are getting ready to put the gavel down
there. this means that the attorney general is the first sitting member of cabinet, a cabinet member to be held criminally in contempt of congress. also civilly in contempt of congress. we did ask a democratic lawmaker, california congresswoman jackie spear to come by. she is not there. she has walked off the vote and hasn't come back. we're back with the panel. if she does come back, we'll bring you her thoughts. a.b., you heard congressman mica there. your thoughts? >> well, he is right. somebody has died. tucker is right, there is a real story here. it was a bone-headed operation. and the attorney general has revealed himself that he wasn't straight and honest about when he knew about this. the "associated press" is reporting today e-mails from february and march of 2011, in which he and deputy attorney general james cole went back and forth. he was saying we can't, we need real answers. no defensive b.s., we need real answers. and when is up boardnants were
exchanging -- su subordinates were saying do they know we didn't run guns for sure? it was forwarded to eric holder who said do they really know? do they really, really know? it wasn't that it was his operation. but he wasn't totally accountable for when he knew and what was revealed. the fight over the documents will continue, because the president invokeed executive privilege to protect. they said hey, the executive branch deliberation. that is as old as the hills between the two bodies, administrations. president bush did the same thing in december of 2006 -- excuse me, 2001. i think it is -- there is a lot of meat to this. politically it's tricky for the republicans to take this too far. >> bret: it did raise a lot of eyebrows in washington when the execuvilege was
issued. and it led to this standoff. in a different level than it was. >> for the media, which it studiously ignored the story, they finally had to explain to the american people, explaining why there was a contempt citation, the story of the operation was, and even parts of the coverup. i think what is really important here is to distinguish between the substance and the politics on the substance, republicans have a case. the case is there a letter issued by the department of justice, beginning of 2011, which was also. it said there was no gun wal walking. it retracked it. that was nine months later. the documents they are looking for are in the nine months to understand what happened, who covered up why and at what level it rose. that is what the department will not release. but the problem is this. because of the separation of powers, it's very hard for congress to pry it loose.
the administration adopted a stonewall that will probably succeed at least through election day, which is all the horizon the president cares about. in the meantime, he will stick with holder. they will slow it all down. it will have the same political effect as the flight over the debt ceiling. it certainly hurt the president but it hurt the republicans more. simply a matter of protection. not substance. this is unique and historic and it doesn't look good. on the other hand, they be a portrayal of the republicans, as people only interested in partisanship, only in obstruction. that's how it will play in the media. that is why i think the republicans and the house and the senate are going to get off this train as quickly as they can. >> bret: okay. final thoughts as we are coming to the closing of this vote. you can see it's 255-93.
217 is the threshold. it's not official until the vote is closed. it says time remaining zero, this is called holding open the vote until everyone is essentially voted. until the gavel comes down. but it looks like at this point, we can say that the attorney general is going to be held civilly and criminally in contempt of congress. final thoughts, chris? >> bret: if the republicans are in risk of overplaying the hand,teams have already overplayed their hands on -- the democrats have already overplayed their hands on this. accusation of racism, bringing this odor in to it is a turn-off. not attractive for voters. when they said, when nancy pelosi accused her fellow members of congress being involved in a conspiracy to suppress votes of majority voters of southern states that is taking it too far. i think democrats overplayed. we'll see if republicans do, or not. >> i don't think anybody is more sensitive to possibility of overplaying than the republicans. the 1998 mid-term election is
at the top of everyone's mind in house leadership. they have spent -- i'm not making excuses for whatever the behavior may or may not have been. i know for a fact they have been retie sant about bring -- reticent to bringing it to this stage. a chore for chairman issa to bring others to his side. they are concerned about being seen as zealots. i think accommodation could have been -- >> bret: go to the house floor. >> yeas 258, nays are 95. five voting present. resolution is agrewed to. >> bret: final word, a.b.? it passed officially. >> what we are saying we won't hear much more about it. holder will stay. he tried to leave and the president asked him to stay. i think he remains in the position. we'll continue to defend his attorney as attorney general. >> bret: attorney general held in contempt criminally, civilly by the u.s. house of
representatives. we'll follow this story. thank you for watching the special coverage from washington. "special report" starts at 6:00 eastern. a lot to cover today. healthcare ruling, of course. more on this vote. now back to new york and my colleague kimberly guilfoyle and "the five." have at it. >> kimberly: thank you, bret. the house voted to eric holder hold in contempt. the first house member held in criminal and civil contempt with a significant vote. many think this is a bipartisan effort. when you look at the vogt totals and the number of democrats that voted to support this contempt vote. >> eric: 21 democrats voted yea, to uphold a civil contempt charge on eric holder. five democrats voted present. 26 didn't vote against the contempt charge. it's great. 26 people stood up and said let's find out more about what is going on. they're admirable. people in those districts
should say thank you very much. i know there is at least one family that is happy they voted that way and probably several hundred people are. >> bob: if you look at the districts where the democrats are fun. they are all from the nra sensitive districts. they came out with a big push on this thing. of course they will vote this way. >> eric: good. good. whatever it takes. >> bob: it won't take much for us to get it put behind us quickly. >> andrea: if there were more democrats that voted with the republicans they would have had a stronger argument in an election year. now, as i wrote last week, i do think there is a risk. voters that are fired up about the issue are not going to vote with president obama anyway. likely, if they keep going on the "fast and furious," when they should be talking about the economy and now obamacare, they have a great argument. obama is going to come out and say why are they talking about this? i turned over the dock meants. i have some job plans. the republicans don't want to talk about the issues then they look boxed in and detached and that they are
overreaching and bullying the president. >> kimberly: they are at risk today -- >> andrea: they have done it before. republicans have. >> kimberly: alienating voters. >> bob: go ahead, greg. >> greg: i just forgot how exciting is it to watch middle age men vote. >> there are women there, too. >> greg: not really. i give you that. there is naval gazing going on, in the breaks and shows about whether the story is big or not. is this going to keep going or die out. you have to look at it in the context of if it was bush, how much different would it be from the perspective of the media if it happened under george bush. oliver stone would be directing the movie already and martin sheen would be the father of brian terry and carrot top would be eric holder. media would see this as a huge thing. but because it's obama people spend more time wondering if this is a story. maybe it's politically motivated but it is also a
real scandal. you can have both. >> bob: one thing that eric said before. the fact that the democrats walked out is not historic. bush, when they brought up bolton under contempt charges and meyers around contempt charges, boehner led virtually all the republicans out of the chamber. >> greg: but should you walk out if somebody died? isn't that disrespectful? >> bob: that is one salient argument. you have a dead border agent. i understand that. do the republicans want to be seen as playing politics? that's how they'll be seen. >> eric: it's not politics. >> bob: it will be played that way. >> eric: by you. by the left. >> bob: by the obama campaign. >> eric: right. by the left. >> bob: there you go. it's going to be played that way. you don't have a lot of other stuff in the story until you get in another courtroom. >> eric: not politics. dead border agent. you can't call it politics given what is going on. let's do this. is it politics, bob, if the
next kid that dies in the border is american with a "fast and furious" gun? then what? is it still politics, bob? what about the one after that. or? or the fifth one that died. >> bob: i could make that same arguen't about the war in iraq. >> eric: it's different politics. people want answers from the attorney general who has held back information. >> bob: i want answers about iraq, we lost 4,000 kids. >> andrea: all three of you are right. bob is rig with so many other issues did voters from the political standpoint, where voters in the middle to elect the next president, what do they care about? what is the number one, i? are they going to look at this and say is this critical? are we voting on this? greg points out that the media isn't covering this. eric is also right when he says somebody died. this isn't politics. this is policy. the question is what is going to drive to us the election? fast and furious or the economy an and obamacare?
>> bob: good coalition building. >> kimberly: nice consensus building. this has tremendous impact. how does it play out for obam obama? if you look at what happened today, confluence of event, seen as a big victory this morning with the u.s. supreme court. no one expected chief justice roberts to come out with that vote and side with the liberal justices. but the first sitting cabinet member held in contempt. >> bob: the reason it's not good politics for the republicans. you can argue whether you think it's politics or not, i believe it is. but the healthcare bill, the healthcare law has things to come in play. state capitals, you have to vote on it. you to have meat to carry it on. fast and if furious is over. it will be in a court. it will fade quickly.
the healthcare law will not. now the question is how much is it going to help the republicans in terms of the search? there is something to be said about that. but not where it matters. >> kimberly: coming up, another hisser to rick decisiode --historic decision. what are the implications for both parties? that's next on a very busy news day. stay with us. ♪ ♪
today, the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act. the name of the healthcare act we passed two years ago. in doing so, they reaffirmed a fundamental principle that in america, wealthiest nation on earth no, illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruin. whatever the politics. today's decision was victory for people all over this country. >> bob: that was president obama talking about the
victory for the supreme court upholding the mandate provision of the affordable health act, which is now law. and it essentially saved what most people thought was going to be, certainly the mandate would be ruled unconstitutional. it was not. eric? , around the table most of us said with the exception of me, of course, said it would go down. >> eric: you definitely called int right. taxes, $600 billion in new taxes. it should be called not obama care but obama's healthcare tax going forward. >> bob: is it not true it's tax -- let me ask. it's a tax on people. >> andrea: it is a tax. >> aheavy, fine, call it -- beckel. >> bob: that is a good idea. >> andrea: that will really help republicans. >> greg: beck is a term for wild hot tub party. >> bob: it is. remember that one we had? >> greg: yeah. >> what is the question? >> bob: my question is what, if you get whatever tax $700, if you don't buy this.
if you don't buy insurance, right? nobody else gets taxed if they have insurance, right? >> that is true. think about it. a lot of people out there are going to say why would i buy a premium insurance policy when i could just pay the tax? we're still dealing with the same problem. >> eric: you are talking about the penalty. different from the new taxes. >> andrea: taxing from tanning on up. sorry, eric. >> bob: what are you and eric going to do if you don't have tanning? >> andrea: spray tan. >> greg: this is a mandate for health insurance. you can't have a mandate to carry identification. so does that mean you have to walk around with a health card and can it be used to prevent voter fraud? >> andrea: good question. >> bob: that is a good point. as usual, you're right on point and right on the issue. >> greg: there you go. >> andrea: i think the founding fathers are probably rolling over in their graves. this is terrible. listen, roberts defended the commerce clause but he basically said that the power of the government to tax and spend are limitless.
that's terrible. >> bob: they are all dust now. >> andrea: this is establishing a dangerous precedent. some people think they are getting something for free. that the obama administration, the greatest thing they have ever seen. but they don't understand there are financial and economic implications that are be far reaching. also the precedent established with this decision is really disturbing, when you think about it. we're becoming more and more like a socialist country where we will say you know what? we'll decide whatever it is you should do. if you don't do what we say, we are going to fine you. we are going to tax you under this authority of congress. it's too broad of an expansion. >> bob: only thing you left out of the rant was just like greece. maybe we'll have time now an people will learn about the bill, the law and realize what is going on. je to get out of this. coming up, how should republican hand the supreme court ruling? stay with us now. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] if you have to take care of legal matters. legalzoom has an easy and affordable option.
you get quality services on your terms, with total customer support, backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee. so go to legalzoom.com today and see for yourself. see life in the best light. a 100% satisfaction guarantee. [music] transitions® lenses the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. experience life well lit, ask for transitions adaptive lenses. ( dog barking ) this is the plan that revolves around you. introducing share everything. unlimited talk. unlimited text. and a single pool of shareable data that powers up to 10 devices. the first plan of its kind. share everything. only from verizon.
roberts decision it's kicked back. if they want to get it repealed, it has to go through congress. i want to go to you. it may seem like losers for republicans but it's a long-term winner. >> eric: america lost, they're the biggest loser. we'll be taxed to the begeesees now. we need to see what the taxes are. and the penalty. if you don't buy health insurance, you are penalized through the i.r.s. if you don't pay the fine, they can't -- number one, they can't garnish your wages, they can't put you in jail. there is no teeth. so people will not do it. they won't pay the fine. >> andrea: that is the problem with obamacare, right? penalty is less than the premiums, why would anyone care. >> bob: let you all -- >> andrea: it's -- >> bob: let's talk about mitt romney for a second. here is his problem in this politically. he has the massachusetts healthcare bill with a mandate in it.
if it was another candidate besides romney it might have more teeth. but what about you, gor? the bill looks like yours. >> kimberly: it makes him look not very bright. if it's so flawed, why did he do it to begin with? that doesn't sound like good thing to do. >> bob: because he knew romney would be the nominee. that is my logic. >> andrea: if it's a different candidate, it could be a clean hit. what about him saying wait a minute, we were just trying to cover the uninsured, right? >> greg: bob is right there. obamacare delivered the house to republicans. pelosi won't be happy until they are delivered the senate and the white house. this is a win for the republicans in the long-term. if job say it's a big win for obama it looks like it's not about him. >> eric: this is great point. you have awoken a sleeping
giant. the tea party will come back. >> andrea: how much does obama talk about? he will talk about the popular provision until election day. >> bob: there are 8 million people right now benefiting from this. >> andrea: remember obamacare -- >> greg: they will vote against that -- >> kimberly: if you remember obamacare is a tax and spend. this is a disaster -- tax and spend disco. that is what it is. >> andrea: but disco is fund. >> kimberly: you're right. >> bob: man, this is sweet! >> andrea: that is it for us on "the five." stay with fox for the continuing ruling and we'll be here tomorrow analyzing more. come back. people with a machine.
yep. the longer you stay with us, the more you save. and when you switch from another company to us, we even reward you for the time you spent there. genius. yeah, genius. you guys must have your own loyalty program, right well, we have something. show her, tom. huh? you should see november! oh, yeah? giving you me. now that's progressive. call or click today.