tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News October 29, 2015 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT
ago. today. when news breaks out we'll break in because breaking news changes everything. cavuto gets you started yet again right now. >> who saw the debates last night? and great book. who won the debate? >> you did. >> funnive they said, not you, but they did not. welcome everybody, i'm neil cavuto. you're watching "your world" and carl cameron is in the very quick shifting post debate high in colorado. hey, colorado. >> well forks donald trump it wasn't the kind of dominant performance we have seen in his previous two appearances on the debate stage, about he was boasting last night about snap polls, which we don't report on fox. say they'd had him as the early winner. marco rubio did particularly
well. and it was in part because jeb bush picked up on the florida sun sentinel newspaper and sayseye some resign his seat for missing votes and rubio was prepared for and it put down jeb bush, put him in this place, and in that moment got by far and away the loudest applause. another couple of winners that played well yesterday. ted cruz was the first of the candidates on the prime "time" take on the media that's been the dominant theme, how it wall handled by the moderators. here's what ted cruz started what was the unity moment for the republican field. >> this is not a cage match. and you look at the questions. donald trump, are you a comic book villain? ben carson, we do math? on kashich will you unsilt palm? jeb bush, why have have your numbers fallen? how about talking about about t.
>> christie has a chance to mock the questions about fantasy pool and today ben carson held a news conference before takenning a rally with 1500 people and announces his campaign is now pro-actively calling the other candidate, urging them to come together and put pressure on the republican national committee and the rnc is planning a conference call today with the candidates and put pressure on the rnc to make sure there's a change in format so they'll have some opportunity to state their cases without being interrupted by rivals and more particularly, without being interrupted by the moderators, and donald trump and ben carson joined together to put pressure on cnbc to cut he debate time from three hours to two success in and they're already driving this idea to change the formality for the next few debates. >> thank you very much. chris christie was on another news network today, saying the
next debate on fox business network, i'm told, he would not let the moderators ask stupid questions. so noted. to form white house press secretary ari live inner, and megan mccain. what do you make of that and who wins are loses? i look at it in the eyes of the donor. if you're a jeb bush donor and saw he did with the marco rubio and the back and forth on fantasy football, did did he hurt his cause. >> definitely on life support. i'm diseasely disappointed in jeb bush. a lot of people are asking me -- comparing his campaign to my father's in '07 because hi father had a lot of trouble. his cam imploded and he came from the bottom up. jeb bush has made no big structure changes. hadn't fired hi communications staff. needs to hire a real debate coach and i have no more room for jeb bush. you're very bad at this and you're not doing any better and you're an establishment
candidate in an antiestablishment time right now and you d. >> the difference between jeb bush and your father? your dad was down to change in the couch cushion. >> i was there. >> but he came back. jeb bush still has a good amount of money. >> he still has his family name but showing he is not ready for primetime. i was talking to a girlfriend and i said i think he still thinks it's 1998. this is the third debate. this is a very important election for republicans, and i'm completely off the jeb train and it breaks my heart. i'm a huge fan of his brother and his father. >> one debate shouldn't make an entire race but perceptions carry a lot of weight. you take out of there with some zingers that don't carry weight. debt that hurt jeb bush? >> it's 3-d baits, not just -- it's three debates and one
debate can do you in that's how severe the judgment of the voters in the modern pletka era, general needs to show fire and fright, you need to take down the people ahead of you. tackle trump and take him down, instead he punched down to rubio, and missed. and gave marco a wonderful opportunity, which marco seized on to punch up and took jeb down. i don't know why the bush camp thought it was important to go after rubio instead of going after trump. >> i will say this. maybe i read too much into things itch don't think that bush wanted to go. this don't think he wanted to ask marco rubio that nasty question about this voting. i think the was uncomfortable. >> it showed. probably member told him. mark row co-rubio had a perfect answer, and jeb doesn't look like he is excited or interested. he is a really bad debater. i didn't cover enwhen he was
run -- >> was a great debater -- >> he needs to clean house on his staff. that's what my father did. these people are not doing him any service. >> wow. >> it's not a staff issue. these issues -- this is what is good -- >> whoever is in charge of his messaging isn't do do -- >> hold your hourses. northwestern people can see the candidates and read who is who, what they like, what they dislike about the individual candidate, and that is why the presidency is bigger than the staff. it comes down to measure of the individual. it's not -- >> well, who has the momentum in your eyes -- >> that's true -- >> megan, momentum is everything. you can change with the next debate. >> it does come from the top down. jeb needs to get himself in order as well. i think there are people that can help him. who is winning marco rubio. donald trump had a big night, although i'm not a trump fan,
and ted cruz looking alive. >> remember when scott walker dropped out, the idea was, i hope you find someone to rally around to counter at the time donald trump and now that might be ben carson, but what do you make of that and whether the rallying figure might be a marco rubio right now? >> the history of the republican party is always -- almost always an insurgent candidate who gets 20, 25, 30% of the vote, and then you have a mainstream establishment conservative candidate. the two go man mano ao and the history is the mainstream' candidate wins you. have to say rubio has the best chance. what is so interesting to me about this is rubeover was really a tea party candidate. he took on the republican establishment front-runner, charlie crist, the former governor of florida in the republican primary against everybody's wishes in washington and rubio prevailed.
show. he has a lot of interesting things he can bring to this. now it's his term to get scrutinized and see if he can survive scrutiny and has to raise a lot of money. >> he has the best narrative to go up against hillary and gets me excited. he is young. >> carly? >> i love carr carly. there's nine more debates. >> i loved her smiling thing. they say i don't smile enough. thank you both very, very much. in the meantime, i want you to see something that will be happening or is happening. we have rand paul. he is beginning a filibuster that will pick up steam in the hours ahead. i hope he has a strong bladder. what he is talking about and on and on about is this new two-year budget deal. he has promised this moment would come because he wants to protest it. even though it's all but a done deal. he is saying that doesn't make
sense. shouldn't even entertain it. to south carolina republican senator tim scott. he is trying to provide some rallying support to consecutive republicans to say this is bad you. shouldn't sign onto. the is don't care paul ryan is speaker. i don't care if my fellow kentuckian and senate leader likes that. but it seems he its fight fighting an uphill battle. >> certainly is an uphill battle but a battle worth fighting. no doubt. when you think about the budget deal, think about the fact, for the first time since 2011, we'll break the budget spending limits we all voted to keep down. >> you support what senator rand paul is doing some. >> i'm going to vote against this budget deal because it's not in the best interests of the american people. we're going to say, instead of a certain dollar amount that we'll add to the credit card balance, we'll say you have until march of 2017 to spend money, and
whatever you spend, we'll say it's okay. and in addition to that we'll allow for $80 billion above the budget cap we voted for in 2011, to be the new number. so, when the new norm is breaking spending limits, increasing increasing the balance on the credit card, not by a certain dollar amount but the time to put money on the credit card, aid hard to go to the american people, hard to go to south carolinians and say that this is a good deal, and in your best interests itch don't see it. >> senator, it's weird, too, because there seems to be a divide in republican party. you have tried to cover that=i p a little bit. and tried to hand, hold through the whole pie ryan thing. where he said i don't like this anymore than you do. i think it stinks but its what it, i'll support it. get out of the way. the old -- clean up before the new guy comes in, fight the good fight on other things later you. say this is the good fight.
>> this is the fight worth fighting. at the end of the day the question is how to fight it. to vote against it. to speak out against it and be clear in my position and explain why my position is so clear. it is simple. we spend in 201 -- we said in 2011 we're spending too much money. washington has a spending problem. here's how we fix it. the bca fixed it. now we're saying, well, without actually fixing it, we're going to actually increase by 80 billion cozy our spending -- $80 billion our spending in the next two years and in addition we'll allow to have x number of dollars, probably $1.5 trillion, added to the credit card balance between now and march of 2017. that is a difficult deal to swallow. i'm not sure where the win is for the american people. >> if donald trump were you
nominee, he said he we blow up the -- we have -- makes it laughable and wants to change it from the ground up. >> donald trump would be a better leader than hillary clinton. many of us are looking for ways to transform what we're doing and started with numbers. zero-based budgeting would be a good start. each dollar we spend has to be fought for at the beginning of the next fiscal year. going to a two-year budget would provide certainti' predictability for those in the world world where i came from. this notion of beating the deal the day before and calling that a victory, that is not a victory. if wore returning out of money on november 3rd, we knew that a long time ago and should have been work only this in january, not september or october. >> senator, blue. temperature joining us.
i mentioned donald trump, we're sew fork cussed on the outsiders very the establish. guys, maybe we're missing it. maybe it's the old establishment guys with the new establishment guys? why this particular exchange might brilliantly illustrate it. >> the senate, a french work week? get three days where you have to show up? you can campaign, or just resign.
immediate response a lot of voters got in those who were there just sort of gauging the reaction to this debate, and the marco rubio scored well. before i -- this was the one that intrigued me and the response. and then talk about it. >> in 2008, barack obama missed 60 or on asker of business votes and the same newspaper endorsed him again so much this is another example of the double standard that exists between the mainstream media and the conservatives -- [applause] >> the senate, is it like a french work week? get three days you have to show up? you can campaign. or just resign and let someone else take the job. >> know how many votes john mccain missed i don't remember you ever klaining about mccain's vote record. this only reason why you're doing it now is because we're running for the same position and someone convince outside attack me will help you. here's the bottom line, my campaign is going to be about the future of america, not about
attacking anybody else on the stage. >> that conservative, moderate -- >> tells me that jeb bush made the biggest mistake of his presidential campaign. the second most unpopular candidate should not be attacking the second most popular candidate in terms of favorability, and positive ratio. and mash co rubio know that this was coming because jeb started to challenge him self -- several days earlier. so this is politics 101. for people watching, the higher the lines go, the more favorable reaction. did you watch when jeb bush was speaking? it caved. went down immediately. and the more that general went after marco, the angrier our participant got and they represent republicans from courtroom this country because they felt that general was doing the work of the mainstream media rather than focusing on the real enemy, which is hillary clinton.
>> again it was the mainstream media that posited the question about the missed votes and everything and could have left itself at that. later on, the governor got himself that -- governor bush got himself in trouble on fantasy football and a certain response by another governor. >> we have $90 trillion in debt. we have people out of work. we have isis in al qaeda attacking us and we're talking about fantasy football? can we stop? [cheering] >> explain there, governor bush was talking about maybe the congress should look into the fantasy football phenomenon here and where it is a rigged game and gambling but got lost in the whole argue. >> threing ins that happened chris christie is one of the great disease baiters of the time. and enwho he looked straight into the camera. republicans felt like he was talking to them. number two he used the most important word that republican candidates should be using a lot more often, which is stop. stop spending.
stop tasking. stop regulating, and in this case, stop focusing on issues that don't matter. and number three, the intensity, the passion, where chris christie has been saying is, give him the chance to challenge hillary clinton in those debates, and he will win. it's a very powerful argument. 0 only two candidates ran on that strategy, carly fiorina and christie but chris christie is stronger. >> let's talk about how this affect mash co rubio. such a crowded field and looking at establishment candidates. who wins out in that? obviously they can't elect multiple or nominate multiple candidacies you have a tier of ann establishment guys, trump and carson, establishment guys, chris christie or marco rubio where does the race stand. >> never talked about this
before on fox. i don't see this establishment-antiestablishment. i see this as positive negative. marco rubio the most positive. john kashich and donald trump. kashich says he is positive but really attack ago candidates itch don't think he performed well yesterday because in the very first question, he came out against everybody. so you have some candidates who will attack. some candidates will present a positive view toward the future. rubio's advantage is he talk busy those american dream. he has lafd it. it's part of his life and his cure to all. rubio has the advantage. >> some big develops in washington. we'll explain with the state department spokesman after this. it's extraordinary. because there is no stop in us. or you. only go.
was this raid on an isis compound where they had all these hostages combat? now, the official white house read even today it was not. kevin cork from the white house on all the fighting back and forth that claimed the life on an american soldier who was decorate over the last 20 years. kevin? >> frankly, the pentagon is saying it was combat, and if you listen carefully you can sense the white house continues to have this visceral reaction against using that word because they don't want people to confuse them with what happened under the bush administration, in iraq and afghanistan. so i want you to listen carefully. to an exchange i had with josh earnest on this topic. >> the situation now, while continuing to be dangerous, and while those men and women in uniform face a risk we would certainly not downplay, there's no denying that the mission they're carrying out is quite different.
>> just so i'm clear, the mission may not be combat mission but there will be instances potentially where they are in combat situations. is that accurate? >> that is accurate. >> look, you don't have to be a dentist to see it was like pulling teeth to get the administration over the finish line, but to earnest's credit he finally did acknowledge what we have known for quite some time that u.s. forces are in fact engaged in combat and not just in the air by bombing raids. we talking about combat on the ground as you showed in the pictures and it's been that way for quite some what is behind te in the dis2k10 between the pentagon and the white house is clear. but to what end? combat is cot bam. don't have to be september mat tick. it's -- semantic. it's not a negative for the administration. i don't understand why that would be such a big deal. >> this is what really confuses so many people. if itself looks like combat and
people are dying out there it is combat, and yet the reluctance has to do with this notion that this administration had for quite some time, pledged to not put boots on the ground at the level we saw under the bush administration. not going to be in combat? now noh. but let's face facts. we're in war in a lot 0 of these situations and they don't want to label it that way. >> there's no truth to the rumor that your white house pass was not revoked. >> so fair can still get in and out of the building. >> thank you, buddy. now to john kirby, the state department spokesman. i never understand the battle over the words. i don't know to what end it matters when you say combat or not combat. and i want to play something for you from the democratic from hawai'i, she didn't get it either. listen to this. >> did he guy combat? we're not using those words.
>> yes. the simple answer is, yes. there's no other way around it. >> so what's the big deal? >> well, i agree with you, neil. i think we're worrying too much about parsing on words. what we said all along, and my prior capacity speaking for the pentagon, obviously american troops, some, were involved in combat operations in iraq and syria, when you are dropping bombs on an enemy, that's an act of combat. what we have always said and remains true today is that there's no mission of combat operations on the ground for troops in iraq or in syria. their job on the ground is largely training and advising and assisting. now in the conduct of that particular mission set, are they going to be exposed to combat operations and are they going to find themselves at risk? absolutely. what we have all along good even when i was being interviewed by you many, many months ago we talk about the fact the troops
have the right to have the responsibility to defendant. thes and if northeast be to defend our allies and partners on the ground when they have to. and that's what happened in this case. we're not -- it's not about whether it is or isn't combat. clearly sergeant wheeler died in an act of combat and we all share our pride in him and thoughts and condolences for the family. what hasn't changed is the central mission, to enable and partner with and to support the capabilities on the ground of indigenous forces in iraq, it's the iraqi security forces in syria it's the various moderate opposition groups and counter isil fights. >> you'll hear from those who criticize the administration. john mccain was saying this reluctance to use the term you just did, this administration has been known for pulling back from an area it never wanted to us be involved in. they've been consistent, and anything that hints of re-inserting ourselveses in the
the role, whether it's the 5500 troops in afghanistan, others in the region but if you're in a region with unfriendly folks, isn't it automatically a potential combat role and aren't we just overanalyzing it? >> i think -- i agree with you no empeople are overanalyzing this. clearly there's a combat role here for u.s. forces as they continue to launch, now more than 7,000 airstrikes against isil in breath iraq -- in both iraq and syria. what we're talking about here, though, and what we learned over now 14 years of counter-insir general si warfare in iraq and afghanistan, the best ante dote to tropic -- extremism on the ground sis indigenous forces that can sustain defeat over time for terrorists -- >> even -- by the way in republican and democratic administrations alike that's
been of scant success so i guess what i'm asking you, there is something to this notion that the way things are now, if you're looking for -- to truly take the battle to isis and you need either more men and women or weapon ricer that's just not in the cards and that for at least the next 15 months or so, get it out of people's mind. >> i beg to differ. the commander in chief has been very clear we'll intensify our efforts against ice until both iraq and syria, having these advisers on the ground in this rescue operation, and then making the decision, tactically to go ahead and put themselves at greater risk to assist their partners, i think is an example of how we're going to continue to intensify our efforts against isil, and both areas. but what really needs to happen for a sustained defeat hoff this group is good govern sentence in iraq -- >> good luck on that. >> that's why secretary kerris working so hard on this diplomatic track.
>> thank you very much. john kirby. >> now, you might have heard there was a debate last night. and maybe what you saw doesn't match quite what the media reported. we'll explain. phil! oh no... (under his breath) hey man! hey peter. (unenthusiastic) oh... ha ha ha! joanne? is that you? it's me... you don't look a day over 70. am i right? jingle jingle. if you're peter pan, you stay young forever. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. ♪ you make me feel so young... it's what you do. ♪ you make me feel ♪ so spring has sprung.
so, forget about the debate and the role of the questioners versus the question itch want to focus on how the media has since covered the big event. and depending on what publication you look at, they might have looked at it differently than you did because a lot of people felt that there was a media pileon and others felt that with the mainstream media reviews a. the fact it continued. did it? let's ask a democratic strategic. adriana, your take, not so much on what happened last night but the media reaction to what happened last night? what do you think? >> well, i think the big loser of the debate was cnbc, the moderators. they clearly engaged in media bias. no question. and they took a lot of heat for it today as the should there's no doubt. >> but i don't want to make this about cnbc. i want you to focus on the spin that it got today and throughout
the mainstream media that these candidates were the ones who botched it. that is was a sham. i think i'm getting to the gist. >> that is completely unfair. in my column today i said the big loser was cnbc moderators who engaged in media bias ump can count at least ten examples right now during theine -- >> these not what i'm talking about and i'll take a pope francis and sigh -- say, whom ato job. i'm asking you about what happened with the media coverage, because when see media coverage of democratic debates, like hillary, it's fawning, media coverage of republican debates. it ills not so much. not so much. what do you think? >> i think that we live in a partisan world. everyone has think echo chamber. with the internet everybody can speak to their you'dens andness publications can spin their
message one way and the others the other way so you have echo came chers are not speaking to each do. >> that's what not i'm asking. i'm look can at it and wondering, did they watch the statement debate -- the same debate? >> depends how you look it's. i don't think they did as poor his as people are saying. they asked tough questioned -- >> anytime not talking about the tough questions. i'm talking about whether there is a gap between how the media covers and reviews the republican debate versus democratic debate. >> i don't think so. >> maybe you can help me. that's where i find the distinction. >> yes. so, democrat hacks, media hacks, are going to say cnbc didn't do anything wrong think asked tough questions. people who are more neutral or right-leaning are going to defend the republicans and they were treated unfairly. we see that divide even in media. but there's no question if you look at some of the requests that were asked of those
candidates -- hillary clinton was not asked the requests, they were demeaning and belittling and asked certain questions with the attempt to discredit the presidential candidate. like donald trump for example. >> the questions -- >> i am begging you, if you start critiqueing the question i'm going to get rid of both our you. that is not interesting. what interests me i how it is reviewed and all i'm saying if you didn't watch the interview would you not know, whereas when i see democratic debates reviews, and i look through a behalf -- behalf of them with hillary clinton and barack obama and joe biden, and they were largely lincoln-douglas affairs, by and large. these ones with the republicans are like the clown car, and i'm just saying either both are clown cars or both lincoln
douglas but i think it's a little weird when we start parsing who are the real thespians and the great -- >> it's partisan nature of the reviewers. there are -- >> yes, hello. that's exactly what i'm saying. >> we -- >> that's not fair. >> i agree with you but that's the world we live in tonight. people only want to listen the commentary they want to hear so it'sen echo chamber. >> but journalist are supposed to be politically neutral and fair and balanced and the whole point doing this debate was to help republican voters at home talk about the substantive issues so they can help figure out which one of these candidates or stage, the 15 they want to vote for, but instead the candidates engage in putting candidates down, trying to discredit them -- >> well, let's not push. again you failed to -- you forgot your assignment. post debate.
nothing gained here. i'm not tout do that as much as i am the consistent theme after an event. republican event versus democratic event. if bogey going to be easy 0 to one side, be easy to one side. and cover it and critique it that way. when it's not done that way, it stands out. the tax plans that are everyone's -- for these candidates to say they will have the most aggressive tax cuts even if they're not revenue neutral, is that the new cool? after this. a dry mouth can be a common side effect. that's why there's biotene. it comes in oral rinse, spray or gel so there's moisturizing relief for everyone.
on a new set of wheels, then... wham! a minivan t-bones you. guess what: your insurance company will only give you 37-thousand to replace it. "depreciation" they claim. "how can my car depreciate before it's first oil change?" you ask. maybe the better question is, why do you have that insurance company? with liberty mutual new car replacement, we'll replace the full value of your car. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance. we're just learning that harry reid of the democratic leader of the senator is calling on marco rubio to resign phenomenon the senate because he has missed too many important votes which i find interesting because i don't remember harry reid saying that john kerry had
stepped down as a senator and a -- when he was running in 2004, he missed 61% of his votes, or obama running in 2007 and 2008 when he missed 32% of his votes and the year before missed 68%. bottom line is, on these cases, where democrats are running who served in the senate and missed far mary sloats as a percentage of their time, then marco rubio -- i don't remember those calls now. marco rubio, senator reid says, get outta here. here's something else to that caught our attention. the bat over tax cuts. take a listen. >> reducing taxes to 15% will bringing corporate taxes down. >> get rid of all the deductions and all the loopholes. >> a simple flat tax. >> only if it's about three pages are you revel leveling the
playing field. >> get rid of the payroll tax. >> the plans would cost trillions of dollars in debt. >> the back and forth had to do with who has the most aggressive tax code plan. charles payne favors the zero percent rate for everybody. so i'll start there. those making money -- your view is, better to be arguing over the size of tax cuts and more spend -- than more spending so you're okay with. >> i would love for someone to come if in with the spending side out bit the third rail. the idea that there mississippi be so-called rev enough neutral is almost -- it's a specious argue. elf that not where the problem is. i want to jump start the economy. it's a no-brainer the more money people have in their pockets the
more they'll spend. that's the way you spark the cycle. doesn't mean these guys can't mount another 18 trillion in debt. >> rand paul is the most honest help says, whether you agree or disagree, 14.5% tax rate for everybody. he didn't -- doesn't care if it's revenue neutral. the whole idea is to some rink the money going into washington and some rink the beast of government down. at least he is honest. these others are going through hoops, revenue neutral. won't be a problem. maybe they should be more like that. >> i agree a thousand percent. the idea of striking the beast down is apolitical. this is what this election is all about. certainly to this point has been about the size of washington, the dominance of washington this, money they tack from us, the control of off lives. that was on the stage over and over again. the tax foundation -- he is the only guy who put up a tax row pose sal that would bring money
in. we -- >> none of these plans are -- the reagan tax cuts, we were old enough to remember -- you did have deficits because youh[ sucd the revenue out but did create a reef knew boom that republicans and democrats alike spent. but it creates revenue. so, that not immediate. so how do these guys address the fact that short term at least they suck some money away from uncle sam. >> the idea we're having deficits anyway. but there will be a point where not only the deficits draw down, but american prosperity comes back. if you tell me that, i'm willing to buy it. i'm wide open to the allergy. and the american public is as well. >> thank you, my friend. >> charles payne. well, did you hear the one about
who can name the third president? and the largest planet? someone we haven't heard from. anyone else? when comcast offered low-cost high-speed internet to low-income families, more than two million hands went up. and pretty soon, so did everyone's in the classroom. ok, veronica. amphibian excellent! internet essentials from comcast. helping to bridge the digital divide. [female announcer] dsave up to $400 on beautyrest and posturepedic.n, get interest-free financing until 2018 on tempur-pedic. plus, helpful advice from the sleep experts.
don't miss mattress price wars at sleep train. who can name the third president? and the largest planet? someone we haven't heard from. anyone else? when comcast offered low-cost high-speed internet to low-income families, more than two million hands went up. and pretty soon, so did everyone's in the classroom. ok, veronica. amphibian excellent!
internet essentials from comcast. helping to bridge the digital divide. all right. the white house says our prisons are way overcrowded and wants to ease the pain and relieve those who are in there, incarcerated, shouldn't be in there. at least not for the amount of time they've been in there. so 6,000 are going to be let free. 2,000 of them are illegals. so sheriff paul beau from the fine state of arizona wants to make sure they're shipped back to wherever they came from sheriff, you have your concerns, right? >> well past practice is actually the best indicator of what's going to happen in the
future if anybody think that any of these illegals, what they're saying, they're promising they're going to turn them over to i.c.e. and deport them because of their severe criminal records, hows that that worked for us so far? it hasn't. flos chance of them being deported to their country of origin. this just another lie. these 6,000 today that are being released, all of them have been in prison for an average of nine years. they don't come out of a federal prison as better. and adding value to our community. so this total number that they're looking to free is 46,000. these are 46,000 criminals, making criminals the priority instead of our safety and our citizens. >> you're referring to 46,000 drug criminals added to the 67,000 criminal illegals the president has already released in the past two years. this is 6,000 more that are coming. i guess what i want to know is what is the procedure for that? do you know how many of these are your neck of the woods and
what you're obligated to do. if they're let go, are these illegals, forget about the others, whatever. these illegals are first and foremost, illegal. whatever crime they committed, they're illegal first and foremost. so presumably they would get shipped back. >> not just presumably. with the wave of the hand, remember the six-page memo that jeh johnson, the current secretary of the homeland security put out, deferred action. all of these people will fall under that. these people are not going anywhere. and so what do you think they're going to be doing when they're let out of prison. there is no enforcement of the law these false promises have been made in the past and we're living in the impact. released a murderer in my county from russia this guy stabbed a guy, poured fuel on him, lit him on fire, tortured him to his death and they released him in my county and let me know two weeks after they release ed him.
we're talking the small portion of illegals that are here, committing these heinous acts, murder, rape, kidnapping, a small portion. they should have no option, they should be deported to their country of origin, never to return again and the president can't even do that right. >> so what is your best option? you don't even get a heads up of who's coming your way, right? >> that's the reality of the situation. and this is not a democrat/republican issue. we have 15 elected sheriffs in my state. half of us are republican like me. and the other half are democrats. we stood together in unity. saying that this system is broken. and we pointed out, this isn't just illegals from mexico. we had a guy from sudan, from iraq, from russia, two of them convicted of murder and they're not going to their country. their only answer is they didn't have proper travel documents to get here and we can't prove
their citizenship. this is unacceptable. that's where the priority is them with the sentencing reform and not us. american citizens who are paying for it and then live in the impact and effect of the crimes that occur on our american citizens. and the president should meet with some of these victims as i have, moms and dads of some of these american citizens, who have been killed or murdered, he hasn't done this once. why doesn't he meet with them once, instead of to youring these prisons, putting the priority with sentencing reform. meet with victims, american citizens. >> thank you very much. >> we'll have more on this because these are the type of issues that are going to come up in probably the next debate. which you might have heard is going to be on fbn. [ female announcer ] if you don't think "i've still got it"
about it. after one debate, we've got another one coming up. less than two weeks on fbn. we thought we'd bring up things like business and economics. we thought it was a good idea. hope you watch. we'll see you on the 10th. hello, everyone, i'm eric bolling, along with kimberly guilfoyle, juan williams, melissa francis and greg gutfeld, it's 5:00 in new york city and this is "the five." the third gop debate went down last night. i might be uniquely qualified to say this to cnbc -- what the hell were you doing? i used to work there. the debate was bill as your money, your vote. but cnbc showed it can be as biased as the mother ship, nbc. the moderators focused not so much on the economy or money, more on fantasy football, comic books and gotcha moments, the candidates? let's just say they didn't appreciate the lefty leaning. >> the democrats have the