tv The First 100 Days FOX News March 23, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
that's all the time we have. "special report," especially dish and coming up with red bear right after this. "the first 100 days" hosted by martha maccallum starts right now. >> martha: breaking tonight in washington, it is so not pretty to see how the sausage is being made right now in washington. there are a lot of scraps on the floor, you could say, it is pretty messy, but in the end, we will have a new health care law or we want. sean spicer pretty confident earlier today. >> if they build is not past tonight -- >> it is going to pass. that's it. >> martha: now the vote is not passing and it is not tonight, in the last couple of hours, we had reince priebus and steve bannon rushing through the halls of capitol hill, huddling with speaker ryan, trying to figure out what to do next. the president at the white house has his sleeves rolled up.
he is working to get a artful deal put together in hopes that perhaps they can take another crack at this thing as soon as tomorrow. good evening, everybody. i'm martha maccallum. that is where we are. quite of excitement on day 63 of the first 100. we got our cameras on the hill. we will head there. first, our other huge story tonight, brenda fox news reporting on allegations that the obama administration may have effectively used the fbi and nsa to get inside information on the incoming trup team phd day, devin nunes said that he was not sorry that he revealed to the president new information that u.s. intel agencies may have surveilled communications involving members of the trump transition team, and then the intel agencies and perhaps the white house and the doj altered the rules to permit spreading that sensitive information so it could
essentially be gawked at by a wider circle of insiders. is that okay? here is chairman nunes in an interview that will air later tonight on "hannity." >> i will say that the dissemination was pretty far and wide, and like i said before, it appears to me that it was all legal. the question is, should it have been done in the first place? did it meet for an intelligence value. and secondly, or any other american names unmasked, and i have information that says that there were. >> martha: information that more names were unmasked. training me now, dr. charles krauthammer, fox news contributor. thank you for being here. we're sort of on date two of this particular chapter of this story, and devin nunes says basically that he is not sorry that he went ahead and share this information with the president. what do you think? >> i think he did make a mistake in the sequence of these revelations going to the press, than the white house, then to his committee.
in fact come up we hear from reports that in meeting with his committee today, he did actually offer an apology for not having told the committee first, which is what you would expect. the mainstream media have been harping on that as if that is the main story here. it's not. it's a sideshow of a sideshow of a sideshow. something he shouldn't have done. but the fact is that he saw something that disturbed him and that he thought ought to be revealed. the problem we had is that we don't know enough of the facts. we do know there is a charge against the trump administration that there was collusion with the russian campaign. there is an investigation of that. we also know it was trump's own charge of being wiretapped. for which there was no evidence, wiretapping of trump tower. now there is this third story.
which is nunes' charge that there was improper use of the information picked up legally and incidentally in the surveillance of foreign folks. which, of course, is allowed, which we do, but normally you are supposed to mask the names. his charge, and we would have known if there was one improper use of that in the surveilling and leaking up the name of general flynn. now, whether or not he acted properly or not is not the issue. but there seems to have been an abuse of the system here. the nunes charge, as you have shown in that clip, is that it was widespread and systematic. that is what he said. we need to see the evidence. but one it goes back to "the new york times" story, and in that story, it was revealed that they went to great lengths to open up the channels and make it easier for more people in a wider circle to see the
transcripts of conversations or the emails that the nsa has gotten their hands on. in that story, charles, the overwhelming feeling is that there were do-gooders, that is how they saw themselves, we have to make sure the country knows what the administration was up to. if we didn't leave these tea leaves and open these doors, it was all going to go away, and they would never know. that is a pretty big assumption to say, we are going to change these rules because we have decided that this is what is best for the american people. >> and there is a second problematic aspect which is the way the information was achieved in the first place. you are supposed to, when you are listening in on the foreign people, let's say ambassadors from other countries, and according to nunes, this is not russia. these are non-russian people. that's perfectly legitimate. when you pick up incidental americans, you are supposed to protect their identities.
the question is, where they are abusing statute by using the foreign is driving as an excuse, an avenue to get in, and that the real purpose was to listen in on americans. that's the larger charge. that would be a pretty big violation of what you're supposed to do. the lesser charge is, they overshot on flynn or perhaps they improperly unmasked the name of somebody else. but the question is, was there an intent to abuse the listening in on the foreigners as a way to get inside and improperly is the name on americans. and as you know, that's the one thing these agents are not supposed to do. in the absence of a court order, you don't go listening in on american citizens. >> martha: they are supposed to be apolitical. the report, the intelligence. that's the job. it is not to become a spy or to
trade information to an outgoing administration about an outgoing one. charles, thank you so much. joining me now is a former intel committee chair peter hoekstra who says that the bottom line here is that of chairman nunes is accurate and there were raw intelligence reports in the white house of intercepted american phone calls, that is unprecedented. democratic analyst also joining us and fox news contributor. pete, given what we know today, do you think that is what happened, and what is the motivation? why do they want to call, the word be used, at this information? the names peeled off, have a look at what was going on in this? >> i want to make a couple of points, martha. i want to correct charles a little bit. not only when given foreign intelligence is collected on americans, not only do the names have to be masked, but before
that information is ever shared throughout the community or the white house or wherever, there has to be a compelling reason for national security, for why this information has to leave. if you collect on americans, foreign intelligence agencies, that information should be deep-sixed and thus there is a compelling reason. if there is a compelling reason, you can share it, but it has to be masked. what it appears happened here, these transcripts were shared and went all the way to the white house, raw intelligence. in my ten years on the committee, i never saw raw intelligence. i only saw intelligence analysis. that is a huge breach of confidence. why? who knows. it's interesting. >> martha: and the person who has her job now says that when he saw this brief flow of information, he said he only saw about a dozen but there's a lot more, that it alarmed him. he found it alarming that our
intel agencies would be allowing this information and free flow. actually, what do you think? democrats in the past, including al franken, have complained about this 702 rule, that it can easily be misused and abused. >> there are two issues, we have late-breaking news this afternoon and early this evening that chairman nunes conceded that it may not even be that there were any trump transition members on these interceptions, that is may have even been as little as foreigners discussing the trump transition. >> martha: just to clarify, he's not sure -- what it seems to say, could have been phone calls, could have been emails. not sure how many people were grouped into those was the entrance but with god a long way to go on those. >> that detail is important. that means there were not trump transition people, maybe foreigners discussing the transition, which is a huge difference. this point was made really well in the washington journal today,
this has gotten so toxic on both sides that there is really no faith on either side that when or if the truth comes out it will, in fact cannot be the truth. and i think it is time for jim comey or whoever is, in fact, in charge of this operation -- coats but one that is a great question in and of itself. >> we need to fish or cut bait, unfair to trump administration to have this hanging over their head since july, apparently, but also unfair to the american people to have speculation on both sides without any clarifying answers. i think it is time that they come out with whatever they have. i understand there is an investigation going on. that is just not fair to the american people or, frankly, to him. >> martha: we need resolution. thank you so much, both of you. we'll continue to talk about this as it moves forward. breaking tonight, house republicans will be up late tonight, as in all night,
perhaps, as they scrambled to secure the votes needed to pass the health care bill. they may give it another go tomorrow, and we should find that out over the course of this evening. going to be joined by congressman adam consider. talk about how he's trying to convince his fellow members that this whole thing is a good idea, plus terrific news on the horrific rape case out of rockville, maryland, where there is no information. both illegals involved, so say the attorneys, our innocence. the latest when we come back. >> now come up with this policy, we say when our law enforcement arrests somebody, their hands will be tied as far as working with i.c.e. and federal authorities even if these are authorities even if these are terrorists, gang members,
say goodbye to slow downloads, slow backups, slow everything. comcast business offers blazing fast and reliable internet that's over 6 times faster than slow internet from the phone company. say hello to internet speeds up to 250 mbps. and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more a month. call today. comcast business. built for business. >> martha: breaking tonight, the vote of the house republican bill has been postponed on a day that was meant to have powerful meaning. obamacare's seventh birthday is today. instead, the battle over how this bill is going to go is continuing to rage as the president and his top advisors scrambled to get those books together on the floor. vice president pence saying moments ago that he believes both sides are making progress. that sort of a broad term but that's what he had to say on it.
right now, g.o.p. members unsur unsure, unsure what happens next would have this -- in this whole thing. >> not yet, that's why i believe the vote was postponed. if it doesn't happen tonight, we may have to wait until tomorrow or monday. >> the president has made great progress with individuals. we just need to make sure everybody is there and will be able to solve this problem. >> we are going to get to the finish line because the president is committed to getting to the finish line, moderates and conservatives are committed to getting to the finish line. >> martha: joining me now, congressman adam kinzinger, no doubt be burning the midnight oil, good to see her tonight, congressman. what is the mood there? >> well, everybody is interested, right? we are all waiting. we don't know exactly where the boat cart vote count is.
we want to move forward and follow through on the promises we made to the american people, and we've got a conference that is happening here very soon. we're going to probably talk about this. ultimately, we have to be able to get to yes. that's the difference between being in charge now versus being in the opposition party. voting though is easy. but governing and getting to yes is difficult, and we are all going to have to make that decision on our own. i hope we can get there. >> martha: the president was meeting with members of the tuesday group, it seems to me that they are trying to -- they sort of went a little bit toward the conservatives on this and made some of them happy but some of the moderates sort of fell off the front end of the raft and the water, right? >> again, the art of this is very difficult, as he made concessions to one group, another may be doesn't like it. the obamacare, democrats had the cornhusker kickback, the louisiana purchase, they loaded it up with earmarks. we don't do earmarks come i
don't have that option. it has to be on people's goodwill that this moves forward. i hope some of my friends and colleagues in the freedom caucus can get to yes. that's where we need to be. again, you'll never see a perfect bill, a danger of letting good become perfect, we need to move forward. >> martha: are we going to see a vote on this tomorrow? >> i hope so. i think there'll be more direction we have immediate staked out about it, i hope we can get it done tomorrow. move on to our next promises. >> martha: good to see her tonight. joining me now commend david mcintosh, president of the club for growth a , firmly agait this, -- conservative enough and repeals the heart of obamacare. good to have you both here. david, let me start with you, if
i were to bring or if the president were to bring, which might work better, rand paul into the room and paul ryan into the room and say, we are going to have a bill at the end of this conversation, what would it look like, and what would your side be willing to concede? >> yeah, i think the conservatives would say, at this point, if you simply make sure you put some provisions in there that will really reduce the cost of insurance, that's the core of the promise they have made in four elections to get rid of obamacare. and paul ryan keeps saying, i don't want to do that. he kind of says the senate can't, but the house can, and he is in charge of the house. the way you do that, you reveal the obamacare regulations, then you require insurance companies to compete nationwide, one of president trump's key promises lester in the campaign. i think they are getting close if they can just get to the point where they can keep those
last two promises, i think you'll see it. >> martha: doug, what do you think about that? >> i think there are two problems. cbo has already scored the bill as reducing premiums, down 10% at the end of the decade, and -- >> but they are doubled. small amounts. that's hardly anything. >> that is an artifact of the fact that the cbo is using all data, it doesn't have anywhere in this analysis, sought in the third year, if you compared to 2017 numbers, the numbers are down. this is a nonissue. the other thing is, everything david said requires 60 votes in the senate, you're not going to get 60 votes in the senate. a nice fantasy, but not the vote they have to take, and the boat they have to take is one way this bill, which repeals the taxes, the greatest entitlement reform this country has ever seen, relies on and individual
freedom, it does all of those things and is a great step toward a better place. it serves the american people who are trapped in these obamacare system and an underperforming medicare system. >> martha: seems like there is a lot of competition between the house and the senate. already saying, forget it. you guys do it you want. if you want to bring it over, we're going to basically start from scratch. you would like to see the repeal passed in the house and then begin the replaced part in the senate? is that right? >> i think if they totally repeal it and replace it with what they have in the house, conservatives would like that. i don't think they have to do a two-part bill. the house isn't constrained by the same rules. the parliamentarian actually telling some senders -- i saw a tweet from one of them -- no, i haven't made a ruling yet on whether we can get rid of those regulations. pass it in the house and take it to the senate and see what you can get paid by the way, those
regulations that they are leaving in are responsible for 40%, 50% of the increase due to the obamacare. so they are leaving in the big increases that everybody is paying for, and it is disingenuous to say, well, they are going down a little bit but in a couple years they will start up again. suppose we talked to a roomful of people in north carolina last night, i asked them, do you like the paul ryan version art rand paul version. a couple of hands for each one. i said, do you really not understand what this is about and how it is going to affect you? pretty much every hand in the room went up. it's really heartbreaking. very difficult, i think, for people to wrap their arms around. number one, they want the costs to go down and want more choice, right? doug, can you promise them with this bill that exists, the paul ryan bill, for lack of a better term, that they will be able to have both of those things? their costs will go down? they will feel it, see the difference, and have more
choice? >> i think that is absolutely right. some of the research done by a nonpartisan group shows immediate premium reductions from this. we have seen the ability of the states to take over a lot of the regulation, gives us a lot more flexibility and choice for individuals. and i have little doubt about that. i think there is a fantastic future. the issue in the kinds of things being posed is, they want to have it both ways, senate one way, they want the vote they want. in the end, the house and senate have to vote on the same bill. have to stretch from the freedom caucus to susan collins. >> i think you have to start with the assumption that you're going to have a bill and get there from there. we've got to go. thank you very much, good to see both of you tonight. also tonight, the death toll in the london terror attack rising at this hour. we are learning more now about the suspected killer and his very troubled past. i had come out we are going to take you to london live for the latest on that.
various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide. these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here.
>> martha: developing tonight, the confirmation hearings for supreme court nominee judge neil gorsuch wrapping up today after four days of hearings, the senate judiciary committee will hold their vote and send a decision to the full senate floor. senate minority leader chuck schumer has already pledged that he will take the extraordinary step of filibustering the vote of this nominee who has had broad support. >> eyes say if this nominee cannot earn 60 votes, a part met by each of president obama's nominees and george bush's last two nominees, the answer isn't change the rules. it is to change the nominee. >> martha: here now, karl rove, a fox news political contributor, juan williams, cohost of "the five." are we really in a place where someone like neil gorsuch, good
democrats, i think everyone would have to admit, scrambling to sort of find something that they could pin on him. in most cases, he ran circles around them, that they cannot come to a vote on this individual, juan? >> i think the real issue here is merrick garland and the fact that republicans blocked president obama from advancing a nominee to the court for almost a year. there is a big, you know, problem, something is mysteriously missing in the roo room, you see even people who i would describe as moderates >> martha: let me ask you one thing. >> let me finish my point. >> martha: in washington, if you look at something and you think it is egregious, your response is to do the same thin thing? isn't that sort of eighth grade? >> not in the current washington where there is so much current political paralysis to the point of dysfunction.
i think what you're asking is that democrats would lay down and say, you know what, we understand what republicans did over the course of the last year and denying merrick garland the opportunity to meet was wrong, but we are not going to say that two wrongs make a right. but in this current situation where you have donald trump in the white house, where it is all about wiretaps, collusion, all that, that that person should then immediately step in and be given the opportunity to nominate a supreme court justice, i think that is why you had even moderate democrats like even bob casey of pennsylvania saying they will filibuster. >> martha: i think the american people across the country look at that and they say, gee, if we ran our lives that way, we would be in pretty big trouble. if you have to overlook a person who is obviously qualified for the job, karl, and you're going to bring in every other dirty issue and pin it on this guy to make yourself feel better,
that's not really where we want to be. >> let's put this in perspective. we have the vice president of the united states when he was in the united states senate, george biden, say that george w. bush should not be allowed to nominate a replacement to the supreme court in his last year in the presidency. we have a democrat minority leader, chuck schumer, say in july of 2007, a year and a half before the end of george w. bush's time in office, that he should not be allowed to propose that have accepted by this senate a nominee for the supreme court. so they set the rules. the rules were, for the last 80 years, no president has been able to nominate in the last year of their term in office. now we get to this very able individual, and we have seen three days of unserious questions by the democrats. i've been astonished. dianne feinstein, the ranking
democrat, normally a reasonable person, said, and i'll quote her here, you have been very much able to avoid specificity like no one i have seen before. that is by repressed and press and press. i looked at what she asked in 1993 to ruth bader ginsburg, and they didn't ask specific questions. she said, don't even bother asking me specific questions. >> martha: that is how the game is played now. now, apparently, the game is played to the point where you have to have the right house and senate if you want to get someone through. it makes me think, juan, you don't need hearings anymore. >> quickly commit the key point here is commit the court has become so politicized, martha, everybody knows this is about republicans wanting somebody who will support their point of view and not democrats who will support another point of view. quickly, in response to karl, i seem to member that not anthony kennedy was nominated and confirmed in the last year.
>> no, he was nominated a year and a half before president reagan left office, confirmed five days. >> obviously, and the final year. >> martha: thank you, juan, thank you commit karl. we are learning more details tonight about a very disturbing story. it is any alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl and rockville, maryland. the case is sparking a lot of debate about immigration, the loopholes that allowed these two young men to be here. we'll take you there for the very latest information that we have learned tonight in this case. thus, the death toll is rising after the terror attack near the british parliament, terror scare in belgium now has all of europe on high alert. we'll discuss next. >> we are not afraid and our results will never waver in the fa
>> martha: we have no details emerging about the suspect and yesterday's deadly terror attack near the british parliament in london. the alleged terrorist killed four people including an american man from utah, kurt cochran. isis has now claimed responsibility as we learned that the suspect had a history with law enforcement. foreign affairs correspondent benjamin hall joins us. sitting on edge after the terror sweep last night. good evening to you. >> good evening, martha. less than 24 hours after this brutal attack on westminster bridge, where it first started, it was already opened again. a clear sign from the u.k. government that they would not be brought to their knees by terrorists. as you say, we are learning more about the attacker himself. his name was khalid masood. he was 52 years old, and he was born in britain, and had a spate of prior arrests, possession of weapons and assault. he had also, tellingly, been
under investigation for extreme and extremism. today commit seven arrests carried out in london, more principally, birmingham. masood is believed to come from there. memories of yesterday's attacks are still strong. four people are now dead and six remained in critical condition. the victims came from 11 different countries, germany, china, south korea, ireland, greece, as you said, also among them, an american. kurt cochran was 54, he ran a recording studio business and he was visiting london to visit the 25th wedding anniversary. she remains in critical condition. condolences coming from around the world. this is seen not only as an attack on the u.k. parliament but also an attack on western values in general. martha? >> martha: been, another story this afternoon about a possible suspicious finding in antwerp.
but can you tell us about that? >> a very similar kind of attack to the one we saw here, fortunately foiled. a tunisian man was driving his car at high speed into a shopping center, shopping street. he was stopped by the military, but they found in the trunk of his car weapons, military uniform, and a gas canister full of suspicious liquid. it does seem as though another terror attack was averted there, and it does seem as though isis are using vehicles more and more. it has become their favorite sort of weapon because it is so hard to find a defense against it. >> martha: benjamin hall, thank you very much. joining me know, lieutenant colonel tony shaffer, senior fellow at the london center for policy research, and a former islamic extremist and author of "radical, my journey out of islamist extremism." good to have you both here. let me start with you. when you listen to the details of this story, what strikes you the most about what we need to be concerned about here.
>> unfortunately, as we just heard commit these sorts of attacks are going to be coming extremely common and difficult to predict and stop. what we do know is predictable pattern would exist in both of them, not just a random vehicle being used to attack people. we also know that these extremists will seek to pick out high propaganda targets, they seek to attack police officers, as has happened here. and we have to acknowledge the loss of life of everyone, also of a very brave police officer. finally, understand that because we can't predict them, the long-term solution is going to have to be building community resilience within muslim communities who have to start speaking out against this sort of poisonous, extremist rhetori rhetoric. >> martha: there was a woman who was on with tucker carlson last night, a british author, and she has been criticized because she has spoken out
against multiculturalism. she said that this idea that london comes together as a city after something like this is not true, that there are such distinct sections of the city where people continue to live within their own culture, that the cultures are not lending. do you agree? >> it the way that multiculturalism was in fermented in the united kingdom and the '90s is largely responsible for the polarization and self segregation and immobility in britain and across europe. we muslims are disproportionately represented in prisons, underemployed, and we are suffering to progress and get ahead and advance due to some of those policies. as someone who identifies as a liberal, perfectly consistent to speak out against this. let me give you one example. lived in birmingham. one in ten attackers in birmingham, one in ten attackers from across the u.k., purchased five wards in the city of
birmingham. if that's what multiculturalism has produced, i'm sorry, something has gone wrong in regard to address it. >> martha: what do you think? >> i agree, we've got to look at the root of this. you can take guns away, take explosives away, but this violent attitude will find whatever weapon is available. it is a cultural issue. that may be clear on this, we have faced here before. my first operations in europe, chasing a group called the red army group, the ref, which was a terror group funded by the russians as part of the effort against us. we need to look at how we defeated that sort of thing back during the cold war. we talked about, as part of brexit, asked nader to start working on this, then we have to work with people like the presis said, islam must give up violence as part of its faith. it is counterproductive. i think we have to work both at the tactical level to figure out what targets they are going to
go after, how we could good counterterrorism, this can be done. but at the same time, you have to change the culture. putting things together like in birmingham -- by the way, i work with good muslims in birmingham, a group called the association of british muslims, formed in the late 19th century, works to try to counter this. we have folks we have to work with in the community to take the violence out of the message. >> martha: will leave it there, our thoughts and prayers with kurt cochran's family tonight, the american who was killed in that attack in that beautiful spot on westminster bridge were so many people wanted to visit, as he did come up with his wife. up next to my attentions running high in maryland tonight after new details from the alleged rape at brockville high school as this case continues to emerge. doug mckelway joins us with brand-new information, and katie pavlich and michelle here to
he has said basically, he is a master negotiator, he has been working this very hard, been extremely involved in this process, but he says he is done and devote will be tomorrow. we will keep you posted on new developments paid also tonight, new outrage over a case we have been bringing you all week, the alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl. they are growing demands for answers as to why these two suspects who reports suggest were both illegal immigrants were allowed not only to remain in the united states but to enroll as freshmen in a public high school. but even amid all of the controversy surrounding this, some lawmakers there have been pushing legislation to make maryland a sanctuary state. foxes doug mckelway joins us with the details tonight. hi, doug. >> tonight we are at the montgomery county detention center where earlier this afternoon, the defense attorney for one of the accused, 18-year-old henry sanchez, had his first ever face-to-face meeting with his client.
in an exclusive television interview with us, the lawyer, rated as one of the top 100 maryland attorney speight super lawyer magazine, described that first ever meeting with the man who has become a focal point over the immigration battle in the united states. >> we talked about the case, the facts, his background, how he got here come up with his defenses are, and how he got here as a person. he is a humble, soft-spoken guy who fled a lot of gang violence in his country, talked about his trek through guatemala and mexico, talked about his detention with i.c.e., talked about how i see chose to let him go. >> jezic also told us he feels his client is innocent of all charges. they plan to fight the charges and he believes they will be acquitted. >> the physical evidence is not there. there are no scratches, no bruises, there is no injuries like that. also, this is a bathroom in the middle of the day where it doesn't appear that she was screaming or anybody heard
anything going on. >> that is a confident pronouncement, met with a very swift rebuttal earlier today. >> there is physical evidence of a rape and assault, very clear that there was no consent in this whatsoever. >> when asked why sanchez is not being charged with statutory rate, as he is 18 and the victim in this case was 14 years old, maryland has a unique law that requires a minimum separation of age of four years, in this particular case, it was just under that, three years and some months, meaning it doesn't means make meets new make maryland statutory requirements. >> martha: katie pavlich and michele jawando, legal progress vp, good to have both of you here tonight. michelle, let me start with you. what do you say to those who say, regardless of the legal
outcome in this case, these two young men do not belong in this school? they are too old to be freshmen in the public high school and they are illegal in this country. >> i will say this, as a montgomery county resident, as someone who is living in this community every day and raising young girls, i first have to say that the allegations of what happened are heinous. we'll start there. but i will tell you, the u.s. constitution prohibits the ability of anyone who would like to attend a public school, prohibited in a 1982 decision, from inquiring about your status, your immigration status, and allows everyone access to public education. that is what our constitution says. so it is a horrible, horrible circumstance, let me start with that, but it is important to recognize what the constitution says on this issue. >> martha: it katie?
>> the supreme court doesn't say it, a supreme court precedent does. but this idea that marilyn saying they want to be a sanctuary state four days later after this horrific incident after two young men, not children like the fortino victim is, from very violent countries like guatemala and el salvador, where they have a very serious ms-13 gang problem, been put in our system using public school resources and enrolled as freshmen in order to learn english as adults is absurd, ridiculous, and a public risk, as we have seen. they should have never been in the country. the local authorities, who refused to participate with i.c.e. to make sure the retainer was held on them, i.c.e. letting them go in the first place under obama's catch and release program, all of that has to change. if you look at the comments that were made by the parents who attended the superintendent meeting on tuesday night, a number of them saying, look,
we're happy to take our kids out of the schools because we feel like they are unsafe. the idea that we have illegal alien young men using our public school system from very violent countries where they have no fighting on their criminal history before they came here, it has to stop, putting people in danger. >> martha: michelle, what do you say to those parents. >> >> a few things paid i am apparent in montgomery county. i will tell you first and foremost that the law in maryland, local, federal, and state, it makes it clear, if you are between the ages of 13 and 21, you have a right and an opportunity to attend public schools in montgomery county. that is the law. secondly, there is no prohibition on working with i.c.e. i will make it known over and over. there is no prohibition on law cooperation with officials. let me highlight this. this is a sexual assault issue.
i worked on sexual assaults on a bipartisan basis in the senate. let's talk about that. let's do it together. we can make that happen. this is that kind of issue. >> martha: well, it's both issues. good i'm only in my 60's. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him.
[ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel - and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide.
♪ >> martha: poor little bill, setting on capitol hill and hoping to make his way to become analog. that is our quote of the night. will it happen? a lot of developments. mick mulvaney has just said there will be a vote tomorrow. apparently the boss, president trump, has said he would like to see a vote on
this. kevin mccarthy also chimed in and said that is his belief as well. we will be with you tomorrow to see what happens. we'll see if that little bill on capitol hill it fin its way up to being a law. have a great night, everybody, o'reilly is up next. we'll see you here tomorrow. ♪ >> hi, i'm eric bolling and for bill o'reilly. let's get straight to our top story. a wild day in washington over health care, a vote for the republican plan scheduled for tonight has been canceled due to a shortfall of support, leading mike leaving g.o.p. lawmakers scrambling to get more support behind it. joining us with reaction, sean spicer. let's get right to the news that literally came across the wires a couple of moments ago. it says that the boss, the president, is demanding a vote tomorrow, friday, on the health care law. >> my