tv Cavuto Coast to Coast FOX Business July 20, 2017 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT
stuart: a prison you would like me to buy for you. ashley: a list of the top 10, we go from there. stuart: why is the market selling stuart: neil, it is yours. neil: you know, ashley, he no more going to buy you a birthday gift unless it has coupons. by the way, i love, love your show. i love you to death. i'm catching interview with tomi lahren is it? reguileing when you and lou dobbs were at cnn didn't she seem fascinated? she bottom into it. stuart: she was fascinated. neil: it was like grandpa telling a story. i love it, looking at you, yeah. what? [laughter] stuart: are you done? neil: i am. stuart: do you have a show? neil: i have a few spare
moments. not even my birthday. felt it was a birthday present for me. stuart: you don't look 39. neil: i'm a long way from that. many years about i get to 39. happy birthday, ashley. stuart, thank you very, very much. we're on top of same things that stuart and ashley and lizzie were on again. all eyes what we'll get going on tax reform here or tax cuts. as stuart indicated one of the things happen, phenomenon building, sense of diminished expectations. that might not be justified. whatever is going on is taking a lot of momentum for big tax cuts away. gets further pushed back, offer something on corporate front as charlie gasparino reported would be welcome news on corner of wall and broad. we'll ski. house ways and means committee member, crucial voice in this
battle, republican congressman mike kelly. always good to have you you. am i right to interpret things that way? diminished expectations maybe big tax cuts, sweeping reform is pushed back, if at all maybe corporate tax cuts in the offing, maybe just that for 2017? >> i think you're basing your opinions and stuff on what we actually see happening. neil, i'm with you, weç talked about this before, coming from the private sector you can't accept this type of behavior or slow pace. you pivot quickly or you lose market share. for news ways and means, stay focused, pro-growth tax reform in way of makes sense. real lead will come out pro the white us, the same way president reagan did in '86, something bipartisan. i'm so sick and tired we can't do it right now of the rest of the world will not wait for us. you can't continue to lose the base market think it will be all
right. it doesn't make any sense to me. i'm from the private sector. i would not run a business $20 trillion in the red, okay to have deficit spending and more deficit spending. we're okay, because if we can't race it in taxes we'll print it. neil: i understand that. maybe disavow my concerns, congressman. later this fall is when speaker ryan says you start getting serious about a tax package. i assume what he means by launching one, voting and approving one. odds of that being retro active, i think are nil. this could be wrong but looking at 28 -- 2018 development. >> we have president in the
white house dawes because he is a get it done guy. he got elected not as republican but a strong american that wants too get things done. neil: should he get more involved? >> absolutely. neil: a lot of criticism of the president, that he didn't get really involved until it was too late. >> i'm on board with you. i have great faith in him. his leadership is most important piece. should he get involved? absolutely. they're involved every day. my understanding a lot of meetings take place ever day, speaker ryan, chairman brady go to the white house, they meet with their colleagues in the senate and meet with white house folks but i keep going back to who president trump is. he can not accept this type after model. he will pull it out of the ditch, enough screwing around. get it fixed, get it done. we're too far behind. the mantra in korea, in 1949, 1950, the leadership in south korea, hurry up, hurry up, we're too far behind. united states needs to understand we're in that same
situation. hurry up, we're too far behind. i'm sick and tired sitting in legislature there is no end, that finishes things at. in my life you work against a calendar or clock, if you don't get it done the ship sails without you. he will take a strong stanes. believe me this guy will take control get it done. it may not be all republicans get it done. never happened that way in the past. why should it happened that way in future. need bipartisan agreement, move forward, give relief to the american people. i'm concerned about the corporate tax yet. that is only 10, 11% of our total revenue. i'm concerned about 80 or 90% revenue produced by hard-working american men and women go to work ever day. neil: could you live, congressman, finding agreement on these issues is proving thornier than health care thing, but could you live with corporate tax relief this year and individual rates addressed next year. >> you know what?
i'm looking for forward progress right now. could i live wit in the interim? yes. let's get that done. i want personal income tax to be taken care of too. the biggest issue i have myself as business person, i expect to pay taxes when i'm profitable. all the wage taxes come from people who work and people who employ them. that is fine. we have people hurting around this country. if we can't get people's take-home pay to start to increase again, then we're really missing the boat. it is take-home pay that is important to every man and woman in america now. we talk in lofty terse. makes no sense to them. when you talk about take-home pay they get that. their take-home pay is determined by taxes. neil: urgency is right. >> got to be. neil: are you bitter with your senate colleagues, they dropped the ball on the health care thing, maybe for perfectly justifiable reasons but are you angry with them. >> not so much that i am angry. kind of consistent. i would like to think, you and i had this conversation before, if we don't get more people from
the private sector coming for and serving we can't get these things fixed. if you worried about the political future than the people you represent you have this mixed up, cart before the horse. i'm so concerned right now people placed their well-being, some case not all ahead of the concerns that of people we represent. those are people that sent us here to represent them. that is my main concern. pennsylvania third congressional district, every single district we have to respond to. that is who we're responsible to, neil. that is why they sent us. get it done. neil: you're right about all of the above. congressman kelly, good seeing you. >> thank you, neil. neil: we have white house correspondent eric mcpike. we hear a lot of talk like that where there is frustration from republican what is is going on here and slogging they're going through. many in the house pointing fingers to a senate that they argue dropped the ball. how serious are those differences and that anger right
now? >> i think pretty serious. look you're hearing senators say again they will try health care a third time this week after it died twice this week. neil: what makes them think, erin, they have any better luck for the umteenth time? >> that is the biggest question of all, right? if you're hearing a big ground well to move to tax reform, why don't they just do it, as opposed to try to resuscitate health care reform again. neil, you and i talked a number of times how the president said he has a tax reform plan coming. here it is july 20th. we haven't seen it. if they think they can do something on tax reform, where is the sustained plan, sort of a long term push, laying out details, not just floating a couple of numbers, really laying out a plan, doing a number of events, actual rolling something out in a sustained fashion? if they want to get tax reform done, you would think they would have a coordinated push to try to do that and roll it out in really organized way. neil: i believe these kind of
things start with the president. i'm old enough to remember when ronald reagan came in and this t was big thing for his presidency. it was disrupted by the assassination attempt. he wasç focused like a laser bm when he was well enough to walk around and initiate. he was aware of tax cuts, who he had to woo, unconcluding southern democrats at the time known as bo weevils than anyone else in his cabinet. he was leading the charge, do you see this president doing the same or ready to do the same? is it too late to do that? >> it is never too late, right? we're six months n he definitely has plenty of time. talking to "the new york times" and talking about jeff sessions all these other things i don't think helps the cause. neil: why did he do that by the way? to your point, that has nothing to do with the agenda at hand? >> i wish i knew. neil, i don't know why he did that. seems like that took his eye off the ball.
he could talk to the "new york times," why not lay out plan for tax reform? why not lay out -- neil: bingo. >> he has small legislative team. they're still focused resuscitating health care reform. you would think they redeploy the legislative team to get tax reform. neil: i'm peppering you with lot of silly questions. that amazed me, you would think going to the well so many times, not getting as fraction of a bucket, you would drop the bucket and move on but they're not. must be someone telling the president, you know what you said the other day about letting obamacare implode on its own and lay it on the democrats, that is not good. >> cannot let go. neil: so what is behind that strategy? because it seems to be you know, just a foolish strategy but again i'm here and you're there? >> neil, you know i think if i knew the answer to the white house strategy, my, i mean, i would think i would be much more successful if anybody
could figure this out. neil: i find that hard to believe. >> look, i think also you're hearing the white house talk about infrastructure. where is that going? president trump has held a number of meetings on infrastructure reform but there is absolutely no movement on that particular issue on capitol hill. that would be another very popular issue, especially with his base, throughout the country. there is just no movement. i can't explain why the president keeps going on and on about health care reform, some of these other issues. it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. neil: erin, i will say this, the president is very good at rallying the troops. he is very persuasive when he wants to be, but you have to be consistently persuasive. if this is his sweet spot, comfortable and tax related matters, giverren the business background he knows this in and out, go with your strength. pound with your strength. for the life of me i, first got
"new york times" interview and about jeff sessions dumping about him and no one is talking about these tax initiatives. >> he does like to get out of the country. to understand why he is is not getting out there more, not just holding rallies, but holding business roundtable meetings throughout the country. neil: absolutely. >> where he connects with people. you would think he would do more of that. maybe we'll see some later this summer but that remains to be seen. neil: you're right. erin, great reads as always. independent journal review white house correspondent. good to see you. >> you too. neil: what erin was saying about jeff sessions thing. jeff sessions whatever you think of him as attorney general has been a loyal friend to the president and president throws him under the bus in interview with "new york times." he is free to do that, this is one of his most loyal lieutenants, he is more or less saying, you disappoint me. the guy has to come up on tv
saying i am still saying in my job. he did not say a word, one word about his boss. trouble? after this ♪ potsch: you each drive a ford pickup, right? (in unison) russ, leland, gary: yes. gary: i have a ford f-150. michael: i've always been a ford guy. potsch: then i have a real treat for you today. michael: awesome. potsch: i'm going to show you a next generation pickup.
michael: let's do this. potsch: this new truck now has a cornerstep built right into the bumper. gary: super cool. potsch: the bed is made of high-strength steel, which is less susceptible to punctures than aluminum. jim: aluminum is great for a lot of things, but maybe not the bed of a truck. potsch: and best of all, this new truck is actually- gary: (all laughing) oh my... potsch: the current chevy silverado. gary: i'm speechless. gary: this puts my ford truck to shame. james: i'll tell you, i might be a chevy guy now. (laughing)
so we need tablets installed... with the menu app ready to roll. in 12 weeks. yeah. ♪ ♪ the world of fast food is being changed by faster networks. ♪ ♪ data, applications, customer experience. ♪ ♪ which is why comcast business delivers consistent network performance and speed across all your locations. fast connections everywhere. that's how you outmaneuver. so new touch screens... and biometrics. in 574 branches. all done by... yesterday. ♪ ♪ banks aren't just undergoing a face lift. they're undergoing a transformation. a data fueled, security driven shift in applications and customer experience. which is why comcast business delivers consistent network performance and speed
across all your locations. hello, mr. deets. every branch running like headquarters. that's how you outmaneuver. >> essentials should have never recused himself and if he was going to recuse him self, he should have told me before he took the job sandy would have picked somebody else. that is extremely unfair, a mild word to the president. neil: he will not let go. maybe that is justifiable. his comments perfectly justifiable. his frustration then and now justifiable. it is what it is, if you don't like jeff sessions fire the guy, put him in embarrassing position jeff session had to say i'm sticking around. didn't make a reference to the president. i know they talked. this comes at a time when a lot of republicans want to focus on taxes and all that it is getting in the way. this is with the "new york
times." fox business's blake burman with the latest dust-up on all this. blake, what are you hearing? reporter: timing on this was very interesting. those comments president trump, "new york times" interview came directly after he dressed down republicans on health care, when he brought cameras in, hey look, get some things done here. he lit into senate republicans. goss into the oval office. makes comment about jeff sessions which he says he is unhappy. if he had known now what, if he knew now what he had known then he wouldn't have hired the guy. jeff sessions was involved with a news conference here in washington today on an issue completely not related to any of this. a bit of fortuitous timing for us covering the story. couple questions were posed to sessions about all of this, and sessions said this morning that he is not going anywhere anytime soon. >> i have the honor of serving as attorney general. it is something that goes beyond
any thought i would have ever had for myself. we love this job. we love this department. and i plan to continue to do so as long as that is appropriate. reporter: in that "new york times" article the president also questioned the number two at the department of justice, rod rosenstein, questioning where he lives. the president saying quoting here, he says there are very few republicans in baltimore, if any, like his boss sessions, earlier today, rosenstein gave the company line. >> proud to be here yesterday. proud to be here today. i'm proud to work here tomorrow. we're spending every minute working to advance the interests of the department. reporter: both of these men, neil, number one, number two at doj, you heard this phrase before, they serve at the pleasure of the president. clearly at least yesterday, this was a president very displeased with the doj. neil? neil: man, oh, man, i don't get it, mike. i don't get it. you're closer to this fire than
i will ever be. blake burman doing great work in washington. this is my opinion, folks, you stand by your friends. look at those that look after you. they put a lot on the line for you, mr. president. they're your team. save it for the folks who again whenly do hate you, want to run you out of town. these guys are your guys. you demand loyalty of them. it works other way around. that is my opinion. you hear from this on the right and left. this is bipartisan feeling. it is called being a good human being! speaking of good human beings, my buddy charlie gasparino. this is nuts, charlie. this is nuts. >> listen to it is more surreal, when i read the story in "new york times." it wasn't much of a scoop. he laid it a awe all out. neil: he scoop is he can't let it go. >> he was more vehement. neil: never would have appointed in the first place. >> i thought, i had to do a double-take i thought i was
reading the onion, you know the pair row he did i? it was so bizarre. starts attacking one of his most loyal soldiers. goes after comey in some bizarre way. goes after rosenstein because he is a, from baltimore. neil: he put both of them on the spot. they have to justify your remarks. >> when, and then muller, mueller shouldn't be going into his finances. neil: that was the takeaway big news item. >> when he did that, broke on bloomberg mueller is looking at his finances. the dow took a dip. down 70 points, maybe more. i got to check. neil: i thought that was takeaway news story, not regurgitating old rifts, i will say this, because come up again and again, his frustration with congress when something doesn't happen, maybe justified. anger at senators when they can't get together on approach. but a lot of blaming for things that go on you could argue that
he is a very forceful spokesperson for whatever cause he wants. he could be out there non-stop doing it. that's what bugs me. >> yeah, scary thing about this, is that we, you and i both know, he has a good fiscal agenda, really good one. what we believe, this is our opinion now is needed to get the economy growing. neil: something that -- >> why is that important? not to make rich people rich. not to just make the markets go up. economy growing at 2.5% average, wages go up, average people make more money. neil: that should be the focus. tax thing is slipping away. >> deficit goes down. 2 1/2% growth pays back deficit. this is important stuff. way to get there,ç more free market stuff, ken is syians and president obama thought it was spending. neil: you're right, charlie. this is not the basic business view. the more money you put in
peoples hands the better off every within is. now what i think the president is missing is that gut, portion of him, that business acumen, that skillset, knowledge base he has, that is his sweet spot and his comfort zone. i worry when he gets distracted on other stuff. it is worse than tweeting. move on! >> crazy town. here is what i will tell you, there are two schools of thoughts from my sources, take it for what it is worth. they're rich guys. neil: have you ever talked to a poor person? >> yes. i was once poor. i talk to myself. neil: excellent. >> one is that, as long as he passes tax cuts, you know who cares what he says. he will get the economy rolling everything will be hunky-dory, can be crazy as he wants. neil: i don't know if that is such a slam-dunk this year. >> i just tell you if we get the corporate tax cut we're all good. the second line of thought, pretty smart people are republicans, that support candidates, they say, i don't know how much more i can deal
with this sort of stuff. because that interview today, with the "times," was so nutty. neil: if i'm jeff sessions i resign today. i would. >> i don't know why you need the job? why would you work for a boss like this? neil: no job is worth demeaning grief. >> i know donald trump. i like him. i don't know if i can take like that. neil: by the way, presidents are free, they have been of both parties free to rip their top lieutenants and their staff members. >> have you ever heard it like this though? neil: never, never. if they do it in private, some presidents who had very calm demeanor we're told privately had quite a nasty temper, bill clinton comes to mind, jfk comes to mind. >> of course. neil: there are rare moments ronald reagan would show his irish but never in public. idea never let them see you sweat. certainly don't throw your own team under the bus. this is not a way to instill loyalty. >> i don't know how you have four years of this. neil: no. you can't do this and can't keep
a team. >> just, it is just really, i'm telling you, i was blown away by that interview. i don't know why he had to do it with the "new york times." "new york times" will not do any good. neil: this interview was scheduled for a long time. >> think who you had in there? those reporters, from what i understand, asked like simple questions, what you do you think about jeff sessions they thought he would dance around it. they couldn't believe what they were hearing, i'm sure. thank you, buddy, very, very much. i know hear from people say i'm globalist. >> you are such a globalist. neil: i thought they were talking about my waistline. the fact of the matter this is no way to lead. keep your friends pretty close. i understand about the idea of keeping your enemies closer but right now, when you make your friends the enemies no one will get close to you. they will get frustrated. these are the guys have your back, doing and carrying a lot of issues controversial to them, controversial to you. so if you wan to see your very
promises economic agenda implode, keep doing it. we'll have more after this. r'. last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. at&t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques. remote moisture sensors use a reliable network to tell them when and where to water. so that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. china. oh ... he got there. that's the power of and.
>> we take an oath to protect and defend, whatever the mission is, whatever we need as president kennedy said, fight any foe. but that is not the point of this. this is supposed to be a budget that prevents the spread of violence, instead they have a budget that stirs it up. neil: is she honestly comparing fighting any foe and a budget that john kennedy had in his first year of $60 billion, with one today north of $4 trillion, that not enough money is being spent -- fine. to retired army lieutenant-general thomas bor-f. general, if i am hearing her at face value, what she is saying republicans are inciting violence with a budget that is only at $4 trillion.
that is kind of what i am hearing. >> yes, seems a very bizarre statement to make. what president trump has proposed to increase defense spending to a level which will help rebuild our military. in the face of a shriveled, deteriorated military, only seems like prudent thing to do. as opposed to stirring up violence, i think it will have the exact opposite effect. neil: we always see hyperbole on both sides when it comes to budget time, general. that doesn't surprise me. what it does, unwillingness to look at the math behind this. that we spend a lot more than we take in. that is a problem, i think for economic security, down the road for national security but the preference for building up the military now is deemed a nonstarter for democrats. what is your take on where all of this is going? >> i think they're not looking at the issue clearly. we have a military smaller now
than it has been since world war i. the army is smaller. it is less ready. only 1/3 of our brigade combat teams are ready. we are short our ships and navy. our navy smaller than it has ever been since world war ii. the average age of our air force aircraft is 27 years old. so clearly, the military has been depleted over the last eight years, and needs to be rebuilt. neil: you know, general, you can look at the our expenditures, and look roughly $600 billion annual commitment to defense, surely there, within that budget there must be room for better priorities before we commit more cash. are you in the camp that says, sort of a, you know, top to bottom, bottom to top review of the expenditures so that we could see where this money really is going? >> you know, there is always room for reforming the military especially an organization that big. i would never be here to say we
can't find savings in the military. having said that they have been squeezed pretty hard last four years, so all the easy low-hanging fruit has been pruned. now i think it is time we really need to take a serious look rebuilding our military. neil: general, thank you very, very much. taking the time, we always appreciate it. also, we are appreciating the comments we get now and then on this show concerning certain comments i make on this show. one particularly enlighting, very clear to me, cavuto, you're as left as they come you were probably one of the big critics going after the president for outlandish second meeting with vladmir putin. no, that is quite the opposite. i took quite a different tact on that. i had no problem with that meeting because the whole world knew about it. i think i call these right down the middle here. i have no agenda here but president's economic agenda is a sound one. when he gets off that track, when the media obsesses over stuff like this, which is stupid, that gets everyone hurt. but as for that meeting, and
whole powwow with the russian leader, that is not an issue. what is at issue a president that can't stay focused. he has a lot of great ideas. all this other stuff, when throws his own people under the bus, that is not a good idea. he gets away from his good ideas. that is not a left or right view. i'm a money guy. for my money, that is a nonstarter. we'll have a more after this. ♪ ♪ whatever you want to do... ♪ ...is alright with me. ♪ ooo baby let's... ♪ ...let's stay together...
[ intense music playing ] ] it's here, but it's going by fast. the opportunity of the year is back: the mercedes-benz summer event. get to your dealer today for incredible once-a-season offers, and start firing up those grilles. lease the e300 for $569 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. with some big news about type 2 diabetes. you have type 2 diabetes, right? yes. so let me ask you this... how does diabetes affect your heart? it doesn't, does it? actually, it does. type 2 diabetes can make you twice as likely to die from a cardiovascular event, like a heart attack or stroke. and with heart disease, your risk is even higher. you didn't know that. no. yeah. but, wait, there's good news for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit.
jardiance is proven to both significantly reduce the chance of dying from a cardiovascular event in adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease and lower your a1c. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. so now that you know all that, what do you think? that it's time to think about jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. and get to the heart of what matters.
neil: all right. just to let you know the o.j. simpson patrol hearing begins next hour. we'll bring you in his live statement beaming electronically via skype. the media upset over donald trump an vladmir putin meeting at the g20 gathering. a conversation, whatever you want to call it, but the venue has them upset. i wondered why. so, donald trump had a second
meeting with vladmir putin and we are upset why? because we in the media didn't know about it prior or because we just want to pile on about it now. you know for the life of me, i'm really at a loss on this one, why this is even an issue. these guys were not holed up alone at some supersecret location. they were at a group of 20 summit of world leaders in germany. this was at a dinner for those leaders, all the leaders knew about it. they were all there. not a one from what i can see wearing a disguise. look at that table! they talked, they mingled, they moved around, you know sort of thing that world leaders do at a meeting of world leaders. the same media famous for saying leaders should talk, just not this one, and break bread, not war, just not this one, work together on solving crises, not making new ones, just not this one, stop. just stop. you are trying very hard to mask a hate that is now too over the
top. go after the president on things that matter, not the silly things that don't. it is fair game to say the president might have dropped the ball on health care. we said it on this show, but to say the same dropping in on a world leader at same table, look at that table! everyone's there! it is like five cavuto family reunions! we call them as we see them here but the whole thing about go after donald trump, and we do on issues that matter. we figure we have time to do the good and the bad, because there are so many 24 hour business networks, news networks we get everything. this thing was silly to me. that common sense getting reaction. as we speak, twitter, donald trump can worry about russian influence but until then, can they focus on us and catherine on facebook, i'm so over all this bs. if it was reported trump ate corn flakes for breakfast the
deranged left would find issue. it was not a meeting, it was a conversation. come on, neil. the point, obsession meeting or conversation, it doesn't matter. it was in front of the all the world, the world leaders, spouses and respective camera crews. everyone saw it or caught it, if you were trying to hide it didn't work. too clever by half i guess. to a "washington times" columnist, didnt mean borelli and democratic strategist chris at this setzer. to you, i found this obsession crazy. believe me, we do it here, go after him on things that matter sudden obsession still going after jeff sessions when he should be focused on all things economic, this not fair game. >> i 100% disagree if you were an alien came down from mars and knew nothing about the november elections, you didn't know that putin in fact hacked the u.s. elections to donald trump's benefit, you didn't know that
donald trump actually called on russia to, unleash hillary's emails and go through them. you didn't know don jr. -- neil: that a is not my question. if you knew they talked to each other in conversation or meeting, at a dinner, that raised suspicions, when everyone. >> desk it did. neil: everyone knew about it, is that so wrong, all i'm saying. >> i don't know if it is so wrong we don't know. is it suspicious? certainly is. this was on top of a two plus hour meeting they had recently already, that self -- neil: i thought the left likes it when world leaders meet. i thought left liked world leaders meeting talking over stuff. >> we don't like what our president i see submissive relationship to the president -ç neil: whoa, christie, i love you dearly, when barack obama was confiding with his former russian president med a have deaf, i have to wait past this election before we can do anything, to paraphrase him --
did you have a problem with that? >> lots of other people have tried, frankly failed to have a relationship with russia before. neil: that, did you have have a problem with that, that we caught on mic. that we did know what he said. >> did i have a problem with that? that was very much before russia hacked u.s. elections. neil: you can't pick and choose it. dineen. >> i can pick and choose. very different. neil: a lot of picking and choosing going on here. >> you can't say that. >> i'm in las vegas today let me tell you left and media gone all-in with anything russia. they have bet the house. listen the media is a left-wing arm of the left-wing party. listen when you look at how they're going after donald trump, going after his family, boeing after anybody, really what they are doing, disservice to the country because what they should be doing reporting on issues that people care about, issues that are important to our country. neil: dineen, the president get as --
>> what about our election. neil: side tracks on silly stuff. you have to, i'm not condoning all other stuff going on here. i'm saying this president hurts himself with this stuff. i don't think this meeting, whatever you want to call it, dinner conversation that apparently everyone knew about is the issue. i think it is this president sometimes feeds the beast with this stuff, doesn't he? dineen? >> listen, i think it is great that he is able to go on twitter because he is going around the media that absolutely hates him. he needs to -- neil: stick to topic. stick to topic. this is not -- >> talk to americans. neil: all right, fine. you can tweet all you want, but tweet to topic, don't go off on tangents. madison, that is my worry, this issue, this meeting, at this global gathering of leaders and their spouses an translators, this is not one of them. i just don't think it is one of them. what do you think? >> right. let me reiterate what you said at beginning of this segment, and that is president trump is president of the united states. he is at a dinner for world
leaders and you talks to another world leader and media goes crazy over this. what is most ironic during the campaign they were complaining that president trump had past reality tv now they're seeming to wish this was reality tv show now. neil: reality tv show. reminds me of hogwarts and "harry potter." i don't know. the idea you can keep something secret -- no, no, the idea you can keep something secret there with that many people, that many cameras. everything one is looking around. i understand a lot of leaders don't flip over donald trump. they will extra notice if he ignores them goes over to vladmir putin, that might be catty but it is not a conspiracy. that is what i'm saying, that is not making of a conspiracy there. >> it is not a conspiracy, but he put us at serious disadvantage. one item we haven't discussed only russia had interpreter there. they are only ones have
transcript what was said. neil: so what? so what. >> that is problematic. problematic. neil: did you have any problem, way before you were born, any problem john kennedy meeting with nikita khrushchev, there was no transcript of pow-wows limiting nuclear weapons, did it big you then or your parents or grandparent then there was no transcript of that meeting, ultimately an agreement was scored years later months before he died? what matters? >> i think it is unfortunate we can no longer take the president's word on all things russia -- neil: everything comes back to bashing trump with you. i'm not here as right or left person. this president doesn't flip over me or this show. by the way, barely like myself. dineen, i'm looking in all seriousness, surely there are bigger issues to address? i chastised president at beginning of this broadcast, chastising attorney general, still fixated whether he should
recuse himself. still fixated what that created and investigations that followed. get it, mr. president. that is what i said. the dinner, timing, who speaks to him, waste of time. what do you think? >> i agree. what we're seeing in headlines, neil. which is very unfortunate. listen, a lot of americans want to get past anything that is russia because they have been investigating forever. they haven't found anything. and they really need to move forward to get our agenda spearheaded. talk about talk about the president's position on energy, our energy independence, which would create jobs and better the economy. talk about issues that really after fact americans. neil: i agree, madison, do that point, the president himself has to avoid making those kind of distractions when he tells "new york times" and revisits this whole sessions thing, genuinely disturbed angry about it, i understand that i think doris kerns goodwin historian pointed out, you never really want the world to be seen
sweating. you might be sweating, cursing, doing a lot of other things in private but you don't want to give that advantage to your enemies, do you right? >> regardless what he says to the media they will continue to cover him negatively. harvard came out with a report saying covered the first 100 days coverage by all the mainstream media outlets and fox news and other, they saw over 80% of coverage was negative towards donald trump, just unheard of. president barack obama had 41%. other presidents were 60 and under. never really happened before. he is in a war against the mainstream media which is very unfortunate. regardless what he says they will draw the attention away from his main goal which is continuing to best serve american people. people want to be better served by their president, want to be better served by congress. we could see changes in 2018 along same lines. neil: not worry about a dust-up over dinner. he has to stay focused as well. many have to take a chill pill here. step back, prioritize what will
tick him off. i don't know if that is in the category. that is my opinion. remember the right and left hate me. i feel vulnerable at times. when we come back, we're getting yet another score from the congressional budget office on revised health care plan, would increase number of uninsured people to 22 million people by 2026. that is 14 million less than original plan. still 10 million americans would be insured. president's plan stayed in place,ç cbo saying 22 million less than otherwise would be the case. hard to follow. that is a big swing. what justifies it? after this. ♪
neil: all right. to read the media, first six months of team trump pretty much a disaster. investors though are not thinking so. look at stocks. look at the nearly $4 trillion in market value added. look at company after company reported far better-than-expected earnings and guidance that looks forward to lower taxes, fewer regulation, whole nine yards. national federation of independent business ceo juanita dougan. again to look at the media, the general view is disaster but they see that through the
typical prism of controversies, some the president himself inspires, and often times through old metrics like how much legislation you get approved and all that. important, i grant you, but, totally missing what has been happening, all this wealth that has been created. what do you make of that? >> well at that time least part of the disappointment among small business owners is return to gridlock in washington. neil: right. >> small business owners for making accomplishments and tax reform, repealing obamacare and deregulation. now that we're bogged down in the senate on health care reform, when they voted forward to repeal obamacare, seems a bit irresponsible to small business owners. neil: it is interesting, small business owners what i have noticed there, whether democrat or republican, or just apolitical, they're all about the green, they're about finding a way to make money and get ahead. a lot of things that government does under the federal level,
local level, they're regulated, either taxed to death, everyone anyone seems to get in their way. so they just want these guys to get out of their way. that seems to be common theme. they can't do that, can they? >> one of the things that has been success story over the last six months the trump administration is very serious about deregulation. they have made huge strides. unfortunately that story has been buried a little bit, but that is one of the biggest bright spots. repealed a number of really expensive and needless regulations over last six months. congress, house and senate have repealed something like 14 different regulations. that is a bright spot. when we come to the harder things like health care, and obamacare he repeal, and tax reform, small business owners want our elected officials to walk and chew gum at the same time. neil: good luck with that, juanita. good luck with that have you very, very much, national federation of independent business president and ceo,
juanita dougan. we're minutes away from o.j. simpson and parole hearing. this for the 2008 several felonies including kidnapping and robbery trying to get his own memorabilia back. he is up for parole. many people think by end of today he will have it. be released sometime in the fall. we shall see. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
there's an o.j. simpson parole hearing going on. to hillary vaughn in carson city, nevada. lay out what's going to happen today, hillary? >> reporter: all right, neil, well o.j. has a shot at freedom, but first has to say to the parole board that he should be set free. simpson will plead for his release appearing via videoconference in lovelock, nevada. a two-hour drive from where we are in carson city where the parole board waits and hear his case. the board will listen to questions and listen to testimony. board will break for half hour before announcing their decision. simpson will be joined by his attorney and members of his family, but also a victim in the vegas robbery, a sports collectibles dealer plans to speak in favor of simpson's parole. he needs four of the six commissioners to vote for release. if it's a tie another hearing will be rescheduled for six
months from now. the biggest consideration, how did simpson behave in prison? in nevada, a set of criteria the board uses to calculate eligibility for parole. they look at prior criminal history, the type of prison programs he participated in, if he was in a gang or used drugs. legal experts say simpson has a few things working in his favor. he's considered a model inmate with no write-ups filed during nine years in prison and also the same commissioners in the room today already granted simpson parole four years ago on the lesser charges associated with the armed robbery. now if o.j. gets parole, the earliest he will be released is october first but there is a catch, they can place conditions on his release. neil? neil: we'll be watching, thank you, hillary vaughn. examining the fallout of senator john mccain just diagnosed with aggressive type of brain cancer. adam shapiro with the latest on that.
>> reporter: as you said, it is aggressive type of brain cancer, senator mccain issued a tweet responding to the outpouring of support that he has seen in the last 24 hours. here's what the tweet says, neil -- now, this is important because john mccain is one of the key senators for the republicans, but here's what leader mitch mcconnell said on the floor the senate this morning about his colleague, senator mccain. >> senator mccain, as we all know has never shied away from a fight, and i assure you he isn't going to back down now. i know the senator from arizona will confront this challenge with the same extraordinary courage that is characterized his entire life. and he should know that we're all in his corner. every single one of us.
>> reporter: and, of course, also the tweet from president barack obama who said, quote, john mccain is an american hero and one of the bravest fighters i've ever known, cancer doesn't know what it's up against. give it hell, john. this is a sampling of the kinds of words that people have been sharing in regards to senator mccain, neil? neil: adam, thank you very much. i want to take you back to the o.j. simpson parole hearing, which has begun. o.j. simpson is now 70 years old. he was convicted in 2008 of several felonies. this is nothing to do with the murder of his ex-wife nicole brown simpson and her friend ron goldman. this has to do to a time he broke in to get his hands on stuff he claimed was his that was his for auction, and the conviction involved in that was calling for him to be in prison as long as 30 years. he is up for parole right now. let's listen. >> commissioner andel, to my left is commissioner jackson,
and then to her left is commissioner forda. we're seeing you this morning on an aggregated case sentence, and that is cases number k-237890 count nine assault with a deadly weapon. c-237890. c 2237890 account with a deadly weapon. count five use of a deadly weapon enhancement. k-237890 count eight use of a deadly weapon enhancement. and one of the things i want you to make you aware, those enhancements include both to the kidnapping and the robbery charges, even though they're not necessarily the way i've said it, make that clear. and a case worker, i have a parole eligibility date of
october 1, 2017, with a current expiration date of september 29, 2022, is that correct? >> that is correct, i have parole eligibility date of october 1, 2017, and expiration date of september 29, 2022. >> now at this point, case worker la floor, is there anything that would change that parole eligibility date? >> that parole eligibility date is not going to change. >> okay, thank you very much. mr. simpson, you are getting the same hearing that everyone else gets. i want to make that clear from the get go. however, since we have a crowd of people here that have not taken advantage of our public meetings before in order to attend the hearing, some of the things i'm going to say are going to get a little lengthy. so you will understand everything, but it will be new information for some other folks. just wanted to let you know that from the get-go. >> thank you, ma'am.
>> i will tell you as appointed members of the nevada board of parole commissioners, we have an ethical duty to consider each inmate for parole in a fair and consistent manner. like other parole boards across the country, our responsibilities include needing to balance prisoner rehabilitation with public safety, as well as taking action that considers the interest of justice. that's what we're doing here this morning. we have adopted a guideline to assist in making consistent decisions, we apply the elements and factors to each inmate considered for parole. a component in the guideline is risk assessment. the board uses a scientifically developed validated risk assessment as part of its parole guidelines. the risk assessment helps us determine which inmates are more or less likely to return to prison if we release them on parole. using a risk assessment is not unique to nevada. as a number of other state parole boards also use them.
we have revalidated our assessments three separate times in the past 14 years and have consistently shown to be predictive. using this risk assessment has significantly improved our overall performance. i'm going to go over each of the items of the risk assessment with you at this time, and just as an aside, this risk assessment is being revalidated as we speak by the jfa institute. so it's pretty darn predictive is the bottom line here. so my first question for you, mr. simpson. were you arrested for the first time at the age of 24 or older? >> i was arrested for the first time, i think, it was 46 or 47. >> okay, so you were over the age of 24. >> yes. yes, ma'am. >> okay. am i correct that you have never been on parole or probation before, therefore you
have never had a parole or probation revocation? >> that is correct. >> okay, and i have that you are -- were unemployed at the time of this offense because you were in retirement status? >> that's correct, yes. >> okay. now this is a property conviction. we're currently hearing out robberies and the enhancement, and so you have been assessed as a property offender. now we've also assessed you as having a substance abuse problem. i'll tell you why that is, you have indicated also in the past that alcohol had a big factor in this particular crime, and the fact that you have spent the last almost nine years in prison because of an alcohol-related incident would be indicative of having some sort of at least temporary substance abuse problem. so we have scored you with having some history there. we have you as male, and we have that you are currently,
well, very recently turned 90 years old. 90, i'm sorry about that. [laughter] >> you look great for 90! [laughter] >> how about we take that off and call you 70? okay. we don't have you as having any gang affiliation, nor has the mboc found you having gang involvement. we do note that you have completed one of the vocational trainings in having completed the computer application course. we note that you have not had any disciplinaries current or pending, and that you're currently medium level there at lovelock correctional center, would you say all of the items are correct, sir? >> yes, yes, ma'am. >> you do score out -- the risk score, scores you in a low risk. however, because of your particular offense, that severity is the highest.
when we combine your risk score along with offense severity, our guideline recommendations are that we consider factors. consider factors means we consider everything in terms of whether or not you're a risk to reoffend and return to our criminal justice system. and so what we do at this point, when we're looking at the risk score, we look at what are called aggravating and mitigating factors. aggravating and mitigating factors don't include everything in the world. they're very specific as to what we consider under those items also. so under the aggravating and mitigating factors in your particular case, we have mitigating or positive things for considering you for parole, is the fact that you've been disciplinary free throughout your entire period of incarceration. you don't have any prior conviction history. you have community and family support. have you what appears to be stable release plans. you have participated in
programming. some rather significant programming. on the aggravating factors and the only thing that fits under our aggravating characteristics in terms of risk in your situation is that at the time of this offense, your victims indicated they were in fear for their safety, having been threatened with a gun during the commission of a crime. so those are the risk aggravating-mitigating things we are considering. that's the overall risk score. right now i'm going to stop talking and ask the members of the panel if they might have questions of you? >> yeah, mr. simpson. you've lived most of your life in the public spotlight. yet, you go into a hotel room in las vegas, bring along four other men with you. two of them are armed. and rob the two victims of property. what were you thinking?
>> well, this might be a little long. i'll try to be brief with it. i had been contacted by a man named riccio. he had contacted me over a period of time, told me that there was some guy that was trying to get him to fence my property and thought i should try to get it. i kind of blew him off because i'm not interested in football property. i don't collect memorabilia. only my own personal items. he was pretty persistent in calling me, and finally i told him, see if you can get pictures of what they have. he sent me some pictures, and what i saw was my family, my mother's albums, pictures of my kids growing up. certificates of mine. pictures of what i call
significant famous people. letters of myself. i told him i would really like to get this stuff, so after a period of time, through what he described in court as a perfect storm, we all ended up in las vegas, you know? i was there for a wedding, and he told me that the property was there. and would i like to try to get the property? i said of course, i would like to try to get the property. he told me the names of what he thought were the people in the room and realized these are friends of mine. actually guys who helped me move, helped me move and store some of this stuff, right? so on the day of this incident, he came to my hotel to talk about how this would take place. i told him i met with a lawyer last night, and my sister and my daughter and some other friends and discussed it.
i pointed out another lawyer that was at the poolside as a part of this wedding party that was going on. i said i discussed with him, and they told me they can't do this if we're going to their home or even to their storage, o.j. you cannot go in there because if they ask you to leave, you gotta leave. i said riccio, you got to get him to bring it to a public place. he said, well, let's see what i can do. all of this has been testified to, so i'm not just going, you know? he called me and told me he told them to bring it to his room and he's going to have it brought to his hotel, and would i come and get it? i said of course, i'll come and get it. he said a lot of stuff, o.j., you better bring friends. well, i had a couple friends at the wedding that was going to go with me. he also said you should bring security. i know these guys, i don't think i need security.
it turns out that one of the guys, bruce here, i didn't know it was him, i thought it was mike, an ex-partner of his. i said i don't need any security. well later that day when they arrived at his hotel and spread out my property, he called and said they're here. are you coming? i'll meet you in the lobby, and you need security, o.j. this guy, beardsley, big guy, and a little -- he's a little weird. i think anybody that knows him, knows he's a little different. i told him this guy is not dangerous, man, but he says, man, bring some security. during the day when he was, there he met people from the wedding, one guy, the clintons said he did security in las vegas and would help his business if he could have me as a client. i told him i didn't need it, after he insisted i needed security, i said i could use
your help. i went to the hotel, i met mr. riccio in the lobby. the two guys met us there, which was a big mistake, obviously, i realize that. quite soon after this. and riccio led us to his room, put the key in the door and let us in. i know i've seen the last two or three days the media reporting we broke into the room. we didn't break into any room. mr. riccio brought us into the room. when i came into the room, i noticed spread out everywhere was my personal property, you know? the only thing i saw that was on display that wasn't mine was some baseballs and i made it clear to everybody those are not mine. all i want is my property, and i think there's a tape of it. you hear me on at least three or four occasions that i just want my property. go forward and try to make it a little quicker. at some point we started leaving -- when we're leaving
the room, i was pushed out of the room by the security guys, because while i was in there and i recognized bruce was there, i was surprised to see him as he testified. i was shocked to see him. bruce has been a friend of mine, he's traveled with me, we've done a lot of business together over the years, and he and i said, man, what are you doing here? he explained to me why he was there and had my property there, and i told him, geez, you should have told me. i understood why. it was an 06-07, people were losing their homes, a guy owed him money, couldn't pay him the money. gave him my property to sell. i told him i understood that but you should have told me. we had a chance to talk about this at a later date, and he apologized, i accepted his apology, i apologized for these two guys that pointed a gun at him. he's traveled with me. he's known me when i've had
security. he's known me when the venue supplied security. and there's time he had security for me. he knows i would never, ever direct anybody to point a gun at him or threaten him. i've never done this in my life. i want to point out, you mention all the gun charges. bruce and alford, they made it clear during the trial i had no weapon. they didn't feel threatened by me, and from what you said, i didn't threaten them. it was the other two security guys that did that. i haven't made excuses in the nine years i've been here, and not trying to make excuse now. they were there because of me, you know? but in no way, shape, or form did i wish them any harm. this is on the tape, too. bruce said o.j., hey, man, there's a box that's with that stuff, those don't belong to you. those are mine, man.
he told me that because he recognized everything else that i took out of that room was mine, you know? and he also recognized they wasn't there to steal his stuff him i'll leave it at the desk, i'll send your stuff at the desk. we didn't know the security guy stole his blackberry, the minute i saw that, i made him send it back and he gave a cockamamie story in the trial why he didn't take it back. in any event, i am no danger to pull a gun on anybody. never have on my life. never been accused of it in my life. nobody has ever accused me of pulling any weapon on them, and bruce knows that i would never do that. i never have. i want to also, as a post script, when i got to lovelock, the state of california took up
the issue of whose property it was. they did an investigation, and they came to the conclusion that it was my property. they turned it over to me. i have it now, you know? so it's kind of mind-boggling that they turn over to me property that i'm in jail for, for trying to retrieve, you know? it was my property. i wasn't there to steal from anybody. and i would never, ever pull a weapon on this. >> so you believe that the property was yours? >> it's been ruled legally by the state of california that it was my property and they have given it to me. >> that's the question, why you went into the hotel because you thought the property was yours, is that right? >> yes. whatever he was telling me, when riccio was calling me telling me this, i wasn't interested. it wasn't until he got actual pictures of what they supposedly had, and because it
was family photos and stuff, that's when i got interested in going there, and i only went there to retrieve my own property. >> so what were you thinking when the guns were being brandished? >> well, i didn't see the guns brandished. i didn't see -- you say guns, as i understand it, one guy who was behind me, somewhere, pointed a gun at him. so i never saw him brandish a gun. when i left, there i called back to the room to ask bruce, you said that there were pictures, what do you have? and asked him did the walter alexander return the cell phone? he said no, and said o.j., wasn't cool the guy pointed a gun at me. i said who pointed a gun at you? he described who it was. and to be honest, i didn't really believe him at the time. i asked the three guys i was with, said they didn't see him do it. i got back to my hotel, we waited for the two security guys to show up, and the minute they drove up, the first thing
i said, man, did you pull a gun in that room? he swore to high heaven he didn't, and asked walter alexander for the cell phone, and he threw the cell phone to me, but i wasn't aware until i was in the car driving back to the hotel that this guy pointed a gun at him. earlier in the day, when he was talking to me trying to get me to let him come, i didn't hire him. he said it was for free and all of that. he did show me. i didn't know this guy. i knew the alexander guy, but i didn't know this guy. he showed me his license, his ccr, i assumed that state gives a guy a ccr and stuff, they vetted him. should i have vetted him. i didn't really need him. i knew these guys weren't dangerous. >> the number of offenses differ a little bit about the
official records, mr. simpson. but moving forward here, considering the fact that what we have on record, weapon brandished, you were there, property was taken. >> oh, i was there. >> the next question is to you, is what do you think was the impact on your victims? >> well, i know what the impact was. we've talked about it. mr. beardsley, we had long talks back then. he told me he tried to call my lawyer. he testified in court that he called my lawyers and tried to tell them in the months previous that guys have my property and they were trying to sell them, but the lawyer never called him back. he actually testified for me, i'm sure you know, during the trial. bruce and i talked, and bruce was traumatized by it. fortunately, as i said, we
talked it out, he knew that i would have never condoned what happened. he stepped my apology, and i told him that these guys should be put in jail. if he did, that i wasn't going to defend them. unfortunately, they got a get out of jail free card when they said o.j. told me. nothing i can do about that. but i want to point out that bruce, i knew his family. his mother was terminally ill, i'd call, she was a fan, i'd call and sing to her. the night before or the night of the jury's verdict, his son actually called me and tried to give me a headup on something to do with memorabilia and told me that he and his mother was cheering for me. this family knows that i wouldn't wish any harm on these guys ever. like to think we're
friends again. >> thank you. >> good morning, mr. simpson. i conducted your last hearing in 2013 with hearing representative mr. robin bates. you recall that hearing? all right. at the time, we asked you what your plan would be if we were to grant you consecutive sentence, and you told us you were going to complete commitment to change. have you done that? >> no, you haven't. at one point i couldn't take the course. you know, i took two courses they guess you guys don't give much credit, to it's called alternative to violence. i think it's the most important course anybody in this prison can take because it teaches you how to deal with conflict through conversation. i've been asked many, many times here to mediate conflicts between individuals and groups,
and it gave me so many tools, how to use it, to try to walk these guys through, not throwing punches at one another. also, at one point, a couple of guys came to me and said o.j., i understand you're a baptist. we're baptists and we have no baptist service here. you can help us get a baptist service here? i worked with them, we have an ongoing baptist service, i attend it religiously and pun is attended, i was a good guy on the street. i'm sure when bruce gets here, he'll tell you i was a good guy. i could have been a better christian and my commitment to change is to be a better christian. >> all right, thank you, we know you programmed over term of incarceration, you completed victim empathy, alternative to violence, basic and advanced computer application.
i'd like to tell us more about victim empathy and alternative to violence and how it will benefit you in the future? >> i always thought i've been pretty good with people, and i basically have spent a conflict-free life. i'm not a guy that ever got in fights on the street with the public and everybody, but as i said, they give you a bunch of tools about how to talk to people instead of fighting, instead of throwing punches. tools that i've used here. it's how you talk to people, it's the tone that you use. the victim empathy was once again, i didn't really see that in had this case, i didn't really see that alford beardsley was affected by it all, but bruce was affected. bruce, i saw that he was affected and as i said, i would have done anything, anything
not to have that. if for no other reason, i regret this because he had this guy point a gun at him. and he told me, man, the guy put a gun in my face, and i said in the beginning i department -- didn't believe it but i know it to be a factor now, but the empathy course, it pretty much tells the guys who's all there. have you talk to your victim. what would you say to them if you were to see them now? and to take responsibility for what you did and to recognize how it affected their lives. as i said, bruce expressed to me how to affected him, and i told him i couldn't be more apologetic for him going to that. >> thank you. i know that alcohol was a factor in the instant offense. have you addressed this issue as you state you would?
>> i think i made it clear back then, i never had an alcohol problem. and if i took the alcohol course, it would have been more for my children, in case they ended up having a problem. well, my kids don't have a problem, i don't think anybody has ever accused me of having an alcohol problem or any kind of substance problem. of course, on that day, i had drinks on that day, but it was a wedding celebration, but i never had a substance problem at all. so i didn't. >> okay, you told us in the last hearing you were going to attend aa, that's the reason for my question, was the factor in the incident hadn't you been drinking that day? >> yes, yes, as i said, we were celebrating a wedding thing, i felt that the alternative to violence course and my involvement with the church, i also as recently became the
commissioner of the softball league, the team league. my primary responsibility was rules enforcement and, you know, player deportment. you know, guys player, they argue, my job is they get surly with one another, to remove them from the game. and if it goes beyond that, to go to coach and have them suspended. i never got anything back from the guys because they know i'm doing the best i can and trying to keep them out of trouble, so my -- my agenda was full, you know, here. i've been active, totally active in all the years i've been here, i don't have much time to sit around and do anything. i don't know if that answers your question. >> so of all of the programs that you had an opportunity to complete, what do you believe is the most significant, for
you personally? well, for me personally, it was alternative to violence. as i said, i think that should be mandatory for every inmate here. once again, guys get hot here and we've had our share of fights here, and as i said, i've been called in sometimes to keep guys from fighting, and you have groups, you know? serrenos are fighting, the northtown boys, it's crazy, and most of the time it's over something really, really stupid. in a basketball game, somebody will say something to somebody or somebody will go to somebody to complain to them about it, and it's how they complain to them about it that actually initiated the conflict, you know, the fights. so i, for the life of me, i don't understand why that is not a mandatory course for everybody here.
excuse me, my mind is trying to think of other things, but that's the course they would recommend to everybody. i mean, i took a computer course not because i was computer illiterate, but took the computer course because sometimes i could never get my kids on the phone but if you text or send something on the computer, you can get them. i actually took that course to better communicate with my children. >> all right, and have these programs prepared to you return to the community setting? >> i believe so. you know, i -- look, i've missed a lot of time, like 36 birthdays with my children, and you know, i've spent 12 years leading up to this incident in vegas raising two kids in l.a., i'm sorry, in miami, and you know, with all the media stuff, we've got the guys like jeffrey felix, making up stories and
stuff, that was happening on the street also, but i was able to keep their eye on the ball, great grades, they went to the college of their choice, and i end up missing their graduation because of it. trust me. i wish it would have never happened, but as i said, the courses i have taken, i hope it helps me more if i run into the conflicts with my kids. i'm not a guy that has conflicts on the street. i don't expect to get in any when i leave here, but feel i'm much better prepared, but more so for, i think, my commitment to being a better christian because i thought i was a good guy. i had some problems with fidelity in my life, but i have always been a guy that pretty much got along with everybody. >> are you humbled by this incarceration?
>> as i said, i wish it would have never happened. i was going to do this by apologizing to the people of nevada because i wish this would have never happened. i apologized to them at my sentencing, there is nothing i could do about this media circus that's going on right now, but i could do something about the whole thing in the beginning, if i would have made a better judgment back then, none of this would have happened. and i take full responsibility because i should have never -- you know, i haven't made any excuses in nine years here, but i should have never allowed these alleged security guys to help me because it turns out they were only trying to help themselves. if they weren't there, bruce and i, we tried to do this, we tried to sit down in the room and call this guy mike gilbert and discuss it all, but they took over and we were unable to
do that. if we were able to do that, we would have never heard about this, none of us would be here today. >> okay, and lastly, i'd like you to know that we received hundreds of letters of support and opposition and while we always encourage public input, the majority of the opposition letters are asking to consider 1995 acquittal and subsequent civil judgment. however, these items will not be considered in this case. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. all right, mr. simpson, when we grant offenders parole, one of the conditions a parole will impose is to pay court ordered restitution to victims of the crime. according to the judgment of conviction in this case, you and codefendants were ordered to pay $3560 in restitution, and return 12 montana lithographs to the victims. can you tell us the status of the restitution and the return of the property taken during the robbery?
>> well, one, i was unaware of the restitution. i do know about the prints. when i was talking to bruce on the phone and asking him was there anything else that should be yours? he said, the cell phone, right? so i said are you going to come and meet with us that or how do you want to do it? a mr. cashmore, now the guy i didn't know, mr. cashmore said i'll go by the hotel, i'll drop it off. he testified to this, too. this is not an allegation from me, mr. cashmore testified to it. so i say this guy is going to come back and drop it off at the hotel. his testimony later was that he didn't remember the name of who he was supposed to drop it off
to and that they had decided to screw o.j. we're going to keep this stuff. i mean this is his testimony, in court. the last thing i heard is that he actually tried to use those prints as the -- i can't find the word, to get his bail, with his bail bondsman. he was trying to use it as -- i can't think of the word. >> i think we're getting into the restitution. >> so the last they know of these lithographs was that this cashmore had them. i didn't know this guy. that he had them, and he testified to the fact, in court, that he had them. >> let me ask you this -- >> the restitution was paid by my lawyer, yes. >> so the restitution has been paid, and there's no pending -- the property has been returned, the lithographs as well? that's what you were saying?
>> i have no idea what this guy -- he says they have been returned to him. i'm sorry, they have been returned to them. >> okay, thank you. >> all right, thank you. >> if granted parole as opposed to completing your sentence in prison, you will be under supervision in the community. why is it better to be in the community than in the prison? >> well, you know, i do have four kids, i've missed a lot of time with those kids. i think i'm a guy who has always been a giving guy, even on the street, people have always come to me. my reputation has always been that i'm open to the public, i'm open to everybody, you know? you know, right now i'm at a point in my life, all i want to do is spend as much time as i can with my children and my friends and i'm not looking to
be involved with the media. i've had so many offers for interviews when i've been here and lovelock, i've turned them all down. i'm not into that. i've done my time. i've done it as well and respectfully as i think anybody can. i think if you talk to the wardens, they'll tell you i gave them my word, i believe in the jury system. i've honored their verdict. i've not complained for nine years, all i've done is try to be helpful and encourage the guys around there, hey, do your time. fight in court. and don't do anything that's going to extend your time, and that's the life i've tried to live because i want to get back to my kids and my family. >> all right. do you realize if you are granted parole, you could be returned to prison for any violation or conditions of parole? do you understand that? >> yes, sir. yes, sir, i do. >> the conditions could be easily as not drinking alcohol
to excess, associating with ex-felons, leaving the state without permission. being subject to search and seizure. there's going to be a whole slew of conditions you're going to have to follow, and do you think you can be successful with the terms of parole? >> i haven't been drinking nine years and haven't missed it. most of my life, i could be stopped and searched whenever. i'm not a guy who lived a criminal life, you know? i'm a pretty straight shooter. i've always tried to be a good soldier. i have no problem. none whatsoever in living with those conditions. >> here's the other side of that. as an easily recognized person in the community, if you're granted parole, how will you handle public scrutiny in the community? >> well, i've been recognized ever since i was 19 years old. you know?
i'm sure bruce will tell you. wherever we've been, it's always a crowd. it's not new to me. rarely have i even in the last 20 years, rarely have i even had any person give me any negative stuff in the street. people give you looks and everything, but i'm pretty easily approachable. i've dealt with it my whole life and don't foresee any problem dealing with the public now at all. >> okay, and mr. simpson, we've been -- since we've been made aware you're requesting to live in florida, i've asked captain shauna rudquestions, we thought
prerelease side, we have specialists who work closely with the case workers at the nevada department of corrections, and they help to develop that valid plan of supervision, talking about what is your plan of release, where do you want to go to, who is your support system? once they make that determination, they process the -- they process the information necessary and in this case, if you were to apply for an
interstate compact, our prerelease specialist will be the ones to forward the documents to the other state for their consideration. once the determination was made and once a valid plan was developed, then they would work with your case worker to set up your release and case worker would then manage the release through the nevada department of corrections. >> does the panel have any questions of the captain? >> no. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> now, mr. lavergne, i'm going to defer to the two of you, and you mr. simpson. we'd like mr. simpson to be able to tell us anything else he'd like to tell us. we'd also like to hear from one of the supporters if any of them wishes to make restatement to the board and like to hear your statement, mr. lavergne. i'm going to put that back to
you in what order you want the three things to happen? >> we're going to hear from mr. simpson's daughter, arnelle simpson first, and i'll make closing remarks. >> okay. >> and officer bautista, if you will make the switch for us, please? >> thank you. >> good morning, ma'am, if you will give us your name for the record and your relationship to mr. simpson? >> yes, i am arnelle simpson, my dad's oldest child of four. >> okay, ms. simpson, welcome, and feel free to speak. >> thank you. i'm a little nervous, though, bear with me. >> so are we. [laughter] >> i know, it's a lot.
as you know, i'm here on behalf of my family, for the purpose of expressing what we believe is the true character of my father . no one really knows how much we have been through, this ordeal in the last nine years. excuse me. my experience with him is that he's like my best friend and my rock, and as a family, we recognize he is not the perfect man, but he's clearly a man and a father who
has done his best to behave in a way that speaks to his overall nature and character, which is always to be positive, no matter what. he has spent the last nine years in lovelock, as we all know, and has been a perfect inmate following all the rules and making the best of the situation, which is truly amazing to me under the circumstances. the choice that he made nine years ago that resulted in the sentencing were clearly inappropriate and wrong and counterproductive to what he was trying to achieve. as a family, we were all there to celebrate a wedding of a very good friend. i can honestly say my dad recognizes he took the wrong approach, and could have
handled the situation differently. my siblings and i and family know that he didn't make the right decision on that day, but we know his intentions were not to go in and to just make the wrong decision at the wrong time. throughout this ordeal, we have remained close. we have stayed strong, and i for myself am grateful to god for giving us the strength to get through this last nine years and to stay positive always, no matter what. and a lot of that is because of him, so on behalf of my family, my brothers, my sister, an
aunt, an uncle, his friends, we just want him to come home. we really do. we want him to come home, and i know in my heart that he is very humbled throughout the situation. this has been hard. let me be honest, this has been really, truly hard, and there's no right or wrong ways to explain how to handle this, but we do know that, i know that, she remorseful. he truly is remorseful and we just want him to come home so we can move forward for us, quietly, but to move forward. so i thank you for allowing me to be here this morning. thank you. >> thank you, ms. simpson, we
appreciate you being present and appreciate your comments. and officer bautista, if you would bring mr. lavergne and mr. simpson back to the table, please? >> yes, ma'am. >> and mr. lavergne, this would be the time for you and mr. simpson to make any closing remarks that you would like to make. >> thank you, commissioner, do you have a copy of a letter i provided through your liaison? it's an undated letter from mr. simpson to stableman osvaldo, that should have been provided to you. >> yes, sir, we have that record. >> all right, give me two seconds to get set up here. that's where i'm going to start. did you take the letter? i can't find it now. and the
letter as you can see is very short, so i figure it would be appropriate to read it into the record, if the commissioners would allow me to? >> that would be fine. >> okay. but the first thing i have do is find it. here it is. by way of setting this letter up by the way, the most important part about this letter is this is not a letter that mr. simpson provided to me, okay? what happened is mr. simpson at some point wanted me to communicate with an individual by the name of osvaldo fuma, an assemblyman prior to that time, and now an attorney, in the full interest of disclosure, he was one of mr. simpson's attorneys during the habeas proceedings of this case. during this time, ozzie, a friend of mine, became an assemblyman with the nevada
legislature and after that, mr. simpson sent mr. fumo a letter and i found out about the letter not through mr. simpson, i found out about it through mr. fumo when i was advised
to thank ozzie fumo for was it books and educational equipment to the prison here at lovelock, nevada. i'm going to read the letter. and by the way, mr. simpson did authenticate this letter this morning. i produced it this morning when i got to see him prior to the hearing. he did indicate he wrote the letter, though it's not dated, he indicated it was probably sent to ozzie within the last nine months or so. dear legislator fumo, allow me to say how happy i was to hear about your new position about a state legislator. i was not surprised to hear about your interest in furthering education and helping of prison inmates.
i must admit i've taken my exposure to education for granted partly due to prowess as athlete, i've been afforded opportunities for higher education. it wasn't until i got to prison they realized just how many people did
not have the exposure to said education. in part, because of their circumstances i.e. gangs, bad neighborhoods, lack of parental supervision, poverty, et cetera. but ozzie, i can't tell you how inspiring it is to see how said inmates have taken advantage of the educational department and the advantages that it offers. i have seen a change in inmates as far as self-esteem goes that is amazing. they come to me to talk about subjects that they would never have thought about before their exposure to education. they talk to me about things they want to do when they are released, things they never would have thought about they were capable of before. they say "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" and as an
old dog, my friend, i can tell you that is not true. i am currently taking a computer science course -- a computer course that shows me i am capable of learning new skills. these new skills at a minimum will help me better communicate with my children. who knows? you may even see a web cast or blog in my future. i work in the athletic department here at lovelock and i fully enjoy what i do and can tell you that this is very important for the inmates to have a release for their energy and for recreation, but i can think of no better place to use state funds than to educate, add to the self-esteem and prepare these guys for their eventual release. in closing, i want to tell you how much i look forward to following your political career and your participation in what i know will be a very successful prison educational program. gratefully yours, orenthal j.
simpson, and it's signed by mr. simpson. reason i wanted to read this to you is because it just kind of surprised mr. simpson with it because obviously this is mr. simpson's, what i would consider mr. simpson's first opportunities to have clout in the political system of the state of nevada. he pretty much has an end at that point. he has ozzie fumo, they had attorney-client relationship with, a very good relationship and now ozzie is in the assembly, he's in a position of power, and what does mr. simpson do? does he say ozzie, can i have a better bed? or does he say ozzie, can you pull strings and get me out of here earlier? no. he doesn't do any of that. he uses that clout, the one time he has clout in the state of nevada, he uses that clout to paint funding for books and education in the prison. you know, and some of the men
as mr. simpson said, they really are going to get out and have a decent and better life for themselves as a result of mr. simpson's efforts through mr. fumo. i think that's the definition of character, and frankly, i think if it was me personally who was in prison for nine years and frankly forget nine years, nine days, if i had the opportunity and position of power somebody could do something for me like this, i would say get me out of jail, okay? he doesn't do that. it is very, very, very selfless. he's thinking about the people here, and it's also the definition as someone asked earlier about being humbled and humility. it shows a genuine form of humility that he has the capabilities to think of people here who are not as empowered and not as privileged as he has been, and when he gets out, probably will continue to be in society. so that's the first part of my closing remarks. the second part of my closing
remarks is to deal with the other individual in this case that was a victim. he's not here, mr. fromong is sitting right here. mr. beardsley passed away in 2015. mr. beardsley and mr. fromong have made calls to my office and the last time i recall speaking to mr. beardsley was in september of 2011. this is not that long after i maybe had been representing mr. simpson for a couple years at that point. i was uncomfortable that mr. beardsley who was a victim in the case and my client is considered the person who victimized him was calling me. i did explain i wanted to record the conversation. i asked him if he wanted an attorney before he talked to me. he said fine.
he indicated in no uncertain terms in that conversation that he had cleared up this matter with mr. simpson. he was trying his hardest to do to get mr. simpson out of prison. and they had made it right. mr. simpson had apologized to him, and they had sent letters to mr. simpson, and mr. simpson responded, and that was on counsel at the time. and also, there was another issue of -- and mr. simpson has written, and i want to emphasize this again. that he had a set of photos, and these are not memorabilia. mr. simpson, if he didn't make his point already, he could care less about some signed football or some signed photo. he could care less about it. he could rip them up and burn them up.