tv The Intelligence Report With Trish Regan FOX Business July 20, 2017 2:00pm-3:00pm EDT
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. i know they mean a lot to a
lot of people, but that was not what was really the true impetuous for what happened here. there were intimate family photos that were taken from him. literally stone, and there's no dispute that these would be any type of judgment, collection, these are just intimate family photos. mr. simpson had a former family, a second family. there's pictures of his mother, other things. famous celebrities, and they were not subject to being taken. they probably have no value to most people, but they have all the value in the world of mr. simpson. they're not footballs, and that's what set it off. and he at least represented to me on the photo that he had these photos, and i had made every effort that he could to try to obtain those intimate family photos that i was well aware that basically all mr. simpson wanted in the first place. unfortunately, whatever happened, i tried every effort
to get those photos from him. and then at some point along the lines, we lost contact, and then i just discovered that he had passed away. but i will speak on mr. beardsley behalf from that phone conversation at least september 2011, him and mr. simpson had made things right. okay? and finally, and, again, obviously the commission is not used to hearing where victims are calling people who are in prison their attorneys and having multiple conversations with them. i've also had bruce sitting right here to my left and will testify shortly. he's also called my office. he had called before many years ago, and we had spoken. i can't necessarily remember the substance of those conversations. they weren't recorded. if they were, i can't find them in my files. but he's recently called again. he called on july 3rd, and he called me on july 14th. and both times i missed the call, but i called him back.
and i can hear the -- that they have made things right with each other. that he has accepted mr. simpson's apology wholeheartedly. he seems to be a fundamentally really, really good guy who's falling on some hard times recently. and he told me that he would be calling and coming in and testifying favorably for mr. simpson. i made sure i told him probably 15 or 20 times to say whatever he wanted to say because, you know, obviously, mr. simpson talking to a victim, it could be interpreted the wrong way. say whatever you want to say. no one is telling you how to testify here. and one of the things that we did -- and i did inform probation about both of those conversations on july 3rd and july 14th. and one of the things we did spend a lot of time. that was a small portion of our conversation was the remorse on mr. simpson's part
that was accepted. most of the time was spent, we were talking about some other unfortunate things that happened. now i believe i know because i've researched this now. there was some civil litigation that went on out there. and this was against the -- one of the primarily against one of the uncharged codefendants in this case, a guy named --vich named richio. something happened in this civil litigation, and i don't know what's going on with it. i told him that i would look into it. i explained to him that he really should talk to his lawyers who were involved in that civil litigation to try to make that judgment due whatever he wants to do, and it was unfortunate. i believe that -- you know, this kind of is an opportunity to show you that in the criminal case, he's completely the victim. but he has filed a civil lawsuit, and the jury actually
found him 16% liable for what happened here. it was pretty unique, to say the least. in any event, he's going to testify, but i did feel that i needed to note that i don't think i have a prove with mr. mr. other than he did say he was going to testify, and he did discuss with me on several occasions this civil judgment out there that he was hoping that mr. simpson could take care of for multiple. and that's that. thank you very much. >> thank you and mr. simpson, did you have any closing remarks? >> i accept that, you know, i've come here. i spent nine years making no excuses about anything. i am sorry that things turned out the way they did. i had no intent to commit a crime. i came here, i tell the inmates all the time, man, i don't want to hear about your crime. argue in court here. we're all convicts.
i'm a convict. do your time and don't do anything to extend your time. i told the warden when i got here that i would be no problem. i believe in the jury system. i will honor what the jury said, and i will be no problem, you know? and i think i kept my word. i -- like i said, i've done my time. i would just like to get back to my family and friends. and believe it or not, i do have some real friends. but i don't think i could have represented this prison. i don't think any inmate has ever represented better than i. i did my time. i tried to be helpful to everybody. and as i said, bruce beardsley, i made up with them years ago. so i'm sorry it happened. i'm sorry to nevada.
i wish richio had never called me. i thought i was glad to get my stuff back, but it wasn't worth it. you know, nine years away from your family is just not worth it. and i'm sorry. thank you. >> just one more thing for the record. today 9/20/22 and all the people are wondering how that adds up to 33 years in the state of nevada. good behavior, complying with the rules can mean up to a 50% reduction off the bad end of your sentence. if granted parole, that september 29, 2022 time could move closer, so i want to put that on the record. and at thispoint, i'll ask if you will movement delivered in the percent examined.
>> thank you. >> thank you. >> if you will put your own name on the record for us, please, and then proceed. >> yes, it is bruce, and i would like to thank the opportunity to be able to speak today. first and foremost, i would like to state that i'm not here just as mr. simpson's friend of almost 27 years, because that i am. but today, i'm also appearing as the victim of the crime on september 30th -- or september 13th, 2007.
on that day, i felt that mr. simpson was misguided. not by himself but by tom. he was led to believe that on that day, there were going to be thousands of pieces of his personal memorabilia, pictures of his wife from his first marriage, pictures of his kid kids. family he heirlooms. he was told there was possibly going to be his wife's wedding ring. thousands of things. it was misled what was going to be there that day. a man named thomas promised him this big package. in reality, -- tom in h never met me. never me me until the night of
the robbery. he got there and saw this stuff. he went down, he got oj, and instead of telling him that that's not what was there, he brought him up anyway. when oj got there, unfortunately, he was already worked up and had people with him that were hollering and screaming. there was a lot of commotion going on in a very, very small room. real, small room. and a lot of things happened very quickly. and, unfortunately, if oj had just said everybody out of here. bruce and i need to talk for a minute, none of this needed to happen. but that didn't happen. and it took -- one of the things that i wanted to make clear is it took two years in
a california court because -- and a judge's infinite wisdom instead of going ahead and turning things back over, everything got sent to a california court to get straightened out. and after having the fight, the goldman's lawyers, oj's lawyers, and it took me two years to get back with over 600 items. a majority of it did come back to me because i had to go back 19 years through our friendship, but i had to go back 19 years, produce records for almost 98% of this stuff. and it is true that items in that room belong to oj. there were no two ways about it. but it's also true that i have never stolen anything from oj. i did not -- i have never stolen from oj. i think oj will admit that i did not ever take anything from him.
it wasn't me. an expartner of mine and his mistress christa have taken things. other people have taken from oj, but i have never stolen from oj. oj is my befriend, always has been, and i hope will remain my friend. but there were things in that room, and i admit to that. and i'm sorry things did not work out differently. but there were -- and i will make this clear to you. oj never held a gun on me. there was a coward in that room. a man named mcclinton came up gangster style acting like a big man. he held the gun on me. not oj. another man came in, hit me -- not oj.
he never laid a hand on me. layoff people were yelling bag that stuff up. let's get out of here. during the trial after i had already testified against oj, and this is why i absolutely believe him after i had already testified against oj, i had already said everything i had to say, we happened to pass each other in the hallway. and oj came up to me and said can i talk to you for a minute? and we had a chance to talk to each other, and i told him i'm sorry that i did not get the opportunity to call him and tell him that i had that stuff. those few items that belong to him, i told him i'm sorry that i did not take the opportunity to call him. because we had been apart for a long time. we haven't had a chance to talk for many years, and i had been buying stuff from mike
gilbert, and i wish i had. and he said "bruce, i can't tell you how sorry i am." we've got a saying between us. it is what it is. and he put his hand out. i shook his hand, and i said i forgive you. we all make mistakes. oj made his. he's been here and from what i've been told, he's been a model inmate. he's been an example to others. during the trial, i recommended that he serve one to three years. that's what i recommended to the da. and i'm here to say that i've known oj for a long time. i don't feel that he's a threat to anyone out there.
he's a good man. i know that he does a lot for other people, and i feel that nine and a half to 33 years was way too long. and i feel that it's time to give him a second chance. it's time for him to go home to his family, his friends. this is a good man. he made a mistake. and if he called me tomorrow and said "bruce, i'm getting out, will you pick me up? " i'll be here tomorrow. i mean that, buddy.
>> thank you. we appreciate your comments. thank you. >> thank you for this opportunity. >> you're welcome. >> approach the table, please. >> i want to ask family members if they have any questions. okay. now our deliberation. again, everything we do a little bit differently today because frankly, we need our offices back, folks. so we're hoping to deliberate, come to an agreement, and be able to produce an order some time in the next 30 minutes or so. so what's going to happen is we are going to break.
and then after deliberating, we'll come back to this room, i'll ask each commissioner to vote, i'll vote myself. if we're able to agree when those votes are cast, that will be a final decision. again, if it becomes obvious that there's a flip on this particular panel, i have commissioners eddie gray and commissioner michael keillor stand by in las vegas, and they will either -- we will call them, they will either cast their votes then or after deliberation. so that is what we're planning at this moment. we are about to leave the room. going to arrange to clear the courtroom there also. i ask that you give us about two minutes to clear out of the room is that you're not chasing us down the hall, and then we'll give you a five-minute notice that our deliberation is over, and we'll be able to cast votes.
so on that, i will call this hearing into recess, and we will return after deliberation. trish: all right. this is the poll hearing that you've been watching for oj simpson just wrapping up. the parole board is going to take a break there and talk about whether or not he deserves parole. the highlight from this is that oj simpson is saying -- and i quote right now. i'm not a guy who lives a criminal life. i've basically spent a conflict free life. that was oj simpson, as he was talking there to the parole board. this is, of course, in regards to that robbery hearing. he had been given nine to 33 years in jail. he's now up for payroll. will he get it come october 1st? we're going to find out, essentially in a very short time. i'm trish regan. welcome, everyone, to the intelligence report. all of this news happening as we continue to watch a market
that is hugging a flat line. though, down 19 points, despite being earlier in the session a bit higher. oj simpson, he's out there making his case for freedom, as you just saw. this is all via videoconference. he's 70 years old, and he's been nine years there. basically paying the price for what happened there with those memorabilia items that he allegedly went in and forcefully stole from someone. he said that they rightfully belonged to him, and he never wanted to harm anyone. i want to get some analysis here from -- we have a terrific team for analysis. but first, some hillary vaughan who is outside the courtroom there. hillary, again, as i led the show, i think the two newsworthy quotes here basically spent a conflict-free life, and i'm not a guy that lives a criminal life. i imagine there are some people who flinched when they
heard those. is that a question at all that the parole board is going to be considering? >> well, we did hear from them, and they stated on the record that the 95th acquittal for the charges -- for the los angeles incident, they're not considering that case at all when it comes to whether or not oj simpson will receive parole because he's actually serving nine years of a 33-year sentence after he was found guilty on 12 charges, including kidnapping, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon for an incident in vegas. now, this all went down when simpson said he tried to get back some some of his own sports memorabilia from a friend who he believed stole personal photos and sports memorabilia. we heard from one of the victims bruce who says he's a friend of oj simpson. he testified today in support of simpson's release on parole. called oj his friend and says he's sorry things didn't work
out differently sayin saying it's time to give him a second chance saying quote we all make mistakes. oj made his. i don't think he's a threat to anyone out there. now, this is the second time simpson has appeared before this parole board. in 2013, he won parole on five of the 12 total charges. but he didn't walk then because he had to serve his sentences consecutively. this same panel of commissioners that granted him parole four years ago will decide today if he will receive parole on those remaining charges. and today since then, made his case again. but he didn't want to take all of the blame, trish. take a listen. >> i had no weapon. didn't feel threatened by me and what you said that i didn't threaten him. it was the other two security guys that did that. and i haven't made any excuses in the nine years that i've been here, and i'm not trying to make an excuse now. they were there because of me. >> as far as what's next for
simpson, we do know that he will live in florida during parole. and said he doesn't have any interest in that at all. trish. trish: all right. hillary vaughan, thank you very much. joining me right now whether or not oj simpson will get parole, we have fox news anchor and former defense attorney gregg and trial attorney misty. great to have both of you. and, again, these quotes. i'm not a guy who lived a criminal life. i've basically spent a conflict-free life. does that open him up to some perhaps disorder as the parole board listening to him say those things, knowing what we know? >> it could have. and i'm sure his attorney, you know, was on high alert when he uttered those words because the lawyers know that sort of opens the door for a payroll board member to say "what do you mean a conflict-free life? didn't you plead no contest and were convicted, therefore, of beating your wife viciously
in 1989? and as you know because you pulled out the pictures, anyone can online. i'm going to call brown simpson in 1989 back when she was still alive this horribly bruised and battered face that was swollen. obviously, evidencing a vicious beating at his hands. that's just one instance. trish: that's a conflict. >> yeah. trish: but does that matter legally? in other words, he's coming up on parole on something entirely different. so can they bring sort of his past and at least in this particular situation, the fact that he admitted "yeah, i beat her" can that come into this? >> if you go to the website of the parole board, they have all of the mitigating and aggravating factors. prior conviction can be considered. the beating of his wife, that's a conviction. as for his acquittal in the murder case back in 1995, the
double murder case, that doesn't count, technically, under prior convictions because the jury found him not guilty. however, the language then says other information that concerns the board that the inmate may be a risk to public safety if released on parole, they can consider anything they want to. they have that discretion and latitude. they could, for example, take judicial notice of the civil juries unanimous verdict. two years later in 1997 in which they said they did, in fact, brutally kill nicole brown simpson and ronald goldman. and if they don't want to review the record in that case, just read the trial transcript of his testimony on the witness stand under cross-examination, he absolutely melted and removed any doubt. they could have considered that, but you heard the commissioner saying clearly they had agreed ahead of time that we will not consider that in this case. trish: wow. misty, is he going to wind up
getting parole, come october 1? >> well, you know, this is largely based on these 11 factors that come into play. and they're 11 objective factors. but as gregg said, it really is. there's a lot of digression in the parole board. one thing we heard today. there's a lot of people saying he's going to get paroled. pretty confident he's going to get paroled based on his prison record. based on the fact that he has expressed remorse. and especially since you have a unique situation here. you have a victim of the crime advocating for his release. so that's something. but one thing he didn't do that we learned today is these programs that he promised to complete in his 2013 parole hearing, he didn't complete all of them, and it's now 2017. so that's certainly a factor that the parole board is going to take under consideration. trish: why would they want to give him parole, gregg? >> well, they might want to get rid of him. this has brought unwanted attention to the state of nevada, you know, and it's going to happen every time he
comes up for parole, which would be a regular event. lots of media attention, and they receive continuing criticism that the trial judge was too harsh during the sentencing, giving him up to 33 years behind bars. but the gravity of this crime, the serious brandishing weapons with bullets and threatening people. you know, you heard oj simpson say it wasn't my gun. doesn't matter under the law. that's not true. there was an audio recording inside that room, and he's the one who's the gang leader. he's organized nobody leave the room with guns showing. that is a clear and present threat, and yet he denies it. trish: and yet, he still may get parole. >> he probably will. i mean, if i had to make a guess at this point since they're not considering the earlier conviction and the earlier civil jury verdict, it's a mathematical formula right now. trish: gregg, misty, thank you, everyone. we're going to continue watching this, of course.
and as soon as the parole board comes back with the decision, we will have it live for you. in the meantime, i want to check out the markets because you've got the, i nasdaq, the s&s&p 500 hitting new all-time highs today. the dow and the s&p 500 are on track for their third straight record close. all of this as reports a republicans may scale down the massive corporate tax cuts promised by president trump. the white house needs to deliver a win on taxes, i'll tell you that. the expects a win on taxes. they cannot allow this one to slip by the way they did with health care. but the gop wants tax reform to be revenue neutral, which they say is impossible under the administration's initial proposal. so where do we all go from here. joining me right now, founder adam johnson. johnson group founder david and lori rothman who's live from the new york stock exchange. and, adam, i could tell you.
i'm annoyed, i'm frustrated at this party right now because i think that they had every opportunity to get repeal and replace done. they squandered that opportunity. and my concern right now is they could do the same darn thing with tax reform. >> i tell you why they're not going to do that. they're actually going to get this one right. because if they don't, they don't get reelected. this is political survival. and the nice edge is as sharp as it can get. repeal and replace was something we tossed around for months. actually, years as you point out. but no one really was going to live or die by that. trish: you're seeing a market that has been bidding things up. prices keep going higher because people expect that tax reform is going to happen, and as you know, that's going to be very beneficial to how earnings look, et cetera. how everything is; right? in the economy. i say this is economics 101. butth happen, lori, how does
the market react to that? and do these lawmakers then run the risk of they're out. people are done with them. >> so i totally agree with adam. but from a market perspective, i think we're around these record levels, 26-record closes for the dow jones industrial. so some would argue the market is a little frothy here. we're having more than fewer strong better than expected earnings here. we're in the midst of the latest earnings season. so that's really where the focus is. but when you bring policy into the game, especially tax reform, especially coming off the gridlock with health care, if things don't go the way that the president promised when he was elected, we may see some trouble here for the bulls on wall street. let's talk about these rates. 35%. guess what? pretty much everyone else in the world does a better job when it comes to corporate taxes than us. we have the highest taxes when you factor in state taxes,
municipal taxes, the highest in the world. you look at canada. what is it? 21% in canada. the uk, they do a better job on this. ireland does a better job on this. numerous countries throughout the middle east do better jobs on this. we are penalizing over and over and over again corporations for being here in this country. i don't get it because this is all wrong in terms of incentives. i think it could get bipartisan support on this one. will they? >> yes. they will. and, by the way, they're not just penalizing companies for what they're doing here, they're penalizing them for doing business overseas that is opening up new markets, creating that you jobs, and is really a growth-oriented expansion. trish: i want to stop you there and understand what you're saying because i think tax policy is all wrong when it comes to allowing these companies to be overseen, and
then they leave of their profits overseas; right? >> well, that's the point i'm making, trish. trish: want to create jobs overseas. bring that money back home, create those jobs here. >> trish, it is exclusive. we do create jobs here when we create markets overseas. we want customers overseas. we want people involved in design and engineering and accounting. trish: okay. but you do believe that we should be allowing those corporate profits that have already -- >> to come back here. trish: okay. i'm just making here we're on the same page on that one, david, because that's another one that's a no-brainer. >> it's a complete no-brainer, and it is going to happen. where the actual corporate rate gets set, i think remains to be determined. i don't think they're going to have to go all the way up to 25%. i don't think they're going to get the 15% that they through out there. but somewhere in the low 20s because i think they have a very intelligent, very well planned treasury secretary mnuchin has done a remarkable job teeing up where they need to come in to get this done
through reconciliation, so they won't have the filibuster burden. >> adam johnson, that has been -- you think it's totally dead? >> totally dead. it's an unfair test. >> and an unfairway to pay for the tax cuts here and now. is that going to be a holdup? >> no. i tell you what. i think we can get the first 10 percentage points in a bipartisan basis. and i'll tell you why. some people say they're fudging the numbers, but they can do it effectively. number one, they do what's called dynamic scoring, so as economy grows, you can add those tax revenues in to help offset the cuts. and number two, you can actually lengthen the time period by which you measure the impact of the tax cuts. so, again, the critics will say you're just fudging the numbers. but guess what? you can actually by adjusting those numbers get both republicans and democrats.
trish: adam, david, lori, thank you so much. all right. we have an update on john mccain, senator mccain for you coming up. both sides right now are all wishing him well, as do we. all of us at fidelity, trades are now just $4.95. we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. so we need tablets installed... with the menu app ready to roll. in 12 weeks. .. ac ross all your locations. ross all your locations. fast connections everywhere. that's how you outmaneuver.
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. >> senator mccain as we all know, has never shied away from
a fight and i assure you he is going to back down now. >> incredible credibility as well has great courage and great character. if anybody can be this, john mccain is the man. >> i do know this. there has never been a more worthy opponent. >> working and getting things done, he is a real warrior. >> support pouring in for john mccain after it was revealed that he had brain cancer. the support is coming from both sides of the aisle. john kerry tweeting, quote, i love senator john mccain, unbeatable, unbreakable, he is teddy roosevelt's man in the arena even when we are on opposite sides. former president obama tweeting john mccain is an american hero and one of the bravest fighters i have ever known. cancer doesn't know what it is up against.
give them hell, john. emergency director, doctor jeanette, joined me now with more perspective on all of this. tell us a little bit about what it is that he has and what the treatment is. to fight against it. >> what senator mccain was diagnosed with is called glioblastoma, which is a serious brain cancer tumor. he has a tumor that was found last week and he has already had surgery. he is home recovering taking time off, the doctors recommended. what he is doing now is discussing with his doctors, reviewing his options with his family as well to talk about the next step, the next plan. usually the most common type of therapy would involve a combination of chemotherapy, radiation but that is something he wouldn't start right away. he would take some time off,
three or four weeks to recover from this surgery and move forward if he decides to go that route. >> how challenging a cancer is this? >> very challenging. it is difficult. the survival rates very. the studies show up to 10% of people can survive five years but i believe senator john mccain, in his dna he is a fighter, he will push and persevere and move forward and that is one of the qualities that can have a significant impact. trish: his daughter megan mccain issued a beautiful statement about her dad's, read on twitter and instagram account, let me share part of that, the toughest person i know, the coolest enemy cannot break in, the aggressions of political life could not bend him and he is meeting the challenge as he has every other.
cancer may afflict him in many ways but it will not make him surrender. nothing ever has before his daughter. we are with you, senator mccain. thank you so much. donald trump taking aim at attorney general jeff sessions saying if he had known sessions, would recuse himself over the russian investigation he never would have appointed him to the job. the president says what he did was, quote, very unfair. does he have a point? should sessions have refused the job if he knew he had this conflict?
>> never recused himself and if he was going to recuse himself he should have told me before he took the job and i would have picked somebody else. trish: sessions was forced to step aside after not disclosing previous meetings with russia's ambassador, this is not an effort to push sessions to resign and sessions said today he is not going to. >> i have the honor of serving as attorney general, something that goes beyond any thought i would have had for myself, we love this job and this department and i plan to continue to do so as long as it is appropriate. trish: is it still appropriate given what we just saw donald trump say to the new york times? from american university, he got a glimpse. let's call it like it is. he seems to be a little bit annoyed that sessions accepted
the job and wound up having to recuse himself from pretty important stuff because he didn't disclose the meeting. is that the right move for the president to take? >> eight of 2010 years in the ohio senate, the joint legislative ethics committee, look at this law and order circumstance, very black-and-white way, jeff sessions did the right thing by recusing himself. maybe didn't approach it appropriately from the front end, when and how he disclosed other meetings with russian ambassadors but the bottom line is the attorney general did not pledge allegiance to the president of the united states. you never know what he may have to recuse himself from in the future. it is about the rule of law, about making sure that the permit of justice and all its
underlying agencies are as independent as possible. it may cause annoyance to donald trump but i would say the same thing if hillary clinton was in office. the purpose of justice needs to be -- >> do they regret having chosen them, making a valid point. he is telling the new york times that and that is no good. does he have a point? sessions maybe told some of this stuff. >> sessions should have told him up front or recused himself. would a democratic ag in recent memory have done it? fat chance. he is grousing about a larger point. a larger message up and down pennsylvania avenue into congress, republicans have forgotten how to fight. essentially too off and they
fall on their sword. all of them i too off and falling on their sword in bad news and they have to realize they have to be willing to fight to the end like we are seeing with his obamacare repealing congress, republicans have forgotten how to fight and he is reminding people he doesn't want jeff sessions -- doesn't want to fire him and jeff sessions is not going to quit, should have told them up front, could have been made head of the permit of homeland security, there are lots of places for jeff sessions with the fact this russia probe is dragging on his administration, their loving every minute of it. trish: are they? are they loving every minute of this? >> there are democrats across the country that are salivating and chomping at the bit to continue banking the drum on russia but i also think there's a reality that is slowly but surely coming to fruition of democrats understanding that it is time for us to work together. leader schumer was saying it is time to work in a bipartisan
manner, the situation of repeal and replace is fallen apart. we need to come together. maybe, just maybe, i'm sure it is short-lived, this might -- we might be turning over a new leaf at least in the short term to work together. it is not going to be good. >> it is getting out of hand because they haven't found anything but it is almost like you got to be extra squeaky clean given the media has this laserlike focus, razors out get you in the trump administration, and is there part of view -- not disclosing some of these things, why not just put it all out there? >> that is the point. jeff sessions should have put it all out there indefinitely in terms of the trump administration, donald trump is no saint but he is not guilty of russian collusion.
he has to show more discipline but the reason he said this the new york times was a message to everyone. my problem is he shouldn't have said this out loud but he has to get everyone to jump at attention because we are 6 months into his presidency and essentially if we don't get something done in the first year this presidency may well be for not and democrats may take over congress. this is larger than sessions because jeff sessions outside the russia probe is doing a fantastic job. look where we are immigration, actually putting law and order back in america, jeff sessions was the right guy, this was handled poorly and donald trump when it comes to hearing his grievances has to be more disciplined about who he talked to and what he talks about. trish: except he is successful in sending a message to those on capitol hill and in the meantime lots of people love it. i want to get back, thank you so much, very interesting perspective. back to this oj situation, just
returned to his seat as he waits for the parole board's decision. the board could decide whether or not he is going to be free come october 1st. greg jarrett and misty marist i back with me and the thinking is you would be surprised if they said no, you're going back to jail. >> i would. they totally decided in advance they were not going to consider his prior conviction for beating his wife and were not going to consider that he is a threat to the community by virtue of a civil jury's unanimous verdict that he brutally killed nicole brown simpson and ronald goldman. it seems to me all they are going to do is look honestly at the mitigating factors and guidelines, compose a mathematical formula and because he has no disciplinary problems behind bars, no gang activity, alcohol or drugs, his score should be a fairly good score
and traditionally if you get a score that is good you get released. trish: he did invite some questions when he said i'm not a guy who lived a criminal life. do you think they picked up on that? >> how could you not? that is a pretty confidential statement, i'm surprised the parole board has begun speaking, let's listen in. >> mister simpson. you organized this crime, mister dickens was robbed at gunpoint. there is no excuse for it. you deserve to be sent to prison. you have been in prison almost nine years. there was imposed by the court.
you have complied with the rules of the prison, you have programmed in an acceptable manner. you have no prior conviction of criminal activity. you have listened to our guidelines, you have community support and release plans. we heard from you and your victim, the question here, whether or not you have served enough time in prison on this case. considering all of these factors, we grant your parole effective ineligible. >> thank you.
>> i concur with the commissioner and grant parole. in addition our decision although difficult is a fair and just decision. >> i concur and agree to parole. >> i want to let you know that believe that we are a consistent board. i will let you know that consistency also goes to parole and we do not look kindly on parole violation. if i have my vote to grant and it concludes the hearing, expectation would be that you not violate even the simplest commission of parole.
having said that, i am prepared to count the vote and asked the commissioners the condition if that happens, sometime in the next to 20 minutes to your presented to you at the institution and it will become a public record. based on all of that, mister simpson, i do vote to grant you parole and that will consider this. >> thank you. [applause] trish: o.j. simpson, big sigh of relief, happy face and they have
granted him parole after nine years. back with misty and greg, you anticipated this would happen, you anticipated it would as well. clearly this parole board didn't want to think about any of the previous problems he had in his life come basically spent a conflict free life, they took that at face value. >> not only the prior conviction for beating his wife, the civil jury verdict he killed two people. there were also other things of the road rage incident in which thanks to his lawyer he managed to eat the rap on that. a woman he was living with also accused him of physical abuse, he managed to obeid that. then he goes into the hotel room with a group of guys armed with guns and threatens and ends up
convicted of kidnapping and aggravated assault, armed robbery and a total of 12 charges. for him to claim he has lived a conflict free life is ludicrous. trish: a bit of a stretch and ludicrous. what does it tell us about the overall prison system? he was 9 to 33 years and we like to believe people can change and we can bring out the good in folks and those prisoners can be reformed, but given his past infractions as greg jarrett has laid out, can he really be reformed? is and he still a danger to society knowing that he has had the violent past? >> an interesting question and it is a big controversial topic about what it means to let people out after serving only a small in the grand scheme portion of their sentence but when the parole board looks at these cases they look at these
11 objective factors, we are not even going to consider any of that other stuff which is hard for us to forget what happened in 1995 but it is a point system. it ends up being -- stuff like his age, 70 years old, means he is looked at more favorably than when he goes out there, less likely to commit a crime. that is what they are looking at. whether it works who knows? there is need for reform. trish: you want to believe the best in everyone, they can turn over a new leaf, this is a man who has had a violent past and didn't complete the coursework he was supposed to complete to get the parole. >> had second, third, fourth and fifth chances and every time he abuses those chances he is a recidivist, the fact is, i recall fred goldman telling me after the acquittal in 1995 in
los angeles. trish: which we should point out you covered. you were in the trenches every day. >> goldman pulled me aside and said he was heartbroken, he so loved his son. oj will end up behind bars, this was in 1995. fred was right and i wonder if fred is thinking his pending release, o.j. simpson's, that he will somehow find a way to end up behind bars and that is a pretty good bet. trish: even now? >> even now. some people never learn. he has such a temper and if you ever wonder about it do two things, look at the abuse online of nicole brown system -- simpson. i saw the autopsy photos, he nearly decapitated her and dad ronald goldman more than 30 times and listen to the audio tape in that hotel room in las vegas in which he explodes in rage.
that is the real o.j. simpson. trish: is there no one articulating in these parole hearings, no one that can take you back to the kind of guy he was rather than the kind of guy they believe he is now? >> that is the interesting part because the testimony is limited in a parole hearing, limited to testimony relating to the charges that he was convicted of. so the one person that could have stepped forward and talked about the impact of the case is the victim and you have the victim testifying on his behalf advocating for his release. he is a longtime friend of o.j. simpson's, publicly come out many times and felt the sentence was too harsh which was a criticism of the judge in the case that oj was actually being punished for the acquittal that he was acquitted for in
i do hope you will tune in. tomorrow i will be on the catch. liz claman has you now. >> we've just gotten word that one of the four major developing stories that is coming to a head will happen live and that is the one in europe. just hours after the cbo. president trump is about to speak live at the white house. along with corning to make a major announcement about a partnership again they just gave us the notice that any moment now it will not be taped. it will be live. the senate still struggles to make it to the next healthcare mile marker.