too expensive. >> john? >> j-lo is partnerng with verizon to hit the latino market. i like verizon, i love j-lo. both.y b., bull or bear? ut verizon at a lower price. >> neil is up next. well, whoever said that nothing is certain in life but death and taxes apparently forgot one littl thin. a job, government. it takes lot to get fired. when you are forced to step down, it takes a lot for you to lose your pay. welcome everybody. i'm neil cavuto. maybe the first tipoff should have been the s.e.c. workers caught downloading porn. most still kept their jobs. not that there's anything wrong with that. like the official at this center of this irs storm, resing to answer questions and getting put on paid leave. and a key state department player in the benghazi mess getting a white house nomination for a promotion. we're not saying all government workers are bad bad government l

on the job at your expen, that's a bad people. >> charlie gas parrino. charles is off today. megan, what do you make of this? >> this leviathan, this monstrosity we call government, there is zero accountability. lois lerner takes the fifth and essentially acknowledges that there was maybe some criminal acivity that goes on. in the greatest sidestep of all-time, the first senior administration official to testify about this irs mess, deputy treasury secretary neil wol en, when they were being sworn in, he took a ste to his left so he would not be in the money shot with the other irs officials. >> i got to go. >> independent investigator. oh, and then when lois lerner was dismissed, therwas an empty seat between him and douglas shulman. he refused to move over until

congressman darrell issa told him to move over. >> what do you make of this? >> i make of it the fact that if there is an irs official taking the fifth, there's got to be criminal activity there. that congress or someone else is going to grant her immunity for testifying. for contempt. there's going to be a heck of a lot more reveal. >> i can't believe i'm hearing you say this. >> well, adam, i think -- without getting sidetracked in the scandal, what i do want to get a sense fr you is how even the folks directly or indirectly involved in it, can still have their jobs. there are consequences if you're head ofhe division where something bad happens. they don't answer any questions. yolose your job. it might not be fair or right, but that is the reality of the corporate world today. they fire and ask questions later. it's just weird, isn't it? >> well, the fact of the matter is we hve a presumption of innocence in this country. we've had for a very long time. >> weave at the very least an

appearance of a lot of impropriety at a government institution and at the very least people should step down and go away, right? >> no. i would say, bully for us that we do assume that somebody is innocent until proven guilty. by the way, somebody who takes the fifth is not acknowledging that ey've done something criminally wrong. >> why would she say i didn't do anything wrong and take the fifth. >> let me finish. maybe somebody else has done something criminally wrong. this is long-standing tradition. >> dyou think there's anything wrong here? it sounds like you don't think there's anything wrong here. it's so patently obvious that something went down re. a big bureaucracy, one of the heads, why can't they explain it. if they can't explain it, it's obvious criminality. >> i appreciate all of you wanting to get to the bottom of it. the fact is no one has lost their job yet. it took an acting commissioner

who is a temporary one out of there. no one has been remove yet. >> this is big government. >> i understand that. >> this is the scandal -- >> everybody you talk to in the brokerage community, that wouldn't last long. >> jamie dimon took responsible for the london wales where they lost a lot of money. he took responsibility. this is the difference between big government and business. >> he didn't take responsibility. >> big difference between government and business, there is no accounts accountability. there's layers and layers of bureaucracy that protects e people at the top. remember in the godfathers buffer, there was buffers between michael core -- >> there are buffers. >> what is abuffer? >> dag an, what i'm -- i think appearances do count for something. i think if you're going to say this happened under your watch, whether you are responsible for it or not, or a division head is responsible for it or not, you have to go. i'm sorry. you have to go. >> absolutely.

>> dag ann waited for you. >> i beg your pardon. >> hit the bricks. instead. she refuses to leave and she's on the beach now stll getting paid. i think that -- >> we don't know she'sn the beach. she could be in the woods for all we know. >> charlie can back me up when you say somebody is on the beach, it means they're not in their office in their job. >> understood. >> they're somewhere outside of the building. still getting paid. >> they're in malibu with ben. >> i know. >> i think that it speaks to just really quickly the fact that why this behavior can go on within the irs and why it is bred within the irs. >> it goes on in every burucracy. >> it does. ben stein, what do you make of that? >> i make of it the fact that they are incentivizing her to keep her mouth shut by sayin you'reoing to get your paycheck as long as you keep your mouth shut. if they are to fire her and cut off her paychecks, she has nothing to do but sell a book or agazine o an interviw. they're incentivizing her to keep her mouth shut.

>> i totally disagree with all of you. first of all, there's no accountability. we are hammering them. congress isammering them. >> why isn't -- why isn't anybody fired? >> my second point is -- hold on. let's be consistent. we all complain when the government does things too quickly. when tarp happened too quickly. adam, when the -- >> nobody had a chance to read. let's take the time to get it right. that's how -- >> john? >> even the fat cats on wall street act faster than these guys. this is what you get when you get big liberal government. you vote for bureaucracies you get this. layers upon layers of no accountability. >> adam, could i say this. i love you dearly like a brother, not rlly. but i do likeou a lot. when you talk to the irs and you demand we have patience and understding with the irs, if you have gotten a notice from the irs, they are not like that with you. i like the fact that you don't necessarily respond the same way and get on the same small

shallow level that i do, but when push comes to shove and you want the irs to act the same way, they have a history of not acting the same way. in fact, adam, they're in the deep doo doo they're in precisely because of that. >> you know, we're at a high level, wre blessed that we have a system of d process in our country. >> there we go with the due process. >> all right. -- >> we're not -- >> we do not have due process with the irs. if the i says you owe it money with no answer, they will freeze your bank accounts, period. >> youave an alternative. >> we know that this went on in the exempt division, period. we know that. why she's ill there and getting paid is beyond me. >> buy the way, it makes far more oomph and push when dag ann says it with a southern accent. >> i like the way she took the fifth. i'm innocent and i take the fifth. >> that is a legal right. >> if you were in a court of

law, that's contempt. you can't go out there and say i'm innocent, i am innocent. >> if you get into trouble, charlie, youake the fifth, i'm not going to disparage you. >> you don't make the opening statement. >> you don't get to say i didn't break any laws. >>any have done that before. >> through the watergate hearings. >> they all said -- >> with all due respect, people were not taking the fifth during the watergate hrings. they should have but they didt. >> do you think, ben this -- is it taking the fifth now, do you think that that means that this official simply for taking the fifth then, that that alone, it raises issues enou that she shouldn't be in her job at all? >> without question. >> wow. >> you can't do that on wall street. you get fired if you don't answer questions to the s.e.c. you get fired. if you don't answer a question from the securities and exchange commission, every wall street firm will fire you. that is the truth. >> i'm going to go back and look at my history and look at the watergate thing, if ben is right, of course, i won't say

that next week. if i'm right, i most certainly will say that next week. when we come back, forget about making irs officials talk. how about making the entire agency walk, take a walk. to get rid of the irs with one simple thing. next, the government snooping? not surprising. private companies giving up your information to help had the government do that? shocking.

nearly 1 in 200 americans suffer with the debilitating pain and constant disruption of inflammatory bowel disease. the toll is both physical and emotional. chances are you know someone with ibd. someone like me. i'm amy brenneman and i support the crohn's & colitis foundation of america. ccfa was created to help those with ibd cope and to find a cure. people with ibd can't wait. won't you help someone you know?

cavuto on business. have a great day. all right. you get by with a ttle help from your fends because when the government wants to snoop on a.p. reporters or other reporters like fox's james rosen it needs help from verizon and google to get access like calls and e-mails. usually the companies say no problem. adam, you say when that happens, big problem, huh? >> yeah. the bar should be extremely high before telephone carriers and internet companies give anything to the government. they should resist as much as possible. we don't have an absolute right to privacy. the government can demand this information. but they should do it the right way. >> what do you think of this, ben? >> well, i think that the leak must have been a super gigantic important leak for them to have gone to all this trouble and for them to be attacking fox. i seriously question whether it's just a leak or whether it's another iteration of the irs

harassment of conservative tea party groups. i noticed that they don't seem to be asking for the phone records for people from abc or nbc. >> that might be coming. he is rit. at least so far at this juncture that's not happened. >> you're supposed to t someone's phone, show probable cause of committing a crime and then the court gives you a court order to put a listening device on your cell phone or your phone. >> familiar to you. >> what interesting -- i know this for two reasons. i'm writing a book about insider trading where they tapped a lot of phones. en i was a kid, i believe my phone was tapped. my father was involved -- >> that's okay. we don't need to know. fine, this is america. >> you hear little clicks and you knew they were listening. >> let's hope that the companies, i do agree with adam, will stand to protect free press and protect those from the government. given the actions of thi government right now and the lengths to which they have gone to go after people labeling james rosen a co-conspirator to

get that search warrant, wouldn't you be afraid of the government if you're a google, if you're a verizon? we're in a very dangerous situation here. >> i don't know if you need a warrant, adam. let's say the government is coming to you, you're an officer of google or verizon and say you know we want to look at the phone records. i hear more often than not these guys don't answer tht. whatever, here you go. because they're afraid. >> i don't know that they need a search warrant either. i know that they have a -- >> not for charlie. it's an open-door policy. you know what i mean. >> i'm sure he has no -- >> but then, you raise something interesting. if you suspect there's something bad going on and you take it to that level. what i notice with leaks in the past, ben, is that when they look, in this case the administration looked at tracking down osama bin laden have at -- leak away and fine. when it comes to things maybe like benghazi or north korea or a host of other things and they

don't look good, not so fine. >> no. well, it goes even bigge than that. it's a big beautiful people media elite sort of to put it charitably -- this wikileaks guy to many people in this country is a big hero. but the -- mr. rosen, just a repoer trying to do his job, he's labelled a co-conspirator. i go back to saying with all due respect, i think if he worked for a mainstream media network, this wou not be happening. >> that's a very good point. >> here's the scary thing about it. you need a court order to get a tap on your phone. you go before a federal judge, the judge says x, y and z, do we have probable cause? where is that check when it comes to your e-mails and this stuff. it sounds like they don't have to do that. >> a subpoena. today's companies very often -- >> they can subpoena -- >> see that's what i wnt to know. conflicting reports earlier.

bore all this stuff fired up where google was giving away secrets and info on customers, with little provocation or little, i don't know, docuntation from the government. i guess what i'm asking , why do they do that? are they goin to be more scrupulous whether they respond in the future? >> in the past, there was a situation wherdoj subpoenaed about porn on the -- it jeopardized it's own trade secrets. >> i want to look at dagan. they might go ahead and give it. >> that's the scary part. there is no report -- >> they need to stand up for the american people. >> listen, the -- >> here's what we really need. we really need to update the privacy laws. title ii of the wiretap act. there's a thing called title iii, it was for looking at terrorists and white collar crime. there's a process. y go before a federal judge. there is no -- >> charlie raises --

>> look at e-mails, that is a modern form of communications. >> and we do need to -- >> these companies, the phone company alway had a ton of information. now companies like google and facebook inparticular, is have more information than was ever envisioned five years ago. >> you need to update that title iii act. update the privacy laws. >> they can blackmail any citizen in this country at this point. the amazing thing is they can blackmail any scitizen by going to his google records. by finding out what porn sites -- what sites he's been . >> a lot of friends and contacts who used to e-mail me a lot, call me a lot. they're afraid to do it. actually, aum the government is going to find out is a lot of takeout orders. that's fine. have at it. did any of you s this? >> all right. the supporters of immigration reform chanting again and again yes, we can, yes, we can.

something in this bill, though, could have taxpayers reeling and wondering, oh, no we don't, oh, no we don't. test test test test test test test

♪ ♪ >> well, you know nothing comes for free or does it? >> a lot of people celebrating the immigration reform bill. but t critics say it is not

requiring them toay back taxes at all. charlie, what does that say? >> the hard stuff ner gets done. i am dubbuous about the border patrol. the bad nows, stuff like taxes and we are supposed to wait for background checks and border patrol. it will never get done. it will just pass through. >> daggen. >> there i no record of where they worked. this bill would never get passed unless you do it piecemeal. nben, where is it going in >> it is going to an unimaginable pandering of the hispanic vote. charlie is right. they will never collect taxes or meaningful background checkss daggen said. we said open up the floed gates

and let anyone who wants to come in, come in. >> adam, what is weird about, it is a way to assure conservative to are reluctant to pass is. just like to daggen's point we would protect the border and we ended up not protecting the border through ronald regan and that will be left aside. there is an issue in my craw. sides in this country owe and pay taxes. citizens that are not citizens of the country get a pass on that and that bothers me. nall sorts of people in the cash economy don't pay taxes. that is not good but is. this is an issue and opponents of the bill bringing something. as daggen explained, you would not get them to y. but you get them here and they

pay. nall of the illegal tivities, let that go and a now starting point and hope you behave and pay your taxes. >> we are ing solve a proem. >> we solve the problem by letting anybody in. that is what it is going to be. >> that's your conjecte. >> thergument is, bring them out of the shadows and they are legal. >> and do bacackground checks. >> can you do background checks. >> then you get taxes from them. >> one way or the other they would try to get it through. thank you.

>> stocks in it for the long haul, what do we have, adam? >> people should look at quest diagnost. they run the labs for blood drives and other reasons. it is going to around f a long time. it pays a modest difdepd and not been up very much which is the way people shouldhave approached their invest ams. >> i have kept them in business. ben? >> what does adam know that the market doesn't know? it is a find company. >> what are you doing, ben in snrngs industrial diamonds and average i will stick with that.

>> what do you think of that, adam? it is fine. i would want to mimic the s&p 500 and all of the stock markets and not . >> i want to thank all of you. . >> what we still don't know is is it time to fix this mess for something steve forbes has been advocating for years? >> the flat tax is something simple like my flat tax. >> the flat tax. >> something single rate. >> flat tax. >> simple flat tax. >> sorry a simple flat tax a way to tame the irs