>> i'm bullish on it. when it drops 40. >> brenda: toby? >> yum love kids. >> brenda: john bull or bear? >> i'm going grocery shopping. bear! ] >> brenda: neil take it away. ♪ >> neil: do you ever wonder who can you trust? for more americans it ain't the white house. hi, everyone. i'm ne cavuto. watch your back. the government could be watching yu. here, there, everywhere. reports that it's monitoring million of verizon customers in america. getting host of internet companies together online information overseas. a poll shows half of americans don't think the president is being truthful with the country on the i.r.s. scandal. even the "new york times," writing this about the sndal. thiss updated a little bit. the administration has now lost all credibility on this

issue. that is a big deal. if perception is reality, i the administration in real trouble? daigen mcdowell and julie up stephen. charles payne. >> when the "new york times" says president obama lost all cribility -- >> on this issue. that's how it was in the original draft. >> on this issue. >> he is great on the economy. the headline is the headline. this whole thingbout whether it's the patriot act. it's the patriot act on steroids. the internet companies, you know, people have to feel like they have nothing, nothing. the president talked about when he is not president, he wants to protect his privacy. that is why he cares about this now. give me a break. that is lame. are you kidding me? >> neil: i'm sure he does. >> we will fix it in three years? you're snooping through everything from what i

cerony on goggle and what i say on a telephone. >> neil: very defensive. something is worrying you. what do you make of this? >> i don't have a problem with the national security agency program at all. i don't have expectations of privacy. i freely am -- i will stel up for a patdown at the airport. i find that a bigger invasion of privacy. >> neil: so do i, but i'm lonely. >> the issue is here, what they are doing -- >> neil: u are used to it and this is nothing new. what does that say? >> we live in a police state. we have after 9/11 increasingly. i don't't think is purely president obama's ise. i am with daigen. everything i'm doing is monitored. >> neil: you can count o that. >> what is interesting is that the alleged civil libertarians that would go nuts if george bush did this or this happened

in the bush administration, we need -- these are grave national security issues. there is a hypocrisy. >> that is an excellent point. saturday obama against the intrusion that president bush made to allow the stuff we are seeing going on now. but on steroids. it just seems weird. >> theres a big difference. under the bush administration they didn't get court orders. under the obama admistration they are getting a court order for the surveillance. >> there is a big difference. >> there is a big difference. >> whether you have judicial supervision. i'm with daigen. i don't think this is a big scandal. you are n talk about the government eavesdropping on the conversation. >neil: how do you kn? we discovered that is indeed what happened and that getti the records was -- >> that is -- >> that is not what we know. >> that's what we know so far.

>> neil: we didn't know this a few day ago, julian. >> if you let me answer i will try to explain. >>eil: go ahead. >> what we know the program allows the government to get me the data, the toll records. originating and terminati phone numbers to try to prevent anothe 9/11 attack. the other case, the government is following the law in evy instance. up in of the complaints made begin to allege that the both is doing anything other that following the law. >> were you for the patriot act? >> yes. >> you were. okay. you're consistent. >> this mystifies me. before you came on i watched president obama talk and say there is n probm. nobody phone's are listened to. if nobody's phones are listened to, then what is the point? what is going on if they are not listening. what is the point. >> there is an easy answer to that.

there is an ey answer to that. >> julian, you are forgetting this is the first step to get the probaly cause to listen to your phone. that is the way the f.b.i. work. they get -- >> so why don't we point out that the court orderses are never -- >> [ overtalk ] >> the position that the republicans have taken. if you have us a spted terrorist in yemen, speaking to somebody inside the united states, i want to know the phone number of that person. i wab the court to authorize this -- >> this is not what the president said. what we're talking about here is preventing another 9/11 attack. >> that's what george bush said before -- >> neil: all right. >> we are combining events. here is what i think. maybe you can help me with this. fact of the matter is this is not an isolated incident.

collecting phone records on millions of americans is one thing. saying you are going after conservative groups and then it's more than a few. then a lot more than just groups. it's individuals. exanding this to go after fox. there is a steady, systemic pattern of invading people's privacy to use the full weight and power of the united states government to be a pain. >> there is arrogance. the notion that this is monitoring phone calls from here to yemen, 170 million customers are calling yemen? c'mon. if you want to cross reference after the boston terror event, and you are getting the information for vezon to cross check and cross reference anyone that might have been with him and his brother -- >> i'm with you. now you have the documents.

i'm with you. all of that. that is how you typically gather the information. >> there is contempt and arrogance at play that dismisses the reference to presiden press conference. dismisses the concerns. >> this is a creep. it es forward and forward. you have to be czy notto think they aren't monitoring the phone calls of avera americans, people that are probably in the tea party. they believe are right -- >> neil: wedon't know that. to julian's point we don't know that. >> if they are going t go for a court order for james rosen's e-mail account, and his father e-mail account, they willet court orders for people to listen to the telephone calls. >> can i say? i have been sitting here quietly, which i usually don't do. the n.s.a. program, if this

had come out by itself, i don't think -- >> neil: exactly. that's exactly right. >> but do we trust the obama administratioand the white house to protect us and the information thathe.s.a. is getting with what happens with the i.r.s. and with what has happened with the criminalizing investigate i reporting and not protecting the first amendment in this country? people are in doubt. >> neil: the creepiness -- i guess what i'm asking is what part of custer don't you understand here? you are surrounded andou see one ips dept after another that comes up. it comes to the samessue. privacy invad or potentially invaded. doing the same thing. there is a pattern. >> if y want to conflate and combine the issues and make the general statements you can do that. i don't think it's a

thoughtful way to approach it. >> neil: think about what i said. >> i don't connect the dots. i don't connect the dots. >> neil: julian, i'm telling you. drop the liberal thing and focus on the reality thing. you have one entity going after american people. depament after another doing the same thing. you can call that conflating. p i am telling you there is a pattern. >> i could as easily -- >> neil: i guarantee you if it were geoe bush doing i you would be all over it. >> that is wrong. that is incorrect. that is -- >> face it. >> go ahead. >> you want me to reond? look, you can't conflate all the issues. you t have to speak about them differently. the case of the i.r.s., targeting is wrong. no connection to the white house. >> he would make a lousy reporter. >> there was no -- no one was criminal sizing the investigative reporting. nobody in the justice department spoke about prosecuting rosen. that was a method to get

subpoena -- >> that is not targeting him. >> neil: i'm not going get anywhere arguing this point. julian -- [ overtalk ] >> i want to talk fas and you want to make general broadside. >> neil: you are saying notng and it's ofensive. >> neil, speak about it specifically. let's debate the issu >> neil: why don't you talk back? it's annoying how obnoxious you can be on reality. i'm not going to play this game with you, juli. you played theame game dismissing one -- [over talk ] >> obama hater. you're playing obama hater and not backing it up with facts. >> neil: i want toe clear on this. cut his damn mickism want to be clear to you. ben, is this pattern of behavior you see here, i want to keep politics out of it. i want to keep the nuances out of it. i want to just address a pattern of behavior you have seen, that does or does not worry you. does it? >> it worries me terribly. charlie gasp abrino got it right. it's a police state situation. getting worse and worse all

the time. the fact that mr. obama campaigned against it is really extrely unformnate. now he is defending it. i think, i say the idea that over 100 million phone calls are being made to terrorist groups in yemen are all over the middle east is comical. of course they are listening to the phone conversations. >> they are not listening to the phone conversation. >> how do you know, julian? >> neil: i'm not going to get in a he said/she said thing that is nonsensical stupid point. i'm not going to do it. sorry if a lot of you at home are offended by this and clicking the challenge. we are too knee-deep in this

i a jamie colby. send you back to "cavuto on busess." >> neil: all right, this is going to have you at a loss. literally. th government sellng 30 million more saresof bailed-out general motors continue to pull away from the to rimmal $15 billion investment, which would be our investment. taxpars, that would be us, still expected to lose $10 billion on that investment. >> you are not surprised, you expect it. but a huge deal. $10 billion is a lot. i think we went about this the wrong way. free markets could have handled this. they should have gone bankrupt. it was designed to save the unions or to benefit unions. we paid a big price for it i think as miles pe miles per ame. >> ironic that bailed-out bank underwrite bail-out company ipo or the secondary ofring

is the best way to put it. ed whitaker, the former ceo put it best. he said they should have drop it all at once. ty could he sold out all at once and whitaker's point if they did it the first time, because there was so much demand they could have sold at a profit. tim gehner the treasury secretary would not do it all at once. >> neil: a lot of folks on main street say we are too focused on the wall street side and jobs were saved and company was savedded. that is far more lucrative gain in the long run than any stock performance. what do you think of that? >> i was in favor of bail-out. i think you are in a tricky situation of trying to sometime a stock sale. at this point, everybody wants and probably the people at g.m. want the government out of the company as well. you got to eat the loss. especially though g. is doing extremely well. high sales last month.

>> i love the fact they rescued g.m. g.m. is american institution. what is goodor america is good for general motors or maybe it was vice versa. i love they saved it and saved the job. i doesn't bother me they are the union jobs. $10 billion is a small price to pay for saving company of that magnitude. >> we are presupposing this is the only way to save them. we could have done a prepackaged bankruptcy where you would have craed down unions i'm a union guy. but they extorted so much benefit -- >> neil: you say are you a union guy? are you in a union? >> no, my dad was a union. >> neil: so the reason why you call yourself union guy your dad was in a union. which is great. so was m dad. i am not a union -- >> here is why. we moved from a crummy apartment to a crummy little house because old man was in a union. >> is that why? >> that isone of --

>> my you moved to the house he was in a union? >> they help provide my father with benefits and work ethic. one thing that the unions did, they did extort, if extort. tremendous benefits at a g.m. what should have been done. not against them being bailed out but should have been done through a prepackald bankruptcy to make the unions -- >> that is what wonder about. union guy say it's not realistic option. if you pitch the rescue and the bail-out saying you have to shut down the factories they would have never been approvedded. but what we got,ere the taxpayer finance bail-out. that never would have been counted if they were pitched that way in the first place. >> we talk about the continued reckless behavior. we know anytime it come up again, people say the last one worked. general motors -- >> neil: did it for them.

bentein -- >> we re in a panic situation. >> neil: absolutely. absolutely. i understand. >> i think they had to step in with something mre than prepackalled bankruptcy and put the full weight of the federal government behind the rescue. i would still choose cadillac over goldm sachs. >> i wouldn't bail out anyone. but that is me. all right. what if the people who are supposed to benefit from the healthcare law don't really want the law? ain't that a kick in the pants? the forbes gang on how all of this could cost all of you. that is the top of the hour. you next, food for thought. one of the biggest hotels in ameri

>> neil: quiet in the break. want to bring you up to speed. hilton in midto manhattan, biggest hotel isditching room service turns out the expensive burrs aren't giving them a lot of extra beef. it's coming as the airlines are cutting back on everhing from free food to free carry-on. ben, what is going on here? >> what is going on here is a disaster. those who travel a lot, arrive late at night exhausted. needing to go over the speeches the next morning ed room service. we are sffering terriy. it's just almost unsakable the forture we are going through [ laughter ] >> when i hear the pain of america streaming on that, first thing it does in fact come to mind is what i will get the chickp wings at 1:00 in the morning delivered to my room.

the wings are outrageously priced. average they make on room service is $3 a person. >> not far from us had a tray charge. $15 for the tray. can i keep it? they said no. shocked. i thought we were moving toward a jetson worldut it's moving toward the flintstone's rld. you go to the supermart, self-check-out. what the heck happened. pretty soon you have to change your linen and have the same towel until you check out. you probab won't see a human beng at the hotels in a couple of years. >> neil: but they are giving all this up. maybe it's a pay-for-service type of thing. >> brown bag delivery. >> neil: i'm told the hotels with a fi star rating must have room service.

>> you know what? you are not staying in the right places. if you want room service from the hillton, no offense. it's food out of a bx, bag, jar, canister or god knows where it comes from. it all tastes the same. >> neil: are hotels going the airline route? >> my mother would say eat a banana before dinner. so ben, eat a banana. >> neil: good point. >> what is the relevance of that? >> i have no idea. >> you don't need room service in the middle of the night. it's bad for you. >> you are a health maniac. >> he is. >> i indulge every now a then. >> he jogs more miles than i drive. we have more coming up. another choppy -- i love you, too. another week for the choppy markets. charles and ben have a couple of stead destocks they hope to

>> neil: stocks to weather the storm. >> lincoln, it can be a volatile stock but $250 stock ultimately. >> neil: wow! ben, what do you think of lin linkenin. >> i don' know what charles knwshat the market doe't know but anytime you get warren buffett to do your investing for you, let's do it. join in with him. he is the greatest jeepous ever been in the world of -- geniusver been in world of stock picking. buy in with him.

he charges his salary, like $100,000 a year on the biggest, one of the biggest companies in the world. let's be his partner. >> neil: and never invest in anything charles says. that will do it here. cost of freedom continues now. ♪ fighting back afr being singled out by the i.r.s. >> what is intolerable is one set of rule for one side of the political fight and another set of rules for the other. >> since may of 2011, i have been dormant not only out of the inability to raise money but abject fear government had a target on my back. >> i want to protect and preserve the america i grew up in. the america that people cross oceans and riskheir lives to become a part of. i'm terrified it's slipping away. leader conservative groups testifying how the i.r.s. went afr them. the agency is supposed to follow the money. and the rule of law. but did the victims just prove the tax man was playing poli