neil: well, who says the white housdoesn't talk about stuff that's illegal. that's not so. the president's been talking 5 lot about ilegal immigrants and finally making them legal and russia holding edward snowden ill saying, well, thas ilgal, but when it coes to a certain irs scandal or justice department scandal or a pattern of healt care department related scandals, not only does the wor "illegal" come up,not a one scandal comes up, not ever. be careful about a president who picks and chooses what he finds illegal. history suggests th real events ultimately determines what is. welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto, and as we end this week, this just seems weak, a pit that, well, makes me

vomit. a president deciding wh a legal issue isso big he'll talk about it, yes, if it's the supreme court ruling on gay marriage, yes, if it's the same ruling on voting rights, and, yes, if it's voting on illegal immigration bill. all illegalities have to be addressedn society, but not the others bubbling in his own administtion. now, good lawyers now how to deflect, and his preside isa good lawyer, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a good many scandals. now, some tat look awfully ilgal to me, but then again, i'm no lawyer, slicg words, i'm just a voter wanting answers. to larry on whether this pivot is ieed a pivot, and if we should be worried about it, or just an example of yet nther president choosing to talk about the legal issues that matter to him and not the legal issues that coull be early damaging him. larry, what do you makeof all

this? >> neil, you hit on it when you said you were a voterbecause ultimately it's a political judgment by the voters, but the next election's a yar and a half awa esidents don't talk about ings -- unhappy things unless they are forced to, and he can only be orcedi twoways, a full-blown press conference, that he rarely has, and even in those cases, call on friendly reporters who don ask the questions or ask them in a nice way, and an election. the elecon is november 2014 for the senate and houue. neiljust running out the clock to see if it loses steam? of course. presidents always run out the clock on bad news. that's part of the trick of the job. neil: you told me as great historian you are, you rub it in my face whhen i get you icecream when i'm wrong, that history rewards those presidents who et in front of something, even if th are n responsible for it.

john kennedy cmes to ind after the bay of pigs disaster, he was willing to take the blame, his poll numbe shot up. history rewards residents who try to get ahead smething, doesn't it? >> yeah, assuming youave the answers, neil. look, the voters, people generally love nthi bette than a president or a politician who's willg to admit they were wrong or to take responsibility for something hether they personally did it or not. you know the people, nemo. they are prey big egoed and they don't do that often. neil: i have it with the big egoe and that's what i love about myself, but, anyway, do you feel this is going to come back to bite him, though? by singling out, playing tongue-in-cheek to say, all right, these illties the supreme court's addressing, the senate's

addressing, they matter to me. the other clear illegalities do not. -eople at home just don't say, wait a minute, you're picking and choosing here. >> well, if they pay attention, they might do that, neil, but, look, you're talking about hypocrisy, and we've had the conversati before. hypocrisy is the life blood of politics. neil: tuche my friend. good to see you. >> thank you, neil, take care of yourself. neil: you too. ignore the man behind the curtain. the great oz. was an old dude pulling a crank. remember that? whether the president is doing the same thing and it's getting old, and melissa francis on investors who sy we got it wrong. he's not the realrank and he's nots the real oz, and someone else is, and if he screws up, we go down. maryatherine,the pivot,way do you think of it in >> i agree with larry thatthis is self-preservation of politicians, and the president's

particularly good at running ut the clock, i think. that's why you didn't get the obamacare regulations until three years after the bill was passed because he knew if they did that, people react before the election. he's good at this thing. he als has a way of lecturing the rest of us how we should not jump to cop collusions unless he wants to jump to cnclusions, and if it's trayvon martin, what have you,he's happ to act poetic about whatever it is and ju to plenty of conclusions, but we are not llowed to if there's a bunch of political terms for conservatives to target people from the irs. neil: looking at the markets generally, melis, they are not interested in what hs doing, but what the ral as i doing. >> that's federal reserve chairman, ben bernanke, focud on everything he does and says, and we saw as he hinted thatat maybe, maybe the punch bowl might be goig away at the enof the year if things continue to be okay, which they are not, by e way, if you look to gd, it's smaller, and the ecnomy

grows slower than we thouht. that bad news for regular people. neil: what do the markets think then, to that point, if it turns out whatever selectivmemory the president has about illegal acts, they really fester and they really come bacc to bite him, and tt it gets to be re wrry, then what? do they start paying ttention? melissa: maybe they pay attention, but it could b a good thing. one thing tat happened is it distracted the preside more or less from doing more damage to business. he came out making the speech about the environment, and that destroyed coal stocks for that day, but as long a he's distracted in doing something else, i mean, i had banker say recently every time they stick their head up, they are pistol whipped bywashington. theyry to do as little as possible. that's not good for the ecoomy, not good nor growth, business, or regular people who need jobs. neil: mary katherine, what do you think of the argunt, though, there's a ort of

strategy to it, that might not be too stupid, and that is deflect, wait it out, defleect, wait it out, and before you know it, we're through the summer, through the worst of it, and we stl goa year togo to the midterms >> yeah, i mean, it wrks well for him sometimes, and i think sometimes, unfortunatelily, because the medias happy to let hiay out the clock here. you know, i think -- neil: explain that. i didn't want to jump on you, mary, i apologize. >> no, go ahead. ne: u mentioned a profound point. the mediadropped tis rs thing ry quickly when they got word or appeared to get word, and melissa's point of fact it was not what it appearto be, liberal groups were included in the witch hunt, and that gave them a cover to drop it. what do you think of that? >> yeah, i think it did. the irs comes out again saying, well, okay, there six -- the actual data shows six liberal groups in hundreds and hundreds of conservative groups. it doesn't fly. they are happy to let him swim

along and avoid things. on benghazi, for instance, would we have gotten questions answwred unless republicans and a few reporters had kpt asking question, and they were, of course, trashed by other pople in the media. i think asking these questions is key, and part of the key is fixing these problems so that peop have some trust, maybe occasionally, in theederal government making all systems work better. at this point, a lot -- neil: no, no, that's interesting because to your pint, melissa, that what scares me the most is how much the media tires of these various scandals, and doesn't really want to dig that much in it because it's just -- i almost see them dragging them, oh, i got to uncover this, and when you got word ofhe liberal things, oh, good, we can drop it. without doing what y did to find -- >> no, look to the bottom. it was a small number, and their names were just put on the lookout list. it was not --

their application for the tax exempt status was not held up. thhy didn't actuay receive the samebuse -- neil: the media takes that and says, oh. >> they are tired of the story because it's not playingthe way they want to. they feel there's balance in there. both sides get it, which was not theecase, and it's okayto drop it and moveon to something else. neil: mary katherine, final word. >> yeah, thank they don't want a story that makes the administration looks like they fulfilled the wost nigtmares of the tea partiment they want to act as if it's pair know ya, but it's not what theyet you, and that's what the story hows, and in order toto xit, you have to figure out that that's th problem, and you have to shine a spotlight on it. whhn he's able to run out the clock, we don't get solutions to the prlem. it can happen in the futre. neil: ladies, thank you both. it knows who you call and e-mailing, a when you thought the nsa snooping scandal couldn't get worse, ha, it ets

worse.

neil: you know, i really think the nsa is turning into me. the house guest who will not leave. i'm that guest. i am the nsa.

what they are doing is worse than what i did at your hous being a couch poato, listening in on your calls, and even learn, well, what your e-mails are abou, read every singl one ofhem. that's what the irs is charged withoing antensa more to the point mining millions of them to see who sent what and when. snooping that's getting exhausting. liz? >> here's the problem. i mean, amercans really want to catch terrorists. they support the government, saying, yeah, cath terrorists, it's great, let's do it, but when you do it without really indicating to congress what you're doing, and then gong after the fact to get congressional review of what you're doing and when it's e-mails, e-mails bother me because they show your location, also, what about what you write in the bject line of your e-mail because the nsa says we didn't view the content of the e-mail. they use subject lines all the time, and what bothers me about the story too is senator wyden asked the director of

intelligence, james clappe are you collecting data on millions of americans, and he flatly said no, ad now we have an e-mail controversy popping up. neil: they say there's no news here. >> no. neil: what do you >> i'm flattered they are reading my e-mails. you know, most of the time, i send them, noody responds back. when iake a list of, like, the top 50 things that are, like, on my mind today, my problems, nemo, you know, i mean, you know, problems with a specific customer today, i ha a big softball game sunday, worries - playing on the softball team, and whatever the government is reading in y e-mail, believe me, read whatever they nt. if it's helping them protect us and provide that security, it's just not on my list of the 50 things i'm worrying about, and it has not been. neil: okay. adam, is it on your list of worries? >> well, o -- well, yes and no. first of all, it's a joke to say it's fine if they ead my

e-mails. we should be clear if what we now so far they are not reading our e-mails or listening to our phone call, but lookin at the data and trying to mine somethingwith it using algorithms to try -- neil: you're right, you're very right. you know once you have all that stuff, the next step would be eavesdropping, the next step is reading all of the above, and by the way, just collecting the e-mails leads me to believe they are not st sor of sitting on a deskr on acomputer. >> well, nemo, the next step you raise ishe least troublesome of all because the nxt step would be, you know, old-fashioned going to the judge and asking for -- neil: i don't think it does. the history of the government, i don't think they bther with the judge, and z's point, it's after the fact for this stuff, it concerns me. that's the concern. >> that's where i said i'm concerne neil. i comletely support that we, you know, we investigate this, write about it, make sure that they've got permission.

>> the thing, too, is who has security clearance to do this? the thing is, they can say they are making -- that they are not reading e males, but -- -- neil: i don't believe a word i'm hearing. >> it violates the fourth amendment. neil: exact limit it's only a feconservative groups turned to bhundreds. we never went after individuals, but it was several big donors. everything you've told me, government, irs, is a lie. when we first up covered the ap reporter targeted, that was it, only a few, but it extended to a fox news reporter and executives. i don't believe nything you say. i'm never confident that anything you say ended. that's the point. >> i understand that, neil, but when you -- neil: you're too busy playing softball, and you're willing to let the government continue to play hardball. >> i've not been hitting well recely, and it's on my mind. neil: keep playing, running around the bases, and they are running and destroying the

country. >> when i think about security, does the government have he resources to read my and liz's -- >> sure they do. neil: yes, teydo! >> you're a nice person. >> you're a nice person. >> don'take it the wrong way. they don't care what's in your e-mail. neil: oh, really? how did james rosen get caught up? >> it depends on who the person is, and, loo there's 3 # 30 million -- >> she's one of he most celebrated reporters in america. no, serious. i'm just saying, and adam, this worries me. when so much -- neil, come dawn, don't be worried, i mentioned on the show, the twilight zone episode where all the guys from planet earth run into an alien spaceship, and it's a cook book and they get the ingredients in someone's salad. your answer. >> well, what i'm sayin is, neil, don't calm down, go ahead, be worried, but that we want to workith the government to do this well. >> seems worse after the fact.

neil: very understanding. >> i'm understanding, t i'm trying to -- >> understanding to a degree. i don't like that i's worse after the fact. the news comes out, and it's worse. neil: next's week's team is blaming the irs also. >> no fly balls, hit it on te ground. neil: in the meantime, gobble up, pay up. how washington wants a bite from how washington wants a bite from your wallet for every bite you

[cell phone beeps]

hey! so, same time next week? wewell, of course. announcer: put away a few bks. feel like a million bucks. for free tips to help you save, go to ♪ feed the pig

neil: that's goi to cost him because in washington, taxes on

home or loan pay down the entire national debt. a new government sponsored study showing a calorie tax helps cure the oesity crisis to resolve our financial crisis. now, an agriculture department official is agreeing. they are calling this a fat tax. the attorney says fat chance. ashely, what do you think? if you tax food ased on its calories or by some extent how bad it is for you, you make a killing, and you can stop bad behavior, make the government some money, just le cigarettes, what do you think? >> right. well, the last thing we need is more taxes so this is just a bad idea all around. you can't tax someone to force them into good behavior. it didn't work with cigarettes or alcohol. neil: theyargue with cigarettes it did. i agree with you, but they argue that, you know, smoking is way

down, and we've madd it so prohibitive for smokers that look at how life has changed. >> you know, though, i don't agree with that because if you look at the socioeconomic classes of smokers, it's not the rich people necessarily the majority ofsmokrs, and so i disagree that the tax has anything to do with that. i think educaon had something to do with that educating the peop how horrible cigaettes were for us, and we sort of ha publicsarrizing of smokers not allod to smoke in airports or eating establishments with food served, things like that. kneel noel i didn't think of that. good point. be careful what you start with here because what goes with forbidding smoking or making it more costly leads to prohilting in establishments. i could actually be arrested for eating a winkie at the corner of 48th and 6th, which i've done many times, by the way. that's an nteresting extension of that. >> right. 's free choice.

i think it's free choice what you decide to put int your body is your free choice in the nei the smoking thing is differt in this case, that that could, secondhand smoke i dangerous, all that, and i'm not rting anyone outside of my myself eating all of ths bad stuff. they might be offended b ho i eat. i tend to be a sloppy eaer, but that's not compromising hair health. what do you think of that? >> right, definitely. there's a flip side. if we tax calories, we hurt people who are doing the right things, some athletes, i run some dtance e racesn the past, and i had to consume more calories. y should the people doing a healthy activity be punished with the calorie tax? neil: the problem as well is what you start taxing, you don't stop taxing, and cigarette smokerfound out whn fewer of them appeared, the tax all the more on those still smoking so

's, you know, it has an unending nature to it. where's all this going? >> i think it starts at home. what we should do is there ould be mo educion and parents should teach children how to et healthy because the study was based on childhood obesity, a horrible epidemic, but the more education we have, then the better off we're going to be and able to make better food choice, and maybe we ought to help the farmers so that fresh fruits and vegetablee are easily available, readily available, and less expensive than taxing other types of food that we don't want peple to eat. encucialg good eating, but discourage bad eating, but not with taxes. neil: very good. thank you very much. >> thank you. neil: short, sweet, and ends silent. silent for now, why lois lerner may break hr silence soon because of this. ♪ >> i have not

♪ ne: lo iring's s, please see us. still t talking, but house republiians want to be sure se does dragging her back to capitol hill again to get her to talk a little longer, again. the house oversight committee voting today to do just that. congresswoman, many of your colleagues argue, some f your democratic ones as well, that she did leave herself open to this because with that inoduction statement of her, she took all tt pleading the

5th nonsense aay. is that your take as well? >> that is my take. she said she broke no laws, didn't do anything wrong, that she didn't violate irs rules and regulations, and that she did not provide false ttimony to congress, and then she inoked her 5th amendment right we have believe she waived her fifthamendment right against self-inimination when she mae those assertions. it's to the extempt of what the did say. we have the right to cross-examine her. neil: have you heard back from her? >> we have not, but we did pass aresolution today saying that we believe that she waived her rights, and now -- neil: what if she says no? >> if she says no and, again, comes in and invokes her right against self-incrimination, then we'll have to make a decision about wheeher to hold her in contempt or not. neil: what if she says she's not coming at all to invoke the

right, been there, done that, not doing it again. >> well, then i believe have the option to explore whether or not to hold her in con temperature. if held in contempt by the committee, it goes to the vote in the house of representatives, then a u.s attorneywho then takes matters to a grand jury. plenty of lega rights still t come. neil: can you update me on the lab rail groups targeted as ll? hearing there's not that many group, and they might not have been tareted to the degree certainly conservative one wrs. what do you know about it? how big was it? >> we don't know the extent of hog it was yet, and th's why we want to talk to more people from the irs who were nvolved in making the decisions about the be on the lookout memos that were sent around within the agency saying, hey, be on the lookout for people who have tea party or patri -- neil: way about th liberal ones

with t words "occupy" or "keystone" inhe nam were they -- >> occupy? neil: was that any of them oror just a ruse, what? >> we don't know yet, but there's targeting of conservative group, and whether or not there was targeting of liberal oups we have to know becae as you know, neil, the page is turned on this. you can have a conservative administration go after a liberal group or vice versa if we allow the irs to rn amuck. neil: that's the bigger point, isn't it? whether this turns out to be true or not, tht liberals were rgeted even to the degree, it's not what the irs should be doing. >> targeting is targetg. liberals, consertives or somet's other way out group. that's not the point. the point is do they deserve tax exempt status and when d they deserve it? in a timely mannr, at least a

decision when they deserve it should be made in the timely manner so they can appea that decision. neil: congresswoman,n, thank yo. >> you're welcome. neil: snny jeans, fat controversy, the war over slim jeans that could change my weekend wear forever.

neil: the drama overen anyone. the european union dramatically increasing a tari on american skinny jeans. i'm not talking big baggy mom jeanup to your chin, my weekend wear, by the way, but jeans tapered so tight they look lick denim stockings. the california manufacturers behind them are scrambling to deal with that figuring the european forms are perfect for their stuff, other than the french. to the business blitzer on

europe piling on on te blist against america. what do you think? >> it's great as long as you have less comptitive industries abroad, but what they are signaling is we want torotect our own industries. skinny jeans, if they are catch shes there, they pay whatever it takes to look good. neil: al, i didn't know about skinny jeans, i wonder why, but i -- i woder as well what the european have agait them, assuming they make plenty of the same. >> well, this is retaliatory strike. we raised tariffs, they are raising them back. the whole world is engineered by banks from dropping money from helicopters. the strong dollar makes it harder raising tariffs, this is what happens. it's one thing leads to another. frankly, i'm surised they fit in them after eating our mcdonald's hamburgers. neil: what's outrageous is the

video bringing me up to daton this issue. i think we have to keep rolling this, guus, extreme slowly, frame by frame to get to the bottom of it, but you say, keith, we're not going to make progress it goes on and on and on and away for th europeans to ensure they never get there? >>we've seen this time and time again from the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. it doesn't matter, agriculture or jeans, doesn't matter. there's high unemployment in europe, costs out of control, and we know from history that protectionism hurts the consumers ey try to protect. the arguuent is a very socialist one is who you are informing. are we protecting the manufacturs or the consumers? i don't know the aswer to that, but it will continue. neil: i don't know who put this together either, but i'll find them. in the meantime, nike ust doing it in the u.s., bt just in the u.s.. anywhere else, not so much. the sneaker make r ou with good numbers here and it's not exact hi sppeading out there.

al, is the rest of the word nike achilles heel? what's going on? >> it's hard for america companies to grow if europe is slowing. well, we got used to that story, but china is slowing. where are they going to sell? well, the answer is in the u.s., there's a boom going on here, and hopefully that lasts. i don't know how long the american economy can contie to, you kno, turn out healthy consumers when, you know, the company's can't grow, so i don't know. i think nike had a pretty good report, but, yo know, i think the stock is reacting to the fact that there's a lot of uncertainty. neil: always the sam old thing with the companies. they got cautionary warnings; right? nike's to be taken seriously with great reserve, what? >> you know, i think nike gets a big fat timout here. you know, the fact of the mater is that they've been there, they've done that, not just doing it anymore, and the competition in china, i think, is the real issue, it's not that

sales are slowing, but chinese brands make seerious impacts ino otherwise fickle consumer base, and i think it's only natural, unfortunately, they are caught in the middle of this. neil: hated the adveising campaign, "ju do it," i will, i will, when i feel like it. as we get to our third issue here, no eedto wk to the bank when the bank is in your pocket. go bank is th first one designed to be used on mobile devices. here's the wist, only mobile devices, no such physical structure to go to. it's a bank game changer, is it? >> i hate the word "game changer" because then yyu wonder what the game is. neil: so do i. me too. neil: do you tnk it's a game changer? >> i remember the first internet bank. i don't know what it was, but -- neil: ing; right? >> it was a game changer. if they succeed, everybody knocks them off, and i's not a game changer, buta new game.

i like the company. i get press releases from them and there's research and surveys, and they are a clever bank. the ida people pay what they want, 0-9, see lounge that lasts, you know. they say, yeah, we wok for tips. i don't know what banker works for tips. [laughter] neil: keith, to the poi that you can offer people maybe even jeans you can order online, but that you can really drastically reduce your costs if you don't have much of a pysical structure that costs >> right? >> well, you know, that's a great idea -- sorry, al. there's a great idea in hre making people pay what they want to py, but this remind me an awful lo of what happened in napster when it was legit. it's a consumer base, free banking clients are not the multimillion dollar clients banks want. it's easy to move from one free offering to the next

i wonder if it'sever profitable. neil: the mobile device botching a blackberry come back. sharesallng as much as 26% today after the company's first quarter earnins really missed the mark. , what do you ink of this? >> a big disappointment. you know, i have a olumn back in february about how they are coming out with new phones, a cool phone, but it was wa late to the markets, and then, you know, after they announced i, and, you know, sent it off, they were not sending it off here, you know, basically, they are gettgclocked. they were clocked by apple, now apple clocked by samsung, and improvemen seen in the technology are so incremental, nobody has to run out, wait in lineyou know, for a new phone so this doesn't surprise me at all. i think blackberry's -- they are going to be in trouble. neil: what i d noice in the cases, keith, is how quickly the leads changes like the american league east in baseball, boston, baltimor the yankees, but it's

that tight. don't assume it's your birthright tstay on top. blackberry used to own it. apple came in, d now, you know, samsung with the array of phone products is a threat. my point is that, you know, blink, like the weather, this too shall change. >> well, this is like eastern airlines, palm computing. remember those? the first end of the market doesn't ncessarily survive. it's eier to become number one than to stay number on blackberry's etenon, and they are the only ones who don't know it. neil: really? you think this is it? >> i do. it's a company in the death throes controlling less than 5% of the market, droid took over the market. if you don't see guys controlling the toys and stereos th anything else with a blackberry, but apple and samsungs. that's the center of the universe and existence for 20-30 years, annd blackberry's not there. neil: guys, thank you both very much. >> thank y, neil. neil: from the ba to jy-z,

nobody is fa to push this health care plan. are the stars keeping their distance because they don't think there's anything to pitch? ♪

neil: could i see that grapc again, guys? ♪ il: says it all. the g.o.p. pressing the nba and nfl to think twice on promoting the hlth care law. so bad now we have special

graphics assigned to it that are expanding. the digital health records, huge and expensive part of the law, found to be riddled with errors, ann in the rush to conform to the w, the errors have absolutely resulted now in the dedeath of some patients. that is the reason among may for everyone to run away from this, including those famous athletes. doctor, it's ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. >> run and run faser. i can't believe, neil, ty are trying to recruit the nbaand the nfl to put their names against something that's completely hollow. what do they want them to sell? there's no insurance exchanges up, nd people haveno clue in terms of what they are going to sign up for, and i find it hard to believe they are trying to recruit such famous people or today's students or libarians. it's a ridiculous effort t --

neil: i see the method in the madness. you want to seek out young people, and young eople watch football, young people watch basketbbll, ect., so you're see if by seeing wonderfulce and things about the health care law, they sign up. we need young people to sign up, you kn, to pay or the older americans who re leaving the work force and realy responsible for much of the costs of health care. >> well, if any of the basketball players like cob, kobe bryant understands the health insurance law t sellt to sommebody, i want them to sin up too. neil: i think he's not aware of it, but he'll say,for all i know, there's a health care law insignia thy might have patched on to the sures, whatever, and that's it. kobe likes it, i should like it, i should sign up for it. >> that's the taget audience they got to gofter. you're right. they have to focus on the younger audnce betting on the

fact the yunger folks will sgn up for the insurance, and they probably don't need, probably can't afford, to make up for the losses that are going to be incurredded because the insurance copanies need to cover everybody else. neil: all right, if they can't do that, the have -- the simple math works against them in the hope they had by now to cv everyone with preexisting conditions and cover all americans, period, you need young people signing upp to support tis. >> yeah. neil: and they are not. furthermore studies show they are not eager to, and add o that the fact that a lot of poor americans don't think they can and n't and the or ensuredded completely don't think this is worth their whi. what the hell did we have the health care system to do this? >> with the hope we get to a single payer system because this fails, i think. kneel they'll there was a goal to do just that?

weight get that? >> we might bydault, and we have talked about this. remember even sitti on, y know, the rooftop of the museum as the law was being passed. neil: i remember. >> and, yeah, that may ultimately be whe it's going, but you mentioned, you know, the whole failure with the electronic medical records, and look at the hundreds of millions oo dollars that have been spent. hhs just released a report to congress this month about the adoption. the adoption rates look promising in terms of the number of doctors and hopitals that are complying, but when you look at the numbe you just talked about on the flip side of the disasters that are happening either because the systems are clunking, because people don't understand the tchnology and theyre making mistakes, and within the report, and 've got props here, the bigger problem is that right now, the obama administration is implemented a

system that sort of looks like th. it's a mishmash of systems that came together that don't connect. neil: what is that? >> it's legos that stack upon each other that don'tonnect. the i wat system we goat to is this. remember the tinker toys? they don't make them anymore i don't think, but we create a connected system where information flowsnd information's accessible, but guess wht? the epics of the world have made a killing in terms of selling their sstems, but the problem is nobody'swilling to give up the data. ery -- we built these thiefdoms where they don't communicate. neil: i don't know what concerns me more, the health carere law r the toys you brought wih you. good sin you, very well explained. >> thank you very much, neil, good to see you. neil: from hacking back to lawyering up, still laughing, china? i don't think so.

i used to dread tting up and going work. i was done with the corporate grind. i was tired of being a starving artist. i started looking around for a business that believed in and i nd of want to do something a little more green. for my kids. my art is my passion. my score mentor helped me take the first step. he helpeped me create a busine plan and helped me implement it. feels like you're not in it alone. how to expand... ...my business. if you get a solid foundation laid, everything else falls in place. their tant helps me be successful at mine. my score mentor has been tremendoly helpful in the marketing of my business. every person i've encountered with score is so incredibly passionate about what they do. score helped me to make the unimaginable, poible. all for free. for free. i could not have done it alone. i'here because of score. i'm here because of score. i'm here because of score. get your free business mentor at score.org.

neil: i just show the graphic we're not forgetting health care because we move on to another segment. show that one more time to show you -- ♪ the end of the health care crisis, and if it gets more than that and a life and death thing, it moves on. just so you know. yway, this is what i call fighting fire with fire, brinng out the lawyers and filing suit after suit, and it is true, and china going to find out fast and the hard way. you keep hacking, we keep suing. i find all this tft fortaft refreshing because a week after we vowed to hack back, we are lawyering up. wh do you think? >> how american can you get? if we don't get our way, we sue the pants off them. neil: what re they going to do? >> my opinion is you got as much

chance collecting as many chinese companies as you do from tony soprano. you can sue and sue and sue, good luck with the money. neil: espially now. liz? >> agree. the thing is, we can't sue them. the government -- nobody in congress has the wherewithall or gumption to do it because they are sitting on foreign reserve equal to the size of germany. we are panicked about the fact they own so much of our debt and angering them over hagging. yeah, that's a problem. you know, the hacking issue is a problem. 250 billion loss in intellectual property out of the u.s.,5 lot stolen by china because china has no soft economic power, no name brands they are interested in. that's why they are stealing ur stuff. neil: addam, the only alternatie is if they waste time with the lawyers, just continue to hack, hack back, in other words, do what youdo, but in space, what do you think? >> it's rare, but i disagree with rare, but i completely disagree with what she said.

we should sue, hack back, we should pursue deploam sigh, we should per sue military, you know, mac hacking options, everything. weave toefend ourself. i'm not the least be concerned or feel that we should be concerned aboutgoing after the chese. i mean, we've got thir money, not the other way around. you know, if -- are e concerned they will repatriot every investment in our money? i don't thin s. il: they an do what they'v been doing, stop additional buying, and we seem to survive th well. you might have a point. >> well, ann on the contrary, someone did a story this week about how the chinese are buying trophy properties in the united states the same way the japanese d in the 1980s. this is just the beginnng. they want to invet in the united state and we're going to tell them, essentially, if you invest in the united states, we have the legal system here, and if you break our laws, we sue you. >> i hear at. i hear your points. listen, i'm not saying no to

suits, but what i said was i don't think anybody in congress would do it. by the way, a lot of foreign investors are running away from the 30-year bond, and so that you see that yields gyrating. china is saying, wait a second, we may not buy anymore . debt. neil: if they are stupidto buy $95 ilion pnt house in central park, have at it. >> do yothink the chinesestp hacking because of the lawsuits against thm? neil: in all cases,the point is, have to get tougher. at we have to realize, and i know it'slike donald trump here without being so blunt. they need us as much if not more than we need them. how do you ge the point across whatev they , continuing to do this is not this their interest? >> you have to fight, instigate lawsuits, show distracted employee my, and talk tough.

do you think the chinese stop hacking? no, they are not. the big -- neil: we just hack in space. biggest defense -- >> i disagree. >> protect yowrg and then, you know -- neil: why do youisagree, adam? >> because there's two aspects to this, commercial and military. neil: they hack both. they are hacking both. >> right. that's why you have to -- you use a crude metaphor. you have to get in their face at every opportunity. neil: wait, white, wait, wait, wa, woah, if issadam saying, "in your face," and this is what a gentleman you are, adam. >> i try, neil, you know i try. neil: that's me in the morning, d i elevate from there. >> we tried to ge in their face in two decades. they don't respect us. treat it like, you know, get out of here. it's like the same issue with us saying, hey, opec is acartel,

and we have not done anything about ec being a crtel and fixing prices in the oi market. i don't think a lawsuit has impact whatever. they are just going to break it off. >> they are not beaking laws in the united states. we have a good marketplace here and the chinese clearly want to be a part of it. neil: i don't know. they are go nowhere. here's what i worry bout because i want you to be aware what a crisis this isongoing, switching gears back to this. ♪ you know, the guys here slip in special grahics, and i don't appreciate the hard work they do to get that out there, but we can see that again, time and energy weptinto this. ♪ that is the goofyist graphic i've ever seen moking the crisis that's out of control, but it may be pieces of the said crisis. what do you think of how this is getting out of control? you're hinting at not the

graphic, but there's reports of more abuses, reports hitting up the nba, the nfl, igt after, weekafter hitting up mpanies, private companies to pay for promoting it. it's out of control. out of control. worse than our graphic. what say you? >> no further comment on that. neil: are youa lawyer? >> not in the least. neil: good thing. adam, what do you think? >> if i don't have to -- this is the effort to give 20-30 million more americans access to health insuranc is that what you refer to, neil? neil: many who don't even want it which is odd that we up ended everything for them, and they don't want it. isn't that weird? by the way, that necessitates the dramatic graphic development. take a look [laughter] ♪ neil: run a crawl there, people who got it, don't want it. >> health care, the reform,m, yeah, we wanted help insure hat adam is saying, but it's about

to expode the launch pad. maybthe grapc is about to explode too. neil: like a launch ad mobile devices tiff. >> the graphic designers doa fine job. they work hard, it's an excellent graphic. neil: this one, gu, weig this, look at the graphic again. i'm not a fan. ♪ i don't think it says batle to me. i dot think it says tis crisis and on th brink fear that ifer enough. ♪ >> it's just a red asterisk. neil: you'll get kicked in the asterisk, good point. time thoughts? >> on thacking the chinese, try to get insurance rather than giving up. neil: getting in everybody's face, getting crude. >> trying. neil: i'm told that a graphics are being removed from the neil cavu show as is any mention of neil cavuto period.

that'll do it. remember if it's a crisis -- now that's a threat. that one's a threat. see that! the flag, ed of the world. have a great weekend. thanks for being with us. one nation prevailed in asserting its interest in the summit in northern ireland and it was not the united states two days of tal at the g 8 in bellfast and a one hour discussion between presidents obama and putin on syria turned out to be an 'em brarsment for the president. the call was for assad to step down and a condemn nation of assad after