sure that you have a device to ♪ ♪ ♪ neil: your lucky stars that we haven't been hit since 9/11. what if we are to have been hi again? i'm talking about san jose. it was darn near destroyed. welcome, everyone, it is coming to light that the most significant incident of domestic terrorm involving the grid that has ever occurred in the united states. and i am quoting directly the man who headed the federal energy regulatory commission saying that.

a middle of the night concert is terrorist attack in san jose, california someone started cutting underground cables and then snipers. they started opening fire on transformers directing power to silicon valley. and no one knows where they went or how many there were. and it has many worrying that maybe someday very soon. it might've been a warm-up for

something much more devastating. it is hard to say. no one volunteered this information and reporters kind of had to dig it out. and now the man who is in charge of our regulatory commission at the time of this attack with authorities who downplay it in the public that still knows nothing to do about it until now. they are just the opening acts. what is scary about they are leading us quite literally in the dark. secretary, what do you know about this and how to do they take us so long to find out about this remark. >> i don't know the details beyond what has been published, but it clearly is a pretty serious issue.

and the cascading effect of that could be devastating. you know, if you talk to utility company executives and ask them to keep some of tt night, i think right at the top of the list would be most of the focus that has been on cybersecurity and what we have learned about here just on last day or so causes us to think that it is a broader set of security and is the cyberattack. neil: especially right after 9/11. most would not know what to get out. and they knew exactly what to hit. >> after 9/11, but the department of energy and the office of homeland security and

this includes security issues that would relate to the grid into their various facilities that were not nuclear. >> and is probably what i alluded to earlier. and that is the focus has been so much on cberprotection. that we may be turned too much attention away from pure physical attacks. neil: do think others could come to light? we are just finding out about something from last april. >> this is something that the deral authorities need to look into. there hasn't been in the cloud. and this includes the protection

of the grid. >> what was this for? what is this about. is it a dress rehearsal for something bigger than this is far more damaging than getting the target card screwed up. >> especially with these transformers, it could take months to get these back in service we are talking about though western parlor country being without power or a month or longer. and so it is just the beginning. and it opens up the door for them to be preoccupied with this

kind of disruption. >> i think these guys know exactly what they are doing. and they made great care to do this in a certain order. >> it looks like they are planning for the future, just like he said with 9/11. you know, these sophisticated terrorist, not the one offs that we have seen that the more sophisticated types of attacks take time. neil: no one was hurt, thank god.

>> there is no human being for security there and there probably should be. there should be back up to transformers and this is the kind of thing that we worry about. and there's so manythings like this. the water supply, the private aircraft locations. >> they're just a couple of utilities and it seems that you can effectively shut down a whole grade 48 region. >> yes, that's right. say that they have three or four grid that one time they could shut down the country's. neil: that's right, it hppenened

here in new york cit >> this is what we're worried about. that thing is that if it is a planned attack or planned event and they do this all the same time across the country, we are in bad shape. not only because we can't stop them but we can't get our electric back right away either. so we have to be prepared and we are not prepared right now. neil: robert, thank you so much. it i think it bears repeating that we will run out of energy. california telling residents to cut their electricity usage. this is usually a concern in the summer. not in the winter. but the reason is a shortage of natural gas. the president keeps saying that he is has a pl to deal with stuff like this. >> if we are going to control our energy future, we have to have and all of the above strategy. >> might all of the above energy strategy. >> all of the above energies

tragedy. neil: maybe only the types of energy that the president wants to use. this might be low on the list. >> absolutely. we already have and all of the above strategy and california would be exporting power to other venues like arizona and others. instead, they have a shortage. neil: it was clean, efficient, it was skyrocketing. but it was at least a cheaper and cleaner alternative for a well. >> and they only have one operating nuclear plant.

not only this but the energy reduction. -nd they are the number-on state economy, the eighth largest econy in the world. and that is what is part of this. the federal government is not all of the above comments only what the president wants. it's being set before they can even use it. >> there lies the prblem. in the last segment we are talking about threats from without.

and they have fallen way short of that. neil: we are i a pickle right now. always good to see you, my friend. last month's jobs numbers was bad, but obamacare is going to make more workers toast

neil: i've got some nuers for you. you're going to see yur benefits get cut, 44%. you are under betting on obamacare. and don't slough these off. they are the guys that say we are going to have to start putting things off.

this works if you can fool them. and it looks like people who can't take care of themselves. neil: it' overstated to the degree that the drastic cuts include health care coverage for their workers. >> we intend to offer employees health care.

>> it will cost you more and most employers will reduce benefits and that is absolutely true. >> but it will be less than they are offering now. neil: why don't we just have them on these exchanges. >> the math works out. because young people -- we talked aboutthis, young people are not signing up. that will cause the premiums to go way out. the cost of health insurance becomes excessive.

>> i think the president is a sincere guy and he believes what he says. and let me say this. the administration has been exceptionally wonderful. neil: they always say that this is just like romney care in the state of massachusetts. >> he denies it. but there are a lot of individuls that are kicking the can down the road.

and there's a lot of people that saw the documentary and said the where was th guy. the one i thought the exact same thing. >> i think that everyone did the. neil: especially when his wife messed up his hair. [laughter] >>ne of the cbo report this fitting what you have talked about. we thought people were going to be provided health insurance and people that needed it. and we're talking about people and they want to pursue their hobbies. and it's nota lesson to the pele who have to pay for that. and it's got to come from the middle class the people can be listening very carefully. because the extent and trent expand the benefits to people

who work and have jobs. and we will pay for the insurae. neil: the farm bill from hell. it is now the law of the land. eat up and throw up.

neil: that did not take long. a trillion dollar farm belt. working out to about a billion dollars in pay is about the law of the land.

they are even marketing fresh-cut christmas trees. and that is when a christmas tree bulb went off. billions of dollars in special tax breaks and subsidies for at all for growers and once growers and one growers. that would have been cheaper. adam lashinsky said it is a pile on >> that's right, the whole thing is a christmas tree. and it's not just the spell. we have all sorts of is flying

around and i'm waiting for the weather channel as well. and we've got this. and i would say the tax code is a 21st century version of pork. so there is spending that goes on and it's a gateway to bigger spending. and i'm just saying that i'm always attentive to it and the other kinds of spending. >> the bottom line is that i look at this as being a gateway drug. and even though you might argue this, i mentioned with the befe this is money that we don' have. wondering whether this is the time to be thrown more cash. >> rather than an analogy to a gateway drug. i would say that it is always

going to be in the water. and by the way, they say they are not going to do this crap. >> and this is a good idea. and i merely will try to make the case that it's not that bad of things. to be clear, i'm not saying that i like it. but you are implying that we are taking the money and pouring it down the drain. no offen to goats and cows and others. i love all of these creatures.

and here is the thing. they often trat this as part of the program and we've got pork flying around. and watch what is going on with the agribusiness bill. they give money to 6300 farmers who are deceased or dead and that is clearly money is going out the door. and mcdonald's and other companies are getting credits and writeups, just as they provide subsidies and making money hand over fist. against the right incentives to mcdonald's as well and they also make a lot of money. >> i am with you 110%. and if you want to keep a high level, this is a perfect example of the bigstate and small state compromi that the founders made way back when.

members of congress in these less poputed states. >> what about the christmas tree >> local by local. >> you want to know why you are not in t top 1%? you don't work hard enough to be in the top 1%.

>> here is the nice thing about being a billionaire. you can say whatever you would like.

99% about the 1% and that is the top 1% and it is hard to ignore. and so there is a more added touch. to annther billionaire to weigh-in. if you want to be in the top 1%, it is all about hard work and drive and being oblivious. >> you have to be a risk taker. and everyone has made a good fortune for themselves and has had all of those other attributes.

neil: what he was risking was sounding snobbish. undoubtably for some and i don't think that that is the big preponderance. and the other 63% along along as well. >> talking about the 47% and won

support from the government. nancy pelosi says it has liberated a lot of folks from having to work and i think it's tragic. the only way that peole can do their income is if the government wants bigger deficits. the government doesn't make a real product that can sell and expand the volume of. so the only way that they can do it is exploiting the deficit. and i don't understand why people in washington find it hard. neil: eryone talks about the rich not paying enough than the 39.6 and that top isn't enough.

and a lot of states have been raising their top rates. raising their top rates. >> i think that the mainstream and that is a really bi problem to say that rich people should pay their fair share, surehey should.

>> obviously it is not 50%. it has to go higher. it is always a pleasure, sir. >> it is good to see you as well. neil: wilbur ross out of florida. the president has decided to double down. >> america does not stand still and neitr will live. neil: not only his attorney general is convinced that he is on copper ground for this.

>> and analysis is done that the president is acting in a constitutional way. >> which of those three categories would you do to delay the enforcement enforcement of the employer mandate? >> i don't remember looking at

and i haven't seen the analysis. sometimes i'm not sure where along the spectrum that outcome. >> mr. president, when your own attorney general is not so sure your executive orders on the legal up and up, you might want to slow down. to eric holder's predecesor. welcome and it's good to have you back. >> it is good to be back with you. >> what you make of this because eric holder didn't want to be cornered in the moment. especially when it comes to changes in the health care law. but there are constitutional. but are they the constitutional up and up?

>> every time that an executive order is signed by the president it would be the department of justice and a legality and has given us an and it is constitutional. >> absolutely. i am sympathetic to the attorney general not commenting or answered with respect to specifics of the legal rationale or the legal basis.

and especially with respect to the executive orders. neil: he did more than that. they were the realm of just initiating and bypassing congress. but the wholesale changes keeps revamping and changing the law itself. and especially with congress changing it with you. >> no question about it. they cannot supplant this statute passed by congress.

effectively deciding not to implement and enforce it. especially with the intent of congress and it does raise serious questions about whether or not there is a constitutional basis for this executive order. neil: general, it's good to see you. thank you. >> it's good to be with you. neil: in the meantime, do you like this movie?

>> i need to get it. ♪ ♪ neil: it's always a pretty good movie. but if you downloaded this one, you better start sweating. the makers are suing. nevermind how it looks for them. if you look at this lawsuit saying that he is one through 31, we are denoted he had no idea. they expect t learn it through a discovery. so looks faulty by definition. and we have other lawsuits as well. this is going to be dismissed. we don't know what they are

doing. >> let's just call it what it is. this is fact and no one can take them to court and sue them. and you can't even ascertain.

>> we live in a very high-tech world. people are bridging us left and right. and all they have to do is serve a subpoena on the ips providers and they are getting the mes and phone numbers and finding the culprits of that. neil: why can't they do what this guy d? he kind of said that if you want to download this and you're not paying for it, you are just robbing me blind. because he figured that it is just going to create more interest in a variety of the shows. and he thinks better for the longer term. what do you think of that kind of approach and they have the account information and what if

it is starbucks and a wifi connection thais open. who is it at is doing a? and this is great publicity for this movie. and if you are the makers of the movie, you can seize on this and say, everyone is downloading these things. >> i get the point. when we are talking about it, it makes sense when you're talking about huge motion pictures. this is an independent element. a the piracy does affect the bottom line in these lawsuits are not collecting multimillions of dollars here. but if you're getting $100,000

from 2000 plaintiffs come in at a profit for them. i agree that the purpose of these lawsuits is to deter people from doing this. they are getting money. the same producer h done it where they use the strong-arm tactic. you better settle quickly and i have thousands of dollars. neil: ladies, thank you. those folks over at apple say they would never do his bidding. and i think that they just blinked. and i think that that is kind of like a

stephen apple is buying back a lot of his stock. tim cook said tha he wouldn't use hisis cash to do that even s his latest investor carl ichan has started loudly demanding it. acknowledging that lately they have been buying back the shares to the tune of $14 million. in tonight's business splits, the most feared man in corporate america. he's going to sit down face-to-face with me next esday. >> i think that it isn't too much of a coincidence not to have cause and effect there.

>> what do you make of a? because they do have this plus it has been chump change in the scheme of things. they say thathey regularly do this thing that they will take credit for it. but honestly he wants to see a lot more of us. >> it is pretty much a disgusting cash balance that they have. this is not more than a drop in the bucket. carl ichan so said that he was investing in apple and you have to be really happy. he is lighting a fire under the apple management. apple has been in the product cycle and they have had a lot of cash and they've done very little with regard to the product may need somee to get them motivated.

i think that this is working so far. neil: some companies are reluctant to spend a lot of that cash because it's ways for research and development. but i guess he put the limit at a hundred billion plus. >>es. you would throw a person like this a bone. we invest in the stock of the company and we don't have any purchases that they wantto make. i think everyone wins in this case. >> this is about to become reality?

futuristic eyewr. getting access to the databases as well in the field. when you think of it? >> i love it. it has been well-documented. this is another use for the product is going to drive demand that will help the stock. and they don't have enough evidence to convict and this is an issue where you can actually have this for good rather than entertainment. that is just bad attack you. why would i go there? >> what do you make of it. and even if this doesn't work

whether it's law enforcement and airlines, it's totally information driven. and that is their forte. neil: these classes look stupid and dirty. you can thank me later. >> we have had a great past few days. my big question is is this real or a dead cat bounce. i think it's the latter. we think back down and unfortunately i hope i'm wrong. >> were you looking at? >> about the same thing. you drop a cat out of a window

and it does boun a little bit. and i think if you dropped it in the economy is slowing down and average hourly earnings growth is out as well. and it has been a better part of two and half years. and earlier this week it is har to imagine that 10% is a normal correction and we have a longer way to go. and i'd like to get it out of the way so we n move out of 2014. neil: thank you both very much. and carl ichan, can catch him in

a conversation on the phone. rarely doing face-to-fac interviews. he's doing one with us. so he is