. neil: welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto, and it is good to be back, and my special thanks to friends and colleagues, colin mcshane and cheryl casone and david asman for having my back when i was out. a case of burger king trying to have doughnuts and eat it, too. bk insists it never, ever, ever thought about setting up shop north of the border. burger king and tim hortons will continue operating under independent brands but common ownership. a big chunk of the brand, the hortons part will enjoy paying

taxes at canada's lower tax rate. bk will have tax advantages baked into the merger. warren buffett insists berkshire hathaway stake in the company will pay appropriate u.s. investment and related taxes in this combined company. but is the safe still playing us for a stooge? investing in a deal where the hortons part of the transaction will enjoy a much lower tax bill than would otherwise b the case if the combined entity were considered based in miami, florida as burger king is separately right now. some tell me this is a less obnoxious version of the tax inverring, you would think buffett, a man who bemoans paying lesser than his secretary if this becomes an issue. it is weird when. mitt romney was doing the same thing in bain capital days, he was satan, the sage remains the same. not fair, not balanced, not right.

how is it buffett wring out saveings from companies he targets, yet mitt romney is a ruthless cost cutter when he does the same thing that companies he targets? both create jobs and opportunities for those companies and workers but romney's pathetic buffett gets a pass. only media's hypocrisy is a lot more obvious. before we get on all-stars, i might point this out, this morning i wrote for our website a special column on the subject and using canada as a ploy to avoid taxes. within hours of writing, the statement out of bk, no, no, we're going to pay the u.s. ratement i think i single handedly prompted this deal. enough of my gigantic ego, now with hadley heath manning and sherry jacoby. what do you think? >> you took the words out of my mouth. we've been watching this throughout the day. i knew i was going to be coming on here and we saw the story

change. i don't think it's your ego, i think you were just right. i think you did have an impact. all of a sudden this doesn't look quite like it did a few hours ago. neil: they are paying two different rates if you think about it, the large chunk of this combined entity tim hortons north of the border is legal, too. >> sure. neil: they get on have the best of both worlds, right? >> right, and you don't hear mr. buffett talking about it. this has to be -- you had to pull it out. he gets to have his cake and eat it too. neil: but we find the holes in the story. >> yeah. but yeah, he gets to have it both ways but didn't want anybody to know about it, you knew about it, other people knew about it. the story is changing. neil: hadley, this is interesting, not all politicians are liking this, dick durbin in illinois saying wait a minute, so they're going to give pause to this, where is this going? >> whether or not warren

buffett wanted to thrust himself back into a u.s. tax policy debate he has by participating in the deal. it should be an opportunity, neil, to have conversation about america's corporate tax rate which is the highest in the world at 40%. canada about 26%. not a surprise that tim hortons wants to stay in canada, they're a canadian brand and should ask whether other u.s. corporations have incentives to move overseas or new corporations have the incentive to incorporate in the united states. we have a lot to offer in terms of stability and great justice system, the tax rate is detrimental to corporations who have to pay the full rate. neil: read between the lines and bk saying it has no intention right now to leave the united states, and i'm wondering does that mean down the road it would? >> they could be buying time, there was a lot of hostility by burger king fans on the website it looks like they're attack sheep. >> i thought they were more

upset about freedom fries. >> it's a king, the kings don't pay taxes. that's the idea. neil: by the way, the mascot is the scariest known to man. >> they made it a u.s. company, our higher tax rate which applies to foreigners, they're not going to do that in canada. that was the deal, the stocks would be down, not up. as for warren buffett, a great investor. he's like apple, gets slack from the liberals for a lot of reasons. if you look at his business, full liberal policies destroy his business. he's moving coal around, serving up dairy queen, the carbon tax higher capital gains. neil: to compensate him through the partnerships. >> if he paid himself a $3 million salary, it would be taxed at a higher rate than a secretary. neil: pay your secretary more then, if that's a problem. >> from a political standpoint, i'm a political consultant, he

can no longer be the spokes model for the tax issue for the democrats. he's hurt himself on that. neil: has he? he can claim, look, i'm playing the established rate for u.s. taxes on this deal, even though he is investing in a deal that will have a two tier tax structure, that favors the company part of that structure, right? do you see? >> he's got to be a pure ist on this. neil: he should avoid it like the plague. >> a great martyr and was going to tell all the other wealthy people what to do. neil: he looks hypocritical here. >> you can talk about the corporate tax rates and the rates that are different in american countries. you have to look at within the united states, drivers of job creation, the drivers of economy are small businesses, many small businesses file

profits throug income tax code, that's the individual income tax that warren buffett says should be higher for high earners. he's speak out of both sides of his mouth or actions don't line up with words. i would hope for more consistency to see taxing something gives you less of it. we want more growth and business in the united states, we shouldn't tax business or income. neil: no one ever pays at the market or headline rate. argument is few companies in the united states pay close to 40%. >> warren buffett said repeatedly our corporate tax rate is a lot lower than the official rate. however -- >> companies you're looking at. >> it is still a lot higher than companies in canada, their government doesn't add up the taxes. neil: would they have looked at the deal if canada had a prohibitively higher tax rate. >> i don't think everybody would be as jazzed about it. buffett is financing the deal.

i don't know what the terms are, would he want more risky to be the loan? perhaps for the financing of it. burger king is going to avoid taxes. neil: do you think the canadians insist they get rid of the stupid mascot? the scary mascot? do we have a picture of that? i don't know, i would not eat at a place that has a mascot like this. >> supposed to hate royalty. neil: look at the outfit, for god's sakes. when we come back, 2 million dollars a day, 2 billion dollars in assets, you wonder why we're concerned about isis, especially when you consider 9/11? they pulled that off for half a million dollars.

. neil: all right, i've always told that you isis must be pretty bad bunch of terrorists because al qaeda fears them. keep in mind, al qaeda, when you look back to 9/11 spent half a million dollars for those devastating attacks. isis right now has over 2 billion dollars in assets. it has drones, advanced weaponry and it makes courtesy of oil holdings, more than 2 million dollars a day.

to former 9/11 commission chair and new jersey governor tom cane on the money behind the threat and why we can't ignore any of that. you're right about that. isis is over there, not over here, you say what? >> look, we said in 9/11 report, the one thing we can never again allow terrorists to do is to have space and time and money to plan a major attack in the united states. neil: you think that's what isis is doing now? >> i don't know if they're doing it, they have the capability of doing it because they have control of the territory. we have no isinians that say it is effective. it could be of the staging ground. we've only had small attacks, boston marathon, attempt at times square. small attacks. they've had no place to plan. no afghanistan. now if isis is successful, they could have an area which to plan a major attack on the united states, that's scary.

neil: the argument against that happening is that they're a disparate group, all over the place, while they have a lot of money and all of that, they're on the run in iraq and on the run in syria and we shouldn't worry as much, you say what? >> i don't know. because i don't know what their intention is. neil: you're the first expert who said i don't know. what's wrong with you? >> i don't know. but the -- they've -- they really haven't decided i don't think the matter right now because we've been bombing them. whether or not they decide they're going to be a terrorist organization, they're awful people. >> what makes them so awful in your mind? some have said like you, much worse than al qaeda and the taliban, why? what is it that heightened the fears. and getting syrians to accept the possibility of u.s. air strikes within syria? >> well, for one, developing a state.

al qaeda was an idea. they're developing a state to pull off the ideas. secondly, sharia law with all the executions and what they do to women and all of that, which we don't like at all. and third, they've got all this money, which you said, american arms, which they've confiscated already, and seem to be trained to use them, and so it's a very dangerous group. they have not yet, in my mind targeted us, they have not said as al qaeda is, we're the great villain and we'll target the united states. neil: i know when you released the 9/11 report, one of the first and most significant criticisms you had was that there was no communication, no consistent read out of the various agencies involved. i was thinking of that when i heard the mixed reads from the government itself whether issis a threat. the security agencies involved said yes, a very big threat, but josh earnest, the white

house press secretary said not so much. >> we are concerned about the threat that is posed by isil, but it is the assessment as stated by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, by the intelligence community there is not an active plot under way to attack the u.s. homeland by isil. neil: what did you think of that? >> he's right. i don't know of active plot and they don't either. talking privately to the agencies both present and past, they're scared. they're hair is on fire about this. neil: scared of what? >> scared of the idea that there's another group you could get a place to plan a major attack on the united states which hasn't been true since 9/11. neil: bigger than 9/11? >> who knows? the second thing is there are people fighting over there, maybe a thousand europeans, less than 100 americans, we think, but we're not sure am the americans can come back in and roam around the country if they're radicalized in freedom

because they're american citizens. europeans can come in without a passport because they're europeans. that such more dangerous to us, and that's what the intelligence agencies are worried about, they don't know who the people are. that american who blew themselves up the suicide bomber had come into the united states in between and gone back, and we didn't know it. neil: and didn't look suspicious because he was american. >> that's right. neil: if you don't mind my switching gears, governor, and talk about successor chris christie down the road. what do you think of his chances if he were to run for president? >> he's got as good a chance as anybody. neil: you don't think he's damaged goods? >> he has such tremendous talent. look, there have been six to seven million dollars spent by new jersey on investigating chris christie, and bridgegate, whatever you want to call, the scandal. his story still stands up. neil: but let's say bridgegate isn't the issue. the sputtering new jersey economy is. very bad pension problem is.

and the thing he said he would address remain. >> that's going to be a problem, no question about it. this state, new jersey, is in deep problems with the pension, the budget next year looks again in deep, deep trouble. democrats are not agreeing with him anymore, there isn't as much bipartisan cooperation. neil: do you think he's all bluster and little else? >> no, i think he's a very, very talented individual. neil: what is the game plan. >> when he gets on stage with the other individuals, he looks very good, he looks very, very good. the way he fixed to criticize the democrats. the way he puts things. addresses issues, his opponents. he looks good. neil: you think he has a shot at nomination. >> i think anybody who discounts chris christie is making a mistake. neil: do you get along? >> we get along, we've had our differences and i've known him

as long or longer than anybody else. neil: did he apologize to you? >> closest chris christie comes to apologizing. neil: governor cane, the governor very pressed on the terror warning, hopefully he's wrong this time. the congressional black caucus saying thank you but no, thank you, why they're energizing african-american voters and making sure the president does not? charles payne on why. so what we're looking for is a way to "plus" our accounting firm's mobile plan. and "minus" our expenses. perfect timing. we're offering our best-ever pricing on mobile plans for business.

run the numbers on that. well, unlimited talk and text, and ten gigs of data for the five of you would be... one-seventy-five a month. good calculating kyle. good job kyle. you just made partner. our best-ever pricing on mobile share value plans for business. now with a $100 bill credit for every business line you add. [ dog barks ] ♪ [ male announcer ] imagine the cars we drive... being able to see so clearly... to respond so intelligently and so quickly, they can help protect us from a world of unseen danger. it's the stuff of science fiction... minus the fiction. and it is mercedes-benz... today. see your authorized dealer for exceptional offers through mercedes-benz financial services.

. neil: after ferguson, now the congressional black caucus is trying to energize african-american voters but don't want the president

involved. they don't want him involved at all. elijah cummings saying it best. you had so many people who see the president as someone they don't like. you need others to come in and talk about the same things he would talk about. to "making money" charles payne on why that is the case. good to see you. what's going on here? >> in the black community there's an unwritten rule you don't dis the president, not dissing him and being energizing by him are two separate things. they are going to sing from the same hymn sheet and unfortunately it's the sort of they're against you, the fair tactics, we need a police czar. these kind of things. also the president at some point, i don't know how he could go in front of black crowds and not accept responsibility. he'll talk as if he's not the president or doesn't have a role to play in policy and

where the economy is. neil: he has framed it that i would be much more effective, if not for the damn republicans stuff, even the racist republicans, without saying it. >> sure, sure, there's always that there's a certain segment of the republicans that don't like me for some apparent reason, wink, wink. neil: right. and many in the african-american community feel that is the case. >> many feel, for instance, for the most part that he's talking about the tea party wing of the gop, that maybe they're the second coming of the ku klux klan. i think that's one of the more unfortunate parts of the presidency to be honest with you. as a black person i hated being painted with the same brush. we have fought so long not to be discriminated, to be judged not by the color of our skin, the behemoths to be painted as a group, as a hate group, that's a big failing for his

presidency. i really do. neil: what i don't understand is the fact that a lot of the congressional black caucus is relaying this message rather than the president. are they just talking to the same choir, or are they more or less saying look, we are better messengers than is the president? because the president enjoys 95% approval within this community. >> he doesn't enjoy a fair amount of approval, but the president also -- there's no way a white president could have gotten away with what president obama did during the ferguson situation, still at martha's vineyard playing golf, having a relaxing time. if that was president bush it would not have been enough, it would be the exact opposite. neil: a reverse katrina moment. >> exactly. it would have been how could you be this indifferent to our community? so he is given a free pass. neil: you seem to be hitting not as much as a free pass. >> enough of a free pass he

can't go in front of the crowds, no one is going to dis the presidents, the few blacks who have are cornelle west others who say he hasn't done enough for the black community. they are raked over the coals, black media. neil: you have been critical, what do you call this? >> the typical uncle tom kind of stuff, fox slave master kind of stuff. and it's really, again, it gets back to what martin luther king said, at some point we don't all have to quote, unquote keep it real, keeping it real means we have one unified mind-set if some of us don't think differently, what are we fighting for in the first place? neil: do you feel republicans give up on the african-american vote for whatever reason, and say look, we might not give

democrats 90% of that vote. it's not worth that. what do you think of that? >> i think it's stupid. it's dumb when you frame someone, you can't show up at the naacp meeting two months before the election and hope can you skim a few off the top. it has to be a grassroots effort, you take the slings and arrows and people say different things about you because there's a fair amount of misinformation, and you have been indifferent to the community. it's a lot of work to do. a lot of work that you should do. this is what i defy republican presidential candidates. you've got to explain to me why a free obama phone is more important than message of american prosperity. why do you tell me you can't get a vote because of the cheap crappy phone despite the fact you are telling a story about the greatest country in the world and how people can be great? that's what they've got to figure out. stop blaming the phone, it's

your message. neil: very well put. charles payne. thank you very much. name of the show is "making money" with charles payne. he has all the talent, tells you, you will make money. me, i say i'm cavuto. next time you use the atm your bank account could read zero. the next possible cyberattack that has more than a few banks freaking out? after this.

. neil: all right, here's when this whole hacking thing gets to be a problem, when those hacks work at homeland security. 25,000 homeland security employees can be hacked. they were hacked. anyone safe? wall street isn't taking chances, bankers are planning to meet with the treasury

department to figure out what the heck is going on here? former cyberczar howard schmidt eerily predicted a lot of the stuff coming to pass. he joins us with the new focus apparently on the financial sector and it gets the latest homeland security attacks prove anyone is fair game? >> that's pretty much the case, and it doesn't make any difference whether it's cybercriminals or terrorists. the bottom line is as long as these systems are vulnerable, they're going to people to look to exploit them. and speaking of terrorists, if you would, this was back in 2002. one of the radicals in prison wrote in his book that the financial services sector of the united states will put us back in the dark ages and they can shut it down. neil: in other words, nothing more frighten than going to the atm and reading your account balance is zeroed out. you hope things stabilize, that freak a lot of people out,

doesn't it? >> it does. and the bad part about this is, we have the talented people that work in those cybersecurity offices in the major financial institutions for years. they've not gotten the respect. they are the i.t. guys, the ones that make you use strong passwords and all the things. we need to redo the system so they are able to do their job which will make the business run better. neil: howard, is there something to the point of targeting, you know, key government defense contractors or the defense department or homeland security? is it just to relay the point no one is safe, not even the folks presumably going after us? >> yeah, and for the most part, those are the people you want targeted. you get an inside grip what they've got, that can be a stair stepping into controlling the entire system. neil: who are these culprits? >> well, you know, there's

primarily the russian criminals over there, eastern europe. we've got a lot of activists that say listen, if i get in there, i can expose certain things. the things that scare and you and i worry about is the fact that they can do it means terrorists and others can do it. so there's a whole group of people out there that can do these things. what we have to do is fix the system so no matter who they are, they can't get away with it. neil: in other words, these are kids who are very good at this stuff, and sell themselves off to the highest bidder, right? >> well, and it used to be kids. now it's professionals, researchers. there's tech support for some of the hacking booths. they create malware and give you tech support as well. it's becoming a booming business for quite awhile. neil: what are you more worried about, howard, a cyberattack or real live 9/11-type attack? >> that's a tough question. obviously both have consequences.

i think what i worry about the most is those things happening in tandem with each other. a dual attack. you take a physical piece and shut down the communications and television systems and ability to paralyze an entire nation. neil: to tom cane's point, the 9/11 co-chair who is saying that they are -- someone sinister, isis or you name it, planning to do just that. >> and that's correct. that's the thing that we really are concerned about, because then the same things we use to communicate with and everything else is part of that infrastructure they would attack now. neil: all right, howard, thank you very much. good seeing you again. even under these circumstances, sir. >> you, too. texas governor rick perry is selling this t-shirt, this particular t-shirt to raise money off of latest charges. next, why he's raising hell to drop the charges? this might be sending him to the wouchlts don't laugh. we debate it next.

crestor lowered bad cholesterol in it's a fact. high-risk patients more than lipitor. bad cholesterol... you're going down! yeah! lowering cholesterol is a big deal, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors, because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time.

so, when diet and exercise aren't enough to lower cholesterol, adding crestor can help. i'm down with crestor! crestor is not right for everyone, like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant, or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired; have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. are you down with crestor!? ask your doctor if crestor could help you. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.

. neil: what's that they say about the best defense being a pretty good offense? texas governor moving pretty good to dismiss the use of power charges against him. perry arguing that the charges are the baseless political act. former whitewater independent counsel robert ray agrees, you argue the charges are bogus, not for the obvious reasons. >> you have to question a number of things here. this is when prosecution becomes politics by other means, that's dangerous, it may not be as dangerous as a terrorist attack. but that's a big swipe at a sitting governor. i think the other question is indicting somebody for an act, a political act which governors are supposed to do. veto things, and the threat of a veto, whatever the reason,

you don't like it, impeach the governor, but we're getting to a point it's like okay, if you're on the other side or losing side of a cause, the notion you would have a prosecutor involved even an independent prosecutor to return charges, that strikes me as outrageous and raises the question where is the grand jury in all this? a grand jury passed on all this? a grand jury foreperson who signed the indictment. neil: another group decided it was worthy of an indictment. >> apparently they did. and the only recourse now short of a trial is to hope that a judge steps in and says wait a second. neil: you think this could get to a trial? >> i think this would be dismissed. i think the notion has merit. neil: democrats agree with you, which is more interesting, even they argue this is going past the bounds of reality here. but what do you think is really going on here? and let's say it succeeds? what then? >> there's a history.

there's clearly a long-running dispute and a political pull and tug between the power of governor elected across the state and what's going on in austin and specifically with regard to this particular unit. the public integrity unit. but you know, the government plays hardball. that's politic. you don't like it? get rid of the governor, vote him out of office, impeach him, but you can't indict him. that seems to me. neil: making the argument he was unfairly targeting an official for drunkenness in this case. >> when you think about, it so what? so you don't like that, you think it's outrageous and awful and terrible, there are means in the political process. you don't use the tools of a prosecutor, you're talking about arresting somebody, progresses them to the system, fingerprinting them, photographing them. neil: but he smiles in the

photograph. >> he's putting as good a public spin on this as you can. neil: you're note into the politics part of this. you don't think this has helped his political career? >> it may well have done that. that doesn't change the fact this is outrageous. neil: switching gears to talk that the e-mails that we thought were deleted are there in a master superserver, but they're there. >> i don't know how it works. i know enough to know having done a few cases that it is very difficult ever to get rid of anything permanently. that it resides -- neil: let's say they find it someplace, how damning could they be? >> could be, depending what's in them. i think if there's a paper trail that shows that there was premeditated action and targeting against a political group, that's the other place where politics and the tax

function in the irs are not supposed to mix. that's a very dangerous place to be. it's been dangerous for the better part of the 20th century and certainly dangerous during the nixon era. but that's a place where also you don't want politics messed up and mixed up with the tax policy or the tax power because it's such an enormous power. you can destroy people over that. neil: and try to skew the politics from all of this. let's say republicans in the house, are we more likely then to see a back and forth about constitutional appropriateness and all that? >> well, i think, if the senate goes republican, you're likely to see a pretty heightened area of scrutiny for the remaining two years of the obama presidency. neil: can we go to the point of so many investigations going on concurrently, it doesn't survive the party's interest? >> there could be backlash, if people think all you're

attempting to do is exercise your power inappropriately to investigate. that's one thing, if people come to the conclusion it's a legitimate basis for investigation where there is merit, and that there should be a prosecution behind that, i think the public will come to accept that. look, it's all about public sentiment, if public sentiment ultimately believes the merits are in favor of the republicans doing the investigating with regard to something and doing it in an appropriate public will come to accept that. if they think it's partisan politics all over again, you know largely that will be discredited. we're in a tough environment where it's hard to draw that line and people have a difficult time. the public has a tough time trying to figure out which are the ones that have merit and separating those that are politics by other means. neil: former whitewater independent counsel among many other things. the koch brothers are evil

for pumping money into political ads. tom steyer apparently a hero for pumping money into his political ad. why this ad is crazier than the ad itself. ad itself. >> keystone is only going drive when folks think about what they get from alaska, ad itself. >> keystone is only going drive they think salmon and energy. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing.

across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs. when we set up operation in one part of the country, people in other parts go to work. that's not a coincidence. it's one more part of our commitment to america.

. neil: president obama is back from vacation, and back to weighing executive action on immigration. senator marco rubio telling the president if he does act alone saying good-bye to any chance of getting reform passed by congress. dick armey on how republicans should deal with this. dick, always good to see you. the president we're told is told to take executive control

issue and an order that would keep a number of millions of illegals here and prevent them from being deported or something far grander, what do you say? >> senator rubio has got it right. that would be a mistake. quite frankly, have you people on both sides of the aisle that would like to see the president sit down and work this thing out. we've got serious work to do here. we ought to be able to work together. you act unilaterally, show us your contempt for our legislative process and you're not likely to get much cooperation from us. neil: maybe the president setting republicans up and what do republicans do in response? they then would look or at least he would want them to look as obstructionists? >> yeah, that could probably be his objective, but my own view is he's so out of sync with the american people right now, if the republicans answer this in a measured way with sobering

syria's rhetoric and not hot rhetoric, they in fact could win the public relations battle over this. neil: i know you are well-schooled and watching the chicanery, i'm wondering if this is impeachment actions on the part of republicans and doing things that are so constitutionally obnoxious that he baits republicans? >> well, again, that could be possible. impeachment evers, the efforts to impeach president clinton, it began with his own attorney general appointing the special prosecutor. did, in fact, backfire on the republicans. they have a tendency, politicians they're not deep thinkers, and they have a tendency to see if we cannot replay the act that worked out for us a while back.

so that's possible. neil: do you think it's possible for republicans to risk or avoid overplaying their hand here. any action on executive order to this degree may be potentially by edict keeping millions of illegals in this country and preventing them from being deported. that's a big step for a president to do unilaterally? >> i think what the republicans need to do is stay focused on the policy not the politics. stay focused on the action taken, not the individual taking the action, and, in fact, i think if he tries to issue an edict like that, there has to be a way to challenge edict without challenging the president. you might go so far as to pretend that you believe the president is a man of good intentions here. that might be difficult for you to take emotionally but strategically it would be good pretension for you to pull.

neil: well put. dick armey, former house majority leader. good to see you. >> you, too. tweet something about me on twitter, i might let it slide. do so about the government? washington won't let it slide. denturthan real teeth.erent they're about ten times softer and have surface pores where bacteria n multiply. polident kills 99.99% of odor-causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains. for a cleaner, fresher, brighter denture everyday. has this kind of passion, this kind of innovation, engineering,

design and performance... been available... for this kind of price. the 2014 cla from mercedes-benz. see your authorized dealer for exceptional offers through mercedes-benz financial services.

neil: all right, in biz blitz, a bizarre ad from billionaire tom steyer. with an actor in this one. >> we sense the keystone pipeline was going to increase american oil independence, you want to see who is really going to increase oil independence f for. [ laughter ] god bless america. neil: all right. so why are liberals giving this

ad a pass, but criticizeing say the coke brothers for -- koch brothers for their ads? we side. kennedy: >> people who agree with liberal content of that message give it a pass. i am taken aback by the style, sort of outside of the box, perhaps bizarre distracting from issue at hand. maybe they will do their own research. but the music. and weird graphic effects may turn open off. neil: actor looks like the late george kennedy. sherri, i am wondering, whatever think of steyer, i'm saying that media should treat both of same. if you are okay, with the billionaire in this case, forking over a lot of money for a cause he believes in, you

should be okay with brothers billionaire -- >> do you really think that is going to happen? neil: no, that is my points. everything they will give him a pass, go after the koch brothers, it amazes mos me, how everyone else thinks they can be a political consult sustain consultant, he wrote this ad himself. >> he did. >> that does not surprise me, this ad is insulting to the viewers and voters, it is creepy and weird, that is not going to help the person he is trying to help. it is insulting. he thinks he knows how to do this. neil: it does make a caricature out of an issue. >> you know his video don't do well on youtube. that is disrespectful to all

liberal film director out there. i don'i don't know why they ge pass. neil: you will never see a bad thing written about him in the mainstream. >> no. he invests or invested, i 14 say, from pipeline in competition with this one that would benefit from this not happening this so hypocriteal on so many levels, he owned houses that consume more energies than towns. neil: all right, to issue two, federal government, monitoring your twitter account. backing a study nearly way million buck that tracks hate speech, they would be in business forever tracking my hate mail, i worry about a whole new data pace.

-- base. >> you should, here is what is happening, we have a government, overstepping boundarys on corruption and spying and gathering information, washington is afraid to speak out. they go okay we'll push the envelope more, and find another way to spy on americans, social media, facebook and twitter should come out, screaming about this, if they don't another company should come out against it, and ern will join them, this is outrageous, dangerous and frightening, this is about hate speech, who decides what hate speech is, we are talking free speech, an airs re-- irs we fuseing to give tax status to the conservative groups who disagree with the president, and we're allowing this to happen. everyone should be concerned, you have that control over the

things we do on social media. kennedy: hadley. >> study to mont monitor misinformation how it spreads on line, all of us can identify with seeing things on-line, that is frustrating we' people to find the truth. i am hesitant about studies like this, that set up a government-funded source, and as ash tor of who -- as arbiter oft truth is. it is treating all political perspectives, misinformation is identified in eye of the beholder,. kennedy: and government is the -- neil: and the government is the beholder here. >> this is a national science foundation grant to a university to do research project that economy interact with database. neil: well, all right. >> who decides what hate speech

is? neil: all right, well, we don't know, i'm telling you, keep those tweets and e-mails coming. kennedy: what on earth is creating mariner between jihadist and rappers. first we heard about the brit, and now fox news confirmed a rapper douglas mcaurthur mccain, an american, has been killed fighting with isis. he called himself the slave of alah and now in holly giving satan's corning bits a comeback. >> i guess for lost lambs for whom fame has passed them by, becoming a jihadist is next theft bing to becoming khalifa. two groups who fought, and