if you would believe the world rejected president obama's bad iranian nuclear deal. and 95% of you did say yes. we're out of time. thank you for joining us everybody. i'm lori this ticket is the upside. >> this is your age. he stopped the tank from. john: square. ♪ similar americans have done similar things. >> you would not have to do that in baltimore who was being abused? >> are you watching this? >> what should you do? did he do the right thing? the constitution has been violated. what about my brother? is he doing a the right thing? >> i said no.

people fight gun-control. >> gun owners are refusing to register their firearms. >> sarah refused, according and the option to opt out. what should you do? that is our show. tonight. john: i spent much of my career doing consumer reporting urging government to pass rules to fix things to make things better and safer for consumer government did pass the regulations and these are some of them. web hundred 75,000 pages. this is just the federal regulations state and local had many more. these laws now rule our lives. i now realize it rarely makes a better for consumers but makes it worse. they slow everything down.

to make everything cost more. looking at the pile innovators are afraid to try new things. what can we do about that? the bureaucrats will never stop right team rules in fact, they righted dozen new ones every day the lawyer who wrote the best seller, it could tries to free people from the regulatory state for everybody agreed with the point but it made no difference the rules keep coming is a hopeless? the help not know someone tietmeyer has come up for the regulatory state that might work benghazi has us track record years ago i assume will fare but then charles murray wrote losing ground then bill clinton

said it would be welfare as we went. >> now their new book by the people of redoing liberty without permission it encourages americans to disobey the rules. >> just ignore them. make it possible for people without the government to come after them and that can be done. i applied to operate a legal aid. i wanted to be on behalf of the ordinary american. you have some small business person arrested by a bureaucrat to threaten him with a fine. i want somebody to materialize we take his case we will litigate. you will be sorry you got into this and if at the end of this you have to pay a fine but we will reimburse him. >> then government will say

we have to pick and choose because we cannot enforce them all the time. >> the government should have the no harm no-fault regulatory approach. ince boards you could call of fall every time they come down the court but they don't. if it doesn't affect the play them medico. do that with regulations if nobody has been fined - - armed. >> somebody may get hurt. >> we have so many regulations that are so obvious they are stupid. that is the criteria. i am not saying don't pay attention to anything. i believe to have strong tunnels and coal mines the head is fine but with the regulations with 42 inches high and other rail link if it is 40 inches high you will be fined the

overwhelming majority of americans would say that is stupid. john: the boxes are filled with these rules because she wore pecked to death by ducks. i'd make the bill attempts to show how it will strangle us. >> i trapped myself in spider webs getting bystanders to wrap me in red tape in front of congress. and a chain saw. the producers gradually suffocate robert deniro and engineer who did not register his business. a pitt do anything but david produce more. >> there is nothing to stop them because congress can write a lot to say give us clean air. what is clean?

that is up to the regulatory agencies to do as they see fit. >> if they don't do something to make it cleaner >> that is what happens with regulations. so take a careful look to pick and choose with systematic civil disobedience that ordinary americans will agree are dom and it doesn't have to be along partisan lines. in and you ignore those. john: thousands of parents are breaking the rules to resist the standardized test to tell their kids skip the exams. >> behalf of the students opting now spin mcfadyen schaede terrific idea.

another form of civil disobedience the last time you were on the interstate with 65 miles per hour what is the flow of traffic? that is civil disobedience and the state troopers don't arrest everybody goes 66 they have to restrict themselves to those who are creating a driving hazard. >> if you say don't do a for taxes it is day of legitimate function of government but then they'd thing is the civil disobedience with the tax code it is indistinguishable from cheating on your taxes it is systematic for others. >> and rebuilding america without permission it

>> >> with data agree with the cause the conservatives were big conservatives when they held their guns to say the fed could not take cliven bundy cattle. >> to is the trespasser? united states or cliven bundy? >> this kind of american civil disobedience began with the boston tea party.

is there a rule to be good or bad? >> i want to preserve the right i don't vote for a lot but i want to do disobey when people roll over meet. read the law but with the teapartier a that was the king went into posing a decree without representation. if you see that again and again over the last 250 years of the right and the last. they're duet for different ends but the same means from the left to the rights. madison talked about the tyranny of the majority. sometimes the majority most of the people industry did not go for their government still neck-and-neck it passed a law that ordered people to register guns.

>> tens of thousands of gun owners are refusing to register their firearms that me they have hundreds of thousands of brand new criminals because not registering is a felony. what happened after this? nothing. they did not crack down. >> what is important is it is a mass movement is effective and there are a lot of people doing and. people who'd drink during prohibition space would drink it was civil disobedience in a mass movement and was quite effective. john: it is easier for the gun owners to get away with it because by not registering the state does not know who they are but they could catch the drinkers. >> most of that was done in a secret. john: christian leaders threatened civil disobedience if the supreme

court of the guys says gay marriage. i am not sure how they can do that. >> there is a long forgotten history of right wing white the abortion protesters to violate laws to do protest with the right to choose there was a massive tax revolt that is never talked about in the history books. 30,000 people in the city of chicago refused to pay taxes for years and was the most successful. john: they don't talk about it because it threatens disorder. >> a little disorder is good for the republic. somebody said that. [laughter] john: to join the debate followed me on twitter. use the #we the people or like the facebook page. edward snowden. my brother and the dancing

raisins but next we debate the reason between healthy disobedience and rioting

>> get back. john: part of the rioting in baltimore. our next guest calls it civil disobedience. kevin powell is an author and activist labeling the baltimore situation because it is it racist to use the word riot. >> i said using that term to describe people in urban areas when they a prize or rebel. john: that looks like a riot then for about university of kentucky or any college program when they lose the championship came they don't call them thugs or gangsters or riot. john: you are right we did see vandals but after the stanley cup riot when vancouver lost the police

chief called them criminals and thugs. said nato summit protest the eggs and wisconsin's state protests union thugs it isn't just black. >> i agree but when you talk about urban areas we are stereotyped. maybe a few people disrupting is the major -- the main thing the ec for five immelt there have been protesting a few years around ferguson and trayvon martin now here in new york city you rarely see coverage of a peaceful protest but if somebody breaks something now look to the riots. john: that is true. the broken glass gets the viewer's attention you have a point. also that blacks complain about this is not new but malcolm x gave the democracy hypocrisy speech hispanic

then to turn around and a key issue of attacking them. called saying police brutality against the negro. then they take you to court to charge you with assault. what type of democracy is that? >> i wish this had changed. it is incremental progress because of the civil rights movement and civil disobedience but the fact we have high profile cases around the country says we have a long way to go where everyone feels they are treated justly and equally. >> it is true with the police are caught they are rarely prosecuted. >> very rarely that is why we consider it a small victory when the officers in baltimore where he then indicted. that is progress because

other places no conviction or nothing. we're not saying anti-a police began thai police brutality or racial profiling all people are supposed to be equal. john: but after baltimore they destroy their own community i a understand why. >> i am from brooklyn i am from the inner cities. >> it doesn't do anything good to loot the stores. >> but people pay attention in a different kind of play just like in the 19 twenties and 1940's and 1960's. john: disturbances every 20 years? >> i don't condone it but i understand it. dr. king's birthday we celebrate every year a man of peace he said the riot is for the unheard because he understood why they would

destroy their own community just like the colonial people disobeyed the british. what is the difference? if you have the injustice you will resist. we could minimize the teapartier but they destroyed property. john: to the baltimore mayor to the right thing? image she had to maintain peace. i get it. but you have to listen to the voice of the people all people even the poor people i come from poverty and want to hear a working-class people have to say. i don't condone it but i understand it. john: her reaction puzzled me it seemed to say go ahead and destroys stuff. here she is talking about protecting the protesters. >> we tried to make sure that they were protected from the things going on. also those who wished to

destroy safe to do that as well. john: did we gave them space to destroy. >> in my humble opinion you talk about a powder keg and poverty and failing school systems and lack of opportunities. john: those are complaints for ever. nigerians, asians they have worked hard to get out of the ghetto. >> but those of us who are still there field there is no way to get out so we are frustrated. john: uk and riot or work hard. >> we can address the fundamental inequities. otherwise baltimore will happen over and over we don't want that to have been so collectively what will they do about it? john: i say we poured money into these towns addressing these causes and it hasn't

made anything better. >> i disagree every major city with after-school programs but where are the resources that we talk about? >> i don't know where it goes. there probably is squandering a. thank you kevin powell. once said we will not take it now he owes the government n

♪ john: the california raisins. would you pay for that? it promotes my whole industry my competitors they get the money i spent but as you saw they do exist we

also see cotton, the fabric of our lives because government forces all the growers to chip bin so there are no freeloaders. >> i wouldn't give my family anything less. >> it is hard to believe that sells raisins but maybe it does. the controversy ochres because farmers and government get together to force everyone to do chip in and. that is what government does. the recent administrative committee also orders reason farmers to give the car for mitt one-third of their crop to help the reason farmers by reducing supply to keep prices up most along with it but if you refuse and i interviewed one. >> there wanted to take my reasons i said no. then they said then we will

give you a fine. i was not the only one there were 60 of us who said no more. >> now owes the government $700,000 with 1 million pounds of reasons he still will give them and that its civil disobedience. he is taken as to the supreme court that will give the decision next month. the constitutional law specialist has followed this. this is good civil disobedience? >> absolutely he said i will not give you my reasons tent -- raisins 10 years ago they took 47 percent and gave him nothing. john: now first they offered some money less than the cost of production. >> data not due offer anything it is a cartel. they said in an office building in fresno

california some are made up representatives they decide about the supply i've loved it when government makes fun of itself. it is a ton that exist own celerity built-in. john: his wife is on his side to explain why she does not want to give it up. >> we pick the grapes we do everything and i hate to see it just given away. it doesn't matter what we produce let us do what we want with their own crops simic they took them over the years. we don't need that we don't need artificial price subsidies based on new deal programs for economic ideas they are so crazy nobody would promote them now that doesn't matter how silly. that is why she is a hero

because danceable disobedience perry barely people stand up to say no more. john: the new deal program is wrong but if it is advertising then these people are free riding at the expense of their competitors. >> that is cartel speak for freedom. but opec try to get people to agree to raise the price there is no super government at the top the best cartel is one that gets the government to enforce that if they come by with a crowbar in the government situation with any other business got together other than this they would be put in jail for colluding for

antitrust gore monopoly but with say committee then it is the government. >> exactly. is edward snowden a trader or a hero? next.

♪ ♪ how ♪♪ ♪ >> speiser great when they are on our side but you can never forget that they are incredibly powerful and dangerous. stossel: that was edward snowden from russia. he is someone who said that i am not going to take it. he was working for the nsa and he felt that spying was wrong. he risked his comfortable life and freedom to leak information about that. that is what we know.

last week a court ruled that the blanket collection of phone records is illegal and that only happened because snowden revealed it. but he released information, broke the law and that endangers us all. fred says edward snowden is a traitor. but another individual says that edward snowden is a courageous hero. so he didn't give up a lot he had a conscience. >> he is a traitor, he is someone that cannot be should not be taken seriously. first of all, he has made significant false statements. >> i work for the house intelligence committee he could've come to us. i have talked to my colleagues

who would agree to him with open arms and brought him immediately to the chairman. he went to the public but he could've gone to senator wyden. >> the reality is that we are dealing with a law from 1917 when the country fundamentally changed its values, we use the laws to prosecute americans and that is the very law of the espionage act that edward snowden has been charged with. >> he said that i'm going to keep this stuff classified. >> i am not here to defend edward snowden particularly but i'm grateful for what he did. if he had not blown the whistle on outside of normal channels we never would have known. >> would've he went to congress? >> is not the first person that has tried to blow the whistle on some of these programs. there are other people that they saw that he tried to leak go to congress, or try to be more selective in dealing with journalists.

they were persecuted, hounded for it and nothing changed. he did the one thing that he thought might change something. fred has some good ideas about how to make the intelligence committee a safe harbor and more welcoming for whistleblowers and i would agree that generally speaking that's a better route for dealing with this. but that cannot be the only route. the fact is that congress, despite these revelations, has been very slow to change what is a fundamental unconstitutional surveillance program. >> people do want to kill us and i don't feel particularly threatened by this. they are not listening to individual phone calls. >> only 22 people at the nsa are allowed to use this. >> the court has said that it's unconstitutional. >> there have been 38 decisions on this. thirty-five have supported this program. it's clear that this program has stopped terrorist attacks. it stopped attacks in the new

york subway, and attack on the u.s. stock exchange in new york it has been useful in other ways. opponents insist that it hasn't. >> that is why we have our electorate of representatives to oversee these programs. we cannot reveal the total of these programs because they are intended to target people that want to kill us. >> one reason edward snowden says he did what he did is because of this. >> does the nsa collect any kind of data at all on hundreds of millions of americans? >> no, sir. >> it does not? >> not willingly. >> so he just lied. >> two responses to that. he was set up. he knew the answer to that question. he should not have said that, i

agree, edward snowden said that he leaked this information. we know that snowden tried to leak material to him months before eric clapper made that statement. this is one of many false payments made. >> what difference does that make? >> he was collecting billions of classified documents for years. >> is there ever a justification to break the rules and leak something? >> i think that there may be justification. if you go through this to make sure that it won't hurt you why didn't he ask to meet with senator wyden. i know having been in the committee, there are many members who come to us and say that we have something we have to tell you, don't give running away. there are people who claim otherwise. i know that the system works. >> one question is whether he revealed secrets that endanger

americans. did he carefully decide this one i'm not going to reveal in this one i will. this comedian asked him about it. >> how many of those documents have you actually read? >> i have a value weighted all the documents. >> you have read every single one? >> i do understand what i turned over. >> be difference of understanding what is in the documents and what is in the documents. stossel: would you have done what he did? >> i am not sure that anyone of us would've had the courage to exile himself from the united states for the rest of his life to reveal these programs. i'm not sure that i would have done what he did and i'm not sure that i would have defended how he did it. but it isn't just edward snowden but the black box. what fred is saying is that we should let people on the hill sorted out. we have only one senator who has

really been able to fight on this consistently and he will say if he didn't make a public himself, then how serious the problem have done. what he is saying is that unless he is willing to be kicked off the intelligence committee he should just work inside the proper channels and they will spy. >> the majority of senators look at this program, they said it was legal and constitutional. one guy doesn't get a veto when he has someone he disagrees with. stossel: thank you. coming up next, my dog or brother and what he calls "pharmaphobia." he says doctors shouldn't take it

here at the td ameritrade trader group, they work all the time. sup jj? working hard? working 24/7 on mobile trader, rated #1 trading app in the app store. it lets you trade stocks options, futures... even advanced orders. and it offers more charts than a lot of the other competitors do in desktop. you work so late. i guess you don't see your family very much? i see them all the time. did you finish your derivative pricing model, honey? for all the confidence you need. td ameritrade. you got this. we live in a pick and choose world choose choose choose.

but at bedtime? ...why settle for this? enter sleep number... don't miss the memorial day special edition mattress with sleepiq technology. sleepiq tells you how well you slept and what adjustments you can make. you like the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! now we can all choose amazing sleep, only at a sleep number store. save $500 on the memorial day special edition mattress with sleepiq technology. know better sleep with sleep number. ♪ what. ♪ >> my doctor tells me that i'm supposed to take one of these pills every day and i do, but maybe i shouldn't. what if my doctors would prescribe this because some salesgirl came and said oh, if you prescribe enough i will take you to lunch. also maybe the research advisor said that the drug worked only because they wanted to get rich.

that is why i am glad that they're all of these rules. and i wish that there weren't that many. but my instincts tell me that it's good the regulators restrict interaction between medical researchers and business. but the smartest person i know i'm a harvard doctor and researcher in my older brother tells me that i'm being stupid and i suffer from "pharmaphobia" the title of his new book. i told him that he should add dash so that people would know what he was talking about but he did not. so what is it? well first of all, let me say that if i was so smart -- but i'm really glad that that pretty salesgirl took your doctor to lunch and got you on those pills. you know from our family history that there was a chance that you could have a heart attack. taking the pills is probably preventing that and i'm glad that pfizer profited because it is difficult and expensive to

get those pills. it can save your life. >> some people do bad things for money. >> i want to believe you. but then i see the news stories talking about drugmakers spending on doctors. >> including those taking doctors out to hooters. >> ask your doctor if this is right for you. >> ask your doctor. >> this is about money. >> everything is about money. it's getting the good pills to you. the doctor has to know about them in order to prescribe. if going to hooters is what it takes and it's good for your health i don't have a problem with that. what you see on tv telling you to ask your doctor, it includes

stigmatized conditions and you can do something about it. they come to the doctor and they say that i want this as well and getting the better care. >> what prevents the doctor from prescribing stuff raiment. >> is taking a kickback. >> if you catch people doing that it's illegal. >> he could say you get paid sometimes to speak to doctors you could call it a form of bribing. >> i don't do the kind of speaking that you are talking about when doctors talk to other doctors paid for by drug companies and tell them about products. and why is paying someone to provide education a bribe if the drug is a good drug. and by the way the doctor can only talk about what the fda has approved. the fda has huge oversight over the safety and efficacy of drugs

and devices. >> they have kept passing new rules that limit what you can do. >> what we lose is this device. and what you do is just make a small stick in a vessel that has been blocked off and then you blow up this balloon and you pull this clock out that formed. it saves your life and heart and brain. and this device was invented many years ago by a surgeon named tom fogerty who worked on patients. and today many would say oh, you cannot try it because you have a commercial interest in it. so he would have to get someone else to try it. and if he can find someone else, that someone else may not have had the skill or the passion to

make it work. >> and it has saved huge amounts of money, simpler procedures. >> absolutely. it saved millions of lives and hearts. >> fogerty left stanford because these committees harassed him and he called them the unfit recruited from the unwilling to do the unnecessary. >> medicine is incomparably better than when we started out and i can give you an example as to when that is it's all because of the great tools that we have and the drugs and devices and those drugs and devices come with great difficulty and a great expense. but many deny these facts and worst of all they allege that doctors or researchers interact with companies and get paid for it and they become corrupt and they lose concerned for their reputations and they do bad research and make her patience. >> my book, read it and you will see that they don't have

evidence. they tell stories of the media loves to propagate, that the lawyers love to take advantage of. but the substance is not bear. stossel: so you're telling doctors not to take it anymore? >> i am saying to have patience. people like you are concerned about health. >> thank you. next come as we contemplate civil disobedience, we should be thankful that we live in america

stossel: what are we going to do about this repressive pile of rules? they suffer much of life and yet politicians keep adding more. this level of micromanagement is not what america is supposed to be about. almost none of this existed during america's first 150 years, the years when this country grew and became the envy of the world. the little house on the prairie books decide to what life was like. and many say americans won't obey any king on earth. that means that they have to obey their own consciences. there isn't anyone else that has the right to give me orders. sorry, it hasn't worked out that

way. lots of people give us these orders and the orders keep increasing. so what do we do about it two in much of the world when people fight the rules, they are killed. we don't know what happened to this young man. china keeps that secret. hundreds of thousands were killed in tiananmen square. and thousands more were killed during the arab spring protest. the good thing about living in america is that usually we can protest rules without being killed. women fought for the right to vote and won one at 95 years ago without bloodshed. they just marched and demanded the right and then a few years later they got it. the civil rights revolution was bloodier. rosa parks helped she was tired of giving in, she said. she lived a long life and died when she was 92 years old. dozens were killed and other

civil rights protests, but most of the movement like the massive march on washington was peaceful. ♪ ♪ >> it was one of the capitals greatest spectacles. demonstrators moved on in quarterly masses and not a single incident occurred. ♪ ♪ stossel: i do not claim that these endless rules from today's regulatory state are as bad as segregation wise. but the way the government keeps adding is just really bad. it sucked the life out of people. they have delayed or stopped lots of potentially great innovation. they will kill the future unless we kill some of the rules. so what is the best way to do that? selective civil disobedience.

let's rebuild america without permission. tell the oppressive state that we are not going to take it. that is our show and we will see monday lou's back. have a good night. neil: well never let a crisis go to waste, especially if you can use it to waste more money. welcome, everybody, i'm neil cavuto. and think quick, sherand chuck schumer, what do you think they have in common? amtrak spending the trainer and the entertaining senator using this week's train disaster to push for more federal dollars, not only for amtrak that received billions over the years but pretty much everything else while they're at. it does that ring a bell? it is a familiar liberal theme. >> we need to invest in the infrastructure not just when something bad happens like a bridge collapse or train derailment but all the time. >> our safety is linked to the

in