from? if she answers the wrong bronx, go ahead. and it right now. >> stuart varney's birth date is 1949. >> wrong. wrong. wrong. although i'll take that because that makes me one year younger than i actually am. . neil: thank you, stuart. thank you, alexa, and thank you, america. welcome, everybody, i'm neil cavuto, and we are heating to hear from the president of the united states who is going to out line a new policy on negotiating with terrorists, not on the part of the government, but on the part of private families and friends of those who are held hostage abroad, and it used to be that if -- let's say isis demanded ransom, and you were negotiating directly with isis or any outside group, any terrorist group, you were technically breaking the law. and besides dealing with the

grief of potentially protecting a loved one, that could all change. but there's a lot of interagency stuff going on here, but with the very latest of what the president will spell out. >> yeah. about 20 minutes from now, the president will announce that families of hostages will indeed be able to negotiate ransom payments to terrorists. without fear of criminal prosecution. that is what changes. what stays in place, though, is the administration's policy that government money will not be used to pay off terrorists in return for american hostages. we just got a fact sheet from the white house and that executive order just about 15 minutes or so ago, neil, i've been looking through it. the white house basically says here the no confessions policy stays in place that they will not be handing over money to terrorists, but they say that does not mean there will be no communication as in with the families of these hostages. i want to put up a statement

real quick that the white house used to kind of summarize the feeling that they say took place over the last six months or so as the president completed this review. they say quote the government's handling of these hostage cases and in particular the interaction and communication with families who's loved ones have been taken hostage must improve. this policy review comes of course after the just brutal slayings by isis james folly, peter, isis claims kayla mural died in a air strike. now, the families were very critical after their loved ones died how they were treated by the administration, they say they were warned by the government not to pay ransom. now we know by the department of justice they also released a statement 15 minutes ago or so, neil, that they will not be prosecuting the families or at least families will not need to feel the fear of

prosecution. . neil: on top of everything else they have to worry about. blake, thank you very, very much. but am i looking at some of the details of these hostage recovery activities as it's known. but for the government not being involved, it will have a number of acronyms and departments answering to this. we are told when the president is going to announce this, he will begin an interagency body called a hostage recovery fusion cell, and this will work in concert with the department of state, the department of treasury, department of defense, department of justice, the fbi, it will have its own director, it shall have a full-time senior officer with detailed relationship with the fbi, there will be a family coordinate, so, again, i may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but that seems to be a lot of federal participation in a ransom act that hassan no federal supposed

participation. so it is confusion if we are letting families do what they want to do, then we don't think that you would have to do all of this other stuff. but, again, there will be some administrative details and costs to this. and former commander of chief in the united states central command general. again, i'm just getting the details of this, but it sounds to me that the government doesn't negotiate with terrorists but families can. but if we are doing so, we are doing so with an alphabet soup of agencies and directors saying we don't do so. i'm confused. >> well, the way i read it now, and obviously it has yet to come with out. neil: right. >> is they will not be prosecuted if they do it. i don't think part of this is an encouragement to do it. if anything to bring them more in the loop and to explain the downsides of trying to

negotiate and what that may mean. neil: and why do you need a hostage recovery team at all? why do you need an agency with the department head and a coordinate and a psychological counselor i guess doing all of this other stuff? maybe to improve relationships with families that are going through this. but if we still have a no negotiation stance with hostage takers, it sounds like we have set up something that will be akin to working with families that are going through this. >> well, i don't think. part of this is to improve the communication, and there's been an issue with this. the other part is that the status of the hostages, maybe even potential operations by our special operation forces to recover hostages, there may be a lot of elements that can pone a part to this. my sense is that the reason they're putting this together is that there's been confusion or maybe stove piping of some of these issues on the exact status of the hostages. and there may be things that

you could learn that are communicated through the families that maybe are not communicated to the government. so if the purposes of the fusion cell was to put all the pieces together, not just in terms of negotiation, then i would understand it. i would say why aren't we doing this before? this just seems like something that should have been done a long time ago. neil: but here's where i'm confused. we do negotiate with bad guys. we did negotiate a prisoner swap, five of those for sergeant. so we have negotiated with them. i don't know any other way to explain that transaction for lack of a better term. >> well, we have a history of negotiating with organizations that have been on our terrorist list. i mean we did it with the ira back when the plo was becoming more politicized. neil: well, that was a clear swap. >> it was a direct swap.

neil: how is that semantically different from what the administration is out lining today that the government don't do this, but they're got an punish individuals or families that do. >> well, it is exactly what you said. it is confusing because we have dob it in the past. it's not been a case where we've held to this consistently. , and i think the government contributing factor a policy in this respect, but may find themselves where there's exceptions, overriding exceptions. all policies have exceptions to it, and anything that is hard and fast, i think we're going to find ourselves trapped by a policy that can't be adhered to in every situation. neil: you know what i worry about, general, is that any u.s. citizen traveling abroad, not just in the middle east, not in just dangerous areas, like, syria or libya or iraq could be fair game here.

the dirty little secret on isis is it gets a lot of money from ransom. second only to the black oil market. so what's to prevent me franking that this is now been green lighted for terrorists, this is not a crime in the united states, we can negotiate with these families. >> uh-huh. neil: we can get money. other countries have ponied up considerable doe to get loved ones back, that is the families involved. not so much th the governments whereas the governments look the other way. how is this different from that. >> well, it's not. and obviously you can look at countries in europe that have done this, even the israelis trading a prisoner mailbox that they traded for one of their soldiers. i would say the value in taking demonstrations isis is not only in terms of ransom, they believe in a perverted way that they get a lot of

propaganda. neil: well, it might -- it doesn't prevent, it might embolden. >> why would they do it if they could? i don't see why this is going to yes, sir crest it anymore than it is now. if they see an opportunity to grab an american, i can't believe that they're not going to do it. i think they believe those executions in beheadings bought them a lot of propaganda value, maybe even helped their recruiting of people that, unfortunately, have this sort of bent in see, and i don't know that this is going to increase or motivate them any further that they're already motived. neil: no, i agree with you on that, i guess where i'm splitting hairs is the united states government might not offer ransom per se, it is looking the other way now in individual family members or friends who are ultimately

ceased or kidnapped and that now -- while it's not a dramatic policy change, the fact that we are saying there's no risk to you about being pushed under the federal government or anybody is going to come down on you like a ton of before this accident. that would appear to green light more kidnappings if you know that one doubt that one last wrinkle has been removed. >> well, let me put it in a different -- maybe say it a little bit differently. . neil: sure featherweight has someone's son or daughter or father was taken hostage, i don't think that the potential prosecution by the u.s. government is going to prevent them from trying to negotiate their release. and then if you look at prosecution in the sense of grieving and what they did to gain their loved one back, for us to prosecute somebody like that may be something that i don't think will be very popular. neil: i can't imagine we've ever done that in the past have we, sir?

>> not that i know of. i mean i certainly think it would be an uproar with that. neil: all right., general, if you would be so kind to stick around, i know you've got a crazy schedule, we do appreciate getting your expertise. >> sure. neil: the president is going to out line a plan for how the united states will move forward when americans are kidnapped abroad when they're taken as either hostages by terrorist groups or by american business executives who are nabbed when they're on foreign assignments. that message will be this. we will not -- as the united states government negotiate or offer any financial incentive to those groups. the families of those individuals, though, are free to do so without any fear of punishment. but it does go a little bit further than that, and we are waiting to hear just how much further. but as i outlined with the general, there will be an acronym filled bureaucracy

here, at least one we don't typical see, work in concert, the department of justice, national intelligence, fbi, cia, with something called a hostage recovery fusion cell, it will be a government entity with its own director and a number of other personnel who would be supposedly communicating with families and ironing out how they do this. but, again, i'm no lawyer, the details are kind of sketchy here and very loosy-goosy. what kind of advice can you share if you're sharing monetary figures to release a loved one. if the government isn't in that business, it seems like a lot of black and white. we have a lot more after this, take a look at meanwhile on the dow, this isn't so much weighing on the market as much as fears that we could see this greek deal that was unwinding. but we told you that yesterday. remember we said it's just like going to a closing. you're ready to close on your

house, everything looks good, 95% of closings go without a hitch, but 5% discover a hitch, either the seller or buyer, other fees are involved, lawyers get involved, start changing the agreement as per se, and some people walk away. some people walk away. that'll closing with greece, someone's walking away. we'll have more after this

here is a simple math problem. two trains leave st. louis for albuquerque at the same time. same cargo, same size, same power. which one arrives first? hint: it's not the one on the left. the speedy guy on the right is part of an intelligent system that creates the optimal trip profile for all trains on the line. and the one on the left? uh, looks like it'll be counting cows for awhile. so maybe the same things aren't quite the same. ge software. get connected. get insights. get optimized.

"what is it that we can do that is impactful?" what the cloud enables is computing to empower cancer researchers. it used to take two weeks to sequence and analyze a genome; with the microsoft cloud we can analyze 100 per day. whatever i can do to help compute a cure for cancer, that's what i'd like to do. having a perfectly nice day, when out of nowhere a pick-up truck slams into your brand new car. one second it wasn't there and the next second... boom! you've had your first accident. now you have to make your first claim. so you talk to your insurance company and... boom! you're blindsided for a second time. they won't give you enough money to replace your brand new car. don't those people know you're already shaken up?

liberty mutual's new car replacement will pay for the entire value of your car plus depreciation. call and for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch to liberty mutual insurance and you could save up to $423 dollars. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance. neil: all right. we do not negotiate with terrorists, and we do not pay ransom. but some of that could be changing a little bit today. the president is expected to out line in a few minutes a new plan for how to go about this for family members who are ever in that god awful situation where a loved one is sized, particularly about i aterrorist group.

business executives who were ceased by kidnappers who just want money and ransom, that's a separate issue. but the former commander-in-chief of the united states, we'll have a few others here with me as well. but, general, to that point, is there a distinction being made here to business executives who are kidnapped and their families called to pay ransom? >> i haven't seen any exception. i don't think it should apply differently to business executives versus journalists or tourists or any part of hostage taking situation. neil: okay. i'm going to bring in the mix here former fbi special agent, and we were talking earlier that the fbi doesn't distinguish, you are an american, it becomes a fbi matter i guess; right? >> yes. neil: okay. explain. >> the fbi has the exclusive

rights to that negotiation process. that has always been the case. and, in fact, this new organization that they just formed will be housed at fbi headquarters and be headed by fbi personnel. neil: right. this hostage recovery fusion cell. and i saw that as well. does that mean that it is an fbi adjunct? because i know it's going to have its own staff, its own coordinat coordinator, it's own director, how does that work out. >> well, it will be headed by the fbi for three years and then revaluated and maybe by another organization. but obviously the white house believes that the fbi is the best venue, being that it has done the hostage negotiations . neil: understood. so explain how this would work then. your child is kidnapped. traveling broad. terrorist group, let's say isis has that child. you want to get that child

back. what do you do? >> well, now this new policy let's family members directly speak to a potential terrorist organization and negotiate their own deal. neil: so i could speak to isis. >> correct. with the blessing of the government. neil: without checking with the government. >> no. they're still going to be checking with the government. this new organization will be heading that effort. however, now family members can be part of the process. before, it was basically illegal, although never did the government actually went against a family member. neil: what if i wanted to go -- isis called me personally and said we want to get going, and i don't have much faith, trust in the government, not necessarily that you're the fbi, but i want to get my child out. >> right. before you were seriously discouraged to do that by the fbi and government in general, it was illegal to do that, now in this new policy, you can engage

directly. neil: so i could avoid you, i could avoid the white house, i could avoid the fbi, i am free to talk directly to isis. >> that's basically what the policy is saying. it's still kind of vague and has to be flushed out as well what the individual could do. in that respect, however, we do know now that there won't be any sanctions if the family member. neil: understood. >> directly with a terrorist organization. neil: but, if you're still with me, general, that's where the confusion comes in because if i'm a terrorist organization, i can divide and conquer here; right? i can get a family member or loved one out and the washington bureaucracy that might say there's a procedure to go by here, and we strongly suggest you do this. the family is always going to opt on the side of i'm going to pay anything, i'm going to do anything to get my loved one back home sound; right? >> yeah. i believe that's true. i think what you're seeing now is an acknowledgment of just that. the families are going to do this, they're not going to be

concerned about prosecution. they want their loved one back. and, again, i want to go back to the point. isis gets some advantage in their minds out of executing hostages. this is a way if you're a family member to say i can prevent this. i can trump the propaganda value. unfortunately, that's the situation they're stuck in, that's not ideal for us, but this at least brings in the hope that we can coordinate this and communicate it that the term fusion is usually used in terms of intelligence corporation, and think might be part of this to make sure that everybody understands what's happening. where these hostages are, who has them, what status they're in, what might be going on to recover them. so this doesn't confuse that. so there are other elements to the fusing of this that i think are important to understand. neil: all right. we're waiting for the president, this is where it gets

gobbledegook in policies, there will be recommendations made to deputies committee, multiple deputies, multiple committees, and i'm wondering about this, and congressman scott periwho disagrees with the president on this. why, congressman? >> well, first of all, fusing family members that are emotional, think about this, your mother, father, children, one of your children is overseas and has been taken hostage by isis or a group, and you're going to negotiate directly with the ransom? and ransom might not be money. what if you don't have any money and the terrorists say, well, look, if you don't have any number we'll take social security numbers, a passport or two. we're inviting these folks in. so number one that seems completely wrong headed to me. the second thing is that problems existed because we have individual agencies, inner agency politics safeguarding their own information not working with one another. what we need is a leader. we need somebody to sift

through that and say give me the briefing, what's their status, what do you know? and what's the plan. neil: well, that's what i was raising manual gomez, that's what i worry about, is that we have one more cook in what is a very crowded kitchen. >> that's exactly right. . neil: i want to get manual's reaction. >> i totally agree with the congressman. this is just one more level of bureaucracy. that being said, it's a step in the right direction. . neil: this seems to be a more confusing step in a different direction. >> it's a confusing step, but it opens the conversation with family members. family members never had to say in what's happening with their loved ones. it was always left up to give the and sometimes the family members weren't even told what position or what the government was doing. neil: congressman does raise a good point because some families -- they're not even aware that in an attempt to free the loved one or

furthermore negotiate on behalf of the loved one failed or whatever -- well after the fact or god for bid that loved one had been killed. so there's some value in that,. >> well, obviously -- yeah, so obviously these are very sensitive situations, life and death situations in many occasions. but if we're just talking about the family doesn't have information regarding that circumstance, that is easily fixed. neil: i see. >> and without creating a bureaucracy, without hiring more people and without all this window dressing. contact the families and get them in the loop. it's easy. neil: all right, general if you're still with me, sir, i'm finding out, i am being told that audience members are not family members of hostages, in other words, those that are going to be witnessing the president's address. they're state holders who provide input as part of this process. but 24 of the 82 families invited to assist in the policy review decided to do so. they just do not appear to be in that room.

do you make anything of that, general. >> no. i'm not sure. it seems strange to me that they're not invited. i'm going to make one point about leadership in this. normally when you work across inner agency boundaries, the fbi is an elite agency. in this case it looks like it is the fbi. so if there is an issue between agencies that can't be resolved by the lead agencies, it's normal to go to the deputy level, which is one under the secretariat level,. neil: i hear you, i hope the other agencies know, awaiting for the president no, you, but former deputy, now the none that i'm aware of i'm sure would have isn't sort of role or input here, maybe i'm missing it, but the fbi seems to be the go to agency for the next few years. after that, it's anyone's guest. but i was around when they were forming homeland security

after 9/11, and that was bumpy, it has been a bumpy communication since, a lot of egos, turf that come into conflictive view. do you think that could happen here? secretary? can you hear me? >> yes. do i think that maybe could get involved in this. neil: that there are a lot of chiefs and very few indians. >> that's one of the things that's clearest about this. i think the congressman had the point correctly and that is imagine if you put yourself in the unfortunate unhappy shoes of somebody who's family members have been taken hostage and now you're confronted by what? 20 federal bureaucrats? i mean what's that? . neil: do you need this communication? i'm going to take a step forward to understand what our policy is, is this the way to

do it. >> yeah. but, look, as far as our policy goes, it's the total effect of this is to say that it's okay for families to offer ransom for their loved ones. that's -- that doesn't really amount to very much. it's already been done. it's sort of like, neil, as though you were going to make a declaration that you decided not to go out to be a member or -- we know that okay? unless i'm missing something here. . neil: you didn't know what i was up to privately, but -- >> what administration is going to prosecute a poor family or an unfortunate family for trying to get their son or father or wife. neil: see that's an excellent point. and manual, that's what it comes back to, what do you think of that? >> well, the policy was they couldn't. it was illegal. correct. i agree. no government agency is going

to go out there and prosecute a family who is already suffering from having a loved one in a hostage situation. neil: this was sparked by the folly family. >> right. that being said, they should be part of the conversation and they should be allowed certainly to try to help their family out. it shouldn't be illegal. this is a step in the right direction. it's a shotgun start, a lot of bureaucracy, a lot of red tape, i agree we shouldn't have a separate agency just for this, it should be a few lead agencies discussing this with the input of the family members. neil: secretary, you were saying. >> yeah. i think a better step in the more useful step in the right direction would be to instead of discussing what to do about hostages once they're taken is to make sure that the hostages aren't taken in the first place. and that means a strategy for isis, that means letting iran know that there are consequences if they develop a nuclear weapon or -- neil: haven't we done just the opposite here? potentially. >> we've done exactly the opposite, and inc i think

mist all these hodges at all hostages being held overseas. neil: we do that know isis gets a lot of money from ransom, european countries deal with it directly through the government or through us and agencies that help them. is america about to join that list? >> well, i think obviously individual citizens family members. neil: what did she hang onto that, general, the president on this. >> since 9/11, more than 80 americans have been taken hostage by murderous groups engaged in terrorism or privacy. these innocent men and women, tourists, journalists, humanitarians, it's cruel.

and for their family and friends, it's an unrelenting nightmare that we can't begin to imagine. as a government, we should always do everything in our power to bring these americans home safe and to support their families. dedicated public servants across our government work tirelessly to do so. our military personnel risk their lives in dangerous missions, such as the operation i authorized last year that attempted to rescue americans held in syria and yemen, and there have been successes such as the chapter of captain phillips, and jessica rescued from somalia. of these more than 80 hostages taken since 9/11, more than half have ultimately come home. some after many years. tragically too many have not.

and at this moment americans continue to be held by groups by foreign governments. for them the nightmare goes on, and so does our work day and night to reunite them with their loved ones. as i said before, the terror threat is evolving. the world has been appalled by isis and beheading of hostages, including americans, and month over they have told me directly about their frequent frustrations in dealing with their own government. how different departments and agencies aren't always coordinated, how there's been confusion and conflictive information about what the government is prepared to do to help. how they've often felt lost in the bureaucracy and how in some cases families feel that they've been threatened for exploring certain options to bring their loved ones home. that's totally unacceptable.

as i've gotten to know some of these families and heard some of these stories, it has been my solemn commitment to make sure that they feel fully supported in their efforts to get their families home and that there is a sinking up of what i know to be sincere relentless efforts in the government and the families who have one priority and one priority only, and that's getting their loved ones back. these families have already suffered enough and they should never feel ignored or victimized by their own government. diane if yo fully, who's son was killed said as americans we can do better. i totally agree. we must do better. and that's i didn't ordered a comprehensive review of our hostage policy. i want to think everybody who

contributed to this review inside and outside of government, some of whom are here today. i especially want to thank the former hostages who have contributed. i've come to know some of these families under the most heartbreaking circumstances, her son peter was being held in syria, her mother wrote me a letter and in it described how on clear nights she should look up to the stars and the moon and wonder if perhaps there's some might be able to say them too. a reminder of the bond they might still share. i've called these families to offer our condolences after thee received gut-wrenching news no parents want to hear. i visited with them, i've hugged them, i've grieved with them. i just spent time with some of the families as well as some former hostages here at the white house. and needless to say it was a

very emotional meeting. some are still grieving. i thank them for sharing their experiences and their ideas with our review team. in fact, many of the changes we're announcing today are a direct result of their recommendations. i acknowledge to them in private what i want to say publically is that it is true that there have been times where our government, regardless of good intentions, has let them down. i promise that we can do better. here's how. today i'm formal issuing a new policy directive to improve how we work to bring home american honest and how we support their families. i've signed a new executive order to ensure our government is organized to do so. and we're releasing the final report of our review, which describes the two dozen specific steps that we're taking. broadly speaking they fall into three areas.

first i'm updating our hostage policy. i'm making it clear that our top priority is the safe and rapped recovery of american hostages. and to do so we will use all elements of our national power. i am reaffirming that the united states government will not make confessions, such as paying ransom to terror groups holding hostages. and i know this can be a subject of significant public debate. it's a difficult and emotional issue, especially for the families. as i said to the families who are gathered here today and i've said that families in the past. i look at this not just as a president, but also as a husband and a father. and if my family were at risk, obviously i would move heaven and earth to get those loved ones back. as president, i always have to consider our larger national security.

i firmly believe that the united states government paying ransom to terrorists risks endangering more americans and funding the very terrorism that we're trying to stop. so i firmly believe that our policy ultimately puts fewer americans at risk. at the same time we are clarifying that the family of hostages, or third parties who help these families. and when appropriate, our government may assist these families and private efforts in those communications. in part to ensure that the safety of the family members and to make sure that they're not defrauded. so my message to these families were simple. we're got an abandon you, we will stand by you. second. we're making changes to ensure that our government is better organized around this mission.

every department that is evolved in our national security apparatus cares deeply about these hostages, prioritizes them, and works very hard, but they're not always as well coordinated that they need to be. under the national security counsel here at the white house, we're setting up a new hostage response group, comprised of senior officials across our government who will be responsible for ensuring that our hostage policies are consistent and coordinated and implemented rapidly and effectively. and they will be accountable at the highest levels. they will be accountable to me. soon i'll be decimating as well a senior diplomat is my special presidential for hostage affairs who will be leading solely with efforts to bring people home. at the operational level we're creating for the first time

one central had yo hub where experts across the government will work sid side by side to find american hostages and bring them home safely. in fact, this fusion cell located at the fbi is already up and running, and we're decimating a new official in the intelligence community to be responsible for coordinating the correction, analysis, and rapped dissimnation to act on that intelligence quickly. third and running through all these efforts we are fundamentally changing how our government works with families of hostages. many of the families said they felt like an afterthought or distraction that too often the law enforcement or military and intelligence officials they were interacting with respect begrudging in giving them information. and that ends today. i'm making it clear that these

families are to be treated like what they are. our trusted partners and active partners in the recovery of their loved ones. we are all on the same team and on anybody cares more about bringing home these americans than their own families, and we have to treat them as partners. so specifically our new fusion cell will include a person dedicated to coordinating the support families get from the government. this coordinator will ensure that we communicate with families better with one clear voice and that families get information that is timely and accurate. working with the intelligence community, we will be sharing more intelligence with families, and this coordinator will be the family's voice within government, making sure when decisions are made about their loved ones, their concerns are front and center. everyone who deals with these families on a regular basis will be given additional training to ensure families are treated with the dignity

and compassion that they concern. in particular i want to point out that no family of american hostage has ever been. prepared for paying the ransom or return of their loved ones. the last thing we should ever do is to add to family's pain with threats like that. so for the bottom line is this. when it comes to how our government works to recover americans held hostage and how we work with their families, we are changing how we do business. after everything they've endured, these families are right to be skeptical and that's why it's so important as i told them today that we will be setting up mechanisms to ensure accountability and implementation. i've directed my national security team to report back to me, including getting feedback from the families to make sure that these reforms are being put in place and that they are working. now, in the course of their review several families told

us they wanted to spare other families the frustrations they endured. some have even created new organizations to support families like there's or to honor their loved ones, such as the moral foundation for steven who wrote everyone has two lives. the second one begins when you realize you only have one. as a government and as a nation, we can learn from the for example and the strength of their lives, the kind of strength we've seen in all these held hostages, including kayla mueller. kayla devoted her life to serving those in need around the world, to refugees in syria who have lost everything. before her tragic death, she was held by isis for a year and a half, and during her captivity, she managed to smuggle a letter to her family.

she said none of us could have known it would have been this long, but i know i'm also fighting for my side in the ways that i'm able, and i have a lot of fight left in me. i'm not breaking down, and i will not give in, no matter how long it takes. today my message to anyone who harms americans is that we do not forget. our reach is long, justice will be done. my message to every american being held around the world who is fighting from the inside to survive another day. my message to their families who long to hold them once more is that the united states of america will never stop working to reunite you with your family. we will not give up, no matter how long it takes. thank you very much, everybody. . neil: all right. and that's what the president just said about hostages, you can talk, just don't expect us to pay. i'm just simplifying it here to get to the point. a new federal agency within an

agency is being created here to help filament a communications process that will involve no. no. government money changing hands to terrorist groups that hold americans hostage. he extended that any american who is kidnapped abroad. now, many of those who have been kidnapped and killed in the past have responded to this development today, it's too little too late. diane foley, for example, the american journalist who was killed and then later killed in syria said that this threat right now remains just that, alive and well. she says the latest act does little is to change the equation, she said that these people talking to us had no idea what it was like to be the family of someone abducted. the president is trying to change that there will be more communication and more interest expressed in and for

those victims and the families. but is it going to change much? rejoined by former fbi special agent manual gomez, and a friend of james foley. matthew, very good to have you with us. do you think that these rules are in place when your friend was later kidnapped and killed. >> i think it would have certainly changed how the family was treated. the foley went through a lot of difficult dealing with the u.s. government, they've been very vocal about it, and that's why these changes have occurs. 80 hostages have happened since 2001, and that's who should be credited for this change. neil: and they were the inspiration for this, you're right. but is it your sense with what the mom had said that fast not only were they rarely listened to, even when they tried they were ignored. is that true? >> i believe it's true.

my family's had some experience of this, i was a prisoner of war during the conflict in libya, and my mother had a great deal of difficult dealing with the state department. one time she was made to stand out in the rain because she didn't have a appointment. neil: is that right? >> that's true. neil: how long were you there. >> i was held no six months. neil: and how were you treated? >> psychological torture, it was quite difficult, the government never figured out where i was, it was actually passing on information through the government. neil: did they demand ransom for you? exchanges, concessions? >> no. i was held as a prisoner of war and only got out of prison when prisoners broke me out and we escaped. a different category but the relation between the u.s. government or trying to find information to get help. neil: i hate to keep putting you on the spot. but do you have any confidence that another agency, within an

agency coordinated with other agencies is the answer? or at least the attempt to communicate is a step in that direction? >> i think it's a good step in the direction. it's much easier to have one point person held responsible and who to get on the phone with a lot of times. i think the families will still be told, we don't have any information, but at least who you know to call this time. . neil: you know, manual gomez former fbi special agent, there's a lot that the fbi knows that they're not at liberator to share. does that change with these exchanges with the family itself because the families speak to the media and they want to get the word out. that's only right. but you were working behind the scenes. so does this really change that where the secret at some point it changes the family's fear. >> it does. certainly the fbi is not going to divulge to the families or anybody classified information as to operations that they might be planning or taking place with the department of

defense, with the military, with the cia, et cetera. that being said, it seems to me that the message here is that the families will now be part of the solution before they were simply treated as part of the problem in ana annoyance to the government, where now they're being included in the decision-making process. we have to remember that the families and friends know them any better than any organization ever will. why won't then part of the solution in terms of knowing okay. what the family member -- neil: but they don't. and the government takes a cavalier at it too. like what your mom dealt with or what the foley's went through. do you expect that to change? maybe hope. >> obviously i don't expect it to change too much. dealing with employees that view this as a case, it's a file, they don't know the families. it's difficult to make the human connection, but i certainly hope that one of the considerations when selecting

people with these will be able to connect with the families more effectively than what's done in the past. . neil: we appreciate that and the new policy from the united states government is that we still don't pay for ransoms, but we will commit to listening to the families who are being asked to do so. is that different? the hope is it is. we shall see. dow down 112, we'll have more after this there's nothing more romantic than a spontaneous moment. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions

and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com having a perfectly nice day, when out of nowhere a pick-up truck slams into your brand new car. one second it wasn't there and the next second... boom! you've had your first accident. now you have to make your first claim. so you talk to your insurance company and... boom! you're blindsided for a second time. they won't give you enough money to replace

your brand new car. don't those people know you're already shaken up? liberty mutual's new car replacement will pay for the entire value of your car plus depreciation. call and for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch to liberty mutual insurance and you could save up to $423 dollars. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.

neil: real quick i want to update you on the dow, we're down 116 points, now, that has nothing to do with what the white house announced today with the new policy of americans who are held captive abroad, but we have greece

unraveling, and just as we said yesterday, a supposedly done deal is not a done deal until it's a done deal much like a house closing. how many of you have done that and left surprised because you didn't have that house that you thought you had, and you didn't have the deal that you thought you had. well, that's equivalent what the greek negotiators have done, they walked away from a deal that they didn't originally agree to, and then some of the officials at the table were told today that that's not what they agreed to. so i don't know if that's the proper greek term, but it's weighing on the markets. and you know this space very, very well, you look great. good to see you. what do you make of this and what the president tried to do first off on a new i guess hostage policy for lack of a better word. >> i think you have to divide them into two, the humanitarian, have you just

wonder whys this been our policy all along? . neil: well, in the bush years. >> well, i don't know. it's not an issue we really got into. neil: the president said it was never clarified, now it's clarified. >> now that we're working closely with the families, the families are cut off, there's never more of a time to work closely with the families and hug them than if a family member is taken hostage. so that i'm glad to see the president is organizing the government to do a better job . neil: but here's what he told me yesterday. >> the minute you start paying ransom, you're going to have more kidnappings. we had kidnappings in the u.s. before lynnberg because we paid ransom. and we've had very few since because we don't pay ransom. you can't pay ransom. . neil: now, to be clear. we're not paying ransom. but the understanding here is we're going to let families do so if they want to privately. >> well, that was the second

point i was going to make. there's the bottom line side and what is our policy. and it's tortured logic to say the united states government won't pay ransoms, but if somehow the families through third party families pay, it's not okay. and it will encourage more hostage taking. we have to be consistent as a nation, if it's wrong to do it, in this case kidnapping, on anybody can pay ransom. neil: but do you think that that ever factors in to potential kidnappers. >> absolutely. neil: to know that the family is or isn't going to pay ransom. >> sure. you look at the somali pirates, they target people who know are going to pay ransoms. >> those are big businesses a lot of times. >> yeah. but there's a rewar. neil: and someone saying isis because it's the second form of revenue. >> that's correctrevenue. >> that's correct. and this is why we have a united states marine core is because the pites kept taking ships,.

neil: no fewer than 85 americans have been kidnapped over the last few years, so we're still getting our guys kidnapped. >> well, it will be an awful a lot more if we paid ransom. neil: really? even the individual family doing so. >> absolutely. neil: what about the this notion for individual families left out of the loop? the one thing we got from the foley family is that there's very little communication with them, and an indifference if you believe the mom, and, you know, no acts to say that her son is dead. >> yeah. neil: now that's all she knows that this doesn't change anything. >> well, that's why i went to the humanitarian side first. anything the united states government can do to work closely with those families, we should be doing. neil: all right. real quickly you worked for bush. do you want to -- setting your sights on another bush? >> well, i'm neutral in the primary. i'm just watching it unfold, i still thank jeb bush and scott walker are the top candidates. rubio has been very impressive. donald trump i think is going to be a spectacular disaster. .

neil: he's second now. >> well, he reminds me of the type thing that happens when there's a roadside crash and everybody is going to stair at it. he's not qualified to be the president of the united states, he's very unpopular in the. meaningless when it comes to the decision-making to lead congress, work with. neil: what did she chris christie we're told next week,. >> this is a strong crop of candidates. neil: yeah. >> it's over crowded. neil: yeah. >> sorting through, it's going to be very tough for my party . neil: all right. we'll watch it very closely. great seeing you again. take a look at the dow again, it's not exclusively grease, but it's a lot grease that once again a deal is not a deal, and i keep telling you unless someone has signed off on that and committed to the measures in that, you don't have a deal. we don't have a deal. we don't have a rally either.

>> all right. things are untravelling very fast in greece right now. we're getting word that the greek prime minister had been

meeting with the equivalent of his cabinet and finance mensters right now in brussels, trying to come up with something that appears to be, as i say, unravelling. we warned you about that yesterday, the distinct likelihood when either side doesn't know what's in the deal. that's a precursor. a selloff could continue, what do you think? >> it's not good news, neil. i need to put this in terms that everyone understands. the greek prime minister got body slammed by angela merkel because they aren't buying the package that greece is bringing to the table and i frankly don't disagree with them. neil, you know, the problem with greece is they've been told year after year, you have to raise taxes, cut spending, reform the pension system and stop borrowing and they just are not willing to do that.

neil: they're doing it, but just not as much. >> not fast enough. neil: you're a cruel, mean ogre and whatever they do isn't enough. i wonder if you're being kind to the greeks? where is the incentive for them to do well? >> well, the tough part is there's really not much effort or really, opportunity left for them. i mean, they've been warned about this for a long time now. i feel for the greek people because i don't feel like-- >> we told we don't think that scott martin feels at all for us and-- made that up. >> news flash. remember what they did, they ousted the property to bring in a new party that's more awes r austerity appreciative. we'll say again and again bring back my favorite old time currency drachma.

and you can't spell drachma without the words that form drama. you devalue the currency and you get foreign balance in the system and pay back and more drachma and value and you get out of the problem. neil: what if you don't want to have the drama, goodbye, greece, don't let the screen door hit you, bye-bye. >> they could be kicked out and why they've been calling the bluff so long. fine, we won't acclimate what you want us to do. go ahead and get rid of us. the ecb and eu know it's bad pr and it's going to kill the currency and the euro and they're reluctant to do it as well. neil: i was only kidding. boy, the greeks are mad at you now. have a nice day. scott martin was referring to the european central bank and european union when he posted

up that rattled markets in europe, and it's costing our dow a gain that it might otherwise had. in the meantime not everyone is feeling that, if you're a netflix shareholder, connell mcshane. connell: minus the greeks. simply the stock alert to talk about netflix and the seven for one stock split as the shares have doubled or gone up thereabouts this year. and anytime a company, especially one as well-known to consumers as netflix is does something like this. it's not like your investment, as i'm sure most people know, changes at all in terms of value when the company splits its shares. however, the hope is and history does tell us this happens from time to time. you'll get the small investor, the so-called mom and pop investor interested in stock at a lower price.

when apple did this, the stock went up, the same exact situation. seven for one stock split. not everybody appears to be on board with the netflix move, well, they split the shares and as they say, mom and pop investors will get interested and the stock will continue to rise. interesting from carl icahn today, i know you were talking to him recently, neil, saying that he sold the last of his netflix investment today and believes the aforementioned apple currently represents the same opportunity that netflix offered several years ago. that from carl icahn, interesting. neil: what he's saying, it could be a house of cards? connell: i see what you did and i caught on right away. neil: on cable, i said that. dagen: you did not say that! you've been sitting around three years waiting to say that. connell: a good show. neil: two years. dagen: the show is stale, too. neil: it was disappointing. connell: who is the woman speaking up, has she been introduced? >> unfortunately, it's dagen

and we've got charles and jo ling kent and dagen, since you couldn't shut up prior, do you have any thoughts on this. dagen: it's a content company, it's not scaleable like a content company. it can't be an apple or a google. valuation roughly is $42 billion. you look at, say, time warner or 21st century fox, our parent company. neil: love that company. dagen: 68 billion to 72 billion for time warner. do you know how much more content, which is very expensive to make, very slow to make, that netflix would have to churn out to be the equivalent size of those companies or worth that much money? it's incomprehensible. plus, so much competition for netflix right now. you have h.b.o. now. you have showtime stand alone. amazon prime, you have hulu is ramping up, you name it everybody is on the on-line content, better get out the

way. neil: you can look at it and immediately say, well, all those-- back to arguments notwithstanding, anytime a company that is a very rich stock, cuts it down to size so it's affordable in the short-term, it's good. would you agree with that? >> in the short-term it's good. analysts have been telling me this morning, it's cosmetic and it is, like connell was saying, divide it up and shows that there's momentum within the company and they feel they can have the confidence to go to their board to have the-- >> and how is this brave to do? >> we have the confidence at least in the next year or so that we're going to continue to do well and we have the momentum. we're going to have the money to spend on that very expensive content that more retail investors will invest because maybe they use netflix or like netflix. dagen: it's a wink and a nod to investors we're not going to screw up in six quarters. neil: it worked for apple. it's worked for a lot of company. neil: do you as a pretty savvy investor ever invest on just

that? >> no, but my subscribers are in it. we took profits last week at 690 and went back in 650 and almost went-- >> the first was 400. >> didn't you hear me when you said can you give me a clue. >> i said you're joking. neil: that's illegal. >> the bottom line, it might be cosmetic, but netflix-- netflix has the bandwidth. >> 60 million people use it. neil: it's a one-trick pony according to dagen. >> the trick isn't over, wait until they become profitable. >> they can't produce the growth to justify a much higher valuation than they have right now. >> well, that makes a lot of firms on the street stupid because almost every day someone gives them a $900 valuation. i won't be in until 900 bucks, they got an upgrade to 900.

i want to finish my point. those 62 million people become shareholders. two years ago i was in a cheesecake factory, three kids 18 to 21 looked like they were young college kids laughing and i didn't know exactly what they were talking and said, yeah, my dad short the stock, but binge watched so-and-so and laughed. netflix up 100% that's are the people that will think that 100 is cheaper than $700. cosmetic, yes, change of fundamentals, no, does it work? with this company it will. >> the series though-- >> it looks like it's on a momentum that won't stop anytime in the relative-- >> they build out international and when they turn out profits, the margins are going to go up. i think it's got about another year or two are real strong growth that could justify the stocks, but i-- yeah, there's no doubt. dagen: hulu is becoming increasingly aggressive snaring

content. seinfeld partially owned by 21st century fox and got episodes of "empire", and showtime with hulu and there are a lot more options. >> there's no doubt the content is there. >> you're missing that most people will buy both. i didn't say all. neil: a lot of people do. >> absolutely. that's standard among to have netflix and hulu or h.b.o. and netflix. and by the way, can i point out that those dvd people, there are still 5 1/2 million of them and actually make a lot of money. >> the margins 48% profit margin. >> huge. >> that's why outer wall o-u-t-r. people still rent dvr's, the red box. dagen: i think that house of cards is over and done and jim jimmy schmidt is over.

>> i like jimmy. >> when i'm going to buy netflix stock. they'll say the stock is splitting and, orange is the new black. our kids are talking about it, everybody is talking about it because those are the metrics that they use is what show and the stocks. neil: you're hanging out with financial types talking about stocks? you know what i want to hear i want fridays with that. >> and i'm looking at what risk of the individual are taking. 4.2 shorter than the bond market index, which is interesting, neil. neil: sure, absolutely. do any of you-- do you know what the other one earns, do you know. >> the spouse? >> the significant other. >> what the spouse earns? >> of course. >> you do? do you really that most do not

in this country? most do notments really? >> there's a study ai wouldn't make it up. >> those that do are divorced. neil: and more than that, shows nearly a third of us, a third of us are on the brink of financial ruin. have a nice day. >> not surprising.

♪ ♪ ♪ get excited for the 1989 world tour with exclusive behind the scenes footage, all of taylor swift's music videos, interviews, and more.

xfinity is the destination for all things taylor swift. >> you know, i guess i can laugh all i want about dagen mcdowell looking at average bond fund durations here, but the fact of the matter is maybe more of us should be doing that because a lot of us are knee deep in big old financial trouble because we're not. right now, 70 million americans do not have any formidable emergency savings and a lot of

them are secretive how poorly they're doing and in fact communicating with their spouses. the other spouse has no idea what that spouse is making. i could go on and on, but why should i? larry winget is here, a lot of us are in deep financial doo-doo. what's going on? >> i tell you when you've got 34% of americans with no emergency fund and that's up 5 points over last year, 47% of americans say that their savings wouldn't last more than three months and that's up six points over last year. neil: what is an emergency fund? it's supposed to last how long? >> it last you for six months, in fact, that's not just for emergencies, you should have your total living expenses put back to cover you for six months. but when we're talking emergency, we're talking two primary emergencies are medical expenses and automobile expenses, because you've got to figure out a way to get yourself from your house to your work. the problem is, people are not prepared. we can blame a lot of this on

the fact that wages are flat and we have more millennials, depending on their parents, and rely on them for financials, income, and we have debt problems and we have expenses going up, but the bottom line is two things, two d's, discipline and the fact that we are more dependent on the government than ever before. neil: but the government has a back stop. no wonder why people don't fret too too much about having no savings, right? >> well, that's exactly right. when you look at right now, we're creating a culture dependent on the the government. we created cash for clunkers, if you don't have money to go to college we're talking about giving it to you for free. no medical putback, don't worry, we've got obamacare to take care of you. the list goes on and on, lose your job, no problem we've got 99 weeks of unemployment benefits set aside for you. we're conditioning society to become less self reliant and

more government dependent, that's a problem. neil: we're keeping ourselves not only in the dark, but our respective others in the dark, significant others. i was surprised by the number of american couples who have no idea what the other is earnings, assuming both are working and even when the spouse is not, couldn't tell you he or she is making. what's the deal with that? >> well, that's financial infidelity. when you're hiding how much you spend, hiding how much you make from the person you're supposed to be in this deal as a partnership. well, money problems are the number one cause of divorce, usually comes down to the fact a lack of communications. we've got to talk to each other and actually have family discussions where we include the kids how much we earn, how much we have to stay alive as a family, and how much we're saving and investing, but we don't have those good communications and those open lines like we need to in every family right now and we end up with a bunch of kids who don't have a clue how to handle their

money. >> you don't realize the value. my kid thinks i earn $1,000 a year and i go with that. you saw the cost of college, go with that. now what are you going to do? it's not an option. right? >> well, you know, the problem right now, we've got so many adults that don't have a clue how to handle their money and they know that the government will be a back stop for them. you know, it's not the big stuff, neil, that's the problem. things like even unemployment or medical expenses, it's that little bitty stuff. the average american family right now, the household is one hot water heater away from financial devastation. neil: you're right. >> it's the little bitty stuff that eats away at you, that you're not prepared for. $400 would put most familiar it list into a financial spiral. they'd have to go to a credit because they don't have that. neil: thank you, so many best sellers and he's way ahead of the curve. watch your pennies, they add

up. meanwhile, climate deniers, not normal? i mean, now they're not normal? after this. ♪ i built my business with passion. but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy for my studio. ♪ and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands

of dollars each year going back into my business... that's huge for my bottom line. what's in your wallet?

>> it is normal human beings that haven't put their day into politics above silence. it's normal human beings that want us to do the right thing and we will if you help us. neil: which means it's not normal. i could tell you that without a full-blown press conference. joe bastardi what she says to the climate change deniers, i guess like yourself, are not quite bolted title. >> well, you can blame it on my

mom and dad. my dad used to say, i don't care what everybody is doing, you do the right thing and i guess that just sat with me the rest of my life. look, let's look at it this way, first of all, i don't want to just trash the epa for everything, because a big supporter of a lot of the things the epa has done and continues to do. in this particular case, if we look, for instance, at the linkage between co 2 and temperature in the geological time scale here. maybe i'm not normal, but it's tough to see that linkage if you actually look at the chart. in addition, some of the real hockey sticks. neil: do you have a chart? could you give us a chart? i'm afraid you might over the show. what is the chart? go ahead, tell us-- >> it would show that there's no linkage or put it this way, neglible linkage. i put that chart up there, i can't see you, i don't know if that's fortunate or

unfortunate. the true hockey sticks of the fossil fuel era, if i could speak, are life expectancy, personal income, and the amount of people on the planet who, by the way, do you know neil you normally exhale 100 times more co 2 than you inhale, and-- >> does that include the fumes from bakery products? >> no, we have organic chemistry because of the study of carbon and compounds. neil: you don't-- we're kidding, but you don't-- do you take offense because someone says you're not normal if you don't? >> look at this, if you're the director of the epa, shouldn't you answer why there's no traffic hot spots, no catastrophic global warming going on. why the computer models, all the things you based your endangerment data on are

provebly wrong? >> and what we did, we went back in time to the '70s, early '80s, and all of these were worried about a global freeze, we could show those, these are all magazine covers, there was a leonard nimoy cover on the global to come. and that was then and concensus was-- >> you follow what is true. in my business, and what i do, i have to make forecasts for people that verify the past is an essential step to the future. so, knowing the past and knowing what i know, leaves the stand i take. if that's not normal, then i don't know what is. >> all right. well, the pope hates you, too, because he doesn't want to-- but we love you, joe, we don't find anything unusual, of course, these are the inmates judging the people in the asylum. always a pleasure, thank you

very much. >> thank you for having me, neil. neil: can you imagine that. and right now, whole foods is dealing with some controversy here and they're a very popular grocery store chain as you know. the company's chief litigation counsel on accusations that the store might be overcharging customers, you say that's not true, john. what's up? >> well, i think, neil, what we have is a little bit of coercion, we were working with the dca and we were having conversations with them. neil: what's the dca? >> apologize for that, it's the new york city department of consumer affairs and when we wouldn't agree to their excessive demands, the next thing you know, i don't think coincidental, i'm talking with you rather than the dca. neil: now, they were arguing what? when it came to produce, in particular, that the prices were darn near it -- rigged, and you say that's not happening other customers say

prices are high, but you're getting good quality. what do you say? >> you're certainly getting good quality and i would disagree that all of our prices are high. there's no question what the dca is trying to do is to coerce us into paying way more money on damages claims that they don't have evidence to support. we're willing to sit down and talk with the dca and we have. we're cooperative with them every step of the way. however, as soon as we deny that their demand. next thing you know, i'm talking with you rather than the dca. neil: you argue that they were trying to blackmail. >> i would say coerce. neil: when someone wants to blackmail you, they're basing it on something that's frightening or embarrassing. >> we don't think it's frightening or embarrassing because we haven't done anything wrong. our team members work very hard to make sure that we are and while we do have sometimes have mistakes, you're going to have human error anytime you have humans dealing with these sorts of things.

we have third party audits in place to try to make sure we're doing the right thing. our team members are constantly auditing the stores to make sure we're pricing correctly and frankly what we've found, many times when we make mistakes on the pricing it's in favor of the customer rather than in favor of whole foods market. neil: where do things stand now on this? you continue to talk, i guess, but where is this going to go? it's a happy medium, they want money and you say you have no reason to give money so where does this go? >> i suspect it ends up at the courthouse, that's where disputes often ends up. if the dca wants to get off the media and talk with us, we're willing know do it. if they don't want to, we're going to make them prove their case. we don't think they can. neil: and it might or might not pan out, and pass it along. and we'll pass this along the dow slips under 17,000.8,000.

the biggest is agrees, and no deal, or a shot at becoming a new deal. and again and again and again. much more after this.

neil: good luck finding a confederate flag these days. alabama saying the latest state be out of the state capitol. others will say they will do it. can't get them on ebay,

amazon, sears, walmart, host of other places you used to be able to get them. so, hard pickings. so niger innis, what he makes of that, tea party.net executive director. what do you think? >> look i'm not a big fan of the confederate flag although i have southern friends see quite differently than i do. neil: how do they see it? >> they see it southern heritage, pride in the south. neil: you don't, as african-american yourself don't see it as little more disturb? >> i see it much more disturbing. i see it as symbol of domestic terrorism visited on black folks for 100 years. neil: if we didn't have the killings last week it would be flying everywhere now, right? >> it would be. i think there was slow movements away. of the at one time it was on the capitol dome. neil: true. >> in south carolina. they moved it off the capitol dome but still on government property. my concern, neil, we're missing the big picture here.

think about that picture of that press conference. you have this indian-american governor, you have, flanked to her right, but a black-american senator, first one elected to the senate in the south since the reconstruction era. getting more votes by the way, more white votes than lindsey graham, that guy running for president of the united states. we are an extraordinary country. neil: so you don't need this archaic symbol? >> you don't need this archaic symbol on state property. if a person individually, to express their first amendment rights wants to put it on their car or in their window at their home -- neil: does it bother you? >> no. neil: a neighborhood where they're all lined up? >> i usually walk through the neighborhoods because i find supporters. neil: is that right? >> absolutely. neil: speaking of supporters of tea party movement, there is a lot of concern among your colleagues especially the 20 some odd congressman against what speaker boehner wanted to do on trade and they don't like

the way they're treated. i think we have one who was telling us because of his vote against the speaker lost something very important. let's take a look at this. you voted against something leadership valued, including chairman chaffetz. i guess by extension all the way up to john boehner and did they warn you in advance you do this, this is what's going to happen? >> well they didn't warn me in advance but yes, chairman chaffetz said, exactly that is the reason for it. i voted against this rule. neil: all right. so congressman meadows, niger, lost a key subcommittee post. the punishment was unyielding. he told me later, we have other members, we'll meet with other members don't like how we're being treated. quickly interpreted as speaker, maybe by extension chairman chaffetz feeling comfortable in their own shoes they could do this without fear of retribution or leadership change. >> that is a real problem. it's a particular problem that the american people, republicans and democrats, are rebelling.

i think the fact that you have got traction from people like donald trump on republican side and bernie sanders on the democratic side is a reflex of people being sick of that kind of politics and power play politics, if you don't march to the drum we set, we're going to ostracize you and take power from you. neil: are you concerned that the tea party is kind of losing its oomph? >> not at all. i travel the country all the time. i meet with tea party groups across this country. while the movement has evolved gone to really impacting elections as opposed to holding a rally i think the enthusiasm is just as great as ever. neil: so, when you see treatment of a congressman meadows and others like him, the tea party have now become easy targets. there is confidence on the at least the part of leadership, what the hell are they going to do? >> what is so tragic, neil, i find sometimes, i meet with the establishment, i have good relationships with many in the so-called establishment and i say to them, guys, you have to

understand, we're your marines. you don't shoot your marines in the back when you're at war. unfortunately -- neil: you guys made john boehner speaker. >> that is exactly right. gave him even bigger majority he had than when he walked into the speaker's office. neil: amazing. >> good seeing you, neil. neil: good see you, my friend. always calls it like it is. imagine you're getting hacked at the government. every agency gets bungle and compromised. who will you call? if you're the united states government you call the heirs. i'm just serious. they just called the irs to rescue them. can't make this up.

>> i'm connell mcshane back with you. time for your fox business brief here on "cavuto: coast to coast." we take a minute here to look at some stocks, big screen gives it away, apple is one of them, winners and losers today. apple up in a down market. a report out pointing to higher iphone resale value. stronger demand for the iphone going forward, up by 1 1/2%. netflix, call it a winner for a moment now. the stock, 681.41. it has been fluctuating last few minutes being up and down. we'll call it a winner because of the seven-for-one stock split and record high. ford, freeport-mcmoran, among the gainers we're seeing. quick look at some movers in the opposite direction, remember the dow is down 144, fitbit, big

splash with its debut is down today almost by 6%. staples is another one that has been sliding. more "cavuto: coast to coast" coming up. it's one of the most amazing

things we build and it doesn't even fly. we build it in classrooms and exhibit halls, mentoring tomorrow's innovators. we build it raising roofs, preserving habitats and serving america's veterans. every day, thousands of boeing volunteers help make their communities the best they can be. building something better for all of us. neil: i want you to think about this one. this would be like our obesity campaign in country going wrong and they say it is time to call up cavuto. i'm saying it would be an odd

move but government now, after all these hack attacks saying it is time to bring in the irs? kind of along the same weird moves. gerri willis on that. what the heck is going on here? >> it is not just weird, it is ridiculous, neil. listen to this. mark warner, the senate democrat, begging the irs to get involved with the hacking that hit opm, office of personnel management. this massive attack that would embarass edward snowden. here is what warner said to the irs commissioner. he says, do everything in your power to protect millions current and former federal employees who had their sensitive personal information exposed by the hack of the opm database. which to me sounds really crazy, as you know, it has only been a month ago that the irs was exposed giving away personal information, including social security numbers of americans during tax season. here is an agency that can't keep us safe, that ti-fta, the

inspector general says they do things wrong all the time with their computer software systems. they don't work, they crash and they're not secure. warner wants to see this agency, the one that is being investigated by tigta, the one being investigated by congress, wants to see this agency fix what is going on with this massive hack, massive hack at opm. it seems to me incredible. i don't know where all these ideas come from but somebody has them. warner saying he wants to see these folks get a certain pin number to protect them when they file, make their irs filings next year. they're going to need more than that to protect them. neil. neil: incredible but it is happening to all of them. thank you very much, gerri. i don't know which came first but as soon as i heard that montana senator steve danes was saying that the head of opm should just go, then he gets news that he is hacked. i don't know which came first but i do know that the senator

joins me right now. which came first, senator? >> well, neil, i got that letter, i was back home in montana over the weekend. i have a letter right here from the opm says my data has been hacked. neil, i've been a consumer for three decades. i made plenty of transactions with my credit card online, i never got a letter like that until i became a federal employee, congressman a couple years ago. shows complete incompetence from the federal government. that is why we need to adopt in the same practice as the private sector, in government, heads need to roll. i think the director of opm should be fired. neil: now did the letter indicate when you were hacked or could have been. >> it doesn't say when i was hacked but what we know now is opm saying there were 4.2 million records exposed in terms of employees of the federal government. neil: right. >> the fbi is now saying it is more likely 18 million. the opm can't even get their numbers straight whether four million or 18 million.

neil: what is bizarre, you're a big deal. one of only 100 people who have great influence in the government how things are done. and i'm thinking if a guy like you can get hacked, than any of the rest of us that most can get hacked. this worries me more common than you think, if they get away, found out from josh earnest white house press secretary was hacked. who isn't hacked these days? >> neil, i am more concerned about the men and women serving your country whether military or intelligence. very likely their data has been hacked. looks like chinese hackers with this information. we have men and women across the globe in intelligence and counterintelligence. their data may have been hacked and that puts our intelligence operations at risk. neil: all right. we don't fire them there. we don't fire anyone at the vets agency. we haven't fired anyone at

health and human services with clumsy rollout of the health care law, on and on. what does it take to get dumped in federal government? >> well, i will take as lot of pressure to do anything in terms of holding people accountable in the federal government for results. in the private sector, neil, i spent 28 years in business, half that time with proctor & gamble, half that time with a cloud computing software company. we need to hold the government accountable to standards of people we hold in the private sector. the director should be let go. the cio as well as opm awed to be fired. this is unacceptable. it put up to 18 misdemeanor americans, federal employees at risk here and compromised personal information. neil: you can relax. the irs is on it. we'll get back to you. >> neil, you're not making me relax. neil: i hear you. i couldn't believe that one. i will will have healthy eating report out at end of the show with all of you that put me in charge of our nation's fitness

program. to politics very quickly. bobby jindal is in. we're told another governor, chris christie, is teeing up next week. forget how many are in the race or rumored to be in the race. who is benefiting in those various states where the big cheese is looking to do just that? after this. it's a highly thercontagious disease.here. it can be especially serious- even fatal to infants. unfortunately, many people who spread it may not know they have it.

it's called whooping cough. and the cdc recommends everyone, including those around babies, make sure their whooping cough vaccination is up to date. understand the danger your new grandchild faces. talk to your doctor or pharmacist about you and your family getting a whooping cough vaccination today. having a perfectly nice day,

when out of nowhere a pick-up truck slams into your brand new car. one second it wasn't there and the next second... boom! you've had your first accident. now you have to make your first claim. so you talk to your insurance company and... boom! you're blindsided for a second time. they won't give you enough money to replace your brand new car. don't those people know you're already shaken up? liberty mutual's new car replacement will pay for the entire value of your car plus depreciation. call and for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch to liberty mutual insurance and you could save up to $423 dollars. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.

neil: bobby jindal is in. we're told next week chris christie is in. we could see a few more alearning the way. my buddy know well nick pour said we'll have maybe 37. i don't think we're off the mark -- noel nick pour. joe miss coto could benefit in new jersey. everyone loves him there. people indicted and not indicted

with governor christie. governor, senator, either intrigue you? >> you know what? actually they do at this point. fun on radio. i know issues. i'm ready to rock and roll. neil: you're ready to be national player. >> only with your support, mr. cavuto. >> run, joe, run. >> did you ever stop traffic on the bridge to screw over a opponent. >> all right, charlie going after -- neil: tunnels, bridges, air? he would do it right. >> you're full italian. you go the full monte. you wouldn't just do a bridge. neil: are there to many in the race, noelle? >> it is great to have healthy competition. neil: i don't think you mean it. think it is worrisome. >> same thing i just said, right? neil: absolutely. >> what motivates him? what is the group that is talking to them to recruit them, like, for example, george pataki. a lot of people forgotten he is in the race. what about some of these people

have announced? bobby jindal. great guy. did great on education. what is motivating? i talked to three donors in louisiana major bundler donors, yeah, really? try to avoid his call. neil: are these guys hurting themselves applying this late? >> i don't think so. i think they see this thing emerging kind of, if donald trump could do it, i'm not degrading donald trump, he is a really smart guy, a great businessman. neil: he called me yesterday and said you were. >> no, he didn't. neil: he said you would sleep with the fish. >> no, he didn't. what they're all saying, i think george pataki is perfect example of this, i think george probably wants to be commerce secretary. but the other ones, they're saying, donald trump can possibly get in, you know, why can't i? i'm a serious guy. i've been doing serious sort of politicking for last couple years. neil: you don't think it is too late getting in at this stage of the game or no? weird to say that this stage of the game. >> if you're expected t was late for jeb bush to get in.

there is money behind him and there is buzz. donald trump getting in. let's face it, he is kind of a quasi-celebrity. twitter, twitter feed was going nuts. the whole news day was on donald trump. >> all he is is a celebrity. neil: you built -- why are you whining? >> i wish i had his celebrity power. that dude puts his name anywhere he make as gazillion dollars. neil: joe, you know that counts for a lot. charisma counts for a lot, whatever you have to say about him. from your perspective by all counts, i don't want to pin you on one, it is about exciting and bigger than life, right? who fits that bill in that group. >> great question. neil: not answering it. >> donald will make a lot of noise with his celebrity status. he has a lot to stay. he is very smart guy. >> he is pretty big. >> donald knows exactly what he is doing. he knows exactly what he is doing. charlie is busting my chops. make him stop, neil.

neil: he will be going. >> don't ever discount, i know neil will be all over this, don't discount governor christie. this guy is so smart, intrinsically and instinct tiffly smart. they will have bump in the fall when bridget kelly and "bridgegate" people come out and start talking. don't ever underestimate him. neil: his approval ratings are record low. >> who isn't? when a governor leads a state to run for president the numbers dive. happened to everybody. it happened to bill clinton in arkansas. neil: don't dive like this. >> he has two good things, chris at this has two good things. he has ken langone and nick lobe. both these guys are pretty active fund-raisers. neil: he will have money. maybe not as much as jeb or scott walker but he will have money. >> the more money you have the more you get your message out to the masses. >> -- in the past. >> i love ken langone. >> ken run as good business.

>> joe, ken is a very good businessman. he is guy said rudy giuliani, you know how many arms he twisted last time around? but he doesn't have the same political calculus. neil: what are the money guys telling you? >> the money guys basically in for bush, they believe it's rubio bush, walker. neil: those three. coming back to those three. >> that is it exactly. i do think our party, i said it over and over again, our party is so fractured it will take two types to win ticket against democrats. take uber conservative and quasi-moderate to come together to make one ticket to be able to beat us, to beat the democrats because the republican party is so fractured. tea party, establishment. >> they are really scared of donald. i'm telling you when i talk to -- neil: now you're acknowledging the influence. >> he is a junkyard dog. he will go, he will go absolutely ballistic. look what he did -- neil: neil, first to say i think

you're right. i think he is factor. i think he is really running. >> i think he is factor because he is a junkyard dog. neil: don't you think he is weasel on this subject? >> come on. >> i watch marco rubio. has vowel at end of his name. marco rubio. neil: take a quick break. wish we had more time. blessed we do not. more what is causing this selloff here.

neil: all right. big down day on the markets thus far. we don't normally obsess but seminal things that happen we pay attention. all 10 equity sectors are underwater today or down today. that doesn't mean it will carry tomorrow but on the heels of some disappointing negotiations between the greeks and all the people they owe money to, this is looking like a deal that is falling apart. now you know, they robbed peter to pay paul to keep this thing going longer and longer.

as i tried to analgize on this show, akin to closing goes bad. closing you thought you had, deal you thought you had, at last second someone balks, someone walks. in this case both parties did just that we'll keep an eye on it. trish regan will. hey, trish. trish: hey, neil, president obama will now allow families of hostages to pay ransom to terrorists but is it right for any american to be negotiating with extremist? won't this mean more kidnappings? we will have intel on the story. polish plane hack may be just the tip of the iceberg. we'll look how hackers are getting in. what it could mean for all airline travelers. stocks plunging and a lot of news coming out of europe where people are meeting there in brussels. we have creditors wanting to get more and more out of greece. the latest meeting starting just about an hour ago. headlines crossing right now, as they go back and forth.