never deal with it again? >> they don't have to. like you said eaie hillary clinton has to speak, nobody else necessarily. ashley: boy, we've run out of time. john, wendy, steve moore, you've been brilliant. thank you, one and all. that's it for us. now to charles payne. take it away, charles. >> thanks a lot, ashley, shocking breaking news fbi recommendation no charges for hillary clinton, the entire presidential race, though, has changed big time and over the next few hours, we're going to get reaction, we're going to get fall out and of course the market's impact. but first blake burman on what the fbi just said. blake. >> hi, there, charles, comey just said after her tenure her colleague were quote extremely careless in handling classified information. however, james comey added his fbi agents did not determine there was malicious intent in the way clinton handled her e-mail arrangement. he said no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case

against her and that is his agency's recommendation to the department of justice. >> although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. prosecutors weigh a number of factors before deciding there are charges. for obvious considers like the evidence regarding intent. responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past. >> now, comey said he did not coordinate his statement or review it with anyone at the doj or at any other level in government and said he could assure the investigation was done honestly, confidential, and independently. however, charles, the timing here will be one of many questions, along with a decision regardless. just last week as we know bill clinton privately met with the attorney general lore eight lynch for 20 minutes.

that came just days before the fbi interviewed hillary clinton this weekend. clinton is also scheduled, to me, her first campaign appearance with comey and lynch's boss, president obama in near hours. donald trump as you might imagine is reacting to all of this. he just tweeted out a little while ago quoting here the system is rigged. general petraeus -- sorry he says quoting there fbi director crooked hillary compromised our national security. no charges. wow. and he is using the hashtag rigged system. charles. >> blake burman, thank you very much. of course we're going to later play that replay of the entire comey statement in its entirety for you in gibbet. but first let's get reaction from state official christian wyatt en. christian, it was interesting because as fbi director james comey laid out the case if you will, it really felt like he was laying out the indictment. you know, the first several minutes of that were damning. the entire part was damning, but it really felt like it then and then of course we've

got that turn that a lot of people expected. what were you expecting and what shocked you from today? >> well, i was expecting comey to do his job and to anyone who was held the clearance, and i have, and anyone who had knowledge of people prosecuted for miss handling information as i have, it's really just very disappointing. this was obviously a case that should have been prosecuted and very sad day for america. comey has chosen to politicize the fbi and degrade the fbi more so that be any director since j edgar hoover. it was shocking to me that he arrived at that decision after calling hillary clinton reckless. this is a woman who's going to gain access to the daily brief as soon as she's nominated. he may be right, i don't think he is right, but i understand what he's saying when he says no prosecutor prosecutes this. but what agency would give someone like this a security clearance? what agency of government would allow you to even look at the lowest level classification? it's just shocking turn of events. >> so are you saying that he should have, you know -- he

should have come to the conclusion that criminal charges should be brought against? or just the fact that the evidence was so overwhelmingly damming against her and her miss handling and arrogance with this whole thing that it makes her unqualified for the white house? >> i would say both. anyone who deals with classified information learns very early on that foreign government information is classified. she got that forwarded it even in the case of an italian diplomat who asked to send something secure was robust. anyone who would understand the movements of a war zone like libya was classified she was found to have trafficked in the highest levels of classified. so this isn't just some bland memo about the turn of events in british politics. this is very sensitive information where lives are on the line. people -- would have trouble getting a promotion if you left your safe unlocked at the state department. she set up a whole system scrutiny.

she set up a system that is undoubtedly compromise by the chinese and the russians and other agencies. and it's just shocking. >> james comey admit it as much, even though they couldn't prove it, more than likely bad actors had access to their e-mails. and that means we are all left to our imagination wondering what they got or maybe we should assume they got everything because, again, they can't prove it but really feels strongly that that happened and yet he came to the conclusion that there was no malicious intent. what do you make of that? because early on, it seems like he set up the stage that the intent wasn't the focus here. that if she was on sloppy, if she miss handled this classified information, that would be enough for an indictment. >> yeah. i'm not a lawyer, but i've never heard the fbi and the justice department needing frankly to prove intent preventing them from ever holding clearance in the future and potentially convicting them of a crime. second of all, i think there is intent, disagreements with

the department officials who know how to handle classified information, anyone who spent a day in the state department knows this is extremely unusual as it would be with any agency of government. so i think his excuses for not indicting her frankly are ridiculous and as i said before, such a sad day. the fbi was one of relatively few parts of our government that still had public support that the public thought was still credible along with the military, and he has ngle-handedly undermind that. >> christian, thank you very much. appreciate it. >> thanks. >> well, president obama said to appear what hillary clinton said later this afternoon in charlotte, alexander smith is questioning the white house's and the clintons. alexander, when you say you're questioning the relationship of the clintons, what do you mean? >> you know, i think everything comey just said, the american people are going to take this perception as reality when it comes to the clintons and dealing with this administration. you have the attorney general

lynch meeting privately with president clinton just days ago. you have this afternoon and then suddenly she's cleared of these charges. i think there's something suspicious going on there and something that the american people are really going to question or factor into. there are already four judgments that hillary clinton is untrustworthy. >> nigel, i'm sure -- you're an an awkward position here. hillary clinton dodged a legal bullet but just listening to what comey said, it seems like it would sink your candidacy. >> yeah. but i think you can pull two very important things away from the statement today. one that she's not facing any criminal charges, which a lot of us have said and talked about all along. but two, i do believe contrary to what christian said earlier in the program that you can have faith that the fbi did their job. he came down with some fairly strong language. so whether

you want to believe that there was something about the impromptu meeting between loretta lynch and bill clinton the other day, whether you want to, you know, engage in the narrative of her untrustworthiness, both of which i don't subscribe to. but you can feel free -- you can believe i think that the fbi did their job and did it in a way that was free from any political -- >> well, i think at this point, you know, listen, there's going to be a debate what the fbi did or didn't do, christian whiten lost his respect but more importantly think how damning this is for hillary clinton and, again, even though she lost the huge lell bullet just listening to how many of these classified e-mails -- how many of these e-mails were classified, top secret, how many were handed over and even if it was pure sloppiness, mixed in with arrogance that is the hallmark

of the clintons seems to hurt her campaign. >> there's two americas out there. there's the america where people follow the rules and faces consequences and then the america where people got off scot-free. and i think it was defeatest in nature if you listen to it. he said people in similar circumstances would have faced consequences. the prosecutors bring cases that they can win, and i think he knew this was unwinnable against the clintons. he knew that the kind of apparatus they have out there would not allow her to be prosecuted, at least under the system. so i think that they decided not to bring these charges because they knew that they couldn't win under the circumstances. but i -- you know, what was interesting also about his statement is that those are statements that are typically made by the fbi, by the justice department in a courtroom. not in a public press conference. so it was clear that he was frustrated on some level, that's fine that she should have been prosecuted but -- >> but i don't really see the

correlation between you're talking about this publically and a frustration and not being able to bring charges. here publically in my mind because there is a public need and want to have this information and to be -- to be clear, if there is any -- if there's any sense that there was something going on with -- between loretta lynch and bill clinton, why not air these publically? loretta lynch has said that she's staying out of it, and she will accept any recommendation. >> the meeting on the tarmac last week, prosecute hillary clinton goes in over the fourth of july weekend for fbi interview and then the first day we get tuesday, we get this decision. and of course later on today perhaps overshadowed to a degree with her and president obama both getting off of air force one. it all feels very orchestrated. >> i don't know about that. i mean when would you want it done? right before the republican convention or the democratic convention? they met on saturday, i think

that it was at the end of the investigation, not at the beginning of the investigation. so the fbi probably said, hey, look, we're at the close here, there's no reason to drag this out. we did it -- we were going to release it and talk about this right after the holiday weekend and now everybody can move on. >> so let me then ask you about the 110 e-mails classified top secret. that's not including the ones that were somehow lost. he gave hillary clinton a benefit of the doubt. but, again, in a court of public opinion where hillary clinton has awful trustworthy numbers, that's certainly going to erode even more after this. >> well, people talk about her untrustworthy numbers and more trustworthy than donald trump -- you would want the president to be managed. my issue here going to question specifically about untruth worthiness. if there are people who have brought into the narrative

over the last 25 years her untrustworthiness is it going to bring in more fuel? it probably will. but she's acknowledged that, she's acknowledged the trust issues, she has said she has worked on it, she addressed this over a year ago when she said it was a mistake. so i think we have hit a reset button here. >> the e-mail scandal by telling lies about that -- >> alexander, we know that this is not going to go away. certainly it's a huge, huge arrow in a quiver of donald trump. how he plays it from here out remains to be seen. already put out a tweet, maybe more. but how do you see it playing out? again, the public looking at two candidates high on favorables but hers certainly more in most polls, how do you see it playing out influencing the rest of the election? >> you know, i think it confirms for many people out there who dislike the clintons that they are above the law but also importantly that it also spills over into independent swing voters. that's something we see in our research particularly with

young people is that they already have an unfavorable opinion of her mainly because they don't trust her. and it's a story like this having stern words from the fbi director that are said publically like that i think that really feed into that narrative with those independent voters. so i think that if you're a hillary clinton fan, you know, this is welcome news, but i would not count out swing voters in terms of their dislike of this news or paying attention to what's going on. >> there's definitely a punch in the gut no matter what. all right. guys, thanks a lot. appreciate it. i want you to take a look at the big board here. down in the '80s when comey spoke, went all the way down a lot, came back and said after he wouldn't died but now starting to drift. a whole lot of things have gone on with politics global uncertainty, and also the bank of england talking about brexit. already saying it's having a negative impact. that's interesting because last week we had four-day winning streak, it would snap big time so far this morning, and we got the jobs report on friday. we're going to talk about this continued volatility in the

meantime take a look at the ten-year treasury. historically low to 1.36 now down nine basis points. that is absolutely rackable. so did the republicans just lose their biggest car? next we've got a republican that says not even close ♪

amazing sleep stays with you all day and all night. sleep number beds with sleepiq technology give you the knowledge to adjust for the best sleep ever. it's the final days of the lowest prices of the season sale, with the our best buy rated c2 queen mattress now only $699.99. know better sleep. only at a sleep number store.

>> we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. all the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful miss handling of classified information or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the united states or efforts to obstruct justice.

charles: house foreign affairs committee member republican congressman mark meadows on how the gop responds to this. congressman, thanks for joining us on such an eventful day if you will. well, we heard -- we've heard fbi director james comey lay out the fbi's case. he went into -- he went pain stakingly details on this. i think trying to not necessarily mitigate public outrage per se but trying to explain to the public what the process is. are you excited with the outcome from the fbi's point of view? >> well, i think really what the american people want, charles, is they want the same set of rules for everyone. whether you're on main street or on k straight or in washington d.c. and they're not seeing that. now, director comey, i have great respect for him. and as he went to lay out that case, it was all about, well, the prosecutors can't really prosecute with criminal intent. but what's -- what he did go on to say is the fact that hillary lied to the american

people and that's a big word, but she said that she did not actually transmit any classified information. we know today that that was false. we know that based on this investigation not only was it false when she did it but when she repeatedly said she was not engaged in that. so i think the jury is still out. the jury will really be the american people, perhaps not a jury of her peers. charles: yeah, i think so. i think she dodged a major criminal bullet administrate court of public appeals still out there. big day for your state. hillary clinton is there, donald trump is going to be there later on today, president obama will make his move there, considered one of the key states that will determine who's the next occupant of the white house. how important will this be as opposed to the overall economy, especially in a state like yours? >> well, it will be very critical and it's interesting that hillary and the president are going to charlotte because the vast majority of north carolinaians across the

state -- and you're right. it is a swing state. they see this particular issue of the e-mails as being foundational. the fact that she can't be trusted, that she has just unbelievable negative polling numbers. but really i've got to -- a text within minutes and say how can we convict petraeus and let her off of a similar type of offense? so when you start to see that, it's that double standard. so i think here in north carolina what we'll also see is that it is time that she makes an apology to the american people. apologizing for misleading them, whether it's on benghazi or the e-mails within a week now, we know that she has told us falsehoods with regards to benghazi and now the e-mails, it's time that shepologists t that she apologizes to the american peel. charles: i'm not sure we're going to get that apology, but she has said she made a mistake in the past. but she didn't go as far as

today what comey put out there for the public to see, if she does apologize, what that make you feel better to a certain degree? >> well, i'm not going to vote for her, but it may make some of those undecided people feel better. but really what it has to do is there's two things. one an apology has to be made. but then she has to change her behavior. you know, if it continues on and on, then the apology is hollow and what we've seen is that too many times she's been willing to say what is convenient for today instead of what really matters to the american peopl p. charles: representative meadows, i've got to tell you. some people saying it's a multidecade string of behavior, and that might be hard to change overnight. appreciate your time, though, this afternoon. thank you very much. >> thank you. charles: well, there's still one thing hanging over hillary clinton that could be even bigger trouble for her campaign. and with charges now out of the way, will the economy once again be the top focus for the election? the shift that could be coming. next

. charles: stocks continue to drop deeper into the red, let's go to nicole petallides on the floor of the new york stock exchange. nicole. >> we're hovering around the session lows, we saw our low at 17,815, so we're about 15, 20 points off the lows of the day, but you can see 112 points dropped here for the dow jones industrial average. first when we heard chief comey talking, at first we dropped, and then it started to come back, the market. but then taken a turn for the worst. seeing eight of the ten sectors to the downside. everybody continues that flight of safety right over the ten-year treasury bond over 3.6%, which is hovering around record lows, so that's something worth noting. they are certainly going for yield stocks such as utilities and gold continues to be the safe haven as gold remains at 52-week highs.

gold and silver a bit in the area everybody is running to. everybody else sensitive financials, energy, certainly the number one loser. but we've seen goldman sachs, jp morgan weighing on stocks, and overall now this brings back the uncertainty to the markets. what comes next? we know as of right now for temporary moment, there's be no charges. but what news after that and that's what everybody continues to ask now. a lot of people taking a look at bernie sanders saying that as well just in case. . charles: yeah, even before comey's press conference, nicole, the market was under pressure. do you think guy, mark harney, the president of the bank of england. i don't think if he's deliberately trying to spook the market but every time he opens his mouth, the market gets hammered. he already sees damage from brexit. i don't understand. >> there's no doubt there's damage from british exit. there's no doubt serve worried about contagion for

recessionary matters while they're saying we're not a part of it, still something in the back of everybody's mind. i saw a graph of the next five meetings for the bank of england ask the likelihood of rate cuts because they need to do something and while the fest one was a little bit low, everybody else was 80% and higher. so they know that they have to have a very accommodative bank of england to get through this. and for right now i mean we started to hear about layoffs happening and such and bonuses being cut. these are the types of things. these are the stories we're going to get out of britain. charles: all right. thank you very much, nicole, appreciate it. stocks dropping on a variety of uncertainties across the globe. and while the fbi elephant right now is out of the room, deirdre bolton is here to tulstell us how this race could shift and go focus on what it always focuses on, the economy. >> i was just going to say, and i think, charles, we saw this on the right with donald trump, on the left sanders, hanging in there just in this case this headline isn't quite complete, but it's always then

about jobs, at least in large part. if you have a job, do you feel secure in that job? if you're getting a raise, is it actually a raise that moves the needle for your family and for a lot of americans, it's not the case. so just taking a look at recent economic data points, factory orders in may declining and of course this friday the key focus jobs data. and you remember that last report, we were so surprised, i mean it was a huge miss as a number of jobs added to the economy. so i do think this was going to become the economic election or the jobs election. we've also talked about the fact that every month in this country between 3 and 4 million jobs go unfilled because of a skills gap. so i think these talking points are going to become more and more important. listen, donald trump already has a large amount of support from people because they do think especially for blue-collar jobs that he is the candidate who some understand their challenges. charles: and that's the irony to a certain degree when you bring up skills gap, certainly when i do in social media, a

lot of people play that down, they're upset saying that's be not the real reason and just how many factories could we bring back in the modern era? but having said that, 38,000, 28,000 private sector throwing the 35,000 from verizon. still an extraordinarily low number. in my mind it has got to be over 200,000 but right now the estimate is far lower than that. >> it is. i was surprised, i'll admit it. last month's data came in much lower, showed a much weaker underlying economy than we have either been led to believe or we have been believing. you can choose your phrase of choice there, but, yeah, i think it's going to surprise to the downside as well. charles: all right. thanks a lot, deirdre bolton. next up the fbi official what exactly went on during this investigation and also next up, hear comey's entire statement in full. we're going to replay it for you ♪ there's a lot of places you never want to see "$7.95."

[ beep ] but you'll be glad to see it here. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be. if only the signs were as obvious when you trade. fidelity's active trader pro can help you find smarter entry and exit points and can help protect your potential profits. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be. .. many people clean their dentures with toothpaste or plain water. and even though their dentures look clean,

in reality they're not. if a denture were to be put under a microscope, we can see all the bacteria that still exists on the denture, and that bacteria multiplies very rapidly. that's why dentists recommend cleaning with polident everyday. polident's unique micro clean formula works in just 3 minutes, killing 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. for a cleaner, fresher, brighter denture every day.

>> she also used her personal email extensively in the united states, sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. given that combination of factors, and hostile actors, for

personal email account. charles: that is strong stuff, damning stuff but the fbi holding back on an indictment. you heard some scuttlebutt that maybe today there would be an indictment. whatever they came up with. >> i heard staffers based on stuff you laid out an indictment was warranted, there was something, could have been a misdemeanor indictment. based on everything we went through, the evidence laid out was pretty damning. i thought he was going to charge her with something. charles: i was watching the market, we were down 120, felt like we were going to see something historic, the democrats and the white house, he was on the cusp. charles: i can think of two reasons. he overruled a lot of his staff.

i know that for a fact. we may see fbi agents come out soon and say these guys are tightlipped, they want to keep their jobs, who knows how that will come out in the next couple days. you can make a good case that comey was not a straight shooting gumshoe everybody thought he was. he has a very -- >> you could take cuts of what he said running as a political adversary. charles: had evidence to indict but chose not to and the prosecutor should win the case. that doesn't make sense. why does he care what a prosecutor says? he makes recommendations, they follow up but one way to look at it is not the straight political guide to protect hillary clinton because he is worried about a

donald trump presidency and that is my guess, that james comey did not want to weigh in on the presidential election. it is not his call. if that was a reason, picking his brains and surmising, if that is the case that is way above the pay grade and bringing charges based on facts because look back at history, what james comey did, he was appointed by george bush to be us attorney for the southern district big time, the biggest low enforcement position out there particularly white-collar crime, there are two cases. charles: a well-earned reputation. charles: if you want a touchstone why you would think he would bring cases the case he brought that ultimately got reversed, emails, things we don't really know. look at the case against martha stewart, did not have her on insider trading but found a

dispute. charles: got her for lying. charles: the dispute was pretty marginal. did she like? may be. who knows? she gave hillary clinton, he gave hillary clinton a path he did not give to martha stewart and trump-based, this is my opinion -- charles: one thing that misrepresents facts in a political stump and another, the interview in front of the fbi. before he said he didn't lie but the point is if you look at the evidence he needed to bring charges against her, take-out intent, when you create a private email server and that is where you receive -- there was intent and read doing that, you want to hide it from somebody else, you don't need an email saying you want to hide it from someone. it is known. it is implicit. if you look at the levels of evidence, i suggest people look

at it, look at the evidence it is pretty obvious the old gym comey would have brought the case so why didn't he? it was overturned. charles: the point is why? i think it relates -- charles: he didn't want to get involved -- i want you to stay there because donald trump has something to say, reiterated his opinion the system is rigged and i want to bring in bill daly on what possibly went on behind the scenes. during this three our interview, do you think that was a make or break moment, to charlie gasparino's point, sitting on all this evidence, they know exactly that some of these emails were classified or how many were top-secret and gave hillary clinton an opportunity to save herself over the

weekend? >> that interview was probably quite intense. i can only imagine the line of questioning. they are armed with information they earned over the past couple years not just by their own investigation but the inspector general and the state department came about. they have this information and look to see if there is any inconsistency much like was mentioned. it is possible to prosecute someone for lying with intent to the fbi, trying to deceive them, not being cooperative. in this case, back up and say everything i heard about director comey, heard him speak to fbi people, he is well respected by people who work closely with him, i have always said what he comes out and says is i will -- whether people believe there is something untoward or something suggestive in not bringing charges, i

believe because of his stature or former stature as a prosecutor -- charles: when you were an investigator, did you ever have a case where you felt, push toward prosecution and someone above you decided that is not the case? >> that has not been the case. it comes down to the us attorney making some decisions when put forward by the fbi thinking they might have a case. he felt as though there were no charges to substantiate moving forward. charles: paul ryan has just given a statement on this topic, quote, i respect law enforcement professionals at the fbi, this defies explanation. no one should be above the law. we need more information how the bureau came to this recommendation, the american people will reject this

troubling pattern of dishonesty and/or judgment. charles: not much of a political leave to think they are polarized. this is what you and i were saying. why was a gym comey's job to determine what the prosecution should do. 's job is to recommend whether there is a charge or not. if you look at what he says, no reasonable prosecutor could win this case. what is that? charles: in the same sentence he used the word intense, contact, he started off by saying it wasn't just about intent but there were other reasons he could be charged, also thinking about the past, david petraeus, there is political precedent already established here and he referred to it as a lot of people watching, he overlooked it. charles: not in a position where i have all the inside information but i can tell you i

would assume at this point whatever words he used, he didn't see a violation of the us code so he didn't say that but what he said -- potential violations. he said there were potential violations. he said he didn't think it could win in court. i note gym comey. look at his past cases against martha stewart, the level of evidence he had. charles: the last word. >> we are quarterbacking this from our armchairs and don't have all the details. at this point i feel as though it will fulfill the investigation. later on people resign from the fbi. maybe that might -- i believe he did the right thing.

charles: thank you all very much. hillary may have bigger problems. the dow jones industrial average off 120 points. another sloppy jobs report could do as much damage as he has been doing today. we will be right back.

nicole: i am nicole pedallides, stocks down 124 points. 10 points off of the lows of the

day. and that we 10 year treasury yield, 1.36% is a record low and is down 5 consecutive weeks, down eight of the last we 10 weeks to show investors have been trying to find a safe haven in a volatile market. that being said we gained 800 points and you can see the market selling off. they are running for yields, real estate investment trusts and consumer stocks, equity residential, consumer stocks, stock is up and realty income new highs, lifetime highs, con edison. and utilities a big deal.

charles: clinton campaign statement, quote, we are pleased the career officials handling this case determined no further action by the department is appropriate. it was a mistake to use her personal email and she would not do it again. we are glad this matter is not resolved. that is spokesman brian fallon followed by bernie sanders spokesperson reportedly saying the fbi announcement will not impact bernie sanders's decision to stay in the race. he is still in. now there is this. >> we did not find direct evidence secretary clinton's

personal email in various configurations since 2009 was hacked successfully but given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved, we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. charles: cybersecurity expert not happy about what he just heard. not only beyond the hillary clinton private email server but also felt almost a tacit admission our government is woefully behind and our foes want to come through cybersecurity. >> no question, there have been so many breaches of data in the corporate world and government agencies. when stuff like this happens and they don't come to a conclusive determination as to whether her servers were accessed although there have been other reports of

hackers expressing the they did, something is missing. charles: what worries me is the notion that hackers hacked their way through the private email server and were able to clean it up on the way out and even after the facts the government doesn't have the tools if there was a breach. >> when you look at breaches like the office of personnel management, 20 million records have been compromised and another 5 million fingerprints are compromised, you have to look at a government and determine whether or not they have the wherewithal to protect our critical infrastructure in any way. charles: we will leave it there. really appreciate it. stocks getting hammered, dow jones industrial average down triple digits. what is behind the drought? also coming up in moment, james comey's entire statement, you cannot miss it. you pay your car insurance

premium like clockwork. month after month. year after year. then one night, you hydroplane into a ditch. yeah... surprise... your insurance company tells you to pay up again. why pay for insurance if you have to pay even more for using it? if you have liberty mutual deductible fund™, you could pay no deductible at all. sign up to immediately lower your deductible by $100. and keep lowering it $100 annually, until it's gone. then continue to earn that $100 every year. there's no limit to how much you can earn and this savings applies to every vehicle on your policy. call to learn more. switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509. call liberty mutual for a free quote today at see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.

charles: you are looking at hillary clinton boarding air force one. her big debut, campaigning alongside the president of the united states, the big swing state of north carolina that could help be a major determination who wins the white house. hillary clinton making the big journey. a lot of it, still tied to the british exit vote, continues to hunt investors, to discuss this pattern we are already in. the first couple days after brexit, people who don't like that thing, then they say told

you so. >> you are made of sterner stuff. i am an investor. i thought it was a surprise. there was a little bit of a market temper tantrum. from the point of view of an investor, is just there. and a selloff and program trading. today, this is part 2, a lot of people lobbying for the uk to leave the eu, we are not going to be involved, david cameron is old news now and boris johnson and newer old news of nigel garage saying the same thing.

treasury prices on the floor of the stock exchange. the fear and uncertainty back in the market and this is the result. charles: the bank of england, already determined damage was done, economic damage was done. don't know how you can make such a determination so quickly. they can't forget the economy from one month let alone one year to another. >> which brings up a great point because we are concerned about this race to the bottom for currency prices and based on mark carney's statement it seems he is going to try to increase stimulus which makes people anxious. does the us have to match? does the ecb have to match? do we consider a pattern people consider dangerous? if you like voters investing with their feet and saying we will sit a few rounds out.

charles: friday is the jobs report. we talked about this earlier. every week the jobs report comes out. the week leading up to it we have this extravolatile market so where this is. >> a lot of underpinnings that have a lot of people, a lot of people call the us economy. the us is more steady right now, arguably in asia it is slower than many people were hoping. charles: don't miss deirdre's show every night at 5:00 pm eastern on foxbusiness. coming up, fbi director comey's statement in its entirety and watching markets as the tao continues to fall lower. session low for the day down 134.

charles: the recommendation is in, donald trump saying the fix is also in. the fbi director james comey with an announcement earlier today bringing to a conclusion his part of the hillary clinton email saga. this is cavuto coast-to-coast, i am charles payne filling in for neil cavuto. the entire presidential race changed, fbi director james comey, no charges against hillary clinton coming against against email server practices short of recommending charges. an extraordinary announcement, we thought you should hear it all over again for yourself in its entirety, take a listen, james comey's statement on hillary clinton's investigation. >> good morning. here to give you an update on

the fbi's investigation of secretary clinton's use of a personal email system during her time as secretary of state. after a tremendous amount of work over the last year the fbi is completing its investigation and referring the matter to the parliament of justice for a decision. what i want to do today as three things, tell you what we did, what we found, what we are recommending to the department of justice. this will be an unusual statement in a couple ways. i will include more detail about the process than i ordinarily would because i think the american people deserve those details in cases of intense public interest and second, i have not coordinated the statement or refuted in any way with his affirmative justice or any other part of the government. they do not know what i am about to say. i want to start by thanking the fbi employees who did remarkable work in this case. once you have a better sense of how much we have done you will

understand why i am so grateful and proud of their work. first, what we have done. this investigation began as a referral from the intelligence community inspector general in connection with secretary clinton's use of a personal email server during her time as secretary of state. the referral focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system. our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on the personal system in violation of a federal statute that makes it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way. second statute, making misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.

consistent with counterintelligence responsibilities we have also investigated to determine if there is evidence of computer intrusion by nationstates or hostile actors of any kind. i have so far used the singular term email server in describing the referral that began our investigation. it turns out to be more complicated than that. secretary clinton used several different -- different servers and administrated those servers during four years at the state department and also use numerous mobile devices to send and read email on the personal domain. new servers and equal were deployed, older servers had taken out of service stored and decommissioned in various ways. piecing all of that back together, to gain is full an understanding as possible of the ways in which personal email was used for government work has been a painstaking undertaking requiring thousands of hours of

effort. for example, one of secretary clinton's servers was decommissioned in 2013, the email software was removed. that didn't remove the email content, but removing the frame by an unfinished jigsaw puzzle and dumping all the pieces on the floor. the effect was millions of email fragments in unused or slack space. we searched through all of it to understand what was there and what parts of the puzzle to put back again. investigators read all of the approximately 30,000 emails secretary clinton provided the state department in 2014. email possibly containing classified information the fbi referred that email to any government agency that might be an owner of that information so it could make a determination as to whether the email contains

classified information at the time it was sent or received or whether there was reason to classify it now even if the content had been classified when it was first sent or received and that is the process sometimes referred to as upclassifying. from the group of 30,000 emails who turned to the state department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. eight of those chains contains information that was top-secret at the time they were sent, 36 of those chains contain secret information, and eight contains confidential information at the time. that is below with level of classification. separate from those, 2000 additional emails were upclassified to make them confidential. those emails have not been classified at the time they were sent to received.

the fbi also discovered several thousand work-related emails that were not among the group of 30,000 emails returned by secretary clinton in 2014. we found those emails in a variety of ways. some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on servers or devices that had been connected to the private email domain. others were found by reviewing the archived government accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as secretary clinton including high-ranking officials and other agencies, folks with whom secretary of state might normally correspond. this helps us recover work related emails that were not among 30,000 that were produced in state. others, we recovered from that painstaking review of the millions of email fragments dumped into the slack space of the server that was decommissioned in 2013. with respect to thousands of

emails that were found not among those produced from the state department agencies have concluded three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received the one at the secret level and two at the confidential level. there were no additional top-secret emails found and none of those have since been upclassified. i should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work related emails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them in some way. our assessment is like many email users secretary clinton periodically deleted emails, or emails were purged from her system when devices were changed. because she was not using a government account or even a commercial account like gmail there was no archiving at all of her emails. it is not surprising we discovered emails that were not on secretary clinton's system in 2014 when she produced those 30,000 some emails. it could also be some of the additional work related email we

recovered were among those deleted as personal by her lawyers when we reviewed her email for production in 2014. lawyers doing sorting for secretary clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all the emails as we did for those available to us. instead they relied on other information it used search terms to find all work-related emails, 60,000 were remaining on her system at the end of 2014. it is highly likely their search missed some work related emails and we later found them and the mailboxes of other officials or the slack pace of a server. it is also likely there were other work-related emails that we did not find elsewhere that are now gone because they deleted all emails, and lawyers

wean their devices in such a way as to preclude forensic recovery. we have conducted interviews and non-technical examinations to understand how that sorting was done. we don't have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that story, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort and in addition to technical work we interviewed many people from those involved in setting up the personal email system and maintaining various iterations of secretary clinton's server to staff members she corresponded on email to those involved in email production to state and secretary clinton herself. last, we have done extensive work to try to understand what indications there might be of compromised by hostile actors in connection with the personal email system. so that is what we have done.

let me tell you what we found. although we did not find clear evidence that secretary clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing classified information there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information. for example, 7 email chains concern matters classified at top-secret special access program at the time they were sent and received. those involved secretary clinton sending emails about those matters and receiving emails about the same matters. there is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in secretary clinton's position or the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters should have known and unclassified system was no place for that conversation. in addition to this highly

sensitive information we found information properly classified as secret by the us intelligence community at the time it was discussed on email excluding up classified emails. none of them should have been on any unclassified system but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers, not even supported by full-time security staff like those found in agencies and departments of the united states government or a commercial email service like gmail. it is also important to say something about the marking of classified information. only a small number of emails here containing classified information or markings indicated the presence of classified information. even if class of it - even if not marked classified in the email participants who know or should know the subject matters classified are still obligated to protect it.

while not the focus of the investigation we also developed evidence the security culture of the state department in general and with respect to the use of unclassified systems in particular was generally lacking in care for classified information found elsewhere in the us government. with respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors we did not find direct evidence that secretary clinton's personal email domain in its varied configurations since 2009 was hacked successfully but given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved we assess we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. we do assess hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom secretary clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. we also assess secretary clinton's use of a personal

email domain was known by a large number of people in readily apparent. she also used her personal email extensively while outside the united states including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. given that combination of factors we assess it is possible hostile actors gained access to secretary clinton's email account. that is what we found. with respect to our recommendation to the department of justice. in our system prosecutors talk about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the fbi helps collect. we don't normally make public recommendations to the prosecutors we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution might be appropriate given the evidence. given the importance of the matter, unusual transparency is in order. although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding handling of

classified information, our judgment is no reason a prosecutor would bring such a case. prosecutors necessarily way a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges. obvious considerations like strength of the evidence especially regarding attempt, responsible decisions also consider the context of the person's actions and how a similar situation has been handled in the past. looking back at our investigations into the mishandling or removal of classified information we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. all the cases prosecuted involved some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information, and institutional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the united states or efforts to obstruct justice. we do not see those things here.

to be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. to the contrary. those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions but that is not what we are deciding now. as a result although the department of justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case. i know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation as there was throughout the investigation but i can assure the american people that this investigation was done honestly, competently and independently, no outside influence of any kind was brought to bear. i know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation including people in government, but none of that mattered to us. opinions are irrelevant and they

were all uninformed by inside investigation because we did our investigation the right way. only facts matter. the fbi found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way. i couldn't be prouder to be part of this organization. charles: that was james comey laying out the case for not charging or at least recommending hillary clinton be indicted. hillary clinton's campaign released a statement, as the secretary said it was a mistake if you use personal email, and would not do it again. we are glad the matter is resolved. just before she boarded air force one on her way to making a major joint campaign visit in the state of north carolina. we are waiting for president obama to board air force one. you see it waiting but first let's get reaction from senator

scott brown, former clinton aide, simon rosenberg. scott brown, to you, a lot of people thought this would be the outcome but in the beginning, sounded like he was laying out the groundwork for an indictment. >> related out quite eloquently and everybody was a little surprised he did not recommend misdemeanor type of charge moving forward. he laid out successfully what the problems were. what it did was it does not discourage elected officials in the future to do the same exact thing and be held accountable. she did a couple things, she avoided foia by having a personal server, she lied based on this she said she never sent or received classified emails but we know that is not true so it contributes to the narrative

that she can't be trusted and is a liar. the american people finally understand what those facts are and ultimately they will make their own decisions moving forward. charles: he started at the beginning of the press conference, he talked about the federal statutes to mishandle classified information intentionally or in a grossly negligent way. it felt like he himself laid out the argument for at least the grossly negligent way of nothing else. >> i'm not a lawyer, this has been complicated for us those on the outside. the decision has been made. where we are now and i know we will be litigating in this for years to come but for this campaign, this issue is settled now. hillary clinton is going to be the nominee, it will be a trump/clinton race and she is leading now and republicans looking for some silver bullet here it is not going to happen.

charles: her numbers are starting to fall in poll after poll. her unfavorable ratings are skyhigh, trustworthiness is questionable among the american public. even bernie sanders said since james comey has spoken it doesn't sound like he is throwing in the towel. i would think someone in that camp speaking of silver bullets is sweating a lot of bullets. >> i just think right now, when it is going to happen, what happened today, this issue of emails is largely settled for this election cycle and if republicans want to the theater they have to use other means to do so. i don't think it will do it for them this year. charles: nothing to see here. >> i am an attorney. the basic factor to move forward, i was surprised and

others will be surprised. >> air force one with the president, he speaks half an hour before, too cute. i have tremendous respect for the fbi director, and i will hold back my final judgment by getting more information what the process was moving forward. martha stewart and general david petraeus i like what is going on? what about us? far less then it appears, and more serious consequences. charles: do you think this will have an impact on the election which is still months away? will we have so many other things come up between now and november? >> this adds to the narrative and the fact that she is not being honest with the american people, she put up the server to avoid the american people knowing what she was doing, she lied when she said there were no

top-secret or secret information being passed. that is not true. the fact that she would be so callous as to put these things in front of potential hostile actors and others, she knew or should have known. when i spoke on the show months ago it doesn't matter if they are marked, she knew or should have known as secretary of state what is classified and what is not, it goes to the fact people don't like her or trust her and polls are shifting, they don't want to admit it. charles: a criminal bullet today but in court of public opinion, there were several snippets of james comey's press conference that donald trump put out as an ad, doesn't have to do anything, just put it out, 32nd commercial. he led into hillary clinton and how she was indifferent or arrogant or combination of all with a respect to national security, even using a private server in foreign countries, we

know they probably got involved and looked at everything she had. >> i have been very critical of secretary clinton, on air, in private, i have been on fox many times, incredibly critical of her. i am astonished this took place and it took place for a length of time that it did. a political strategist, political observer, she has already taken hits for this. people know she did something bad. i will be surprised, i will be happy to come back on the air and talk about this. i will be surprised if there is additional information that will be able to be used by republicans to weaken her position. she has already taken an enormous hit in public standing over this email stuff and i don't think today the narrative is pushed any further than people understand. charles: we will see, thank you very much. appreciate it. the tao near session lows, global uncertainty, brexit rearing its head, we snapped a four they winning streak and we

will talk about the volatility, friday's jobs report, looking at the tao 30, most of them in the red. take a quick look at the 10 year treasury because that hit another record yielding 1.7% closing 1.6 and investors, safe havens continue to do very well. gold broke out and a lot of people flocking there, good place to hang out and get another big move, a lot more right after this.

charles: no charges but that doesn't mean donald trump is going to stop charging, chris bedford on donald trump not letting go of this email thing. seems even though hillary dodged a legal bullet, there is so much that can be repackaged to drive

home the trustworthiness angle. >> james comey's statement was damning which is interesting when it got to the end, he made the case for criminal negligence and said we are not going to charge her with criminal negligence. back to the reason hillary clinton used a private server in the first place, so she could protect her records from the american public. dc circuit judge just ruled today that private emails can be subjected to foia requests. that is not going to work. charles: will that be retroactive? >> it will. it will be difficult for her to go back and hide that and cause news to come out week after week and donald trump will use that against her. charles: without getting too much digressing, talking about freedom of information act which allows a lot of the stuff that might be brought out on the public side we will see how that goes but donald trump's initials we talked about general david petraeus and other people, there

are so many angles to go with this. do you think it is possible to muddy the waters? do you go with hillary clinton is incompetent, indifferent, above the law? she didn't care? put people in danger? or do you go all above? when you throw a lot of things that these things, that is when the public gets confused. >> not caring and feeling she is above the law is the most likely narrative republicans use to attack the secretary simply because they have gone with that narrative time and time again. here is an issue republicans attacked hillary, not the same when chris christie, americans have a difficult time, everyone has a difficult time understanding complications of email rules, classification rules, private servers, not like the traffic jam where every american can relate to them. they won't get too specific before people zone out and talk about the larger narrative of trustworthiness. charles: i want you to respond to the statement that was released, quote, this is grossly

negligent conduct on the part of hillary clinton and her aides. the obama administration has shown throughout this process they were never going to prosecute clinton's criminal behavior. between the attorney general's private meeting with bill clinton last weekend president obama's active support for hillary clinton's candidacy the american people will the left guessing whether justice was really served. that is the central message for the rnc. should that be echoed by trump's campaign? >> absolutely. i don't think republicans have been careful, there is no reason to doubt the fbi in this. they have been straight shooters, put everything out and made a recommendation. democrats working on the optics, the people of lynch and clinton, the private meeting that was over personal matters, him saying he was paying golf on a 110 ° day and to see president obama boarding air force one with hillary clinton moments later shows such a level --

charles: we are showing the audience president obama got off the presidential helicopter and is entering air force one. you got to wonder when he walks in those doors what he will say to hillary clinton, without being facetious about it what do you think the conversation will be? >> they will say thank goodness that is behind us and they feel they can talk about it. the president and hillary are long time rivals. he took down her original rise to power and he has the ability this time to take down her second rise to power before the democratic national convention. he chose not to and she is in position of campaigning against her husband, to support president barack obama and he is happy to see that she will save her place and it is going to continue the work he has done in the white house. before that is up quid pro quo. it is really tough. bernie sanders has weighed in

saying his campaign -- his spokesperson -- he was waiting for an indictment. that will not happen but he is still campaigning. he is something of the king/queenmaker. >> absolutely is and indictment is what he needed to get a chance at being the nominee. maybe joe biden couldn't come out, but neither of them got the indictment they were looking for. his final mission is not -- bernie sanders's mission is to take america to the left. he is a declared socialist and you can see hillary clinton on the democratic platform, free college for illegals, he is succeeding in that. and he will be that drum to philadelphia. before thank you very much. president obama joining hillary clinton on air force one. rudy giuliani, america's mayor is next.

. . . . hi, i'm matt mccoy.

how long have you had your car insurance? i ask because i had mine for over 20 years, before i switched and saved hundreds with the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford. i was with my previous insurance for 30 years. but they could not compete with the hartford. people 50 and over could save hundreds of dollars when they switch. i had done a lot of comparison shopping. the rate was like half of what i was paying. [ female announcer ] $420 is the average amount drivers save when they switch to the aarp auto insurance program from the hartford. you know, it makes me wonder why everyone 50 and over hasn't switched. [ female announcer ] 4 out of 5 aarp members

who switched to the hartford from companies like allstate, state farm and geico, got a lower rate with the hartford. so, call... or go to gohartfordauto.com for your free quote. if you're not already an aarp member, the hartford can help you join in minutes. let me tell you what else the hartford does. they promise not to drop you, even if you're in an accident. it's called lifetime renewability and it's included with your policy. it's a great feeling to know that they're not going to drop you for that reason. and if by chance you're ever injured in an accident, the hartford has a benefit called recovercare. this will help cover the cost of having someone do your grocery shopping, your house cleaning, lawn care, even walk your dog. [ leslie ] they were there when we got the insurance and they were there when we needed it. and we really appreciate that. [ female announcer ] save $420 on average, get lifetime renewability and recovercare.

call the hartford at... to request your free quote. that's... or go to gohartfordauto.com today. get this free calculator just for requesting a quote. charles: stocks getting hit. 10-year treasury yields at record low. gary kaltbaum on uncertainty hitting these markets. garrett week of the jobs report is always sort of volatile and edgy. this one feels like there is a lot more at stake. >> charles, you know i watch everything in the market and all i can tell you, the leading groups are real estate, utilities, food, drugs beverage, tobacco, household products, gold and silver. all the defensive areas are leading. that's worrisome for what i do. and then you look at the crash in bond yields, not only here

but around the globe. something is up. i hope i'm wrong. i don't like what the action is telling me. i think last week was nothing more than end of quarter window-dressing jack to the upside. i think that is over and done with. charles: the uncertainties, gary won't be resolved anytime soon. can we pinpoint them? is it global economy and does it get worse with the british exit vote? >> uncertainly on the election and uncertainty on central banks. couple weeks we have earnings season. i can promise you they will be pedestrian at best. i can see down earnings and down sales third quarter in a row. i'm not sure that will be good news. one other note the financial are acting horrid, my friend. if there ask anything in my work that tells me to worry, financials leading on the downside. seating it from big and small right now. charles: isn't there contagion

right before the great recession if you will, with these banks? i felt same way walk watching european banks particularly british banks. you don't come down two weeks a re. something tells me something is going on here. >> tells me they have a lot of bad loans on the books. that the markets know it. that is clear sign. if they have a lot of them, u.s. banks have bunch of them also. remember the word derivatives. there are more derivatives now than in '08. there is more leverage than 08. that has to be watched very closely as we enter second half of the year, my friend. again these financials are scaring the willies out of me. i remember back in oh 07 and oh oh --' 07 and '08. thank you, gary.

that is air force one with president obama and hillary clinton on board. probably uncork a champagne. tesla in the red after more bad news hits the company. what elon musk must do to calm investors worries. that is next. a dry mouth can be a side effect of many medications. but it can also lead to tooth decay and bad breath. that's why there's biotene, available as an oral rinse, toothpaste, spray or gel. biotene can provide soothing relief and it helps keep your mouth healthy too. remember, while your medication is doing you good, a dry mouth isn't. biotene, for people who suffer from a dry mouth.

>> i'm jeff flock in chicago with your fox business brief. the story is jobs. first permanent automotive layoffs in the automotive industry since the recession. why?

fiat chrysler 200. a small car they make at sterling heights assembly plant. 1300 workers losing their jobs. sales have been so weak. before you panic we should point out sales of fiat chrysler's jeeps have been booming. in fact they tell us they're actually going to eliminate the summer shut-down at some of their plants because they need to catch up. stock not doing very well, today down about 7%. that is because of fears about the european situation. fiat chrysler obviously doing a lot of business overseas. year-to-date, that stock down, ouch, 60%. maybe a buying opportunity? in chicago, jeff flock with the fox business brief. "cavuto: coast to coast" is coming back right after this.

charles: many people now feeling this this presidential race is probably going to shift now back to the economy and critics say clinton doesn't really have much of a case if that is the case. let's bring in hadley heath manning. hadley, certainly that last jobs report, 38,000 jobs, 25,000 in the private sector, no year with 3% gdp growth. the numbers go on and on and on. maybe why hillary clinton invoked bill's name more than once when it comes to the economy but she has nothing to run on there, does she? >> no, that's right. the fear for many americans associated with a clinton presidency she would represent another term of the same

economic policies pursued by the current administration. unless we start to hear something about a new direction which is what the majority of americans say they want, it will be difficult for her to make the case on economic policy. charles: now seems like her, quote, new direction, will be sort of to take this inflection higher. in other words, she'll take the social justice, compass of a president obama and even layered on even more thick, particularly as she is pushed by bernie sanders. hey, i will make sure higher minimum wage gets you jump-started. higher overtime pay gets you jump-started. we'll tax the rich and find a way to make things fairer. do you think after seven, eight years of going along this path, that will resonate with the american public? >> of course two 2008 until 2010, this is when president obama was able to get a few pieces of his economic agenda including obamacare and dodd-frank passed. since then we've seen a major demonstration how important congressional elections are in

addition to the presidential election. this is something for voters to keep in mind this november, policy isn't just made by the white house but we do need to keep in mind that congress makes the laws when it comes to economic policy. when it comes to agenda called a better way speaker ryan has presented, so important whether or not the next president will be one who can agree come to the same terms when it comes to tax reform, economic reforms, health reforms and so forth. charles: interesting. you may have to remind congress they have a job, a role in that as he well, not just the american people. a lot of folks think congress forgot they had a roll in all of this stuff but, she is not going to come in for lower taxes or any of that stuff. she is talking higher taxes. it is again politics of envy. that is her economic message. and it just seems curious to me, after, that it failed miserably she would run on this. but i guess she is going to say, give me to your point, hadley, give me congress to go along with the white house i can get it done the right way? >> well, americans should be very wary of that type of

approach because again, when you're in a hole you should stop digging. we have to take an important look not just at our economy in terms of gro but also in terms of some of these economic policy matters that have to do with the federal budget. when it comes to social security and other entitlement programs. when it comes to type of revenues coming into those programs, they're dramatically insufficient to fund liabilities of those programs. that will impact americans for many years down the road. something we ought to pay attention to not just the election standpoint what voters are hearing from both candidates but can we actually get done between congress and the white house? charles: we keep kicking the can but it goes less far down the road as it used to, that's for sure. hadley, appreciate it. >> thank you. charles: right now the dow jones industrial average at session lows. senator marco rubio responding to the fbi's decision not to recommend charges saying, quote, only a matter of time before the next shoe drops. we'll have more on that. after this. if you have medicare parts a and b

and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long.

perfect driving record. >>perfect. no tickets. no accidents... >>that is until one of you clips a food truck, ruining your perfect record. >>yup... now, you would think your insurance company would cut you some slack, right? >>no. your insurance rates go through the roof. your perfect record doesn't get you anything. >>anything. perfect! for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claim centers are available to assist you 24/7. for a free quote, call liberty mutual at switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509 call today at

see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance. charles: fbi director james comey coming down hard on hillary clinton but stopping short of recommending any charges. liz claman is here. that was one heck of a press conference, wasn't it? >> oh, man. it was a verbal slap over and over again with, very little to conclude beyond except there is no criminal path here for an indictment. therefore we recommend walking away. charles: although he laid it out so amazingly. he laid out. felt at least in the beginning going to be criminal charges. i thought the key line was a felony is mishandled classified information, intentionally or in a grossly negligent way. then he went out of his way to explain how she was grossly negligent. >> well, it was extremely disturbing to anybody even if

they are on hillary clinton's side to hear things like, i was jotting these things down, some of them said, she was using this server, she was using personal email, extensively outside of the united states in areas where there are hostile actors. charles: right. >> you know, you talk to hedge fund guys. we're in a business network. you talk to hedge fund guys. they change their passwords, 58 times. they have strict rules where and how you can use your own personal laptop, if hacked that is real money if hacked that could be real lives. to hear this outline, it was a laundry list of issues. you would have thought he come to the conclusion, however the conclusion he came to there is no real criminal intent. of course you talk with the legalese and lawyers, there you go. charles: you know, some people will bring up petraeus or martha stewart or there is this guy last year, bryan smora who, faced similar circumstances and had to go through, face some form of criminal charges. hillary dodge as legal bullet

but in the court of public opinion this is not a good day for her. >> look, she was never going to get any donald trump fans. they already felt negatively about her, certainly. so perhaps fence-sitters, people who aren't sure, they have to look at all of this and say, this goes for a lot of voters, what's worse? all of this or the issues that make people very uncomfortable about donald trump? whether he makes blatantly racist statements according to some people yet is he racist? that discussion comes on and on. when you talk about what may or may not have been violated, there is section 793. it's a code says if you're negligent you should be at least fined and could even be in prison. there was a lot of negligence and complete disregard for security and it is disturbing. charles: maybe comey left that part. that wasn't focus today. this is focus on whether or not we'll be, you know pursuing these sort of, suggesting that there be criminal charges. want to bring in america's mayor

right now, rudy giuliani. thank you so much for joining us. you're a prosecutor. you understand how this works. a lot of people thought that there was overwhelming evidence that hillary clinton was guilty, if not of negligence, if not of being intentional, certainly of being grossly negligent. >> i will divide it into two things. let me tell you sort of my background. i was third ranking official in the justice department. u.s. attorney of southern district of new york. at one time i was jim comey's boss. i am very disappointed in what he just did. the first and easiest one is exactly the stout you're talking about which i have in front of me. 18 united states code, section 793. there is no-brainer violation of that statute. >> right. charles: that would be felony or misdemeanor? >> felony. 10 years in prison. and, the words that he said, which he was ill-advised to say, was that she was extremely negligent. this statute requires gross negligence in the handling of

information relating to the national defense. the definition that a judge gives a jury in the charge on gross negligence includes the words, extremely negligent. >> right. >> they're one in the same thing. so he has found that she violated 18 united states code section 793. charles: by his own admission. >> he can't somehow bring himself to the conclusion she should be indicted for it. which says he putting her above the law. second, the way prosecutors prove intent is not, you know, somebody says, i intend to do insider trading or, i intend to give a bribe. we prove intent through circumstantial evidence. >> her action. >> right. so we have thousands and thousands of documents that she handled, carelessly, that she handled with, no regard for what the rules of the laws were. then we have 34,000 documents she destroyed.

that alone is evidence of guilty knowledge. charles: right. he gave her benefit of the doubt on those. like anybody else, leading emails in course of life you will make a few mistakes. he gave her enbit if of the doubt. where does he get the leeway. >> any prosecutor uses die leagues as guilty knowledge. >> he knows the laws. >> i think it is opposite. >> you think he is totally wrong? would you look at him -- >> i look at him and i would say, jim, how do you prove intent? circumstantial evidence. you just laid out so much circumstantial evidence it will take weeks to go through it. second, you have a straight-out violation of 18 united states code section 793. why don't you indict her for it? >> mayor we know this is about semantics, you brought it up, gross and extreme negligence. you mentioned intent. he said there was no quote, malicious intent. does that make a difference?

>> no. very few of these statutes require malicious intent. willfully, unknowingly conceals. willful any and unlawfully conceals. we prove by circumstantial evidence, things people hide, people running away, destroying, possibly relevant documents. charles: yeah. >> here is the argument you make to the jury. she deleted 34,000 emails, to you think, ladies and gentlemen, she deleted emails because they were all about chelsea's wedding dress? charles: right. mayor giuliani, thank you very much. want to share breaking news with your guys in the audience. >> theresa may winning first round of conservative leadership vote in the uk. she is favorite to replace david cameron. will stocks continue to sell off because mark carney spooking the markets early this morning. "brexit" drama has not gone away. we'll be right back after this.

why wouldn't he aggressively campaigned for her. all of the issues that he put in place. he wants a better record. better than a donald trump. talking about the economy that never left. the economy is so complete. the fourth of july holiday. everyone is still talking about welfare. what are we going to do about this. what about the brexit. charles: being pressured to take bernie's, you know, the big

thing, i mean, how do they persuade bernie sanders. >> in her mind, she wants him gone. go on vacation. go to key west. florida. charles: thank you very much. here is cheryl casone. she will take you through the next hour. >> they give very much. breaking today. james comey with a bombshell announcement. he is not recommending the prosecution over hillary clinton and her e-mail scandal. i am cheryl casone. and for trish regan. welcome to the intelligence report. they were extremely careless in their handling of classified information and it is possible "hostile actors hacked into her e-mail. not recommending