attacks. >> that's tomorrow. going to be a sad day. >> all right. thanks for joining us. >> with the election less than two months away, hillary clinton's e-mail scandal isn't going away. house republicans now calling for an obstructionion of justice probe into clinton e-mails being deleted. devices being smashed. all despite a subpoena to preserve them for the fbi investigation. with this probe be worth the price? hi, everybody. i'm in for brenda butner. this is bulls and bears. the bulls and bears, gary smith, jonas, john, along with emily, and julie. welcome, everybody. >> come on, i couldn't resist. emily, is an obstruction of justice investigation worth taxpayer's money? >> absolutely. i mean look we're handing the

keys to the next president of the united states, gets the keys to the most powerful office in the world. i think, of course, and i think the real key is that the american people, their polling on the side of jason chaffetz around 60% of americans say they distrust hillary clinton. not only are they okay with it they welcome these sorts of investigations to get to the bottom of what's going on with secretary clinton and i would like to add i'm amused by congressional democrats newfound interest in spending taxpayer dollars efficiently. that's delicious. >> delicious is a kind word. john, what we did find out from house oversight chair congressman chaffetz there was evidence that a contractor working for clinton deleted e-mails after they were -- despite knowing they were the subject of a congressional subpoena. there was a conference call with clinton attorneys before these deletio deletions. there's a lot that smells awful. what's wrong with looking into it? >> because nothing is going get done. that's what's wrong with it.

look, are these serious allegations? absolutely. they're under subpoena and some tech staffer erased those e-mails after the subpoena, that is a crime. a serious crime. if you deleted these e-mails, that is also a crime. if you're knowingly deleting and using that for classified information. the bigger issue why she was using this private server, why were these e-mails deleted anyway. that was never investigated. the department of justice never investigated the alleged collusion between the secretary of state and the clinton foundation. so, but now at this point, you've got these republicans that are going after miss clinton. the only reason they're going after her, not for justice, stupid to even suggest that, they're going after her because of politics. democrats are defending miss clinton not for justice, not because it's right, that's stupid to believe that either, it's because they want to get their candidate elected. so justice is not going to be served here. this is all political. this is going to be like the clinton impeachment, this is going to be like and like the andrew johnson

impeachment, one more thing being done and nothing is going to change. it's a waste of money. >> but jonas, isn't that why the house oversight committee exists and with this additional information that came out in this fbi report, the use of sa software program to erase data, two blackberries destroyed with a hammer and the fbi didn't do anything about it? >> i had a hammer -- you know, i would say -- i've always been for investigating both candidates with taxpayer money as if they were trying to get a job at the cia or fbi which includes all kinds of background tests, whether they use drugs, criminals, they don't do any of that. it's weird we don't know unless they get into a problem like this and then call for more additional on one side. as far as this particular case i think we found what -- like she doesn't care about the rules. i mean, what more you going to learn about that? i think the goal was her privacy, knowing some day somebody would look through the clinton e-mails, that's always going to happen, because of the kind of stuff they get involved in. does that mean we have to look

for technicalities now? like with the clinton affair. he had an affair. we don't have to find something later to get him a bigger bowl of hot water. so much more than she let accidentally slip through this it was about her privacy and scheming than government secrets. >> gary, what is wrong with using some taxpayer money to. to look into this as -- to tn to look into this as congressman chaffetz is call for. >> i want it on record that we had the very similar discussion about this issue a few weeks ago and i was the one who said it was going to be a complete waste of money. so everyone here has come over to my point of view. i would like to say. but that said, i will reiterate, john and jonas made good points. jonas made a brilliant point. why do we vet these presidential candidates like we do cia workers? or maybe because we'd never have a presidential candidate.

but john was on to a good point that it's all politics at this point. look, if we even divide this panel up into left and right, emily's mind is not going to be changed one iota whether she's guilty or innocent after the investigation. >> never know. >> and julie on the left side is still going to be a hillary supporter. the biggest nut out there is the presidential election. people have made up their mind regardless of what's going to happen with the investigation. and then all we've done is spend millions investigating stuff that we already know. >> but you're saying we should vet these candidates. there are tens of thousands of e-mails destroyed by the clinton operation to avoid an investigation. >> my point was jonas'. if we're going to vet them, vet them thoroughly. that would have probably had to start almost a year ago. we don't have time for that anymore. that's not part of the, you know, when they sign up to be a presidential candidate, otherwise, maybe the only one that would sign up is jonas. >> julie, where do you come

down? i think -- i'm constitutionally banned from being president. i would be more than happy to be investigated but i am taking myself out of the running. at the end of the day jonas is right, john is right, everybody is right. ultimately nobody's mind is going to be changed. let me add that jason chaffetzs is singing a different tune, i asked him two or three months ago, whether he would respect comey's findings, absolutely, heaped praise on comey and what a professional and nonpartisan he was. comey comes back with findings he's not happy with and he wants more investigations. the republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. i forget who brought up watergate -- sorry, not watergate, but whitewater or the monica lewinsky scandal. they overshoot and people get tired and constantly smoke and don't produce much fire. ultimately people say you're wasting our money. until they get an indictment which they're never going to get people are going to say move on to issues that affect our life on a daily basis and from a political standpoint i think it's a loser.

never mind from a fiscal standpoint which is a loser. jason chaffetz is not doing his candidate any service by hammering this because ultimately it's not going to change any minds. no pun intended at all. >> aren't we glad, though, that looking back at watergate, that congress continued to push ahead on that? i remember i think it was the saturday night massacre in october of '73. nixon fired those special prosecutors, abolished the office of the special prosecutor and then the attorney general and deputy attorney general both resigned. congress kept pushing on that ultimately led to richard nixon's resignation. because he's a crook. >> yeah. and i think you can apply that same story to the larger arc of clinton scanned pls. so people may have been saying the same thing. we get it the clintons are corrupt. years before we uncovered this stuff that continues to come out every day, the drip drip drip with the clinton foundation and family in general. to be fair to jason chaffetz this came out in comey's findings the subpoena was issued

and e-mails deleted that came out in the fbi findings. >> why didn't he indict? if comey thought there was a crime why didn't he indict. he has tenure to go beyond the administration and not get fired. there's no reason to indictment. he didn't indict. from frankly the way normal people look at this they're saying, if there was a criminal act, he would have indicted. >> because he was probing classified information and not just obstruction of justice. >> doesn't matter. doesn't matter. he thought it was an obstruction of justice investigation he would have investigated that. is there an investigation going on -- >> there wasn't a transcript of the interview they did with her. >> when the feds meet with you they don't have transcripts of interviews. usually when they meet they don't write it down. that is common practice. anybody who's talked to the feds or a lawyer who's been involved with anybody talking to the feds will second that. that's the difference. >> last word, emily. >> yeah. i know, i mean i think your point is completely correct and probably need to spend a little more time considering. we could have stopped looking at the clintons years ago when we realized they were corrupt but i'm sure the american people are glad we've continued to dig and

uncover every thing that we have over the course of the last ten years because it continues to be damming. >> i don't know. shrimp on a treadmill, obstruction of justice by possible next president of the united states. i don't know. how do you want your money spend. thanks, guys. >> look who's back, neil cavuto on business in about 20 minutes. what have you got? >> hey, dagen. billionaire mark cuban telling me if donald trump takes the white house the market takes a dive. we debate and you decide. the administration getting grilled on the hill over that $1.7 billion payment to iran. now some are saying the issue isn't how much they got. but just how they got it. we'll see you at the bottom of the hour. >> thank you, neil. we're so happy to have you back. up next, donald trump and hillary clinton both promising to deliver military might. but who's plan is going to deliver the most bang for the buck? noon.

back to bulls and bears.

>> donald trump unveiling his plan this week to rebuild the u.s. military will mean more defense spending. in the meantime hillary clinton wants to lift the cap on defense and nondefense spending. emily, whose plan is best for taxpayers? >> yeah. well i think we need more specifics from both of them. i think trump is -- he's proposing -- our military every year comes in around $600 billion. trump is proposing specifically what looks like an 80 to $90 billion increase. i believe very firmly in the principle of peace through strength and i think his plan is a step in the right direction. but even as a conservative i am telling you we need more specifics on him on where he's going to offset an 80 to $90 billion increase in the defense spending with cuts. we need more specifics on that. >> and gary, the broader idea is, that the military is overtaxed and then under funded based on its current missions and that's essentially what trump is addressing? >> well, i think it's ludicrous.

i agree with emily in that the whole carry the big stick but does the stick need to be bigger than the next 15 countries combined? as emily pointed out we're spending a half a trillion. we've spent ten times what the uk spends. my gosh, you go any country down, whether it's india or china or whether it's japan, we're like 10, 20 times the amount they spend. do we need to spend 40% of the entire world's budget -- defense budget just on ourselves? i mean, at this points, it's becoming a little much. yes, we should be, you could say, the world's policeman, although i would argue with that, but we're spending half a trillion dollars. let's reel it in a bit. >> jonas, military leaders have said they've criticized these sequester caps and saying that they hurt our preparedness.

>> really? military leaders don't like spending caps on defense? i'm sure the defense contractors are really psyched about the caps on the defense spending. if you're in that business you want unlimited spending. to gary's point, look, as far as -- to answer your question quickly, taxpayers are worse off under hillary she will raise taxes to pay for it. bond holders are worse because he will borrow money because his magic pool isn't going to pay for all these these 1980 grade defense plan what he's talking about. it wasn't very focused on terrorism. it was talking about more troops and all this stuff. our biggest adversary is russia. all of their tax revenue if they put all of it which they can't on defense our defense budget is larger than that now. like really, i think it's not like we have to worry about that. >> but julie, trump did say he's going to collect uncollected taxes and cut wage and get rid of pentagon bureaucracy which proves he is a politician now. >> i am glad he's going to stick

the irs with more people. this is fantastic. wait this is like a new democratic donald trump. i don't know where this magic waste fraud and abuse is coming from that he's going to get money to pay for that and all of it he's going to suddenly get all this money from waste fraud and bay because. i want to -- abuse. he's great at throwing this out. i don't want to be matt lauer on him but somebody has to ask him for specifics, nobody else has. >> john, he did come up with specifics. he went into specific numbers of the number of ships that he wants for the navy and the number of new soldiers for the army, 90,000, dozens of new fighter aircraft for the air force. pretty specific. >> yeah. why don't we bring back morhors for more cavalry. as long as we're bringing back stuff that doesn't fit in a 21st century war. two presidential candidates that want to spend more money. surprise surprise nothing new. there has not been a war, pearl harbor we were attacked but not a war fought on our soil in over 200 years. the only thing that's going to attack us now we found this out

after we got retaliation from that is cyber warfare. that is where we need to be spending our money. not on more tanks and planes to go overseas and fight wars somewhere else. >> emily, i will give you the final word. >> yeah. i would say to donald trump's credit he does have the specifics laid out in where he is spending the money. the problem is he is not giving specifics on how he's going to offset the 80 to $90 billion increases so i think as conservatives it's important we pressure leaders to say if you're going to increase defense spending have a plan to increase spending elsewhere and balance things out. >> thanks, cashin' in over an hour from now. what do you have coming up? >> hi, dagen. president obama calling americans lazy not once but twice on a trip overseas. is that what our commander should be calling u.s. citizens? plus, 15 years after the 9/11 attacks, a 9/11 memorial is being called offensive for listening to perpetrators as, quote, islamic terrors. who will win the p.c. battle. see you at 11:30. >> we'll be watching. up here first hard to believe

but 15 years after the 9/11 terror attacks, the visa loophole exploited by 9/11 hijackers is still open. why is that?

♪(banjo) ♪ooooh ♪i hope the days come easy and the moments pass slow♪ ♪and each road leads you where you want to go♪ ♪and if you're faced with a choice and you have to choose♪ ♪i hope you choose the one that means the most to you♪ ♪and if one door opens to another door closed♪ ♪i hope you keep on walkin till you find the window♪ ♪if it's cold outside, show the world the warmth of your smile♪ ♪but more than anything ♪more than anything ♪my wish for you ♪is that this life becomes all that you want it to♪ ♪your dreams stay big, your worries stay small♪ ♪you never need to carry more than you can hold♪

♪and while you're out there gettin where you're gettin to♪ ♪i hope you know somebody loves you♪ ♪and wants the same things too♪ ♪yeah, this is my wish ♪may all your dreams stay big

hey how's it going, hotcakes? hotcakes. this place has hotcakes. so why aren't they selling like hotcakes? with comcast business internet and wifi pro, they could be. just add a customized message to your wifi pro splash page and you'll reach your customers where their eyes are already - on their devices. order up. it's more than just wifi, it can help grow your business. you don't see that every day. introducing wifi pro, wifi that helps grow your business. comcast business. built for business. tomorrow will be 15 years since evil struck america and life as we knew it changed forever.

and believe it or not the loophole that allowed the terrorists to overstay their visas to plan the attacks here, still exists. john, you say it's time for congress to get its act together and close this loophole? >> it is. we've done some great things since 9/11 keeping our country save but this is a massive loophole. 45 million people come on visas last year, about 500,000 have stayed in the country. we don't know where they are. up to 40% of the estimated 11 million undocumented people in the united states are here because of visa overstays. we don't know where they are. a couple things you can do to solve this. biometric data at entry and exit points which we don't have on all the exit points specifically and need some type of national i.d. card where people that work can easily identify they are here legally. those two things will go a long way to solving this problem. >> the deadline for that biometric data is 2018. that will be 17 years after the terror attacks. >> it's ludicrous. john has done a great job of telling us what it is basically

in shorthand kind of like they will tell you, you can check in but can't check out because we don't know if you checked out. we don't have the technology there. as you rightly point out, dagen, this is something -- we are now fighting world war iii if you will. and this is something, my gosh, could you imagine if after pearl harbor we had twidsled our thumbs five, ten, 15 years thinking about a response. no, we threw together the manhattan project. the biometric data to check out that john talked about should be our manhattan project. why congress and the president aren't acting on this i throw my hands up. >> julie? >> i think they're not acting because it would cost tens of billpsens of dollars. we need it but just for our airports, never mind the fact that the majority of people who come come over land. you have to get everybody coming here via canada or mexico to do this as well. you know, it gets into the tens of hundreds of millions of dollars and add billions with a "b," when you start adding it up.

i'm all for it. we need to figure out a way to pay for it or can't pay for it need to be honest with the american people and say we need to borrow tote go this done. >> half a million people overstayed their visas in 2015 that's ludicrous. >> i want to put the number perspective for everybody, 15 years. to have the chairman of the 9/11 commission come out 15 years after the attacks and say this glaring loophole we knew about back then hasn't been fixed is unbelievable. 15 years ago i was in third grade. 15 years ago the iphone hadn't been invented. two presidents a war in iraq, the fact that we let 15 years go by, i worked with high school students, some of them weren't born, their entire lives have gone by and this hasn't been fixed why congressional approval ratings are at lows. >> new york city has remained the top tourist destination, coming and no one will come and pick another country to visit to go to france. that said, 15 years ago, the flip phone was like the hottest technology. now everybody has a gps enabled

phone we can probably do a cheaper system where you can check in and check out. not such a privacy hit to say basically let us know where you are and leave through the government app if you're a visitor that's not that much of a restriction. wouldn't cue you in the airports for hours of questions. we have to go in that direction with the current technology. >> and we're still waiting. thanks, guys. thanks especially to emily and julie for joining us. ladies we'll have more after this. what is success? is it a professor who never stops being a student? is it a caregiver determined to take care of her own? or is it a lifetime of work that blazes the path to your passions? your personal success takes a financial partner who values it as much as you do. learn more at tiaa.org

mother: good job!er] is it pretty? how's your hair, is it pretty? it's pretty!

predictions, gary, go. >> you know we had an awful sell-off on friday, but i think most people, including myself, are going to sit back, relax, and have a budweiser. i love the stock, i think it's up 20% by the super bowl. >> because it's football season! john your prediction. >> dividend stocks, barnes & noble, 5.2% yield, i own it, it's up in the year. >> top of the line smartphone battle heating up because the

samsung are bursting into flames. hillary clinton, wished she had one of these. everybody is smart, buying these fire extinguishers from united technology in one everybody else going apple. >> neil, save me, now. >> in the event donald wins i have no doubt in my mind the market tanks. >> that's billionaire mark cuban telling me if the other billionaire running for president wins you lose, investors lose. is he right or wrong? hi, everyone. glad to be back on the cavuto. ben, charlie, along with kennedy, like madonna, just kennedy, and adam was debating, sticking with adam, dagen, doing her great job hosting "bulls and bears." first off want to thank charles and elizabeth and stuart and david, for sitting in while i was away. they were