>> steve: thank you for making a house call. we'll see you next time. >> thank you. >> brian: tomorrow, dr. john stossel. michelle malkin could have been a doctor, she chose to be a pundit. >> alisyn: have a great day. >> steve: happy birthday tomorrow. >> alisyn: thank you. bill: big morning here. good morning, everybody. fox news alert. a countdown to possible contempt on the hill. there was no deal reached. the attorney general did not hand over documents republicans were asking for. eric holder meanwhile disagrees and now a house committee will take the next step. there will be drama. i'm bill hemmer. welcome here to "america's newsroom." how are you doing? martha: i'm doing fine. good morning. i'm martha maccallum. this morning's hearing comes on the heel after that big meeting yesterday evening between eric holder and congressional republicans. mr. holder showed up empty-handed in terms what they were looking for and the 20-minute sit-down fell flat. >> we hope and some news

services reported they expected documents to be delivered. we never expected to get all the documents. >> i want you all to understand we never moved toward contempt until the flow of meaningful documents dried up. brian terry is dead. he is dead with weapons allowed to walk by our government. in fact then false statements were made about letting guns walk. holding the people responsible for brian terry's death within the justice department is critical to the family and to me. holding responsible for false statements made to congress on, that the american people relied on for eight months is also important. bill: now a vote on contempt. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel is live on the hill. what do we expect today, mike? >> reporter: hi, bill. in about an hour we expect the house oversight committee to get together to meet to prepare a contempt resolution. we do expect a vote in the committee and we do expect it will likely pass because chairman darrell issa, the chairman of that committee, we do believe has the votes.

then ultimately up to the house gop leadership for when they would bring up a contempt of congress resolution up on the house floor. first things first. chairman darrell issa says, essentially the attorney general left him with no choice because he was just offering a briefing and not physically handing over the documents they have been asking for all these months. senator chuck grassley, the top republican on the senate judiciary committee who has been on this case for the past 18 months says chairman issa is right to move forward, bill. bill: what did holder offer to try and avoid the potential of a contempt vote, mike? >> reporter: the attorney general seemed to realize if he handed over some documents there could still be contempt of congress vote. so he was trying to work out a deal to get an agreement, a guarantee there would not be a contempt of congress vote. bottom line the attorney general tried to strike a deal. >> he offered the documents on the condition that we would resolve the subpoena

question, that he would view the provision of these documents as fully satisfying the two subpoenas that have been sent to us and i think pretty clearly demonstrate there was no intention to mislead or deceive. i don't know. i think the ball is in their court. i think they rejected what was a extraordinary offer on our side. they have the ability to change their minds but as i said, offer we made i thought was an extraordinary offer. >> reporter: the attorney general does not need to appear at today's house oversight committee hearing. so the face-to-face confrontations between holder and darrell issa may be over for now but their battle is far from over. bill: so they came to negotiate and that failed. mike emanuel, thanks. keep us posted there. headlines when we get them, martha. martha: we'll hear exactly what happened inside that closed-door meeting late yesterday afternoon. we'll speak with iowa senator charles grassley. he is the ranking member of

the judiciary committee. stick around for that. he was at that meeting in the room and he will tell us exactly what happened. it is a massive entitlement program that costs close to $800 billion over the last decade. and senate republicans are not looking for modest reform in the food stamp program. they're basically trying to stop people from taking advantage of the program. but it was shot down, that plan to make some amendments to that by democrats. it is a program that has ballooned in the last couple of years. it grew 64%, think about that, from 2008 through march of 2012. more than 46 million now get food stamps, one in seven americans. now qualify for the program that was originally designed to help those who were in the most severe financial distress in this country. in the last decade it has grown by more than 27 million people. that is more than those that

live in the state of texas. it is a big number. stuart varney joins me from the fox business network. good morning, stuart. this is a growing problem obviously. >> whole world is looking to america to see if we're prepared to rein in, at least a little bit, our entitlement programs because we want to rein in our burgeoning debt. judging by the performance of the u.s. senate yesterday. we're not prepared to make even minor changes in a program like food stamps. two proposals were up for vote. stop giving food stamps to people with tens of thousands of dollars in the bank. number two, stop the feds from paying half billion dollars to the states to go out sign up more people for food stamps, two very modest reform proposals. both were roundly defeated. which means we're not prepared to rein in even a little bit this program which will consume $770 billion in the next 10 years. as you said, martha, one in 10, one in seven people now get it.

can't even tinker with it. martha: an incredible number when you think about it that way. stuart, one of the things pointed out that changed people's attitude toward receiving them. used to be something it was a hit to somebody's pride basically, if they were in that situation and nobody wanted to be in the situation where you had to ask the government for help with food stamps. that has changed to some extent? >> yes, absolutely has changed. now an entitlement. it is your right. driving into work this morning i heard on the radio an ad for food stamps. it was, food stamps were advertised as a health product, a weight loss product. go out, sign up, get this free government food. you might even lose weight. you will certainly be healthier. it was an entitlement pushed at me over the radio as i was driving into work today. the attitude completely changed. martha: certainly is, stuart. something to think about today. stuart varney, see you on the business channel. bill: we have breaking news now in a troubled country. new protests rocking egypt

yet again. the results of the nation's first free election as it is described hang in the balance and ousted former president, hosni mubarak, now in a coma amid reports that he is clinically dead. leland vittert back on the ground in cairo. what do we know about mubarak's condition at the moment, leland? >> reporter: good morning, bill. what we're hearing on the ground he is in slightly better condition than clinically dead but certainly in grave health. he was rushed last night from the prison where he is serving a life sentence to a military hospital, the mahdi military hospital, actually where his predecessor died back in 1981. he either suffered a stroke or heart attack or both. there was a large crowd protesting behind me in tahrir square last night all night. the place was filled. it was rockin'. the right when the rumors spread that president mubarak was taken to the hospital. there was a roar in the

crowd and they went back to chanting slogans against the army and in what they call a military coup by the army. bill: leland, how will all of this affect the presidential election and the future of the egyptian people? >> reporter: it is all up in the air. right now we are 24 hours away from when the election commission is supposed to announce the results and they are expected to announce that the muslim brotherhood candidate won the election. right now in the vote count he is leading by about four points. you could probably hear the sounds of the big crowd in tahrir square that was there last night. they were protesting at the army because the army here has already dissolved the democratically elected parliament. many say they have issued enough constitutional decrees it made the new president, whoever is elected, nothing more than a figurehead. we're entering into a time of great flux here. even though the army promised to transfer power to a civilian government, there are many members of

the muslim brotherhood, who is the largest political party, they will be back in the street as soon as election results are announced. if the election results are not announced to demand their man is put in office to have real power, something the army is far from agreeing to. bill. bill: leland vittert on the ground in cairo, egypt. there are so many things yet to be settled in cairo. we're a year and a half down the road since the first protest there. martha: a long way to go. those are a few of the stories we've got for you in "america's newsroom." a big scare for jetblue passengers just moments after takeoff. why the crew had to walk up and down the aisles to quell an all-out panic. bill: oh my. new concerns over denied care and soaring costs. the dangers of behind president obama's health care law. we'll tell you who is behind that and what is behind that. martha: another intelligence leak. this time on a computer virus designed to cripple iran's nuclear program.

details from the newly-leaked intelligence report as the white house defends its plan not to seek a special counsel. >> well over one will obviously participate in the investigation. you've got again two united states attorneys that have been appointed by the attorney general of the united states who will look thoroughly into this. >> but has the president ordered his staff to come forward? >> obviously everyone will participate in the investigation.

with hotwire's low prices, we can afford to take an extra trip this year. first boston... then san francisco. hotwire checks the competitions' rates every day so they can guarantee their low prices. so our hotels re half price. ♪ h-o-t-w-i-r-e... ♪ hotwire.com we charge everything else... maybe it's time to recharge the human battery. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system from beautyrest...

it's you, fully charged. get a free set of sheets when you buy a select beautyrest mattress. hurry, offer ends soon. [ male announcer ] ok, so you're no marathon man. but thanks to the htc one x from at&t, with its built in beats audio, every note sounds amazingly clear. ...making it easy to get lost in the music... and, well... rio vista?!! [ male announcer ] ...lost. introducing the musically enhanced htc one x from at&t. rethink possible.

martha: all right. moments ago during leland vittert's report from cairo we showed you pictures from greece for a moment. obviously those pictures should have been from cairo to continue that story. meanwhile there are new details on an explosion rocking nashville's famous opryland hotel. investigators say a gas leak ignited in the convention center. more than 5,000 guests were led outside by security. witnesses say the blast shook the building. >> just heard a big boom. we saw the framing of atrium,

support beams shaking a little bit. we looked off to the side and saw a little light smoke. that was about it. don't know what happened. martha: so at the time hundreds of law enforcement professionals were meeting for the 2012 national sheriffs' association conference. nobody was injured thankfully. police ruled out any suspicious activity. bill: back to our top story now, what exactly happened inside that meeting with the attorney general and congressional republicans. my next guest was inside that meeting. senator charles grassley the top republican on the senate judiciary committee. welcome here to "america's newsroom". >> thank you, bill. bill: 20 minutes is not a long meeting especially by washington standards. what happened? >> well, basically we expected documents to be produced because those documents have been subpoenaed and i've been trying to get them before the subpoena, over a period of about 18 months now. we've got relatively few, if you want me to quantify it, about 6,000 out of 80,000

pages we know exist. and the documents were not produced. the meeting was supposedly to resolve that, to avoid a contempt citation but by the house of representatives, which maybe could come out of committee within the next couple hours. those documents could still be produced but i doubt if they will be. bill: i'm guessing that, i'm guessing that you asked the attorney general where the documents are? and if you did he said what? >> well, basically there was an offer for a briefing but not necessarily to give the documents to us and obviously that's where the standoff is. we're functioning as a congress under our constitutional responsibility of oversight and we believe that these documents are very important to finding out what happened in the murder of border patrol agent terry.

why the guns were sold illegally in the first place. who made the decision at the highest level of government? and so basically we're trying to uncover what appears to be a cover-up or stonewalling. bill: he came to negotiate then and you did not like the terms? >> very definitely. it was beyond negotiation. there is no question about the ability under the constitution of the congress to require information, to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed. in this case to get to the bottom of a murder that nobody's been arrested for and why the cover-up and all, it's really good if public information is made public because that sort of transparency brings accountability and really what does the attorney general have to hide? bill: he said that the ball's in your court, and just quoting here, we made what we thought was an extraordinary offer.

>> we subpoenaed documents. we didn't subpoena an offer. we didn't subpoena a conference, a meeting like we had. we thought the documents should be produced and if they aren't produced, of course i'm not in the house of representatives but it's my understanding that congressman issa is going to move ahead and speaker boehner is going to bring it to the floor and the president or the attorney general will be held in contempt and it will be turned over to the u.s. attorney. bill: will you support that contempt charge, sir? >> oh, definitely, definitely. in fact i have ever reason to have more of a excuse for this sort of approach than even house of representatives does because i started this document request two or three months before i asked them to help through subpoena. and secondly i held up the deputy attorney general's nomination a year ago now for about two months. we had a conference just like this with the attorney general then. we were supposed to get

documents if i released the deputy attorney general. i did that and the, they did not keep their end of the bargain. bill: you say it is unacceptable. i think your quote is, i'm not going to buy a pig-in-a-poke. that comes right out of your home state of iowa. >> yeah. bill: what do you think he is hiding? >> we feel that they feel that there's political consequences during an election year if the truth gets out. bill: so can he stonewall for five months until after the election then? >> i hope not. i hope that, if the house goes ahead with contempt and the u.s. attorney does his job, then obviously it's pretty serious for an attorney general not to be complying to the constitutional responsibility of the congress to get information from the executive branch, to do our job, to see, under checks and balances to see that the laws are faithfully

executed. now remember, this whole thing involves the murder of a border patrol agent. it involves the justice department going ahead with selling guns illegally in america. it added up to 2000 guns. two of these guns were found at the murder scene. the guns weren't followed across the border. no drug cartel czars were arrested as a result of it. it was a botched program from day one and it ended in a murder. we wouldn't even know about it today if whistle-blowers hadn't come forward. bill: thank you for your time today. chuck grassley, we'll see whether or not there is movement on this because there is still time on behalf of the attorney general. chuck grassley, my guest now. thank you, senator. >> thank you. bill: martha. martha: a father allegedly catches a man behind his barn molesting his little girl and he kills him with his bare hands. we now know whether he will be charged with murder in this case. the decision is straight ahead. bill: also, it is the first day of summer.

we've got a weather warning already. triple digit heat out there. martha: a lot of red on that map though. bill: crank it up. ♪ the medicare debate continues in washington... ...more talk on social security... ...but washington isn't talking to the american people. [ female announcer ] when it comes to the future of medicare and social security,

you've earned the right to know. ♪ ...so what does it mean for you and your family? [ female announcer ] you've earned the facts. ♪ washington may not like straight talk, but i do. [ female announcer ] and you've earned a say. get the facts and make your voice heard on medicare and social security at earnedasay.org. want to start the day with something heart healthy and delicious?

you're a talking bee... honey nut cheerios has whole grain oats that can help lower cholesterol. and it tastes good? sure does! right... ♪ wow. delicious, right? yeah. it's the honey, it makes it taste so... ♪ well, would you look at the time... what's the rush? be happy. be healthy.

bill: 23 minutes past the hour now. developing in france one hostage released moments ago. three are being held inside of a bank by a man claiming to have ties to al qaeda. it is happening in the same french neighborhood where islamic extremists went on a deadly rampage in the month of march. cancer experts questioning a decision to compensate 9/11 first-responders for health problems. a federal agency linking 50 types of cancer to exposure

at ground zero. some in the medical community say the policy was not based on science. plus fire out west and a lot of it. there are new evacuations. 90-degree heat. hundreds of homes taken out and destroyed but there is some good news. colorado's high park fire is now 50% contained. which is progress. 24 past now. martha. >> there's some new developments to tell you about this morning in a dramatic story we've been covering near houston, texas. a father, reportedly heard his little girl crying behind their barn and went there to find a man allegedly sexually assaulting his little girl. he beat that man to his death and now we are told that he will not face criminal charges in this case. heather childers is live in our new york city newsroom. so, heather, why did the grand jury decide in this case they would not indict? >> reporter: martha, apparently under the law in the state of texas deadly force is authorized and

justified in order to stop a sexual assault. according to the district attorney, the grand jury did not indict the 23-year-old father on homicide charges because there was overwhelming evidence by texas rangers and the sheriff's investigators supporting that his actions were justified in the death of 47-year-old serious flores. he was an ain't acquaintance of the family that helped tend to the family's ranch. that is where with the attack happened, during a family barbecue. a witness told law enforcement, flores was seen forcibly carrying the little girl, five years old to a secluded area. when the girl's dad found out he began calling her name. he heard her screams. he moved in, beating the man to death with his bare hands. here is part of the 911 call placed by the dad after the incident. >> 911, what is your emergency. >> guy was raping my daughter and i beat him up

and i don't know what to do. >> reporter: can you imagine, martha? when emergency medical personnel arrived at scene, flores's pants and underwear were down and all the witness's statements corroborated the father's story. martha: what an incredible story, awful story. do we know anything about the condition of this little girl and how she is doing? >> reporter: perhaps most important in all that. she was taken to the hospital after the incident and here is what we know. >> the 5-year-old victim sustained physical injuries noted by the same nurse and were absolutely consistent with all the witness statements. >> reporter: on top of that the sheriff of lavaca said he believes the girl's father is remorseful and did not intend to kill flores. he called the case traumatizing for the girl and her entire family. flores had a green card and the sheriff's office is working with the mexican consulate to work with his family. martha: some of the calls he was pleading to the ambulance to get there

because he was afraid that the man was going to die. thank you very much, heather childers reporting on that. >> reporter: you're welcome. martha: awful story. bill: democrats accused republicans launching a war on women's health care but now a women's group is attacking the president's law. what they say it will do to patients and doctors. we'll debate that, fair and balanced in moments with bob and andrea. plus, did you catch it? >> 1.6 remaining, westbrook turns it over. that will do it, the miami heat survive game 4 and take a 3-1 lead in the nba finals. martha: pretty dramatic game at some points too. there is lebron james who was on the bench with a big cramp at one point but they managed to pull it off. miami heat one win away from the a nba championship. they defeated oklahoma 104-98. much to the chagrin of oklahoma city fans and lebron james shook off leg cramps.

game 5 is tonight. no team has ever gone down 3-1 and gone on to win. are you receiving a payout from a legal settlement or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today.

that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you.

anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan

that's right for you. bill: 9:31. check your calendar and summer is here. temperatures expected to reach triple digits on the first day of the season. maria molina is live from the fox weather center. you live for this kind of stuff, don't you, maria. >> anything that is record-setting sounds good

to me. we hope everybody stays safe out here and stays hydrated and try to stay indoors for as long as you can throughout the day. we're talking about temperatures that could possibly be setting records across the northeast for today. it will get even hotter as we head into tomorrow. tomorrow is the day we could look at triple digit high temperatures across areas like d.c., baltimore, philadelphia. for today, philadelphia expecting high temperature at 98 degrees. possibly tying a record temperature of 98 last set in 1930's. across new york city, expecting high of 96. richmond, virginia, 96 degrees for high temperature this afternoon. when you factor in the humidity it will feel even hotter. heat index values could be five to 10 degrees hotter than what the actual temperature does feel like. 95 to 110 degrees could be heat index values from boston to the d.c. and baltimore area. a number of heat advisories, excessive heat warnings are

in place. bill, like we mentioned it will get even hotter as we head into tomorrow. d.c. could have a high temperature of 101 degrees. same for you in baltimore and philly. bill: i am kind of liking it. i like hot weather in the summertime. >> this is a little too much from me. bill: this came out of nowhere. it is already hot out there. health officials say drink a lot of water. check on elderly neighbors and pets if you have any. schools are told to limit outdoor play time. schools. martha: graduation tomorrow in some places. it will be really hot with no air-conditioning in the gym. bill: i'll pray for you. martha: to health care now, a women's health group is launching a $6 million ad campaign aimed at president obama's health care law. this launch comes days before the supreme court is expected to rule. it could be even tomorrow. we'll wait to find out on the signature health care bill of president obama. here is part of the ad. take a look.

>> look at our health care system. everyone agreed we needed reforms but this new health care law, it just isn't fixing things. president obama promised my patients that they could keep me but what if because of this new health care law i can't keep them? martha: andrea sanitary rose is daily news columnist. bob beckel is former campaign manager. both are co-hosts of "the five.". >> good morning. >> if hemmer likes the heat so much tell him to broadcast outside. martha: he will meet you out there on the chair, bob. bill: i heard you were trimming down. we'll send you out in that sun. >> there you go. good luck. >> don't make him even more irritable please. martha: speaking about health care, right? that's the ad. andrea, obviously they're not trying to influence the supreme court at this point. all that happens behind closed doors but they are trying to influence the voters, depending on how this decision comes down, right? >> absolutely. i think you're going to see more of these ads. if the law is upheld you

will see more of the ads we just saw. if it is not, expect to see ads on how the bill comes out. and really i think, if it gets overturned, the mandate, that is, president obama has a real policy issue on his hands because the mandate, martha, is the glue that holds the bill together. it is what gets all the healthy people into the system. now, if the law is upheld i think that galvanizing the base for mitt romney. i think that he can argue that this is a bad law and he needs to stay in office to overturn it when he gets in. i think that the president has a real big problem on his hand though. if anything is overturned in this law because despite the fact that it does take one of his greatest vulnerabilities off the table which is this law he will have to explain why wasted four years of the voter's time. i think that is the strongest argument there. martha: it is an interesting campaign equation because most of it hasn't been felt by anybody yet, bob. in some ways this group wants to remind people what

they think are the problems with it so that it is fresh in their minds as they head into, starting to really think about this election season. the ads will play in iowa, minnesota, new hampshire, new mexico, virginia and wisconsin. that is no accident. >> that is a surprise they picked out those states. wonder why they did that. that is right-wing group. the ad was horrible. the woman said what if, what if you can't see me? we don't know what the cost, said a trillion dollars. we've heard these arguments over and over again. if they think they're impacting supreme court they ought to go back to civics class because this thing has been written now and probably out end of this week or early part of next week. but, look, if this thing, take the mandate out the bill is dead. the law is dead. so then obama i think has got a perfectly good position to say, all right, mitt, what are you going to do about 40 million uninsured. while we're at it, you seemed to like the bill when you were governor of massachusetts. now you don't. romney has the problem, not obama. martha: us does the romney

side, andrea, have to be more clear how they would handle this issue? >> yes. his current answer i have to say is not enough. he is saying he would issue waivers so states could opt out. think about that, martha. a state like california they're not going to opt out. most red states would opt out, but most blue states likely wouldn't. those taxpayers in the state will not get reimbursed for federal dollars. republican states will pay for obamacare but democratic ones running up the tab. >> that would be poetic justice. >> does not make any sense. i do think mitt romney has to come up with something better than that. that is just a sound bite. >> in washington state they had had mandate bill. people were being insured and everything was fine. republicans took over legislature. took outmanned date. no insurance companies in washington state. that is the consequences. supreme court hopes take into account what they're doing here. what you're essentially doing forcing 40 million people, when you say nobody

has been helped by the thing so far, 3 million kids now on their parents health insurance policy. i for one, who had open-heart surgery have insurance because of that preexisting condition. there are a lot of people being helped already. >> those are good things to people like you and young people, but martha, the bottom line, the bottom line those things drive up costs. martha: that's true. >> so it gets passed down into higher premiums. >> i see. martha: driving up everybody's costs, bob. >> what is --. martha: i got to go. tail end of this conversation -- >> it is all yours, it if it goes down it is always yours. >> i guess it is my fault, bob because i drive up your heart rate every day. >> you do that. i wouldn't have insurance if it was up to you guys. bill: if bob loses weight, too. you notice the suspenders are --. martha: a little more forward. bill: keep it going, beckel. martha: good job, bob. bill: ben bernanke will hold a news conference later today, translator not

included. the dow closed up yesterday finishing at 12,037. martha: outrage over recent intelligence leaks fearing they could damage our national security. now we're finding out about yet another leak on the front pages of the papers this morning. so ambassador john bolton is here to weigh in on that next. bill: the battle over illegal immigration. why 20 senators are telling the president his latest move is illegal. people with a machine.

what ? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it ? hello ? hello ?! if youbank doesn't let you talk to a real perso24/7, you need an ally. hello ? ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense. then our invisible hearing aids are for you. loaded with our most advanced hearing technologies, our invisible hearing aids are comfortable to wear and are specifically designed to improve hearing in noisy environments, sound more natural, eliminate whistling, and let you talk comfortably on the phone. call... to try invisible hearing aids yourself free for 30 days. choose from 2 great styles. the invisible-in-the-canal rests comfortably inside your ear where no one can see it.

the mini receiver-in-canal hides discreetly behind your ears virtually undetectable by others. invisible hearing aids deliver exceptional sound quality yet are so small, only you'll know you're wearing them. call... today to try them free for 30 days. now these hearing aids are truly invisible. you can't tell that i'm wearing them. no one knows that i'm wearing them. call... today to try them free for 30 days.

martha: have you ever lost your wallet? this might give you hope maybe you will find it one day, maybe even today. listen to this. an oklahoma man's wallet was just returned to him more than 50 years after he lost it in a movie theater. workers found it while doing a little renovating after 50 years. they took out the old seats. guess what they found? the theater owner managed to track the man down and needless to say he was pretty stunned. >> after taking her home i

realized my billfold was gone. i got my flashlight. i crawled around on the floors and i couldn't find it. i figured it was gone forever. my billfold had restoration cards in it. i registered for the draft. >> it is unbelievable that you can find something like that after 53 years. and just bring back the memories. >> i never figured i would ever see that again. it was quite a surprise, really was. >> we were teasing. luckily there was no other girlfriends pictures in there. martha: whoa, luckily. that would have caused a big problem 50 years later. in there were pictures, driver's license and even speeding ticket that was paid off long ago. bill: i love those stories. martha: good story. bill: another intelligence leak revealing the u.s. and israel develop ad computer virus meant to choke iran's nuclear program. security experts call it the most sophisticated program

to date. john bolton, former u.s. ambassador to the u.n., fox news contributor. it was called flame, the program was. how serious was in relation to other leaks we've already been learning about? >> well, i think when you add it to what's already been said about the stuxnet virus and our cyber warfare capabilities generally, it helps add to the picture what we're up to, what we and the israelies are up to. it tells iran and other potential adversaries a lot about our thinking and capabilities. it allows them to project from that things that will help them build defenses. i think the whole thing is such an outrage just violation of the trust that's put in officials whether in the intelligence community, the military, the state department, to breach their obligations, the oaths they have taken not to reveal classified information. whether they're still in the government or they have left it. martha: this is from "the

washington post." one former high-ranking u.s. intelligence official was quoted in the article there. why is this happening? >> well, i think there has been a deterioration over time of the, of the ethic of keeping things secret by i think in this context, again, you have to look at this leak together with the others in the series over the past couple months that very much look like the administration touting its successes and for all we can tell, flame and stuxnet were successes. i understand that. but that doesn't justify in any way either the white house or anybody else for that matter revealing what they know about this operation. bill: you're suggesting this was a marketing campaign? >> i think the mark of many of these leaks is the administration beating its chest about how well it has done, whether it is the drone campaign or various other aspects of cyber warfare or, assault on usama

bin laden's compound and the others. it is pattern together of all the leaks over the past few months that give credence to the idea it is an administration campaign. bill: i don't know if you ever been inside any of these high-level meetings. to a degree i'm certain you have but when this kind of information is brought forward, i don't know to the extent that you have experience hearing it first-hand. but as a former ambassador, did someone break the law here? >> i think very possibly they did. look, a lot of this information you read in intelligence reports or classified documents that you know well in advance are classified because it is stamped or typed all over them. what is interesting about some of the insights from the meetings is how personal they are to president obama and other senior officials which certainly tends to suggest that the people doing the leaks were there and actually saw it in operation. and it is when you put it all together i think that

the evidence that this is, these leaks are sanctioned by high-level decisionmakers becomes almost in escapeable. bill: one more possibility here. perhaps flame and stuxnet, is it possible we have moved well beyond those software programs and, our ability is so advanced that we're five, six, seven steps ahead of the iranians? and these programs, perhaps are lying dormant at the moment? would you cut them that slack or not? >> well, it's possible we advanced substantially. i certainly hope that's true but that is no justification for revealing even programs that are six or seven generations old. everything you tell the other side is a clue that they can use. now the best argument the administration could make, this is all a bunch of lies. this is a disinformation campaign. if i thought the administration were that sophisticated then i would cut them some slack but that

is not what it looks like. bill: john bolton. thank you. foxnews.com /americasnewsroom. we'll take questions on this. shoot me an e-mail, hemmer@fox news.com or twitter. @billhemmer. about. why a. don't try to figure this one out. martha: we had a spirited debate on the whole health care issue and the supreme court ruling. why shouldn't we watch the spirited debate when the actual decision comes down in the supreme court, right? some top lawmakers are trying to make that happen. could we see it. v cameras in the high court? should you be able to? judge napolitano has his take on that. he will be here in a moment. bill: who better to ask than the judge. martha: we'll ask the judge. bill: the war on large sugary drinks is spreading in america. it started in new york but two major cities are talking about it. it leaves some with a bad

taste in our mouth. >> what size drink we need with our meal what else are they going to try to tell us? [ male announcer ] introducing a powerful weapon in your fight against bugs. ortho home defense max. with a new continuous spray wand. and a fast acting formula. so you can kill bugs inside, and keep bugs out. guaranteed. ortho home defense max. as part of a heart healthy diet. that's true. ...but you still have to go to the gym. ♪ the one and only, cheerios

martha: we've got breaking news right now in the "fast and furious" situation. attorney general eric holder has just written a letter to the white house asking the president to apply executive privilege to the documents that have been requested under the subpoena by the committee. this is a very big deal obviously. yesterday eric holder, we watched as he walked on to capitol hill to discuss this with the house investigative committee that is chaired by darrell issa. issa basically said that the documents that have never been presented, that he feels are pursuant to the subpoena. now eric holder basically saying that he believes that the internal documents that were generated with regard to "fast and furious" should

be held under executive privilege by the white house and he directly cites the june 20th, that is tomorrow, hearing that would begin, starts today actually, that would begin the contempt proceedings against him. so this obviously a big development in all of this. we'll see what the white house response is. more on this coming up at the top of the hour. stick around. bill: meantime a jetblue flight taking off from vegas on sunday. aircraft was nearly out of control, lurching from side to side. dropping into steep turns causing passengers to get airsick. hear is the pilot's call to the control tower. have a listen. bill: after five hours, the flight landed in las vegas. oh, my gosh. passengers eventually made it to new york early monday morning. stories to tell. ♪ .

martha: a little rolling stones. classic "brown sugar". speaking of cigar, new york's fight against sugary drinks is spreading to other states. a proposed limit on fluid ounces started here in the big apple, only in new york as we say here, it could spread to other cities as well. we have this report. >> there are many factors that contribute to childhood obesity but the single biggest is soda and other sugar sweetened sodas. >> reporter: mayor michael bloomberg was taking aim at large sugary drinks in new york city. others are taking a page from his book. los angeles city councilman mitch englander is one of them. he wants to ban sodas from city parks and library vending machines. he claims the amount of suggest ga in each will undoubtedly lead to obesity.

he poured out 22 packets of sugar, the same amount of sweet stuff in 20 ounce soda. >> for each additional sugary drink a child consumes his risk of obesity increases astonishing 60%. >> reporter: one says it is bad for business. >> our business model doesn't work. it doesn't work if we don't have the products consumers want to buy. >> reporter: henrietta davis is the mayor of cambridge, massachusetts. she is jumping on the ban. she wants to limit drinks to 16 ounces. >> weight is such a issue for us. >> reporter: some say it is government overstepping its bounds. >> granted i lost 60 pounds but not drinking sugary drinks but at the same time i don't want someone to say, no you can't and wagging their finger after me. >> reporter: some say consumers should be provided about effects of consuming so much sugar rather than

rather than banning it out right. martha: ainsley, thanks for that report. a lot of controversy. bill: more of breaking news what the attorney general is asking the white house to do about "fast and furious." it is just crossing at the moment. wait for this. martha: big, big news on this. that is breaking. we'll be back to that in a moment. a top european finance leader lashes out at the u.s. and blames us for their financial problems? really? >> this crisis was not originated in europe. since you mentioned north america, this crisis was originated in north america. and many of our financial sector were contaminated by, how can i put it, unorthodox practice from some sectors of the financial markets. summer road trip, huh?

as the hotel experts, finding you the perfect place is all we do. this summer, save up to 30%, plus get up to $100 on us. welcome to hotels.com. >> you've probably heard a lot about reverse mortgages lately and frankly, it may all seem just a little confusing. and if you're anything like me, you want to have all the facts before you make any big decision. that's why i want to send you this free dvd about reverse mortgages. it'll walk you through the process, from qualification to counseling to closing and also, answer some important questions. what are the costs and how do they compare to a traditional mortgage? how is the government involved? and what is your responsibility after you get your reverse mortgage? the answers are all in this free dvd. a reverse mortgage could be a smart, safe and secure option that could help you pay off your

original mortgage, manage your health care costs or just cover your day-to-day expenses. so call this toll-free number and let me send you your free video right now. [♪...]

martha: breaking news on "america's newsroom" right now and we are watching this very closely. what has happened is that the attorney general requested that

the white house make available executive privilege, basically, to prevent them from needing to turn in the documents that were subpoenaed of them by darrell issa and his house investigative committee. that has been signed off on by the white house now. that is the big bit of information that has just come through. the request from attorney general eric holder that these documents requested be under executive privilege so they would not have to turn them over, and the white house has indeed put that executive privilege on those documents. that's how we start a brand-new hour of "america's newsroom." a lot going on this morning. i'm martha maccallum. bill: i'm bill hemmer. if morning, this 11th hour meeting between the attorney general and th chairman fell flat. this just in from the attorney general eric holder. martha: it says i respectfully request that you assert executive privilege over the identified documents. bill: william la jeunesse first

to los angeles and william who has covered this story from the very beginning. what does this mean, william? >> reporter: it means we will have a big showdown between the executive and legislative branches because we do expect shortly that the house oversight committee will indeed approve the contempt citation, because they have the votes, it's 22 to 16, republican, democrat. we expect possibly one democrat to cross over. it would be up to the house speaker to have that contempt citation acted upon by the full house, and that would be referred then to a u.s. attorney who is obligated to take it to a grand jury. they definitely have increased the stakes here. they did not reach an agreement last night there are two letters that we received in the last ten minutes. one of them is a request from the attorney general to the president asking that executive privilege be granted, and the second one from a deputy attorney general to darrell issa saying that indeed the president has approved executive privilege

over documents post february 4th. these, quote, deliberative documents that relate to the possible cover up by the attorney general's office. bill: was this the trump card that eric holder had in his pocket the entire time? >> reporter: i suppose so. the investigators that i've spoken to have said all along if this was innocent, if there was nothing in these documents they believed that he would have turned them over. he would not have said that -- because the general subpoena related to a lot of areas that were covered under -- that were investigative documents that may have hurt an ongoing investigation. darrell issa said out of those 80,000 documents we don't want those, we just want 1300 documents related to the letter that was produced to congress that was later rescinded that had to do with denying that it existed and then admitting that it did and they had to recall that letter. those documents related to the

deliberative process. many didn't believe that it was that serious. obviously the attorney general, and the executive branch feel that it is and they are standing on principle in exerting this privilege. bill: now you wonder if the contempt vote continues or not in the house. we'll standby on that as well. martha: steven hayes is a senior writer for the weekly standard and a fox news krerbt an contributor, what is your take on this. >> reporter: it raises the stakes and makes it a much bigger issue. from the obama administration situation it hasn't got even mainstream coverage. now this will be covered by everybody. every time you have the executive department asserting executive privilege, that is a big deal. and i think this means that we will now have a national debate

about this specific case and about executive privilege more broadly. martha: and, you know when you get down to the heart of what darrell issa and his committee has been asking for, they want to know how this happened, how did 2,000 guns walk across the border as part after program u. had atf agents screaming to high heaven that there was a huge problem here and they wanted the program to be stopped. their cries were not listened to. you had a border agent killed and their guns were found at the scene. they want to know what level does this go up and is there a cover up. doesn't this heighten this when the documents are so held closely that now they are under executive privilege at the request of the attorney general? >> it's not like we've seen from the obama administration a long-standing case of executive

privilege power. you've had senior bush officials like dick cheney who had literally decades worth of philosophical arguments on behalf of a strong executive in -- an executive branch that assert eud itself over the legislative branch. you haven't seen that from the obama administration going back three and a half years. you have seen them take liberties with executive power. barack obama was not in 2006 and 2007 as a member of the senate arguing in favor of a strong executive. so there is not the sort of principle argument that they can look back on and say, look we've been making this case all along, that raises then the question, is there something specific that they are trying to keep from darrell issa and from the investigators? martha: i don't know how you avoid that notion in this. steve. i mean there have been specific documents that have been requested and basically the impression that you get is there's been a flood of documents that number 7600

documents has been thrown out there so many times in nine hearings that eric holder has participated in in front of this committee and yet you have this frustration level from darrell issa saying this is not what we requested in the subpoena. you imagine the subpoena it has a specific 20 items or something like that that they are looking for, dated documents, exchanges and emails, all that kind of thing that they haven't got even. now you go to the extraordinary length to bring in executive privilege saying we don't have to ever turn over the documents and it raises a huge number of questions. >> because the obama administration doesn't have a history of asserting strong executive power or making the principle plain that they believe in a strong executive power that complicates their case. the other thing that needs to be said here is that darrell issa has been asking this for a specific time now. this is a specific request for specific documents. he knows what he wants to get and he knows what investigator

are looking for. i think it all stems from the fact that you had justice department officials both in testimony and documents that have been produced to date offering conflicting understanding of what actually took place. and the only way to resolve those conflicts is either to get the full story from eric holder and others or to get some account of what happened from these documents when they were written. martha: if they don't prove any connection and they don't prove eric holder or anybody at his level or above him knew about this you would think they would want to turn them over. the biggest issue was they weren't keeping an eye on everything that was going on in the department and maybe they would have to deal with that at that time. one of the other ways they've dealt with this is to say that their own investigation is ongoing and it's been ongoing for quite some time, and when they are done with their internal investigation at doj they say then heads might role, people might get fired and things might come out, right?

>> look you have the attorney general who has made conflicting statements in congressional testimony. you have to give him the benefit of the doubt to believe that he wasn't straight out not telling the truth. i don't think anybody has any confidence that the justice department's own investigation is going to uncover these things and that they will be forthcoming about what is in the documents. the key point i think, think back to the bush administration, the first days of the bush administration when you had dick cheney, the vice president's office running this skwr-r energy study group and refusing to provide documents to henry waxman. dick chain see said at the time we don't care that you're asking for these documents, this is the proper function of the executive bran o branch. we can't have you looking into every person who comes for a meeting to the white house. i have been making this argument on behalf of executive power for 30 years. what you don't have with president obama or withhold hold is that consistent argument

looking back over the years to say we've been talking about a strong executive and therefore we are relying on principle now when making this claim. that gives rise to questions, what is it that they don't want the investigators to see. martha: they were very critical of the bush administration. >> so question. martha: -- of expanding in their mind executive pow er power and they claimed they would never do that. they wanted to be very transparent. thank you, steve haze. bill: you have the justice department saying that the president has granted the executive privilege in the fast and furious documents. moments ago the u.s. panel in the house that is getting together as of 10:00am eastern time nine minutes ago says it will proceed with the contempt of congress charges. that is according to what is crossing waoeurt wires now. our own judge, andrew napolitano

says this is not a subject for executive privilege, it should only be abo issues. you have a face off between the house and the executive branch in addition to what is happening at department of justice. if this committee does vote to cite the attorney general the matter goes to the full house floor. if the entire house votes yes, then the u.s. attorney has to convene a grand jury. the grand jury must then decide whether or not to indict holder on criminal contempt charges. then it would go to trial. and if convicted the punishment can be up to a thousand dollars and up to a year in jail. so we are reaching a moment here as we follow this story now for the past year and a half where some things will be decided very soon as to where we go next. martha: we have lots and lots of developing news here this morning that we are following in "america's newsroom" and

republican lawmakers are clearly not backing down on that issue or on this one, the house's immigration decision that came from the white house. they are questioning now whether president obama was legally allowed to go ahead and establish that new policy that he did on friday on his own. bill: another green energy company accused of having close ties to the white house, how secret emails might reveal another solyndra scandal. do you remember this? >> we have three deceased, nine injured. we've had an explosion on board that's why we are taking on water. martha: a hoax distress call of a yacht explosion off the coast of new jersey. now a possible lead in that case. ahead, the clue that landed investigators more than a thousand miles from the site. [ male announcer ] don't miss d lobster's four course seafo feast, just $14.99. start with soup, salad and cheddar bay biscuits then choose one of 7 entrees plus dessert! four perfect courses, just $14.99.

come into red lobster and sea food differently.

bill: investors hoping the federal reserve take action to boost the economy. what more can they do we

wonder. interest rates near record lows, still chairman ben bernanke wrapping up a two-day meeting on the economic crisis. some think he will launch another round of bond buying in an effort to get more spending, and economic growth. others say he'll act if things get worse. a news conference later today, we'll keep you posted on that. martha: big news breaking moments ago, executive privilege has been asserted by the white house over the documents requested in the fast and furious scandal. you're looking at a live shot on capitol hill this morning as well as they start to begin the contempt of congress hearings that were already scheduled to get going. a lot going on, i'm joined now by arizona republican congressman david swiekert. let's start with regard to fast and furious, congressman. what is your take on all this this morning? >> i'm sully bouncing off the

walls almost outraged. look, this is first not even a proper declaration of executive privilege. but think about how long this game has been dragged on by this administration. it makes you really start to wonder, what is in those documents, what does this president so desperately wish to hide from those of us in congress and from the american people? martha: it definitely raises that question. there is no getting around that, because they are now going to quite a length to prevent these documents from being seen. go back to the initial part of your assertion there, and that is this you think that this is an inaccurate e e tkp-rbgs certion of executive privilege? >> is this information that would den fit our enemies? is there something here that has to do with national relations with a foreign power? does this affect the military? none of those apply here. this is about a botched

operation by the justice department and others that have taken lives. being from arizona people have died, you know, south of the border and even on our side of the border. we need to understand who knew, when they knew it, and why this was done the way it was. martha: so, what do you think congress might do, you know, about this use of executive privilege? i mean where do you begin i guess is my question? >> well, i think we begin exactly where darrell issa is taking his committee today. it's time for a contempt of congress. it is time for the voice of congress to be heard, but also the voice of the american people. and, martha, think about this. if this were the previous president the left and the media would be bouncing off the walls with anger. but somehow this president gets a pass on something that is truly just outrageous. his repeated attacks on the constitution whether it be last friday's order on the immigration, saying, just don't follow the law, or now i'm going

to declare executive privilege and not deliver the documents darrell issa and the committee is asking for. martha: you talked about the proper use of executive privilege and i was just talking to stev steve hayes moments ago and he brought up vice president cheney saeugt energy meetings at the white house fell under that, that he didn't have to release the names of who participated in those meetings because of executive privilege. don't think the other side would assert that that was also not an accurate use of it, perhaps. >> that was exactly back to my point before. think of the screaming and the outrage that also came from the left when that discussion happened. where is that same outrage today? martha: well, okay. i mean, you know, not to go back over that ground from before, it raises a question that when this is used, when the white house evokes executive privilege it is going to spark outrage and it goes become to this big question, you know, about what needs to be -- what they are

trying to prevent from being shown, and why they are now wanting so desperately it might appear for some of these documents to not be revealed to the public. and, you know, it just -- it really does, i think has steve hayes pointed out congressman this will put this smack in the middle of most of the mainstream news outlet as well you can imagine. >> i can only hope, martha. look, i've been stunned -- being from arizona, we're ground zero for these actions, and the devastation, and the chaos its helped create. but a lot of the other media around the country have just considered this a sideshow, and now it's coming home. martha, i'll make you the argument, this type of arrogance from this white house is a pattern, that the number of items where this white house says, hey, just ignore the law, because it's invent to our re-election. you start to wonder, how much has to do with this owe hrebgs coming up. martha: we get a lot of tweets

and thoughts from viewers and many of them have said that these contempt proceedings should have happened a longtime ago. i guess the main question for you as a congressman is, so you can yell and scream about this all you want, but what is congress actually going to do about it? there's been a lot of talk that congress is actually divided on this. that congressman boehner doesn't necessarily want to push this contempt of congress forward. what can you till u tell us about that? >> on that point there may have been some tonal differences, how do we work with the white house. i think with the arrogant actions that this white house just executed, i think this president closed the gap and created a unified voice foreig coming from us on the republican side saying you can't do this. you've got to tell us the truth. martha: i just want to point out on the left side of our screen right now we see the committee chair, darrell issa, who has really been at the center of pushing this fast and furious

questioning and wanting attorney general eric holder to put forward these documents. let's hear what he has to say for a moment. >> of representatives finding the attorney general eric holder jr. in contempt of congress. on the night of december 14th, 2010, in a canyon west of rio rico, arizona. u.s. border control agent -- agents were engaged in a shootout with armed, mexican bandit bandits preying own agents. one was a 43-year-old brian terry who served as a u.s. marine and gone through boot camp at camp pendleton in my district. during that firefight a bullet peered agent terry's aorta and he died in that canyon. two weapons were found at the

scene, they were later traced to an operation conducted -- bill: this story has just gone to a whole new level. back in a moment right after this. >> 16 months ago this committee --

bill: fox news alert two major headlines in the past 30 minutes. the department of justice says the president has exerted srut executive privilege with regard to fast and furious. this while darrell issa heads up a panel where we expect contempt of charges to be filed perhaps this hour or at least this day against eric holder. let's listen back in. >> to the 80,000 documents or more that the inspector general has received. our purpose has never been to hold the attorney general in contempt, our purpose has always been to get the information the committee nodes t needs to

complete its work, that it's not only entitled to but obligated to do. we had offered the department an accommodation to address its concerns about information related to ongoing prosecutions. if the justice department had delivered the documents they freely admitted they could deliver we wouldn't be here today. as late as last night in discussions with the attorney general our offer -- his offer was only to give us a briefing and such documents that supported the briefing, and then only if we ended the investigation. contempt today is not about whether we end the investigation or not, it is about a narrow subset of the documents that the committee must ultimately receive. the subpoenas are eight months old. we have not received a credible reason for them not being

supplied, and in fact no constitutional assertion has occurred. rather it is the duty of the executive branch and its agencies to represent itself honestly before congress, and to make available such transparency as necessary for us to fund and authorize, now and in the future, the request of this and future presidents. only today, only a few minutes before the gaveling of this mark up did we receive from the deputy attorney jenn attorney general a letter dated today which says -- i'd ask unanimous consent the entire letter be

placed in the record, without objection, so ordered. in the first paragraph it says i write now to inform you that the president has asserted executive privilege over relevant, post february 4th 2011 documents. it goes on for several pages. as we speak -- as i speak the committee is evaluating this. we have verified that no communication from the president has arrived before the house. additionally at least in a preliminary evaluation we discover that the president, well after february 4th, has said that in fact he has not discussed this. and was not made aware of it. additionally, the attorney general has repeatedly given us testimony showing that he did not speak to the president about

this. i now read for the record from page 25 of when congress comes calling, which is from the constitution project, and i apologize if this seems preliminary, but this communication arrived only within minutes of the start of this mark up. executive privilege. the president's communications privilege, and i quote "the communications in question must relate to the quinnee sepbgs and nondelegatable presidential power that requires direct presidential decision making. the privilege is limited to the core constitutional powers of the president, such as the power to appoint and remove. the commander-in-chief power, the sole authority to receive ambassadors and public ministers, and the pardoning

power." i claim not to be a constitutional scholar but the house is currently working to financed out what assertions may in fact aeu arrive and we will take notice of them. having said that more than eight months after a subpoena and clearly after the question of executive privilege could have and should have been asserted this untimely assertion by the justice department falls short of any reason to delay today's proceedings. we have made many attempts to accommodate the justice department. originally some 22 areas were on our subpoena, many of which were never complied with. we narrowed three master areas to two in a letter on may 18th, unprecedented letter from the speaker of the house

asking for cooperation and narrowing the coac scope of the subpoena. martha: we are in the middle of breaking news right now, this is live coverage of darrell issa who was to begin contempt proceedings this morning. now there is a letter claiming executive privilege to those documents coming from the white house. what does all this mean? judge napolitano weighs in after this. eat good fats.

avoid bad. don't go over 2000... 1200 calories a day. carbs are bad. carbs are good. the story keeps changing. so i'm not listening... to anyone but myself. i know better nutrition when i see it: great grains. great grains cereal starts whole and stays whole. see the seam? more processed flakes look nothing like naturalrains. you can't argue with nutrition you can see. great grains. search great grains and see for yourself. for multi grain flakes tt are anxcellent source of fiber try great grains banana nut crunch and cranberry almond crunch.

. bill: back to our breaking news,

elijah cummings at microphone there. this is what darrell issa stated regarding executive privilege only moments ago. >> sought to protect its political appointees. it has used its investigation by the department inspector general which has been pending a very longtime as a reason not to cooperate. we are now on the second inspector general, there has been no interim report, and although they say it will be forthcoming within a month, we and the american people need answers sooner not later. bill: apparently those answers will not be today, and possibly no time any time soon. judge andrew napolitano with me now. judge, good morning to you. executive privilege now exerted, signed off by the president. what does this mean, judge? >> this means this is going to a

new level this morning, bill. this means that we may be on the verge of a constitutional confrontation between the white house and the congress. executive privilege is defined in the leading supreme court case, united states versus nixon, that is richard nixon that is the watergateer a the efforts ever the special prosecutors to subpoena tapes from president nixon as protecting conversations with the president himself. now the letter that eric holder wrote to the president saying please give me executive privilege did not say, because i discussed this with you, mr. president. but the implication is there. executive privilege protects communications with the president, the human being of the president, not with people that work with him and the justice department. bill: let's be clear now. you say this is not an acceptable subject for executive privilege. >> correct. bill: why would they seek this? >> there must be something in these documents, or there must be someone who observed these documents that the attorney

general is trying to keep from public view. if the attorney general sat down and discussed it with the president he probably doesn't want the congress and the public to know that, because we know of the awful events that occurred as a result of the fast and furious escapade. but we also know that executive privilege only pertains to military, diplomatic and sensitive national security matters. now, was fighting the drug gangs at the border a sensitive national security matter? and if so was the president of the united states of america personally involved in making decisions as to how to conduct that fight? if that is the case, this has reached a different level, and we now know why the attorney general has ferociously defended these documents and refused to reveal them. bill: two specific questions. does the attorney general now have to show or prove why executive prove applies here then? >> well, the attorney general is arguing that the committee has

to show why executive privilege does not apply. the last time this happened, 40 years ago in the nixon/watergate saga a federal district court judge got involved and he ruled against the president and the supreme court upheld his ruling. we may be seeing this going in that direction now if there is a standoff between the president and the congress, the attorney general and the congress, the court, the courts will resolve that standoff. bill: back to the comment you made two answers prior, if the attorney general had a conversation about this atf operation in phoenix, arizona, with the president of the ooh mighted states perhaps executive privilege applies here. but what would the president of the united states have to do with this operation run by the atf allegedly out of phoenix? >> i could only speculate. i have no basis for this. but the president of the united states may have wanted to participate in decisions about defending the border between mexico and texas, mexico and new

mexico, mexico and arizona, and they may have run this past the president. but, bill, if the president of the united states knew about this. this attorney general holder discussed this with president obama that would be at odds with his testimony under oath given to congressman issa's committee. he would be in the same position as others. congressman swaoeubger was direct. they can't have it both ways. if the president does not personally involved executive privilege does not apply. if the president was personally involved and they want to argue that fighting drug gangs at the border is a matter of sensitive national security then they at least have an argument for executive privilege but that would be at odds with what attorney general holder has already testified to under oath. bill: don't go far waoerbgs need

your knowledge. than. we need your knowledge. martha has more. martha: the white house issuing an executive privilege on the fast and furious documents that ag eric holder has been withholding and that darrell issa has wanted so very much to get his hands-on. here is ranking member elijah cummings on all of this moments ago. >> last night the attorney general came to us in good faith. he offered to provide additional internal deliberative documents. he pledged to provide substantive briefing on the department's actions. he agreed to a request by senator grassley to describe the categories of documents being produced, and those being withheld. he made clear that he was willing to provide subjec substantive responses to additional questions, an even offered to provide documents that are outside the scope of

the committee's subpoena, an also made it clear that he had already provided documents that weren't even asked for. all he requested in return was that you, as chairman of this committee, give him your good faith commitment that we would move toward resolving this contempt fight. martha: darrell issa responded basically that that didn't answer the question of what he was subpoenaing, and that he was not willing to move beyond this fight, and doug mcelway joins us now live outside the white house with more on this. >> reporter: good morning, to you. there is no press briefing scheduled for today here at the white house, as you know the president and hits entourage returned from the g-20 summit very, very late last night about 1:00am. this is largely a day of rest and no public appearances scheduled whatsoever. that may change given the magnitude of the decision from the white house granting

executive privilege to the documents. the most recent we've heard in regard to fast and furious from the white house came over a week ago during the press briefing from press spokesman jay carney who said on june 11th when asked about the fact that the house oversight committee was moving toward a contempt citation, he said this. quote, the attorney general himself has spent eight times on the hill, including four hours of testimony last thursday. so have several assistant department officials. given the justice defendant's efforts to accommodate the committee investigation i can only refer you to the pickup house judiciary member who recently conceded that this investigation is, quote, politics. so there is the most recent comment that we've had from the white house. our producer up on capitol hill on the house side reminds us that the constitution clearly states, just as judge napolitano just said that executive privilege is the exclusive

province of the president. it suggests that the president may have known of this. unless there is some other explanation that we may not yet have heard. we are keeping our eyes on it, martha. martha: thank you very much. we continue to go through this letter from eric holder requesting this. and we are going to have a lot more on it throughout the course of this morning. bill: congressman randy forbes grilled attorney general eric holder about two weeks ago. he is on deck live in a moment here. here is congressman darrell issa again moments ago inside that hearing room. >> the attorney general has refused to cooperate, offering to provide subpoenaed documents only if the committee agrees in advance to close the investigation. no investigator would ever agree to that, and as you can understand, the other information related to those in the chain of command responsible for brian terry's murder, and the death of individuals, both north and south of the border, cannot be concluded simply based

on a briefing about post february 4th. [ woman ] for the london olympic games, our town had a "brilliant" idea. support team usa and show our olympic spirit right in our own backyard. so we combined our citi thankyou points to make it happen. tom chipped in 10,000 points. karen kicked in 20,000. and by pooling more thankyou points from folks all over town, we were able to watch team usa... [ cheering ] in true london fashion. [ male announcer ] now citi thankyou visa card holders can combine the thankyou points

they've earned and get even greater rewards. ♪ [ male announcer ] we began with the rx. ♪ then we turned the page, creating the rx hybrid. ♪ now we've turned the page again with the all-new rx f sport. ♪ this is the next chapter for the rx. this is the next chapter for lexus. this is the pursuit of perfection.

or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it!

take beano before and there'll be no gas. martha: breaking news out of this hearing of the oversight reform commit fee. dan burton says that u.s. attorney general eric holder is blocking the fast and furious investigation. here is what he said. >> there is no question in anybody's mind who has been involved in this investigation that the attorney general has been stonewalling this committee. the chairman has contacted him and his associates numerous times, and without result. and when the chairman met with him in the last 24 hours and discussed this there was no information forthcoming that would have been able to set aside this contempt hearing today. martha: republican congressman randy forbes is on the house judiciary committee.

he grilled eric holder, asking him questions about awful this all of this a few weeks ago and he's here with us today. good to have you here. >> thank you, mart that. martha: what is your reaction to the executive privilege from the white house on all of this. >> i think most of us are shocked on outraged because this plot is thickening. it's getting ready to spin all of control. it's important to note that two weeks ago the top campaign strategist from the obama campaign mr. axelrod tee need having any contact or advising the attorney general regarding this matter. the attorney general stated under oath that he had had that contact and had been counseling with mr. axelrod. now we find that the white house can't have it both ways. if they are putting executive privilege, that means it went all the way up to the white house and the president had some knowledge about it. and i think this is very, very concerning for the white house right now, very concerning for the american people, because they don't feel like they are getting this investigation

completed and they need answers on this. martha: we are still pouring through this letter that was to the president from eric holder, which really outlines the argument saying, mr. president was of these following reasons you can invoke executive privilege in this situation. i just want to read to you one section of the letter. he says, as set forth more fully below i'm very concerned that the compelled production to congress of internal executive branch documents generated in the course of the deliberative process concerning its response to congressional oversight and related media inquiries would have significant, damaging consequences. do you take issue with the circumstances surrounding the executive privilege in and of itself here? >> well, martha, i think they can't have it both ways. first of all the question is why wait until the 11th hour to do this if they thought this would be of significant concern.

the second thing is, if this goes all the way up to the white house this is in direct continue vicks to what mr. holder has been telling us all along. if it doesn't i think the president would want this investigation completed and he would want congress to know what actually took place in this situation. martha: it sound like in this letter he's saying that in response to this whole fast and furious issue, it sounds like he's saying there were discussions in the executive branch in response to the issue, in response to the media inquiries, and those are what they want to have executive privilege over and apparently those fall among the documents that are being requested as part of the subpoena, right? >> that's right, martha. understand, if that's the case it's even worse, because we're talking about what steps they might have taken to cover up some of this situation, what they were doing with messaging, and we ought to be as the american people have the right to know what actually happened in fast and furious. remember, we had a lot of individuals who were innocent who were killed because of this

program, and now we find out that they want to cover this up, and it went all the way up to the white house. martha: thanks. congressman randy forbes. more coming up, breaking news on capitol hill on fast and furious. almost tastes like one of jack's cereals. fiber one. uh, forgot jack's cereal. [ jack ] what's for breakfast? um... try the number one! [ jack ] yeah, this is pretty good. [ male announcer ] half a day's worth of fiber. fiber one. droid does. and does it laun apps by voice while learning your voice ? launch cab4me. droid does. keep left at the fork. does it do turn-by-turn navigation ?

droid does. with verizon, america's largest 4glte network and motorola, whater you want to do... droid does.

minute during this hearing regarding fas fast and furious. here is new york democrat carol maloney moments ago. >> what we should be doing is looking at ways we can stop problems from happening again. so my basic question, mr. chairman, is where is the reform? our committee is supposed to be working on government reform, and any legitimate investigation must be rooted in finding solutions to problems once they

are identified, not just character assassination. bill: there is carolyn maloney, republicans might argue that this is what the hearing is all about to make sure it doesn't happen again. bret baier is with me now, host of special report. chuck grassley came out with a strong statement and asked three pointed questions to the white house. here is one of them. how can the president assert executive privilege if there is no white house involvement? where does this go? how does it unwind? >> i think bill those are great questions, and to congresswoman maloney's point about reform, you know this has been 18 months back and forth about trying to get these documents, and they know -- congressman issa knows specifically what documents they are looking for in fast and furious. it's after february, it was this back and forth about a letter that the doj sent up that they had to pull back. not to get too much into the weeds, but this committee knows exactly what they are looking for. at any point the administration

and the tk-rbgts oj, attorney general eric holder said you know what we can assert executive privilege, the white house could have got even involved long long ago. you mentioned chuck grassley and that statement goes onto raise the question, how can the president assert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen. is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme snow says the concept citation is an important procedural mechanic sis eupl in our system of checks and balances and he goes onto say that this is an important moment in the checks and balances. this is going to be a fascinating day. bill: it sure is. i mentioned the headlines are changing by the minute, quite literally and expected throughout the day here. in this game of political and legal chess you wonder who mikes thmakes the next move. more on this hearing when we come back. the medicare debate continues in washington...

...more talk on social security... ...but washington isn't talking to the american people. [ female announcer ] when it comes to the future of medicare and social security, you've earned the right to know. ♪ ...so what does it mean for you and your family? [ female announcer ] you've earned the facts. ♪ washington may not like straight talk, but i do. [ female announcer ] and you've earned a say. get the facts and make your voice heard on medicare and social security at earnedasay.org. sfx: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering on medicare and social security sfx: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering so, i'm walking down the street, x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering just you know walking, sfx: sounds of marching bandnd and crowd cheering and i found myself in the middle of this paradeeet, x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering honoring america's troops. sfx: sounds of marching bandnd and crowd cheering which is actually in tquite fitting becauseadeeet,

x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering geico has been serving e military for over 75 years. aawh no, look, i know this is about the troops and not about me. right, but i don't look like that. who can i write a letter to about this? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

martha: big day. we'll have major developments throughout the whole course of this day