for cars -- >> yeah. if you're look for community outreach, that seems like a smart thing to do. >> you'll drive it. >> i'll totally drive it. >> thanks for joining us. >> "america live" starts right now. new questions in the boston bombing investigation about a laptop computer and what the fbi has for possible evidence as it tries to track down where the tsarnaev brothers got the information and know how to build what we are now told were fairly sophisticated bombs. welcome to "america live." i'm megyn kelly. it comes from the affidavit yesterday, filed in the arrest of three new suspects, classmates and friends of dzhokhar tsarnaev. two are accused of trying to get rid of evidence after the boston bombing. the two college students on the

screen left, this person robel is accused of lying, the two on the right, obstruction of justice. they removed a backpack and a latch top from the bombing suspect's dorm room. after the fbi had publicly identified him as a suspect in the boston marathon bombings. while they found the backpack in a landfill, no mention of a laptop computer that could also lead them to believe if they had any help. catherine herridge is live in california. >> reporter: thank you, good afternoon. the computers had been recovered. two sources telling fox that they had not wiped or cleared the hard drive. according to the criminal complaint the two young men from kazakhstan, dias kadyrbayev and azamat tazhayakov seen here with the bombing suspect are charged

with obstruction of justice and the third man, robel, who is not pictured here is charged with lying to federal investigators. the complaint also alleges that they decided to take the empty casings from the dorm room to keep their friend out of trouble. the documents go on to say, quote, kadyrbayev decided to take the laptop as well, because he did not want tsarnaev's roommate to think he was stealing by just taking the backpack. the criminal complaint is then silent on whether dzhokhar's laptop was dumped in the garbage and recovered in the sweep by new bedford, massachusetts, last week. two sources told fox news no evidence had been shown so far, including the video recordings of himself, which is seen by the intelligence community as an indicator or marker of sel self-radicalization. the months before the marathon

bombing, dzhokhar told two of his friends he knew how to build bombings and two days after the bombings and before the fbi publicly released photos of the suspects, dzhokhar cut his hair in an apparent effort to an tar his appearance. >> thank you. well, before police announced the arrest yesterday, two were being held on immigration charges. the father of azamat tazhayakov was asked about that a week ago when a news channel in kazakhstan challenged him about why his son was being held. he insisted his son had nothing to do with the bombings. >> we were shocked. everyone knows my son. he's never fought with anyone. he's never been in touch with any radicals. he doesn't go to the mosque unless we go for some reason. in america he's never been to a mosque. they don't believe that he did

that. >> well, turns out dad didn't have the whole picture. now we know according to the fbi affidavit, tazhayakov and kadyrbayev did suspect that dzhokhar was involved in the bombings. up like the rest of us, they recognized them. they were close with him. they had been paling around with him since 2011. now that man's son is one of the two accused of intentionally hiding evidence in order to protect dzhokhar tsarnaev. did he call the police? they're saying he bombed hundreds of people, killed three, wounded over 200 others? no, he went to the kid's -- the man's dorm room, took his backpack. a bunch of other items. took his laptop and threw half of it away. coming up, we'll speak to mark fuhrman about what else the affidavit reveals about the young men. i want to get into with mark the time line laid out in the

affidavit which we have now poured over. and the story it may tell us about whether these men who were just arrested knew more than they're admitting. prior to the day their friend was identified. wait until you hear this. stay with me. we are hearing new worries about health care, as senator harry reid offers an ugly warning about a coming quote, train wreck. as obama care is rolled out. that's comforting. he's not alone. this headline from the associated press -- study, health overhaul to raise claims costs. 32%. the a.p. warning, obama care credits could trigger surprise tax bill. that's a wonderful term, surprise tax bill.

"time" magazine cautioning about what it headlines as obama care income incompetence and the delays in the rolling out of some programs. surprise tax bill, courtesy of obama care. >> well, when you put it that way, megyn, you make it sound bad. maybe it's a good tax bill. >> does it sound better than train wreck? that comes from senator harry reid and max baucus, who pushed this thing through. they're saying it's a coming train wreck. why are they saying that and what -- i mean, put it in perspective as to their motivation and what they hope to accomplish with the comments. >> well, no one ever thought this law was well constructed. even its staunchest advocates and that includes the two senate democrats who have come out to talk about problems with implementation of the law. that's jay rockefeller and then

max baucus and now harry reid. no one ever thought this was well done. but it was done as well as they thought was possible. it took on sort of the feeling of a snatch and grab operation. they knew that scott brown had been elected in massachusetts. they just had to get it done in 2010 or they decided they had to get it done. they put it together. nobody thought it was put together particularly well. liberals had complaints about it too, but they pressed on. under promises that this would get better. well, it isn't getting better and the implementation isn't going well, so now democrats ahead of midterm elections are making clear if there are problems with the implementation here, it's the fault of the administration, one. and two, republicans and harry reid's case who refused to provide enough additional funding to put the law in place. >> why do we need all this additional funding? where was the discussion about this additional funding when we were debating how much this law was going to cost, how much this new entitlement was going to

cast the american taxpayer? and we had assurances it wouldn't add to the deficit, it would be budget neutral and eliminating waste and fraud and that was really going to fund a lot of this law. now it's, where's the funding? the republicans are blocking all the funding. what extra funding? >> you have been gone from washington too long. you know there was not enough money and there was never going to be enough money and there never is. that's the great thing about the way that the government operates. they blow budget -- they miss their mark. then they say, well as it turns out, give it to us. this is the more -- this is not about implementation of the law. the president knows and as he said in his press conference earlier this week, even if it's -- i think he said glitches and bumps, but even if it's a train wreck it is okay for his purposes because you'll still start enrolling people in the new subsidized government health insurance program. you'll still create what he calls obama care and even if the implement ace doesn't work his legacy is safe, because nobody

will throw those people off the rolls. if you're a democrat facing election next year, good grief. this is going to be big trouble. but that's not barack obama's problem. it is harry reid's because he wants to continue become the majority leader. >> there's a reason they put the good stuff up front and then all the difficult stuff later. and president obama it worked out pretty well for him. he got re-elected. obama care wasn't a huge issue for him in the re-election battle. you have to love baucus. the top democrat. saying last week, i am very concerned, very concerned about the implementation of this law. really? then listen, let's have the viewers hear it from his own mouth about the train wreck. >> i see a huge train wreck coming down. you and i discussed this many times, i don't see any results yet. what can you do to help the people around the country. what in the world do i do? i don't know what to do.

>> but he found a solution. he's leaving congress. so good for him. >> yeah. >> but as far as the rest of us, we're still on the train. >> still on the train. and here's what's going to happen. democrats are going to get crabbier about the president's law and this will increase the lake duckness of president obama as they try to distance themselves on this law. but he probably doesn't really care because as long as people on october 1 start getting aboard the train, even if the train wrecks it's okay because his legacy project in terms of the expansion is still intact. >> beautiful views out the train window. he can have a glass of wine, have your peanuts. enjoy it until it all crashes. okay. i see how it works. thank you, chris. >> you bet. well new questions about whether terror suspects get to keep their privacy rights and whether those privacy rights somehow outweigh the public's need to fully understand how terror suspects and those who

help them wound up on the university of massachusetts at dartmouth campus. that's the debate in the news today. we'll take it up with our panel coming up. and new developments in one family's unbelievable custody battle. after police forcibly remove a baby. now we have the full video. forcibly remove a 5-month-old baby boy from his mother's arms after a single doctor gets ticked off because the family says they want a second opinion. >> listen, if you don't -- because right now -- >> i went to the hospital. i told the hospital -- i told the hospital -- >> so i'm going to grab your baby and don't fight me, okay. open your hands -- >> please.

arigato! we are outta here!

finding you the perfect place. hotels.com. developing right now, a

growing fight over information in the boston bombing investigation. umass-dartmouth is refusing to release school records for dzhokhar tsarnaev or his three classmates who are just accused of hiding evidence and lying to the fbi when authorities showed up to question them. the school claims that the students' right to privacy outweighs the public's right to know. turning to trace gallagher who has the live report from our west coast newsroom. >> in the very heart is the reports that dzhokhar tsarnaev was still attending the university of massachusetts despite the fact that he owed the university some $20,000 in unpaid tuition, room and board. and that he was getting failing grades. university of massachusetts will not confirm that. in fact, the college won't release basic information on dzhokhar or the three other classmates who are now linked to the boston bombings. the school says that privacy rights outweigh the public's right to know if the suspects

were getting public funding, saying i'm quoting here, we are prohibited from releasing such records. our interpretation of the law indicates it is confidential. but it turns out that the law is open to interpretation because massachusetts community college and bunker hill college both released the financial aid information on tamerlan tsarnaev saying the older brother got more than $5,000 in aid. their quote is this. we released it because reporters asked. we believe we are well within our legal rights to release the information that we did. now a massachusetts republican state senator named robert headlund is pressing them to release the records, saying the public has a right to know how their tax dollars are being spent especially in a case like this. once you engage in the kind of activities these punks engaged in, you forfeit whatever rights

to private. the university is standing pat. >> trace, thank you. turning to liz wheil and i get that we have rights, but dzhokhar is accused of bombing us and murdering at least four people. not to mention the scores of others he named. and the other three are accused after the fact. they have to release -- >> absolutely. the federal family and educational rights and privacy act does not accept something like this. this is going to be subpoenaed by law enforcement. the law enforcement clearly gets it and beyond that, look at this, megyn. we have four umass students involved in this. umass cannot say to the public there isn't an on going safety concern on that campus or that institution. we have a right to know as a public to protect ourselves. and prosecutors get that information over all the time when that's a right to know for

public safety. >> to the point, you look at umass-dartmouth and we say we don't believe in your abilities to protect us anymore. you have four current former students involved in the boston terror attack in some way. >> it's interesting because even me being, you know, the ogre and the nerd, the law does say that the only thing that can be done is a subpoena court ordered or from law enforcement and law enforcement can't disclose it to anybody else. that's why maybe the other schools that trace was talking about did go ahead and do it. because the law only applies to us. >> what do you mean? >> in other words, the law i read, the family privacy act says no school can release grade information without consent. period. and assuming that umass dartmouth receives that funding -- >> but i'm not talking -- >> but they can disclose it to law enforcement. >> i don't care about law enforcement. law enforcement is going to get

it. >> of course. >> the question is whether the media and the public have a right to know what these guys were doing at umass-dartmouth. there's a question about immigration violations here. and in the case of dzhokhar tsarnaev was he on campus, what do we know about him? >> we go to the safety here. if the prosecutor has information that it gleans in an investigation, you're right. they can't turn that information over. they're get that information. but if there's a public on going safety public issue which i believe there absolutely is here, then they have -- not just a right but an obligation to turn it over. >> i agree with megyn. you're 100% right. what were they studying, were they moving to and fro? the public has a right to know? >> the specific details about when they were at the school, when they were not. because now they're just saying, okay, one is a current student. who they just suspended in the wake of the arrest. >> right. >> one is a former student, robel is a former student. one is no longer enrolled.

well, that's the one, kadyrbayev, he's in olonger enrolled because of an alleged immigration violation. we need to know the dates of what went down. >> when you look at the law that they're hiding behind and i will say they're hiding behind this federal law, it's very narrow. it is about their status as a student. whether they're enrolled or not and maybe grades and maybe some other financial issues. beyond that, they can't hide behind this law. >> what i'm saying there's a distinction between law enforcement and i know you said you didn't care. >> i care that law enforcement is going to get it. but i believe they'll get it. >> all i'm saying, i may be wrong, at this early stage, we don't need to know. at a trial, absolutely. everybody wants to know. >> but let me shift gears for a second. because one of the close friends of the guys on campus who dated the terror suspect dzhokhar tsarnaev has come out that he was the leader, the most popular among this group of students

that was about five students strong. okay, if you assume you have two or three of the guys who are all alleged after the fact, there are two others. to what extent can law enforcement probe the school's records on that? find out who they hang out with, let me see the class schedule. let me see everything. >> absolute right to that. this statute does not protect students who may be involved in criminal activity. this is a civil -- civil action. not criminal. law enforcement will definitely not get it. >> one more thing. they were going to update this law in the wake of virginia tech, but they didn't do it. same way they'd update miranda to make it easy to interrogate the terror suspects. they didn't do it. we have a new twist in the case of a california couple who had the police storm into their home and literally grab their sick baby boy after they had the nerve to ask a doctor at a hospital for a second opinion.

>> you want to take away my baby? you want to take away my baby? you want to go to the hospital? [ kate ] many women may not be absorbing the calcium they take as well as they could because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption.

well, today we have the first look at the dramatic video and the new twist in the case of the california mother and father who had their 5-month-old baby literally grabbed from their home last week. we spoke with the mother and father on the program on monday. we did not have the videotape at that time. but we reported to you then about how these parents took their sick child, he had a heart murmur, seemed to graduate into something much more serious. they brought him to the emergency room and they were told he needed surgery. they decided they wanted a

second opinion, but they left the hospital against medical advice. the hospital said they didn't want them to leave and then the hospital called the cops who showed up at their home. the police corner an understandably upset mother, ripping her crying baby from her arms. trace gallagher tells us more. >> you have to remember that the reason that the state came in, the police came in and took the baby from the nikolayev's house is because the child needed urgent life-saving child. we just found out that the baby sammy might not get that surgery for another two weeks. and we're told the baby is doing quite well. so the doctor at sutter memorial sacramento said that sammy needed the surgery right away. they wanted a second opinion. doctors at kaiser permanente and the police cleared the family to go home. the next day, police and cps show up. here it is. listen.

>> no. >> a medical attention, we were instructed to go -- >> okay. >> okay. >> you can get him looked at for medical attention. >> okay. >> okay. so now they're in the house, clearly negotiating. here's where they physically take the baby away. kind of hard to watch, but very important to the story. play this. >> let go of the baby right now. listen, if you don't because right now you're -- >> i told the hospital -- i told the hospital -- >> don't put the baby through this. >> i'm going to grab your baby. don't resist, don't fight me, okay. put him down. >> please. he'll be fine. >> where is he going to be? where is he going to be? >> he's going to a hospital. >> which one?

>> okay. which one? which one? >> i'm not telling you right now because i don't think you're acting, you know, rationally right now. >> mom's not acting rationally right now is the last thing she said. cps won't talk directly about this case but continues to say they did what was best for baby sammy. now, the parents have regained custody, but they still have cps oversight, but now california state lawmaker tim donnelly, republican, is asking that cps be audited by the state because he says he's asking questions about this case and he's not getting any answers. and he said he's tired of this agency working in secrecy with complete autonomy and now he wants some answers to all of this. >> we're not going to tell you where we're taking your baby right now? because you're not acting rationally? that -- could you think of any mother who could act more rationally than she acted given the circumstances?

>> crazy. it's crazy. if you go on, the tape was seven minutes. i mean, for the sake of time we pulled out the most compelling part. it goes on, all she's asking as they walk out the door, i just want to know where you're taking my baby. that's all i want to know. cps says, you don't have the right to know. we are taking your baby. we'll notify you. >> keep in mind, she wanted to know which hospital. she had just removed him from a hospital she didn't think was giving him adequate care and there was a mistake made by a nurse who tried to give him antibiotics about which he should not have received. it's not like they took him home, they took him to another hospital. they got a doctor's note saying these are great parents. there's nothing to worry about. only after he released them did they take the baby home and that's when the cops showed up to grab him to another hospital which they refuse to disclose to the mother.

incredible. >> and don't forget the police and the doctor both released the baby from the kaiser permanente hospital. this doctor said it is fine, you can go home and then the next day cps came back with another set of police officers. >> these parents have been caring for the baby, bringing him to doctor's appointments since he was born. they saw no signs of abuse or neglect. this relates to some doctor who got ticked off because they wanted a second opinion and took him out of the first hospital against medical advice. that's what set this chain of events in motion. trace, thank you. we're not done with this. we talked with the parents on monday and their lawyer was the first to tell me they're going to file a lawsuit. wouldn't you? we're going to debate that today in kelly's court and we'll have an expert witness, a doctor who doesn't necessarily side with the parents on this. so we'll watch it coming up next hour. and an fbi affidavit raises new questions today about the

involvement of the three men in the boston bombing marathon -- boston marathon bombing. mark fuhrman will walk us through the time line laid out by the fbi. i want to go through the time line with him because the specific hours in question laid out but the fbi affidavit raised real questions about whether the three must have known something about tsarnaev prior to seeing his face on tv that night. and coming up, andrew mccarthy who has put terrorists into jail for a living will be here. and i will ask him if there's a chance that the guys knew more than they were letting on and how their arrests affect the main case against dzhokhar tsarnaev. we're hearing more about whistle-blowers wanting to come forward about the other terror attack in september of last year, that killed four americans

in benghazi. we'll investigate what the whistle-blowers might say and why some top administration officials say this is all about politics. [ man ] on december 17, 1903, the wright brothers became the first in flight. [ goodall ] i think the most amazing thing is how like us these chimpanzees are. [ laughing ] [ woman ] can you hear me? and you hear your voice? oh, it's exciting! [ man ] touchdown confirmed. we're safe on mars. [ cheers and applause ] ♪ hi. [ baby fussing ] ♪

humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer.

call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- res. what's your policy? well, we are learning more about the three suspects arrested yesterday in connection with the boston marathon bombing. the fbi is laying out convincing evidence they're close friends. while investigators suggest the trio tried to destroy evidence

or lie about it to help cover for dzhokhar tsarnaev. they claim they had no clue that their friend, dzhokhar tsarnaev, never mind his brother, had plans to carry out a terror attack on this country. what does their arrest and the affidavit tell us about the main case against dzhokhar tsarnaev? andrew mccarthy is a senior fellow at the national review institute. you used to put terrorists into jail for a living including the blind sheik. you know a thing or two about these cases. yes, we care that the three met justice if they did what the fbi said they did. but we care mostly about the two guys who bombed the boston marathon. so how do you see their arrests and what's in this fbi affidavit affecting the case against dzhokhar tsarnaev? >> probably the biggest thing they're looking into is dzhokhar's state of mind and the time line of when he became competent to do what he did on

the 15th. i think it's pretty clear he did it. now we're trying to figure out what's the time line. the theory i have been operating under is that tamerlan who was in dagestan where we know there are jihadist networks and it's important to understand here that the guys appear to be adhering to jihadist ideology, i believe he was trained in dagestan and came home and trained the younger brother. at a certain point in time, dzhokhar knew how to build a bomb and they picked a target. if that's what happened, these three friends that he was spending a lot of time with could be a real window into what the state of his training was, what the state of his mind was in the weeks leading up to the bombing. >> you know it's interesting because the affidavit talks about how when the three loser friends went into the dorm room

after they, you know, saw him on tv, in these pictures that were released by the fbi, they went over them and saw the backpack. they saw empty fireworks and vaseline and said these are bomb making materials, let's getem. it appears that dzhokhar tsarnaev had in his dorm room bomb making materials. not just, you know, the remnants, but the bomb making materials. therefore, any attempt by his defense attorneys to put it all on the older brother, the older brother got trained in making bombs, he made the bombs, he looped the poor younger brother into against his will, doesn't seem to be is up boasupported b evidence. >> look, it won't be. people get led into doing all kinds of things, but nobody gets led into mass murder. not one of the things you get led into. in a lot of the cases where for example, the attorneys claim

entrapment, i said what would somebody entrap you into committing a bombing which would be like a multiple mass homicide? and of course people sort of roll their eyes. nobody gets led into that. the interesting thing here is, the bright line between success and failure for terrorists tents to be training. the guys who are trained are competent enough to pull these off. the guys who are not trained may have very ambitious plots but they tend to get tripped up along the lines because they really don't know what they're doing. these guys knew what they were doing. they had to learn it at some point, in some place. >> so that trip by tamerlan overseas is so critical. they get into a lot of detail about the actual boston marathon bombing. and this fbi agent specifically talks about how bomber two, dzhokhar tsarnaev takes his knapsack, appears to drop it, walks away with without the knapsack. he is accused of the second bombing, second location. he walks away without the

knapsack having left it on the ground, and then ten seconds later an explosion occurs where dzhokhar tsarnaev had placed the knapsack. it seems clear that even more clear than tamerlan tsarnaev, they have him dropping the bomb. in terms of death penalty discussions which are going on behind the scenes, how big a factor is that? i don't care if he's a sweet kid all his life, they have him on tape dropping the bomb. >> number one, the evidence is crucially evidence. up with thing to describe what somebody did, but another thing to watch it. which is atrocious. the second thing, you say to yourself, they shouldn't have been worried about miranda or statements. if they have an overwhelming case, what's the big deal f the judge suppresses evidence -- >> you have pictures. one second he has backpack on, the next second he doesn't.

>> don't get early excited about the miranda. >> they're likely discussing death penalty behind the scenes. is in any chance in your view that the doj agrees to take the death penalty off the table in this case? >> i don't think so. it's an atrocious event -- offense. when the embassy bombing happened in '98 that case went to trial in 2000, 2001. holder was deputy attorney general at the clinton justice department then. they signed off on it then. this is a domestic attack. i think there will be more outcry for a death penalty. >> given the circumstances he's not averse to death penalty cases. >> no. >> andrew mccarthy. thank you. the defense department confirms you may be court-martialed if you're too free in talking about your faith. we'll talk with a head of the concerned vet group about what it means for those in uniform. one of the hottest new developments since the ipad, a

mobile device worn on your head you can operate with your eyes and your voice. we'll take it for a test drive today. okay, i never had them on. but i'm going to put them on and we'll figure it out together. coming up. .. on angie's list

before i do any projects on my own. at angie's list, you'll find reviews written by people just like you. i love my contractor, and i am so thankful to angie's list for bringing us together. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. some changes you liked. and some you didn't. come back to see us. we listened to you. now we'd love to see you. ♪

fox news alert. a line of wildfires is threatening an entire neighborhood in california right

now. look at this. on screen left, live pictures courtesy of kttv. screen right, video from five minutes ago of showing how close these flames are to hundreds of homes that have been evacuated. this area is 50 miles north of l.a. we are told. firefighters report zero progress in containing the thing so far. it's massive. we'll stay on top of it. we will bring you updates on any new information. meantime, growing outrage over a pentagon decision that could possibly lead to court-martials of soldiers and even military chaplains for sharing their faith. the ban on proselytizing comes after an atheist organization met with air force officials demanding that soldiers who spend too much time talking about jesus be booted from the military.

the group that pushed for this is called the military religious freedom foundation that said u.s. troops who proselytize, basically preach and try to spread the faith, are guilty of sedition and treason and we have to stop this, quote, horrible, who ahorrendous dehumanizing behavior. the air force didn't say get out. they said you may have a point. tell us. >> well, i don't want to give any credit to the group bringing the charge. he equated it with rape saying it was spiritual rape. the pentagon should have never let them into the pentagon to talk about. they're anti-christian zealots, however, the story that's come out of the meeting is that the dod has changed the policy. i think it's a little early and speculation at this point about whether there's a change at all. i have two statements that i have read thoroughly. they're defending their policy has not changed yet. you're free to share your faith

and free to talk with others. you can't and never have been able to use your position to coerce, to force, conversion, to put undo influence on subordinates. you have never been able to do that. but nothing within the regulations restrict your ability to share your faith. chaplains, a lot of my commanders have been religious. it's something infused in the bond of a unit oftentimes, but never never forced it down anyone's throat. the worry is this a trial balloon for more restrictions. >> by the way, the group is very controversial. tony perkins of the family research council who advocates on behalf of christian values, that kind of thing, more christian values calls this one of the more rabid atheist groups, like talking to china about the religious freedom in the military. the regulation, as far as i can see, says you have to have government neutrality regarding religion and supposed to balance

the free exercise of religion and the prohibition against too much government interference. so it's not like you're supposed to say, no religion, period. we don't want to hear about religion, don't speak ago religion. don't tell us if you're religious. you can't preach it and try to force it on others the way i read it. >> well, the statement even says you can evangelize. if you want to evangelize and talk with fellow soldiers and share your faith and why it's important to you in the context of why you wear the uniform or as a person you can do that. it is going that next level of using your position to coerce the subordinates or force conversions. the only faith we recognize is a christian faith. >> is that happening? >> no. i mean, not very often. i mean, sure, you'll have a one off here a commander here and there. that's too forceful. that's usually somebody being stupid. at the end of the day you have christians and muslims and jews and a diverse environment, standing alongside each other. but the majority obviously at this point in the military are

christians so there are more protestant and catholic chaplains than of other faiths. they aren't pressing the others to convert. >> the pentagon an parentally met with this group and its -- and the person who speaks for them. weinstein. in connection with other people, too. it wasn't just mickey weinstein or mikey, how ever you pronounce his name. but this guy's message is to allow folks to proselytize, they're creating humiliation and horrible, horrible pain among members of the military, he calls it a national security threat. like there are atheists who make their point rationally and in a way that's persuasive, we can understand. what do you make of it? >> i don't know. the door has been opened to some strange folks under the administration who have been given access at times that i don't think would have been given access by other administrations. i think that's part of it. >> yeah. >> weinstein requested this meeting. not the way other around.

they probably -- no reason they should have done i. i hope the military pushes back and recognizes how important faith is. but we're not imposing it on anybody. >> pete, thank you. north korea sentenced an american to 15 years hard labor. in north korea that can mean death. that's next. have you eaten today? i had some lebanese food for lunch. i love the lebanese. i... i'm not sure. enough of the formalities... lets get started shall we? jimmy how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? happier than dracula volunteering at a blood drive. we have cookies... get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

♪ >> megyn: imagine this. north korea, just sentenced american to 15 years hard labor for so-called crimes against the state. few people to ever escape the north korean labor camp describe scenes of torture, starvation and a short le expectancy. so the question now is what washington will do, if anything. david piper streaming live from bangkok, thailand with the latest. >> reporter: it's been toning down the rhetoric over the past week or so after all of that talk about nuclear war

against the u.s. but it now seems to have changed now they jailed that american. the announcement, that 44-year-old kenneth bay is given sentence of 15 years hard labor, came from the north korea state news agency. held from last year after entering the country as tourist. last week, pyongyang announced charges of crimes against north korea,be including attempting toover throw the country. pyongyang said he was accused of what they describe as antigovernment crimes. according to activists in north korea, he is believed to be operator of korean defense. the press news agency reports the trends describe him as devout christian. south koreanbe activists say he may have gone over the boarder to take picture of starving north korean children. the state agency an department said they want him released immediately humanitarian

grounds. swedish diplomats are giving council to bay. north korean has arrested several citizens over the years but it may need to take a high profile person to help the release. back to you. >> megyn: david piper, thank you. fox news confirming one of the college students charged with trying to hide in evidence the boston bombings came in country illegal. up next how that happened? and what it says about our security. don't go away. what do you think?

that's great. it won't take long, will it? nah. okay. this, won't take long will it? no, not at all. how many of these can we do on our budget? more than you think. didn't take very long, did it? this spring, dig in and save. that's nice. post it. already did. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. ep you yard your own more doing. with your choice lawn insect controls, just $8.88. 8% every 10 years.age 40, we can start losing muscle -- wow. wow. but you can help fight muscle loss with exercise and ensure muscle health. i've got revigor. what's revigor? it's the amino acid metabolite, hmb to help rebuild muscle and strength naturally lost over time. [ female announcer ] ensure muscle health has revigor and protein to help protect, preserve,

and promote muscle health. keeps you from getting soft. [ major nutrition ] ensure. nutrition in charge! 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. >> megyn: fox news aleft on new questions, about the suspects now accused of hiding evidence, disposing of it or lying about it in connection with the boston marathon bombings after the fact. and how one of them may have entered this country unlawfully. bran new hour here of "america live." welcome. i'm megyn kelly. we have new details about the through new suspects that the f.b.i. says helped cover the tracks of one of the accused bombers. all were classmates at one point or another of dzhokhar tsarnaev. dzhokhar is now in custody, of course. one of the newest suspects is accused -- well, one is an american citizen. that's robel on screen right. robel. he is accused of lying to law enforcement. the other two suspects, right next to robel many this picture here, are from

kazakhstan. there is a picture of these two with dzhokhar tsarnaev in times square in april of 2012. they are now, these two, facing felony charges for obstructing justice. and now we are looking in to whether one of these two is in this country illegally and if so,be why didn't we do something about it? there he is. he reportedly left the united states for kazakhstan. an then returned. but his student visa was terminated because he stopped going to class but he was allowed back many country. could show with done that? michael cu cutler with i.c.e. if a student visa expires january 3 and because he is not going to class, he tries to get back in on january 20.

how is it supposed to work? >> the visa didn't expire but he violates terms of being opportunity in united states. people presume if you have a visa you can enter. that is not the case. the border inspector has to admit them in the united states. i did that job at the beginning of my career. >> megyn: just because i say i have a student vis sand it didn't expire until august, you have to let me in. you say no, i don't. >> if i have evidence you are not coming to be a student, just as though i have evidence you claiming to be a tourist but believe you are coming for work you don't get admitted to the united states. >> megyn: when he tries to come back and say i want to resume classes. then there is an alert the university put out january 3 supposedly saying he no longer goes to classes here, how would you know that? >> a program is a computerized data base supposed to flag it so when you try to re-enter the united states, the

inspector knows. but it keeps on failing. we keep being told to focus on the mexican border. but we have a bunch of holes in the boat. we know terrorists in the past committed fraud, to get residency and political asylum like guys that pulled off the attack. they probably committed fraud. >> it's so awesome, i need asylum. help me, help me. >> they go back to russia. >> if you had credible fear of being in russia, why in the world would you go back to russia? the same regime was in power and the same circumstances were there. it appears that someone nudes to look at the idea they committed fraud. the yusuf and we have seen

this. the 9/11 commission warned about this. i testified before a bunch of congressional hearings it. gave testimony to the commission. >> megyn: why is the system working poorly. or am i overstating the case given the volume they deal with? >> no. they are not doing face-to-face interviews and 99.be 5% approval level right now. do you think anyonebe is scrutinizing anything in you have 7,000 ice agents in the united states. half of them is doing custom work. nobody is checking in the status of the student or the school. 10,000 schools according to the g.a.o. are authorized to bring in foreign students. 850,000 foreign students in the united states right now. gape of hide and seek. they are hiding but nobody is seeking.

>> megyn: realistically how does it work? if they come from a country with radical pockets. i assume they check somebody coming from chechnya more thoroughly than someone from great britain. you tell me. >> interesting point because great britain has hundreds of thousands of naturalized citizens. >> megyn: and robel phillipos is a naturalized citizen, too. not u.s. born. >> his mother working with refugees. my concern is did she know the tsarnaev family from the prior circumstances? because of they were originally. the root is immigration. not just secure borders but we have 5 million illegals violating the terms of the entry. a president saying if you are here illegally we want to give you lawful status. under the dream act they are

not doing face to face interview but giving dockment in alien. we can't confirm when they got here or who they are. imgrace's primary goal is protect americans' and lives. it's failing miserably. it's the system and no one is talking about it. >> custom and border protection had not been notified he had left school in early january. they said we didn't know. no derogatory information that he posed a public safety threat in any way. now the department or homeland security reform the student visa system to ensure we have updated system. so problem solved. >> i have a thence to sell you.

a guy got political asylum and the justice department has it on their website, bragging about it. pleaded guilty at the time he was running for his life. there wasn't a word on the press release how they went after him. he was an alien smuggler. time and again, you look at what they are doing at immigration and yaw rolize dysfunctional agency with broken components. they know the system doesn't work. they are pressured to approve the application. it takes minutes to approve an application or hours or days to deny one. clear up the bag logg you have to approve everything on your desk. >> megyn: immigration reform barreling forward prior to the boston marathon bombings has dropped dramatically already.

michael, thank you. >> sure. thank you. safety first. >> megyn: this is raising questions what about the three suspects may have known, if anything, about the bombing. before it happened. there is a timeline laid out thursday night about what the three did and when they did it and when they smoke to dzhokhar tsarnaev. former homicide detective mark fuhrman will walk us through the timeline and tell us if it raises a possibility that they knew more than they are letting on. coming up. if you were not with us, wait until you see the video. case of a california mother and father, baby taken from their home by police. after they left the hospital. that they wanted to get second opinion. it was against the medical advice. they didn't bring him home. they brought him to another hospital. and that hospital said he's finebe, release him back to the parents. so they went home with him. then the cops showed up.

an unbelievable scene happened. we'll show it to you and discuss it afterwards because a lawsuit is coming. and today we investigate why a controversy in benghazi is blowing up again. and what we may learn next week. will whistle blowers go before congress to tell what they say is the truth? >> with all due respect, the fact is we have four dead americans because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night to decide they'd go kill some americans? what difference at this point does it make? [ male announcer ] in blind taste tests, even ragu users chose prego.

prego?! but i've been buying ragu for years. [ thinking ] i wonderhat other questionable choices i've made? [ club scene music ] [ sigh of relief ] [ male announcer ] choose taste. choose prego.

the defense department and the state department both written letters aunderstand to republican darrell issa saying they are not aware of anyone coming to them asking for security clearance for council or anything to come forward. first, is that your understanding?

second, if someone were to come forward, is the white house willing to let it go uncontested? >> let's be clear. >> benghazi happened a long time ago. we're unaware of any agency wanting to provide information related to benghazi. >> the whistle blowers want to reveal new details about the terror attack about benghazi last fall and cannot, blaze they claim they are threatened by superiors at the state department and c.i.a. congressional republicans say they will call the whistle blowers to testify in a new hearing on benghazi next wednesday. the hearing will drill down when doesens of men stormed the consulate.

this is video of the attack that resulted in attack. comment again at a las vegas campaign event that same night. >> i want to begin tonight saying a few words about a tough day we had today. we lost four americans last night who were killed when they were attacked at a diplomatic post in libya. >> megyn: even before the pres secretary of state hillary clinton suggested the attack was the result of protests, breaking out across the middle east at the time. some of which were blamed on islam film that was posted on the internet.

>> some sought to justify the behavior at the embassy in cairo responsebe to inflammatory material posted on the internet. >> megyn: the bodies would return an the father of a victim, woods says secretary clinton told him at theteam the u.s. was determined to arrest and prosecute the person behind the anti-islam video. then rice went on shows to -- sunday news shows. >> attack in libya took lives of four americans. we are being told there was no protest underway prior to attack.

susan rice insisted that the administration has done on a larger scale basis that this attack can be blamed on video that resulted in a protest that preceded they claim the attack on the consulate. did they cover up the intel and security failures in the middle of a presidential campaign? who gave the ambassador the talk points? did we do all we could and should have done to save lives during that attack while it was in progress? when press about the conflicting explanation as the weeks have gone done, secretary clinton made headlines with this react. >> with all due respect, we had four dead americans because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk who decided to kill some

americans? what difference at this point does it make? >> the state department conbe ducted review with four people picked by secretary clinton one picked by the national intelligence director and they found there was not enough security in place ahead of time and went on to report there were no immediate warnings before the attack. the whistle blowers will speak out to answer this question. has the administration been honest with the american people about terror attack last fall? mark thiessen is a former speech writer for bush and rumsfeld. welcome to the program. we had a guest this week who said look, the investigations take time. we have no one in custody. no one under arrest. we have not killed anybody in response to the benghazi terror attack.

afghanistan was a decade-long war. you shouldn't condemn the administration on what appears to be an investigation that produced very few results. your thoughts? >> that is right. i was shocked by what carney said because he is ready to put this in the history book. he said this is a long time ago. this wasn't a long tile ago. this is a month ago. if you are a family member this wasn't a long time ago to you. we haven't done anything. these people attack american embassy and killed an ambassador and there is no responsebe from the administration. in one month we liberated afghanistan and it took that amount of time to put f.b.i. team on the ground. third, we don't know all the facts yet, seven months later.

i spokebe to one of the lawyers who said they will tell congress and what they know is going contradict official scenario. there is a thorough investigation, the spokesperson said and "that should be enough." sorry, but it are officials who have information we don't have. so it didn't sufficient. there is more to if be found out. they are threatening them with career-ening reprisals for coming forward. >> megyn: that is the report. >> nothing to see here, let them speak. >> a report by a lawyer representing a whistle blower that they are threatened with their careers, end of their careers if they come forward. which is a reason they don't want to do it until they're protected and process is set up for them. john kerry said we have given

you testimony and documents. white house said this is political and about politics. that we are putting a period on the end of this. find guys who did it. that is the next chapter in the benghazi case. >> this is a controversy of your own creation. the reason we are talking about this, the coverup continues. the president said he doesn't know anything about it. untrue. >> megyn: whistle blowers. >> the state department said no one requested security clearance. darrell issa put out two letters requesting security clearances for the lawyers for the whistle blowers. so they can't tell us the truth about two letters? how can we trust them to tell us the truth about what happened on the ground in benghazi? compare boston with benghazi. nobody is going out to

complain aboutbe a coverup of the boston bombing. no one is saying they haven't truthful because so far they've been up front with us and you and media about this. but they didn't do that in case of benjbe benj. they change the story and block it from coming out. it's controversy because they won't tell the truth. >> megyn: if there is nothing to hide, there should be no harm to let whistle blowers come forward. clearing the process for them to make it as easy as possible for the c.i.a. and the state department employees to come forward and say what they know. that still has not been done. we're here on thursday. victoria on fox monday saying it needs to happen. mark, thank you. >> thank you. >> megyn: coming up, mark fuhrman on the new arrests in the boston bombings and what the guys really know. we talk about it based on what we see in the affidavit. plus, we will test drive the gogglgoggle glasses.

this is unbelievable. has everyone talking. we'll show them to you an how they work. i have never had them on. they tell me i'm supposed to say how you say hot dog in german. that's next.

>> megyn: get ready for google glasses. they are getting more attention than anything but the ipad. mobile device on your head just like glasses and operate it with your eyes and your voice. take it for the tiny test drive. you have them on. they're sarah palin-esque. have you heard that? >> i haven't. >> megyn: like them.

when sarah palin came on the scene in 2008. you spent 18 hours with these on your face. >> 36 at this point. >> did you get used to them? are they comfortable? >> i feel like "i'm back in future." ready for hovercraft to come around. >> megyn: you look like you are from the future. is there glass in front of them? >> glassless eye glasses. you a piece up here. all the wi-fi, bluetooth, gps in here. it communicates with your cell phone and lets you take picture and talk to google and you can learn information. it will translate in real-time for you directbely in your ear and speak to you. place phone calls. it's a computer in this thing. >> megyn: before i try them on, why is this necessary in life? >> that is a very good question. one we have yet to get a good answer for. but all of my geek friends go crazy. i have many geek friends. they have come up and said this is the future, the next ipad, the next cell phone and the next laptop. whether it's in a more elegant

phone. it's weird look but not cool. >> megyn: not that weird. may i? >> absolutely. >> megyn: goog it won't hurt you? >> no. no no. >> megyn: they are kind of stylish, aren't they? >> don't put it in your eye. over the bridge of your -- there you go. >> megyn: i like them. >> i hope we have a display on. try once more. >> megyn: there is the display. i see it. okay, glass. >> brings up context menu. >> megyn: okay. and now, google. google says ask a question. here i go. how do you say hot dog in german? >> it caught you saying, "how do i say cache" >> megyn: okay. try it again. >> pull down with your finger. >> megyn: right here? >> slide down. [ laughter ] >> tap it again. >> megyn: okay, glass.

google. how do you say hot dog in german? >> so it's talking to my cell phone and get information off the internet. [ speaking german ] >> there you go. >> you can have useful pieces of information as well. who is in the ironman movie? how long is the brooklyn bridge? >> i keep of like them. here is my concern with these, jeremy. did you see the movie "the jerk"? >> i did. >> megyn: you know what happened with him he had a thing he was cross eyed. >> all too well. you are wearing it directly above your eyes. and out of your line of sight. so you are not staring directly at it. in reality i'm looking at it. >> what you see on screen i am seeing above my eye. your personal vision. i see the little "okay,

google." or okay, glass. results come up. i see more car accidents in our future. >> that is a big concern. privacy thing. are you taking pictures? does it know who i am? does vit information on me? >> they can't do it and google says we don't want to. not possible. >> you can see the future where it might come in to play. very interesting to think about this. >> shades, too. adaptable season glasses on them? >> you look like the terminator. potentially this is how we do eye glass, too. i wear glasses all the time. >> megyn: this is a palin ripoff. >> the future is here. >> megyn: i like the past. laptop is here. easy, type on it. voice recognition freaks me out.

three friends accused of covering up evidence of a terror attack. they had no idea what is going when they raided the boston suspect dorm room and took evidence and threw it in the garbage. we are pouring over the -- we are poring over the affidavit. i'll ask next if they knew something about the terrorist leanings prior to when they admit they did. on december 17, 1903, the wright brothers became the first in flight. [ goodall ] i think the most amazing thing is how like us these chimpanzees are. [ laughing ] [ woman ] can you hear me? and you hear your voice? oh, it's exciting! [ man ] touchdown confirmed. we're safe on mars. [ cheers and applause ] ♪ hi. [ baby fussing ] ♪

>> megyn: well, as you learn more about the three men arrested in connection with the boston marathon bombing, after the fact they are said to have helped dzhokhar tsarnaev get rid of evidence. we're starting to get a more clear picture of what they did in the time after the blast and what role they may have had in helping the suspect. start from the beginning. the first blast, vaterring the -- shattering the calm of the marathon was 2:05:00 p.m. on april 15. three were killed. 200 were injured or maimed. 5:00 p.m. on the following thursday, boston marathon bombing monday. thursday night, the f.b.i. agents unveiled the first pictures of the suspect. tamerlan and dzhokhar tsarnaev. they didn't know the names at that time. they were asking us, the public, to tell them. we knew them. 8:43 that same night that dias kadyrbayev, one of the three men arrested yesterday texted dzhokhar tsarnaev to tell him he looked like one of the bombing suspects he had seen on tv. the response was "lol."

you better not text me. then "come to my room and take whatever you want." later in the evening, "i'm about to leave. if you need something in my room, take it." that is from dzhokhar tsarnaev. 17 minutes later at 9:00 p.m.,be the affidavit says that kadyrbayev and the other two, azamat tazhayakov and robel phillipos, all whom were arrested yesterday, would be in tsarnaev's dorm room and notice a backbe pack with fireworks, jar of back vaseline so they decided to take the items with the laptop. by 11:00 that night, two hours later, the m.i.t. campus police officer sean collier would be shot dead allegedly by tsarnaev and his brother. that same night or early hours of april 19, that kadyrbayev and tazhayakov decided to throw awa away tsarnaev's back

pack. the other guy claims only once he woke up from the nap he discovered the back pack was gone. police may believe him. he was charged only with lying to investigators. mark fuhrman joins us. he will take us through this. when i read the aft o affidavitf timing we left out paragraph 24 which says thursday night, between 6:00 to 7:00 p.m., robel phillipos, azamat tazhayakov and dias kadyrbayev met at the dartmouth campus and went tsarnaev's dorm room. the roommate let them in. they spent time watching movie. noticed the back pack, firework, opened, that's when kadyrbayev realized tsarnaev was involved in the bombing. they start the chain of events between 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. well before kadyrbayev and dzhokhar were texting one

another about you look like one of the bombers and so on. so one hour after the f.b.i. shows us the pictures of tsarnaev for first time at 5:00 p.m., one hour after the three guys meet up on campus and the first thing they decide to do is to go to dzhokhar tsarnaev's dorm room. what does that tell you? >> that tells me somebody is lying. you look at the situation exactly the way it's laid out in the aft. this is top of arrest warrant so they are skimming the basic facts so the basic facts snub chronological order. so at 5:00 p.m. they released photos of the two suspects from the bombing. between 6:00 and 7:00, you have the characters showing up at dzhokhar's dorm room. they are allowed in by the roommate. lounging around and they just

happen to notice back pack that happens to be open with fireworks are empty of their powder. anybody can call b.s. on this one. they went there. supposedly they didn't see the photos on tv. later in the affidavit, it said they leave dzhokhar's dorm room an go back to one of their apartment. then they watch the news. they bring up in the back pack there were vasline. somehow the college kids knew vaseline is used in homemade bomb. i don't think anyone outside of somebody involved in making a bomb or bomb investigation would know that. i certainly don't know a soul that would know that. i don't know anybody in law enforcement that i associate with, that would know that. they knew that, they made that

conclusion. my feeling is either they watched dzhokhar make bombs, assisted, listened to him and quite possibly they knew loosely what his intent was. but they didn't think he would act on it. and/or they were actually part of planning in the beginning stages but they backed off. something is here that doesn't add up. >> megyn: that is the thing. the vaseline is devastate pog tenially. according to the aft they decided to help -- according to if affidavit they decided to help their friends. they went to dorm room and had seen pictures and say hey, it look like him. it wasn't until later they knew it was him for sure. they went to dorm room and they took the back pack and firework and the vaseline. if you are an innocent friends, in quotes who wants to help your friend avoid

arrest or suspension, how do you know without talking to him, because they are not alleging the conversation. i just read the viewers the next. how do you know to put vas line in the back pack. who gets rid of vaseline? >> the interview with dzhokhar it doesn't go far enough. we have something to refer to the three men. there is nothing from dzhokhar that he made statements to the f.b.i. in his interview. he is concealing information. i agree. i think dzhokhar had a conversation with one or more of the individuals. he instructed them what to go get. they are trying to make a somewhat innocent sounding i'm going to help a friend. when people in a murder investigation, terrorist act like this.

they interject themselveses in the investigation, and take evidence and hide it or destroy it, what they are usually doing is protecting themselves. if they don't hide the evidence, suspect in custody might implicate them later and that would be the proof of their implication is the evidence. so if you get rid of the evidence like laptop and text. i don't any they are sophisticated in how they got rid of anything. but they did it in the way they thought they should. the biggest issue is they did it. for what reason? >> lawyers deny it. it will play out. mark, thank you. >> can i add onebe thing? >> megyn: go ahead, mark. quickly. coming up against a hard break. >> section 16, the f.b.i. agent talked about identifying the brothers as the suspects in the bombing.

in the next paragraph they release the photos. >> there must be a mistake. they needed our help to identify them. >> it probably is. i hope is it. >> megyn: got to run. coming up against a hard break. up next, the awful video from california and whether the mother and father have a lawsuit as they say they are about to sue in the wake of what happened to them and their baby. getting ripped out of their arms in their own home.

♪ >> megyn: the california parents are reunited with their 5-month-old son sammy. but they say their battle with child protective services is far from over. sammy was taken away from them by police. that happened after the parents told the doctor in the hospital they wanted a second opinion on whether sammy needed surgery and left the hospital against medical advice. the police showed up the next day. and here is what happened. >> hold on. you want to take away my baby?

>> megyn: now the parents are getting ready to sue. joining me now former prosecutor and defense attorney. faith jenkins, former prosecutor and dr. marc seeing with the medical "a" team. they're getting ready to sue. if i was that mother i'd sue them for all they were worth.

>> i would help them pro bono. i'm outraged by the video. but some of the facts that weren't discussed are compelling. they su a nurse in the i.c.u. give the baby antibiotics and doctor told the nurse not to give them antibiotics so they had ever reason to question the hospital. any reasonable parent could have taken them for a second opinion. cops got there and the doctors say the baby is fine. nevertheless, they come the next day. this is outrageous. >> they didn't take the baby out of the first hospital an bring him home and ignore the condition. they took him to another hospital where a doctor gave them a note saying they are good parents and the child is fine. pursue the care. next day, pursuant to that doctor's blessing the cops showed up and took him. faith? >> doctors are mandated reporters when they see there may be an issue about child's care. it's not what they did but how they did it. they removed the 5-month-old baby from care. this baby probably had tubes, heart monitor hooked up to him. they took the baby on their own without waiting for the hospital's approval to perhaps

see if he could be safely transferred to another hospital. took measures in their own hands. that is the problem. >> dr. seigel your thoughts? >> faith makes a great point. they are known for pediatric heart surgery and first in the region and top in the region. thi >> megyn: this couple didn't think they were getting adequate care. >> they may have been misinform but the issue is how stable the baby was. flu kills infants. if that was influenza and if this baby had ventricular defect, if the baby was in heart failure, the baby could have beenbe unstable and the hospital has an obligation to not let a baby like that out of its hands. >> megyn: marc, the parents have an obligation when they see a nurse giving medication to baby, a nurse was, according to the parents and lawyers she shouldn't be giving him. >> i agree. the zero tolerance mentality really means no common sense when you have a second

hospital, doctors, who told police when they showed up that the baby was fine. stepped over the line. >> megyn: much more to discuss. many more points we have to get in tafter the break. kevin. to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. that was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again, and now i gotta take more pills. ♪ yup another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] this may, buy aleve and help those in need.

>> megyn: the lawyer for the parents toll me that everybody is exposed here. sounds like he is going after cops, division of child services and the first hospital. who is the culprit? >> i have a problem with child protective services. they knew the second hospital, the doctors there said there's no safety concern for the child. that information was known. the problem is, suing government entity is not easy. if it was, they would all be bankrupt. >> faith, hate to come down too hard on the cops and cps who is assume were acting in good faith. but someone should be hell

accountable. >> when medical issues are involved, it raises the stake. child protective services have to investigate this, and when they get a call from the first hospital and the doctor tells them, this child should not have been released, this child needs to be in care and needs heart surgery, and i have to investigate that, and perhaps take that child away to make sure the child is getting the medical care he or she needs. >> megyn: let me go back to mark. your thoughts? >> she was telling them, there's a second doctor. so they could have said, we're not going to take your child away. let's do some followup investigation. instead, we're here, taking the child. >> doctor, if your child is sick in the hospital and she says she witnessed a nurse give the baby the antibiotic, and it was around that point the mother said, i'm not feeling that good about the hospital. that's the mother's story.

what do you do if you want your child out, you want a second opinion, it in hospital is saying the child is not fit to lead. >> i agree with mark about child protective child protect child protective services, and the family no matter how to they feel badly they're not in the position to make medical judgments. >> we'll be right back.

>> megyn: two final thoughts on google glass. number one, still some kinks to be worked out. what did i say, how do you say hot dog in german, and we put up a quote with a naughty word. and number two i end the show with this. -- i rest my case. thanks for watching everybody. i'm megyn kelly. >> shepard: you're out of your mind. >> megyn: i know, and the google glass knows it. >> shepard: i want that. i want to steal jeremy's. >> if i get them, this is how i will wear them from now on. >> shepard: instead of like this, which is how we do now, looking down at our machines. news begin anew on "studio b." a 65-year-old american woman now on theaism fbi wanted list as some of the world's most dangerous terrorists,