call. thank you for being with us tonight we'll see you again tomorrow night. make sure you go to gretawire.com and let us know what you thought about tonight's show. good night from washington. >> yes, demand it. this is a tokes news alert. -- a fox news alert. a verdict has been reached in the trial of dr. kermit gosnell. he is accused of killing a patient and four babies born alive. the jury found him guilty of three counts of first degree murder. kimberly is outside the courtroom in philadelphia and joins us now. kimberly? >> hi, eric. hi, everybody. justice delayed was not justice denied. a jury of his peers found gosnell guilty of first degree murder charges of infanticide. there were 211 counts of failing to notify the 24-hour time frame and council before an abortion is performed.

he was found guilty of 16 counts of a felony of performing abortion after the 24-week legal time line for abortions in the state of pennsylvania. this jury took their time going through the charges of the i will luminous number of pages and they did their job. i saw him laughing cavalier chatting and making jokes during the course of the trial. he was not laughing any longer because they have done this job going through difficult evidence . the jury was going to get a break which is unusual in death penalty cases. during this phase they want to find a number of things and there will have to be a unanimous verdict. the decision on the three qualifying charges, does he deserve the death penalty or should he sit behind bars?

life without possibility of parole. the man's life hangs in the balance. the jury will consider whether or not he is guilty of committing a felony during the commission of these homicides. there are a number of factors that would qualify. the fact that he performed them outside the legal guidelines of past 24 weeks in the state of pennsylvania. that should be easy to determine. and the heinous nature of these charges will be taken into consideration, having tried these cases and put them before juries they have more than enough to work with. i think the fact they were able to find him guilty on those three counts out of the four tells me kermit gosnell will be getting the death penalty from this jury. >> we have to say thank you very much. kimberly will be back later this hour. first, another week and another obama scandal.

president obama took to the podium today to confront two pressing scandals threatening the very credibility of his administrati. benghazi and the irs targeting the president's political enemies. on friday abc uncovered bombshell evidence that team obama was covering up evidence evidence -- information in the benghazi terror attacks that left four americans dead. the other problematic story is about the irs. we learned about an effort to target and even harass conservative groups for being conservative. let's start with benghazi and here is what the president claims he said about the attack. >> the day after it happened i acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism. what i pledged to the american people was we would find out what happened, we would make sure it did not happen again and we would make sure we held accountable those who perpetrated this terrible crime.

>> mr. president, you didn't call it terror from the get go. remember when you said this? we do. >> here is what happened. you had a video released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is extremely offensive video directed at mohamed and islam. we had nothing to do with the video. we find it uh ifen sigh. offensive. it is not representative of america's views. >> i heard hillary clinton say it is an act of terrorism. what do you say? >> we are still doing an investigation. >> look at those dates, september 18th, september 25th, september 26th. this is after he claims he knew. >> i know the math is hard, but those numbers for me, those numbers don't add up. they haven't from the beginning. i am really surprised at the press conference today because it continues to pick up

steam. you had to witness the career civil servants last week and you have documents. there are two basic questions on this. one is the stand down order. was it given and who gave it? and the second one is -- was the question of not just the talking points, but the whole -- the deleting of the truth and replacing it with a lie told over and over again. >> you know what is strange, i don't know if you watched the press conference, but earlier he said right away i called it terror. and then later in the same rant he didn't even stop. this is the same paragraph. he says no about three or four days after susan rice went on the talk shows i realized it wasn't the video to blame. are we that foolish to believe this? >> he thinks he is the president in the 1920s. he forgets there are cameras and recordings. we have him on tape and we have his mouth piece, jay carney, saying the same thing. and this is a president who

spent $80,000 on ads in pakistan apologizing on behalf of the united states for that video. so if it was terrorism then that's a confusing thing and a waste of money. also, eric, he was misleading about two other things. one he said the congressional committee found no wrong doing. that's not true. those congressional committees found there was improper drafting and handling of the talking point. he is saying the opposite of the truth. he says there was that review board with pickerring and mull lynn. he said they investigated it, it is over, no big deal, but they were on the sunday shows. it was narrow in scope and it didn't focus on the talking points, only the security. and it didn't interview hillary clinton. >> no other person on the ground had the most information and the eyewitness accounts, they don't even ask them that. i think that administrative review board thing is going to be set aside as inoperable.

>> flawless. it is filled with flaw. >> at one point president obama said there is no there there. >> and that's an old line used to describe oakland. he needs new writers which brings up another point. it didn't feel like a press conference. it felt like another "saturday night live" skit. the fact that he brazenly doubled down on this idea. i mean me is the cockiest fail this of snooki. he has people there to protect him. that's why now his credibility is not just on the rocks, it is resting comfortably at the bottom of the ocean. >> what about jay carney? he had to go back out and repeat the same -- honestly they are lies.

>> the cia came in with their talking points and they initially said it was an act of terror. i believe they identified the groups. the state department didn't want that. cheryl mills didn't want that. when you have the disputes between agency itself goes to the national security council. they settled those disputes at the white house and they agree on an administration. somewhere in that process cheryl mills told hicks that she did not want to see those talking points put in, the cia talking points in. somewhere this got changed. i have never seen a situation where the secretary of state of the president approved talking points. two days later you have susan rice going on these talk shows and still talking about a video which has been pretty

much de bunked. that and the question of who -- >> how about president obama? we rolled three sound bytes after susan rice went on the talk shows that you mentioned were wrong. president obama still repeating those talking points. >> he said he was using his initial intelligence brief. wait a second. whether the president was involved in that process between then and the times he said those things, i can't tell you, i don't think anybody can tell us. >> he said he called it terror from the get go. >> either somebody gave him that information orie peteed that information. >> or maybe the get go was a bar. >> can i say something in agreement with bob? the white house cannot just put this off on the state department . if there is an inner agency dispute between the cia department of defense and the

office, the state, there is a coordinating council, the national security council, they are the ones who figure out how to deal with the dispute. remember though that there is another thread of this sweater that needs to be pulled. that is what is happening at the same time with general petraeus? he is at the cia and he knows at any minute the revelation about his affair with paula what's her name is going to be revealed. his family is going to be embarrassed and destroyed and he will have to repair that. his career in government is about to be destroyed. his reputation is going away, and they contact him and in the article that steven hayes reports, petraeus says, well that's not what i sent over. that's not what i would say. it is up to them. and he throws up his hands. >> there is still the issue remaining that somebody, somewhere ordered the stand down. i have not yet heard an answer that is satisfactory.

we had the head of the military say he was directed to do that and send it to hicks. we don't know who directed him to do that. >> why don't we? one of the reasons we probably don't, the review board assessment never asked hillary clinton and never asked her number two in charge and number three in charge and if i am not mistaken never asked hicks what he knows. >> the review board's charge was much more narrow than that. it should have been broader. >> and who appointed the review board? you expect hillary clinton to investigate herself in a fair manor? let's assume the president didn't know. either the president is one of two things. he did a bad thing and tried to cover up terrorism to protect his political duff or he is a very, very bad manager. if he is a bad manager why haven't heads rolled? why isn't he more furious? why didn't he take

responsibility? and we know based on e-mails that his speech writer addressed victoria newland's concerns. he said i have concerns. this will be resolved. >> one point i have to make, do you not think mitt romney is saying i wish i would have will toed up the benghazi thing and made it into a bigger issue? >> i contend he was caught flat footed. you say it was by design and i say it was flat footed. president obama also addressed the growing irs scandal. listen to the commander-in-chief unaware they are targeting the conservative groups. >> i first learned about it from the same reports most people learned about this. i think it was a friday. if in fact the irs personnel engaged in the kind of practices that had been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that is outrageous. >> if, sir, they admitted to

it you heard it on the news on friday and i have to ask the question who the hell is running the country this. >> it is valerie jaret which is why you don't see her anywhere. amilia earhart didn't disappear this quickly. and note to the press, if you are watching "law and order" that's probably a clue. i will talk about it in my monologue, but has a tea party ever been vindicated? here is a group that is critical of the debt being targeted by the debt collector. you can't get anymore outrageous than that. i think president obama is going to say he is just as outrageous outrageous -- he is as outraged as anyone else, then he should fire himself. >> but he has done it so many days later. this is what i couldn't understand. usually you do a friday night story because you can't them to die over the weekend. they grow over the weekend. except for jay carney's press conference you don't have any

administration, outrage or control of the situation until president obama says he learns it from the news. well, there is a white house liaison at the treasury department at every cabinet. there is a person whose job is to make sure they are coordinating with the white house. so either that person didn't know or they didn't tell the white house or that information doesn't get to the president. it does make you wonder does he want to know anything? are they afraid to tell him something? >> did he know or bad manager? >> we have to go. we will talk about this more. greg has more thoughts. don't go away. we have a lot to get to. more on the guilty verdict of abortion dr. kermit gosnell. kimberly will explain what is next for the convicted murder. and the mother of one of the benghazi victims has a message for hillary clinton. you will hear from he

so it turns out the butt of every liberal's joke and the target of every anchor's ire, the tea party, was right. they were not only persecuted by the media, but the media darling. how funny those screaming witch hunt was exercising their own. the real fun is watching those in the media circle their prompters. the usual suspects "sc -- snl" colbert i wonder how they will do this one. it is time for the pros to get involved. like the years prior to an intervention we have watched the devil destruction up close. it is time to bypass the enabling media and get one bough ma some help. get obama some help. the wheels are coming off. remember when i asked who

pushed the video? itit is a leader who knows and why drop the irs receive lyings -- revelation. it is an old ruse if there is a crime scene in the living room, but he cannot be adored by the media. they mock the victims incompetence reins. it is the press. they need impeachment. and they will just find jobs at obama's white house. that at least when they lie they will be right there in their loving, loving arms. bob, this has got to be incredibly mind blowing for you. >> it is. let me tell you why. having been the subject of my group in the 70s being targeted by the nixon white house, the internal revenue service for this same thing it was outrageous and frightening then and outrageous and

frightening now. keep this in mind, these allegations surfaced in 2010 by the tea party groups. this is not new information. the thing that disturbs me is ms. lerner at the treasury department, these are tax exempt organizations and there were a lot of questions about whether they were going over the line and using their status to get involved in the political campaign. that not with standing she said she didn't know anything about it until she read about it in the press. she was briefed in 2011. i don't think for a minute the president had anything to do with it. >> do you believe it was a local flack? >> i don't think a local flack would do that on his own. then again, joe klein makes the limp argument that everybody does this. but he does say more and more it x loo like the obama administration is incapable of running the government at the same time they are trying to expand it. i will say this confirms every

suspicion of conservatives. greg you said the tea party is vindicated and before the tea party is vindicated. if you would have said something like this they would have called you wacko and crazy. >> i am getting out my tin foil hat. >> the obama administration has declared war on anyone who disagrees with them. conservatives are the enemy and not a jobless economy and struggling middle class. they are willing to use agencies, the thugry to perpetrate war on conservatives. >> you say they are willing to use it. >> i am making an early leap. i made the early leap in fast and furious and i was right. i made the early leap in benghazi. >> who will win the preakness then? >> i am not sure.

>> look, the idea -- first of all, the decisions are to send cinncinati out. do i find it surprising somebody in politics said, look, these things are causing us a lot of troubles. >> who? >> i don't know. but your assumption that this is something directed from the white house. >> and your assumption -- >> i don't have any evidence to indicate that and until i do i think you are grasping at straws. >> when you look at the media aren't they becoming the disappointed parents sitting in the awed yensz, in the auditorium as their precious snowflake fails? >> they don't even realize how they are protecting him. let me give you an example. epa is responsible for lots of different things. they are rule makings they have to do. i remember mountain top mining. epa makes a decision. the headline in the washington

post and everywhere else, the ap was not epa makes decision. bush administration and white house makes decision. when it comes to president obama it is like he is totally ab so -- absolved from running the government. they are very careful to write the irs and it has nothing to do with the white house is accused of. from a pure media perspective you have to work harder. i recommend they should not underestimate the depth of anger and disgust across the board about this. in their hopes of winning the 2014 house back from the republicans are over. >> i was going to say the political point is enormous. they are suspicious of obama's big government about to take over immigration, this is going to do it. don't blow it. >> i am waiting for the e-mail that surfaces that comes from the white house from somebody

in that area to the irs saying you know that scandal, break it now. >> coming up, a verdict reached this afternoon in the trial of dr. kermit gosnell. kimberly is live outside the philadelphia courthouse with the details. first, more on president obama's remarks on benghazi and the impact the scandal could have on hillary clinton if she once in 2016. ♪

the boys used double miles from their capital one venture card to fly home for the big family reunion. you must be garth's father? hello. mother. mother! traveling is easy with the venture card because you can fly airline anytime. two words. double miles! this guy can act. wanna play dodge rock? oh, you guys! and with double miles you can actuay use, you never miss the fun. beard growing conte and go! ♪ win! what's in your wallet?

>> all right, well koll back to "the five." here is the thing, benghazi is talking a lot about it and people cannot help themselves to talk about the possible fallout from the politics of it. everyone is wanting to know will this hurt former secretary of state hillary

clinton if she then decides to run for president in 2016. two senators, senator income cane and senator feinstein were on the sunday shows yesterday and here is what they had to say. >> she had to be in the loop someway. i call it a cover up. i would call it a cover up in the extent that there was willful removal of information that was obvious. >> when hillary clinton's name is mentioned 32 times in a hearing, the point of the hearing is to discredit the secretary of state who has very high popularity and may well be a candidate for president. >> she is the most popular politician in america over president obama. but andrea, having been at the helm of the state department and having said she took full responsibility and have repeated thicks we now know not to be true -- things we now know not to be true is it too early to wonder if this will hurt her in 2016? >> i don't think so. bad manager or bad person who

turns a blind eye or both? in this case we know hillary clinton was told that it was a terrorist attack. if i am the head of the state department, dana, i will be cracking heads together like mo. she has not done that. i think republicans should be careful with overreaching on her. she has overcome so many scandals, and it has only made her more powerful. i think they have to be careful not to let her play victim because when she plays victim she often wins. there will be so many democrats running against her and their staff that i think they will do it on their own. i think we need to be careful how far we go. >> do you think there is more to come out on benghazi? >> there is more. but we are the only ones who will press the issue until we get answers. owe -- obama can deal with

some of it because he is not up for any re-election anytime soon. who ordered the stand down? we need a name and find out who told that person to stay stand down when there were seven hours between the beginning of the attack and the final attack that may have killed -- the ones that may have resulted in the death of two more american service people. seven hours in between and somebody said don't go there. how do we know there wasn't more and we could have had assets there. we need to find out who that is and get him or her in front of a congressional panel or senate panel. >> how early is it too early to talk about 2016? if you are going to run when is the time when you would make that decision? >> not for her, but you have to be very careful. they ran this ad attacking clinton which was a stupid thing to do. she is a professional when it comes to dealing with conflicts like this. going back to white water and she survived it.

she will not only survive, but grow. this will have zero impact. she will have the nomination and beat any republican. >> that's interesting. when she was secretary of state she was popular. but if she was running for president you are not running as secretary of state. you are running on your past policy. >> she challenge that she is the most pop are la. she is probably one of the most unlikeable based on her performance in that hearing. it cemented how unlikeable she is. but she is like ms. pac man. she gobbles up scandals that make her descronger and stronger -- stronger and stronger. and dianne feinstein is right. covering up a horrible misjudgment makes you definitely eligible for the president that she can seek office and that is amazing. >> feinstein is right.

using her as a point32 times they are making it a political issue. >> republicans can leave it to the democrats. there are plenty of democrats who don't want her to run. >> all you have to do is raise enough doubt whether or not she should be president. >> i recommend eric bolling. before we talk about his presidential run in the e block we have to do the d block and that is the gonell verdict. kimberly is there and will explain what is next for the doctor. don't go away. ♪

this is a fox news alert. philadelphia doctor kermit gosnell found guilty on three counts of murder. let's go to the courthouse where kimberly is standing by. kg? >> hi, andrea. hi, everybody. dr. gosnell faced 258 counts and found guilty of 238 counts. in fact, there has been one update. tuesday the sentencing phase is going to begin. they moved it back one day. this is where the court is going to hear the factors of aggravation and mitigation. the only factor of mitigation for dr. gosnell is he has no prior criminal record. the fact is the aggravations are numerous. the defense attorney, mr. mr. mcmann was surprised and so was the defendant. you qoo see the surprise on his -- you could see the surprise on his face. that's what observers said when the verdict came in. mcmann thought they had a strong case because they felt

the medical evidence didn't rise to that degree of medical certainty to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. so quite surprising that the jury found him guilty on those charges. >> it is a good day whether you are pro life or pro choice you say justice has been served. you said earlier in the hour, you believe that the jury will seek the death penalty, he will get the death penalty. what leads you to believe that? >> the fact they came back guilty on so many charges shows they have the stomach for it. they were able to evaluate this evidence, and there is no doubt from anyone who sat in that courtroom about the heinous, atrocious nature of the crimes committed not only against children, but against women. you cannot turn a blind eye to the evidence. when i saw those pictures blown up in the courtroom of those babies and the graphic detail it shows the jury evaluating this evidence believed the weight of the evidence, the credibility of the eyewitnesses who were present, and if you believe

what they were talking all of the rt facts, they said there is no way they can spare this man's life. keep in mind he is 72 years of age. regardless he will spend the rest of his life in prison. >> kim, something must have changed in pennsylvania since i remember this. i didn't know the juries in pennsylvania made the decision about what the punishment was. don't they make a recommendation to the judge, and then the judge decides? or at i wrong about that? -- am i wrong about that? >> the jury will have to decide a unanimous verdict. all 12 deliberating in the sentencing phase. they will make a recommendation as you stated to the judge, but it is rare that a judge wouldn't uphold the jury's findings. the will of the jury is sack -- sacricent. i think he will follow their recommendation. >> does that mean the judge in the end if they come back unanimous then he will make

the decision about whether this person will go to death or not? >> ultimately the judge will have to enter that sentence in and follow the jury's recommendation. this is not one of those cases -- i had death penalty cases where it was a close call. this is one where the aggravating circumstances are tremendous. keep in mind, bob, the defendant, dr. kermit gosnell, who we did not hear from has the possibility and the defense has not made a decision whether to put their client on the stand. as of today he said they are still figuring that out. if he does expect the 72-year-old doctor to get in front of the jury and beg for life without possibility of parole jie. aggravating factors, fee tale -- fetal pain sadly and are there others beside that. >> reporter: when you think about it, yes. there are aggravating factors such as felonies committed. he was found guilty of 21 of

24 counts. it was of performing late-term abortions. that means under pennsylvania law, post 24 weeks. the heinous nature of the crime, and the fact that these crimes were committed against children under the age of 12 is also statutory in the state of pennsylvania. they have quite a few things to substantiate their recommendation and their findings for this judge to uphold their verdict. >> kimberly, this is dana. i heard there were reports as the verdict was being read the prosecutor was in tears. have you learned anything about that? >> yes. this was very emotional for the prosecutor. they had a tremendous amount of work and a very difficult case. i sat in those chairs in the death penalty cases. it takes over your life and you can't help be moved. they worked on this case for years. there was so much at stake. they were hugging and crying and overcome with emotion.

>> in my opinion if this is not a hate crime then hate crimes don't exist. could they argue this is is a hate crime against minority children? >> you make a great point. from a moral and ethical standpoint you would have to hate children to do what you did to these babies. these were not abortions. these were homicides. they were children born alive and murdered at the hands of this man and at his direction. he trained his staff to be murderers. it is unconscionable. you would think it is not on the books, but it should be in a case like this. >> kimberly, i am from pennsylvania and volunteer etd -- volunteered my services for bad people. i would like to make the decision on how to treat him if the jury wants. don't go away. stay with us. we so...how'd it go?

well, dad, i spent my childhood living with monks learning the art of dealmaking. you've mastered monkey-style kung fu? no. priceline is different now. you don't even have to bid. master hahn taught you all that? oh, and he says to say (translated from cantonese) "you still owe him five bucks." your accent needs a little work.

(hocoming!ing) mom, come on. mom! because we know that this is the season that inspires. (sigh) from dressers to duvets, it's time to refresh with ikea.

this is a fox news alert. back now to the verdict in the trial we have been watching for quite some time, the trial of dr. kermit gosnell. kimberly is with us. kim, do you think this reignites the issue of right to life versus abortion as a public policy issue? >> bob, great question. it puts a spotlight on it and brings it to the forefront of

discussion and the media outlets that were brave enough to cover it like fox news has been. you listen to this and what happened to these babies and not rethink abortion and choice and all of it. >> what do you think? >> i think it does. i think there was a reporter who was pro choice who switched to pro life when he heard the details of this. i want to ask kimberly, the media presence there, is it what you expected? early on you were the first to be there of the first to be there, and you have been there throughout. have they caught on this is a big story? >> it was remarkable. when i went there we were one of the few people in the courtroom and then the courtroom started to fill as the interest in the case grew. the concern and the compassion. since you made the point whether this rekindles the debate. the sides have been even in the polls.

now it is 50/50, do you think this is one of those things that will put it to another public debate? >> if science continues town form us so we can make better policy decisions and law, will this case have any impact as they heard the evidence, did the science change to help the other cases out there or possibly any legislation that could be introduced as a result? >> yes, dana. you know there is some disparity about viability and the dates of when abortions are illegal. in pennsylvania it is 24 weeks. other states it is 20 weeks. when you listen to scientific evidence and the testimony and how they are able to determine viability and breathing of babies, that tells you that it is perhaps much earlier than doctors initially thought. you have seen it go in that direction. they are making third term abortion illegal and we are definitely going more toward preserving the caping tau tee of life -- the sank tau --

sanctaty of life. >> i always like to look at how the media treats a story that makes them really, really uncomfortable. there is a paper of note. when talking about the babies it calls them fetuses removed from their moms. technically we are all that. >> not only are you a pennsylvania an, but in pennsylvania it has always been a biggish you a, right to life versus abortion. will it go countrywide? >> i think it will. pennsylvania as you mentioned even the democrats are often pro life. senator casey is pro life. there have been many before and it is tough to get elected without being pro life. why is a baby killed outside the room murder and one inside the womb not? planned parenthood made a statement saying they need mr laws on the books -- they need more laws on the books. they are working, but we also

have to be vigilant including planned parenthood and calling out murderers like kermit gosnell. >> kimberly, i have to ask you -- >> fine, great po nie t. planned parenthood mentioned the women and they didn't mention the children murdered. that says it all. they need to be more open minded about the children and the lives being lost. they are alive inside and come out breathing. we heard of a baby on the table for 20 minutes. things have to change. >> thanks. you have done a terrific job carrying almost by yourself. 1.

>> eric: time for one more thing and andrea is kicking it off. >> andrea: four minutes from now see bret baier "special report." he elm seed the fifth

annual gala. they received $2 million on saturday. the most they have ever raised before in their five years. now this is very personal for bret. he has a 5-year-old son that had two open heart surgeries his name is paul and seven appearingio plays at children medical center. paul is doing great and bret is very grateful. that's such a great evening. >> eric: dana, you are up. deign date of birth news story the hits keep coming at the white house. you never attack an organization that buys ink by barrelful? >> greg: never heard that. >> dana: justice department two months of reporters and editors for the associated press blah blah blah. looks like righted to a terrorism investigation. the justice department did not comment. i will make one more point about that. government obtains records in probe. if this was the bush administration, it would say bush administration, bush white house obtains.

we will see how this story unfolds. this could be a big one. >> eric: that will be a huge one. i predict we cover that tomorrow. >> when it rains, it pours. >> greg: often when i'm walking down the street people will come and you say. >> dana: how is dana? >> greg: she is unconscious as usual. but they often ask me greg, where can i read your writing? where can i find your monologue? >> dana: nobody asks me that. >> greg: breitbart.com for pop culture and politics. i will be writing there again this week a couple columns a month. >> dana: do you need any ideas? i think i have a dog named jasper. >> greg: they want more dogs. >> bob: i want to congratulate rob lowe. >> kimberly: if i had a nickel for every time i heard that. >> bob: 23 years of sobriety. i know how tough that is.

more people should. you pointed out not ready to go there. you went and you were ready 23 years congratulations. >> he is cute. >> eric: yesterday national police week law enforcement officers who gave the ultimate sacrifice. 1 one law enforcement officer dies. 127 officers died and 18 canines. this is a satout to all law enforcement officers and their families who have given the ultimate sacrifice of doing god's work. a couple more minutes. just randomly writing at breitbart? >> greg: whenever i feel like it. >> bob: he has a new book out. we will start talking about that. that will be for a year. >> dana: what is first topic going to be? >> greg: writing about elvis presley. >> bob: he is still in the

building. >> eric: we will leave it there dana, this is a huge story. we will leave it there. >> dana: elvis story. >> eric: a.p. story. welcome to "red eye." it is like walk the line, if i walk you mean bill did. let's go to tv's andy levy for a pre game report. what is coming up on tonight's show? >> did the irs single out tea party and other groups for extra scrutiny? yes, yes they did. they admitted it, so i can't do the whole some say and others say thing here. and why are teen girls swarming the internet in support of alleged boston marathon bomber dzhokhar tsarnaev? some say it is because they are dumb and others say they are really dumb. and what happens when we send bill schulz to time square to ask about sexting? hopefully they will give him great answers. >> really? >> no, hopefully they are so