glass to cover windows and fighter jets to protect the president, joe biden gets a pair of running shoes and a can of pepper spray. you're on your own. >> greta: g why he says what mr. snowden is going through is because of what he went through. i am andrea tan tar as, with bob beckel, dana perino, greg gutfeld, eric bolling. this is "the five." the obama administration kicks into overdrive to quiet the outcry over its spying agenda. in an interview that aired last night, the president broke his silence of more than a week to discuss the controversy. here he is defending the secret surveillance program. >> if you are a u.s. person, the nsa cannot listen to your telephone calls unless they, and usually it wouldn't be they, it would be the fbi, go to a court

and obtain a warrant and seek probable cause, the same way it has always been. nsa is not listening to your phone calls, it is not targeting your e-mails unless it is getting an individualized court order. >> and his nsa director, keith alexander made another appearance on the hill today to double down. >> in recent years these programs together with other intelligence has protected the u.s. and our allies from terrorist threats across the globe, to include helping prevent the potential terrorist events over 50 times since 9/11. these programs are critical to the intelligence community's ability to protect our nation and our allies' security. they assist the intelligence community efforts to connect the dots. >> before we go into his testimony on the hill, eric, i want to ask you about what obama had to say to charlie rose in this interview. he seems to have a lot of faith

in the fisa court. a quick search, fisa court gets about 34,000 requests. how tough to get a warrant? only 11 times they declined warrants. it is basically a rubber stamp. do you feel safe? >> look, let's clear something up. there's no one who's saying the nsa shouldn't be allowed to do what they're doing, that's not the question. the question is have they turned the fisa court into overreach, into what you say is a rubber stamp, what sounds to me like an analyst at the nsa says i have a hunch, give me a warrant to look and find out what's going on. number one, you have to trust what they're doing, implicitly i don't trust what they're doing. number two, we have an fbi not director but agent, an analyst, w said that they didn't need a warrant to go and listen in on some conversations, if they had reasonable suspicion. my problem is can you blanket and this really arose from them blanketing the whole verizon

network, including innocent people and americans who weren't contacting people overseas, whether it is reasonable suspicion to go and get that information and then the other one, what are they going to do with it now. >> doesn't it come down to trust, greg? look, in the past, people in washington, d.c. used information to go after their enemies, look at j. edgar hoover. some people, myself included are okay with moderate surveillance if it is used to get the bad guys and if it is not used against enemies and they can protect it. >> like what i said before, don't throw out the spying with the spy water. if the programs are valuable, you don't destroy them because there are abuses or potential for abuses. it goes back to trust. there are three people involved right now in this question of trust. there is president obama who spoke yesterday, and i don't think was very convincing. to me, he said everything right, but it doesn't matter any more

because of everything that's happened with benghazi, with the irs, with doj. when you hear president obama, it is like that's exactly what i would say, but it is not helping. then you've got snowden. he is the point of the arrow, the people that are against the war on terror. if you read his own words, he's coming from doesn't like the war on terror. he said himself he believes the american police kills more people than terrorists. so we actually believe that we are worse, our law enforcement is worse than terrorists. in fact, there are many police officers who died on 9/11 and to me it is incredibly insulting he would say that. the idea that somehow he raises awareness about security, well, i could go out and drunk drive now to raise awareness for drunk driving. you don't raise questions on security by leaking secrets to a foreign power. so that leaves one person left to trust. general alexander, finally an intel meeting talks about things

that we're preventing. we don't know if there were 50 or not. the fact is i look at somebody like that, i think you know what, in this world in which we can't trust anybody, i kind of trust that guy, and i think he's the guy that can do this for me, and i do believe that he can do it, and i do believe there are abuses. however, you know, maybe there's a better way to address this stuff that we don't know about. the irony of this all, the snowden defense. snowden says more people fall in their bathtub than get killed by terrorism. that's a salute to anti-terrorism work, because we stop terror, not because more people fall in bath tubs. >> he also did it in china, releasing more information, making them seem like they're victims, you go what side are you on. i want to ask about the way president obama decided to defend or rebut this, when he said this is transparent,

transparent, transparent. he came out to charlie rose and said in an interview, not a national press conference, he wants to have an advisory board to look this over and defended this court. what do you think of the way he did it? >> i think it is too little, too late. i agree with what president obama is doing. nine days to wait to respond to something that basically has resulted in addition to the benghazi, irs piece, the cnn poll about his trust numbers, the number of people that trust him slid 8 percentage points in a month. nine days, they waited too long, sentiment already set in an advisory board doesn't sound like it will cut it, protecting the country, convincing people this program is necessary is not the best way to do it. >> an advisory board, bob, that he appoints, he is in charge of it. not exactly a check and balance to put everyone's minds at ease.

let's get to the testimony today on capitol hill. what did you think about alexander saying that this information had foiled upwards of 50 terror plots? >> i listened to a lot of testimony, actually on this case, listened from beginning to end, i felt no more comfortable at the end than at the beginning. what he is basically saying is we need to connect the dots. problem is to get the dots, they're going through everybody's records looking for the connection, algorithms on computers that say this fits a certain profile. i want to know what it was that before we had this program, we were connecting the dots and thwarting activity, and for some reason they had to expand it to all americans. it was a violation of fourth amendment before, it is a violation of fourth amendment now, they ought to get out of my mailbox. i have done mega trends for years in politics, this goes way too far. >> meta data goes too far, what alexander says a phone call,

dialed from, to, duration, time of day it occurred. i am reasonably certain there's an ability to get more information than just a phone call, than just basic details about a phone call. i am reasonably certain there's a way, and they may have already done this, to have access to what the phone call and e-mails -- we know they have access to the e-mails, we absolutely know that. individual companies, google, facebook, yahoo! keep the meat of the e-mails. when the government gets it, they have your e-mails. what are they doing with it. they say they're only going after foreign intelligence and terrorists and treason issues. the irs wasn't going to do wh they have done either. >> how do you think eliot spitzer was ensnared? there are people that polled, yes, we listened phone calls, didn't have a warrant, it is ripe for abuse.

>> that was the question you asked me earlier. something is ripe for abuse, you try to create a way to prevent the abuse from happening, but you don't dismantle something that could possibly save lives. we have to separate the two programs out. phone records, we know that exists, reported by usa today, then p.r.i.s.m. spying on foreigners, not a problem with the fourth amendment. like i say, it is the fourth amendment, not the fourth yemendment. they do it to us. that's why i believe he is a traitor. he could go after the chinese, not us, show us how bad it is. the bigger existential threat is radical islam. our disarray among the right and left is giving them the biggest chuckle. and it gives them a first class ticket to the apocalypse as we sit there and consider dismantling something that could save our lives. i understand the trust, but we have to do something to solve this.

>> we had a discussion about this earlier, great start in gaining the trust of the government gaining the trust of us would be where they make a promise if some of this data they weren't supposed to be leaking or weren't supposed to be using the wrong way is used the wrong way or leaked, they will prosecute. we're going to go after you, you can't leak data and use it in a way -- >> it is a great idea, but do you trust them to actually go after the culprit that did it? this is an administration who has no problem leaking when it is convenient for them to do the leaking. they selectively prosecute. nobody held accountable on any scandal. why would i believe eric holder will hold somebody responsible for targeting or misusing data, i just don't. >> in the 1970s i was in front of fisa court three times. in every case they had specific targeted people they wanted to go after, fisa did rubber stamp, no question about it, very few

questions were asked. three different occasions having to do with panama and two other issues, i was sitting there because i had to testify on something, and they are just not -- there's nothing that's necessary about -- you call it megadata, the idea that you have to go through all this stuff to find something you should have intelligence on a particular person. >> dana, is it silly if you look at the plots they claim they foiled. >> claimed is the word. >> exactly, i agree. >> i don't understand -- >> the number is 50. do you believe they have foiled these plots? >> yes. >> you look at the plots they foiled, there's no greeks on there, no italians, no swedes, and investors daily said they're not monitoring mosques. what are we doing with all of the data if we don't go after the right people. >> i believe general alexander. i think on the advisory board piece, there's one that exists, it is called united states congress. all the members of congress that didn't go to the briefing the

other day because they were too busy, not one that went into the briefing has come out, said holy cow, your fourth amendment rights have been totally -- that's not happened by the people that have been informed about it. i believe -- i have no reason to believe they would lie that there were 50 plots. you may say that was an easy one, why did you miss all the other ones. the terrorists, can you imagine they're sitting back there watching us have this institution discussion, and in china, i bet you money they're taking snowden's information and feeding it through state television in china to say can you believe the united states of america spies on its own citizens? that's the kind of propaganda they're going to push out there and in russia. so it usurps the whole point of the snowden piece and everybody saying he is a hero. >> released at a time when the chinese people were distrustful because of what was going on with chinese hacking. it is a little too convenient. >> the question is what was in place before p.r.i.s.m. and before the patriot act, could it

have done and foiled these plots. that's something i want to hear specifically why it didn't. >> irregardless, not a word, regardless of what happened in the past, going forward, dana, you're right, there's an advisory board, congress. when congress can't put a perp in a walk and put him behind jails for violating it, they need another advisory board. >> they don't even go to the briefing to find out. >> find out how many irs agents go to jail. there's another advisory board, the media. if we are shining a light on it and getting president obama or eric holder saying we will prosecute if you leak. >> one journalist can make a huge difference. >> none of these scandals were broke by journalists, this he were broke by snowden and irs, lois lerner when she decided to leak herself and set up questions. the media isn't the one breaking the scandals. coming up, the irs admits to

overseeing of the tea party from the nation's capital. guess the rogue agent story won't hold up much longer. details next on "the five." with the spark miles card from capital one, bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve limited reward here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button?

so some time ago we used to be the chum and the irs were the sharks. the chum is circling the great whites, and those fish are scared. it would be stupid to stop now.

turns out that irs big wigs had a pow wow over handling of the tea party. she says the commish came up with a way. it was an easy way to reference the topic, like calling a soda coke or calling an academic a commie pinko. did that for you, bob. why is it when the tea party is targeted, it is not personal. when they say it is not personal you can be damn sure it is. a ruling class discussing how they can screw you hidden behind the myth of the low level hack. under the obama administration, there is no low level hack, rather just a drone targeting you for punishment, per approval from the top. low level is high level in cheaper shoes and a squad car. that's why the nsa story is a

gift from heaven to obama, with the left and right in a cloud of confusion, the irs has been obscured. when mommy and daddy fight, it allows the kid to steal from the liquor cabinet, i know, which is what the irs is doing and will keep doing until we ground them for good. andrea, what's your take on the latest news, d.c. involved in the scandal would you say? >> absolutely, i think we have known it for a long time, it is another confirmation it came from d.c. think about her excuse, tea party groups, i thought they meant 501(c)4s. if i said get rid of all of the coca-cola in the green room, does that mean get rid of the pepsi, mountain dew? it is a lame excuse. this holly paz girl is in the administration, on paid leave like lois lerner, there's no accountability. president obama said heads should roll, heads are going to

roll, i am outraged. same with the nsa, let's have a nating any time soon. >> she looks like she just graduated from eighth grade, and the award was going to the irs to get this job. one thing i will say about this, this is a vastly expanded political hack job that has been going on, i will say this for sure, it has been badly handled, somebody we talked to before the show said this is what happens when you put hacks in charge of policy. >> are we supposed to believe that holly paz came up with the idea to target conservative groups? seriously, guys, this feels like to me that this came from the very high levels of the obama administration, probably from the campaign that may have made the jump to the white house, or

during the re-election, this is a great -- they're our enemy, let's target them. they got caught, need a scapegoat. holly paz is a scapegoat. there's no way this young girl told cincinnati to start targeting groups. there she is. that's the face of the irs scandal? come on! she really needs to be the whistleblower now. tell us who told you to take the dive for this. >> what do you think, dana? >> i think i wou comment on another part of this, which is the other revelation, steven miller, remember him, who testified, and lois lerner cooked up the pr idea to have her take a plane in question at a conference to get the news out there. what's strange about this, he went to the white house 131 times or more, one for the easter egg roll, the other 129 times we don't know what he was doing. am i to believe this guy, political appointee with that much access to the white house

didn't coordinate a communication strategy about an inspector general report they thought was so bad, they kept it from president obama? they should be fired for incompetence. >> that gets you promoted. >> can we point something out, the irs, because of what's going with the irs, they lost the trust of the american people and lost all credibility, until they figure out what really happened, we know what happened. all of the nsa things or next scandal next week or the one after that, you have to say don't trust them. >> one night in a meeting to find out who did what, announce it tomorrow. it is not complicated. >> and the president should do that. >> but the person tasked with doing that, you would think, the director of the fbi is supposed to be leading the investigation testified in front of congress i don't know who's leading the investigation. so either the right hand is investigating the left, the problem with that, they claim ignorance every single time. it doesn't get better, and nobody cares in the

administration. no one cares. >> no one goes to jail. >> it is not a complicated deal. >> they get paid vacations. >> there's a story brewing, look at the number of bonuses given to political appointees, those have to be signed off on, that's a story line that's going to come back around to haunt them. >> you may be right. some new votes in the senate on the bill to grant citizenship to millions of illegals, but the speaker of the house threatens to block reform without support from a majority of republicans. more on that when "the five" returns.

♪ today, the senate began voting on a series of amendments to the bipartisan immigration reform bill, but the legislation

could be dead on arrival if it gets to the house. speaker boehner says he will not push it through unless most republicans back it. even trash talked the gang of eight's plan earlier calling it laughable. >> i don't see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn't have a majority support of republicans, and i frankly think the senate bill is weak on border security is weak and the triggers almost laughable. if they're serious about getting an immigration bill finished, i think the president and democrats should reach out to build bipartisan support. >> then leader reid shot back at the house speaker. >> i have talked to four democrats on the gang of eight. i told them concentrate on the

senate. don't at this stage worry about what's going to happen in the house. >> andrea, want to ask you a political, tactical question. should the senate pass a bill that could not pass the house? >> it depends, if you're a republican or a democrat. i think they should because right now in its current form the way the senate bill is looking, it's a mess, and the really good work on it i think is being done in the house. i think john boehner is smart the way he handled it. he isn't pushing his members out without the majority, he knows mid terms are coming out. a lot of the bill turned into a christmas tree. i support and we talked about doing something, the border amendment bill that failed today is not strong enough. a lot of republicans voted against it because they said this is not good enough, the poison pill as you talk about, dana. they said i would rather vote against this that says border security than allow something to go through that might not be as strong, and they have a lot of

work to do in the senate, a lot. >> i want to ask the two of you something, a similar question. is there anything that the senate could do that could convince the right that this is a good bill? >> i think there is, and it would take -- probably not pass the senate, to get the right on board, it would have to be the border has to be secure first. that's the one issue that's dividing now. now, senator marco rubio watched our show last night, called me, said can we talk about this a little. he said i do want to pass some legalization first, pass a bill first, then secure the border later. i said senator, how do you do that, how are you going to secure the border, how do you know it is secure. he had a three part plan that sounded good, but for me i think senator paul is right on the other side saying get the border secure first, then work on the other thing. i am telling you, privatize the

border. >> that's not going to happen. and a deal is in on security defense that's already been cut. they voted it down today, going to get a stronger bill with much more support, and the cbo came out today and said that the bill will save 197 billion over 2014 to 2023. but beyond that, this is a deal that's inevitable. seen these so many times in washington, the train is moving out of the station. boehner is doing what he needs to do. there will be a bill in the house, they'll get to conference, and the republicans are not going to stop a conference bill. >> let me ask greg this. i can guarantee a way for a gop congressman or senator to get front page "the new york times" coverage. >> how? >> attack one another. >> always the best way. the left has been able to skate under the radar with their division. do you think it is hurting the right or the gop, the debate? >> i don't know, we keep being told, you know, it is good policy. don't convince us it is good

policy, convince us it is right. republicans need to form a coherent argument about why the other side's promise of free stuff is enslavement through dependence and that hard work and achievement is why you come to the united states. they have to do that whether they're for immigration or not. i think the 11 million documented workers are heroes because they're raising awareness about our border. >> undocumented. >> undocumented. >> it is a little joke there. >> let's stop calling it -- two things, stop with the gang of eight. there's the gang of four, call it a gaggle, that's a lot of people. don't call it a fence or border, call it a friendship hedge. >> a double fence around san diego that's working, but one of the most important things, what happens if you do do this, what happens if the gang of eight gets it through, house decides to do it, it goes through. you're an illegal currently here. why would you go through the

process of 10 to 15 years before you get citizenship, pay your taxes for 15 years, hope at the end it is still going to be there for you. why wouldn't you just do what you're doing now. >> work illegally. >> i think the level of anxiety for people is too strong. i think there's an economic argument to be made that companies are uncertain about how to handle things, and some companies are accused of abuse, and that could hopefully be taken care of with e-verify. the economic thing isn't being discussed because of the border argument. >> the political thing is weighing over their heads. you heard bob say, republicans don't pass it, they'll use it as a club against them. we're not really having a real policy discussion, we're having a political discussion about what we can do to punish each other, instead of do what's right and smart. >> all things are local and all things are political. >> with those words of wisdom, we're going to be back. there are hidden cameras catching store employees handing

out free government phones to scam artists with your tax dollars. that's up next.

♪ welcome back. remember the woman that coined the term obama phone? a little cooky, lots of fun. >> everybody get that obama phone, keep obama as president, gave us a phone. >> how did he give you a phone? >> you sign up, you on food stamps, social security, you got low income, disability. >> fast forward, let's see how

the money is being spent now. >> getting a phone. >> all you have to do, say you're no longer on that insuran insurance. >> what do you mean you don't judge? you have to judge. that's your job to judge. you're spending our money. therein lies the problem, folks. nobody is judging who gets the stuff, who gets the phone, the food stamps, obama care, gifts freebies. the obama phone lady changed her mind, doesn't support obama any more. maybe she had enough of the wasteful spending. robert beckel, if you want to buy heroin with your free phone, don't judge. what happens when you have a $3

trillion obama care issue. >> i could find a first responder somewhere in america that we endorse and honor in these progra, find somebody cooky. two people out of a large group of people. you put them up as an example that everybody is like this. it is ridiculous. it is selectively picking out people that are a little bit crazy. >> pretty sure i didn't say everyone was going to do it. i am saying you have a $2 billion program for fraud, what happens when you have a trillion dollar program? >> what are you suggesting? >> the obama phone is $2 billion, obama care is a trillion dollar program. >> you suggest 2 billion is being wasted? >> no. that's not what i said. fraught with waste, fraud, abuse. >> that is a great point, what would happen if it is a 1 to 2 trillion dollar program. we don't have to look at hypothetical. look at the stimulus, turtle tunnels, taco bell, studies on

prostitutes and this is how a welfare state works. it comes back to trust. do you trust the government to administer this program, it opens it up to shenanigans, corruption, people in the private sector to end up policing it like this guy who is supposed to be a judge, then gets fired. so it is a mess. >> republican appropriations bills are loaded with that. >> both parties do it, bob, both parties do it. the big spending is the impetus for both. >> i think we're missing the big story. why is the woman with that voice not a major performing star? that is one of the greatest voices i think i've ever heard, and whenever i hear that, it is like amazing to me, she should have a recording contract. stuff that's free you tend to treat with less respect. i know this when i go to a restaurant, all you can eat buffet. i put so much crap on the plate

and then i never finish it. there is a value when you pay for something. i think that's how you see things. i feel bad at times with gotcha things for the clerks, they're there, want to get out of there, they're not making the decisions. it is always good to shine a light on the money that we are spending to remind people this is how government works sometimes. >> dana, this program i think under the bush administration was somewhere around $200 million program, in a few years, gone to a $2 billion program. >> tracks the other welfare and government programs, food stamps probably up the same percentage points. congress is about to vote on the farm bill that includes that money, there's a big fight about it, something worth watching. i feel sorry for the worker. this is a guy that's working, probably making an hourly wage, probably going to school at night, and he is like look, dude, if you want to sell heroin, do what you want to do, here is your stupid phone.

>> a libertarian. >> can i make one point, we don't have on the air because we selectively edited, because it is funny and cool to show against obama. the number of people's lives saved who had the cell phones who had to call 911 to get medical help, probably were a lot of them. >> oh, boy. >> oh boy what? >> like i said, a few years back, $200 million program, now $2 billion. jumbo shrimp, a little pregnant, ahmadinejad is out, and he calls himself a moderate, is that an objectixymoron.

iran has a new president elect, the western media seems optimistic about his future. the times calls him a moderate. "the new york times" called him a pragmatic victor.

according to bloomberg news, reformist. is there such a thing as a modern, pragmatic reformist? compared to ahmadinejad. you could come up with adjectives to describe this guy. in the end, the final decisions are made in iran based on what the lead cleric has to say. i don't know whether -- one thing that occurs to me, economic sanctions are crushing iran. maybe he is starting to reflect that. you have a minute to believe he is going to be pragmatic? >> if i recall when ahmadinejad was first elected, there was all these hopeful articles maybe this is somebody we can talk to, bush administration tried. it was a fool's errand. this is fool's gold. i don't know if the economic sanctions are having as much impact. i think other entities like russia and china are skirting them. when you have a market that big, may not matter. i think one of the best ways america could help is to do something you do through

broadcasting board of governors and state department, that is to help provide technologies for internet sirk up convention, so people longing for freedom have access to media, not watched by government, say that today when we were talking about america watching its own citizens. but i think it is probably a lot of wasted time to think he is a moderate. >> i will say this. 20 some people on the ballot, he did get 50% of the total vote, eric. maybe he does have popular support. maybe if there's somebody rise up against the government, maybe they'll participate. >> fair elections they hold in iran. >> that one i think was a fair one. >> ahmadinejad we know is a figure head, the clerics really run the country, they're more orthodox in their islamist beliefs that islam should actually rule the world. i am not buying he's a moderate, he may be a moderate for show. not sure if you said that, the man has nuclear intentions for

iran. they're this far away, and all this is going to do is confirm the fact -- >> i think it changes nothing because it depends on the definition of moderate. is it a western definition of moderate or middle eastern definition? a middle eastern definition doesn't want to launch into israel today but maybe will do it later. you ask if there's such thing as a moderate, anwar sadat. he tried to have a peace accord, they killed him. there are moderate muslim leaders, a handful, they're people that turned in the minds of muslim radical leaders, like king abdullah of morocco did the same. what's unfortunate, like dana said, you have a country like iran, 80% of the population is under 35. they rose up in the green revolution. we could have backed them. we backed the muslim brotherhood, no friend of israel, and they preach was has

been eeism. it is very anti-west. saudis do the same. the short answer, bob, it is very hard to find. >> greg, they said they want to open dialogue with the west again. many times they have said it. should we pick up that mandolin and talk to them? >> i think we should. i find out they only cut off half your hand when you steal. >> that's to be expected. >> take what you can get, people. >> one more thing is up next!

> it is now time for one more thing. we have a special treat. key and oh reflects from the

matrix joins us. >> waiting for the chinese government to hack into computers, i am highly qualified. one of the things you hear about the chinese, how disciplined they are as workers. let's look at a film of a chinese worker loading stuff onto airplanes. take a look at this dude. yeah, you see that, keeps throwing the bags on there. another one didn't make it on, crushes that one. god, is that disciplined work. is that the kind of people you want working for you? throw that on. another didn't make it. another didn't make it. >> how can you be so nice to the obama phone kid. >> cory hart, put your sunglasses back on. >> you heard about lil' wayne. have to say that right. >> so he's dancing, filming a

music video, they purposely drop the flag. he claims he didn't know he was stepping on the flag, which he was. regardless of that fact, they dropped that flag for the music video. there are people that died and hundreds of thousands of americans died for the freedom, for first amendment freedoms that allow you to sing and spew whatever you want to say, and get millions and millions. it is disrespect. he says he didn't do it on purpose. i say you owe everybody a big apology. >> lil' wayne, big jerk. >> so there's a woman that's 22, in indiana, graduating, her mom went to get her a cake. said could you put a cap on her head. there's a misunderstanding. he thought she said put a cat on her head. it is graduation season, she has a cat on her head. >> looks yummy. i'd still have a piece. >> a cat as a hat.

>> yes. >> greg? too soon. people say it after somebody died. too soon. it is never too soon for that line to die. >> never too soon to turn off your phone. >> that's my bookie. >> half of nasa's graduating class are women. continuing with dana's theme on women, told you about the first chair of the college republicans, now four athletes for nasa, and that's out of 6,000 applicants. congratulations, ladies, pretty awesome, at the time sally ride has the 30th anniversary of the first woman in space. very cool. all right. that's it for us here at "the five." thank you for watching. see you back here tomorrow. "special report" is next. bob put his sunglasses back on. you okay? >> i am ready to be retired. meet me in an alley down the

road. >> see you back here tomorrow! "special report" is up next. welcome to "red eye." it is like a fish called wanda if by fish you mean a humiliated stripper and vic who wants it back. >> our top story tonight, president obama talks to charlie rose about the nsa programs leaked by edward snowden. the latest on how this could affect his upcoming impeachment trial. and a psychic ordered by a judge to pay almost $7 million after falsely telling police a texas couple had a mass grave on their property. the story so shocking it has been five days in our show run down. and should porn stars teachers and steeks ed? some say no, but some say -- well, i give up.