>> laura: the o'reilly factor is on. tonight: thank you to the constitution and thank you to justice that was served today in this court. it was aan amazing day. >> laura: the supreme court hands down two major decisions on gay marriage, striking down parts of the defense of marriage act and clearing the way for same sex couples to tie the knot in california. >> what does this mean for america? we'll have a debate. >> nobody worries or cares about what obama says because it carries no weight. >> laura: barack obama's second term off to a very rocky start as he struggles to contain scandals on several fronts. now his polling is taking a severe hit. we'll have analysis. >> i have never, with any intention, hurt anybody on purpose.

and i never would. >> laura: tv star chef paula deen gets emotional this morning as the fallout continues over her racially charged comments. can she cook up a recipe to save her career? we will debate it. >> i is what i is and i'm not changing. >> laura: caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone. and the factor begins right now. >> laura: hi, everyone, i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. let's get right to the top story. no time for talking points tonight. two major rulings from the supreme court on the issue of same sex marriage. both welcomed news for advocates of gay rights. first, the justices ruled 5 to 4 that a crucial part of the defense of marriage act is unconstitutional. dome marks as the law is commonly known, prohibited the federal government from granting benefits to same

sex couples who are legally married by a state. today's decision means that gay couples will now be treated the same under federal law as other married couples. in a separate split decision, the court allowed gay marriage to stand in california but did not address the merits of the case or decide the right to marry is a constitutional right. that involved prop 8, of course. so where does that leave almost half the country who have a different point of view? so what will the political fallout and social fallout of these landmark rulings be? well, joining us now from new york, democratic strategist bernard whitman and from dallas, robert jeff res the pastor of the first baptist church in dallas. let's start with you, mr. whitman. this has been celebrated coast to coast by advocates of gay rights. they are not so worried that the court didn't address the issue of gay marriage as a constitutional right, in that prop 8 case.

what's your take on that ruling first? >> laura, i think it's an extraordinary day for all americans. because the supreme court in both the decisions affirmed what a growing majority of americans have come to realize and that is a loving couple be they gay or straight should have the ability to love whoever any want and enter into one of the most conservative and traditional structures we have in our society today. and that is the institution of marriage. in a committed couple in love, and the fact that they now can enter into the institution of marriage strengthens our families, strengthens our communities and strengthens america as a whole. >> you make the point that, you know, growing number of americans support this and i think you are right. i mean, clearly a growing number of americans do. doesn't that though lead one to think that maybe let the democratic process go forth so you don't have this issue thrown into this contentious arena where the court steps in and as justice scalia pointed out in his descent short circuits the will of the american people,

mr. whitman. >> i don't think so at all. i give huge credit to the members of the constitution they foresaw. meant to guarantee the rights of everybody. the rights of minority, be they racial racial minority sexual minority should not be put up for veevment the supreme court was very clear saying the government has absolutely no business to discriminate and therefore cannot. >> laura: it's a protected class. but if it's a protected class and we will get the par tore in here. if it's a protected class that means there invariably will be a constitutional right for gay americans to marry and that this will be the law of the land. maybe not today, but down the road. essentially that's what justice scalia predicted. >> i predict that in the next few years, yes. >> laura in 1885 the supreme court said in murphy vs. ramsey that marriage is a sacred union between a man and woman from which all good things from society come. now 130 years later this is changing. you have to ask yourself, what has changed in the constitution hasn't changed. what has changed is the

culture. the supreme court caved to political correctness today. and i would suggest to you that our other guest really doesn't believe what he said and constitutional rights for everybody. i mean, after all, if we have the right to love and marry whomever we want to, why not expand the definition of marriage further to include polygamists, to include siblings, to include 15-year-olds. there are sound sociological reasons. not just religious but sociological reasons that government has historically and should continue to give preference to heterosexual marriage. >> laura: a lot has changed since 1885. obviously with the way the court has dealt with precedent. >> but the constitution hasn't. >> laura: the constitution hasn't but obviously we have a whole history of recent juries prudential decisions where the court has evolved. that's not the way i look at the court. the court has evolved and you have elections have consequences and mr. whitman. go ahead. >>' laura, let me also

point out that there are sociological reasons. our friend bill kind of got to criticize for talking about conservatives not offering a good case except for bible thumping. there is a good case beyond the bible for traditional heterosexual marriages. in my book i quote princeton sociology gist sara mcclan hand who said if we were trying to design a situation in which to best raise a child and ensure its needs were met it would be one in which the child is connected to both of its biological parents. that's not always possible, laura, but it ought to be the preferred status and government ought to promote it instead of discouraging it. >> laura: mr. whitman, you were an advisor to bill clinton. in 1996, of course, you weren't involved in the decision to advocate for the defense of marriage act or to sign it into law. nevertheless, it wasn't that long ago, right, that bill clinton did sign doma into law. and we have 30 plus states where the american people have either through referendum or through, you know, through other means decided for those states this is the way they view

marriage. are we to believe now that all of those states are demeaning and derogatory and dismissive in their views of gay americans? because that was kind of the subtext of what the court said today in one of these decisions. kennedy was pretty clear there. >> we have almost never seen in our life times or even before such a swift change in public opinion toward the full acceptance of gays. >> laura: why does the court have to step in? >> the reason for that is that people are being harmed. children are being harmed. millions and millions of couples are legally married across the united states and not afforded the protection by government. i'm sorry. i'm not going to allow pastor jeffrees to suggest that children raised by gay couples are any bit well less adjusted study out in australia 500 kids that showed children of gay couples are healthier and get along better with family members than do straights. >> no, that's not true at all. >> laura: that's not the role of the court to decide. >> the fact you used religion to promote gigot

tri between gays and lesbians has to stop. >> that's not true. >> they are not approving your message they just don't. >> laura, let me respond to that. >> laura: can you respond. but what we're concerned about. what i'm concerned about is in this conversation, that we're respectful that both sides can be heard without people who believe in traditional marriage being branded as intolerant or anti-gay. i don't like that. okay? i don't like when people are branded one thing or the other and there better be a respectful conversation here. at least i hope so. you can wrap it up, pastor. >> laura, i just want to remind our guest that neither he nor any of use had t been for a heterosexual union between a man and a woman. nature teaches us and i believe it's god that the best relationship in which to raise a child is with a father and a mother to say that two men can just as easily and effectively raise a child is to demean the role of women. and, listen, even though culture changes and the court may change, god's word never changes. he designed marriage. he knows how it best

operates. >> you do not have a lock on god. sir. you do not have a lock on god and my god does not agree with you. >> laura: to be continued. we appreciate it next on the rundown. plummeting poll numbers for president obama as he juts off to africa. 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?

>> rca: a name you can trust for the latest innovation in hearing better: the rca's symphonix personal sound amplifier. >> the rca symphonix. >> symphonix! >> symphonix! >> our business is a very social business, and we're always talking over loud music. i would find myself missing things. >> and i'd go to restaurants, asking, "could you repeat that?" >> excuse me? >> since she's been wearing the rca symphonix, i think it's-- the communication has gotten a lot better. >> i hear, like, the leaves rustling. >> i can hear my boyfriend. >> for the first time, i could enjoy it all. >> it's crystal clear. >> it just made my life that much nicer. >> right now i can hear him. >> robin will testify.

it's made-- >> oh yes. >> --a change in my attitude. i've been much happier. >> it's an ear-opening experience. >> isn't it time you heard what's going on? now you can, with rca symphonix: the breakthrough personal sound amplifier that uses hd digital technology to distinguish speech from background noise. you'll hear more clearly and comfortably in large groups, crowded streets, office settings, watching tv, or at a restaurant with friends. sleek, lightweight, and virtually unnoticeable, rca symphonix fits comfortably behind either ear and lets you set the volume level and noise reduction that you need. just flip the switch, and you're all ears. and the rca symphonix rechargeable battery recharges while you sleep; so the next day, you'll have up to 15 hours of use time. call now to take advantage of our special purchase offer on an rca symphonix personal sound amplifier. you'll receive everything you need to begin hearing better, including the ultra-light symphonix and all of the ear pieces,

accessories, and charger kit. try symphonix for a full 30 days, and if you're not absolutely delighted, send it back for a refund, no questions asked. plus call today to learn about getting a free symphonix cleaning care kit, a $29.95 value, as our gift to you. so call or go online now to learn more about this very special tv offer. rca symphonix: clearly better hearing. >> laura: in the impact segment tonight the president's image taking a hit as scandals engulf his administration. according to a new fox news survey. 43% of voters approve of the president's george performance. but 51% disapprove. that's almost a complete reversal from one year ago. only 32% approve of the way he is handling our government surveillance programs with 61% disapproving. and a measly 32% like the way he is handling the irs's targeting of conservative groups, 55% don't like that. and meantime the commander

and chief elm barkted on a well only 100-million-dollar trip to africa today. joining us now to sort it all out republican strategist kate obenshain democrat and fox news contributor kirsten powers. all right, kirsten, let's start with you. this is quite a reversal, is it not of where we are just of where we were a year ago and even a few months ago. seven months ago the president wins election. everybody loves a winner and now, well, kind of gone down hill. >> well, look, there has been this explosion, basically of scandals one after another. i don't know how anybody could hold up under this. it's almost-i there is too many even to name anymore i feel like. it's sort of incredible. and i do feel like this -- the nsa scandal really just sort of -- it was the tipping point. people were already, i think, getting frustrated with the irs situation, with benghazi. with different things and then you have this. you have, you know, i think the president looks, you know, not great to say the least, having somebody sort of on the run from the united states who is

exposing secrets. there is a lot to be unhappy about. >> laura: you know what the amazing thing also, kate, a growing number of people distrust the government and think the government has gotten too big. too powerful. 71% think washington has too much power. that should be good news for conservatives who instead are off fighting with each other over immigration. >> i i know it and the fact that half of the american people actually think the government is listening to our telephone conversations and reading our emails. that is striking. there should be this great movement, this uprising. but i think one thing i want to say about what kirsten said. the president is not a victim of these controversies and these scandals. he actually perpetrated them. he actually -- he has been out there sort of relying on his likability factor right now that's down for the first time. a majority of americans don't even like the president. and he has sort of been banking on that pushing through programs that the american people are not comfortable with. now, all of a sudden that's

evaporated. >> laura: let me tell you, kirsten. i think the image of obamas getting on another chopper trip over to air force one to head off on another vacation, part business, i guess. mandela is failing, so i'm not sure whether he is going to be able to visit him. but, i don't think this sits well with a lot of americans who frankly can't take vacations this summer. and, look, the president is going to travel. he needs some down time. everybody gets that. this is a big price tag. even more than bill clinton's trip to africa costs. quite a bit more. 35 million more. >> not a vacation. he is he going on business trip. and i do think that we have -- every president has gone to africa. laura bush went there like four times or something. i'm kind of in the camp that i feel like of all the problems that we have. >> laura: maybe the timing isn't great. >> well, i don't know a time when conservatives have ever thought it was a good time for the president to go on vacation frankly on any trip. i just don't -- that kind of stuff doesn't bother me. i'm much more concerned about. >> laura: this comes on the

heels of this disastrous european trip. this was not a fun european vacation. this was the g 8 where he got stared down by putin. then we get rolled by the chinese when they visited us. then we can't even get them to obviously turn over edward snowden. we have gotten faced on numerous fronts and just the image of the president then taking off and, you know, making the call to the lgbt people, i understand that i just don't think it seems all that compelling. >> $100 million. look, the amount of money being spent on this trip is the same as any other trip that a president has gone on. >> the one thing, kirsten though if he is taking the whole family. taking the kids. he is taking his -- >> come on, really? >> 76% of americans are going paycheck to paycheck, i do think it's probably not taking. >> when bush was doing. this laura bush went to africa literally like four times. >> kirsten, 76% of americans are living paycheck to paycheck. truly $100 million trip is

excessive. >> laura: i think kirsten's point is well between. every president travels. i think the difference is though still 7.6% unemployment and there are all these scandals that are making people trust the government less. you know, they travel. they do stuff. >> i don't think -- like i said, i think this is the least of our problems. >> laura: 100 million, what does that count anymore? i appreciate you guys thanks a lot. directly ahead, another controversial ruling from the supreme court that some on the left claim is is a major blow to civil rights. we'll break it down and

>> laura: in the unresolved problem segment tonight, the supreme court is causing major consternation on the left by blocking a key part of the voting rights act which required certain states with a his industry of discriminating against voters to get federal approval to change

voting laws. the court ruled that the country has made major racial progress since the law went into effect 48 years ago in 1965. and that has to be reconsidered. here now to explain and analyze the decision hillary shelton the senior vice president for advocacy for the naacp. now let's break this down. some people think the entire voting rights act was thrown out. it was not. >> that's that's correct. >> laura: it was just this one section of it which is section 4 which required certain states and certain districts in other states to get clearance from the federal government before it made any changes to any part of real voting. if you change voting precincts and requirements you have to get it pre-cleared. the court said it's not 48 years ago. we made great progress. it's discriminating against those states today given all the progress that's been made. why is this a big set back. >> it's a big set back because the voting rights act has proved to be very helpful tool in preventing

discrimination in the election place. so very well because it's been so successful the question becomes why would you change any of it that sn as noted back in 2006 congress reauthorized the voting rights act in 1965 and did a very thorough review that included 70,000 pages of testimony, 51 witnesses, 21 hearings on both sides of the aisle. >> laura: congress passed the defense of marriage act. >> that was back in the 1990s, we are talking about 2006. absolutely. >> laura: do you think at this point given the fact that we have an african-american president. we have all congress men and women and african-american. we have a growing population of latino and african-american that we are still in the same place that we were in 48 years ago when we had poll taxes. literacy tests that were still a concern? >> gnat no. provisions in the voting rights act that were not up for consideration. prohibited those particular actions. the problem is we have still seen a lot of

discrimination at the ground level, both the state and the local level around voter participation. >> laura: like what what's akin to the literacy test or poll tax today. >> they play games like they send out information to the african-american community telling to vote on different days. we very had election day we have seen all kinds. >> laura: this wouldn't prevent that if someone says something on election day preclearance from the justin department wouldn't have helped that. >> that's exactly right. however, what would happen if if we move apology place without telling people. and made sure people went to the wrong spot rather than going to the spot they were or saw people's names being purged from rolls without voter registration act. >> laura: a friend emailed me what about like remember the poll that came out showing that obama had won like 110% of certain districts in pennsylvania and the concern about voter fraud and so forth. people voting multiple times folks were saying come on. concerns on that side but supposed to be flogging

alabama, mississippi, arizona, texas, over and over again for the sins of the past that the current citizens can't seem to ever get past. >> i would love to say these are all just concerns of the past. quite frankly -- when we look at things like states and talking about section 56 the voting rights act and it should say the preseq. i have the section 4 sets the actual strategies for how sanction five would be implemented we know some the big problems are we still have those that are actually doing those things that prevent african-americans and other racial minorities. >> laura: you are talking like voter i.d.? >> photo ids. if it's implemented in a way which it disenfranchises a racial group it does disenfranchise. >> laura: thanks so much. plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. paula deen saga that continues. makes first tv appearance since being sacked by the food network. more drama in the

>> laura: in the personal story segment tonight, paula deen made an emotional appeal for forgiveness this morning in her first tv interview since being fired by the food tv network for using the "n" word. >> if there is anyone out there that has never said something they didn't wish they could take back.

if there is anyone out there throw a stone throw it at my head so it kills me. >> do you have any doubt in your mind that african-americans are offended by the "n" word? >> i don't know, matt, i have asked myself that so many times because it's very distressing for me to go into my kitchen and i hear what these young people are calling each other. these young people are going to dr. to take control and start showing respect for each other and not throwing that word at each other. >> laura: a lot of these kids are getting their cues from pop culture. take a look at these lyrics from great lake drake. is he one of the biggest hip hop music stars alive now. and as you can see these lyrics are pretty reprehensible that song is number 8 on the billboard hip hop chart. but back to paula. here with reaction deneen berrellly a fox news

contributor. david johnson the ceo strategic vision pr firm and branding agency. let's start with you, david, because i know you are not a fan of paula deen to say the least. it was a painful interview to watch. to watch, to experience, to shoe was weeping throughout much of most of the interview. she believes she was targeted because she is successful and other reasons. she says look i haven't used that word for 30 years. she has lost her tv show. she has lost her restaurant gig and she will probably lose a lot more. is this fair if indeed it's true she said this 30 years ago? >> the key thing is that we are really not criticizing her for what she said. more than anything, why she is losing the gigs and everything is how she has handled the crisis afterwards. it's her failure in the first 48 hours to apologize and really get in front of the story that's the reason

the food network and others are leaving her is it fair? it's reprehensible that anybody uses the "n" word we have heard oprah winfrey and bill cosby these are just as bad as the racist to use the "n" word. there is no use for the n word. pr standpoint and paula deen, the bigger thing in politics it's not the crime it's the coverup that gets you in trouble for paula deen it's not what she said but how she handled it it afterwards. >> what can thee so doo at this point? she has done this interview extremely emotional to say the least. you get the sense that she has become, you know, it's kind of a pathetic thing but she says it's unfair like her record. i don't watch her show. i really don't know much about her. she apparently has been a big success and she is not like she has had a history of these kind of comments. at least not i'm not aware of them. >> first of all she is a cook. she has absolutely no idea

how to handle such a situation. >> laura: she is a rich cook. >> she rich person, yes. she has apologized for something that she did that was wrong. and for the media for the media to keep pounding her for owned up for her actions and what she doo she did and apologized. let the free market decide whether her books sell or appliances whatever else, the tv show all of that let the free market decide if her career continues or not. >> laura: free market is deciding. a lot of these companies. >> the companies but a lot of her core fan base. >> laura: what about her argument that look the culture has steeped itself in language that's reprehensible and demeaning. implicitly the women. you have to go through the billboard hip hop chart and it's hard to find one song on the chart that doesn't use some offensive word the "n" word is used and one of the titles of the one of

the top ten songs now. but it's okay, right? because it's authentic and it's street and it's urban and that's the way people talk so it's considered okay for certain people to use that word. but not for paula deen because she is a white lady from the south. >> that's why there is a huge double standard when it comes to this issue. she is being vilified for something she did years ago when she already apologized for but on the flip side, yes. we have music. we have videos. >> millions upon millions. >> children hearing these words on a regular basis. and acting out on what they hear. >> laura: david, what's your response to that the culture is what it is today. >> the culture is what it is. but it's not just one isolated incident with paula deen. let's not forget in that transcript she also referred to jews. she also had a plan that she scrapped about doing a party that was pretty much reminiscent and celebrating the plantation style. >> laura: that was bizarre. that party was bizarre. it was that wedding reception or something? i didn't get that thing at all. that was weird.

>> and the market is deciding. what we're seeing, yes, some people are rallying to her. more and more not just the corporations but some of her fan base is beginning to desert her as well. the problem for paula deen is the way that she handled this crisis. that's why we are still talking about it it. >> laura: what could she do? should she immediately say i'm going to hire a minority consultant to help produce my show or be a co-host? what would she do? >> what you don't do is go on the factor. >> laura: bill would have loved that. >> don't go seek jesse jackson. he is weak. and is he an opportunist. he is just going to go after her for her money. >> laura: jesse will save the day for paula deen. >> jesse is already saying she has got -- settle the lawsuit. he is not there to help her. is he there to promote himself is. >> laura: up next more courtroom drama in the zimmerman murder trial. we 8 bring you the latest. new england patriots star aaron hernandez charged with murder after a dead body is found near his

>> laura: thanks for staying with us. i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. in the factor follow-up segment tonight, two tantalizing legal cases. new england patriots tight end aaron hernandez charged tonight with murder after authorities discovered a dead body one mile from his massachusetts mansion. but, first, an update in the george zimmerman murder trial. today trayvon martin's friend racism jeantel took the stand. she was on the phone with the 17-year-old when he was shot. during that call trayvon told her he was being followed. >> i asked him what the man looked like. he looked like a creepy [inaudible] >> lead me make sure we got that. >> creepy ass cracker. >> is that what you recall him saying? >> yeah. >> is that mean you mean

like a white individual? >> yes. >> >> laura: i like that follow-up quell. much tell us what the jury heard. a homicide prosecutor. ansica let me start with you. first of all that moment was interesting for a bunch of reasons. the sense of being there that night, he -- and what the defense wanted not to happen is to paint this picture of this was someone who was afraid. the victim was afraid and he was afraid of mr. zimmerman. >> and what you actually end up is nothing less than bone chilling testimony. i mean it is the type of things that prosecutors begin their summations with the that jury could actually feel the rainy night. they could feel trayvon martin telling this young woman that this guy was watching him, that he was following him. she heard him running and the phone went off. can you hear the prosecutors starting summation with some of

trayvon martin's last words which is why are you following me? heard an outof breath zimmerman saying what are you doing around here? and the young man saying she heard a scuffle, what sounded like grass, get off, get off. and we all know that a shot came next. that is incredibly powerful. and right there, leaving it alone i know there is a lot more -- you have actual liability starting to build very powerfully in this case. >> laura: hey, eric, is the use of the word cracker, is that dangerous for the prosecution? because you have some jurors obviously that are white. do they hear that this is a kid also kind of looking for an altercation? could it play both ways there? laura, let's be honest i have had this in my trials. it's a problem for the prosecution. cases are won or lost in jury selection. this is all white female jury to hear the word cracker to be used by trayvon martin with the

prism and the light and that the jurors view the world from. can 100% back fire and get a certain image of trayvon martin as to what he thought. was he a racist himself. everyone said this case is about race. on the other hand, using the term cracker, it's reverse racism there. i think that is a problem for the prosecution. i think it might make some of those jurors cringe. i don't think the prosecution liked when it happened. they brought it out because they have to deal with the evidence. but it definitely was not a good factor for the prosecution. >> laura: let's move on though. because this is -- witness jeanne malano also testified. she said she believes zimmerman was on top of trayvon martin but then it was brought up in defense questioning that she had never told the police that in her statement. so that was sort of new information coming out at trial. what about that moment? >> well, new information sometimes does come out at trial. but the defense was effective here where i think they started to break away the power of what she

was saying you are saying now for the first time that he was on top. they are going with all these witnesses is there some sort of bias? are they looking for particular outcomes so they are embellishing, adding into their testimony to make it so? >> laura: that seems curious to me. >> it did. start to put together pieces. a lot more to come. put it together. and at the end of the day that is what the jury sees, then although they may be able to or decide to disregard certain pieces, it still may be proof beyond a reasonable doubt of some of the crimes. >> laura: eric, let's move on to the aaron hernandez, shocking to new england patriots fans. people across the country follow professional sports. is he not a witness in the case. is he charged with murder today and shortly after of course fired by the new england patriots. what do we know? >> well, very serious indeed. it's a circumstantial evidence. and some lawyers will tell that you circumstantial evidence not a great case for the prosecution. but sometimes it's a stronger case. but the million-dollar question is i haven't heard

any evidence that actually they have got circumstantial evidence. they have got this gum. they have got the casings. they are trying to make their case stick. but do they have any direct, whatsoever evidence at all that he is the trigger man or that he was involved or that he did anything? they have got some coverup, you know, sometimes coverup is worse than the crime getting rid of some tapes allegedly, but what do they really have? we'll have to see. >> laura: anna signature go, the relationship between the victim and hernandez comes through the fiancee and girlfriend of the two men, but we don't know much more than that at this point, do we? >> no. we just heard some reports that during the arraignment when the prosecutor was talking about that hernandez was heard saying that he was having trouble trusting anyone at this point, that he was upset lloyd someone talking to. footage of hernandez leaving his residence with a gun. again, in many murder cases do you not often have actually putting the gun at the moment of the crime and

the defendant's hand unless there was a witness. criminals don't like to commit crimes in front of other people often. we're going to have to say what the evidence around it is. because a lot of times if you have the pieces of the puzzle, you put them all together they only paint one picture. we have to see if that's what the has. >> laura: annasigga thanks. filibuster in order to protect that state's liberal abortion laws. that report when when we come

>> laura: in the second unresolved problem segment tonight, texas state senator wendy davis, a democrat, staged a 13-hour filibuster in the state capital last night. no bathroom breaks no, leaning on the podium in order to kill a ghal would have banned abortions after 20 weeks. >> members, i'm rising on the floor today to mummably

give voice to thousands of texans to ho have been ignored. >> laura: her antics paid off. the bill got enough votes to pass but the vote missed the deadline so it wasn't valid and the bill was declared dead. joining me from new york to defend the senator, alexis magill johnson who was on planned parenthood's board of directors. this was an amazing sight to behold last night. it was impressive. she was up there 13 hours. couldn't lean, at one point someone wanted to help her at some point and she -- they were worried that was now an invalid filibuster. you see all the supporters of abortion there. dewhurst tried to keep control of it but it got out of control. in the end planned parent hood won the day. however, it seems, alexis that the people in texas have a real problem with .

month. so after five months, no abortions. why is planned parenthood is against that fact? >> look, 99% of abortions actually happen under 21 weeks. and so, what we're talking about is protecting the legal right to -- for a woman to make a decision, a very personal and complex decision in consultation with her family, with her doctors, with her spiritual providers. it's a decision that a woman needs to be making in con making in consultation with those folks, not politicians so it wasn't just planned parenthood who had a victory. thousands of women, millions of women who stood with wendy davis, because they understand that no one makes these decisions lightly and as long as abortion is safe, legal, and under our constitution, we have the right to continue to -- to fight for it. >> barack obama says frequently he agrees with his predecessor bill clinton. when abortion should be safe,

legal and rare. with 330,000 abortions performed at planned parenthood clinics by last count, how is that rare, alexis? >> compare that to the number of actual births. i mean, no one is pro-abortion. >> 330,000 rare? a simple question, yes or no. >> it is. it is rare in the context of when you look at the number of births and the ability of women to make these decisions. and i think that that's what we're talking about here. you understand that texas is actually just a small piece of this story. in this year alone, we had some odd 700 bills that affect women's rights to their own bodies. how many bills have we had to men to restrict their access. >> until men can have babies and birth babies, we won't have the same. >> we are attacking women. >> you all feel the heat i think in part because of what happened

with this so-called dr. kermit go gosnell, but that kind of opened the door, or shined a little light on what abortion is, partial birth abortion, late-term abortion, whatever you want to call it, this is fwr graphically startling to a new generation of americans about what inside the womb looks like because of technology and people are becoming more pro life as time goes on. >> i don't think people are becoming more pro life. i think people are strongly supporting a woman's right to choose. what gosnell did is absolutely wrong, illegal. >> why was it wrong? >> wrong, illegal, beyond the -- beyond the limitation of when you can provide abortion services, and so we -- we support gosnell and his conviction completely.

and at planned parenthood, we're trying to provide sex education and reproductive health. we're the leading provider for young women, where abortion will become increasingly rare. >> you don't do ultrasound. everybody thinks planned parenthood is doing ultrasound. i believe that doesn't really happen, does it? >> we don't provide ultrasound, we provide education, birth control, breast exams. we focus on helping women be healthy and empowered. >> what do ultrasounds do? what do they give women? we see what is going on in there, a picture is pretty available, right? >> as woman who has had two children on her own, ultrasounds is very powerful, but it's not the role that planned parenthood has at this time. >> i think it's a better

information. >> it's not that we don't. we don't have the ability to make those decisions. >> definitely a win for planned parenthood. >> a win for women. a people's filibuster. >> not the women still in the womb necessarily, but i see your point. alexis, thank you very much. directly ahead, how high-tech track chairs have

in the back of the book segment tonight, as you know, "the factor" has been on a mission to get our wounded veterans high-tech track chairs. here to tell us about the difference it can make in a wounded vet's life are two heroes who use them. marine sergeant jack pierce, injured severely in afghanistan and sergeant first class john rogers, injured in between

combat tours. gentlemen, thank you for your service. we love you here at the "o'reily factor" and across the country. jack, start with you. first of all, take us back to january 9, 2010, in helmand province. >> we were doing a resupply convoy, insurgents had buried 400 pounds of sentec under the road. i knew immediately i was paralyzed. i just was trying to get on the radios and let everybody know we were hit and get somebody in there to help us out. >> so you are immediately paralyzed. you certainly didn't know at that point what your life would have in store. fast forward, and a track chair, up until o'reily really started getting into this, and helping raise money for 50 of these chairs, they are expensive, people didn't know what they

were, how did it change your life? >> changed my life tremendously. i had always been an outdoor person, and one of the things i missed was able to get back on some of the back hiking trails or go down to the water at the beach. once you're wheelchair bound, are you kind of stuck to hardball surfaces, and sand or grass is just a barrier, and the track chair opened all that back up for me. made a huge, tremendous difference to my life. and to be able to take my son back out to look at bugs again. >> i love the pictures. sergeant rogers, you were also wounded and your life changed for the better using this chair. it's amazing to see these photos, tell us. >> yeah, i wasn't injured in combat. i was -- fell out of a tree, suffered a compression fracture in my l-1 vertebrae when i was on active duty. it gets you back off the pavement, you can maneuver soft

terrain, go to the beach, go for a walk with my wife. >> how does that make you feel on a beautiful day when otherwise you are confined to sidewalk or hard surface? >> it's just life-changing event. your whole perspective on things changes. i had gone a long time without a track chair, and i just got satisfied i guess you would call it with the quality of life i had. and when i saw one of these, immediately i was like i am going to get one of those. and it has been going straight forward after that. >> it is so heart warming, restorative power of nature. and by the way, john is going to be profiled on the sportsman channel tomorrow night, two american heroes and many more helped because of what, of course, o'reily is trying to do with the track chairs, raise money and help these brave men and women. that is it for us, but a reminder of "the factor's"

mission to get all veterans a track chair. the eight highest proposed donations will be awarded this historic signed picture. please make donations on billoreilly.com. and if you would like to get a facsimile, donate $25 or more to independence funds at independence fund.org. and to find out more about my radio show, my podcasts and my website. laura ingraham.com. thank you for watching tonight. i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reily. >> good morning. it is thursday june the 27th. coming up first it was lois learner and now another irs

official is taking the 5th this amid new allegations of abuse by that agency. we will have the shocking details ahead. >> and a voi >> and a voice from the grave. the diary of chris stevens revealed. >> a scare in the skies as 15 passengers get sick aboard a delta flight. could food poisoning be the culprit? fox and friends first starts right now. >> good morning everyone. you are watching "fox & friends first" on this thursday morning. i am patti ann browne. >> i am heather nauert. thank you for starting your day with us. >> he went from a rising star in the nfl to an accused killer possibly facing life behind

bars. we are learning new details about the arrest of patriot aaron hernandez. >> good morning to you, good morning to everybody at home. 23-year-old aaron hernandez showed no emotion as prosecutors accused him of the cold blooded killing of his friend. hernandez and him argued after leaving a club on friday night. hernandez monday two friends drove to a nearby industrial park. loud was then shot 5 times. authorities say hernandez was the mastermind. >> after picking him up he brought up the subject that he was mad about that incident. he then drove the victim to the remote spot and he orchestrated his execution and that's what it was. >> prosecutors also laid out the evidence trail that led to learn d hernandez's arrest tire