flirtest on this breaking news. make sure you go to gretawire.com and let us know what you thought about the show tonight and don't forget... this is a very importantretsin, everyone wants it, new and improved. remember that seinfeld? tonight at 8:00 on fbn. hello, i'm andrea tantaros, with eric bolling, bob beckel, dana perino, and greg gutfeld. this is "the five." well, it is day seven of the george zimmerman murder trial where several key witnesses took the stand, including a lead detective on the case, a medical examiner, a fingerprint examiner, and zimmerman's best friend. greta vansusteren has been in the courtroom for today's testimony, joins us from sanford, florida. greta, what stood out to you today? >> reporter: what stood out, the starve the day was our own sean

hannity. sean hannity interviewed george zimmerman a long time ago, and the prosecution played that video. now, sean got the interview, we all hustled, he beat us out, he got an interview with george zimmerman early on. the prosecution played that video for the jury as a statement of the defendant. what they were attempting to do is show a couple things, one of the things he said to sean was that he didn't know about the stand your ground defense in florida, so the prosecution put that out. then what they tried to do later in the day was to say george zimmerman knows all about this law, stand your ground defense, and that the reason he told the exculpatory stories to the police officers, video taped and audio taped is because he knew the law. the prosecution wants to prove that by rolling out course work he had taken in criminal justice work. that stood out. sean hannity was the star of the show today and got the interview nobody else did. some other interesting points. last night, end of the day the

defense asked the detective on the stand, this is a state's witness, the detective or chief officer over the investigation, and asked him did he believe george zimmerman, because george zimmerman had given all these exculpatory statements, even had taken the officer to the scene, done a re-enactment, asked do you believe that's his voice on the tape yelling help, help, and the officer said i do believe him. well, end of the day, prosecution went and had dinner, thought oh, my god, why did we let that come in, that shouldn't come in, that's opinion of a witness on a defendant, really shouldn't have come in. probably were up all night fretting about it. they show up this morning, raise it with the judge, want the judge to strike the question and answer. there was back and forth debating about it. the judge said you know what, prosecution, you're right. that question shouldn't have come in, and the jury shouldn't have heard it. i am going to instruct the jury. bring the jury in. the judge turns to the jury, says remember the question where the detective said he believes what george zimmerman is saying, remember that question?

the detective said he believed him? i want you to strike that. and i am thinking to myself, really? so now the jury heard it yesterday. if by chance they forgot it overnight, they're now reminded by it, and reminded by the judge that the detective believes george zimmerman's case. so that is sort of a little of what happened today, andrea. there's so much more, i will toss it back to you for any questions. >> been in a number of courtrooms, i think this case got off to a rocky start for the defense. yesterday they had a great day. how would you call the day today, do you think they're gaining momentum? judge it on today's testimony. >> you know, it is weird, sort of building for the defense. it is the jury who will decide, maybe they see it differently than i do. but when you have the prosecution have to put on a fingerprint expert to tell that they couldn't lift any fingerprints of anybody from the gun, negative evidence? that's not the strongest way to approach a case. you don't get the sense that the prosecution is on offense, but they're anticipating what they

think the defense is going to do or going to ask, so they put on evidence. they had a doctor on today who looked at photographs of george zimmerman's injuries and she concluded and said i don't think it looks like he hit his head on concrete but that others might. and this doctor never even looked at it, but looked at photographs of the injuries. didn't examine george zimmerman. that's just weak. that may be the best they have, and they probably couldn't get george zimmerman examined by a doctor at the time, close to the injuries, but it looks weak. this doesn't look like a prosecution they get the sense is strong. >> hold on a second. we have that sound bite you're referencing. let's take a listen. >> we have one small injury right there, and one injury right there. >> are either of those lacerations life threatening? >> no. they were so minor that the individual who examined and treated mr. zimmerman told him

that the sutures were not required. >> the injuries on the back of the defendant's head consistent with one strike against a concrete surface? >> yes. >> why do you say that? >> because if you hit the head one time, it is consistent with having gotten those two injuries at that one time. >> greta, i heard that, then i heard she is not even the one that performed the autopsy. what do you think? >> reporter: the autopsy, when you bring that up, that to me will be a key witness because trayvon martin isn't here to tell his side of the story, he is the decedent. george zimmerman told his story multiple times. listen carefully to the one that did the examination, a forensic expert. what is going to be key is if you look at the trajectory of the bullet and the clothes, does it look like the sweatshirt was close to the chest, which would suggest they're standing next to each other, or was it far away from the chest. you can in some instances tell

that, which would mean he was leaning over george zimmerman which would be consistent with george zimmerman saying trayvon martin was on top of him when he was shot. that testimony, that science may be very instructive to corroborate either george zimmerman's version of events or what we assume would be trayvon martin's if he were here to testify. that evidence to me, because people come into the courtroom of all sorts of reasons to color things, people's memories fade. when you get closer to science, not perfect, but in some instances, it may provide key corroboration that could validate a particular version of events. that's what i would be watching for. >> greta, yesterday we speculated, said there wasn't much forensics coming out. we said at this point the way the trial is going it is almost the defense could rest as soon as the state rests because they haven't made the case yet. as forensics come out, it doesn't sound like they're making a compelling case for the prosecution. why, what are they waiting for? is this the most compelling

evidence the state has? >> reporter: eric, i once had a chase where a judge said to me as i was making my argument, he said i was making a silk purse out of a sow's ear. sometimes you don't have great cases, you just don't have great cases, you do what you have to. one of the considerations here, if it turns out this case continues to unravel and it is not a compelling case and we have to hear what jurors think afterwards if they talk to us, if it turns out, it may appear there was peer pressure for the prosecution to bring this case, and in some instances maybe that's a good thing, let the community see the case, so the community doesn't have a great mystery, it is televised. jurors may have a different view of what they've seen so far. i'm just sitting in the courtroom. i am one of the people. i am not on the jury. they may have a completely different version. they may find george zimmerman unlikable, may think this is a vigilante thug roaming the neighborhood looking for a kid that happens to be walking through with skittles and an

iced tea and he is following him. i don't know, that could be what happened. i am just telling you my view of the evidence, and it is not over, the prosecution is on the run. >> greta, i wondered about the lawyers. obviously the jurors as you explained yesterday, they're not supposed to be reading all of the media, don't know necessarily about all of the attention, but lawyers for the prosecution and defense, how close attention do they pay to media coverage, does that influence them at all? >> reporter: i may be one of the few people that thinks not. when i tried cases, dana, i had no idea what was going on in the back of the courtroom. you could have people crying back there or screaming, you never paid attention, you were so focused on the trial and so focused on your job. when you leave at night, you don't go back and watch tv. you've got to go back and research, you're filing motions, preparing witnesses for the next day, you're looking at depositions, looking at transcripts. it is not like the lawyers have any free time on either side.

so i would be surprised if any of them had five minutes. you may notice we interviewed one of the defense lawyers yesterday, but it is only because we grabbed him coming out of the courthouse right after i was on "the five" and we did it then. he couldn't come back last night and do that, and if he has extra time, he wants to sleep or eat. i actually -- i don't think the lawyers pay any attention at this point to the media. >> greta, as you know i watch a lot of crime television, good wife, law and order, night court. you always hear people say you need to -- >> with subtitles? >> yes, it is. >> i am extremely slow. they always say you have to strike something from the record. how can a jury not hear something that they already heard? is that actually possible that you can just suddenly forget? that's going to play a role. >> reporter: well, greg, that's why i say today when the prosecution after they made the mistake yesterday not objecting soon, they could have objected as soon as the question happened. they didn't even have to get the

answer out. as soon as the defense lawyer asked that question, they should have been on their feet objecting so the jury never heard the answer. instead what they did, they sat, let it happen. that was dumb. then they go home and then they think about it, come back today and have the judge instruct the jury, which to me always was like okay, jury, remember that police officer says he totally buys the defense case? i am exaggerating a bit to make the point, but remember that testimony? and the jurors go yeah, we remember it. they go forget about it. how do you forget about it? they now heard it twice. >> greta, can i boil this down to one simple question. is this a lousy prosecution? >> reporter: no. it may be just lousy evidence. i mean, these are not bad lawyers. look, you know, sometimes you have a really rotten case, and sometimes you think you have a good case and your witnesses fall apart on the stand. sometimes, bob, i tell you, when i tried cases, it was not a big surprise to me, i would spend hours and hours with the client,

and if i put my client on the witness stand, by the way, hated clients on the witness stand, i did as much as i could not to present any defense at all, i thought it was better to attack the prosecution case, but on the occasions i put a defendant on, one i spent hours and hours with, you hear things you never heard before. trials are surprises. it is not that the lawyers are bad on prosecution, they may just have a really bad case. and it may look bad that they're putting all this evidence on audio statements and video that help the defense, but if they don't do it, here is what's going to happen. the defense will be talking about it in closing argument, why was the prosecution hiding audiotapes, hiding video tapes. same reason christopher dard enput that glove on o.j. simpson. if he hadn't, johnny cochran would point at marcia clark and christopher dard en, say they got the glove, why don't they want him to try it on, because they know. then you make the prosecutor

look like a crook. >> part of the reason we're all surprised the prosecution doesn't have a case is because the media already tried the case with a different outcome before the case even started? >> reporter: i suspect that's true. one of the problems you have in any case is that people take sides. shirts and skins. they immediately take sides, no matter what it is, not just on the racial issue, in any case, someone may be more likeable or not likeable. you often times have that. there's the beauty, going back to dana's question, hopefully the jury is not poisoned like that, hopefully lawyers aren't doing that, and the judges. we may have all of this chatter and noise outside the courtroom, but they all have a very important job. i suspect they're all doing a good job at it, i suspect the jury is doing its best. never met a juror that had a cavalier attitude, like he or she didn't care. ey're all very, very serious citizens when picked for a jury. >> greta, zimmerman's buddy took the stand today and described

the moment where zimmerman supposedly reached for the gun as for a possible motive. i am going to play the sound bite. i want you to react. >> do you recall if he even told you that trayvon martin had touched the gun or just that he was reaching for it? >> i thought he had said he had grabbed the gun. i only heard the story twice, whether it was grabbed the gun, grabbed for the gun, perhaps it was just the intent. but i believed he said he grabbed the gun. >> what do you think? >> reporter: well, first of all, that was -- the point of that, that's about 2% of his testimony, was to show that it was inconsistent with other things that george zimmerman had said on audio and video tapes, make george zimmerman look like a liar. that was the point of it, 2%. the other 98% of the testimony completely helped george zimmerman. so now the prosecution is in the awkward position. they can't stand up and criticize the 98%. they're the ones that called the witness.

what do you mean, they want to criticize him for 98%? they're the ones that called him. they didn't have to call him. they have a hard time in closing argument. as that 2% that's inconsistent, that when it goes to the jury. does the jury think that inconsistency is minor or do they think it is major? people don't have perfect memories. in this instance, is this something so significant to this jury that it really tests the credibility of the defendant? or will the jury think i can't remember what i had for lunch. perfect memories are sometimes a problem. don't want perfect memories in a trial from a defense perspective, looks like everybody got together and cooked up a story. imperfect memory is okay, as long as it is not incredibly material to the jury. >> greta, we're running a little out of time. how important is momentum? america is getting ready for the great holiday weekend. are the jurors as well? how important is it for the prosecution or defense to keep this going? >> well, it feels like it is important, frankly, get a chance at closing argument to tie it

up. you hate to have the interference and big break, when you get to closing argument, you get to put on all of the bells and whistles, show them pieces of evidence, remind them of testimony. a good lawyer can fix that. that's not a problem. >> thanks, greta. >> reporter: thank you. >> tune to on the record for more in depth analysis of the george zimmerman murder trial. now ahead on "the five," eric had a couple of big interviews with rush limbaugh and glenn greenwald earlier today on fox and friends. we'll show you some of the highlights. don't go away!

♪ so lawyers are asking the pentagon to hold off force feeding gitmo inmates during the day out of respect for the religious holiday. meanwhile, the u.n. human rights council of inquiry on syria found much like in other places of the world christians are under attack by islamic militias. those that do not flee often end up dead. just last week, a catholic

syrian priest was murdered by syrian rebels. the media here does a great but very easy job focusing on extremism here. we target those god awful ghouls like the phelps family, they're easy, comedians like to put outrage on them. but that's one sad family and they aren't trying to blow up marathons. if you had guts, stop by a mosque and ask about other factions around the world festering hate. we embrace tolerance, yet those expecting it remain immune from its demands and we tolerate their in tolerance for fear we will hurt their feelings. called islamaphobia phobia. this is inviting the devil to your doorstep, handing them the key. bob, why are we so scared of calling out deadly extremism around the globe? >> you know, i think what we're

afraid of here i guess is some sort of sensitivity about a bunch of people because the assumption is that the vast majority of those people are not radicals, and so we are trying to go out of our way, figure out if we can cut out the radicals and dump on them without dumping on the other 85%. what gets me angry and has been for months, the treatment of muslims of christians. now we have another example of christians being killed in syria. we have had this going on in nigeria, had it going on in egypt, and i have said this over and over again, i don't know what my government is doing about this, but it is time for this to stop. if this is what you consider your religion and you consider your great prophet to do, you're in the wrong place and wrong time, we have been tolerant with you. the time to be tolerant is coming to an end. you have no right to treat them that way.

we treat your people well, you should treat our people well. if not, our allies ought to gather with us and do something about it. >> andrea, what do you think. we bend over backwards to condemn nonviolent extremism, common bigotry, but cower when it is deadly. >> bob mentioned we go out of the way to do this in the hopes they'll change. i'll save you the suspense. they won't. they will not stop until we are all muslims or ruled by muslims. being nice and talking sweet doesn't work. the only thing they understand is a 2 x 4 over the head. bottom line, one of the most disgusting injustices, in addition to what bob said about persecution of christians, the war on women in the women and the way they treat homosexuals. i am sick and tired of liberals and the media ignoring it. it is one issue where right and left can come together and really expose the injustices in this world. instead they focus on the republican party, they focus on christians, they focus on

everybody but people who do not fit into their narrative, and it is dangerous and we're going to learn the hard way. more people are going to have to die unfortunately. >> i think to the point, moderate muslims, if you're not going to stand up and say something and allow this to go on, let your religion be dominated by these thugs and anti-human beings, then for the life of me, no wonder your religion is starting to get a bad word around the world, but stand up, but you don't have the guts to stand up. >> eric, thoughts? >> look, there's the other one that's going on in the news now, egypt. president obama is kind of stuck now because remember when hosni mubarak had to go. he had to go. >> an ally. >> our ally. the people of egypt wanted him out, the people have spoken. now that those same people want

mohammed morsi out, he is what everyone thought here, he was going to be muslim brotherhood extremist, pushing more into muslim brotherhood dictator ship. now president obama, what's he going to do? he is the one that helped facilitate morsi, now he is stuck. what he needs to do, if he was with the people then, has to stay with the people now. get mubarak out. >> like egypt is like iran. >> i'm sorry, get morsi out. >> the green invest lugs. >> charles krauthammer pointed it out last night, another place where president obama stayed on the fence. >> now there's neutrality they're trying to navigate. i think there are a lot of muslims, a lot of americans do business with every day, also in the medical profession. there's a lot of ways to work together. one of those is something bob and i disagree on. students. the only way is to concern to

have western nations educating younger muslims. i am a big advocate for that. some of the biggest protests in the history of the world are happening now in egypt, it is difficult for america to stay on the sidelines. in some way, maybe that's the right thing to do. >> how do we compete with saudi arabia that spends billions of dollars educating young muslims on wahhabism, which is so anti-west, so dangerous, so radical, and they're just growing. islam is on the march, we are officially in retreat. the time to stand up was on the green revolution. he wasn't on the fence, wasn't even outside, he was in the basement hiding. >> time to stop calling saudi arabia an ally, call them what they are, antagonist of the united states. >> eric had a couple huge interviews with rush limbaugh and glenn greenwald. the only show in history probably that has those two guys together! ♪

♪ andrea loves the cow bells. welcome back. busy workday. this morning on fox and friends, had a couple of big interviews, first with glenn greenwald on the edward snowden case, then with rush limbaugh on the egypt

unrest and the white house response to obama care and the push. rush has a theory on the president's urgency to sell the health plan. >> turns out they're having problems selling obama care. they're having so much problems selling obama care, they're actually turning to school kids, turning to librarians, nfl, nba, et cetera. what about it, rush? can this thing survive? >> eric, it is going to survive. it is law of the land. i don't think -- it will survive, but i think it is going to implode on it self. why are they selling it? it is the law of the land. i tell you why they're selling it, 2014 mid terms. >> he brought up 2014 mid terms. there it is. >> they've got to sell it, no one likes it. a third of people think it has been repealed. think about what they're doing to try and educate people on obama care. they're basically shaking down these organizations. you saw kathleen sebelius do it with insurance companies when she was soliciting donations to

get money to educate people on obama care. they have a huge problem on their hands and they know it. i still don't think roping in the nfl and players is going to help them fix the pr problem they have. >> they need young people. >> i tell you, one of the reasons they have to sell it now, they didn't sell it in the beginning. that was one of the big problems. now they have to catch up. it has a lot to do with 2014. not everybody dislikes it. and it is the law of the land. a lot to be perfected, but it will be the law of the land, try to make it work. if they don't do a better job of selling it, it will cost people at the polls in 2014. >> they didn't sell it in the beginning because they didn't want to sell it, because if they sold it, everybody would know what a sham it was. that's why nobody read it. it was a national enema. we had no choice. now they're trying to sell something they still aren't even clear on, so they need a program to sell a program, now they need a program to sell those two programs. >> are enemas covered under obama care? >> unfortunately no. >> you sound like you know for sure. >> i checked in on it recently,

why i have the imodium here. >> it is the opposite. >> this is the anti. >> i agree with bob. rush says it is going to be the law of the land. if you're in the administration, you've got to try. they're trying everything that they can. but something that's a problem for them is that the realities of the bill are catching up to them before they get off the ground. today, united health care announces they're pulling out of private insurance market in california, one of the largest markets in the country. what does that mean? it gives lie to if you like the plan, you can keep it. that company will probably be vilified by the administration, i would imagine, but they're probably making the best economic decision. >> undercut by the government. >> i was going to say in addition to what dana said, they promised premiums would go down,

they have gone up $2500. everything they promised is a lie, it is the opposite. trouble. >> this morning i had the opportunity to discuss the latest on the nsa leaker edward snowden with the guy that wrote the bombshell story, glenn greenwald from "the guardian." he said he has new dramatic nsa information and it is about to come out. >> i think what the obama administration wants and has been trying to establish the last almost five years now with unprecedented war on whistleblowers it is waging is make it so that everybody is petrified of coming forward with information about what our political officials are doing in the dark that's deceitful, illegal, corrupt. they don't care about edward snowden at this point. he can no longer do anything that he hasn't already done. what they care about is making an extremely negative example out of him to intimidate future whistleblowers from going forward, they think they'll end up like him. that's their objective. >> dana? >> i think if they have new information to come out, i advise them as a former pr

person, the holiday weekend is not the best time. may want to hold onto that. >> i would give even better advice. if you're an american and this hurts america internationally, don't do it. i really have -- greenwald, i don't believe that he thinks anything that has leaked could hurt america because he doesn't believe in the war on terror. it is always the so-called war on terror. so there's no such thing as espionage in his mind. therefore, anything that's released is okay, that's the frightening thing i think. >> quick thoughts? >> i don't think it is what president obama is doing to double o dork face, it is what dork face is doing to himself. president obama has no control over him, he can't get him back, can't pressure allies to give him back. if president obama really could flex his muscles, he would. he's not. >> i quote watergate papers, daniel ellsberg, what he did was

expose i will lee gallonity, he uncovered that from the united states government when it comes to tapping their own citizens. you may want your stuff tapped into. i don't want them to touch mine. they can kiss my -- >> two issues, did edward snowden break the law, the other, did the nsa break the law. in my opinion -- >> i wish they would be specific. >> if you tend to like jazz music, read books on the beach so people think you're smarter than you are -- >> wait a minute! how does that go backwards like that? i can't figure it out, to impress others. how did that happen? ♪

♪ that will wake you up. a british survey says a fifth of all adults admit they tried to impress other people by acting more clever or cultured than they are, doing things like reading a serious magazine on public transportation. mentioning a recent opera outing in conversation. i did that, i have to admit i left in intermission because it was terrible. how about that people are stealing their jokes and wearing glasses with clear lenses. and pretending to like jazz, something i would never do for one second. i love this survey because i said i thought oh, my gosh, i know people like this, or i've done it. greg, people do take a lot of your jokes, recycle them. it is really annoying. >> do you know why i banned phrases? people are like why do i do

that? that's because jargon is the worst offender. people use jargon to sound smarter without coming up with an original thought. they'll say it is what it is rather than explain something. the biggest trick of all has been played in recent generations, called open mindedness. open mindedness has been portrayed as being intelligent and judgmentalism seen as narrow minded and stupid. that created horrifying majors in varying things because they have to be open minded. >> people that quoted shakespeare. have you ever quoted shakespeare? >> i am quoting "the wall street journal but not shakespeare. retweeting a clever tweet is bad? >> you do it to impress others. >> retweet means it is not yours. you credit the original tweeter. >> throwing up for the holiday

weekend people that read a serious book at the beach. does that annoy you, make you impressed? >> i usually leave the conversation because i don't want to hear it. i usually read us weekly on the beach. i never try this, i look like a phony. i like to repeat jokes though. dana, they say men quote shakespeare to impress women, if a guy was like romeo, romeo, i would be like check pleased. >> i don't think people are impressed with that. bob, i am impressed with you, you don't have to try these. >> good reason, i don't. never been to an art gallery, never listen to classical music. i read playboy on the beach. talked loudly about politics, done that. wouldn't get on public transportation. >> you wouldn't, mr. liberal? >> i don't travel. >> man of the people. >> it is not that, there's thugs on there, like you.

i plead innocent here. a, i am not clever, b, i don't do any of that stuff. i do like jazz. >> you do like jazz? really? wow. >> that's news. >> i love jazz. >> i figured out, dana, i do have really thick books that i've never read on my bookshelf. i don't do it to look smart, everyone is like you read all these books? i am like no. when i was younger, i had car keys. one thing i did before i could drive, so people thought i was older. one phony thing i did. >> if you have a serious book with you, if you get called to jury duty, there are certain books you could take with you that if you're holding them, a jury will never pick you. >> like bush's biography? oh, i don't want her. >> people try to impress you with reading material in the bathroom. that just means you spend a lot of time in here. >> is it like in the movies, you

see people with the ipad? >> you spend a lot of time talking bathrooms. >> spoken from a guy with a bottle of imodium in front of him. >> do you take reading material into the bathroom any more? >> it psychologically stains the magazine. >> many people lose the iphone, usually like dropped it in the you know what. >> would you retrieve it? >> no. >> everybody i know that dropped it in the toilet would retrieve it. you would, you would get somebody else to do it. >> put a glove on. >> that's terrible. >> you're a monster. >> no, they don't work any more anyway. >> put it in a bag of rice, it dries it out. >> that's a disgusting conversation. >> ask jeeves would never mistake us. >> he would have a hell of a time today. coming up, should this 19-year-old be behind bars for

making a sarcastic comment on facebook? could something like this happen to you? details on that conversation next. ♪

test test. yeah, behind bars since late march for what his father says was a dumb joke on social media. he was arguing with someone on facebook about a videogame when he made an offhanded comment about shooting up a school. he was arrested and charged with making a terrorist threat, crime punishable with up to ten years in prison. eric, what do you think? >> tough one. i am all for free speech, there are certain things you can't do, as we're learning, in the george zimmerman case, you can't make racist remarks, just kidding, can't call me a white ass cracker, lol, not be offended by that. the point is, can you do it on

text, on twitter and facebook, do it in person. if i were saying this out loud, you have to say how would it sound, and live by that. >> he is in jail two months. this is ridiculous. >> he is 19. >> we need a national holiday, to say lighten up, america. you got kids with guns on their shirts, nra, angry tweets, kid with the pop tart shaped as a gun. we're going nuts. this guy said something really bad as a joke, they could have visited him, he could have said hey, i'm sorry, check him out. the guy is -- this is nuts. >> we talked about the guy yesterday, bob, that rapper, and he is sentenced to etiquette classes to deal with his tweets. this kid is in jail. and we seem to have no perspective any more. he is 19. and they didn't find anything at the home. the woman that saw it and reported it is from canada. >> what do you think? >> this is absolutely outrageous. is there no more free speech in this country? saw a jailed filmmaker, this

kid, it was a dumb comment, he was being sarcastic. someone said you're crazy, you're insane, he says oh, yeah, i am insane, like i am going to shoot a bunch of kids. sarcasm doesn't translate. they visited the house, no guns, no threat. i spoke to an attorney to say in order for this to be worthy of putting him in jail, he would have to say i am going to go shoot up a school at 9:00, get my guns -- >> this is an example of us going overboard on terrorism, taking it to the degree it is getting absolutely silly. go out and find some terrorists, leave this kid alone. >> linked to the sandy hook thing. >> before it. >> it was a month after. >> even so. >> it is crass, but it could be easily solved, visit, make a phone call. that's it. >> you want to say something? >> listen, i agree with you guys, kid probably shouldn't be

in jail. you can't say i've got a bomb on a plane. can't say there's a fire in a movie theater. >> it is the difference between saying i want to rob a staples and greg, meet me at staples, 9:00 p.m., we're going to rob staples, kidnap a person. >> thing this would happen before 9/11? >> the austin police department should be slapped down. where's governor perry, hello? sorry. >> where's the judgment. >> where are the politicians in texas? >> i agree with you. i just think this is another overreaction to 9/11. >> but it is not overreaction to terror, it is overreaction to gun shootings. >> should all be called a terrorist act. one more thing is next. ♪

♪ it is time now for one more thing. greg? >> today, banned phrase, baked in the cake. i've heard this three times today so far during the zimmerman trial. i want dana to explain what it means, you use it all the time. something is baked in the cake. >> means something is already in there, you can't get it out. i didn't use it in reference to the zimmerman case. i said the liberals had been baked into the cake of the government, that's what i said,

and it makes sense and people understand it. can't get the eggs back out of a cake after it is baked or the flour, sugar, whatever you used to make a cake. >> i want to apologize to america for even bringing it up. >> maybe you should. >> i did, i apologize. >> i want to talk about something nice and pleasant. president and mrs. bush were in africa, president obama and his wife were there as well. that's bob's phone. they were hosting the african first lady summit, in tanzania, helped clean up, spruce up an aids clinic. today, the president, president obama and bush were together at the tanzania memorial. a great trip all around. >> very nice. >> congratulations to both of you. >> eric? >> we heard about the 19 firefighters that were killed out west, trying to battle that blaze. this morning, one of the wives was on i believe the "today" show. watch. >> the best person i've ever

met, and he gave all for his job and it doesn't even compare to what he gave for his family. >> so there's a way to help. i did this, i donated a thousand dollars today to united way. there's the website for that. these people need some help, they're very young people, they have young families. nice way to do it would be that way there. >> absolutely. >> very nice. bob, do you have a call? >> sorry about that. thought it was going to come on later. on this day in 1964, almost 50 years ago, president lyndon baines johnson signed into law the civil rights act, probably the most important sweeping act, brought racial equality or attempt at racial equality to the country. lyndon johnson to be congratulated, martin luther king, of course, and all those that participated in a very difficult legislative achievement. may it live in history. >> indeed. very nice. since greg gutfeld is not

officially is not announcing for new york city mayor, check out the cover of the post today, kiss and tell. that's right. the man that's running against anthony weiner came on my radio show, said he hopes that the women that weiner dated will come out and talk about their experience dating the weiner. i wonder what would happen if they would pair up on the same ticket, joe loda and weiner. >> i thought he sold dirty pictures on the internet. he went out with you? >> he was quite the ladies man, dated a number of gal pals. >> do you think that's a good strategy for loda? >> to come on my radio show, absolutely. >> does it take away attention from his platform. >> any kind of name id is good in new york city, especially when a lot of reporters have predetermined outcomes. baked in the cake. it is hard to get good press in

new york. weiner can lead in democratic polls for pulling his pants down, how can it hurt. down, how can it hurt. welcome to "red eye." i'm tv's andy levey filling in for greg gutfeld who is locked in his office because somebody put the keys on a high shelf. let's go to michael moyn hi an for our pre game report. what is coming up on tonight's show? >> scientists in italy claim human head transplants will become a reality. could doctors attach a funnier one on bill schulz's little body? probably not. plus, first lady michelle obama says living in the white house is like being in a nice prison. her hunger strike for better con dieciouseses is in -- condition is in the third week. and a new line of lego for girls is a massive success, but is it exist? but is it sexist?