if your pill isn't giving you the control you need, ask your doctor about non-insulin victoza. it's covered by most health plans. 1:00 in new york. 1:00 in washington. foxnews alert. former acting cia boss. mike morel, taking heated and pointed question on the hill. a brand-new hour of "hq." welcome. >> hi, i'm sandra smith. the fireworks on whether mr. mo morrell bowed to pressure on the attacks that took four american lives. let's get back to michele bachmann asking questions. >> if we don't take the totality of the information about something this important. until we get it right. this wasn't just in the

immediate two days afterwards. the president of the united states, two weeks later, in front of the united nations, continued the false narrative that it was a youtube video that was responsible for what happened. as a matter of fact, that film maker went to jail for a year and he was the only scapegoat while the thugs and criminals in benghazi are still wandering the streets. he's the only one that has ever gone to jail. no wonder the american people are absolutely upset about this because how interesting that at the u.n., the number one agenda identify imof the oic was to criminalize any speech in any country h somehow insults the prophet muhammad. why is it our president and secretary of state continue to put forward was parallel to the agenda of the oic.

i don't get that. and it had nothing to do with the facts on the ground reported by the eye witnesses on the ground. so, it seems to me that what you rely on from your analysts, didn't take into account the truth, so that's what gives us problems. >> man, i want to clear something up hoar, really important. there's implication in what you're saying that the analysts were aware of the eye witness accounts when they did their analysis, wrote it on the 12st and disseminated on the 13th. they were not aware of the eye witness accounts. and i just wanted to clear that u up. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. morell, i'm going back again to this intelligence report that you used on september 13th called extremist capitalized on

benghazi protests. that's the one you used, correct? >> uh-hm. >> and you were quick to point out there was no mention of a video in that. >> correct. >> but you failed to mention there were two other cia pieces produced on the 12th both mentioned the, quote, recently released flamer to video, unquote. were you aware of these two products that were published on september 12th? >> probably. i don't know in what context those references were made. >> so, if the reference to benghazi protest wasn't related to the video, what type of protest did your analysts believe it was in reference to? >> their view what motivated the attackers that night changed overtime. what they said on the 13th was that the attackers -- >> you can't have it both ways. >> look. are you going to let me answer

the question? >> i will. but you can't have it both ways. >> i'm not trying to have it beth ways. i'm trying to explain the facts. on the 13th analysts said what motivated the attackers is what happened in cairo, they saw the guys go over the fence at the embassy in cairo and wanted to do the same thing in ben guard zi. they later added another motivation. which was calling for revenge. those are the two motivations analysts have talked about, period. >> but -- >> so i don't understand. >> why do your analysts ignore, if they went along with the protest, the cairo row defendant, al libi pretty test. why do they ignore the other two wheezes talked about in the video and they don't include that in this analysis? >> i don't know the answer to

that, sir. >> i yield back, mr. chairman. >> our time is out. i just want to clarify again for the public, i think this is important, the talking points are one of the data points in what concerns the committee as we look at all of the classified materials going forward. that the narrative just wasn't -- may not have been for political campaign, which is beyond your position, mr. morell, but that that narrative continued on afterward and subsequent, so we had seen the fact that we've seen pulling back of certain counter terrorism programs that we believe we've, dangerous islamist extremists on the the battlefield in a way we wouldn't do before. the fact we have a number of individuals who have been left on the battlefield we know participated in a terrorist act that killed americans in benghazi, something that wouldn't have happened before and our concern is trying to under all of this and that narrative, and did that

narrative bleed into what is real policy today, which is why you see members so frustrated about what are we doing to bring these people back, and if there are those who were involved in the decisions that don't believe it was terrorism is alive and well unfortunately, that it poses a threat, then you can see that narrative actually being implemented in a way that i think is dangerous to the united states and that's why i think you see the concern of this committee. why the way, behind closed doors in this committee, there's bipartisan concern as you saw today about moving forward, about things are being done that we used to do that i do believe puts america in a position to be more vulnerable. that's why i think you see the interest in the emotion today. i want to thank you for your candid testimony today. i want to thank you for your 34, 33 years. you -- someone told me you started when you were 11.

i think your wife floated that to us. we do appreciate it and thank you for being here voluntarily. >> you're welcome. it's good to be here. you and i have spoken at length about counter terrorism. and you and i are both deeply, deeply concerned about this country and where it's headed and i really appreciate that. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, thank you for this hearing, i think it's important to have these hearings, i want to say to my republican members that i respect each and every one of you have a point of view. i think the reason this committee has been so bipartisans, democrats and republicans might not agree we respect the fact somebody has another point of view. and we try to come together for what is right for the american people. where i am personally, not speaking for other members we need to have investigations on issues as important as this and american people are looking for

answers. my point, we've had six separate congressional hearings. we've had thousands of hours spent on investigation, and yet we're still looking for the issue of whether or not the facts that we have, the facts that we have before us, were politically motivated. i think this that is where this is coming down to. and there are some people that think, people on both sides, might think it is or is not. you have to deal with the facts. that's what i'm doing today. that's what you've done today and i think you presented yourself well in that regard. i also want to talk about mr. labiondo. he works hard, travels to dangerous places to do what he needs to do. that's where i am basically with what he is talking about. we need to make sure the focus is finding these bad guys who killed americans. that's where our focus is. now, the fbi is conducting the majority of investigation working with other people. that maybe is another area where we need to look.

at that point where the evidence is, we somehow have to decide where we're going from here. >> and that should be the highest pry orrist. if in fact -- i have a lot of respect for mr. pompeo, there's more information, and i know the chairman the way he works. i tease him about being former fbi agent a and i was former investigative prosecutor, if there is any other evidence that leads us to come to different conclusion, we'll prioritize. you have to look at the russian cyberthreat, terrorism threat. it goes on and on. you only have certain hours a day. it comes to a time. where do we go here. do we get hearings, where i haven't seen anything that gets to that one issue. was it split click motivated or not. if there's evidence, we'll deal with it. in conclusion, i have a lot of respect four. i know you served your country well.

it's unfortunate allegations that get out there. you came before us. you did not back away and i think your factual statements will hopefully clear up some allegations that have been out there. thank you for your service. >> people can find this statement by tomorrow. >> 3 hours and 6 minutes, that hearing now wrapped. mike morell. director of cia. one critical element is talking points and why. what morell said classified sources told us al qaeda was involved but because they were classifieded sources that was not part of the talking points passed around washington, d.c. and then he conceded i wish it was in there. but you heard several lawmakers, they admitted they were confused and confounded by that response. even if they're classified sources why would not information not been contained in there. katherine herring has been

reporting on this from day one, 2012 and again today. katherine, the headlines from this hearing are what? >> just a short time ago there was an exchange which seemed to summarize the frustration of the republican members on the house intelligence committee. essentially what the former acting director of the cia. michael morell testified to is that the buck stops with me on the talking points. i was responsible for the changing. there was no outside political interest. but this explanation just did not seem to hold water for a number of members, rather. listen to this exchange with congressman bachmann. >> you made significant, substantive changes for the white house. whether it was on behalf. we don't know, but we know you are the one who made those changes. >> ma'am, if you look at the

record, what you will see is the changes i made were fully consistent with what our analysts believed at the time, perio period. >> one of the extraordinary headlines we had in the last few minutes was also from morell and his pretty stunning statement. what he said was that the analysts -- and we heard this consistently -- he relied on the findings of the analysts in washington, who were thousands of miles away from the scene of the attack, and he also testified that those analysts did not have access to eye witness accounts on the ground when they said they believed the attacks came out of a protest. and that really begs the question for every single intelligence officer operating overseas. why are they there? to collect information about what is happening on the ground when it is essentially dismissed as morell testified today, by the leadership within the cia

and the analyst whose judgment now seems reigns supreme. not that of the station, but the top intelligence officer on the ground but an analyst thousands of miles away from the scene of the action. that is the headline that will be a body blow for many intelligence officers who are putting their neck on the line. >> we heard a little on the tend. catherine, thanks very much. back to you in a moment ago well. >> and did one of the members on the committee receive the answers he wanted? he's going to tell us next. >> i believed what my analyst said, that there was a protest. i also believe it it to be a terrorist attack. see, we never saw those two things as mutually exclusive. so i believed both of those at the same time.

hey kevin...still eating chalk for hearburn? yea. try alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heart burn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. alka-seltzer fruit chews. enjoy the relief!

at any time, did you have any verbal conversation with anybody at the white house about what the nature of those talking points were, and what they needed to look like? >> no, sir. >> at any time, did you have any conversation with anybody at the white house, and i mean anybody, that had anything to do with preparing susan rice for going out and being the face for america on that september 16th? >> no, sir. in fact, i didn't even know she was going to be on the sunday shows. >> and no one asked you to prepare talking points for her? >> no, sir. >> no one asked the agency either through the corrector or herself to prepare documents for her? >> no, sir. >> was she prepared or have information and materials from all of the materials we discussed, did she have any of those materials? >> i believe she had the talking points. >> just the talking points? >> i believe she had the talking points but she would have also had access to all of the

intelligence information that she had received in the days before. >> that was just some of the heated highlights from today's hearing. former cia boss, mike morell on the hot seat on benghazi. let's bring in florida republican tom rooney who silts on the house intelligence committee. congressman thank you for join us. >> thank you. >> what's the reaction to the testimony that we saw today? >> you know, it's more of the same. i don't think we're never r ever going to get the answers from a guy like morell from a guy on the cia. this that was a maneuver to avoid al qaeda's attack on a u.s. interest right before the election which would have changed the narrative to al qaeda is on the run, and no, they're still dangerous, oh, we had four americans killed

because we weren't protecting them. i don't know that mike morell really, as you heard from the sound bites before from our chairman asking him. did you coordinator with the white house, i don't know if we'll be able to prove or disprove whether or not that's true, but it's clear to me from all of the e-mails that we've read and all of the documents that politics was at play at every level from the state department to the white house, with regard to how is this going to look and what is it going to mean. that much, too me, is clear. and, you know, it's going to be up to the american people, and probably in the next election, whoever the nominee is on the democratic side, as to whether or not they're going to buy into that and believe that that's the way we should act across the globe, moving forward. >> with that being said, congressman, you know, he didn't rewrite the talking points. he made that very clear. he also said, quote, nobody deliberately misled congress. what do you think that his motivation would be for altering

those talking points? >> i don't know. i mean, it was speculative. he kept saying he didn't remember, on a lot of key questions that he had. he may well have coordinated. he denied it under both that he had any coordination with the white house. in that situation, we had to take him at his word but regardless of what mike morell's point was trying to do with making those talking points as na villa as possible at the end because they didn't start out that way. it came back very, very scaled back and scaled down. and that wasn't the point that the committee was asking for talking points in the first place. we were trying to get on the same page as the intelligence community as to what happened so we could attack this together. but when the white house got their hand on it and state department. it became we can't have members of congress going out there and

spouting off on something that happened in benghazi that doesn't fit within your narrative. >> congressman we'll have to leave it there. thank you for joining us fresh hill today. >> thank you. >> certainly the search for answers continues on benghazi. coming up "hq." senator nancy ayotte, will be live in a moment. she has other own answers and pressure is on to release the man who shared national secrets to israel. can jonathan pollard's freedom play a pivotal role in middle east peace talks? oth sigh ] ♪ ugh! ♪ you told me he was good, dude. yeah he stinks at golf. but he was great at getting my claim paid fast. how fast? mine got paid in 4 days. wow. that's awesome. is that legal? big fat no. [ male announcer ] find out how fast aflac can pay you

at aflac.com.

[ male announcer ] find out how fast aflac can pay you put it on my capital one i earn unlimited double miles. hey, you're not the charles barkley? yes i am. nah charles barkley is way taller. there's my picture on the wall. yeah that could be anyone. what about my jersey over there? oh yeah, that's your jersey. there's my bobble head right behind you. alright well let me see you bobble.

yeah, i'm just not buying it man. earn unlimited double miles with no blackout dates from the capital one venture card. my brother john, he works here. john, you know this guy? what's in your wallet? these days, everything is done on the internet. and tomorrow you'll do even more. that's what comcast business was built for. slow dsl from the phone company was built for stuff like this. switch to comcast business internet. then add voice and tv for just $34.90 more per month. and you'll be ready for tomorrow today. comcast business. built for business. a surprise twist in the middle east peace talks. there were question whether or not an american convicted of spying on his own country could

become a key bargaining chip. casey mcfarland, national security analyst. how are you? k.t.? >> who is this man, pollard? why is he considered so significant here? . he was tried and convicted and sentenced for spying for israel. in other words, he worked for the united states navy department. he took secrets. he gave them to the israeli government. he was convicted and found guilty and sentenced to a life sentence. now, the israelis have, for year, ever since the late 1980s. when the trial happened. they said, look, we want him back. he wasn't guilty of anything. this is a mistake, et, et cetera, et cetera. what kerry is doing, secretary kerry is throwing a hail mary pass. he said pollard is in jail, he's sick, he served a long time. if we release him, israel, don't you think we should give him concessions on this israeli

palestinian negotiation? secretary kerry is desperate to not get -- >> the suggestion is pollard can save the talks. . yes. >> but will this lead to middle east peace? >> there hasn't been peace in the middle east for thousands of years. secretary kerry things he can throw a bone to the israelis and they'll make concessions which might endanger their national security in exchange for pollard. i think it's not only foolish, but revive policy that isn't there. this has always been a hopeless case. israelis and palestinians don't want peace nearly as much as john kerry wants to be the guy who is the peace-maker. that's the problem. we should have seen this in every country we've dealt with. we can't want it more tan they do. right now the two group, palestinians and israelis don't see a common ground here. >> we're a country of law, right, k.t.? he's been found guilty and sentenced, correct? >> that's correct. >> not only is the hail mary

pass going to fail because the israelis will not sacrifice their security for this. but secondly, we're a country of laws and we don't have a president that will willy-nilly, as part of a bargaining position, let people out of jail. if there's a legal reason to do it, fine. if you think it's going to sweeten the deal to make a better deal and maybe somehow peace talks will get back on track. i think we need to think again. >> or if he's freed and talks fail. what does that get you? >> what precedent does that set. >> thank you, k.t. nice to see you again. we'll talk soon. thank you. >> so, what's next there? >> also, we have more coming up on benghazi, former cia boss saying he pushed the facts on bengha benghazi, as he makes this startling claim. tivational spea?

i look around this room and i see nothing but untapped potential. you have potential. you have...oh boy. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. it's eb. want to give your family the very best in taste, freshness, and nutrition? it's eb. eggland's best. better taste. better nutrition. better eggs. it's eb.

head lines now, unofficial death toll still climbing from the devastating mudslide in washington state. county medical examiner claiming 39 people are dead. 20 missing after that disaster ten days ago. >> and british government join the search for flight 370. saying one of the submarines arrived in the ocean today. australian authorities say search planes may not sign signs of wreckage and there may never

be a answer for what happened. and classic sandwich getting recognition. it's national peanut butter and jelly day. the average american eats five pb&js a month. i'm not average. i'm not one of those five. >> we were talking earlier, what is your favorite combination? >> uh-huh. pb&j. >> you're' big fan, right, smitty. . i had one for breakfast. >> fire away at bill hemmer. >> and sandra smith, fbn. . you got it. >> ruling by the supreme court that came down today might change the course of future clad plit cal campaigns. the court striking down limits on overall contributions to political campaigns. foxnews digital politics ed for and author of foxnews first, how

are you, sir? >> i'm well. >> they're saying get over it. you can't decide how much money a person can give each cycle. here's the deal. you remember the president made a big deal on what we call the citizens united case that said you can't put a limit on when and how much organizations can spend to say what they believe, that if you -- whether you're republican, democrat, libertarian, whatever, the government can't say when and how much. so, that changed things. president talked a lot about it. he upgraded the supreme court. it had an interesting effect. was that it took money away from candidates and political parties. and they call them shadowy outside groups. democrats and republicans have become equally good exploiting these outside groups. instead what happens now with the consequence of this decision, is that candidates and parties will be able to take lots more contributions from individuals. that means it's transparent,

we'll be able to track it and see where it goes. that also means these outside groups will have somewhat less interest, than the individual candidates and parties themselves will get a shot in the arm. >> did they give it limits or just say limits that are now going to continue? >> they still have limitations on how much you can give an individual candidate. that still sands. >> and how much is that, chris? >> that's a 2200 -- i forget what it is. how much can i give candidate x. what they said was the government can't put a limitation on how many candidates i can give to. previously it said 17. you max out. you can give the 17 campaign bus no more. they said that's arbitrary and silly. you can't do that. that means deep-pocketed donors are able to invest in a lot more candidates in a lot more races across the country. it's good timing for the republicans looking for a whichway to broaden the map and be competitive with more races. >> back to the first answer, the

president did not like citizens united. >> oh, no. >> that dealt with corporations and companies. will the left like this decision or not? >> they don't like anything much that isn't sort of a government-funded taxpayer funded campaign. they want to take the money out of politics. in time, i think they will see this as a better solution than they had before. just remember this. the democrats complain about these things and then end up turning out to be very adept at exploiting them. i'm sure this is no different. >> thank you, chris, kreis stirewalt. nice to see you. >> today, the former acting cia chief, mike morell concluding his testimony on benghazi and three republican senators mccaimccain graham and ayotte. renewing their request to investigate what happened. senator ayotte is with me now.

welcome back here to "hg." i know you were not in that house hearing but i know people talked in washington. do you believe the p testimony of mike morell took us in a different direction as of today? >> i think there's still many questions that need to be answered. first of all, as i under it, mike morell thought there was a protest based on what he has been presented. but also equally leaved there was a terrorist attack, so why is it that the demonstration he has in the talking point but the fact it's a terrorist attack did not. really went to the heart of the matter. we knew the secretary of defense knew it was a terrorist attack and gregory hicks testified it was a terrorist attack. that would have given a much better picture to the american people about what was going on. i don't accept the explanation why he removed the references to al qaeda. i think that's an unacceptable explanation that somehow this was a classified source. does that mean when we get

attacked by al qaeda we'll not say what this is an and it's a terrorist attack, i think it's misleading. he also said, he didn't believe susan rice or, to his knowledge, anyone at the cia. so who did brief susan rice and go beyond the talking points and claim al qaeda had been decimated even though it has been removed from the talking point. who is shaping her testimony which inaccurate. >> you mentioned a classified source. what he said at the end of his testimony was that the classified sources were the ones that told us al qaeda was involved in benghazi, but because they were classified sources, that would reveal sources and methods why bay of american intelligence, that that should not have been in there. and then they went to to suggest i wish it were in there. what explains why. what sort of confusion was offered for the lawmakers to explain why classified sources would prevent that line of information, from being

included? i think it's inconsistent. i will also say this, that we also know that an affiliate of al qaeda took responsibility. that was known at the time. even though they with drew their claim, that was public information at the time and it does not make sense to me that we would not be told even though they knew it was a terrorist attack from the beginning, that it was a terrorist attack, but somehow the american people were told they believe al qaeda committed the terrorist attack or afill yats of al qaeda. >> do you think mike morell is covering up? do you think he's not giving the full truth? >> i don't know. i was in the meeting with senator mccain, and susan rice when he originally told us it was the fbi who changed the talking points. so it's been obviously a number of changes even though he was the one that actually removed the reference to al qaeda from

the talking points. i don't know why he wouldn't have made that clear to us when we had a meeting in the fall. >> do you believe him or not? >> i'll tell you, until there's a full complete investigation of this, i don't know what to believe. because there's been so many inconsistencies, unfortunately. again it never gets to the question why did susan on all of the sunday shows and really misrepresent this. >> you're pushing for a select committee. i don't know if that's going to happen. perhaps it does and maybe not. regardless, what happens next in this investigation? >> obviously, i would like to see a joint selection committee that really reviews and puts all of the committees' jurisdictions to get the bottom of the picture here. that said, next, i hope there continues to be followup, i hope by the house and i think we would want to know the answer to the question. who did brief susan rice and why was this misrepresentation made to the american people and why

did she go well beyond the talking points? i think you have to look at the context of this right before an election, where the narrative was for -- that al qaeda had been decimated, even though this attack contradicted that narrative and they didn't want people to know at the time. >> senator, thank you for your time. busy day down there. kelly ayotte, talk for coming on today. >> closely watched report on jobs out today, just ahead of the big government jobs report out friday. what did it reveal? >> also is obamacare more about politics than the people of america? fair and balanced next. >> it's not about policy, it's about politics. we should never have a deal about politics. if you want to move big things and solve big problems, do it on a bipartisan basis. this bill never had bipartisan support. that's the reason it's going to fail. it has failed so far.

you know how painful heartburn can be. for fast, long lasting relief, use doctor recommended gaviscon®.

only gaviscon® forms a protective barrier that helps block stomach acid from splashing up- relieving the pain quickly. try fast, long lasting gaviscon®.

but with so much health care noise, i didn't always watch out for myself. with unitedhealthcare, i get personalized information and rewards for addressing my health risks. but she's still gonna give me a heart attack. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

we've got one congressman who has been grilling the former deputy director of the cia about the benghazi talking points that's coming up. plus mothers of the benghazi victims tend to give a speech. hillary clinton will be there next week. now that will be in person. did they cause that change? and cleej athletes want to un yohnize. and meet the little boy that gave a soldier $20 that he found because he reminded him of his father that died in iraq. the most amazing pay it forward story you'll ever here all at the top of the hour. >> gretchen, thank you. a survey out today ahead of the big jobs report. jobs were short of expectations of 195,000. they predict the government's more comprehensive report will show more jobs added. we shall see on friday.

>> this is a phony number, and it's wonderfully precise. these guys go six months without any idea what the numbers. and all of a sum it's to a decimal point, 7.1, not .2. it's meaningless, so, afrjt, we don't know howment have paid. so it's an enrollment number that's not unrollment and the important number is how many were previously uninsured. >> charles krauthammer suggesting what we don't know about the obama enrollment numbers. meanwhile. the surge may not be enough to give the democrats up for re-election this fall. david webb, host of david webb radio show. kirsten, maybe the numbers came

too perfectly above the 7 million benchmark. he's questioning that. >> i don't think it's fair to say they are phony numbers. we don't have evidence of that. it's hard to make up a number that we'll prove at some point is uncontradict. i think even if you account for the fact a certain percentage of these people have not actually paid their premiums which is typical. they are seeing where between 85 to 90% of people will play the premium. they are probably going to still come close to hitting the 7 million number. and i would argue that even if they didn't hit the 7 million number, it still would be success. because if you consider how things started. i think it's incredible they would even get close to the number because it's been so difficult for people to get on. it makes you wonder how many people would have signed up had the website been working properly. >> david many are arguing we don't know much about that 7 million figure. we don't know how many have paid and whether they were previously

ininsured. is the president and his administration celebrating too soon here? >> yeah, they are celebrating a little too soon. i'm upset with charles to steal my talking points and do them ahead of me but the reality is, this is a phony number when you look at the fact data exists when you go through the enrollment process that gives graphic information. age, gender, that website is out there. they could put it out. for months they haven't been able to give it to us, because they don't want to. they want to show the young invincibles they are not seiping up. they quote 48 million americans that needed coverage but how many of 7.1 million exactly are those that lost coverage for whatever reason. so that's a transference. and numbers that matter. how about the value of subsidies that make it cheaper for the individual and net-net economic

is a loss for the american people and taxpayers who are paying for them. >> why not release the numbers if they have them. kirsten? >> i don't know what they have. it would be nice to have more information about this, there's no question it's been frustrating to not get all of the information that we need and i think it's going to take time. >> kirsten what does it do for the my namic as we head toward the mid-term elections. poll after poll, obamacare is not popular with the american people. >> obamacare really was never popular with the american people. that would have happened regardless how the rollout went. the rollout made it worse. i think this would have been a problem for democrats. either way, it would have been better for them if things have gone well and perhaps they could say this is unmitigated success. now they are sort of in the defensive because things have gone so badly and even with these numbers they still have to exchange the fact that a lot of these people were people who already had insurance. there were people who lost their

doctors after being told you're not going to lose your plan. those are issues that make it difficult for democrats to turn this into something positive for them in this election. >> but, david, one could say that the democrats could see this as a big opportunity, as we head towards the mid terms, to go after those republicans that have been pushing to repeal this law, now that reportedly 7 million people have signed up under it. >> they can sell whatever narrative they want. what the narrative can't overcome is the fact that americans who look at this say i'm the person that's not being served if i wanted obamacare. the 48 million, again, it you take away 7. that still leaves 41 million by the democrats numbers that are not getting their health care in some form, the unsureinsured. they can't use a narrative to oversell the truth. we have to stick with the structure in a lot of way, this is about numbers. numbers do exist.

if the data didn't exist you couldn't determine the subsidy, you couldn't determine the cost. the insurance company couldn't determine a price. if the data is there. why don't they it out? they can't support argument and narrative. >> this debate will continue. thank you. >> thank you. >> federal education standards known as common core facing controversy. one state has withdrawn, will other states follow suit. the powerball winner who got his jackpot on april fool's day. those winnings are no joke.

we have a winner, a retiree who didn't want to show his face holding up a checks for $425 million after winning last month's powerball jackpot. he finally claimed his prize on april fool's day. >> he's no fool. no way. indiana drops out of common core, controversial education standards. 45 states adapted math and reading measures. now other states may follow the hoosier lead. mike in chicago on this. mike. >> we could be looking at the beginning of a domino effect. oklahoma senate approved a house bill rejecting common core. indiana was the first to turn back on this national set of standards. the program is intended to elevate the performance of struggling schools.

schools say a federal overreach, take over and does not nurture schools that are performing well. >> while some states may have needed to improve their standards, settling for a status quo of mediocrity for every state certainly shouldn't be the answer. we should be striving for something much higher than that. >> wisconsin and kentucky are also exploring the potential of pulling out of common core. the program does have its supporters, republican governor of michigan rick snyder is one of them. >> curriculum itself and how it's taught is at the local level. bringing the high standards with common core and flexibility in the local school district and the school with the teachers on how that gets applied and delivered to the students. that's a good balance. >> supporters of common core say if this was a heavy-handed federal mandate, indiana and now looks like oklahoma would not be able to just pull out of the

program. >> interesting. thanks. mike tobin more on that as it develops. thanks in chicago. open up the cupboard. it is national peanut butter and jelly today. we want to know -- >> you're a fan. >> i am. >> what's your favorite combination, america? your best tweets are next. >> we want to hear them. what's not to love about a pb & j. >> you make a good argument. >> ham and cheese? >> it's so satisfying. (dad) well, we've been thinking about it and we're just not sure.

(agent) i understand. (dad) we've never sold a house before. (agent) i'll walk you guys through every step. (dad) so if we sell, do you think we can swing it? (agent) i have the numbers right here and based on the comps that i've found, the timing is perfect. ...there's a lot of buyers for a house like yours.

(dad) that's good to know. (mom) i'm so excited. that's a ringtone. what's your favorite combination, america? we asked, you answered. >> david, only natural crunchy

peanut butter and grape jelly. i eat onant and a banana. >> jack and coke. >> peanut butter and jelly with bacon purchase everything better with bacon. i think so so. we're back tomorrow, hope you are, too. gretchen carlson starts now on "the real story." >> thanks, guys. we start with fox news alert. fireworks on capitol hill as the man in charge of the cia at the time of the benghazi attack talks now, what really happened that night. hi, everyone. i'm gretchen carlson, welcome to "the real story" today. member of the house intelligence committee grilling former acting cia director mike morell about his role crafting talking points and allegations he caved to political pressure towed it them. bret baier is the host of special report and my guest. fatnating. co