went down. again, thanks for watching us tonight. i am bill o'reilly. please remember, the spin stops here. we're definitely looking out for you. i'm martha maccallum in tonight for megyn kelly live in new york city. and tonight -- senator ted cruz throws down a challenge. >> it is unconscionable. >> the angry senator as one of the iranians responsible for holding americans hostage heads here for a big u.n. job. ted cruz is with us. plus -- see how an off-duty marine reacted when a protester decided to dis the american flag. plus, dr. kathy platoni was working at fort hood when major nidal hasan opened fire. in fact, she was at the top of his hit list.

she joins us live tonight to talk about the feds and how they're handling it. then and now. breaking tonight, new details on the shooter behind the second mass murder at fort hood as investigators determine whether he intentionally targeted his fellow soldiers. this is "the kelly file," everyone. i'm martha maccallum in tonight for megyn kelly. so this gunman killed three people and wounded 16 more before fatally shooting himself. just hours ago the secretary of the army telling congress that the military cannot yet rule out terrorism completely. >> we're going to keep an open mind and an open investigation and we will go where the facts lead us, and possibly extremist involvement is still being looked at very, very carefully. >> policy is to avoid using the names of these mass shooters.

rick levin that'll is live in fort hood in colleen, tx text tonight to look into some of the details, though, on this gunman's background. good evening, rick. >> good evening, martha. the u.s. army has confirmed the identity of the shooter, a husband and father who was born in puerto rico and joined the puerto rico national guard 15 years ago, in 1999, and has worn a u.s. army uniform on and off ever since. he did two overseas tours including four months in iraq from august to december 2011, driving a truck during the u.s. troop withdrawal from that country. and he received 11 commendation medals for service and awards. but this was a deeply troubled man according to fort hood's command officer lieutenant general mark milley, who says the shooter had an unstable psychiatric condition, likely the fundamental underlying cause of the shooting. and the trigger event may have been some sort of argument with other soldiers just before the shooting began. >> it was mentioned yesterday there may have been a verbal altercation with another soldier or soldiers, and there's a strong possibility that that in

fact immediately preceded the shooting. >> reporter: the shooter had claimed he suffered a traumatic brain injury overseas, but the army says he was never really in combat and was never wounded. and the shooter claimed ptsd and was being tested for it but was never given that diagnosis. he'd only been here at fort hood a few weeks after a routine transfer from fort bliss, and friends back in puerto rico say he was deeply devastated by the loss of his mother back in november and his grandfather just a short time before that. but losing a family member doesn't typically trigger a mass shooting and now investigators are talking to witnesses and other family members and colleagues to try and determine who made this soldier turn a weapon his fellow soldiers before killing himself, martha. >> thank you, rick. one of the first questions to come up after this shooting is why were none of these victims armed? john lott is a foxnews.com columnist. his son was at fort hood yesterday. lott asks why his son can carry

a concealed handgun whenever he is off the base from fort hood and can protect himself and others. but on the base he and his fellow soldiers he says are defenseless. why would that be? texas republican congressman steve stockman is behind a bill that he hopes will change that. congressman, good evening. good to have you here. you go so far as to say you believe the extent of these shootings happens because these soldiers on this base are not allowed to be armed. >> that's absolutely right. in fact, this is a 20-year experiment that's failed. this has only been in place 20 years. we're not talking 50 or 100 years. this has only been 20 years. and since it's been in place you see a rapid increase in this kind of violence on bases. and john lott's absolutely right. as he walks off the base, he can carry a gun. >> i mean, it is extraordinary in many ways when you think about it. in fact, after the original fort hood massacre the restrictions

were tightened on this base, correct? >> yeah, this is a bizarre response. i know there are some generals that are saying hey, we shouldn't still allow them to protect themselves, but these are young men and women we say we want them to protect us. and it only makes sense if we're trusting them to protect us we should trust them to protect themselves. and this is a notion that we need to give them the right to protect themselves. it's a crazy notion that we train them and then we don't allow them to -- to say you can't have a gun. it doesn't make sense. >> the fact of the matter is when you look at all of these mass shootings there's one thing that ultimately ends the violence, and it is when that person generally is confronted with a gun. and that's what happened here. a brave military police officer on that base, a woman, stepped in and stopped it, right? >> yeah. in fact, you look at all the gun violence, almost all in what is called gun-free zones. people that rout there committing crimes are not stupid. and this is a soft target.

and it will continue to be a soft target until we give our soldiers the right to carry a weapon that they've been trained to use. >> a lot of controversy where this is concerned. thank you very much, sir, for sharing your side of the story. good to have you tonight. >> thank you so much. thanks. >> new developments tonight in the struggle to stop an iranian hostage taker from coming to america as the ambassador to the united nations. his name is ahmid mutalebi. he was one of the students who grabbed the members of our embassy in tehran back in 1979, holding 52 americans for 444 days. we have been trying to get answers from the state department about whether the administration will block this guy from coming. watch this exchange. >> does the state department have enough data on the visa application of ahmid mu tachlt a lechlt bi to be the next ambassador to the united nations? >> no updates. we don't talk about visa cases individually. we've raised concerns about the possible nomination with the government of iran. >> numerous former hostages who

were held for 444 days. you can understand their outrage. there's been numerous statements in the past 24 hours. do you have any message to them? >> i said it is extremely troubling to us. >> does the state department view this as a slap to the face? >> i'm not going describe it that way. this is troubling. we'll talk about it with the iranians. >> is the state department looking into what his involvement may or may not have been in the hostage situation? >> the u.s. government is looking into this case. in terms of him i just don't have anything further for you. >> has iran ever apologized for its role in the 1979 hostage crisis? >> i don't know. >> would you like to see an apology if this ambassador -- will go forward? would you like to see an apology from the nation of iran? >> i'm not going to make predictions. >> texas senator ted cruz has introduced a bill that would prevent terrorists from entering the united states as u.n. ambassadors. good to have you here. >> it is it's great to join you. >> what do you make of that exchange at the state department?

>> it's dismaying. and even more dismaying is this is yet another indication of just how radical, how extreme, how anti-american iran is. this is not an accident that they nominate and name an admitted terrorist, someone who participated in holding americans hostage for 444 days, and they propose to send him as their ambassador to the u.n., to live in new york city and manhattan. that's completely wrong, and it's designed to be a slap in the face. >> that is the nature of the slap in the face question. i was just going to say. especially with our ongoing nuclear negotiations, supposedly, with iran. if they were really serious about negotiating, do you think that they would send over this former terrorist to be representing them at the united nations, someone who held 52 americans for 444 days? >> of course not. and i would note that even calling him a former terrorist -- the group that took americans hostage still have his name and picture on their

website. and you're right. this goes to the broader question about the naivete of the obama administration, that they think they can engage in good faith negotiations with a nation whose leaders refer to israel as a tumorous cancer that must be removed, who refer to israel as the little sate sxn america as the great satan. a nation that right now is holding pastor sayeed abedini, an american, in prison, prison, simply for professing his christian faith. this is not a good negotiating partner. >> what would you do? she's saying we're the host nation for the united nations, you know, we are not the united nations per se, we are the host nation for this entity. no doubt there have been a lot of people who floated in and out of those doors that a lot of other countries would rather not have there. >> you know, there's something fundamentally different about an acknowledged terrorist. right now the current statute requires that in order to exclude someone on a visa that they have to be a national security threat and they have to

have committed espionage. sought legislation that i introduced in the senate this week changes the and to an or. it doesn't require that they have committed espionage because we don't have evidence that this person has done that. it simply says if they're a national security threat we can deny their visa. and i would note under the existing statute if the taliban in afghanistan had sent osama bin laden as their ambassador to the u.n. the argument would be we'd have to accept him into new york city. now, that's crazy. and i will tell you, martha, i do have some hope that we're going to see bipartisan agreement on this. i was encouraged that senator chuck schumer, a democrat, and senator bob menendez, another democrat, have both been supportive of the effort. i am hopeful we will get all 100 senators to unanimously consent to pass this legislation, to keep acknowledged terrorists out of the united states. all right. we are also keeping tonight a close eye on severe weather threats out there, as we get

several reports of possible twisters. we're watching that. we'll bring you the very latest. plus, wait till you see what happened when a u.s. marine spotted some protesters dissing the american flag. and why did former cia directors decide to cut any mention of islam in describing a deadly terror attack? the answers, next. >> i took out the word "islamic" in front of "extremist." and i took it out for two reasons. i've always kept my eye on her... 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.

(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.

[annpurina pro plan can can help him achieve it. epic classical ♪ music stops ♪music resumes purina pro plan's bioavailable formulas deliver optimal nutrient absorption. purina pro plan. nutrition that performs. with the quicksilver cash back card from capital one, it means unlimited 1.5% cash back on everything you purchase, every day. it doesn't mean, "everything.. as long as you buy it at theas station." it doesn't mean, "everything... unl you hit your cash back limit." it means earn 1.5% cash back on every purchase, every place, every occasion, all over creation. that's what everything should mean. so consider... what's in your wallet?

all right. now to a revelation that is raising some new questions about how the white house handled the benghazi terror attack that killed four americans. former deputy cia director mike morel yesterday admitted that when he edited the white house talking points he specifically removed the word "islamic" from the term "islamic extrtalking p. >> i took it out because we were dealing with protests and demonstrations across much of the muslim world as a result of the video. and the last thing i wanted to do was to do anything to further inflame those passions. >> well, if you think back to this time, it was not just morell who was trying to placate

the muslim world during this time. do you remember this effort by the president and the secretary of state in they put this message out on the following day, squarely blaming the murders on the video and rorgd a message of apology that was to be run on television in pakistan. >> the united states government had absolutely nothing to do with this video. we absolutely reject its content and message. >> remember that? and despite the fact that the president said that he knew that this was a terrorist attack on day one, he was still blaming the video and pointing to it again and again weeks later. >> here's what happened. you had a video. extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies including the one, the consulate in libya. what we do know is that the

natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video -- >> the crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the muslim world. now, i have made it clear that the united states government had nothing to do with this video. >> so interesting to look back at all of that effort, right? hindsight now. south carolina congressman trey gowdy. he's a member of the house oversight and government reform committee, and he joins me now tonight. good evening to you, congressman gowdy. what do you think when you look back at that concerted effort? >> well, what we know now, martha, is the video had absolutely nothing to do with the attack on benghazi. the question is how soon did the administration know it? they knew it on september the 12th. and what i find interesting about mike morell's testimony is in the state department e-mail where they call it islamic extremism. that is the cause that they cited of the attack. nothing about a video. no one on the ground in benghazi

mentioned a video. so for the president to perpetuate this mythology on the eve of an election and frankly susan rice continues to refuse to apologize for misleading our fellow citizens. mike morell made eight different changes to the talk points. and martha, every single one of the changes he made, going from an attack to demonstration, from terrorism to extremist, every one of those changes was calculated to cast this administration in a more favorable light. >> it's interesting because he said he took the word "islamic" out because he didn't want to further fan the flames that he felt were simmering across that entire area. and we did see the outrage and protests that happened in cairo. and there was that belief that maybe this was what occurred here. but as you pointed out clearly in the first 24 hours they knew this was a very orchestrated and militarily sophisticated attack. so why would he feel he needed to remove that word from that

testimony given the fact that they knew at that point that that's exactly what it was? >> well, mike morell gave two explanations, both of which are patently absurd. number one, he said that he didn't want to spawn more violence. if we just apologize enough, particularly to countries that don't let women drive or don't let women vote or still have these oxymoronic things called honor killings, if we just apologize enough under some version of the stockholm syndrome they'll forgive us. the other absurd explanation was he said what other kind of extremists are there in libya? there aren't mormon extremists. there aren't episcopalian extremists. the problem with that, martha is in their own documents they call it islamic extremists. so they're willing to say it to each other but they won't tell the american people, which leads to the third explanation. remember the narrative. osama bin laden is dead, and al qaeda's on the run. but we certainly can admit, six

weeks before an election, that al qaeda's not on the run. they're at the front door of our facility in benghazi, murdering our ambassador, and setting it on fire. heavens knows we can't make that admission. >> all right. congressman, thank you very much for being with us tonight. trey gowdy. >> yes, ma'am. so there is the view from capitol hill you just heard from trey gowdy, and then there is another view. mark teesen is a "washington post" columnist, also a presidential speechwriter in the bush white house. he joins us now. good evening. >> good to be with you, martha. >> what are your thoughts on whether or not -- part of, this we have focused so much on whether or not it was called terrorism in that first 24 hours, but you say there was in fact an effort to placate, to downplay discussion of islamic terrorism in order to appease this part of the world. >> oh, definitely there is. and unfortunately it's a bipartisan phenomenon, trying to downplay the word "islamic." i remember in the bush administration, in about 2005 the pentagon wanted to rename the war on terror the global

struggle against violent extremism, the gsav. and it was absurd. we weren't at war with all violent extremists. we weren't at war with the i.r.a. and the tamil tigers. we were at war with islamic extremists. so even in the bush administration we had our struggles over whether to call it islamic or not. but we never struggled with whether to call it terrorism. and that's the problem that we're facing here today with benghazi. president obama didn't want to admit this was a terrorist attack. so i wish you could -- i wish we could blame this on sort of high-minded misguided foreign policy motive, but it was a crass political motive. he wanted to get re-elected and he didn't want the american people to realize that al qaeda was not in fact on the run. >> mark, thank you very much. always good to see you. >> thanks, martha. so democrats are calling it the, quote, road to ruin. and mitch mcconnell is here on the fallout from a court ruling that many say will change politics forever. we're going to talk about that. and up next, the video you need to see involving a protest, an american flag, and a u.s.

marine. >> [ bleep ]. [ bleep ]. create a three course italian dinner with olive garden's new cucina mia for just $9.99. first, choose unlimited soup or salad. then create your own pasta with one of five homemade sauces. and finish with dessert. three courses, $9.99. at olive garden. ♪ ♪ no two people have the same financial goals. pnc works with you to understand yours and help plan for your retirement.

visit a branch or call now for your personal retirement review. but when we put something in the ground, feed it, and care for it, don't we grow something more? we grow big celebrations, and personal victories. we grow new beginnings, and better endings. grand gestures, and perfect quiet. we grow escape, bragging rights, happier happy hours.

so let's gro something greater with miracle-gro. what will you grow? share your story at miraclegro.com. what will you grow? 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?

. breaking tonight, a severe weather threat across a large portion of the central and southern united states this evening. thunderstorms, large hail, damaging wind gusts, even a few strong tornadoes are possible. you can see the boxes on the screen. severe weather hitting the fort worth area. look at those clouds. forecasters warning that the possibility of strong winds and hail does exist in that area. and early this morning a tornado striking the st. louis suburb of university city. look at the damage in that town of university city. trees down. fortunately, no injuries reported in that area. we'll keep an eye on it for you

tonight. as promised, now to a confrontation that is getting a lot of attention. it came during a recent demonstration in albuquerque, new mexico. they've been having a lot of problems in albuquerque lately. it involved two protesters, an american flag, and two u.s. service members. trace gallagher with more from our west coast bureau. hey, trace. >> hey, martha, these protests were sparked by albuquerque police fatally shooting a mentally ill homeless man. the protests themselves then turned violent after the demonstrators began throwing rocks at police and in turn police fired tear gas at them. two people were riding a scooter carrying an upside down american flag. that is supposed to be a sign of distress, meaning your life is in danger. well, an unidentified marine and another military man didn't see it as a sign of distress but as a sign of disrespect. they ran after the scooter and when the flag dropped as you can see, they picked it up and they rolled it up. but listen now to the choice words these military men had for the protesters.

play this. >> pick that flag back up! >> [ bleep ]. >> this started a debate about whether the military men violated the proerltss' right to free speech. some saying the protesters have the right to carry the flag any way they want. but this apparently became a theme of the protest because the same men who took the video you're watching here also took this picture of protesters hang the flag upside down with their middle fingers right side up and some believe that the military men finally said enough is enough and went after that flag on the scooter. >> a lot of free speech flying around there. trace, thank you very much. coming up, this story for you this evening. dr. kathy flatoni was working at fort hood when major nidal hasan opened fire. in fact, she was at the top of

his hit list. she joins us live tonight to talk about the feds and how they are handling this story then and now. >> she was about to go upstairs to her apartment. it's around 5:00 something. and they announced the shooter. soon as they announced the shooter she stopped dead in her tracks and she just broke down. mine was earned in korea in 1953. afghanistan, in 2009. orbiting the moon in 1971.

[ male announcer ] once it's earned, usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protecon. and because usaa'commitment to serve current and former military members andheir families is without equal. begin your legacy. get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve. and it feels like your lifeate revolves around your symptoms, ask your gastroenterologist about humira adalimumab. humira has been proven to work for adults who have tried other medications but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief, and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tubeulosis. serious, sometimes fatal events, such as infections, lymphoma, or other types of cancer, have happened. blood, liver and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions,

and new or worsening heart failure have occurred. before starting humira, your doctor should test you for tb. ask your doctor if you le in or have been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. tell your doctor if you have had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have symptoms such as fever, fatigue, cough, or sores. you should not start humira if you have any kind of infection. ask your gastroenterologist about humira today. remission is possible.

we have multiple gunshots. >> unbelievable hearing those sounds there. again, back to our breaking news tonight. investigators are still trying to figure out why a soldier opened fire, killing three soldiers and injuring 16 others before turning that gun on

himself. this tragedy comes less than five years after 2009, the shooting on the same base when major nidal hasan yelled "god is great" in arabic and killed 13 people and wounded 30 others. dr. kathy platoni was there that day. she had arrived one day before the attack to get ready for her deployment. she was not shot, but she worked tirelessly to save the lives of friends who were caught in that crossfire, one of whom died in her arms as she attempted to help him. >> joining me now is dr. kathy platoni, retired u.s. army colonel and psychologist for 30 years in the u.s. army. doctor, welcome. thank you very much for being with us tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> tell us a little about you and what happened in your experience that day at fort hood. >> i think the most important thing to remember from that fateful day was the unequalled heroism that i witnessed among all of our soldiers.

one thing that you can always say about people in uniform is they run towards the danger rather than away from the danger. and as all of us rushed towards the door to go to the building where the shooting occurred, we were unable to exit because the nine wounded were being brought in. several of my soldiers, my fellow soldiers, rushed the shooter and lost their lives in the process. and this just highlights the sacrifices that those of us who wear the uniform or have worn the uniform are so ready to make. >> you were told you were going to be his supervisor. you were told that you were at the top of his list, right? >> i was later told in the years following the massacre that indeed i was to be nidal hasanu was looking for me specifically. >> thank you for your service and for all you did that day and for all you've done in the 30 years of your service to help so many people who've been through these traumatic situations in

different forms in the military. but that shooting that you witnessed that day is still classified as a workplace shooting. do you agree with that decision? >> absolutely not. this has continued to be considered the act of a disgruntled employee and workplace violence is another of the ultimate betrayals that many of us have faced in the years following the massacre. when someone stands up behind a cubicle with two pointed lasers and two weapons and yells "allahu akbar," that is a terrorist incident admitted from nidal hasan. in the years following the massacre the families, the wounded and the survivors have yet to receive the full benefits deserved at the hands of an enemy of the united states. and again, nidal hasan has admitted being just that. >> absolutely. absolutely right. kathy, what was it like for you when you heard this news, you know, these 911 calls?

you must have been in absolute shock this could possibly happen in the same place again. >> yes. abject terror. it's as if the world beneath you begins to crumble away. i think for those of us who've been exposed to trauma, you're always just an inch away from the feeling that disaster is right around the corner. and to have that repeated has struck a devastating blow for so many of us who were there that day. and for anybody who's been exposed to trauma and terrorism. it definitely rocks your foundation in a very powerful way. >> your work is so extraordinary because you have been right in the middle of these situations. and even before that you dedicated your life to helping people deal with this kind of trauma. and that it happened to you in your own situation. what do you think if you look at this one and this story and you start to hear there was some argument beforehand, that he was being treated, that he was on several different medications? what's your assessment? >> you know, without having all the facts, it's very hard to

assess the specifics of this situation. i think that we're very much in the dark ages in terms of looking at signs and symptoms and taking them seriously. i realize this person was undergoing treatment. i don't know the quality of the treatment, whether he was receiving psychotherapy in addition to medications. but i think we are so quick to dismiss what is so obvious that may not be safe for people. i think we look the other way too easily and shirk our own personal responsibility for reporting things that just don't pass the smell test and that your gut tells you are indicative of danger. >> really important words. dr. platoni, thank you very much for your service and your dedication to these situations and for all you've done -- >> thank you. a tremendous honor. >> good to have you here tonight. many thanks. >> thank you. all right.

to politics now. as democrats are accusing the supreme court yesterday of sending american democracy down the road to ruin, they say. is it true? up next, mitch mcconnell, a senator, will talk to us about that. plus the man whose case led to this historic decision. when we come back. >> money out. we asked people a question,

how much money do you think you'll need when you retire? then we gave each person a ribbon to show how many years that amount might last. i was trying to, like, pull it a little further. [ woman ] got me to 70 years old. i'm going have to rethink this thing. it's hard to imagin how much we'll need for a retirement that could last 3years or mor so maybe we need to approach things dferently, if we want to be ready for a longer retirement. ♪

developing tonight, new anger and anguish from liberals and democrats reeling from a historic u.s. supreme court ruling that they believe will ruin american democracy. some gathered on the steps of the supreme court yesterday, making some dire predictions about the ruling that lifted some limits on donations to political candidates. >> the direction that the court is headed in is just dramatic and just dark. >> it is the sign of a court that has an agenda. >> the money rules and everybody else can go hang. >> today deals a real blow to those of us who believe in integrity and government. >> inequality is sweeping over our political system. >> this is not about democracy for the many. this is about democracy for the money over here. >> very unhappy on the hill yesterday. in a moment we're going to speak with the businessmen and

conservative activists whose case was at the heart of that ruling. but first, megyn spoke yesterday to a public senate minority leader mitch mcconnell about this ruling. he had filed a friend of the court brief in this case. watch this. >> good to see you again, sir. and so this is a victory for your side. i want to let the viewers know basically what this did was there was a limit of $123,000 per election cycle. basically, every two years that you could donate to candidates and their parties. and once you hit $123,000 you had to stop, you couldn't donate any more. folks like you said that's a violation of free speech. what the other side is saying tonight is that the bottom line here is much more money is going to be flowing into politics, mostly flowing from rich people. is that a good thing? >> well, it was a great decision for our democracy. what the court did was to rule down -- to overrule congress's efforts to kind of micromanage how people participate in political campaigns.

there's still a limit on what an individual can give to a party, committee, or to an individual. but no cumulative limit on how many party committees or how many individuals they can contribute to. >> so let me just stop you there so the viewers understand. so before if somebody wanted to donate to mitch mcconnell they could donate i think it's 2,600 bucks. >> and they still can. that's all they can give. >> they can't give $5,000 more, $10,000 more. but if that person had already donated $123,000 in the past two years and then they wanted to give mitch mcconnell 2,600 bucks they could not before this decision. now as a result after this decision they can. they can go above 123,000 cumulative. >> in other words, they can contribute to more candidates. not more money to each candidate but to more candidates. it's none of the congress's business how many candidates americans want to contribute to. so this encourages more participation, more speech, more involvement. and look, megyn, with a government that spends about $4 trillion a year and is big enough to take away everything

we have, we don't need the government micromanaging americans' participation in the political process. >> but this is -- the other side says what this decision does is it helps rich people because regular folks don't donate more than $123,000 every two years to politics, you know, to politicians. so this just opens the door for rich people to start controlling elections and greasing the wheels in a way that regular folks cannot. >> well, rich people have always had the opportunity to do that. they can go out and spend all their money on a political cause if they want to. there's nothing new about that. you know, what -- let me tell you what the liberals really wanted, megyn. and this supreme court of course would never let them do it. they want the government to control how much is said in campaigns. in other words, a spending limit. how much a campaign can spend advocating its point of view. and they want that to be paid for by the taxpayers. they want the government to take over the process of getting to office so that the people who get in office are more beholden to the government. that's what they really want.

and this supreme court has basically said under the first amendment political speech is the most important speech referred to in the first amendment and it's none of the congress's business micromanaging how many candidates people can support. that's the core of this decision. it was an excellent decision. it's good for our democracy. >> it was a 5-4 decision so the viewers know and it was a plurality. but in any event, do you think -- because in this case it was basically republicans and conservatives on one side and liberals and democrats on the other side. the liberals and the democrats lost. do you think this is going to help republicans in the coming election? >> i think it will help the country because it will be more money available for more candidates to get their message out. whether they're on the left or the right. to try to convince the american people that what they want to do in congress is the right thing to do. look, america doesn't suffer from too little political speech. we need more of it, not less of it. and that's why this was such an important decision for our country. >> senate minority leader mitch

mcconnell. good to see you, sir. >> thank you. >> interesting, right? so now that i cable news exclusive, the man who won that lawsuit that led to this historic supreme court decision. shawn mccutchen is a member of jefferson county, alabama's republican party executive and steering committees, and he's the founder and ceo of coalmont electrical development corp. shawn, good evening. good to have you here. >> great to be here. >> did you ever expect you that would be at the center of a case like this that got so much attention? how did you get into this? >> well, i just became an activist several years ago. i didn't expect this much attention in all this, but i'm very glad and happy that it happened. >> what do you think it's accomplished? >> well, i think we've accomplished more money from private individual people exercising their free speech, especially in the political process. i think it's a very good thing that private people and individual people outside the government are going to be able to support more candidates, parties, and committees. >> well, you saw chuck schumer

on the steps of the capitol. he said this is leading to the ruination of this system as we know it. i'm paraphrasing him. but that was the idea. basically, it seems like democrats are very upset about this. they think conservatives and republicans are the ones with the deep pockets, even though we do know, actually, that democrats tend to have more money in the coffers at the end of most elections anyway. but that's the take on this. that it's a rich people, elitist way to get your dollars to some candidates who might not be able to get noticed without them. >> well, again, chuck schumer is an elected official. he's in the government. this is about people outside the government being able to have their voice in the media and spread our ideas in the political marketplace. which is very important. it's not about the government regulating itself. it's about our free speech outside the government and our political process outside the government to choose who's going to be in the government. i can't for the life of me

understand why chuck schumer is against free speech or free americans in a free country. >> how do you think this will allow you to sort of expand your freedom of expression, your freedom of spending your money around -- you know, how will you do things differently now under this law? because you can't -- as we put it up before, you can't give a lot of money to one candidate. you max out at the 2,300 level and then, you know, you can spread the money around to a lot more candidates. right? >> that's correct. you can support more candidates. you can support more parties. and more committees or pacs, which are essentially state parties. so it allows you to support more numbers. it involves the number of candidates and committees that you can support. it's not the base limit. >> shaun, thank you very much. shaun mccutcheon, at the center of this very controversial decision that some believe will lead to the ruination of the campaign finance system. you are on the other side of that, sir, obviously.

thanks for being with us tonight. good to have you. >> thank you. >> coming up, hollywood legendary producer jerry bruckheimer sat down with us next. plus hannity at the top of the hour. >> once this is full, then you put them in this van? >> yep. they'll fill this with the prisoners. they'll come from different prisons. and then they will be put into our transport van and taken to the sxwral. download the expedia app text expedia to 75309 expedia, find yours i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired.

i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. whether you're just starting your 401(k) or you are ready for retirement, we'll help you get there.

news tonight. a severe weather threat in several states tonight. reports just in of possible tornadoes spotted in missouri. people near st. louis are told to take shelter at this hour. thunderstorms, damaging wind gusts, large hail the size of baseballs reported in eastern kansas. tornado watches in place in

texas tonight. listen to your local areas of watches in effect at this hour. well, film and television producer jerry bruckheimer is the man behind some of the biggest hollywood hits of the last three decades, including "top gun," armageddon" and the emotional story of "black hawk down." earlier he sat down with megyn and talked about his new book "when lightning strikes" and what makes him stand out in hollywood other than his vision and success. >> you've come out with this new book. and the reference is your conservative politics. how did you last four decades in hollywood with conservative politics? >> everyone has asked me that. hollywood is about success. if you're going to make them money, they are with you. >> here in new york, the progressives are accepting of everybody except for successful conservatives.

that's the one group they seem to not like. >> i don't know it they like us, but as long as we do them at the box office or on the tv screen, they like us a lot. >> you're seriously this powerful producer. "beverly hills cop," american gigalo, you own half of the industry. >> i don't believe that. i believe that if you're really talented and good at what you do, politics has nothing to do with it. we don't sit and argue about politics. they let you be. believe me. the only thing they don't like about me is i don't donate to their favorite politician. >> but you did in the past. how did you go from a guy that donated to barbara boxer to george w. bush? >> well, you change your views sometimes. it changes. >> you've come out with this book. why?

because you need more money? >> that's exactly it. you've got it. it's kind of a celebration of my career. i'm a photographer. it was a coffee table book to show the work that i did and great photographers and the stuff they did. plus, it's an inside look at the movies that i like to produce and kind of tells the audience how they got made and why they got made and how we got these great actors and directors to work with us. >> you're a blue collar guy. you didn't come from money, you didn't come from privilege. you worked your way up and started at the bottom. >> exactly right. my dad was a salesman his whole life, i grew up in chicago far away from hollywood. i got into the television section of the mailroom and made award winning commercials and moved to new york and then came to hollywood. >> it's truly an american dream. you've worked with so many forwards. let me do quick hits with you. nicest person you've worked with, nicest star.

>> johnny is up there. he's the most caring, kind, wonderful man. he takes his kids to school whenever he's in town. loves to play the guitar, hangs out with some of the great guitar players. >> enough about the nice people. biggest diva. >> i wouldn't tell you that. >> come on. >> i can't give you that. >> i tried. i tried. are you considering banning ben affleck who says when i watch a guy i know is a big republican part of me thinks i probably wouldn't like this person if i met him or we would have different opinions. do you think he should be banned from jerry bruckheimer movies? >> no. i like him. he's a good guy. >> he doesn't like you. >> he likes me. he'll accept my politics. >> sure he will. >> megyn, i have to work with every government. i can't just pick republican government. we need a government for our movies. i had to work with the clinton

administration and obama administration. so i've got to be kind to everybody. >> good for you. thank you so much for the enjoyment that you've brought to so many millions. >> thanks, megyn. >> good stuff. go to facebook.com/thekellyfile. we'll be right back after this.

we are back. keeping an eye on the potential for tornadoes tonight in certain counties in missouri and texas. watch your local coverage for that as well. if you missed the interview with ted cruz, go to facebook.com/thekelly file. i'm martha in for megyn tonight. and tonight, should soldiers be allowed to carry firearms on military bases? that and more on this jam-packed edition of "hannity." are you ready, america? let's roll. >> we have an active shooter on ft. hood. >> so what went wrong? >> we have multiple gunshot wounds. >> the latest developments on yesterday's tragic ft. hood shooting. >> also, part three of the expose traditio