jon: and we both agree we wouldn't want jay carney's job, especially at this moment in time. jenna: but you reap what you sow. jon: that is true. we will see you back here one hour from now. jenna: "outnumbered" starts right now. ♪ ♪ >> welcome, everyone. this is outnumbered, i'm kimberly guilfoyle, and here today, one lucky guy with, steve doocy, and he is outnumbered. feeling pretty good about thatsome. >> i only showed up because i heard you were having lunch. [laughter] >> you came for the snacks. >> the first half hour i will have my legs crossed like you gals do, in the second half hour, i'll go that way. >> solidarity. [laughter] >> i'm starting on your side. >> he's already stirring the pot. >> i think he's up for the challenge. we're going to see if we can break him in a little bit more today, but now we have breaking

news on benghazi because we're awaiting comments from press secretary jay carney at the white house on the latest developments. there was also an emotional moment on capitol hill. a former top intel official telling lawmakers the military should have tried to protect the lives of americans and saying nobody ever thought a video had anything to do with the attack. all that leading to this tension exchange with congressman jason chaffetz. >> what was going on in the room, general? our people are under attack. there are people dying. what is the military doing? >> desperately trying to gain situational aware withness in an area wherety awareness in air area where we had a dearth of it. >> were they moving to the sound of the guns, or were they sitting around for the state department and hillary clinton to call them up and say do something? what did they actually do? >> we sent the predator drone overhead to be able to -- >> did we do enough, general?

>> sir. >> and it's those infamous talking points that susan rice gave on the sunday talk shows that has lawmakers and many americans hopping mad as newly-released e-mails show senior aides neck deep in sharing those talking points. and it's an e-mail from deputy national security adviser ben rhodes that really stands out, pushing rice to say the attack was, quote, rooted in protest over an anti-muslim video. senator john mccain telling fox news a short time ago the appearance of a cover-up is why we need a select committee to investigate. >> the appearance by susan rice was alleging there was a hateful video that sparked a spontaneous demonstration was not only not based on any fact be, but they went ahead in contradiction to information such as the station chief in libya who said there was no spontaneous demonstration. >> powerful news day, harris. a lot of information coming forward and finally the answers,

and answers to questions that fox news posed right from the beginning. >> yeah. you know, really what's at the heart of this, kimberly, is this idea of perseverance of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, obviously, from the declaration of independence and the idea that we're all safe. so where there's deception or even the whiff of deception and knowing when americans were killed, the american public has a right to know what happened. so we as journalists are tasked with trying to figure out what the truth is, because if you're being deceived, you're being manipulated, and that's not freedom can. we don't know the answers. and you're right, today's a very important day for getting to some of the answers that are unfolding. you've got the hearing going on. there's a little break right now. when it comes back, we'll monitor that for the big, hot moments. a pivotal moment in finding out what's happening and an important one in american history. >> you know, sandra, we saw the people advising the president, people that we were counting on to get the answers have proved themselves to be masters of on few scaition. they have -- obfuscation. they have misled, tried to cover

up, redacted documents, and here it is, so much time has passed, are we still going to be able to get the answers we deserve? >> well, you know, we're finally seeing some heated conversations and journalists actually pressing for answers. we saw in the white house press briefing yesterday it got very heated. we have yet to see if it's a similar environment today with jay carney. but yesterday carney said referencing those talking points susan rice had which we now know were false, he referenced that that was the best information that we had at that time. why didn't they come out and say that rather than doing what we now know was misleading the public and putting out false talking points? it's going to be really tough for democrats to try to distract from this conversation right now. >> yeah. steve, welcome again to the program. give us your thoughts. you've seen this news develop throughout the day here. >> well, you know, what's interesting is let this be a lesson to the kids watching right now. when you tell a lie and you get caught, you get in trouble. you were talking earlier about

how there's clearly been a cover up because they got caught, but there was also system sort of a conspiracy because the general lovell today said we knew at 3:15 in the morning that it was not the video. the white house knew, the cia knew. we knew at fox news the next day that it wasn't that, and so it's very curious. so you've got the controversy of the cover-up, and you've got all sorts of problems right now. they're stonewalling, but they can't anymore. what's interesting though to me is hillary rodham clinton, right? why didn't she go on the sunday show? probably was because she was told, okay, we want you to tell this lie? she goes, i don't think so. one of these days i'm going to be done giving my $400,000-a-pop speeches, and i'm going to run for president, so i can't do that lie. >> kirsten, we were speaking earlier before the program about this and kind of your take on it, which i think is unique. >> yeah. well, i think there are two scandals going on. there's the scandal of what the

white house has done. and, look, we did know this was knowable information in the beginning. the station chief said it was the video. for them, you know, to have said this, they had to know that it was wrong. and if they didn't know it was wrong, then they're incompetent. so those are their options, they're incompetent, or they made this up. so that's scandal number one -- >> so you're stupid or a liar. >> number two is the media. the fact that this e-mail is now finally out when anybody who thought that benghazi was a scandal was crazy toons, right? and now we see this e-mail that was interestingly not released and was, in fact, redacted -- >> redacted, right. >> -- in previous requests, and we only know about it because -- >> judicial watch. >> so all the journalists who were just the white house line, that this is just a fox news crazy scandal, they didn't do their job. this is information we needed to have before the election. now, i mean -- >> but that's the problem, it just goes to show you the timing

is no coincidence here. this is just, i think, on their part malfeasance. the fact of the matter is, they knew. there's no delay in the information coming out now except that it impacted and affected the outcome of an election that was very important. >> you know, i want to ask something about these hearings, and i was watching this morning. and i didn't watch every single second, but i don't think i missed it. what about questions coming from democrats themselves? >> oh, my gosh, unbelievable. it was unbelievable. >> yeah. >> i mean, i'm a democrat. democrats actually can care about this. democrats actually can care -- >> and they should. >> -- that this happened, and the way they just ignored this general saying these unbelievable things and just pretended like he wasn't there, it was appalling. >> but it goes to credibility too. i've seen in court cases and, kimberly, your an attorney, to add credibility to your side, you always ask questions even if they don't make you look good, because you want to seem fair. >> i'm curious -- this is the first day, by the way, that we have a very strong liberal voice on this show, and i think it's

going to be interesting if you spin this forwards to the midterm elections. one way that democrats and the administration have tried to distract from this story is pointing to out the economy, but we're still looking at unemployment at 6.7% in this country, we've still got a major problem with the housing market. where are they going to go when they try to run from this story as we have seen them do so far? >> well, i don't think thai going to have to run from the story, probably, because i think it's going to continue to be ignored the way it's been ignored. hopefully, i'll be wrong -- >> well, you've within very honest -- been very honest and candid many your answers. >> they could have told the truth in the beginning, and people probably would have gotten past it, right? >> how much does this hurt hillary though? >> well, i think -- again, if people pay attention to it, it would hurt her a lot. but i think that she'll probably push it off as a right-wing conspiracy. >> i like sandra's question because it talks to the future, and it speaks to something that's going on today. and it drums up another thing too.

democrats are starting to feel some heat after a new poll shows a key part of the political party's base does not plan on vote anything the midterms. a new harvard poll finds fewer than a quarter of millennials say they will definitely vote this fall, yet young conservatives seem more likely to head to the polls than their liberal peers. 32% of self-identified republicans say they will definitely vote in the midterm, that's a change, right? compared to just 22% of young liberals. so what about the democrat message is not resonating with 18-32-year-olds, kirsten? >> well, so typically they don't show up in midterm elections generally speak, and democrats generally don't do as well in midterm elections. that said, there was another poll i think harvard did that showed that they are still falling beneath what the turnout democrats, or democrat millennials are still falling beneath the number they hit in 2010. >> all right. i've got to bring it to a chose. white house briefing, jay carney, let's watch together. >> review the history here.

what happened in benghazi was a tragedy. four americans were killed including the u.s. ambassador to libya. this administration's focus since that event has been on pursuing those who did harm to americans, who killed americans and bringing them to justice and taking action to insure that the failures in security that helped cause this or lead to this event were addressed and changed. what we have seen since hours after the attack, after the attack beginning with a statement by the republican nominee for president is an attempt by republicans to politicize a tragedy. and that continues today. and yesterday. how much time has been spent focused on talking points that

could have been spent on -- [laughter] moving forward to help create jobs in this country and move the economy, grow the economy. how much time also has been spent, obviously, on show votes to repeal the affordable care act, something that a majority of the americans have said they don't want to -- >> but, jay, november 2012 the president said i think it's important to find out what happened in benghazi, and i'm happy to cooperate in any ways that congress wants. we have provided every bit of information that we have. >> right. >> that e-mail was not provided. >> have you read the e-mail, jim? >> i have it right in front of me. >> okay. so here's the thing, backing a year ago now roughly when republicans on capitol hill were feeding information to reporters about what was in a bunch of e-mails that had been given to congressional investigators, feeding false information about what was in those e-mails and in those talking points that were

produced by the cia, we voluntarily released all the information regarding those talking points. causing news organizations to have to correct what they had reported because it turned out to be false because they were lied to by folks on capitol hill about what was contained within then. you've -- within them. you've seen deputy director of the cia testify repeatedly, including, i believe, last week that he produced those, the cia produced those talking points. he made the decisions about what, ultimately, would go in those talking points. and that he felt no political influence from the white house or anywhere else about what should go in the talking points that were such a focus of conversation. the talking points that were provided to members of congress of both parties and by this administration to our representative who was going out on the sunday shows to talk

about benghazi and everything else that was happening in the muslim world at the time which included huge protests outside of numerous diplomatic facilities, violent protests that included, you know, scaling of walls, taking down the american flag, you know, molotov cocktails and the like, right? the talking points that ambassador rice used -- again, produced by the intelligence community for members of congress and in the interest of having everybody use the same information, used by the administration and ambassador rice on those sunday shows -- were divulged. and like so many of the conspiracy theories that have been promulgated by republicans from the beginning of this, this one turned out to be bogus, right? the documents released through a foia request by the state department that include the e-mail that you're talking about are explicitly about the broader

areas, separate from the attack on benghazi -- >> but they go to talking points. it talk talk talks about the got protests are rooted in the video -- >> i'm sorry, did you say protests? read the talking -- it's a q&a about protests in tunis, in cairo, everywhere. >> at that time that was this administration's explanation as to what happened. >> no, no, no. so here -- let's just get to the facts here, okay? so in -- the cia talking points said -- you just said it did. the currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in benghazi were respond tape lousily -- spontaneously inspired. that language comes from the cia-produced talking points that have been the focus of discussion now for some time.

that, you know, produced another dry hole in the effort to prove a conspiracy by republicans. as mike morrell, deputy cia director at the time, and so many others have testified, this was based on what was -- as it says here, the currently-available information suggests. the fact that some of it, i mean, that a lot of it was murky then, that some of it turned out to be different from what an analyst thought was the case at the time is something we've discussed repeatedly, right? the fact of the matter is, and i would encourager you to go -- encourage you to go back and look at what was happening and what was being reported during that entire week is that there were potentially dangerous and violent and even fatal protests happening at facilities everywhere. and so there was these basic top lines about that. but on the specific issue of the

benghazi attack, our representative, the administration's representative who went out on the sunday shows, the u.n. ambassador, relied on points provided to the congress and to the administration that were produced by the intelligence committee -- i mean, the intelligence community. and, you know, i feel like we've been through that, right? i mean, is there nothing -- and there's nothing in the e-mails yesterday -- look, if the e mill that you're -- e-mail that you're talking about had been, if you had seen it earlier, what would you have said? well, it doesn't have a bearing on the cia talking points that we released because republicans were, staffers on the hill were feeding them to some reporters, falsely characterizing them, and we felt it was necessary to set the record straight. so voluntarily we provided them to you. and it turned out that the charges were bogus. well, you know what? that's not the first charge that was bogus. the one about the idea that there was a military standdown

order that got a lot of air time on some channels, bogus. right? conspiracy theory that turned out not to be true. >> so all of this is politically-motivated? >> all of what? >> all of these questions, the fact that these questions are -- at this point -- >> when darrell issa gets up and said what he said today, i don't know, you guys be the judge. >> all right. does the white house have a firm understanding of what happened to those mitt romneys that night? >> -- to those americans that night? >> there is an active investigation to find the people responsible, there is an active investigation into the details. the answer broadly is -- >> 18 months ago. still no firm grasp as to what -- i'm just asking. >> well, no. as i said -- >> was it a video, was it protests? was it -- >> you should ask the intelligence community what their current assessment of what happened was. what we know is that there was an attack, that there were extremists involved, and four

americans were killed. we have been saying that from the beginning. again, if you look at the language provided at the time by the ic to members of congress and the white house, that's what ambassador rice stuck to. and as i said and others, it was based on what we believed to be true at the time, and we, there were caveating all the time about the fact that more information might become available, more details might become available, and as they did, there would be more information to provide. what hasn't changed has been the effort by republicans to, you know, to claim a conspiracy when they haven't been able to find one. and, you know, what we have done is provide 25,000 pages of documents. we have provided, you know, officials who have testified on capitol hill. we've spent a lot of time in this room and elsewhere talking about it. and, you know, the focus should

be on making sure that what happened outside of the diplomatic facilities in benghazi doesn't happen again. and yet in the president's budget he proposes investing $4.6 billion to secure overseas personnel and facilities including sufficient funding to support embassy security construction funding of $2.2 billion as recommended by the accountability review board chaired by admiral mullen and ambassador pickering, but congress hasn't acted on that. instead, they're holding hearings about talking points, right? so you might want to ask them why they haven't acted on this. by the way, those are recommendations from an accountability review board that at various times republicans have tried to impugn, an accountability review board led or co-chaired by the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff appointed by president george w. bush. and again and again, they come

back to this, and, you know, instead of focusing on what the real issues are are here which is there were serious problems identified in a very critical report, independent report produced by with, again, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and one of the most celebrated diplomats serving administrations of both parties that outline 29 recommendations that ought to be taken. and the secretary of state at the time immediately accepted all of them despite the fact that it was a pretty critical report. and began implementing all of them. that should be the focus. ed, it's your turn. >> if e-mail was not about benghazi, why did the white house turn it over to a conservative group seeking information about benghazi? >> you would have to ask the state department about how they responded to foia requests. i would, again, point you to the fact that -- i mean, all you have to do is read it, ed, right?

top line points, goals, that kind of stuff. the only mention of benghazi in the e-mail is a question about what's your response to a story by the dependent newspaper in the u.k. that says we have intelligence -- we had intelligence 48 hours in advance of the attack that was ignored. not aware of any actionable intelligence, was the answer. and then what does it do, it cuts and pastes the same line from the cia talking points that, again, was what ambassador rice used. >> it's not about benghazi, why turn it over in a benghazi suit? it seems -- >> you would have to ask the state department about their process for responding to foia requests. again, you can just read it and then decide for yourself as many people have now said and written. like this is a conspiracy theory in search of a conspiracy -- >> some group comes in and says we want benghazi documents, the administration says this is not a benghazi document, so we're not turning it over. >> again, i don't -- this is a

state department foia response. yeah, but again, whether it was released monday or a week ago monday or whatever, it doesn't change the fundamental facts about the so-called talking points which which, despite great efforts by your news organization and others, have been, you know, proven not to be a conspiracy. you know, mike morrell, the deputy director of the cia served at the cia for decades under administrations in both parties, said that he felt no political influence, you know, when he was directing the composition of those points. and it was based on what he believed was the best analysis of what happened at the time. and in the very first sentence of those points, it said currently-available information in a situation which, by the way, was incredibly murky and chaotic halfway around the world. not in a capital, but in a regional city at a diplomatic facility. so -- >> putting aside republican darrell issa, retired brigadier

general robert lovell testified today, testified under oath that by 3:15 after the 9/11/2012 attack they dismissed the video and very quickly identified this as a terrorist attack. by 3:15 he testifies, under oath. in light of that, why on 9/14, two and a half days later, was ben rhodes writing an e-mail about the general state of affairs, as you say, highlighting the video and not highlighting terror? >> ed, the e-mail was about protests around the region. if you want to tell me today -- >> [inaudible] benghazi was part of it, right? >> right. and i would refer you to the cia-produced talking points on that that referred at the time to currently-available information suggesting that the protests, there were protests outside of the facility in benghazi inspired by demonstrations outside of cairo. what inspired those

demonstrations outside of our embassy in cairo, do you even remember? >> cairo i don't remember specifically. there was -- >> does anybody -- >> a flag being burned. >> they were trying to get the blind sheikh out of jail and then to get more people in, they started talking about it. >> okay. i think there was a lot of tumult in the region. daily caller's been heard from. [laughter] backing you up, ed. >> that was your call. [laughter] >> well, i, you know, i think it's fair to say that most people remember that there were demonstrations around the region, right, scott? i mean, they were in reaction to what people felt was an offensive video. and there were demonstrations outside of u.s. facilities because the video was produced in the united states. >> okay, so -- >> so, again, that's -- it's pretty clear if you read it, that's what it's about. when it comes to the connection between the protests if cairo and what happened in -- in cairo and what happened in benghazi,

that's drawn directly from talking points produced by the intelligence community as testified to by the deputy director of the cia on multiple occasions. >> to your point earlier about you were working in the immediate aftermath of the terror attack with the current information that was available, on 9/12 you were asked about benghazi, whether it was premeditated. you said, quote: it's too early for us to make this judgment. i think, i know that this is being investigated. we're working with the libyan government to investigate the incident. so therapy being cautious. that -- you were being cautious. that was 9/12. why then on 9/14 is ben rhodes writing an e-mail that is making judgments, that this was inspired by a video? >> ed, do you need a copy of the cia talking points? because i can get them for you. >> read them out all you want. go ahead. >> the only thing that refers to benghazi is a cut and paste which much to your disappointment and your boss' disappointment turned out to be

produced by the cia. whatever information this in there that turned out not to be accurate has been addressed multiple times by folks at the cia and elsewhere with. i, you know, it's a human enterprise, intelligence gathering and analysis. those men and women who serve in the intelligence community do so in service of their nation, and they do the best job they can every day. and what they produced was what they thought was what they thought they knew at the time in a very difficult and murky situation. and by the way, you know, separate from the connection between video and what happened at the attack, you know, in benghazi, you know, we, you know, a lot of what those points said turned out to be true, right? but it was based on currently-available information. and as you can imagine in the days after an attack in a regional city in a faraway country, that information was

not complete. which is what we said repeatedly. mr. finish. [inaudible] >> you've got the house majority leader today going on twitter saying it's time for the white house to come clean on benghazi and urging his followers to retweet his twitter. [laughter] >> well, as a representation of the superficiality of the partisan attack, i think you've made a good point. but the fact of the matter is, again, voluntarily in response to some bogus partisan claims made by republicans to reporters about what were, what had happened in the compilation of the original talking points around the benghazi attack, we produced that material publicly which which showed that we were right and they were wrong, that they were mischaracterizing what those e-mails and those points said. and so that is part of an effort that includes something like 25,000 pages of documents

produced, hours and hours of testimony given all in pursuit of, clearly, partisan agenda because the conspiracy theories keep falling apart. right? you know, whether -- they claimed the arb report was a whitewash and didn't look at senior state department officials. admiral mullen knocked that down, right? they claim that there was a military standdown order. some news organizations went hard with that. well, it turned out not to be true. and, you know, they claimed that the white house directed the cia talking points. well, the cia says that's not true, and the traffic shows that wasn't true, that the product was one that the cia took responsibility for, the deputy director has said he didn't feel any political influence when it came to producing them. they were producing those points, by the way, not for us, but for congress. for members of both parties.

and in the interest of a novel idea which is that in a time of crisis and tragedy everybody in washington, democrats and republicans alike, ought to be singing off the same song sheet are the basic facts based on what the independent intelligence community assesses, we use the same points. >> so you believe the white house has been as forthcoming and open as it can be on this issue? >> i don't -- i really don't know how to answer that except to say that we have provided an enormous amount of information, we have answered a ton of questions. we have, again, in a rather unprecedented way provided documents that normally white houses and administrations have not or would not provide because they were being mischaracterized. obviously, they've been provided as part of our cooperation with congressional committees to congress and then reporters were called up and lied to about what was in them. so we felt we had to set the record straight. that was the focus of attention, those talking points about the attack in benghazi.

so this release for a foia request, you know, has revived this story, but it doesn't mean that the facts have changed. they haven't. >> by the way, is there a joint news conference tomorrow by obama and merkel? >> yes. you can expect that. >> okay. >> major garrett. >> jay, do you wish this e-mail had been included earlier? >> here's what i can tell you, we provided -- >> just, not asking anything about the broader, just do you wish this had been included in the process of communicating, the administration communication to the congress that was requested? >> i wish that rather than spending so much of their time -- and we all have limited time, right? -- republicans in congress on this and on repealing the affordable act, republicans in congress actually got about the business of helping the economy grow and helping it create jobs and making the necessary investments for the economy to grow in the

future. >> has been providing, as the president said, all relevant information, do you wish that this had been included in that relevant information? can you imagine not being a partisan, not being a conspiracy theorist, someone hearing that conservative group sues the state department or a foia application is requested, this comes back because their request is about benghazi, and then you say, well, it's got nothing to do with benghazi. can you imagine someone being legitimately confused about that sequence of eventsesome. >> sure. what i can say is what i, and i know the focus -- >> overall? -- >> you would have to ask the state department about its -- again, the focus was on the talking points around the attack on benghazi. those were provided in full to congress. not to public release because a lot of it was sensitive national security stuff, but in congress.

congress started calling reporters and mischaracterizing what was in those documents. so voluntarily we provided to the public those documents which were the focus of all the allegations and assertions. so this document changes -- >> [inaudible] >> but it doesn't -- >> i'm just asking. >> it explicitly talks about the broader protests in the region -- >> handed over in the context of benghazi. >> we asked the state department about how they respond to foias. in dealing with congress on the so-called benghazi talking points, they were provided a long time ago, and they were made public a long time ago, and the only reference in this e-mail about benghazi is a cut and paste from the talking points that you guys have for more than a year or roughly a year, right? >> right. >> so -- >> my only question is it was okay to divulge those other

documents, do you wish it had been? >> i'm not -- what i wish is -- well, i won't even get into what i wish. [laughter] roger. >> ukraine. administration officials are asking, seeking, urging u.s. ceos, presidents, top leaders of business not to attend the economic forum in st. petersburg later this month. i'm witness wondering -- >> all right, so we have just been watching live press secretary for the white house jay carney talking about the hearing, obviously, that's been going on, in fact, it's already resumed right now on capitol hill having to do with benghazi, what happened the night, september september 11th a couple of years ago, when our four americans including the ambassador to libya were killed and the talking points that ensued that were put out through their spokesperson at the time, susan rice. and where exactly those talking points came from. so on and so forth. and those hearings today have been extremely emotional. and out of that emotion now is this talk, this press for more information.

so press secretary jay carney clearly dealing with this issue at the press conference but not necessarily on point with answering the questions. we heard a lot of laughing back and forth with him and media members there, and then a testy exchange with fox news' own ed henry, white house correspondent, as he pressed him for answers on what really happened that night, what was the thinking, so on and so forth. during this whole thing, one of the things you couldn't see if you were watching live was kirsten powers, our strong democrat voice on set on "outnumbered," reacting to all this and surprising some people. >> i don't think anybody who follows what i write and say is surprised, but it is unusual that you find a liberal or a democrat that seems particularly concerned about this, though you have to remember most polls show that most americans think the administration lied about this. so i think people have been pretty skeptical. but i think what is particularly frustrating about this is listening to jay carney said, well, it's just so obvious, ed, if you just look and see that this was about the broader

protests. well, here's the thing, first question: are you lumping in a protest in egypt, which was terrible, with four americans being murdered? is that what you're telling us? you actually just lumped these things into one talking point? that's kind of unbelievable, but if it's true, we need more information about this, you know? and second of all, i think it's quite clear that if you go back -- pulled up on go get the transcripts of all the sunday shows. every question was about benghazi. no one was asking about anything else. this was prep to talk about benghazi. >> you know, one of the things i heard you say, steve, you used the term "double down" by jay carney. what did you meansome. >> yesterday's exciting telecast jay carney said, yeah, that memo about, the talking points memo that we used for her, judicial watch sued to get, it wasn't about benghazi. even though it was titled "benghazi." and in the body of it, it talked about how the united states would avenge the deaths of the americans in libya.

the only americans who died in libya were at the embassy. and so clearly it was about benghazi. the judicial watch, the organization that sued to get the documents, they only were asking the federal government for documents regarding benghazi. so for him today to say once again, oh, i'm telling you, it wasn't about benghazi, that is -- we need a lie detector on that guy. >> oh, my goodness. you know what? let's talk about legality with you, kimberly, because if what steve is indicating is true, and it would seem that it would be, why would they have given that particular document? clearly, a foia request is looking for a certain thing. you understand it, you turn it over. was that a mistake since they gave these e-mails? >> yeah, no. it just shows -- and let me put this in a nice way -- they have a loose relationship with the truth. and even though it's right there in black and white, they're going the tell you don't believe your lying eyes. i'm going to tell you what the truth is which is never accurate. and the problem here is the focus is so much on politics and

winning at all costs that they really lost their moral compass. ethics are not in play here at all. winning is all that matters. and here we saw it about getting it at the expense of the investigation in a timely way and honest answers about the death of four americans that were murdered senselessly. and this administration should have done something about it and been honest with us from the beginning, and today really missed that opportunity. >> well, and, kimberly, i just was going to wrap up with a few comments from jay carney. there's nothing in the e-mails -- these are the e-mails, of course, that have been breaking news other the past couple of days. he also said the cover-up is bogus gop conspiracy theories which, he said, continue to fall apart. one other thing i wanted to note was the tone, once again, it was very heated in that room today. there

>> a penalty for moms about how muh less money they are offered than women who don't have kids and how dads are treated too. plus, toronto's mayor rob ford making the headlines again. ♪ [ male announcer ] identity theft ... it's one of the fastest growing crimes in america. in fact, there's a new victim of identity theft every...three...seconds. so you have to ask yourself, am i next?

one weak password could be all it takes. or trusting someone you shouldn't. over 100 million consumers had their personal information stolen in recent retail store and online security breaches. you think simply checking last month's credit score can stop identity thieves now? that alone just isn't enough. but lifelock offers the most comprehensive identity theft protection available. as soon as the patented lifelock identity alert system detects a threat, you'll be notified by text, phone or email. ♪ your response helps stop thieves before they do damage to your identity... helping to keep you safe... with three powerful layers of protection. detecting threats to your finances, credit, and good name 24/7. alerting you to potential danger. and if anything is found, your resolution expert will help restore your identity. so you can get back to enjoying your life. ♪ lifelock watches out for you in ways banks and credit card companies alone just can't. plus, it's backed by a $1 million service guarantee.

if your identity is ever compromised, lifelock will spend up to $1 million on experts to help restore it. try lifelock membership risk free for 60 days with promo code easy. that's 2 months of proactive protection to help keep your identity safe, risk free. act now and get this multi-device charger. charge all your devices at once to save you time... a $30 value, free! call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com/easy. try the most comprehensive identity theft protection available risk free for 60 days plus get a $30 multi-device charger, free. enrollment takes just minutes. your protection starts immediately. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com/easy. ♪

with diabetes, it's tough to keep life balanced. i don't always have time to eat like i should. and the more i focus on everything else, the less time i have to take care of me. that's why i like glucerna shakes.

they have slowly digestible carbs to help minimize blood sugar spikes. glucerna products help me keep everythibalanced. (crash) ugh! i'm good. well, almost everything. [male announcer] glucerna. delicious shakes and bars... rererered and seventy-seven thousand dollars per minute. that's what big oil made last year... now they're spending it to rig the system against you. pushing washington to cut american-made biofuels... bullying gas stations to use more of their oil... all so they get richer...and you pay more. truth is, biofuels are cleaner, better for your engine and less expensive. washington, don't let big oil rig the system any more. protect the renewable fuel standard. >> welcome back to "outnumbered." toronto toes's crack-smoking mayor is going to rehab. rob ford announcing he is taking

leave of absence to seek treatment for his addiction of the as new video surfaces reportedly showing the mayor smoking crack just this past saturday. he a recording was released of ford in a bar saying somebody obscene about a female political opponent. this is latest from his fall from grace. this is a look what is gone on the past year. >> nor am i an addict. yes, i have smoked crack cocaine. [bleep] can you get off my property, please? can you get off my driveway, please? can you get off my driveway? ♪ let's get together and feel all right ♪ [shouting] i'm happily married. i have more than enough to eat at home. >> oh. >> kimberly, you're reaction.

>> first of all -- other thing, you know what? where was he smoking the crack? at his sister's house. i go to my sister's house, i take pot luck. he takes pot. he is, look, you know the way he portrayed as kind after loveable -- >> crack addict. >> buffoon for the most part, like in the movies, in television, they always depict the fat, drunk, guy as loveable, misunderstood but it is pitiful. time for him to go. >> i don't want to distract from the fact this is very serious subject that a lot of families deal with addiction. here is the difference between this particular mayor. we have video of him smoking the crack. in his statement he says i have a problem with alcohol and choices i made while under the influence. he decided to go into rehab he goes on to say. kimberly, he is not acknowledging that he has a drug problem too. isn't that the first step? >> yeah the statements are going out saying he has substance

abuse but polysubstance abuser. they will have to address all of those issues. maybe he doesn't want to get one with the word crack. he said alcohol is basically his problem. that seems to be more socially acceptable, for someone to say i have a drinking problem. to say i have a problem with crack cocaine seems more overwhelming. >> if he will get clean and get help he has to deal and address that issue. >> then there's the political connotation here, kirsten. would i be curious from your take, do you think if this were a woman suffering with these kind of props and this footage video of smoking crack, do you think this situation, if you will, would be treated any differently? >> i think it might be slightly different, just a tiny bit different. he is so delusional and out of touch with reality, he doesn't seem to care what anybody says, right? maybe you had a woman as crazy as he is, just kept hanging on. i think there would be more pressure on here. i don't know what you guys think. >> it is interesting.

they voted to strip him of his power. he basically doesn't have a political career right now. i don't know if he can regenerate that. anything is possible. redemption is out there. >> marion berry. >> also trying to deal with that issue. >> we hope toronto mayor rob ford we hope he gets the help that he needs. meanwhile, kimberly, given us pictures to look at. >> i know. the poor guy. at least this is sort of pushed him into rehab. we wish him well and his family. this has to be tough to deal with. have you heard about the motherhood penalty? studies using equal resume's and job experiences found moms were offered starting salaries at $11,000 less than women who didn't have kids. on flip side, dads like, steve, were offered $6,000 more than men without kids. steve, fork over the cash immediately. mama with the kids. go ahead. >> i have kids too. we don't, we don't know exactly why. we don't know the circumstances behind it.

maybe the employer said to themselves, do you have kids? okay. that is good to know. thinking in back much their head, i need somebody who can be here 100% of the time. whereas, let's face it, moms make choices sacrifices. >> but they shouldn't be penalized. >> they shouldn't but we don't know all the circumstances. >> almost makes sense we would rather have a man rather than a woman with children because the woman might not be available. that shouldn't be okay but why get paid less if she will do the same job. >> how does that add up? >> that doesn't add up. this is major reason you hear women always talking about they made a career choice to delay having children. which is what harris, we're seeing in our society today. people are getting married later. they're having children later because these added pressures. >> they want to have the life they dreamed of before they realize society might cut them off for what they're trying to strive for. if i'm an employer i want a

woman. she is juggling so much. she can multitask. makes my dollar paying her go further. >> if i make $6,000 more, i'm buying coffee. >> gator arms, you're buying more than just coffee. >> where is my wallet? darn it, upstairs. >> flashy cars and hot girl's is every buy's dream, right? what do women say about the man. what might surprise you. 40 eras pin-up girls turning heads at military hospitals across the country. the story behind these beautiful women and their dedication to wounded vets. ♪ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... cleared

fighting constipation by eating healthier, drinking plenty of water, but still not getting relief? try dulcolax laxative tablets. dulcolax is comfort-coated for gentle, over-night relief. dulcolax. predictable over-night relief you can count on.

trwith secure wifie for your business. it also comes with public wifi for your customers. not so with internet from the phone company. i would email the phone company to inquire

as to why they have shortchanged these customers. but that would require wifi. switch to comcast business internet and get two wifi networks included. comcast business built for business.

♪ >> welcome back to outnumbered. some patriotic pin-up girls are putting smiles on facings of our veterans. part of the group, pin-ups for vets. they visit veterans affairs hospitals and military bases across the country. their proceeds from the world war ii style calendars help hospitalized and deployed troops. the gals say it is a way to show how much our vets we love them. that is terrific. >> also, while i may be out

numbered today, it is my turn with the story. guys, if you're trying to pick up chicks, you may want to trade, that's what the teleprompter said -- [laughter] >> keep going. good thing they pay you the big bucks. >> may want to trade in the corvette for corolla. new study 56% of women think guys with faster exotic cars are arrogant and overcompensating. 32% say a car can reveal what kind of family man a guy will be. kimberly, if you see a guy in a lamborghini, what is he overcompensating for? >> i don't know but he is not dating me. >> you go for a guy in what kind after car? >> i like a sports car. i don't mind that, okay. the need for speed but you're also going to get mama's number if you drive american. buy american. like it. and i practice what i preach. >> really? >> see i find a lot of truth. >> there is my car, ford explorer. >> i don't want to rule out our muscle car-driving audience.

they're all good guys too. this falls in line with my belief as well. people want a sensitive, a sorry, a guy driving a sensible car. this happens to be my vehicle of choice, 2013 jeep grand cherokee. very sensible. has utilitarian. >> what kind of gas mileage do you get. >> by the way, these cars, this particular jeep i know was made in michigan, kimberly. >> i know that. i was going to give you props for that. >> thank you. >> harris? >> i drive a minivan. we call it the mini who when my mom drives. my plates say u.s. brat, military brat and drive a coup. just mama, baby. >> powers, tell us about your prius. >> should have had people guess. >> of course, i drive a prius. any question? >> awesomely consistent. i love it. >> guess what i drive? >> what? >> lamborghini. >> you're all crazy. my wife crazy, is right. i drive a yukon.

that's it. >> does tell a lot about a guy. my first husband, wasn't letting me drive anymore. had a ev-1. it was falling apart all the time. liberal democrat. >> a minivan a prius. ford explorer and a cue con. >> year ago i would have told you a yellow taxicab by the way. >> exactly. >> guys, listen up, it could be the future of underwear designed for our protection. we're going to tell you why you might actually be wearing a pair of those with a radioactive shield. >> aye yi yi. ♪ared ared ared

marge: you know, there's a more enjoyable way to get your fiber. try phillips fiber good gummies. they're delicious, and an excellent source of fiber to help support regularity. wife: mmmm husband: these are good! marge: the tasty side of fiber. from phillips.

it's personal. but there is a new type of underwear designed to hit the shelves designed to it protect the nether regions from mobile phones. steve doocey is wearing them i think. >> we are talking, let me be brief. they wear underarmor. >> supposed to protect what? >> it is interesting. a lot of the people lay on bed with the lap top and cell phone and they are concerned about what it is doing to the reproductive parts.

>> they have that for women, too? >> i. it is a belt. >> we have a clip right here. >> that's it for outnumbered. we'll see you for tomorrow. for now, what is happening now. snooshgs fox ne the u.s. military should have take an action. and rising flood waters and drenching rain on the east coast. rick tells us who is in the danger zone noe now. pro russian separatist forcing the ukranian government to come up with a new strategy. they are coming up with defense in dealing with the threat. ne