this is the fox news alert. breaking at this hour, bombshell audio for the first time ever, you're about to hear former president bill clinton in his own words admit he had the kill shot on osama bin laden. remarks made a mere ten hours before terror struck the world trade center on september 11th, 2001. listen. >> if i'm osama bin laden, he's a very smart guy, i nearly got him once. i nearly got him. and i could have killed him, but i would have had to have destroyed a whole town called kandahar, and killing women and children, and then i would have been no better than him. and so i didn't do it.

>> that newly released audio discovered by our news partner sky news, the audio was recorded on september 10th, 2001. the first time we're hearing, a, clinton having bin laden, and why he let the terrorist go. we'll take it around the table. kick it off. he let him go. >> i don't think this is that stuping. i don't. bill clinton we know could have gotten osama bin laden when he was president two times. the fact that he's being thoughtful about this, and saying, i could have destroyed that small town in kandahar and killed 300 people. i think these are the tough decisions that presidents make. i also know that bill clinton challenged the cia on the report that they were giving about, is this an exaggerating picture of osama bin laden? isn't that what presidents are supposed to do? look, i think bill clinton was one of the worst presidents when it came to foreign policy. he gave the pakistanis the nuke.

i don't know what is so terrible here with what bill clinton said. >> we are at war. we had a terrorist who was hell-bent on killing americans. wiping out not only israel, but also wiping out western civilization. he had the kill shot, he didn't take it because he was worried about sol villagers who frankly would have been collateral damage. we lost 3,000 americans the very next morning. things may have been different. >> that's the interesting thing. first of all, imagine if he had, if he had taken ubl out. then there would be no 9/11. then his decision to take ubl out would not be lauded, because there would be no evidence that he prevented 9/11, because you can't prove that something didn't happen. therefore, it is almost a nonsensical argument. hillary clinton got a rapist off. bill clinton let a terrorist off.

i cannot condemn clinton for this other than that he likes to tell stories. and this is what happens when you tell stories. sometimes the stories come back and bite you in the butt. >> and sometimes the stories get exaggerated. i spent half of today trying to remember why i didn't think this was news. and trying to figure out, you know, i had heard this before, but i think it was probably because somewhere in the white house, i had heard it over time. and something we talked about. because i think as those points are made, it wasn't all that relevant. what i always understood when i tried to confirm it today, i didn't talk to the cia, okay, but osama bin laden at the time wasn't in the town. he was in a camp. when bill clinton said he would have killed all those women and children, unless he was planning on a carpet bomb, like a huge area, that actually wasn't going to happen. it could be the case of a story gets better the more you tell it. >> maybe he should stop telling it. >> a lot of near misses, almost, looking back, i think what we lack the most was intel,

coordination, and imagination. and i think the real worry should be that the 9/11 commission came out just last week with its first report in a decade and said that we are at risk of being as complacent as we were right before 9/11. on september 10th when bill clinton made these states. >> that's the relevant point for me there. he made those statements ten hours before the terror attacks happened. it looks like i'll be the only one at the table that finds this absolutely astounding that hours before he killed 3,000 people, we had a shot at him and we turned it down. we understood that in the past. >> no, he didn't have -- >> we didn't hear bill clinton say it. >> but he didn't say he was able to take him out like ten hours before. >> ten hours before the 9/11 happened. he said he had a shot. >> obviously that was many moons before. but i think the key here is in retrospect, it's just that you would think we would have saved 3,000 lives. in that sense i'm with you. you say, gosh, we should have

really emphasized getting bin laden much earlier. and the way eve heard this from the 9/11 commission people, who have said this to me, that there was the briefing that president bush had up in crawford. they said to him there's a memo, bin laden intent on using airplanes to attack. why didn't we put the dots together and do more. if we had just -- if clinton had acted when he acted. you think about all these things. it's not that everybody's culpable and a bad person for not having done it. bill clinton made a decision. >> a lot of people know how evil bin laden was. a lot of people never heard of him until 9/11. but the thing is, you know this story that he tells, what the lesson is, the lesson supports drones. because you -- a drone is designed to kill a terrorist every chance you get. so every time you send a drone, you're possibly preventing a 9/11. so the consequences of that are

the collateral damage of the innocent. but the knowledge that you might have killed another bin laden will bring you no accolades because you can't prove a negative. >> can i just throw two things out there. i was literally in the building in 1993 when the world trade center blew up. the first time they tried to blow up new york city. then the embassy bombing in 1998. the thing is, yes, would it have changed the course of history? i think it might have when he had taken bin laden out when he had his chance. this is the first time you hear a president talking about, i had the shot, and laughing it off. right? >> i don't know. listen -- >> we knew bill clinton had him twice and didn't take the shot. it is interesting to hear bill clinton tell a story about having the shot and not taking it, and the ironic part is that happened ten hours before 9/11. so that is, i think, what's so fascinating about this. i can't ding clinton, though, on this, because when you look and read back, the beginning of the bush administration, they did

not look at obl the way they did towards a post-9/11 world. osama bin laden, even though the cia was talking about him, was not the figure that he is today. okay? a lot of administrations, bill clinton, they missed him. they did. and we can do hint sight and rear-view mirror but it looks like bill clinton, he shouldn't have laughed in that tape. but he was being very thoughtful about how he handled it. that's what presidents do, they make tough decisions. now we have a president who seems weary of making tough decisions. >> there we go. just remember, put this in historical context. you had the bombings in tanzania, the bombings in kenya during clinton's watch. after that time clinton does pursue bin laden. but he misses him. and he has the opportunity for a shot. >> did he choose not to take the shot? >> no, he took shots before. >> he said i didn't take the shot because i didn't want to kill 300 people. >> not only that, he was giving

aid to the pakistani secret service to find bin laden at that point. it wasn't that he was not doing anything. >> whoever would have been in office at the time in 1999, say joe blow, i think logistically and politically it would have been very difficult for them to have carried it out. logistically, because it's such a huge area, and the other reason, this is both logistically and politically, there wasn't a coalition of people against the war on terror at the time. i think it would have been hard for him to do politically not only with our congress but certainly in the region. >> and the thing is, to juan's point, you know what? president obama might have killed 15 or 20 bin ladens already with drones. we'll never know. >> listen, now i know what bob feels like at the table. >> nobody's disagreeing with you. >> i think it's crazy that -- >> we find it tragic. it's not outrageous, it's tragic. different adjective.

but -- let me see if you find this outrageous. are check out muhammad al saha, a florida man who blew himself up in a suicide bombing just weeks ago. he's believed to be the first american suicide jihadist. >> you think you're safe where you are in america? or britain? or indonesia? you think you are safe? you are not safe. those people who died on 9/11 just doesn't justify. when the americans were back in iraq, before 9/11, you think that you killed osama bin laden. that means nothing. you sent him to paradise. you think that you have won? you have never won. we have come for you. mark my words. >> okay. now, here's the scary part. before blowing himself up, he returned to america for months after training in syria. will there be more? and will the next one be on our

soil? how about this one? >> well, this is, a, this shows how religious extremism offers a path to losers. satisfied winners don't choose a death cult, only losers do. it's clear that guy is a loser. the other thing is, we talk about signs and stuff. he was definitely communicating with somebody in the united states to somebody outside the united states. that's what spying is all about. snowden, you can credit him for tipping these guys off. now they know they're being spied on. >> damian -- >> remember, we were talking about the foreign fighters who are being trained in syria. i was looking at stratfor and scott stewart did a great piece about the whole phenomenon of foreign fighters, and trying to put it in context for people like me who wanted to understand it better. so the estimates are between -- around in the low thousands. there are foreign fighters who have been trained in syria. they go there because they want to fight.

and like this guy they had jihad on the brain. but they had western passports, but they can travel out of there. it's not that easy to get in and out of syria at the moment, but it can be done. often they're trained not necessarily in blowing themselves up, but hand-to-hand combat to fight with them. i think the intel point is very important. i worry it's only a matter of time. i imagine if the cia director, if there's anything that keeps him up at night, it is somebody like this. >> this is what i hear all the time. right now, the big threat is that there are so many americans, people with american passports -- by the way, the thing about him eating his passports -- he's a loon. >> cultural appropriating. >> the idea is that they go over and say, i have some loyalties to one side or another in the syrian conflict, or they're in iraq, or they're in sudan. and all of a sudden they have american passports. you're not sure where they are overseas. then they come back. what's interesting to this story

to me is, he didn't do anything here in the united states. he's a suicide bomber. he could have done something here. >> it's too difficult for him to get here so -- >> no question he didn't do it here and did it over there because it's far easier to do it over there. which is a good sign. but i agree with dana, it's only a matter of time before they hit us. the problem is, we have a president that has proclaimed on a national holiday in the united states that we're not at war with islam. we have a president who's gutting our defense budget to pay for obama phones. we've got an administration right now that does not go after hamas for being a terrorist organization. in fact, the opposite, as the spokeswoman at the department of state legitimate idsed their position. the former secretary of state, hillary clinton, explained that. we're screwed. we're in big trouble. it's just a matter of time. >> you know what i think, though? it's amazing that we haven't been attacked. >> credit to the men and women in our intel, and also to our

law enforcement. once they had the patriot act that broke down the wall between information sharing, they were able to coordinate a lot better. they disrupted a lot of attacks. the big ones. it's these little ones that might not cause the catastrophic damage, but they could cause a psychological damage to the nation, irreparable harm. >> not only does it call for enhanced droning and spy network that we can trust, but impenetrable border. next on the five, dana has an update on the drama on the hill today. the house gop pulled the vote on their own border bill. and justice ruth bader ginsberg about her male colleagues when it comes to women. stay tuned.

crisis at the border is not letting up. but congress may be close to giving up. republicans in the house pulled their own $659 million border bill. after leadership realized they didn't have the votes to pass it. speaker boehner had hoped a provision in the bill that would block president obama from expanding deportation of illegals would sway his caucus.

now the leadership said they will call their members back from a five-week recess when they have the votes they need. take a look at this sound byte. this is the new first day on the job, majority leader kevin mccarthy speaking on the house floor when all this happened. >> i want to advise all members that additional votes are possible today. i am hopeful that by late this afternoon, we'll be able to notify the time of it. >> the house will be in order. >> madam speaker, i yield back. >> that kind of action in the house, let me give you one poll, the a.p. poll, do you approve or disapprove of president obama's handling of immigration. 68% disapprove.

andrea, let me ask you something. even though it looks like the congress can't get anything done, does it actually look like the congress is doing the will of the people by not acting? >> i don't know about that. it was pretty disorganized on capitol hill today. it was very embarrassing. kevin mar car think used to be the whip, the man you saw. congressman scalise is now the whip. >> before you call the vote? >> before you call the vote, you know you have the votes. they didn't have the votes. that's embarrassing. if i was in charge right now, i would get a bill together that i know they have the votes for to strictly close the border. i'm thinking politically right now. president obama is not going to sign any bill. it's unlikely harry reid would bring anything to the floor that the house republican majority had crafted. however, if they can't get president obama to support this, and seal the border, they have to crash this down on the heads of senate democrats who are in vulnerable seats. they should have been crafting bills on closing the border,

sending those bills to the senate, get whoever's running against these vulnerable senate democrats to ask them, do you support the house bill to close the border and put them on record and notice that they are not supporting a bill to close the border. because the polling, i believe, is not in favor of what the president's doing. it is working against him. so republicans have public opinion on their side, but they can't get their act together. >> eric, do you think they should just pass something on the house side to get it into conference so they can then actually work out a compromise? >> can i throw an alternative theory in here? >> sure. >> maybe they know exactly what they're doing. if this bill doesn't get voted on now, they can talk about it for five weeks when they're back in district and say, this is the hot topic. at 68% disapproval rating for the president, on immigration, you want to extend this as long as you possibly can. play this game out. we're winning, let's play this out. if they do go to a vote, send it to the house and harry reid sits on it, game over.

>> why not have -- i wouldn't understand why wouldn't you give the republican members covered next to an aye vote. and say, look, i tried to close the borders. >> a bill that they can -- >> it's better to send them back with that vote. >> they're also starting to get traction to say we pass things and the senate doesn't. juan, let me ask you. the president thinks he has the moral high ground here. he's not going on his vacation until august 9th. he's got another week to try to persuade the american people. a 68% disapproval in the a.p. poll has got to be very challenging for a white house to come back from. >> i think you've got to look inside the numbers and understand that the president's losing support among democrats. this is a little different than i think the way you guys perceive it. he's trying to be defiant of the fact that all the republicans are trying to do is obstruct and won't act.

if you look at it, i think there was a poll out that yesterday i saw, it was almost like 70% of americans think these children should be allowed to stay. but what precedent -- >> is that a beckel institute? >> o'reilly did it first. >> no, no, no, you have the -- >> you know what? americans are compassionate. no question they think something should be done here. and people also favor some kind of comprehensive reform. so when you talk about, why not just get a simple bill to say secure the border, people look back and say, wait a second, there was a bipartisan bill with republican support in the senate that had a tremendous amount of money to do just that. but it dealt with the immigration reform that the house won't look at. >> senator reid won't even pass the president's bill. they would not do the president's, because democrats could not --

>> but the bill they had had a tremendous amount of money for border security. >> that amnesty was in there. >> when you are looking for a sensible compromise, america, the first person you turn to is greg gutfeld. >> juan used the word, compassion. people always use that to demonize the opposition. if you're not amnesty, you're against compassion. what does amnesty do? it's hurting president obama's, a lot of his constituents. if you plook at young black unemployment, 24.4%. 16 to 24-year-olds. they need jobs that are -- they're entry level jobs that everybody does. where will those jobs go if there's amnesty? that will hurt them if there's an influx of 5 million or 10 million. cheap labor does nothing for them. it hurts them. >> but greg, they're already here. these are 12 million people here. most of them are working in this country. >> he's talking about the most recent influx, and what the

president calls a humanitarian crisis. >> you simply don't become a citizen by showing up. there is a line. what the republicans have to do is reverse the priorities. the last thing president obama has put the world before america. put america before the world, or we become the world. unfortunately there's no america for us to flee to. we cannot be refugees in another place, as we watch our borders crumble. that's what we have to do. was that common sense? >> it was very followable. >> thank you. >> i just don't agree. you know what, i look at the statue of liberty standing there saying, come to me. you know what, we love new talent, new ideas, new people. this is not about taking anybody out of work. >> you know what's right next to the statue, juan? ellis island. immigrants who came over were checked in and they were documented. and became legal through ellis

island. >> right. >> as opposed to swimming across the hudson river and showing up in new york city. >> most of our legal immigration, the plur at of the people who overstay their visas. they're flying in. >> you're talking about an international movement of squatters. if there was your apartment or your house or your apartment building, you would be evicting them. >> i love it, though, isn't that an argument for reform saying this is the legal way to do it? why don't the republicans do that? >> why aren't the democrats putting a bill forth without amnesty? >> if i were republicans right now, and i used to craft the message for the hout republicans when they would go into august recess, the message needs to be, pro-legal immigration. i know democrats are busy talking about humane and kids from guatemala and mexico. if the republicans want to do the right thing they will talk about what the influx does to american kids and how it's going to bankrupt schools and cities.

>> i see -- oh, this is -- >> it's about american children. no question -- >> the chamber of commerce, the republican favoring chamber of commerce, they will tell you it would help us. it would boost the american economy. >> we just clarified not necessarily republican favoring chamber of commerce. i wanted to clarify that a little bit. >> okay. that was fabulous. all right. >> stop patting yourself on the back. >> nobody else will. i have to do it myself. how did lois lerner really see her power at the irs? one word used to describe them that we can't say on television, because bob's not here. greg's going to fill you in, coming up.

the former irs official said e-mails describing conservatives and wack, crazies, and a term for an orifice not used for speaking. i use the same language when describing lou dobbs. it's disturbing because it comes from lois lerner. the e-mails show the malicious intent of a flack whose office targeted political speech that their boss didn't like.

lois commanded the goons, a batman villain and her one and only power is coercion. this was no accident. it was planned, encouraged, carried out. that covered up with a lame investigation and a premeditated apology. when it started going really bad, the irs told congress that eight workers involving investigation all had computer crashes, losing scads of data. now, from an odds perspective, that's like getting hit by a meteor by a unicorn attached to your back. like dana smoking a joint. his media minions are all in the same boat. it's got to be seem odd knowing that you're one of the men, and maybe men is the wrong term, cowards seems more fitting.

>> dana, i hated doing this monologue. the language is horrible. i didn't want to do it in front of you. >> i'm very sensitive. >> i know. are we biased? >> it was the most, like this tasteful bureaucrat, is the one that gets a political appointment, abuses their power and tries to curry favor and get pats on the back from the white house. i remember a couple of those people from an agency that won't be named. okay, epa. i don't think that this position should be politically appointed. i think it should be a nonpolitical position. and there's plenty of those throughout government. i think that's one thing that congress could do to say they've actually tried to address this going forward. >> i think the irs should be run by a robot. that's the first robot -- >> and to be named? >> a machine with no political affiliation whatsoever. >> can you imagine what we still don't know? this is what we know. look, here's a chance to prove motive, malice and probably state of mind. i think you can check all three

of those off when you're defining corruption. this is a prime example of corruption. she's proving it to herself. i'd say quite a bit more than a smidgen of corruption. >> wow. >> by the way, what did she call it? >> oh, yeah, yeah. >> kennedy would say it rhymes with -- >> glassful. >> juan, let's face it, if the situation was reversed, this is a republican administration, there would be screaming in the streets. "the new york times," the "huffington post," people would be going apo plek tick. that's a word. >> that is a word. nice tie. i hear people talk about the left wing in the most powerful ways. right here. >> i know. >> we're not in charge of collecting their taxes. >> she's a human being. this was a private e-mail. this was not an e-mail she was sending to people who were in

fact auditing some of these groups applying for tax-exempt. >> remember -- >> this was a private conversation. >> don't you remember two weeks ago the e-mail that said i'm worried if congress asks for these e-mails, they might be responsive, so let's be careful what we say on this government e-mail? and in her personal e-mail is what she wants to do politically. >> i see what you're saying. by the way, i think greg's got a point, if this was reversed, liberals would be up in arms. i agree with that. but i've got to say, it's a private e-mail. i don't see that -- you said then. this is now. the proof she has opinions about people? >> of course. you don't think this influences at all her decisions? >> no. >> chat, chat, chat. there's breaking news. >> we'll turn this over to shep.

>> breaking news this afternoon. fox news confirms secretary of state has just announced that hamas and the israeli government have agreed to a 72-hour cease-fire, so the firing will stop in gaza, and in israel for 72 hours, beginning friday local time over there. so tomorrow morning, our time, or somewhere around 10:00 tonight our time actually, a cease-fire to last 72 hours. the humanitarian cease-fire, they tell us, as i'm sure many of our viewers know, they're in a world of hurt in gaza. there's no power there. hospitals are stretched to the limit. a lot of children have been injured by some close to 250,000 people are displaced. and they need to get people fed and treated. so a 72-hour cease-fire. what happens now? well, the interested parties from hamas and from israel will go to egypt, where they'll conduct talks. the hope was the egyptians could be a peace broker in all of this.

at the egyptian's word, the last time around, of course, their government has changed and they don't have quite the sway with hamas that the previous government did of the muslim brotherhood. but the hope is that this might lead to a lasting peace. now, remember, the israelis have said we're going to destroy all of these tunnels, whether there's a humanitarian cease-fire or not. what remains to be see is whether israeli troops will remain in the gaza. if they do remain in the gaza, the hamas and many palestinians will not be happy about that. but we'll see how this works out. the headline, again, just in to fox news, a humanitarian cease-fire just announced by the u.s. secretary of state john kerry, a r cease-fire in the war in the middle east, to begin on friday. talks will happen in

the fox news alert. a cease-fire between israel and hamas has been reached. this is a 72-hour cease-fire that will commence in the middle east starting 8:00 local time there. this is a big development. they're citing humanitarian reasons for the cease-fire. so eric, what do you think about this? we've seen some pretty explosive footage happening. it's only 72 hours. but why now? >> i'm going to take this tact. i think israel's doing this for humanitarian reasons. they're giving hamas a break. it's time for hamas to say enough.

i think hamas is losing their own palestinian people. they're getting destroyed. they should at some point say, look, we give up. put the palestinians back in charge of the palestinian authority, get the terrorist hamas out there. during this whole campaign, israel is around 92% support for what they're doing. unless hamas backs out, i think this is going to continue to keep rolling, cease-fires, finish this off, put your hands up. >> there's no question, dana, that israel's winning, and they could completely eradicate hamas. some of the pictures of today, in newspapers i was reading today, the u.n. condemning israel, showing these horrific pictures of palestinians running out of broken buildings. do you think israel is stopping because they don't want to let hamas win this pr war and say, okay, we'll give you your 72 hours, so that doesn't reflect poorly on us, what do you think the thinking is? >> i think they might be beyond that, actually. they made a decision that the media is not going to help them. i think the tunnels was a huge wakeup call. that's why the country i think

israel is 92% support going forward and finishing the job. hamas, because they have in the past, they're the ones that have broken the cease-fire. plus, 72 hours, to be cynical, is just enough time to reposition enough women and children to be targets again if israel restarts their operations. >> greg, you've said before, no cease-fires, especially when you're winning. do you think israel should have agreed to this or keep going? >> i think the cease-fire is for john kerry, to get away from things, not cause any more trouble. cease-fire for hamas is reload. sometimes the merciful thing is to let someone win. what eric pointed out is much of the arab world is on israel's side here. they can't stand hamas or hezbollah. what's interesting is what happened to hollywood, in 2006, 85 entertainers put out an ad condemning hezbollah and hamas. you haven't heard much of anything than penelope cruz, not supporting --

>> joan rivers. >> joan rivers and howard stern. >> and madonna, not supported israel, but compared the palestinian children to little flowers. >> let me just say, i don't know how you guys missed it, but it's not only that the united states has expressed concern about the slaughter taking place there -- >> whoa, whoa, whoa. you're saying the israelis are -- >> they could wipe out everyone they want to. >> and they haven't. >> not only have people said, what's going on, the united nations has now said it -- >> the united nations? >> terrorists are the slaughterers. >> what are you talking about? but military, when you have someone who is not a soldier getting killed, you know, you see children -- it's just upsetting. israel is making a smart move here. israel is trying to regain moral authority, make sure people don't buy into what the u.n. --

>> it already has moral authority. it's fighting against a terrorist organization. >> to that point, i think israel is the only country in the world that calls ahead when they're bombing. >> and drops fliers. >> that's slaughtering. >> right. >> got to go. still ahead, ruth bader ginsburg breaks her silence on the hobby lobby case. you'll hear her up next. @w@wowog

test ♪

i voted for culture... ...with a 'k.' how are you? i voted for plausible deniability. i didn't kill her, david. and i voted for decisive military action. ♪ america, you cast your votes. now, go to xfinity on demand and select the people's hotlist to see this summer's top 100 shows and movies. i voted! female announcer: you'reduring sleep train's triple choice sale. for a limited time, you can choose to save hundreds on beautyrest and posturepedic mattress sets.

or choose $300 in free gifts with sleep train's most popular tempur-pedic mattresses. you can even choose 48 months interest-free financing on the new tempur-choice, with head-to-toe customization. the triple choice sale ends soon at sleep train. ♪ sleep train ♪ ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪

it's been a month since the supreme court issued its controversial hobby lobby ruling. and we're now hearing from one of the dissenting justices on the case. here's ruth bader ginsburg explaining why she ruled the way she did. >> the decision that an employer could refuse to cover contraceptives, meant that women would have to take care of that for themselves. contraceptives, protection is something that every woman must have access to, to control her own destiny. they have no constitutional right to foist that belief on the hundreds and hundreds of women who work for them who don't share that belief. >> and listen to what she had to say about five of her male

colleagues. she thinks they have a, quote, blind spot, end quote, when it comes to women's issues. >> do you believe that the five male justices truly understood the ramifications of their decision? >> i would have to say no. >> but you do in fact feel these five justices had a bit of a blind spot? >> in hobby lobby, yes. >> andrea, blind spot on the part of the male colleagues? >> could you imagine if justice scalia would say the same thing about the women on the court, that they have a blind spot. in other words, they're not reasonable. i can't imagine -- >> or rational. >> and rational. i can't imagine justices besmirching each other like this. she's also besmirching the court that she pre sides on, basically saying it doesn't really work because the guys i work with, they're not reasonable, they can't come up with a reasonable position on this. >> i don't think she said that. she said as a man --

>> let me just finish, juan. she's supposed to interpret these laws of the constitution with some regularity and due process here. isn't she sort of saying, keep men away from this court? in a way? that is how i took it. look, i get it. she's a fan of birth control. but she is an enemy to the bill of rights. and to civil rights. if she's going to give interviews and make comments like this. >> i think the disturbing point is that what you see over and over again is that one cannot empathize with somebody who is different from you. so using that logic, only black doctors should study sickle cell anemia, pediatricians should be children. you cannot have somebody else or something dealing with somebody different. it's a consequence of divisive thinking. and what it is, it replaces competence with illusions of empathy. >> dana, what do you think? >> well, i think that in 1972, when the nine male justices

approved roe v. wade, that there wasn't a blind spot. megan kelly did a good job of dismantling the argument that katie couric and ruth bader ginsburg were making. forcing an employer to pay for four contraceptives after they agreed to pay for 16. i think it's blown out of proportion. the way to solve all of this, in my opinion, kind of radical, but i think we should have no employer benefits, do everything on the open market, approve all of these drugs over the counter, if your health plan or your government decides they want to pay for it, medicaid or something pay for it, fine. >> then we give huge tax benefits to corporations. >> i'm blown away. i agree with dana, when i was listening to it, i thought, this is a supreme court justice, lumping all contraceptives together? basically saying hobby lobby or an employer shouldn't have the

right to keep women from contraceptives. this is exactly what it is not about. hobby lobby was about the contraceptives that they disagree with. if she's making decisions on something so important, wouldn't you think she would have a working knowledge of what's really it's about? >> i think what she's saying is, these guys, older men, didn't understand the issue. from her per spike tiff as an older woman -- >> older men on the -- >> as the oldest one here, i'm

it's time for this. earlier in the week, penelope

cruz, along with her hubby, they denounced israel and heavy-handed open letter trashing our ally. i'm not an expert on the situation, and i'm aware of the complaints. just wanted to let you know, penelope earned you the fool of the week. >> she's a hot fool. >> in the movie "the counselor," fantastic. >> noah aldridge, an 8-year-old boy, he decided to take his younger brother everywhere he goes, that includes the triathlon that noah just completed. here he is on weighing in on why he decided to take his special needs brother all the way. >> i asked my mom if i could do it, with lucas. he most of the time doesn't get what i get to do. like when i play sports, he has to just watch. i just want to finish with lucas. >> his brother suffers from a nervous system disorder, which

allows him to do a few basic things in life. he's always going to go where i go. very cute. >> dana? >> who dat? it is drew brees. the new orleans saints quarterback is not only good at throwing a football, one thing i wish i could do is toss a frisbee. take a look at this. there you go. very talented. if i could throw a football or frisbee, jasper would have a lot more fun at the park. i kind of throw like a girl. >> jasper, jasper, jasper. baseball game, the pirates and giants, greatest team ever. jody mercer, why don't you show it. hits the ball to home run. still loses to the giants. ha ha. look what happens. slow motion, watch. >> oh, my gosh!

that's why i don't go to baseball games. >> i guess that beer is on her. >> there's services in the parking lot in memory of that beer. $12 down the drain. >> i would be so mad if that happened. >> last night, arlington, texas, look at this. a surprise appearance. there's derek jeter in his farewell tour, he's retiring. guess who shows up, president bush. president bush saying good-bye to derek jeter. remember right after 9/11 he was at yankee stadium, threw out the first ball. jeter's advice, don't bounce it. also, news today that george w. bush is going to write a book about his dad. one of my favorite people. we have to leave it right there.

>> friday august 1st. glowing fears this morning about the deadly ebola virus as two americans are infected and they head back to the u.s. >> bombshell information about the worst terrorist osama bin laden. >> i nearly got him. i could have killed him. >> those comments coming hours before the 9-11 attack. why didn't he take him out? the shocking report ahead. >> the sudanese mother who escaped a death sentence for being a christian arrives back in america. the