fractious when writing to the "factor." all right. tomorrow we have our "is it legal" people on the gay laws that are causing a lot of controversy. thanks for watching us tonight. miss megyn is next. i'm bill o'reilly. please remember the spin stops here because we're looking out for you. breaking tonight. now fallout in a white hot political fight after ted cruz wins colorado and donald trump cries foul. welcome to "the kelly file," everyone, i'm megyn kelly. donald trump rallied more than 10,000 supporters in good old albany, new york. the next state to hit the polls in what is predicted to be highly favorable territory for the new york businessman. this comes after two setbacks for the trump campaign. first, a loss in wisconsin and then a rough weekend in colorado where ted cruz won every delegate in a system that donald trump says is rigged. watch. >> we have a rigged system so in colorado, they were going to

vote and you saw what happened in colorado. it's one of the big things. it's a fix because if i go to the voters of colorado, we win colorado. so it's a crooked, crooked system. >> cruz is just kicking off a rally in california where he seems to have shifted his focus and was earlier defending his weekend win. declaring that donald trump's complaints are par for the course. >> donald has been yelling and screaming. a lot of whining. and the latest thing he seized upon is when people vote against him, they're stealing the election. it's a really odd notion. >> in moments we have two big guests. trump adviser steven miller and former secretary of education, bill bennett. first, trace gallagher explains why all the

controversy. trace? >> megyn, the trump campaign says it's very confident he will get the 1,237 delegates needed to win the nomination and yet donald trump is arguing he shouldn't need 1,237 saying whoever gets the most should automatically win. trump believes the process, as you pointed out, is crooked and rigged against him and he points to what happened this weekend in colorado where ted cruz completed his sweep of colorado's 34 delegates. here's trump on "fox & friends." >> the people out there are going crazy, the denver area and colorado, itself. they're going absolutely crazy because they weren't given a vote. >> even some colorado gop party leaders admit their state process for choosing national delegates is confusing and excludes way too many voters. but the information about the colorado contest certainly wasn't secret or as the cruz campaign retweeted, the rules, "were publicly available for months to people who know how to read and understand words."

and it's not as if the trump campaign was blanketing colorado. trump didn't put a paid staffer on the ground there until last week and when the trump campaign finally distributed its list of preferred colorado delegates, the list was riddled with errors and misspellings. the trump camp blames that on getting bad information. and donald trump's newly hired convention manager, paul mantefort, says the campaign will be filing several protests accusing ted cruz of not playing by the rules and using gastapo tactics. they respond accusing trump from lashing out with falsehoods to distract. across media outlets today the trump argument raged on. is this system rigged? is it fair? should it stand? rush limbaugh supported both cruz and trumps at different times. here's his take. >> what happened in colorado,

it's not a trick, it's no secret that colorado was going to choose its delegates before the primary. it's not a secret so it was left to be discovered by people who didn't know. >> joining us now, senior adviser to the trump campaign, stephen miller, thank you for being with us tonight. what do you make of rush's take on it? he's been very fair to mr. trump. he thinks the homework wasn't done. >> well, aisi'm going to say something, megyn, that's extremely controversial. in america, people should get to vote for who they want to be president. i was in colorado. there was to election in colorado. zero people voted for president in colorado. they canceled the election. i think it's an important conversation for us to have right now about whether that's fair and that's right. >> well, that's what you're going for. you don't think the system is fair. to be honest, i think many people didn't understand we have primaries and we have caucuses and then we have a few states

that do this other weird thing colorado does which is called, like, a convention system where you just elect some delegates then they'll go and figure things out. but they are going to support ted cruz in this instance. in any event, so you don't think that's fair, but fair or not, it is what the people of colorado put in place last august. >> well, the people of colorado didn't put it in place. the republican party of colorado canceled the election. they had election in 2012 and didn't have one in 2016. but here's why i think it's unfair. let me give a very specific example. imagine that you are a soldier serving overseas who fought to secure iraqi elections. remember everyone with the purple finger? you, a soldier who went overseas to iraq, she now can't vote in america's election in her home state. that just seems crazy to me. >> so let's say you're right and, i mean, they've got this wacky system and the people of

colorado, some of whom are very ticked off about this, say we don't like that, right? they redo it the next time around. is there any remedy now other than just sort of saying -- >> i'm so glad you asked that question because something really marvelous happened tonight in albany. >> albany, albany, stephen, come on. >> the -- the -- donald trump said that he is going to reform the rules of nominations if he becomes president of the united states. he'll work with the rnc to do that. i think it's something to celebrate. i think americans should be excited about democratic reform and if you really look at what's happening here, and look, i understand that these are the rules. we all do. but that's a weak thing to say, well they are the rules so this should never change. what's happening here is insiders -- >> i don't know that they shouldn't change. you heard ted cruz sort of saying, hey, he knew and that's too bad and says that you don't get to come out and say it's rigged when it was out there, it

was changed, it was public and, you know, they just didn't win. >> the part that was rigged, and i don't want to get into all the anythinegatives but the part th rigged because i was there, i saw it firsthand, i was in the district delegate meetings, is i heard people shouting out loud that names were missing from ballots, numbers didn't correspond to names. they would bring up easels and say everyone write down these names which aren't on the ballots and sometimes they'd hand out ballots -- >> trump campaign detractors, you heard in the trace gallagher report, the list of preferred trump delegates in colorado was riddled with errors which they blame on team trump. i mean, shouldn't you be -- >> what i saw had nothing to do with that and my only regret is that i didn't invite the cameras of fox news into the rooms so people could see what i saw. >> are we allowed in there? >> i don't know, actually. >> all right. stlst there are a few more of these. >> one of the reforms we could perhaps put in after mr. trump is elected to get fox news

cameras inside the meetings so people can see. >> it's a date. >> it was chaos inside the room. >> i got to run. think you for being here. >> thank you. >> joining us with more, bill bennett, author of the new book "tried by fire: the story of christianity's first thousand years." bill, great to see you. thanks for being here tonight. >> thanks, megyn. you don't think greatness is possible in albany, don't think greatness is possible in albany? >> i didn't like he said albany. that's my hometown. it's albany. we'll also accept smallbany, but not albany. >> got it. >> first nine years in syracuse, the rest in albany. i know what i speak. question about stephen miller's testimonial. agree or disagree? >> i don't agree. i'm not a kasich guy, trump guy, kasich guy. last time i was any guy, it was reagan. stephen miller can't dictate what colorado does. that's the way they set it in up

colorado. we do not have a pure democracy here. we have a constitutional republic. and states do things in different ways. that's the way colorado decided to do it. i think the crucial point is that donald trump and his people were not kept out of colorado. they could have gone in and done the exact same thing ted cruz's people did. they chose not to do it. >> what about his point that the people never voted for this? he said the people never got to vote. >> i'm an alternate delegate in north carolina thanks to my friend, claude pope. i probably won't go because i imagine everyone's going to want to go to this convention. there isn't going to be much room for alternates. but the states have different rules and the rules belong to the people who put them in place. these are the activists in the state. the people who want to get engaged. the people who want to get involved. you get to vote for president, you know, in november, and that vote counts. however, there, again, it's not a pure democracy. you can ask al gore about that. he had 500,000 more votes than george bush, but he lost to george bush because the

electoral college. we have a complicated and intricate system and it's designed by people at the federal level and at the state level to get the results that they want and if you want to get engaged and involved and change it, that's what you do but you can't be a bystander and just point and say, that's not the way you do it. they decide how they want to do it. >> what's happening here, the reason this is relrelevant, is because we have such a tight contest on the republican side. >> sure, sure. >> these guys are duking it out to see whether trump can get to 1,2 1,273, not realistic cruz or kasich can get it prior to july. cruz has been very well organized in these states that require organization. what does that tell you about this race and the parties involved? >> it tells you that organization means a lot in politics. ground game means a lot in politics. there you can consult hillary clinton and ask her about barack obama and his ground game and something we'll consider again at the time of the general, but

these things matter. that kind of organization, that kind of getting people out, getting their enthusiasm, getting to the caucuses. i was in instructed on what it would mean to be a delegate. by the way, all this stuff about the rnc is in charge, cruz is in charge, or trump -- these delegates are in charge and these are very active and smart people. when i was briefed on what it meant to be a delegate, it's very complicated. you have to make a major commitment and so they'll be the people who ultimately decide it. but look, this is what happens. it's happened before in america. '76, ford/reagan. it will happen again. this is red hot tempers, red tape, but it's better than red blood which is what they do in other countries. >> what do you -- you know, understand the obligation, like when they talk to you about, okay, you're bound on the first vote but then it's a second vote, anything could happen. we're being told delegates can be wooed, they can wine and dine you, say, bill, how would you like to come to mar-a-lago or i guess ted cruz could have you down to the ranch. what do they tell you you're allowed to take? how can they woo you

appropriately? >> you know, this is james madison buying drinks, right, for the delegates in virginia, our very own founding father. all sorts of things can happen that will turn on the rules, but, yes, it was explained to me if i'm an alternate delegate and a delegate drops and i get that delegate's position, i have to vote for the person on the first ballot whom that delegate supports and if that person was john kasich or marco rubio or someone we've forgotten by now, i still have to do that. that's my obligation. what about my right to vote for who i want to? that's now how the system is set up. >> what do you think of the odds of them parachuting in somebody not running for president right now to step in? >> i think they're small. you know, i think they're small, but i'll tell you, this is a crazy year. anything can happen. but it's in the hands of the delegates. i know a lot of these delegates and frankly, i trust them. i've been all over this country. i've met with tons of delegates. i'd rather see it in their hands. they're like the republican phonebook, you know, that bill buckley talked about. i'll take them over the experts.

>> fascinating. bill, great to see you. good luck with the book. >> thank you, megyn. while trump was accusing ted cruz of cheating, there are new reports that john kasich may be trying to help donald trump win this nomination. montel williams just came out for kasich. he's here on that. plus, president obama's now trying to argue that mrs. clinton broke no secrecy rules with her e-mail. but one of the president's former top intel guys says his old boss is very wrong. and general michael flynn is here to tell us why. and then, there's an explosive new claim about 28 highly classified pages from the 9/11 report that could prove one of our allies may have been helping the attackers. former senator bob graham has seen them. not many people have. he's here on why he thinks these pages must be released. >> you will find out who really knocked down the world trade center because they have papers in there that are very secret.

you may find it's the saudis, okay, but you will find out. at mfs investment management, we believe in the power of active management. by debating our research to find the best investments. by looking at global and local insights to benefit from different points of view. and by consistently breaking apart risk to focus on long-term value. we actively manage with expertise and conviction. so you can invest with more certainty. mfs. that's the power of active management. i am totally blind. i lost my sight in afghanistan. if you're totally blind, you may also be struggling with non-24. calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com. wyou could just forget frthe beach wedding... and the beach booty... you could just book a different resort. like in alaska.

they've got igloos. are not equal especially when it comes to reducing lead in your water. zerowater's five-stage filter is the only one certified by the nsf to reduce lead lead that conventional, two- stage filters may leave behind. so, if you want the purest-tasting water and the water filter that's proven to reduce lead look for zerowater. get more out of your water. as long as you love me, it's alright bend me shape me, any way you want me... shape the best sleep of your life. sleep number beds with sleepiq technology adjust any way you want it. the bed that moves you.

only at a sleep number store. "are you okay?" "yeah, i just got charged for my credit monitoring. that's how i know it"s working." "ah. you know you can go on creditkarma.com and check it out there. it's completely free." "really?" "yeah" "oh, that didn't hurt at all." "yeah, completely painless." "credit karma. give yourself some credit."

breaking tonight. we are seeing new reports that gop front-runner donald trump may be getting some help from one of his opponents. some pundits are suggesting that governor john kasich is making moves that appear designed

specifically to help trump. trace gallagher live in our west coast newsroom. trace? >> megyn, john kasich believes both donald trump and ted cruz would get killed in the election by hillary clinton and says he is the only one who can beat her. kasich also knows he stands zero chance of winning the nomination in the primaries but is staying in the race because during a contested convention, he thinks delegates would see he is the most electable. here's kasich. >> so what we really need to do is get these people, these critics to get behind me and get their people to drop out so we can actually beat hillary clinton. >> political analyst seth abramson writes in the "huffington post" he thinks we'll end up with a kasich/marco rubio ticket because they'd appeal to mainstream republicans, tea partyers, along with nonwhite voters and many young voters. of course there's the sticky issue of marco rubio who dropped out a month ago still having more delegates than john kasich. now many are wondering about the possibility of john kasich being donald trump's running mate.

over the weekend, the kasich campaign actually teamed up with the trump campaign in michigan to help trump's delegates get committee positions at the gop convention in july. positions that would otherwise have gone to ted cruz. kasich's team says they helped out trump because ted cruz is trying to scoop up too many delegates. analysts say the favor to trump may mean nothing, or it could mean if given a choice, kasich would take trump over cruz. megyn? >> trace, thank you. joining me now with more, montel williams who's an activist, former tv host, former naval intelligence officer, and a supporter of presidential candidate governor john kasich. great to see you, montel. >> good to see you, too, megyn, thanks for having me. >> do you think there's any chance john kasich is really in this to support donald trump? >> your question is a great question, but it's absurd. absolutely absurd. i think john has been on a record standing out equivocally that he wants a fair process and i think if you take a look at the entire landscape, why would he not position himself this

way? because the more in this particular situation he can drop trump/cruz, he can also trump trump. no one is going to go to this convention with the magic number. >> so he's being strategic. you can't read too much into the actions about supporting one guy or another, being strategic for himself. >> absolutely. i think unequivocally, people need to remember history in itself. remember lincoln wasn't picked until the third round, so truthfully, this can be -- you were talking about it earlier, what happens to the delegates after the first vote? all bets are off. >> that's why there's this article in the "huffington post" eight reasons why the gop ticket will be kasich/rubio they said. trump is not going to get it in the first one. they said if you think the establishment is going to go for ted cruz, you're crazy. >> correct. >> they're going to look at one thing, who can beat hillary, and they say that's where john kasich comes in. >> you look at the numbers, the numbers are actual factual. if it's kasich against hillary clinton, he crushes her. if it's kasich against bernie, he -- bernie's got an

opportunity there but i think if we get into the general election and they're both running, i think kasich will close that gap. >> two points on that, number one is people on the trump team and on cruz say kasich hadn't gotten it that bad, he's never been the front-runner so he didn't have all the cannons aimed at him so his numbers would go down and those matchups would not be as favorable to him. the other thing they say, ted cruz said to me recently the republican nominee is not going to be a guy who lost 49 states. >> yeah, but also take a look at the fact neither one of the democratic candidates ever bring up kasich's name, and why? it's fear. they talk about the guy they're really afraid of, they'll make everybody else understand his legitimacy behind the kasich camp. they know he's the guy that can beat them, so i really think this is all strategic and strategic on the democratic side also. >> you know, the republican party has this problem, it's had this problem repeatedly where there's a candidate who matches up well against the democrat in the general election but that candidate cannot get out of the republican primary. i don't know that they've figured out for themselves what the issue is. you know, for years people have

been saying, we need to nominate a true conservative and that's the person who -- ted cruz is still making that argument. but so many others in the party this year are saying we don't care about conservatism, we want somebody to blow up the system. >> they want a reagan republican. listen to what a reagan republican is. he's a person that's inclusive, he's a person that listens. he's a person that works with both sides to see if he can come up with a solution. that was the republican i was. i left the republican party after ronald reagan because the republican party left me. now i'm an independent. but for the first time, i actually see a candidate that's looking at america the day after the election. not the day of. >> 30 seconds left. >> sure. >> why don't you like cruz? why don't you like trump is. >> i will tell you, my perspective, most of the military people i've talken to, i cannot vote for donald trump. he's a person, literally, his responsibility and sought a deferment at a time when there were people in this country dying and wrote about how lucky he was to get away with that

being able to chase women, one, and now he wants to be the commander in chief and send other people's children off to die, not happening. >> he said he had an injury -- >> yeah, whatever, okay? that's really -- he also wrote about the fact that he got away with that in his book. and i'm so sorry, i just do not believe that mr. cruz represents the mindset of anybody in america. except his own. >> montel williams. great to see you. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> further updates to follow. coming up, president obama is setting off some alarms with his new effort to defend secretary clinton on her e-mail scandal. one of the president's former intel guys, one of the top guys, lieutenant general michael flynn is here tonight on why he thinks his old boss is very, very wrong here and out of line. plus, a new book takes us back to 1995 and some behind the scenes from when then-first lady hillary clinton decided to stand by her husband. the author reveals why she did it. coming up. what's going on here? i'm val, the orange money retirement squirrel from voya.

we're putting away acorns. you know, to show the importance of saving for the future. so you're sort of like a spokes person? more of a spokes metaphor. get organized at voya.com. i use what's already inside me to reach my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me. with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight.

trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. it should be used along with diet and exercise. trulicity is not recommended as the first medicine to treat diabetes and should not be used by people with severe stomach or intestinal problems, or people with type i diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. trulicity is not insulin and has not been studied with long-acting insulin. do not take trulicity if you or anyone in your family has had medullary thyroid cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2 or if you are allergic to trulicity or its ingredients. stop using trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of an allergic reaction, such as itching, rash, or difficulty breathing; if you have signs of pancreatitis such as severe stomach pain that will not go away and may move to your back, with or without vomiting; or if you have symptoms of thyroid cancer, which may include a lump or swelling in your neck, hoarseness, trouble swallowing, or shortness of breath. medicines like trulicity may cause stomach problems, which could be severe. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and any medicines you take. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin

may increase your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney failure. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option, ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. and click to activate your within. &. business hasn't always been good at &. held back by a world requiring them to decide between one choice or another. always or. but with the rate of change increasing, there's simply( no time for or. businesses today need the agility to do one thing...&...another. and only at&t has the network, people, and partners to help companies sense and adapt like never before.

to be local & global-for keeping a closer eye on your business from virtually anywhere. open & secure-for sharing data without a hint of hesitation. all to discover the endless power of &. because no one knows & like at&t. from the world headquarters of fox news, it's "the kelly file" with megyn kelly. tonight we have a fact check for you on president obama's newest defense of hillary clinton in her ongoing e-mail scandal. in an interview on "fox news sunday" yesterday chris wallace asked president obama to weigh in on the ongoing investigation

into mrs. clinton's private e-mail server. the president could have declined to answer saying he wanted to avoid influencing an open case, instead we heard this. >> here's what i know. hillary clinton was an outstanding secretary of state. she would never intentionally put america in any kind of jeopardy. there's stuff that is really top secret, top secret. and there's stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state you might not want on the transit going out over the wire but basically stuff you could get in open source. >> last october you were prepared to say she hadn't jeopardized. the question is can you still say that? >> i continue to believe she has not jeopardized america's national security. >> in moments we'll hear from one of president obama's former top intelligence officers, lieutenant general michael flynn, on that statement. but first we go to chief intelligence correspondent live tonight in washington.

>> reporter: megyn, as part of our fact check we had a former senior intelligence official weigh in on the president's suggestion that some classified information is more deserving of its top-secret label. we were told that even if highly classified information shows up in "the new york times," a security clearance holder is still obligated to protect it and neither confirm nor deny the news report's accuracy. >> if i see what has been deemed classified information no matter what level it is in open media, it is my responsibility not to acknowledge it. >> and we checked out mr. obama's statement to chris wallace that mrs. clinton did not intentionally harm national security and we learned today it was not based on information from the fbi or justice department. >> the president has neither sought nor received a confidential briefing or confidential information about the ongoing investigation. the public's knowledge is based entirely on public reporting. >> in our ongoing reporting of the clinton e-mail investigation here at fox has shown that mr.

obama, himself, exchanged 19 e-mails with then-secretary of state clinton using her personal e-mail account. the e-mails don't contain classified information but still aren't public because they involved executive branch discussions. experts now question whether mr. obama has a personal conflict. >> if there's the possibility, and it looks like there's evidence that he was in some sense involved in what happened, was aware of what happened, could potentially be a witness to what happened, he shouldn't be making public statements prejudging the outcome of something he could have personal involvement in. >> today the white house acknowledged that mr. obama knew that clinton e-mail address but didn't know about her private server, megyn. >> thank you. the president also raising eyebrows with his declaration that mrs. clinton has not put the country at risk. >> i continue to believe that she has not jeopardized america's national security. now what i've always said is that, and she's acknowledged,

that there's a carelessness in terms of managing e-mails that she has owned and she recognizes. >> joining me now, lieutenant general michael flynn, president obama's former director of the defense intelligence agency. they provide intelligence to the military. general, good to see you tonight. >> hi, megyn, how are you? >> i'm very curious to get your thoughts. you were the first person i thought of when i heard this yesterday. your reaction to the president's comments? >> yeah. well, first of all, the president should have either gone into that sbrir and told chris wallace i'm not going to answer anything on this account because it's under investigation. there's a very, very serious investigation going on and there are at least from what i understand, at least 100 fbi ajea je gents involved in this thing. the interesting thing, though, megyn, for the president to use the word carelessness, i mean, so there's a -- you know, if

it's classified, it's classified, period, you know, like the president says, stop all engines kind of thing. this issue of carelessness that the president raised, so he made -- he sort of made this point, you know, so we're careless with highly classified intelligence, we're careless with, what, the decision to go into libya? he also talked a little bit about that. we're careless -- this is now hillary clinton, we're careless with the russian reset, we're careless with the pivot to the pacific? so if there's a persistence of carelessness which means you're prone to making mistakes and you have a judgment problem, the other thing that i think that exists here is the lack of accountability and i think despite what the president said about she's owned up to it, there's just such incredible lack of accountability for the use of highly classified information and intelligence that's at the highest levels of our government and we know she knew that she is a target of

nation states like russia, china, et cetera, and, i mean, we hear more and more about this kind of stuff these days. to me, it's just unbelievable that the fact that the president, the president said she was careless and i agree with him. she was very careless. that carelessness to me is also an indifference and, frankly, a lack of accountability. >> let's talk about your view on whether she's jeopardized our national security or not. this was your industry, your business for many years. do you agree with the president? is he able to say that? >> i don't agree with the president, not one bit. i do not agree with the president of the united states saying, he should not have said it, he should have stayed away from it because it's under investigation. the potential here to have a divulged highly classified information as has been described by the state department, by the inspector general from the national intelligence community, that there has been a basically an

exposure of highly classified information on an unclassified capability meaning her -- >> you believe the chinese could have accessed it and others? >> yeah, hey, look, megyn, whenever i had to travel overseas, i had to change my entire system and i never used a personal device, anyway, because the government would issue me a classified means to communicate. why did hillary clinton believe that she was above that? i don't know. that's something that they're going to find out in the investigation and that's going to lead to some other problems for her, but -- >> what did you make of the president's statement that, you know, there's top secret, then there's top secret. >> yeah, it's -- you know, it's classified or it's not, and we now know that there are highly classified, you know, e-mails that she shared, like he says, when something goes over the transom, president said this, over the transom or through the wires, let's not make light of this. this is unbelievable.

this sun precedented for a member of the senior member of the national security council, the secretary of state to do this, and all these excuses about, well, other secretaries have done this in the past. no, they have not. not in the way that we have seen hillary clinton do this. and frankly, because i just don't think that she feels that she's accountable to the people of this country, frankly, certainly to those of us that have -- that have done this for a living and she had many, many people in the department of state that were willing to work on her behalf to do the kinds of things that were the right things to do and megyn, they're the right things to do but they're absolutely the right things to do and she decided that she didn't need to follow those rules. and that, you know, makes me -- that makes me angry as an american that she felt like she did not have to follow the rules that the rest of us in government had to follow. >> general flynn, thank you for being here. >> thanks, megyn. within 24 hours of that interview with the president,

the washington, d.c., based website, politico, published a report that reveiewed dozens of alleged mishandling of classified records and concluded it is highly unlikely that mrs. clinton will face any charges here. we asked judge andrew napolitano to review the poreport. judge, what are they saying? they're basically saying this kind of case would not typically be prosecuted. >> the cases on which they relied are cases of one-offs, cases of people making mistakes, people leaving things in their briefcase and taking the briefcase home. alberto gonzalez did that with classified information in the briefcase, brought it back and realized he had done so and self-reported. they can't find anything of this magnitude of 2,200 e-mails that are confidential, secret, or top secret. 65 that are secret or top

secret. 22 that are top secret. four that are so secret the fbi agents are investigating can't look at them because they lack the security clearance. >> two points, she's saying what the president is saying is which don't believe that. when you get a look at these, you'll see these are not the be all, end all. there's things you could have seen and did see in some instances in the paper but they had been labeled top secret and they weren't really. that's number one. and secondly, she says this was all as a result of, you know, carelessness. inadvertent on her. she never intentionally gave anybody classified info. >> that is very, very dangerous for her to say that. general flynn is correct, it's very dangerous for the president to say. here's why. espionage. the removal of state secrets from a secure place to a nonsecure place is one of the few federal crimes that can be proven by negligence. now, it's not simple carelessness, it's gross negligence. but i suggest to you, here's where the politico article was

off the wall. it wasn't even remotely near this. if you do this, regularly, consistently, and systemically 2,200 times over the course of 4 years and you don't care that you removed national secrets from a secure venue, the place that sent them to her, to a nonsecure venue, the server in the basement of her house, that is gross negligence. on top of that, there are two e-mails from her from which the government could argue intent. one e-mail that said, remove the secret marking on it. send it from your fax to my fax, nobody will know the difference. that shows an intention to break the law. >> she could have declassified it because it was a state department -- >> she couldn't because she wasn't the author of the document. >> that's different. i want to ask you this, though. was president obama -- obviously wallace asked him to do it, doesn't mean he had to do it. he commented on it in a way some people are saying, you know, you're sending a message it the

doj, you know, like, no there, there. got me? >> i don't think he can do that with the professional cadre of fbi agents that have been assigned to this case. >> what about the doj? >> well, i agree with general flynn and agree with the lawyer just interviewed. it is reprehensible for the president to have answered those questions. here's why. because he may be a witness in this case. he has an absolute conflict if he is the officer who decides whether or not this evidence is presented to a grand jury. the conflict is do i want to expose myself to this or not want to expose myself to that? when you have that personal involvement in a case, withdryot be the decision maker and for the president to have opined -- she was a great attorney general, her e-mails didn't harm anybody. harm isn't the test here. her greatness or the absence of it isn't the test here. the test here is that she knowingly, regularly, consistently and systemically exposed national secrets to the gaze of those that would harm

us. the answer is yes. >> he spoke to that, too, said she never would have intentionally done that. got to go. great to see you, judge. >> great to see you. there's an explosive new claim about 28 highly classified pages from the 9/11 report. did you see "60 minutes" last night? that could prove that one of our allies may have been helping our attackers. former senator bob graham is one of the few who has seen these documents. he's here next on why he thinks when you booked this trip,

you didn't know we had hundreds of thousands of places to stay all over the world. or that we searched billions of flights to get you here. a few weeks ago, you didn't even know where here was. now the only thing you don't know, is how you're gonna leave. expedia. technology that connects you to the people and places that matter. it's more than tit's security - and flexibility.

it's where great ideas and vital data are stored. with centurylink you get advanced technology solutions from a trusted it partner. including cloud and hosting services - all backed by an industry leading broadband network and people committed to helping you grow your business. you get a company that's more than just the sum of it's parts. centurylink. your link to what's next.

quite like the human foot. introducing the 241 horsepower lexus is 200 turbo. with almost twenty percent more base horsepower. once driven, there's no going back. e*trade is all about seizing opportunity. so i'm going to take this opportunity to go off script.

so if i wanna go to jersey and check out shotsy tuccerelli's portfolio, what's it to you? or i'm a scottish mason whose assets are made of stone like me heart. papa! you're no son of mine! or perhaps it's time to seize the day. don't just see opportunity, seize it! (applause) new details on an explosive claim about pages from the a 9/11 report that could prove our allies in saudi arabia may have been helping the attackers. the pages have been locked up for 13 years viewed only by a select few. now some of those folks want them released. >> i think it is implausible to believe that 19 people, most of whom didn't speak english, most of whom had never been in the united states before, many of whom didn't have a high school

education, could have carried out such a complicated task without some support from within the united states. >> and you believe that the 28 pages are crucial to this? >> they are a key part. >> the 9/11 commission report says that saudi arabia has long been considered the primary source of al qaeda funding through its wealthy citizens and charities with significant government sponsorship. but the sentence that got the most attention when the report came out is this. "we have found no evidence that the saudi government as an institution or senior saudi officials individually funded the organization." attorney sean carter says it's the most carefully crafted line in the 9/11 commission report and the most misunderstood. >> when they say that we found no evidence that senior saudi officials individually funded al qaeda, they conspicuously leave open the potential they found evidence people who were officials that they did not regard as senior officials had

done so. >> reporter: john layman, secretary of the navy in the reagan administration, says he and the others make up a solid majority of former 9/11 commissioners who think the 28 pages should be made public. >> it was no accident that 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudis. day all went to saudi schools. they learned from the time they were first able to go to school of this intolerant brand of islam. >> cbs and "60 minutes" doing an explosive report there. bob graham is former chairman of the senate select committee on intelligence and former co-chair, the inquiry into intelligence failures surrounding the 9/11 attacks. thanks for being here. >> thank you, megyn. >> you want the 28 pages released. you've seen them. what are you at liberty to tell us about them? >> not much because i am still under an oath that i took not to disclose classified information,

but it has been said publicly that this chapter primarily relates to who financed 9/11 and that it points a finger at saudi arabia. >> when you look at that statement that was in the 9/11 report saying we found no evidence that the saudi government as an institution or senior saudi officials individually funded the organization, you can drive a truck through that sentence, there are a lot of holes in there. senior saudi officials which doesn't rule out non-senior saudi officials or the government as something other than acting as an institution. >> and one of the things that makes this even more confusing is that the concept of sovereign immunity, that is the king can do no wrong and, therefore, you cannot sue the king, has been used by saudi arabia not only to cover the official government, but also charities, private foundations, religious organizations. all had been put under the

umbrella of sovereign immunity, so the question of where does the government end and the rest of the saudi society again is very murky. >> so that explains their motivation for trying to, you know, potentially obfuscate the facts but what is our motivation? why would the united states not be releasing this information and letting us all know whether our allies were, in fact, behind this attack? >> megyn, i think that's inexplicable. there was some reasons to suggest why under the bush administration they might have wanted to have avoided this disclosure, such as we were looking to saudi arabia for substantial amount of intelligence and other assistance in the period after 9/11. the bush family had had a close relationship with the house of saud going back for three generations. why under the obama administration they have continued this policy when there

is mounting evidence not just the 28 pages, but other issues that have involved the saudis and 9/11, which, to me, makes it not only disrespectful to the american people not to allow them to have the transparency of knowing what their government has done in their name when it does not involve a national security risk. in fact, i think it actually increases our vulnerability because it allows the saudis to continue vulnerability because allows the saudis to continue feeling that there's no sanction against them to fund terrorist activities and to train the next generation of terrorist in mosque and madrassas, schools financed by saudi arabia. >> white house is reviewing it again. we'll stay on it.

senator, thank you for being here. >> great. thank you very much. and up next, a new book dishes on when's described as an icy relationship of first lady michelle obama and hillary clinton. the author tells us what the story is next. jack knocked over a candlestick, onto the shag carpeting... ...and his pants ignited into flames, causing him to stop, drop and roll.

luckily jack recently had geico help him with renters insurance. because all his belongings went up in flames. jack got full replacement and now has new pants he ordered from banana republic. visit geico.com and see how affordable renters insurance can be. . .

first on the kelly file tonight, revealing new information about the often mysterious lives of our first ladies. a new book details the secret scandals, unlikely friendships and bitter feuds among the women of the white house. joining me now, author of "first women" kate anderson brower. great to see you. >> great do see you. >> and her first book is amazing. we're working together to make it into a huge success on camera, but that's a different story. let's talk about the first women. you have juicy nuggets and starts with the premise that what? >> well, there is a sisterhood that transcends political parties. you know, you have republicans or friends with democrats, hillary and michelle, for instance, not getting along so well and two democrats who you would expect to get along and then you have lady bird johnson who is a democrat getting along very well with betty ford, in fact keeping a framed photo on her bedside table until her death.

they know what it's like to be in the white house. it's one of the hardest jobs. you're a wife, a mother. you campaigned very hard for your husband. go through the tumultuous campaigns. they're the only women that know what it's like. >> you talk about the 2008 election when hillary clinton cried before new hampshire. and an aide to laura bush said, that's a publicity stunt. >> exactly. laura bush said you have no idea what it's like. laura bush said the same thing when michelle obama says i'm proud of my country for the first time. and laura bush in an interview said, you know, she probably didn't mean to say it quite like that. so she came to michelle's defense again and you see that again and again. >> a class act. >> yes. >> why don't michelle and hillary like each other or why is it cold? >> well, you know, michelle looks at the clintons like this political dynasty that came before them. michelle obama can't wait to leave the white house. she is very anxious to get out. and obviously hillary clinton can't wait to get back boo the white house. so they're incredibly different women and that speaks to that hillary and michelle really have very little in common. yet michelle has so much more in common with laura. >> we'll stand you by with more in the break and we'll be right

back with kate. low prices. pinky swear? low prices. eskimo kisses? how about a handshake? oh, alright... the lowest price. every time. staples. make more happen. came out today thousands of people to run the race for retirement. so we asked them... are you completely prepared for retirement? okay, mostly prepared? could you save 1% more of your income? it doesn't sound like much, but saving an additional 1% now, could make a big difference over time. i'm going to be even better about saving. you can do it, it helps in the long run. prudential bring your challenges

are not equal especially when it comes to reducing lead in your water. zerowater's five-stage filter is the only one certified by the nsf to reduce lead lead that conventional, two- stage filters may leave behind. so, if you want the purest-tasting water and the water filter that's proven to reduce lead look for zerowater. get more out of your water.

this is your daughter. and she just got this. ooh boy. but, you've got hum. so you can set this. and if she drives like this, you can tell her to drive more like this. because you'll get this. you can even set boundaries for so if she should be here, but instead goes here, here, or here. you'll know. so don't worry, mom. because you put this, in here. hum by verizon. the technology designed to make your car smarter, safer and more connected. put some smarts in your car.

again, "first women." go to facebook.com/the kelly file to hear more of my interview with kate. and also tomorrow in a kelly file exclusive, heidi cruz for the first time on that tweet, the national enquirer and more. welcome to "hannity" and we're coming to you live from saratoga springs. we're in beautiful upstate new york. it is just eight days -- hello, hi, welcome. [ cheering ] eight days voters from the state head to the polls and help decide who they want to be the 2016 presidential nominee. 95 republican delegates up for grabs and tonight gop presidential candidate he's the governor of the great state of ohio, our good friend for the entire hour, john kasich is with us. how are you? how are you? >> good. >> standing room only. it's like a million people standing behind there.