spin stops right here because we are definitely looking out for you. breaking tonight, a big shift in the race for the white house as donald trump loses ground to hillary clinton in brand-new fox polling while hillary clinton's numbers head south on honesty and her e-mail. welcome to the kelly file everyone i'm megyn kelly. the trump campaign has been hounded about questions about the fraud case and mr. trump's comment that the judge ruled against him. now it appears that all of this may have taken its toll. according to a brand-new fox poll hillary clinton is leading donald trump 42% to 49% and it's not because she's gaining any supporters. in fact her overall numbers are

stayed the same. her honesty numbers have fallen. but mr. trump's numbers have seen an erosion of six points in the last two weeks. this comes on the day that president obama put his supported behind hillary clinton, despite the fact that his administration is investigating her e-mail and whether she should be criminally charged. we're talking about the new report that mrs. clinton may -- we begin tonight on this polling. chris, good to see you. >> how you doing? >> it comes down to the independents because trump lost three points with the republicans but he's lost 11 points with the independents over the past few weeks. >> the way to think about this independents aren't moderate independents go from very liberal to very conservative they just have low attachment to a political party. and what you see with trump is well he dropped with

republicans a bit, a few points with republicans. he'll still in the 80s. for the ips they can be conservatives who would normally not vote for a democrat may hate the republican party and don't want to be part of it. and this shows what the challenge for trump is. he's got to do this with the independents. there aren't enough republicans. >> the lesson in here if any, we're in june he's got a lot of time. but is the lesson that the stuff that would work for him during the primary campaign or certainly would not alienate his core group of supporters during the primary campaign is not necessarily going to serve him well in trying to actually win the general election? >> right. tim tebow was a great college quarterback when he played for florida and did all kinds of great stuff. but he couldn't stay on the new york jets once he got to the nfl. and the deal is you've got to play a different game in a different level and it's a different thing to be in the general election than it is to be in the primary.

and also when he's in the primary he had some guys who were dopes that he was smacking around pretty good. and by the way, the press is rooting for him as he's beating up republicans. then you get to the general election he turns and the press treats him differently and his opponent is different. >> he's beating her be points with men, she's beating him by 18 points with women. and in the meantime the enthusiasm seems very low. trump supporters basically 50/50. those who are happy to vote for him, those who have to hold their nose. with her it's 60/40, 60% happy, 40% have to hold their know to vote for her. >> yay. the american electorate is so enthused right now about this election. the reality is -- hillary clinton has not yet -- this poll was in the field through wednesday so it got some of what she'll get out of the bounce out of beating bernie sanders. but we haven't seen the next part where the president and the democrats rally around her. she's going to pick up numbers that way that trump picked up

numbers. that enthusiasm number will go up a little bit about president obama and other popular democrats say she's not so bad. come on. >> it's amazing the see the honesty numbers with. 60% believe she's lying about houb her e-mail were handled. yet still her overall numbers, she didn't go up but trump went down. so she's in the lead. and they believe she put national security at risk 57% of the public. thank you. >> you bet. also breaking tonight, president obama makes his endorsement of hillary clinton official. despite the fact that his administration is investigating her use of a private e-mail server that may have put national security at risk. in a video that was actually recorded on tuesday, president obama argued she's the best person for the job. watch. >> i know how hard this job can be. that's why i know hillary will be so good at it. in fact i don't think there's ever been someone so qualified to hold this office and i'm with

her. i am fired up and i cannot wait to get out there and campaign for hillary. >> this comes on the same day president obama sat down with mrs. clinton's democratic challenger bernie sanders. yards mr. sanders with was not ready to say he's exiting the race but he signaled a willingness to help defeat donald trump. >> i spoke briefly to secretary clinton on tuesday night and i congratulated her on her very strong campaign. i look forward to meeting with her in the near future to see how we can work together to defeat donald trump. >> following all of that senator elizabeth warren of massachusetts got in on the action taking mr. trump on for his comments about judge curiel in the trump university case dropping a loaded carriage in the process. >> trump is picking on someone who is ethically bound not to defend himself. exactly what you would expect

from a thin skinned racist bully. donald trump is a loud nasty thin skinned fraud who has never risked anything for anyone and who serves no one but himself. [ cheers & applause ] >> joining me now, charles krauth hammer. what does it tell us you've got the president endorsing hillary, bernie signaling the end is year and liz bert warren coming out in support of hillary. >> this is a carefully choreographed cabu ki play. it's rather well done. it starts with the honoring of sanders by having him meet with the president, the vice president, the head of the senate. then you get the official endorsement which had been recorded already in on tuesday.

in a year of a hundred surprises, this was the least surprising of all developments. then you get bernie sanders coming out not withdrawing, because that would have been seen as a capitulation. the withdrawal has to wait a week and that will be the d.c. primary. he said i'll contest that. then obviously he'll step aside. he'll have his meeting with hillary. they will decide on what the price is for his acquiesce sense and his support. and then the joint announcement. >> so the dems are coalescing and we're seeing something very different in part on the republican side. trump has managed to get 86% of the gop behind him but he's down six points from the last poll we did, head-to-head matchup and he's down within those numbers significantly. now 11 points with independents. that seems to be where the loss came from. >> it's pretty clear where the

hiccup is coming from and that is from the statement that he made about the so hch called mexican judge born and bred in indiana. there are a lot of charges and mistakes and slips you can make in american politics. racism is the one unforgivable one. jimmy carter once spoke offhand edly in 1976 when he was running about ethnic purity in neighborhoods and he was absolutely dead in the water until he made a joint appearance with martin luther king sr. who essentially gave him abs solution. and i think this is a little bit different. i don't think it will sink his campaign. but it certainly counts the statement about the so-called mexican judge. it certainly counts much more than any of the other slipups. when you get the leader of your party, meaning the speaker of the house paul ryan saying this is an expert case of racism you've got a real problem.

then as a result you get one senator in illinois who withdraws his support of trump, you get the governor of wisconsin, a very popular guy who's suspending hi support. so the colessalescing that was happening is now on hiatus. >> the thing about trump is people express their outrage when she makes these statements. and then they seem to move on from it very quickly. you know trump, he does a lot of controversial things but it seems like his supporters believe they can see right past that to a good man who just says stuff that gets him in trouble and the line is he's not a politician he's not filtered. that kind of thing. i don't know. like there's nothing in the past to suggest this is going to affect him in november. >> but let's remember as you said his supporters is the key phrase in what you said. his audience until now has been

republicans with a large plurality supporting him. his supporters won't be swayed by this one way or the other. but as you also pointed out, with independents he's now down -- he's lost quite a lot of ground among independents. those are the persuadables. those are the people who don't like hillary and they don't like trump and they're going to have to choose. but an issue like this can damage him in a way that can be really difficult to recover from. i'm not saying it will. he's defied all of the odds. but i think if you want to account for what's happening now, yes, no movement against him among his supporters but it's the nonsupporters, the waiverers who are the real prize here. >> what do you make -- you mentioned scott walker. we reported last night that there is a movement under way in earnest to actually get the delegates at the republican national convention not to vote for trump even though he's the presumptive nominee, to sustain. and the name they're cir now is a possible alternative is

scott walker. somebody asked scott walker about it and he said i would support the nominee. trump is not the nominee yet. do you think that this has any chance? i mean i know the judge thing was controversial but was it that controversial? >> this is a repetition. if it ever happens, the parting of the red sea. and that happens only every few thousand years. there is no way this is going to happen. this is another of the fantasy of people who can't accept the reality of trump. trump is reality. he's going to be the nominee. can you imagine if a guy comes in with a fairly substantial majority of the delegates or at least the pledged delegates who have to vote for him and he's denied that? i mean trump is talking about riots in the arena with an ominous edge. but that is a prescription for mayhem in cleveland.

i can't see it happening. >> great to see you, chaurls. thanks for being here. >> my plaesh sure. tonight national security experts are raising new fears that the mess created by former secretary of state hillary clinton and her private e-mail server may have revealed the identities of cia personnel. potentially risking the lives of undercover op tiffs. richard fowler is a senior fellow at the new leaders count till. that's very much in question, whether she risked the identities of cia agents. but it has been reported now that she engaged in correspondence over her e-mail unsecured server discussing cia matters including the drone program which the state department was allowed to weigh in on an unsecured fashion prior to the drone strikes, mark. >> no, that's exactly right. and what we have here is a dangerous conversation of

negligence and incompetence. the incompetence is that we have at least 2,000 clinton e-mails that include classified information, including 47 that have information on either cia personnel or activities. those are both highly classified facts. any foreign spy agency that broke into her unsecured server in the basement of her home has that information. now they might not know that they have it because the cia personnel or activities might not actually be flagged in the e-mail. so this is where the incompetence comes in. the state department gives them a road map to figure all that information out. they put out 55,000 pages of her e-mail with redactions of all of the classified information and they helpfully mark all of the classified information about the cia 47 times it says the notation b-3 cia personnel organization. what that means is any foreign government who has her unthose e-mails, because they hacked them, now just has to check it

against this information to find all of the relevant information about either cia personnel or operatives or about drone strikes or other cia activities that might not be in the news. >> they gave them the other piece of the puzzle. >> exactly. >> the state department in redacting her e-mail and try to deal with the mess she created gave them the other piece of the puzzle the potential hackers. richard, you've got to see this as a problem. >> there's no question megyn, that her having this e-mail server in her basement is problematic. i said that over and over again. but i do think to get to where mark is it requires a lot of assumptions. it requires you to assume her e-mail was hacked from a foreign government. the second assumption you have to make is they downloaded the e-mail. the third assumption you have to make is that they are reading the 55,000 e-mails that they have and they're matching them up and you also have to assume that the cia operative is still in the same location. is this problematic, yes.

>> did she mean to do it no. is this what scooter libby did? absolutely not. there's in priorfire here at all. >> go ahead mark. >> that's what spy agencies do. they do read 55,000 e-mail and go through them. >> isn't that amazing? >> you're not right about that. >> that's what the oig said. >> mark. >> the oig said her server was hacked and they had to shut it down. >> pulled the plug out of the wall. >> to stop the attack. nbc news reported that chinese hackers in an operation called dancing panda proek into the unclassified government e-mail of white house officials and downloaded their e-mails and also there's a "the new york times" reported that russians broke into the unclassified white house and state department servers to get to president obama's e-mails. those -- her private server in the basement of her home is not

nearly as secure as the unclassified e-mails in the white house and the state department. >> michael flynn who used to head up the dia u which is the sister to the cia, he said there's no question in his mind that the chinese and a perhaps the russians hacked into her e-mail. >> the report indicates there was not a security breach on her private server. >> the general cannot say that definitively. >> based on the evidence they've indicated there's not a breach. either way for mark's scenario to be possible, it requires tons and tons of assumptions that we don't know. >> shouldn't have oochbeven been a risk. >> that's the problem. why were they so stupid with all due respect to release the information. just in case you weren't sure this is the cia agent. somebody might have this document.

all right, i got to go. >> don't read the 55,000 pages. >> just read our key and go straight to the juicy bits. >> they're going to take the time to read the 55,000 e-mails. it's the key like you do on the kid's menu. i got to go. i stole the last word. i'm sorry. up next donald trump not the only candidate facing questions over unfair business practices. you know trump university and all of the trouble he got into for that? we'll bring you a report on the clinton's university problem and why no one is discussing it. professor jonathan turly is here next. a major second amendment case with gun advocates warning the move could pave the way to ending gun rights all together. a major decision today. new reports of gitmo launching deadly attacks on

american troops as president obama rushes to empty the camp before he leaves office. stay tuned. >> sirs what i can tell you is unfortunately there have been americans that have died because of gitmo. >> how many americans have to die? everything you're pretty good at now you were once, well pretty bad at. but you learned. and got better. at experian, we believe it's the same with managing your credit. you may not be good at it now. but that's okay. because credit isn't just a score. it's a skill. and you can get better. experian. be better at credit.

(man) oh, looks like we missed most of the show. (woman) and there's no way to restart it. (jon bon jovi) with directv there is. ♪ you see, we've got the power to turn back time ♪ ♪ so let's restart the show that started at nine ♪ ♪ and while we're at it, let's give you back your 'do ♪ ♪ and give her back the guy she liked before you ♪ ♪ hey, that's the power to turn back time. ♪ (vo) get the ultimate all-included bundle. call 1-800-directv. can a toothpaste do everything well? this clean was like - pow. it felt like i had just gone to the dentist. my teeth are glowing. they are so white. 6x cleaning*, 6x whitening* in the certain spots that i get very sensitive... ...i really notice a difference.

and at two weeks superior sensitivity relief to sensodyne i actually really like the two steps! step 1 cleans and relieves sensitivity, step 2 whitens. it's the whole package. no one's done this. crest - healthy, beautiful smiles for life. think you're taking what's best for your heartburn? try nexium 24hr. now the #1 choice of doctors & pharmacists... for their own frequent heartburn. get complete protection with nexium 24 hour.

new developments tonight in a story that until now has gone

largely unreported and totally ignored. the clintons now embroiled in their own for-profit university controversy. joining presumptive republican nominee in that regard. we have the law professor who wrote the piece with us tonight. jonathan turley is here. first trace lays out the detail. >> hillary clinton vowed to crack down on federal aid that flow to for-profit colleges quoting with there are students who take out loans to pay for an expensive degree for a for-profit institution only to find little support once they actually enroll. and yet when hillary clinton arrived at the state department in 2009 she requested that lore yet be included in her higher education dinner a company that runs 80 for-profit colleges in 30 countries, including five schools here in the u.s. in her e-mail hillary clinton

wrote that lore yet was started by bob decker who bill likes a lot. who a few months after the dinner was hired by doug becker to become the honorary chancellor. and between 2010 and 2015 bloomberg said that loreyet paid bill clinton $15.5 million. loreyet sent $2 million a year on aggressive marketing. they wrote about accusations that they were boosting revenue by turbo charging enrollment without the parallel increase in academic investment. and a loreyet school as graduation rates as low as 15%. doug becker donated between $1 million and $5 million to the clinton foundation. he also runs the international

youth foundation a foundation that received grants from the state department but during hillary clinton's time as secretary of state the grants increased dramatically. it does not receive a penny of the grant money given to the international youth foundation. >> thank you. turning to me now, the man whose blog brought this story back into the headlines. jonathan turley. thanks for being back with us. it's confusing. tell me whether i have the right. this guy becker hires bill clinton and pays him $16 million in the course of four years. one of becker's groups that he's associated with gets money from the state department. oh that worked out well. then becker -- a different becker group gives money back to the clinton foundation. so it's a circle of becker who has a couple different groups one pays bill one gets money in the state department and round and round it goes in this sort of web like we've seen so often

around the clintons. >> well you know it's -- this company is simply enormous. it's about $4 billion of assets. and it's often pointed to as really what's wrong with the direction of educate. >> loriyet university. >> this is what mcdonald's is to culinary arts. they produce things at the lowest possible costs with questionable ingredients and they leave often students with debt with not many tunts. >> >> right. students we should not be taking advantage of. it's controversial to have the clintons associated with that at all, certainly given her stance on it. but they were. we know they were. >> and to give the former president this obscene amount of money. $16.5 million. now what we can see is that he did give speeches in various countries. but the size of this contract which was not initially

disclosed, the media tried to get this information out and both the company and the clintons without much success. what i believe you have here is some serious questions. now that doesn't mean this is the same as trump university. i think that there are distinctions. >> let me stop you because this is confusing enough to talk about. so they give bill clinton $16.5 million. it would be nice to have a good relationship with the state department and she happens to be secretary of state. but the state department doesn't get money to this group. the state department gives money to an organization run by the same guy who runs loreyet, this becker guy who the clintons love. it gives you the feeling that everybody is in bed together which the clintons deny and loreyet denies. but it smells. >> there's in question you had all of this money going and coming from different directions. the one common denominator is

the fact that mr. becker who has involved with both loreyet and the international youth foundation -- there's no question that loreyet benefitted greatly from the association not just with bill clinton but with hillary clinton. this is a company with most of it abilities abroad. to be able to have the picture of bill clinton with the connection with hillary clinton, strong relations with the state department, that's an enormous advantage. >> and loreyet did make donations into the clinton count dags foundation. for educators, this company has long be controversial. now i'm not a big fan obviously of for-profit educational companies. but this company has been repeatedly criticized for making education into a commodity, to

be sold at the lowest possible cost. it's not something you would normally expect a former president to be associated with. but to have the husband with the of the secretary of state raises some legitimate questions. >> and those questions will continue if the media does its job. professor, thanks for calling it to our attention. still ahead, a federal court issuing a major ruling just hours ago on your gun rights. why it says the second amendment does not protect your right to carry a concealed weapon in public. a fair balanced debate next. and the trial for the driver of the van in which freddie gray was traveling began today but only after prosecutors were berated by the judge. we'll take a look at the case and what today's developments mean for a prosecution that has already seen two of their trials end much differently than they hope. there is big news in this freddie gray case today. you recall we told you that the evidence came out last night

that suggested the prosecution had withheld evidence and low and behold what happened but the judge weighed in on that today. actually here's what we're going to do. we're going to go right to our gun debate and get right to the ninth circuit ruling. tucker this is big. this is big because the supreme court had held in heller that you do have a constitutional right to keep your gun in your house period. but now the question is can you walk around with it? can you walk around with a concealed weapon? and the ninth circuit court of appeals originally ruled yes, of course you can. yes. but then they come back with -- like the full panel of the ninth circuit and the full panel on a

split decision said no you can't. enjoy it inside your living room and that's it. >> well it does raise a deeper question which is what is the point of a right if you're not allowed to exercise it. >> you can enjoy it in your bathroom. >> you can enjoy it in some theoretical plane. you're ato have a gun. you can't touch it or use it in self-defense. why is the left so intent of eroding the most basic constitutional rights. why is that. in their place substituting these rights like the right to use bathrooms that you decide you need to use but ignoring the foundational rights that made the country what it is. very odd. >> the dissent in this case was not pleased and made this point which is the second amendment is not some second class right. and you know the ninth circuit is reversing itself in a decision it could not agree on. i think it was 7-4. >> in that heller decision the

decision was not absolute. meaning it wasn't contained or limited. now one thing to keep in mind is the limitations of the second amendment. the second amendment was one part that nobody wants to talk about, the right to bear arms and organize a well-regulated malitia malitia. back then when we had militias in our state they were made up of men from 16 to 60 years old and they brought their own muscats with them. that's what the second amendment is about. none of madison's writings did he ever discuss securing your home or concealing weaponry. that is something that is very between 2016. going back to the heller decision five of the supreme court justices were members of the nra. not only is it an activist supreme court -- >> that does not undermine their decision. i mean that's -- the law is the law. and the law right now is that

you do have a constitutional right to carry a firearm. the question is how far does it extend. and this same court, the ninth circuit two years ago said it extends outyour home and today say they it doesn't. their ear not alone. the seventh kir suit of nlds found the opposite. the supreme court is going to decide this. >> they decide whad the second amendment is in the heller decision. but the more interesting question is why is this playing out in the courts in the first place. what would happen if you put the second amendment up to a popular vote. i think you would find that it has pretty broad support. that hillary clinton is actually out in step with the country on this question. the left is out of step with the country on the question. which is why they want anytime the courts.dn't politicians live by the laws they espouse. i can't carry a concealed weapon fine.

neither can hillary clinton's bodyguards. if they had to live by those laws -- >> we live in the city lots of cops, brave men and women on the streets protecting us. a lot of people in rural areas don't have the luxury of cops everywhere looking out for them. and they feel in some of these counties that the sheriffs are not consistent with their world view and might leave them hanging. if you talk to people in the real world want they want to have their gun just in case. >> i'm from arizona. i get it. >> we're city slickers. this is a real issue for millions of americans. >> that's what's great about the judicial decision. it leaves it up to the states. >> they can't do that if the constitution already decided. >> the constitution is talking about militias and muscats with not concealing a handgun.

>> the supreme court said it means that. >> there's always -- >> keep in mind here if we're going to talk about -- you're talking about -- >> the supreme court decided that. i don't know whetherre you were that day. it was in the paper. it is not the right to organize malitiailitias militias. >> own a gun -- >> no. folks on the left want to go back to the founding days a about the second amendment. but don't want to go back there when they want to talk about the constitutional right to abortion. >> exactly or gay marriage. >> if you want to go back to the way the situation was 200 years ago, let's do that for all of the amendments. >> there's no amendment about abortion or gay marriage. >> that's the point. >> there's an amendment about malitia and it was purposefully put in. >> and you want to interpret that -- >> no. the constitution deliberated this. one of the things about the heller ruling that is important

is it wasn't absolute. it was to be built on this empowers the state to make the decision. every libertarian should be sitting here, thank god the states can decide. >> why the effort to curtail first and second amendment rights? >> because the nra spends $40 million a year on this and gun manufacturers. >> the truth as you well know is a disarmed population is a compliant population. and a population that can't say what it thinks is a population that's easier to control. that's why we have the first and second amendment is we remain a free people. how striking is it that one political party is trying to undue those protections. >> let me ask you this whether this plays politically at all in this election. now as i said there's no question this case is going to get decide bid the supreme court. they decided heller. this is a step beyond heller and you've got a split in the field. tailor made for the supreme court to take it. this is an election year. one of the things they've been

talking about is the empty justice scalia seat. this raises the stakes for republicans. the nra endorsed donald trump. but republicans who don't take their marching orders from the nra are going to stop and look at this and say, this could affect me. so you tell me whether this helps or hurts the democrats. >> i think this is going to help the democrats. ultimately it will. the majority of americans want -- every day there's a mass shooting. this is because the gun laws have loosened. up until earlier this year five out of our supreme court justices were nra members. that has influences decisions like the heller decision scalia -- >> ruth bader ginsberg -- >> the head of the aclu? the most liberal group. it with as pro-choice group. we can't subject the justices to this kind of a litmus test.

you can't scrub the ideology out of the justices before you put them on the bench. atter i do think this may secure hillary's vote in madison, cambridge and west hollywood. but the average person a lot of working class democrats, a lot of bernie supporters and trimp supporters think why are they trying to prevent me from protecting myself. >> you can carry it and register it. you can conceal it if you register it. >> hold on. don't talk over each other. tucker? >> honestly why not apply the same standards to the people in power. why shouldn't politicians have to live by the same gun control laws that you're espousing. why shouldn't they live by the same rules that we do. >> their bodyguards register their guns and that's the important thing here. >> power. >> it's important. you don't want terrorists to have guns you don't want rapists and murderers to have guns. all this is saying is that if

you want to conceal your gun, the state sets the regulations. >> yeah but it's saying you to go to your local sheriff or cop to get approval and you can't get approval for general self-defense. it has to be unless you're specifically under threat. >> if it's concealed. >> right. okay. and still we had to cut them off. breaking tonight, new reports of a dozen or more former guantanamo bay detainees launching deadly attacks on americans in afghanistan. this news comes as president obama is ramping up efforts to honor his unfulfilled 2009 campaign pledge which release all of the gitmo prisoners and close the prison. trace gallagher live with the details. trace? >> the pentagon finally admitted back in march that former gitmo detainees were responsible for the death of americans oversees.

well some gop lawmakers accused the administration of hiding behind the top secret classification to avoid discussing a political hot potato. now the washington post put it back on the front burner reporting that at least 12 detainees released from guantanamo bay launched that killed half a dozen americans including a female aid worker in afghanistan in 20 of the dozen former detainees, nine are dead or in foreign custody. all released under the george w. bush administration and ufl the attacks took place before twrien2009 which does not change the argument that violence against americans is further evidence that the president's plan to close gitmo is dangerous. u.s. intel says 30% of former gitmo prisoners return to the battlefield and that is in question because nobody knows. and many believe the most dangerous detainees ever released were the taliban five

let go as part of the president's swap for bob bergdahl. but sexy over current and former gitmo detainees is nothing new. both the obama and bush administrations have remained very tightlipped. most of the information we get from gitmo or from these gitmo detainees comes from leaks or from lawyers. >> thank you. turning now for more were monica crawly and larry corp. great to see you both. monica worked for nixon when she was four. >> that's true. thank you for pointing that out. >> you're a child genius and now remain an adult one. >> indeed. >> this is a disturbing number. what they're heard from the left is they were let out during the bush administration. what are you claiming about?

>> nothing is going to dissuade this president from releasing some of the world's most vicious islamic killer. over the past year this president has released some guantanamo bay detainees to countries that don't have tight controls over these kinds of prisoners, in fact one recently released guantanamo detainee promptly returned to yemen and is now running the al qaeda franchise there. the president from day one of his campaign in 2007 2008 strongly opposed to president bush's prosecution has intended to release pretty much all of the detainees with the exception of about 59 of the most incorrigible ones at guantanamo bay. he's in the process of doing that even though we have the reports fly in the face of reality. and flying in the face of what we know that so many of them including the president's own director of national

intelligence estimating that the recidivism rate is between 20 and 30% which is a low ball estimate of those -- >> i guess that this happened these people were released under president bush. but the point is president obama is doubling down. more are being released. and the ones in gitmo now are not the ones who are like the model priszoners. there's a reason they're last. no one wanted them and no one wanted to release them. >> well the recidivism rate among the people that bush release was over 20%. with obama it's less than 5%. it's also important to keep in mind that unlike bush, president obama has six agencies in the government that have to sign off before they can be released. what you have right now, you've got of the 80 prisoners left 30 have been cleared to be released by the six intelligence agencies. and what's missing in this is the longer you keep it open the

more recruits you're getting for groups like isis. when we capture these people and we interrogate them they will always mention guantanamo as a reason for them doing it. and not the mention the fact of the cost. it costs $5 million per prisoner prepared to say 70,000 in a prison in the united states. obama doesn't want to release the people who shouldn't be released. he want to put them in prison in the united states where we have over 500 people -- >> that isn't an option. he can't do that. >> that is exactly right. >> they're wrong. they're wrong. >> go ahead. >> there is such strong bipartisan opposition to this that every national defense authorization bill since 2011 has prohibited the transfer of guantanamo bay terrorist to u.s. soil. >> eric holder was about to do it and the american people through their representatives roads up and said no. we're happy with them in cuba.

>> that's exactly right. but look nothing is going to stop the president from indulging his fantasy that he wants to close guantanamo bay. but that doesn't change the nature of the threat. what he is in the process of doing is replenishing terrorists ranks and endangering the american people. >> wait a second. >> they say that that argument has diminished and they've seen less of that in the past year. >> wait a second. wait a second. >> the american public is not persuaded by the cost. >> wait a second. president bush senator mccain and colin powell all wanted to close guantanamo. it wasn't only obama. and president bush released over 500 people. obama has released about 150. and they didn't check them. they're the ones responsible for this. 4% of the people that obama has

released have gone on and they're not responsible for any of these killings you're talking about. no evidence at all that that has happened. as trace pointed out, the ones that we let go to get bergdahl out they're still in the uae. they're our allies. >> this is one of the reasons chuck hagel was so unhappy. he felt he was under pressure by the president and the administration to fas track this and he felt uncomfortable. he's on record about that. >> i know that. there are many people in the pentagon who don't want to release anyone. they don't want to take a chance. the white house is saying when you get the groups clearing it you've got to do it. the burr rocky is a cya thing to prevent themselves from getting into trouble. if you release them the worst of worst should happen that's why they're doing it. >> the worst of the worst is already happening. we have a report that six americans are now dead because we released a number of

detainees who nould not have been released. >> vi the same question for you guys as the last panel. page two of the story. does this play in the 2016 political race? this is a promise that president obama made. he seems determined to get these people released if he doesn't, this is going to carry over. you tell me the independent mind minded voters out there are going to be behind hillary or trump? >> the vast majority of the american people including theble voters understand the nature of the threat and they understand that you can't fight the war with one or two hands tied behind your back. again, you know gran tan mo bay is a terrorist recruitment tool. the united states itself is a jihadi recruitment tool. i think that's why they're really taking to donald trump's message of rebuilding the military strong national defense and fighting the exso

tenl threat. and that requires the continued operation of guantanamo bay. >> go ahead. same question. >> build a wall? come on. when you tell the american people the facts that six people who obama left have gone back to fighting. only six. when they hear that then they don't hear all of this other thing. six people that he's released. >> you understand the reason -- the way that this has been framed is that you know people are -- that people view president obama as weak on national defense. this is how the republicans frame it. the republicans are tough and president obama has been weak and his behavior and decisions and hers to some extent led to the rise of isis. and that just like him, this is what he's going to argue. she won't keep us safe. just like him she'll release terrorists who we've already caught. just like him she won't stop the rise of a terrorist group like isis. you know that's where it's going. how are the democrats ready to

combat that? >> don't forget. there's only 30 people obama wants to release. >> but they're bad guys. >> no they're not. they've already been cleared by six agencies. six agencies have cleared them. >> these remaining detainees are the worst of the worst. that's why they're still there. and -- >> those people. no no. >> you release them to terrorist sponsoring countries who put them in luxurious accommodations or he wants to return them to the united states to stand trial in our criminal justice system. >> kuter is our ally. we have bases there. >> they have the taliban commanders in quote luxurious accommodations and let them roam free until they release them. they're on the battlefield they're not on the batter battlefield. >> there were reports on that. thank you very much.

great to see you. >> you bet. thanks megyn. >> a special edition of the kelly l special. so major developments today in the freddie gray case. officer caesar goodson was the driver of the van in which freddie gray was driving after his arrest. and the prosecutors opened up his trial today by accusing him of intentionally hurting freddie gray by giving him a quote rough ride. they're saying this cop was out to murder freddie gray that he went to work that day and decided today is a good day to cross over to the other side from being a cop to being a criminal. but after learning last night that the prosecution failed to disclose an interview they conducted with the only other person in the back of the van with freddie gray the judge spent the first part of the day berating the state. this is marilyn mosby's office telling them they better disclose what they have by monday or they will face sanctions. welcome back.

so let's just -- you start arthur by telling us what were the highlights of when we left off last night the prosecution was in trouble because the judge found out they hadn't disclosed all the interviews they'd done. we in the press knew t had spoken with allen but there were a few mettings they had and they didn't disclose all of them. they disclosed the first one they had and where they said we turned over the substantive information and either earlier this week or late last week the lawyer called and said did they tell you about the second meeting and the defense attorney said no so the defense attorney brought up what about the second meeting. they said yeah we did have a second meeting but he was so consistently inconsistent in his answers that we did not think there was any exculpatory material there. they have to turn over

exculpatory material. they don't have to turn over everything but something that would help the defense and in these situations you turn it over. the judge says we're coming in , meaning this morning and i want to hear from the prosecutor and tell me what happened. how come this hasn't been turned over. only because this is a bench trial and not a jury trial did the judge allow them to start testimony. if this were a jury trial and there was the possibility of outstanding material out there he would say i'll give you until monday. but because he's the only finder of the fact he said okay i'll start the trial so we don't waste any time but by monday if there's anything else exculpatory i better have it. >> what did we see that would support a finding that officer goodson committed murder. >> we're not going to see it but i have to say something about this judge.

i love this judge. >> i like this judge too. >> he's courageous to find the guy not guilty when the public pressure was so extraordinary and now he has this trial. what he did to the prosecution is something i swore i would never do to my own children, he spanked them hard and they discovered it. if they ever fail to disclose anything to future defendants this judge is going to issue sanctions and he should. back to the questions you asked about the evidence everyone needs to understand that even in the worst case scenario this judge finding you should have done this and you were negligent in this way, that's not what he's charged with. being negligent is not sufficient. they must prove a callus indifference to human life and guess what? the prosecution said porter is going to testify. he's going to be a star witness for the defense in this case. >> go ahead. >> when you said earlier about hi waking up and wanting to

kill someone, it's not that he's charged with wanting to kill this guy. he's charged with -- in new york called called the indifference to human life. the example is you go into times square at mieptdnight with a machine gun and there's not one individual that you want to kill but you start firing bullets everywhere with no intent to kill one particular person but your action is such that you knew or should have known it was going to cause his death. here going too fast in a car maybe he should have known it's going to hurt someone, but it's going to snap their neck and kill them? >> they're trying to suggest that they singled out freddie gray. so porter will be a star witness -- >> another one of the defendants. there are six cops charged. >> porter is going to testify to the same thing he did previously that in 150 transports of prisoners guess how many he's ever buckled in?

zero. when they trained porter he never saw anyone buckled in. >> they changed the rules three days before freddie gray's arrest. three days and there was no evidence in the earlier trial it had been communicated to the cop. >> so the public needs to know that maybe legally okay you didn't do what the policy said and so that's why they might have paid the millions of dollars in civil money, it's a different burden it's a different standard a different action they're looking for to find someone guilty and throw them in the pokey for decades. >> did you hear anything today that suggests second degree murder. >> no. this is what i heard. your producers today were excellent in following this and educating me and i kept saying where is the beef if anyone is old enough to remember that commercial. this is the first day. anyone who -- the first year of law school you lead with your strength. you lead with your strongest

argument. you only get one chance to make a first impression. my understanding is there's a surveillance video that shows the truck driven by goodson making a turn so quickly he had to cross over the two double lines and went through a red light, that's how fast he was going. if that's it that's not enough. if there's a nun two blocks away and she saw him stop short and go fast and a rabbi seems him swerving that's a different ball game but we're not in that ball game right now. >> i'm so glad you brought up the videotape. that's the biggest evidence they have and what does the video show not that he made numerous stops as arthur suggested is required but that he failed to come to a complete stop on the a stop sign then swerved would

which describe how arthur drives every day. >> it's new york city. >> you get killed if you don't drive like that. >> the bottom like is they're stuck with this prosecution team is stuck with this pile of dog poop that they indicted in a rush to judgment in a rush to calm down the riots, in a rush to -- you wanted justice i gave you justice now you give us peace and now they're stuck with it and this trial attorney has to live with it. >> a mistrial and an acquittal and now we're on to the third cop. one of the interesting things about the freddie gray case as we watch it play out is that there's a lot of pressure being put on this judge in baltimore. so far he's been very strong. not as much pressure as is being put on this other judge in this rape case that has made national headlines. mark tell us. >> well the defendant was

convicted. this wasn't a plea and there's a big difference when a jury finding someone guilty. he raped someone who didn't concept. >> a student athlete on the swim team at stanford university. just setting it up. goes to a party meets a woman go ahead from there. >> two passersbies saw what he was doing. >> she was completely passed out. she was not aware of what he was doing. >> had to sit through a trial where it was argued she consented and you have to defer to what the defendant's attorney said because she was passed out so she can't say what happened. so he was convicted and the judge could have given him up to 14 years in prison the prosecution requested six years, but he gave six months and he'll do maybe three months. i'm telling you as a former prosecutor, this is a miscarriage of justice. this is not a case where he's treated like other defendants. he was treated differently and i

think this was a horrible ruling and it sets a horrible precedent for future victims many of whom are afraid to come forward. >> because the message to rape victims is it's not -- was it really that bad? he's going away for what -- you could commit a misdemeanor and get a sentence like this. >> sure. >> yes, you can. >> this is a dui sentence. >> what i try to be and i've been dealing with you for a long time as i try to be the fox news legal analyst and not the second guesser and i did not watch the entire trial. the judge did. i did not hear the statements from the victim the judge did. i did not hear the statements from the defendant and the defendant's father. the judge did. the judge took into consideration this guy's no longer going to the olympics as he was and lives the rest of his life like a felon. >> she lives the rest of her life as a rape victim. >> the reason why we have judges

as human beings and not computers is because we want them to do their job. >> because they're human beings sometimes they make mistake. >> when they sentence someone to 100 years when it should be a year they make mistakes. >> human beings can vote him off the bench. >> i bet they won't. >> i hate to come down too hard on the judge because you never know. when you're not the trier of fact but i'm looking for the evidence that makes this somehow understandable. i don't see it. >> i'll tell you, i've represented a lot of guys like him and i think that a judge -- i'm not defending it. but the judge probably sees someone who if he goes to prison will be destroyed. >> he also said i don't believe this kid will ever hurt anyone again and that was one of the reasons he gave. >> the victim statement is heart wrenching and it's worth your time. great to see you both tonight. thank you very much. it's been a commercial free

kelly file and there's a really interesting fact story about that but the show is over so i have to go. bye. welcome to hannity and tonight we have brand new fox news national poll numbers that shed light on the general election matchup between hillary clinton and donald trump and early today president obama endorsed hillary for president but it probably wasn't make a difference. we're at the hannity big board with more on the polls. >> it's a close race between hillary clinton and donald trump with a brand new national head-to-head poll that shows clinton with a slight lead over donald trump 42% to 39%. it's important to note tha