started. >> bill: the dow. we were down 400 points a moment ago. 350, 375. >> sandra: still a big loss right now. a wild end of the week. >> bill: friday is right around the corner. >> sandra: thank goodness. "happening now" starts right now. >> fox news alert on drama in the shutdown showdown with senate leaders racing to get their budget plan approved today to keep our government operating past midnight. wouldn't that be an amazing thing? despite opposition from some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. i'm jon scott. >> sandra: i'm melissa francis. the bipartisan budget agreement adds billions of dollars to military and domestic programs over the next two years and it is that extra spending that worries some deficit-minded republicans. meanwhile the sticking point for some democrats centers around the so-called dreamers and the fact that immigration isn't part of the senate

measure but so far president trump is backing the deal. >> chief white house correspondent john roberts live with more. >> good morning to you. the white house so far pleased with what it is seeing in the senate. at least among senate leadership. it says it has to see the whole deal. then there is the question of what happens in the house because not only do you have nancy pelosi standing up for hours upon hours saying a daca deal needs to be attached to any deal on the budget caps but you also have the house freedom caucus coming out and saying you want to spend how much? however, one person who was pleased to see the pentagon budget increased by $300 billion over two years secretary of defense james mattis who spoke to us at the white house yesterday for the daily briefing saying it is crucial that congress gives the pentagon and military the money it needs. listen here. >> absent a budget this year, america's military will not be able to provide pay for our troops by the end of the year. we will not be able to recruit

the 15,000 army soldiers and 4,000 air force airmen required to fill critical manning shortfalls. we would not be able to maintain our ships at sea. we would have to ground aircraft due to a lack of maintenance and spare parts degrading our pilot's defesh insee and deplete the manpower and training required to deter war. >> he said the pentagon meantime is developing some options for the president because the president went to james mattis not long ago and said i was at that bastille day parade in paris watching those tanks and troops come down the street. i think we should do something like that on the fourth of july in the united states. mattis was told that the president did not tell him to go ahead and do it, just to come up with options. mattis will report those back to the white house. interesting i put senate a tweet about this yesterday. opinion is split pretty much down the middle whether or not there should be a military

parade down pennsylvania avenue on the fourth of july. >> plenty of drama in the building behind you. a senior white house aide who resigned after allegations of abuse. what is the latest on that? >> this is the staff secretary rod porter. as far as we know he is still working in the white house. he offered his resignation yesterday. the staff secretary is the person who is in the tightest orbit around the president. he coordinates policy as well he vets all the documents that end up on the president's desk. but on tuesday it became apparent there were some serious allegations being leveled at rob porter from his two ex-wives. one of them who we had communication with last night kolby holderness, she says he punched her in the eye when they were on vacation in italy

in a motel room. she provided photographs to me of a black eye. porter denied all of the allegations against him. listen to what sarah huckabee sanders said. >> these outrageous allegations are simply false. i took the photos given to the media nearly 15 years ago. the reality behind them is nowhere close to what is being described. i have been transparent and truthful about these vile claims but i won't engage publicly with a coordinated smear campaign. >> there are reports and sources have told me that the allegations against porter were known by a small group of individuals here at the white house for a number of months. one of the reasons is that the f.b.i. had interviewed both of porter's ex-wives as part of his security clearance. he has never received that security clearance. still operating on an interim security clearance. the chatter about all of this

increased in recent weeks after porter broke up with his girlfriend, samantha dravis. an attorney for works at the environmental agency and started dating hope hicks. chief of staff john kelly is one of the people who knew about the allegations against porter for some time. in a statement earlier this week that hope hicks the communications director helped him craft. rob porter is a man of true integrity and honor and can't say enough good things about him. a friend, and trusted professional and proud to serve alongside him. however, after the photos of kolby came out yesterday. the ones showing her with the black eye there was blowback against the chief of staff for that. he released another statement last night completely different in tone from the one he released earlier this week saying i was shocked by the new allegations released today against rob porter. there is no place for domestic

violence in our society. i stand by my previous comments the rob porter i've come to know and believe every individual deserves the right to defend their reputation. i accepted his rest ignition earlier today and ensure a swift and orderly transition. how long did the white house know and when did they learn about the allegations and what porter had to say about all of this? he said in the statement yesterday he wasn't going to comment on the allegations against him other than to say they're false. we do not know his side of the story yet. jon. >> thank you, john. >> fox news alert for you now. u.s.-backed coalition killing more than 100 troops allied with the assad regime overnight. reportedly in a response to an

unprovoked attacked by the assad-linked fighters. we're live with more. >> the response from the u.s. military was overwhelming. the pentagon is calling this an unprovoked attack that lasted for three hours beginning around midnight last night. 500 fighters affiliated with russia and syria's assad regime attacked an outpost used by u.s.-backed fighters in eastern syria. five miles east of the euphrates river not far from raqqa and near the oil fields that were, until recently, controlled by isis. this river has become the demarcation line separating u.s.-backed fighters and russian-back syrian fighters. not clear whether russians were killed in the u.s. counter attack. u.s. officials say they had been observing the build-up for a week. the russian-backed fighters attacked using tanks, artillery.

there was a massive air strikes with gun ships, f15, f22 and marine artillery. all u.s. jets available in the area killed 100 fighters. 20 to 30 rounds landed five foot ball fields from u.s. troops one u.s. allied fighter was hurt. american military officials called their russian counterparts on a special hotline. they had been making similar calls all week. the russians reassured the americans that no attack was imminent. the pentagon believes the russian-backed forces wanted the take back former isis oil fields in the area now guarded by u.s.-backed syrian fighters. how easily the syrian conflict could turn into a proxy fight between the u.s. and russia endangering the lives of the 2,000 u.s. troops on the ground in syria, melissa. >> thank you.

>> scary stuff. explosive new details in the uranium one scandal. an f.b.i. informant gives a statement to three congressional committees alleging moscow tried to flew hillary clinton by funneling money to her husband's foundation. plus the battle over the spending bill continues in congress. does it have the votes to pass? >> the easiest thing that he could do, it's so easy and we did it a number of times before, bring everything to the floor. you want to bring goodlatte to the floor? we want the aguilar bill brought to the floor. the senate has a proposal, give the house a vote on that. i'm telling people why i'm voting the way i'm voting. don't we need that cable box to watch tv?

nope. don't we need to run? nope. it just explodes in a high pitched 'yeahhh.' yeahhh! try directv now for $10 a month for 3 months. no satellite needed. pepsoriasis does that. it was tough getting out there on stage. i wanted to be clear. i wanted it to last. so i kept on fighting. i found something that worked. and keeps on working. now? they see me. see me. see if cosentyx could make a difference for you- cosentyx is proven to help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx, you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease,

tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. never give up. see me. see me. clear skin can last. don't hold back... ...ask your dermatologist if cosentyx can help you find clear skin that lasts. 4 out of 5 people who have a stroke, their first symptom... is a stroke. 80 percent of all strokes and heart disease? preventable. and 149 dollars is all it takes to get screened

and help take control of your health. we're life line screening... and if you're over 50... call this number, to schedule an appointment... for five painless screenings that go beyond regular check-ups. we use ultrasound technology to literally look inside your arteries... for plaque which builds up as you age- and increases your risk for stroke and cardiovascular disease. and by getting them through this package, you're saving over 50%. so call today and consider these numbers: for just $149 you'll receive five screenings that could reveal what your body isn't telling you. i'm gonna tell you that was the best $150 i ever spent in my life. life line screening. the power of prevention. call now tow to learn more. >> jon: fox news alert. not a good day on wall street. the dow down about 300 points right now.

it has been a whip saw of a week on wall street. melissa gets more excited by these things and knows more about them than i do. the dow clearly is unhappy this morning. we'll keep an eye on it for you throughout the day and let you know where things end up. >> melissa: lots of volatility. >> jon: uh-huh. >> melissa: new developments in the uranium one controversy. f.b.i. informant doug campbell giving a statement to three congressional committees claiming millions of dollars were funded from russia. his attorney firing back at criticism from democrats. >> democrats are trying to attack anybody who is telling the truth about hillary clinton and we'll just take those things and bounce back at them. my client is so credible. he came out because he thought he was dying from cancer and he wanted his story to be told. >> melissa: joining us now is the editor in chief of the hill.

you guys are the ones working on this story. left me ask you about some of the details. the attorney claims her client said that russian nuclear officials told him that they, the russians, were paying $3 million to this apco, a lobbying firm in washington and not expecting them to do anything for them in exchange for the money they were supposed to do work for the clinton foundation. is that right? >> that's right. apco said the work was separate. their work for the clinton foundation and the company overseeing it involved in the uranium one deal are completely separate. but the informant we've been waiting to hear from for months now is telling congress something quite different. now democrats as you mention, they say this witness is not credible and that the justice department has told congress that he is not credible. but remember, the f.b.i. is investigating the clinton foundation. the arkansas branch. it's unclear the parameters of

that investigation. like the mueller investigation we don't know where it's going. this could be part of it and republicans say it's a big deal and democrats say it's nothing. >> melissa: looking at it, it is not like they gave the clinton foundation money directly. it is different from those who paid president clinton for a speech and then had something going for the state department or before hillary clinton and that was a situation where money going directly into the clinton's own bank account. this was in kind. they were doing lobbying work for the foundation, maybe they would have donated that lobbying work anyway. >> that's right. that's what democrats are seizing on. as you mentioned, they aren't direct payments, they are more funneling. the fact that you have this witness who was certainly at the center of a lot of this activity making these claims. that's why congress is taking it seriously and looking into it. we'll see where it goes from here. whether there will be a final report from these committees on this. but it is striking that once

again intelligence used to be bipartisan and now it's extremely partisan. >> melissa: how common is it you would have a lobbying firm in washington -- i don't know how many clients apco has. how common that they would be simultaneously be doing work for the clintons and for the russians? does it strike you as unusual or is that common practice and maybe these guys have a million clients? >> a lot of firms have foreign clients and register with the justice department. so it's a way honestly for a lot of firms in washington to make a lot of money. quite lucrative when you work with other countries actually you can make more money outside this country than you can inside it. it is not that uncommon, melissa. >> melissa: the clintons put out a statement through nick merrill saying this is simply being used to distract from the investigation into president trump and russia. this is the response to everything right now. everything that goes on is an

attempt to distract from the president and russia. how much credence do you give that when you hear that every day? >> it's a line they've been using for months now without a doubt. and that's why you have these competing investigations and there is leverage here. donald trump is talking about the hillary clinton clinton investigation. the clinton people and democrats including former obama people are talking about the special counsel. i honestly think that a lot of these investigations have to play out and you have to see what the conclusions are. then go from there. >> melissa: you made the point the real one that counts is the investigation that is going on in little rock into the foundation itself. what do you know about that and where it stands when it might end, any of that? >> there has been no timetable. we reported it in january that it existed and that this trump justice department moved forward on a lot of questions about the clinton foundation that handicapped hillary clinton's presidential campaign. there is no timetable on it other than the statute of

limitations is only five years. she left office in 2013. so it has to be wrapping up relatively soon if that statute of limitations unless there is a technical reason to extend it. >> melissa: thanks for your time today. >> jon: well, the senate expected to pass its two-year spending plan today. some lawmakers in the house are not exactly convinced it's the right way to go. can congress reach an agreement before tonight's spending deadline? plus take a look. fired up fans in philly. an estimated two million people flooding downtown to celebrate the first-ever eagles super bowl victory. your son is not there? >> he wants to be but he is not. he is in school. looking for balance in your digestive system? try align probiotic. for a non-stop, sweet treat goodness,

hold on to your tiara kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support, with align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. also in kids chewables. searching one topic. that will generate over 600 million results. and if you've been diagnosed with cancer, searching for answers like where to treat, can feel even more overwhelming. so start your search with a specialist at cancer treatment centers of america. start with teams of cancer treatment experts under one roof. start where specialists use advanced genomic testing to guide precision cancer treatment... ...that may lead to targeted therapies and more treatment options.

start where there's a commitment to analyzing the latest research and conducting clinical trials-to help each patient get the personalized cancer care they deserve. start at one of the cancer treatment centers of america hospitals near you. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com/experts appointments available now.

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone.

now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. >> melissa: in the city of brotherly love millions of football fans are celebrating big time today fresh off philly's first super bowl win. many headed downtown before the sun came out. some slept in their cars braving 20* temperatures this morning it was worth it. >> jon: you have to scrape the inside of the windshield when you wake up after sleeping in your car on a night like this. >> melissa: my son wanted to go. he is 7 and he is an eagles fan and he has been wearing his jersey since the super bowl. the school said you have to put on something else today. >> jon: two million people flooding the streets in philadelphia. >> melissa: pretty exciting. a lot of fun.

>> jon: a long dry spell for the eagles. >> melissa: good for them, congratulations. >> jon: all right. another government shutdown could be on the horizon but senate leaders are hopeful it can be avoided after unveiling their two-year spending deal which includes $160 billion for our military. the senate is essential -- expected to pass the measure but it's unsure in the house. both parties say they have problems with it. nancy pelosi. >> why should we in the house be treated in such a humiliating way when the republican senate leader has given that opportunity in a bipartisan way to his membership? without that commitment from speaker ryan, comparable to the commitment from leader mcconnell, this package does not have my support nor does it have the support of a large number of members of our caucus. >> jon: joining us now new york

republican claudia tenney. it does not have nancy pelosi's support. does it have yours? >> i'm leaning yes on this. it is a very, very hard vote and i am really concerned about our debt and our deficit but also concerned as a mother of an active duty marine officer about the status of our military and general mattis recently made a sobering and compelling case for us to rebuild our military that has fallen on the wayside after many years and one of the longest, if not the longest war we've experienced in this country. 80 different families are suffering the losses of their loved ones who served in our military because of training accidents. not combat duty because of the failures of our -- adequately funding our military. i think it's most important -- the most important role of our federal government and the reason we were created in 1789 the federal government was for national and border security.

i think this bill covers that. let's put this in perspective, though. 70% of our budget is non-discretionary. we're only dealing with 30%. there are balances if play here. from that perspective the military funding adequately funding our military, knowing that we have a great leader in general mattis, our secretary of defense behind us, i think that this is why i'm leaning yes and why i probably will end up voting yes on the bill. >> jon: this senate bill would eliminate the budget caps that were voted in a few years ago which were at the time sort of hailed by a lot of fiscally conservative republicans. what's changed? >> i think you can see the devastation to our military on these arbitrary caps. i think we have seen a few things in this budget we've moved the parity issue so now we are spending more on the defense side, which we should be doing, and less on the domestic side. but we are getting in exchange some things we need on the republican side. we have disaster relief coming

in. that's really important in my region and also important for all across the southern tier including puerto rico suffering from devastating natural disasters from this year. we have opioid funding that is a huge crisis in my area. our public health centers, hospitals are being recovered. we're repealing a part of obamacare that a lot of people don't like. the independent payment advisory board. that will go on the wayside. it is a very hard decision but when you are on the field and you have to score you get four chances to get a first down and it takes several first downs in many cases to get a touchdown and score. i'm concerned if we rely on hail mary's we'll end up with nothing and hurt our communities. we have to look at incremental progress going forward. i like the fact the speaker and mitch mcconnell and finally we have something out of chuck schumer.

we will be putting together a bipartisan special committee to finally address this broken budget process that we have. so i'm voting for that which skepticism but high hopes that we can resolve the issues. we must fund our military and protect our nation and must protect those in harm's way. >> jon: on funding the military here is what lindsey graham would mean if there is a no vote on this spending bill. >> the freedom caucus is a good group of conservatives but freedom is not delivered by anybody on capitol hill. it is delivered by the men and women who have been at war for the last 17 years who are all over the world who need more help, not less from congress. so i'm going to vote yes and i'll go on the floor and talk about what it means to vote no. it means you are putting the military behind the 8 ball again. it means they have less resources to do their job with and their families suffer longer. >> jon: we have a couple of seconds left. it sounds like you are in agreement with that. >> i agree with him on that.

let's be hopeful. today is the opening ceremony of the olympics. aaron hamlin will be the flagber year in the opening ceremony. that's a positive note coming out of my district. that will be very exciting and looking forward to supporting our team, team usa as we go forward in the olympics. >> jon: we all are. claudia tenney, republican from new york. thank you. >> thank you. >> melissa: we're waiting to hear from house speaker paul ryan in minutes. he will come out for his weekly news conference. he will likely face questions about that budget deal. but first, why newly released texts between top f.b.i. officials are raising questions about former president obama and his role in any f.b.i. investigations. >> the president's words there are not just hyperbolic and wrong. to say there was no influence in any case.

>> jon: a fox news alert. it is thursday and that is the day that the speaker of the house paul ryan holds his weekly news conference. as we approach another budget deadline at midnight tonight. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are expressing concern over the senate's two-year spending plan. now congress needs to reach a deal by midnight to avoid another government shutdown.

can it happen? paul ryan said he is in favor of this deal and a fiscal conservative and a lot of fiscal conservatives especially in the house do not like this senate deal. will it pass? fingernail biting time. we don't know. we'll bring you speaker ryan's news conference live as soon as it begins. >> melissa: newly released texts between top f.b.i. officials raising questions about former president obama. in 2016 he said he doesn't talk to the f.b.i. about pending investigations. but one text between peter strzok and lisa page suggests otherwise. possibly revealing the former president was interested in the investigation about russia's interference with the 2016 presidential election. the text reading, quote, potus wants to know everything we are doing. we have a retired f.b.i. special agent joining me now. what do you think of this? >> well, now obama had made a comment several months before that he does not talk to the

attorney general or the f.b.i. about pending investigations. on its face value it may seem somewhat unusual that he was wanting to be briefed on this case but put things in context. the context is the president was going to russia a few days after that and he was going to be speaking with putin. and as a president of the united states i would think he would want to know about the investigation into potential national security matter before he went and talked to the person who may be responsible for that. >> melissa: make sense. we'll have to ask you to stand by for a second and i'll go over to jon now. >> jon: weekly news conference with paul ryan beginning now. >> this is a statistic that gets to me. in 2017, we lost 80 service members in accidents and training incidents. nearly four times more than we lost in combat. in 2017, we lost 80 service members in accidents in

training incidents. that's four times as many people we lost in combat. just think about that. with better training and equipment, many of these deaths could have been prevented. this is a sad and tragic state of affairs. and this is why we can never allow anyone to politicize our military or use our troops as bargaining chips. the stakes are too high for this. let me say one more thing. i know that there is a real commitment to solving the daca challenge in both political parties. that's a commitment that i share. to anyone who doubts my intention to solve this problem and bring up a daca and immigration reform bill, do not. we will bring a solution to the floor, one the president will sign. we must pass this budget agreement first, though, to get onto that. please know that we're committed to getting this done. before i turn it over to chairman thornberry i want to take a moment and thank him. i want to thank him, the chairman of the armed services

committee and all the members both republicans and democrats. their leadership and unwavering commitment to our service members and their families made this budget agreement possible. they know these issues and they know all the people who are fighting to keep us safe. they can tell you as well as anyone how critical it is to get this done. chairman thornberry. >> thank you, speaker. and all of us on the armed services committee are extremely grateful for the speaker's leadership in putting -- fixing the military as a priority. let me just remind you all of a couple of statistics. when the house passed our defense authorization bill at exactly the same numbers that are in the cap deal that we'll vote on today, the vote was 344-81. when we voted on the conference

report at exactly the same defense levels that are in the cap deal today, the vote was 356-70. in the senate the votes were 89-8 and in the conference report was a voice vote. my point is, there is widespread agreement in both parties that we have cut the military too much, that our service members are suffering as a result, and that we need to do better. this cap deal that will be voted on today is at exactly the same funding levels as the bill that i just read the votes for. my view is that this -- fixing the military is the dominant priority. we have to fix the military. i know members on both sides have other concerns. i wouldn't do this cap deal exactly the same way but we owe it to the men and women who are

risking their lives for us to give them the best equipment, the best training, the best support this nation can provide. and this agreement begins to do that for the first time in a long time. now turn to a combat veteran herself, the lady from arizona, ms. mcsally. >> i'm a retired air force colonel and i deploy to washington one of the reasons why many of my fellow vets like mr. gallagher here and i came here we felt it was important for those of us who served to be here when decisions like this are being discussed, debated and voted on. we need veterans in congress to be a voice at the table and we've been advocating and working with our leadership to be that voice for our troops. when we talk about these 80 people who were killed in these accidents, these are real families who are having flags handed to them and having been a commander and seen the

impacts, very dangerous thing we do in the military training as well as in combat. it is a combination of things. the safety chain of events that ends up with a mishap. a combination of a lack of training, a lack of resources, a lack of hours, a lack of experience, experienced pilots. and all that comes together under difficult conditions and then maybe the last thing happens and they lose their lives. and so that is what we've been seeing happening after the dangerous cuts in our military from the last administration. it has been at -- aour people are keeping us safe all over america training and ready for what might come next. we owe it to give them everything they need and not play politics with them. they're ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice for us and we need people to stop playing politics with their lives and with everything they need in order to defend us.

there is a lot of things we also need to work on. there are a lot of issues related to our fiscal responsibility. we have to get to those. we have to work together to get to those and get spending under control but we have to make sure that right now we give the troops what they need to keep them safe and alive and keep us safe because that price is one that we don't want to pay. so i'm glad that we finally were able to get to a place working with our chairman, leadership here, secretary mattis and a commander-in-chief who has the commitment to make sure our troops are supported and are trained and ready to do their job and mission. we have to get these resources to them right now and stop playing politics with what they need. thank you. >> thank you very much. you know, it is a very sobering experience as a member of congress to have the secretary of defense say to you that no foe in the field has done more harm to our military than the budget control act, sequestration, the policies of

the last administration. that's where we are today. we've come to this place where we all, everybody on this stage i would say everybody in the republican conference understands we have to deal with the debt issue. there is no question about it. but we cannot do it on the backs of the men and women serving us. we don't have time on our side. we have to get these resources to them right away as quickly as we can. and i would also say to my good friends in the freedom caucus that we got these numbers, we got where we are because we were all unified. we stayed together and i would ask them not to quit before we get this across the finish line. we need to stay unified and get the budget deal pass to turn to the kinds of reforms that are crucial in terms of the overall budget process. it is important. as we are having these debates as republicans and members of the house i can tell you we all keep very much in mind the moms and the dads out there, some of whom in our own conference whose sons and daughters are deploying and we cannot be in a situation where we're letting our political debates and

political fights, our arguments get in the way of getting them the resources they need in this increasingly dangerous world to protect and defend every one of us. our most sacred obligation and very proud and honored to stand on this stage and grateful for the hard work of the speaker, of the chairman, of mike and martha and all of our colleagues on the armed services committee and proud to cast my vote in favor of this deal to get the military the resources they need. thank you. >> mr. gallagher from wisconsin. >> i spent seven years on active duty in the marine corp. we used to say you ride to the sounds of the guns which basically means if you see a problem, you don't run away, you don't punt that problem to someone else, you confront it head on. do your best to fix it no matter how difficult that is. that's why i ran for office and that's what we have an opportunity to do today, to end the devastating cuts to our defense. to my colleagues who have concerns i would say two things.

neglecting our defense is not a recipe for long-term savings. as we've seen time and again throughout history weakness invites aggression which costs us a lot of money when we have to rearm or we slide into conflict on someone else's terms. i have only been here a year. i got lost trying to find this place today. but it strikes me it is always easy to vote no. you can always find some excuse to vote no on a bill. but the american people sent us here to ride to the sound of the guns and to fix problems like this no matter how difficult that may be. so thank you. >> anybody have any questions? >> pelosi had her big show on the floor last night that lasted over eight hours. why are you insisting on the bill that the president will sign and mitch mcconnell says any bill -- [inaudible] >> first of all i have talked

to her. i don't know if i could hack that for eight hours. it was impressive. you're right. she wasn't wearing these kinds of shoes. i would have gone to the bathroom well before then, i have to tell you. so we want a daca solution. in order to shift our focus on get on to the next big priority, a daca solution, we have to get the budget agreement done so we can focus on this. i said it once and i'll say it again, we will bring a daca solution to the floor. as far as the senate is concerned, first i think it's important to see what they -- if they can produce a bill and what they can produce. our system works different than theirs. the leader would say the same thing. so i can't speak to what our rule is going to look like. i can say we'll bring a daca solution to the floor because we want to solve this problem. >> on the defense side of this, on the disaster relief the big

question is hearing from -- [inaudible] would paul ryan have supported this bill? >> i did the first murray ryan. it was called murray ryan. she calls it ryan murray, i call it -- i didn't want to see the sequester hit the military. i supported the boehner deal. i didn't want to see the sequester hit the military. we're doing this one, why? we don't want to see the sequester hit the military. there are other good things in here. this is a bipartisan bill. you get some things you like, you give the other side things they like. that's what bipartisan compromise is all about. i think on the net it's a very good solution. and as to the debt and deficit concerns, most of this domestic spending is one-time spending. it is hurricane relief. what, we aren't going to rebuild houston, florida or help puerto rico or the fires

in california? those are things that we have to do because our fellow citizens in these disaster areas need assistance and that's a proper role for the federal government. a lot of that spending is one-time spending. the other domestic spending is something we all agree on. we have an opioid crisis in america. we think we can get close on cancer research and getting cures. let's keep that going. we all know we want to work on infrastructure. we're getting a good down payment on infrastructure and other good reforms. the budget process is broken. we have another cr, cr omnibus. that's why something we put in here i feel very passionate about is having a budget process reform dialogue. we have had a one-sided dialogue in the house among house republicans. i've been working on this my adult life. we need to get the senate involved in a conversation so we can actually have a budget

process that works. the house passed all of its appropriation bills this year before the deadline in september. we're doing our work here. the senate has a different system and as much as we are frustrated by that system, it isn't working and that's why we have a joint select committee between republicans and democrats, senators and house members to figure out how we fix this budget process so it works more smoothly in the future. >> speaker, the tax cuts starting to kick in now and this bill will put the deficit over a trillion dollars this year and probably over a trillion dollars next year. these are supposed to be good times. are the times going to be that good to close that deficit to start paying down the debt? >> by the way, economic growth is one of the critical ingredients to getting the debt under control. the military is not the reason we have fiscal problems. it is entitlements. that's why i keep telling you. the budget we passed this last

year was the best -- biggest most conservative budget congress has ever passed. something like 7.4 trillion in spending. we have shown as house republicans what you need to do to deal with the debt crisis. it is entitlement reform. we have more work to do with our friends on the other side of the aisle and the -- >> the president is known to change his mine. see if the president will support a bipartisan plan. >> i don't want to risk a veto. i want to get it done the first time and i think we can get there. i'm confident we can bring a bipartisan solution to the floor that can get signed into law and solve this problem. we want a daca solution. we want an immigration solution. i'm confident we can get there. by the way, getting this budget agreement done allows us to shift our focus on the next big priority which has a deadline which is this issue.

>> there is a great deal of spending in this bill. you are speaking to why you are supporting it. i wonder if you think the spending levels are sustainable after these two years or are we setting up another budget cliff and if all five of you have read this bill. >> this gives people the money to write the details of this bill for the march 23 deadline. let me back it up. remember why we had the bc in the first place. remember the super committee when president obama said we'll set up the super committee to do entitlement reform. if that doesn't work this thing kicks in. that's what happened. the original plan which never came to be. it didn't happen. the entitlement reforms that were necessary did not occur and then the sequester kicked in. it is a very crude tool which

puts the cuts where they don't belong on our military. and we need to get back to focusing on the true driver of our debt crisis. it is really healthcare inflation, entitlements. these are very important programs that were written in the 20th century that aren't working the way they could and should in the 21st century combined with the fact we have a demographic challenge. fewer people following people in the workforce. we have to deal with the challenges. cutting the military doesn't solve the problem. we can get rid of the military and still have a deficit. you get entitlement reform you can solve a lot of these problems. >> on immigration there is more speculation about your own permanent future here. an issue that has bedeviled republicans. how does your own personal future play into your decision on this issue right now?

>> it doesn't. not at all. i don't think about it at all. >> i wanted to ask you about that tweet over the weekend highlighting the tax increase? >> you know what i know? a average family of four in america is getting a $2,000 tax cut and billions of dollars going into bonuses. we were working the concession stand last weekend and a friend of mine from our parish working at home depot and said thank you for this raise. that's what i know. thank you very much. >> jon: so with a defense of the tax cut bill that just passed both houses of congress and was signed into law by the president the speaker of the house departs his weekly press conference. let's digest some of what we just heard with our panel. we have a democratic strategist and founder and ceo -- and the

chairman of gopac. thank you for being with us, both of you. it sounds, antwoine, like they have -- they definitely have bipartisan agreement in the senate to try to get this budget passed. what do you think the prospects are in the house? >> the house, as you know, a totally different animal. keep in mind the devil is always in the details when it comes to these large proposals. whether it's immigration or budget. the one thing the speaker did not commit to is a bipartisan vote. his reaction to that was we want to do something that the president will sign. these issues we face in this country whether it's immigration and funding our military, i don't see it as a democratic or republican issue. it should be a bipartisan issue, one the american people can live with. i didn't feel a sense of security on the bipartisan side from the speaker in his comments. he may not allow the open amendment process that speaker pelosi is asking for. i'm not sure the vote tonight will be bipartisan or sure he

will have all the democratic support. >> jon: david, the president has already caved some would say on some items in this budget that again has passed the senate. he had wanted big cuts in state department spending and some other issues. epa and so forth. a lot of that money is still in this budget but he does get -- the president gets more military spending which is what he seems to want. does it appear to you that this is a bipartisan document that has a chance of passage in the house? >> it needs to pass the house and it needs to pass the senate and we have a bipartisan agreement on the senate side. we just passed tax cuts. more money is being put in people's pockets as the speaker just alluded to. more jobs are being created. the worst thing we could do right now is send a message to the markets and send message to job creators that somehow washington can't pass a budget.

that's why this budget needs to pass. keep the economy going in the right direction. it is what americans want. >> jon: the fact that they have essentially set aside the dreamers issue, antwoine, promised to work on it after passage of this budget, does that seem senseible -- sensible to you? >> they have the power and the votes to do what they want to do or feel like they need to do in order to play indicate their constituents. i hope we will do all these things whether it's the budget, immigration and dealing with the dreamers issue. what i hope and pray and do it in a bipartisan away and do what 80% of the american people want to do. they want a comprehensive, permanent immigration issue. >> jon: there was a time when democrats controlled the white house, the house and the senate early in the barack obama years and nothing was done about the

issue then. >> keep in mind it was stopped by the republicans because as you know there was the gang of six or the gang of eight or what have you led by graham and others and slowed up by republicans in the senate. barack obama was ready to make a deal on the immigration issue. >> americans aren't worried about what happened in the past. they want a solution now. the president put out a set of principles. republicans are pushing we have to get rid of chain immigration, we have to get rid of the lottery system. we have to secure our borders and we have allowed plenty of spots to take care of those who are in this country to get them on a path to citizenship. the president has made very clear -- the president has made very clear. i didn't interrupt you. and the president has said we

aren't going after folks currently here if they don't commit crimes. this is a legislation that should pass. think about the message you are sending the people who came here legally. you stand in the line of disney world in four hours and you get the time to get on the ride. somebody in the crowd he says come on up. we don't do that anywhere else in america. >> david is trying to make this as if dreamers came here on their own illegally. keep in mind they came here no fault of their own. parents brought them here. >> jon: their parents broke the law. >> we don't need to punish them for the sins of our parents. >> we aren't. we are trying to take care of them. >> they are working hard, in school, doing their jobs. let's find a reasonable way a pathway to citizenship for dreamers. >> we have to leave it there. thank you both.

we are back in a moment.

>> sandra: "outnumbered" starts right now. >> harris: senate is set to vote on a binge et deal today, expected to pass, where it could take trouble from both sides of the political aisle. we're being told to expect a very late night. this is "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here today, sandra smith, host of kennedy on fox business kennedy, democratic strategist, jessica tarlov. and in our center seat today from fbn, co-host of after the bell, david asman, and you as we say, are "outnumbered." i don't mind at all. a bipartisan deal, then it