screaming fans packing the arena when they took the stage that night. beatlemania exploding as the tour went on and it started 55 years ago today. a nice look back, nice to have you here. thanks, jon. thanks to all of you. "outnumbered" starts now. >> harris: we begin with a fox news alert. the stock market is continuing to rebound today. white house officials are out in full force looking to tamp down talk of a possible recession. 2020 democrats still are sounding the alarm about the economy. we'll get into it. this is to is "outnumbered." happy monday! i'm harris faulkner. here today, melissa francis. fox news correspondent gillian turner is here! host of "kennedy" on the fox business network, kennedy. >> kennedy: also fabulous. >> melissa: i don't want to cheer for one and all the other! [laughter] >> harris: let's save the chair for the n. center seat, radio host and fox news contributor, richard fowler!

[laughter] kennedy and i were remarking that we haven't seen each other much. >> kennedy: it's been three weeks! >> harris: too long, my sunshine friend. should we get to the news? president trump is pushing back against concerns about the possibility for a recession. it sparks vitality in the market. analysts warning the risk of a wider economic downturn. for the president telling reporters his pro-growth policies are helping americans spend more. watch. >> i don't think we are having a recession. we are doing tremendously well. our consumers are rich. i gave a tremendous tax cut and they are loaded up with money. >> harris: white house economic advisor larry kudlow also called fears of a recession "overblown." >> i don't see recession at all. second of all, the trump pro-growth program, which i believe has been succeeding, louvered tax rates. a big rollback of regulations.

energy opening, trade reform. we are going to stay with that. we believe that is the heart of the free enterprise. >> harris: however, 2020 democrats have doubled down on their warnings about the economy, saying americans are not seeing the benefits the white house is touting. >> very worried about their jobs, access to health care, they are worried about providing for their kids. >> you've got an economy not working for most americans. there's a big debate going on right now about whether we are on the cusp of a recession. i think we probably are. >> i think this president is driving the global and economy and our economy into recession. >> harris: meanwhile, a new nbc "wall street journal" poll finds 49% approve of president trump's handling of the economy. 46% disapprove. it also shows an increase in the sport for free trade as the white house confirms it moved to the deadline for new tariffs on chinese goods from september to december. first of all, how many of those 2020 candidates to be now are

economists? [laughter] >> melissa: that's a great point! i don't think any of them. although elizabeth warren act like she has a lot of knowledge about the economy. i've interviewed her many times going back to my days at cnbc created in my mind she has never had a lot of economic knowledge. she was a lawyer, but not a lot of economics. i would say this -- the idea that we are due for a recession or that we may have a recession comes from two different places. one, we generally have one every ten years. if you look at the clock we are due for it, that means nothing. it's just averages. the second is a signal that was coming from the bond market that also a lot of people think isn't a good indicator. >> harris: that a hundred plus point loss that we saw. >> melissa: it was that and everything going back and forth with china. we just have grown dramatically under this president. the divide between rich and poor expanded dramatically under the last president. here's what i would say that i think is very interesting -- i think the president has, with the tariffs, created this hold on the market and the economy.

he has held things back. this is very clever because at any point in time he could declare victory on the war with china and release the economy and the market to new highs. if you are cynical, you think that is kind of maybe what he is doing and he is saving that release and that boom until closer to the election. i'm just saying. >> harris: politics would never be cynical, right? i want to get this out there. our economy is growing very strong despite the horrendous lack of vision by jay powell." this is a tweet, i believe prelet's put it on the screen. "and the fed. the democrats are trying to will the economy to be bad for purposes of a 2020 election. very selfish. our dollar is so strong that it is sadly hurting other parts of the world. let us a president trump tweets. our democrats smart to go after the president on the economy but not have the answers or ideas on the economy as a flip? >> richard: this is an interesting move for democrats.

here's why -- a lot of the tools that the market, whether it's the congress or the federal reserve, would have if we should tip into recession, they've been spent. we have physically spent to the point of no return. if there were a recession come over the president do to push the economy forward? he couldn't pass a stimulus package because that would add to the deficit. >> gillian: nobody cares about the deficit. >> harris: in answer to my question, where the democrat ideas? if it's truly imploding -- uh-o uh-oh, kennedy might want to take this one. if it's truly imploding -- >> richard: i don't think there's an implosion. any time there's an inversion in the bond market usually takes 2425 months to see the recession after that. >> kennedy: it can be 6 to 20 months. it can be as quick as six months, which would be a problem for the president. that really is a reaction to how the markets are doing. that is not --dash the inverse of the yield

curve is not necessarily the cause. we have to be careful to say that. i think it is laughable for a democrat to talk about deficits and the concern about spending, because what democrats want to do -- and they've all been very plain about this, which shows they don't have a good grasp of economics -- they want to increase spending and increase taxes. so how do you bring an economy to a grinding halt? by doing those two things. hold on, i'm halfway -- i'm halfway through. so the president has decreased taxes. and he says that that is a cause for this economic growth and the fact that many americans are enjoying increased wages, as melissa pointed out. that we do have a much higher participation rate in the labor force. that's all good. but the problem is, when democrats and centrists or trumpian republicans get together, the increased spending paid so we are only halfway there. what you have to do if you care about the economy is bring

spending down. let's say we know there's a storm coming -- what you do when there is a storm coming connect to put out your nice furniture and all of that china and the vases that your grandmother can be left you in her will? know! you batten down the hatches. you take everything in sight. what does that mean? you cut spending to decrease the risk. that we would feel in a downturn. >> richard: i hear that argument, but here's what -- >> kennedy: that's not even an argument, those are my feelings! >> richard: i hear your feelings! [laughs] >> gillian: but do you have nice try to? can you tell us about that? if you said you had your own china pattern in a nice set i would be very impressed. >> harris: let's jump back on track! >> gillian: sorry for derailing everything. >> harris: let's get back on track and see what democrats will do about this. even before the talk of any possibility of a recession, whatever, democrats were not coming strong with their economic. gillian? >> gillian: a couple of things. as good as the job numbers and the on point numbers are, the

president's approval rating is somewhere around 50% in terms of how he's handling the economy, that's pretty good. a lot of folks in washington are telling me that administration sources are saying there's a big issue that still has to drop. and that issue is how things shake out with china. some people think there might be a trades bat. the president and some folks on the left, the trade war. it depends pair the president has now delayed some significant portion of the next round of tariffs until december. this will delay the answer to the question. >> harris: can i just put this out there? the president over the weekend talked with tim cook. we know he's talking with those tech giants, who were talking china trade and some of their devices, where they are made, so forth. i would imagine those are interesting conversations. as i'm seeing it, the president is not getting credit for digging deep into it. he doesn't have to have those conversations.

is that helping? >> melissa: the market gives him credit. if you go over on fox business that's a lot of what's being talked about. the fact that the president is treating that tim cook made some good points, when he tried to say that. the trade war is helping samsung over apple, the fact that he said he made good points is tipping his hand. i believe at some point he almost arbitrarily declares victory on the trade war with china. and we see a big boost in the market and the economy. i think giving him some justification with cook. >> gillian: a lot of folks don't realize this, part of the reason they met is because technology, cybersecurity, is at the heart of the standoff with china at the moment. intellectual property rights. so that's why they are meeting now. that's another huge aside from prices -- >> harris: is richard right about that? if he declares victory has to figure out some of that stuff? not to get too much into the weeds here, but i'm not single a lot of talk about that. i know it matters that he met with tim cook. we will move on.

attorneys for sexual predator jeffrey epstein have gone after the official autopsy results concluding he died by hanging himself. they vowed to conduct their own investigation. this, as newly released video reportedly shows a british royal visiting epstein years ago. and democratic aoc plus three members, as i call them -- ilhan omar and rashida tlaib -- today set to address the uproar over israel initially scrapping their visit before tlaib rejected a leader offer from israel to visit her grandmother, 90 years old, palestinian. she could have gone. so, is this controversy putting democrats in a tough spot? we will debate it. ♪ >> she said, "all i want to do is see my grandmother." she said yes and then pulled the rug out from under the offer. the bottom line is they are radical when it comes to israel. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely...

with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein. the first survivor of alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association.

wit looks like jill heading offe on an adventure.

jill has entresto, a heart failure medicine that helps her heart so she can keep on doing what she loves. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto was proven superior at helping people stay alive and out of the hospital. it helps improve your heart's ability to pump blood to the body. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto, for heart failure. where to next? entrust your heart to entresto.

that could allow hackers devices into your home.ys and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today.

>> melissa: fox news alert, we are awaiting a news conference from democratic squad members rashida tlaib and ilhan omar to address the controversy over israel initially banning their visit. israel did eventually grant congresswoman tlaib permission to visit her grandmother in the west bank but she rejected the invite. over the weekend, tlaib and omar posting to their instagram's a current soon depicting benjamin netanyahu silencing tlaib by covering her mouth. president trump doing the same to omar. the cartoon was drawn by an artist previously accused of anti-semitic work. the president treating, "house democrats want to take action against israel because it's fighting back against two, maybe four people who have said unthinkably bad things about it and the israeli people. dems have such disdain for

israel. what happened? aoc plus 4 is the new face of the democratic party!" 2020 democratic senator kirsten gillibrand says israel needs to be held accountable, but republican congressman lee zeldin because the whole thing a stunt. watch >> there was an opportunity for tlaib and omar to have gone earlier this month with 70 colleagues, republicans and democrats. to listen and learn in good faith. but we see this bad faith p.r. attempt. >> in this country we believe in free speech. in this country we don't deny people the right to participate in conversations about their views and their values. unfortunately, netanyahu has allowed a very conservative government to have a law that says if you support the bds movement they can prevent you. >> melissa: and now hbo's bellmawr is facing backlash from tlaib over this.

>> it's a bowl [bleep] security test. bds is a bull [bleep] security test by people who want to appear woke but slept through history class. as if the occupation came right out of the blue. that this completely peaceful people found themselves occupied. >> melissa: tlaib may leader treating, "maybe folks should boycott his show. i'm tired of people discrediting them form of speech that centered on equality and freedom pair this is how they try to discredit and stop the boycott to stand up against apartheid in south africa. it didn't work then and it won't work now." gillian, i will start with you because you have the national security program. what do you think about that comparison between what's going on in israel and apartheid south africa? >> gillian: speaking as an american jew i can say that, first of all, anti-semitism is alive and well today in some countries. it's just as much of a threat to

the health and well-being of israel and the jewish people as it was in some senses 50 to 100 years ago. so it's a real threat. i think people are right on both sides of the aisle to stay on guard. i think that's a wonderful thing, even though it causes political discord. i think the conversation is great. this, "will they, won't they?" trip has been toxic for the dialogue here in america. but i will say the one beacon of hope coming out of it is we are having an important conversation about whether you can be pro-israel and supportive of the jewish people, and of the jewish diaspora, and still be critical of benjamin netanyahu's government. i think a lot of folks on the left and right have started to conflate these issues. i think just because someone is critical of benjamin netanyahu does not make them anti-semitic. it is still important to have that conversation. but it would be like saying someone who doesn't support president trump or someone who doesn't support president obama's anti-american. i think that is a really good

thing to to out of this. >> melissa: i think that's absolutely true. although it's very nuanced. i'm not sure if that is where the conversation is, necessarily, among the american people. candidly, i would ask you -- i talked to carmen michael waltz last week, it was on that bipartisan trip. it was huge, there were a lot of congress members on both sides of the aisle. he said they really went and listened to it exactly that topic. people within israel who aren't with benjamin netanyahu any longer and educated themselves about what's happening on both sides. it strikes me those two congresswomen, had they been there in that group along the way, educating all the congresspeople as to their point of view, it would have been sincere and productive. >> kennedy: the key is what you said, listening. if you really want peace and you want to bring about some sort of

problem solving that honors people who live there, regardless of their background and their family heritage, then you have to listen. because you have to find a different type of solution. at this point, it's been an impossibility, unfortunately. like with china, you can't expect to do the same thing and get different results. maybe people over who love israel and who want peace indeed between the palestinians and the state of israel, maybe they want someone other than benjamin netanyahu to lift them out of the impasse. maybe they want a more nontraditional politician. >> gillian: area seems that something interesting there. share it with us. >> harris: representative lee, lee zeldin has been part of the caucus. we are having him on next hour for the first time since he said a lot of this this morning. just a few weeks ago he was talking about the two women going to israel. it was said on the floor of the house of representatives, compared boycotting israel to

boycotting nazi germany. he has had tough words to say about this. the big question is, do our politics have a place in israel's politics? that's kind of the bottom line and all of this. that's one of the things i will ask about today. i'm curious to know your thoughts. >> richard: i agree with gillian a lot on this. i have a chance to visit israel and the border. it's "fifty shades of grey" versus here in america where it's black and white. we saw this week from aipac, they not only condemned the congresswomen but also president trump and benjamin netanyahu. the reason they condemned them was for israel to get what they needed has to be a bipartisan effort. you want everyone's voices be heard. banning them into the country is not allowing everyone's voices to be heard. >> kennedy: they didn't ban rashida tlaib. that's a thing. she almost wanted to be banned. so they could have this press conference. and a scream for more attention.

>> harris: did he fall into it? a >> richard: when your own lobbyist in washington is saying -- >> harris: that israel respects congress but defended the decision as a free and vibrant democracy, they are open to criticism with one exception. it is really law prohibits entry to israel of those who call for and work to impose boycotts on israel. as do other democracies. people coming to harm the country. >> richard: what aipac said in their statement is they feel everyone should be able to experience israel first hand, and they are the number one lobby representing -- >> melissa: riddle me this -- why didn't they go with a larger group, then? they could have easily gone with the larger group and they would have been allowed in. >> kennedy: they don't get as much attention that way. >> melissa: "we are going to meet with this other group." be one that felt like a nail being hit on the head. could you say it again? >> kennedy: they don't get as much attention that way. that's not the point. >> richard: that's not the question though -- i think the reason -- >> kennedy: were talking about

bipartisanship. >> richard: but the reason why it's irrelevant -- israel should want rashida tlaib and ilhan omar there to talk about it. here's what the democracy works. that's why they need support in washington. >> harris: could they do that without calling for a boycott and sanctions? that's the key. >> richard: of course they could. if you want to change their mind you have to conversation and listen to them. >> melissa: and they refuse have a conversation. >> kennedy: they don't want a dialogue. >> melissa: if they went with the larger group because i've had that exact conversation, you're totally right. they chose not to. we will carry that press conference coming up later on so you can hear what they have to say and decide for yourself. the investigation into the origins of the russia probe could be wrapping up, according to one top republican. will this be the next bomb shell to royal washington? president trump and congress under pressure to reach an agreement on gun legislation.

after a string of deadly mass shootings. can they come together and get something passed? >> this is a mental health problem. i don't want them to forget that. it's the people that pull the trigger, it's not the gun that pulls the trigger. ♪

there are three words when you live with migraine... "i am here." aim to say that more with aimovig. a preventive treatment for migraine in adults that reduces the number of monthly migraine days. for some, that number can be cut in half or more. don't take aimovig if you're allergic to it. allergic reactions like rash or swelling can happen hours to days after use. common side effects include injection site reactions and constipation. aim to be there more. talk to your doctor about aimovig.

♪ >> congress is working on that. they have bipartisan committees working on background checks. they will come in from democrats and republicans, and i will look at it very strongly. just remember, we already have a lot of background checks. i don't want people to forget that this is a mental health problem. it's the people that pull the triggers, not the gun that pulls the trigger. we have a very, very big mental health problem. >> kennedy: president trump speaking out yesterday on the gun control debate. congress is facing growing

pressure to pass new gun laws after recent mass shootings in el paso, texas, and dayton, ohio. of course, gilroy, california. lawmakers will not have an opportunity to formally debate any legislation until september when they return from august recess. when they do, one democrat senator says it will be a golden opportunity for the president. watch. >> the president is the only one who can make this happen with the control they have as far as the senate. if the republicans do not have the cover of the president, and the president says, "we are going to make america safe again by starting with the building block of a background check," that makes so much sense. >> kennedy: meanwhile, a new "wall street journal" poll shows overwhelming public support for expanding those background checks. 75% of respondentses say they would support such legislation. 14 percent only 10% with some level of opposition. on the issue of red flag laws,

which help law enforcement invoke the guns of somebody being a danger to others, 57% strongly support that idea. you have a president who does not seem to have an entirely firm position on gun control, and he is persuadable by both the pro-gun lobby and some moderate democrats who are able to bend his ear. so why aren't democrats pouncing on that opportunity to work with the president on the area where he is not fully entrenched? >> richard: i think you are seeing that, outside the 2020 campaign noise, on capitol hill, in washington. speaker pelosi, chuck schumer, they talked about this. but you are right, you were very nice about it but i think where the president sits on gun control or background checks is very squishy. that's probably the best word. he has flipped on it. he says -- >> melissa: how about open and not entrenched? how about thoughtful and listening to other people? >> richard: when you have the majority of the country saying

that now more than a beer time we did about contracts, that they caught shooters this week, three of them. one with bullets. also given the fact that in dayton, and 30 seconds this guy mowed down massive amounts of people. we have a problem in this country. if we sit here and ignore it and try to move around it we will continue to have these shootings. >> melissa: so thank god he's open to that. he makes all kinds of sense. that's why you see so many americans open to it. but i think what's interesting, axios had a great article about it. i think it's true that it is september or bust. like said, democrats should be right there working on the president. it does seem like there's an opening to do something right when they get back. with that is? we talk about background checks, there is nothing that would solve all these problems. we all know that. if you go by that litmus test of what would have stopped these last ones, we will never get anything done. >> harris: there looking for the perfect instead of what might be -- >> richard: the house is already past the background check bill.

>> kennedy: the senate almost passed that conference a background check bill in 2013 after sandy hook. the worry, harris, is that by the time lawmakers come back -- because mitch mcconnell is not going to call the senate into session. one are you going to say what i think you're going to say? >> kennedy: by the time that happens we will have rotated through so many news cycles that i think the shock of these horrific incidents unfortunately lessons a little bit. you don't have the same urgency. >> harris: that makes my throat hurt, going down. i don't know how much more we have to see to know that we need to do something. when obama was president and he talked about the political will, now this president talking about political will. at least, as melissa is pointing out and as we are saying today on the couch -- except for you, richard -- at least he is looking at different options. look at -- the nra has always been a place where democrats have pointed and said, "the president can't get anything done for that." they've been pretty damaged with

scandal. >> kennedy: i want to bring in gillian because she hasn't had a chance to respond. let's say the president is talking about involuntary commitment. he's talking about putting people into psychiatric institutions. let's say we completely disarmed the population, at least the law-abiding, good citizens of this country. and we take their assault weapons away, which means all semiautomatic weapons. so people are left with muskets and revolvers. what does that do to neutralize the hate and evil and society? >> gillian: here's an interesting thing, too -- even if you somehow prevented every american from getting their hands on a semiautomatic or automatic weapon in the future, you still have to deal with the 10 million that are existent. that are owned by americans today. >> kennedy: those go underground. >> gillian: that's almost a more important question. and it's something democrats are trying -- except for beto o'rourke, they are trying not to --

>> harris: they say they will come get the guns you have in the house. >> gillian: for good reason. i will say to point a moment ago highlighting how it -- whatever adjective you want to use. open or undecided -- president trump is on this issue, i think his goggle with reporters yesterday in new jersey was very telling. in the sense that i went back, looked at the transcript from yesterday, and looked at the one from about a week ago when he left for his summer break. back then he was very, very focused on talking about expanded background checks. that was his main focus. talking about how some folks in the republican party are more open to it now than they were. i'll maybe there is some room with the nra. yesterday he was complete focus on mental health. i don't know if that's a result of the briefings he's getting behind the scenes, so it's foremost in his mind, or if that actually indicates a potential policy move for the president. but it was very interesting to look at how much his focus

yesterday was -- >> harris: that's why i brought up the nra. >> kennedy: how wide of a gnat are you willing to cast in order to commit people to mental health institutions? it's not the bad people who could commit these acts. >> richard: i hear about and i think we should have a quick competition about mental health -- >> melissa: this is nypd commissioner james o'neill. he is discussing the decision involving the officer, daniel pantaleo, who is the one who killed eric garner about five years ago. we are finding out today if he is fired. let's listen. >> from the standard of conduct established for a new york city police officer. after noting that officer pantaleo had admitted, he was aware that choke holds are prohibited by the department. she further concluded, with a strongly worded and repeated warnings, about the potentially lethal effects of choke hold's founder of multiple sections of the training materials.

it was evident that the department made its recruits keenly aware of the inherent dangers associated with the application of pressure to the neck. given his training, a new york city police officer could reasonably be expected to be aware of the potentially lethal effects connected with the use of a prohibited choke hold, and be vigilant in eschewing its use. from the start of his process, i am determined to carry out my responsibility as police commissioner, unaffected by public opinions demanding one outcome over another. i examined the totality of the circumstances and relied on the facts. i stand before you today, confident that i have reese the correct decision that has not made it an easy decision. i have served for nearly 34 years as the new york city cop before becoming police commissioner. i can tell you had i been in officer pantaleo situation, i

may have made similar mistakes. had i made those mistakes, i would have wished i used backup officers to get the situation more time to make that arrest. i would wish that i had released my grip before it became a choke hold. every time i watch that video, i say to myself, as probably all of you do, to mr. garner, "don't do it. comply." two officer pantaleo, "don't do it." i said that about the decisions made by both officer pantaleo and mr. greta. but none of us could take back our decisions, most especially when they lead to the death of another human being. i was not in officer pantaleo situation that day. i was chief of patrol. later that year, chief of department. and i propose our neighborhood policing model so that the same cops would be in the same neighborhoods every day so that relationships would replace preconceptions. so that problem-solving and prevention would become tools

officers were trained in and supported in using. therefore, one of the greatest challenges of the policing profession here in new york city and elsewhere will always remain. arresting someone who intends to resist that arrest. communication and de-escalation techniques are employed where possible. more often than the police and the public alike would prefer, varying levels of force are used to ensure compliance. society gives our police the legal authority to use acceptable levels of force when necessary, because police cannot otherwise do their job. every day in new york, people are arrested by officers without any physical force being used. but some people choose to verbally and/or physically resist the enforcement action, lawfully being taken against them. those situations are unpredictable and dangerous to everyone involved. the street is never the right place to argue the appropriateness of interest. that is what our courts are for.

being a police officer is one of the hardest jobs in the world. that is not a statement to elicit sympathy from those we serve. it is a fact. cops have to make choices, sometimes very quickly, every single day. some are split-second, life-and-tough choices. oftentimes they are choices that will be thoroughly and repeatedly examined by those with much more time to think about them than the police officer had. those decisions are scrutinized and second- guest, both fairly and unfairly no one believes that officer pantaleo got out of bed on july 17th, 2014, thinking he would make choices and take actions during an otherwise routine arrest that would lead to another person's death. but in officers choices and acte pressure matter. it is unlikely that mr. garner thought he was in such poor health that a brief struggle with the police would cause his

death. he could have decided against resisting arrest, but a man with a family lost his life and that's an irreversible tragedy. a man who took this job to do good, to make difference in his home community, and lost his chosen career that is a different kind of tragedy. in this case, the unintended consequence of mr. garner's death must have a consequence of its own. therefore, i agree with the deputy commissioner of trials and legal findings and recommendations. it is clear that daniel pantaleo can no longer effectively serves as a new york city police officer. in carrying out the court's verdict in this case, i take no pleasure. i know that many will disagree with this decision, and that is their right. there are absolutely no victories here today. not the garner family, not the community at large, and certainly not the courageous men and women of the police department.

they put their own lives on the line every single day in service to the people of this great city. today is a day of reckoning, but it can also be a day of reconciliation. we must move forward together as one city, determined to secure safety for all. safety for all new yorkers and for every police officer working daily to protect all of us. i will now take your questions. >> reporter: [indistinct question] you touched on this. the decision, as you said, was very difficult. but it was so difficult you decided you would rather leave the department. >> i'm not going to talk about rumors. let's talk about the decision that rosemarie made. the decision that was affirmed by deputy commissioner tucker and the decision i just made you today. >> reporter: [indistinct] >> is an extreme a difficult decision.

>> reporter: when did you actually make this decision? was it down to the wire or a couple days ago? >> i think you've known me long enough by now that this was not an easy decision. it's not something that i can make over a few hours. i've been thinking about this since the day i was sworn in as police commissioner. the decision was made in the last couple of days. tony? >> reporter: commissioner, have any determinations been made about -- [indistinct] >> he's being terminated. whatever contributions he made to the pension system, he will get back. marsha? >> reporter: [indistinct] i know you've talked about reconciliation. are you worried about losing the

rank and file? [indistinct] >> immediately, i am sending out my remarks and the video of this press conference, so they know what you all know. i have been a cop a long time. if i were still a cop, i would probably be mad at me. i would. for not looking out for us. but i am. it's my responsibility as police commissioner to look out for the city, and certainly to look out for the new york city police officers. they took this job to make a difference. you all know the city has been transformed. had a lot of help, but cops out there right now and the thousands that have become before us that could seem to make the city safe. some will be angry, and i have a great executive staff.

these police officers do a terrific job each and every day. we will have to wake worked through this. it's a resilient organization. >> reporter: [indistinct] >> i did this based on the evidence and testimony at the trial. >> reporter: our understanding is that negotiations went back and forth friday and saturday, and that at one point you were either told or instructed by city hall that things had to go a certain way. >> that is not -- this is my decision. there are a couple of possible outcomes, but this is the decision about the police commissioner makes. this is a disciplinary case, and like other disciplinary cases. it's my decision. i'm going to get you a second, hold on. rocco? >> reporter: did you file it day by day, or did you wait for the end? >> i did not follow the trial date today.

i waited for the testimony to come up, and for the evidence to come up. i have a staff that works for me up in my office, they do disciplinary cases. they reviewed it. we got rosemarie's decision. we look at that and we move forward. right here, with the blonde hair? >> >> reporter: [indistinct] >> i have not. tucker has attempted to reach out to them. a couple different phone calls. it didn't happen too long ago, we are waiting for a callback. >> reporter: have you spoken to officer pantaleo? is this the first time -- >> this is the first time. the announcement was from here. what's that? >> reporter: [indistinct] >> i talked to mayor de blasio about process and possible outcomes. ashley? >> reporter: [indistinct] they also raised questions about

the credibility of other officers. can you speak about that and how you -- [indistinct] >> this whole situation transpired in seconds. i'm sure no one in this room, no one in this room probably accepted that the police had to arrest anybody in a physical struggle. if they could recount step for step what they did, i think that would be nothing short of a miracle. this decision rosemarie made, this was affirmed by the first deputy commissioner, and i'm agreeing with that. es >> reporter: to be clear, are you making this decision to agree with the judge? or are you making this decision because you believe it is also the right decision? >> there is a department trial. there is a process. rosemarie made the decision, again, confirmed by ben tucker. i agree with both of their findings. yep? >> reporter: you spoke about

how if he hadn't resisted it would have been fine. he also said you wish that officer pantaleo would have waited. what is the lesson to her officers coming out of this? >> immediately after this, back in 2014, ben tucker was the deputy commissioner and training still at the time. we taught all of our police officers de-escalation. we do fair and impartial policing and everybody wears a buddy coming out. there are a lot of things that came out of this incident. every time there's an incident, it affects the nypd and there is always something to learn. right behind you? >> reporter: [indistinct] how do you square those two things? [indistinct]

>> officer penta leo had 289 arrests. as far as we can tell, searching for all her records, no other person he arrested was injured. he did have a number of resisting arrest, which is not unusual. he had some ccr bs, the one where he was -- it was substantially, it was a bad stop. not use of force. all of this has to be taken into totality. at about 289 arrests, there were a number of gun arrests. what is the nypd do each and every day? we try and reduce gun violence in this city. we have to look at his record. that's part of the disciplinary system. >> reporter: did you make a decision not to discipline officer pantaleo, impact on the community, have any factor in your decision-making? >> i'm not going to stand up here and say i didn't think about that.

but i had to be guided by the facts of the department trial, and i was sent up to our office. i see a lot of journalists here that went through 2014. the protest, the murder of ramo ramos, to say -- that is never out of my mind. i think about that every day. whether there is a department trial or not. so i can't stand up here and say i didn't think about that. but that's not how i made my final decision. right here. >> mayor de blasio promised -- here for more to legal standard. do you personally believe this outcome constitutes justice? >> this is the outcome of our trial. we needed to be fair and impartial. it was a fair and impartial trial. right here, with the glasses? >> i haven't spoken to the

family of mr. garnier. what would you say to them right now? >> from day one we said there would be a fair and impartial trial. this is the results. make no mistake about it, this is a tragedy for the garner family. i fully understand that. he was somebody's son, somebody's dad. everybody in the nypd understands that. >> reporter: when is this effective? >> is in immediate termination. >> reading judge maldonado's decision, was there anything you disagreed with? >> i agreed with the content of her decision. who didn't go yet? right here. >> reporter: it came out that a lot of the partners had charges on official forms for eric garner's arrest. did any part of that come to you -- [indistinct] >> right after this, people from internal affairs looked at each

officer that was involved in this. there was a number of civilian witnesses and a number of police officer witnesses. it was the sergeant to receive charges, and officer pantaleo. >> reporter: he spoke a bit as your time as a police officer. did you approach this from a position of reluctance? >> melissa: this is nypd pollution commissioner james o'neill. he revealed the decision to fire officer daniel pantaleo. it has been quite a long road since that officer from staten island exerted the choke hold that killed eric garner. there's been an investigation over time into exactly what and to that. we are hearing the result right there that he is fired effective immediately. i want to bring it on out to the couch. he said the choke hold that was not a legal thing to do, it was ruled out as lethal force. even though the officer denied it, he clearly did it.

that's why he's being fired today. >> richard: i agree with this decision wholeheartedly. i'm set it took so long for us to get here. as i'm watching that press conference, all he could see was that video of that man saying, "i can't breathe, i can't breathe," over and over. and the police never responded to it. this is not an indictment of all cops, but i think you have a choke hold that is illegal and you decide to use it, we shouldn't have waited all these years. he should have been fired immediately. you were against department protocol, he should have been dismissed. the fact there were protests and people had to rally for us to even get to this point is indeed problematic and it speaks to white people in the black and brown community have issues with police. >> kennedy: they should also have an issue with the mayor. because he could have taken action sooner. >> richard: the mayor does not get a pass. >> kennedy: if they had to wait for the attorneys general to look at this case, they had a different interpretation. the mayor certainly could have done more.

the family was obviously paid close to $6 million. it is a really hard time. obviously, cops are going to be very upset by this. they feel like they are being attacked from within and without. but this is a very, very clear case. that was a violation of the rules. unfortunately the mayor has to do a much better job but also supporting the police force. >> richard: you won't get me to disagree with you on that. the other point was this idea of selling a loose cigarette is not a death sentence. at the ticket. >> melissa: the point they were making was that he resisted arrest. that's not an option for people on the street. it's also not an option to use the full force. it shouldn't be. that it's too dangerous to use the choke hold, can't do it. >> gillian: here's an interesting thing i notice on try to pay from julian castro's press secretary

"there's nothing preventing officer pantaleo for moving 20 miles away and taking a job with another police department there." >> richard: that's absolutely true. >> gillian: is there action that can be taken now? are they debating internally whether this is something that can be prevented against? or whether there is some kind of legislation that can rectify this? or is it fair that a police officer has been discharged in one department can move and get a job in another one? speech is it true he can get hired? >> richard: be seen in other cases. of an officer being let go and getting a job somewhere else. it's common thing you see happening a lot. officers get involved in this conduct in one city and they go to coke cities over and get rehired. i think you're right, gillian. this is what we have to do in this country. have a conversation. the community -- the police need the community to trust them. this is a breakdown in trust. >> gillian: we have to leave it there. coming up next, fall out

surrounding jeffrey epstein's death. that is continuing. newly released shows britain's prince andrew at the accused sex traffickers mention back into any 2010 for the prince saying he's appalled by the allegations against epstein. meanwhile, his lawyers are rejecting the medical and errands examiners findings that it was a suicide. that his safety was the responsibility of the mcc. it's indisputable that the authorities violated their own protocols. the defense team fully intends to conduct its own independent and complete investigation into the circumstances and cause of mr. epstein's death, including necessary legal action." republican andy biggs is house judiciary committee is determined to get answers. >> we want to find out in the judiciary committee all the procedures, all the protocols. whether they were followed, why mr. epstein was left alone. also, when you start looking at

it, it just lends itself to conspiracy theories. so we want to get to the bottom of it. see if we can find out and understand, because it really goes to the credibility of the federal bureau of prisons. >> gillian: lots of questions about the hours and minutes leading up to epstein's death. but also a lot of questions about the years and decades leading up to this, as well. something the investigation showed this week was that ten years ago when he was serving time in florida he managed to buy children's panties at the prison concession shop. >> melissa: the other salacious detail we mentioned at the beginning that includes prince andrew, the reason why that's not just gossip and is important is because it needs to be an investigation and an outing into the people that made this possible. over all these years. if you truly want to stop this from happening again, it is everyone who let this fester within our society and participated in it who needs to

be outed and punished. so in the future people with the sickness wanting to take advantage of something like this don't get involved because they know they will be consequences. there obviously hasn't been. it's not enough that something happens to jeffrey epstein. the victims obviously need retribution. but everybody who is involved needs to be outed and ashamed to stop it from happening again in the future. >> richard: i think that's right. two points on this, and i will be brief. one, nobody is buying the timeline. nobody is. number two, to speak to your point, gillian -- the fact that this went on for so long. i think it speaks to a larger problem in our justice system. it's better being rich and guilty than poor and innocent in our justice system today. epstein is the poster child for this. >> gillian: what you make of the prince andrew element coming into light? >> kennedy: it doesn't matter if the photograph seems innocuous. there is enough suggestion there -- and we know enough of the

details about epstein. now we are hearing that he was videotaping all of his friends who were coming as they procured these young women. they sexually violated and abused these young women. they stole their innocence, treated them like objects. epstein did that in order to cover his own backside. >> gillian: isn't there something -- what i keep thinking about with the prince andrew element, if these allegations add up to something later on, does that make this entire episode more sinister? you don't just have this trafficking ring run by an american -- it's actually got international components. that's pretty horrific. >> kennedy: he should have been convicted of sex trafficking back when they got him in federal court in south florida years ago. unfortunately they didn't and he continued to create more victims. in the meantime trait of course he had powerful friends. he did not want to be the only person who was doing this.

so he objectified girls and shared them freely. the people who took advantage of that should absolutely be punished, regardless of whether or not jeffrey epstein is rotting in hell. >> melissa: what's important about this moment in time as we hear more about the story -- you combined with people coming over the border in the south for sex trafficking reasons. i think the majority of americans didn't realize there was sex trafficking and sex slavery in the united states. when i talk to people who weren't involved in the news business before this, they felt it was something that went on and the rest of the world but didn't exist here. to bring forth of this happening right here and we need to do something about it and do something about those who are taking advantage of the system -- >> gillian: and americans trafficking other americans makes it particularly difficult. >> richard: baltimore, they are literally taking young girls off the playground and putting them into sex trafficking. it's real and we have to do something about it. >> kennedy: the hammer is coming down! >> melissa: we want to say

thank you to richard fowler for being here today. and gillian m kennedy, as well. join us back here on the couch at noon eastern tomorrow. now, here's harris. >> harris: we are getting set to hear from two members of congress locked in a bitter standoff with israel amid a report that house democrats plan to retaliate. this is "outnumbered overtime." i'm harris faulkner. we are awaiting a news conference where congresswoman ilhan omar and rashida tlaib will address israel's decision to refuse the request for an official visit. this, as house democrats including jewish members are reportedly considering action against the u.s. and israeli ambassadors over the band trip. president trump went after the potential move on twitter over the weekend. democrat kirsten gillibrand says the u.s. must hold israel "accountable." >> congress has a duty to make decisions about whether we give aid, how we protect allies such