>> i am not a lawyer so i'm not -- i'm not equipped to answer that question. >> so when the director stated before the house budget committee that the individual mandate penalty is not a tax, president obama has publicly stated that it is not a tax, yet your legal briefs and the supreme court case in writing have submitted on your behalf, because you are a named defend in that proceeding, the breath of operation and minimal coverage provision is a tax law. do you agree with your attorneys in the assertion to the supreme court that it is a tax provision? >> i think it operates the same way a tax would operate but it is not per se a tax. >> for some reason if an individual is still cannot afford to buy health insurance coverage, and they are exempt for paying the penalty. clearly this penalty is not a tax. >> they said there's no tax increases if people make under $250,000. if i make under $250,000 and i do not buy health insurance as i'm required to under the affordable healthcare tax, is

that a tax on me or is it not? a moment ago you said there was no tax. but that's not a tax? >> no. >> for us to say that you have got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. what it is saying is that we aren't going to have other people carrying your burdens for you. >> under the dictionary, a tax, usually a charge of money imposed by authority on person or property for public purposes. >> the facts you looked it up the decksary, it indicates to me you are stretching a little bit or you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. >> i want to check for myself. your critics say it is a tax increase. >> my critics say everything is a tax increase. my critics say that i'm taking over every sector of the economy. you know that. look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we are going to have an individual mandate or not -- >> but you reject that notion? >> absolutely reject that

notion. >> the supreme court an lifted is here now to breakdown the ruling. and the president rejects the notion it is a tax. how about the supreme court? >> the supreme court embraced it," which the chief justice said we find it a tax and we find it it is within congress's power to stacks. and a lot of people said eats all about the commercial clause, it's been their strongest argument all along. and the majority said no to that but yes to the taxing power. >> reading the dissent, the chief justice, while he is the majority of the court may think it's a tax, justice scalia, kennedy, thomas and alito, they say the majority is rewriting the statute and making it a tax. >> and judicial tax writing is egregious they said. this is exactly what is happening here. know all throughout the lower courts and the p. r. battle about this, and the government argued both ways, it is a tax and it is not a tax. but it was the winning argument at the court with the chief justice lining up to be the

swing vote at this time. >> what is interesting, no politician, for all the debate about the statute and for the statute itself when it was voted and signed by the president. all the politicians said this is not a tax. the minute it got to court, the doj, the lawyers at the department of justice, they said suddenly this is a packs. >> and it changes everything because we had an initial argument about whether or not this is a right because there's the old anti-injunction act that 1867 if it's a tax you have to wait until someone doesn't comply, pays the penalty, and then they can come sue. but ultimately i don't think the government ever felt of that that was going to be their strongest argument. it's not something they emphasized the three days they were arguing this in march. >> and you can't challenge a tax until you have paid it. nobody has paid this mandate so it really isn't what we call ripe for challenge. yet the chief justice sort of jumped the gun a little bit and

goes way ahead and said in spite of the fact it really isn't ripe to challenge, he said, oh, this is a tax. >> it is. it's very interesting because i think it's confusing and surprising at the same time to a lot of folks that through the way that they got there that they reached the end result but it was the path they traveled, the roller coaster they took that we are still trying to die jest. and you talk about the dissent. it was very powerful, it was very strong. you can tell they were probably heated discussions about this getting to this final order and final opinion. and in that dissent they talk about the fact that all of us eat food, there's argument that all of us are in the neighborhood of using healthcare. well, in the dissent they say just because we all eat food that's correct doesn't empower the government to tell us when is #* and what we are going to buy for food and that's esectly what this tries do. it exceeds federal power. >> and there's quite a division between the majority and minority. it wasn't just that they had a disagreement, it seems more of almost hostile to each other. >> from what i understand, and you know how this happens, when

the gusties read the opinions from the bench, they can read the concurrences and the dissents and from what i understand there was a split on the medicaid issue. i wasn't inside in the courtroom we were on the sidewalk trying to decipher it. but when ruth bader ginsburg was pointed and strong. and you get the feeling there was a lot of friction over this case but they reached their conclusion dodd. >> they didn't get to the medicaid extension. we will get to that with another guest. but a big day in the supreme court. janet, thank you. the legal challenges to president obama healthcare law started the day it was signed." on march 23, 2010, then attorney general of a state filed the first lawsuit. and now the highest court has rule. what does attorney general mccollum say? he joins us. >> good to be with you, greta >> i know you are a former member of congress and as well

as the attorney general that filed the first case. i'm curious, during the postmortem, would you have done anything differently? >> no. i think it was well-briefed and well-argued and well-presented but i was shocked and disappointed that chief justice roberts in the end concluded the individual mandate was a tax and not only it it it it was a tax s not prohibited by the direct taxes by the constitution. and he went into an elaborate been about why this is the case which sets a lot of press den for the future in which scalia and kennedy and alito and others disagreed. and he pointed out that portion wasn't fully briefed, wasn't briefed by the government. but he went into a great contrived way of finding the tax. and wanting to, as i said, showing absolute deference to the congress and to the constitutionality of the statute and he thought this was a, quote, reasonable

interpretation. which again, we would disagree with. but he did go through the argument. he went through it explicitly point by point. there's nothing more we could say. we just didn't convince him of that, apparently. >> talking to shannon moments ago, we mentioned the medicaid expansion which is another area the states did prevail. whether or not the government could force the states to expand medicaid that would have costs for the states down the road and the states won that. explain that decision or that part of the decision >> well, let me say at the top there were two big victories for the states and our case. one of them was the fact that the interstate customers clause was held by a majority of the court, including chief justice roberts, not to be able to used to force somebody to buy a product or service. so a limit was placed on the expansion and use of the interstate customers law by this court. that's important for the future. the second thing, the decision by the court to uphold our argument for the first time, a big precedent, that a medicaid requirement that you have to --

you have to follow the rules of the game and adopt a new medicaid provisions or you will lose your existing right to have the medicaid funds you have contracted for as a state, that that's unconstitutional. that that lefter that was in the law given to the department of health and human services is unconstitutional. so it means states can opt not to participate in this very onerous new medicaid provision and they can opt out and that's very important. that's a very expensive proposition. also, has a lot of implications to undermining the ability of this law to function as a coherent package as was intended apparent libby its authors. so the debate has just gun on healthcare reform. >> if the state opts out of the medicaid expansion that covered more people, it covered a certain segment between these people who were poor and on medicaid already and those people who buy health insurance or at least could buy health insurance by the individual mandate, now it appears that

group that would have received coverage under the medicaid expansion, are they just without insurance? and we are back to having a huge segment of our society that will have no alternatives? or what's the provision for them, if any? >> there's no provision for them. there wasn't any to begin with until the law was passed this time. you know, originally medicaid was designed for the elderly, for the disabled, for the children ever the needy, and then it was as chief justice roberts went into great detail explaining, expanded especially in this act to a very high percentage of above the poverty level for everybody, regardless of means or age or whatever. regardless of age or disability. and it's because the state's flexibility is taken away by the new law, new provisions, i suspect many states will not embrace the new provisions. now that they don't have to. and that's a very important distinction. they simply can't afford to do it. this law is very expensive for a lot of reasons, but for the states, which is the reason and

large measure we brought the suit is state interest and state individuals. it is a very favorable ruling with respect to the extra costs and burden that they would have to have. so that was a win for the states in this case. the individual mandate was a loss for individuals, a loss for freedom, a loss for a lot of things you and i believe in. and i wish the whole law had been taken down. which by the way, the four dissenters said in their opinion, not only an individual mandate in the constitution but they would not have severed it. they would have taken the whole law down. >> if there is any chance this is repealed, i realize there's a vote coming up that is largely ceremonial because it will never be taken up in the senate, but the house of representatives will make a statement. but if it is repealed come january if there's a new president, what is the plan and is there a plan by the republicans? >> well, i think there area number of different view points about that. i have been aware of a plan for some time that i don't believe the republican leadership has

been willing to embrace yet or governor romney has been willing to but i hope that he will. it's been drawn up, it's comprehensive and would turn most of this bacover to the states to regulate insurance and do other things but it would cover pre-existing conditions, it would cover a lot of things people are interested in through a refundable tax credit. and that itself hasn't been fully vetted out there but i think it's a good, conservative position to take. it costs a whole lot less than this law and it allows the states to exist as the principle regulator. and in that process, as you know, the premiums would be paid for basic insurance policy with a very large deductible, you would either do that through a tax credit if you are taking income taxes and if you are not eligible for other coverage you will get a refundable amount to buy the basic policy. that has not been introduced. but i think it's a good provision and a good way to go. >> thank you, attorney general. thank you for joining us.

>> you're welcome. >> the supreme court's ruling is setting social media on fire. former governor sarah palin quickly taking to twitter. she beats obama lied to the american people again. he said it wasn't a tax. obama lies and freedom dice. good evening, governor. >> how are you, greta? >> governor, that's about 140 characters or less about how you feel about this decision today. now tell me, given more chance to amplify it your view of what happened today. >> i received a lot of messages about this one today and a lot of the e-mails and texts used the treacherousry in the messages. i tend to agree with that term butch we have to be optimistic about it. basically what chief justice roberts did for us, for the american people, was put this shall uh-oh obama care and the individual mandate back in the hands of the people via our representatives. so now back in congress' hands, congress has an opportunity to

act on this tax as this has been deemed a tax as opposed to obama's insistence it wasn't a tax and after the july recess i expect congress to come in and rescind this tax. they have the power to adopt and enact the tax and they also have the power to rescind it. i want to see that done in july. >> president obama has said this is not a tax. it was the chief justice roberts and the majority that has decided, has deem it a tax, which is, of course, their privilege. they are the supreme court. i am curious, is this a tax or not? >> absolutely it's a tax. it's nearly a trillion dollars worth of tax via levies, fines, tariffs, whatever anybody wants to call them. this is a penalty and it is a tax on the people. it is a tax on states. itit is a raiding of medicaid funds which will result in states having to find other funds to supplement their medicaid budgets. overall this is about a trillion

dollars more tax put on the american people. do people think, greta, that there really is anything such as a free lunch? there is no such thing as a free lunch. and the 50% of americans who are paying their taxes today are going to get hit with even more tax to pay for now this mandate of obamacare. the other 50% who are thinking that perhaps they are going to get a free ride and get some free healthcare, they are not. they are going to have less availability of healthcare. they will have fewer choices. they will have less efficient, more bureaucratic healthcare and it will be rationed that really truly defies economic sense that healthcare with more enroll lees would not have to be rationed." people who are thinking this is going to be a free ride for them, 509% of americans who aren't paying tacks today, they have got another thing coming. >> so what do you expect is going to happen from here and through the election into next year? let me give you too

hypotheticals. one is gov. romney wins president and the other one is president obama is re-elected. >> well, if gov. romney is elected president and let's hope that the gop does take over the white house and can secure the senate and holds on to the house, then obviously first on the list of priorities must be repealing and replacing obamacare with something that makes more sense. you know, get rid ever the tort reform problems that we have, get rid of the anticompetitive problems that we have that are prohibiting people from being out shopping for good healthcare coverage and prices. all the problems we talked about that there are common sense truly sound economic solutions for. well, the republicans then and constitutional democrats will be able to enact and that's and if the republicans take over the white house, house and senate. now if obama is reelected we

will be a fundamentally transformed country as obama promised us as he was re-elected. we are down that road now. the decision made today, heck, obama even proposing it and ramming it through and down our throats through pelosi and reed's embracing of it, that's things to come. if obama is reelected, america, you will know longer recognize the country that today you truly love and can enjoy all of it's freedoms and prosperity and security if obama is re-elected because obamacare is a harbarjer of things to come. >> and the states have a decision to make right now with the medicaid expansion and they need to decide if they are going to opt in or opt out. under this decision they have a chance to opt out and it's a very sort of pricey matter for the states. on the other hand, they will have a lot of people who don't have coverage. at leasted ones with the large

populations that are under certain income levels. how do you foresee that whole medicaid expansion thing unfolding? >> many, many states are not going to be able to afford expansion of medicaid and these exchanges that are going to try to be forced down states' throats through obamacare. i would like to see governors be tough and opt out of this and exert our tenth amendment rights and tell president obama, who does not understand the constitution, he even being a constitutional elect you arer and scholar, and probably never reading or absorbing the tenth amendment to understand that states have rights. we're are sovereign states that can make up our own minds about our budgets and how to prioritize the dollars that we have and the dollars that are shared by the federal government to the states. i will like to see a constitutionally conservative

governors opt out what have obama is going to try to do to the people of america through mandates on top of what the states already have to provide. >> governor, thank you. nice to see you. >> thank you so much, greta. >> straight ahead, there is good news and bad news for the 26 attorneys general leading the charge against obamacare. that's coming up. texas attorney general greg abbott is here to tell you next. and where are they going in dozens of lawmakers marching right out of the capitol. here's aahing. it has to do with attorney general eric holder. darrell issa goes on the record. it's all coming up.

[ creaking ] [ male announcer ] trophies and awards lift you up. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, what's next? [ zapping ] [ clang ] this is the next level of performance. the next level of innovation. the next rx. the all-new f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection. the all-new f sport. see lioutdoors, or in.ight. transitions® lenses automatically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. maybe even a little better. experience life well lit, ask for transitions adaptive lenses. visit seemoresights.com for your chance to win the ultimate sightseeing dream vacation and more great prizes.

brought to you by transitions lenses, the official sponsor of sightseeing. syou know, i've helped a lot off people save a lot of money. but today...( sfx: loud noise of large metal object hitting the ground) things have been a little strange. (sfx: sound of piano smashing) roadrunner: meep meep. meep meep? (sfx: loud thud sound) what a strange place. geico®. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. ( dog barking ) this is the plan that revolves around you. introducing share everything. unlimited talk. unlimited text. and a single pool of shareable data that powers up to 10 devices. the first plan of its kind.

share everything. only from verizon.

>> no question about it, a big win for the president but the states won some too. greg abbott joins us, attorney general of texas. >> great to be but, greta. >> before i ask you with the win for the states and the medicaid expansion, you were in the court. what was it like? >> i was in the courtroom as the justices began reading the decision and when chief roberts began reading his decision talking about how the individual mandate was going to be stricken down as unconstitutional because the customers clause did not empower congress to enforce this law, and i thought we won. this is great. and then suddenly the chief justice transitioned to talking about his decision concluding that this is a tax.

and i couldn't believe it, and you could feel the movement among everyone in the courtroom that this was just stung because no one in the courtroom, no one involved in this case from the beginning thought that this would be the outcome. no one thought this was going to be a tax. the president didn't think it was going to be a tax e said it was not a tax. congress didn't think it would be. the lawyers didn't think it will be. the states. no judge that's ruled none so far in all the obamacare taxes ruled this is a tax so we were stunned. >> i remember it was raised in the trial court in florida the first when it was filed. but it was raised in a very different context because you can't appeal a tax until after you have paid it. so it was used at that time by the department of justice saying this is a tax, and so because this is a tax, that's the first time i her it said, is the cases should be thrown out until they have paid the mandates. mandates have not been paid by anybody so it was an effort to sort of sideline the case for a while. it wasn't meant to be a

determination if it was a tax or not in terms of the supreme court. >> it falls on what is called the anti-injunction act that would prohibit anyone to challenge a tax until they paid it. that would apply only if it was a tax. so the obama administration had to argue it was a tax but that argument failed and always failed and no one made the argument directly that the chief justice relied on today and it is flat out a tax. and we were all stunned. >> the medicaid expansion, is texas, do you know whether texas is going to participate in medicaid expansion or are you going to opt out? >> first, this is one of the ways in which we did win, and we were almost equally surprised we won on this. the court agreed that coercing the states, butting a gun to their head, as chief justice roberts said it, is unconstitutional. so now we have the flexibility about whether or not we are going to expand medicaid. it will impose huge burdens on our budget, which is already tight. >> not the first year.

but the second year it begins to become -- the state has to pay more and more every year. >> exactly. and as the court analyzed and concluded, this is just ways to suck the states in and get them hooked on the system so you pay more. that's why it grew so much the past few decades anyway. >> if people aren't covered and you decided to opt out of the medicaid expansion, let's say it's 200 people, and they get sick and go to the emergency room, they will get medical care, right? >> right. >> so which pocket pays more than anything else? >> important point because the reality is none of these people are going to go without healthcare. >> what would they get with medicaid expansion that they won't get otherwise? >> not sure what they would get. but one of the issues, the central issue to get at is texas going to go through the process of expanding its medicaid system, or will we be free from doing that. that's a policy question the states will wrestle with in the next couple months. >> you have not set up an

exchange yet, have you? >> have not. >> you better get moving on that one. now it's been determined that, you know, there will be exchanges, i guess. >> we will see what happens in november. there's one more vote, you know. people today were frustrated with the vote of five justices on the supreme court. americans can cast a referendum on this in november. there is a way that we may not be subject to obamacare anymore and that will be decided this november. >> attorney general, nice to see you, sir. >> you too, greta. >> one battle ends but the healthcare war is not over. the supreme court may not be over with the healthcare law. what do we mean by that? and also in contempt. attorney general eric holder held in contempt of congress. congressman darryl issa who is leading the charge is here to tell you what is next for the attorney general. ♪

[ female announcer ] the perfect song for everywhere can be downloaded almost anywhere. ♪ i'm back, back in the new york groove ♪ [ male announcer ] the nation's largest 4g network. covering 2,000 more 4g cities and towns than verin. rethink possible. covering 2,000 more 4g cities and towns than verin. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement available only with liberty mutual auto insurance, if your car's totaled, we give you the money for a car one model year newer. to learn more, vit us today. responsibility.

what's your policy? last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spotn the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. [ thunk ] sweet! [ male announcer ] the solid thunk othe door on the jetta. thanks, mister! [ meow ] [ male announcer ] another example of volkswagen quality. that's the power of german engineering. right now lease the 2012 jetta for $159 a month.

do you remember when your first tackle box seemed like your very own treasure chest? then keep the tradition going at bass pro shops' family summer camp. and check out the tahoe q5i runabout starting at just $23,995. at bass pro shops and tahoe dealers nationwide.

>> the fight isn't over, at least not yet for some. the state of virginia has its own separate fight with president obama over the national healthcare law. their case is technically still pending before the supreme court. what is the latest on that case? technically your case is still live in the supreme court but going nowhere fast? >> right. we all have the same central issues. and the supreme court chose the florida case to hear the rationale and all respects it applies to virginia's case and we are looking now at every other state is what does this mean for our medicare, the exexpansion you talked about.

and some said it's awful hard to find the money and unlike the federal governments, we have to balance our budgets so we can't keep printing money to expand programs. >> at least for you in medicaid expansion, if you had all the money in the world and didn't have to balance your budget, you would not be opposed to medicaid expansion? >> no. >> or do you still object to it on philosophical grounds. >> there are philosophical reasons that we've ended up fairly -- we are frugal in virginia, this program and others. we decided we don't want to expand it any larger. now that we don't have the threat, this hang over the whole medicaid program, i can't imagine our legislature and our governor are going to want to take on another couple hundred million dollars worth of costs into the future for virginia. >> if you do that, if you don't

expand your medicaid, let's say someone gets seriously ill who has no insurance, not eligible for medicaid, doesn't have medicaid expansion and ends up in the emergency room, someone will pick up the freight. but it's probably the hospital and the doctors? >> that gets programmed into the costs for the system, as you sort of imply in your question. to reform all of that, we've got to clean this out. it's one of the reasons we were hoping to win today and knock this law out because it really stands in the way of actual reform. we have done one thing for 47 years for every healthcare problem we've had in this country and that's more government. and as dr. phil would say, how is that working out for you? it's not. the one thing the supreme court did for us today was on the electoral side. because they upheld this l law under the taxing power, it does not take 60 senators to repeal obamacare, it takes 51 and we

are within striking distance of that. and we can get unwith of those seats in virginia. >> on a practical side, if you won everything, if there are people not covered by insurance, if they show up in a coma at a hospital -- >> this still doesn't solve that problem. >> no, no, i understand that, but someone is going to pay for it if you don't have medicaid expansion that covers it. someone ends up paying for it, the doctors and the hospital. we don't turn people away. >> the way to attack that, and you never completely eliminate the problem. what you try to do is minimize it and shrink it down by making healthcare and health insurance more accessible as a matter of cost, not by forcing the entities to take people. >> make it more attractable and available to people? >> that's right and do that by attacking the cost side of the problem. that hasn't been done in this monstrosity of a bill that we now know is a huge tax increase. >> do not get me started on

waste and fraud. >> no, no, you are talking about the attorney general. we go after fraud in my office, specifically fraud. but the fact of the matter is the system is incredibly in efficient because of how government has completely messed up the market. let me give you an example. the next time you go to your doctor, say you have to get work done on your shoulder. go to the doctor and ask them how much it would cost if you fay cash and they won't be able to tell you and do you know why? because there's no market in healthcare. >> nice to see you. thank you, sir. >> glad to be here. >> and up next, darryl issa for the first time an attorney general is held in contempt of congress. darrell issa is ready to make his next move what have is it? he will tell you come up i mean he could teach. he was there for us, even if we needed him in college. you could call him, you had his phone number. he was just focused on making sure we were gonna be successful.

he would never give up on any of us.

uh, trouble with a cainsurance claim. ah, claim trouble. [ voice of dennis ] you should just switch to allstate, and get their new claim satisfaction guarantee. hey, he's right, man. [ voice of dennis ] only allstate puts their money where their mouth is. yep. [ voice of dennis ] claim service so good, it's guaranteed. [ normal voice ] so i can always count on them. unlike randy over there. that is one dumb dude. ♪ the new claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. are you in good hands? >> a speed trap lands a woman in the slammer but not because she was speeding. she was not driving a car, she was riding a bike. she was riding a bike along a huston street and she noticed police pulling over cars. she decided to help the other drivers out. she made a sign warning them about the speed trap.

she parked her bike and post the the sign but police department like that and arrested plumber. the charge standing in the street when there is a sidewalk available. plumber insists she wasn't stand income the street. she claims police made up a sign to arrest her because posting a sign is not a crime. still she was spent 12 hours in jail. she was released after posting bond but has to go to court after being charged with the maryland charge. we want to know what you think. go to gretawire.com. we are back in two. ♪

why not make lunch more than just lunch? with two times the points on dining in restaurants, you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. >> attorney general makes history the not so good way, he's held in contempt. let's go to our income news and we have the other headlines. mary ann. >> a massive wildfire continuing to burn out of control in colorado. it's said to be the most

destructive in state's history. it's burned more than 350 homes in colorado springs and has forced more than 30,000 people to pack what they could and get out. it's already scorched 29 square miles and is still under investigation. so far it's only about ten percent contained. and a u.s. soldier shooting and killing a member of his unit before turning the gun on himself. it happened at fort brag in north carolina. there was a safety meeting and he turned and killed a commander and another soldier before shooting himself. the shooter is in custody. the other names are not released. now back to on the record. >> it has never happened before but today it did. the full house of representatives in a bipartisan vote, vote to hold attorney general eric holder in contempt. congress. it's the first time an attorney general has been held in contempt but not all house members were sticking around for today's historic vote.

in a dramatic display, most democrats walking out of the capitol building in protest. what is next? we spoke with house oversight chair derek issa. >> thank you for having me on. >> i take it you haven't received any phone calls from the white house in the last 12, 14 hours? >> no. the last conversation we had was a picnic yesterday even evening with one of their staff and said we would have liked to brought it to a close without the vote. >> and i should say the annual are picnic with everyone gets together at the white house. >> and the entire administration and all of the key staff is there. but we had no contact after that and obviously the vote has been held. >> you have held them in contempt criminally and civilly. tell me what is the difference or what is impacted? >> based on past experience, it's very possible the president will instruct the u.s. attorney not to prosecute further on the criminal side. the house is authorized me to

hire staff and legal staff who then can pursue civilly in the courts to try to get a federal judge to order straightly this discovery. >> when do you head off to federal court with the civil contempt? >> after a reasonable time to see if the administration will allow compliance by the u.s. attorney in the district of columbia. certainly a few weeks. >> do you think it will take that long? won't it be obvious whether they intend to or not? >> if the president issues instructions, that would settle it. but if we don't know any better we have to give the u.s. attorney a reasonable amount of time. after all, the same u.s. attorney is also investigating the leaks in the administration. >> and with the republican u.s. attorney in maryland? so he has a lot on his plate. >> he has a lot on his plate. but at the same time this is a year and a half. we will be off for a week during the district work period. our committee will be planning to continue the investigation, if you will, around the cooperation of the attorney general. >> what was your thought when

the democratic delegation got up and walked out, most of them? this was a bipartisan vote, i will concede that. many in the democratic delegation walked out ever the chamber. >> their walking out was probably symbolic of the fact that in 2008 something similar happened among republicans. what was disappointing, though, the facts were lost. a lot of things were said on the house floor today that do not bear any resemblance to the truth. for example, repeatedly members on the democratic side kept saying that this was gun under bush when they know that the programs gun under president bush were stopped under president bush and admitted and said they were wrong and this was a program that was completely gun under president obama and ultimately the attorney general's justice department does own this failed operation. >> well, the attorney general has made a statement, and he has said others, and i assume he's pointing at you, have devoted their time and attention to making reckless charges, unsupported by facts. he said you don't have facts,

and to advancing truly absurd conspiracy theories. that was said right after the vote. >> well, the attorney general was a little bit like, if you remember the brothers who killed their parents and then if they claimed they were orphans it would have been equally genuine. ultimately he is saying we don't have facts. well, the facts we have points to the coverup in people in justice and we aren't being given the documents. it's rather self-serving to say we don't have all the proof of what we are trying to discover, even though we have testimony that indicates high ranking individuals in justice are ultimately responsible for fast and furious. >> you have subpoenaed documents. are any documents forthcoming the last 24 hours? >> they actually gave the press some that they denied us. one where apparently the attorney general looks really good saying i want no b. s., i want to get discovery. the fact is they are selectively releasing documents from what they claim to have privilege on

as we speak apparently. but, no, there's been no offer ever documents. as a matter of fact, the attorney general told us if we didn't go forward with the contempt he would give us a couple hundred documents and if we did go forward, we would get nothing. >> the white house calls it political theatre. what do you think? >> i'm sad they think that way. when the shoe was on the other foot president obama felt very strongly in the oversight and for the separation of the branches and their responsibilities. i would wish he will feel the same way now. >> and is it that they have a grudge with you or they don't want to turn them over or they think they have a legitimate right on the privilege, or are they hiding something? what is your theory as this advances? >> a year ago, july 3rd and 4th, the former acting atf director, kenneth nelson, told us that he believed they were covering for high-ranking political appoint tees and it's

one of the reason he came forward to give us voluntary testimony was he wanted to clear the air about what he knew, what he didn't know, and in fact correspondence he had once he discovered that guns were walking and that some of his atf agents were part of it. >> did he give you names? >> he did. and we pursued those and that's one of the problems is he gave us the names, he gave us the e-mails that he sent to, and those are some of the e-mails that we've been denied. >> do you think those names he gave you, are those people obstruct being the investigation in any way? or are they cooperate? >> well, they certainly aren't cooperating the e-mail trains that we are talking about asking for. and we have to consider that a coverup because they were, at least if kenneth nelson gave us honest testimony, and it's a crime to lie to us, then in fact they were informed and should not have allowed that false letter to come to congress and to last for ten more months, at a minimum. >> any last message tonight as everyone starts to go home after the vote, any statement to the attorney general you want to make?

>> i have no statement to the attorney general. my statement is to the terry family that in fact we will continue with the investigation to try to get to the people responsible for their son, their family members' death and we will let the court and the rest of the process play out for the attorney general. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> it's been a big news day and it's not over yet. coming up we have big news about us. we will tell you what it is. that's next. [ male announcer ] trophies and awards lift you up. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, "what's next?" introducing the all-new rx f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection. our cloud is made of bedrock.

concrete. and steel. our cloud is the smartest brains combating the latest security threats. it spans oceans, stretches continents. and is scalable as far as the mind can see. our cloud is the cloud other clouds look up to. welcome to the uppernet. verizon.

>> big news at fox news today. our parent company, news corporation, announcing it is separating its publishing unit from their entertainment division. they will become two companies. one will include 20th century box, fox broadcast network and fox news channel. the other will contain the publishing assets, including the wall street journal. rupert murdoch talks about his decision. >> what brought me to it, and i've been 58 years building a company, gradually, you know, i realize the larger and all the companies would be better managed and would be a lot better in every way. >> sincally one would look at

him and say he wouldn't be doing this if not for the hacking scandal. and that prompted this. maybe it's a way to keep any litigation, any of that on the publishing side since that's where it originated in britain and you can divorce the more lou extrative, profitable part of the businesses from that. and had it not been for the hacking scandal you wouldn't be here. >> no, it doesn't have anything do with it at all. it's not a reaction. it's looking forward to what's best for our companies and what is best for our shareholder. >> coming up, plenty of drama inside the supreme court today but the real show was outside on the courthouse steps. that's next. chances are, you're not made of money, so don't overpay for motorcycle insurance.

geico, see how much you could save. every communications provider is different but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company. ♪ we link people and fortune 500 companies nationwide and around the world. and we will continue to free you to do more and focus on what matters.

see lioutdoors, or in.ight. transitions® lenses automatically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. maybe even a little better. experience life well lit, ask for transitions adaptive lenses. visit your local sam's club optical today to discover how authentic transitions brand lenses enhance your vision. sam's club. savings made simple

last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans...

in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spotn the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. >> greta: colorful scene outside of the supreme court on the bull hoshs and signs, hundreds on both sides of the health care debate gathering. for members of congress to belly dancers, everyone reacting passionately to the ruling. griff jenkins was not one of

the belly dancers, was there. >> greta an historic day on the steps of the u.s. supreme court. from joy, sadness, celebration, outrage. we were there with cameras to capture it all. >> i think historians will look back on this. it's wrong. >> just say in a controlled way as possible i am ecstatic about the decision but mainly for the american people. >> but the turning point in american history will never be the same again if this ruling is allowed to stand. the supreme court isn't the final word on the law that's we live in. >> five justices voted in

favor of the law. >> in one instance, we showed the world that a force that has representatives from different political perspectives can uphold the constitution of the united states of america. >> i'm disappointed but to be honest what is bothering me more than anything is that now it's apparent the president of the united states and his administration misled the american people. >> greta: thank you for being with us tonight. make sure you go to greta wire.com. good night from washington, d.c.. good night. >> laura: the o'reilly factor is on. tonight: >> whatever the politics. [chanting] strike it down. strike t down. >> today's decision -- >> a healthcare for everyone

is a human right. >> victory for people all over this country. >> laura: the supreme court upholds the president's healthcare law. is the victory for mr. obama a victory for you and your family? we'll have analysis with meg begin kelly and a special report from bill o'reilly. >> i disagree with the supreme court's decision. obama care was bad policy yesterday. it's bad policy today. >> laura: how will this ruling impact the presidential election? michele bachmann, dennis kucinich and bobby will weigh in. >> both do the same. >> and eric holder becomes the first sitting attorney general held in contempt of congress for refusing to turn over fast and furious documents what happens next in this ongoing battle, we'll have a special report. >> it's good to be here and not in washington, d.c. right now. you know? [ laughter ]