what's in the public good, you can't pay ransoms. you can't legitimize them, giving them cold hard cash, recognition, recruiting and success in the eyes of our enemies. you constant cave in. and we've learned this the hard way. we've learned it the hard way ray, by paying ransoms by allowing families and you're not dealing with a trusted business pattern at the other end. so they're not obligated to release your loved one or give them to you. so the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, is based on those fundamental principles. >> if i understand you correctly, you are saying not only should the united states not pay ransom but the families should even be constrained from making their own deals or going through third parties? >> right. the current law is that if it's a foreign terrorist organization, the families cannot pay ransom. if it's a criminal organization, nonterrorist designated, they can. but fundamentally the advice that we would give is that it's not in the best interests of the public good. because all you do is ra

and ransom money is ransom money whether paid by families, and so doesn't this risk endangering more americans overseas. >> i understand that critique. here is what i think is different which is to say the u.s. government policy is no concessions. that is ransoms other policy concessions and a number of levers or issues that could be on the table if it is an issue of the u.s. government providing that concession whether it is money and the seemingly vast resources at the government's disposal or a policy concession or a policy change or a pledge not to undertake some type of foreign policy or military action. all of those things would be in the realm of a u.s. government concession that will not be on the table. >> regardless, that money the president said that and oil basically helps fund the terrorist groups so providing that money even from families doesn't that ultimately put a price tag on american heads overseas. >> there is no doubt that the payment of ransoms fuels the very activity that we are trying to stop. which is why the u.s. government has worked and urged other govern

we've had very few kidnappings since lindbergh because we don't pay ransom. you can't pay ransom. it is terrible. it is heartbreaking. maria: wal-mart stores will begin charging fees to the nurse first document items in stores, raising pressure on suppliers. also offsetting costs and wage hikes come as something i talked about the ceo doug macmillan yesterday. >> we want to make sure we've got strong talk for the future and we retain and develop people to become store managers and do great things within the company. maria: the changes will affect 10,000 suppliers to the u.s. stores. netflix up at 10 to one -- seven to one split with a ambitious expansion. six july 14th. ix additional shares will be paid out on july 14th. shareholders on record july 2nd. futures this morning expecting weakness at the opening of trading. the dow industrial pulling back today as we see weakness this morning and skepticism around a deal for greece. we will tell you about it. upstate new york this morning, talk about free production. the prison employee looked at her convict terry's escape may have bri

you can't pay ransom. . neil: now, to be clear. we're not paying ransom. but the understanding here is we're going to let families do so if they want to privately. >> well, that was the second point i was going to make. there's the bottom line side and what is our policy. and it's tortured logic to say the united states government won't pay ransoms, but if somehow the families through third party families pay, it's not okay. and it will encourage more hostage taking. we have to be consistent as a nation, if it's wrong to do it, in this case kidnapping, on anybody can pay ransom. neil: but do you think that that ever factors in to potential kidnappers. >> absolutely. neil: to know that the family is or isn't going to pay ransom. >> sure. you look at the somali pirates, they target people who know are going to pay ransoms. >> those are big businesses a lot of times. >> yeah. but there's a rewar. neil: and someone saying isis because it's the second form of revenue. >> that's correctrevenue. >> that's correct. and this is why we have a united states marine co

they were threatened to face criminal prosecution if they paid ransom for aiding terrorist group. they're choosing their words very carefully. they're not saying that it's fine to go and pay ransom, they're only saying that no family has been tried criminally for doing so. they said they will not directly aid the paying of ransom. >> as president i also have to consider our larger national security. i firmly believe that the paying ransoms and risk the taking of more americans. >> the argument is that if he believes getting u.s. government money to hostage takers will put more americans at risk, what is the difference if it's private money? isn't that still an incentive? his advisers have been asked that repeatedly at the white house. they only say it's complicated and they have to stand with the families. >>> now boston marathon bomber has been formerly sentenced to death by an u.s. judge. at the hearing tsarnaev addressed the court with a five-minute speech saying he was sorry for the lives he took and the suffering he caused. a court ordered tsarnaev to die for the becomes that

not paying ransom, if the families are paying the ransom. i want to get your take on if you support that. but with the big question in mind, this is what this administration has had previously and administrations before that have said previously, the reason they don't want folks to do that is because it could potentially put more american lives at risk. house speaker john boehner said that earlier today, it could -- there's a concern this could put more americans' lives at risk if families paid ransom. what do you think about that? >> no question if the government pays ransom, it puts more americans at risk because every american held hostage becomes a winning lottery ticket for their captors and for these terrorists. as it relates to the family, we need to see specifically what it says, whether it says the administration won't enforce laws against even having conversations. it's not clear. the data doesn't necessarily indicate that if families are involved in trying to get their loved ones back, whether that increases the number of american

now the changes basically that he can families can pay ransom. u.s.government officials like the fbi can help them do it, but as you heard the president say the government won't pay. >> why is the u.s. president still being criticized? >> he tried to find the middle ground here. if they paid ransom that would make americans target for hostage takers. the hostage takers won't differentiate between the government money or private money, money is money. but they will realize that not all american families have means to pay ransom. it will be an open debate in change of policy, a policy that's been put in place for hundreds of years. >> patty culhane from washington, d.c. patty, thank you. >>> the boston marathon bomber has come face to face with injured victims of the 2013 attack as he prepares to be formerly sentenced to death in an u.s. court. in may a federal jury con detectedjury convicted dzhokhar tsarnaev for sentenced. it is expected he will appeal. >>> responding to a severe heatwave crisis, 138 people have died as many in decline as many elderly

britain does not pay ransom, canada does not. the argue system you're reducing the incentive to kidnap an american but there's such publicity value in getting an person that the kidnappings continue and i think these steps are positive but until there's a more coordinated response between the u.s. and europe this won't make a big difference. >> suggesting now that the threat of prosecution under the materiel support provisions that the justice department often will announce when those who are arrested in support for terrorist group, these are the kind of things some family members said they heard, that they would be facing prosecution under the material support statute. suggesting now this will not happen. will this embolden the taking of additional hostages or will it happen anyway no matter what the policy is here? >> i think people will try to take american hostages no matter what. i think it was a mistake, people in the administration have told me this. there were two officials in particular, one at the nsc and one at the sta

pays ransom they fear more americans will be targeted for ransoms.will the hostage takers differentiate between private money or government money? they just said it was a complicated situation and at the end of the day the u.s. government cannot abandon these families during a terrible time for them. >> patty culhane live in washington, d.c. thank you. >> research has warned that the ebola outbreak caused an increase in malaria deaths. tens of thousands of people suffering from malaria stayed away from clinics because they were worried about catching ebola. malaria kills half million people on average every year, many of them children. catherine soi reports from one of malaria's hot spots science is turning to new technology. >> from a big county in kenya scientists and researcher have been here for decades studying the mork mosquito and the parasite it carries, malaria. >> this team of health workers is yet to install a solar power powered mosquito trap. it's one of 4 hup that have been installed. this has been laced with the human scent. >> you're

i might not have been as pro-ransom negotiation, et cetera.n it's your own son and you have not been told that there are other activities going on that might proactive. we didn't actually handle any money but we asked for people pledge us donations if, in fact, we got to the situation where money was asked for. we were told that we might be prosecuted. big deal. i would rather be in a prison here than my son being in prison over there. nobody has ever been prosecuted for doing that. we were under a great deal of duress. and at that point we really had no misgivings, if that was the only avenue open to us we were going to take it. >> but that's where it was difficult because we would like through the foundation for there to be better support and dialogue between kidnapped american families and our government. we would like there to be just we needed help. people were very sympathetic, greta. it's not that. people were very kind. listened to us, all that but and they got a lot of information from us, constantly wanted information from us. we nev

families ignored even bullied threatened with prosecution if they paid ransom. the new policy does not explicit say that it's legal for families to pay now. instead the white house will only say no family has ever been process prosecuted for it. the government will horde a task force to handle hostages and their families. the president is promises more information will be shared but one thing will not change. >> as president i also have to consider our larger national security. i firmly believe that the united states government paying ransom to terrorists risks endangering more americans and funding the very terrorism that we're trying to stop. i firmly believe that our policy ultimately puts fewer americans at risk. >> the new policy will do exactly that. >> the concern that i have is that by lifting that long-held principle you could be endanger endangering more americans here and overseas. >> ultimately i think you are likely to at least marginally increase the incentives for people to kidnap americans. >> after they were incentivize ing further hostage takin

ransoms are isis' number-two money maker. dagen mcdowell says we could have made it their number one money maker. the rst of our panel join us. adam will be back next week. daighen? >> the whole point of having a firm no negotiation, no ransom policy in this country is to prevent americans being targeted and by announcing this policy openly with a lot of holes in it you're asking for americans to be kidnapped for ransom and to be targeted period. then what? >> now, the government's policy charles, is that you don't do this. we will allow private families if they want they can go ahead and do it. i guess there were laws against this sort of thing. but i don't remember anyone ever being punished. >> no one was ever punished for it. >> what do you think of it? >> i disagree with-in the sense if there's a young american in syria, afghanistan, someone wants to help out all the refugees in iraq they are going to be targeted. it might be the number-two money maker for isis but it's their number-one pr stunt. beheading people -- i'm

government will not be going anywhere near paying ransom.kicking a hornet's nest. this was primarily about showing sympathy. >> and that does set up a weird situation. maybe an uncomfortable situation where some families, if you have the money, your loved one is taken hostage, maybe you can pay the ransom. if you don't, your government won't be chipping in. >> there is no good answer here, steve. obviously as heidi was pointing out, you put yourself in a situation where you're either paying captors and encouraging that behavior or not. to have this bifurcated system, it feels like bad policy. either the u.s. government should be in the practice of communicating with and negotiating with hostage takers, potentially even paying ransoms or not. when you've got this sort of side issue where families can do it, what you're saying is those who can afford to do kit do it and those who can't should say goodbye to their loved ones. and i don't think there's an easy answer here. it seems like an odd decision policywise. >> it is one of those, a wrench

. >> the problem, wolf the families could always pay ransom.y almost 30 years in the fbi, the fbi left that to the family if they wanted to pay the ransom whether it was organized crime, kidnappings for hire whatever it may be and including terrorists that could be paid. the family if they can raise the $15 million, $30 million, $50 million whatever they ask for that's been a family decision without threat they would be prosecuted by the department of justice. >> you heard the criticism by making the announcement the president is in effect telling terrorists you want to make money go ahead and kidnap americans because their families not the u.s. government will be able to pay that ransom. >> the easy answer, wolf, yes this will fuel terrorism. i'm not sure the easy answer is the right answer. as the the white house said we have had dozens of people taken since 9/11. 30-plus out there now. americans taken by hezbollah in the 1980s. this is not going to suggest to terrorists this is a new game. they have already been making money off this. i don'

families ignored bullied and threated with prosecution if they paid ransom. instead he would only the say that no families have been prosecuted for it. >> as president i also have to consider our larger national security. i firmly believe that the united states government paying ransom to terrorists risks endangering more americans and funding the very terrorism that we're trying to stop. i firmly believe that our policy morepolicy puts fewer americans at risk. >> by lifting that long-held principle you could be endangering more americans here and overseas. >> ultimately i think you're likely to marginally increase the incentive it's for people to kidnap americans. >> after incentivizeing hostage taking, they could not answer instead saying. >> message that we're sending is that the government of united states of america stands squarely behind american families who are in the unthinkable position. >> changes that will come too late for those journalists and aid workers but with more than 30 americans held hostage their families now being promised they can foc

alone in banning their citizens from paying ransom? >> no we had a very strong partnership in that policy of no concessions to terrorism. the british, the australians, and the canadiens were lock step with that u.s. policy which in large part protected americans. the fact that the perception was that the u.s. the uk brits and australians don't pay ransoms, it actually protected their citizens. the countries that did pay ransoms, france germany, italy, many mainland european powers all it did was drive up the price and put a target on anyone traveling with those passports. this change in policy sadly will actually put a bigger target on americans traveling abroad. >> that's what i wondered. now if all of a sudden hostages can be ransomed american hostages doesn't it make the kidnapping of other americans more likely? >> of course it does. it will drive the business. it will drive the industry and that's, you know -- the sad part of this business is it's a commodity. when every -- when the word came out the french released a hostage for

and paying off ransoms.e also have his expansion in that part of the world with putin. we obviously have environmental concerns but we also have the ability to step back from our dependence of foreign oil by expanding and growing our own natural resources. and not only creating jobs along the way, but doing it i believe, in a safe and secure way. better than anyone else in the world. >> scott brown, thank you, always good to see you. >> good to see you, neil thank you. >>> meanwhile, the threat of rising interest rates may be giving home buyers off the sidelines, but does that mean we are off to the races? here at fidelity we give you the most free research reports, customizable charts, powerful screening tools and guaranteed 1-second trades. and at the center of it all is a surprisingly low price -- just $7.95. in fact, fidelity gives you lower trade commissions than schwab, td ameritrade and e-trade. i'm monica santiago of fidelity investments, and low fees and commissions are another reason serious invest

government not officially negotiating or paying ransom to free u.s. hostages held overseas while at the same time saying they are not going to be burdening the families by harassing them or threatening them with prosecution if they were to try to establish contact with the hostage takers the holders, the captors and try to negotiate a ransom. the president all but saying they are going to facilitate the communication to ensure they are not defrauded or toyed with in any way, shape, or form that the fbi is going to do that. and the president announcing a restructuring there, of several different entities within the government. a fusion cell that will be the overarching coordinator, an envoy who is going to take care of international relations in trying to locate and secure the release of these hostages. and several other entities within the government and that again, has been the nut of some of the criticism we have seen and that is there is no central hostage czar if you will an overriding authority that can run rush out over these various agencies. s

. >> no family of an american hostage has ever been prosecuted for paying a ransom for the return of their loved ones. >>> rudy giuliani will weigh-in on allowing families of american hostages to pay terrorists ransom. >> you can't pay ransom, it's terrible it's heartbreaking. >> and hillary clinton ditches the scooby van for yet another private jet. we'll have reaction. >> i think our country needs big change. >> governor bobby jindal is here to explain why he has announced today he's running for president. hannity starts right here right now. >>> tonight, a hannity history lesson on democrats civil rights record. now, liberals in the mainstream media want to blame the gop for race problems in america, but they will never tell you the real history. let's start at the 1964 civil rights act. 80% of republicans in congress voted for the bill only 64% of democrats did. oh and by the way. al gore's father bill clinton's mentor a segregationist by the name of j. william full bright. a one time senate majority leader and former klan member, they all voted against the civil rights ability.

isis is going to demand these ransom ransoms be paid not just by individual families but also by governmentshat they pay these ransoms. >> and ari, the government have also been following a group of people that communicate with families. that's also something that's going to make a difference. >> yeah that can make a big difference. there have been reports of family members hearing complicating things from different parts of the government which makes sense. the state department, which is following due did i ploemplomacy may have a different agenda than just following the laws domestically, yet you would want a reliable form of contact. the other piece of that, jose, is these families are looking at a situation that the u.s. has not historically confronted a great deal. we have other types of conflicts and threats, but look isis is a fairly new phenomenon and a lot of previous terrorism focused around killing americans, not trying to take them hostage abroad. so the government is adjusting that. they're calling it this czar or so-called fusion cell the goal is a positive one, to get these fa

government pay ransoms was decreasing the incentive. you are correct.w of any studies that show american and british citizens, because their governments don't pay are somehow being kidnapped less because of those government policies. when i was in captivity, my captors simply thought the u.s. government secretly did pay ransoms. that's false but they really believed it. so captors aren't hearing the message or believing it. even if they think, you know, they are not go ing to get money for an american 0 or british captive they can still use them for publicity. it is, you know, i would agree it's not clear at all that this is the -- the nonpayment is resulting in fewer kidnappings. there's a moral argument against paying and that's a separate thing but the statistics don't back up the argument it is decreasing kidnappings. >> the parents of jamess foley, the journalist murdered by isis have welcomed all of these changes. i'm sure for many people they are long overdue thank you for your insight and your time today from d.c. >> thank you. >>> an ambitious

going to try and pay ransom. >> that is different from a u.s.t doing it. >> if the reason americans aren't kidnapped with as much frequency is because terrorists do not think they can get money from americans and they now know that there is sort of open door policy to get money from the victim's families. >> i don't think that is exactly what the policy means. we'll see it in action. but i do feel like there will continue to be ways to discourage the paying of ransom to explain why it's wrong. i just think the heavy handedness of going to these families and families complained about it. of being told we will prosecute you was terrible. and that that had to be changed. but i do worry we're opening the door to a terrible change in policy. >> i guess we'll have to see. tomorrow is the official unveiling of the hostage policy. at some point or someone is going to officially announce and then we can debate this all over. joan walsh, always good to see you. mike and jess hang with me. when we come back taylor swift proves she just might be the most po

but ransom money is ransom money, whether paid by the government or by individual families. so doesn't this announcement , today risking injuring more americans overseas? lisa monaco: i understand that critique. the u.s. government policy has no concessions -- that is ransoms, other policy concessions, other issues that could be on the table. if it is an issue of the u.s. government dividing the concession, whether it is money vast resources, or a policy concession or change, not to take some action -- all those things would be in the realm of the u.s. government concessions that are simply not on the table and will not be on the table. >> that money -- the president said that it helps fund these terrorist groups, so providing that money -- doesn't that ultimately put a price tag on americans' heads? lisa monaco: there is no doubt that the payment of ransom fuels the very activity that we are trying to stop, which is why that the u.s. government has worked in urged other governments internationally to not pay ransom. at the same time, we have a responsibility to stand with f

sometimes we've seen $100 million asked for ransom. how realistic would that be for these families to raise this kind of money without even tapping into the u.s. government or other governments for help? >> well i think for most families it won't be realistic at all to raise that kind of money. now, it may depend if someone who's kidnapped works for an organization that has the wherewithal and the willingness to try to provide a payment to get a hostage back. but, you know we do have to be very mindful of the fact that to the degree any ransom is paid it really does help fund these organizations to kidnap other people or commit other terrorist acts. so it's certainly not something we want to encourage, but i do think it's important that the administration is saying also that it may communicate with hostage takers. that can buy time and also gain information that might be necessary for rescue attempts. so i think that's a sound change as well as the organizational changes that will help harmonize our policy in this area i think are all

. >> you can't pay ransom. it is terrible. it's heartbreaking. >> and hillary clinton ditches the scooby van for yet another private jet. we'll react. >> i think our country needs big change. >> governor bobby jindal is here to explain why he has announced today he's running for president. "hannity" starts right here, right now. >>> tonight, a hannity history lesson on democrats civil rights record. and their connection to the confederate flag. liberals in the mainstream media want to blame the gop for race problems in america, but they will never tell you the real history. let's start at the 1964 civil rights act. guess what? 80% of republicans in congress voted for the bill. only 64% of democrats did. oh, and by the way. al gore's father, bill clinton's mentor, a segregationist by the name of j. william fullbright. a one time senate majority leader and former klan member, they all voted against the civil rights act. as for the 1965 voting rights act, 87% of congressional republicans voted for it, 79% of democ

released last september after captors demanded and got a 1.6 million ransom. moore says it will help the families cope. >> some agencies like the fbi have a lot of educational experience. they give advice support. there's nothing wrong with that. and, of course it would be terrible if a family were on their own. >>> congress granted trade powers to the white house. the senate passed a bill that fast-track authority to president obama. the enhanced training act was improved in a 16 to 38 vote with 13 democrats voting in favour. the passage expected to help the president negotiating the transpacific partnership. the president called his french counterpart to assure him the u.s. is not spying on him. french president francis hollande says president obama promised to stop espionage considered unacceptable between allies coming in response to a revelation that the n.s.a. eaves dropped on francis hollande and two predecessors. >> in new york, a second employee was arrested. corrections officer gene palmer delivered the tools that the in mates used to escape inside f

says it will not negotiate with terrorists, it will not pay ransom to terrorists. they also will not prosecute families that choose to do so. the other big concern here is communication, the other families are saying they weren't getting realtime up-to-date information with the government. prior to today's announcement together with the government, an interagency fusion center headquartered with the fbi to better keep the families informed but it will not, we're told, include a so-called hostage bribe which a lot of people have been preaching for. but that apparently is not in today's announcement. >> tracie potts live on capitol hill. thank you tracie. >>> 4:47 now. if you thought the pool of people running for president couldn't hold anybody else, think again, today louisiana governor bobby jindal expected to announce he's running for the job. the republican governor will make his bid official. jindal is pulling in last place among all the candidates for the gop nomination. >> ford entering the car sharing business and d.c. is the first place to test it. soon tho

he says there will be no concessions to hostage takers no ransoms paid by the u.s. government to those individuals who take americans from overseas to the streets. but he says there will be no punishment and no threats of proses accusation to dashes -- prosecution. >>> president obama made it clear, the government will work with them and not stand in their way as they seek the return of loved ones. >> these families have already suffered enough and they should never feel ignored. e-or victimized by their own government . >> reporter: mr. obama ordered the review last year a response to a long list of complaints from desperate and angry families that they received conflicting information from the government. that they were ignored or were an afterthought or even threatened by government officials when they tried to make contact with captors. some went public, like the parents of journalist james foley after i.s.i.l. murdered hymn last year. >> all i'm saying is what we've been doing to date is not enough. >> it wasn't enough. >> reporter: included in the president's

will not make concessions including paying ransom, the u.s. is willing to communicate with terrorist groups, and families won't face prosecution if they want to pay in hopes of bringing their loved ones. >> doesn't that ultimately put a price tag on americans' heads overseas? >> there's no doubt that the payment of ransoms fuels the very activity that we are trying to stop. >> reporter: critics on capitol hill argue it'll put more american lives at risk. >> if you reward hostage-taking behavior, you're going to get more hostage taking. >> reporter: the family of journalist james foley killed by isis last summer applauded today's announcement calling it an awakening to make kidnapped americans a priority. before they killed him foley's kidnappers were demanding more than $5 million ransom and today foley's former boss expressed concerns the new policy puts the burden squarely on families. >> that is a great deal of money for any average person or maybe any person to raise. >> reporter: and earlier today the president met privately with the fami

now everyone will be able to stay. >>> a king's ransom for baseball.ple brings this bizarre story together. >>> so the test of a rocket powered flying saucer ended with partial success. the nasa spacecraft deployed the inflatable cushion, but the test parachute failed to work as planned. it made a super sonic splash down in the ocean. nasa says it will study the data to learn and improve. >>> music streaming not the only big news from apple. tim cook announcing the company will pay the ransom playfully demanded by members of the cleveland indians bull pen. the pitchers penned this ransom note with ipods and ipads and the apple watch. tim cook displayed the ball and saying the teamcompany is picking up the ransom. >>> many of you may have been sleeping at 9:00 last night. christine romans did not stay awake for it. something epic happened. a cnn quiz show with a heroic finish. >> we think it is f. lee bailey. >> that is correct. >> yeah. >> how much did you wager? 371 points. that brings you you up to 1,181. you win the game. congratulations. >> i'll be

we've had very few after lindbergh because we don't pay ransom. you can't pay ransom.t's terrible. it's heartbreaking. ♪ i built my business with passion. but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy for my studio. ♪ and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... that's huge for my bottom line. what's in your wallet? >> the obama administration is expected to announce today that it will allow hostages families to communicate and even pay ransom to terrorists. all rise judge andrew napitano is here. judge i would expect you to say that the government has no right to step in and stop you from negotiating with kidnappers to get your child back or to get your relative back. you would say that? >> your expectation is correct, there is no law, there is no statute prohibiting the victim of a kidnapping to negotiate with a kidnapper. when i say victim i mean the family of the victim. it is the president

even as he says the government will not pay ransom. it is alleged that some european and other governments do pay ransom directly. the u.s. has always felt it only increases the value of hostages and makes more kidnappings likely. in this case we will have to see what -- the pressure on families, of people who were taken to pay up will be enormous. charlie: i've always assumed that come june 30 they would have an agreement between iran and p5 plus one and somehow they would be able to wrap it up and make it happen. then i see today and yesterday where the ayatollah came out strongly. does that change the likelihood and the perception of the united states as to what might be possible? david: i think there was a lot of concern about the ayatollah's comments in which he seemed to be rejecting the basic framework for inspection which u.s. officials feel is the critical remaining part of this agreement to be pinned down. i think the dilemma for the u.s., if the iranians went ahead and signed an agreement with the basic framework that secret

under the new policy, if hostage families raise money for ransom, the u.s. might now actually help make it happen. the president was clearly moved by one question hostage parents had bluntly put to him. what if it was your daughter? >> obviously, i would move heaven and earth to get those loved ones back. >> these families have already suffered so much brian. and even though many can understand why families would want to pay ransom themselves authorities still have concerns about that money? >> reporter: that's right, david. there's concern that the new policy will make americans even more attractive to hostage takers and that's why the president made it clear today that u.s. government policy is unchanged. the u.s. government itself will not pay ransom or make concessions to terrorists. david? >> all right, brian ross live in washington. brian, thank you. >>> to the race for 2016 tonight, a new face jumping in. louisiana governor bobby jindal now the 13th republican candidate, making history as the first indian-american to make a serious bid for the white h

no longer threaten to prosecute families that try to pay ransoms. communication restrictions will also be eased. mike is live in washington waymore, mike, what prompted these. >> well, randall, this is a review that is long awaited. under a lot of criticism from the families. americans who had been held overseas by other groups prince bly in the middle east, what we do know is the white house announced officially that the review will be released tomorrow, president obama will do it himself, families of these hostages are in washington today, meeting with top officials they are expected at the white house tomorrow as well. and reports confirm what we have suspected all along and at least what we with have been led to believe and that is the the united states will no longer prosecute families. who attempt to pay ransome on their own. much of this is precipitated by many of the families. today at the white house talks about being responsive to those concerns and some of the issues that are going to be addressed in h review tomorrow. >> making sure we w

they try to raise a ransom for their loved ones freedom. the last thing we should ever do is to add to the fam's pain with threats like that. official a sass the change came in the wake of what happened in the case of hostage james foley with their son facing death the isis capture foal's parents were met with threats pi the white house about pulling together ransom money. >> it just made me realize that these folks talking to us had nod idea what it was look to be the family of a kidnapped american. >> the policy does not change the u.s.'s position on government ransom payments. >> i firmly believe the united states' government paying reason some to terrorists risk endangering more americans and funding the very terrorism that we are trying to stop. >> over 36 americans boeing held hostage overseas. some by terror group other is by criminal gangs and cartels. within is kaitlyn coleman killed buy the taliban in pakistan. the 36-year-old was last seen with her husband buy her side. the white house will also create a special enjoy and new off

policy is to never pay ransom. cnn is not working. >> the families told us that they at times felt like an afterthought or a distraction. that too often the law enforcement or military intelligence officials they are interacting with were begrudging in giving them information. and that ends today. i'm making it clear that these families are to be treated like what they are, our trusted partners and active partners in the recovery of their loved ones. >> i don't e know of any studies that show that american and british citizens because their governments don't pay are somehow being kidnapped less because of the government policies. when i was in captivity, my captors thought the u.s. government secretly did pay ransoms, that's false, but they believed it so the captors aren't hearing the message or believing it. and even if they think they are photo beginning to get money for a captive, they can use them for publicity. >> families of several american hostages killed in the last year call the changes a step in the rig

families will be able to negotiate ransom with foreign groups who hold american hostage. under the current policy, families can be brought cute for doing that. >> public viewers begin today for pastor pinkney killed last week at his south carolina church. the body will be in the rotunda of the state capitol this afternoon. bible study will resume today at emanuel a.m.e. church. >> in the aftermath of the shooting, the discussion has turned to the status of the confederate flag in the south. florida, mississippi georgia south carolina, and louisiana all have laws banning the did he say creation of that flag. many residents in those states feel the flag doesn't represent them. the shooting in charleston has brought the debate over the flag back into the national spotlight. >> these cannons in a charles stop park honors a city's role in a war that divided the nation. it is a part of the history and d.n.a. some say it's time to leave the past behind. >> that flag does not represent the black culture. >> charleston native we've baskets on the street. while they say the war is

by now allowing families to pay ransoms, doesn't that put american lives at risk?oesn't it perpetuate the problem you are trying to stop plus send a message that ransoms might work. the white house answered like this. they said there's no doubt that ransoms fuel terrorism, but at the same time we're going to stand by the families and help them. lisa monaco said in the past we did not do right by these families something the president said he found totally unacceptable. >> that is michelle kosinski reporting there. >>> france is fuming following new spying allegations from wikileaks wikileaks. >> it indicated the nsa eavesdropped on president hollande. his two predecessor and other top french officials. it said the spying went on from at least 2006 all the way to 2012. u.s. secretary of state john kerry said he is quote absolutely guarantees the u.s. is not watching and spying on france's president. >> meanwhile, mr. hollande gathered his defense council and summoned the u.s. ambassador to explain the report and it's clear the french are miffed over these allegation

in the case of some of the european countries who do pay ransom or allow families to pay ransom the vast majority got out alive. the only other country that has the same policy always the united states is the united kingdom, and they have had as much success in removing their captors as the u.s. which is to say not very well. >> this only empowers isis and the next terror group that pops up years from now to believe, if i get an american i get what i want. >> there is no doubt about it that kidnapping and hostage taking is a very lucrative business for terrorist organizations. that is a fact. the numbers back it up by 160 million on how much isis has made on the kidnapping of foreigners. but you saw from these parents' perspective, they will do what they can to bring home their loved ones. but this new change in policy has a lot of questions to be answered for, and some parents have put out statements, like the wasserman family and they said they would have preferred to see this fusion. >> explain that. >> the families were complaining they weren't getting the communication they needed f