Did White House policies contribute to growth of ISIS?

close

Video

Did White House policies contribute to growth of ISIS?

The debate continues on 'The Five'

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," August 11, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Eric Bolling along with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Julie Roginsky, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld, it's 5 o'clock in New York City -- this is "The Five."

A bombshell new report suggests top intelligence officials may have been cooking the books on ISIS to make it seem like the war on terror was going a lot better than it actually was. A House republican task force reveals government documents were manipulated to paint an unrealistically rosy picture of the U.S. fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Investigation started when a central command whistleblower came forward last year. Meanwhile, Donald Trump fired up on the campaign trail, again, calling out President Obama and Hillary Clinton for dragging their feet against radical Islamic terrorists.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Isis is honoring President Obama. He's the founder of ISIS. He's the founder of ISIS. And I would say the co-founder would be Crooked Hillary Clinton.

(APPLAUSE)

TRUMP: I call President Obama and Hillary Clinton, the founders of ISIS. They're the founders. In fact, I think we'll give Hillary Clinton the -- you know, of your sports team, Most Valuable Player, MVP. You got the MVP award. ISIS will hand her the Most Valuable Player award.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: So how have the White House's policies impacted the growth of ISIS? Retired four-star General Jack Keane explains.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACK KEANE, RETIRED FOUR-STAR GENERAL: It is a fact that the administration's policies did contribute to the fact that we have ISIS as a reality. Walking away from Iraq certainly in 2011 and creating -- helping to create the stalemate in Syria as opposed to throwing our weight behind the Syrian moderates and topping the regime. That gave ISIS the opportunity to form the safe haven in Syria, which has been so destructive, because it's from that safe haven that everything that ISIS have been succeeding that comes from.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: All right. Greg, you have a ton of notes there.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Yes. I don't even know where to start.

BOLLING: Where do you want to start?

GUTFELD: And I -- and you know what? The producers are telling me --

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: The producers are telling me there's a Hillary supporter now climbing the Statue of Liberty. So we're going to throw it to Shep, and, for the next hour we're going to watch her climb it slowly.

BOLLING: Statue of Liberty or Planned Parenthood midtown office?

GUTFELD: It's only -- I think it's only two floors. But, you know what the --

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Don't forget the ice coffee.

GUTFELD: No one has underestimating a threat has never led to victory.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

GUTFELD: And this administration is thrilled to overestimate certain threats. For example, climate change. There will be a subtle for action increase in Celsius. They will talk like that is the apocalypse, but when it comes to something and which there is an immediate threat, not Celsius, but ISIS, people are dying. They are saying, well, you know, and we've heard, we've heard how it's been describe. But the fact is this is a personal, ideological vendetta by President Obama. The fact is he doesn't want to admit that the republicans were right about ISIS, and that they were right about staying in Iraq. And so they're -- instead, he's treating it like a sales report where they're puffing up the numbers. The only difference is people will die from this.

BOLLING: You know, and -- Kimberly, now we find out that the CENTCOM may have been cooking the books, downplaying the threat of ISIS. I mean, you could almost say, and if you're the Obama administration, you know this whole JV team where they missed call that from the beginning, maybe there was because they were getting bad information.

GUILFOYLE: Well, yeah, because shaping the information to say, in fact, that it's the JV team, when it's not. I mean, there's a serious question there as to the ethics regarding a national security assessment and a fraud perpetrated on the American people. There should be serious concern about that. That affects the choices we make, it affects the troops, it affects their lives out on the line, it affects these like very limited, like you know, rules of engagement, the very limiting that cause a lot of casualties in the theater and in the field. So, all of this is part of a matrix and a web of our foreign policy and of our national security. And if you cannot trust the people in charge, and also to keep our troops safe, we have a serious problem.

BOLLING: So if they're getting bad information, because the cooks -- the books are cooked from the top down, allegedly, right? The top CENTCOM said, "I need better numbers. I need this to look better." If they're getting bad information, as Kimberly points out, then you make bad decisions --

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Well, remember --

BOLLING: Where to put security in Libyan consulates that are asking for it.

PERINO: Yeah. This actually helps explain a few things. Remember we've had several scenarios where the president on one day will say, JV team or it's not that big a deal where everything is OK. And then the very next day, there will be testimony from administration official who will contradict him. I mean, he's done a lot of stories about that. This actually might help explain that, if he was getting different information. And for based on my experience, I think the president of the United States should always want to know what the worst case scenario is. I would say, tell me like --

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

PERINO: What is your -- what do think is the worst possible thing that can happen? And that's what I want to plan for. I also think that what Trump could have done today, on that piece of it is to say, I will always tell it like it is. You say, America, you -- the ones that you (inaudible) like me, you say, you like it that I also like it is. And I will promise you this; I will always tell the military and our intelligence community that they can tell me exactly how it is. I would never try to sugarcoat what this terror threat is.

GUILFOYLE: Great point. We're in it together.

BOLLING: This goes off --

PERINO: He didn't do that, though.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

BOLLING: These go all the way to the upper echelons of the --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: … Defense Department.

JULIE ROGINSKY, GUEST CO-HOST: Yeah.

BOLLING: And maybe state, too.

ROGINSKY: I don't know about state. I think that's wishful thinking on somebody's part of this table, but look CENTCOM --

(LAUGHTER)

ROGINSKY: CENTCOM -- is CENTCOM -- somebody did this. The CENTCOM did this. It wasn't that they take instructions from the White House, as far as we know. But look, Dana raises an excellent point. Donald Trump had a huge opportunity today to talk about exactly what Dana talked about. What did he do? He went out and said, oh, Barack Obama is the founder of ISIS. Hugh Hewitt, who's a very friendly interviewer to him said, "Wait, wait, let me clarify this for you; you mean he created a vacuum that allowed ISIS to flourish?" And Donald Trump said, "No, no. He's literally. He's the founder of ISIS." I mean, again, he can never miss an opportunity; to miss an opportunity, to step on his own message, to step on the message as Dana point it out. That could have been a great message for him.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: I was thinking --

(CROSSTALK)

ROGINSKY: Yeah.

BOLLING: Can we stay on this topic, though, that the fact that --

ROGINSKY: It's the same topic.

BOLLING: Well --

ROGINSKY: Yeah.

BOLLING: No, no. I know. But let's -- but the point being, wow, they were forced. There's -- that the agency .

ROGINSKY: Well --

BOLLING: . was forced to make the war on terror look like we were winning when we weren't.

ROGINSKY: Well, I don't know. Were they forced?

PERINO: No.

ROGINSKY: Is the CENTCOM made this knows? CENTCOM made this decision, as far as we know today, on its own. I don't think anybody from the White House has any allegations at all. That's if somebody from the Defense Department came down and told them to do that.

BOLLING: I'm not sure .

PERINO: Correct.

BOLLING: . I'm pointing the finger at the White House. What difference does it make if the upper echelon --

PERINO: If the climate --

BOLLING: Who is that at the top of CENTCOM?

PERINO: Just right today?

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Then -- during then, during this period?

PERINO: I'm not sure.

ROGINSKY: Ultimately, the answer is the Department of Defense .

BOLLING: Right.

ROGINSKY: The secretary of defense, though --

BOLLING: The secretary of defense.

ROGINSKY: There is no evidence that the secretary of defense, under any circumstances, is one who did this.

BOLLING: Does it scare you that, if it did come down from the top, that secretary of defense or whoever is right underneath said, "Make this look better for me."

GUTFELD: I think they were working backwards from a conclusion .

BOLLING: Sure.

GUTFELD: . that they made prematurely. And the fact is, the less competent you are at something, the more you overestimate your competence. And we've seen this in a lot of different areas with President Obama, and also with other candidates that are currently running, is that they boast. And studies show that the people that boast are the people that are least competent and should not be boasting. And I think this was all based on a boast, and now they figure out how do we - how do we fulfill the conclusion?

BOLLING: No, no. They said, they said (inaudible), they said they put -- changed the data for politic -- they politicized the data.

GUILFOYLE: All right. And so --

BOLLING: Can you imagine?

GUILFOYLE: No. I can't imagine. And when it is OK to like lie to the president of the United States who is the commander-in-chief? I mean, my God. He has to have accurate information, or if you are going to make all the wrong calls.

GUTFELD: But he didn't want the accurate.

GUILFOYLE: Well, you know, this is another problem, right? I mean, so that's why Dana's point say that Trump should said, "Look, this is will not happen in my administration. If you elect me president of the United States, I'm going to get the facts and I'm going to share them with you because we're a team together. And I'm not going to lie to you and I'm not going to make calls based on the real-time facts and evidence happening in that geopolitical theater."

GUTFELD: It was all about one thing, telling the boss what you -- the boss wanted to hear.

GUILFOYLE: Well, it's true.

PERINO: It happens in -- this happens in corporations too, (inaudible) -- let's say like you're the boss -- I remember when I was the press secretary, these are great assistant press secretaries, Carlton Carroll, Stuart Siciliano, (inaudible), they were amazing. They never wanted to bring me bad news, because they knew I already had a ton on my plate. So, whenever they approached me, you never go to the boss and say, hey, everything is going great. You go in and say, I've got an issue. And they would say, "I'm sorry to bother you." And I never wanted them to have to say that --

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

PERINO: You don't want that as president, either. You don't want people to be concerned or afraid to bring you bad news, because that's just leaves to more problems.

ROGINSKY: We're making a bunch of assumptions here. We're making assumptions to either that your implication is that somehow they were directed to do this or --

BOLLING: So that's what they said?

ROGINSKY: Well, no, actually. All this says is that CENTCOM has made the decision to do this. This is the only allegations --

PERINO: Right. There was like a lone actor.

ROGINSKY: Right. This is a lone wolf situation. It wasn't that anybody, the White House or the Defense Department will call a CENTCOM --

BOLLING: There was, there was some -- if I'm not mistaken, 50 people who believed that this is what the -- that would they were supposed to do.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: But that it wasn't coming from the White House. That accusation was that CENTCOM would do. BOLLING: Oh no, no, no. I'm not -- no one suggest it was the White House, but --

PERINO: I think you guys agree, actually.

BOLLING: We are agreeing. Let me take your analogy and I think you're a hundred percent right. It happens all the time in business, but the problem is when you're in business you say .

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

BOLLING: . you know, our sales in the -- well, I don't know. The southeast regions are lagging --

GUILFOYLE: . of paper clips.

BOLLING: Yeah, and all that happens is you don't send more salesman down to the southeast .

GUILFOYLE: Right.

BOLLING: . and you don't sell as much cocoa powder or paperclip.

PERINO: Or how about your subprime mortgages .

BOLLING: Not. Not people are --

PERINO: . are over leverage?

GUILFOYLE: Right, another --

BOLLING: Not people are dying because we didn't send enough assets to an area.

GUTFELD: But that's -- that a good business analogy is fudging analysis on a pharmaceutical --

BOLLING: Right, exactly.

PERINO: That is going to work better.

GUTFELD: That it's going to work better and --

GUILFOYLE: Like cancer --

GUTFELD: . and you lower the side -- you say there's not as many side effects and it solves this problem and it turns out there's more people dying and they have to recall it.

PERINO: Of liver disease.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: And the commercials are on our network.

BOLLING: So is there any legal implication to this?

GUILFOYLE: You know, there could be, it depends. I think you have to dig deeper on this to find out like, remember, who pushed the video, you know.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: Who pushed this idea? When it says it was alone (ph) -- one person that woke up and the alarm went off that morning and they said, "Alrighty, I'm going to cook the books." It's like, what is the basis for it? Just because you don't want to tell the president, so he doesn't get mad, so what you don't lose your job because things are really bad in the Middle East? I don't know --

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: Do we have time to talk about the second part, though, the founding part? Donald Trump saying that --

BOLLING: Sure.

PERINO: That Obama -- I think on the Obama front, I don't think that founding is right, but I think all the other pieces could be led -- could be lead to Obama's door. But on Hillary Clinton, I think the more effective argument would be that she was ignored by the president, that she was incompetent. She was not effective in getting her way, because if she is on record and it's corroborated by the people, that she did want to keep troops in Iraq for a longer period of time, and she did want to go up against Assad, and she was rebuffed.

ROGINSKY: That's exactly my point. There are all sorts of things that you can say about this. And look .

PERINO: Right.

ROGINSKY: . you can easily -- I think this as a democrat. You could easily say that conditions were made by this administration that allowed ISIS to flourish in places like Syria. Why this candidate cannot just stand that message? And instead, decides who is going to come up with some of fantastical claim, that then a friendly reporter tries to bail him out of, and he still steps on his own message.

GUTFELD: But the thing is -- it's a consistent issue with Trump. And the thing is you -- the best comparison which, you have Keane -- General Keane come up and get this incredibly cogent analysis of, of what? Everybody would understand. Yeah, that makes a little sense that the recent foreign policy blunders under President Obama has created -- helped birth and then spread this toxic ISIS scourge on earth. You don't -- but it's, that's not talk radio language. And Trump is the first talk radio language candidate. He speaks as though he's on a phone call; first time, long-time listener, first-time caller. I think Obama caused this, and then he go, "Tell me more."

BOLLING: I'll tell you what I would do.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: . first time caller. That's true.

BOLLING: I have been calling to "The O'Reilly Factor" tonight at 8 o'clock, and I'll ask him exactly --

GUILFOYLE: Oh, nice --

BOLLING: Are you sure --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Are you sure --

(LAUGHTER)

BOLLING: Are you probably going to -- are you sure you want to go the founder? Maybe something like -- I don't know. And they --

ROGINSKY: Probably not a first-time caller into "The O'Reilly Factor."

(LAUGHTER)

GUILFOYLE: I think he's gonna be the biggest founder --

GUTFELD: And he's a long-time listener.

GUILFOYLE: He's going to stick to the founder.

BOLLING: I'm going to leave it right there. I'm not commenting on that, I'm commenting on this.

Coming up, stunning new developments in Hillary Clinton's e-mail scandal suggests her State Department pulled strings for the highest bidder. So why did the Justice Department allegedly decline to investigate the Clintons? Details next.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: New developments on those e-mails that suggest Hillary Clinton's State Department was doing favors for donors of her family's foundation. Today, we are learning that earlier this year, the Justice Department reportedly decided against an investigation into the Clinton Foundation, after the FBI requested the agency look into allegations of corruption. The DOJ's public integrity unit apparently declined to pursue the case, citing insufficient evidence. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is slamming his rival over these new revelations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: New e-mails come out, new e-mails. How do you think Hillary would feel if e-mails were never invented, would she be happy?

CROWD: No!

TRUMP: That's like a truth serum. It revealed the lies, the deception, the dishonesty. What came out yesterday, reported today, "I pay for play." Called pay for -- you're not allowed to do it. It's illegal, it's illegal. And I would imagine other things are going to be coming down the pipe. So let's see what happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: I have to say, Greg, I actually might be happy, too, if e-mail was never invented.

GUTFELD: Oh yeah, because we're all gonna hit by no matter what. We will be hacked. I feel really dumb because I want a foundation, like why didn't I think of this, an operation that matches me with really rich people who want to spend time with me. I mean, this really isn't a nonprofit. It's a sugar daddy --

PERINO: Piggy bank.

GUTFELD: No, it's a sugar daddy operation .

GUILFOYLE: Well, that's called .

GUTFELD: . for the Clintons.

GUILFOYLE: . seeking arrangements.

GUTFELD: Yes, seeking arrangements. That's what I'm saying, you could --

(LAUGHTER)

GUTFELD: Are there going to be commercials for the Clinton Foundation?

(LAUGHTER)

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

GUTFELD: But it is. Look, it's a larger quid pro quo. We talked about that. I'm in public service for years, and I am broke. Therefore, when I'm out of public service, I deserve to be wealthy, because I've been spending all my time. Hillary and Bill, they're spending all their time with all these rich people who have yachts and four homes, but they're on an Arkansas salary and they're like -- they get angrier and angrier. So they feel that they're entitled to this money, they deserve to be wealthy and it doesn't matter how they get there, right? No?

PERINO: Julie, do these --

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: Do these stories make --

(LAUGHTER)

PERINO: I think revelation and the anticipation that there's probably more that came from it. And even if nothing comes out, there's probably more of where it came from. Does it make any democrats queasy?

ROGINSKY: It makes me queasy -- personally. I mean, I said this yesterday. I think what they did is wrong and they shouldn't have done it and it's inexcusable. Does it make me queasy in terms of getting her elected or not? Elected -- I keep saying, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. And this like, will she happen to be the one-eyed woman? And she's running against somebody who can't help himself, so perfect example, right? So Donald Trump, from the clip that we saw, stayed on message. He was actually very good. But what's going to happen in the next 24 hours, 36 hours is he's going to say something, because he has to bring it back to himself, because he's completely narcissist. He's gonna have to start talking about himself. He's going to step all over that message only to talk about himself, non-stop. And that's when this message, which is a great message from him to run on, is going to dissipate and we're all going to start talking about Donald Trump again, some crazy that he said.

PERINO: However, Eric, the media really has stayed on this story, I mean across the board. And they are not getting off scale-free.

BOLLING: Do you know where the --

PERINO: Well, I think of those. But I think the Clinton Global Initiative .

BOLLING: Yeah.

PERINO: . which is the initially revealed by --

BOLLING: Well, I'm not sure. I'll agree with you that what we are, we're certainly staying on it. And I think -- the reason why we've know about this tie between State Department and the global -- the Clinton Foundation, not necessarily CGI, the Clinton Foundation is that, judicial watch put in a Foyer request. Now if you know anything about FOIA, it takes forever to get a request, request processed. Literally, they go to the agency. One guy in the agency is responsible for this, and he has to dig through volumes and volumes or paper and then he turns them back. This is something like the amount of backlog of requests right now is 75 years to get them all.

PERINO: I know --

BOLLING: Right. But the point is -- Julie says this is inexcusable. What does that mean? You mean politically inexcusable, ethically inexcusable or criminally inexcusable?

ROGINSKY: I don't know about criminally, but I think it's politically inexcusable --

BOLLING: I would say that all three.

ROGINSKY: I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know. And apparently, the Justice Department doesn't think so --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Who they've not yet. Not yet.

(CROSSTALK)

ROGINSKY: But, I will say

BOLLING: There's more.

ROGINSKY: Well, to answer your question, I think it is politically inexcusable, because I think there's -- because they always do this. They always set up barriers for themselves, the Clintons. I never understand why --

PERINO: That even at this point, Kimberly --

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: . if there is sufficient evidence that comes forward, they're not going to be able to put a case together and prosecute it before November 8.

GUILFOYLE: Of course, because they're running out the clock. Like we did at (inaudible) yesterday Greg --

(LAUGHTER)

GUILFOYLE: And that's "The Five." Yes, so they're just like slow walk this, right. It's the total trick that everybody does with defense, you know in cases and stuff. They just try and age the case. And they want to run it out, let her become president of the United States. And it's pretty shameful, because there's a tremendous amount of material to work with here that should be taken seriously and investigated. There's a serious question as to whether or not, you know, the DOJ punted on this and declined to -- why would you decline to investigate this? Unless you're all in for Hillary, and now you look Loretta Lynch, who is very tight with the Clintons. We saw that on up, you know, on the plane, in the first class and (inaudible). So this is a problem all across the board, but is it going to be enough to resonate with the voters despite the lack of a substantial investigation with some kind of conclusion, prior to the general election.

PERINO: You know what the part that really, really bothers me?

GUTFELD: What Dana?

PERINO: That Huma Abedin, who was .

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: . Hillary Clinton's right-hand --

GUTFELD: I know who she is.

PERINO: OK. So she was getting a State Department salary.

GUTFELD: Of course.

PERINO: OK? And that's not -- that's good money.

GUTFELD: It is.

PERINO: But in addition, they signed off on her getting a part-time job, a consulting fee with Teneo, which happens to be connected to the Clinton Global Initiative.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: And I find that to be disgusting.

GUTFELD: Uh-hm. It's shadier than Michael Moore's shadow. You know, if this whole case is gonna --

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: You could never get sunburned in that shadow.

GUTFELD: You know -- I go back to that one thing that I mentioned briefly yesterday when Huma Abedin left Hillary's schedule in an empty hotel room with the door open in a foreign country. So she's as careless about information as Anthony Weiner, her husband. I mean, both are addicted, addicted to exposure. What is wrong with these people?

ROGINSKY: That was a good one.

BOLLING: Can I give you a business example of what --

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

BOLLING: What can goes on? Because you put -- you make that very, very, important case of Huma Abedin working for both. It'll be like working for Goldman Sachs, but also working for the Bureau of Labor Statistics where they release the employment number of the week, right?

PERINO: Sure.

BOLLING: So you have the same person who knows what that number is going to be, but is supposed to keep a wall up between what he or she knows there and not be able to tell Goldman Sachs -- your real employer .

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

BOLLING: . but then numbers are about to (inaudible). It could be --

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: It's huge flag. It's a huge conflict of interest .

BOLLING: Conflict.

GUILFOYLE: . that shouldn't be allowed, but with the Clintons .

BOLLING: If someone signed off.

GUILFOYLE: . there's a separate set of rules, and there always have been. And because there's such like fatigue, no one can really pay attention to it anymore and absorb it. There's so many transgressions, there's so many flags to be like -- oh, here we go again.

BOLLING: Who signed off on that?

PERINO: I've -- who did? Do you know who signed off on it?

ROGINSKY: I suspect Hillary did --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: No!

ROGINSKY: I don't know. I mean, I have no evidence of that --

PERINO: You're a government employee. You should be mad about that. That is -- that should be --

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Or you should try to get that same gig for yourself.

PERINO: No, don't do that.

GUILFOYLE: No.

PERINO: No more of that.

GUILFOYLE: Don't do it.

PERINO: OK. Directly ahead, could a third party candidate spell trouble for Clinton or Trump? Greg breaks down what a libertarian on the ballot may offer voters, when we return.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: So what's the argument against the third party? It helps elect the other party that it's least like. Meaning, a conservative third party would only help Hillary win and a liberal third party will only help Trump. But what if no one is thrilled with either ticket? Remember, the Republican Party began as a third party. And today, we have the two least liked candidates ever.

So there's a third choice: libertarian. What's it got? Gary Johnson, a successful two-time governor who vetoed 47 percent of all legislation and left office with a budget surplus. He won as an anti-tax Republican in a state that's 2 to 1 Democrat. That's pretty good. Plus, you've got this fellow, William Weld, another popular governor. But who, unlike Johnson, is far from libertarian. He's a supporter of the EPA, eminent domain and gun control. I don't know, call it balanced or schizophrenic, either way, Johnson, Weld are conjoined success stories.

So, rather than vote who is not the worst, why not pick what's worked? Everything candidates keep saying they'll do, Gary has pretty much done: Shrinking government, promoting school choice, leaving a surplus budget. True, he's inhaled, but at least he's honest about it. Plus, there's no amount of dopey could smoke that would match Winston Churchill's booze intake.

And really, America deserves more than two choices; out of 320 million it's Hillary and Donald. That's like going to Disneyworld and only being able to ride two rides: Captain EO and It's a Small World.

GUILFOYLE: Oh.

GUTFELD: Which is my favorite.

GUILFOYLE: Which is mine, too.

GUTFELD: I love it because it's slow and I don't throw up.

ROGINSKY: Which of it?

GUTFELD: I don't -- what? It's a small world?

ROGINSKY: No. Which of the two candidates? Is this the, It's a small world versus Caption EO?

GUTFELD: Captain EO is Trump and It's a small world is Hillary. Now that you're already taking --

GUILFOYLE: Oh, so you like Hillary?

GUTFELD: Yeah, well -- I didn't say that.

ROGINSKY: You said you like "It's a small world."

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Yeah.

(CROSSTALK) GUTFELD: . "It's a small world." Actually, because it's like -- It's a small world is about diversity, right? When you there is about --

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

GUTFELD: Why are we talking about this? I want to ask you about Weld .

ROGINSKY: Yes.

GUTFELD: . because you lived under Weld.

(CROSSTALK)

ROGINSKY: I did. I live Massachusetts under Weld. He was a republican governor. I thought he was a great governor. He ran --

GUTFELD: That's a bad sign.

ROGINSKY: It's a bad sign already, because I love him, so you probably --

(LAUGHTER)

ROGINSKY: Run against the democrat, John Silber, who I'm still happy lost. He was the --

GUTFELD: President.

ROGINSKY: Of Boston University, (inaudible).

GUTFELD: Yeah.

ROGINSKY: I'm so glad John Silber lost.

GUTFELD: He was an interesting guy.

ROGINSKY: Not direct assault, but poor guy. And he died ...

PERINO: Gosh, Julie?

ROGINSKY: He died much later, I had nothing to do with that. But he, I thought, Bill Weld ...

PERINO: All is just about ...

ROGINSKY: Yes. I thought Bill Weld was a very good governor, which probably means that he's a little out of step with the Republican Party today. He actually came back to New York and tried to run, I believe, as a Democrat, I'm not sure in New York. So he kind of a little bipolar in his political affiliations.

GUTFELD: Eric -- Gary, tax wise, great, perfect on taxes. You would love him. Consumption tax, he's for that. He likes the fair tax.

BOLLING: Fair taxes.

GUTFELD: Yes, yes, fair.

BOLLING: Light them up more, right. Yeah.

GUTFELD: Yeah, he is.

BOLLING: Is a libertarian more GOP or more Dem? I mean, I think.

GUTFELD: I think it's always more GOP because it's a -- the crux is small government, but there somethings that aren't Republican, which is slashing military funding, which I have a problem with.

BOLLING: And, you know, opening up, you know, drove -- all the ...

GUTFELD: Yeah, all the things.

GUILFOYL: Decriminalization, non-interventionist, small government or limited government.

BOLLING: So who is he taking from? Is he taking from Trump or is he taking from Hillary?

GUTFELD: I think ...

GUILFOYLE:: A little of both.

GUTFELD: I guess, he's different from Trump on immigration and different from Hillary on big government. So I could be ...

BOLLING: And militray, yes.

GUTFELD: Yeah. It could be ...

ROGINSKY: A whole show he's taking from both, right now, of you listen to both ...

GUTFELD: It's a push.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: It's a push.

GUILFOYLE: That's in betting term, I like that.

BOLLING: You know, if you look at some of the recent polls too, Trump does do better with Gary Johnson in. He does two points behind, the last poll, I can't remember what it was. He had two points better with -- but Jill Stein was in that poll too, so I'm not sure how that plays in.

GUTFELD: Yeah. What do you think, Dana, does he have a chance to make the debate? He has to get the 15 percent and where is he, he had 9?

PERINO: 8.6 percent. I think it's a tough to do that in the next six weeks. But it's not impossible. They are raising some money and obviously, they are getting some attention.

And I think on Friday, August 26th, John Stossel will have a Fox Business not debate or forum with them.

BOLLING: Town hall.

PERINO: Town hall, thank you for that.

GUTFELD: Stossel has the best mustache at Fox, Geraldo.

GUTFELD: You're so mean, poor Geraldo.

PERINO: I have a point, if you didn't know that ...

BOLLING: Why? Why there's a little mustache?

PERINO: How many people do you know that describe themselves this way, when -- what are your politics? And you don't know them. Though say, most people say, "Well, I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and I'm not interventionalist in foreign policy."

GUTFELD: Yeah.

PERINO: Now, if he, if Gary Johnson were to describe himself that way and say, "Unless, it is necessary to protect national security, I actually think he would get to 15 percent at least."

GUILFOYLE: Most people describe themselves that way. More free advice, Dana. More free advice.

GUTFELD: That's why I say Rand Paul should run as libertarian.

ROGINSKY: How could you be socially liberal and fiscally conservative? It makes no sense. Socially liberal means you want to spend money on social program ...

GUTFELD: No. But I mean -- but that basically means is you're OK with gay marriage ...

ROGINSKY: And gay marriage and abortion. I got it ...

GUILFOYLE: That's not -- to me, that's not socially liberal. People can tend to be pro-choice but also self-identify that way. Here's the deal, always good to patty power, great for betting. They said no shot.

GUTFELD: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

GUTFELD: What is patty power? I'm afraid to ask. It's the betting out of Ireland.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

GUTFELD: That's right. That's right. But ...

GUILFOYLE: I love to weigh in on American politics. But yeah, I don't see it's a chance. I don't see how he makes it up between now to get out of 8.6 percent.

GUTFELD: I mean, to get in the debate or?

GUILFOYLE: No, debate, you know, to be able to get 15 percent, to be able to make the stage.

BOLLING: How many days does he have? He's got about what, September, he's got a month?

GUTFELD: He's got a month.

PERINO: No, more than a month.

GUTFELD: Yeah. Well ...

PERINO: Well, if you chipped in a bunch of money turning the term ...

GUTFELD: By the way, he funded his own campaign when he ran for governor in '94, and he -- when he ran again, against a Hispanic candidate in a state that's 40 percent Hispanic, he won big.

PERINO: He won.

GUTFELD: He won big. So he pulls off surprises.

GUILFOYLE: He has some popularity.

ROGINSKY: He and weld have the best commercial ...

GUTFELD: Yes.

ROGINSKY: ... at the cycle. Have you guys seen it?

GUTFELD: Yeah, it was great.

ROGINSKY: ... for long, it's online but it's a really great ad. And then, there two of them that are (inaudible).

GUTFELD: All right. On that note, Trump says he wants to debate Hillary very badly, but he has some conditions. Not medical ones.

Will the upcoming show downs be fair and balanced? Details when "The Five" returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MITT ROMNEY, FORMER GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

PRES. BARACK OBAMA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Get the transcript.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: He did, in fact, sir. So let me -- let me call it an act of terror.

OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy.

CROWLEY: He did call it an act of terror. It did as well take -- it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You're correct about that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: Painful, should have shut it down, all right.

We all remember when Candy Crowley took president Obama's side while moderating a presidential debate. This time around Donald Trump is worried the same will happen to him when he faces off against Hillary Clinton.

He has agreed to participate in all three general election debates, but warns he may try to renegotiate the terms if it's not fair and balanced.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If I want to do the debates, I, you know, was -- I did very well in the other debates, obviously. Otherwise I wouldn't be sitting here. And I think we're going to have very good debates.

I don't think they should put them opposite to NFL games, because I think that's really unfair to do that. And, you know, I probably -- Hillary Clinton would like that. And I want to see a fair moderator and whatever else we'll look at. But certainly, I want to do the debates.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: OK. Dana, so he wants to do the debates, he wants them to be fair and balance, he reserves the right to renegotiate if he feels, in fact, they are not. How this should play out?

BOLLING: Well, they're not very specific. I -- of course, you want have a fair and balanced debate. Nobody gets everything that they want in a negotiation.

I think, I don't know what specifically he's going to ask for. If they ask for, I don't want any Candy Crowley moments, I don't know how you are actually ever going to be guarantied that. So I don't understand exactly what they'll ask for.

And I, you know, I know Candy Crowley for a long time, and I do believe that was a mistake. In fact, I was just remembering that Greg and I, we're watching the debate together at that time and you threw your pen against the wall. You were so mad that that had happen. But you were mad at Romney, right, for not seizing the opportunity.

GUTFELD: Yes, I was screaming.

PERINO: So it's not necessarily the moderator's responsibility to make something out of a moment, it's the candidate. So whoever is there and recognizes the opportunity, Romney I think was trying to be polite and pulled back and he should have pressed the advantage.

GUTFELD: This is ...

GUILFOYLE: I hate a missed opportunity.

GUTFELD: This is where I was going, "Oh, my God, we need a fighter. We need to have somebody." And it's like -- and so now, we have the opposite of Romney, which is why I don't think this is a real legitimate concern, because I don't think -- I don't think Trump is going to react the way Romney did. He should actually demand that Candy Crowley do this debate. Let's do a rematch. Give her another shot.

I cannot wait for these debates. This is like -- this is the Ali-Frazier for dorks. This is going to be the least boring debate ever. It could get so ugly.

PERINO: Pay-per-view.

GUTFELD: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

ROGINSKY: Here's the problem though. He really doesn't have much of a choice, right, so commission of presidential debate, whatever that organization call, who's going to decide who they want. Maybe they'll ask for input from those candidates. They don't need to accept their input.

They're going to decide whom they want. And Trump ...

BOLLING: They know who they want.

ROGINSKY: They want Eric Bolling.

BOLLING: No, they want Donald Trump so they'll ...

ROGINSKY: No, wrong. Disagree, because he has one of two choices. Either he shows up or he doesn't show up. If he doesn't show up, he's going to get such a rough of, you know, what on his head. He's going to have no choice but to show up.

So at the end of the day, they know they have him. Well, he's not going to show up to a presidential debate ...

BOLLING: Listen, I'm saying that ...

ROGINSKY: He's going to make -- he never tank even more. He might think that's a good strategy. It's a terrible strategy. He have to show.

GUILFOYLE: But they know that he's not showed up before, so it's not like that president is a little bit of ...

BOLLING: Exactly.

GUILFOYLE: ... in this. I mean, you ...

(Crosstalk)

ROGINSKY: No, no, totally.

GUTFELD: When did he do that?

GUILFOYLE: I do not recall.

ROGINSKY: Right. OK, fine. It's like, so don't show up. But you know what the Clinton campaign is going to do with that? He must know, and people around him are at least smart enough to know.

GUTFELD: They're getting impersonator.

ROGINSKY: They're going to say he's not, he's too scared. He's a coward. They're going to push every button that he's got, he's so easy ...

(Crosstalk)

ROGINSKY: He's going to debate.

GUILFOYLE: Of course, he is, so this is all much to do that another. Because everyone has been saying, "You know, listen, he's going to get after it. He's not going to stand down. He's going to be like, can't hear the stand down order." He's just going to plow after especially somebody tries to contradict him or go after him.

So, Eric, what really should be the strategy here if you're advising him on this debate?

BOLLING: Trump?

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

BOLLING: Exactly what you're doing. Say, "I will do this. I'm all in for the three presidentials and the one vice presidential. I'm all in." But I want some say -- and you don't want that -- you want a completely biased moderator.

She took down Romney. Grant it, he should have known that, he should have known. She was wrong and fought back. I don't think it was lack of fight in him, it was lack of background on the topic.

BOLLING: I don't know which is worse.

BOLLING: But I think he's playing this right. Listen, you know Donald Trump brings eyeballs. We've seen what happens when he shows up, the eyeballs with him (ph).

So the commission, they negotiate everything, besides the podium, where the location. They negotiate everything. I don't know, is it the commission that's involved or the individual networks?

ROGINSKY: it's the commission. They don't care about eyeballs.

PERINO: And then, there's a Republican and Democrat and they work together. It's Mike McCurry and Frank Hancock (ph).

The other thing is, a lot of people think that Romney lost the election because of that debate. That is by all accounts ...

ROGINSKY: For the hug.

PERINO: ... looking back, he was probably going to lose any way. That debate maybe didn't help so much but it's not -- it was not the deciding factor.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: But it's always -- it is have to be a legitimate concern if you're a Republican, because the media is largely Democratic. So you got to have some due diligence and you got like go to the -- in imagination.

BOLLING: But he doesn't want bias questions.

ROGINSKY: But I'm sorry, you have Donald Trump. And look, he boycotted a debate of this network.

(Crosstalk)

PERINO: I mean, are we going to say that the people here biased? Come on.

ROGINSKY: Do you know what the answer is? Robots.

GUTFELD: Robot.

GUILFOYLE: Robot moderators.

ROGINSKY: Oh my gosh.

GUTFELD: I like robot for president.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: Yes, no followup.

GUTFELD: Yes, exactly. Exactly.

BOLLING: What a Tuesday debate.

PERINO: No followup, the bubble have all the information.

GUILFOYLE: At the end of the day, though, he says that, listen, I'm a great debater. I do well in these debates. He's gone against people who are seasoned debate veterans, you know, 16 other candidates.

PERINO: And he dropped the NFL concern, because that was dumb.

GUILFOYLE: He punted that.

GUTFELD: Oh, wow.

PERINO: Very nice.

GUILFOYLE: Deep into the opposing field.

GUTFELD: You're on fire day.

GUILFOYLE: When we come back -- I know, I'm "fuego", a major decision from the federal government about the legality of marijuana, all the details, up in smoke, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROGINSKY: Some marijuana lover's dreams are going up in smoke. The Drug Enforcement Administration announced it's still illegal to smoke pot for any reason under Federal Law. DEA says Marijuana will stay on the list of our country's most dangerous drugs because it has a high potential for abuse and the benefits don't outway the risk.

The decision keeps the feds at odds with 25 states in the District of Columbia which have passed laws allowing medical use of Marijuana to some degree.

Greg, I going to go to you because you know we're having a discussion earlier about this, where you said your concern was about synthetic marijuana that you know is being sold downtown. But then we said, if you legalize it, you won't have to have a kind of moonshine kind of pot that you have on the streets.

GUTFELD: Yeah, exactly. We live in a strange world where thousands of substances and objects, which are far more harmful than marijuana, are legal.

Texting kills more people than marijuana. Everything has the potential for abuse. Pot is a substance with actual properties that if studied in a controlled environment, could provide help to millions in various illnesses. But there's a stigma attached to these substances.

Imagine the new pharmaceuticals that would be available right now if we were able to study ecstasy or lysergic acid the way we would study aspirin. We might have new treatments and really effective treatments for depression, hostility, dealing with marriage issues. They know that MDMA was very helpful enough in early '70s.

But people are scared of drugs, because they proximate the transcendence and oblivion one gets out of religion. It's competition.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my goodness, the thought were probing. I think more than that ...

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Did you smoke?

GUTFELD: Yes, I share the dobbie with Gary Johnson in an agreement.

GUILFOYLE: I think more than that.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Gary Johnson is currently off the pot for the election.

BOLLING: That's right.

GUILFOYLE: Good for him.

GUTFELD: Good for him.

ROGINSKY: You know, Eric, what's interesting to me is that, it's actually overtaken tobacco as a more prevalent substance that people are now smoking.

BOLLING: So, one of the main reason the DEA said that it's going to stay on schedule, level one schedule one is because it has a high tendency for abuse, so as alcohol.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: And will tell you, forget whether or not you want your family member, your son, your daughter driving high or drunk, you'd want them high than drunk.

I would rather be on the road with, you know, someone who was high rather than drunk. Just a safe -- and I think a lot of the issues is the benefits could be seen in drunk driving fatalities going down.

ROGINSKY: So you're saying essentially, if you have the choices smoking pot or drinking drunk ...

BOLLING: I think that is a natural ...

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: I think there some research, but I can't ...

BOLLING: Are you going to look to either products ...

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: No, no. But it is social, I mean, do we find that people will not drink if they can smoke pot, and if they do smoke pot, they won't drink. If that's the case, I think drunk driving.

ROGINSKY: What's interesting here really, you as prosecutor, I mean, did you guys go after -- I feel like you go after, not you, but prosecutor tend to go after people who have low levels of pot on them. And ...

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: We don't many time. I mean, no, not at all because you didn't even in San Francisco, even in L.A., like small, like the minimal amounts of personal use or possession, that's not the deal.

They want to go after people that are the dealers that are selling large quantities, because the jails are overloaded with maniacs as it is. And you want to focus and target your resources which make sense in a triage fashion at the most sick, violent predators, the recidivist, people that are criminals, homicide teen, gang units, you know, sexually violent predators, child abuse cases. So we're leaving like the Cheech and Chongs alone.

ROGINSKY: But people do the line ...

GUILFOYLE: ... to jail for pot.

ROGINSKY: They have, a lot of it in their possession.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah, you can.

ROGINSKY: To me, like, that's such a waste of our criminal tax dollars.

PERINO: I guess so. I mean, listen to this because I am conflicted on this issue. I remember Charles Krauthammer one time on "Special Report" said that a society can't really handle two legal substances like this. I think that's what he said.

GUILFOYLE: Very interesting.

PERINO: I would have to go back and please forgive me Dr. Krauthammer.

GUTFELD: I've heard that from very -- yes.

PERINO: If I got that wrong. But I have to look at this from a political level. This coming fall, November 8th, Arkansas and Florida have ballot initiatives that will be on that same ballot where you vote for president Clinton or Trump and your senators and whoever.

So in Florida, I think this could actually help drive voter turnout and I would imagine that the marijuana supporters want that. I just don't know who that helps.

GUILFOYLE: Probably, Gary Johnson.

GUTFELD: We're also expecting the marijuana (inaudible) if they want their supporter to actually go to the polls. It's hard to do.

(CROSSTALK)

ROGINSKY: I'm going to stick to my Martini.

GUILFOYLE: Julie, well, I'm going to say really quick is that. The DEA said that there aren't an health and even services evaluation shows marijuana has "No currently accepted medical use, because the drug's chemistry is not known and reproduceable." So they don't have adequate like safety test and chemical test ...

GUTFELD: Because it's illegal.

GUILFOYLE: ... to be able to do it.

ROGINSKY: Because it's illegal, that's right.

GUILFOYLE: Right. So they can't say when you got to do it and it's 100 percent medical, you know, beneficial because they just don't know.

ROGINSKY: One more thing is up next.

BOLLING: Exactly.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLLING: It's time for one more thing. K.G.'s up.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Well, last night, Ainsley Earhardt and I were on at 10th Annual Summer Social to Benefit Special Olympics NYC, the largest Special Olympics program in North America.

We've both have served as ambassadors for the New York Junior Special Olympics for the past five years. Our awards were presented by singer- songwriter Meredith O'Connor and the first down syndrome model in the world, Madelyn Stewart. Mady, so cute, who has an amazing career, by the way, modeling in New York fashion week, being featured in Vogue and Cosmopolitan magazine.

We've raised $101,000 exceeding the goal and all proceeds will directly benefit. Listen to this, the 67,172 athletes of Special Olympics, New York. And special thanks to Kaitleen Brennan and James Tang who made it all possible.

BOLLING: Very nice. K.G., congratulations. Dana, you're up.

PERINO: You know, I love to watch the Olympics and one of the things I like to see is all the diversity at the Olympic. And check this out, the tallest tales and the shortest stories.

Can you see this picture? This gymnast from Spain, Ana Perez, she's 4'11", basketball player from Spain Pao Gasol is seven feet tall. Then we're got our own U.S. gymnast Simone Biles, she's 4'8" and U.S. volleyball player David Lee at 6'8". I mean, this is just amazing.

Here's another one, gymnast Regan Smith, she's ours, 4'6", and basketball player DeAndre Jordan, 6'11". I always remember this picture here, me with Dikembe Mutombo. I was wearing four inch heels.

I love the diversity in the world.

GUILFOYLE: Wait, where is that Kareem Abdul Jabbar one from jeopardy?

GUTFELD: It just so offensive, I just don't believe sizes should mix.

GUILFOYLE: Oh my god.

GUTFELD: Greg's nutrition tips, all right.

You know, when you eat nachos, it's not a multitasking event. You got to concentrate. Take a look at this fan at a Pittsburgh Pirates game, trying to catch a ball and his face goes right into the nachos. It's all over the place.

That was like $50 worth of food, if you're eating it at a ball game.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: They gave them a shirt though. The Pittsburgh Pirates ...

BOLLING: All right, we got two more to get in very quickly. Pull up the full screen.

Look at this lineup tonight in the O'Reilly Factor. We're going to start with Donald trump, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Rand Paul had some very provocative comments, Dana Perino and we're going to bring up the caboose with Geraldo.

GUILFOYLE: Dana Perino is a member.

GUTFELD: Glad you said "caboose."

BOLLING: Julie, you're up.

ROGINSKY: All right. So this story made me cry. Jeni Stepien, her father was murdered about a decade ago. And as he was dying, after he died, they gave his heart to a man named Arthur Thomas in New Jersey, who was on the verge of death and was saved by Jeni's father's heart.

He traveled to Pennsylvania almost a decade later to give away the bride, and he did that because her father's heart is inside his body. And I think this is such a beautiful story. This is them walking down the aisle.

BOLLING: Yeah, that's very, very touching, very touching. And we going to leave right there and never miss an episode, you know, all the stuff "Special Report" is up right now.

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.