tv On the Record With Greta Van Susteren FOX News March 5, 2014 11:00pm-12:01am PST
access to foreign exchange, he'll feel that bite very fast. when you see that leadership we're not going to have the results we unafraid. greta goes on the record next. it is the interview you want to see, and you will. only here. house oversight committee chair darrell issa goes on the record about the explosive irs targeting hearing. chairman issa confronting lois lerner with potentially damaging evidence, and learner, again, pleading the fifth. >> you e-mailed your colleagues in the irs the following -- tea party matter very dangerous. this could be the vehicle to go to court on the issue of whether citizens united overturning the ban on corporate spending applies to tax-exempt rules.
counsel and duty need to be on this one please. cinci should probably not, all in caps, have these cases. what did you mean by cinci should not have these cases? >> on the advice of my counsel, i respectfully exercise my fifth amendment right and decline to answer the question. >> ms. learner, why would you say tea party cases were very dangerous? >> on the advice of my counsel, i respectfully exercise my fifth amendment right and decline to answer the question. >> ms. learner in september 2010 you e-mailed your subordinates about initiating a parenthesis c-4 project and wrote,que need to be cautious so it isn't a per se political project. why were you worried about this being perceived as a political
project? >> on the advice of my counsel, i respectfully exercise my fifth amendment right and decline to answer that question. >> you will see more of learner's controversial e-mails in just a minute. but now, the clash of the titan. moments after she pleaded the right, issa cutting off the microphone as cummings tries to speak. >> ms. learner, you are released. but first, i would like to use my time to make some brief points. for the past year, the central republican accusation in this investigation. >> we're adjourned. close it down. >> before our -- >> thank you. >> president's political
enemies -- >> mr. cummings -- >> if you will sit down and allow me to ask the question, i am a member of the congress of the united states of america. i am aggravated. we represent 700,000 people. you cannot just have a one-sided investigation. there is absolutely something wrong with that and it is absolutely un-american. >> here, here. >> we had a hearing. it's adjourned. i gave you an opportunity to ask questions. you had the mic. >> i do have a question. >> i gave you -- >> he's taking the fifth. >> he can take the fifth when he
appears on fox news, saying that ms. learner was at the center of a target of conservative groups. >> and the drama did not end there. chairman issa and cummingouplum taking their comments to the media. >> he came to make a point of his objections to the process we've been going through. he was actually slandering me at the moment the mics did go off by claiming that this had not been a real investigation. this had been a bipartisan investigation by multiple committees. >> today i felt that it was appropriate that the members of a democratic side have their say. as you can see, we were basically shut out completely. >> and house oversight committee
chair darrell issa joins us. >> good evening. i'm glad that's over. aren't you? >> let me start about the e-mailing. but before we ask you about the specific e-mails you have shown at the hearing today, have you obtained all her e-mails? >> no, we haven't. the irs has failed to comply with returni with turning over many of her e-mail. we've said turn them over to the ways and means committee who's also made a request. they've made a partial discovery, as you know from your background in law. the ones you get last are often the ones you've wanted most. >> have they said when they're going to give them to you? >> they have not. >> one of the e-mails says basically your theory is, the reason for the targeting is because the irs, particularly people at the irs didn't like the tea party and also they didn't like the supreme court
decision citizens united. >> it appears from the e-mails that lois lerner specifically felt that whoever they are, they were pressuring to fix what her employer couldn't fix after citizens united, a court case that the president once shook his finger at the u.s. supreme court in the well of the house because he didn't like. >> in fact, we have that video of when the president did shake, make that remark about he didn't like that decision. let's look at that at the state of the union. >> request all due deference to separation of powering, last week the supreme court reversed a correctry of law which i believe will open the floodgates for special interest, including foreign corporations to spend without limit in our elections, and i'd urge democrats and republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems. >> now the supreme court didn't like that.
at least one member of the supreme court, remember, from that night. is it your opinion that that is the beginning of this narrative, that the president was signaling that something was to be done about this? >> the e-mails in which lois lerner seems to be the hub of activity include a rule, similar to the one they're claiming now, to rein in 501 c 4s. but it appears that she was working that track and also working the track of trying to do what they couldn't do in this case by notth allowing these tea party and patriot named organizations to go forward. >> what jumped out at me, it said everyone is up in arms because they don't like it. the everyone, who's the everyone? >> everyone who's a democrat seems to be up in arms. quite frankly, this is an example of a pretty partisan view of the world when you say everyone, and they want us to fix it. again, we don't want the irs to
fix problems determined by the president. that's exactly what the irs is supposed to be above, is political influence. >> are you going to seek to hold her in contempt for not answering the questions? >> well, you know, the speaker called that he thought that was appropriate today. our committee will consider it. i've conferred with some of my members. i plan on meeting with them before we leave this week, and we could, could consider doing it as early as next week. >> chairman right after the hearing we also spoke with representative cummings. here's what he told on the record's griff jenkins. >> to date, i have not seen any evidence that shows where this was politically motivated or that the white house had anything to do with it, but yet, still, those assertions are being made by republicans. i've said it over and over again. all i want is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. you cannot have a fair
investigation where you only present evidence that you like and exclude evidence that you don't like. and i've asked that of the chairman. for some reason, the chairman did not want to hear what i had to say today. he closed the hearing, barring me from saying one syllable. >> what was your reaction, he turned the mics off, for our audience at home. he turned the microphones off on you. >> i thought it was extremely unfortunate. that is just not the way a democracy runs. this is still america. and i would fight for his right to say what he had to say for the republican side. i would fight for the right of tea partiers. because i believe in this democracy. i believe that when you have members on the democratic side and members on the republican side, they should have their say. you can't have a hearing without hearing one syllable from the other side. >> so is it fair to say that
chairman issa could do more? do you believe he's driven by political motivation? >> what i'm hoping, what i was trying to do was accomplish what he was trying to accomplish. that is get some information. we walked out there with nothing. with no information. we could have probably gotten the attorney to at least proffer, to tell us exactly what she would have said. now, you know, she's going to have to face, she'll eventually, probably, end up in court and at some point, the court will determine whether she must testify or not. but in the meantime, if we really want to get to the bottom of this, i think the appropriate thing today, once she said she was not going to testify, to at least be able to get a proffer. that's all i was trying to do. >> mr. chairman, has congressman cummings joined you in requesting all the e-mails from the irs? >> no. never. it's -- >> i mean, to me, that's, that's the most potent information.
because that will either exonerate or convict, essentially, lois lerner. >> mr. cummings is there with the president on not a sminlion of evidence. as a matter of fact, our evidence leads to lois lerner. and that's why we'd hoped to hear from her. if the ranking member had wanted to make a motion before i had adjourned i would have accepted. i adjourned. he then said he had a question. what you played there was after an adjournment. he then perked up and said i want to ask a question. i said what is your question. and then that exchange occurred because he didn't have a question. he was endlessly slandering the efforts of the committee. but having said that, we want to get to the truth. if the attorney had a proffer, which, as you know, would be tell us, don't tell us your client's innocent, tell us what we need to know. and he's never offered to do that. we've offered with his attorney, to be quite frank, his attorney
in writing had supported the idea that she would testify under certain conditions. as we began rolling out an a little bit about what we intended to do in the hearing as far as question, she decided not to testify. >> did you share with congressman cummings before this hearing her e-mails in which she says for instance, the tea party matter very dangerous. did you share that with mr. cummings. >> these e-mails, when the discovery comes in from the irs, it goes to both of us together. so simultaneously, they've been receiving the same information, the same e-mails. they've been in every single one of 33 interviews. this is not something where we're asking questions behind closed doors. attorneys for the ways and means committee and the oversight committee have been in every one of these, republicans and democrats, and all the discovery has come to both committees. >> all right. i suggest, i've been pounding you for a long time about being more aggressive in getting information from lois lerner. i see you need information from the irs. you need her e-mails. have you thought of even seeking
to hold the commissioner in contempt for failing to comply with the subpoena? because if you've given a haful subpoena to the irs, this is his responsibility. and this is now almost a year old. >> you're exactly right. and just a few weeks ago we issued to the commissioner a fresh subpoena. >> he doesn't need a fresh one. the subpoena is to the irs. >> i understand, but now that he is in the custody of these, we wanted to give him an absolute straight chance. but there's no question. if he fails to comply with the delivery to the committees of congress then we would have no choice but to hold, as we did eric holder for withholding information, we'd have the same situation with the commissioner. ? you mentioned eric holder, and according to at least one report, it says the officials from the department of justice said they have no evidence of the type of enemy hunting that would warrant federal charges being filed. do you know if they had these e-mails? ? we don't know if they're
interviewing anyone. it appears as though they're not doing a very active investigation. everything we've delivered by subpoena, they could have received simultaneously and could have gotten additional information. the u.s. attorney in the district of columbia has declined prosecutions of federal workers who falsified work documents, who stole from the government, even one person who bonused her own daughter using the anti-nepotism rules using funds of the committee, of the agency shy worked for. we're very disappointed in eric holder's willingness to go after white collar crime inside the government. why is president obama so dismissive of this irs targeting. he claimed to bill o'reilly that there is not a smidgen of corruption. and remember, he called the targeting a phony scandal? >> an endless distraction of political posturing and phony
scandals, phony scandals, phony scandals. >> you're saying no corruption. >> no. there were some bone headed decisions. >> but no mass corruption. >> not even mass corruption. not even a smidgen of skrupgs. >> and today, learnrner refusino answer. >> joining us are our guests. i look at these as a lawyer. i don't have the political bent, but there's enough to be aggressive in pursuing further. ? this appears to be all about confelt. we nolois learner had refused to answer these questions last year. and there was some kind of contempt in the pipeline. darrell issa surprised a lot of people by telling people on fox news sunday that lois lerner was going to testify. >> every lawyer in town must
have called him and said he must and nut case to let her testify. >> issa wasn't just winging it on these questions. he was using the questions to reveal the new information that he'd gotten. and that wray he could get this out, get her to refuse again and strengthen his hand big time for a contempt citation. ? there's a level of both, i don't know if it's naivete. she's the one that almost offhandly apologized and said they were targeting. >> that's the oldest trick in the book. because she knew she was about to get caught. >> did she think this was going to go away? that president obama was going to stand up there and call it
outlrageou outrageous? >> but the irs isn't complying with subpoenas. so maybe there's good reason to think that it might go away. >> and she's facing the possibility of contempt charges. take this stuff seriously. >> it wasn't always, the leadership and the membership at large had disagreed on how to pursue this investigation. so a lot of members wanted independent counsel, different investigations. the leadership wanted to make sure sa issa was in charge of the investigation for a period of time. we now see the date last may and the day today with both times lois lerner appearing and saying she's refusing to testify, pleading the fifth. in between a lot that's happened. they've built their case, and this is a change of heart for the leadership saying she should be held in contempt, because it's not something they were interested in before. they wanted this to go away. >> they wanted answers, but they weren't interested in a big
political spectacle. she's going to have to talk. >> she, there's still the whole discussion whether she did waive her fifth amendment in the original appearance and then take the fifth amendment. there's still that thorny issue. >> she responded by saying she could waive it again. she's going to have to talk. what's interesting is that congressman cummings said i was interested to see if we could get a proffer. was he really interested? in order to get immunity, she's going to have to have a proffer. >> i would bet my right arm that the lawyer has been talking behind the scenes with the staff. if the lawyer wanted to give a proffer, that would have been done. who knows, that's sort of my guessing on that. panel, thank you. and still on the record, lois lerner took the fifth before congress, but is she talking to us? our next guest will tell
[ chanting ] >> a tense stand off in crimea, ukraine. first a convoy is threatened by gunman and confronted by crowds of protesters. shep smith just visited the region. he joins us live from kiev. shep? >> reporter: that was a tense scene this afternoon. and a lot of people have been surrounded. and i think they call it thugs, the locals do from time to time, but this was a u.n. official, and that was significant. eventually, nobody got hurt and he did end his trip early. as it turns out, we went down to the crimea, took a 400 mile flight down, and here's what we saw. we arrived at the airport midday and everything seemed pretty normal. nobody asking you questioning or staring you down.
the weather much better here than in the north. and then over here at this gate that leads out of the airport, a man who professes to be a local who has russian tieing but is volunteering with volunteer equipment, things that belong to himself. but one thing that you might difference here, see the brand new scotch tape on the fencepost here holding up what is a brand new russian flag. and then there's this, a ukrainian naval station. you can see the ukrainian flag on top. the man is waving a crimean flag. the russian troops have come in and in essence taken the place over and told the ukrainians to surrender their weapons. some of the people here we're told are wives of those men who have in essence been held inside for days, wanted to bring them food or something, but they're not allowing them any contact. that said, it's all become very much of a tourist attraction with the might yeah from around
the world. there is much tension, but it's much quieter than in recent days. of course, it has seemed as you walked around that there are not many troubles, but the russians have taken over every strategic point in crimea. it has done so bloodlessly. now the international community trying to get that section back for the ukrainians, a matter that has proved quite difficult. >> what are the people saying on the street to you, shep. >> reporter: it depends on who you talk to. down in the crimea, a large percentage of people are more closely associated with the russians. many of the older folks come being from the former soviet day, and they seem to want more russian influence. the country acts as a whole. and putin had no right, by international lawing to move his troops in there. secretary kerry and others have
made that perfectly clear. but at this point, putin either isn't listening or has his own agenda or both. >> thanki you for staying up late. >> reporter: you bet. now new questions about how much the white house really knew about kathleen sebelius's fund-raising for obamacare. secretary sebelius is going outside to raise funds for healthcare.gov. >> right. >> did the white house know about it? >> that's the question. what there was an uproar, republicans were saying this is illegal, this is outrageous. the white house said we did not sign off on it, but we generally were aware of it. but the information i've obtained. >> freedom of information act. >> exactly. it shows new information about
whether the white house was being truthful that they genuinely knew about it. also whether sebelius was being truthful in that she was just soliciting agencies that the hhs does not regulate. >> they're dragging their feet, and i take they've blackened out, redacted. you don't get all the information. that's routine and very annoying. i hate that there's no transparency with that. the second thing with the fund-raising. the fund-raising is only a problem for kathleen sa beal yugs if she's raising money from the people she regulates. if she went to a local bridge club it's okay, but if she went to a drug company. . >> there were solicitations to h&r block. >> they're the tax people for the irs. >> and they stand to benefit from the obamacare with new
business and to determining whether their clients qualify for obamacare subsidies. >> once you got these e-mails did you call up the white house? and what did they say? >> nothing. nothing. now hhs have actually been getting back to me. they never answer the questions in the e-mails that i ask. there were certain questions about the conference calls, that the white house is having with hhs and enroll america. on a weekly basis. and they're coordinating with them very closely on a day-to-day basis. and so i asked, do you think this -- how do you say you don't know, specifically about the fund-raising when there's all this coordination going on, and they just sidestepped the question. >> so much for that so called transparency when you get answers and documents. nice to see you. good luck with your investigation. hope you get more documents. >> he too. coming up in new jersey, judge blasting a teenager for showing gross disrespect for her
test test leaves home, then suing her parents for living and school expenses. she lost in round one, but did she open the floodgates? >> what would the next step be, depending on how the court may rule on this. are we going to condone or open the gates to a 12 year old to sue for an x box? a 13 year old to sue for an iphone? everyone else has one. why can't tommy? or how about a 15 year old asking for a 60-inch flat panel
tv? >> the judge denied her demands for living expenses and tuition. what kind of precedent does this set. joining us is jim hammer and bernie grim. and what do you think about this? >> what do i think? the question is, greta, why is this case in court? i mean, this is a case that makes a mockery of the criminal justice system. the lawyers should be -- >> and the civil justice system. >> the lawyers should be ashamed of themselves. also the judge should be ashamed. this small brat, disrespectful, drinking, staying out after curfew, cursing at her parents. all of these things alleged in this case, and she wants to be on her own? go! get out! get a life, young lady! >> bernie? >> at 17, i told my mother i had
it. i'm moving out. my mother walked out of the room, went to the attic, brought out the only suitcase we had, and i said, well, not quite now, but eventually, i want to move out. ted was outraged about this. as a teenager, ted, you didn't drink, stay out past curfew, skip school, they know your foul mouth. that's being a teenager. i went through it with my kids. that's being a teenager. the difference is, i didn't get caught, but my god, ted is right. don't let the door hit you on the way out. i'm, i want to leave, get the hell out. >> your turn. >> at least it's not a california case, greta. we have our own problems here. when i was a kid, if i sued my parent, i guess i could have sued for the use of the beat-up pinto and a bowl of irish stew.
that's about all we had. this is a suit for rich, entitled kids. that's the whole problem with this, the sense of entitlement, that you can do what you want, run out of the house and force your parents to pay. i hope they throw the case out and let everyone know if you want to walk out, walk out, but you do it on your own credit card, not on your parents'. >> obviously the family is dysfunctional. that's probably a nice word. for the life of me, i can't figure out why a lawyer would bring this thing to court, why you can't at least try to throw this family in one room and r resolve it. why do the taxpayers have to pay for it? >> to make it worse, the friend's father is funding it. >> what's with these lawyers? >> it smells. it smells to the high heaven, and i'm sad, look, i love this profession. and to have lawyers do this -- >> you always say you want to get out of this business.
that's such a lie. >> he's my lawyer. >> he says he wants to get out. >> wanting attorneying for this. then they'll say you've got to pay for high school, moore's cat lic catholic. and then where's my college money. where's miochy college money. they were called loans when i was a kid. >> you may have to blame a part of this on new jersey law. and under new jersey law, non-emancipation says even if you're 18 years of age that you still may be responsible for your child's college education. so it wouldn't surprise me if this judge ruled that the parents still have to pay for this spoiled brat's college. >> it happens when you're divorced. you should pay for your kid's college. my kids got into a very fancy
ivy league law school, i said good. you put up a dollar, i'll put up a dollar to match. >> new jersey should close the law, to quote my dad mr. hammer, when you're 18, you can do what you want on your own dime. straight ahead, brace yourself. this may be the most disgraceful political play with your health insurance yit. is the white house trying to trick you? and are you going to fall for it? that's next. so our business can be on at&t's network for $175 a month? yup. all 5 of you for $175. our clients need a lot of attention. there's unlimited talk and text. we're working deals all day. you get 10 gigabytes of data to share. what about expansion potential? add a line, anytime, for $15 a month. low dues, great terms. let's close! new at&t mobile share value plans our best value plans ever for business.
your hepatitis c.forget it's slow moving, you tell yourself. i have time. after all there may be no symptoms for years. no wonder you try to push it to the back of your mind and forget it. but here's something you shouldn't forget. hepatitis c is a serious disease. if left untreated, it could lead to liver damage and potentially even liver cancer. if you are one of the millions of people with hepatitis c, you haven't been forgotten. there's never been a better time to rethink your hep c. because people like you may benefit from scientific advances. advances that could help you move on from hep c. now is the time to rethink hep c and talk to your doctor. visit hepchope.com to find out about treatment options. and register for a personalized guide
this is a fox news alert. the obama administration allowing a two-year extension. >> i tip my hat. what's happened. >> the white house announced today that some people are going to be able to continue their current coverage through in fact 2017 after obama leaving office, which is huge news. >> before that, what was the situation? >> the situation was last
november we remember president obama announced that some people would be able to keep their plans for another year. now the way this works is very technical. you can't just go to your insurance company and say hey, president obama said i could keep my plan. that's not how it works. insurance companies are going to decide whether they want to allow it. >> when president obama gave th that, now with today's action it going beyond the midterm election, so anybody who would be no longer -- you're not going to get furious on october 1st anymore. you're going to get furious a couple years beyond that. >> that's exactly right because what was happening with the insurance companies, they're required to send cancellation letters to consumers 90 days before the new plans take effect and when you count back 90 days from january 1st that is the
height of campaign season. so that's clearly what the house was thinking about here. >> is there any justification other than pure politics for the white house? anything on this? is there any -- why they would have done it now. >> i mean, certainly there are a lot of consumers out there who want to keep their current plans, particularly people who are sick, who like their doctors, who are concerned about moving into a new network where they would have new health care providers. those people will benefit. along with people who just don't want to change right now, they don't want to move to the new marketplace, or people who don't want to pay for all of the coverage that obamacare requires on these new health plans. we've heard criticism from republicans and critics of the law who say why does everybody need pediatric care and maternity coverage? >> let me give you the flip coverage. what's the evidence that shows this was done purely political so they get past the mid-terms? >> i mean, they won't say. of course today they denied it was political at all. but they actually explicitly gave cover to about a dozen vulnerable democrats in their announcement. what they said was all of these lawmakers, we discussed this extension with them, they support it, we all want to come
together and find ways to make obamacare work better. so that was an explicitly political move to allow those democrats to go to voters and say listen, we want to fix this law, that's what we want. >> elyse, thank you. congratulations for beating everybody else on the story. thank you. >> thank you. coming up, a friend of oscar pistorius testifies in his murder trial, and what he said does not sound good for the blade runner. you'll see that testimony for yourself next. honestly? i wanted a smartphone that shoots great video. so i got the new nokia lumia icon. it's got 1080p video, three times zoom, and a twenty-megapixel sensor. it's got the brightest display, so i can see what i'm shooting -- even outdoors, and 4 mics that capture incredible sound. plus, it has apps like vine -- and free cloud storage. my new lumia icon is so great, even our wipeouts look amazing. ♪ honestly, i want to see you be brave ♪ ♪
i saw mdoctor. a blood test showed it was low testosterone, not age. we talked about axiron the onlynderarm low t treaent that can restore t vels to normal in about two weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especlly those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoidt where axirons applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or incased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctorbout all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased sk of prostate cancer, worsening prostate symptoms, decreased sperm count, ankle, feet or body swelling, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing while sleeping and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, common side effects include skin redness headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about axiron.
bill o'reilly's next but first get ready to speed read your way through the news. a friend of oscar pistorius taking the witness stand in the blade lunn runner's murder trial. the friend testifying about an incident at a restaurant where pistorius was holding a gun that accidentally fired. he hayes pistorius asked another friend to take the blame. >> i don't know what happened, how the gun went off, but he did apologize and say i'm so sorry, it was a mistake, are you okay? is everybody okay? i do remember oscar saying
please to darren, just say it was you, i don't want any attention around me, just say it was you. >> that gun incident happened just a month before pistorius shot his girlfriend reeva steenkamp to death. and a terrifying scene in daytona beach, florida. police say a mother drove a van with her three children inside right into the ocean. luckily, the beach patrol saw it happen. lifeguards scrambled to res kuyt mother and the children nep got everyone out safely. the mother has been sent for mental health evaluation. the children, well, they are in state custody. and chilling video of a double hit and run in southern california. 14-year-old girl darts into traffic and gets hit by two cars. she suffered leg injuries and is in the hospital. one hit-and-run driver has been arrested. police are still looking for the second driver. and that's tonight's speed read. thanks for being with us. we're going to see you tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m. and right now go to gretawired.com and answer this. should lois lerner be held in contempt of congress or not? vote in our gretawired poll. up next, "the o'reilly factor."
good night from washington, d.c. and we'll see you on gretawired to vote in the poll and we'll see you right here tomorrow night 7:00 p.m. eastern. tonight on "red eye." >> coming up on "red eye," would soccer be watchable if you forced an entire city to play at once? what if you could use your hands? what if you could get away with murder? we'll show you one town who had the guts to find out. and how long does it take vice president biden on average to finish a deep dish pizza? >> 3.4 seconds. think about that for a minute. >> and finally #r baby red squirrels the most adorable drinking milk, sleeping or fror fror -- frolicking with friends? none of these stories on "red eye" tonight. >> let's welcome our guests. she defies all laws of science by h