This is a rush transcript from "The Five," April 1, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Dana Perino, along with Andrea Tantaros, Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, and Jesse Waters.
It's 5 o'clock in New York City, and this is "The Five."
This is a FOX News alert. Moments ago, President Obama delivered a statement from the White House Rose Garden heralding his administration's latest figures on the Affordable Care Act.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Last night, the first open enrollment period under this law came to an end. And despite several lost weeks out of the gate because of problems with the Web site, 7.1 million Americans have now signed up for private insurance plans through these marketplaces.
Nobody remembers well those who stand in the way of America's progress or our people. That's what the Affordable Care Act represents.
We didn't make a hard sell. We didn't have billions of dollars of commercials like some critics did. But what we said was, "Look for yourself."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERINO: Despite claiming that they have met their enrollment target, the administration still has not said how many people have paid or how many were previously uninsured.
Either way, Charles Krauthammer wonders if this was all worth the price.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: You've got to ask yourself, the price we have paid, the estimate is 1 million to 1.5 million of these people were uninsured before. The whole idea was insuring the uninsured. That's going to leave about 40 million uninsured. For that, we had to cancel 6 million policies?
The price of this overturning, uprooting and revolutionizing a sixth of the economy and ecosystem and medical care is staggering for a million and half uninsured. Is that the way it should have been done?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERINO: I've got to say, I mean, is there anybody else we have to get sound bites from than Charles Krauthammer. It's getting ridiculous.
BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: Hey --
PERINO: Bob, what do you think?
BECKEL: First of all, I love Charles. I don't understand. I have a long term love affair with this guy. I think we ought to use him more than we have before. We just don't get enough of him.
But let me tell you something -- Obama can talk all he wants about 7.1 million people signing up, but the question, is the promise kept? No. Are premiums going down? No. Are the uninsured now insured?
ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Oh, I get it. I get it/
ANDREA TANTAROS, CO-HOST: Yes.
BOLLING: Absolutely not.
Did people keep their plans? Nope.
Did people keep their own doctors? No.
I mean, they can talk about all they want about 7.1 million --
PERINO: But, Bob, it's the law of the land. ObamaCare is the law of the land, all right? So, you might as well get over it because now, the GOP put all its eggs in one basket and now in November, it's going to have egg on its face.
BECKEL: We'll see. I think we're going to be crushed, Democrats, because of the affordable care act or ObamaCare.
PERINO: All right. Let's just see what Eric has to say.
BOLLING: I'm going to say -- happy April Fool's Day. I got it.
PERINO: We got you?
BOLLING: It took me a little while.
In fact, you know what I did this morning? I did the same thing on my Facebook. ObamaCare is really working. I love this. By the way, happy April Fool's Day.
OK. Here's the deal -- that was a cocky president. That was a guy who had a condescending tone to his voice. That was a guy doing not only a victory lap, spiking the ball, end zone dance, all at once. The problem is we don't know a lot of things he was talking about. We don't know how many have paid, we certainly don't know how many young people, and that's the most important aspect here.
And, by the way, there's still going to be 40 million people -- 40 million people still uninsured at the end of the year, as Charles points out, according to the CBO.
But bottom line, premiums are going up. You're right when you're on her side. Premiums are going up. Deductibles are going up, and the cost of the program is going to skyrocket. I wonder if he's going to have that same, arrogant, cocky attitude when we find out the real numbers.
PERINO: What do you think is going to happen in November now, Andrea? Do you think this is like the hurdle that they needed to get over?
TANTAROS: No, I think if you look at recent polling, it shows that most Democrats also are shying away from this, those who are running for re-election, and on the whole, the American people don't like this still.
What I want to know is how come this White House couldn't get ahold of an exact number until today? The number was a mystery, but they can pinpoint it now, 7.1 million. They have it right down to the nose.
By the way, if I was going to do an April Fool's joke on Bob, I was going to put the dark self-tanner in his makeup, so that he's going to get really, really dark by the end of the show. But I didn't do it.
You know, Dana, I also think the important question that the media has to ask is, what is the net amount of people who actually signed up that didn't have insurance before? So, let's say it's about 2 million. OK, for that price, we could have gotten each of them their own personal doctor.
And now you hear Jay Carney out there talking about, this is private insurance, this is private insurance. No, it's not. These insurance companies are being manipulated by a ventriloquist dummy who's telling them what they should charge and what plans they should offer at what price.
So, don't believe the latest spin from Carney and the White House on this private insurance line.
PERINO: What do you think?
JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: I actually think the White House is straight up lying about these numbers. They're saying 7 million people signed up on the Web site that was broken for the last nine months. They really want us to believe that this Web site is working enough where they can give us a legitimate number?
The White House has lied about so many things, why wouldn't they lie about this? They lied about Benghazi. They lied about IRS corruption. They lied about not spying on Americans.
BECKEL: Jesse, not --
WATTERS: They lied about green jobs.
Now all of a sudden, you want to trust the administration about this?
BECKEL: Now the April Fool's joke is over -- and, by the way, Dana, you did a good job.
PERINO: Thank you.
BECKEL: Actually, if you'd stick to that, you'd be much better off.
The fact of the matter is nobody sitting around this table except for me who ever would have believed they would have gotten 7 million. You don't believe it. I believe it.
PERINO: They were going to find some way, make a way so that they can say 7 million.
BECKEL: Here's the thing that I said before and I'll say it again. I don't think -- there are studies, independent studies saying a lot of people who were uninsured have gotten insured. There are a lot of people who lost their insurance because of ObamaCare. Now, that was 5 million or 6 million, you were talking about, it's down to a million.
There are people -- there are millions of people who are benefitting from this. Here's the problem for the Republicans. There now is a huge political base invested in ObamaCare, and it's going to carry them in November.
TANTAROS: How are they benefitting when they haven't even paid their first premium?
BECKEL: About 85 percent of them paid for it.
TANTAROS: Do you see all these young people from the Galifianakis bump actually getting their premium going, I'm going to follow through? They're not going to do that. That's why these numbers are --
BECKEL: According to McKinsey and Company, 85 percent have paid their bills.
TANTAROS: That was a very, very deep hypothetical.
PERINO: Can I get --
PERINO: I just want, because Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, was asked about ObamaCare being a tough sell today, and she had very little to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sixty-four percent of Oklahomans aren't buying into the health care plan. They don't like ObamaCare. And they have been pretty vocal about it. Now, that's going to be still continue to be a tough sell, but we'll see how that plays out over the coming months.
All right, Secretary Sebelius. Thank you so much for being with us this morning. I think we have probably lost sound here or something.
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, HHS SECRETARY: I can hear you. But I -- thanks for having me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're welcome.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERINO: I think she was like, who cares about Oklahoma, anyway?
Let me ask you a question, Bob. And this is not -- we're not joking anymore.
BECKEL: No, we're not.
PERINO: President Obama and the White House, very good at stage craft.
PERINO: Lots of people behind them. We saw all the people behind them, remember the fainting pregnant lady, all that stuff?
How come there wasn't a single Democrat behind him today that's running for the Senate in 2014?
BECKEL: If I was in the political consulting business, I would tell my clients to shy away from ObamaCare because you've done a wonderful job of making it a terrible situation. But by November, listen, where it was four months ago and where it is today, it is huge steps have been made. And by November, I think the Republicans are going to be left with egg on their face.
PERINO: That's my line.
BOLLING: Where is it? What do you mean huge steps? What huge steps?
BECKEL: Seven-point-one million is pretty huge, isn't it?
BOLLING: Six million got kicked off.
BECKEL: And now, 7 million.
BOLLING: Well, we don't know how many are young people? What we do know, in all the studies and your McKinsey study, go call them, I'll ask them, premiums going up, deductibles going up. And the cost --
BECKEL: Premiums were going up every year before Obama was elected president.
BOLLING: They sold us on the (INAUDIBLE) costs go down.
BECKEL: In the long run, it will go down.
WATTERS: The CBO also said it was going to cost $2 trillion. They say 2 million Americans are want going to have jobs because of it. Eric is right, deductibles are up. Premiums are skyrocketing when we said premiums --
BECKEL: Today. Today, Jesse. Today.
WATTERS: OK? Millions of people can't access their doctors. Can't access their hospital.
BECKEL: Let's see what happens in November.
WATTER: I don't see this is a big --
BOLLING: Your comment is it's so much better now than it was several months ago. What is better?
BECKEL: Several months ago, you couldn't get on the computer.
TANTAROS: And if premiums were going down, Bob, and this was such a good thing, why are they pushing the employer mandate back?
PERINO: I was just going to ask you that, Andrea, if you could talk about things that are still yet to come, because you have the income tax increase, the 3.8 percent. You have the medical device tax. You have employer mandate that's been pushed, and religious objections that are being heard in the Supreme Court. Plus, the Medicaid expansion that are still being heard and the subsidies that the government is supposed to give and whether or not nay can be given on state or federal exchanges. Still a lot left.
So Republicans do have a challenging mission here in front of them because the goal of this was never to lower premiums. It was never to bend down the cost curve. It was never to get people to get insured. It was to get people dependent on government subsidies. It was a wealth redistribution scheme.
So, that's why today, they're high-fiving at the White House because that is actually working. Two things I'm watching, Dana, not just the Supreme Court and not just Medicaid expansion. The employer mandate, which I think is a huge deal, but also there is a case, the way they sloppily wrote this bill, there is a case that is moving its way through the courts that says that the federal government cannot dole out subsidies. They have to go through state exchanges.
If, Dana -- if this gets to the Supreme Court and is overturned, this is the only hope for this entire bill being dismantled, and it could happen.
BOLLING: Can I -- I think Jesse is on to something about the numbers not really adding up.
Remember early, the first few months, they found that for every enrollee, there was, I think there were four Medicaid recipients signing up for Medicaid. They were going on, finding out I qualify for Medicaid so I'm going to sign up for that instead of paying a premium and buying insurance.
BECKEL: Good for them.
BOLLING: OK, so if there are 7 million who have signed up, does that mean 28 million are on Medicaid?
BECKEL: I hope so.
BOLLING: Or did somehow the mix change, or is Jesse right that these numbers just simply don't add up?
BECKEL: What do you think Jesse is going to say? Jesse is going to say straight line lie (ph) about Obama. He was lying about Obama from the time I met him.
BOLLING: How did they get to 7 million?
BECKEL: How they got them? They counted them.
WATTERS: Yes, what are duplicates? What are Medicaid?
BECKEL: Oh, I don't know, Jesse. How do you do the computer and figure that out?
WATTERS: I can't get a computer to figure it out. The Web site crashes.
BECKEL: Instead of saying the numbers are lies, why don't you prove it?
PERINO: OK, I'm going to wrap it up.
WATTERS: Can I say one more thing?
PERINO: I have to make a point before we go.
WATTERS: OK. If they have a death spiral -- you know that means? Where no young people sign up, premiums skyrocket right before the midterms. That's the real trouble.
BECKEL: I have a death spiral every time I sit at the table with you --
TANTAROS: Dana, real quick, real quick.
TANTAROS: Originally, when the bill was passed, remember the number that the Democrats were touting was not 7.1 million. Oh, it was 19 million uninsured to get covered.
PERINO: This chart from the apothecary shows this is what CBO wanted, projections for people to be on -- previously uninsured to be insured, excuse me. This is how many they got. So, it was supposed to be 22.8. It's now 12.5. This is my graphic.
Also, I'm going to answer a question that you just asked. How do you prove it? Well, if I were Jay Carney today, or whoever the press secretary is in the future, the question is, don't just prepare for today's briefing.
But prepare for Friday's or next week's because these numbers will have to come out eventually because they're going to have to score it. And that's when you're going to have to explain if there's only actually -- there are still 40 million uninsured after basically taking a wrecking ball to the insurers.
BECKEL: This is what is called sour grapes around this table.
PERINO: Actually, our grapes here are very sweet. Very, very good.
BECKEL: Listen, you guys hooked your engines onto this failing and you're not going to get it to fail.
TANTAROS: You hooked it on them working.
BECKEL: They'll work, because I want to see people get insured and get medical care.
BOLLING: So do we.
WATTERS: So do we, Bob.
BECKEL: Why don't Republicans come up with some idea to do it?
PERINO: You know what, Bob?
WATTERS: We have some ideas --
BECKEL: Yes, you have some ideas, go to the --
PERINO: You know what? You are my favorite April fool.
BECKEL: Thank you very much.
PERINO: All right. Up next, the head of America's biggest automaker, General Motors, is on Capitol Hill today.
PERINO: -- stemming from faulty ignition switches resulting in the deaths of more than a dozen people. How will G.M. try to explain their way out of that one? More on that after the break.
BOLLING: General Motors is a textbook example of why government should steer clear of business. Remember when bailout Barack Obama said this?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: The Chevy Cobalt that you build here was one of G.M.'s most sought after cars under that program.
Dealers across the country started running out. You need to build more.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: Well, that was September 2009. The Obama administration had just bankrupt and recapitalized G.M. to the tune of $50 billion U.S. tax dollars.
Fast forward to today, G.M. is on Capitol Hill explaining why there was a defective ignition system in their cars, more than a dozen people are dead, and G.M. knew all along, and you the taxpayer financed the whole shebang. Need some perspective. Listen to the families of G.M. victims.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Driving the car was a game of Russian Roulette with my safety and that of my friends. The federal government failed to take action and drivers like me were kept in the dark.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is clear that G.M. is only concerned with their bottom line and not the safety of our loved ones.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Our daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, wives, and husbands are gone because they were a cost of doing business G.M. style.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: Go to Dana first. Pretty dramatic testimony by the families.
PERINO: And extremely good and compelling. That's one of the reasons the story deserves a lot more attention than it has received up to now, but I think with the testimony and this coming to light, you recognize the deaths and you also realize the cost to the families of having to return their vehicles, right?
It's 2.3 million vehicles, 2.3 million that have to be returned and fixed at the cost of the company, and I think that this is just the beginning of what G.M. is going to have to pay. They have sullied their reputation so much you have to wonder about the $50 million.
BOLLING: Bob, let me be the skeptic here. 2008, 2009, when they bankrupted G.M., no one could figure out why --
BECKEL: They bankrupted G.M.?
BOLLING: The Obama administration bankrupted G.M. and recapitalized them and recapitalized certain investments. No one could figure out why.
I'll be the skeptic here. I'll be the cynic. I'll be conspiratorial.
Maybe they bankrupted them to make sure that the old G.M. was responsible for these deaths, because they knew they had a problem and the new G.M. could go on with business as usual and then they would look like heroes.
BECKEL: That's just another one of your skepticisms about Obama that just added to the pile. You made that sound like -- of course, we edited out a clip and made Obama seem like he was responsible for building bad ignition system.
By the way, I think they were built in China, weren't they? Those ignitions? I'm not sure.
But get to me, will you, Chinese government?
The fact of the matter is there's no excuse for this. They should have recalled these cars earlier. This reminds me back, I'm old enough to remember the Pinto --
BECKEL: -- when there was a rear-end cash, and a lot of people dies as a result of it. They kept it covered up. One Ralph Nader made his reputation on that.
This is an inexcusable case, and that new CEO from G.M. ought to be out of a job.
BOLLING: We, the government, our U.S. government, our taxpayers sold our last piece of G.M. at a $10 billion loss at the end of last year. Now we find out there's a 10-year problem, 13 deaths. Is this too close for comfort?
TANTAROS: Yes. So, the question is, so design defects and recalls happen a lot. People don't like them and the media reports them, but this one is a bit different. Why did General Motors hide this for seemingly over a decade? I mean, that's what's really strange.
Bob, you brought up the Ford Pinto. As further research discovered, it was risk over reward. They figured, you know what, we'll take the risk to reap the reward with the Ford Pinto instead of paying for the $20 part.
I'm not saying that's what G.M. decided to do here. But the issue here is the government backed G.M., clearly was not doing its due diligence.
And this is the problem with progressives. They just believe government is good. They pick their friends. It's crony capitalism at its worse and they don't do due diligence because they believe anything that the government gets involved in is good, period.
BECKEL: Now, progressives are responsible for this, right?
BOLLING: Hold on. Let me get Jesse.
Andrea makes a very good point. If you're going to drop $50 billion into a company, you better make sure that there's no pending lawsuits to the tune of, I don't know, $10 billion or $20 billion more on top of it.
WATTERS: Right. It's a real failure of oversight. Two administrations would allow the Obama administration because they directly oversaw, like you said, the recapitalization.
But let's pretend something here. Let's pretend Bush is president, ExxonMobil is the company based in Texas, OK? They go bankrupt. Bush bails them out, billions of dollars in taxpayer bailout. They oversee them going back, but, you know, they don't really do much oversight.
And then all of a sudden, Exxon starts polluting, and they pollute and pollute and a whole town dies, 13 people, something like that, but Bush has run on the fact that he's built this company back up and he got re- elected based partially on that.
This would be a mega scandal. A mega scandal. Like Dana said, this is going to get a lot more attention.
BECKEL: That would assume George Bush knew something like that was going on any more than Obama knew. Do you think --
BOLLING: Especially when you're playing with somebody else's money, taxpayer money, you better make sure --
PERINO: Or was there fraud? Say there was appropriate oversight, but it was hidden from the government. Then the company has an initial problem, and who is looking out for the employees and workers?
You mentioned the CEO, Bob, but she's only been CEO for three months.
PERINO: She actually -- some are crediting her with actually being the one who has to come up and clean up the guys' mess they left all along the floor on G.M.
TANTAROS: To Dana's point, if fraud was committed, that would be bankruptcy fraud. Who is going to hold them accountable? The government?
BOLLING: Let me do we have time to do this, you guys? Can I read this Michael Moore quote? There are people on the right who are going to agree with this.
"I'm opposed to the death penalty, but to every rule there's usually an exception. I hope someone in the Obama administration will get out the handcuffs, the SWAT teams or the U.S. Army if need be, march into G.M. headquarters in downtown Detroit and haul away anyone who is there who had anything to do with this. And if they already went down, hunt them down, bring them to face justice."
BECKEL: Have you wondered why companies like this allow this stuff to happen? No one is going to get caught eventually and then they do it. I don't understand why this didn't come out in the first place.
BOLLING: Money. It's 10 bucks per switch. You know, it's cost somewhere around a billion to retool all the cars.
BECKEL: Well, but they're going to get much more than this in lawsuits, right?
BOLLING: They were broke.
TANTAROS: Yes, I mean, we don't know if that's what they decided, but one has to assume they decided the reward was greater than the risk. And, look, at least Michael Moore is somewhat consistent.
However, imagine if we wouldn't have bailed them out. They would be screaming, the progressive movement, about something totally different, and we failed all these workers. So this is again why government should not get involved in this kind of thing. They can't run companies.
WATTERS: Also, incredibly hypocritical of Michael Moore. His lack of government oversight, that's the problem. And then all of a sudden, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, people died there, too. Does Michael Moore care about that?
BECKEL: I thought you guys didn't like government oversight. I thought you didn't like regulations and oversight.
BOLLING: All right. We're going to leave it right there.
WATTERS: We want a little bit so people don't die.
BECKEL: I see.
BOLLING: No, if you're going to make an investment, a capital investment with the taxpayer money, make sure there's not a big --
BECKEL: Yes or no, would you let G.M. just go away?
TANTAROS: See? There it is.
BOLLING: No, no, I would have let it go bankrupt because someone else would have bought G.M. and it wouldn't have been our money.
All right. Disturbing developments out of Delaware. This rich Du Pont heir was sentenced to probation and no jail time after being convicted of raping his own 3-year-old daughter. Is the American justice system simply a joke?
More on this outrageous case after the break. Stick around.
TANTAROS: We have a truly outrageous and heartbreaking story for you today.
In 2009, Robert H. Richards, a wealthy heir to the Du Pont paint fortune was convicted of the heinous crime of raping his own 3-year-old daughter. His sentence, probation and some community service. But no jail time.
Delaware Superior Court Judge Jan Jurden was apparently swayed by the argument that Richards would, quote, "not fare very well in prison." That being said, the verdict in this case seems to be falling on the part of the entire legal system.
It should be noted that this case only re-entered public consciousness after attorneys for his ex-wife filed a lawsuit seeking damages for the abuse of their two children.
Bob, the legal system clearly failing here. Is it appropriate to say that he should have his testicles cut off and fried in oil? I'm serious.
BECKEL: Yes, and then fed to some Rottweilers.
I mean, look, the fact is that once she gave him the sentence, the charge against his 8-year-old son, abusing his 8-year-old son, was taken off the table.
I mean, what are they thinking? What is this judge thinking? He wasn't going to do well in prison? Good, that's the idea.
BOLLING: You know what's really strange about that part of it? So, originally, he got two second degree convictions which carry 20 years, and then they pled down to a fourth degree which was probation and no jail time on the basis that he may not do well.
He's 6'4," 270 pounds. If he's not going to do well in prison, if that's the basis, look, it has nothing to do with him doing well. It has to do, my guess, his name.
TANTAROS: Affluenza --
BECKEL: Maybe they're worried about going to the showers.
TANTAROS: Dana, it wasn't the judge who said he wouldn't fare well. It was one of the attorneys in the hearing. But, clearly, the judge agreed with the argument and said, OK, we'll just give you minor probation and no jail time. Is this where people lose faith in the legal system because they see as Eric points out, the affluenza defense, that he's a rich little boy and he wouldn't -- actually, he's not little -- and he wouldn't do well?
PERINO: I think it could be a lack of faith in the legal system, but also a lack of faith in the media. Because as you said, this case actually was -- it just came down in 2004. It's not like it was not held in secret. Supposedly, there are reporters who go to the courthouse in Delaware, and we're only hearing about it now because there's a lawsuit pending, and it's come up again.
Also, I think on this judge, this particular judge, Jurden, when I read this entire thing about the sentencing process, I don't think it's fair to her, necessarily, to say that she decided this. The attorney general, the prosecution, I think, actually deserves a lot more of the condemnation for this.
TANTAROS: Jesse, who is to blame? Because as Dana points out, OK, the D.A. offered him a plea which was fourth degree rape of a child, which his wife alleges that he raped both of their children, a little boy and a little girl, but carries no mandatory time, even though there's a 15-year sentence. Dana brings up the media. You bring up this judge, that you featured it multiple times.
Who is to blame?
WATTERS: There's also another element of corruption here. I think there might be a smoking gun. Biden's son is the A.G. in Delaware.
And when he was asked, did you know what was going on in your office when this was signed off on? This is the most wealthy family in the entire state. They sign off on a plea deal for no jail time on a child rapist, and you don't know about it? He's either lying or he's incompetent.
So, I don't know -- I don't think someone is telling the truth.
BECKEL: You probably should get your timeline right. He was fighting in Afghanistan when this took place. You remember he came back and then ran for attorney general? So, don't try --
BECKEL: Why do you cast politics to something as awful as this?
WATTERS: No, no, it's his office.
Let me tell you how sick this guy is. We looked at the warrant. The guy groomed this girl. She said he said let's keep it a little secret, OK? There were disgusting things he did, and he got no prison time because they wanted to make sure he was rehabbed. You can do rehab in jail. You can do rehab out of jail. It doesn't matter. No one cares about the victim. That's the problem.
BECKEL: I do, but I don't think you can blame it on somebody who was not in the office at that point. But the fact of the matter is, the state shouldn't be -- a fourth degree rape charge, you don't go to jail? You should go to jail for any kind of rape.
TANTAROS: But, Eric, if there are so many questions than answers, shouldn't then the media be doing due diligence to figure out where -- who signed off on this? I mean, his name is Du Pont, as Jesse mentioned. It's not exactly, Bob, conjecture or weird conspiratorial theory that sometimes political favors are done for people with money. I mean, come on.
BECKEL: Well, they're Republicans, let's remember that.
BOLLING: They're probably, you know, I don't know, hundreds of this cases all over the place. When they do spring up -- I mean, O'Reilly has another one, another one somewhere in Arizona, somewhere out West.
WATTERS: Yes, there's another case in Nevada. There was a judge. He oversaw a case where the guy was facing 10 years. He signed off on the plea deal for child rape. The prosecutor signed off on it, and the next day, the judge goes, you know what, I'm going to give him probation. He doesn't explain himself.
And also, this judge will not explain herself either. That's the problem. Not accountable.
TANTAROS: Any final thoughts, Dana? I mean, there's really nothing else --
PERINO: No say --
TANTAROS: This is probably the most atrocious story that we have done on this show in a while.
Directly ahead -- the network newscasts blow a gasket over the U.N. climate report. Are they correct in ringing the alarm or is it propaganda in the mainstream media? That's debate, up next on "The Five."
WATTERS: The mainstream media's global warming hysteria hits new heights following the U.N.'s report on climate change. The network news broadcast claimed it's a dire call for action and a, quote, "urgent new warning."
Watch them freak out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT PELLEY, CBS NEWS: A new United Nations report raised the threat of climate change to a whole new level.
DIANE SAWYER, ABC NEWS: We turn to an urgent warning from some of the world top scientists. The extreme weather we've all endured together could be the herald of a new normal, climate change.
BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC NEWS: We have never been warned like this before, all of us, about climate change. Here is the takeaway -- unless the world changes course quickly and dramatically, the fundamental systems that support human civilization are at risk.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
WATTERS: Ooh. Funny how the network reports featured no critics or even a quote from a climate change skeptic.
So, does Brian Williams drive a Prius? Is he buying this? What do you think the motivation is, Eric, behind all these media propaganda reports? Is it money, do you think?
BOLLING: Well, no, if you can be an alarmist, you can scare the heck out of viewers, they go, wow, what's he saying? Hold on, listen to what he's saying, and they got the viewer. I get why the media does that.
I mean, people do that all over the place, all types of mode yeah. The more alarming, the more provocative, the more viewers you get. I get that.
My problem is why does the IPCC continue to put out these reports they know are false? I mean, there's no proof of man-made global warming. There may be proof of global warming.
By the way, wasn't there an Ice Age and it's warmer now? That had nothing to do with man.
But here's why -- because there's probably in the neighborhood of $50 million to $75 million a year full of money that goes to finance research, that goes to finance offices, that goes to finance exotic travel to these places to go take climate temperatures, and they have to keep that game going. They have to keep -- always follow the money, follow that money. If they were to say everything is good, everything is fine, the money would dry up.
WATTERS: Now, Bob, you're a U.N. guy. You believe in the U.N. They come up with this every year. They have the guys in the blue hats running around. Iran is in the human rights commission.
Are you believing what they're putting out there?
BECKEL: I believe in the U.N.
But let me say this, Jesse -- normally, we have Greg here who is the flat earth representative.
BECKEL: And you're ably sitting in his chair, I might add.
So, for you and the rest of the flat earthers, this is 772 leading scientists who did this. Now, I want to see where your 772 -- and Eric said they're all lying. You think 772 scientists got together and said, OK, we're going to pull a big lie here. We're all going to say there's global warming.
There is global warming.
WATTERS: It's called summer.
BOLLING: I think there's a lot of money based on them propagating that lie.
TANTAROS: Bob, if you look at the same report from a decade ago, they were saying the world is going to end in a couple years so we should all be dead. I mean, the point is the network anchors parrot what the report says. And if you read the report, it reads like a bedtime nightmare. I mean, so, these scientists don't have a lot of credibility with me. They said this was going to happen years ago.
I think it's bigger than money. I think this goes back to the progressive argument that government can control the weather.
If they can control the weather, they can control our lives. They can control everything down to our appliances in our homes.
And lastly, what was the big thing they wanted to control? Oh, yes, cow flatulence, and they're assuming they can control cow farts in Russia and India and all those other countries. Imagine saying that to Vladimir Putin. If we could get our hands on your livestock, we could end this problem.
WATTERS: Now, there's new calls to arrest the climate change deniers, as they're called. I think some Web site is putting this out. Do you think this has reached some sort of ridiculous level where they want to arrest anybody who disagrees with you? Why would they do that, Dana?
PERINO: I do think that the hyperbole and breathlessness of the reporting does become a little bit too much for people to understand.
Now, let's just say that I take this report as read, that I say, OK, 772 scientists, I'm for it. What it doesn't include is a realistic solution that a policy prescription that could do anything about it. The world is the world. You cannot hive off and just say the United States should do something if no one else is going to do it as well because then you won't have done anything. In fact, in the United States, our emissions have gone down. The only answer to the problems is economic growth.
And the way to get economic growth is through energy production. We have shown in the United States is it was economic growth, you get innovation. Innovation leads you to cleaner burning fuels so that you can deal with things like global warming.
What they're suggesting right now is basically like, if I had -- you know, I had a cold last week. They say I went to the doctor and they said you have a common cold. I guess we're going to have to take your leg. That's the situation that they present you with policywise.
BECKEL: I agree with Dana. What she said I think makes a lot of sense.
But, Jesse, 772 scientists. Name me five on the other side?
WATTERS: Can you name 17,000? Can you name one of the 17,000?
BECKEL: Professor Stewart Markey (ph).
WATTERS: OK. Professor Spencer from Alabama, he doesn't buy any of this junk. You know what he thinks it is --
BECKEL: Professor who?
WATTERS: Professor Roy Spencer. You know what he says? It's a big transfer of wealth scheme so you have these rich countries --
WATTERS: Yes, you have these rich countries that send all the money to these developing nations so they can fight climate change. And it's all about dollars, Bob.
I have to go. I have to go. It's getting warm in here --
BECKEL: Best part of the segment right there.
WATTERS: Hollywood heavy hitter Johnny Depp disses America during a trip to communist China. Professor Beckel can't wait to school Captain Jack Sparrow on a little China 101 after the break. Don't miss it.
BECKEL: Yes, he starred in some of Hollywood's biggest blockbusters including "Pirates of the Caribbean," "Alice in Wonderland," and one of my favorites, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Actor Johnny Depp, who was in China yesterday, promoting his new film, "Transcendence," says of the communist nation, quote, "I can live here easily." Really, Mr. Edward Scissorhands? You could? You think you could?
Sounds like you need a little lesson in China 101, and I'm going to give it to you, starting with the fact that they assassinate people and then send the bullet to the people's home and make the family pay for it. Two, they limit the number of children who can be born. If they don't, they abort them.
Three, they have the most polluted country in the world, as we just talked about in the last thing. Even Jesse can agree with that.
Four, I don't know where to go. They have -- they've sent toys to the United States that have lead poison in them. I mean, this is the worst -- I tell you.
PERINO: And Christian persecution.
BECKEL: And Christian persecution. That's exactly right. That probably should lead the list.
Anybody can defend the Chinese. You want to live there? I mean, you like Chinese food that much? Stick to chocolate, man.
BECKEL: Yes, go ahead.
BOLLING: Let Dana go. She had the best comment ever.
PERINO: "Chocolat." Well, it is -- to be kind to him, maybe he was just trying to be nice to the Chinese people, right? Pay a compliment. When you go overseas, you like to pay a compliment. That's not an unusual thing, so maybe he was trying to be nice.
But the truth is rich people can live anywhere. And they are not affected by the things that people who toil in the fields or work in the factories or, if you try to go to a Christian church, you could be persecuted, if you try to search the Internet without government interference, you'll get in trouble. You can't protest your own government.
He could live there, because he could afford it. And also another thing, he says he could live there because he has an option that a billion people in China do not have, which is an American passport and American citizenship.
BECKEL: Well put.
PERINO: So he can come back to America anytime he wanted. That's why he's able to say he could live in China.
BECKEL: And Jess, let me ask you a question. I happen to think that the Chinese are the single biggest national security threat to the United States on down the road. Do you concur with that?
WATTERS: They're trying to nuke up. They're trying to build up the navy to kind of challenge our naval supremacy in the South Pacific. You know, they're pirating. They're doing cyber espionage. They're doing all kinds of stuff.
Let me tell you how big of a phony this guy is. Before the Iraq war, he moves to France, because he doesn't like how we're, you know, pushing other countries around. OK? And then he calls America a big dumb puppy dog, right?
Then when the socialist prime minister over there starts raising taxes on all those millionaires, you know what he does? Moves back to America so he gets to keep more of his money. Total phony. And he's just going over there because there's that huge market, and they can watch "Edward Scissorhands" and the new pirates movie. That's what he's there for.
TANTAROS: He can go back to France because today the socialist leader of the country said they actually wanted to cut taxes. Maybe Johnny will reconsider.
You know, when these stars go to these countries, they have the best security, the best food. They walk the red carpet. They don't see what being a real citizen of the country is.
And I would just simply ask Johnny Depp this question. Which one of your children are you willing to give up for adoption? I assume it would be the younger boy, because the girl was born first. He has a young girl and a young little boy. I would ask him how much he loves his son and if he would be willing to give him up for adoption.
BECKEL: Very good point. You have long been a supporter of the capitalist movement in China, including their move towards capitalism. Do you think this is a good and solid country?
BOLLING: It's a first start, but you're right. They're still quasi- capitalist -- quasi-communist. Communist China. They really need to open up the free-trade barriers.
What they do is they have all these protectionist systems. And so whatever is advantageous to them, they'll do it. And if it hurts them at all, they push everyone else aside. They need to drop those, and they need to let the currency float. That's another thing. They play around with currency. No one else can do that.
Can I just point something out? Iran is far more a threat to the U.S. than China is.
BOLLING: I don't believe it. We educate all these Chinese kids in computer sciences, and then they go back and they hack us. I mean, what's that all about?
TANTAROS: I agree with you, Bob. I actually think our great grandkids are going to be fighting the Chinese.
BECKEL: I think so, too.
PERINO: Can I offer one contrary view before we go? It's -- I think it is a good thing that young people in China watch American movies, because I think if we can't penetrate through news, because they keep their media so closed up, I think that the fact that they see American western films, I think that's a good thing.
BECKEL: I think that's right, too. You don't have to be Johnny Depp.
"One More Thing" is up next.
PERINO: If you only knew what happened in the commercial break. It's time now for "One More Thing." Andrea is going to kick us off.
TANTAROS: OK. Some shocking video, and it's not coming this time from Jesse Watters. CampusReform.org sent one of its rising star reporters, a girl that I really admire, Katherine Timpf, to the National Young Feminist Leadership Conference, and she got some interviews about what the conference about young feminism was about. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Everybody can be a feminist, really.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Feminism is for everyone. Everyone from every background.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TANTAROS: Everyone from every different background, very exclusive -- or inclusive, I should say, not exclusive. Then guess what happened when they found out this was a conservative group?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KATHERINE TIMPF, CAMPUSREFORM.ORG: I just want to let you know that this is a conservative media site. So I just wanted to warn you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're a conservative news outlet, so we don't know if you want to participate in that.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You guys aren't wanted here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TANTAROS: They're not wanted here. So much for inclusivity. Very good work by CampusReform.org, exposing feminists.
PERINO: That's interesting. Bob, you're next.
BECKEL: Yes. I've got another student story here. There's a dude on Long Island. The kid got -- applied to and got accepted to all eight...
BECKEL: All eight Ivy League schools. This is what he said to say about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KWASI ENIN, ACCEPTED TO ALL EIGHT IVY LEAGUE SCHOOLS: Appreciation and thankfulness for everyone who helped you, all my teachers for helping me with the grades and what not, all the way down to the counselor, and lastly, of course, your family, parents, for all the support. My preference is Yale. The student body, all the things I want in college. I still have to compare all these schools, wonderful schools.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECKEL: Congratulations. I applied to my father's alma mater, which was Dartmouth, the only Ivy League school. They didn't even send me a rejection letter. That's how bad it was. Congratulations.
PERINO: Right in the circular file.
BECKEL: Yes, exactly.
BOLLING: I really hope Eric Sayes (ph) watched that segment.
So last night, I'm watching "The Factor," and Bill O'Reilly had -- was talking about Tesla Motors and how it was wonderful. He was talking about Tesla. And I e-mailed Bill and the producer and I said, "Good lord, really, Bill? Five hundred billion dollars?"
He took me up on the offer. I sat down with Bill O'Reilly, which is going to air tonight. It's a shoot-out. Here's how it ends. I don't want to give away the punchline, but here's how it ends. Take a look at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL O'REILLY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Eric Bolling, smarter than I am. You guys can decide.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERINO: I like that.
BOLLING: We report, you decide.
PERINO: Jesse, you're next.
WATTERS: OK, so the U.S. State Department is spending $400,000 on a white fiberglass camel looking at a needle. It's going to go in front of the U.S. embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan. OK, this is John Kerry's camel, everybody. That hump looks a little suspicious, I think. So that is what your taxpayer money is going towards. A camel in front...
TANTAROS: Wait, a glass camel in, of all places, Pakistan?
TANTAROS: I hope they have insurance.
WATTERS: I'm not walking past that hump every day.
PERINO: Will it carry water is the question?
BOLLING: It will carry something.
PERINO: Get it? Water? OK, I love this. Awkward family photos. You probably have some. There's actually a whole book that has been written about it. There's a new display that is going to take place in California Heritage Museum. It opens on March 28 in Santa Monica. They are hilarious. The books are great. The museum is great.
They're going to take this all around the country. AwkwardFamilyPhotos.com is where you can see more. We took our own in one of the commercial breaks. A "Five" awkward family photo. Do we have that to show everybody? No?
PERINO: There it is. Don't forget to set your DVR so you never miss an episode of "The Five." We're going to see you back here tomorrow.
Content and Programming Copyright 2014 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2014 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.