The politics of America's immigration problem

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," July 30, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: I'm pretty sure that's an insect bite. Yes.

Hello, everyone. I'm Greg Gutfeld, along with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, and she pole-vaults with a toothpick, it's Dana Perino.

This is "The Five."


GUTFELD: This is a Fox News alert: Nancy Pelosi condemns the separation of church and state.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: Let's follow the lead of the National Catholic Conference of Bishops who talked about the Baby Jesus escaping violence as an infant, who talked about sending children back into the circumstances you described as sending children back into a burning building. So, it's not just about having a heart, it's about having a soul and the soul of our country is about respecting the dignity and worth of every person.


GUTFELD: Well, in that case, I have no heart and no soul. I hate Children, especially babies. They are just hairless cats with thumbs.

I'm glad I got that out of the way, because that's what pro-amnesty types imply about anyone who favors legal over illegal immigration. It starts with Obama, trickles down to Pelosi, and then the media laughs it up.

The gimmick is meant to silence you through fear of personal attack. You don't want these children with their teddy bears? You are Satan. No, you're worse than Satan, you are a Republican.

Compassion is often code for its opposite, creating policies that harm those they're meant to help. Dependence on government is compassionate, while fostering opportunity is not. Letting the mentally ill roam the streets is compassionate, while hospitalization is not. Forcing poor kids into bad public schools is compassionate, while charter schools where they excel is not.

So what is compassion? Nancy Pelosi said that deportation would be like sending kids into burning buildings. If so, then why not help put those fires out? Why not export values that create better lives in awesome countries like ours?

But that's not what the amnesty preachers want. In their odd world, everyone should come here but the very thing they are coming for -- our way of life -- shouldn't be inflicted on others. It's an equation that preserves pain beyond our borders as it rattles what's left of our own.

But what do I know? I hate babies. I just hate some babies.

Hey, Bob, Nancy Pelosi teaching compassion is like you teaching restraint. Is deportation of illegals un-Christian?

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: Well, first of all, I usually don't talk to Satan but I'll talk here for a second. The -- I think she's hit on a point that is a, frankly not a bad sales point to be honest with you. I mean, if you try to -- you get as much emotion around this as you possibly can, these kids, and it is very difficult to take what would be perceived as punitive action against kids. Ted Cruz is trying to do that in the Senate. The House Republican bill is rife with it. And so, we'll keep going with it, Satan.

GUTFELD: OK. So, Eric, he just admitted. They are using children as pawns.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Yes, and that's you're right, Bob. That's the way you do it on the left. You just use a kid and say, if you're against the kids, you're evil. You're horrible.

Let's -- regarding the Christianity part, Nancy Pelosi. We're taught to be Christian-like in your personal being. Not everyone, not saying everyone has to be Christian. I mean, that would be like Islam. If you're not Islam, if you're not with us we're going to kill you. You're against us.

Christians believe you want to be compassionate, be compassionate. Nancy, if you want to be -- 250 million bucks, you want to spend some of that, knock yourself out. Adopt a few Mexican babies, that would be fantastic. Do it yourself. But don't tell everyone else.

We don't want to adopt Mexican babies. I don't -- I'm a 15-year-old. I don't want to adopt any more babies.

So, here's the issue. At risk of getting even more death threats than I've been getting.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: But you mean any babies.

BOLLING: I think -- what?

GUILFOYLE: You mean any babies.

BOLLING: OK. Mexican, Canadian.

GUILFOYLE: Honduran.

BOLLING: Thank you, Honduran. Right, correct, OK.


GUTFELD: I like Beanie Babies.

BOLLING: Eighty percent of all illegals coming over are coming through the Mexican border and likely Mexican. I'm just saying that. Anyway.

So, getting back to my death threats. I do suggest increasing legal integration, quadrupling it, go ahead, knock yourself out -- people hate hearing that -- making it faster, because we can use low cost labor in this country. We can use 4 million or 5 million more people a year into our economy.

That's what killed Japan was this declining birth rate and no one was coming to Japan. I think it's a great idea. I welcome that.

GUILFOYLE: To follow up on what he's saying, why should we be preached to say you're not a good Christian unless you support amnesty and breaking the law. There is a way to do this because it's been done for years and years by people lawfully, who respect the rules and laws in this country. They want to come in, they want to work hard, they want to raise their families, they want to be able to have their choices to go to a public school or a charter school or do something and provide for future generations.

So, I think you're also saying let's not -- let's take care of who we have here. Let's provide a legal path to citizenship that everybody adheres to, because we have plenty of babies here that need good schools and education and have illnesses and developmental problems, that all have issues that we need to address as American citizens. Fair?


GUTFELD: Dana, isn't it -- but it is hypocritical at its heart, because you have people like Nancy Pelosi who always talk about separation of church and state.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Yes. How did you know what I was going to say?

GUTFELD: I don't know, because I read your notes.

PERINO: That's impressive, because I could barely read them myself.

But I want -- this is -- Nancy Pelosi yesterday, we played the clip of her from CNN when she was talking to Candy Crowley in which he is compassionately called Hamas a humanitarian organization, right?


PERINO: Then she was asked, pressed on whether it was a terrorist organization and she said ah-ha and it was not as equivocal as it is this.

Just two weeks ago, when the Supreme Court, SCOTUS -- when Supreme Court announced the Hobby Lobby decision, the left were saying that small business owners do not have a right to practice their religion. They do not have a right to bring their beliefs into a policy arena. But that is what she is trying to do today. I understand the appeal to Christians, and I think that a lot of people share it. In fact, in our Gallup today, or "AP" -- it was "AP" poll -- 62 percent of people said that they are for sending the children back.

I don't think that's out of frustration or anger or being Satan or being mean. I think it is out of compassion, because the better place for these children is not languishing for years waiting for a hearing. It's better to go back to their families and to have some sort of a better legal process to allow them to come into the country.

BECKEL: If they're -- if I could just make one point, I hear from most conservatives and most Republicans the word "law." They break the law by doing this. And it is true, in fact, the law has been broken.

But also, there are hundreds of thousands of U.S. businessmen who break the law every year by hiring them. Do I hear one peep out of Republicans or conservatives about that? I do not. Is anybody -- no, no. Bull -- no, no.

PERINO: That's what E-Verify is all about.


BECKEL: I would like to see somebody -- show me some perp walk that says this is --


BOLLING: There's E-Verify requires you to make sure that you're paying a legal immigrant.

BECKEL: Which means a lot are not doing it, right?

BOLLING: OK. But look --

BECKEL: Why don't you arrest them?

BOLLING: Bob, can I just -- look. Colorado legalized pot, right? That's breaking the law, a federal law, right?

BECKEL: What does that have to do with what I --

BOLLING: Because the point you're trying to make is, OK, so it happens over here so we're supposed to look the other way on all illegal immigrants, just because some people hire them and you don't go after the corporations. You got to stop it. You got to stop it from the corporate side. You got to stop it from the border side.

GUILFOYLE: And we're going to talk about it in E-block.

BECKEL: It's all in the body of the legislation on immigration. Why do we not arrest some businessmen?

GUTFELD: Let's arrest them. But, first, you know what I feel like? I feel like listening to Charles Krauthammer talking about perhaps President Obama's next move on immigration and whether he's going to grant it full, I guess, unilaterally legalization of 5 million or so.


CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: There are reports from the White House that he's going to do something by executive order about immigration. If he were to do something like legalize 5, let's say half, which is what's been talked about, huge numbers of illegal immigrants, it would be an impeachable offense. I would be 100 percent against impeachment because it's political suicide, but it really would be the basis for that.

That's what I think the White House may actually be softening people up for, an executive order that reaches impeachable offense but it's a way, it's like a preemptive strike.


GUTFELD: So, there's a lot of things he touches on there. But I want to know why is he doing this now during the border crisis, and how exactly would this work? And is this all about the mid-terms? That's three questions.

PERINO: That's a lot of questions.

GUILFOYLE: She can do it.

PERINO: Where do I start? President Obama I think is trying to do this because remember what Rahm Emanuel said, never let a crisis pass you by. It gives them an opportunity to do something.

However, it was the White House, it was President Obama who said we do have a humanitarian crisis on our border and something needs to be done. Now, he doesn't back the original bill that he put forward, which is a $3.7 billion bill. There's one today, that's a $4 million without any reforms.

I do think he's stepping over a line because you had Democrats Kagan and Pryor, two red state Democrats, they are in tough races, saying to the White House today please ease off because they know the American people aren't quite there.

I think the president actually is being very unpersuasive as to why something like this -- if they are floating this trial balloon out there, they're going to have a lot of catching up to do to convince people it's the right thing. Maybe they will succeed, but right now, they are way behind.

BECKEL: What, there are 60,000 or 70,000 kids down there right now? Is that right?

BOLLING: Fifty -- yes.

BECKEL: OK. If I were Obama, the thing I would do is I tell the Justice Department to get 60,000 or 70,000 businessmen who hired these people and throw them in jail.


BOLLING: Yes, break the law go to jail. I agree.

BECKEL: They should go to jail.

BOLLING: OK, let's move on.

PERINO: You can understand why people are confused, because within the last three weeks, you said you thought the children should be sent back. Then all of a sudden, when the politics got crazy, all the Democrats start saying, no, we can't send them back.

I mean, I admire the lock step decision-making, but you can understand why the American people are confused.

BECKEL: If I had said they all should be sent back then I made a terrible mistake and I withdraw it. But you still haven't answered my question, there's not one businessman -- wait a minute. Will you answer the question, you want to keep --


PERINO: Why hasn't Holder done anything about it in six years?

BECKEL: They should. That's what I just said.

PERINO: It's your fault. It's Obama's fault no one has been --

BECKEL: For every kid, I would arrest a businessman.

GUTFELD: That's great solution. Let's agree with Bob --


PERINO: No one will have jobs. And their solution will be insoluble (ph).

BECKEL: Do you think they should break the law then?

BOLLING: Bob, what do you suggest? Are you suggesting all the illegals come over, no one hires them and they go on the government dole and use our health care system?

BECKEL: No. So, you want to allow people to break the law.

BOLLING: No, what I would say because I think you're right, if you break the law whether you're a business or someone coming over, you get fined or you get punished for it.

GUILFOYLE: Is anybody not saying that here?

BOLLING: So, make them legal, Bob. Make them legal immigrants so we can follow `em. We can tax them. We can provide them with the things that they need. But they're paying us back for it.

GUILFOYLE: Fingerprint them.

GUTFELD: I want to ask Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: I want to know who we have here.


GUTFELD: The evil businessman, they're Satan. OK, we get it, Bob.


GUTFELD: Charles Krauthammer made an interesting point. He said the White House talked about impeachment early on as a preemptive strike, so he could make this executive order. Do you think that's clever?

GUILFOYLE: Do I think the president is that clever?


PERINO: Charles Krauthammer might be more clever.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I could listen to a whole a block sounds of Charles Krauthammer. Please?

With respect to the president, I think he's that political. We didn't listen a whole --


GUTFELD: You scream at people.

GUILFOYLE: By the way, I need the miracle ear again for Christmas because you're so loud today. Right?

BOLLING: And you yell at me. I agree with you.


PERINO: Krauthammer's angle is an interesting one that they thought so far ahead to say we're going to do this impeachment thing. I'm not sure they are that clever, but maybe they are. However, we spent an entire day yesterday as Republicans trying to smother the idea of impeachment just to blow on the embers so that they flame up again.

BOLLING: So, are we suggesting that the White House floated the idea of impeachment so the right pushed back so hard and said, no --


PERINO: Now they can't say impeachment.

GUILFOYLE: They can't do it.

BOLLING: Use the executive pen in the right --

GUILFOYLE: You know who is smart enough to do that? Karl Rove.

PERINO: It's like a John Grisham novel. I don't know if --

BECKEL: But he can make that decision, right? The legal people say there's not much you can do about it.

PERINO: I don't think it's an impeachable offense. Although Charles would know best.

GUTFELD: All right. On that note, just 97 days out from the mid- terms. How would any immigration action this summer affect his party November? Our election predictions when "The Five" returns.


PERINO: Less than 100 days to 2014 midterms and the Republicans have some reason for optimism. Most election models give the Grand Old Party the edge to take back the majority in the Senate and a new FOX News poll reveals that Republicans are more interested in this election over Democrats by 14 points.

Despite the high hopes, veteran campaign strategist Karl Rove offered some warnings to the GOP on how Democrats will attempt to break this wave.


KARL ROVE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: The Democrats have four advantages. First of all, incumbency. Money -- Democrats Senatorial Committee raising more money than the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Third, the Democrats are focused on their ground game. They are attempting to bring out in the 2014 election, people who voted in 2012 and 2008 but didn't vote in 2010.

And finally, you know, look, in every election you have television ads that stretch the truth. I have never seen the Democrat advertising like this, this year.


PERINO: All right. Let me go to Greg first, because I want to see -- do you think Karl missed anything?

GUTFELD: Yes. He mentioned four advantages but left out the major one, which is the media. Always near the end of an election when a Republican seems to be ahead and a Democrat in trouble, think about the debates between Romney and Obama. The media will step in and pick-off the Republican and save the day. So, the prospects are bright for Republicans if you ignore one major player, and that is the media.

PERINO: I'm skeptical and I'm cautious. I want Bob's take on this, because he has interesting thoughts. But let me first show you, Chris Stirewalt. I talked to him today. He's a digital politics editor. You can see him off and on lots of different programs, including Megyn Kelly's show.

These are the, he thinks, that the reds are the ones that are strong Republican. In pink, they're toss up but lean towards Republicans, and then the rest are just the ones that the Democrats might be able to hold on to.

Bob, I'm actually more interested in your take on this. Some people think that the Republicans are going to have a wave, a tidal wave or a tsunami. But do you think it's that clear cut?

BECKEL: Well, no, it's not that clear cut. One of the things, by the way Rove also made this point and I keep hearing this from Republicans. Democrats are going their ground game. I wonder why the Republicans don't do their ground game, because they could do a better job.

But having said that, I don't think we should talk about the House. The reason we're focused on the Senate, the House is pretty much a done deal. Only question in my mind is going to be seven, eight, nine, 10 either way.

But in the Senate, it's a big deal and it's a big deal some say it's not that big of a deal, you know, it takes 60 votes to defeat something in the Senate. What they forget is, chairmen of committees write bills that go to the floor. And so, if you do that, appropriate -- everything from appropriation to authorization comes from the Republican side. Right now, they have to deal with it from the Harry Reid side. So, it does make a big difference.

My get -- my count today and I can't emphasize this enough, these things change and they change a lot. But I think right now, if the election were held today, the Republicans would win the Senate, 51-47, with two independents voting with Democrats.

I find it difficult to believe any of those states Montana, South Dakota or West Virginia will go anything but Republican. I think you got to have to assume that there's going to be out of the people who are really in trouble in Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina, that you're going to see two of the three of them get knocked off and those that are now in play that were not in play before from Colorado to Oregon to Minnesota to Michigan, then now, the Democrats are more exposed than they had been before.

PERINO: Another one of those, Eric, is Virginia. When that race first got under way, Ed Gillespie entered the race. It was "The New York Times" said there was 25-piont gap. This past Sunday, "The New York Times" put it down to 10. How much is the fundraising disadvantage for Republicans going to hurt them in November?

BOLLING: I don't know. Bob, I'm not sure. But look -- if you're the Republicans right now the ball is in your court. You got the wind behind you. You might as well play this. From Obamacare to IRS to Bergdahl, everything is going to Republicans way.

Just play it out, don't be stupid. Don't make stupid comments about libidos or contraceptives. Just stay on what matters.

You know what else matters in the Senate if Republicans get the Senate, you can bring these bills that Harry Reid is refusing to vote on.

Now, of course, President Obama for the next year and a half can veto them, but that would be more unlikely, but at least you get to see where people stand on things.

Also, there are so many -- I'll let Kimberly jump in here. I think this is the time right now, the House and Senate.

GUILFOYLE: Look, if they can't do it now, when can they get it right? I mean, honestly -- hopefully, pull it together. Learn from the mistakes in the past. I think, traditionally, it's been a problem for GOP candidates, except from some Tea Party candidates, to really emphasize and mobilize their get out the vote opportunities and their ground campaign and also as you know historically, regardless of who the president is in which party in the second term of a sitting president, you're going to take mid- term election losses.

So I'm not going to be surprised by any of it, but let's see if this is an indicator that the GOP is getting more of their game together.

PERINO: Let me ask Greg about this.

Republicans are often accused of being too serious not having enough of a sense of a humor. Do you think they should have enough confidence that maybe they could step out of their conservative box and try to mix it up a little bit with the people, or is that too dangerous?

GUTFELD: No, it's too dangerous. No, I don't know. There's some young blood out there, I guess but I think it's less important for conservatives or -- to send a message to their own party than it is to beat the other guy. So, you need to push a candidate you know can win.

It's not enough just to be right. You have to be persuasively right. I think that's the message. That's for the long term for the survival of the Republican Party.

PERINO: Bob, there's always a surprise in every election.


PERINO: You can answer this however you want, because I know you want to say something else. But you can wrap this up here. What do you think could possibly be the thing that nobody is paying attention to right now that could surprise us in November.

BECKEL: I think they are paying attention, but I think McConnell going down in Kentucky would be the one.

PERINO: Ooh, very unlikely to happen.

BECKEL: Well, but you asked me what's a surprise.

PERINO: But you think that could be it?

BECKEL: Yes. Another couple of things to keep in mind here, is that for the first time, the Republicans have not nominated some real wing nuts and they got a pretty good cast of characters. The second thing in an off- year election like this, the party that is out of power wants to nationalize the elections. So, the Republicans want to nationalize around all these issues that Eric was talking about.

GUILFOYLE: Bolling says it.

BECKEL: The incumbents and Democrats want to make it, this is what I can deliver. I'm an incumbent. I've got as Karl pointed out, that's an important thing to say. Look, I'm high ranking on this committee, that committee, that could bring it home. The problem is that bringing something home from Washington right now is like bringing home Eboli.

GUILFOYLE: It's actually --

BECKEL: I mean, it's not --

BOLLING: It's not the one thing, money. We'll take your money.

PERINO: Ebola and Eboli, if that was a combo, Bob, that would be even more deadly.


BECKEL: Is that what they call it? I thought it was Eboli.

PERINO: Ebola and E. coli. And you like combine them is actually --

GUTFELD: An Eric Bolling.


GUILFOYLE: The hot zone is Ebola.

GUTFELD: Eric Bolling.

PERINO: OK. Next up on our biology lesson on "The Five." Coming up, there are all kind of celebrations in Colorado after pot was legalized there. But the state's biggest city now has a big problem on its hands. Kimberly is going to explain, next.



GUILFOYLE: Well, pot has been legal now since January in Colorado and most people think it's fun and games as Jesse Watters found out in April.


JESSE WATTERS, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: What's your daily routine? Like you guys wake and bake?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I wake up, smoke a bowl, fall asleep, wake up, smoke a bowl, go to work.

WATTERS: How often do you smoke?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Daily. It's a daily thing for me.

WATTERS: What do you do for a job? What do you do?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm a trust fund kid. I don't do anything.

WATTERS: Just a little bit of weed smoke can kind of hurt your brain.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wait, what? So you have to smoke a lot, is that it?


GUILFOYLE: Wow, persuasive.

All right. But legalization is actually creating problems in Denver now. Officials there say it's led to an influx of young, homeless people to the city.

What has happened to your great state, Ms. Perino?

PERINO: They're experimenting. I hope they're not playing with fire. And I guess that they want to give it a shot. I just feel like...

GUILFOYLE: Because otherwise they'll go up in smoke?

PERINO: I don't know you can split the legalization baby. Right? So let's make it fully legal or let's not. I mean, I think that you -- I think you will see a federal push very soon. I admire the White House, who has stuck to the science, which is the science that they tried to apply towards other things, like tobacco or climate change.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Bolling. Making that sideways face (ph).

BOLLING: No. Because, look, it's still illegal federally. If you get caught smoking weed or having weed, and what Colorado has done is say, "You know what? We don't care. It's better for our state to do this." I'm all for that. That's fantastic.

First four months of the year, the latest figures: 200 million, $210 million in legal pot sales that's going to generate somewhere around 30 to $35 million in tax revenue. That's fantastic.

PERINO: That they have to spend on their homeless.

BOLLING: Well, maybe more. Maybe less in the jails. So maybe they're going to make it up in incarcerating fewer people. Look, I don't know. I'm all for it. I like the states picking and choosing what they want to do and getting federal government out of the way.

GUILFOYLE: Different states, right? You're for revenue, right? Because you were saying it's income producing for...


GUILFOYLE: ... the states.

BOLLING: It has potential to be quite a revenue-producing...

GUILFOYLE: And the government to stay out of your personal decisions.

BOLLING: Yes. All that.

GUILFOYLE: So that's a three-fer for you.

GUTFELD: First off if you actually believe that pot legalization was going to solve all of society's ills, that's on you. You're an idiot.

There will always be lazy shiftless bums, pot or no pot. We keep calling these fellows homeless. They're actually young 18-to-24-year-old drifters who are basically following the high. They don't have a bindle on a stick like an old hobo. They've got a Frisbee and a Hacky Sack.

As soon as legalization spread, they will probably leave that town and maybe they'll find a job; maybe they won't. It is your choice to be loser, and if that doesn't affect me, fine. I've never been punched by a pothead in my life. I've been hit by a lot of drunks. I deserved it.

But the goal -- the goal in all of legalization, in general, in my opinion, is to stop punishing people because they're searching -- searching for their kind of martini, their kind of oblivion.


GUTFELD: And I think that -- I think this homeless thing is kind of a ruse, because I don't think they're staying there. They're going there.

And I love Jesse and his popped collar, but he went to a marijuana festival. What are you going to find at a marijuana festival? People smoking marijuana.

GUILFOYLE: But guess what? It seemed like a little second-hand smoke situation going on there.

GUTFELD: He got rid of the collar, which is why I love Jesse.

GUILFOYLE: There you go. All right. So you're kind of concurring here. Mr. Beckel.

BECKEL: If there were -- if there were states all around Colorado that legalized marijuana, you wouldn't have anybody going to Denver.

GUTFELD: Exactly. It's your gun control argument.

BECKEL: But -- and the science issue is something that needs to be dealt with.

However, when they say it lowers I.Q.s, it certainly did mine, because I was stoned when I took a test.

GUILFOYLE: I was going to say.

BECKEL: So that probably -- you have to be real careful with it.

The one place, though, that I really do think they've been lax on is there's no doubt that smoking dope and driving a car is a dangerous combination. Because people who drive -- smoke cars and drive cars drive at 6 miles per hour, because they think that they're going 99 miles per hour. And they're getting backed up and go -- but so I think it's a...

GUILFOYLE: You've also talked about it being a gateway drug.

BECKEL: Well, I think some of this stuff is very, very powerful. And -- but the whole point here is you've got one state in the middle of no place. Right? Once it starts spreading out, I don't think you're going to have these concentrations.

GUTFELD: Yes, that's the point. But the things that the government addressed, which are, I think, illegitimate, the changes in the brain are something you've got to look out for. That happens when you abuse any kind of -- whether it's alcohol, there are permanent changes in the brain over time.

Pot is addictive. It's addictive to maybe 10 percent of the population, 90 percent. Maybe not.

Drunk driving. You're absolutely right. Terrible. That should be illegal. It is illegal. You should enforce it, find a way to measure it effectively. I think they're doing that now.

So you can tackle these things. The problem is, it's your -- again, it's your choice to be a loser. It is not my choice to enforce those decisions.

GUILFOYLE: So the government should not step in to prevent that?

GUTFELD: Well, then we should be doing that with everything: alcohol, you name it. What about sports? People die skiing.

GUILFOYLE: Right. Well, OK, but that -- OK.

BECKEL: The addiction thing...

GUILFOYLE: I mean...

BECKEL: ... just very quickly, addiction generally means that without the substance that you are addicted to...


BECKEL: ... you'll go through physical changes and usually detrimental ones. Marijuana is one of the things that, if you stop smoking marijuana, you're not going to go into the -- you're not going to do the DTs, you're not going to (UNINTELLIGIBLE), which means it's all psychologically addictive. Whereas alcohol is both physically and psychologically addictive, and most other drugs where there is addiction have both. So marijuana does not have it.

PERINO: Do you think we'll see a move to legalize it federally and get it over with?

BECKEL: Yes, I think so. I mean, it's probably where it's headed. I mean, the tax revenue is there. Talks about...

PERINO: That's what's happening.

GUILFOYLE: Same thing with gay marriage. I mean, you're seeing that is going in individual states, and it's going to come across the board. And I think that is the wave of the future with respect to marijuana.

PERINO: And what happens to people who are in jail right now for drug-related charges...

BOLLING: That's the $64,000 question. That's what you really need to work out. Federal drug charges for, you know...

GUILFOYLE: Charges, yes.

BECKEL: If you have a federal law, then you ought to address that retroactively.

BOLLING: You let them out?

BECKEL: Yes, sure.

GUILFOYLE: We have so much to discuss on this show. Don't we?

But next on "The Five," he may have won his legal battle against the widow of the Navy SEAL. But Jesse Ventura is certainly not a winner in the court of public opinion. He thinks otherwise, though, and he's taking quite a victory lap after this verdict yesterday. You're going to hear from Ventura coming up.


BOLLING: Suing the widow of an American hero makes Jesse Ventura not just a chump but a greedy, camera-crazy fool who just made a massive withdrawal from his karma account. Jesse Ventura, ladies and gentlemen.

GUILFOYLE: I like that.


JESSE VENTURA, FORMER GOVERNOR OF MINNESOTA: I'm already damaged. I can't go to a SEAL reunion any more. That was one place where I'd always felt safe. I can't go there anymore. I'd be looking over my shoulder now, wondering who's going to come after me next.


BOLLING: Ventura, you call yourself a SEAL. The jury is still out on that one. Either way, you don't deserve to call yourself a SEAL. Here's a real SEAL, Marcus Luttrell, summing it up for many of us.

Ralston (ph), please. "I sue wives of fallen heroes." K.G., outrageous.

GUILFOYLE: It's awful. And then he waits until Chris Kyle dies and then sues the widow in court and gleefully takes this victory lap. It's really disgusting.

Let me tell you something. They should set aside this verdict. She's going to go ahead and appeal it, and she should. Because I do not feel that they met the legal standard here.

How can you say, when you have 11 Navy SEALs testifying to exactly what Chris Kyle said happened, then say that Chris Kyle, acted in clear and convincing evidence, with actual malice, against a public figure by flat- out telling a bold-faced lie? That's all the evidence supports. And it was a split decision, 8-2.

BOLLING: Right. And they're also looking at damages, because he said Chris Kyle's actions kind of ruined his future career. I think Jesse Ventura's actions is what ruined his own career.

BECKEL: You know, I don't want to the lone voice here. I'm not a Jesse Ventura fan. But if, in fact, this guy did say that Jesse was -- hated America, thought that America was killing women and children in Iraq and the SEALs deserved to lose a few, if in fact, that's what he said, then that is grounds for and should be awarded a compensation.

Now if they had 11 people go there and say that that's exactly what he said, these jurors can't all be stupid. I mean, they must -- they must lack evidence somewhere to make this case. And if Ventura is right, and they did not say that, then I think he deserves to get what he got.

GUILFOYLE: OK, here's what happened. Chris Kyle is saying that Jesse Ventura made those statements; therefore, he punched him.


GUILFOYLE: Did not use his name in the book. But then he went on shows like "O'Reilly" and identified Ventura. That's where the real damage goes. It comes in to the tune of $1.8 million.

No. 1, the amount is excessive. No. 2, the evidence is not uncontroverted; it is inconsistent. No. 3, the defense attorney -- OK -- of the widow said, "OK, go ahead. We'll accept a split verdict instead of unanimous one." Big mistake. Don't ever accept a bad hang.

BOLLING: Can we now watch Jesse Ventura and see what he does with this $1.8 million award? I mean, should we?

PERINO: I never watched Jesse Ventura ever before anyway. So...

GUTFELD: You loved "Predator." You told me it was your favorite movie.

PERINO: I hated that show. I wanted to leave. It was painful.

Ventura said that he brought the lawsuit based on principle. I think the widow is going to appeal it based on principal, as well. And I hope that she gets as much legal -- pro bono legal support as she needs in order to bring it and see then what a jury would say based on what Kimberly just said. Sounds like the jury maybe got it wrong.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. And they should have said -- they should have said unanimous verdict instead of agreeing to the split verdict.

BOLLING: Jesse may be legally within his bounds to bring this. But is he a jerk for doing it?

GUTFELD: Yes. It's the same argument that we had about the Ground Zero mosque, which is no one questioned the legality of them setting up the mosque. We just questioned the sensitivity of it.

So obviously, Ventura can sue, because he felt that he was being slandered. He's claiming that this was never said about him. You can loathe him for it, but you can't forbid him.

By the way, I can't stand this guy but not for this. It's that he's a truther. The guy is -- was the loudest truther. He's got more screws loose than a hardware store in an earthquake.

I would also -- I would blame the jury for this more than I blame him.

But I also want to make a point. I've said he was a SEAL. And you mentioned, he does blur -- he has blurred the distinction. He was actually a frogman. He was a part of the underwater...

BOLLING: Demolition.

GUTFELD: ... demolition team, the UDTs, which merged with the SEALs, but that was after -- after he left. Like eight years after.

BECKEL: You just said something. In fact, the mosque was a thing. In fact, it was going built.


BECKEL: The question here is did, in fact, Jesse Ventura say these things?

GUTFELD: That's the argument.

BECKEL: If in fact, eight out of ten people say no...


BECKEL: ... then the guy has got grounds to get money.

BOLLING: If that's the reason why people aren't booking him on TV shows, he's out being hired on television networks, which is the only reason...


BECKEL: The law is supposed to be blind.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, but guess what else? Chris Kyle wasn't able to come into court and testify. You know, that's another thing.

BECKEL: He actually gave...

GUILFOYLE: In a video deposition which is not the same as live testimony.

BECKEL: But so call -- call Chris Kyle wrong but award -- award Jesse Ventura zero dollars.

BECKEL: Just because he's Jesse Ventura?

BOLLING: No. Because...

GUILFOYLE: Because he's a jerk.

BECKEL: OK, that's what you say.

BOLLING: By the way, Jesse if you sue me, wait until I'm dead and go after Adrian and Eric Chase, if you don't mind.

Ahead, should marriage be a two-year commitment instead of forever? A lot of young adults said they'd be inclined to sign up for that. We're going to tell you what we think next.


BECKEL: Should marriage get a test run before the real commitment sets in? According to a new study, a lot of millennials aren't so keen on the idea of "until death do us part." Forty-three percent said they'd prefer to try out the beta marriage model. It would be a two-year trial period, after which you would either formalize the marriage or dissolve it with no paperwork required.

Now I happen to be divorced myself, but now I've got two great kids out of it. I'm not going to say what it says here on the prompter, or they'd kill me.

OK. Let's keep going. That's it? OK. There are two other models. One was do a five-, ten-, 15-year deal or the presidential model, which is four years. What do you think, Eric?

BOLLING: I think presidential is eight years, if I'm not mistaken.

The test run should be, "OK, I'm all for that." Live with your suppose for a little while and see -- make sure that there are things that don't drive you crazy.

GUILFOYLE: You mean as a boyfriend-girlfriend?

BOLLING: Yes, before you actually, you know, sign the deal, put the ring on. But once you do it, do it, man. Do it for life. I'm 17 years in. I'm blissfully married for 17 years. It feels like...

GUILFOYLE: You've been married twice. Right?

BOLLING: No. What?

GUILFOYLE: You did two ceremonies.

BOLLING: Oh, yes. Married the same wife twice.

BECKEL: If that's true, you had ten.

GUILFOYLE: But I think that's romantic.


BECKEL: You'd have ten if you did two.

GUILFOYLE: You know what?


GUILFOYLE: See, this is Bob's favorite subject matter. I have a witness here.

BECKEL: You have -- you have more experience in this than anybody else. What do you think about this?

GUILFOYLE: OK. Thank you for asking. Such a charming question. Here's the deal.

I think you should be very certain when you get married, the best that you can. You're going into it with a really fully informed decision, that you've gone to maybe some counselling ahead of time, kind of work out some of your issues. This is from the benefit of my experience. Make sure that you are really compatible, personally, financially and otherwise.

I think that's what dating's for. I think that's what, in some ways, engagement, if you take it that next step and then be real certain before you walk down...

BECKEL: And thus (ph) -- OK, I'm serious.

GUILFOYLE: Tried to do it.

BECKEL: Greg, now would you -- if you'd proposed one of these ideas to your wife, what do you think would happen?

GUTFELD: Well, if -- a beta -- beta marriage is two years, and I'm going to be married ten years, I think that makes me a master beta.

By the way, I'm totally against.

BECKEL: And I get in trouble for saying what I said yesterday.

GUILFOYLE: Edit people's thoughts (ph).

GUTFELD: I'm totally against this, because this is just living together.


GUTFELD: This is just living together.

And also, I want to support what Geraldo said about this.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, perfect. Great.

GUTFELD: It's worse for women than it is men, because the world is kinder to an ageing man in the reproductive process. So if you span a two- year marriage, a trial marriage, for a woman in her 20s, it's harder on her than it is for a man, who can still, you know -- it doesn't -- in the reproductive process. He can still continue to have kids into his 40s, 50s, 60s. So I think it's a bad idea for women primarily.

BOLLING: That's the last thing we'll agree upon. For a while.

GUILFOYLE: I like the way you rode that, because I was like...

BECKEL: Would -- would you adopt any of this when you were married?

PERINO: I think this is a regrettable experiment.


PERINO: I think it does reflect some of the millennial generation's description of being afraid of commitment, risk averse. I also think there's something to be said about an old-fashioned traditional marriage. It's wonderfully fulfilling. But half of -- half of divorces [SIC] end in divorce. Half of marriages end in divorce. I'm still dying over that.

GUTFELD: I know.

GUILFOYLE: Don't say it.

GUTFELD: It was nothing bad. It was -- it's completely normal.

PERINO: You're a master. I get it.

Anyway, I think there's a major difference between dating and being married. I actually felt it after I got married. You choose your family. And then, yes, it's hard. But once you can get through, like, the first year is tough. Then, like, the tenth year is kind of tough. But once you're through that, like you're good to go.

GUILFOYLE: I've learned from sitting at this table two things. You want to succeed, get a Peter and get a dog.

PERINO: Exactly.

BECKEL: OK. I know we've got to run, but I haven't said my word here. I think -- I happen to agree with the millennials on this. I mean, I -- you've got to learn what it's about to be married to somebody. I came home after I was married, and we lived in my house. She was scrubbing the bathroom floor. And I said, "What, are we moving?"

OK. "One More Thing" is up next.

GUILFOYLE: That story does not make any sense.


GUTFELD: Time for "One More Thing." I start it off with a banned phrase, "unacceptable." I hate hearing this word. Somebody -- when you're trying to look for something -- "No, I'm sorry, sir. That's unacceptable." It's unacceptable to you. So I'm saying right now it is unacceptable to use the phrase "unacceptable," especially in politics, because that requires work to be done, which you never do.

PERINO: Can you say "not acceptable"?

GUTFELD: No, you can't.

All right, Dana. You're next.

GUILFOYLE: Double ban.

PERINO: Have you ever been suckered into a big nutrition trend, because you thought it was going to make you more healthy or help you lose weight, whatever? So that was me and coconut water. It has a very sweet taste.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

PERINO: It's kind an acquired taste. You know what, though? I've learned to love it.

And then today I read in the "New York Times."..

GUILFOYLE: What does it say?

PERINO: ... that coconut water is changing its claims. It is not as healthy as they originally claimed. There's a whole thing you can read in here. You might like the taste, but do not kid yourself that you're being really healthy by drinking it.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

BECKEL: I can't stand coconut.

PERINO: Also, I have to recommend the coconut water war story about two guys who really got it going is really good. It's in the New York Times business section on Sunday.

BOLLING: Interesting.

GUILFOYLE: Some fun weekend reading.

GUTFELD: Yes, wow.

GUILFOYLE: I'm so happy, because I never did the coconut thing.



PERINO: Now you don't have to.

GUILFOYLE: Can someone debunk green juice?

PERINO: Now even -- now even they're putting it in the soap.

GUILFOYLE: Freaks me out. It makes me feel sick by looking at it.

All right. Let's have a little adorable video that I'm sure Greg will hate.

GUTFELD: I love this one.

GUILFOYLE: This is Alex Miller, who uploaded the video of Sadie. And it's a little girl, 5-year-old, who just loves to pieces her little baby brother, and she's oh, so sad. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't want him to grow up. You are so cute. I love his cute little smile. Oh, my gosh. He's little.


PERINO: Wait until she's 14. Holy cow.

GUILFOYLE: Exactly. I didn't feel like that about my brother. I was, like, "Grow up."

BECKEL: That's what my sister is still saying to me.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. That's what we say about you, Bob.

BECKEL: I know.

BOLLING: The drama.

GUTFELD: An amazing performance by Lou Dobbs.

All right. Eric.

BOLLING: OK. I love bringing you great TV. "Tyrant" last night, amazing. "House of Cards," "Homeland." Guilty pleasures also like "Walking Dead," but tonight watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's happening again.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's go show them what it means to be a New Yorker.

When something bites us, we bite back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We got to work quick before the twisters merge.


BOLLING: So tonight, just DVR it: "Sharknado 2." SyFy, 9 p.m.

GUTFELD: You know, once Ian Ziering starts wearing a hoodie over a leather jacket, that look is over.


BECKEL: By the way, Eric, you got me into that. You got me in that "House of Thorns" thing. I bought the whole thing, and it's terrible.

BOLLING: "House of Cards."

GUILFOYLE: What are you talking about, "House of Cards" or "Game of Thrones"?

BECKEL: "Game of Thrones," yes.

GUTFELD: "House of Thorns" is a better idea.

GUILFOYLE: Where does Bob make...


GUTFELD: ... anywhere, Bob.

BECKEL: This is a very big and important announcement today that, of course, will not normally be covered on this show. But let me try to make this point.

The second quarter GDP expanded to 4 percent. That's more than that happened at any time in the last decade. Congratulations. A little belated, but the Obama recovery is with us. We should be happy.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

BECKEL: Everything is doing very, very well, and he will go down as one of the great economic presidents of all time.

GUILFOYLE: Is this a joke? Are we on "Saturday Night Live"?

BECKEL: No, that's...

GUTFELD: Longest recovery ever.


BECKEL: Oh, yes. You guys can't handle it.

GUTFELD: Don't forget to DVR.

BECKEL: You can't handle it.

GUTFELD: You'll never miss an episode of "The Five." We'll be back here tomorrow, I think. "Special" -- some of us will.

GUILFOYLE: Maybe not you.

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.