Sign in to comment!

The Five

Did Clinton break federal laws with personal email use?

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," March 4, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

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

On the heels of two major scandals that could threaten her expected second bid for the White House, Hillary Clinton asked this question to a crowd of female Democrats last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, FMR. SECRETARY OF STATE: Don't you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America?

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: She's getting closer to making it official soon, but she's got a lot of explaining to do first about foreign donations, her family's foundation accepted while she was secretary of state and also, why she used a private e-mail account to conduct government business throughout her tenure. Did Clinton violate any federal laws? Gretchen Carlson asked Judge Napolitano that question.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FOX NEWS SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: If on her e- mails is classical information -- is classified information, say information about the raid to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, something of the highest level of classified, and she had that on her personal e-mails. She arguably could be charged with the same crime for which the government announced this morning General Petraeus will plead guilty, which is the improper storage, improper removal, improper placement of classified materials.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: Sounds like a legal problem to me. And when I was reading that, Julie Roginsky tried to taunt me and said, you wish. When I said is this the end of Hillary. Explain that comment.

JULIE ROGINSKY, GUEST CO-HOST: Well, listen, Clinton have suffered through 1 or 2 or 27 scandals in the past and still standing. I'm not minimizing this, by the way, I think this is pretty bad and I think what she did is unconscionable and you don't do that as an elect official or appoint official. You actually should have e-mails all of us can read as part of your official capacity. But, this is not the death knell of Hillary Clinton. I mean, this woman has been through the wringer. She will emerge. It will hurt her -- in the short term, I don't know if it's going to hurt her in the long term.

GUILFOYLE: OK, so Eric, you don't think this gave Hillary Clinton the proverbial cement boot?

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: No.

GUILFOYLE: Before she enters into the race officially.

BOLLING: About what she said, she said about the e-mail, she said, at this point, what does it matter? I'm just kidding. Even more concerning that she was using private e-mails was that they were all being stored on the Clinton server? Right, which means, they could go back and they can conveniently find the ones they want and they don't want. Now, it's not like they're without scandal. Hillary Clinton has been plagued by scandal for the better part of 30 years. We can go through a lot of them, not even worth debating right now. So it's not like the first time she's seen some scandal. So when it's a repetitive thing, you see saying, hey. Well maybe there was a purposeful reason for doing what she did. I think judge has a very good point. If Petraeus is gonna get in trouble for typing some information to a girl who is writing a biography about him yet, she wasn't -- some of this stuff was classified. Hillary Clinton has to turned over some classified information to people other than at the State Department, it's just has to happened. There were too many correspondences, there were too many things going on, she's contacting too many leaders, she's contacting too many outside corporations for nothing to be -- none of it to be classified. She has to have the same violation. Will they prosecute her the same way? Will they go after her the same way? I doubt it.

GUILFOYLE: OK, Dana, said she's got some legal problems here quite clearly and then there's the issue to whether not there's gonna be a double standard because, they went after General Petraeus, very aggressively. He did plead to a misdemeanor instead of a felony, but there is a serious suggestion that Hillary engaged in felonious conduct. Not only that. Violating the standards for the administration about retaining and preserving e-mailed.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Right. So Nedra Pickler of the AP just posted a story about the White House, and I thought their response is actually very interesting on two fronts. One, Joshua Earnest has tried to basically, put some distance between Hillary Clinton and the White House to say, the Obama administration guidelines are, that anyone who is an official government employee of which she was, has to use official government e-mail in order to conduct business. So I think that -- OK, that's fine. The question then is though, so no one at the White House who was getting e-mails from Hillary Clinton never said, uh, don't you think you should have a state.gov e-mail? I can't be giving your personal e-mail, your hotmail account to the National Security Adviser or the White House Chief of Staff, and that gets to that question again of character and judgment.

Maybe this won't be the precise scandal that brings them down, but it's again, it's just like, who does she surround herself with, and how does she -- she's a lawyer. She knows what the law is and every person at the State Department, every year, you have to get a briefing, just like you have briefings here at corporate briefings. In the government, you have an ethics briefing. Part of that ethics briefing is the Presidential Records Act which changed in 2009. So she was out of compliance with the law. Now, some Democrats are mad about -- the whole issue, they think it's indefensible, right. I called her earlier the secretary of indefensible. Other Democrats are mad, because the Clinton administration knew this was coming -- or the Clinton camp, knew this was coming. But they did not have an ability to defend it well. So they're not mad about the indefensible, they're just mad about the defense of the indefensible, which puts the PR people in a terrible position, because it's actually not a public relations problem. This is a character and judgment problem and it's possibly a legal one, too.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah, but the problem is, did they think it was better to do this and direct all the e-mails to their server at their personal residence than run the risk of e-mails coming back to haunt her? Did they think this would be a more insignificant scandal than perhaps, if there was e-mails out there loose that they have to turn over?

ROGINSKY: That's what I don't get. I mean, at some point they must have said, this is gonna come out. It has to come out. You're the secretary of state, everything has to get archives, they must have known this is gonna come out and when they so sense to me is, why put yourself in that situation? --

PERINO: Exactly. That's my point.

ROGINSKY: I don't get it.

BOLLING: What is the most important thing, the most concerning thing of this whole -- all the e-mail scandal going on -- I call it a scandal is because, you know how it was discovered? Do you know who unearthed the fact that Hillary was using a private e-mail? Guccifer. That the hackers discovered it before anyone else, before anyone called attention to it. They were the first ones on it, smoking gun, ran with it two years ago. More than two years ago. So they were actually putting a lot of state secrets at risk.

GUILFOYLE: Right. OK, well she's lucky she didn't get double-teamed by anonymous and Guccifer, that would have been rough, go ahead.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Thanks. You know what? I noticed at the beginning of the show, it was -- I thought it was kind of offensive, the way you said on the heels of the scandal.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah. I'd like to take that back.

GUTFELD: It is really -- what this is really about and what Hillary's plan of attack will be, that this is going to be about gender. This is yet another attack in order to prevent the first woman president. First, you had Bill that cheated on her, then you had Obama who pushed her aside and now e-mail, and you can't spell e-mail without male. And if I were her and somebody said, why didn't you use that e-mail? She should say, I use fe- mail. She would win it, right then and there. But --

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: I'm helping her. I'm on her payroll.

PERINO: That's actually not bad.

GUTFELD: No. I think it's really good. The fact - the bottom line is, is that she -- there's information that should be on government e-mail for purely security reasons. So basically, she did the communicative equivalent of violating a monogamous relationship. She cheated on the government. She went somewhere else with her information. My guess is, she probably used that old draft e-mail business where you don't actually -- write e-mails, you put them in a draft. And then the other person who's on the server can look at the draft e-mail, too. So the e-mails are never actually sent. It's what -- I think what Petraeus did. So what -- then you look at the long term for this. What about the historical record? People, you know, want to write about these years. But there's gonna be a large historical gap, because Hillary did all of that privately and then got rid of it. This -- whatever they hand over is going to be the very, very, very most boring stuff. It will be like a picked-over sale on Black Friday at Walmart. The only left was (inaudible) socks. But I want to add this --

GUILFOYLE: It's gonna be like we're out of ink in the printer.

GUTFELD: Yeah. It's like there's going to be nothing there. Basically, what she did, she ripped out the chapters of a history book of the years that she was secretary of state. It's like what Stossel did when he ripped those pages out of those old Playgirls.

ROGINSKY: Exactly like that.

GUILFOYLE: What?

PERINO: But the Clinton's -- here's the other thing about this --

ROGINSKY: We missed that.

PERINO: That --

ROGINSKY: Go to Stossel who's like, what just happened here?

PERINO: What they have is like Clinton foundation has a person who's assigned to look through the e-mails and to decide which gets to get turned in. Nobody that works at the Clinton foundation should be allowed to look at official government e-mail.

GUILFOYLE: Correct.

PERINO: It doesn't belong to them.

GUILFOYLE: Huge problem.

PERINO: And they don't get to decide what is responsive to the government. The government gets to decide that. That's -- the whole thing is associated.

ROGINSKY: This is so shady. This is why --

GUILFOYLE: They turned the State Department into like a neighborhood lemonade stand. Everybody can do a shift, come on and take a look, see whose comes up for business which is a huge problem. But, not only is Julie supporting and helping the Clinton's, and Greg kind of helps Hillary there too, but the media is playing for her as well. Take a listen. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CHARLIE ROSE, CBS NEWS: All of this context, Clinton is widely expected to make a run for the White House, which is why we turn now to our CBS News Political Director, John Dickerson. John, why is this story getting so much attention?

JOHN HARWOOD, CNBC: It is not 100 percent clear to me, whether or not this was a clear violation or a sense of caution on her part. We gonna have to see more come out.

MARK HALPERIN, BLOOMBERG POLITICS: The Times story is imperfect. There are things in The Times story where if they are not flat-out wrong are really misleading and unfair to the Clintons.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: Wow.

GUILFOYLE: My goodness. With a media like that -- I mean, gosh, you don't even need friends or like big, wealthy donors from outside foreign countries.

GUTFELD: But wait a second, MSNBC is calling this a major crisis. You've got -- The New York Times reported on this. This was a plot that the Republicans should have found during the Benghazi hearings and they didn't.

PERINO: So a year ago. GUTFELD: Yeah, this is not an equal --

GUILFOYLE: Trey Doughty is on it now.

GUTFELD: The left-wing media are not covering up for her, which raises the question, why are they kicking her out of the plane now? Because there's got to be something else to come and they don't think she can win.

GUILFOYLE: Win. Correct. GUTFELD: And they're pushing her out.

BOLLING: Did you see -- did you see Media Matters?

GUILFOYLE: Right.

BOLLING: Did you see David Brock.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: This morning on Media Matters.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: Go after The New York Times --

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: Now, this is actually getting entertaining from --

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: From this standpoint. Media Matters, the Democrat talking megaphone for the White House is going after The New York Times.

GUTFELD: Yeah.

BOLLING: Saying that they need to retract the story, because they wrote it without enough -- sourcing, and they don't think that she actually violated any laws. The New York Times stands by their story. This is getting very interesting.

ROGINSKY: You know what I love though? That you think there's some massive left-wing conspiracy and we all get on the phone and we all talk about what's coming next. Because we are all --

GUILFOYLE: You were on the phone earlier.

ROGINSKY: Because we are all -- I was on the phone earlier, you busted me.

GUILFOYLE: I was listening.

ROGINSKY: Because we got -- because we all secretly know what's coming.

GUTFELD: I think no -- but I think --

ROGINSKY: I'm not telling you.

GUTFELD: You know but there are a lot --

ROGINSKY: I do know.

GUTFELD: People in your -- on your side of the fence.

ROGINSKY: Yes.

GUTFELD: That would rather have Elizabeth Warren.

ROGINSKY: Yep.

GUTFELD: And can't stand Hillary Clinton. And I would say there are people in the Obama administration who can't stand Hillary and don't think she's gonna win. Meanwhile, the Republicans are too busy at CPAC going after Jeb Bush.

GUILFOYLE: So true.

PERINO: Do you know -- another thing on this is the -- it's not uniform -- I think the interesting piece is that it's actually not uniform that the Democrats or people in the media are defending her. If you look at thoughtful columnist Ruth Marcus and maybe not so thoughtful --

GUILFOYLE: That was nice.

PERINO: Frank Bruni, both writing that it is indefensible, that they don't understand why she would put herself in this position. The only explanation is that, they were trying to hide it. I don't understand how they say that The New York Times is wrong. The Presidential Records Act is actually quite clear.

GUILFOYLE: Very clear.

PERINO: Black and white.

BOLLING: And updated in 2009. In 2009, right before she was sworn in, that was -- it was very clearly stated.

PERINO: She probably voted on it.

BOLLING: That she --

PERINO: She probably voted to change the law.

BOLLING: That she had to be on the State Department.

PERINO: She did.

BOLLING: E-mail. She had to be and she didn't -- there's --

PERINO: And also did her stuff.

BOLLING: As they pointed out, there had to be e-mails going from Hillary Clinton to the White House. By the way, are those e-mails now gonna be public record?

GUILFOYLE: And what about (inaudible).

PERINO: Well, that will be a question, right? Because they will be --

BOLLING: Can you imagine that?

PERINO: They will try to say that they are privileged, or that they are part of deliberative process. Now, this is the problem with this story. You can get way down into the weeds of the archivist presidential records act, and that's why I think it's really important to just keep it at the top level which is that, she made a decision as the head of the department, as a secretary of state, third most powerful person in the government to defy the law, to protect herself for future political ambitions. That's incredible.

GUILFOYLE: Leave it right there. Game over. Elizabeth, it's like, printing her new stationery --

PERINO: Yeah, Elizabeth Warren, call your office.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah. PERINO: Got an appointment.

GUILFOYLE: Coming up, Obamacare is faded back on the line again as the Supreme Court hears new arguments on a case that could unravel the president's signature law. We go live to the Supreme Court, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: Earlier today, there was another showdown at the Supreme Court about Obamacare. The administration is trying to keep the law intact when it comes to, who is eligible -- excuse me, to get a subsidy to pay for Obamacare. But the plaintiffs disagreed, saying that the plain reading of the law says that only people living in a state that has a health insurance exchange are allowed to get a subsidy. If they prevail, that would mean that only 13 states and the District of Columbia would qualify, and that has everyone wondering what will happen next. Here's reaction from both sides following final arguments this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEAL KATYAL, LAWYER FOR AMERICAN HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: If this novel interpretation by the challengers is accepted by the Supreme Court, it's going to be devastating for the consequences to Americans and their health.

PAM HURST, PALTIFF: Decisions made here in Washington, directly affect middle-class families -- like ours. And we believe it's time that those who have been hurt by Washington take a stand. There is no reason to force millions of us to pay tax penalties if we don't join a government program.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: Let's bring in Shannon Bream, who was inside the Supreme Court earlier today. What did you witness today?

SHANNON BREAM, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well Dana, it all came down to that phrase that said, those subsidies, those go to people who bought a health plan through an exchange set up by a state, those are the words today (ph). But, of course there were those who said, listen, you've got to look at the whole context -- I'm not getting arrested by the way, that I know of. OK. But, it was, it was spicy inside the court as there was a lot of back and forth. I was clear that were certain justices, Chief among them, Justice Elena Kagan, who sided with the government. Who said, "Listen, we got to look at this thing in context, the entire law. What was it meant to do, that make sure that people got health insurance." She said, "You can't just take that phrase, it doesn't make any sense. We want to take it all together." On the other side, you had folks like Justice Antonin Scalia who said, "Listen, it doesn't matter how it impacts the rest of the law. If there is a reasonable unambiguous way to read that phrase, exchange set up by the state, it doesn't matter how it impacts the rest of the law. We have to interpret the way that it's to be interpreted, which is the plain language." So, there were those who are very important to this vote. Probably, the Chief Justice John Roberts, and court's swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy, that we couldn't really tell where they're gonna land. So there gonna be cheated this thing, but we won't know until June.

BOLLING: And -- Shannon, may I ask you, if this affects 7 million people -- if I'm not mistaken is that right?

BREAM: Yeah, and that is something that came up today, because there were justices who talked about, well, what do we do? We know that this is gonna have a big impact, and that's the one thing that both sides agree on. They use the word just fire (ph), well could really have a bad impact on individuals and on the law as a whole. But there were others on the bench who said listen, that's not our problem, if Congress rushed this through, didn't write it well, didn't draft it correctly, that's not our problem. They are going to have to fix it, and there are those across the hill here, across the street from the Supreme Court who say, we do have a plan, the GOP lawmakers and senators who stepped forward to say, we do have a plan, we're not gonna let anybody go without coverage. So, if the government loses here, we will make sure those people keep their insurance in one form or another.

PERINO: Kimberly?

GUILFOYLE: Hi Shannon. So I got to find pretty exciting day for you, as the lawyer to be in court, wish I was there.

BREAM: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: And that I'm here. OK, so I'm curious really mostly about Justice Roberts, because we know that he was the deciding factor last time. He usually -- you know, keeps it pretty close to the test, but could you get as a lawyer any read by the questions he was asking how he might be thinking on this?

BREAM: You know, he was really quiet today, which is a bit unusual for him in a really big case like this. He didn't have a lot to say. On the other hand, Justice Kennedy who, we now know was always on the side of the Conservatives with regard to the Obamacare case back in 2012. It was the chief who was going back and forth. Today, Justice Kennedy was very chatty. Out of the gate he said to the plaintiffs, those who are challenging these subsidies, he said, "If we decide for you, there's going to be a serious constitutional problem here." But also at the end of the arguments, he was hard on the government. He said, "If this is unambiguous, why give all this power to the IRS to dole out billions in subsidies if the language has an interpretation that may go a different direction?"

GUILFOYLE: That's a key point.

PERINO: May I ask you one more and then go to Greg. You said there were a lot of lawmakers who actually.

BREAM: Yeah.

PERINO: Went today. So, I think that's pretty unusual, but Speaker -- Former Speaker Pelosi was there, Paul Ryan was there and why --

BREAM: Yeah.

PERINO: Why did they show up?

BREAM: Well, it's interesting, because so many of these people had a hand in either fighting, to get the law passed or fighting to stop it from getting passed. Of course, Nancy Pelosi was the speaker when it was passed, and also famously said we have to pass it to find out what's in it and see how it's gonna be interpreted. Some of those things came up today, and I actually, there was a point when I believe it was Justice Scalia who said, "Listen, this thing was passed in such a hurry. Maybe some things were missed. That's not our problem." He talked about rushing it through and then finding out what was in it, and I had to take a peek at Nancy Pelosi, because she was sitting just a few feet away from me, trying to gauge any kind of reaction from her. All of them were very stoics, but several senators there -- also the current of them were there including HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell, who has said, along with the president, "We don't have a backed up plan if we lose this tape." Also, Former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who shuffled this thing through, she was sitting there, too, and I think she had to be thinking about her legacy.

PERINO: OK. Greg.

GUTFELD: Shannon, good to see you again, as always. I have an observation for viewers, some advice for politicians, and then a question for you. First, the observation, this is about subsidies and subsidies, let's face it, it's boring. Nobody is listening. And boring things kill you. That's the problem. Boring things kill you. And the left counts on people tuning out when you start talking about boring stuff. My advice is it's time to co-opt the left. When the left wants something, they say it's broken. Foreign policy is broken. Healthcare is broken. Let's fix it. So the only way to combat this is to say that Obamacare is broken, and we need a new program called, no Obamacare to fix it. Now, my question to you is how is Ruth Bader Ginsburg?

BREAN: She was lively. She was right out of the gate. And I guess what you're proposing is, no Obamacare.

GUTFELD: Right.

BREAM: Is what you're going to be calling it. That's not something that I think Justice Ginsburg would go along with. She was right out of the gate. The plaintiffs' attorney went first. He didn't even really get the statement out before she immediately was on to him saying, there's -- you know, sort of no way that we can interpret it the way you're asking us to. It doesn't make any sense. Of course, Congress intended for everybody to get these subsidies. The law doesn't work otherwise. There was one point, though, when there was some whispering among the lawmakers I mentioned who were there and I looked over to see kind of what they were talking about, and they were gesturing at Justice Ginsburg, because sometimes it is hard to tell if she's fully engaged, because her head was down a little bit. I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt that she was reading, but some of those lawmakers felt like she may have dozed off.

PERINO: Last question to Julie Roginsky.

ROGINSKY: So hi, Shannon. So Donald Verrilli, who was the solicitor general, got --

BREAM: Yeah.

ROGINSKY: A rash of trouble last time he argued an ACA case in front of the court. How did he do today? Did he rehabilitate himself as a lawyer? What do you think?

BREAM: You know what he seemed very confident. He was able to go back in each of the contentious thing that came at him. He's not -- he seemed very confident, very able, no stumbling, no coughing and that stuff we saw, that he took so much heat for during the original Obamacare case. He seemed calm, cool and collected today.

ROGINSKY: Right.

PERINO: All right, Shannon, thank you for joining us.

BREAM: Have a good one.

PERINO: All right, coming up, a weasel, a woodpecker and the Iranian nuclear crisis.

GUILFOYLE: Oh my, God.

PERINO: We'll explain, coming up.

GUILFOYLE: You read that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: You want to see something adorable? Check out this rare picture captured by a photographer when he heard some squawking in a London park. It's a weasel riding on the back of a glorious woodpecker. It's like the greatest thing I've ever seen ever. Any child, grandmother or idle house husband might go -- aww. Look how that sweet little birdie is giving a ride to this adorable, distressed woodland creature. This is how the world should work. Everyone helping each other out, regardless of differences, cats and dogs, lions and lambs, weasels and woodpeckers, if only we could learn from our wildlife buddies. How about it, Israel and Iran, Russia and Ukraine, ISIS and everybody, except -- that's not what this picture is really about. That bird is actually fighting for its life after this weasel has embraced its next meal. Weasels do this all the time. They'll eat anything, birds, rabbits, other weasels, if they're drunk. Like Michael Moore on a moon pie, that weasel is going to devour the bird the moment it lands, and it's going to be slow, brutal and ugly like a date with Keith Olbermann. So what's you're looking at now in the air, that bird is the west. The weasel, fill in the blanks. It could be Iran, Russia, Cat Stevens, and as played by nature's remorseless hand, they're doing exactly what you'd expect them to. And as we watch, we realize that naivety is a luxury when you're far, far away from the threat you know nothing about. It's one thing for Iran to eat our lunch. It's another thing if that lunch is you.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, wow. I thought they were mating.

GUTFELD: That's disgusting! Not in my world, K.G. They're separate. Once that happens, I'm moving to Texas, where you'll get shot for that sort of thing. Weasels -- weasels and woodpeckers together? Nuh-uh. I'm OK with gay marriage, OK? Don't get me wrong. But weasels...

ROGINSKY: Draw the line.

GUTFELD: Yes, I draw the line at weasels and woodpeckers.

ROGINSKY: I see. It's a slippery slope, you know.

GUTFELD: It is. I've been saying this forever. It's a slippery slope. Cats and dogs. All right.

GUILFOYLE: Wow.

GUTFELD: Wow, where am I? I know where to go. Dana, it seems to me that the message here is that President Obama is more willing to talk to the weasels than to his fellow birds.

PERINO: I think that you're right.

GUTFELD: Thank you.

PERINO: I feel like -- full disclosure, I got to see a draft of that earlier, and I've been laughing about it all day. Because all on Twitter, on social media, Facebook, people have been posting and reposting this amazing picture. And the only person in the world who could look at it like you, was you. I thought it was a really good point.

The thing is, is that you don't even realize that the weasel on your back is about to destroy you. That's the moral of the story?

GUTFELD: Yes. But when you're far away, Eric, when you're far away, when you're President Obama, you can think, "Oh, look at them. They're working together."

BOLLING: Aren't they adorable?

GUTFELD: They're a team.

BOLLING: Come on, buddy, get on my back. So Obama is the woodpecker.

GUTFELD: Well, we're -- I would say we're the woodpecker. Or Israel is the woodpecker.

BOLLING: Or Obama is the woodpecker.

PERINO: OK.

BOLLING: And Putin's the weasel. The mullahs in Iran are the weasel. I mean, there's a whole -- ISIS is -- there are a whole slew of weasels out there.

GUTFELD: Yes. Exactly.

BOLLING: And he can't -- and the thing about the woodpecker is you can't see who's on your back.

GUTFELD: Exactly.

BOLLING: For all he knows, it could be another woodpecker.

GUTFELD: It could be.

BOLLING: It's truly a weasel.

GUILFOYLE: They think that the weasel needs a job. That's the problem. They're carrying him to the employment office. They're going to give him some options. They've got a little resume folded up in the pocket.

GUTFELD: Yes.

ROGINSKY: I want to know what your problem with cat Stevens is. I draw the line on Cat Stevens.

GUTFELD: Just because he was OK with the killing of what's his face?

PERINO: Yes.

GUTFELD: Salman Rushdie. He was all right with that.

ROGINSKY: That was, like, 30 years ago.

GUTFELD: Oh, yes. Forget about him. One radical Muslim threatening death, they're over (ph).

ROGINSKY: ... dude. I thought you didn't like Cat (ph). Come on. That was, like, ancient history. There's new ones.

GUTFELD: OK, I just want to run a -- by the way, this picture created quite a stir. And some memes, a word that I thought I banned. Here's my favorite picture that came up. This is delightful.

BOLLING: So many of those.

GUTFELD: I know. I usually don't do this, but I like that one, because it's adorable. That's...

ROGINSKY: Is that a little Putin?

GUTFELD: Yes, a little Putin.

By the way, that's actual size.

ROGINSKY: Did you Photoshop that yourself? That's awesome.

GUTFELD: No, I just -- I found that. By the way, I just want to run this, and then maybe K.G., you can respond. Here's a sound on tape of critics of Bibi Netanyahu's speech. And there's an interesting thing that happens in this. Roll that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: On the core issue, which is how do we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, the prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What I heard today felt to me like an effort to stampede the United States into war once again.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It was a very dark Strangelovian speech, painting a picture of a really dystopian world.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: This man from a foreign government walked into the United States legislative chamber and tried to take over U.S. foreign policy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: K.G. ...

GUILFOYLE: Please. Somebody ought to.

GUTFELD: Yes, but no...

GUILFOYLE: Nobody's at the wheel.

GUTFELD: When she said Strangelovian, she's talking about "Dr. Strangelove," which is about detonating a doomsday device. Doesn't she realize that's probably the wrong comparison for this? You want to stop a bomb.

GUILFOYLE: It's the wrong comparison, absolutely. And he's -- he's on the money about this. And even Arab press was quite, you know, excited in terms of their praise and thought that he did a great job and that he gets it and that he conveyed the message that needs to be conveyed about the seriousness of Iran becoming nuclear.

So you know what? I'm all in on Bibi Netanyahu. Call Vegas.

GUTFELD: All right. Excellent. That was fun. Ahead on "The Five," the story behind the dress. The people behind the Internet phenomenon that divided the world describe how it all started.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLLING: Welcome back. Time for...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(MUSIC)

GRAPHIC: Fastest 7

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: ... the "Fastest Seven Minutes on Television." Three luring stories, seven lively minutes, one loquacious host.

GUTFELD: Luring?

ROGINSKY: Yes, what's that word.

GUTFELD: What does that mean?

PERINO: Like a lemming.

BOLLING: Luring. Luring, interesting.

GUILFOYLE: I think alluring.

GUTFELD: Luring is something different.

BOLLING: You can look in the break. Luring is also a word.

GUTFELD: We're doing it for you.

GUILFOYLE: You're using it as -- you're using it as a verb. He's using it like alluring, like an adjective.

ROGINSKY: You're luring somebody. Like, you're getting a little kid to come to your house.

BOLLING: It's an adjective. It's an adjective. All right, first up -- Don't yell at me. First up, major -- former Major League Baseball player Curt Schilling was a proud dad when he announced on Twitter his daughter was going to college and would play softball.

He was met with sexually explicit tweets, some even including references to rape. Schilling got really fired up about Twitter trolls and penned an op- ed outing the names of the Twitter fools. Now two have been fired from their jobs after being exposed. Sean McDonald was fired from the New York Yankees organization, and Adam Nagel was fired from his job at Brookdale Community College.

Here's the legendary big leaguer in his own words. describing the social media abuse.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CURT SCHILLING, FORMER MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYER (via phone): No one in the world deserves to be talked to like that. No. 2 is part of this is criminal. There are laws that are broken, and which I'm pursuing. My daughter is a minor at 17 years old.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What was your daughter's response?

SCHILLING: She was devastated. I mean, this is one of the most exciting days of her life. And now she's of the mind that she may not be able to go to college there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: All right. We'll bring it around, K.G. I mean, forget about the legal aspect. Talk about the parent aspect of this.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I love a father like this or a mother, for that matter, that's not afraid to stand up, take some names, kick some you know what, big ol' -- yes, big time. I love it.

And you know what? You have to have some consequences for actions like this. So I hope it makes other people think about doing this, afraid.

BOLLING: Greg, we talk a lot about people who hide behind their Twitter name...

GUTFELD: Yes.

BOLLING: ... anonymous Twitter names and get very aggressive. He went further. He found out who these people were.

GUILFOYLE: Amazing.

GUTFELD: You know, it's -- it's so easy to take great pleasure in this, because we've all wanted to do this. Because the thing is, when you put something out on Twitter -- and he put something out about his daughter -- he -- how he didn't know that there are creeps out there. Twitter is a giant bathroom wall that is there, visible and eternal.

And kudos to him for tracking down the people who wrote on the bathroom wall and screwing their lives over, because he did. Those guys lost their jobs.

GUILFOYLE: Good.

GUTFELD: The problem -- Twitter magnifies the divorce between relative and stranger. Nobody ever thinks when they're saying something vile that that could be somebody's daughter or that could be my daughter. That's the problem with anonymity -- anonymity, is that you don't feel anything.

BOLLING: Can we also say kudos, Dana, to the organizations that fired these people, no tolerance? They said immediately, "Done. You guys are gone."

PERINO: Sure. I mean, sometimes, When you are the target of these kind of things, and people in the public eye are, right? So you can kind of grow a thick skin and ignore them, tell your mom not to look at Twitter, whatever. Sometimes you need a defender. OK? So that might be a friend, a colleague. Sometimes, you know, ask Greg, like, "Can you go beat that guy up?"

GUTFELD: And I do.

PERINO: And he just messes with their minds.

But going after them to the employer, I think this is also a very interesting thing about how employers are dealing with employees in the world of social media to another layer. And that they weren't doing it in their official capacity, but they are connected to the company. And the company says, "You're out of here." That's just another way to get fired.

BOLLING: Good heads up to everyone out there, these Twitter trolls.

ROGINSKY: I'd say this was a diehard Yankee fan, but good for Curt Schilling. Good for him to do this.

And you know, you're so right, because people, I think, when they tweet you, they don't think you're a real person.

GUTFELD: Yes.

ROGINSKY: They think you're just some person they see on TV or playing a baseball game or doing whatever they think you're doing.

BOLLING: You're in the public eye. You're...

ROGINSKY: You're in the public eye. Whatever.

BOLLING: You're OK to be -- taken shots at.

ROGINSKY: Like we read this stuff...

GUILFOYLE: He took a bat to them. I love that.

ROGINSKY: I love that. And by the way, Salve Regina, where she's going, is a great school. She should go. It's a beautiful campus. Go, go.

BOLLING: All right. Up next, the dress that won't go away. You know, blue and black or white and gold. Turns out our producers love this story so much, they want to show the people who started this crazy viral debate that almost broke the Internet. Grace MacPhee and Keir Johnston appeared on "Ellen" yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELLEN DEGENERES, TALK SHOW HOST: Your mother sends you a dress and -- to wear at your wedding, right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. She sent me three photos of three different dresses. And I said, "So which one is it? Which one do you like best?"

And she said, "The third one."

I said, "Oh, the white and gold one."

And she said, "No, the blue and black one."

And I was like, "No, Mum, that's white and gold. And if you think it's blue and black, you need to go to the doctor."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't get the gold and white.

DEGENERES: I don't get the blue and black.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Really?

DEGENERES: No. I mean, I see it now. I know that you're right. But that to me is so white and gold. All day long, that's white and gold.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: Let's start on this end this time.

GUTFELD: OK. Two things, clearly this is Islamophobic. Why does it have to be a dress? Why can't it be a burqa? And when I look at that dress, I'm sorry, I see decades and decades of sexism, heteronormative abuse, and oppressive patriarchy.

BOLLING: Very good. Dana.

PERINO: What I think is that no one looks good in horizontal stripes.

GUILFOYLE: No. Ever. Ever.

PERINO: Don't do it.

BOLLING: Well, what color are the horizontal stripes?

GUILFOYLE: Doesn't matter.

PERINO: I went with white and gold.

GUILFOYLE: Well, it looks blue there now, right? But now it's moving over. There's blue and then the next one rolling up is white and gold, right?

BOLLING: Now, Julie, you weren't here last Friday, were you?

ROGINSKY: I don't think so.

BOLLING: When we talked about it the first time. Your thoughts on this controversy?

ROGINSKY: I'm so over it. I shouldn't say that.

BOLLING: Thank you. That's perfect. That's perfect. Now we have this one. Finally, a few weeks ago, we told you about this. "The Conan O'Brien show" traveled to Cuba to tape the first U.S. talk show from Havana since Jack Paar hosted "The Tonight Show" 56 years ago.

Here's a clip from the show, which will air tonight on P -- TBS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONAN O'BRIEN, HOST, TBS'S "CONAN": We have an incredible show. Isn't that right, Cuban Andy?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Si.

O'BRIEN: (SPEAKING SPANISH)

GRAPHIC: I have a show in the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (SPEAKING SPANISH)

GRAPHIC: That's a lie.

O'BRIEN: Si.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One, two, three. Five, six and seven.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: Now, Julie...

ROGINSKY: Yes.

BOLLING: ... the minute the Obama administration announced kind of the lifting of some of the sanctions on Cuba, Conan announced that day he was going to head to Cuba.

ROGINSKY: This is going to be, like, Miami circa like -- this is going to be like "Godfather." The minute the Castros die, everybody else moves in. This is going to be "Godfather" and "Godfather Part 2," where they go to Cuba and everybody's going to make a billion dollars.

Good for Conan O'Brien. I think the more they get exposed to American culture, the more they realize what's going on in their country is terrible. And I think this is a good start.

BOLLING: Take this to Cuba?

GUILFOYLE: Si. La gusta mucho.

BOLLING: Good idea for Conan?

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I think it's fun, and my God, he can dance.

BOLLING: He did well.

GUILFOYLE: I thought he was very good.

BOLLING: Thoughts on the first Cuba social exchange (ph) in 56 years?

GUTFELD: I'm so happy for all the dissidents who get to look at this, frickin' commies. By the way...

GUILFOYLE: Bleep.

GUTFELD: ... I talked to the bosses at "The Five," and we have been approved to do a live show at the Newark Comfort Suites. So...

BOLLING: There's no way they approved that.

GUTFELD: Well, you know, they approved it as long as we're taking public transportation. And we have to -- we have to have -- use the senior cards that we're getting from the second floor.

GUILFOYLE: Can we still get Diet Cokes?

GUTFELD: By the way, I think it was a mistake. They were supposed to have Cuba Gooding on.

GUILFOYLE: Ohhhh!

BOLLING: Very good, very good. Thoughts on the Cuba -- forget that. Thoughts on Conan going to Cuba.

PERINO: OK. I think if America is going to go down this road, changing its foreign policy, then I do think that cultural exchanges or cultural exposure is probably the most effective way.

However, it has to be coupled with some real honesty...

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: ... about what happens to people there and their political oppression. We have to be able to point out to them that, when you are, as a tourist, go to Cuba and you pay in dollars...

GUTFELD: Right.

PERINO: ... the people that work there are paid, then, in pesos. And I think a constant reiteration of that is really important. But if we are going down this road, I like the cultural stuff.

BOLLING: Very good. They're wrapping me.

GUILFOYLE: Concur.

BOLLING: There's a lot more to that. Maybe we can talk about that tomorrow.

All right. They let their 6- and 10-year-olds walk home alone from the park to teach them independence. Now a set of parents in Maryland are being accused of child neglect. "The Five" weighs in on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROGINSKY: Can parents no longer be the judge of when to let their kids walk alone? A mom and dad from Maryland have been found responsible for neglect by the state's Child Protective Services for letting their 10-year- old and 6-year-old walk alone from the playground in December.

Mom Danielle Meitiv said she's shocked and outraged by the allegations and fully intends to appeal.

So I love this story, because first of all, when I was 7 or 8 -- I grew up in the Bronx -- my dad would send me down to the bodega for cigarettes. I think he -- well, he bought it for him, but really kind of for both of us. No, for him. And you know, nobody worried about it. That's a joke. It's a joke. If Dad's watching, don't kill me. But you know -- but he didn't really worry. And I think it instilled confidence in me, and my parents trusted me.

I have a 2-year-old. A lot of people on the playground think I'm nuts, because I just let him run around and, you know, if he falls, he falls. But he's got to learn how to do stuff by himself. So I'm kind of a free- range mom.

You've got a son. He's 16. What do you think of this?

BOLLING: Yes. So -- and I love the idea of parents having the right to parent the way they want or right. But I will tell you, when Eric Chase was 6 years old, we were in Chicago in a T.J. Maxx. He got into one of those -- you know, the clothes racks. They're circular. Couldn't find him. There's a protocol where they shut the doors. They lock; people can't come in. I was never so scared in my entire life. He was five feet away from me. Didn't know. But just for that -- from that moment forward there was never a moment that either myself or my wife didn't have our eyes on him. And I think...

GUTFELD: He was abducted by a clothes rack?

BOLLING: Yes. It was funny, you know. It was like, "Ha, ha," it was funny. But I will tell you, I thought of the things that could go wrong, especially a mile away from home with a 6-year-old walking into traffic.

I have to say, I think this worked out the right way. They called it unsubstantiated child neglect. They got cited it for it. They're not going to do any jail time or anything.

ROGINSKY: I disagree for family (ph). You have an 8-year-old. What do you think? Are you free-range?

GUILFOYLE: No chance. My kid can't even go to school with his hair curly. I've got to slick it down and cut it, because it interferes, they said. It disrupts the class, because the girls want to touch it.

So no, I can't send him, OK...

ROGINSKY: That's a whole other segments.

GUILFOYLE: ... a mile away, you know? No. No way. Not in New York City. Maybe this is super, like, Petticoat Junction and innocence still lives somewhere. Not as a former prosecutor.

ROGINSKY: I don't know. You and I live about five blocks away. So we live in a different -- different New York City than I do.

What do you think? You've got -- you've got jasper. Would you ever let him run around?

PERINO: Obviously, a dog is very different. You would never let him out of your sight.

ROGINSKY: Right.

PERINO: But I think the worry now is that, yes, I think a mile is a long way for a 10-year-old and 6-year-old. I think the parents can make their own decision. The only thing is, I think that parents are starting to make decisions more worried about not what's necessarily going to happen to their kids walking for a mile, but that their neighbors are going to call them -- call the government on them and that their kids might be taken away. So that I think it's coming at it from two angles.

ROGINSKY: Greg, what's your metaphor about all this?

GUTFELD: No, I just want to point out that nearly all child abductions are done by people that the child knows. And we've been so guilty of stranger shaming. You know, just because a middle-aged talk show host likes to use the neighborhood park slide for recreation at lunch time, I'm the threat? I'm asked to leave? That is wrong. I'm tired of it. I'm absolutely...

GUILFOYLE: You fit on those slides? Really?

GUTFELD: Sadly, yes. I can actually go through the tube. I can actually climb it and go through the tube.

ROGINSKY: All right. "One More Thing" is up next.

GUILFOYLE: As if that wasn't enough.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUILFOYLE: It's time now for "One More Thing." Woodpecker, you're up first.

GUTFELD: All right. I haven't banned a phrase in a while.

PERINO: All right.

GUTFELD: So let's ban a phrase: Blowing up. People keep using this phrase when something is happening on Twitter. They always go, "Oh, it's blowing up on Twitter." Look, Twitter is not real life. Nothing is actually blowing up there. You should only be blowing up beach wraps and dolls. Enough.

GUILFOYLE: Whoa. That was weird. OK.

GUTFELD: You're weird.

GUILFOYLE: Blow-up dolls? Anyway. I wonder what yours looks like.

GUTFELD: It's the Kimberly Guilfoyle 300.

PERINO: OK. I have a nice clean "One More Thing." The lost art of handwriting and cursive writing, and why it's important. A lot of schools, they don't even bother teaching cursive writing anymore.

BOLLING: Outrage.

PERINO: It bothers me. But now there's good scientific reason that schools should start doing this, and parents should demand it. I'm just going to give you five tips here. It helps you integrate knowledge if you know how to do cursive. It teaches you how to write better.

GUTFELD: Why isn't that in cursive?

PERINO: Well, because we want people to be able to read it.

GUTFELD: To be able to read it!

PERINO: And you want -- and then you learn better if you write it down. It leads to cognitive development and creativity. And it also inspires -- let's see -- reduces distractions.

GUILFOYLE: You just got distracted.

PERINO: I don't know what's wrong with my eyes.

GUTFELD: You can't read it because it's...

PERINO: I love cursive writing. And everyone should know how to do it for all of those reasons, and also, it's nice when you send a thank-you note.

GUILFOYLE: You like to make lists. That's why you want it. You want to write Christmas -- OK. What do you have?

ROGINSKY: All right. So Jimmy Fallon got bullied by a 12-year-old yesterday to go dance on a table. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY FALLON, HOST, NBC'S "THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH JIMMY FALLON": "If you really want to be funny and cool, you will get up on your desk right now and dance. And audience, if he decides not to do it, chant, 'You're not cool' until he does, please."

I'm not going to dance on the desk.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not cool. You're not cool. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not cool. You're not cool.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not cool. You're not cool.

(FALLON DANCES ON HIS DESK)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROGINSKY: So, Greg, I'm not going to be here tomorrow, but I'm going to say I have a little challenge for you.

GUTFELD: What's the challenge.

ROGINSKY: You're not cool, my friend. And I think people should tweet you.

PERINO: You've got to dance.

GUTFELD: So what -- she hasn't told me what I'm supposed to do yet.

ROGINSKY: Dance on the table.

GUTFELD: I do that every night down in Chelsea.

ROGINSKY: Bolling, go.

GUTFELD: What?

BOLLING: Now?

GUILFOYLE: Before "Special Report."

BOLLING: So Priest David is a self-proclaimed priest who's now accepting confessions over Snapchat. I really just want to talk about this. When I went to an iPhone 6, I lost all my Snapchat followers. They all went away. I am so mad.

GUILFOYLE: Thank God.

ROGINSKY: Don't you use Snapchat for really sketchy stuff?

BOLLING: It's amazing. No, no. That was the old Snapchat.

GUILFOYLE: OK. My "One More Thing" is that's it for us. "Special Report" is next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 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 Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.