Sign in to comment!

Cashin In

Dems claim GOP 'squandering' taxpayer dollars on Benghazi

DISCLAIMER: THE FOLLOWING "Cost of Freedom Recap" CONTAINS STRONG OPINIONS WHICH ARE NOT A REFLECTION OF THE OPINIONS OF FOX NEWS AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS INVESTMENT ADVICE WHEN MAKING PERSONAL INVESTMENT DECISIONS. IT IS FOX NEWS' POLICY THAT CONTRIBUTORS DISCLOSE POSITIONS THEY HOLD IN STOCKS THEY DISCUSS, THOUGH POSITIONS MAY CHANGE. READERS OF "Cost of Freedom Recap" MUST TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN INVESTMENT DECISIONS.

DEMOCRATS CLAIM GOP 'SQUANDERING' TAXPAYER DOLLARS ON BENGHAZI HEARINGS

Michelle Fields:  Well it’s nice to see that Democrats suddenly have become fiscal conservatives, but they’re wrong on this issue.  The amount of money that we’ve spent on this investigation, taxpayers spent on 2 golfing trips and a fundraising trip that Obama took earlier this year.  I’d argue that we’ve gotten a lot more in terms of knowledge, and bang for our buck when it came to this investigation than we did for those golf outings.  Let’s be honest, if it wasn’t for this investigation, we would have never learned the Hillary Clinton was using a private email server.  I think that in and of itself is worth it.  

Jonathan Hoenig:  The government spends 7 million dollars a minute, so we’re talking about 30 seconds of federal spending.  Put the money aside, I think it takes a lot of gall to even bring up money.  Set the context here, we’ve got 4 Americans murdered, not killed, they were murdered on 9/11, one of whom, their mother is crying on TV hysterically about how government lied to her.  One of whom was an ambassador.  This was the first U.S. ambassador killed since ’79.  To put a price on that, the ambassador is every American’s representative. How can you put a price on getting the truth about those murders?

Jessica Tarlov:  I wouldn’t put a price on it.  I’m departing with the Democrat party on this one.  I think $4.5 million is certainly, in light of the 7 million a minute or whatever we’re spending, a small price to pay.  I happen to be someone who thinks this was worthy of investigation.  It wasn’t until the end that we realized that we knew about Hillary Clinton knowing about the video not being the cause of the attack.  I think that that is an important revelation.  Overall I would say that Trey Gowdy summed it up best in his post conference interview, when he wasn’t particularly clear on what it is that we had learned.  He said there was some good questioning.  I’m sure he’ll regroup today and in the coming weeks to give us more information on what it is exactly that they did learn.  If you wanted this to be nonpartisan, then we should have had a special council conducting this.  The fact that we had a team of elected officials who are all running for reelection, everyone wants to get their shots in, I think makes it fundamentally unfair.  So if you don’t want partisanship, don’t have partisans running the committee. 

NEW DEBATE AS HISPANIC GROUPS DEMAND NBC DUMPS TRUMP FROM 'SNL' NEXT WEEK

Michelle Fields:  This is the typically tactic that liberals use which is to just silence the opposition instead of just talking about the issues and addressing them.  It’s not just Latino groups that are doing this, there’s also a Democratic congressman that’s sending letters.  I think that’s why Americans dislike Congress so much.  We send them here to do stuff and to help fix our country, and instead, they’re worried about who’s going to host a TV show for one night.  It’s ridiculous. 

Jonathan Hoenig:  Boycotts are what the free market is about.  Boycotts are essentially how you settle disagreements in a free country by using your economic power, not your political power with tariffs, taxes, fees, lawsuits, and threats.  So I’m totally for boycotts and to Michelle’s point, that’s how the discussion comes, people make a big stink.  “I’m boycotting X, Y, Z,” and that’s part of the free market, that’s part of the discussion, I’m in favor of it. 

Jessica Tarlov:  I’m super excited for the episode.  I think he’s going to be hysterical. What I will say though, we should think back to when NBC severed ties with him.  When he immediately made the comments, calling Mexicans I think criminals and rapists?  I know that he has come very far since then but I actually think it’s important that the American people see as much of who could be the Republican nominee as possible.  I realize that it’s Saturday night at 11:30, it’s not going to be the same crowd seeing an 8 p.m. primetime interview.  I’m not for a boycott of it, but I do think that these Latino groups are making a good point.   They have been actually trying to meet with Michaels, the creator of “SNL”, for years about underrepresentation of Latinos on the program.

GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES SET TO FACE OFF; DONALD TRUMP REMAINS FRONTRUNNER

Sen. Rand Paul:  Before the last debate, we announced to everybody that I thought I had been a little easy on him [Trump] in the first debate, that I thought I was going to be more aggressive and I think he took the bait.  He decided to come all after me and it looked ridiculous, of course.  This time, I think we’re just going to ignore him.  I think people are getting over him, and I think it’s about time that the slide is going to begin.  As he slides on out, I think we’re going to have a more substantive debate over who we’d really like to be Commander in Chief.