This is a rush transcript from "The Five," July 18, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Hi, I am Greg Gutfeld with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Juan Williams, Jesse Watters, and she runs laps on a close and play Dana Perino -- "The Five."
So, how come health care is a disaster? Here's why: This is a remote. It's got like a hundred buttons, but I only use the power and the channel arrow. I don't know what the other buttons do. And I know that if I hit the wrong one, it's all over. I'm helpless. That's health care: It's poorly designed, overly complicated, one side fits all. It is so convoluted. Its manual needs a manual… which needs a call center… which needs a help desk. Why is that? Because like this remote, it's badly designed.
If it were a car, ObamaCare would have been recalled in hours. You'd be sitting on the steering wheel, the windshield made of marshmallows. Remember that website launch? It made Olestra look good and Olestra caused diarrhea.
DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: Oh my God!
GUTFELD: But that website, that website was the door to the ObamaCare building and you couldn't even get inside it. What is that say? It says that bureaucracy fails because it is designs for the product and not for you. And the product fails because no human can figure out how to use it.
So, President Obama took something as vital as health, cordoned it off like a crime scene and left it to a bunch of chuckle heads. The wrong people are handling it and it's time to get it out of their hands and into those who understand humans. Every single day, doctors and business types email us with solutions. They understand functionality and simplicity so people can use this service minus all the anxiety. The cell phone is way more complex than a financial product. But a10-year-old can master it. Because a successful product fits you, not the reverse.
So, if President Trump truly wants to change things, here is his chance. Wrestle this problem away from politicians and ideologues and let someone else have a shot. Could it possibly, possibly be any worse?
So, Dana, I was talking about this with you last night over cocktails.
PERINO: In separate apartments!
JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: Yes. Okay.
GUTFELD: You told me that Newt Gingrich --
KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Thank you for the clarification.
GUTFELD: -- tried this idea of getting the public involved in terms of balancing the budget.
GUTFELD: How does that work out?
PERINO: So, it was in the 1990s and the balance budget amendment was a big thing for a long time. Republicans ran on it. In fact, Bill Clinton was even like oh, I'm kind of for that. But it's really hard.
PERINO: And one of the things that Newt Gingrich had the idea to do was to go out into the community, several different cities, and then you can sign up. And my dad actually did one of these in Denver. And basically you went with a, let's say there were ten tables of five people. You were given a number saying, this is the number that we need to get to you. How would you balance this budget?
PERINO: And then the five of them would try to work it out. And they would try to come up with solutions. Basically were -- they sound like they would have any skin in the game except they were confirmed citizens and that they wanted to participate.
GUTFELD: And so now with the internet, if you did the same thing, you could essentially --
PERINO: You could crowd sourced --
GUTFELD: You could crowd sourced that and you create some kind of an algorithm that finds the best way to solve these problems that create financial product which is what health insurance companies is, Juan. My problem is, is that we no longer have small government versus big government. The Dems create a program and the Republicans stir the pot until the Dems are back in power. We don't have a small government party anymore.
JUAN WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Right.
GUTFELD: So, we need a third way.
WILLIAMS: Well, no, I mean, it seems to me that there is a division within the Republican Party. People like Paul Ryan to believe in small government doing away with safety net programs, entitlement programs or at least reducing their Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the like. It's not very popular with rank and file Republicans though.
WILLIAMS: Guess what, they are the people that elected Donald Trump. They are populous Republicans. If they have a program that is serving their needs, they don't want to do away with it.
WILLIAMS: Oh, no, not at all. So, what you have seen here to me is evidence, Greg, of people who say all kinds of things on the campaign trail. They make all kinds of promises. No, they'll never have to live up to it. But the minute you have Republicans in control of the House, Senate, and White House, oh, gee, you guys, for seven years, you've been saying, you're going to do away with it? Let's see your plan.
WILLIAMS: And guess what, today we learned, Greg, it's been a scam. This is a scam of the highest caliber. Perpetrated on the Republican Party.
GUTFELD: Do you agree, Kimberly?
GUILFOYLE: Well, perhaps I don't.
But here's what I do agree with. My point. So, what I think is that the Republicans and you talked about this. They really need to get it together. Because yes, health care is very important but right now, this isn't like driving the train. So, yes, they need to focus -- because they made a big deal about it and they raised a lot of money, okay, with people across the country promising this.
PERINO: Good point.
GUILFOYLE: But now, what have you done for me lately? Okay? So, to me, you've got to be honest and straightforward as an integrity issue with respect to the party and a reckoning is going to come in 2018. So, the other things that they need to do is the tax cuts. And I do agree with you Newt that it needs to be retroactive to January 1st. Because if they do not and I've said this many times on the show have economic growth, they are in huge trouble for this midterm elections and they could lose one of these house.
And if you think the Russia thing, the collusion psychoness is crazy now, wait until if they have the House back and they are able to actually put forward all of these craziness of impeachment, et cetera, et cetera. It is going to be a big disaster. He's not going to be able to accomplish anything. However, if the jobs numbers, the economy, tax cuts, and all of that and you have a pro-growth economy, that will resonate with people. Even people who are undecided that may not have been super happy with President Trump personally, they will like this kind of positive economic affirmation and it will win the day for him.
GUTFELD: What do you think, Jesse? What needs to be done now? Well, you focus your lazer like intelligence on this problem.
WATTERS: Okay, this is going to take a long time.
WATTERS: I don't think you can drain the swamp with members of your own party or plugging the hole. You have three senators from Alaska, Maine and West Virginia. They are independent minded senators. They come from poor states. They got hooked on the Medicaid money.
WATTERS: And they needed their Medicaid money, they worried about re- election. I understand they are not robots. They have, you know, they have concerns to look after. But McConnell couldn't close a deal with them. McConnell is not a closer. McConnell couldn't get it done. I don't know why they came out of the gate with ObamaCare repeal, especially knowing they had no plan in place.
Anybody could have coalesced around. That doesn't make sense to me. The Republican Party couldn't even stay on message. They weren't even talking about increasing competition or reducing premiums. They were running away from headlines about coverage. When you are worried about coverage, you are fighting on the Democrats turf. If you want to go bold, go bold. Fight on your principles. Fight on free market reforms, fight on choice. They didn't do that.
They tried to split the baby and they failed. I agree with KG. Should have gone with tax relief, should have even gone with infrastructure. That would have really peeled off blue state Democrats, union guys. They didn't do that. I am going to make a point too that is going to offend a lot of people. Congressmen and senators are smart. They are not smart people.
They are good at winning elections but they don't know anything about policy. Their staffs know more about policy than they do. Lobbyists run circles around them. This is why we need term limits. Because these people get in there. And they don't do anything, they are not result oriented. They just care about headlines and they ran scared.
WILLIAMS: I was saying go lazer go. I was all for your intellect, so you said that all the politicians are dumb and you blame them, not Donald Trump? Donald Trump by the way --
WATTERS: Donald Trump did not have his heart on health care. I will admit that. But at the same time, he allowed Ryan and McConnell free reign and what we have for it? Nothing. And it's almost --
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump said it right at the start, I'm going to repeal ObamaCare and then talk about replaced. Repeal, replace ObamaCare. He said he wasn't going to do anything with the entitlement programs. Right? Nothing to Social Security, nothing to Medicare, nothing to Medicaid. But then, guess what? CBO said this latest goal was going to cost 32 million people coverage. And you say don't worry about coverage. Those dumb politicians you're picking on, guess what? They represent real people who need real help here.
WATTERS: Most of those people aren't going to have coverage because you're not forcing them to buy a plan. And I understand that. And if Republicans can say that, they were going to give you a choice, and we're going to have cheaper plans that you can choose from and we are not going to slap a tax on you so you have to buy a plan that cover stuff you don't need. That's an argument to me. They didn't make that argument and now look what they have. They have nothing.
GUILFOYLE: That's a problem.
GUTFELD: But you know, can I just go back Dana, the point of the monologue which is, is there a third way? You know, a lot of public intellectuals out there that are thinking about this stuff. I always bring up Scott Adams. He brings up this innovative ways of dealing with his stuff. One of them is actually trying health products out on Silicon Valley.
Because they can actually deal with the risk. Instead of trying out on the poor, try it out on the rich. It's an interesting idea. How do people who write to us every day, how do their ideas get to the people that matter? I tend to agree with Jesse. I don't think these --
GUILFOYLE: A call center.
GUTFELD: Yes. Call center. But there is no way, I think the politicians don't have the good ideas.
WATTERS: They don't.
GUTFELD: They don't.
PERINO: Well, the other is that it's extremely easy to give money away and a program away and it is almost impossible to pull it back. And that's what you have in these states. We do have a problem that there are many low income people in the country that worry every day when they wake up that if they get ill or hurt on the job, that they are basically going to go bankrupt and that their kids are going to have to basically forgo college. I mean, all of that financial anxiety is tied up in our health care debate.
GUILFOYLE: So true.
PERINO: Clearly these members of Congress have listened at least the three that you mentioned. And there are also three women. They are listening to their constituents and they are responding to that. So, I guess what I would say is, more communication is better. I think the President is smart to have tomorrow. The Republican senators are coming to him. They also know that they are going to have to vote on McConnell said early next week or probably be Tuesday.
And they're going to have to put up or shut up on the repeal part of it. But to your point on how do you get to the replacement, that gap, I'm not exactly sure how they do it, you know, they are so far apart. When Rand Paul initially said, he couldn't support it at all. Mike Lee says, from Utah, he says, well, I can't support it with the tax cuts, and then everybody is against it. And I don't know how you actually try to get all of those people in a room when you have to get 50/50.
GUILFOYLE: So true.
GUTFELD: Kimberly, the first thing you have to do is create products that could compete and then you end up with sites like Trivago or trip advisor - -
GUTFELD: Kayak, that sifts through the choices. It is now easier to fly to Tibet than it is to cast an ankle. To just go and set-up some place where you can fix an ankle but you could -- in two hours you can book an entire trip.
GUILFOYLE: You are so obsessed with the Trivago guy.
GUTFELD: Well, you know, he needs to change up his wardrobe. Again, competition forced them to --
GUILFOYLE: But this is the point, you're making the point that actually some of the people that have conscientious objections --
GUILFOYLE: -- to the way that the healthcare bill structured is based on the fact that it should be based on free market, based on grounded in capitalism, that having that healthy bit of competition and also being able to purchase across state lines, actually makes it better for the consumer.
GUILFOYLE: So, if you are in one state, you are not at a disadvantage compared to someone who has exchanges and another state that has multiple options to be able to do it.
PERINO: Unless you have somebody competing for your slice of the pie --
PERINO: They are going to set the standard and have a monopoly on it with essentially is going to drive up the prices and only benefits the health care insurers. So, what about something that is a little bit more patient centered and focused to say, what can I do for the average Joe sitting across from me? Don't take it personally.
GUTFELD: That is all right. I am average.
GUILFOYLE: To make sure that he has the same advantages and opportunities for his family, to use his dollars to move forward as Miss Perino in the next day? How do you do that? And level the playing field.
WILLIAMS: Let me just say, speaking for the majority of Americans, we have heard of such a plan, it's called ObamaCare. And guess what? Guess what? Sixty percent of Americans now say that's what is going on with the health care system is the responsibility of Republicans and as we saw today, they are not doing a good job.
GUTFELD: Thank you, media. All right. Ahead, a brand-new tweet from President Trump slamming a story the media is blowing up tonight. We'll tell what he said.
And later, we are 48 hours from O.J. Simpson's parole hearing in Nevada. If he's set free, he could be walking into a whole new set of legal troubles. Our only lawyer, Kimberly Guilfoyle, walks us through.
PERINO: This is a breaking news, FOX News alerts. That's what we call it here. So, President Trump just responded to a news story that broke earlier today, in which there is a scenario that happened at the G20 that we didn't know about, apparently. So, the report is that President Trump met with President Putin privately. It looks like a sidebar meeting with President Putin's interpreter, no one else. There was no media in attendance and President Trump has just tweeted about it.
And we have our very own Ed Henry here to explain to us, what is this breaking news and what is the President saying about it?
ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Dana, good to see you. As you know better than anyone, there are meetings on the sidelines of this G20 and G8 Summits all the time. The question is, whether or not it was really a private meeting between President Trump and President Putin or whether it was just as you suggest, like potentially a sideline conversation at a dinner. The point is, we already knew there was a two- and-a-half hour meeting couple of weeks back in Germany at the G20 Summit between these two presidents.
It went on a long time. They talked about election meddling, Syria, all kinds of other issues. The Washington Post tonight breaks a story saying that there was a second, quote-unquote, secret meeting that lasted about an hour on the sidelines of this G20 dinner. The White House is pushing back hard telling us tonight that this is a gross distortion of the facts. It didn't last an hour. It was a brief encounter. It wasn't really a second meeting. And it wasn't secret.
The President jumping in the last couple of moments, just breaking, the President is tweeting, quote, "Fake news story of secret dinner with Putin is sick. All G20 leaders and spouses were invited by the chancellor of Germany. Press knew!" He goes on to say, the President, "The fake news is becoming more and more dishonest, even a dinner arranged for top 20 leaders in Germany is made to look sinister."
By the way, a moment later, the President re-tweets a FOX News graphics suggesting that the stock market has done very well under his tutelage. So, you get the idea that that's what the President wants to focus on tonight. Not these continuing questions about Russia -- Dana.
PERINO: Ed, who with the source of this be? I mean, the President is saying that this is fake but this news broke. So, presumably somebody that was at the dinner is talking to the press about it.
HENRY: Yes. And there was, for example, Democratic Senator Chris Coons was on CNN earlier tonight saying, he had a source who told him earlier today that this second, quote-unquote, "secret meeting had taken place on the sidelines of this dinner." So, the point being so our viewers understand, there was a dinner at the G20 at the end of the summit that the press knew about, the public knew about.
The suggestion from Chris Coons, the Democratic senators and others tonight, at least their allegation is that on the sidelines of that dinner, maybe the TV cameras would be allowed in for the first couple of minutes, as you know, Dana. Hey, here's a quick spray, here are these leaders shaking hands, now the press gets out of the room. These Democrats and others are suggesting, wait a second, after the cameras left, there was some sort of a, quote-unquote, "secret meeting" where President Trump then went over to President Putin and went on for some time and also did not bring an American translator or an American official of any kind for this conversation with Vladimir Putin.
Why would that be significant? That would suggest there was no public record within the U.S. government of this, quote-unquote, "meeting" actually happening. As you can tell from the President, he's saying it wasn't a meeting, it was just, hey, on the sidelines, let's talk about Syria, let's talk about other subjects. You remember Dana when you are working with President Bush, there would be, you know, the bilateral meetings that were official, less than hour, less two hours and then on the sidelines of a dinner, you may have another conversation with Tony Blair and other world leader to continue the conversation.
That could have been what this is. On the other hand, the President's critics tonight are suggesting there was something more sinister here and that maybe the President was trying to follow-up on all of these Russia investigations.
PERINO: The adjectives of secret might not be fair given that there were lots of other people there. We will going take it around the table. Jesse is next.
WATTERS: Okay. So, let's talk about sinister. He said the enemies of President Trump are accusing him of what, exactly? You know, just putting a little ribbon and bow around the election hacking? It is that what they are alleging?
HENRY: Well, if you read the New York Times accounts other accounts tonight, the suggestion is since there was no U.S. interpreter there. Just a soviet Russian interpreter, I should say. That perhaps the President wanted to hide something here. Again, I am not saying that's what happened, we're trying to gather the facts here tonight as it breaks. But the suggestion in some corners of the media tonight, Jesse, is that the President kept the secret and wanted on the sidelines, when the TV cameras weren't there. He wanted to continue his conversation with President Putin and again, there is sort of an insinuation if you will that something sinister was going on here. Some cover up or something else.
PERINO: Okay. Kimberly Guilfoyle.
GUILFOYLE: All right. Thank you. So, I guess the problem I'm having with this is, what is wrong with the President doing something like this? If you are at an event where the spouses are invited, everybody is there, it was, you know, bye Germany --
YLE: And okay, they are there. What was so nefarious about it that he's not able to have a normal conversation with other people that are attending this? Which, you know, this is what people do.
HENRY: It's a good question. Because, you know, having covered a lot of these summits over the years, various White Houses, there are all kinds of sideline conversations. You are absolutely right, Kimberly. So, it doesn't necessarily mean that anything bad or sinister here happened. On the other hand, given all these investigations back here stateside, there are questions being raised tonight as to why the President would have a, quote-unquote, "side conversation" without President Putin without a U.S. official with him.
Because typically, even if you have a side conversation, you would want to have your interpreter or have your National Security advisor or somebody because even if it's an informal chat with someone like the President of Russia, particularly with everything that is going on, you want to make sure you have your own interpreter, your own people there so that everything that is set back and forth is interpreted right, number one.
But number two, there is no, you know, nothing that is misunderstood about a serious issue getting beyond the election meddling. Syria, the Middle East, all these big, big issues. Iran that are on the table. If you have a conversation without a U.S. official, maybe the National Security interests of the U.S. are not being taken care off.
PERINO: I think they've been talking about their grandkids because --
PERINO: On the tarmac.
GUILFOYLE: And I guess it's fine, it's not Crohn (ph), or Merkel or May, I don't know.
WILLIAMS: Well, you know, it surprise me, again, the context Ed, I thought that you hit on exactly right. Is that people don't know what's going on and of course, the Democrats have long charged that there's a bromance between the President and Vladimir Putin. And as I recall, there was questions about whether his wife had to be used to get him out of that two and a half hour meeting and then you have this now side meeting and I remember when Republicans were highly critical of President Obama for saying to at that time the Russian President Medvedev, oh, let's have a little flexibility. That was caught up mic and people went nuts.
WILLIAMS: So, now you have an hour meeting on this side that no one knew about?
WILLIAMS: That seems to me to be, hmm.
HENRY: If it lasted for an hour, certainly questions are going to be raised about it based on the pushback from the President. And I can tell you some of his aides tonight, they are suggesting the idea that it lasted for an hour is a gross exaggeration, misinterpretation of the facts and that this was a much more brief encounter and as Kimberly was suggesting the moment ago, this kind of brief encounters happen at summits all the time.
Bottom-line is, Juan, you are right. That given everything that is happening back here with Robert Mueller and the investigations, every contact this president has with the Russian president is going to be scrutinized big time. But what I think a lot of people are missing in terms of context is, when you mention the word "bromance."
Remember the campaign, what people tend to forget is that then-candidate Donald Trump talked about how, let's have better relations with the Russians so they can help in Syria for example and what happened? People don't seem be reporting this. But coming out of the G20 Summit, there was an agreement brokered by the U.S. and the Russians to have at least a partial cease-fire in parts of Syria. That was an accomplishment coming out of the Summit but not a lot of people are mentioned.
PERINO: All right. Last question from Greg.
GUTFELD: Hey, Ed. Is it true that what they had for dinner was nothing burger?
HENRY: You know, I am being told that there is a restaurant in the D.C. area that is actually serving nothing burgers and I am absolutely convinced that they are doing this just to make Greg Gutfeld happy.
GUTFELD: No, you make me happy.
WATTERS: Oh, there's a bromance.
PERINO: We are happy to have you, Ed. All right. Thank you, Ed. We appreciate it.
We turned to O.J. Simpson's parole hearing Thursday. That's next.
GUILFOYLE: You can tell I'm hanging out with Dana. O.J. Simpson has been behind bars for more than eight years but he could taste freedom soon. If he's paroled Thursday, he'll have a whole new set of legal troubles however because he owes the state of his murdered ex-wife and her friend Ron Goldman tens of millions of dollars after losing a civil suit.
But there is plenty of money the families won't be able to touch according to FOX News Gregg Jarrett.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: An NFL pension according to one report earns him about $19,000 a month. He has a retirement account that is $2.7 million. None of those can be touched by that judgment against him and by the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. He wants that property on Florida that is also protected by homestead laws. At that judgment has escalated to more than $50 million because of the interest and unfortunately, the families will probably never see a dime of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUILFOYLE: Dana, we were emailing back and forth about this. There has been some concern in the public arena as well about the fact that he would be able to keep his NFL pension and the property in Florida as well.
PERINO: Yes, reading it today, I was curious, I was contact my lawyer Kimberly Guilfoyle. I didn't understand that your pension is protected even if you are -- convicted is not the right word. If you are found guilty in that civil trial then you get to keep all of your pension money. That is what's curious about the principal of that. It seems to me, that is pretty nice money. He can live quite a long time. He is only 70 years old and looks in fairly good health.
GUILFOYLE: That is for the frustration I think for victims seeking compensation, especially when you have the criminal prosecution and civil, he was found liable and responsible in the judgment issued against him. They have been trying to get some monetary compensation back but it has proved to be elusive. One of the reasons is public policy, in terms of -- the law supports this, with retirement and pensions that protect the holder of those pensions from having someone sees them as part of their asset for portfolio. It's frustrating when you think about the victims and the families, really just so horribly and emotionally damaged and then not have any kind of financial compensation. For example, he is still popular, apparently a model prisoner, the celebrity inmate. There will be iteration for O.J. to be able to make some money.
WATTERS: O.J. has the next chapter. He is always been a survivor. He grew up very poor, no father, really rough neighborhood. He really navigated that world, navigated corporate America very effectively. He was in movies, the Naked Gun series, he had a lot of endorsement deals and crossover appeals, and he is kind of an L.A. Socialite, a man with a really high-end crowd. It all came crashing down. That is the tragedy for the country but he comes out of this with $19,000 a month. It may seem like a lot of money for most of America but for O.J., not that much, but he is still going to be embraced to a large extent by black America. There will always be people inviting O.J. for rounds of golf, always buying O.J. drinks, prompting him dinner. Will he be rolling in it? No. But will O.J. survive, absolutely.
GUILFOYLE: Juan, your thoughts?
JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX "The Five" SHOW HOST: First let me respond to Jesse on this, on black folks are going to love O.J. Simpson. I don't see it. What you have to do, if you go back to the case, realize we are talking about the black lives matter, anger at police, questions about whether or not, in fact he was handled fairly. That is a separate issue. I've got to tell you something. I don't hear people in the most radical communities saying anything positive about O.J. Simpson.
GUILFOYLE: Are they going to go --
WATTERS: I think he'll be just fine.
WILLIAMS: No, I don't think so. Let me ask you guys, seriously. Here's a new book by O.J. Simpson. Would you buy that? Not me. O.J. Simpson, do you want him on "The Five"? Not me. How about an O.J. Simpson speech? Oh, I think I've got something to do. I just don't see it. This is what O.J. Simpson will bear for the rest of his life. America thinks he is guilty, black-and-white.
GUILFOYLE: All right I think we are going to see a different outcome. Ok, go ahead Greg.
GUTFELD: We are all talking about the same thing. He is famous. And can the average person resist paying attention to him when he is out? When you question him for me, we used to shame people but there are too many people on the planet that are willing to indulge him. Think about how different the world is now. He was incarcerated. We have Instagram, smart phones, twitter. Every single moment of his public life will be documented. He will be posing for selfies every (inaudible) the moment he is outside. If he was smart, he would create a tracking app, an O.J tracking app. Where's O.J.? You download it. At any moment you go oh, my god, he is in my neighborhood. Or he is over here. The fact is, his whole life -- come
WATTERS: TMZ is working on that right now.
GUTFELD: His whole life is going to be like this, putting his arm around somebody and somebody taking a picture. This is my girlfriend, take a picture with her. Hey, I'm stabbing her. No, he will. He doesn't care. We don't care. Right now, we as a public -- we put fame before everything. We consider pass judgment but we when he is out on the street on a Friday night, in a bar, everybody there is going to want to be there.
GUILFOYLE: And full respect to some of the other charges, there's only one surviving living victim of the robbery attempt. Again, he is up for the parole hearing for the robbery. Not for the murder.
GUTFELD: He had a prank show called Juice, the whole point of it was him surprising people in the skies. Hey, you are the double murderer. That was the whole point.
WATTERS: That was rock-bottom.
GUILFOYLE: More rock-bottom on "The Five."
WATTERS: Welcome back. The liberal media seem to be connecting race to the various Russian investigations? Take a listen to this liberal analyst make a strange link between Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Russia, and race.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today Attorney General Jeff Sessions did another one of his tough on crime speeches. He wants to bring back the war on drugs and stop and frisk and all these policies that target young black men. When you compare that to the way that Republicans respond to Donald Trump and at this investigation, where frankly all of the targets rich white dudes, the Trump folks are all like, we don't see the problem with that fortunately Special Counsel Bob Mueller shouldn't go by that double standard.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WATTERS: As a pundit, I just have to applaud this guy, playing the race card and a Russia card at the same commentary.
GUILFOYLE: It's a full house.
WATTERS: A full house. Amarosa and Ben Carson were tied up in the Russia thing. I think the Republicans would be exactly the same. Wouldn't you agree?
PERINO: I was reading it earlier today, it's a real stretch. If you separate them, I do think when he is talking about actions by the Justice Department that black America, as I understand it, I heard Cory Booker the senator from New Jersey talk about it, they do feel that their policies in the United States that existed before President Trump was ever in office have been unfairly targeting young black men for so long and that there was bipartisan agreement to try to do criminal justice reform. And while there is bipartisan agreement, Attorney General Sessions is pursuing the policy is that the President wants to pursue and it's getting tougher on crime, so there is a, disconnect there. He is got a strong point, at least as a pundit to make. As soon as he is brings in the Russian piece, he lost me.
WATTERS: Juan can you be tough on crime and not be a racist, because it seems that what he is saying is, if you are tough on crimes you don't like black people.
WILLIAMS: That is not what he is saying.
WATTERS: That is exactly what he said.
WILLIAMS: What he is saying that Sessions is picking specific crimes to focus on.
WATTERS: Is the war on drugs just racist? If Trump wants to go after this opioid crisis, that goes after a lot of white people.
WILLIAMS: That makes her case, Jesse.
WATTERS: To go after opioids, because it affects more white Americans.
WILLIAMS: let me just say, I don't think that he spoken on going after a member what happened with crack and black America? They raised the penalty for crack as opposed to powdered cocaine. Nobody is doing that with Opioids in fact. That there's much more of an emphasis now on dealing and rehabilitating people that are being so severely damaged, it's an epidemic proportion in our country. The way they look at drugs and by people.
GUILFOYLE: Do you agree with the approach of not criminalizing and trying to work towards rehabilitation program?
WILLIAMS: Yeah. I would agree with that.
GUILFOYLE: You think that is a better approach? You applaud what they are doing?
WILLIAMS: Of course. I think it's important to rehabilitate.
GUILFOYLE: Do you like my cross-examination?
WATTERS: Case closed. Greg Gutfeld.
GUTFELD: I see this as another example of identity politics that is full on ideology and cults. To a hammer, everything is a nail. To a social justice warrior, everyone is a racist. You hear people wishing happy birthday to Joann Chazimar, who is a fugitive (inaudible). If you could link this to Russia, I would link that to that. They don't do that with white -- because she is a black woman. On twitter, therefore considered oppressed, because she is a black woman, therefore she is innocent. She shot and killed a police officer. They wish her happy birthday. My point is that is racist. Sooner or later, you've got a let go of this identity politics, because it will lead to failure, you will devour each other over this decisiveness. Every great success on the planet is due to cooperation which is the opposite of division. That is why the left keeps losing.
GUILFOYLE: You're absolutely right. This is a move in the right direction. It will produce more effective outcomes. It is going to be beneficial for the families and also lowered the rates of incarceration. But this other guy, totally out of his mind saying that. That was nonsensical. It's divisive for the very purpose of being that way. It's not moving above.
WILLIAMS: Kimberly, if you call attention to racial divide -- --
GUILFOYLE: Where's the racial divide?
WILLIAMS: If you'd --
WATTERS: They play the race card when there's nothing left, a new poll that might give President Trump some satisfaction, when "The Five" returns.
WILLIAMS: President Trump's approval ratings are anything to brag about six months to his presidency, very low. But, he may find solace in a new national poll by Bloomberg. There are some less popular than President Trump, Hillary Clinton, by 2 points. What do you say, Gregory?
GUTFELD: Hillary, she keeps coming back. She is like political heartburn. It never goes away. She serves as a reminder of two important things. Why Trump won. And why they lost, her. So that's why.
WILLIAMS: What do you think?
PERINO: I think President Trump should take some comfort in the fact that he was able to win the presidency with the approval rating that is about the same as he has now. Despite all of these attacks, it hasn't gone down. At the other thing is if Hillary Clinton is interested in how to increase her approval rating, after your political career is over, you stay quiet. Look at President Bush's numbers now. They are higher than President Obama's. That is been because he is been gracious and has moved on and as other great things like public service.
WILLIAMS: In fact Jesse, Obama is at 61 percent. Joe Biden is at 60 percent. And we know Trump is in high 30's.
WATTERS: I want to talk about that, can you guys please, nominate Hillary again? This poll is not fake news. I believe everything about this poll. Also if you look at the bottom of the poll, O.J. has better poll numbers than Hillary Clinton. It's not a good scene. Dana, if she had been more of a states woman coming off of that loss, her numbers would have been much higher.
GUILFOYLE: Remember the whole thing "I'm with her?" she will probably try to hog it again and destroy it for the Democratic Party.
PERINO: If she runs for mayor of New York.
GUTFELD: I would vote for a sack of cat hair instead of de Blasio.
WILLIAMS: For Trump actually, the Republican base is pretty much -- there's some flip among white evangelicals and white men who have no conscience --
PERINO: We have to do "one more thing."
GUILFOYLE: Also, he is appointing a whole slew of judges. That is going to be very good for him as well, by the way, no chance for reelection? Look at the numbers. That is how he won.
PERINO: We have to do "One More Thing"!
WILLIAMS: okay, "One More Thing," up next.
GUTFELD: Time for "One More Thing." Jesse.
WATTERS: Dana thought she was so cute with their little dog video yesterday, but I have something that is more ferocious. This is a bobcat attack on a German shepherd and the owner gets involved. Roll the tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Holy (BEEP). Oh, my god. Holy (BEEP).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WATTERS: And look that bobcat. He is swinging the bobcat from his forearm to save the German Shepherd. Now, that is what a dog video is all about.
GUTFELD: Tomorrow I am not going to be here but if you want to see me, go to the Paris resort in Las Vegas. I will be at freedom fast. Speaking at the opening ceremonies with William Shatner, Steve Forbes, and Kennedy will be there. Freedomfast.com, now it is time for this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OMG, OMG.
GUTFELD: This is an incredible footage of the world's largest wine cork rolling down a hill and a man trying to stop it.
GUTFELD: I would like to say that he is fine, but he never recovered. He is fine. He is fine.
GUILFOYLE: Who does this?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERINO: We promote a lot of books on "The Five" because we read a lot. We've never, I don't think, promoted a 12-year-old author. My good friend from Colorado, she wanted to write a book's since she was little. I think at that joke, Greg. Ever since she was little, she wanted to write a book. She won a contest at her school. Her book is called (inaudible), 28 pages long. My mom loved it. It's a mystery. It's available on Amazon. She actually got a book published. Congratulation, Mackenzie Jones, keep it up.
GUTFELD: Dana? No, Juan.
WILLIAMS: I'm very proud of you. The GOP failure to repeal and replace ObamaCare is seen as a broken promise but guess what? It's not the only broken promise this week, remember Canada Trump trashing the Iran nuclear deal? He called it the worst deal ever made. Here he is three months ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's one of the worst deals I've ever seen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Too bad. The Trump administration says they will recertify the deal. They agreed that Iran is complying with its terms. Wait, what happened, unbelievable.
GUTFELD: They did a political story on "One More Thing."
GUILFOYLE: All right, this is quite charming. A 90-year-old grandmother had made over 2,000 tiny hats for newborns. She should make one for Greg. Her name is Barbara Lowe and she makes this by hands and it took four hours to do each hat, in Mayfield Heights Ohio since 2009. She is delivered 2,252 hats to the hospital and she is living right across the street. She absolutely loves it. You will like this Greg. They come in pale pink, pale blue, pale green and pale yellow or a combination.
GUTFELD: Set your DVR. Never miss an episode of "The Five." "Hannity" is up next.
Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 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.