This is a rush transcript from "The Fox News Specialists," July 17, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I am Eric Bolling along with Kat Timpf and Dagen McDowell, who is in for Eboni K. Williams today. We are "The Fox News Specialists." Hurry up and wait surgery for Senator John McCain, throwing a major curveball at senate Republicans efforts to repeal and replace ObamaCare, Senator McCain procedure to remove -- delaying majority leader Mitch McConnell's timeline for a vote. But, President Trump isn't taking his foot off the pedal, the White House making clear this afternoon that he's charging ahead with efforts to get senate Republicans on board. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN SPICER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He's been very active on the phone. He's going to continue meeting with senators. I think you'll have another -- some senators over tonight. He's been very active over the weekend. The vice president has been extremely engaged as well. We'll continue those discussions. So, you know, I think we're going to do what we did the last time. The president is going to be engaged, he's going to get this done. And then, you know, it's been said before, there's no one better than Mitch McConnell when it comes to knowing how and when to make a bill successful in the senate. So we have every confidence in the majority leader's ability to get this done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: So Kat, we've heard this over the weekend. That's how skinny this vote is for them that they can even lose a senator who has to have emergency surgery.
KATHERINE TIMPF, CO-HOST: Absolutely. And we still don't know if that will be enough. There's a lot people who say that they're not really sure. You know if the Cruz's and the Lee's -- they don't really know. It does show how close it is, yeah.
BOLLING: And Dagen, one of the dirty little secrets going around is that they're making deals, McConnell, are making deals with senators who say they're on the fence, as Kat's point out. And they're getting, like, all these free things, backroom deals going on.
DAGEN MCDOWELL, GUEST HOST: It's called tax-and-spend liberalism, and there are a lot of Republicans at the trough, just like the Democrats eating the slop and spending our money. And I don't know -- $172 billion in revenue raised by keeping those ObamaCare investment taxes in that place. So again, how much more money do you need to get the vote for it?
BOLLING: It's swamp. It's a swamp. And by the way, let's not forget.
MCDOWELL: There's a book out.
BOLLING: This has to go back -- even if they do get the votes, it has to go back to the house.
TIMPF: Exactly. Absolutely. It's a far cry. They're trying to act like it's all good and they're staying calm, but if they're staying calm, then that's not a good thing.
BOLLING: Something wrong with that.
TIMPF: They're very, very, very wrong.
BOLLING: All right. Let's meet today's specialists. He's a former Republican presidential candidate, a conservative radio talk show host, and he's the author of seven best-selling books, and my good friend, he specializes in being an entrepreneur, Mr. Herman Cain is here. And he's a former New York State senator, he's a former New York State deputy secretary for public safety, and he's the current president of the Redlands Strategies, but he specializes in surfing, Michael Balboni is here. Now, as we know, Senator McCain is recovering from surgery in Arizona. At the end of last week, he gave a very blunt warning about what he sees ahead for congress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.: We've got a train wreck coming. The senator from New York knows. You've got the debt limit. We've got -- appropriations bill passed. We've got -- all of these things are piling up, and we've got about 30 days to do it in, and so far I've seen no plan. No plan to address these challenges. We can do it without betraying principles, but we can also do it by understanding the priorities and the dedication and patriotism of those on the other side of the aisle.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: OK. Herman, I loved everything the senator was saying until that last part. I'm not sure what that was. It's an outreach to the Democrats. Can they, can the Trump get his agenda through, all the things he wants to tackle? Does he have time to do it?
HERMAN CAIN, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: May not have time within the time they said that they're going to be there, but the reason they don't have a plan, as Senator McCain pointed out, is because the Democrats are slow walking, obstructing, and resisting. That's why they don't have a plan. I understand his passion and everybody is frustrated. But it all gets back to the Democrats intentionally, intentionally, wanting to slow walk and obstruct everything that they try to do.
BOLLING: Michael, you know, Kat and I have talked about this on the set. They're maybe -- it would be, I don't know, not a bad thing to delay the health care. Do me a favor. Just take a look at this, guys. Producers, can you roll that poll? There's a pull out that shows that health care is overwhelmingly the number one issue on Americans' minds. Look at that. Health care, number one above unemployment and jobs, above terrorism, immigration, and climate change, Michael, Americans want this thing fixed.
MICHAEL BALBONI, FORMER NEW YORK STATE SENATOR: But the senate is looking for it. Everyone is taking a look at the August recess. It's really to look at the midterm elections. They need to get stuff going now, particularly tax cuts, so they can see the benefits the next time when they're running midterms. So we're all focused on the short-term, but they're focused on the next year, when they run midterms.
BOLLING: And Dagen, some of the things that they're talking about is attaching some of these agenda items to bills that the other side can't vote no for. In other words, funding the government, funding veterans affairs, and they're attaching some of these major initiatives to these bills. These are legislative -- I don't know, gymnastics that they're performing.
MCDOWELL: Well, and I've heard last week, Senator Scott said on Your World with Neil Cavuto that, oh, well, we're going to keep the tax increases in the health care plan, the ones I was mentioning for ObamaCare, investment income. We know how important it is to make credit -- not credit, but capital available to individuals for businesses to be started. But he said we'll deal with that in the tax reform bill. No, you won't, because -- where are you going to get $172 billion in revenue when they're already struggling to raise revenue. If you think -- if they think they can kick this can down the road even a few weeks, they're out of their minds.
TIMPF: I completely agree with that. I think that it's been -- going back to your point about the midterm elections, right now we have the Republicans embarrassing themselves. It's what they've done with health care. It's an embarrassment. You can't put it any other way for them to run on this. If they tell you that, vote for us, because we're going to solve this and they don't and then they can't. And Eric, I agree with you, voting yes on this bill would be a mistake, because right now, this bill is a disaster. This would make it even worse. But how would anybody trust their products for the future?
MCDOWELL: I think Rand Paul, such a hard time for so long about him digging in his heels on this. But what he saw that I couldn't see is that his colleagues aren't conservatives. They're not Republicans. That they were going to stand up for all this Medicaid funding, this gigantic growth in Medicaid, the largest insurer in the world now. It's bigger than the national health system in Britain. He knew early on they would end up doing that.
BOLLING: Herman, you're shaking your head, you're nodding your head. You're agreeing with some of this.
CAIN: Just because I hate to say it, but I'm starting to agree with Rand Paul. And the mess -- I know, I hate to say it. The mess that they have now is nothing like the train wreck if they eek this out and send it back to the house because the freedom caucus has already said were not going to approve.
BOLLING: See Herman, here's my problem with this. And I saw an interview with Dave Brat, freedom caucus member, right?
BOLLING: Professor, knows his numbers. Neil asked him -- Cavuto asked him, if you get this bill back are you OK with this? Are you OK with holding your nose and agreeing to this massive investment tax? And he said, yeah, I can do that. And I'm thinking, Herman, what goes on? You get to D.C. and all of a sudden all your principles and values go out the window?
CAIN: Twenty nine others aren't going to do that. I'm just telling you. I've talked to some of them, 29 others of the 30 freedom caucus they're not going to do that. So that's going to be another train wreck.
MCDOWELL: These moderate Republicans in the senate, they've got everything that they wanted. They've gotten $172 billion for greater -- for Medicaid, for example. They're getting 40 times the amount of money for opioid and heroin abuse treatment that Obama promised. And that's not enough. And they're still not going to vote for it?
BALBONI: But Congressman Brat did have a good point. He said that the problem with the current bill structure it doesn't go to the underlying regulations. That you have to do is you have to address those regulations or you maintain the core of ObamaCare. And that is what's driving a lot of the insurers out of the markets. And that's really a huge problem not just for hospitals, for long-term care as well. What we're having.
BOLLING: So Michael, so the insurers will stay, let's say they do push this thing through. The insurers will stay and health care costs and premiums are still going to go up.
BALBONI: So Eric, you're absolutely right. We have done nothing in this debate to address health care costs. We're only shifting who's paying and how they're paying.
BOLLING: Wasn't that the initial problem with ObamaCare. They promised to bend the cost curve down and they didn't. The $2,500 per family that was going to go down, it actually went up.
CAIN: And the bad part is the taxpayer is picking up all of these subsidies that they want to leave in there, and that's where it's going to be a train wreck when it comes back to the house.
TIMPF: And the taxpayer is going to have to pay for insurance companies, to give my money to insurance companies. I don't know if you guys heard, but they're doing just fine on their own.
TIMPF: It's gone beyond just a debate between, oh, it's health care right, health care privilege. It seems that most people, even if they call themselves conservatives, think that it's a right. And they also apparently think that insurance companies have a right to my money. I feel like -- I look at this happening and it's just bizarre land to me.
BOLLING: ObamaCare was wildly unpopular once it became -- from one from bill to law and people realize exactly what was in it. And the problem is Republicans who feel to me like they're doing the exact same thing. Let's pivot a little bit to some of the other things that went on Capitol Hill today. Watch outside the White House, I love this. This is a moment for Donald Trump. He was walking around on the White House grounds -- this is made in America, part of his America first agenda, honoring American corporations and products made in America. There he is, donning his steps. Now Herman, I think this is a real pro-Trump moment right here. This one of the things he ran on, America-first, bring jobs back to America. Buy American products.
CAIN: Absolutely. And I think it's a great move to try and help set the narrative. And if the media -- some of them aren't going to focus on this, we know that, but a lot of them are going to focus on it. And here's the other beauty of this particular move, a lot of people aren't aware of all of the products that are already made in America that are going to benefit from the rollback of all the regulations that this administration has already done.
MCDOWELL: I think that this is a classic moment, but it does speak to what Herman has done with his whole career is focusing on, really, business owners in this country, rolling back their taxes and rolling back the regulations. Congress alone more than a dozen times used the congressional review act in the first six months this year to rollback major, major regulations. Things are happening. But you focus on that tax reform, and there are reports today out that the White House is on top of it. They're putting together a plan in a way that they haven't worked on health care, that's going to be critical because they need to do something for small business owners. And that means, tax notes, the same rate those big corporation gets.
BOLLING: Big initiative, dropping taxes for everyone, American and corporation -- American and corporation as well. Good policy.
TIMPF: Absolutely. And President Trump has done a good job on rolling back regulations. That's been something I really, really like to see. But you do see how he gets attacked no matter what, right? Because you have seen some of the questions -- well, Ivanka, not all of her stuff is made in America, and that's the other thing. So they kind do look at these stories and say, how can we make this look bad for him. But I think this is good, it keeps the narrative, like you were saying, on what he likes to talk about, and on what he succeeds, and inspiring people when he talk about, which is this America first, jobs in America type of thing. That's how he got elected.
BALBONI: Well we saw in -- the fact that the American businesses pay the more taxes. We're such a disadvantage. We don't talk enough about that. So he can do a lot to try to bring down that tax rate and give us that kind of advantage. And yet, we never really focus on that. But did you see how comfortable Donald Trump was in that press conference?
TIMPF: I thought you were going to say in that hat.
BOLLING: Can we let our audience know that Mr. Herman Cain -- take that camera right there. That's the man who -- you are really recognize the first time you stood up to President Obama and talked about his taxes and ObamaCare, isn't that right? And you said, do more of the things that Trump is proposing now and do less of the things that he did.
CAIN: Exactly. President Obama did all of the wrong things, in all honesty. And I've told people, and I mean this, everything that this president has done so far with his administration is what Herman Cain would have been doing if he had been president. How much stronger can you say, I agree with what's he's doing.
BOLLING: All right. We'll leave it right there. Straight ahead, Democrats are praying for the Trump, Jr., Russia controversy to turn up waves of voters against President Trump, but new polling shows they'll have to pray a lot harder, coming up.
TIMPF: As Democrats bang the collusion drama over Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer, it may not be having the impact on voters that they expected. According to a new Washington Post-ABC News polls, roughly 4 in 10 Americans think the Trump campaign weren't put the Russians to try to influence the campaign. However, that number has barely changed since the last poll that taken back in April, long before the Trump Jr.- Russia revelations. Today, President Trump sounded off again about the controversy, tweeting, quote, most politicians would have gone to a meeting like the one Don Jr. attended in order to get info on an opponent. That's politics. I don't know about that last part, especially because the same poll that we just talked about also said that people responded by a two to one margin that they did think the meeting was inappropriate.
BOLLING: Inappropriate, yes, but not illegal. And again, so -- you keep hearing more and more constitutional scholars over the weekend saying, look, maybe he should, maybe he shouldn't have done it. That's not the issue, but whether or not was legal. They cannot find one single person -- who said it was illegal. And again, I think they're hanging -- the people who think something bad happened are hanging their hat on exchanging something of value. And they're saying that this information, this opposition research is something of value, but I think the technicality of the law says that, you know, it has to be a physical thing, a monetary value, not just information. Information is valuable no matter what, but there's no way to monetize that.
TIMPF: Right. Dagen, were you surprised to see that it didn't change anyone's mind. I wasn't really surprise to see that it didn't change anyone's mind. People seem pretty strong and steadfast whatever their opinion of this is by this point.
MCDOWELL: I think that people have stopped listening to the rhetoric about it. It's part of what's happening. And I do think that if the Democrats keep hammering this, and hammering this, and thinking somehow they're going to win the midterm elections, based on chatter about the Trump administration and the campaign and Russia that they're delusional if they think that that's going to work because people increasingly are becoming deaf to it. They care about their livelihood. They care about their families, not Russia.
(CROSSTALK) BALBONI: The expectations so much that, aha, this is a smoking gun. They've got him. And then they go to the statute and they're like, well, wait a minute, no. They didn't get something of value. It's a conversation. So how is that thing influence us necessarily? And having been through 13 different campaigns, personally, you know it's kind of hard when someone says to you I've got opposition.
CAIN: I believe that this poll didn't change much because the gullible are still the gullible.
CAIN: It's not recruiting in new people to believe this stuff. I was about to use another word that I can use on the radio, but I'm going to respect the fact that I'm on this TV show. And here's what's happening with all of this nothing burger.
CAIN: That is true. I can use it in Georgia. Here's the principle here about this nothing burger. The Democrats are demonstrated over and over and over, if they throw enough mud on the wall, often or not enough, long enough to see what sticks, they're hoping they're going to try some of the people. But like Dagen says, and like Kat said, I don't think it's.
TIMPF: I don't think it's a nothing burger just to be clear. I think it's a, I don't know burger. I think I'm going to wait and see. The fact that there's been so much changing of the story from day-to-day always makes me listen a little more closely. But I completely agree with Dagen, and I completely agree with you as well, about how -- if you do say every single thing is a smoking gun, people are going to stop listening.
MCDOWELL: The only thing that I don't understand, my parents instilled in me a deep-seated fear of the Soviet Union based on the cold war. And I read John Le Carre books, and I read the recent Kim -- book about Russian spies. So if someone calls me on the phone and says hello, this is Natasha, me and Boris wants to have a meeting with you, the answer is going to be no, even if my father isn't running for the presidency.
TIMPF: I saw enough Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoons growing up that I agree with Dagen. I would, probably, have the same.
BALBONI: You know, must kill moose and.
MCDOWELL: Not taking that meeting.
TIMPF: Yeah, absolutely.
BALBONI: But this ironic, though, the whole Trump clan, they're not politicians. And the thing is standard -- politicians won't take that meeting. They're not politicians. So maybe Donald Jr. -- nobody said that and said to him, you know what, don't even talk about this issue, don't go there. Maybe they just really didn't know what was up on this thing. It doesn't excuse, possibly, a prosecutor looking at this. But right now, again, it's that expectation that's something is wrong here.
TIMPF: Here's the thing though, if they would have thought there was nothing wrong with it, why wasn't he more forthcoming about it from the beginning, rather than changing the story so many times?
BOLLING: Even if you consider information as an asset or something of value, it wasn't exchanged. She duped them. And so there was actually no transfer of value whatsoever. She was trying to get a meeting, this Russian lawyer, she just trying to get a meeting with the Trump administration about her issue.
CAIN: It is easy a year after the fact to say that it was inappropriate. To say that maybe he should have thought this through. When you're in a campaign at any level, I can tell you this from experience, it's like being in a blender. Every once in a while, they take the top off to see what flies out. They probably didn't even think about all of the blowback that they were going to get now that they're out here active in looking for a smoking gun and they don't have one.
BOLLING: So someone hired Christopher Steele in England to do this opposition research, Russian dossier on Donald Trump. Someone hired them to do that. Now, if you want to use that same inappropriateness, illegality, whatever you want to call it, if you apply that, you should find out who that person or people were, and find out who did that because that could be just as damning as anything Donald, Jr. did with the Russians.
MCDOWELL: There's a great article by Paul Roderick Gregory writing for the Hoover Institution about this very subject, and it's about -- Russia didn't interfere in the U.S. election to help President Trump, but to destabilize America. And that's what it's essentially doing because this is one of the greatest divides certainly among people on the right, the left, liberal, conservative, Democrat, Republican, is being angry over this issue.
BOLLING: There is a group called Fusion GPS.
BOLLING: That group -- they were involved with setting up the meeting with the Russian lawyer and Donald Trump, Jr. The same group, and the same guy -- he's one of the founders of Fusion GPS. He was involved in the Russian dossier that hurt Donald Trump and was allegedly going to help Hillary Clinton. So it's very corky and it may win credibility to -- hey, they were just interested in destabilizing.
MCDOWELL: Well, this really quickly. I know journalists who works -- well known journalist in the '80s, and they would get calls from people saying they were with Russian news agencies, and these guys would show up and they were clearly KGB and it was comical, but everybody knew it. And I just think we've kind of lost that connection with Russia as our enemy and what we went through during the cold war. And I think it's a little lost on some of the people involved in this.
TIMPF: Well, coming up, a former Gitmo detainee who killed a U.S. soldier now officially made a millionaire by Canada. And the soldier's wife -- excuse me, widow, may never see a single cent. Stay with us.
MCDOWELL: Omar Khadr, the Canadian ex-Gitmo detainee who admitted to killing U.S. army sergeant Christopher Speer during a 2002 firefight in Afghanistan, is now a multimillionaire. Khadr scored a reported $8 million payout from the Canadian government alleging civil rights violations during his time in Gitmo. But Khadr's actual victims may end up going penniless from his actions. Tabitha Speer, Sergeant Speer widow, and Layne Morris, a retired Special Forces sergeant, was blinded in the firefight, won a $134 million judgement, wrongful death judgment in fact, against Khadr two years ago in Utah. Their lawyers requested in order freezing Khadr's now multi- million dollar assets, but a Canadian judge had thrown out that request calling it extraordinary. How is this justice, Eric? This story is repulsive.
BOLLING: So you have to look at that. I'm trying to figure, maybe Herman Cain can close in on some of this, how does Justin Trudeau allow this to go down? I mean, does he just look the other way and say, you know, he was, quote-unquote, tortured at Gitmo, so he deserves -- I think Khadr sued the Canadian government for $16 million and they settled for only $8 million. It's insanity.
CAIN: Trudeau explanation was because he's a Canadian citizen, there is a quirk in the law that said that Canada didn't step up to defend him, whatever that meant. It is a pathetic interpretation of the law. Canada basically rewarded a murderer. And how you are able to justify that is beyond me.
MCDOWELL: The actions, Michael, of the prime minister, Trudeau, are actually worse than that because there was a Canadian press wire service that said Trudeau knew there was an outstanding judgment against Khadr in Utah and that they -- the Canadian wire service reported that Ottawa rushed the payment to Khadr to dodge compliance with the Utah judgment for the Speer family and for Mr. Morse. They filed that injunction to enforce the Utah judgment in Canada, and the Trudeau government had the money out the door before their petition could be heard in court. This according to an editorial in "The Journal" today.
BALBONI: what would we do if the situation were reversed? If we had somebody in our grasp who had killed a Canadian. Would we be saying, "No, of course we're going to give you money. Of course, we're going to take care of your rights"? No, we wouldn't.
You know, they were enemy combatants. They actually participated in a military operation against U.S. soldiers. At the very least, Canada -- Canada should sit there and say, "You know what? We're in solidarity with you. We're not going to protect this guy against a murderous act like that."
TIMPF: Is this a situation where they didn't have a choice? I mean, I don't think anyone would want to do this. This is obviously a disgusting story. I think everyone can agree that you see this happen, you look at this, and you don't feel good.
And you see him also in interviews complaining, "How am I going to have a life now, because everyone knows I killed somebody and I want to be a nurse?" Wah, wah, wah. I don't feel bad for you at all, believe me.
But what do you do? Is there -- I don't know if anybody can answer that question for me. Was there any other option under the law, or why?
CAIN: That judge had the choice. Remember, that's what opened up the floodgates. That judge could've said, because of the extenuating circumstances, because he killed someone, because there's an outstanding judgment, that judge could have exercised some discretion, and he did not.
BOLLING: He could've also said, "Yes, we're awarding you $8 million, but we're going to go ahead and pay to the victim in Utah."
MCDOWELL: But they took it a step further and actually made this payment, timed it so would make it impossible for the Speers family and for Layne Morris to collect this.
I just really wanted -- this is the Peter Kent editorial I was referring to in The Wall Street Journal. He writes -- Peter Kent is a member of Canadian parliament, official opposition critic for foreign affairs. He writes "Mr. Trudeau's actions are an affront to the memory of Christopher Speer, to Tabitha Speer and her children, to Layne Morris, to our U.S. allies, and to all men and women in uniform. This payout was a cynical subversion of Canadian principles. Mr. Trudeau made Omar Khadr a millionaire, and he did not have to."
CAIN: I think Michael made a great point. If it were the other way around, the United States would've found a way to honor their laws. They simply disregarded our laws; and that's why, to answer your question, it was not justice.
BOLLING: And remember: we were supposed to be a coalition fighting terror at the time.
BOLLING: And now.
BOLLING: Thanks, Canada.
MCDOWELL: Again, the rights of -- the rights of a terrorist, the rights over those he harmed.
When we come back, time to "Wake Up, America." Jane Sanders now claiming sexism is behind a federal probe into her and her husband, Bernie. Eric Bolling begs to differ. Stay with us.
BOLLING: Welcome back to "The Fox News Specialists." Our specialists today are Herman Cain and Michael Balboni. So let's continue the conversation, because it's time to "Wake Up, America." Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: Certainly, misogyny played a role. I mean, that just has to be admitted. With men, success and ambition are correlated with likability. So the more successful a man is, the more likable he becomes. With a woman, guess what? It's the exact opposite.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: What is it with liberals always blaming someone or something else for the misfortunes?
No, Hillary, you didn't lose because of sexism. You lost because you are a bad candidate. Hillary ignored Michigan; she blew off Wisconsin; and she passed over Pennsylvania. She lost all three blue states, because she took them for granted and not because she was a woman.
But Hillary isn't the only lefty to blame their bad situations on gender. Bernie Sanders' wife, Jane, is under FBI investigation for corruption relating to potentially falsifying financials, which she tried to pass off as legit.
The FBI is looking into whether Sanders lied and falsified documents to secure a loan for the now-defunct Burlington College, which she used to run, which by the way, may amount to fraud.
But instead of showing a morsel of remorse or a smidgen of character, the socialists play gender politics and blamed, wait for it, sexism.
That's right: Jane Sanders suggested an active FBI investigation was opened because, of course, she's a woman. Wow. So Hillary lost because of sexism, and Jane Sanders may have been caught falsifying documents because of sexism. Why is everything that goes wrong somebody else's fault with liberals?
I've got some free advice for the Sanders. Lose the fake Robin Hood shtick. You claim to be for the common folks, fair share economy. Please tell me how a guy who's never collected a private-sector paycheck and whose first steady job was in Congress can afford three luxury homes. Vermont, D.C., and of course, a vacation home. Maybe the FBI should investigate you, Bernie. Or would that be ageism?
The fact that Jane Sanders is blaming her getting caught on sexism doesn't surprise me. Liberals have no moral compass whatsoever. What does surprise me, however, is that she didn't blame Donald Trump and the Russians for her misfortune. But you know what? There's still time.
Kat, sexism on the FBI investigation. What happened?
TIMPF: I don't get it. So she's saying she's being investigated by the FBI because she's a woman. And I don't um in what universe that makes even the slightest amount of sense. I really certainly don't.
As a woman, I face sexism. I've also faced problems that have nothing to do with sexism. And I don't know why it's so hard for so many people to distinguish between the two. This certainly seems to be one that's got nothing to do with what her gender is.
BOLLING: And go ahead.
MCDOWELL: This gives me the biggest headache. Because as a woman, I -- the fact that when they get caught doing something wrong, when Hillary Clinton loses because she is a God-awful candidate, she blames her gender. She uses it -- uses it as a crutch. And they can't take personal responsibility, exactly like you said, for their own failings, and faults, and misdeeds. And that actually hurts all other women, because then -- because then men also expect us, "Oh, well, you know if she can't do her job, then I'm going to get accused of sexism."
TIMPF: Is she going to say that, "Your honor, I'm only here because I'm a woman"?
MCDOWELL: If you stink at your job -- if I say you stink at your job, well, then, you're going to accuse me of being...
BOLLING: Let's bring the gentleman in.
CAIN: I have a memo to Hillary. Sometimes you're not likable, because you're just not likable. Duh. She doesn't get that.
Look, maybe this is the age of excuseism. If it's not racism, its sexism, it's ageism. What "isms" are they going to add next?
MCDOWELL: I call it victim chic. It's chic to be the victim.
CAIN: She wants to be the victim.
MCDOWELL: Isn't that what women have called for, for the last half century -- or century, is not be a victim?
BALBONI: How about -- so she is at Burlington College from 2004 to 2011. 2016, it goes out of business. Hang on a second. Yes, there ought to be an investigation. You oversaw the failing of a college. How much do college students who went to class and got degrees, not sit there and goes, "Well, this degree doesn't really matter that much any more, because it's a defunct college."
BOLLING: Let me say to you, Michael, you're an investigator. You've been an investigator, so to speak. OK? Good enough?
Senate salaries, $174,000 a year. And that's us over the years. It started much, much lower than that. Bernie Sanders has three very nice homes, and I read some numbers but his net worth was in the millions but how do you accumulate millions in homes on 174 before tax?
BALBONI: That's been a question for a lot of folks in Congress. Got to say that. Not just one person. There's a lot of questions as to gee, how do you accumulate that kind of money when you've got this kind of salary? And there's little laws like, you know, folks in Congress are exempt from the insider -- not insider trading stuff, but they get -- yes, the stock information.
So they are able to amass that kind of money. I don't know what Bernie Sanders did inside his world or what his wife did. I do know this. If you've been the head of this college and it failed, someone ought to be looking at it.
BOLLING: Herman, the average -- the average net worth -- we looked this up -- of senators in the United States Congress, in the Senate, $9 million net worth, on average.
CAIN: And the Democrats in the Senate have a greater net worth than the Republicans. In other words, the party that has ripped most people off, yes, the party that has ripped off more people, deceived more black people and the list goes on, they are worth more than the Republicans in aggregate. Something's wrong.
MCDOWELL: May be the Sanders are just very frugal, and they've saved their money.
BOLLING: I don't know, man. Of the people, for the people. Right?
TIMPF: Sexism -- sexism is a problem, and the worst thing you can do is call everything sexism so then when there's an actual instance of it, no one is going to listen.
BALBONI: Well, the same thing...
MCDOWELL: Well, the funny thing is that Hillary Clinton accused Bernie Sanders of being a sexist, because he talked about people, like, shouting about gun control.
MCDOWELL: And she accused him of being...
CAIN: You know how tentative the meeting was when President Obama was president. They were reluctant to criticize him, because they didn't want to be accused of being racist, and he got a pass on a lot of things because of it.
BOLLING: I'll leave it right there.
Up next, Al Gore coming out of his carbon-neutral bunker to peddle new apocalyptic predictions of climate change doom. You're not going to want to miss this.
TIMPF: Much like a crazy person yelling about the apocalypse on a street corner, Al Gore is emerging from hiding, all to make new proclamations about our impending doom from climate change.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AL GORE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: It's no longer just the virtually unanimous scientific community telling us we've got to change. Now Mother Nature has entered the debate.
Every night now on the television news is like a nature hike through the book of "Revelation." People who don't want to use the phrase "global warming" or "climate crisis" are saying, "Wait a minute. Something's going on here that's not right."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: Maybe it's because you're comparing today's climate to "The Book of Revelations."
The vice president kept it up this morning, humble bragging about how his 2006 documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," magically predicted the future.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GORE: Well, regrettably, some damage has been done. Major sections of Antarctica have now passed a point beyond which some which huge additional sea level rise is inevitable. And we're now seeing these incredible downpours. This city was inundated during Superstorm Sandy, as the movie a decade ago predicted. And it happened years beforehand.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: We literally do not have time to go through all the things that movie and Gore have gotten wrong.
But if you smell rank opportunism, it's because Gore's new movie, "An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power," comes out next week.
Eric, climate change. Most Americans are concerned about it with good reason. However, he predicted Manhattan would be underwater. I walked here without a scuba tank this morning. Why are we still listening to him on this issue?
BOLLING: No idea. No idea. And not only that, yes -- so just one of the lines that we just played, "virtually unanimous scientific community." That's -- that's an inconvenient truth for him. It's not unanimous, not virtually unanimous.
Look, I don't know if the climate is getting warmer or colder. I do know that in 2009, when he predicted by 2015 you were going to be scuba diving to work was incorrect.
But here's the big thing. Al Gore flies around in private jets. Right? If he's so worried about the climate -- He has a -- something like a 20,000 square-foot home in Tennessee that is just a monster guzzler of hydrocarbons and fuel and energy. If he really believes in this shtick that he's selling us, why don't you give that stuff up and go live off the wilderness, sir?
MCDOWELL: Speaking of the dude on the corner who's predicting the end of the world next week, that guy does a better job of selling the apocalypse than Al Gore does, because that dude, Al Gore, is too monotone and boring for NPR. Hasn't he worked on the delivery in the last decade or so? The last 17 years?
Another thing: the big lie that -- that Democrats and liberals tell, or the truth that they don't tell people is that, if they want to fix the climate, it's going to mean hurting the very poor. It's going to mean taxing fossil fuels, which are very inexpensive, and making the cost of gasoline and other cheap, efficient fuels so expensive that, basically, the developing world stops developing.
BALBONI: And that's what we've got to do. We never talk about the solutions that people are proposing. We only talk about, is there global warming? Is there not? That's the litmus test for everybody: Are you for it, are you against it? We never talk about the actual pain and the cost to our society if we actually were to implement everything that people talked about. And the countries that are not involved in this.
You know the Paris Accord, it's great that everyone got together, but the results were imperfect, at best.
BOLLING: Can I throw a very quick number at you? According to -- following up what Michael just said...
MCDOWELL: no, I'm a woman. I don't like numbers.
BOLLING: No, no. But maybe a lot people don't love numbers.
We spent somewhere around $100 billion on developing some alternative energy fuel cars. And President Obama wanted to have a million of those cars on the road by the end of his term. We had somewhere around 100,000 or so. And that cost -- Herman, $100 billion of government taxpayer money that went towards something that's just a colossal failure.
CAIN: Colossal failure. A lot of the companies that were into the green energy stuff, you know that they went bankrupt.
Here's the other thing that they're not talking about, Michael, that Michael brought up. They're not talking about voluntarily, businesses and individuals are pursuing different forms of energy when it makes sense. That's the difference. And so that's also one of the things that they're not talking about.
TIMPF: I've always really hated the way that you're supposed to only have two views on this issue. Either you think climate change is a joke or you think it's not. And therefore, the government should be, you know, unconstitutionally setting regulations, which by the way, they've never been able to prove whether that would even work or not.
MCDOWELL: If you look at what's gone on in Germany, electricity is essentially a luxury good in Germany, because the focus on renewable fuels. We pay $0.12 a kilowatt hour in the United States for residential electricity. This is a few years ago.
In Germany, it was $0.35. It was almost three times the amount that we paid here, and they're still burning massive amounts of coal, because the renewables don't make any sense.
BOLLING: Rick Perry today, secretary of energy, declared we were going to be the energy superpower of the world. And now that's a massive change from where we've been, literally, over our history.
CAIN: And we are moving in that direction, because this administration has rolled back those regulations that we're talking about.
MCDOWELL: You know, it gives -- you're an oil guy. It gives us power over the nations that hate us.
MCDOWELL: We control the price more; we control our own energy supply.
CAIN: I want to say, Eric, if I can't drive my gas guzzler, it must be racist.
BOLLING: That's right. Or sexist, Herman.
CAIN: She's got the sexist. I've got the racist.
MCDOWELL: That's why...
BOLLING: I've got nothing.
MCDOWELL: That's why I made the numbers joke. It was a joke about Hillary.
TIMPF: When we return, we're going to "Circle Back" with our specialists, Herman Cain and Michael Balboni.
MCDOWELL: Time to "Circle Back" with our specialists, Herman Cain and Michael Balboni.
Herman, I'm going to bring up something that I said that made you laugh about Republicans and Democrats feeding at the trough.
CAIN: I love that metaphor. And do you know who's putting slop in the trough? The insurance companies. That's the problem.
MCDOWELL: Well, we are; the American taxpayers.
CAIN: Taxpayers, insurance companies. And Democrats and Republicans are just eating it up.
TIMPF: Michael, you said -- we were talking in the green room. You had a comment on cybersecurity of some kind? What was that?
BALBONI: So this year, Ukraine was attacked, and it was by a virus called Crash Override. It has raised huge issues about our utilities and their vulnerability on social media -- social phishing. It's a real concern; and we ought to pay attention now. We need to do more on cyber in this country.
BOLLING: I'm going to use my time to do a public service here. Apparently, tomorrow the owner, the founder of Z-Burger in D.C. is offering free Nothing Burgers from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. tomorrow. They're free. Apparently, a Nothing Burger is a plain burger on a toasted bun, and they're free tomorrow.
Herman, are you up for it?
CAIN: I'm up for it. I'll be in town.
TIMPF: Where is it? D.C.? I go to D.C.? I don't know about that. But yes, pretty funny.
BOLLING: I'm sure this guy is going to be inundated with people going to...
TIMPF: I'm sure he's getting some e-mail.
BOLLING: ... Z-Burger in D.C., free Nothing Burger.
CAIN: Nothing Burger.
BOLLING: Asked for it.
MCDOWELL: Can we -- can we officially stop using that?
TIMPF: The word, "nothing burger"? Yes, I agree. It's time to retire it.
BOLLING: Do you need Gutfeld to ban it so no one uses it?
TIMPF: Maybe. We should, absolutely. That's his thing, though.
MCDOWELL: What, banning -- banning...
TIMPF: Banning words.
MCDOWELL: ... people from words?
MCDOWELL: He would do that.
Thank you guys so much. Thanks to our "Fox News Specialists" today, Herman Cain and Michael Balboni.
And my special thanks to everybody for letting me sit in this seat, filling in for Eboni K. Williams. This guy, that gal.
We thank you for watching. Make sure to follow the show on social media, @SpecialistsFNC on Twitter, Facebook. Remember, 5 o'clock will never be the same. "Special Report" starts right now.
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.