President cancels fundraisers in wake of 2nd Ebola diagnosis

close

Video

President cancels fundraisers in wake of 2nd Ebola diagnosis

Do Americans still have confidence in administration's plan?

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," October 15, 2014. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: The Ebola crisis has gotten so serious President Obama cancelled a fund-raiser and a campaign rally today to meet with the advisers on the outbreak, if things get much worse, where he is? He might even cancel a golf game.

All right, it's not very funny though folks. I think many Americans have lost confidence in our government's ability to keep us safe. Stock market is plunging, an infected nurse, who just days after working on the Ebola victim, Tim Duncan also -- Tom Duncan -- I'm sorry, the CDC director says, he wishes he had done more. But now Tom Frieden is trying to convince the American people that they have -- this under control, watch.

(BEGIN VDIEO CLIP)

TOM FRIEDEN, CDC DIRECTOR: Our information is clear and correct. We know how Ebola spreads, we know how to stop it, we know what is happening. It spreads by direct contact. And you know, sometimes more isn't better, you put on more layers, you put on more things that harder to get on, that harder to get off. You may -- yes, really, it may end up to a higher risk.

MEGYN KELLY, "THE KELLY FILE" SHOW HOST: If you go into an infected Ebola patient's room without covering your head, with only wearing one pair of gloves and with your feet exposed, would you do that?

FRIEDEN: Absolutely.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: So I share some of the same concerns that the majority of the American people have, the government doesn't really know what Ebola is or what it could have become. But don't worry the CDC keeps telling us Ebola's really hard to catch, really hard. So Bob, you know, everyday something new happens, someone gets infected and they has hazmat and they're still getting infected.

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: Well, first of all, it's not that many do we have it so far. And secondly, the idea of calling for his -- the director of CDC's job is -- is just ridiculous, in the middle of this crisis. Look, it is new in to the United States, Ebola, I think they got a pretty good job. But, except -- the real problem was in the hospital in Dallas, and the press secretary (ph) in the hospital would they allow doctor in there in the nursing (ph) room. He was a fifth patient in line, they took his blood stuff and they put in the magnetic tube. I mean, that's not the problem of CDC, that's the problem with the protocols of the hospitals.

BOLLING: Can just read -- rebutting with what you have just said. This is Duncan -- Frieden quote, "I wish we have put a team like this on the ground the day the patient -- the first patient was diagnosed and may it prevented this infections."

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Why did they?

BOLLING: Why did they?

BECKEL: No, I don't know, I don't know the answer to that.

BOLLING: So you're saying it's not his fault?

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: I don't think it's his fault that this thing spread in that hospital. I think this was the hospital protocol that was the problem.

GUILFOYLE: But aren't they following protocols that have been handed down by the CDC.

BECKEL: Obviously not, that's the problem.

GUILFOYLE: Once they had the case that was confirmed to be Ebola. The point is, there's need to tighten this up, because it's sloppy.

BECKEL: Well, that's every hospital they should do that, because the CDC, the government, the federal government can't commit every hospital that they could tighten up their protocol.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, it can.

BECKEL: Why? How?

GUILFOYLE: Yes, it can Bob.

BECKEL: There's thousands and thousands of hospitals around the country.

GUILFOYLE: It's a serious enough issue that in fact they can, and that's why we're listening to these press conferences from Frieden and listening to what the CDC has to say. And that's what they're saying they gonna put a fast team on the ground to be able to go in and deal with the situation. They have the ability to shut this down, so do it.

BOLLING: One of most the greatest things that happened Dana is that, we found out today that Amber Vincent, the second Ebola victim, the one who worked on Thomas Eric -- Duncan in Dallas, was able to fly a couple of days after Duncan died. She wasn't on a list -- she was not a watch list, she wasn't on a no-fly list, she wasn't on a quarantine list. (inaudible)

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: That's where it seems that the government response was really broke down. Because, if Ebola were that easy to catch, then everybody on that plane would be at risk, or there'll be hundreds and hundreds of more people that already have Ebola, and that actually -- that is not happening, so I think we need to keep that in mind.

But, for -- I think that the government will have to admit that they did something wrong there and the protocols. It sounds like because, she -- they weren't wearing the head coverings, initially when dealing with him, then that's a breach of protocol, and that gets me to the Nurses Association -- the union, the nurses union.

Their statement today is absolutely devastating for the administration. They are demanding more training, more information, and the administration has even said, "The world hasn't been doing enough on Ebola", I think the world that means, the United States has to leave.

Back in May or June, the doctors without borders and others, were World Health Organization, the U.N. was raising the alarm about this, and the administration was slow. I think on that point, they are very vulnerable, that they could have been talking to the nurses and the hospitals all across America because, even if there were a travel ban from those three countries, that doesn't mean a person in that country who knows my best chance of survival in getting to the United States, would be for me, to leave Liberia. Go to this country where there isn't a travel ban and then travel. I mean, I don't know if they can actually ever try to wall off this problem unless, they try to solve it there. So I think that -- in this ratio, (ph) biggest vulnerability is how long it took them to act and then having the basic, revise their story now.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: They also added that there was quote, "Blood vomit and diarrhea so hazardous materials piled up to the ceiling." I mean, you know, they live CDC, deliberate (ph) told us we have protocols in place, for if is it there were -- you gonna be a case on U.S. soil, doesn't seem like to have it.

BECKEL: If protocols are in place, but hospitals have to adapt -- take those protocols and make them work.

BOLLING: But they didn't seem to have them, Bob. There'll be hospitals at the hospitals nurses unions telling us, that the protocols weren't in place, they weren't well trained, well versed out, to avoid two people being infected so far.

BECKEL: Well, I don't comment here, let Greg in here, then our comment.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: There's actually some good news here. Number one, the health worker that was infected had been treating Mr. Duncan and for two days, they didn't have hazmat suits, which is bad and wrong and the breach of protocol. However, those were the people that got infected. Meanwhile, there are 48 people out there who asymptomatic, who are out in the community, who have not developed symptoms in this window -- the symptom (ph) window, what is that tell you? The most obvious thing, that when you were treating somebody and you're not adequately prepared with a heavily infectious disease, with the effusive secretions, you are more likely to get infected, that is what happened. This is what is a tragedy, but it's also good news. Because, what it is telling you is that the only way that this can get infected is, if you are treating a very sick patient and you are not properly covered.

The other good news is, the great story here is the nurse, Nina Pham. She's doing well after getting a blood transfusion from the cured doctor, Kent Brantly. So thank God, that we did the right thing and we flew him here and we got him the best damn treatment, so that now his blood is saving the lives, if we had left him in Africa, he would be dead.

And I'd like to add, God bless Shepard Smith, for coming out and saying what everybody needs to hear, that there is nothing good to come from raising panic and telling everybody that they're all gonna die. You're gonna die from 100 different things before you even get close to an infected patient.

This is not a contagious disease, it is highly infectious when you are treating it and you are breaching a protocol when you're treating it. These people were not prepared, we must improve on their protection, and that will help this, we were the best (inaudible) unfortunately, we are failing right now on protecting the nurses.

BECKEL: Well, let me to say, as far be it from me to want to take on the unions, I don't -- you know I don't like to do that, but in this case, the nurses knew that this is problem existed. They knew what the protocols were, and clearly, now they're saying, "You're putting us at risk." They're the trained professionals, they're the ones who have to deal with this.

GUTFELD: They didn't have enough hazmat suits.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: So if two nurses got it, because they didn't have hazmat suits, and these two people have traveled, one of them on an airplane to Cleveland or from Cleveland back to Dallas, how many more people may have it?

GUTFELD: But that's not the question, the question is, what did they defined monitoring, if monitoring allows a nurse to fly, that's not monitoring. Nobody asked about her flying, because we assumed she wasn't, that's an issue. But I would not instill panic among people on planes and say, "Oh my God, how many other people who gonna get it." You have to be in direct contact, without protection with somebody who is symptomatic, who has effusive secretions.

GUILFOYLE: Right. And he's saying that violated the controlled movement.

GUTFELD: Right.

GUILFOYLE: .Protocol, which means you're only allowed to, if you think you have might be symptomatic, go on a chartered plane, go in your own car, or stay in your own home, you are not allowed to go on any public means of transportation. That was the latest update.

PERINO: And that was why they quarantined them -- Dr. Nancy Snyderman of NBC news, when she came back, that she's in her through, are being asked to.

GUTFELD: I agree with you, Eric. Doctor Siegel talks about this idea of fear guides. This is somebody that you trust when there is panic, we don't have a fear guide, we don't have somebody that can come in and tell us, like things are going to be okay. We need -- instead we have a bumbling character, Frieden wasn't so bumbling at the beginning, but he seems to bumble more. We need to find somebody that who you can actually trust, that makes you say, "OK, here's the actually possibility of what gonna happen and here's how we gonna fix it." We don't have that yet.

BECKEL: That was the kind of guy that vouched (ph) it is on the AIDS, remember?

GUTFELD: Yeah.

GUILFOYLE: They want an Ebola czar? (ph)

BOLLING: Can I -- the reason why take it outside the White House is President Obama may -- actually, make an announcement during in the next few minutes, if he does, we're going to break into it.

GUILFOYLE: Can I get some background on that.

BOLLING: Please. GUILFOYLE: So this is what I think is happening in the cabinet room right now. So as you mentioned in your opening, President Obama cancelled his two fund-raisers today, which as I think the absolute right thing to do and he called a cabinet meeting.

Remember on the fund raising piece, it's not that the Democrats aren't gonna to get the money, because the checks are prewritten, use this in going to the event, but again, so the right thing to do. But what happened in the cabinet meeting like that is that you have all different entities. You think why they have to bring all these entities together? It's because, I think they're being smart enough now to say, "OK, we need veteran's affairs here, because if somebody goes -- a vet comes in to a veteran's affairs hospital, do they have the protocols? Or we gonna have the similar problem that the nurses unions say that they have there.

Department of justice has to be involved because, they have to be prepared for any possible security concerns and retaliation against people, which could actually happen, if you have the plan for that. DHS has to be involved and homeland security because of immigration and border enforcement, education because of schools, HHS because of all the doctors, it goes on and on so I think they're really smart to have that. I do absolutely think that the president will try to speak today with some authority and try to be -- even though he cannot be -- to completely, he was trying to be that fear guy.

BOLLING: So Ed Henry pointed something out today, that the president did go back to the White House, he cancelled the fund-raisers to do this. Other crises or other major events, he chose not do that. He said, by going back to the White House, it instilled fear in the American people or in the world, then some cases. But now it does did add to the fear.

GUTFELD: It's a catch 22, if he doesn't show up.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah.

GUTFELD: .then this table will say, "Where the hell is he?" And if he does show up, we go, "Oh men, we're all gonna die." So there's no way he can win on this.

BECKEL: I think it's exactly right. And the other thing keep remind me is that -- let me be a little class here, this is two or four weeks before the elections and if you're sitting there and you're the political director in the White House, you say now, " What's the right move? Do we have a fund- raiser whether this thing goes on, or should we have to go back and have a meeting?"

PERINO: Yeah.

BECKEL: I think it about are we go back and go have a meeting. BOLLING: He did a fund-raiser the day after Benghazi. He did a fund-raiser, you know, there were two or three of the times where.

PERINO: Not to mention golfing after the beheading.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

BOLLING: Literally involving the family on the beheaded American, was talking on a microphone, he was golfing at the very same time.

BECKEL: I think with all the respect to ben (ph) that place, this is far more serious than Benghazi ever was.

GUILFOYLE: What?

BECKEL: I don't say it, as it the Ebola.

GUILFOYLE: We're not talking -- we're talking about after the beheading and he went golfing.

BECKEL: Well, he's not.

BOLLING: Can I get to this sound in a bit? First, I want to point out that you have your cigar in your pocket.

(LAUGHTER) (CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Its travel ban, much like British airways did back in August. I thought that was the smart move, than it still kind of do it, I still do it actually. The CDC begs to differ.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLY: Why not put a travel ban in place until we've shorn (ph) up the system.

FRIEDEN: If we do things that are going to make it harder to stop the epidemic there, it's gonna spread to other parts of Africa.

KELLY: How is it going to make it harder to stop over there?

FRIEDEN: Because you can't get people went out.

KELLY: Why can we have chartered flights?

FRIEDEN: You know, chartered flights don't do the same thing commercial airlines do.

KELLY: What do you mean? They fly in.

FRIEDEN: For a week, if we isolate these countries, what not gonna happen is disease staying there, it's going to spread more all over Africa and we'll be at higher risk.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: How do we avoid another Thomas Eric Duncan coming in?

GUTFEL: Well, OK. It is Thomas Eric Duncan, it is he's like you Eric, a hero. You save the Bob Beckel's life that day when he was chocking and Thomas not gonna save -- tried to save a woman who was dying, so he's -- he gave his life. In this case, there's an inherent contradiction here, you can't have -- it doesn't have to be all or nothing. You need a travel ban, you don't need the entire travel ban, you can allow in and out travel.

GUILFOYLE: What about limiting certain visas.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: That's why I don't get the -- I don't know why they have to say all or nothing.

BOLLING: Here's what they're saying, if you ban travel to and from these three countries, Sierra Leone, Guinea and.

PERINO: Liberia.

BOLLING: . and Liberia. You're increasing any of the chances for to spread in those countries, and I just.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: That what's Dana say about this, you can fly out of any of those countries to Europe and from Europe then to the United States. I mean.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: You have a Sierra Leone passport, you don't get admittance.

GUILFOYLE: Meaning you have a stamp on there saying that you stopped in there during this time then you wouldn't be allowed.

BOLLING: If you originated there, you stop there. You don't get in.

GUTFELD: The thing is Duncan came from Brussels right? Will he be able to - - and also he was asymptomatic so at that point maybe not, but I mean, I don't see why you can't, I mean, you can't do a ban -- partial ban and still let people go in and out.

PERINO: I think the other thing is we've lost track -- we're talking about two people who are being treated with the best possible care in America, when World Health Organizations that day expect 10,000 more cases a week. Although after -- You are not going to be -- I don't have things to be able to stop this in terms of a travel ban. You might be able to slow it down slightly. But you're actually if -- and I believe that they are correct, that it could actually exacerbate the problem there and then spread it and they can even more dangerous for people. I don't think it's the right move at this time.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Muslims. It's the Burqa. It protects you.

BOLLING: On that note, we're going to leave it right there. We're still waiting for remarks from the president, from the White House on the Ebola outbreak, were going to have more on that, coming up next but, did the Pentagon conceal the discovery of chemical weapons in Iraq following the 2003 invasion? We'll tell you all about a shocking New York Times report. Plus, the operation to take out ISIS now officially has a name, what the military is calling it, next on The Five.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUILFOYLE: This is the Fox News alert, we are waiting for new remarks of President Obama from the White House. He told in the cabinet meeting, coordinating with his advisers on nation's response to the Ebola outbreak. We'll bring that to you as soon as he speaks, we'll be watching on the other side of the screen. In the meantime, a bombshell report from the New York Times reveals new details about stores of chemical weapons uncovered in Iraq between 2004 and 2011. Not only were the discoveries kept secret, but on at least six Caucasians troops encountering this chemical weapons, were injured. To keep the revelation hidden, these soldiers were often denied necessary care, and were not recognized with their wounds. The details have reorganized (ph) that the debate over the case for war in Iraq, and whether the 2003 invasion was ultimately necessary. Critics however maintain the weapons found were not the same as ones used in the justification for war.

Alright, so this them interesting story, a lot of people talking about it. Let's break it down. Dana, I want to get your reaction.

PERINO: Well, I'm actually confused by the story, and I'm confused by our intro because, I actually -- I read that I thought I don't really think this is news. I have not seen the FOIA documents that the freedom of information Act document for the New York Times that they have a bond Intel side (ph) of things. I do remember reports that old WMD were found. And I don't remember -- I've never seeing evidence about people being injured and not being allowed to talk about that perhaps, the New York Times has that and it's solid, it's just not something that I am familiar with. And also, if there was WMD found and if these people were injured, I would think under the enormous pressure the Bush administration was under, in order to justify more that then they would've actually said, "We found this WMD" so that.

(CROSSTALK)

PERINO: It doesn't make sense. You're missing something very important here. The New York Times has trying to rewrite history and trying to put in place, an idea in people's minds and solidify it. That George W. Bush went to war thinking that Saddam Hussein had a new weapons program, he never said that. And Gabriel Malor, of Ace of Spades, did an amazing job of breaking down, taking President Bush speeches, and showing what President Bush said, is what the world said in 1998. National intelligence estimates that Saddam Hussein had had weapons and he had a propensity to try to reconstitute a program. That was went to the U.N. for what the Congress for, and that's went to war for.

GUILFOYLE: That was the case for war.

PERINO: That was the case. So they're mixing apples and oranges and I'm confused by the New York Times story and why it is such a big deal. But, again, I haven't seen this secret intelligence FOIA document that they say that they have.

GUILFOYLE: They say their story is good, Bob.

BECKEL: Someone to keep in mind here. Those are mostly mustard gas canisters that they were found. They will help hooked those together by the west, when they were fighting the Iraqis, when they were fighting the Iranians. They used an enormous amount of those weapons during the war with Iran, and making people died during that. So I'm not at all surprised that they were sliding (ph) that all catch of those around. The real issue is was there a new program, and the answer was, there was not a new program. But, that I was agree with him, I was not -- I never heard the word new used from Bush. So I don't.

PERINO: So if the New York Times makes that case, that's what they're be at, they try to say the President Bush did say that and he didn't.

BECKEL: I was trying to make.

GUILFOYLE: And you were there?

BECKEL: .agent (ph) get cared and be the sudden week before now.

GUILFOYLE: Eric.

BOLLING: That his point now. We said that it reignited the debate. Why is there a debate anyway? Saddam Hussein, I mean, is there any question that he was a bad guy, he was dictator who murdered -- mass murdered his own people. Government approved mass murder, torture and rape, sometimes up to several hundred thousand. Some people say -- New York Times actually says, up to a million using mustard gas on his own people, so he actually had a dirty dozen. I think the Bush administration went to war -- correct me if I'm wrong, with the dirty dozen not the Iraqi people. With Saddam Hussein, you know the five or six or so security people and the top advisers and the two sons, that's who we were trying to eliminate, not have go to war with the Iraqi people.

(CROSSSTALK)

BOLLING: Who cares if there was a weapon of mass destruction or not. The guy was bad, he killed his own people.

BECKEL: The question is a lot of bad people in the world, the question is you go to war against him?

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Have that debate. But don't say they went to war for weapons of mass destruction. That's a different debate.

BECKEL: We, wait a minute. They didn't go to war for a new program about this mass destruction. Colin Powell went to the U.N. and said, "That there is -- they have the ability to build these things." And that was.

PERINO: Desire.

GUILFOYLE: And certainly had demonstrated the propensity to do so and use them, not just to design them and manufacture them, but actually to deploy them against their own people.

BECKEL: Well, in also with you mind, I've said about the Iranians, they -- that was something we pushed very hard for them to do.

GUTFELD: It was felt there was plenty of evidence. I mean, they gassed thousands of people, what's your definition of weapons of mass destruction. There were 2,400 nerve agent rockets, I guess in the world where we called Fort Hood workplace violence, that's nothing more than roman candles? I mean, this stuff was deadly, and I agree with Eric, It was part of the reason, everybody including the Clintons, wanted Hussein dead, they want him dead. His death should be roundly cheered, it was a great accomplishment. And when we look back long after we dead -- what were dead, that will be looked upon as a great thing.

BECKEL: You think the circumstances there now in that area that there was worthwhile?

GUILFOYLE: I mean, this is a guy too that used the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq, as his test subjects for VX gas. I mean, the unbelievable atrocities, so now to sit in judgment and say, "Oh well, this is the reason they may" -- you know what? Come on.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: Let's remember there's no fly zone, they weren't getting the Kurds at that point.

PERINO: I think that. But, I do think Bob, to your point though, that I do believe that a premature withdrawal in that area by President Obama, that the decision has led to the problems that we're having now with ISIS. And that's what point of the New York Times story that ISIS is now getting their hands on these old weapons and could use it against innocent people.

BECKEL: He would say about that I think (inaudible) but I 0counter with this, which is we wouldn't have had to draw back people if we hadn't gone to war in the first place.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: But you -- I mean, OK. You've always been anti-war and that's great. Being anti-war is great, because you can always say you're gonna be anti-war no matter what happens. But at the certain point, when you want -- when you needed to get rid of somebody and that person that invaded Kuwait, a person who killed thousands and yet, after that, that led to chaos, but it was a lot better off before Obama let it go to hell.

GUILFOYLE: And nobody liked him.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: I would say to response to that, George H.W. Bush made the decision not to follow to get his saying. And because, he thought it was sudden -- if I remember what Colin Powell saying, "If you break it you have to keep it."

GUTFELD: He's probably buying rules.

GUILFOYLE: We're done with this, yeah (inaudible)

Coming up, Mark Zuckerberg just gave the fed some big bucks to fight Ebola. If the rest of us could you take up where -- pick more our tax fall is when to. Where would you directed. We're going to tell you where we would, and that's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: So we've got roving hordes of madmen and pestilence. It's like the Middle Ages, except with iPhones and stretch pants. War and plague are things we cannot control, but the government should, especially when they have all of our money. And if they can't, what good are they?

A government focused on issues that appeal to Lena Dunham and Matt Damon, ignore the big-box items like war and disease. President Obama is the guy you send to the store for food and water, and he keeps coming back with Yoo-hoo. He has the priorities of a dorm-room activist: stuck on injustice, blind to real threats.

It's not just him. Back before he was head at the CDC, Thomas Frieden was pushing taxes on sodas. Apparently, he used to think cola was worse than Ebola. Thank you.

Thankfully, Mark Zuckerberg has tossed $25 million at the disease. So if he can, why can't we? I mean, what if we could choose where our tax money goes? I bet we'd make sure what matters most gets help the most. Disaster, disease, the troops. And the silly stuff would vanish.

Economist Catherine Eckal (ph) once gave study volunteers 20 bucks, with the option to give some to the government. Most gave a buck 70 to the man, but when they could target specific programs, they gave twice as much to disaster relief and three times as much to fight cancer. Because, see, we know what matters.

But when you have a president who prefers feel-good fads favored by sheltered undergrads, how can we depend on him to fight the real battles? But at least we're cracking down on cupcakes at school. Those things will kill you.

So let's go around the table. Dana, Zuckerberg, nice of him, he gave $25 million. Granted, he just bought a $100 million plot of land in Hawaii, but $25 million is good. If you had $25 million, what would you do with it? Or give? If you had to give it away.

PERINO: I'm thinking there should be some context.

GUTFELD: OK.

PERINO: Mark Zuckerberg giving 25 million to the CDC, I do think -- I think that is very generous. But it is the equivalent of me giving $250 or less to the CDC, just given his wealth.

GUTFELD: Really?

PERINO: Yes.

GUTFELD: Did you work this out?

PERINO: Because it's -- right, Eric?

BOLLING: I was going to go with 25 bucks.

PERINO: That makes me feel even worse, right? I could give 25 bucks. But there's also -- the interesting thing is the government has these things called foundations, so the CDC can actually have money like this that you can receive. So, you know, it's conceivable, under your theory, that each department could have a foundation. Then you could compete for dollars, so that people could -- if they wanted to donate more to troops versus climate change, you could do that.

GUTFELD: If I only wasn't so cheap and lazy.

GUILFOYLE: That's what we have been saying. I mean, finally the truth.

GUTFELD: Eric, if you had -- what would you -- if you had -- well, for you it would have to be $350 million.

BOLLING: Zuckerberg donates $25 million for Ebola. Right? We know it's going to be hundreds of billions of dollars, at least tens of billions of dollars to fight Ebola. NIH, I think their budget's like $30 billion alone, just that. So it's a token. It says this is what he cares about.

So if it were me, with 25 million, I would probably do something in the area of -- it would definitely be energy and maybe something in the area of nuclear energy, like some awareness on the safety, address some of the concerns on nuclear energy. Make it safe. People understand it's safe. And clearly the most efficient form of energy that would help us out.

GUILFOYLE: I knew you were going to go to the...

BECKEL: First of all, this monologue of yours was almost over the top today about Obama. I mean...

GUILFOYLE: Almost?

BECKEL: No, but I give him a lot of margin here because of who he is and what he says.

But, you know, the fact is the president of the United States does care about these big issues. And the question is, emphasis or not, but I mean, you make it funny. But anyway, I don't want to tell you -- My $25 million would go to WIC children.

GUILFOYLE: Don't say it.

BECKEL: Women, Infant and Children nutrition.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, which is good (ph). That was rather charming of you, Bob.

BECKEL: Thank you.

GUILFOYLE: You must be trying to get a Saturday night date.

BECKEL: No, I've got one already with you.

GUILFOYLE: No, no, no, Bob, I did not agree to that.

BECKEL: I don't know. I sort of thought...

GUTFELD: I thought you were going to do an exchange student program.

BECKEL: No, I've got that funded already.

GUILFOYLE: That's already in place. That's already in place.

GUTFELD: K.G.

GUILFOYLE: OK, so for sure, money for cancer research, absolutely, and my other big issue is the children. And so children that suffer from abuse and neglect and also education, special needs children.

GUTFELD: I think I would give 25 million -- that's -- how many missiles does that buy, 25?

BECKEL: No, no, no.

GUTFELD: Not even?

BECKEL: No, that's not even close.

GUTFELD: I would be -- wouldn't it be great if you could buy missiles and say this is where they should go?

PERINO: No, I don't think that would be great (ph).

GUTFELD: No? No, that's why I'm not allowed to be in any political office.

BECKEL: We were just saying the other day, we should just nuke them, get all together and nuke them. But you think about that. You nuke them, and then all that stuff goes all around the world and everybody dies.

GUTFELD: It's not as bad as a volcano.

BOLLING: I'm pretty sure it doesn't go all around the world.

BECKEL: No, no. It goes (ph) a good distance.

BOLLING: Does it bother you when you see one of these missiles, one of these Hellfire missiles? A million and a half bucks. On a truck.

GUTFELD: Yes, it's troubling. It is troubling.

BECKEL: Trucks are carrying a lot of stuff.

GUILFOYLE: It depends -- it depends on who and what's inside the truck. Let me tell you, that's why you need people on the ground to tell you which trucks to hit. Sums it up.

GUTFELD: There you go.

Next, does the city of Houston want to silence pastors who have spoken out against a controversial measure? Sermons have been summoned, and you'll hear got it when "The Five" returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECKEL: Two big celebrities are making some headlines, Bono and Brad Pitt.

GUTFELD: Married.

BECKEL: He did. There you go. That's news, right?

Ireland's native son has come out to hail his country's lowest in the world tax rate for corporations. Yahoo. The U-2 front man says it's a boon for Ireland's economy if businesses don't have to fork over big bucks to the government.

And back at home, Brad Pitt, Kimberly's favorite, has revealed himself as a gun owner since kindergarten. Let's begin first with Bono.

Eric, this is a big deal, but as a matter of fact, Ireland's economy is in the tank, and I suppose it's...

BOLLING: No, but he's right. I mean, the low tax -- corporate tax rate in Ireland is making -- literally making our pharmaceutical companies and other companies look to de-patriate themselves. Declare themselves not American anymore. And go to these foreign countries, because it's frankly...

BECKEL: Why is Ireland's economy in the tank?

BOLLING: A lot of reasons.

GUILFOYLE: Now, but not before.

BOLLING: By the way, if we lowered our corporate tax rate or allowed business to bring their corporate profits back at no tax.

GUILFOYLE: The Irish community was doing very, very well.

BECKEL: Really very, very well.

GUILFOYLE: ... the history.

BECKEL: So what did you do with Brad Pitt last night? You saw him last night, right?

Dana, you agree with this celebrity...

PERINO: Absolutely, it's been a boon for Ireland, and America should definitely do the same thing. President Obama said that he could go from our 39 percent rate to 29 percent. Republicans have said they wanted 25 percent. I believe that, in the next year, you will see some compromise between that 25 percent and 29 percent.

BECKEL: But effectively, the U.S. corporate tax rate is very low because the corporations are allowed to write off so much stuff. But I think you're right. I think there will be a bipartisan agreement?

Greg, what about you? Are you into this bipartisan agreement.

GUTFELD: Yes. The reason why you could trust Bono on this is that he spent a lot of time going around the world in dealing with all sorts of problems, including AIDS and starvation. He understands, through all of his experiences, that capitalism is the only way to reduce pain and suffering in the world. The only thing -- the only model that works.

And you know what else he learned? That the opposite doesn't. He gave his new album away, through Apple. And people hated it. They didn't want it. People like stuff that they pay for. They want to put -- they value the idea of value.

GUILFOYLE: He's also worked very hard to end extreme poverty...

GUTFELD: True.

GUILFOYLE: ... throughout the world. Yes. He puts his money where his mouth is. He's been very active on that end and successful in doing so. So I think that's good.

BOLLING: And also point out that U-2 probably incorporated. Make sure that they get that low tax rate.

GUILFOYLE: Well, do you blame them? I don't blame anybody for taking advantage of common sense. Like come on.

BECKEL: Let's -- I guess. Let's talk about Brad Pitt here for a second. He says he's been a gun owner since he was in kindergarten. Greg, you're a big fan of this stuff. Is -- you think that's sort of a breach in the wall of those of us who don't think the guns ought to be allowed on the street?

GUTFELD: Well, it depends if he's a hypocrite or not. I mean, if he has a gun, but he doesn't want you to you have a gun, I don't like him. But I don't think he's that way.

How -- I just wonder how many stars are like him, but don't say anything? Who all have guns, but then say they're for gun control. I don't like those people. So I'm kind of glad that he came out and said, "I got to a gun." And you know what he said? Basically what he said, "It's a right. I do it because I protect my family."

GUILFOYLE: Right.

GUTFELD: It is an innate right.

GUILFOYLE: And I'm happy that he's open and transparent about it. It's a man who says, "Listen, I have a gun. I've had guns. I want to be able to protect my family." And that is his God-given constitutional right.

BECKEL: There's a little difference between -- I have a gun, too, a 12- gauge shotgun in my house. The difference is I can't carry my 12-gauge shotgun out on the street to protect myself in the local 7-Eleven, which a lot of people might be able to do. I mean, it's not a question of being a gun...

GUILFOYLE: We've got a permit for that, Bob.

GUTFELD: No, you cannot have a shotgun in New York, Bob.

BECKEL: No, not here. In Maryland. I have a 12-gauge shotgun.

Dana, you have anything to say about this?

PERINO: No. Because we've got to tease, because we've got President Obama.

BECKEL: Oh, I'm sorry. Is that right? What?

PERINO: Go.

BECKEL: Go, go. Obama's coming up right now on Ebola. Is that right?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: This is a FOX News alert. President Obama delivers new remarks from the cabinet room on the Ebola outbreak just minutes ago.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, obviously, the news has been dominated by the diagnosis of a second healthcare worker in Dallas with Ebola.

And in light of this second case, I thought it was very important for me to bring together our team, including our CDC director, Tom Frieden, to hear directly from them in terms of how we are ramping up our efforts here.

Obviously, initially, we want to express concern for the two health workers who have been affected. Our nurses and our healthcare workers are absolutely vital to the health and well-being of our families. They sacrifice for us all the time, not just in this case, but in the case of other illnesses that affect us.

They are selfless. They work hard. They're often underpaid, and so our thoughts and prayers are with them. And we have to make sure that we are doing everything we can to take care of them, even as they take care of us.

As a consequence, what we've been doing here today is reviewing exactly what we know about what's happened in Dallas and how we're going to make sure that something like this is not repeated. And that we are monitoring supervising, overseeing, in a much more aggressive way, exactly what's taking place in Dallas initially and making sure that the lessons learned are then transmitted to hospitals and clinics all across the country.

First of all, what I directed the CDC to do is that, as soon as somebody is diagnosed with Ebola, we want a rapid response team, a SWAT team, essentially, from the CDC to be on the ground as quickly as possible, hopefully within 24 hours, so that they are taking the local hospital step by step through exactly what needs to be done and making sure that all the protocols are properly observed, that the use of protective equipment is done effectively, the disposal of that protective equipment is done properly.

That the key thing to understand got this disease is that these protocols work. We know that because they have been used for decades now in Ebola cases around the world, including the cases that were treated in Emory and in Nebraska. So if they're done properly, they work. But we have to make sure that, understandably, certain local hospitals that may not have that experience are walking -- walked through that process as carefully as possible, and we've got to make sure that this rapid response team can do that.

In addition, we are reviewing every step of what's happened since Mr. Duncan was initially brought in to the hospital in Dallas so that we understand exactly where some of the problems may have occurred; and doing a thorough canvass and inventory of all the workers who had contact with Mr. Duncan, including those who engaged in some of the testing that took place.

We are now communicating all these various lessons to hospitals, clinics, first responders around the country and, obviously, giving all the attention that this has received, we're going to make sure that that provision of information is constant, ongoing and being updated on a real- time basis.

In addition, we are working very carefully with the mayor of Dallas, the governor of Texas and others to make sure that, in the even any other cases arise from these health workers, that they are properly cared for in a way that is consistent with public safety.

I know that people are concerned about the fact that the second healthcare worker had traveled. Here's what we know about Ebola. That it is not like the flu. It is not airborne. The only way that a person can contract Ebola is about coming into direct contact with the bodily fluids of somebody who is showing symptoms. In other words, if they don't have symptoms, they're not contagious.

What we are able to do, however, is to do what's called contact tracing, so that anybody who may have had contact with someone, even if it was incidental contact, even if they weren't showing symptoms, being able to identify who those individuals are and make sure that they are then being monitored in a way that allows to us to make certain that the disease does not spread further. And that's currently taking place in a very aggressive process, conducted by the CDC, HHS and the rest of our teams.

I want to use myself as an example just so that people have a sense of the science here. I shook hands with, hugged and kissed, not the doctors, but a couple of the nurses at Emory because of the valiant work that they did in treating one of the patients. They followed the protocols. They knew what they were doing. And I felt perfectly safe doing so.

And so this is not a situation in which, like a flu, the risks of a rapid spread of the disease are imminent. If we do these protocols properly, if we follow the steps, if we get the information out, then the likelihood of widespread Ebola outbreaks in this country are very, very low.

But I think what we've all learned over the last several weeks is that folks here in this country, and a lot of non-specialized hospitals and clinics, don't have that much experience dealing with these issues, and so we're going to have to push out this information as aggressively as possible, and that's the instructions that I provided to my team.

Just a couple of other points. We are going to be monitoring carefully the health status of the other healthcare workers in Dallas, and obviously, they're concerned. We understand that many of them are scared. And we are going to make sure that we're on the ground 24/7 to provide them the kind of support, information and assurances that they need to get through this particular challenge.

And finally, we're also going to be continually examining our screening processes at airports. We're making sure that, in the event that we have additional cases that involve the need for transporting those patients to specialized hospitals, that those teams are in place and those facilities are in place. And we will make sure that, on a day-to-day basis, we provide the public with all the information they need and day other updates about what has happened, not just in Dallas, but what is being done across the country.

I'll end with this point. We are going to have to make sure that we do not lose sight of the importance of the international response to what is taking place in West Africa. I am absolutely confident that we can prevent a serious outbreak of the disease here in the United States. But it becomes more difficult to do so if this epidemic of Ebola rages out of control in West Africa. If it does, then it will spread globally. In an age of frequent travel and the kind of constant interactions that people have across borders.

And so it is very important for us to understand that the investment we make in helping Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea deal with this problem is an investment in our own public health. This is not simply charity, although obviously, it's important that America takes the lead in the humanitarian crisis that's taking place there, but it is also probably the single most important thing that we can do to prevent a more serious Ebola outbreak in this country is making sure that we get what is a raging epidemic right now in West Africa under control.

So for that reason, last night I had a call with Prime Minister Abe in Japan, to solicit greater support for the international effort. coordinate an I spoke with Chancellor Merkel of Germany, Prime Minister Renzi of Italy, President Hollande of France, as well as David Cameron, the prime minister of Great Britain to make sure that we are coordinating our efforts and that we are putting together a lot more of our resources than so far at least in the international community has put into this process.

So bottom line, in terms of the public, I want people to understand that the dangers of you contracting Ebola, the dangers of a serious outbreak are extraordinarily low, but we are taking this very seriously at the highest levels of government. And we are going to be able to manage this particular situation, but we have to look towards the future.

And if we are not responding internationally in an effective way and if we do not set up the kind of preparedness and training in our public health infrastructure here in the United States, not just for this outbreak, but for future outbreaks, then we could have problems.

So in the meantime, I want everybody to be thinking about and praying for the two health workers that have gotten sick. Those who also treated this patient with compassion and care, we just want to say thank you to them and that we are going to be doing everything we can to make sure that they're properly cared for. OK? Thank you very much everybody.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PERINO: That was President Obama calling together his cabinet today for a meeting in the cabinet room to coordinate our government's response. And making a little bit of news here, Greg, he said that he spoke to several world leaders, because one of the things he said yesterday is that the world is not doing enough. So then he did what I think is a good thing. He used the collateral of the United States to call other leaders like Abe and Merkel and Cameron, and say we need to do more.

GUTFELD: Yes, I think it's good that that happened. I also feel that, you know, he still needs to instill confidence here. I'm glad that we're talking about the world, and the world is important, but we need to think about America.

BECKEL: He said it was extraordinarily unlikely.

GUTFELD: I know.

BECKEL: I know you don't like that word.

GUTFELD: I know, and he used the word "extraordinarily."

BECKEL: This is what he said: it's extraordinarily unlikely.

GUTFELD: I know, I know.

PERINO: ... said that in his block.

GUTFELD: But I just hate that word.

PERINO: You don't like it?

BOLLING: Very quickly, protocols work. I like that. That was fantastic. But the only problem I didn't like about that, he said we're going to continue at the airports screening the way they're going, and boy, don't we know it's like trying to stop people at the border if you don't have them (ph) at the border.

PERINO: All right. Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: We're not stopping them at the border either, because they can come in from those countries, as well.

I liked his tone. I thought that he actually sounded -- kind of hit the right tone. I'd like him to be a little bit more persuasive about calming fears here at home. And I think, as usual, the U.S. needs to seize the opportunity to lead by example, and others will follow.

PERINO: Do you think that he made the sale, Bob?

BECKEL: I think he did. There was a lot of good information. I mean, the last part of that speech, I think it was terrific about talking to world leaders and also sort of outlining what we need to do. The first part was full of a lot of information that Greg was bored with.

PERINO: All right. That's it for us.

GUTFELD: True.

PERINO: "Special Report" is next. Thanks for being with us.

GUILFOYLE: Well, thank you, Dana.

Content and Programming Copyright 2014 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.