President at berkeley heights, new jersey on the tweets that were already creating a storm. Ellison . Reporter neil yeah President Trump is accusing social media in general of discriminating against conservative voices, specifically republican and conservative voices speaking loudly and clearly for the trump adminitration. He says we wont let that happen. They are closing down the opinions of many people on the right, while at the same time, doing nothing to others. In a second tweet he called sensorship a very dangerous thing and absolutely impossible to police. In a third tweet he continued, too many voices are being destroyed some good and some bad and that can not be allowed to happen. Who is making the choices . Because i can already tell you that too many mistakes are being made. And ive reached out to the white house to ask for clarification on those tweets and specifically what the president meant if he is calling for or planning to call for any official action in regards to these allegations, and so far we have not heard back from the white house, but this is not a new issue for republicans. In the past an issue that has come up is socalled shadow banning, President Trump spoke out against what he saw as unfair treatment of conservative voices in the social media world republicans claimed that their tweets were being secretly hidden from other twitter users. Twitter said that this was an issue with their search algorithm essentially a tech issue and they denied any sort of shadow banning and they identified an issue where some accounts werent auto subjected and search even when people were searching for their specific name but they said that it only impacted those auto search suggestions. Some lawmakers wanted twitter ceo to appear on capitol hill and testify about that specific issue. In september, jack dorsey is expected to appear before the Senate Intelligence committee but regards to russian interference and u. S. Elections top executives from facebook are also expected to be there again and the focus is on election interference, foreign actors trying to interfere in u. S. Elections but as is often the case with hearings lawmakers sometimes ask about other things and if the president keeps tweet ing about this theres a good chance this issue could come up in that september hearing. Neil i think theres an excellent chance of that thank you very very much ellison barber with the president in new jersey and now does the president have a point here regardless of whether youre on the right or left is there disproportion at interest in silencing those on the right than the left because of all of the social media Agencies Companies that the have been reporting their new standards and practices, not a one has tried to reign in on thought coming from the left. To magazine publisher is no doubt outraged, Fox News ContributorJohn Layfield and jo nas max ferris in the meantime , david asman and trish regan for all their hard work when i was out they reminded me to thank them. [laughter] neil very happy to thank them John Layfield the president is saying look its not fair its not right. What do you think . I think he has a point. Any time you start to censoring things theres going to be human bias that gets interjected into it and its going ton an in in exact science. I think alex jones is a complete idiot. He claims sandy hook was fake or alleged it could be. He claims Michelle Obama could be a man, i hate that kind of stuff buffets book also has a flat society page so theres nothing illegal about being neil do you have a problem with that . Im actually the president of that. I follow it. I love the page. Its great. Neil but bill marr agrees on that very very subject he was commenting on this last night. Can we show that . If youre a liberal youre supposed to be for free speech, thats free speech for the speech you hate. Thats what free speech means were losing the thread of the concepts that are important to this country. If you care about the real americans or you dont, and if you do it goes for every side. I dont like alex jones, but alex jones gets to speak. Everybody gets to speak. Neil what do you think . Well yeah, i mean, most of us dont agree with alex jones i think, but yeah, it didnt even work. There was a temporary halt. It didnt even make sense and it made him even more popular and probably has more followers but it reminds me a lot when he said the liberal social media just like nixon with the liberal media that was not liberal media its liberal social media. Neil well its not social media with nixon. Right of course so its the new wave of calling these people that come out against your policies are with you just lets go its us versus them so its very reminiscent of the mix on days going against the liberal media which its not true. The media is half and half. I sat in that press room in the white house and it was half and half. Neil really . It really was. Neil everyone is entitled to their opinion but the half and half thing i wonder about but i do want to question you the president in a series of tweets talked about how this is distinguished from even the media, cnn and msnbc and yet i do not ask that their sick behavior be removed i get used to it and watch it with a grain of salt or dont watch it at all cant we just leave it at that . In other words if you dont like what youre seeing dont sensor what you see just dont accept it. I think that that would be a better solution. I also understand, however these are companies, individual private companies that have the right to sensor whatever they want to sensor. They wanted to sensor me for no reason then they have the right to do so. I dont have a constitutional right to tweet. I do think that it is a problem though. I think that neil but what if we censored what you said here . I would not, i mean, fox news is also a private company. I also dont have a right to speak on fox news. Neil but if facebook denies the opportunity for points of views that say like yours cannot get out there as a private company, well of course its publicly traded company. Well right. Neil does it have the right to do that . The president questions whether it does. Many question whether youre on the right or left, bill mahr included, John Layfield included . No. I agree that its completely unfair and there is bias. I just dont know when he says hes not going to allow it what exactly that means. Thats a question that i would definitely have for the president. Neil okay well hes accepting i think what is he calls it fake news one of the things goes on with fake news is it fake if you dont like what youre hearing other president s have problems with the press in the past. I was surprised to learn one of the more popular president s we had was john f. Kennedy had enormous problems with the press so this goes way back but im wondering where you draw the line. John f. Kennedy reference is interesting because some people said he only became president because of tv. You could almost argue trump became president because of social media. Hes like the social media kid. Hes much better than Hillary Clinton was no question about it so total strange that hes picking it out as something that needs to be dealt with when he uses it better than anybody. As far as, okay let me get back to kats point about from private companies. If they all merge some day or get bigger than they even are, theres a point where its like your Power Company cant cut you off theres certain rules, theres nowhere else to speak once they control everything. Its not that far yet and no one is keeping alex jones from having a website and the government is not stopping them from speaking so we havent crossed over yet but i think were going that direction. Neil you dont find it troubl ing that those who control this, social media would sooner cutoff alex jones and maybe perfectly reasons they find it obnoxious whatever but they wouldnt go after left leaning side . That seems to be the state but that is because neil it is the state. Naming one leftleaning side. Both parties, social Media Companies and alex jones, are at the end of the day driven by profits. They are both making money for misinformation. Google, facebook has made more money from crypto coin ads, from russia, they dont care because they make money from fake bots, from users and alex jones makes money hes not just a guy not like hitler trying to change the world through his crazy thoughts hes trying to sell Nutritional Supplements and tshirts by spreading misinformation to people and what the internet is doing a bad job of is making it difficult for people who maybe should be smarter but maybe shouldnt be so miss informed. Neil i think youre absolutely right but John Layfield where i draw a distinction is who is judging that. We have our own personal bias and do we let that come into the picture hooker . I dont see how you couldnt any time you have a human judging Something Like this you have to. Neil so all the humans i see judging this john on the social media spectrum have been targeting rightleaning sources. I agree with that completely and i think they are and i think thats the bias they brought into it before they walked into that equation. Theres a point where you talk about where does this stop . It stops when they start promot ing violence and terrorism but where does that point end as far as free speech becomes hate speech and thats the slippery slope they are talking about. Neil well how would you advise them on this subject to get away from the politics of it to the next leap which is violence . Well it seems the New York Times pointed out they are confused they actually dont even know they said jack dorsey was saying its about the values of twitter and should he have said rules of twitter not values . What do you mean values . What values does twitter have . Neil and this started about people talking about what they are for breakfast . Exactly. Neil socal am down about the constitution. Right the ceos dont even know what they are talking about they arent even using the right words to describe how they are policing whats going on. And youre getting your news from a site that has the most videos in the world there has to be personal responsibility. Neil along with kat . We all love kat. I think there has to be personal responsibility from people that look at this stuff. Neil well the last election and people worrying about this election is more of that stuff is whether its from the left or right, all im saying and i agree with pretty much everything everyone has said here just show the same aggressively in policing whats coming from questionable sources on the left as you do on the right. Thats what im saying. I agree but i think a lot of the people that work at these companies are liberal so theres as you brought up personal bias in terms offer what does and does not get censored thats completely unfair and the solution is for people who are conservative to continue to speak out against it and put public pressure on them to not continue to do this. Neil or dont watch it. Dont Pay Attention to it. The president said now i dont know whatever he practices what he preaches. Hell never stop tweeting. Neil he knows well enough what they are saying on msnbc and cnn and some shows on this network so maybe he cant control it. I think the Internet Companies need to do a better job of making it easier to see whats a lie or not. The whole ranking on popularity concept that drives google is why its difficult for people to determine that vaccines arent bad and you cant have a flat earth and a wookie, because youll fall off the flat earth and its not easy for someone searching for those terms to determine thats whats so crazy it seems balanced because theres a lot of traffic going to the crazy side and they get uprated and if you do some term searches you actually might start to believe this garbage and thats i think the Internet Companies put profit second and get back to this issue, that is not a left or right wing thing the lies. They are just going after the lies of alex jones it seems to be a very quick thing we all got together, but if they focus on just the truth and lies and make that easy for the consumer of the internet. Neil but we have our own definition. Well its almost like pornography who gets to say what it is. Neil i know what pornography is [laughter] oh, my. Oh, my. Neil oh, look at the time. All right by the way are more security clearances on the chop ping block and what would be so wrong if they are . We were just getting into this on fox friends and a brief hit with them that there are better than 4 million of these security clearance passes out there. 4 million. Thats quite a bit. After this. indistinguishable muttering that was awful. Why are you so good at this . Had a coach in high school. Really helped me up my game. I had a coach. Math. Ooh. So, why dont traders have coaches . Who says they dont . Coach mcadoo you know, at Td Ameritrade, we offer free access to coaches and a full education curriculum just to help you improve your skills. Boom mad skills. Education to take your trading to the next level. Only with Td Ameritrade. Man 1 this is my body of proof. Woman 1 proof of less joint pain. Woman 2 . And clearer skin. Woman 3 this is my body of proof. Man 2 proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis. Woman 4 . With humira. Woman 5 humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. Its proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. Humira is the 1 prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. Avo humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. Serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. Before treatment, get tested for tb. Tell your doctor if youve been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if youve had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. Dont start humira if you have an infection. Woman 6 need more proof . Woman 7 ask your rheumatologist about humira. Man 1 whats your body of proof . The fact that hes using a security clearance of a former cia director as a pawn in his public relationships strategy, i think is just so reflective of somebody who quite frankly dont want to use this term, maybe but hes drunk on power. He really is. President trump many people dont even know who he is and now he has a bigger voice and thats okay with me because i like taking on voices like that. Neil by the way the president followed up on his attacks on brennan, has anyone looked at the mistakes that john brennan made while serving as cia director, he will go down the worst in history and since getting out has become nothing less than a loud mouth partisan political hack who cannot be trusted with the secrets to our country so ill just put him down as not quite sure what to make of mr. Brennan for the time being. Those are some of the other candidates whose security clearances could be revoked as well some already have them frozen in place but we shall see lets get the read from former u. S. Attorney Fox News Contributor andrew mccarthy. The back and forth on this, i want to step way back if i can on just the issuance of security clearances period. Now i know there are better than 4 million of these out there and many are given on a courtesy basis to former top Security Officials i can almost understand that, but it seems to have gotten out of hand, but what do you make of that . Yeah, neil i think its way out of hand. Its actually the last number i saw was 5. 1 Million People in this country have security clearances which is just nuts. Theres no way that you can protect the National Defense secrets of the country, the top secret information that really does have to be secret if were going to protect National Security with such a widespread net of people who have this access. I mean think about snowden whose just one person out of 5. 1 million the damage that was done with that leaking incident, and multiply it geometrically about what our threat is and i think where you have to come out there is that people should lose their security clearances when they are no longer working for the government either in a government post or as a contractor. Neil do you think now obviously not all of those 5. 1 million i imagine are given the same level of security access for example, if you work even on a contractor basis for defense contractor for example, just to get on to the facility youre going to need some sort of clearance so that i understand and these have grown over the years, again that i can understand, to your point here i thought it was 4 million but its over 5 million thats bad but what is the understanding given the top cabinet officials . It seems like these are almost a courtesy. Why . Well i think in some ways, its a courtesy, neil. In other ways it really is helpful to the country. I mean, i just think of people like jim wolsey, george tenant, we have a store house of people who have a lot of wisdom, good judgment, and have something that the vast majority of other people dont which is access to this information or having had access to this information that nobody else can see because its our top National Defense secrets and i wouldnt want to deny our current policy makers the ability to tap into that resource, so i think within reason, you have to allow a certain amount of this because its good for the country but that doesnt mean the over arch ing policy ought to be that everybody just gets to have increasing levels of access and we have a creeping increasing per of people who have access. I just think thats a mistake. Neil im kind of doing a play off of spiderman theme with great access comes great responsibility, and i would assume that the president of the United States whatever you think of him, is now some of the other men and women you alluded to who have this security access, leon panetta, theyre very choice in their criticism, they show great discret