>> wow. that's all i could say. one of the targeted leaders, the one you just heard right here right now. >> neil: welcome. glad to have you. today it was their turn to tell their side of the story. a half dozen leaders of conservative groups, testifying on capitol hill, clearing the air about a tax agency they say unfairly singled them out and some democrats tried to paint them as the problem. emotional testimony today. a group was asked to fill out, among the long list of irs questions and spent nearly two years, two years, fighting for tax exempt status. becky is with us now. you brought down the house, young lady. man, oh, man, visiting testimony. -- about. >> neil: 90. >> after we filled out a complete mix. >> give me some examples. >> they wanted our donor's names, how much the donationses were, 501(c)(4)s do not have to disclose that information. why the irs doesn't now that is beyond me. they wanted us to identify our volunteer names, they wanted contact of all the forms of communication that we have ever had with any legislative body, including my open representatives. they wanted copies of all speeches, who the speakers were and what their credentials were, and that's just a sampling. >> neil: what did you do? i'm sure you consulted lawyers or other group members, is it me or is this -- what happened? >> well, fortunately at the time i actually got my letter and really read through the questions, i was getting calls from other leaders across the nation that were getting the same types of hers. so we realized we were being targeted. and i did not answer the questions to the irs. but we received counsel from the american center for law and justice, and they helped fight our case last year. >> neil: did you ever get your tax exempt status? >> in july we did. it was 635 days after we applied. >> neil: man, oh, man, and the average length of time it takes to get tax exempt clearance and good through the hurdles usually six months, often times less. >> 90 days. they said 90 days we should hear something. >> neil: my contractor says 90 days and i never buy that. but let me -- it was interesting. they kind of turned the tables, democrats did, including congressman mcdermott, on folks like you. >> let's not goingfest this happened under an irs commissioner appointed by george bush. if you didn't come in and ask for this tax break, you would have never had a question asked of you. >> we heard gingrich, we heard bush, we had the former irs commissioner who knew about the targeting, implied the organizations were responsible for the targettingsing because they chose to apply for tax exempt status. so you're to blame. >> neil: what sounds weird about that, like what they do with rape victims, they become the victims. what did you mange of that? >> i loved what paul ripe had -- paul ryan had to say about that. it's interesting. this -- we have laws within the irs. the rules and we were playing by the rules. we were -- we applied for our tax exempt status because we thought that was the right thing to do. we wanted to be accountable to the government, accountable to our members and we fell winded -- within to the boundaries and were following the rules-yet it was our fault? >> neil: trying to give the ben fit of the doubt to the irs because none of them come on the show, but we keep trying and hope springs eternal. maybe they were coming down because so many were applying for the status at the same time. that's their argumentment what too you say in response? >> well, there were as many progressive groups or even possibly more progressive groups and they weren't being looked as as closely as we were. so that argument fails. >> neil: becky, thank you. meantime, mam running for the presidential election, losing it, and just now find out conservatives were being intimidated and targeted ahead of it. imagine being mitt romney hearing all of this. you're going to find out what he thinks because mitt romney will be here, and only here, live friday, his first and only response, that's friday, here with us. meanwhile, are these hearings enough? the south carolina republican who says, we need a special prosecutor like yesterday. congressman, the more this blows up, the more i think even some democrats are acknowledging you might be right. where does it stand? >> well, we have to carry the burden of persuasion and we have to persuade our colleagues you can have both a special prosecutor and congress can i continue to do its job. you of you can have both. and when i hear testimony like i heard this morning, which is clearly criminal in nature, congress is not equipped to investigate crimes. so, we have no business investigating that. it's cross-jurisdictional so you can't let one u.s. attorney office in ohio or the district of columbia do it. i think we indiana -- we need a special prosecutor with access to a grand jury, the ability to investigate, and congress can still handle the management of personnel, the funding. it's not either/or. you can do both. >> neil: we head the watergate and then congress was conducting the investigation so there is precedence. a lot of people, especially among the prominent democrats are saying, well, for now, we're getting some answers through these hearings and there's no need to appoint a special prosecutor. you say what? >> we may be get something answer but we're getting them in five minute increments. i cannot think of a less effective way to conduct an investigation than to let members of congress have five minutes and then flip to the other side and then back to paul ryan or whomever is on our side and ways and means. it's not effective. you need an fbi agent sitting down there for five days, not five minutes you. need grand juries. you need subpoenas. you need toll records you. need the ability to immunize, if necessary, and congress is just not good at that. so, we can get answers but what can we do about it? has anyone been indicted? has anyone been brought before a grand jury? >> neil: would a prosecutor have any better luck subpoenaing information from the irs that shields itself under the privacy laws even athlete was the irs that invaded and took advantage of the privacy laws going after groups. how do you rectify that? wouldn't a prosecutor run into the same walls and blocks put up by an agency that claims privacy laws shield them from giving this type of information to you? >> i tell you this, neil, the one time in my life when i had the least amount of trouble getting information from the irs was when i was a federal prosecutor. so those federal prosecutors can access the information through the grand jury, when no one else can. so the reality is, prosecutors are best suited to access that information. i'm not sure some of this information congress could not get. the question is, what will congress do with it? we canned fire anybody. we can control funding, management oversight, all of which we can do while there's a criminal investigation going on. >> neil: i didn't know who the irs was afraid of but there's a group even more fearful than ther isers and that is the federal prosecutors itch didn't think of that. thank you very much. here's where it gets weird and certainly not so fair and not so balanced. left-leaning groups, you think they're getting the same treatment or have been or were throughout the process? fox business network has been doing some digging. apparently not quite. >> not quite. i've been looking through nonprofit filings, looking through web sites. a number of them stand out. these are progressive left-leaning nonprofits that are lob using federal and state officials, elected officials, politicians to do things -- excuse me -- >> neil: leaving you speechless, i hear you. >> like raise the minimum wage. >> neil: get you some water here. i haven't touched it. one of the things that came up is that, wait a minute, maybe if everyone is treated the same way it wouldn't be half as obnoxious, but apparently it was very obnoxious because only conservative groups orthos aligned to conservative causes were treated that way. >> sorry about that. mandated paid leave in the restaurants. and we founded united americans for change therapy. saying call elected officials on their web site. what's striking is the urban institute, which is nonpartisan -- i apologize for my voice. this whole thing leaves me speechless, clearly. urban institute has found that a third of the revenues that nonprofits get in the door come from federal contracts. so these nonprofits are so close to the political machinery and washington, dc that often times they're just thought of as part of the government many times because they're doing what the government wants them to do and that is things like employment, education, health, letting the world know about these government issues. so, i tell you something. when you see them lob using, when you see nonprofits go out there and calling elected officials, saying, do this on behalf of our group, and this is a heavily apparently union-backed organization. you have to say, where is the irs in this story? and it's time and again we have seen across the board, neil, that we don't see enough about the nonprofits that are of a certain political bent getting probed by the irs, that we know under certain republican -- green peace -- >> neil: maybe they did token examinations of the left-wing groups. >> this is why this problem is so striking. usually it's after the fact refereeing that the irs basically does an audit of the nonprofits after they become nonprofits. now we have them stopping them before the gate in the door and it's directly linked to the ten democrats who pressured the irs in march of 2010 to say, you have to go after these groups and see who is donating to them and do a deep dive into their filing so see who was back them and whether or not they're in the bright line, where l they fall within the letter of the law. there was that pressure that i think terrific directly links to what the irs was doing to these conservative groups. >> neil: you go, girl. in the meantime, when left-leaning groups were left alone, the national organization of marriage was not. even the donors were not. >> people's names were disclosed as donors. businesses were bureaucrat coated -- bit -- boycotted. they were assaulted on the streets streets and vandalized. >> that's a national organization for marriage. doesn't that tea party -- doesn't have liberty in it. so why was this group target inside the group's chairman clearly angry, clearly not intimidate. clearly loaded for bear and willing to talk with me exclusively on fox business tonight. watch him, john eastman. he is still on fire. mean while, the government investigators can read our e-mails, right? but we can't read theirs. this should have you boiling. xp. and tea parties. i'll have more awkward conversations than i'm equipped for, because i'm raising two girls on my own. i'll worry about the economy more than a few times before they're grown. but it's for them, so i've found a way. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. ready to plan for your future? we'll help you get there. testing, testing, testing, testing,xd testing testing, testing, tennesseeing, testing ,jf q humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- res. what's your policy? >> neil: after the snooping, the sneaking. this just in. some of the president's top political appointees, includingp health and human services committee, are using secret government e-mail accounts. the "associated press" blowing the cover off theú michelle malkin callingq itxdçód hypocrisy. >> this+ is an administration whose hypocrisy knows no end when it comes to phonyr mgkeuiu reveal as we say not ase conceal. acs:j well, itñi may nott(ñi be thew3d gee -- >> neil: they'll say there's nothing untoward going on here.r basically jay carney'sxd take, d theyñi haven't said thisw3xdñr i imagine they'll jump on the idea, a lotok of people have multiplexd e-mail addresses and a basic law that requires all of theselújju conduct their business inx disclosable communications, and of course if you have theseok secret e-mail accounts, theseñi hidden sockñrñr pt,(et accounts, none will be revealed when youw3 do theseçó requests. its claim as the most bright-lighted, publicly accessible inr history, and now the sunlight is coming, not so much because ofi@ the mainstream media lap dogs.çó i think it's importantlpjf to remember theñi reason why this s a story nowok is because of ther competitive enterprise institute. one of th%ñ calledq the liberal warñr on the firstçóxd agency where the stenchw3 of nondisclosure start andok the epa head had a sock suspect richard windsor and when there are public groups pressing, a it's hard to figure out who is doing what when you have secret accounts. the lawsuitq that was filed last file and the ap followed up on with its own requests thatxd hae been ignored byçóñ5( the administration and subverted for months is theçó fact it's not jt a single agency. that as you said, cathleen sebelitq has been been -- a long-time history of subverting disclosure laws backok to herqr asfá governor. >> neil: you can say not only officialçócu.x e-mails, we wani them. will they claim theseq e-m3i(jñq don't count because therein lies the potential constitutional crisis? >> ifá don't think anybody assue they're goingq to get everything or even a photographic of what -- a fraction of what the administration is obliged to give them. look att(xd what happened to th. the went knocking on the labor department's door and said, give us these secret e-mailq account. they sa; you have to pay us a million dollars to get it, ha-ha-ha. >> neilpfi take it you don't believe anything of this.t(jfñ michelle, alwaysi] good seeingi] you. thank you very much. >> you bet. taker >> neil: get a load ofñr this. the hoopsçó wew3 all went throuo turns out two out of three ofñi them ain':g so sure they want part of this.e1 i don't make any decisions about who to hire without going to angie's list first. you'll find reviews on home repair to healthcare written by people just like you. with angie's list, i know who to call, and i know the results will be fantastic. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. [ whirring ] [ dog barks ] i want to treat mo dogs. ♪ our business needs more cases. [ male announcer ] where do you want to take your business? i need help selling art. [ male announcer ] from broadband to web hosting to mobile apps, small business solutions from at&t have the security you need to get you there. call us. we can show you how at&t solutions can help you do what you do... even better. ♪ , policing, is the healthçó care'á who are sickq ofó[q it? aq new poll showing nearlyñi twá out of three of up insured americans have noñi idea if they're going to b+ñr as the law demands. soónthey ain't buying it. steve, why are we payq but we will be,r >> yeah. neil, the thing that is so surprising about the poll is cé one group of people that was supposew> neil: they don't want it. >> number one is a lot of the peoplew3 don't understand the l. just like businesses don't un$/standlpfá it. the secondlp problem is, they m( want freer the truth is, you /iáe to pay something, and a lot of these people are low income families that can't afford to pay out more. the barely have enough money to pay their bills and a lot of them -- we know a big peåq of the uninsured are young and healthy people and a lot of those peojlt between the age of 18 and 28 to 30ó[ say, look, we don't need this gold-plated we'll good without it. people paying inh ts like myself -- if they don't pay in, we have serious problems. >> that's exactlyc right. they're the healthiest population, butokñifá they getce joke and tho don't want to payñi your healthçóñi care. >> neil: i had añi feeling theye allñr cnnñrc viewers. what is going on here. step back from this, steve. if thexd whole premise of this s a good moral premise, we want to insure theçóñi uninsured, andñih is a finalñrçóxd goal. but those whow3 don'tññd want tt ekp(ple cart for the 90% ofw3 americans who did haveqok cover, liked their coverage, we are willing to pay for the coverage they hadc starkly higher premiums because which is a lot of those 90% of the people who have coverage, d9á like theirt(r a lot of them are goingñ'p to le their coverage because employers are starting to say, it's cheaper for me to just dump people into thelp obamacare exchange. getok rid of my healthr planr there will be millions of americans who are going to lose the coverage they have rightñi now, and remember what that the signature promise of obama care? if you like the coverage you have now you're not going to lose it. people will. now, the bigger problemjf is whn what dook you -- >> neil: i'm no lawyer butçó notice how he phrased it.t(jf i if you like your coverage now, you plan, you're not going to lose it. hexd never, ever discussed the ay throughy going toñi the nose for it but you won't lose it. now it invites the possibility that the -- i know i don't want helicopter crowd but the goal wasjf for ai] single paçkjñ syso fours companies to drop their plans, get everyone on tñ%ñ government plan and you have your single pair system without havinglp requested it in the fit place. >> i'll make a prediction to you neil. i think this plançóe1 is implodg soc quickly. there's so manyz]i] problems wid it. you addressed one today with all theseñi people who are not going to sign up for the program. predict within two years the 'system -- then we'll have another big debate in the country what to do withi] healthcare and what president obama and many of theqr will say is we have to move toça single pair system, m$ñ rid of insurance companies and that's where people like myself and you, who believe inçólp the free market, have to say, give the free enterprise system a try here, becauset(xd if you have competition health care, you can bend the cost care down.t( >> neil: which spider-man was ir when his suit turned black? i think thisñr healthcare thing is -- it's tentacles in eave single facet of our lives and now you can't distractñr yoursef from it.?nm >> i like that analogy a lot. i remember that scene infá spider-man and that's a really good metaphor for what is happening here. also goes to what nancy pelosi says. we have to understandlpfá the bl after we pass it. now that we understand it we don't like itt( much, nancy. >> that's true. was a(m spider-man 2, 3? rm9a5t know but i remember that steve, thank you, ast( always. steve moore. >> great to be if you you. >> the doj says the ag@qndx lie. so why does myfáv say he has something to hide. >> with regard to potential prosecution of the press for not something i have been 4jsj"ájjz would be a wise polic. golf-ball sized hail and damaging winds are on the way... kids... eh, don't worry. it's tornado-proof. anyw, i'd put the car in the garage and secu thesehings. they could become flyingebris. kids! watch this. [ beep ] [ children screaming ] [ car alarm chirps ] awesome. [ male announcer ] mobile weather alerts fr your home insurance? that's allstate home insurance.