tv Legal View With Ashleigh Banfield CNN November 21, 2013 8:00am-9:01am PST
consequences that could be felt for decades. senate mantle leader harry reid and other senior democrats say they have simply had enough of republican filibuster threats. and they're invoking what is known as the nuclear option. it would dramatically alter senate rules to allow just 51 votes, a simple majority to overcome a filibuster. let's listen in to senator mcconnell as he continues to make his case. >> judicial nominees, effectively changing them for all judicial nominees, including the supreme court, as senator grassley pointed out just yesterday. so, look, i realize this sort of wishful thinking might appeal to the uninitiated newcomers in the democratic congress who have served exactly zero days in the minority, but the rest of you guys in the conference should know better. those of you who have been in the minority before should know better. let's remember ow we got here.
let's remember that it was senate democrats who pioneered, who literally pioneered the practice of filibustering circuit court nominees and who have been its biggest proponents in the very recent past. after president bush was elected, they even held a retreat in which they discussed the need to change the ground rules by which lifetime pont appointments are considered. senator from new york put on a seminar, invited lawrence tribe, and in the past the practice had been that neither side filibustered. i remember gagging several times and invoking cloture knowing full well once clotuer was invoked they would be confirmed. this business of filibustering
circuit court judges was entirely an invention of the guys over here, on the other side, the guys you're looking at over here. they made it up. they started it. and this is where we ended up. after president bush was elected, they held this retreat i was just talking about. they made a big deal about it. it was all a prelude to what followed, the serial filibustering of several of president bush's court nominees, including estrada, whose nominee was filibustered by senate democrats a record seven times, seven times. and now they want to blow up the rules because republicans are following a precedent they, themselves, set and, i might add, we're following that precedent in a much more modest way than democrats did. so how about this for a suggestion? how about instead of picking a
fight with senate republicans by jamming through nominees to a court that doesn't even have enough work to do, how about taking yes for an answer and working with us on filling judicial emergencies that actually exist? yet rather than learn from past precedence on judicial nominations that they themselves set, democrats now want to set another one. now i have no doubt that if they do, they will come to regret that one as well. our colleagues evidently would rather live for the moment. satisfy the moment. live for the moment and try to establish a story line that republicans are intent on obstructing president obama's judicial nominees. that story line is patently ridiculous in light of the facts. >> now these are just some of the first comments we're starting to hear in this debate. i want to go directly to where our chief correspondent dana
bash, who joins me live from capitol hill. dana, it can't be understated the significance of what's going on right now. for anybody who is just turning on the channel and sees that there's some conversation going on in the senate, it is anything but just conversation in the senate. right? >> reporter: that's right. certainly they're talking about a very important process that democrats are proposing to change, but process in congress is always politics and in this particular case, the process that they are at least attempting to change could be explosive, which is why it is actually called the nuclear option. this is already a very divided place, a very partisan place. if democrats are successful in changing the senate rules, which is what they clearly want to do, in preventing republicans from filibustering any of the president's nominees for the executive branch or the judicial beverage except for supreme court justices, which it looks like it's going to happen, this could make the division here
even more strident. if you just listen to the tone from mitch mcconnell, it is very different already than what we hear on a daily basis, even when they're trading barbs. we don't know exactly how it's going to play out at the end of the day. here is what we think. we think that democrats, after this speech is over, are going to attempt to have another vote on a judicial nominee to the d.c. circuit. earlier, harry reid was talking about the fact that one of their big beefs with republicans right now is that they are preventing president obama from filling three vacancies on the d.c. circuit, which many people believe is one of the most important -- maybe the second most important court in the entire land, because it feeds into the supreme court and because they hear a lot of important cases, including laws that congress passes. republicans say there's not -- there is no need. they don't have the workload. democrats say you're doing this because you don't want to tip the balance of power on that critical, critical court.
that is what's going on. what democrats are going to do is try once again to have a vote on one of the nominees for that court. we expect it to fail because republicans do have the 60 votes needed to filibuster, which are the current rules. then we are likely to see the democratic leader propose to change the rules so it would be a simple majority and republicans wouldn't be able to filibuster. then you're likely to see a vote on that, meaning a vote on the rule change, which would only require a simple majority to do. it's pretty easy to do. you might ask if it's so easy to change the rules -- >> why haven't they done it so many times? >> why haven't they done it before? the reason is circling back to where you and i have start this had conversation. it is explosive. it is explosive with regard to the way things operate here. things operate here based on institution, based on respect for the institution and for the power of the minority. and it's what makes the united
states senate very different from the house. this would take away a very important power of the minority. and harry reid who, of course, is now in the majority, acknowledged that when they're in the minority they'll have to live by these rules, too. >> and that is why it is so critical to know the arcane aspects of procedures in the senate. when things like this happens, it's so critical. stand by for a moment, if you will, please. dana bash is watching this procedure and so is john avlon, our cnn political analyst, standing by live as well. john, there is no cliche that suit this is better than be careful what you wish for or perhaps what goes around comes around. >> that's exactly right. i mean, this threshold has been put in place as a check and balance. minority party in the senate has a chance to advise and consent. the problem is that it's not working out that way. we've seen a dramatic increase in the number of filibusters overall in the senate and specifically this three consecutive blocks of judicial nominees really has been a
provocation there had been a cease fire. now the fights over judicial nominations are taking on really heated, intense optioposition. you see this opportunity. it could bite democrats in the butt if they get into a minority in the future. right now hyper partisan is making this look like a necessity. >> what does that mean for certain democrats out there who are more moderately minded, who are fearful that this could come back to bite them at election time in their districts, that kind of thing? what does it mean for them? will harry reid know exactly the vote count before actually going for the vote? >> well, i mean, it's difficult to get the math right but ultimately in the senate it's a game of numbers. that's why lyndon johnson was so great when he was senate majority leader. there needs to be some kind of bipartisan cooperation here. there's no question that the
filibuster has become so abused that whatever party is in the majority should fear the precedent that's been set. the question is, again whether there's a sensible senator in the senate that can come to a sensible compromise. filibuster these obama nominees and increasing number of appointees was always going to lead to this kind of moment this kind of showdown in the senate corridors because it's just a symptom of the hyperpartisanship that stopped government from working. >> hold for a minute if you will, john. i want to bring our viewers up to speed. reid proposes filibuster nuclear option, it's absolutely what it says, a nuclear option. this is when a boring chamber becomes very not boring, folks. dana bash will explain exactly what they're doing with this procedure right now when we come back from the break and when this might come to a vote and why that drama is so high, as are the stakes. ♪
♪ [ female announcer ] you're the boss of your life. in charge of long weekends and longer retirements. ♪ ask your financial professional how lincoln financial can help you take charge of your future. ♪ how lincoln financial can help you take charge of your future. thnot at the rings.looking. i can feel them looking at my thick, flaky red skin. do i tell them it's psoriasis? do i speak up and say it's not contagious? or do i just say... have a nice day!" when your psoriasis has gone from uncomfortable to unacceptable, visit psoriasis.com to connect with a psoriasis patient advocate from abbvie for free one-to one education and support. sign up at psoriasis.com, and talk to your dermatologist. maestro of project management.
baron of the build-out. you need a permit... to be this awesome. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle... and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. (aaron) purrrfect. (vo) meee-ow, business pro. meee-ow. go national. go like a pro. could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. yep, everybody knows that. well, did you know the ancient pyramids were actually a mistake? uh-oh. geico. fifteen minutes could save you...well, you know. [ female announcer ] just about anywhere you use sugar, you can use splenda® no calorie sweetener.
you're looking live on capitol hill at the senate floor. there is a vote ongoing right now. hold the phone. it is not the vote you've been hearing headlines breaking all morning. the nuclear option. dana bash is there. could you explain the process, what vote they're talking about, why it's significant and whether we might get to the money vote later today. >> we certainly might. at this point it looks like we will get to the money vote today. what we're seeing right now is the first vote on the road to that nuclear option, to
reconsider, have yet another vote for one of the judicial nominees that you and i were talking about before the break. one of the judicial nominees that republicans have been blocking through the use of the filibuster which at this point they can do because you need 60 votes to overcome that filibuster. what the democrats' strategy is, is to use this particular nominee, patricia mallette, to be a judge on the d.c. circuit, to see if they can once again try to get it through. we expect that republicans are going to once again ultimately block it and once that happens, that is when harry reid is going to propose to change the rules in order to make the threshold lower. a simple majority vote, 51 votes. now republicans could call democrats' bluff. they could vote to approve patricia mallette. the beauty of covering the senate is to sometimes expect the unexpected. >> so, is this a foreshadowing, then, possibly? if they don't use that strategy that you just outlined?
almost the fake -- is this at least the foreshadowing of which democrats might actually be on board with harry reid, with their leader in his potential use of a nuclear option or is this completely apples and oranges for the nuclear option? >> that's actually a great question. it probably won't be a foreshadowing, the vote count at the end of this vote, foreshadowing. most democrats, whether they want to change the senate rules or not want to get this particular judge on the bench. it might not be that much of a foreshadowing. you elude to something important, ashleigh, another reason why harry reid, the democratic leader hasn't made this move until now is because he didn't necessarily have the votes because there were a number of veteran senators in his own caucus -- dianne feinstein of california, pat rake leahy of vermont, who are pretty powerful and insistent -- they were, at least, that they not change the rules because of
the respect for the institution and that the shoe is often on the other foot before they know it. they changed their mind this week and said enough is enough, as harry reid laid out on the floor. we need to change the rules in order to make the institution of the senate work better and washington itself work better. that is why harry reid -- one of the main reasons he is able to do this now. he didn't have the votes necessarily before, even 51. enough people in his caucus oppose it. now it looks like he does. >> it is not often, dana, that i watch your beat and i follow the people you follow every day and i'm reminded of like classic lyrics of famous songs like wasted days and wasted nights. when i heard harry reid on the floor this morning referring to exactly those kinds of things and why that has inspired what he wants to do today, i want to replay that so that everybody else who might have missed it this morning could hear what the senate majority leader actually said on the floor.
have a listen. >> congress should be passing legislation that strengthens our economy, protects american families. instead, we're burning wasted hours, wasted days with filibusters. instead i could say we're burning wasted days and wasted weeks between filibusters. >> like i said, reminded me of the old song. i want to bring in cnn's legal analyst paul callan. you tend to know the legalities, the archean stuff that most of us don't bother with. it's not as if the republicans are sitting idly by with nothing in their arsenal. they don't only have to use future threats in order to tamp down what's going on. what do they have? >> they don't have the votes to stop this or the majority in the
senate. democrats can vote the nuclear option in. what can the republicans do? there's something called unanimous consent. sort of an old gentleman's rule that ifs way back to the beginning days of the senate. you're supposed to read, for instance, every word in the bill on the senate floor, in theory, before it gets voted on. >> you said in theory. >> yes. one senator stands up and says i move that we invoke unanimous consent and wave tive the readif the bill. the republicans aren't going to consent to the waiving of the reading of the bill. i'm not talking about that, but 100 other housekeeping maneuvers that are done by unanimous consent by this sort of assumption that we would all vote for this so we don't have to take a vote. they can stop the senate dead in its tracks and strike back using an abundance of other parliamentary maneuvers. >> effectively, it's a time-buying mechanism?
>> exactly. >> so you could read the material -- >> it's speeding things up. it goes on all over the place. anybody that's presided over a local meeting or town meeting in america, they waive the rules so they can get it done. rks say you want to blow this thing up, invoke the nuclear option? we're going to invoke all of the rules of the senate and stop this thing dead in its tracks. that's what they can do. >> you watched the electric company as a kid. i'm just a bill. we're watching this role call vote. we don't have the results on it yet. like dana bash said, yeah, fascinating but not necessarily the same apple as what might come later, that nuclear option. if you're just joining us now, we want to re-explain exactly what this nuclear option is. no, it's not about nuclear arms. about as painfully powerful in the eyes of senators when it comes to getting your way. we're back in just a moment.
full explainer and possibly some results after the break. the day we rescued riley was a truly amazing day. he was a matted mess in a small cage. so that was our first task, was getting him to wellness. without angie's list, i don't know if we could have found all the services we needed for our riley. from contractors and doctors to dog sitters and landscapers, you can find it all on angie's list. we found riley at the shelter, and found everything he needed at angie's list. join today at angieslist.com i'm here to say a few words about the power of baking stuff with nestle toll house morsels. you can heal a broken heart with a bundt cake. make a monday mornin' feel like a friday afternoon with some nestle toll house morsels. let's close our laptops and open our ovens. these things don't bake themselves. we have to bake them for one another. we can bake the world a better place one toll house cookie at a time.
nestle. good food, good life. morning, turtle. ♪ my friends are all around me ♪ my friends, they do surround me ♪ ♪ i hope this never ends ♪ and we'll be the best of friends ♪ [ male announcer ] the 2014 chevrolet traverse... all set? all set. [ male announcer ] ...with three rows of spacious seating for up to eight. imagine that. chevrolet. find new roads.
again, welcome back. we're following the breaking news on the senate floor as the senators mill about in the well there, the headline says it all. senator reed is proposing something called the nuclear option, essentially changing rules. here is what it breaks down to, folks. they've been blocking senate nominees three times over now and the democrats don't like that one bit. what do you do? you change the rules on how you can block the nominees, how you
can end the filibuster. and that's something they call the nuclear option, because once you go there, there's no going back. that's essentially what we're waiting on today. a little later on today potentially a vote that could effectively change the rules. if that happens, good luck, because what goes around comes around is what everybody is saying, at least on capitol hill. >> i have other breaking news i want to bring to you as well, awe watch this precursor vote. it's not the essential vote i was just talking about. this is just a freakish story coming to us from overseas. at first blush it sounded somewhat similar to the ariel castro case here in the united states. this one in london. apparently authorities there have rescued three women from a household who appear to have been held captive. and this is where it gets very different. for more than 30 years. three decades in captivity. joining us live now from our london bureau.
i think there may be some differences but is it true, three decades of captivity? >> in fact, the captain just said at least 30 years against their will held in that house. which means in this case that at least the youngest of them, the british woman, was most likely born there. she is 30 years old. the other victims were 69-year-old malaysian woman and 59-year-old irish woman. this does look, according to the police, they've never seen anything of this magnitude, ashleigh. >> so few of us have ever heard anything like this we covered the worst of the worst, atika. i saw some of the preliminary notes on this particular case, and it is developing, i wasn't totally clear on whether this was a case of sex crime or whether this was a case of slavery or servitude. or do we even know that yet? >> to be perfectly honest we don't have all the details. the police and the charity involved in freeing this women
were saying this is a case of domestic slavery. what they're seeing is indications, certainly, that these women were threatened. most likely that there may have been physical violence. although they don't have the details on that yet. but they are not saying that there appears to be any sexual motive at this point. but, again, this is all still happening very quickly. the arrests were made just a few hours ago. and the women are very traumatized, as you can imagine. they're all in a safe location now. police are still talking to them to find out what exactly happened inside the house, how were they kept against their will. they apparently had rooms in the house, but were unable to communicate with the outside world. the only way they did get word out is one day the 57-year-old irish woman was watching tv, a program on forced marriages and she saw a charity called freedom charity. she gave that charity a call and that's how they were ultimately freed. >> ultimately just remarkable. atika, i know you're working
furiously to try to gather more details. i want to let you get freed up to work the phones and find out more tails. please do bring them to us as soon as you learn more. that headline from atika schubert. three decades, all of this transpiring in london in the last hour or so. another major breaking story we're working on right here at home on capitol hill, on the senate floor. this is where the rubber hits the road, folks. votes going down in that house today could dramatically alter just how partisan our political environment is. as if it could get more partisan. buckle up. [ male announcer ] this is jim,
a man who doesn't stand still. but jim has afib, atrial fibrillation -- an irregular heartbeat, not caused by a heart valve problem. that puts jim at a greater risk of stroke. for years, jim's medicine tied him to a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but now, with once-a-day xarelto®, jim's on the move. jim's doctor recommended xarelto®. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce afib-related stroke risk. but xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. so jim's not tied to that monitoring routine. [ gps ] proceed to the designated route. not today. [ male announcer ] for patients currently well managed on warfarin,
there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. xarelto® is just one pill a day taken with the evening meal. plus, with no known dietary restrictions, jim can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto®, rivaroxaban, without talking to the doctor who prescribes it as this may increase the risk of having a stroke. get help right away if you develop any symptoms like bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto® and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. xarelto® is not for patients with artificial heart valves. jim changed his routine.
ask your doctor about xarelto®. once a day xarelto® means no regular blood monitoring -- no known dietary restrictions. for more information and savings options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com. welcome back to cnn. coverage of breaking news at united states senate. if you're not a fan of rules -- quite frankly, are any of us? today is a set of rules that really, really matters. it matters how legislation is going to be accomplished in the coming days, months and years. it also matters as to how our senators are going to get along, as if it was already something
we didn't think was completely broken. a set of rule changes could trash relationships completely. i want to get right out to our cnn's dana bash, standing live. dana, set the stage, if you could, for our viewers who may be joining us for the bottom of the hour. our headline on the screen reads "reid proposes filibuster nuclear option." effectively, what does that mean? >> that means what rst eid, democratic leader in the senate, majority leader, is pushing to do now is change the rules of the senate to prevent republicans from filibustering the president's nominees, both his executive branch nominees and most judicial nominees, except for supreme court nominees. and what that means is that he would want to change the threshold to overcome the filibuster from 60, which is what it now is, which makes republicans at this point able to block a lot of things, move it down to 51, which would be a simple majority in the senate. the reason it's called a nuclear
option is because there is a lot of emphasis and reverence, frankly, of the minority. that's what makes it different from the house. the rules that the senate tends to follow for decades. what is happening as they speak on the senate floor is some m k monkey business, frankly. you're seeing republicans trying to kind of work around and delay what looks like at this point could be the inevitable, which is the change of those rules. mitch mcconnell, the republican leader, made a motion to adjourn the senate until 5:00. again, it's a delayig tactic because democrats have 55 votes in the senate. it takes a simple majority to do that. republican sources tell us that they expect this to be defeated. this is just a kind of a move to make a point, delaying tactic until we see the rest of the
afternoon evolve, unless there's some last-minute breakthrough, the rules of the senate are expected to be changed by a simple majority vote. >> just fascinating stuff. dana bash, stand by, if you would, for a moment. keep your eyes on what's happening as well. i want to bring in our senior legal analyst, jeffrey toobin, who knows a thing or two about not only judicial nominees, the process of getting them actually passed through the passage and blockage of them and then how we ended up in this mess today. my first question is the same kind of thing i bring up with my children, jeff. that's this. when they don't like what's going on in the schoolyard, they sometimes try to change the rules and i tell them they can't. why is it today that maybe they can? i kind of thought this was not constitutional, but i'm wrong. >> no. the senate rules are up to the senate. the constitution says nothing about filibusters. it says nothing about how the
senate conducts its internal business. for many years, the senate has had a rule that says it takes 60 votes to cut off debate, to stop debate and come to a vote. traditionally, almost everything in the senate operates by a simple majority, 50. but in recent years, because things have become so contentious, first the democrats and now the republicans have insisted almost always on 60 votes for everything, including judicial confirmations. what today's vote means is that the standard for judicial confirmations will go back to 50, not 60 anymore. and what that will mean is that several of president obama's judicial nom nis who had been stalled will get through. >> what i've been hearing -- you'll have to correct me if i'm wrong. the democrats, as perhaps a bone
in the landscape of something that's really impalatable is that this won't extend to supreme court nominees to which the republicans have responded, oh, yeah? wait until we're the majority, because it will. am i wrong? am i mistaken as to how this is characterized? >> i think you characterized it correctly. i don't think anyone knows how this would be interpreted for supreme court nominations. remember, the republicans are saying we're going to use this when we have a republican senate and republican president, as i believe most people know, you don't have either of those right now. so it is really very much a hypothetical debate about what republicans would do if they controlled both the presidency and the senate. but they may have a point. this may come back to haunt democrats if a republican president appoints someone who wants to overturn roe v. wade,
the democrats may have a harder time stopping that person now. but for today, the issue is will obama's nominees get through to the d.c. circuit and other courts, and the answer appears to be -- if things proceed as they appear to be proceeding, the answer to that appears to be yes. >> i have never been a politician on capitol hill. i don't intend to be a politician on capitol hill. from what i hear, memories are very long and egos can be very bruised. i want to bring in john avlon, our senior political analyst here at cnn. so i keep hearing that partisanship could be at its very worst if the nuclear option is actually successful. to that i say, seriously, that was possible? i kind of thought we were at rock bottom. >> yeah. you know, by pretty much any measure, things are as hyperpartisan as ever before. this nuclear option would
exacerbate even the deep divisions that exist right now. what i think is important for context here is for folk it is realize that the senate doesn't operate functionally with simple majority. the threshold is 60 not 51, the simple majority. this has been in place since 1917 when filibustering and cloture votes effectively began. in the last 12 years there have been 600. we've seen a dramatic ratcheting up of filibusters in the senate. that is what is creating the context and the sense of frustration. there are nearly 100 judicial vacancies right now. as long as those stay open, you look at the increased risk of the filibuster and see the frustration that leads folks to say it's time for fundamental filibuster and that would absolutely destroy, even further the already fractured trust that exists between the two parties in washington. >> if our viewers are wondering,
what are you talking about, john avlon? i've not seen one moment in the last couple of weeks of mr. smith goes to washington, nobody wearing diapers on the senate floor or sneaking candy bars in their long dissertation. it's not always like that. i'll explain why that is. where are all these filibusters that are always such a problem? i thought ted cruz had nothing to do with this. also what those guys are doing down in that well, what the conversations are like between these senators, particularly the democrats, and whether they'll be effective in this nuclear option in a moment. the day my doctor told me i had diabetes,
i remember thinking there's a lot i have to do... check my blood sugar, eat better. start insulin. today i learned there's something i don't have to do anymore. my doctor said with levemir® flexpen... i don't have to use a syringe and a vial. levemir® flexpen comes prefilled with long-acting insulin taken once daily for type 2 diabetes to help control high blood sugar. dial the exact dose. inject by pushing a button. no drawing from a vial. no refrigeration for up to 42 days. levemir® (insulin detemir [rdna origin] injection) is not recommended to treat diabetic ketoacidosis. do not use levemir® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause symptoms such as sweating, shakiness, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar can be serious and life threatening. ask your health care provider about alcohol use, operating machinery, or driving. other possible side effects include injection site reactions. tell your health care provider about all medicines you take
and all of your medical conditions. get medical help right away if you experience serious allergic reactions such as body rash, trouble with breathing, fast heartbeat, or sweating. flexpen® is insulin delivery my way. covered by most insurance plans, including medicare. ask your health care provider about levemir® flexpen today. nthat's why they deserve... aer anbrake dance. get 50% off new brake pads and shoes.
42 minutes, all we've been talking about is this crisis on capitol hill. there's something else big today. at top of the hour, new jersey governor chris christie will take over as head of the republican governor's association. and that, my friends, is one coveted job that will give him a heck of a lot more national exposure. maybe even give him a leg up, if he seeks the republican nomination in 2016. but don't tell him that. because he is downplaying that last part. at least he is on the record. >> everyone here is laser focused, kelly, on 2013. no one even mentions anything else. do the best job you can in 2014, governor. that's it. everyone has been wonderful. >> standing live in scottsdale, arizona, peter hamby, where governors are holding their
annual meeting. i love when people say don't read into these things. all along, chris christie has been lobbying pretty hard for this job. why shouldn't we read into that? >> reporter: genuinely, he and his team do want to elect republican governors nextier in 2014. he did, as you say, lobby aggressively behind the scenes last year to get this job in 2014, both he and louisiana governor bobby jindal were making phone calls, whipping up votes to try to get this 2014 job. christie came out on top. why 2014? 36 governors races next year. as you mentioned, he will be travel i traveling around the country, out of new jersey, campaigning for tons of candidates throughout the country, in various states, including early presidential primary states like iowa and south carolina, where there are governor's races next year. and raising money from some of the republican party's top financial supporters.
this is a great platform for him, if he does want to run for president in 2016. it elevates his profile. mitt romney and rick perry, who ran for president previously ran the hga. as you mention, this is a great place for him, ashleigh. >> great place. if you ask mitt romney or ask rick perry, it's not always a pipeline to the big office. peter hamby, thank you. always good to see you, my friend. thank you for checking that out for us. big top stories we're following, kennedy cousin michael skakel could get out of prison for the first time in 11 years and it could actually happen today. a hearing in connecticut that's going on this hour, a judge could decide to set bond for skakel and his family could actually meet bond. his conviction of murdering martha moxley you will remember, in big headlines, was over turned on the grounds that his representation was not what it should have been. and now it is possible he will face a new trial, or not. we'll keep an eye on that for you. we're checking other top
stories. a deal with iran not to build nuclear weapons and it's a deal that could happen soon. that's the word from the united states diplomats meeting with allies and iranian counterparts in switzerland. any possible deal could involve iran capping its uranium enrichment activities and allowing inspectors to visit nuclear sites. in return, there would be an easing of those international sanctions that have been crippling to the country of iran. we have many more top stories that we're following as well. also keeping our eye on capitol hill. quick break after this. ♪
wow...look at you. i've always tried to give it my best shot. these days i'm living with a higher risk of stroke due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat, not caused by a heart valve problem. at first, i took warfarin, but i wondered, "could i up my game?" my doctor told me about eliquis. and three important reasons to take eliquis instead. one, in a clinical trial, eliquis was proven to reduce the risk of stroke better than warfarin. two, eliquis had less major bleeding than warfarin. and three... unlike warfarin, there's no routine blood testing. [ male announcer ] don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding.
while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. i've got three important reasons to up my game with eliquis. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor today if eliquis is right for you. [ female announcer ] to bake. or not to bake. that is a silly question. bake the world a better place with nestle toll house. bake the world a better place
i always wanted to design a bike that honored those who serve our country. and geico gave me that opportunity. now naturally, we wanted it to be powerful, innovative and we built this bike as a tribute to those who are serving, those who have served and their families. and i think we nailed it. geico. proudly serving the military for over 75 years. it was a today that changed america forever. 50 years ago tomorrow, president john f. kennedy was assassinated in dallas. and that city, dallas, has spent decades trying to shake off the reputation of, quote, that city
that killed kennedy, end quote. tomorrow it's going to present a special celebration honoring the memory of kennedy. the city has already begun paving over those x's where the president was shot. of the many images from the kennedy assassination, perhaps none touched the hearts of a grieving nation than that photograph, you know the one i'm referring to, the little boy saluting the flag-draped coffin of his dad. that little boy was john-john. little john f. kennedy jr. that day, november 25, 1963, if you don't know this, it was his 3rd birthday. he's standing with his mom, jacqueline kennedy, and his sister, caroline and his uncle robert and ed card. dan ferrell the man who took that iconic photograph said it was the saddest thing i've ever seen in my whole life.
and he had to see it through that lens. at that time he was with the new york "daily news" and that's the photograph, folks, on the cover of the daily news, front page news with the words "we carry on" and dan ferrell joins me live right now from his home on long island, new york. mr. ferrell, it's so great to be able to meet you, even this way. it's nice to know the person behind the iconic picture. i have one question for you, off the bat, did you know when you took that picture what you had taken? well, i realized it was going to be part of history and, you know, i didn't realize it would be as famous as it is today. but i'm certainly glad i was able to do that. >> is that the camera, just off to your -- to your left on the table beside you? is that the camera you were actually using that day? >> no, it's not. it's -- it just happens to be an
old camera. it's an old speed graphic. it's not the cam that ra that i used. the camera that i used was broug bought by the daily news from the military. we brought it down to washington that day and i t. was give tonight me to go try to make a different picture. and i went up to the church and that's where i got into a photo stand and i got this one picture of john saluting. >> i think i recall reading somewhere that the camera you were using was big and clunky, and then i found it remarkable you only had 12 exposures of film, those are the days when you didn't hold the button down and get 100 shots. but you really only did take one picture, you took one picture on that roll of 12 and this is the one? >> well, it was -- his hand went
up very, very quickly and i got off one shot and it was all over. you know? just -- it was just one quick picture. i did get -- i realize it was going to happen because mrs. kennedy actually said to him, salute, john. and he didn't salute at first. and then she told him again to salute and he did. >> and he did it. >> i was looking through the lens, and i just knew that he was going to salute. >> can i ask you, mr. ferrell, the notion that you didn't get a pulitzer for this, i think will blow a lot of people's minds but you were nominated for the pulitzer. you were only beaten out by bob jackson because he had the image of the moment that jack ruby shot oswald. but does that even matter at this point that you didn't get a pulitzer for this?
>> no, it doesn't really matter. it would have been very nice for me and also for the daily news and for all of the people who were there covering the event, it would have been a great honor. but you know, that's the way it goes. that's life. he did have a remark -- >> go ahead. >> he had a remarkable picture of truby getting shot. but you know, the kennedy picture, the little boy saluting with his family, it's going to live forever. >> it will. without question, it will. it's wonderful to meet the man behind the lens i thank you for your terrific body of work, all 50 years of your work and this terrific picture as well. thank you, sir. nice to meet you. >> thank you, ashleigh. >> dan ferrell joining us live
breaks ago, i told you that it's a bit weird, isn't it, sense we haven't -- no, not the dream lifter yet. hold on, go back to the senate. why is it there's all of this effort to block judicial nominees with filibusters. i haven't seen the filibusters. turns out, there's something called the nontalking filibus r filibuster. it's a gentlemanly thing. you can do these. they don't have to be talking filibusters, they can be the procedural filibuster, so that's why you haven't seen them. other big news, the dream lifter, landing at wrong airport in wichita, kansas. that airport doesn't handle going 747s, doesn't have a control tower but the dream lifter to land 12 miles away and now it's expected to take off for its original destination today, though the runway isn't really long enough. that was a big problem. seemed like it was going to be stuck there. turns out they may be able to
get that up and off the runway afterall. that's a lot of breaking news for you today. hope you're still with me. if you're still with me, you should be there for the next show, "around the world," right now. new jersey governor chris christie has a new job. taking over the reins of the preb governor association. the question on everybody's mind, what are his plans for 2016? >> also this, pulled off a plane in north korea, the family of this 85-year-old american says, they've had no contact with him since and they are worried about his safety. also -- >> you know which airport you're at? >> well, we think we have a pretty good zbluls not realpuls >> they are trying to figure out a way to
Uploaded by TV Archive on