tv NOW With Alex Wagner MSNBC August 21, 2013 9:00am-10:01am PDT
sentenced to 35 years behind bars. does the punishment fit the crime? it's wednesday, august 21st, and this is "now." 35 years, that was the sentence that army judge colonel denise lynn handed down to bradley manning just hours ago as punishment for leaking over 700,000 documents to the wikileaks website in 2010. manning will receive credit for time already served and could be eligible for parole after ten years. the sentence came after manning, who also received a dishonorable discharge, was convicted on 20 of 22 charges last month including seven counts of violating the 1917 espionage act. at his sentencing hearing manning apologized saying, quote, i am sorry that my actions hurt people. i am sorry that i hurt the united states. when i made these decisions i believed i was going to help people, not hurt people.
manning's first leak to wikileak's julian assange was the infamous collateral murder video showing a u.s. apache helicopter killing several civilians including two righters journalists in bag tad. two months later they were rocked with the afghanistan war logs which detailed previously unreported civilian casualties, use of u.s. drones and special black ops to hunt and kill taliban leaders. the logs showed aiding afghan insurgents while collecting u.s. foreign aid. >> if journalism is good, it is controversial by its nature. it is the role of good journalism to take on powerful abuses and when powerful abuses are taken on there is always a backlash. >> yet, the day after the release of the afghanistan war logs president obama was dismissive. >> the fact is, these documents don't reveal any issues that haven't already informed our
public debate on afghanistan. >> these war logs were followed by the publication of the iraq war logs. in october 2010 and the release of 250,000 state department cables the following month. in sum, manning's leaks constituted the largest security breach in u.s. history but they also constituted something else, the most comprehensive evidentiary trove of evidence of u.s. led wars in iraq and afghanistan. >> joining me, curt anderson and white house correspondent for the "wall street journal", karen lee. and also attorney for wikileaks and julian assange, michael ratner. michael, i'd like to go to you first today. the sentence for bradley manning, 35 years, could go down to 10 years. there have been a number of different reactions to this. i wonder where you stand. wikileaks tweeted this is a significant strategic victory in the case. the center for u.s.
constitutional rights said this is a travesty of justice. where do you stand on the sentence? >> i think the sentence was outrageously long. 35 years for what bradley manning did i find to be outrageous. it doesn't look that way to some because he was charged, overcharged with sentences that could give him 136 years. so 35 years, well, that looks better than 136, but in my view of course bradley manning is a hero. he gave us the information that you just spoke about about iraq, about afghanistan, what happened in that diplomatic cable. he's a whistle-blower. he shouldn't have been prosecuted at all. i find it a particularly nasty piece of business when the people who actually carried out a lot of these crimes are not investigated or prosecuted, including the torture team from the bush administration. so 35 years for a truth teller and we need more and more truth tellers in this country i find to be an outrageously long sentence. >> so, michael, what do you make of the fact that wikileaks is saying it is a significant strategic victory.
manning is eligible for release for nine years, 4 point be point 4 in one calculation. is that still a travesty? i guess you're not on the same page as far as wikileaks. >> i am. what they're saying is he was charged with 136 years. he was charged with aiding the enemy. he could have gotten 90. therefore, the fact that this government which wanted to hit him and is hitting him with a sledge hammer by supporting solidarity, we're able to get it to 35 is significant. let's not kid ourselves about the sentence. 35 years sentence, time served. 32. get 1/3 off for good time, that puts him in the 20 range. if he gets parole, if, he can get out at 10. that's not a guarantee. he's 25 years old. he did things in the best interest of what he believed. i think time served at this point would have been a sentence that was the most appropriate if you're going to sentence him and
now, of course, demands of the bradley manning supporters is that president obama pardon me or give him clemency, reduce his time to three years that he's already served. >> michael, i'm going to open this up to our folks in new york to get their thoughts. kurt, there is still a huge debate over whether or not bradley manning did a service to this country, but i think in the new republic john brings up a good point. he writes any revelation of american government misconduct is a boost to the adversaries. the publication of the pentagon papers certainly helped the cause of the north vietnamese. the question is not if a leak unintentionally benefits add very sarris but whether in the circumstance it has benefitted american democracy. you look at the information we got. the iraq and afghanistan war logs. i do think that was important. i wonder what you think of the sentencing. >> if he were to serve 35 years, that would be outrageous. he won't. he will serve eight or nine
years by most informed accounts under the far more liberal military justice system than exists in the federal justice system. it is eight or nine more years. we can argue about is that the correct amount of time, is that the correct punishment? i don't know. if that's what he serves that doesn't seem to be outrageously beyond the imaginable punishment. if we want to think of bradley manning as a hero, that's fine. heroes don't necessarily get off without paying a price. he can be a hero -- >> in fact, in some ways that makes him more of a hero. >> indeed, if you want to think of him as a hero, that's fine, but i don't think you necessarily are required to give him his cake and eat it, too. which is to say don't prosecute him. don't punish him. if i'm the federal government, if i'm president obama, i don't want to encourage any member of
the military who happens to think he or she knows right to do these massive dumps. some kind of punishment seems to be in order. >> carol, the aclu is calling on the president to pardon bradley manning. what's interesting to me, the president seems to be, i think, pretty dismissive of the notion that this is a patriotic service, whether in the context of edward snowden or in bradley manning's case specifically. we played the tape of the president years ago pretty roundly dismissing the importance of the war logs. what do you think the president does or says or needs to do in reaction to this if anything? >> well, i think that anyone expecting that he's going to pardon him is mistaken, misguided. he's not going to do that. the president is on record saying that bradley manning broke the law. he dealt with over the past few
years his lib wall supporters giving him criticism because of him saying things like that and because of the government's decision to prosecute him. the other thing to go to your point, the government's role here is in part to send a message to anyone else considering doing something like this. >> it's huge. you can't leave that out of this. it's particularly poignant with the edward snowden case. the president has said that bradley manning broke the law. he's not going to change his view on that. i'd be very surprised if he pardons him. he's put up with the criticism on the left including during his campaign. i was at events where he would be heckled. he made clear that he didn't see this as a pentagon papers issue, he didn't see him as a hero, that he broke the law. >> michael, what do you think this does in terms of julian
assange and his case and edward snowden. do you think this sets a precedent? >> my problem here is we're looking at one of the most secret governments in history. the number of classified documents has gone from 5 million to 90 million. i've brought numerous lawsuits to get any information i can about torture, guantanamo, and they've all been dismissed because of secrecy. what we've seen is those who will reveal the secrets but those of u.s. criminality. whether they're journalists, julian assange, bradley manning, others are being hit by a sledge hammer with our government which is the most secret that i've ever come across in my 40 years of litigation. right now what i would say is these people are people that ought to be encouraged to come forward until this government starts to open up its, quote, secrets of its own crimes so that we can actually decide what kind of democracy we want. until then i don't think whistle
blowers at all should be subject to prosecution. >> well, i mean, i definitely think the climate is chillier for people who are thinking of leaking, whistle blowing, whatever you want to call it. today we are finding out that according to the "wall street journal" that the u.s. government, the nsa is spying on, i don't know what word you want to use, but surveilling 75% of online communications. nsa built a surveillance network than officials have publicly showed. it can reach 75% of all u.s. internet traffic. this is days after the british government destroyed laptops that supposedly had information from edward snowden's files on it. i mean, what are the repercussions of this? >> i want to say one can be disturbed about what was done to glenn greenwald's partner and one can be concerned about the extent that is being revealed by
the snowden leaks about nsa leaking. one can be disturbed by all of those things. being disturbed and concerned and the general march towards secrecy does not thereby say and bradley manning should be pardoned or released. i just want to make that clear, that those -- one can be properly concerned about all of those things and think that the snowden effect is more good than bad, but that -- again, i would say that doesn't mean that all bets are off and anybody can leak anything. >> i am not proposing it's a zero sum game. i think the narrative around bradley manning is much more cemented in the anti-camp than the pro camp. he has controlled the message. he's had an independent spokesperson in the name of glenn greenwald to make the information. the release of information has been through more established channels and as a result i think that the public is more for giving, if you will, or accepting of the role that edward snowden is playing in the national dialogue. >> and, indeed, edward snowden
was doing a much more circumscribed set of leaks about the nsa programs telling americans, look, you're being spied on as opposed to the 700,000 document dump of material from the u.s. military that may or may not -- there may, indeed, be crimes that should be prosecuted, investigated there, but it was this gigantic dump by a serving u.s. military person which is a very different thing. >> carol, the president's numbers it's worth noticing -- noticing, noting that the latest polling is showing a 14 point swing in obama's approval ratings. not as much with older generations. >> and i think that when you look at these issues, what you were talking about, how they're separate intellectually and if you look at them i think you can understand it. if you're an average person understanding this there's a little bit of overlap. when you take the broader view the concern is government secrecy. that's where the problem comes in for the president. you see this drip, drip, drip with the nsa, the bradley
manning sentencing, the timing of that just kind of feeds into what is already this disillusionment with what he's been saying about what these programs do or don't do, "the wall street journal" story follows a story from the washington post last week. they haven't addressed this in his speech. he said he was confident these programs aren't being abused. i think the more this goes on, the more questions it raises. these kinds of issues particularly resonate with the younger voters. if you looked at bradley manning, there was a lot of younger people. >> michael, before we let you go, do you feel as if collectively the landscape is changing with all of these different cases as carol points out sort of coalescing at the same moment in time? do you feel like there will be a change in the u.s. government and its policies? do you feel like the national mood around the questions of transparency and accountability is shifting? >> i think we're in a bitter struggle now over controlling
secrecy, particularly secrecy around what our government does as well as surveillance. i don't think we can say who's winning that yet, but i don't think the government is winning right now. i think the snowden stuff coming after they had already tried to sledge hammer bradley manning, julian assange and others is interesting that a man would still come out knowing what they did to them. i also think it's important to understand that if we keep using these kind of sentences against people like bradley manning to deter people from coming out as bradley manning and he had snowden did, then we aren't going to have the discussion we need to have on have the open government. thinking that these two can work together is absurd. we're not going to have sledge hammer work against whistle blowers and expect people to come out and tell us what our government is doing. we need to have an open government. ed snowden is true. the reason -- he's gotten a lot
of support. that's true because he's talked about what was happening to americans. bradley manning talked about what they did overseas. different conversations neld different arenas. u.s. attorney for wikileaks, michael ratner, thank you for your time. one year ago after this week, president obama announced chemical weapons in syria will serve as a red line. today deadly chemical attack in syria. it's not the first. we'll discuss that next on "now." you got your list? i do! let's go! here we go cinnamon toast crunch. yay! a perfect school day breakfast. i know if you find a lower advertised price they'll match it at the register. that's amazing. look at that price. i like that. they need those for school. we're always working to lower costs so you get more savings. now your kids have everything they need. all in one place. more school for your money. guaranteed. ready? wow! that's the walmart low price guarantee backed by ad match. save time and money getting your kids ready for school,
bring in ads from your local stores and see for yourself. glass on floors. daily chores. for the little mishaps you feel use neosporin to help you heal. it kills germs so you heal four days faster. neosporin. use with band-aid brand bandages. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they help save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans
endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief!
nerve gas and chemical weapons while attacking damascus early this morning. the attacks killed hundreds of people, mostly women and children. syrian state television denies the reports quoting a government source saying there is no truth in the reports. but video footage and photos of the scenes show victims with symptoms similar to chemical attacks. a nurse at the scene said they arrived with pupils dilated, cold limbs and foam in their mouth. they say this is typical of nerve gas victims. today this came as a u.n. team arrived in damascus earlier in the week to investigate another deployment of chemical weapons that took place this past march. the u.n. security council is holding a meeting at 3:00 today. if the reports today are confirmed, it would be the
deadliest attack in syria's war. the war has left 100,000 people dead. this attack comes one year and one day after president obama said the use of chemical weapons would be a, quote, red line that would change the administration's calculus. joining us from cairo is ayman mohyeldin. jonathan tep perfect man and joining me on step is tamara oliver. i want to go to you first, tamara. in terms of what is happening in syria, it is without question a human rights travesty. some people would qualify and characterize this as definitely mass atrocities. 100,000 people dead. do you think that it's a chemical weapons attack, if it actually was that, changes the international calculus. >> it should be changing the international calculus. just like many previous documented plans.
we're still investigating what happened today. the news is horrendous. the images are terrible. we've managed to speak to a number of witnesses and a number of doctors in that eastern province to damascus. what they say confirms the symptoms that have been always there when that kind of nerve gas is used. >> just to refresh for our viewers. we were talking about a two-year civil war that has created also a refugee crisis. it's not just syria that's been destabilized. but there are 30,000 syrians who have fled to iraq. there are 1.7 registered syrian refugees and in one camp in jordan there are 160,000 syrian refugees which makes it jordan's fifth largest city. johnson, i want to go to you. in terms of how the syrian crisis has affected the region, which is to say destabilized the region, it's fairly profound. beyond that, unstable states, failed states, if you will, can
often become hosts for radical islams, terrorist strains. there is talk of al qaeda coming into syria. i wonder at what point the white house calculus on our strategic interests shift. the president talked about a red line. we seemed to have crossed it. >> no, absolutely. it's a good question what will motivate the administration to act given what's happened already. the statement of a red line is more than a year old and syria has long since crossed that with no response from the administration. there has been some greater provision of arms to the rebels but on a smaller scale. other than that, they've done essentially nothing. that leaves open the question, what would it take for them act. if these reports are borne out, this would be a significant escalation. i would not expect to see much more from the administration which has shown throughout that it's not interested in getting involved. >> jonathan, i should call to everyone's attention that there is a white house statement that reads the united states is
deeply concerned by reports that hups of syrian civilians have been killed. the u.s. strongly condemns any and all use of chemical weapons. we are formally urging that the u.n. investigate this allegation. they will be having an emergency meeting this afternoon presumably to talk about the situation. can we expect any action given the characters sitting at the table? >> no. the u.n. is not going to embark on any intervention while the russians and chinese are involved. of course, they may send more or try to send more investigators to the country, but there's already a u.n. investigation team on the ground as you, yourself, said. so i think the u.n.'s options are pretty limited, which is why advocates here and in the middle east are pushing for joint western or unilateral american involvement. >> ayman mohyeldin, our
correspondent in cairo, it seems like strange timing, as if there is ever good timing for something as horrific as a chemical weapons attack. given that the u.n. investigators are in the country, the question is why president assad would do this. i want to read a quote from jeffrey goldberg who analyzeds the situation thusly. why would the assad regime do this? the answer is easy, because assad believes no one, not the u.n., not president obama, not other western powers, not the arab league will do a damn thing to stop them. there is a good chance they're correct. what's your analysis, ayman? >> reporter: there is no doubt that what is happening inside syria, president assad has some close allies. his calculus as to why he is
carrying out the attacks has to do with his own confidence that the russian government is going to stand behind him. as we've said time and time again when there has been an attack to try to solve this or put pressure on president assad internationally, russia has prevented that. so he feels he must still have russia in his corner that allows him to carry on with the killing machine that he has unleashed over the past two years. it is not going to slow down. whether or not he felt he had to tactically use a chemical weapon we don't know. he would not be in the position he is acting so bodily today. >> tamara, i want to shift a little bit over to egypt because i do think the question here is one of human rights which is underlying a lot of our foreign policy or not underlying -- not underlying, actually, our
foreign policy agenda. john leanne der son is writing about what's happening in egypt but mentions it in the context of syria as well. he says if the egyptian military violence against its own citizens is unacceptable, president obama has only one choice, cut military aid to egypt entirely. if we have lost the moral cue card, we can just watch sir yeah as the u.s., we must make clear what we're doing. we cannot pay for the bullets and sigh over the people that they kill. we are not paying for the bullets in syria but we are certainly standing idolly by. it's not clear-cut. certainly there is a call that some action needs to be taken either unilaterally. the white house doesn't feel that. i wonder what you think about the turmoil in the region. >> from a human rights
perspective and since we're shifting to egypt, the dilemma has been for the u.s. between wanting to maintain its strategic interests, the passage through the suez canal, unlimited access to the waters, etc., etc., and between one thing to advocate for the values of just human rights, democracy, free speech, etc., etc. and at this point that balance is difficult to strike so from a human rights perspective, we expect them to pressure their friends. >> what about the president in terms of both egypt and syria but let's focus on egypt for the moment given what is going on over there. is there a sense because there is presumably, i mean, according to, well, u.s. history a greater established strategic interest in making sure egypt is stable,
are we to believe that there will be more concrete action from the united states as opposed to syria where we have sat on our hands for the past two years? >> the administration and the president made it pretty clear in the president's statement on egypt that the united states will be guided primarily by its own national security interests in deciding what to do in egypt. and its priority there is, as you said, stability. the big question is how do you ensure stability? nm now that's been in washington's view to stand behind this military backed regime. the question is now given the horrific events in egypt in just the last few days with the massacre of protesters in custody, the arrest of the supreme leader of the muslim brotherhood, the possible release of mubarak from prison
whether the administration will continue analyzing the situation the way it has. as the crackdown gets worse and the violence builds, it becomes less likely that supporting this increasingly libertarian regime will get the results that the administration wants. >> ayman, i want to go to you before we wrap this up. we have heard reports in the last 24 hours that much of the leadership of the muslim brotherhood and the titular head is in custody as well. the spokesperson of one of the other leaders of the muslim brotherhood, i wonder what that has done to change the situation on the ground? have supporters of morsi been as organized? has it had any measurable effect on the protests between the government and morsi supporters? >> it has, and it's not only the leadership that has been somewhat decimated, if you will, it's the mid level and junior officers of the muslim brotherhood not across cairo but across the country that have
come under sustained pressure from the government. that in itself has led to the fragmentation of the organization. it's led to the breakdown of the cohesiveness. that doesn't mean it's reduced its support but it's reduced its effectiveness to bring people into the state. its own leadership, some of it is still on the run. they are too afraid to come out into public. many of them are being arrested from tips coming from private citizens. as we've seen in the last 24 hours with senior leaders. there's no doubt that the muss lick brotherhood popularity has declined. as an organization they are without a doubt under pressure, under stress operating not to the same levels. their communications have been cut off. the military and security forces definitely have the upper hand. the question though is not about the immediate short term solution, it's about the long term. this group has proven in the past it does have resilience. it can regenerate itself. it can generate new leaders.
how will it regenerate itself in all of this recent crackdown? will it be more hard lined? will it moderate its world view? these are questions the group will answer. how will it shape politics as the country transitions to democracy under the so-called roadmap it's now developing. >> jonathan, one last question because i think this is a really interest thesis that john leanne der son has in "the new yorker." he compared what's going on in egypt to what happened in latin america and in the sort of dirty wars in argentina and chile and how that effectively destabilized a region and it had an antiamerican stance, the legacy we feel today. you look at hugo chavez and where edward snowden was trying to flee. i wonder if you think that's possibly what could happen in parts of the middle east? >> sure. you can go around the world and look at regions where the united states has backed authoritarian
regime. once the regions fall, there's no lack of american hostility whether we talk about iran, latin america or other countries that have had this experience. there's no question that what's happening now will not be good for america's standing, not only in egypt but throughout the region. >> thank you. foreign affairs magazine jonathan tapperman. tamara oliver fbi from human rights watch. thank you all and ayman mohyeld mohyeldin. ted cruz has a new message for republicans on the fence about shutting down the government. don't blink. we'll have the details coming up next. ♪ i'm a hard, hard worker every day. ♪
♪ i'm a hard, hard worker and i'm working every day. ♪ ♪ i'm a hard, hard worker and i'm saving all my pay. ♪ small businesses get up earlier and stay later. and to help all that hard work pay off, membership brings out millions of us on small business saturday and every day to make shopping small huge. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. the house caught fire and we were out on the streets.
[ whispering ] shhh. it's only a dream. and we have home insurance. but if we made a claim, our rate would go up... [ whispering ] shhh. you did it right. you have allstate claim rate guard so your rates won't go up just because of a claim. [ whispering ] are we still in a dream? no, you're in an allstate commercial. so get allstate home insurance with claim rate guard... [ whispering ] goodnight. there are so many people in our bedroom. [ dennis ] talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rings ] ...and let the good life in. [ male announcer ] when you wear dentures you may not know it, but your mouth is under attack. food particles infiltrate and bacteria proliferate. ♪ protect your mouth, with fixodent. the adhesive helps create a food seal defense for a clean mouth and kills bacteria for fresh breath. ♪ fixodent, and forget it.
shut down the federal government. we've got to stand up and win the argument. if you have an impasse you want to know one side or the other has to blink. how do we win this fight? don't blink. >> last night ted cruz held a town hall with a defund obama care banner behind him. if he doesn't defund his signature legislation, cruz has encouraged the gop to shut down the government. his strategy, don't blink. it's unclear whether cruz's no blink strategy will have any takers among members of the republican party who both still understand the fiduciary responsibilities and the fact that most americans will blame the gop if the american government is thrown into a tail spin. coming up, oklahoma senator james inhof represents a certain
[ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. the ipcc, the u.n. intergovernmental pam on climate change, recipient of the 2007 nobel peace prize shows that the recent increase of carbon dioxide, methane is unprecedented. revising their already grim
estimates, the commission now believes with 95% certainty that humans are the principle cause of climate change. the panel also warned that sea levels, one of the greatest threats posed by climate change, could rise by more than three feet in the next 80 years. these days even science is partisan. witness, speaker of the house, john boehner. >> the idea that carbon dioxide is a carcinogen that's harmful to our environment, it's almost comical. every time we exhale we exhale carbon dioxide. every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you've got more carbon dioxide. >> boehner's antiscience theorizing has been excode by other self-appointed people. the greatest hoax. >> a lot of our listeners out there are not aware that you have to have c o2.
that's a form of a fertilizer in order to grow things, it's actually sought after in many cases. and so it's not something that you can't just automatically assume, well, we have to try to do something about c o2 because every effort that we do to think that we can change something that nature -- you know, god's still up there. >> and yet as the ippc report lays out in deeply distressing black and white, humans are changing nature regardless of where god may or may not be. joining us now is founding editor of climate progress and a senior fellow of the center for american progress, joe rome. joe, thanks for joining us. i did not read the whole report. i read the analysis of the report to be honest and i found it deeply distressing as i find most environmental treatises. you say this one is an instantly out of date snapshot that low balls future warming. in fact, it's even worse than this climate panel would have us
think. tell us more about that. >> yeah. well, it's a consensus-based approach is the top climatologists of the world review the scientific literature and ultimately the governments of the world, including china and saudi arabia, have to sign off on every word. you can imagine when you have this kind of document, it kind of is a least common denominator, what everyone can agree on. i think the closest analogy i can come up with was the surgeon general's warnings on cigarette smoking. back in the '60s the surgeon general's advisory committee reviewed all the scientific literature on smoking. it was very clear that cigarette smoking was hazardous to your health. they put out a caution, cigarette smoking may be hazardous to your health. it was only several years later that they said cigarette smoke we've determined is dangerous to your health and then finally it wasn't until the 1980s that they said, you know, if you stop smoking, it's going to reduce risks to your health. i think we're getting to the
stage where people -- where the cumulative scientific community is saying we know that greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide particularly, from burning coal oil natural gas is damaging the planet. >> i mean, kurt, as joe says, this panel is a quorum of goodies and baddies. even they can agree with 95% certainty that climate change is caused by humans and that it is not -- what is happening is not a good thing, you would think that would spur someone somewhere into action and yet not only is there inaction, there's debate over whether it's even real. steven king sass global warming is more of a religion than a science. >> the steven kings as we saw the john boehners in maintaining this position because they are ignorant and crazy or simply appealing to ignorant and crazy people remains to me shocking
every time i hear these people. the question is, when and will that change in the republican party. they are practically in terms of a powerful entity in the developed world unique in taking this position. >> but i will say, carol, i mean, they have effectively moved the goalposts here, right? i mean, mitt romney had a laugh line in the 2012 presidential campaign talking about how barack obama wanted to end the riding of the seas, which was a joke about climate change that is actually very real. in terms of political room to maneuver or pass any kind of legislation, the deals with the environment, i don't think the president has any space on the playing field. >> he has no space on the playing field. this is a divisive issue. the republicans who think this is not an issue are not going to be persuaded by a report. >> '95, they think it's still a
hoax. >> 105%. >> the entity that's putting it out is not necessarily one that they take a lot of pride in to begin with so you have that problem. politically the president is fighting an uphill battle. even when he had pull, it didn't work. he's taking steps he can do on his own. he gave a big climate speech in june. the white house speech is on trying to reduce carbon pollution. >> it's regulatory action? >> yes. >> it's the epa, not much that he can control. >> yes. >> joe, i want to talk about the reality of what we're looking at in terms of our globe. the other thing is ppms, parts per million. the carbon dioxide levels, we passed a milestone that has not been seen since the dinosaurs
roemd the earth. >> as you say, we have not had this much carbon pollution in the atmosphere in millions of years. the last time that we did have pollution, carbon levels, we had sea levels 40, 50, 60 feet higher and the temperature was several degrees warmer. what are the kinds of things that you expect when you warm up the planet? obviously when it's hotter on average your heat waves are going to be longer and more intense and we're seeing that. when it's hotter, dry areas dry up. we have droughts. we're seeing wildfires. at the same time, when you heat up the planet, you evaporate more moisture so that puts more moisture in the atmosphere. wet areas get wetter. we see deluges like superstorm sandy. and finally you get the melting
of ice. as you heat up, you melt ice. when you melt ice that's land locked like the is sheets of green land and antarctica, this new report says we could see three feet of sea level rise by the end of the century which would be devastating to southern florida, new orleans, new york city. >> joe, before we let you go, one of the problems, maybe it's not a problem but it's a new sort of strategy that has to be employed by folks who want to see something done in terms of the environment, talk about economics. you have a drought disaster that was last year. the largest draw the -- the largest sort of scope of droughts in 50 years. wildfires that have been raging that continue to rage. the average wild fire today burns twice as many acres as it did 40 years ago. of course, hurricanes. this is framed perhaps in economic terms perhaps there will be more political room to
do something on it. >> there's no question. if people want to know what climate change is like, go out west. they'll see the droughts. people need to understand that the solution is something very affordable. we're talking about replacing dirty forms of energy with cleaner forms of energy with solar and wind. >> joe rome from climate progress. go to climateprogress.org. coming up, supreme court justice antonin scalia has more pronouncements. we'll look at his latest stab at political correctness. that's next. streamed. a quarter million tweeters are tweeting. and 900 million dollars are changing hands online. that's why hp built a new kind of server. one that's 80% smaller.
uses 89% less energy. and costs 77% less. it's called hp moonshot. and it's giving the internet the room it needs to grow. this&is gonna be big. hp moonshot. it's time to build a better enterprise. together. you know, from our 4,000 television commercials. yep, there i am with flo. hoo-hoo! watch it! [chuckles] anyhoo, 3 million people switched to me last year, saving an average of $475. [sigh] it feels good to help people save... with great discounts like safe driver, multicar, and multipolicy. so call me today. you'll be glad you did. cannonbox! [splash!]
continuing his personal campaign against equality. in a veiled reference to this summer's decisions on same-sex marriage, skaly a said it's not up to the courts to invent new minorities that get special protection. scalia's view that gay and lesbian couples have an invented or illegitimate status shouldn't be all that surprising. it's the same justice who wrote ten years ago that the court was signing on to a so-called homosexual agenda when it struck down a sodomy law. there is a feeling of disgrace that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct. r commitm. r commitm. and we've made a big commitment to america. bp supports nearly 250,000 jobs here. through all of our energy operations, we invest more in the u.s. than any other place in the world. in fact, we've invested over $55 billion here
get glad forceflex. small change, big difference. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan
works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals.
so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. the house caught fire and we were out on the streets. [ whispering ] shhh. it's only a dream. and we have home insurance. but if we made a claim, our rate would go up... [ whispering ] shhh. you did it right. you have allstate claim rate guard so your rates won't go up just because of a claim. [ whispering ] are we still in a dream? no, you're in an allstate commercial. so get allstate home insurance with claim rate guard... [ whispering ] goodnight. there are so many people in our bedroom. [ dennis ] talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rings ] ...and let the good life in.
and the deepening crisis in egypt. the court has ordered the release of hosni mubarak. he was overthrown during the swell of the arab spring in 2011. he still faces murder charges. we'll have a live report from cairo. gentlemen, thank you for sharing. >> u.s.a. >> u.s.a. >> wow, that was down in texas. that's the fireworks in the lone star state. senator ted
IN COLLECTIONSMSNBC West Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service The Chin Grimes TV News Archive
Uploaded by TV Archive on