longtime are going to washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture and as ace whistleblower edward snowden has drawn a lot of comparisons to daniel ellsberg but their experiences defer in one very important way more on that in just a moment also in recent years the democratic party has had success in national elections by rallying younger voters to candidates with progressive stances on social issues such as the focus on social justice distract from the fight for economic justice and if you want to know why congress so in effect take a trip back in time to january twentieth two thousand and nine tell you why in

tonight's billeting. you need to know this venezuelan nicaragua and now bolivia have all announced that they're offering asylum to n.s.a. whistleblower edward snowden after weeks in diplomatic and legal legal limbo this may be the best chance yet for the thirty year old former booz allen hamilton employee to find refuge from extradition snowden's search for a safe haven a few years to be entering a new phase it's hard not to make comparisons between his experiences and those of another important american whistleblower daniel ellsberg like snowden ellsberg faced the full wrath of the american political establishment and punishing smear campaign when he exposed the truth about our country's involvement in the vietnam war the new york times in one nine hundred seventy one and again like snowden ellsberg was charged by our government under the espionage act of one nine hundred

seventeen but their experience is. different in one very important way unlike edward snowden daniel ellsberg felt confident enough in the american justice system to turn himself in to face trial right here in the usa on june twenty eighth one thousand nine hundred eighty one just two weeks after the new york times published the first excerpt of alberto ellsberg trove of documents he walked into the u.s. district attorney's office in boston and gave himself up to the authorities ellsberg recently appeared on this show to talk about the snowden saga and how different the legal climate is for whistleblowers today compared with what it was when he leaked the pentagon papers here's what he had to say. do you see a qualitative difference between what you did and what edward snowden did yes regrettably it's a different country it was a different country i enter reason to expect to eventually i'd be out on bail as i was actually the judge put me out on personal recognizance but with

a fifty thousand dollars bond if i didn't show up for trial enough for the next two years including my trial which less than ultimately floor and a half months in court i was free to comment on the case just say why i had done what i had done and what the paper surely keris the it today. daniel ellsberg is right the legal climate for whistleblowers in america has changed since the one nine hundred seventy s. and it's changed for the worse especially during the past five years of the obama presidency the obama administration has now prosecuted more people eight altogether under the espionage act than any administration in history in fact under eric holder the u.s. government has launched more espionage act prosecutions than under every other administration in history combined for those charged under the act the experience can be brutal after he was arrested in two thousand and ten wiki leaks and with wit and whistleblower bradley manning was detained for almost a year in solitary confinement and was limited to only one hour of free time every

day ellsberg if you remember. was released on his own recognizance at his bail hearing john kiriakou who blew the lid on the cia's torture program is serving a thirty month prison sentence a mockery of justice when you consider he exposed crimes for which nobody has been prosecuted and even those modern whistleblowers like thomas drake who have escaped prison time have only done so after months and months of grinding legal battles with examples like this edward snowden search for asylum is all the more understandable our government today is unrelenting to solve and whistleblowers in one nine hundred seventy one daniel ellsberg had every reason to expect that the american criminal justice system would treat him fairly the day edward snowden has almost no reason to expect fair treatment so for him it's venezuela nicaragua and bolivia that look like the shining city on the hill not the united states or anyone who calls themselves a patriot and a believer in open democracy left or right or anywhere in between this should be

extremely disturbing because there once was a time when political dissidents looked to the united states as the place of refuge and that time is now long passed for more on those and the fight in the latest fight to create an open society here in the united states i'm joined by amy stepanovich director of the domestic surveillance project at the electronic privacy information center and you welcome back thank you for having me your organization has filed an emergency petition with the u.s. supreme court on this issue that basically ed snowden leaks the whole n.s.a. surveillance thing tell us about this so i think has filed a petition with the supreme court as the only court with jurisdiction to review this order that was published by release by edward snowden published by the guardian that allows for the surveillance of the so-called metadata which is everything about your phone calls but content for every call that end there originates or terminate within the united states including purely domestic phone

calls so we're saying that the supreme court needs to vacate that order. the the foreign intelligence surveillance court and to prevent them from issuing any future orders has the foreign intelligence surveillance court which is not transparent we don't know where they meet we don't know who's on the court any of that have they actually started deciding for the moment constitutional issues and we're not sure what they're deciding because we don't get to see their opinions which is as you said a product there of them not being a very transparent organization what we're challenging most specifically is that under the law that the two fifteen orders are. promulgated under our past under the law this is the not contemplate this type of data collection so the bias the court and the n.s.a. and asking for in the files the court and authorizing this type for surveillance is not necessarily unconstitutional although we would argue that it's well but it is

definitely unlawful and it is not saying ssion by the laws passed by congress. a lawyer for epic so that the this is section two fifteen the patriot act gives it the patriot act provisions cited by the pfizer court required that business records produced be relevant to an authorized security investigation the wall street journal had a piece today saying that pfizer has essentially redefined relevant. without too much of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin what is this all about so what it is is you can collect this type of information as you said when it's relevant to an investigation by issuing orders that effectively wrap up in the everybody in the in the country and the phone call that takes place in the country they're saying that everything is relevant which because saying is impossible you can't argue that every phone call that takes place in this country is possibly relevant to a specific investigation so you took this lawsuit directly to the supreme court yes

and you said this is the only court that has jurisdiction on this matter is that under the die. traditional review because because some other quarters is purporting to determine cause to shelter for the moment so the fact is that the pfizer court has original jurisdiction any other district court doesn't have jurisdiction to vacate to overturn the fisa court you can only appeal defies the court to the pfizer court of review which epic as a non-government entity cannot be brought in front of so it's only venue is the supreme court because that's the final appeals court exasperates ok so what happens if they refuse to grant cert what i'll be read to hear you are very confident that they're going to hear this case we think it has merit we think there's there's a argument that we've put in front of that meaningful and. while we're very confident that they're also side with us i don't think right now that we believe that there's a chance that they won't at least hear the case in their fall term when they reconvene that's going to be very interesting are you are you asserting that there

has been a damage and if so who is the damage aggrieved party where well as rising customers the order that was published was specifically a variety in order to arise then we have to suppose that the other carriers are involved as well but as for arising customers epic is actually bringing this in its own capacity saying that our communications have been sucked up by the n.s.a. subject to this order and we actually also emphasize the fact that these are attorney client privilege conversations and not only regular attorney client privileges with us as attorneys talking to our clients but also that we are in several cases litigating against the united states the department of justice in the national security agency that is sucking up the information on our phone calls so it's good it's direct there's a direct problem there when we're suing the n.s.a. and the n.s.a.

has access to every phone call that we've heard so you are the aggrieved party this is not a like a class act. sort of thing now to not to worry about john roberts dialing back the ability of class action lawsuit as it says at the end of a epic it's the caption of the case and this is our lawsuit now b.c.l. you and larry klayman and a few others who've also sued over the senate say stuff and we have maybe twenty seconds left it does that this is a fact your do see your action or would help or not at all these are separate cases the a.c.l.u. has a very very great meritorious case going on in the southern district of new york against the n.s.a. for the surveillance at because while epix case won't have any impact on that they won't have any impact on us except to the extent that we're both trying to get the surveillance to and amy thank you so much for being with you know keep up the great work that things in other news shake ahmed al tayyab the grant him all of the al azar mosque in cairo and the most important muslim cleric in egypt announced

earlier today that he will remain in self-imposed hiding until the country's factions find a way to resolve their issues without violence in official statement the in mom said that he hopes everyone shoulders his responsibility to stop the bloodshed instead of dragging the country into civil war i'll tell you the comments come after days of turmoil following the ouster of more president mohamed morsi by the egyptian army last wednesday in the wake of that country's second military takeover in two and a half years supporters and opponents of morsi as party of the muslim brotherhood have clashed in violent street battles in cairo and other cities yesterday over fifty people were killed in a fight between security forces and pro morsi protesters with the army have called terrorists and the brotherhood has called an unprovoked attack as egypt's civil unrest continues the decision of. who appeared with the egyptian military when it was announced that one of the now at the end of the morsi presidency west week

represents yet another challenge for an anti. motherhood coalition that already appears to be fracturing over the weekend egypt's interim government was forced to withdraw the appointment of mohamed el baradei the from the liberal former head of the international atomic energy agency as prime minister after protests from the extreme right wing salafist al-noor party morsi may be gone but egypt's revolution is far from over and in light of the developments of the past few days the road to democracy looks like it will be a rocky one new parliamentary and presidential elections are now scheduled for early next year. coming up considering how much libertarians and conservatives love the free market you'd think they'd listen when insurance companies say guns in school are a bad idea apparently not more on that libertarian commentator austin peterson right after the break.

i would rather as questions for people in positions of power instead of speaking on their behalf and that's why you can find my show larry king now right here on r.t. question more.

or. less i was a new alert animation scripts scare me a little. there is breaking news tonight and we are continuing to follow the breaking news. alexander's family cry tears of joy and great things out there that had been rendered in a court of law found alive is a story made for movies playing out in real life. in screw news ever since the newtown massacre the gun manufacturing lobby has been

pushing for laws that would allow teachers and administrators to carry loaded firearms around schools and they've succeeded state legislatures in places like kansas south dakota and texas have all passed bills allowing firearms in public schools the n.r.a. and its gun industry backers are obviously thrilled with these new laws but not everyone is optimistic about the idea of. guns in the classroom despite kansas new law allowing the practice e.m.c. insurance company that covers most of that state's public schools as announced that it won't insure schools that let their employees carry guns to campus emcees reason is quite simple as the company sees that more guns equals more risk and the increased likelihood that it will have to pay out insurance claims emcees vice president for business development mike lovell told usa today on sunday that we've been writing school business for almost forty years and one of the underwriting guidelines we follow for schools is that any onsite armed security should be

provided by uniformed qualified law enforcement officers our guidelines have not recently changed so now that these so-called free market has decided that arming teachers is a bad idea well the n.r.a. and the gun manufacturers they represent follow its lead it's as caused in peter's chief executive for stone gate l.l.c. and editor of the libertarian republican dot com austin welcome back so. armed third grade teachers well you know only cops can have guns i mean you're more likely to get shot by a classroom you're more likely to get shot by a cop than a teacher thanks again to drugs in this country so let's talk about class when we talk about civil rights though in a classroom the second amendment as a civil rights issue it's not as if it's some last one if someone has a civil right to eat at a lunch counter or even if it's private property to express their civil rights then do gun owners have the right to express their civil rights as a creator have the civil right to go to school with guns and there is a private property issues so that this is not

a private insurance you know this is public property public schools or public school let's break it down if the insurance company does not want to provide insurance to a school because of this and it's a private contract and the school says that we have a creature of that fund someone commits someone else can step in to fill in the gap that's on it's private property issue but gun ownership is a civil lawsuit brought rights but gun ownership is a public rights a civil right right you know what is right about gun owners. well a bit of the thing is that it's whether if you have a contract where there's not this is talking about for owning guns we talk about carrying loaded firearms into a public school ok what's your question well by my question is don't don't you agree with the insurance company that it's a crazy idea that these three republican states that have said oh yeah sure let's arm third grade teachers by the way they're union thugs and we hate them they're paid too much but let's arm them anyway absolutely not crazy would you put a sign in front of a school and say hey there's no guns here you know come on take a look at what happens it's all we want to send my swire almost being

a murderer to them committed in gun free zones. they don't have i would just ignore it they don't have i would government buildings they have going to know where everybody knows that i don't go and not want to send my child to a school that's his private choice that's why when i live in is that why i don't live in liberal tom and liberty well because then you get the choices that you can send your school to and i was it was you know we added on to mr clarke's condoms once we found. another teacher one of the kids their classmate off for their personal home to get out the back the room i mean do you really think that there graders are not going to find a gun a or b. if they don't find the gun because it's so securely locked up and some guy kicks in the door with an air of fifteen blazing away that the teachers are going to say well wait a second just so you know how to pull out the key unlock the thing find a gun load it good option and question well you know sense what stupid ok well i will just have to fall back on jefferson when he said that i would rather be exposed to the inconveniences of too much liberty than too little this has nothing to do with liberty it has to do with firearms as it was lead absolute i would

rather not be exposed or have my children exposed to the inconveniences of too much lead fly and it's sad because five billion dollars that's because timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous seeds of liberty so this has nothing to do a timidity call more. children. going fear surely in your school your mongering about announcement and then an enemy out in public schools should not be exposed to. we got one of them up then go to private schools right private schools would be a better choice for their kids anyway if actually want to get a good educational dran in public schools should not be exposed to guns they should also not be exposed marxist indoctrination but they get that every day to come this is this is a very very simple issue the a it's a stupid idea b. it's pandering to the gun lobby see most of these republican politicians are paid off paid for by the gun lobby which i would think would offend you and it does absolutely ok and d. you have an industry driving their product into schools in

a way that's actually going to lead to more data so i think you and i agree because we're talking about choice here we're saying we want to have more choice so why don't you give the schools the choice the insurance companies say we want we are saying we don't want to insure the school for that let the schools through as well then we can get insurance all we saw was a lawyer and no place for a loaded weapons unless it's a police officer mike are you going to bring them in and murder people because they need somebody to stand there were there or said there were there are people gabby giffords was shot there were two people holding carrying bradfield weapons and train neither of them was stupid enough sir firing into a crowd in new york city and that was an example when the cops got a guy in public and started firing in the crowd they hit five bystanders they didn't hit the car but this is not in a school in columbine there were two armed guards both had armed loaded weapons you know which way they ran when they heard the shots away and where the teachers or administrators allowed to carry guns it doesn't matter if it was the brain due to carry guns or out of there not teachers or administrators should have a right to express their civil rights to second amendment i am sorry austin if

you've never been a firefighter you've never been you've never had a loaded gun pointed at you you know you don't get it it's like i grew up in the mean streets of a killer missouri. i have been on the edge of war zones i've seen people shot it is . well enough. it's going pretty well so. in other news in the wake of the supreme court's decision to strike down the defense. marriage act as well as its ruling effectively ending california's gay marriage ban social issues are once again dominating the political conversation progressive's this is of course a good thing for the first time in history a majority of americans support same sex marriage for the under thirty crowd the level of support is even stronger and now that marriage equality is an official part of the democratic party's platform this will likely help shore up enthusiasm for progressive candidates in the years to come but there is a catch some of the most outspoken advocates for liberal social policies people like meramec manual and even barack obama for that matter often work against

progressive values when it comes to other issues like free trade and unionization and while social issues are obviously important in their own right there is the chance that corporate friendly democrats will use them to distract their constituents from other equally as important but more economically based problems for more on this i'm joined by richard ascot senior fellow at the campaign for america's future richard richard welcome back to the program going to be here you recently wrote an article on this topic richard you called liberals like rahm emanuel's social issue corporatists what you mean by that right well i think we're seeing an increasing pattern where as economic policies of the so-called centrist democrats who are really right leaning they are to the right of popular opinion on a number of issues like social security and bank reform and so on and as those economic positions get increasingly unpopular with the liberal base they are

turning the focus of their comments more and more to social issues like gay marriage like women's reproductive rights and women's health rights which are in and of themselves important and worthy issues but in essence what i was saying is that they're doing very much what the republicans were doing a few years ago with the so-called values voters and that is getting people to ignore or even sometimes vote against. their own economic interests by emphasizing social issues and not economic ones richard haven't we seen this movie before bill clinton in one thousand a two ran platform of what he called the new covenant his new covenant speech which was that his stump speech was to the left of f.d.r. i mean he was literally calling for an extension of the new deal. according to the folklore two weeks before he was put into office before he was inaugurated. let's see bob rubin. who was the chairman of the fed at the time sat him down and

young man and what is so you have life really is and he brought us nafta gatt the deputy you know and all those kinds of things and is this just not an extension of that well absolutely look you had obama run to the left of hillary clinton in two thousand and eight and then got elected in a point alan simpson and erskine bowles to a deficit commission ran to the left again in two thousand and twelve and since then he's been negotiating in secret the transpacific partnership and other trade deals that are very much pro corporate he has offered to cut social security he's repeated the deficit rhetoric of the right etc etc etc but he's also emphasized his what he calls his evolving positions on gay marriage and and women's issues and so on so as a result even though he's far to the right of the democratic base on economic issues he still enjoys eighty five percent support among registered democrats so

that's the playbook that's the clinton playbook and if somebody out doesn't call them on it i think that's how we're going to see the continued wealth and that booty and corporatization of america you know i would submit that these economic policies whether it's rahm emanuel's or bill clinton's or for that matter barack obama's are to the right certainly to the right of dwight eisenhower who in one thousand fifty six ran for reelection on the fact that. he had added more than a million people to the union roles and and expanded social security and i think to the right of richard nixon so assuming that that's the case what do we do about it how do we get democratic politicians who with whom we agree on issues like you know gay marriage to take serious the real stuff the economic issues not to say gay marriage isn't real but i mean the stuff that it absolutely is impacting. while it was so as gay marriage to understand it i'm so annoyed exactly what you're saying

look i think first of all it can be taken for granted that any democratic or liberal or independent left leaning politician is going to have a good stand on these issues so i think it's important to keep communicating to liberals to progressive to the democratic bates' and to independents that just saying the right things about these social issues isn't enough because let's face it gay married couples are just as hurt by wealth inequity and a dying middle class and stagnating wages as are heterosexual married couples and women are more hurt by protracted wage in equity and minorities are more badly damaged by protracted unemployment sort of the young so just mouthing the rhetoric the way that republican voters do with christian as values voters we have to say that's not enough you have to walk the walk and talk the talk and that if you care about americans of all persuasions and types you better be for economic

justice too or you're not acceptable to richard very quickly it's worked just fine for republicans i mean they're there they're doing things the devastate people economically and yet the christian voters vote for them because of their positions on abortion and gay marriage well and if democrats want to be just like the republicans they're on the right track but if they want to demand more now's the time i think you're absolutely right richard ask out thanks so much brilliant piece thank you thank you. ob next as the zimmerman trial enters its third week it's been all prosecution so far now that the defense has its chance to take its case what can we expect those and i'll come more on this with our panel of legal experts right after the break.

admission free accreditation free transport charges free. range month three risk free. free. old free broadcast quality video for your media projects a free media. com. wealthy british style. market. can. find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cause or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kaiser report. let me let me let me ask you

a question from. here on this network is what we're having the debate we have our knives out if. you give the scientists a bad thing never get here in a situation where the talk about the surveillance. back to the big picture i'm tom hartman coming up in this half hour today marked the first full day of the defense's case in the george zimmerman trial and it was all

about the infamous nine eleven tapes how did the defense attorneys try to win over the jury today and can average people really distinguish one scream from another also there's still a lot of confusion over obamacare and what it means for average americans and n.b.c.'s david gregory is only making that confusion worse in tonight's politically corrected segment the meet the press straight on obamacare is true costs and the current congress is well on its way to setting a very unfavorable record and solidify its place as one of the worst if not the worst congress in history so why is congress really so gridlocked and incapable of passing any meaningful forms of legislation. in the best of the rest of the news today marked the first full day of the

defense's case in the george zimmerman trial two police officers testified today that trayvon martin's father told them the person screaming for help in the background of the now infamous nine eleven call was not his son and several of george zimmerman's friends were called to the stand as well and asked whether or not they could identify the screaming force in the tape not surprisingly they all claim that the voice was definitely george zimmerman's the defense also called trayvon martin's father tracy martin to the stand to further hammer out the confusion over the nine eleven tape other witnesses that testified today include zimmerman's former gym trainer. you claimed that zimmerman was grossly obese on athletic and wasn't even able to throw a punch so who scored more points with the jury today and what can we expect to see and hear as the trial grinds on joining me now from oh for more are debbie hines trial lawyer former prosecutor and legal commentator and marc harrold attorney and former police officer with the city of atlanta police department thank you both for joining me thank you great to have you both back debbie first of all your take on

how the trial is going. from grading the prosecution i gave them a c. plus when they ended their case today and moving them back down to a c. i think that you know there was some good today with the fence and it is focused on their case as they had their friends and family day one today with the friends and family to say that the nine one one call for screams was obviously george zimmerman's but what that does i think is it just makes it be a wash for both sides so so mark as a former police officer and an attorney your thoughts on this is the scream on the tape i mean it it it makes perfect sense the zimmerman would claim it was him since his whole his whole argument is i was just defending myself it also makes perfect sense that the person who gets shot and has a gun pointed at them might scream. you know what are your thoughts about about that and about the testimony that's been given so far about that scream but i don't

think the prosecution i don't think this is the case that people expected if i was grading it i put it about a c. minus i had about a c. with the prosecution c. minus i was very surprised that the medical examiner was up last instead of zimmerman's mother that's more of an emotional way to go for the prosecution medical examiner was not a great witness as far as this this is a very powerful this is the screams in this confusion over the screams some of the pretrial motions having to do with what level of expert testimony was going to be allowed towards this to really guide the jury and say this is who it is this is who it is and where you get into now that i think favors the defense you. have everyone kind of camped out saying no that whichever side they are on to say that their sides but whoever they whether their friends or family or the victim trayvon martin's friends or family saying this but it does when you get into a scientific thing when it gets confusing sometimes with something where you don't have expert to guide you and you get into a situation where something like this is highly technical and there's confusion over it and battling testimony sometimes

a jury will just throw up their hands and reasonable doubt will be if they have doubt about the actual evidence they'll find reasonable doubt about the elements of the crime so i think this favors the defense the longer this goes on this back and forth volleying the sort of doubles tennis where the jury is kind of they go back and forth with who's on the who's screaming on the tape does that favor the defense for a full acquittal or for a manslaughter conviction probably for the lesser charge i think that the elements for the great the second degree are going to be harder much higher hurdle here for the prosecution given what their case in chief was i think it's a tough whether they can get to manslaughter i think is much more of a reasonable goal and of course that will not make a lot of people happy deb you essentially have that in a way because i yeah i mean i think that circumstantial murder case it's a very difficult case i mean it's different then what it's playing out in the media than what it plays out in the real court been setting and that's trying that's what we're finding out right now i do think there's clearly enough for second degree

it's not a perfect case it certainly has had some difficulties there but it is still a winnable case but i definitely think that second definitely that manslaughter is what they can definitely get i've been only able to watch this in bits and pieces. but one of the pieces that i did see mark just mention the medical examiner i believe it was the medical examiner who testified that it took trayvon martin anywhere from a minute to ten minutes to die from that gunshot wound was that the right of the matter more than that right as i do in the medical examiner was all over the place i mean he was with the state for a prosecutor honestly one of you know we're. witnesses on some levels because he comes in the court and he's saying different things for the first time that the prosecution is hearing and that's a real no no in in trials so they had a big hearing as to even if he could really testify and they were on the verge of probably almost getting some of this opinion stricken but that didn't happen i mean the court the judge ruled in the prosecution's favor of course it was in front of

the jury so even if you get stricken it's we can't really belive the minds of the jurors that well if some of the his information got stricken they could not use it to come up with a conviction for the state they would have been huge it didn't happen but yeah i mean ending with him was the worst possible way to end it was just terrible i just caught that part of you know it took him a while to die and and i thought. in that moment for me the stop being an abstract situation and you know i just thought of my own kids i have a son is a little older than trayvon but i mean you know just. thinking what his parents must have been experiencing knowing that i believe five out of the six women on the jury are her parents. isn't that the kind of testimony that would cause you to think this is a you know there would be or would that would work against george zimmerman because

he he came in with a gun i mean if we hadn't come in with a gun this this this young man would have been dying well except that it's a murder trial it's not a civil trial and if it were a civil trial yes but i think that the state's chief medical examiner should have just stuck with the autopsy report i mean because it kind of hits both ways as to whether or not how the longer he lived then it also ties in with zimmerman's position that he could have moved he could have gotten up i thought he was still going to do something then they as opposed to it was almost that he was incapacitated and he couldn't move at all so it kind of cut both ways and in any respect the prosecutor said that i've been hearing about his change of opinion for the first time when he took the witness stand you know. mark do you think that that was because this is just a little town in a relatively rural part of florida and the medical examiner was you know this is he wasn't the best doctor in the world and this is the job. i don't know what kind of

doctor he is i don't think he's very good at testifying at trials but my understanding from the research that i did not don't have an exact number is that he's testified sometimes in a small town it's actually in a larger city a larger jurisdiction you have so many different medical examiners they divvy up who prosecutor who what goes to testify in a small town a medical examiner may testify a lot because he's the only one or there's only a couple of them in this case he just wasn't there the problem with bringing in a medical examiner specially last is basically people inherently know the jurors inherently know listen this is probably what should be one of the better witnesses they're wrapping up so he's done you stand up in the prosecution rests and when even the expert even the medical examiner the person who's supposed to be sort of their guide through some of the tough stuff seems to confuse seems to change his mind when the medical examiner changes his mind then you start to say his jurors i mean how sure can we be of anything here that he's for. skeeters i'm sure you're right debbie we've got to look let me just put this is that the tape that the scream is on we have a clip of it this was a large part of today's testimony here is. screaming out and then you don't know

why i don't know why i think they're yelling help i don't know. did he look hurt. i can't see him and i want to go out there i don't know what's going on. he'll announce yet what is your everything. until. it is a gunshot. so. so to me like you know what i mean everybody's got different opinions about this. why was expert testimony and the ability to manipulate the tape i mean you know you you watch the c.s.i. programs on t.v. and we've got this little clip for one full of bruce news vocal cord you know why did none of that happen well they have what's called the fry hearing and what the standard in the real world not on t.v.

were all this is the expert testifying to how it's done under acceptable standards he has to be able to hear he has to be able to say it's done under acceptable standards and that was the problem the yes they were manipulating it i think they looted much longer so they could get out what in fact was the voice that they could make the. it meet evidently at the f.b.i. stand as it really didn't need any stand it was new and novel and that just doesn't work just so i don't think that the judge made an incorrect ruling but it certainly put a tremendous damper who in their ability to prove the voice on the not one one so mark this is just come down to he said she said basically it's it's going to be in the jury's mind who they're believing is the is the martin family and friends or is it the zimmerman family sure as to whether it comes down to credibility and the one of the things here is when you don't have that expert when you don't have the person coming in who is not biased everyone here is has some bias everyone here has

a tie and when you call people and you say look you know this person so well you should know their screens screams inherent in that in what comes with that is you're going to have people who probably have an opinion or favor one party over the other and that's why you need those objective experts but the c.s.i. effect i know people talk about it all the time sometimes jurors now have an unrealistic expectation that a prosecution doesn't just have to go beyond a reasonable doubt they think there should be this three d. video like on c.s.i. which shows the bullet going through which part of the tissue and where it exits and all especially younger jurors have this unrealistic expectation that everything should be able to be shown to them in some sort of three d. conclusory faction about what happened and that's not going to be here very quickly did did testimony on either side seem more credible to you i think what the prosecution has to hammer away at that is the inconsistency that zimmerman did in if they can bring that home then zimmerman's whole deck of cards falls he wasn't hit twenty or twenty five times on the back of his head no one believe that even the detectives and they just have to keep hammering away he knew stand your ground

law he got an a in the course they've got to break down all of his lies in order to bring it back to their sad that's what they have to do. marc thank you both for being with us tonight thank you for talking. coming up what's more important to american student loan reform or the size and consistency of commemorative. baseball hall of fame coined it's republicans think it's the latter why do republicans in congress seem pass seemingly unimportant bills with ease refused to pass legislation the targets of the most pressing issues facing america today.

i would rather as questions for people in positions of power instead of speaking on their behalf and that's why you can find my show larry king now right here on r.t. question more. let me let me i want to know we're going to let me ask you a question. here on this network because we're having a debate we have our knives out. before you feel this right what's the best thing there is again you're in a situation where b. and i don't agree to talk about the surveillance.

is it possible to navigate the economy with all the details of his diction misinformation and media hype keep you up to date by decoding the mainstream has stated if the. your right. for tonight's politically correct. i'm taking on comments made by david gregory yesterday meet the press during a discussion about obamacare implementation gregory suggested that the affordable care act's medical surtax would be felt by every american and in fact it will only affect americans with an annual income above two hundred thousand dollars

a year take a look. i don't mix understand exactly how the exchanges are going to work and i don't understand all the ins and outs of the employer mandate and how that works but anybody who gets a paycheck in this country understands one thing you know there's a new line and it says medicare surtax so the tax parts work and you're well. hold on the care that you are it's working it makes a lot of people men well you know what gregory apparently fails to understand is that both the obama's medicare tax increases will only affect the wealthiest americans a nine tenth's of one percent medicare payroll tax increase only applies to individuals making more than two hundred thousand dollars a year or households earning more than a quarter million dollars a year overall those two groups of americans represent just four point two percent of all taxpayers will also be a three point eight percent tax on the investment income of some americans but as forbes magazine points out for individuals who have little or no net investment

income there are three point eight percent medical surtax medicare surtax will be minimal if not zero looks like david gregory doesn't understand how the obamacare tax increases are going to go are going to work either and that's why he's been politically correct. each to. the. kids the good the bad in the very very scattered famously ugly the good sacramento food bank until blake young took over as c.e.o. five years ago the california capital food bank wasn't that different from many other distribution centers across the country but the generosity of its donors it served mostly processed foods like white bread and salty store bought mac and cheese to its many hungry customers now thanks to young's keen leadership the sacramento food bank has shaken things up they're working with local organic

farmers to bring fresh produce to their distribution centers a new initiative is called farm to fork and has and according to city residents has dramatically improved the health of the banks but this year it could work sacramento food bank everyone especially the poorest among us deserves access to organic fresh and interest food bad dani's spell in north carolina farmers under fire this week after he drove a float at the hope mills for the july parade last week that featured a confederate flag and a sign painted with the phrase white history month hog white people float which you can see here was according to parade regulations supposed to have a sign advertising watermelons for sale farmer spell apparently had other more rebellious ideas because you know nothin so celebrated american democracy like flying the flag of a session this movement dedicated to the preservation of slavery and destruction of

the union. and the very very ugly chris koster the missouri attorney general wants to bring back gas chambers as in it all fit more seriously seriously he does koster told the associated press last week that because his state's death row has become so backlog by appeals and scant supply of lethal injection drugs. it might be time to resort to drastic measures executing condemned condemned in they buy poisonous gas despite the future in general says using lethal gas will be more efficient and siri has an executed anyone that way since the one nine hundred sixty s. and rebuilding their gas chambers would cost the state a lot of money it would also be just plain immoral gas executions can take as long as ten minutes or an extremely painful death penalty is bad enough but attorney general koster is plan to reintroduce all across the state murder to missouri let's just theory here.

every two years a new congress is sworn in and the current congress is the one hundred thirteenth that's been sworn in since the george washington presidency and it's well on its way to setting a very undesirable record our current do nothing congress is on track to pass fewer bills than the one hundred twelve do nothing congress which passed the fewest number of bills signed into law since record keeping began back in the one nine hundred forty s. right now the one hundred thirteenth congress has a pile of legislation yet to be considered including everything from student loans to immigration reform the post office reform and the looming fiscal deadlines for the debt limit to expect this latest and greatest rendition of the do nothing

congress to get around any of that stuff any time soon since the hundred thirteenth congress took over capitol hill in january lawmakers have only managed to pass fifteen bills that were signed into law by president obama to put that number in perspective it's eight fewer bills than the first six months of the one hundred twelfth congress and the. lobbying one thousand fewer bills than in the first six months of the one hundred eleventh congress and of those fifteen bills that were passed and signed into law very few contained legislation addressing the genuinely serious issues affecting america today is of course unless you count specifying the saw as of the precious metal blank that will be used to the branch of the national baseball hall of fame commemorative coins. as an issue of urgent national importance yes they did pass them so how did we get to the point in washington d.c. where congress can't manage to pass urgent or important legislation but instead

passes bills addressing quine age like that. is stunning in action and backlog of the hundred thirteenth congress can be traced back to one point in time january twentieth two thousand and nine inauguration night on the night when most of us were celebrating the beginning of the obama presidency some of us like myself were attending balls and galas a group of republican lawmakers instead were plotting the end of the obama presidency before it had really even begun on that night at the caucus room restaurant here in washington d.c. republican leaders on capitol hill plotted to intentionally sabotage and undermine the obama presidency at every chance possible as robert draper notes in his book do not ask what good we do inside the u.s. house of representatives the list of attendees at the caucus room dinner was a virtual who's who of republican power players in washington are on the guest list

for the for the four hour invitation only me republican congressman eric cantor paul ryan kevin mccarthy pete sessions jeb hensarling pete hoekstra and dan longer republican senators jim de mint and jon kyl tom coburn john ensign and bob corker are also in attendance the whole thing was orchestrated by republican propaganda mastermind frank luntz and newt gingrich was also in attendance and on my radio show a few months back he flat out admitted that the purpose of this dinner meeting was to come up with a plan to sabotage the obama presidency. you were quoted in the book as soon. after this dinner you'll remember this is the do. the seeds of two thousand and twelve were sown is that all accurate well empire so were you guys insurgents against the obama presidency well the fact is not the opposition party ought to sit down and try to figure out how to get back in power that's why they're the

opposition party they're not going to back in power they might as well switch parties and join the incumbent party during that dinner the republican lawmakers apparently vowed to bring congress to an absolute standstill regardless of how badly congressional inaction would hurt the already badly hurting american economy and people by pledging to obstruct filibuster and block any legislation that president obama approved remember we were losing seven hundred thousand jobs a month when this happened and while the meeting at the caucus room was top secret republican attendees at that meeting were very frank just a few months later about what had transpired for example congressman pete sessions told the national journal in march of two thousand and nine at the republican sabotage plan was all about following the tactics of the taliban sessions said the taliban insurgency we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the taliban insurgency is the way they went about

systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes and these taliban that's an example of how you go about to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their front line message and we need to understand that insurgency may be required when dealing with the other side texas congressman went on to say if the democrats not give us those options or opportunities then we will become insurgency i think insurgency is a mindset and an attitude that we're going to have to search for and find ways to get our message out and to be prepared to see things for what they are rather than trying to do something about them. kevin mccarthy similarly said we're going to oppose everything and this taliban like insurgency is working every one of the lawmakers who attended the caucus room dinner has since threatened a government shutdown during the two thousand and eleven debt ceiling negotiations

caucus room attendees congressman eric cantor and senator jon kyl walked out of the negotiations and refused to restart the discussions with their democratic counterparts as a result of this intentional negotiation collapse america's credit rating was lowered since that january two thousand and nine dinner senators jim de mint jon kyl tom coburn john ensign and bob corker de mint course now running the heritage foundation have helped to filibuster more bills and during any other congress in history and all other congresses in history combined and the group of senators has voted no to widely bipartisan legislation including things like senator al franken anti-rape amendment the lilly ledbetter fair pay act and even an anti outsourcing bill in two thousand and ten that would have protected millions of american jobs republicans are so intent on sabotaging the obama presidency that they're unwilling to say no to rape unfortunately despite this appalling behavior by republican

lawmakers in congress our corporate media has completely failed to tell americans about that republican plan that was at the caucus room in january of two thousand and nine the media has failed to report on the real reason why the hundred thirteenth congress is probably going to go down in history as as the world's worst or at least the nation's worst. and it's time for that to change it's time for everyone to wake up and realize that the republicans are intentionally trying to destroy this country in order to sabotage the obama presidency and they're doing it with absolutely no regard for any damage done to the american people or the american economy in the process every time the media reports on republican obstruction structuralism they should also point out that this has been a very methodical well planned and so far very effective conspiracy to destroy the obama presidency nothing more nothing less and nothing could be more

anti-american than what these republicans are doing. and that's the way it is tonight monday july eighth two thousand and thirteen. for more information check out our website so tom harkin dot com please beast dot org or two dot com and who are consolation the big picture and don't forget democracy begins with you today.

yes i was a new alert animation scripts scare me a little but. there is breaking news tonight and we are continuing to follow the breaking news in the. alexander family cry tears of joy at great things other than their path together render it a quart of water around online is a story made sort of movies playing out in real life. i would rather as questions for people in positions of power instead of speak on

their behalf and that's why you can find my show larry king now right here on r.t. question more.

larry king now donald rumsfeld the outspoken former secretary of defense why can't leaders say we goofed or you do we have to be willing to say we made a mistake taking on benghazi you don't put people in a place if you're not going to protect them and the i.r.s. scandal the american people do not want their government turned against them and advice for the president and rules he wants you to live by people lose trust in the white house and that what's being said. it makes it very difficult to lead all next on larry king now. welcome to larry king now on a great pleasure to welcome donald rumsfeld to our program twice served the secretary.