>> welcome to al jazeera america i'm morgan radford in new york of growing backlash on spying on their alies germany will try to force the u.s. to a new set of ruse on inat the against gathering. thiinatintesintelintelligence g. though have sent people to washington regarding spying rules. >> they have afreed to pay freddie may afreddie mac an a a.

>> now beginnings demolition crews have gone tearing down sandy hook hig elementary schoon newtown connecticut. the city asked contractors to get rid of every piece of the school. the new school opens on december 1*6th of those are your headlines. up next on albio a al jazeera ir this." i will see you again at 2:00 a.m. eastern.

you're trying to say that we two after -- >> not going after smuggle. just talking about undocumented presence. these people didn't -- this state has invented putting charges on people saying they are smuggle themselves across the border. i strongly disagree with that. >> we don't invent. these cases have been appealed

and it must terd th mustered the court, the famous 1070, that was uphold a couple of points and i understand some were thrown out. >> sheriff, with all due respect, a lot of these arrests since 2008 that you made in these work site enforcement raids, a lot of these are getting overturned because there's been an outcry about how these laws and charges have been trumped up. >> they haven't been overturned. >> you've spent a lot of resources and taxpayer money investing in these work site raids and hold on, let me finish. and the point is that eventually there is no result because the cases are getting dismissed. we've spent so much money going to court to argue these cases and in the end they're getting dismissed. so it's really i find to be a horrible waste of resources. >> sheriff -- >> firm, the money doesn't come out of my budget.

the legislature gives me the $2 million, it doesn't come out of my budget. number two, i took an oath of office to enforce all the laws, we have state and federal laws which i was enforcing, until they took the authority away. because i was doing too good a job. when i mentioned you should be punished, the attorney general of the united states who is investigating me used the term punished. he use the word punished, people going to jail should be punished. i'm not going to backtrack. they should be punished when they go to jail. >> his constituents certainly like what he's doing, they keep electing him over and over and over again. >> come on, they were electing me for 15 years with ten city change gangs. i've been in office 21 years so

don't think i need this to get elected. >> no, no, my point sheriff is that you have been elected over and over again, given what you -- everything that you have been doing. clearly your constituents approve, or at least the majority of your constituents doing. that's what i was saying to dan. with his constituents supporting him, the personal argument about whether in some cases he's overstepping his bounds legallily, certainly he has a lot of public sport. >> we can talk about that. i think it's tricky. certainly the sheriff's polls have, you know his popularity has dwindled. i think that originally -- one mickey mouse poll. go ahead. >> originally the sheriff was winning his elections by an overwhelming majority and just this past election cycle do you know the margin of victory for

this last election cycle? >> i won by 8%. the president won by 3% and he said that was a -- i got a double mandate. >> i would just use that to explain that i think that the -- his attempt to arrest undocumented workers, it maybe it originally pleased the voting population but i think in the end it's back fired. his numbers have dwindled. >> nothing has back fired. >> regarding the sheriff being in that position where he's the law enforcement officer and he's tasked with the need to you know enforce the laws, i kind of empathize or sympathize. i'm not a law enforcement officer, he's put in a tough spot. the laws are what they are. as we know not all laws are constitutional. not all laws are going to stay that way forever.

so what we're finding now is the sheriff is choosing to enforce the laws on the books but why are the laws on the books? >> that goes to a broughter case. >> exactly, that's why we made a film about the more complex issues and try to understand all the people involved. >> sheriff from 2004 and 2007 you and your jails were sued 2150 times. in the same time new york, houston and chicago put together were only sued 43 times. >> i'm not going to crirt size -- you're just--criticize, it is not 2100 times. let's say 2,000 times when they don't like the bologna sandwich. i'm not going to argue that. i run a greating with jail system.

>> some of the lawsuits were relatively frivolous. >> sure they were. >> he said he doesn't know if the sheriff really believes in lock of parents of a nine-year-old child. what do you say to that? >> well, you know in my 50 years of law enforcement, unfortunately most of it was federal drug enforcement. i had to lock up parents when the poor kid is in the back crying. i had 8500 people in jail, when they say i separate the families, why don't they feel sorry for all those 8,000 families that are separated, why do they complain about the immigration situation? >> because these are hardworking people who are playing a roam in our economy and they are -- role in our economy. they are helping our economy to thrive. forget the economy. these are hardworking people that i want to be a part of the economy.

i think it's a tragedy when a little girl can't be with her parents. >> sheriff i want to ask you -- >> what about everybody else in the jail? what about the other people in the jail spraited? feel -- separated? feel sorry for them too. >> i think daniel's argument is they had committed greater crimes. >> these i.d. thefts, these are felonies, serious crimes. >> two quick questions to both of you. you sheriff are the child of italian immigrants. what do you think of immigration reform nationally? >> you know i'm telling you i said it from day 1 and dan knows this. when you -- if you want to change the laws do something from the white house to the congress. do something about it. stop saying that the board before we do anything else that is a copout because i spent 25 years at the border on each side. you're never going to secure the border 100%. >> let me just say that the

biggest problem with using local law enforcement officers, to enforce federal immigration law is it breaks a trust with the community. and it's a serious problem that needs serious rethinking because it's a misguided attempt to control something that we've said is a federal law. you know you can't being here undocumented. -- be here undocumented. but when the local law enforcement is tasked with enforcingenforcing that, then tt call the local law enforcement. you lose afternoon entire community of people. because they feel the sheriff is going to ask them for their papers. >> the final word is this: where do you think we get our information from? we get it from illegal aliens. they're not afraid to come forward and report these types

of crimes. >> schaeffer joe arpio, daniel devito. i know cat katherine's parents spent some time in custody but two americans airs sunday at 9:00 on al jazeera america. >> our associat social media religion producer hermella: >> i'll tell you more, the heart of it is food. and join us,age consider this

gltion spying on . >> spying on enemies and friends, gentlemen do not read each other's mail. this week we learned that the national security agency is doing a lot more than gathering phone lists and reading e-mails. according to a document linked by edward snowden, the nsa

monitored phone calls of 35 world leaders, including angela merkel. i'm johnny damon by p.j. crowell p.j. crowley, and duncan. p.j. i want to start with you. assistant secretary of the bush administration told the new york times, and i quote, obama and his snelings service intelligence services are the targets, does he do it? thanks to edward snowden we got caught? >> well, it is awkward when it's your hand that's caught in the cookie jar. look, nations do spy on each other. we use intelligence services to understand you know the world. i mean think of it this way: in

the last 30 drais her days in wn we had this political circus over the debt, the government shutdown. and obviously if the united states driven over the so-called fiscal cliff it could have taken the global economy with it. so i strongly suspect that there were a number of intelligence services particularly in europe where leaders were asking their experts find out what the americans are going to do and it's in the country's interest to understand what will happen somewhere else that affects your interests and others. >> so nicholas, coork accordingo lemond, the french newspaper and instrument in leaking mr. snowden's information, the government gathered information on 70 million of french phone calls. the brussels summit was about this.

listen to french prl president hollande. >> when in is spying on certain level and to this extent spying that can affect all citizens including a certain number of european leaders we need to put a stop on it. >> is he focusing on the 70 million calls or his anger focused on that they were listening into his calls? >> friends were listening and reading his mail despite what secretary said. but the tone has changed since june and july because it's not about governments spying on governments but civil liberties of countries that are allies. in france and in germany, especially in germany of course, as chancellor merkel said, it's not just about her, but about all german citizens, you have a foreign power that is capable of

listening on private conversations and doing something that goes way beyond counterterrorism. >> suspect that what intelligence is supposed to do to find out what might hurt the united states? >> i think the important question here is where is the tros been lost and why has it been lost? and in this case for example, apparently susan rice told chancellor merkel that president obama was furious to learn that her phone had been tapped. if he didn't know, why didn't he know? who's in champ? who's -- charge? who's watching the watchers? >> pj, athat's what i wanted to know, she's head of -- natural security advisory to the united states. her counterpart in germany called, furious about this. she said, president obama didn't know about this. what's going on. is this an intelligence

apparatus completely out of control or people are not talking about things or is she protecting her boss? you are talking about a level. that is not something that the president is going to necessarily know. the president will give guidance to the intelligence community, i need to know about these kind of things. and -- kinds of things. then the intelligence community goes about doing what it can to learn -- >> but pj isn't knowing about the phone calls of our closest allies something that the president should know about? >> i don't think that you want to bring those kinds of issues directly to the president. i think it's useful for the president to be able to say and truthfully that look, i didn't know and i've directed my intelligence services to knock it off. that's actually how you solve these kinds of problems, when they arise. so you know the fact is i think the president's giving strategic

guidance to the intelligence community. but how they go about this on a day-to-day basis is really something done at the agency level, not at the executive level. that's the way it should be. >> chancellor merkel said, here is her quote. we need to have trust in our allies and our partners. i repeat, spying among friends is not acceptable with anyone and that goes along with france and germany, they want us to sign a code of conduct on intelligence-gathering -- >> that would mirror the five yie s compact since the second world war and they have agreed not to spy on the u.s. for france and germany to have that i think it would be a plus. >> will it? >> i think it could very well happen because of the fact of it

not happening would for example help derail other transatlantic partnership agreements. lord ismay, said the compact kept the russianed out, and the americans in, to exercise control over what the americans do. so having the americans in the u.n. security council and in nato, means that the europeans can exercise some guidance and not having the u.s. going off in its own direction without european consultation. >> pj do you think this is a serious scandal or just political posturing? >> i don't think those are mutually, there are genuine political consequences here and obviously some adjustments have already been made and will be made in terms of drawing that line.

you know what is something that everyone understands, you know works to everyone's benefit and what in the view of one country or another, goes to far. these adjustments will be made, you're already seeing the signals from various leaders that they understand this is a real issue. they need something from the united states as nicholas was just outlining and there will be some adjustments made and over time this will get resolved. it will take some time and the other dilemma we have here is obviously in the drip drip drip nature of this snowden, you know series of revelations we don't even know if we're near the end of it, still in the middle of it. this is something that politicians will have to manage for an indefinitely period of time. >> and pj what snowden has done in the end has certainly hurt his country in a number of different ways. >> sure. you can say on the one hand the fact that he has released details of the intelligence

budget, if you are interested in transparency there might be some benefit there. he has exposed some things or put at risk very important intelligence cooperation that certainly serves the interest of the united states and likewise serves the interest of our european allies and others. so i think as long as the leaders can keep this kind of fire wall and work the politics and the politics has meaning here but also make sure that the foundation of mutual support remains intact, the kind of intelligence continues that has benefited both of our regions over the past dozen of years. and you adjust where this line is between privacy and security. >> and merkel and hollande signed on, a lack of trust could prejudice the necessary cooperation in the field of intelligence gathering. that's what pj just said.

>> there are two sides to that, and pj is right in what he said, an extremely seamless intelligence gathering antiterrorism system that is in place with britain and certainly very much with france, that's one thing and the operational aspect. but the political aspect is that in the communique of the european union summit have also hit on america's sense of insecurity. it is something that will play very well in the public in the united states, that will say if you don't fix this, american administration you are going to make your country as well as our countries less secure. ever since 9/11 the one thing the americans have been worried about is their security at home. by referencing homeland security i think the european politicians have taken a very important stance to force americans to do something about this. >> but intelligence gathering,

pj, a quick question, will it damage something like the relationship with pakistan? pakistan's head of state was here this week talking to president obama and a lot of information came out about how they supposedly were sanctioning our drone activity in pakistan and that's crated a big mess in pakistan. that could hurt us there, couldn't it? >> well i mean the u.s. relationship with pakistan, is comparable to the disfavor with which americans view the congress. i'm not sure it can get much worse. actually, that could potentially turn in the other direction. obviously there's a lot of activity going on for which pakistan denies it has -- plays a role. that could actually be the case where a little more transparency will be beneficial for everyone concerned. >> pj crowley, nicholas duncan, really appreciate your insights. more information gathering at

home. , writing the a crrveghtsella train from washington to new york when he got on his phone to talk to national security reporters, tom matsy was sitting close by, liberal activity group, move on.org. he began tweeting some of hayden's comments. i'm happy to be joined by tom massey. when did you realize you were overhearing a former cia director talking to the press? >> it was quite a while before i realized. i got on the train at 3:00, didn't send the first tweet until 4:20. for the first hour i thought he was somebody else. it wasn't until i took another look back before i realized this was michael hayden, former head

of the cia, most notably under president bush during the national security controversy. >> sounds defensive, what administration was he claiming to be from and why do you think he sounded defensive? >> well you know i put that term in quotes. you know, quote, on background former sr. admin officials, he was giving instructions tot reporter how to cite him in a news story. he wasn't part of the obama administration except for part of a few days in transition. leon panetta was appointed to replace him before obama was

sworn in. confusing, was he pretending to be part of the obama administration and i don't know the context of the other conversations. >> here is another tweet about president obama's blackberry. hayden talking about a famous bla blackberry now. >> there were other comments he made that i heard that were related to things like a different, quote, authority, that the cia or nsa had which i took to mean things like authority for renditions or you know the kind of the black sites that the cia was operating, also those are terms that he explicitly used during that. and he was talking about the transition period between the bush administration and the obama administration, making comments about you know, this discussion they had about certain legal authority, and the obama people said we don't want to do that. and then he was essentially

talking about how you know that he talked them into doing it, saying you know all sorts of reasons they should be doing it implying they were naive or they -- you know just didn't understand the consequences and seriousness. >> you listen to talks about renditions and black sites, you sent this tweet too, listening to hayden give off record interviews i feel like i'm in the nsa yet i'm in public. were you surprised that somebody like him would be speaking publicly on a train about all these things? >> yeah, i mean and that is the real context here. is i was really shocked, given the nature of the conversations, that he was having it on a train, and it really kind of speaks to, i don't know, a presumption that i think a lot of members of the u.s. national security establishment have, almost about their place and privilege, that oh, how dare

anyone around me, one, understand what we're talking about or care to criticize. >> in the end they figured you were doing it, he came over and ended up taking a picture with you and gave you a short interview. but he did -- we tried to get comment from him today. he did not respond to us. but he did tell the washington post, "i didn't criticize the president, i actually said this was very difficult issues, matsy got it all wrong, he is two seats from me hearing intermittent snatches of conversation." only have about 30 seconds left. what is your reaction? >> i wouldn't agree that it's a bs story. given magnitude of the news you are reporting on this is small potatoes but i was absolutely accurate in the description of what i overherd. and i wasn't saying he was

insulting people or leaking secrets. i was clear about the suggestions that he was making. i stand by what i -- the tweets i made and the statements i made subsequently. >> all right tom thank you so much for joining us, appreciate your time. straight ahead, does former democratic governor of a western al jazeera america... >>introduces... "america tonight". >>a fresh take on the stories that connect to you. >>grounded. >>real. >>unconventional. >>an escape from the expected. >> every sunday night al jazeera america presents... gripping films from the worlds top documentary directors this sunday, a sherrif who implements the law... >> we investigated, arrested and detained 33,000 illegal aliens... >> the young girl who sufferes from it... >> i never thought this would happen to my parents...

>> one issue, different sides, yet they remain two americans. premiers this sunday, 9 eastern >> framed around a big if. will hillary clinton run or won't she? brian schweitzer may be testing the waters for a possible run against her. joining me is former montana governor brian schweitzer. how serious are you about running for president in 2016? >> oh, only you news people are talking about 2016. real people still have jobs and hillary hasn't decided what she's doing. mark o'malley, john

hickenlooper. when george mcgovern announced he was running for president less than 3% of america knew who he was yet he became the nominee. he was the long shot. in '76 when jimmy carter left georgia, they said who, what state? yet he was the nominee. deukakis, who was he? do you remember the name president dean? he was way ahead yet kerry was the nominee. by the way not too long ago 2008, hillary clinton was the runway favorite and a fellow named obama became the candidate. >> it sounds like you are not ruling it out. you considered running for the senate over the summer and you are quoted as saying, i'm not

goofy enough to be in the house and not senile enough to be in the senate. are you crazy enough to run for the white house? >> just maybe. look, it's a long slog. and unfortunately, running for presidency means a lot of fundraising. and the last campaign, both sides, the democrat and the republican both spent about $1 billion. that means that you just -- it's a marathon in raising money. >> but hillary clinton she has been raising a lot of money. >> what's interesting about -- >> go ahead. >> there's no question that some of these candidates can raise a lot of money. but we start this process not on the east and west coast. we start to avoid and then to new hampshire and then to south carolina. and these are not necessarily the places where the folks that are well-known on the east and west coast can just storm into town and say right, you're voting for me, correct?

they want to size you up. >> certainly iowa was not nice to hillary clinton last time around. would an outsider like you have a better chance because of the way the caucuses and primaries are set up? >> could be. i haven't decided to do this. let's understand this, there is a great feeling towards the clintons. i guess we've forgotten what it's like to have eight years of peace and prosperity. people would say, we actually would like to have bill clinton in the white house and there's a great love for hillary clinton, she has been a great secretary of state. there has been at least a bush or a clinton in the warehouse. we are hearing that jeb bush may run, we could have a bush and a clinton, we're not royalty. >> i meant to ask, what is it about the united states that

leads us to go from the kennedys to the clintons, to the bushes? if you look at france and england and germany, that doesn't happen. >> we directly elect our presidents. first you elect a member of parliament, they are elected a member of parliament. and then it's not called the speaker of the house, ipt it's the prime minister. there is an enormous amount of money you have to raise in order to get the name recognition. it doesn't mean that only a few families are going to be elected president. look at president obama. nobody would have expected when he graduated from high school that he would be president of the united states. we want every parent to look at

their child, and say, my daughter could be president. >> as a moderate from a western state you are definitely as i said and outsider. not part of the partisan politics that we are so frustrated with. you could help the democrats because they have become the party of urban needs that ignores the heart land. >> well, there's a lot of people are going to yammer about a lot of things. but one of the things you've got to bring is a record of achievement. here in montana we had eight consecutive years of the largest budget surpluses in history, we invested more in education and it paid off. the u.s. census found that montana increased their education, we cut energy consumption, and those are the things that they need in washington, d.c. they can't balance a checkbook

in washington, d.c, we've all seen that. they can't talk to each other. they are raising money to get reelected and reelected again. we need to change the dynamic. >> can a pro -- coal democrat raise the nomination? >> maybe, i don't know. i haven't decided to run. that's 2016. of course in montana we probably possess more guns than anybody else in the country but yet we have a violent murder rate that's lowest in the country. under my watch we markedly increased our wind energy, we built transmission lines, we have coal we have oil we have sun we have wind. unstable around the wind, we have to unlock all of our opportunities, we need it cleaner, we need it greener but we need it american.

>> have you traveled to iowa any time soon? >> i haven't bought a ticket but when the weather is nice in the summer i'll go see how tall the corn it. >> when you announce, will you announce on consider this? >> the the odds aren't great on that. >> governor keep us posted on your plans. great to have you here. it's time to check on what's trending on al jazeera website. hermella. >> antonio, there is a growing movement in native american communities, eating the same foods their ancestors ate. diets were consisting of huntings fishing and gathering and gardening. government statistics say native americans suffer disproportionate amounts of

diabetes and requesto coronary heart disease. participants can only eat foods that were in the great lakes region before 1600 and before european colonization. in doing so they studied how their ancestors lived. >> we are going ogo to the crabapple sauce and then to the venison sauce. >> further indigenous food programs, what did you think of the program? danielle said, let's get back to nature. you can read more at the website, america .al jazeera.com. >> hermella, i could use some of that buff loi lo buffalo bison

>> data dive, technology, a study out this month from a british health insurance provider found a huge number of young people have back pain. 84% of 18 to 2

-year-olds covered -year-olds suffered some type of back pain. call islouching, it is a big deal because young people are said to be spending an average of nine hours a day in front of those screens. not helping, three out of five parents say they never demolish admonish their child to sit up or stand up. texts are often gibberish and don't make sense. sleep-texting is a trending topic, a hashtag on twitter. four or five teens sleep with their cell phones on or near their beds. doctors say the interrupted sleep patterns could have serious consequence for their jobs.

14-17 year old boys send about 50 texts the day while girls the same age send twice that amount. digital devices are having serious effects on adults too. tiny iphone texting makes you lest confidence. speaking up, than those on tablets, that was on a test that measured power and confidence. also a separate british survey said that instead of hunching over to type on a tabilityd, tablet, those who are typed on a regular size keyboard. five years and 100 episodes later, modern family is still as popular than ever.

>> every morning from 6 to 10am al jazeera america brings you more us and global news than any other american news channel. find out what happened and what to expect. >> start every morning, every day, 6am to 10 eastern with al jazeera america. millions who need assistance now. we appreciate you spending time with us tonight. up next is the golden age of hollywood going golden but elsewhere. why l.a.'s mayor has declared a state of emergency for the entertainment industry there. next. on august 20th, al jazeera america int

>> television has always reflected american life but at times it has led the way to changing american society and american attitudes. as gay marriage has become more accepted, is television lagging behind? does it lead the way for change or does it merely react when change occurs? join ing me is bill wyman. good to have you back. >> good to see you. >> raising issues and relationships, that sometimes were taboo, modern family of course has been a huge hit, depicting among other things a gay couple with a child. but american families have been out pacing, those characters on that show haven't gotten married yet. >> that's such a good point. there's so many things going on in our society now. television, when you would have an interracial kiss or you would

have the mention of a homosexual relationship on some of these shows like all in the family or whatever, everyone had to watch these shows, there were only three channels. these issues were being force fed to americans. but now everyone has been vulcanized and can go to their own shows so they don't feel offended by these things. modern family whether the two guys did propose, when you had the marriage propose al it got a bit of a noise but not like ellen's coming out did. it's almost hard to see where it is. where tv is still breaking boundaries of course is in the areas of vulgarity and violence and gore and things like that. but i can't say that's social evolution. >> let's go back in history and look at tv families in the past. i love

lucy, interracial, white woman married to a cub cuban american. also bringing up pregnancy, which they actually never managed to even say the word on the air. >> that's hilarious. again, everyone -- it was all going into america's living room, literally because everyone would sit around and see these shows. and what tv did is, it broke some boundaries, you had julia with diane warwick-- >> diane carroll. >> did i say the -- it sort of spoon-fed us with these little bits. now with traffic it is a little shock, it's vulgarity, not a little blandness with a little tart. >> like all in the family also made a big difference because it brought up a series of issues

that people were thrownt talk about and certainly -- reluctant to talk about and certainly face in a massive entertainment context. >> and it was very clever. because they let archie bunker, carroll o'connor, they could work out their issues through him. now, there's no one -- he was a deeply flawed character right? but we were supposed to expect he was good-hearted inside. now litany of characters is much less, lecherous grandfathers, lecherous fathers, we have this new tv show called mom, literally all woman, you have a lecherous grandmother, a daughter who made all sorts of bad decisions and then a sex crazed daughter. it's a different thing we're seeing these days.

>> looking back at the cosby show, certainly the role of felicia rashad, a money maker and a big city attorney. these had valuable social impact. >> boy is it hard to see the social impact in shows today. on the other hand, there are things we almost forget. something like a show grey's anatomy, half of the cast is he african american. a panoply of shows, not all of them. >> let's look at the tv season, winners and losers, sit-coms, one is doing well, the other one not so well. >> and it's all relevant because broadcast television isn't doing all that well.

it was a success this year just that they didn't lose a whole lot of viewers. we have to remember that. nbc seems to be dol doing well vis-a-vis last year but it was doing well last year before its ratings went off the cliff. robin williams we blink and he's a senior citizen now himself so that's his draw there. there is another show on cbs, the millers, knot doing well. >> robin williams is still a funny guy but michael j. fox, we were rooting for him and that's not taken off. >> a little easy to say why. even though he is a very likable figure, it's a very indistinct is it sit-come.

i don't know what it's about. he's ineffectual. it isn't memorable. >> and scandal has turned into a blockbuster hit but of the new shows, a run away hit is maybe blacklist maybe sleepy hollow. >> scandal is doing great and the woman who did that, shonda rhymes, is a pro. sleepy hollow, agents of shield and, sleepy hollow is one of those classic fox shows. they know how to put an unusual show together and they did it. the other two i 30 are obviously the black list was unexpectedly a big hit. i think it' it's it's utterly preposterous, james spader has

the united states government wrapped around his finger, they both have a female lead in them, i don't think they're particularly well cast or substantive enough. on the other hand it is about viewers from 18 to 49 and they want the 20, 30 and 40-somethings to identify. black list and agents of shield, have very, very good demographic. professional people behind the cameras. >> reality tv, the voice, dancing with the stars, still among the top shows of the week. interesting season. the show may be over but the conversation continues on our website, al jazeera.com consider this. you can also go to twitter @aj

>> nno apology an no answers. >> winter is just around the corner. >> the plus problems with the shaky obamacare roll out should be fixed by the end of the month. the new contract says the healthcare.government website will be soon bug free. ♪ ha