intense campaigning. the vote could see 12 years of government. see more on our website aal jazeer jazeera.com jazeera.com running on that issue gain traction in the polls. also - sexting between two minors - should it be legal. and my final thought about how the most hated professor in america actually has a valid point when it comes to big media i'm adam may, welcome to "third rail". businessman donald trump recently touched a "third rail" of american politics. >> when they call, i give.

you know what, when i need something from them two years later, three years later i call them, they are there for me so is congress bought and sold? it's an issue where the left and the right are starting to agree. >> billionaires are literally able to by elections and candidates, let's not kid now. >> the problem that underlies all of this is the cronyism and corruption of washington. there's a lot of talk, former presidential candidate lawrence lese joins me, great to have you with us. first of all, what happened. you dropped out of the race in the last week. frankly, not a lot of people knew you were running. >> right. we started about 12 weeks ago a campaign literally at zero, with not a lot of prospects. i'm a harvard law professor with

funny glasses and my first mime is leicester. we raised a lot of money and registered in the poll, the democratics party said if you get three polls in 1% within six weeks of the debate i would be in the debates. we did that, at the last minute they changed the rules and kept me out of the debates. >> do you believe there was a calculated effort by the d.n.c. to keep you out of race? >> the rule was designed to make it so i wouldn't get in. some one called it larry-mandering they gave it a therm. -- term. what is the fear. >> if i was the democratic party, i would be worried that someone would come in from the outside and begin to attack a fundamental problem, which in my view is a crippled and corrupt institution of congress, which is corrupted because of way we fund campaigns, that's the issue i would want to put to the

table. i would not be surprised. we don't want that out there i want to dig deeper into your issue, but first, you say congress is corrupt. democracy. >> we don't have a represented democracy, it's corrupted because of way we make money and the way they jerry manneder the districts. all produces a system where we don't have fair representation, but extraordinarily representation of the most powerful, and that is not a representative democracy didn't we always have money in politics, isn't this the course of history. did we truly have a representative democracy. >> this corruption today is worse than it's been in 100 years, it's a different corruption.

100 years ago it was old-fashioned, bribery. this is in plain site. i don't believe the guys are criminals, but that they allowed a system to evolve, where they are forced to bend over bcked. so we have not seen this level of perversion in 100 years. and it's certainly the case and unless we find a way to address it, you may not have a government capable of doing it. >> if it's so corrupt, why were citizens united upheld. >> they were two issues in citizens united they were compelled to interpret in a strict way. here, it is changing the way elections are funding. giving candidates the options to fund campaigns, without depending on the billionaires, millionaires or the wealthy to give

them the money needed. >> it makes me think of the presidential race, president obama and mitt romney both raised about a billion apiece. did it influence the race. do you think that people, donors are calling the white house saying to the president that i gave you this money and expect a favour in return. >> a problem we have is focussing too much on the presidency and don't realise there's another brans, and that is congress. i don't believe the presidents are engaged in quid pro coe. some think they are. i don't think that's the problem, the problem is the institution of congress is dysfunctional. it is a failed institution. they are thinking can we take this position. given the way the funders will respond. are we allowed to bring the issue up, given if we do, we lose funding from the industry. this is deeply endemic to the

way the institution does not function. we have to find a way to talk about the failed institution. >> polls show that people are concerned about money in politics, and it's the reason you felt you had to run. you felt you had the support of the people, in the end you barely register in the polls, are people more concerned about the bread and butter issues, the issues of the economy. wedge issues and other single issues, and maybe people are concerned but don't understand the gravity of the situation. >> i think it's not true. it was the case before. people would give lip service to the issue, but not vote on the basis of it. this is central in this election cycle. that's part of a reason why donald trump triggered so much excitement and forced people like ted cruz to talk about the issue, and senator, because it's salient on the right in left.

you did a poll of vote erls, asking if the next president could do one thing, what should it be. the most significant answer, the number one answer was to fix the corrupted way that cam mains were funded. in my campaign, you can look at this in two ways. i think we rally support behind the campaign, in polls that had me, where people knew me and him. then? >> if i'm not in a debate, being an outsider non-billionaire, there was no chance to bring the democratic party around to this. we knew from the beginning the only way the campaign made sense was to get in the debates, that's what we focused on, and moved. >> you ran as a democrat, are democrats and republicans equally corrupt or one more than the other. >> democrats and republicans are

deeply dependent on the money raised. i don't think there's a difference in the economy of influence. republicans are slower to propose practical changes. democrats and marylands opposed an aggressive way change... >> he's in one of the safest districts, i know that. >> exactly. the one thing to say if there are more like john in the democratic than the republican party. you have a group called take back the republic, a group started by the guy who helped david bratt beat eric cantor in the upset in the last primary season, and that group is focused on recruiting republicans to the cause of changing the way elections are funded. in the end republicans and democrats - if the base hate the system that we have.

>> it's an issue that you see a consensus on between the two parties. i wonder who you will support for president. who is talking about this issue, and laying out a plan to address some of the problems. >> on the democratic side, every one of the three candidates checked the right boxes, they center not addressed how to solve the problem they have identified. they've not made it clear to the american people that we have to address this issue first. you are talking about taking on wall street or raising the minimum raise or raising taxes to support social security. you cannot begin to address those issues until you address the corruption first. what i'm looking for as i watch the debates unfold is someone to acknowledge that we need to rally america to this reform, if we have a chance to do what they are talking about. >> couldn't donald trump, who is self-funding his own campaign, be a catalyst for the campaign,

if he's not dependent. >> if he is a nominee, i'm not excited to imagine, he'll be challenging democrats to show why the candidate is less dependent on money than he is. i think the only way the democrats respond is to make this a promise, that they will, if they do anything, they'll make this change happen first. the you gough -- u-gov poll, they want it fixed. if they promise the moon, it means nothing if the rocket can't get off the ground. that's the reality of the government. it does not and will not work until we get a democracy back. >> thank you for you time. "third rail" is coming up next. . >> there's a bullying technique on the left. >> i'm having trouble with the exxonmobile. >> i fear climate change is a religion of progressive.

this is a madderb day wich hunt. >> are you saying climate change is not real? >> we're here to fully get into the nuances of everything that's going on, not just in this country, but around the world. >> what, as if there were no cameras here, would be the best solution? >> this goes to the heart of the argument. >> to tell you the stories that others won't cover. how big do you see this getting? getting the news from the people who are affected. >> people need to demand reform... >> we're here to provide the analysis... the context... and the reporting that allows you to make sense of your world. >> ali velshi on target.

welcome back to third rail,

we are going to shift the conversation to climate change are, and some new questions about whether an oil giant is the deliberately trying to mislead the public. >> the new york attorney-general is investigating whether exxonmobile deliberately misled the republic. >> we are interested to what they were using internally, and world. >> we endeavoured to understand the science of this discovery. how do you draw a line between exxon doing research and advocating for policies that they think will be better for the bottom line. >> lots to talk about. let's bring in the panel. a former congressman. now principal of a law firm. an executive director from the independent women's forum, and mr dickie, editor of "daily beas, dollauthor of a new book.

good to have you with us. let's start with you christopher, hillary clinton calling for an investigation into exion mobile. are they made a scapegoat? >> it smells of politics. what eric, the attorney general's case is interesting. he's saying the science that exxonmobile had for a long time told us that the world is warming up, and they acted as a corporation on that new, that information. when it comes to telling the world, especially in the last 20 years, do they think since is credible on global warm, they apparently think it's not. his argument is it's one thing for the public and another for the real science in business. >> i would say some of the other conclusions where overlooked, and one is that there needs to be more evidence and discussions. more importantly, freedom of speech. this is a private corporation

using its own dollars to do research.

african national so actually they are between 105. >> and u.n. forces and molian troops both on the scene? >> yes, they are both on the scene and are operating together and they are trying to end up this effect. >> and just tell us a little bit about the hotel, how easy is it to get close to the hotel, what is the security normally like there? >>