they do say that if a mummy is destroyed that the spirit goes into the statue. that will do it for "around the world." >> we'll be back tomorrow at noon. cnn news room starts now. the united states supreme court strikes down a ke provision in the landmark voting acts of 1965. we'll look at what this means for those states and those who say there's still discrimination at the polls. russia's president says he knows where the fugitive edward snowden is and he doesn't want him there. you'll hear why paula deen's sons say the lawsuit is a case of extortion. this is cnn news room.

the russian president says nsa leaker edward snowden is in the moscow airport. putin says he's a free man and the sooner he figures out where he's going and goes there is better. if he's in the transit air he's in a no man's land. he's not technically in russia as long as he stays there. he talked about that. listen to this. >> translator: snowden is still in transit area as a transit passenger. hour special services never worked with him and are not working with him today. >> you heard president putin saying russia special services are not working with snowden. is he trying to smooth things over with the u.s.? what's your assessment? >> various officials have said this will damage relations between the u.s. and russia.

a former congresswoman has said that the u.s. perhaps has not as much leverage as it might like with russia or china as well because they need things on bigger issues than this. president putin did speak for the first time today. he said he's in the airport. he says he wishes snowden would get on with it and leave. he also said in that same conference in which he was speaking that since snowden has not committed any crimes on russian soil and maybe he's not on russian soil you can see how they are passing that there in moscow. he has no reason to arrest him. he did also say he hopes this does not damage the business-like relations between russia and the united states and that he referred to the fbi director and their deal with it. maybe there's some room for a cord between russia, russian security services and their

version of the fbi and the u.s. this is a political situation between russia and the united states. >> there is no formal extradition treaty between the u.s. and russia that would require russia, for example to send him back to the united states. i assume that russian intelligence services would love to get their hands on the laptops, whatever information that snowden has so they can go through them. i just assume this would be a high priority for the russians. >> i think that's the nightmare scenario for american government officials, for security officials. they don't want any of that being told to or shown to either russians or chinese. snowden in his previous public statements have said he's not talking to any government officials but there raises the question as to whether countries such as russia can by electronic means gets their and ong the information. we don't know where these

computers are. is he carrying it with them. we don't know so much about what's going on. >> he says he does plan on revealing more secrets. he says he has thousands of additional documents. this is the nightmare scenario for the u.s. that they say he could cause a lot of damage. you heard john kerry tell cnn that american lives are in danger right now. >> question. we've heard a lot of debate over that he. that's the u.s. government party line that not just their secrets are out there, not just their methods of electronic surveillance are out there, not just perhaps tip offs to adversaries to terrorists but also american lives, they're referring to agents and other such things could be in jeopardy. others are saying sometimes that tends to be an exaggeration. other officials are saying that but this is all at play for the

u.s. all this info has been taken by his own admission and who knows where it's going to end up. we don't know what he is that information. how critical is it? how bad is it? a lot of it is about how the u.s. conducts its electronic surveillance and how it does its spy. if that gets out then the u.s. will have to figure out ways to change what it's doing and doing different ways. there's a lot out there. a lot at stake. >> we'll have more on this story later this hour. thanks very much for joining us. just programming note. we'll devote the entire 6:00 p.m. entire in the situation room to this nsa surveillance case and what's going on right now as far as edward snowden is concerned.

6:00 p.m. later today. other important news, the u.s. supreme court struck down a key part of the voting rights act of 1965. the part that determines which states must get federal permission before changing any voting laws. for almost 50 years it's been mostly southern states subject to that special scrutiny. the supreme court has left it up to congress. civil rights groups are expressing outrage. >> this is a criminal isstical democra democracy. this decision is a game changer and leaves unpreked minority voters in communities all over this country. >> let's bring in george washington university law professor jonathan turley. you heard the naacp, the white house, the justice department are all decrying the ruling. the president calling it a

setback. what's your analysis. >> i can understand why they were disappointed. it's amajor loss for the administration. we also need to keep it in perspective. it's still unlawful to engage in practices to reduce the voting of minority groups. the act itself is not struck down. we're only talking about the preclearance portion that affects the 16 states. it remains law in effect. the prohibitions remain in effect. the court said it didn't like section 4 which isolated these states because it said you're relying on statistics from 1965 but court said when we looked at statistics that congress looked at you see substantial improvement. during oral argument chief justice roberts created something of a controversy when he said when i look at these statistics it looks like massachusetts today has a worse voting record than mississippi.

that produced quite a controversy. that captures what's going to happen now. as it goes back to congress it's not going to be a simple revote of the voting rights act. congress is going to have to isolate particular states. these comparisons like between massachusetts and mississippi. those are going to occur and it's going to be very controversial. >> as far as i can see in terms of the current republican majority in the house of representatives, for them to reenact, if you will, to go ahead and revive some of those provisions singling out the southern states, political speaking that's unlikely to happen. >> yeah. it's a vastly different proposition to voting for the voting rights act as to now sitting there and saying all right. we think mississippi is a suspect state, massachusetts is not. that's going to raise a lot of problems. what's interesting wolf is in

the oral argument chief justice robert almost mocked the congress and said that members don't have the courage to vote against these bills with these hit it wills. they will have to now if they're going to bring any of this back. >> jonathan turley thanks for joining us. state leaders in alabama argue that cutting out the federal government was about getting rid of red tape. the main defendant is joining us. the reverend albert jones. he remembers the days when crosses were burned in his yard to intimidate blacks not to vote. thanks very much for joining us. i know you must be pretty angry, upset about the supreme court decision today. what's your reaction? >> we are disappointed. more disappointed than anything else. we were praying they would do

the right thing. we know that they made that decision, called it how they see it but we were hoping they did the right thing. over these past 50 years when the voting rights act went into affect do you agree there's been improvement in your state as far as limiting the discrimination that was imposed earlier against blacks? >> we have come a long way. we're not there yet. we're not there where we need to be yet. when congress passed the 2006, extended 25 more years i thought that was a good gesture because we're not where we need to be yet. >> when justice roberts says maybe there's even worse discrimination as far as voting rights are concerned in massachusetts as opposed to alabama or arkansas or some of these southern states. what do you say? i never been to massachusetts.

i don't know how that affects them that much but i lived in alabama. i know about us. >> you say there's still significant discrimination that would undermine the ability for african-americans to go out there and vote in robust numbers? is that what your fear is? >> yes. we think we need to give it some more time before we change that and strike that down. we're making significant gains but we're still not where we need to be. >> do you have any hope that congress will reinstate the provisions or you take a look at the politics of washington now and say it's not going to happen in. >> well, all things work together for the good of those that love the lord. we love the lord so anything is possible. we just keep on believing. >> pastor albert jones. thanks for joining us. >> god bless you. >> thank you. here is what we're working

on on this day in this hour. day one began with four letter words and a knock knock joke. what will day two of the george zimmerman trial bring? we'll go there live for an update. texas electtures are trying to ban abortions after 20 weeks. they are trying to shut down every abortion clinic in the state. [ female announcer ] are you sensitive to dairy? then you'll love lactose-free lactaid® it's 100% real milk that's easy to digest so you can fully enjoy the dairy you love.

lactaid®. for 25 years, easy to digest. easy to love. for 25 years, new beneful medley's... ...in tuscan, romana, and mediterranean style varieties. just mix it in... ...and take play to new places. three cans in every pack. new beneful medley's. it's been that way since the day you met. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow.

cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. ...and we inspected his brakes for free.

-free is good. -free is very good. [ male announcer ] now get 50% off brake pads and shoes at meineke. texas is considering abortion legislation that would be the most restrictive in the nation. the session ends at midnight tonight and democrats plan to spend the entire day talking in an old fashion filibuster to keep the vote from happening. the legislation would ban most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and impose stricter standards on abortion clinics and the doctors who work at them. it's already passed the state house. the senate in washington has taken a major step toward comprehensive immigration reform passing an amendment tougher on border security. it would require 20,000 more border agents and it calls for 700 more miles of fencing along

the u.s. border with mexico. if the bill passes it would clear the path to citizenship for about 11 million undocumented immigrants. the amendment won broad bipartisan support for senators. the senators on track to pass the reform bill by the end of this week face a much, much tougher time in the republican controlled house. it's by no means a done deal. george zimmerman murder trial started with a battle over 911 calls. at issue were calls zimmerman before he shot and killed the unarmed teenager trayvon martin admissible during the court trial. george howell is outside the courthouse in sanford, florida. prosecutors want the tapes played. the defense says no. what's the argument here? >> reporter: defense attorneys don't want those tapes to be admitted into this case. here is why.

they believe if tprosecutors ge the tapes in front of jurors they will show there's a pattern and suggest there's a growing frustration within george zimmerman and when he met trayvon martin that's the person that wouldn't get away. they are worried if they admit these other calls it would confuse the jury in this case. i want you to listen to one of these audio tapes. >> i was just calling because we've had a lot of break ins and i'm on the neighborhood watch. there's two suspicious characters at the gate of my neighborhood. i've never seen them before. i have no idea what they are doing. they are just hanging out, loitering. >> could you describe the two individuals? >> two african-american males. >> when you listen to all of these 911 calls, zimmerman's

tone is always professional. he always describes the people as african-american or black. when you hear what the defense attorneys have to say they say that you're listening to a good samaritan doing what a person would do in neighborhood when they find someone who they believe is suspicious. again, they don't want those tapes to be admitted. >> what's it been like in the courtroom today. let's dip into video. >> reporter: you see the sergeant in the court now. we heard earlier from wendy dorval. she's a volunteer with the sanford police department with their neighborhood watch program. she teaches people about the neighborhood watch programs. she held the presentation in zimmerman's neighborhood. she said zimmerman sent an e-mail to her boss complimenting her professionalism. you get the feeling she likes him. also heard from donald o bryan who is the president of the

homeowners association. he said zimmerman is the person who set up the neighborhood watch program for that particular neighborhood. he also indicated he didn't think that neighborhood needed one. we're hearing from witnesses right now on the third witness and more to come throughout the day. >> you told us yesterday the estimate is this trial could go two to three weeks. is that what you're hearing? >> reporter: that's the case. what you find is you have these side bar hearings. you have all these stops during the day. let's listen in right now. >> stopped right where the laser pointer is and i angled my car up on the grass. >> what was the purpose of angling your car on the grass? >> as i rounded that first turn i saw officer tim smith and someone else standing between the building. >> what was the lighting like in that area? >> very poor. >> did you do anything with your car to aid in the lighting? >> i pulled my car in.

>> did your highlights then illuminate officer smith and the subject he was with? >> it was better but lighting was still poor. >> all right. when you got out of your car did you go over to the area where officer smith was? >> yes, sir, i did. >> were there any street lights or poles in that area or pole lights in that area? >> i don't remember seeing any. >> can you show the members of jury where approximately officer smith was. >> my car would have been here. officer smith and the male would have been standing somewhere near this t intersection right where the pointer is now. >> what was the weather like that evening? >> it was drizzling. >> had it been raining off and on prior to your dispatch in. >> yes, sir. >> the person that was with officer smith did you get an opportunity -- let me ask you

this. did you know the person? >> no, sir. >> did you learn his name to be george zimmerman? >> yes, sir. >> do you see that person? >> yes, sir. >> can you identify where he is sitting and wearing? >> he's wearing a light or gray coat. >> is he standing? >> yes, sir. >> i ask the record to reflect he's identified the defendant? >> the record reflects. >> was he handcuffed whep you approach approached them? >> yes, sir. >> i directed officer smith to place him in the patrol car. >> did you have any sbrer action with the defendant at that time? >> no, sir. >> why not? >> i had other things going on. >> what else did you do in. >> i looked to the south and i saw another officer standing over a body in the grass. >> did you go over to them? >> yes, sir, i did. >> all right. the person who was in the grass did you later learn that person's name to be trayvon martin?

>> yes, sir, i did. >> can you show the members of the jury where approximately trayvon martin and the officer w were located? >> somewhere right in this area, sir. >> that would be south of the t area? >> yes, sir. >> how was trayvon martin's body positioned when you arrived? >> he was lying face down with his head oriented toward the north and his hands underneath his body. >> as we look at state's exhibit 1 is it correct as far as north and south, would north be to the top and east to the right, et cetera? >> yes, sir. >> state's exhibit 5, does that give a general idea of the lighting conditions out there when you arrived?

>> yes, sir. >> state's exhibit 77, do you recognize that? >> yes, sir, i do. >> is that a fair and accurate depiction of the way trayvon martin's body was when you approached it? >> yes, it is. >> did you see any movement from trayvon martin's body as you approached him? >> i did not. >> did you hear any sounds coming from trayvon martin? >> no, sir, i did not. >> did you attempt to see if trayvon martin was alive? >> yes, sir. >> how did you do that? >> i attempted to get his pulse. >> where did you attempt to take his pulse? sgln on his neck. >> have you had training in that? >> yes. >> did you detect a pulse? >> no, sir, i did not. >> did you or the officer mover trayvon martin's body after you failed to get a pulse in. >> yes, sir. >> how did you do that? >> with the assistance of the officer i rolled mr. martin's

body over on his back. i would describe it as west to east or maybe easier to say that i rolled him onto his left shoulder and onto his back. >> as we're looking at state 77, you have rolled him from left to right? >> yes, sir. from the left side of the screen toward the right side. >> yes, sir. >> after you rolled his body over did you try to get a pulse? >> yes. >> were you able to? >> no. >> what did can you do next? >> i breathed for many martin. >> in a cpr technique? >> yes, sir. >> do you have training? >> yes, sir. >> what was your role in that cpr attempts on trayvon martin? >> i was doing breaths, sir. >> did you use any type of mask when you first started cpr with trayvon martin? >> no, sir, i did not.

>> why not? >> i did not have it available, sir. >> do your standard operating procedures address whether you should use a mask when performing something like cpr on a victim? >> yes, sir. >> what are the procedures hold? >> our sop requires that i use universal precautions which in this case is the mask you're talking about, sir, unless the situations or i personally decline to do so because the situations are rare and extraordinary. >> did you consider this to be an extraordinary circumstance? >> yes, sir. >> is that why you put your mouth on trayvon martin's mouth to try to breathe for him? >> yes, sir. >> did you later ask for and receive a breathing mask? >> yes, sir, i did. >> did the officer assist you in performing cpr on trayvon martin? >> yes, sir.

>> what was his role? >> initially he was doing compressions, sir. >> did you hear anything when you were performing cpr on trayvon martin? >> yes, sir. >> what was that? >> bubbling sounds. >> what did they indicate to you? >> it meant that either air was getting into or escaping from the chest in manner that it was not supposed to. >> what did you do upon hearing those bubbling sounds from trayvon martin's chest? >> i called out to the crowd that was gatting nearby and i asked for saran wrap and va vaseline. >> what was the purpose? >> i was going to try to seal the chest wound bp. >> did anybody respond to your request? >> yes, sir. >> was that a civilian? >> yes. >> can you describe that person? >> yes. >> what is that? >> i would describe him as an asian male. >> did you get his name?

>> no, sir. >> what did he give to you to assist? >> a plastic grocery bag. >> do you recall what color it was? >> i don't. >> what did you do after that in. >> i made the decision to try to seal the exit wound first, sir. >> what steps did you take in that regard snr? >> i lifted mr. martin into a seated position and my left hand in his midsection and with the assistance of the officer i raised him to a seated position. >> why were you looking for an exit wound? >> it wouldn't have done any good to seal the chest wound if i didn't seal the exit wound. i decided to start there. >> when you and the officer sat trayvon martin up, did you feel anything in trayvon martin's clothing? >> yes, sir. >> what was that? >> i felt a cold can, sir. >> where did you feel the cold can? >> in his jersey pocket, sir.

>> did the can feel empty or full? >> full, sir. >> when you say jersey pocket. describe that. >> like a sweatshirt where you would put your hands into a pocket in the front, sir. >> in center? >> yes, sir. >> do you know whether or not the can that you felt, do you know if it was in a bag? >> i do not. >> did you examine the can or remover it from his sweatshirt? >> no, sir. >> why not? >> wasn't on my list of priorities. >> did you find an exit wound when you sat himt up and zernled for one? >> no, sir. >> what did you do next? >> i laid him back down. >> did you continue cpr after you laid him down? >> we -- yes, sir, i did. >> was rescue called to that scene? >> yes, sir. >> did they respond?

>> yes, sir. >> did rescue take over the cpr efforts after they arrived? >> yes, sir. >> what did you see the rescue personnel do to treat or assess trayvon martin? >> i watched them hook up the ekg machine. >> was he pronounced dead by rescue at the scene? >> yes, sir. >> were you present for that? >> yes, sir. >> after trayvon martin was pronounced dead did you or anyone else put anything over his body? >> yes, sir. >> what was that? >> an emergency blanket. >> what was the purpose of that? >> well, one was respect for the deceased. two is to mitigate trauma that witnesses or family members may be exposed if they arrive on scene and three was to preserve any physical evidence on the body, sir. >> when you say to preserve any physical evidence, do you mean in part because of the weather conditions? >> yes, sir. >> it was still raining at the ti

time? >> yes, sir. >> when you placed the blanket over trayvon martin's body, did you move any evidence, to your knowledge, sur rouning his body? >> not that i know. >> did you collect or mover any evidence yourself? >> no, sir. >> why not? >> wasn't my job, sir. >> all right. >> your honor if i could ask the lights be dimmed one more time. i have a couple more additional paragraphs. state's exhibit 20. do you recognize that? >> yes, sir. >> what is that? >> mr. martin's body. >> is that in the way it appeared after he was pronounced dead in your efforts and officer effort at cpr? >> yes, sir. >> sergeant, i'm going to circle an object up here on the left hand. do you recognize that? >> yes, sir.

>> what is that? >> cpr mask. >> is that the mask you referred to? >> yes, sir. >> do you recognize state's 21? >> yes, sir. >> is that a close upshot of trayvon martin? >> yes, sir. >> particularly his face? >> yes, sir. >> again the top left hand corner is that the breathing mask that you referred to earlier? >> yes, sir. >> state's 28, do you recognize that? >> yes, sir. >> what is that? >> it's gunshot wound, sir. >> and state's 6, do you recognize that? >> it's definitely a picture of the retreat. it looks like the orientation is toward the south, sir. >> can you see, despite the rain, can you see the blanket that was covering trayvon martin's body in that photograph? >> yes, sir. >> would you circle it with your laser pointer.

>> you're circling an area behind a rain drop? >> yes, sir. >> state's 7, do you recognize that? >> yes, sir. >> in that photograph does the blanket and trayvon martin's body appear? >> yes, sir. >> again, would you circle that for the members of the jury. >> state's number 17. do you recognize that? >> yes, sir. >> is that how trayvon martin's body appeared after you placed the medical blanket on top of it? >> yes, sir. >> state's 3. excuse me, state's 13. there's an evidence marker 3, does that appear to be like the ta type of grocery back or the grocery bag to seal the wound? >> yes, sir. >> your honor, you may raise the

lights. thank you. >> we're going to continue to monitor this trial down in sanford, florida. i want to bring back george howell also our cnn legal analyst. sonny hostin out there outside the courthouse. what's the prosecution trying to do here with this police officer, this eyewitness to what happened after. there's no dispute that george zimmerman shot and killed trayvon martin, so what's the point of going through all the activity that occurred after he was shot? >> reporte >> you have to e show chain of custody. that's part of the story. you can see this has to be very difficult for trayvon martin's family but it's something that must be done. it's an important piece of evidence. i've got to tell you you can't see it and we didn't show it on air but the jury just saw a picture of trayvon martin just

splayed out. he's dead. hiss ey his eyes are open. this is a difficult day for the jury. when the prosecution does something like this they have to show the jury what really happened. this is what happened. trayvon martin was shot. he was lying on the ground in this way. this officer tried to do everything he could do to save him. i think what's also very important is they are talking a bit about evidence. we know forensic evidence will be very important because in opening statements what the prosecution argued was there was no blood on trayvon martin's hands of george zimmerman. none of george zimmerman's dna. you have to show this officer tried to do what he could to preserve the scene and the evidence by covering the body from the elements. it was raining that evening and that will be crucial for the prosecution. why didn't trayvon martin have george zimmerman's dna on his

hand if they were going through the struggle and punching him as the defense suggests. >> that adds to what the prosecutors are tried to do here. it really is a matter of having this officer explain exactly what he saw. exactly what he did. what was george zimmerman's reaction? when you take those elements you're comparing it to george zimmerman's account of what he says happened that night. it's very important to hear from this officer and hear what he saw, what he did, what he said because all of this through this trial will be compared to zimmerman's statements. >> zimmerman makes the point he was acting in self-defense. you make another good point that the parents of trayvon martin are watching and distraught by what they just saw including some of those pictures we didn't show our audience.

the parents of george zimmerman are not in the courtroom because they are expected to be witness witnesses. >> that's the thing. any on the witness list that been asked to leave the courtroom so they can't hear or see what's happening in this courtroom right now. they want them to be fresh when they take the stand and they are questioned by the defense and prosecution we know that zimmerman's parents are out. we know that benjamin crump who represents the martin family is not in the courtroom as well. >> that's pretty common. it's called the rule on witnesses. you really don't want witnesses in a trial listening to the testimony that comes this because you don't want them to conform their testimony in any way in terms of what they've heard. this is not something that is specific to george zimmerman's family. many people have felt uncomfortable that george zimmerman's is not allowed. in florida as in other states the victim's family even if they are witnesses are allowed in.

we did see that in the casey anthony case. her parents would be testifying and they were also in the courtroom. >> there was debate yesterday about asking the family to leave. they're staying in the courtroom. >> defense attorneys are concerned that the six women who are members of the jury could be influenced when they see the parents of trayvon martin distraught, upset, crying as a result of this. that's a source of concern to the defense attorneys those representing george zimmerman. we'll get back to you. stand by. we'll have continuing coverage of this trial. a very important trial happening in florida. other news we're following including a united states congressman who says the irs targeted liberal groups. you'll hear the evidence. that's next. hey linda!

what are you guys doing? having some fiber! with new phillips' fiber good gummies. they're fruity delicious! just two gummies have 4 grams of fiber! to help support regularity! i want some... [ woman ] hop on over! [ marge ] fiber the fun way, from phillips'.

the irs changed its ways after news broke that it taeted tea party groups that applied for tax exempt status. now we're finding out that the irs targeted some progressive or liberal groups. let's go to dana bash.

this is rocking capitol hill right now. you just spoke with one of the top democrats on the hill. what did he say? >> reporter: he's the reason we are seeing these documents. what they do show pretty clearly in black and white is that the terms progressive, medical marijuana, other group terms that are used by liberal groups were in these internal documents. this is a screening document for those at the irs who were trying to figure out if applications were tax exempt status should or should not go through. we only heard so far, at least seen so far conservative groups, specifically tea party groups. he was very critical of the

inspector general talking about reports. it didn't specify that he also knew progressives were targeted. listen to what he said. >> it was a serious mistake. i think the republicans took advantage of that by claiming that there was some kind of an enemy's list of the white house or there's some other activity by the white house that directed all this. if he had come forth and made clear that progressives, liberal organizations were among the 298, i don't think the republicans or anybody could have misstated what was the fact. >> i take it the republicans don't feel the same way about this. >> reporter: you would be right. republicans are saying that they see now that the terms were used to screen political groups but not used to actually target them. i spoke with darrell issa who was been one of those republicans leading the charge

on this investigation saying they still believe that republican groups, were put in a separate category an scrutinized in an inappropriate way and asked questions that dragged things out and despite the fact that progressives were on a list and term was there they were still put in a pile an sent forward. listen to what darrell issa told me about that. >> liberal groups were screened like tea party groups were. what do you say to that? >> you can do a google search on a lot of words. it's what you do after you get there. they keyword search but there was no special identification and scrutiny to progressives. they continued as usual through the process while conservative groups were stopped in their tracks. >> reporter: you might ask what the overall message is and lesson is from what we have learned. democrats say that they believe the case is closed on the idea that this was all done for

political purposes maybe even done inside the obama campaign or white house. this was clearly something done in a bureaucratic way. he said you cannot conclude that yet and this investigation has a long way to go to find out what the reasoning was behind these specific irs employees and why they made these lists. >> some significant unanswered questions. thanks very much. the president of the united states is speaking at georgetown university here at washington, d.c. on climate change. let's listen in a little. >> it's not that sexy. it's good to be back on campus. it's a great privilege to speak from the steps of this historic

hall that welcome presidents going back to george washington. i want to thank your president who is here today. [ applause ] i want to thank him for hosting us. i want to thank the many members of my cabinet and administration. i want to thank leader pelosi and members of congress who are here. we are very grateful for their support. i want to say thank you to the hoyas in the house for having me back. it was important for me to speak directly to your generation because the decisions that we make now and in the years ahead will have a profound impact on the world that all of you inherit. on christmas eve 1968, the

astronauts of apollo 8, the first humans to orbit the moon. described what they saw and read scripture from the book of genesis to the rest of us back here. later that night they took a photo that would change the way we see and think about our world. it was an image of earth. beautiful, breathtaking. a glowing marble of blue oceans and green forests and brown mountains rising over the surface of the moon. while the sight of our planet from space might seem routine today imagine what it looked like to those of us seeing our home, our planet for the first

time. imagine what it looked like to children like me. even the astronauts were amazed. it makes you realize just what you have back there on earth. around the same time we begin exploring space, scientists were studying changes taking place in earth's atmosphere. scientists had known since the 1800s have that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide trap heat an burning fossil fuels release them into the atmosphere. that wasn't news. in late 1950s the national weather service began measuring the levels in our atmosphere with the worries that rising levels may disrupt the balance

that makes our planet so hospitable. what they found year after year is that the levels of carbon pollution in our atmosphere have increased dramatically. that science accumulated and reviewed over decades tells us that our planet is changing in ways that will have profound impacts on all of human kind. the 12 warmest years in recorded history have all come in the last 15 years. last year temperatures in some areas of the ocean reached record highs. ice in the arctic shrank to its smallest size on record most than models predicted it would. these are facts. we know that no single weather

event is caused solely by climate change. droughts and fires and floods go back to ancient times, but we also know that in a world that's warmer than it used to be all weather events are affected by a warming planet. the fact that sea level in new york, in new york harbor are now a foot higher than a century ago that didn't cause hurricane sandy but it contributed to the destruction that left large parts of our mightiest city dark and under water. the potential impacts go beyond rising sea levels here at home. 2012 was the warmest year in our history. midwest farms were parched by the worst drought since the dust

bowl and drenched by the wettest spring on record. western wildfires scorched an area larger than the state of maryland. and we know that the costs of these events can be measured in lost lives and lost livelihoods, lost homes, lost businesses. hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency dollars and disaster relief. in fact, those who are already feeling the effects of climate change don't have time to deny it. they're busy dealing with it. firefighters are braving longer wildfire seasons, and state and federal government have to figure out to how to budget for it. i had to sit down in a meeting with the department of interior and agriculture and the rest of

my team to figure out how we're going to play for more and more expensive fire seasons. farmer seed crops wilted one year, washed away the next, and higher food prices get passed on to you, the american consumer. mountain communities worry about what smaller snow packs will mean for tourism, and then families at the bottom of the mountains wonder wait will mean for their drinking water. americans across the country are already paying the price of inaction inpremiums, state and local taxes and the cost of rebuilding and disaster relief. the question is not whether we need to act. the overwhelming judgment of science, of chemistry and physics and millions of measurements, has put all that to rest. 97% of scientists, includiincluy

the way some who originally disputed the data, have already put that to rest. they've acknowledged the climate is warming and humans are contributing to it. the question now is will we have the courage to act before it's too late. and how we answer will have a profound impact on the world that we leave behind not just to you but to your children and grandchildren. as a president, as a father, and as an american, i'm here to say we need to act. >> all right. so the president making a major, major address on climate change. i want to bring in jim acosta. the president's got some important news he's about to release in this prepared speech as well, jim.

update our viewers. >> that's right, wolf. as you know, the keystone pipeline has been a lot of controversy for the white house for several months. repeatedly the white house has said they're going to leave it up to the state department's determination as to whether or not it's going to be approved. but apparently we're going to hear it in a speech -- we're hearing it right now, but he is going to talk about it. he's going to say that pipeline should only be approved -- and this is according to a white house official -- only if there are no net in creases in greenhouse gases. and so that determination will have to be made by environmental officials, but that is some news we're going to be hearing in this speech, and a lot of people a were looking at this speech before the president was giving it at georgetown is he going to announce it. it now seems he will be touching on that project and saying it should only be approved if no

nut net greenhouse gases would increase as a result of the project. you know, there's a lot of other news surrounding this speech. the republicans are going on the attack on the president's speech on climate right now because of a comment said by one of the president's advisers for n "the new york times" saying there should be a war on coal, basically saying they're supporters of the coal industry. but even though a lot of people thought it was going to be a sleepy unnote worth think speech by the president, they've been listening. >> they've been studying the pipeline for years, jim, and there's still no final decision or recommendation. when do we expect a final decision by the obama administration whether to go forward and build it from canada through the united states down to the state of mexico, creating a lot of jobs, out through the

united states down to the gulf of mexico. when do we expect a final decision? >> reporter: you know, it's been thought all along, wolf, that that desild would come down sometime in the fall, but a lot of environmentisalists, journalists have been pounding on this. i saw a few weeks ago when markey was asked to reject the keystone project. this is going to be a disappointment to the people on the left who would like to see the project completely struck down and the people on the right who want to see the president approve this project right away. he seems to be trying to thread the needle here and trying to find middle ground in terms of the approach, but expect this to generate a lot of headlines as we head out through the afternoon, wolf. >> obviously a very important

speech of the president and important part of the keystone pipeline. by the way, if you want to continue watching the president's speech, go to cnn.com. we'll be right back. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure

or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. the ones getting involved and staying engaged. they're not afraid to question the path they're on. because the one question they never want to ask is "how did i end up here?" i started schwab for those people.

people who want to take ownership of their investments, like they do in every other aspect of their lives.

they're celebrating in chicago today. here's why. >> now the rays. whoo! whoo! >> the blackhawks are stanley cup champions. they scored two goals in the span of 17 seconds aet the end of the game to beat boston, 3-2. it's the second time they've won the stanley cup if four year. the stanley cup parade will be held friday in chicago. that's it for me. thanks for watching. i'll be back at 5:00 p.m. in the situation room and then at 6:00 p.m. eastern we'll have a special one-hour look at edward

snowden's trail. newsroom continues right now with brooke baldwin. >> wolf blitzer, thank you so much. good to be with you on this tuesday. i'm brooke baldwin. where do we begin today? with the world's most wanted man edward snowden who's in russia. he landed in horussia after flyg from hong kong. passengers reportedly spotted him on the flight but somehow he never made it to terminal f as the others did. it's not clear where he went after landing but russia's foreign minister insisted -- and i'm quoting him here, snowden did not cross the russian border. and then it's confirmed he never flew out of moscow. >> narrator: snowden is