far. daniel innoway who fought in world war ii from hawaii said he should be embarrassed. he's right. i'mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm spitzer is next. >> eliot: good evening i'm eliot spitzer and this is "viewpoint." senate majority leader harry reid will never be known as a diplomat. maybe a loose cannon after claiming a bain capital investor told him mitt romney hadn't paid any taxes. reid went to the senate floor today to demand that romney show a decade's worth of returns. >> the word's out he hasn't paid any taxes for ten years. let him prove that he has paid taxes because he hasn't. >> eliot: reid backed up his claim sort of telling his hometown paper...

reid added the burden should be on romney to prove his taxes have been paid. romney told reid to "put up or shut up" while his campaign adviser eric fehrnstrom hammered reid on fox news. >> harry reid's charges are baseless and they're untrue. and i would ask him one simple question. have you no sense of decency sir? is there nothing that you won't do to base yourself and the office you hold in the name of dirty politics? >> eliot: wow fehrnstrom's attack was an adaptation of attorney joe welch's legendary charge which helped take down republican senator joe mccarthy in 1954. with president obama campaigning in florida the romney campaign tried to take him down a notch or two with an ad exploiting the state's miserable economy. >> under president obama 8.6%

unemployment. record foreclosures. 600,000 more floridians in poverty. he focused on obama care instead of jobs. barack obama, what a disappointment. >> eliot: but the obama campaign has a new attack ad of its own focused on the new study showing romney's plan would raise taxes for 95% of the country while giving a tax break to the upper 5%. >> mitt romney makes $20 million in 2010. but paid only 14% in taxes. probably less than you. lan that would give millionaires another tax break and raises taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year. mitt romney's middle class tax increase. he pays less. you pay more. >> eliot: for more on harry reid's bare knuckled attacks on the tax issue in this campaign, i'm joined by juana summers national political reporter with politico. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me back. >> eliot: this is a food fight.

it is getting ugly, dirty nasty. who's winning this? >> it is absolutely correct. instead of talking about jobs and the economy, most of the discussion here in washington, over the wild allegations, harry reid has made, the discussion about mitt romney's taxes about supposed lack of transparency on his part for not releasing more of what's been going on for some time. the question is where exactly is harry reid getting the information from and that question has been really the topic of discussion more than anything else over the last day or so. >> eliot: you know, that makes me think that at a tactical level, harry reid may have gone a bridge too far because to the extent that he now becomes the focus, not mitt romney and mitt romney's tax returns it changes the complexion of this. it makes harry reid look a bit too aggressive and unless he can substantiate and is willing to substantiate the basis for his claims, isn't he putting himself in the same position as mitt romney suddenly putting up a barrier to information people are going to want and mitt romney is going to say hey

you don't have any idea what you're talking about. in a way this may have been a bit too far. >> you're absolutely right. harry reid is sticking his neck out on the line without providing basis. obviously the romney campaign could squash this quickly by releasing a decade's worth of tax information. something i'm sure and they've said repeatedly, they're not going to do. right now, the question is what did harry reid know? how can he substantiate the claim. even addressing this issue on the senate floor he's not really provided a basis for this information so now we're just in wildly speculative state where instead of talking about jobs and the economy and what barack obama the president or mitt romney can do to get americans back to work we're talking about who harry reid's talking to, the romney campaign, i think has played this quite smartly by saying this is baseless. that he needs to put up or shut up. i think that's a great plan. >> eliot: look, what i wonder, harry reid's home state apparently they bet on everything. do you think there is a betting line on what date mitt romney will be forced to release he his tax returns?

is there an over and under on this? somehow it there has to be an angle that makes for better conversation. at this point, frankly we're all tired about mitt romney's taxes. jobs is the issue and taxes. mitt romney on the other hand being hammered because the brookings report and the tax policy institute two emanant institutions said look, buddy you're doing what people don't want you to do, help the very rich and make 95% of the public may more in taxes. that can't be good politics right now for mitt romney. >> more so than what harry reid is saying that, study and the idea that mitt romney's tax plan would only help the wealthiest americans has to be a concerting fact for his campaign up there in boston. they don't want to see -- mitt romney has had trouble appearing out of touch not able to release the american people. so far their strategy has been to dismiss this brookings study as a liberal group study not really based on fact. they've produced counter information from other studies from less partisan. there was an ernst & young study but the obama campaign has

picture this up and said look, this is one more way that mitt romney is out in out to help the average american. they released their own report detailing what they see as problems with romney's tax plan. that, i think is far more troubling and will be more far more of a substantive attack in this campaign as we continue to move forward with this kind of sluggish economy recovery as the backdrop to the last few months of the presidential race. >> eliot: it seems to me the obama campaign is moving on two different fronts. one is the background noise about the tax returns which plays to the image of mitt romney elite out of touch. the other is the purely substantive argument. you can say a lot of things about brookings but they're a solid, analytical group. they're not going to swing analysis one way or another. they're a down the middle type of group. i think that's the deeper problem and that may be why mitt romney is behind in pennsylvania ohio, florida is neck and neck. he is not gaining traction in those swing states. on the very issue where he should be gaining steam if he's going to pick up the pace between now and november. i agree with you.

that's gotta be what he's worried about. does tomorrow's number, we'll get one number tomorrow, the unemployment rate, will that sweep away all of the stuff and set the framework for the next two or three weeks at a minimum? >> depending on just how bad the number is tomorrow obviously will set the tone for the next week of campaigning the next event of mitt romney's selection of a v.p. depending on how bad the number is, he's able to reframe this thing, reset the race to being a referendum on the obama presidency. everything president obama in mitt romney's view has not done to get americans working again. the first friday of the month is typically a good day for most folks in boston depending on how bad it is. it gives them some fodder to move forward with to distract not only from the brookings study but from the debacle some would call his foreign trip and instead, reset the race to be on the economy which is really where mitt romney's wheel house is given his record and the things that he focuses on. >> eliot: juana that should be his home territory.

the next attacks will be they don't create jobs and therefore even no matter what you make of it in terms of the distributional issue they will not help address the underlying problem which is jobs for the middle class. i will be talking about that later in the show. politico national political reporter juana summers many thanks for joins us tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> eliot: even in a presidential election year, august is normally the doldrums. at least until the party conventions begin. but control of the senate could be up for grabs this month with a series of republican senate primaries that will determine the g.o.p.'s makeup in four november races. in missouri, democrat claire mccaskill's senate seat could be threatened by any of three representatives. representative todd aiken john breuner and former state treasurer sara steelman. in wisconsin, herb kohl has decided not to run. former governor tommy thompson, businessman eric hovde and mark neumann are fighting for his seat. in connecticut joe lieberman has passed on another possible

term. linda mcmahon is in the ring again against former congressman chris schays and the primary and then arizona where senator jon kyl has had enough of politics. congressman jeff flake is facing off against businessman will cardon. "national journal" hot line editor and chief wrote about the crucial races today for which we're in his debt. it is a pleasure to you have on the program tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> you're writing about four senate primaries held in the next couple of weeks which most people don't even know about. they could control -- determine control of the senate and the political direction of the senate. how far right or left it moves which one is most captivating to you? >> there are two that i think are most fascinating. i'll start with one coming up on tuesday in missouri where three rep are cans are fighting it out for the right to face senator claire mccaskill. these three candidates are a little bizarre. they're -- sort of none of them are from the really popular establishment wing of the party.

none of them are a plus candidates and yet all of them have a very good shot at knocking of a an incumbent freshman democrat. skip forward a week where you've got an open seat in wisconsin again, four republicans actually all fighting to be sort of the tea party conservative versus the one republican who is the most establishment guy you could possibly imagine former four term governor tommy thompson. thompson, a guy who should be running away with the primary is struggling to break 30%. and ultimately, i don't think he is going to succeed in the primary. the winner is going to take on congresswoman tammy baldwin incredible race to watch. anybody who tells you they know what is going on, is blowing hot air. >> eliot: those who know don't say. those who don't say. claire mccaskill popular when she came in six years ago. she has been viewed as the most vulnerable democrat out there running for re-election. is it your sense that regardless of who wins that republican primary, she goes down to

defeat? >> you know, i would say that she is more likely to lose than she is to win at the moment. some republicans are comparing her to senator blanch lincoln of arkansas two years ago who was completely toast the moment she decided she was going to run for re-election. i wouldn't go that far. i wouldn't say she's completely done. but this time around, claire mccaskill faces a really big deficit. she voted for everything that voters hate about president obama. the stimulus bill, the healthcare law even cap and trade legislation. she sort of -- i shouldn't say cap and trade. that was the house not the senate. but healthcare, stimulus, auto bailouts, check, check check she's done everything. her favorable ratings are underwater. and a recent survey by the "st. louis post dispatch" shows she's losing by 5 points to the weakest possible candidate and by 11 points to the strongest businessman named john breuner. >> eliot: is there an upset brewing in the republican primary there? texas, i want to talk about the tea party impact here.

in texas everybody was shocked that cruz came back. now the tea party candidate surged forward. do you see any dynamic like the most energized piece of the republican party is coming together around one of the candidates? >> well, it depends on how you define tea party candidate. none of the three candidates is really from the establishment wing of the party. you've got a former state treasurer in sarah steelman who has support from sarah palin. the national media might want to call her the tea party candidate for simplicity sake. congressman todd aiken is running. he's seen as the weakest of the possible candidates and he is, however, the most conservative member of the state's congressional delegation. maybe that's the tea party candidate of it. then again brunner, the guy who spent several million dollar ofs of his own money, up to $7 million introducing himself to missouri voters leads recent primary polls but he's the outsider he's never held elective office.

maybe he's got a a claim to the tea party mantle. to have a tea party upset in one of these states, you have to have an established favorite. in missouri, there really is no establishment favorite although let me tell you the guys here in d.c. really like the fact that john brunner has a checkbook where he can write a $7 million check. >> eliot: in the republican primaries, it seems to be the model the most outside of the outsider candidates rushes to the front and wins and that's had a dramatic impact on the senate itself. wisconsin, tommy thompson was mr. insider, mr. establishment cabinet member, everybody loved him until recently. what's happening he can't win within his own party? >> he hasn't run since 1998 and the republican electorate that he faces now is dramatically different from any he's ever run in. you know, the tea party phenomenon i think is a little bit of sort of an expression of buyer's remorse over the george w. bush administration and especially the spending that took place during a republican administration and republican control of congress.

tommy thompson, a lot of conservatives in wisconsin see him as sort of the big spender of the late '90s. they love his record but he still spent a lot of money plus he dabbled in maybe i will get in, maybe i won't get into a governor's race in 2006. a senate race in 2010. that didn't run people the right way. got some folks kind of angry at sort of the old guy. they just want him to sort of stay on the sidelines now. the two other candidates who really have a good shot at this are a businessman named eric hovd-e and a former congressman named mark neumann who has made a couple of runs. both are outsiders. hovde is up to $3.5 million introducing himself to voters. of course, this is wisconsin. the state that just came out of an $80 million gubernatorial recall. you can imagine they've seen their share of ads. they're splitting the vote. tommy thompson's ceiling the top amount he can get is well

below 50%. but with two other people splitting the vote, he just might get there. thompson is probably the stronger candidate in the general election because democrats in wisconsin remember voting for him. they remember him winning with 70% of the vote and by the way he's the same kind of positive associations with a good, strong, robust economy of the 1990s that say bill clinton does. for a national audience. so you know, thompson's -- i don't think thompson ends up winning the race. i think hovde is the front-runner at the moment though mark neumann is showing a few signs he might be surging. he of all of the candidates we'll talk about today he's the one making the most aggressive play to be the next ted cruz tea party style candidate. >> eliot: reid, there is so much to talk about control of the senate. the primaries are fascinating. the impact of the most conservative tea party candidates could be in november. remember in 2010, a lot of them won primaries but lost in november letting the democrats perhaps control the senate. we'll ask you to come back a couple of times over the next couple of weeks because these are fascinating races and

control of the senate matters an enormous amount. "national journal" hot line editor and chief reid wilson, thanks for your time tonight. >> thanks a lot. >> eliot: coming up, >> we talk a lot about the influence of money in politics. it is the defining issue of this era. the candidate with the most money does win. this is a national crisis. i look at her, and i just want to give her everything. yeah you -- you know, everything can cost upwards of...[ whistles ] i did not want to think about that. relax, relax, relax. look at me, look at me. three words, dad -- e-trade financial consultants. so i can just go talk to 'em? just walk right in and talk to 'em. dude those guys are pros. they'll hook you up with a solid plan. they'll -- wa-- wa-- wait a minute.

bobby? bobby! what are you doing, man? i'm speed dating! [ male announcer ] get investing advice for your family at e-trade.

rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth on. now in minis. >> eliot: financial disasters on wall street have become so common, the big numbers don't even seem to suburb prize people anymore. our number of the day $10 million is best viewed this way. that's how much a financial firm in jersey city lost every minute

when it sold off hundreds of millions of dollars in stock which it purchased by mistake because of a computer glitch wednesday morning. knight capital group ended up buying and selling millions of stock shares in just 45 minutes. the hyperdriven trades artificially pushed up some of the prices so when knight capital tried selling their accidental assets, they ended up losing a total of $444 million! this disaster may actually kill the company. but beyond that, it is also yet another serious blow to the financial services industry. banks and brokerages have already been staggering as their reputations have been sliced and diced by trading losses, money laundering discriminatory lending and the libor scandal and all of that is just in the past few weeks. now they can't even blame rogue traders or unethical collusion just a regular computer blowup, maybe a small errant line of programming code.

the real world and politics collide. >> will your next doctor be a robot. gavin newsom probes for answers on "the gavin newsom show." only on current tv. >> eliot: even our national security has now been politicized despite numerous pleas from high-ranking officials in both the obama and bush administrations that we need to bolster our defenses against potential cyberattacks that would target crucial life sustaining infrastructure owned by private companies including electric utilities chemical plants and water systems the senate today failed to get the 60 necessary votes to avoid a republican filibuster of the cybersecurity act. here are the bill's cosponsors, republican susan collins and independent joe lieberman. >> all of the experts tell us it

is not a matter of if a cyberattack is going to be launched. it is when it is going to occur. >> this is one of those days when i fear for our country and i'm not proud of the united states senate. >> eliot: republicans in large part blocked the vote out of a desire to protect private industries from requirements to meet higher security regulations meaning today was another disgrace for a chamber of congress and another victory for the chamber of commerce. here to discuss the implications of the senate's inaction today is council with the aclu's washington legislative office michelle richardson and senior tech editor with "the huffington post,byian" ca. thank you for your time tonight. by bianca, what would this bill have done to protect the utilities, the grid, banking systems? >> the first thing to understand is that some 85% of our critical infrastructure is controlled by private companies so that means the water that we're getting our electricity, all of the

things that keep us happy, warm and safe. really anybody who is anybody in this national security world is telling us that we're headed for some sort of bruce willis disaster scenario and that you know, it is really is a matter of not if but when. so what this is designed to do is kind of create some optional standards originally mandatory standards but now optional standards to help businesses improve their security practices and also share some information between private businesses and government to -- on a critical infrastructure threat. >> eliot: i have to follow up with you. it doesn't sound so heinous so difficult. it doesn't sound as though it is a major imposition on business. what was the chamber of commerce opposition that led to a sufficient number of republicans to oppose even bringing this to the floor for a vote? >> their objection was it is going to be onerous on businesses, it would be this back door into more government interference of what was going on with businesses. but then there were -- other

objections republicans that voted against it also said the supporters are trying to steam roll it through and of course, there is a big election coming up or so i hear. >> eliot: this might have been a partisan ploy to prevent the white house for getting credit for something that would be viewed as important. >> cybersecurity has been near and dear to the obama administration since the beginning. >> eliot: michelle, the aclu traditionally has been in opposition to many of these cybersecurity bills because they almost of necessity permit sort of government invasion and access to private information that gives the aclu rightly so some concern. what brought you over in this regard and why do you not support this bill? >> well, the sponsors of the bill were with the administration and advocates to make substantial changes to make sure privacy was substantially protected in this bill. they made sure that companies needed to make reasonable efforts to protect private information that civilian

agencies would run domestic programs and that the government couldn't repurpose very sensitive internet data for all sorts of reasons. the bill turned out pretty decent as far as privacy was concerned which led to a number of republicans opposing the bill saying that it actually went too far on privacy and that they preferred an approach that would allow the companies more leeway to decide whether the privacy would be protected. >> eliot: in other words there were some who wanted to give private entities greater latitude in terms of what they could do with the invasiveness in their capacity to get access to individual information and then turn that over either to the government, the nsa or the other agencies. >> one of the battles we see in the fall on information sharing is over whether the military or the civilians are going to run this program. and a lot of republicans are adamant that these companies will go directly to the nsa or other components of the defense department so that the military can directly collect information

of innocent americans. >> eliot: although what we've been hearing on this show and particularly the nsa has access to anything anyway. in a way putting up another boundary may or may not be a futile effort. bianca, it does seem as though cyberattacks are part and parcel of on-going military strategies. if you look at the effort to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon and the viruses we've implanted in their systems, it is almost inevitable as you say that nations will retaliate against us and we are incredibly vulnerable from water to electricity to our hospitals and bank systems. what meaningfully can be done to erect a barrier to that access from foreign nations? >> there is always canned food, right? bunkers. no but you know, what's interesting is you point out there is the fear of retaliation from governments but i think what's tricky about this scenario is it is not just governments. there are all sorts of hackers. you look at what happened with private companies and you know, it could be a group of people that have come together to teach

them a lesson or prove that they can get into these systems. so for sure, there is the issue of a foreign policy threat as it regards to it. >> eliot: whether or not it is a foreign government or private entity, how can you erect a barrier so a water utility, for instance can insure it is not open to an attack. >> this is one effort to do so let's make sure our defenses are good enough. maybe they're not great but we're not leaving ourselves wide open. we're locking our doors and we're not just making -- not leaving them wide open. the idea with this bill was to do that, right. that was one approach. let's make sure they've got some baseline security here. we can take it from there. so you know, as far as what the kind of -- also let's share information so we can all do this better. >> eliot: michelle, let me come back to you for the last couple of moments here. there's been so much information recently. ed marquee's request showed 1.3 million requests have been made to law enforcement for

information on cell phones. who the whole privacy issue seems to have fallen off the political agenda. you don't hear people debating it even though i have the sense that increasingly we should be antsy about what government can and can't get about us. where has the sort of public outrage been on this issue? >> well, it is growing over time as we get more information. and the government is getting away with these programs because they're being conducted in secret. and this 1.3 million number has been around for years. but it just came public recently because a congressman demanded it. as you see more and more information becoming available about what they're getting and what they're doing with our information, you'll see the public pushing back more. >> eliot: indeed, my view is certainly they should because the issue of privacy is something that should crystallize via subject of massive debate in years ahead. michelle richardson and senior tech editor of "the huffington post," bianca boscer, thank you for your time tonight. >> chick-fil-a opens a location in a

>> this court has proven to be the knowing, delighted accomplice in the billionaires' purchase of our nation. >> and you think it doesn't affect you? think again.

of sununu, you're wrong. mitt romney, you're wrong. we need more teachers, not fewer teachers and more cops and more firefighters that support our

>> eliot: coming up, the unrest in syria continues but first, colbert re-creates olympic gymnastics, shepard smith doesn't seem to appreciate appreciation day and the real reason mitt romney won't release his tax returns. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> we now know that the romney campaign will not release anymore of the candidate's tax

returns. ♪ >> receipts. the receipts, where are they? i know they're in this closet. >> mr. romney, please show us your returns. >> the taxes. and 2001 to 2010, the taxes. where are they? i know they're in this closet. >> it is 3:00 a.m. >> put this off long enough. >> why governor mitt romney is refusing to release all of his tax returns. >> the american public can't find out. i can't show my old tax returns because i can't remember where i put them. help me, ann! >> washington is abuzz about if thinking there's something terrible in there. >> i can't find my tax receipts. >> because we don't pay taxes. we're rich. >> oh, that's right! >> supporters of the restaurant chain chick-fil-a flocking to establishments all across the country for appreciation day. >> of course, all of the biased, real reporters and lapdoggies in the mainstream media says

quote-unquote anti-gay. >> it is national badminton day. forget national day of intolerance. let's say with badminton. >> a brilliant performance. a brilliant performance why am i just talking about this? let's take a look at the cease and desist letters i've gotten from the olympics telling me i can't use their footage. >> it is going to be close coming down to the touch. and the winner is missy. missy. 17 years of age. missy franklin has won her first individual gold at the olympic games. [ cheering ] >> the new olympic champion. here is chad's father, burt. what a performance. >> unbelievable! i've never been so happy. what a beautiful boy. oh my god.

>> eliot: maybe you should give the parents more airtime. a former u.n. secretary septic disasters are disgusting and costly, but avoidable. the rid-x septic subscriber program helps prevent backups by sending you monthly doses right to your door so you will never forget to maintain your system. sign up at rid-x.com. hey joe, can you talk? sure. your hair -- amazing. thanks to head and shoulders for men. four shampoos that give men game-winning scalp protection, great looking hair... and confidence [ male announcer ] up to 100% flake free

with head & shoulders for men.

>> eliot: things continue to deteriorate in syria today as at least 130 people were killed as fighting continues to escalate. as we told you last night earlier this year, president obama signed a secret order authorizing u.s. nonweapon support for syrian rebels. nonweapon being the key for the white house and i quote... but whether the white house likes it or not bigger weapons are entering the fray. new reports of rebels using captured tanks in aleppo while the regime responds with fighter jets and helicopter gunships. the escalation comes on the same day that kofi annan stepped down as special u.n. syrian peace envoy. he chastised the u.n. security counsel for its inability to get any meaningful sanctions passed. >> at a time when we need --

when the syrian people desperately need action, there continues to be finger pointing and name-calling in the security council. >> for more on the escalation in syria, let's bring in p.j. crowley, former secretary of state for president obama as well as former special assistant to president clinton. now a professor at george washington university. thank you for your time this evening. the situation is dire getting worse. kofi annan stepping back. now what? how does this move forward backwards or sideways in the near term? >> i don't think it changes the fundamentals. we've known for -- unfortunately for weeks the annan plan was failing not because it is not the right answer but because key countries aren't following it first and foremost. syria with the active protection of russia and china. those two countries have made sure that there will be no meaningful action coming out of the security council so to an

extent what kofi annan did today because countries hiding behind his efforts russia in particular, he stepped off the stage and said back to you security council and back to you arab league. you guys have to decide what to do. >> eliot: with kofi annan gone, will there be additional pressure on russia or sufficient pressure on russia for them not to veto a security council resolution that would permit some form of concerted action? >> i'm not sure it is going to be possible to have any meaningful action of the united nations. a year ago there was meaningful and concerted action through the u.n. on libya russia in particular and china are determined to make sure the u.n. does not play a significant role in syria. so as the united states has said in recent days and weeks it now has to look to like-minded countries, perhaps other international institutions to be the foundation for whatever happens going forward. i think the arab league will be a key focus. >> before we get to the arab

league, this is a different paradigm than either libya or egypt, the other -- libya, you had concerted efforts through nato which brought down cad of afy and in egypt, you had the military stepping down which led to mubarak's failure. here you have full-fledged civil war, the military standing aside assad. internationally nothing happening. this could go on for weeks months almost indefinitely. >> i think it is going to grind on for some time. but that said, obviously you have the free syrian army and the opposition. they're gaining strength it seems to me. they're able to hold territory now in a city like aleppo, they're able to fight the regime to a draw. and the regime unfortunately continues to be able to maintain the support of the security services. that's going to be the key issue. at some point in time if the security services in the context of egypt the military needs to eventually determine that their

best interest was not the same as mubarak's. at some point in time, we hope there will be a tipping point where the security service will make the same calculation and push assad to the side but i think that's still weeks or months off. >> eliot: there should be have been some defections they get a fair bit of attention in the western press. do you sense there is increasing trend, increasing number of defections or is it still just the occasional lieutenant general here and there? >> i think the defections are meaningful. that said, what you do see is escalations on both sides. it is very worrying that the syrians are now bringing out hardware and heavy weaponry that they've actually maintained part for some time so now as the opposition gains tanks you know the syrian regime is using their air power more. so this is going to escalate before -- and get worse before it gets better. >> eliot: you mention the arab league earlier. is there enough unity and enough certitude they want to get rid

of assad so they can do anything and at least within the region make it clear that -- firm position against assad is appropriate and in fact desirable from the arab perspective? >> i think below the table there is a lot of activity. in many respects, syria is a proxy war between iran on the one hand the gulf states, particularly saudi arabia on the other. so that there is a lot of weaponry and a lot of resources flowing into syria and part of the challenge to the united states is to try to help coordinate this stuff. try to figure out who's who. what they're doing what they need and in most particular, find out what happens the day after assad -- either steps down, is killed, is pushed aside. and the danger here is that even if assad is killed or pushed aside, this civil war as you called it rightly could continue for some time. but i'm not sure at a political level there's necessarily the same kind of unity of the arab

league in the context of syria that he with saw a year ago in libya. >> eliot: the president signed the intelligence directive of course, we don't know exactly when he did that. do you think there can be and should be any significant escalation of what we do for the rebels and the free rebels in terms of providing them material even if it is nonlethal material? >> well, i mean a lot of material in support can be useful. i think what's significant about the latest finding is that ostensibly, if i understand it correctly, there will be intelligence assets inserted into syria. that's important for a couple of reasons. one, we lost our embassy some time ago. it was closed because of the security situation. to an extent, we lost our eyes and ears that we were able to give a firsthand account of what's happening on the ground. so that restores the ability of the united states to really understand the dynamic inside the country and also to continue to shape the opposition. make it more effective. make it more unified and help

planning for the day after so the syria can come together and work on behalf of the people of syria rather than as is currently happening with the regime against the interest of the syrian people. >> eliot: it sounds like it will be chaos before order. p.j. crowley formerly of the clinton and obama administrations. now professor at george washington university. thank you for your insights tonight. >> thank you eliot. >> eliot: we'll look at mitt >>it's the place where democracy is supposed to be the great equalizer, where your vote is worth just as much as donald trump's. we must save the country. it starts with you. guys that always make you laugh.

charges come down on rupert murdoch's phone-hacking scan l. fruit just got cooler. fruit on one side, cool on the other. new ice breakers duo. a fruity, cool way to break the ice. if you have copd like i do you know how hard it can be to breathe

and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help.

>> eliot: let's check in with jennifer granholm in "the war room." good evening governor. what have you got for us tonight? >> jennifer: eliot, mitt romney is looking battered a bruised. we'll go inside "the war room" with rick tyler. we've also got larry from of course the university of virginia. he's going to be looking at something you've been looking at, what is going on with the tea party and how are we going to be able to take a look at what's going to happen in the senate. we're going to look at it from a slightly different perspective. all of that in "the war room" at the top of the hour plus a lot more. >> eliot: tea party is going to run the senate next year. that's my prediction. >> jennifer: it is not going to run the senate. let me pull my >> eliot: mitt romney's economic agenda is a disaster. and i'm not even going to talk about the distributional effects

the equity and justice dimensions of this. on that score as discussed yesterday, the brookings institution, the tax policy center nonpartisan highly respected think tanks made clear the middle class will be socked with $86 billion in tax increases to subsidize the tax breaks being given to the wealthiest 5%. i'm talking today just about whether it will work. it won't. as explained by a senior adviser glen hubbard who is chairman of george w. bush's counsel of economic advisers brought us the 2008 cataclysm and also made evident in governor romney's own tax proposal their idea is old-fashioned trickle down economics. cut tax rates on corporations and the wealthy because doing so they claim will increase wages and job creation. that is exactly what the romney campaign claimed yesterday in response to the brookings analysis and what hubbard and governor romney have been saying throughout this campaign. it is the old claim that if only

we take care of the job creators, all will be well. but as we say let's go to the video or in this case, the charts. point one, corporate profits are already at an all-time high. as a percentage of gdp. higher than before the '08 cataclysm, higher than ever. point two wages are at an all-time low. as a percentage of gdp having declined almost consistently since 2000 when the bush tax cuts were passed. and point three job creation, as we know, is also stagnant at best with unemployment stuck at 8.2% and the work force participation rate. the percentage of working age americans who are holding a job or looking for one drifting down and now stuck at 63.8%. so the message is pretty clear. the types of tax policies governor romney is recommending have led to huge corporate profits and skewed income distribution but have not led to

wage growth or job creation. as president obama said the other day we've tried their approach. it has failed. this is no longer an ideological debate. it is a matter of simply reading the data we have from past experience. as they say, if you don't learn from history you're bound to repeat it. please let's avoid this rerun. it was rough enough the first time around. that's my vieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieieie

uh, i'm in a timeout because apparently riding the dog like it's a small horse is frowned upon in this establishment! luckily though, ya know, i conceal this bad boy underneath my blanket just so i can get on e-trade. check my investment portfolio, research stocks... wait, why are you taking... oh, i see...solitary. just a man and his thoughts. and a smartphone... with an e-trade app. ♪ nobody knows... ♪ [ male announcer ] e-trade. investing unleashed. our conversation is with you the viewer because we're independent. >>here's how you can connect with "viewpoint with eliot spitzer." >>questions, of course, need to be answered. >>we will not settle for the easy answers.

>> eliot: boycott versus turnout. the battleground chick-fil-a heeding the call from former arkansas governor mike huckabee. thousands of thousands flocked to chick-fil-a restaurants to

support the chicken chain in what huckabee called chick-fil-a appreciation day after the company's president dan cathy came underfire for saying he was guilty as charged for opposing gay marriage. chicken sandwich sales went through the roof according to megachurch pastor rick warren who apparently has a new role counting chickens and sandwiches who wrote in a tweet that cathy called him to say chick-fil-a has already set a world record today and that was with seven more hours to go in the west. while close mindedness may have been good for business at chick-fil-a yesterday tomorrow is slated to be same sex kissing day at chick-fil-a. you can be sure the restaurant chain is looking forward to that. supporters of same-sex marriage have a more important step forward to celebrate with the news that the democratic party plans to include a plank supporting marriage equality among other pro lgbt positions in its platform. joining me now to refuse the legal issues of civil rights is richard socarides who served as

an advisor on lgbt issues to president clinton and served as the president of equality matters. richard, thank you for joining us. you know, it is easy to make -- light of the whole chick-fil-a thing. >> it keeps on giving. >> eliot: i don't know where to stop with this. it is a real issue. your view? should people boycott chick-fil-a? >> i think they should and not because of what dan cathy said because everybody is entitle toed their opinion but because this company spends a lot of money, $3 million over the last several years funneling that money into right wing anti-gay groups that work against marriage equality but also more broadly, engage in things like conversion therapy. this company is a company that has no employment protections for their gay and lesbian employees. they have said previously they're going to fire people based upon their private conduct. that perhaps adulters have no

place working at chick-fil-a. it is a company with some strange corporate policies. it is best practices corporate best practice 101. all of the big companies now promote diversity and have protections for their employees. chick-fil-a is on the opposite end of the spectrum. >> eliot: i have said since this issue emerged consumers have every right to spend their dollars in support and with companies that reflect their values. it is that simple. i said the other night brawny paper towels is owned by the koch brothers. i'm buying bounty. chick-fil-a the target of a boycott. democratic issue will be in -- democratic convention will be in charlotte. a lot of chick-fil-as there. should there be a boycott of chick-fil-as by the democratic party? >> anybody who is disturbed by the positions they take and i think that's many americans should boycott and they had a big day today because the right wing was all over this and they were saying go today and show

your appreciation. but i think no company wants to be on either side of dramatically of the cultural wars. even if it is a 50/50 proposition. for basic fairness. but even if it is just a 50/50 proposition, no company wants to offend this much of the population. >> eliot: i think that's right. companies generally don't want to be in the middle. >> they're very quiet. the chick-fil-a people, there is a lot of political activity around this. huckabee and everything but they're not saying anything. they're just kind of saying -- thanks for your business. >> eliot: now let's get back to business. let's get to the democratic convention in charlotte. there will be, we're told on the platform, in the platform, a plank that says we believe in marriage equality. this is a monumental moment. >> it is a real milestone. especially when you remember that eight years ago the republicans placed these anti-gay ballot initiatives in several crucial swing states in an effort to take the election

to president george w. bush and those ballot -- those anti-gay initiatives may have given the election to george bush. now just eight years later it has turned so dramatically that the democrats are -- may by taking the other position, really help their chances. >> eliot: not only energizing, something the president needed to do, he did it with the issue of same-sex marriage but speaking to what you and i have been discussing is a much more rapid shift in the general public than anybody could have predicted. >> i give you a lot of credit because you were one of the very first democratic party leaders and i think maybe the first if not the first governor -- first governor of an important big state to support marriage equality. that was less than -- that was eight years ago. ten years ago. >> eliot: that's not why we invited you to the show. thank you. i appreciate that. >> it is a big deal. now you were the first just within ten years. and now the whole party -- the entire party has swung.

>> eliot: will the republican party be there four years from now? >> i'm not sure it will happen in four years but i will tell you that in eight years and certainly in the not-too-distant future, this will not be an issue. the republicans are going to have to come around. >> eliot: we don't have a lot of time left. this was a tribute to the executive order the president did not sign. will he sign and should he sign it? he's done so much. it almost seems petty to say go back. that's a tangible, meaningful step forward. >> the unintended consequences in politics. i think he will eventually sign it and of course he should sign it. nondiscrimination order that applies to contractors which is necessary. >> eliot: it was easy to say his words were rhetoric but now the words have triggered a dynamic. >> he's been a great president for gay rights. >> eliot: will you do a quick web extra? >> yes. advisor to president clinton thanks for joining