>> bring 'em in boys, the senate begins voting on the more than 300 mostly republican amendments to the immigration bill. in other words, you could have sat on the couch drinking pbr's and eating pb and j's all afternoon and still had a more productive day than your united states senate. i'm michael shure and this is the war room. >> all the action was in the senate today where debate began on immigration reform, an 800 page bill would completely overhaul our immigration system and strengthen border security,

but the senate won't get to the actual bill until they weed through the 300 amends added in the last two ds. 300! the senate judiciary committee has to vote on each and every one. first was an amendment to fix the typos in the original draft seriously, like spell check the text. unbelievable. that one passed unanimously. whoever said our government was dysfunctional? they got something done. after that, things got tougher. they clashed over how many new immigrants the bill should let in. they couldn't agree an how many bill the bill as written would let in. senator jeff sessions of alabama and chuck schumer of new york had a testy back and forth over the math. >> you've got 11 plus five, that's 15, plus another 15 is 30 million people, is it not given legal status in the next 10 years and does not -- shouldn't we be concerned about

the future flow if we're going to have such a large number of people being advanced in their -- >> i would state there's some simple math here. you're adding 11 million, they're already here. >> well, a little status, compete to job. >> he's trying to answer your question senator. let him do that. >> they're competing for jobs right now. your comprehensive immigration bill and how would you deal with the 11 million people who are here with people whose families are torn apart what is your solution? i think schumer was the one in session from alabama. the other problem in need of solution was how to secure the border. democrats argue the administration's policies have already made the border more secure than it has been at any point in the last four decades. that's according to home land security secretary janet

napolitano. the moves to secure the border were compared to a bad roofing company. take a listen to this. >> it's like hiring a roofer to come to your house because you have a leak in the roof and you find out after you pay the roofer, he leaves and you call him back and say my roof still leaks. he says well, i spent 10 hours trying to fix it, put materials in place but your roof still leaks. so, i understand that we've made a significant investment at the border. that's been very important and i acknowledge that, but it still leaks. >> iowa republican charles grassley went further basically wanting not only to fix the roof, but to cover it with a waterproof superdome made out of union corn pelts his amend requiring establishing operational control of the entire border for six months before allowing any undocumented

immigrants to earn legal status. that basically undermines the whole bill. immigrants would have to wait to start the path to citizenship until the border is completely secure and of course that might never happen. the committee voted down his amendment 12-6. lindsey graham and jeff flake joined democrats in voting against it. don't feel bad for grassley. he still that 76 other amendments in the pipe lynn. patrick lay hey of vermont would extend the bill to include same sex couples. that's drawn all sorts of outrage from the right and today even democratic senator chuck schumer refused to commit to reporting it. he said: >> religious leaders from the southern baptist convention, national association of

evangelicals said they might be forced to pull their support. senator michael rubio another member of the gang of eight said if the same sex bill passes, it will doom the entire bill. the conservative national review called national immigration reform rubio's follow folly. the american conservative union issued a statement saying: between that and the senate agreeing to get rid of the typos in the bill, i'd say we're seeing real progress. way to go, senators. joaning me now is michael tomasky, coming to us from washington d.c. thanks for being with us. >> thank you michael. hi.

>> your latest column about marco rubio will he be able to withstand criticism from the right on this? >> it's a tough call. there's going to be a lot of it, and we saw some senators today jeff sessions and ted cruz against this bill, but there are more. there are a lot of republicans and they're going to try and push this bill far to the right and rubio's going to be in this very difficult position where he's going to have to be placating that base, but at the same time he has certain promises that he's made and commitments he's made to the democrats that he was working with in negotiations over these last several months. rubio is, he's going to have to find a sweet spot and it's a pretty small sweet spot. >> finding that small sweet spot, let's not be naive here, the guy's thinking about 2016 all the time, i would suspect. is there a way that rubio can use this issue to become a

stronger 2016 candidate? i'm not talking about in the general election, i'm talking about in the primary he would have to run. >> i think that if it passes, and it has substantial support from republicans in both houses, i don't think it's going to ever get majority support from republicans in the house of representatives, but if it gets a reasonably substantial number, and i think it might get majority support from republicans in the senate. if all that happens then i think rupe yo is strengthened, and like the front runner for 2016 actually. >> that's interesting. will is like a calculated risk that could work out beautifully for him then. >> i think so. i don't see how he's not the front runner. i'm get weigh ahead of myself, but if all of those things happen, the republican party has taken a big step to address its main demographic problem right the biggest problem that emerged in the wake of the 2012 election, and it has, you know,

modernized and all this stuff that people is going to say and rob a yes is the upon who did it. i think he puts himself in the catbird seat if it passes, but i still think that's a real big as if. >> how would he then be the man who did it and not barack obama going into an election? >> excellent question. i should clarify that. as far as republicans are concerned, he'll be the man who did it, the man who brought their party into the 21st 21st century and all of those kinds of cliches. as far as the american people are concerned the broader public, a benefit or credit is going to go more to obama than to rubio but rubio will get his share. >> tell me about the objections of lindsey graham and jeff like if to some of these crazy amendments. does that mean they want to see reform? >> i think graham does. yes, i think those two probably do. they had been in these negotiation for months and months, and, you know, once a

senator has committed, you know, that many hours to something they do kind of want to see it get through. they put a lot into it, a lot of sweat equity into it. >> right. >> it's not clear that a lot of republican senators feel that way. a lot of them are unannounced just sort of waiting to see as politicians often do, surprise, surprise which way the wind blows. it's going to be a tough tough fight. >> what about the amendment. >> if chuck schumer is talking about that, that's not a great sign for that amendment. remember, like anything, it has to get 60 votes. can it get 60 votes if that amendment is attached to it? i don't see how actually. susan collins is the one republican who has said that she would be for it if that

amendment were attached to it that she could support the bill. even if you assume all democrats, and throw in collins that's 56. the others, graham, flake, rob a crow, and john mccain, the four republicans who worked a lot on this i believe have all said that they would not go along with it, so it seems to me that with the lay he amendment the top most number is 56 and then you start looking at red state democrats who might peel away. i think that amendment has unfortunately, you know, a tough slog ahead of it. >> you know, rubio has already said that it's deal breaker to begin with. you talked about how senators wait to see how the wind is blowing. 70% of americans want immigration retomorrow. we saw when 90% wanted handgun reform or background checks. any of that, this popular support matter when it gets to the house? >> people have tomorrow, these top line numbers in these polls

aren't really what politicians look at. what politicians look at surprise surprise, is how is this going to affect me and my state and my district, how is this going to change the vote in my district. if i'm a republican member of the house, from north or south carolina, two states incidentally and surprisingly with very fast-growing latino populations. i'm going to think i don't want these new citizens and these new voters. quite frankly in a self-interested point of view, republican legislators don't want 11 new million citizens and voters who are latino. they know they'll by and large vote democrats. that's why the democrats want them and the republicans don't want them. it doesn't matter that 70% of the people support it. what matters to each individual legislators is how is it going to affect my district and state.

>> that's a great point. i want to ask you one more question on a pretty different topic here, but we've got michael tomasky here. republicans and senate are keeping two of the presidential nominees from getting concerned for e.p.a. and labor. even these fairly benign candidates can't get through. what's going on here? >> what's going on is that they don't want the department of labor or environmental protection agency to be able to do their missions, execute their missions. it's very simple. they've said it about the e.p.a. at least. they've said iter many, many times, and they've introduced amendments to try to strip existing powers from the e.p.a. with the department of labor they won't say it, but obviously they don't want them enforcing wage standards and workplace standards and stuff like that. that's against what the republican party is for. this stuff is really, really

criminal, and well, it's just, you know, they say that gina% mccarthy hasn't answered the questions they put to her. they put more than 1,000 questions to her, more than 1,000, 653 from david bitter of louisiana alone. that's just crazy but it's -- i don't know what obama can do about it. >> it's going to be tough probably will happen, these things usually slow down. i can think of a few questions i'd like to ask david bitter. michael tomasky special correspondent for newsweek and the daily beast thanks for being here. >> we turn now to a possible break through at the white house. democratic from north carolina told reporters that there was a high level meeting today to discuss sexual assaults in the

military. valerie jarret is leading the meetings. women in the military are moor likely to be raped in cam bat zones by a fellow soldier than killed by the enemy. if you're not shocked or appalled by that statistic the problem is getting worse, it is not getting better. the pentagon issued a report showing a 37% increase in sexual assaults in the military. yet the assailants are often the victim's commanding officers and not punished. there were 4,000 reports last year but less than 200 defendants were actually convicted. that is unacceptal. those who bravely defend our values should also uphold them. we need to hold them to that. coming up, from the fallout of benghazi to the future of syria it's a complicated and dangerous world. michael o'hanlon will help us to

understand it. it's the city so nice they named it twice and elected this guy thrice. who will be the next your honor when bloomy is a goner. there is a growing sense that michael zukerburg is biting the hand that feeds him. looking for likes in the world of politics. particular around. >> democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

>> if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that there is any chance we'll see this president even say the words "carbon tax"?

>> with an open mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned "great leadership" so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter). >> watch the show. >> only on current tv. current tv is the place for true stories. with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines. real, gripping, current. documentaries... on current tv. >> the latest benghazi hearings may have ended but the finger pointing has just begun yesterday the hearing focused on the rivetting and emotional testimony of diplomat gregory hicks, his statement about how send year state department officials cashing tides the attacks may be a rightening rod for republicans who hoped to

build a mountain out of a molehill and bury hillary clinton under it all. john boehner demanded the president direct the state department to turn over emails immediately following the attacks. >> while a few of our members were able to review these emails, they were not allowed to keep them or to share them with others. we all on the president to release these unclassified interagency emails so the american people can see them. >> also, according to fox news, former vice president dick cheney today told house republicans that" i think hillary clinton should be subpoena's if necessary." that is their best hope of weakening hillary clinton before the 2016 elections. we have someone who can give us the clean facts michael

o'hanlon is senior defense fellow at the brookings institution and joins us from washington d.c. welcome back inside the war room. >> nice to be with you thanks for having me. >> politics were driving the hearings yesterday republicans are sympathy shocked by what they heard. was there anything surprising yesterday? >> you know, i think that it is certainly a sad episode in many ways at this point. i do think that there are some important questions raised by the testimony of the second in command in libya about whether there was the correct decision to send special forces from the capitol to benghazi, about whether there was state department pressure on him. i'm skeptical but i think we have to listen to that. you know, we might as well get this done and get this out because i think the overall story is fairly simple, and it's not a great one but it's also however tragic it may be for our

four americans that we've lost, not a geostrategic setback for the united states and not a cover up on par with watergate. we made mediocre decisions that contributed to four people losing their lives. i think the decides began with not having enough security at benghazi and perhaps allowing for people to be active there when they should have been more careful. you have to say listen, diplomats know they're operating in dangerous environments and we can't have a zero casualty outlook for them. was it the finest hour of the state department or hillary clinton? no mistakes happen when you're trying to do the things we do in these difficult combat zones. let's say out the mistakes. people are going to realize these were unfortunate and sad events that cost four americans their lives though obviously

bad luck played there too but it is not a political owe geophysical scandal. >> you talked about it may not be hillary clinton's final hour. you know for the next three years, people are going to talk about this not being hillary clinton's finest hour. what do you think is going to stick long term and are there people who are defending it or do people seem to want to just let it go as it pertains to the secretary of state? >> well, i like to think in terms and i think this is the right way to get to your question broaden the issue which countries in the middle east in turmoil are the most important and where do we have to rethink our policies the most seriously? the obama administration's within wrestling with these issues throughout the arab world, none of which we created.

none are in a stable state some more promising than others. i would have a serious debate with egypt and syria the most important, the countries where we don't have easy answers. that's where our strategic interests are still in play. libya is a strategic side show compared to egypt and syria. if you want to assess hillary clinton or president obama and worry about the middle east and what it's doing for the future, you've got the event. it's a travesty for the four lives lost, a tragedy in those terms. it is not a huge setback for the united states. i'm persuaded it was not a cover up. i guess that's what we're going to have to talk about until everyone is satisfied they've got to the bottom on that. there were botched decisions

along the way but these are the mistakes you make in the real world trying to deal with a complex international environment. nobody's finest hour, understandable but not a huge setback for america's strategic interests. >> it was echoed what you just said. he said we know what happened there. it's pretty basic what happened there and whether or not there was a cover up, i'm with you michael, i don't think there was a can you have up. i see this being played out because of the politics involved. john kerry is secretary of state now and met with his russian counterpart this week. they agreed to hold an international conference to end the war in syria. >> one thing is clear the president of the united states has said that he doesn't think that any option's off the table yet, pending the determinations of the chemical weapons used, and he is serious about making

certain that that mission is enforced. >> how productive will this meeting be, considering that russia plans to sell an air defense system to syria and how important is it trying to get them on our side or the side of what he sees as reasonableness. >> john kerry had a good week. he's a very well prepared and thoughtful secretary of state. it doesn't mean these peace talks are likely to go anywhere in the near term. you begin peace talks to try to look to the future when there might be a right moment. i'm just glad we find some way to partially cooperate with russia on this issue even if russia is still doing things we don't like, they're doing things we don't like and they don't read the military dynamics the same. you have a fundamental disagreement not just on the desired outcome but on which way the battle is trending.

i don't expect any big break through. you may have to see some more battlefield resolution of the question of who's winning and then i think russia may eassess and decide it's not worth holding on to assad and he needs to 10 down. when you've had different groups killing each other for two and a half years, i think we're going to have to think much harder about some kind of international presence to implement any peace deal struck between the parties. that raises unpleasant possibilities that americans don't want to contemplate right now. i'm not suggesting an invasion, but i think we might need to be part of a peace keeping force. hopefully it wouldn't have to be too big. that's the kind of thing we need to get to when we're serious. we're talking about starting the conversation right now. >> we've had the conversation in

iraq afghanistan egypt to a degree right now so it's certainly a familiar conversation, and we appreciate you, michael o'hanlon having the conversation with us and giving us real perspective on what's going on internationally right now. eat your heart out, south carolina, the mayoral race that is the most entertaining political contest of the year. we'll talk about that right after the break. now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? can become major victories. i'm phil mickelson, pro golfer. when i was diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis my rheumatologist prescribed enbrel

for my pain and stiffness, and to help stop joint damage. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections tuberculosis lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores have had hepatitis b have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever bruising, bleeding or paleness. since enbrel helped relieve my joint pain, it's the little things that mean the most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists.

very, very excited about that and very proud of that. >>beltway politics from inside the loop. >>we tackle the big issues here

in our nation's capital, around the country and around the globe. >>dc columnist and four time emmy winner bill press opens current's morning news block. >>we'll do our best to carry the flag from 6 to 9 every morning. >> the self-described lasarus of politics, mark sanford was asked yesterday if he had tips for another politician with comeback hopes. >> there's another politician trying to forge a similar redemption in new york, anthony wiener considering a run poor mayor. based on what you've seen, what would your advice be? >> i wouldn't presume to give any other politician advice. >> sorry anthony there's no hail mary for you in sanford's

playbook. wiener was caught tweeting photos of himself in 2011 and is said to be considering a run for new york city mayor. he seems to be testing the waters with a recent new york times magazine interview. political junkies are operating the campaign will inject new life into the mayoral race. if he does throw his hat in the ring, he would be vying against six other candidates including christine quinn and thomson who ran for mayor in 2009. joining us now is jarret murphy, editor in chief at citylimits.org. welcome into the war room, jarret. >> thanks for having me. >> how would an anthony wiener candidacy impact the race? >> what we've seen from the polling so far is that he would take a race that right now is basically christine quinn against a pack of challengers

led by blazio, the public advocate of the city and turn that into a two tear race with him against quinn and everybody else lapping at their heels. it's name recognition wiener is well known because of twitter and he didn't run a very strong race for mayor in 2005. he would probably set up a dynamic of him against quinn fighting for not just winning the primary, but determining who might make it into a run off in new york city. we have a system where if you don't get 40% on the first go, there is a run off two weeks later where alliances shift. quinn wants to avoid a run off. her chances of wing a run off don't look good compared to winning the primary outright. wiener might change those dynamics. >> it would seem it would.

i grew up in new york city. it seemed like a pretty progressive place i remember thinking that growing up there and from afar. history has shown us it's not easy a elect a progressive mayor there. why would that be? i can think of david dinkins and beyond that, the abe beams and giuliani and bloomberg now it's changed. >> how he rates as a progressive or not since lindsey left city hall, we've had one progressive mayor for one term or none. in a city that has a reputation for being one of the more liberal and progressive in the country, that's an interesting question. lindsey is seen as sort of the last true liberal mayor never won an outright majority of the votes, only clearing 43% or so in both his elections.

since then, there's a narrative of history since then and each election as an episode. there's been up and down a bit but a decline in voter participation. there's been some racial shifts and tension within the liberal progressive coalition that has tended to thwart chances of a progressive victory. if you analyze history on a race by race basis, it looks different. you have a lot of incumbents winning reelection, catch giuliani and bloomberg have won between them five incumbent victories. if you look at conservative candidates prevailing, in each of them fear was a very big factor, fear of the son of sam

fear of the crime wave fear of terrorism. that environment is very difficult for a progressive message to take root. i think there's been a beginnation of that kind of sweeping garment of factors and individual battles that determine each election. >> and we're sitting here talking about you know, how progressive you are and how much of a democratic you are, but jarret, i believe that if mayor bloomberg were to amendment the constitution in the city again he could serve another term under the charter. do you think he'd win if he ran again? >> i don't think so. >> really? that's interesting. >> last time was close. it's difficult for anyone to win a fourth term at mayor. he had cox tried and failed. bloomberg had a rocky start to his third term and has since righted the ship somewhat. on a laugh things, he has worn out people's patience, be it on schools or even on some of the policing issues. last time he had to spend $108 million as a two-term

incumbent to beat an opponent people didn't respect as a challenger and beat him by 5%. i don't think it would work this time and i don't think he'll make that attempt. >> you follow this closely very clearly you do, anthony wiener, is he going to run and do you think if he does, he will be able to stem that steady cline in voter participation we've seen for the past almost 25 years or 15, 16 years in new york? >> that's an interesting question. i think that there are going to be more participation in this election anyway, because it's an open seat and there are a lot of candidates. there is a real conversation about ideas out there. it's not getting a lot of press or buzz, but there are real differences among the candidates. i think wiener is going to run. i don't know if it's 60-40 or 70-30, he has been hyping his run for the past couple weeks.

he's looking for staff now. mark stanford it turns out as inform am advisor has to look elsewhere for that. i think wiener will bring immediate buzz to the race. whether that translates into consistent interest, and really brings more voters to the polls given the fact one of the reasons wiener creates buzz is because something he did that people don't like, i don't know. >> i think it sustains a lot of interest. i think mark stanford did prove that if wiener runs, people all over the country are going to be interested. thanks so much for being with us tonight. up next, heights been one month since mark zuckerberg made his presence known on the political stage. you should keep your old friends, because you sure as hell aren't going to make any new ones. stick around. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not

bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. >> what a way to start the day. (vo) followed by "talking liberally with stephanie miller" >> this is big for me. only on current tv.

(vo) later tonight current tv is the place for compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him.

(vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. >> we have a birthday to report on the political front. tomorrow as i'm sure you know, marks the one month anniversary of the inception of mark zuckerberg's forward us political organization, highlighting immigration focus. we will work to encourage congress to focus on politics that maximize the potential of our country's workforce to contribute to the knowledge economy. it is more concerned about tech workers than low skilled workers. this documented how it is using t.v. ads that some liberal groups don't like.

move on.org has called them out. zuck's hard ball tackics are raising eyebrows in the tech community. this was tweeted: >> to break down this political fight, even perhaps answer that question is our own political app joe garofoli, joining us from san francisco. we say there's always someone in our war room, today it's you. >> it's me. >> joe covers politics for the san francisco chronicle. are people more sup set at the hard ball political tactics or stance on immigration reform? >> i think there's confusion going on between facebook and silicon valley at large.

facebook is about making money and they want, as you said, to get tech engineers here and they're willing to do what it takes to do it. they're willing to step on toes. they're getting blowback for that. the key here is that they want to have cheaper labor and a foreign-born commuter analyst will cost half as much as a u.s. born one. >> i see. listen we all are interested in what interests us, and everything becomes its own special interest. silicon valley is not a one size fits all political community at all. what sets us apart from other tech lobbies efforts and wealthy donors. >> because they are bipartisan. some of the top operatives there have run some of the most conservative campaigns ever. they also have long time white house operatives like joe lack

heart, a guy who worked for clinton, so they have people working both sides of the fence. on paper that is a good strategy, but you are going to -- as you say they're ticking off core supporters, their liberal base. we'll see if they pull that together to get the type of immigration laws they want. they are not worried about the 12 million here, low level folks picking fruit in the fields. they're worried about the cheap engineer that they can get who was born overseas. >> and that clearly comes through in what they're talking about. i want to turn your attention now to another big agenda item in the u.s. senate, guns. today, michael bloomberg's mayor's against guns launched an ad campaign to support republican senator of pennsylvania. take a look at this. >> his idea, protect our families with comprehensive background checks so dangerous

criminals can't buy guns. courage and common sense. that's pat toomey. tell him to keep fighting for background checks. >> the common sense first of all, the problem that bloomberg's going to have to matter where he goes and these ads are going to be tagged as that new york city mayor michael bloomberg. he is going to be always tagged as the outsider. it's going to be used to undercut whatever effectiveness these ads have. i grew up in pittsburgh. the gun culture is pervasive there, doesn't matter if you're white collar or blue collar. a lot of people hunt, guns are part of the culture and michael bloomberg is not part of the culture. it means nothing that michael bloomberg is airing a positive ad in pennsylvania.

>> do you think people know that it's coming from him? >> soon enough, they'll know. between every different stream of media it will soon get out that this guy is funding the ads. the n.r.a. will certainly make that known and is making it known to its members and there are many in pennsylvania. >> even in downtown pittsburgh, right. >> in downtown, plenty downtown. >> plenty of gun guys in downtown. you've written about it recently filibuster reform is stuck in the mud right now. how is it being moved ahead? you have a position on dianne feinstein and her role in it as well. >> very small handful of democrats are trying to move it ahead, newer members. dianne feinstein told me i voted in favor of filibuster reform. she did but a very weak form of it that does nothing to actually reform the senate filibuster

rules. you don't even have to stand in the senate, like jimmy stewart the talking filibuster. you can threaten a filibuster. what she voted for would not do anything to resolve that. without leaders like feinstein who is very well respected seen as a centrist, institutionalist, without her it goes nowhere and she is showing no signs of changing her mind. she came out of the early gun debate there moaning about oh, my god we need 60 votes for everything. lady you didn't even vote to change the rules. that's where she is on this. >> i think we have to stop the tour there with lady, you didn't even vote to change the rules. joe garofoli. >> that will be on twitter soon, i'm sure. >> joe garofoli, you can read joe and his blogs there and his articles and everything about joe garofoli. thanks so much for being on the show. still to come, we held him off

as long as we could but today brett erlich gets to go off on his favorite subject. >> chris christie got the lap band surgery. i've got to stop making jokes about his size. tomorrow. don't go away. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that there is any chance we'll see this president even say the words "carbon tax"? >> with an open mind... >> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> ...and a distinctly satirical point of view. >> but you mentioned "great leadership" so i want to talk about donald rumsfeld. >> (laughter). >> watch the show. >> only on current tv.

you know who is coming on to me now? you know the kind of guys that do reverse mortgage commercials? those types are coming on to me all the time now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely.

>> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? >> now for the best of the rest stories the war room doesn't want to you miss on this progressive thursday. after a week of controversy the body of boston bombing suspect tamerlan tsarnaev was laid to rest today in a secret spot in boston. the dilemma over what to do with the remains rocked the community. the community where he lived said burying them would disturb the peace. others offered to bury tamerlan, buffeted vocal protest. one courageous soul rose to the challenge. a funeral director in worcestor

prepared the body according to muslim tradition. he told the boston globe it's a matter of principle, saying: >> from resting in peace to never letting it die we go. the house will vote next week to repeal obamacare for the 37th 37th time. i can't even believe i'm saying that. the decision to hold a vote serves two purposes, one it will give the 70 house freshman who have never voted on this the chance to do so, and two, it gets them membership into the obama haters club. it's a two for one there. house speaker john boehner fended off confused reporters telling them in his best republican obstructist accent that the term law of the land is negotiable. >> why is it not a waste of time

to vote again on health care repeal when it's been voted 30 times. >> do you want to vote over and over again. >> i want to repeal the law of the land. is that clear? >> from wasting time in the congressional halls to actually doing something for the middle class, massachusetts senator elizabeth warren introduced a bill that would give the college students the same interest rates on their students load as the banks get borrowing from the fed. makes total sense. >> right now a big bank can get a loan through the federal reserve discount window at a rate of about three quarterrers of 1%, but this summer, a student lying to get a loan to go to college will pay almost 7%. in other words the federal government's going to charge interest rates nine times higher

that that the rates they charge the biggest banks. the same banks that destroyed millions of jobs and nearly broke the economy. that isn't right. >> hear hear, elizabeth warren. well said, so important. our brett erlich spent so much of the past year working on chris christie jokes he hasn't had time to realize that the new jersey nets moved to billion. now is his chance to use all those jokes. i'll say it now and may war rant saying again just calm down folks breath's talking now. >> chris christie got the lap band surgery which is good for his cardiovascular health, i guess, but sad for me, because i've got all these fat jokes i won't get to use unless it's a joke dump. >> chris christie's so fat his blood type is gravy. >> he's so fat when he sits

around the statehouse, he really sits around the statehouse. >> if the new jersey nets played the boston celtics in the playoff, he wouldn't know who to vote for because he's the mayor of new jersey, but his pimples are full of boston cream. what do chris christie and a boston bus have in common? size. >> he's so fat he's not technically a planet, but what we call pluto now. he's so at fat, he ate a staffer. i'm going to change hands. chris christie's so fat when he backs up, he beats and he goes "i'm hungry." knock knock. >> who's that? >> chris christie. >> don't eat me! >> he's so fat, one time i was giving a presentation and he ate my piecharts. >> change back. chris christie's favorite band

is bruce springsteen, because be he's from new jersey and least favorite band is the doors because he doesn't fit through them. chris christie's so fat his lap band is an orchestra. thanks for listening. >> retweets do not mean endorsements. i will be sticking around to host "the young turks" where i welcome joe williams into "the young turks." jack bergmann and david as serroda we're going to talk about ted cruz. have a great night. bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of

his ability, is trying to look out for us.

[♪ theme music ♪] >> michael: look at that a guy takes his tie off, loosens up a little bit, and all of a sudden he is hosting "the young turks." cenk is celebrating the 1 billionth view that he has gotten with "the young turks" on youtube. congratulations of course to cenk. and i'm glad to be here hosting "the young turks" after "the war room," "the war room" with michael shure by the way.