>> michael: coming up tonight, the country was already in a pretty foul mood this week and then they got their copy of "rolling stone" magazine. i'm michael shure. this is "the war room." [♪ theme music ♪] >> michael: three months after the boston bombing, suspect, dzhokhar tsarvaev is back in the headlines in a very big way. "rolling stone" chose this month to give the cover honor to tsarnaev.

the decision was greeted largely with outrage including my own, particularly in boston though. major tom menino and governor deval patrick both criticized the magazine's decision today. >> why would they publicize a guy who destroyed people's lives? it doesn't make any sense to me. very pooed taste. >> the substance of the article is not objectionable, but the cover is out of taste. >> michael: menino also sent a letter to the editor urging him to shift his coverage to the bombing survivors and those who helped them. tedeschi said in a statement, music and terrorism don't mix.

"rolling stone" issued a state of their own . . . and in another case causing outrage and complex reaction in this country protests over the trayvon martin continue today. there were demonstrations in cities from los angeles to new york, and hundreds more are planned for this weekend, and net the nra seems intent on making george zimmerman, martin's killer its official poster boy. the gun group criticized eric holder for saying it may be time to take another look at the stand your ground laws. >> it's time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense. [ applause ] >> michael: conservatives are up in arm on killmead and friends

yesterday. >> we're never going to be able to have an honest conversation when you have someone like attorney eric holder that stands up in front of the naacp and basically says we're going to manipulate the law to give you your, quote unquote, social justice. >> michael: so while thousand express sadness, conservatives express anger that the administration is going to take away their guns. joining me now is syndicated radio host david sirota, who i'm very pleased to say will join me inco hosting the show. we also welcome, christine pelosi, chair of the california women's democratic caucus. welcome to both of you. let's talk about the zimmerman case. it has spurred debate about race, gun, violence. what do we hope comes out of this national dialogue? i'll start with you christine.

>> we hope that we take a look at the stand your ground laws, and unbake them out of the instructions that the zimmerman jury took a look at. there is the group alec that has been writing up a wish list that the nra has asked for, that corporations are funding and that legislators are passing, a lot of whom are not subjecting that to full open, honest debate. i think it's time for our country to say, look when what you wear determines whether you live or die, we have got a problem, and when you look at the fact that stand your ground laws when invoked by black defendants are not seen as being legitimate then we have a problem. we need to take a look at stand your ground and take a look at alec and some of the other

right-wing efforts to write legislation out of the public view. and bring into it the public view and give the public a choice. >> michael: that makes sense. david, do these protests help -- does the protest thing going on around the country, including the isolated incidents of violence -- does that just give fodder to alec. >> i think the protests have helped. the first -- the first step towards actually changing things at the state and federal level is to have that discussion. but i think we need to ask ours whether we have created a society that is constantly presuming guilt. george zimmerman presumed the court of trayvon martin, and a court ratified his presearch shun. we are seeing a presumption of guilt throughout the society. the obama administration drone war, presumes the guilt of

people based on a signature, where they are, what their last name is killing american citizens. we have the nsa surveilling people, stop and fisk. i mean these -- these kinds of policies particularly effect people of color, but i think george zimmerman is essentially a representation of a larger presumption of guilt that we need to be asking about. >> michael: yeah, the idea of a presumption of guilt is pervasive in our society, and i would say that's a provocative argument you make. and here is a presumption of something, which is the voting right's act, a presumption that black people at one time shouldn't be allowed to vote. they got the vote and today the conscious of the congress as i know christine, you know him well, and he's an amazing man, he gave testimony before a senate hearing today, lewis, in

talking about the voting right's act, he makes us think that maybe john roberts was wrong. i believe john roberts was wrong, but maybe he was wrong when he said we are no longer divided along racial lines. i think this week has proven that. >> i think we are still steeped in a racist society. i also think that we have to draw a careful distinction between saying our -- our drone policy and our terrorism policy is the same as what george zimmerman did. it's fair to say that george zimmerman had the mentality of the government, but i don't think that the converse is true. at least in the government's case when you look at some of the targeting that was done it does seem they base that on some set of fact. he based this on this is a kid

that give him zero respect and had the wrong clothes on. he has no intelligence and he armed with a gun but not armed with the training that would tell him tray in the car. >> i would agree with that except i would add let's not forget the comparison comes from president obama and the obama administration. when the obama administration was asked why are you counting all military-aged males in a combat zone as combatants. and the answer was because we presume people in those targeted areas, were, quote, up to no good. in that was george zimmerman's rationale -- >> but that's not the president. we have to be fair.

>> it is the policy. i agree every situation is different, but if at the top of the government the government is saying people are up to no good based on a profile, then we are going to have individual expressions of that in our society in the worst ways. >> but we had racial profiling long before there were drones and 9/11. i do think where you are going to see the outcome of this is going to be interesting. with janet nepal on the know coming west i don't see the administration being able to get the stop and frisk through -- >> michael: i don't see that happening either. >> i don't either. let's take a look at who is up to no good.

we have gone from being the deporter in chief on ice to now going for the dream act and immigration reform. let's make a change there. so you could see the dos nomination be a first real test post trayvon as to what direction do we want to go as a country. >> michael: right. if the people making that decision are putting two and put together. [overlapping speakers] >> michael: i think promoting and mentioning are different -- in any case not specifically promoting for the job. we have other work to get to. the "rolling stone" cover, this is a controversy. this -- they showed -- , you know, the cover, the picture of dzhokhar tsarvaev. and it was a really good article talking about the history of this kid essentially. it's a photograph that the

"new york times" used. why is it different that the "rolling stone" used it? and why does it feel different? >> i think because we in our society, our culture, asubscribe rolling stone cover to the definition of what is hip. and that's part of why it was shocking. i think it has a brand identity crisis. it does the most serious kind of reporting on all sorts of issues, the drug war, wall street now terrorism, and packages those stories next to stories about bands, so in a sense there is a confusion around its brand. it is also the public's perception as "rolling stone" as a 1960s magazine about bands when in fact it has matured. but there is a cognitive distance. >> michael: there is, that's a

great way to put it. we have seen presidents and a killer, we have seen charles manson on that cover. on time magazine we saw the columbine killers. why is this different? >> look at my twitter feed every single time there is a mass assault i'm out there tweeting, we have seen the mug shot, the person is in custody, you can get it go now. if somebody is a wanted man or woman, put their picture up to find them, or find out information about them but beyond crime-solving purposes there's no reason to do that. "rolling stone" could easily put one of heros on the cover or one of the survivors, and then back that up, you know, with an article the way it is. but i think the problem is they haven't tried, and until the

media makes as strong of effort to promote the survivors or here rose as they do the killers, they can't make the argument well, if it leads, it leads. how do they know? >> i want to ask you a question. what about "rolling stone"'s argument that one of their reasons of putting him on the cover was to visually show that terrorists look like in many cases so many young americans. >> michael: because i think when you are on the cover of a magazine in this country, generally speaking it feels like it is a gorefying thing. >> that's true. >> michael: coming up we'll talk

to the author of "rise of the warrior cop," plus we asked david for a vital issue that no one else is covering. tonight everything you should know about the trans-pacific trade agreement. it doesn't sound sexy, but it will affect your life. and add philip caputo to the list of great authors who rediscovered america by driving it. it's "the war room" on a wednesday, and we will be right back.

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 there is any chance we'll ever hear the president even say the word "carbon tax"? >> with an opened 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) >> cutting throught the clutter of today's top stories. >> this is the savior of the republican party? i mean really? >> ... with a unique perspective. >> teddy rosevelt was a weak sports until he was a grown up. >> (laughter) >> ... and lots of fancy buzz words. >> family values, speding, liberty, economic freedom,

hard-working moms, crushing debt, cute little puppies. if wayne lapierre can make up stuff that sounds logical while making no sense... hey, so can i. once again friends, this is live tv and sometimes these things happen. >> watch the show. >> only on current tv. >> michael: on september 16th, 2010? roy, utah a narcotic police force conducted a raid on a mr. blair. in the application for the warren the strike force said blair's roommate slash dealer would redestroy the evidence if they were not given the authority to carry out a no-knock raid. they were given information that the roommate had moved out of

the house. but they busted down blair's door, in paramilitary style. careful this could be disturbing. >> michael: extrordanaire footage, you might have noticed the sergeant say get on the ground after he shot him three times. burnett later told investigators, i didn't think about saying words, i just thought about not getting hit. the county attorney's office found the raid to be justified. 100 s.w.a.t.-style raids are conducted every single day

according to a new book by radley balko. transforming the force from protect and serve to seeing civilians as enemies on their hometown battlefield, with me again is david sirota and joining "huffington post" and author of the new book "the rise of the warrior cop: the militarization of america's police forces". thanks for being with us radially. a question jthere has been a frightening up tick in the number of paramilitary forces over the past 20 years. in 199050% had a s.w.a.t. team and in 2005 the number has climbed to 80%. what is this all about? >> well, there are a lot of policies driving this trend, but, you know, without getting into the sentiment that is

driving it is the war on drugs our policy makers declaring war on all kinds of things, like drugs, crime. so they set policies that are war like and that mentality filters down to police at the local level, who if you strain cops like soldiers, and arm them like soldiers and dress them like soldiers they are going to start to adopt the mentality of soldiers. soldier's mission is basically to kill people or annihilate a foreign enemy, and the job of the police officer is to protect and serve. >> david: radially, it's david sirota how do these towns justify having thesing kinds of

s.w.a.t. teams. >> well, when a small town gets this equipment, they want to use it, so that propose starting a s.w.a.t. team. and they will cite columbine, or virginia tech, or some of these mass shooting incidents as it could happen here, this is why we need to be prepared. there is a socialist who has crunched the numbers and found the average middle school high school, or college campus can expect to see a homicide once every i think it was 6,000 years. but when you have the equipment you want to use it. and they are used to perform search warrants for people suspected of low-level drug crimes. >> michael: radially, first of all thank you for mentioning the finist institution in the country, the university of

virginia, but it talks about the jumping off point of paramilitarization. let's take a listen to this. >> despite our budget problems to the extent money can help in meeting the problem of dangerous drugs, it will be available. this is one area where we cannot have budget cuts because we must wage what i have called total war against public enemy number one in the united states the problem of dangerous drugs. >> michael: so 40 years and $1 trillion later, not much has changed. how is waging war on abstracts like drugs and terrorism, perpetuated this style of police force? >> yeah, i would argue that a lot has changed, but i know your point is they haven't made a dent in the drug supply, but

nixon started us off by declaring war on drugs. he passed a number of proposals that he said were critical. one was the no-knock raid. the no-knock raid where the police break into your house in the middle of the night, it was -- the idea was actually -- came from i believe a 29-year-old senate raid as a political strategy basically as a wedge issue to use in the 1968 election to get middle america angry about drug users. this wasn't something police departments were asking for or criminologyists were saying was necessary, it was solely political. and off it was passed there were a number of high-profile incidents where agents were breaking into homes and terrorizing families, and congress actually showed some shame in the '70s. they held hearings and repealed

the no-knock law. of course it came back in the 1980s, and we have had it ever since. and these botched raids, and raids that take innocent victims have continued. but there was a time when the drug war was not completely intractable. >> david: let me ask you a question about the world being a battlefield. if that is the case, what do you say to those who say if the whole world is a battlefield, then our police forces should be militarized. >> i would say that's not what a free society does. armies have a very specific mission. it's again destruction, to annihilate an emmy force. we don't -- we don't have soldiers policing citizens in the u.s. because we don't believe that citizens are an

enemy force to be destroyed. i do think there is a use for s.w.a.t. teams. i think the appropriate use is when you have a violent felon on the loose, or hostage situation, terrorist situation, bank robberies. when the government is using violence to diffuse an already violent situation. the problem is the vast majority of the s.w.a.t. raids are for non-violent crimes. >> michael: and to that radly, your book talks about where there was no crime -- and i find it very compelling incidents where there are s.w.a.t. raids on things as benign as a poker game. talk about that a little bit, prostitution rings underage drinking. this is what sends a s.w.a.t.

team into a home? >> yeah, i think there were two points where we entered new territory with this. in the '80s and early '90s the justifications was drug dealers are heavily armed, and those arguments are not all that sound, but they were making the arguments. when 1996 when california passed the medical marijuana initiative. we saw the government respond by sending s.w.a.t. teams into medical marijuana clinics. and this represents a troubling shift in government policy. now nobody is going to argue that the hippy mom and pop running the pot dispensary in san jose are a threat to a take out a bunch of agents. this violence is about sending a message. this is about making a police call statement, and putting the

boot down on these dispensaries that are openly flouting federal law. and that is really troubling. >> michael: yeah so much of it is troubling, not that if i were losing in a poker game as i usually am, now i know i can just call a s.w.a.t. team. radley balko thanks so much. coming up the future of this country will largely be determined by our trade agreements, and the future of our trade agreement largely being determined in secret. we'll get into that right after the break. ♪

♪ >> david: there is a fight brewing in congress that you probably haven't heard about and it involves around a couple of acronyms, one is tpp. that's the trans-pacific partnership, a major trade agreement with ten other counts they are the obama administration has been negotiating since 2008. trade representatives are in malaysia for round 18 of negotiations.

the administration calls it the cornerstone of its economic policy in the pacific. if completed the treaty could cover as much as 40% of world trade agreement. as for wtf, that's the reaction you get from most americans when you start talking international trade deals. in a letter last month, elizabeth warren chastised the administration for negotiating in extreme secrecy. writing quote . . . the administration argues that the tpp would increase experts and submit u.s. influence in the pacific. but lots worry that it could send jobs overseas and undermine environmental

protections. joining us from washington to explain all of this wallach, director of public citizen's global trade watch division and a certified tppftawft expert. lori, welcome to "the war room." >> thank you very much. >> david: so walk us through the trans-pacific partnership. what is the tpp? >> so it's been branded as a trade agreement. but actually trade is the least of it. i would say a fair description would be that this is the biggest, tellthy corporate power grab we have ever seen. here is how it works. you sit down and just as the executive branch you renegotiate the major parts of the u.s. law we all rely on. the prices of medicine food safety financial regulation, even whether or not our tax dollars can go to buy america procurement, putting our money back into communities to great

jobs here. incentives for job offshoring stuff that should not be in a trade agreement. tpp has 29 chapters, 5 of them have to do with trade. >> david: one of the big fears here is that this trade deal might tighten intellectual property rights restrict internet freedom. what is the fear there? what is the issue there? >> so, i think that the big content folks who tried to stuff us with the stop online act, was stopped in congress. great. in the copyright chapter of the

tpp, large chunks of that bill have been snuck in through the back door. so the way these deals work is if you sign one of these agreements, the u.s. has to confirm all of its domestic non-trade laws to these rules. really it's sneaking right into whether you are going to be able to have access to the internet or if the food you are going to serve your family your kids is actually safely inspected, or if your granny can pay for medicines, because on top of that in this so-called free trade agreements there are also pharma patents. >> david: i mentioned senator warren talking about secrecy saying these negotiations should be open. what do you say to the idea that there needs to be trade

negotiation so the parties can be frank with each other without fearing, i guess public embarrassment? what is your response to that? >> right now 600 u.s. corporate advisors, who are the official u.s. trade advisors to the u.s. government have access to these checks and negotiations. the negotiations in the other countries have access to whatever the u.s. says. the only problem is the u.s. public, the people who are going to live with the results, the u.s. congress, the people who have the constitutional authority over trade, and the press, who should keep the first two parties informed are the only parties locked out so if there is a real problem that there is secrecy, they probably shouldn't let the 600 corporate advise source and lawyers grazing through these documents. senator warren had it right.

the tpp is a lot like dracula, does not do well in the light. there is something in there to really make people really irritated. i mean, hell there is a ban on buy america procurement in there. if it is dragged into the sunshine for debate we're not going to end up with the same agreement. >> david: so let me ask you very quickly one last question, which is the question i don't have a great answer to. a lot of us can remember back when nafta created a huge uproar in seattle, and no it seems like there hasn't been the kind of activism around corporate written trade agreements. what is the explanation for that? >> i would say two things. one thing is that the proponents of the trade agreement learned the lesson when the public finds

out. so they are pushing to keep it secret so there is no debate. when people find out, they get mad. bush hardly a paradigm of transparency released the last big trade agreement that was called the free trade of americas, and he put it on the website in 2001. a bunch of people looked at it and said that doesn't look so good for me. so they walked away and tried a different strategy. my sense is actually there is a lot of information now that has leaked, because there are enough officials that if the public wants to know, go to expose the tpp.org. we have gathered all of the leaked documents and information. you can find out exactly what it could do plus really go ahead information on what you can do to get involved, not the least

of which is, go ask your member of congress for your copy of the text. because it will make them realize they don't have one. >> david: that's so important. lori wallach, thanks for joining us. up next there's nothing like a good road trip. author philip caputo joins us to talk about his new book "the longest road."

♪ >> michael: welcome back inside "the war room," i'm michael shure. we got rid of that sirota guy, he was just too good. the united states is an amazing place. 50 states filled with mexicans seminoles, somalis and eskimos. author philip caputo wondered one thing, what holds us all together? what makes us all from california to new york pledge

allegiance to the same flag? for the answer we did something kwen -- quintessentially american a road trip. he stayed in places you probably never heard of and spoke with folks as diverse as our landscape. latino immigrants in nebraska a la coda businessman, and he asked them all the same thing, what holds our country together? the answers are part of philip caputo's new book "the longest road." he is a critically-claimed author and pulitzer prize win journalist. welcome inside "the war room."

what inspired this book and how is it different? >> well, the inspiration came 15, 16 years ago when i was on an island off of the coast. and i had seen eskimo children there pledging allegiance to the flag, and i had seen children doing the same thing in florida. and i said my god, i said this country is so immense, and it has every race nationality and religion on the face of the earth, and yet it somehow all hangs together so i thought i would take to the road and request -- ask people what they

thought was the cohesive force. >> michael: and what were the answers you got from the people on your journey? what is it that holds the country together according to them? >> well there were probably as many answer as there were people. i think i formally interviewed 83 people and probably talked to well over 100 informally. the answers varied a farm woman in missouri told me she thought it was a belief that we have more in common than not, that we are more alike than different, and that in her view she wasn't sure that was really true but the important thing, she said was that we believe it is. in other words it's a version of the image becomes the reality.

>> michael: right. i -- i hear you say that and -- and i think we're guilty of that all the time of the image becoming the reality, whether or not you finally get to eat in a five-star restaurant and you feel like you have to like the meal just because people tell you it is good. is it the same in america. one of the people in texas her answer was a one-word answer, "hope." are we just that hopeful from key west to barter island? >> well, that answer which came from, as you say, a woman in texas, erica surewood was the most succinct answer. the exact quote was, "it's hope. isn't that what it has always been"? but if you go back to colonial

times to the massachusetts bay colony the pilgrims came here in the hope of finding religious freedom. the call onnists hoped to find hope from freedom from the british. and betterment of if not ones the lives of one's children. that remains today. there obviously is no frontier left but there are metaphorical frontiers, there is room and liberty within the country, to if you'll excuse the cliche realize your dreams. i might add that i have reflected on erica's answer and while it is a very good answer it is also a bit of a warning for us today. i think we have all seen that

class lines seem to be hardening in america today, that opportunities seem to be shrinking, and that the chance to rise out of one's station in life seems to be diminishing sometimes. there's growing inequality in america. and i tend to think if we lose that quality of hope we will have lost something very vital to our national identity. >> michael: and to that you met a lot of people down on their like. did you expect to have so many conversations about the economy on this trip, and i think that goes to the point you just made that hope is an elusive thing, and the economy is not. >> well, i didn't expect -- i should say i didn't really seek out people to talk to them about the economy. it's not a particular subject

that i'm very well versed in, but i was aware like everybody else that we're living in the worst economic recession since the great depression, and so that was being in the back -- back of my mind it was inevitable that the conversation would turn that way. for example, i ran into a woman who had been living a middle -- to i would say almost upper middle class life in florida with her contractor husband, his business of course went bust with the housing bust and now they were living in a trailer in the woods of tennessee, where they had no running water. they bathed in the river and in the creeks and during the winter, they heated water over the stove in their trailer, and oddly enough this sort of thorough like lifestyle agreed with him but it did not with

her. >> michael: yeah, it is an amazing country when you think about not just the diversity of people but the diversity of ways and places in which we live. after this trip, philip caputo, what do you think holds america together? >> well, i've -- i have thought about it quite a bit and i -- it's rather long answer but i'll try to make it short. i actually think it's the conflicts within this nation that hold it together. right now it's the conflict between the tea party right and call it the progressive left. it creates kind of dynamic disequilibrium and i'm not talking about the middle of the road. i'm talking about a constant tension between opposites that holds our political center just as gravity and the expansive force of -- of a star's core

hold the star together. >> michael: that's an interesting response. what wedges us apart is actually in a way what holds us together and that is a fascinating answer. makes me want to read the book and i'm sure a lot of other people. philip caputo thanks for your time. up next, "the war room"'s other political comedian jprinceton grad jeff chrysler will join us to wrap things up. so stick around.

>> michael: i cannot imagine a less republican place than "the war room"'s home of san francisco. 49 years ago, however, that was not the case. and in tonight's trivia we look back to the convention of 1964, held right here in the bay area. that's right. they nominated in bagdad by the

bay. and on july 16th, 1964 which is 49 years ago yesterday, berry goldwater accepted the nomination. he turned back the o'clock of their party. new york governor william miller was the party's vice president nominee, miller is the father of my colleague at current tv stephanie miller. the republicans had an anti come mist platform that refused to repudiate the ku klux klan. he only won his home state and four deep southern ones. he offered these words about his party. [ applause ] >> this is a party, this republican party is a party for free men, not for blind

followers, and not for conformists. [ cheers and applause ] >> michael: now as for their blind followers and non-conformists, 49 years later and they still haven't been able to shake them free. he alluded to balance anddy tersety as part of the republican equation yet two black journalists left the convention after enduring racial slurs. now joining our discussion of the weather and politics is the mark train of a future generation. we're pleased to welcome back jeff chrysler. jeff thanks for being here and of course, david sirota with us as well. speaking of charismatic leaders who love san francisco dick chenny is back.

tell us about that jeff. >> his daughter declared yesterday to run. he is running against the sitting three-term republican senator, who was told she wouldn't run if he was running, and has gone back on her word. today dick chenny weighed in and said he would settle this with his old friend by taking him duck hunting. [ laughter ] >> michael: we know how that ends. david what do we make of this chenny trying to get back in. >> i think the funny thing is usually you see tea party primaries coming from local candidates against the senator who has supposedly gone washington. now you have a permanent fixture of washington saying she is going to be the tea party candidate against the senator.

>> rand paul and newt gingrich said they were surprised that she wasn't for her home state of virginia. >> michael: i love that. few places are hotter that washington, d.c. right now. adding to the steam was former president bill clinton. during clinton's administration the epa was raised to the status position. although much work remained he took many big steps. jeff, do you think bill clinton is happy getting the epa building named after him. >> i think he would have been happier if he got the bill clinton center of attention. in a couple of years he will be renamed hillary clinton's husband. and if the epa can make a real difference.

what is the signature achievement in his administration? it's hard to pinpoint one? doma? making arsono hall relevant? >> michael: and he credited our old friend al gore today as being part of the epa. but bill clinton sitting back i want the epaing? come on? >> probably not. maybe this is the start of the truth of naming. maybe we'll get the ronald reagan office of public debt. the naming of buildings -- you had ronald reagan named after the washington airport after he crushed the strikers at the washington airport, that's not exactly truth in naming. at least this is some truth in naming. >> michael: and they named the little rock airport as the bill and hillary clinton airport so at least he doesn't have to share. finally tonight, i want to thank

abby leonard who is a producer here at our show. we always say there is always someone in our "war room." we're going to miss abby who is moving on to better things. her work is exceptional as has made this show so great. thank you all for joining us here in "the war room." david is taking the reins tomorrow i'll be chiming in from washington, d.c., at least for a black or two. so abby things again. "the young turks" are next. ♪

>> i think it's brilliant. (vo) first, news and analysis with a washington perspective from an emmy winning insider. >> i know this stuff, and i love it. (vo) followed by humor and politics with a west coast edge. bill press and stephanie miller. >> what a way to start the day.

alright, in 15 minutes we're 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. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> cenk: all right welcome to "the young turks." we have a terrific store for you, as always, an we're, of course, going to start with

updates on the trayvon martin- martin-george zimmerman situation. unfortunately, there are a lot more fall fallout stories. let me introduce my panel. we've got john, who will be presenting throughout the day. and jayar jackson from the legendary "the young turks" and