is >> coming up, in a case that was certainly not cut and dried, no surprise that the verdict wasn't either. private first class bradley manning gets a peek at his fate and now must await his sentence. i am michael shore. you are in the war room. >> today in maryland, private bradley man can was found guilty on multiple charges of stealing government property and violating the espionage act but he was found not guilty of the most serious charge. that was aiding and abetting the enemy. the judgment was a rebuke to military prosecutors who tried to bring a charge last used during the civil war.

the military argued that simply by posting documents online, manning aided the u.s. enemies, including al-qaeda. a conviction could have carried a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. manning has admitted to passing 700 ,000 secret government files to wiki leaks, the biggest leak of classified information in our history. he still faces a sentence of up to 136 years in prison. the sentencing phase starts tomorrow and may last for weeks. joining us now from waste is hayes brown, the national security reporter for "thinkprogress.org." welcome inside the war room? >> thanks for having me. >> hayes, mannings' lawyers seemed to feel he dodged a bullet. was today's verdict a bit of surprised? >> it turned out to be the best we could have hoped for in this situation in that, like you said, the aiding and abetting charge, the most serious of the charges was dismissed while the others -- while, also, carrying a pretty heavy penalty don't

carry the death penalty with them. so that's a definite bullet dodged for manning. >> what kind of press dent does this verdibilict set for report in the media? >> it's a very useful precedent for us, i will say that for sure because the way the government was arguing it, merely by passing these documents along to be available in the public, manning was aiding the enemy, which is something that reporters can be seen to be doing every day pretty much in the national security beat. so to say that by passing along these documents, he was aiding the taliban directly, that was a bit of an overstretch. some of these documents did h e reprecushions for people on the ground. many of the people mentioned in the documents were later persecuted for helping out the united states and some were possibly killed by the taliban in afghanistan. >> we can't gloss over the seriousness even as we look at what the legal ramifications are. and, like you said, how important it is for the media.

the debate over bradley manning, one of them has been as to whether or not he is a whistle blower or a malicious leaker or in some circles, even a traitor. does this settle that debate? and what does it mean for edward snowden? >> it doesn't settle it in the least. people are going to read into this verdict what they want to. some will continue to see bradley manning as a heroic whistle blower. i think he is just someone who thought he was doing the right thing but went about it in an entirely wrong manner and, in doing so, possibly hurt -- definitely hurt himself, possibly hurt the country. >> you cover national security, hayes. so the military, as you know, has to prosecute leakers. >> that's part of secrecy. >> that's part of an efficient military. what's an appropriate consequence for this kind of leaking, do you think? >> i think what we saw was close to being the right way of doing things. during his attention, before he was charged even, many of bradley manning's supporters say

he was tortured. the military say they were keeping on suicide watch, taking his clothes away from him, keeping him from sleeping, him watching him all the time to make sure he didn't harm himself. i think there could be a better balance between trying to keep him from harming -- keep him and other future leakers from harming themselves when they are in captivity and the treatment manning received. >> and hayes, i want to ask you frankly -- again, you cover national security -- has this who whole episode changed in any way the way you do your job? >> my job personally, not so much. we are still going to go after the truth, wherever it may be. if a document is leaked into the public that happens to be classified, if it's newsworthy, it's newsworthy. if the american people need to know about it, they will know about it. >> that's my view as a reporter. as a citizen, i suppose, i do understand, though, that there are some things that should be kept secret for the purpose of national security, like with manning's documents that he leaked, the first couple, the

iraq war logs, were great but he leaked the diplomatic cables that looked at what's going on behind the curtain in terms of international relations. some was useful like drones in pakistan and yeme. n. some harmful to how we conduct diplomacy. >> that's always the problem with getting a lot of information. some important, some useful. if you want to read at hayes brown, look at thinkprogress.org. thank you for being on the program. we shift to today's other top story. >> that's president obama who spoke at an amazon.com facility in chattanooga, tennessee today, a day after that company announced 5,000 new full-time jobs. continuing his renewed focus on jobs, the president offered republicans a deal. >> here is the bottom line: if folks in washington really want a grand bargain, how about a grand bargain for middle class jobs? [applause.] >> how about a grand bargain for

middle class jobs? i don't -- i don't want to go through the same old arguments where i propose an idea and the republicans just say no because it's my idea. again, here is the bottom line: i am willing to work with the republicans on reforming our corporate tax code as long as we use the money from transitioning to a simpler tax system for a significant investment in creating middle class jobs. [applause.] >> that's the deal. >> now, when he is campaigner, he is so. >> and so different. the specific to what president obama said was that he would agree to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 to 28%, long a republican prior ity in exchang for infrastructure projects as well. republicans didn't even wait for the president to make the offer before they shot it down. when the words "grand bargain" made their way into the press monday night, republican leadership was quick to say not so fast.

john boehner, michael field issued this statement last night: this proposal allows president obama to support president obama's position on taxes and president obama's position on spending while leaving small businesses and american families behind. today, on the senate floor, also, before the president's speech, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said this: >> it's just a further left version of a widely panned plan he already proposed two years ago. this time with extra goodies for tax and spend liberals. >> extra goodies like lowering the corporate tax rate from 35 to 28. get a grip, mitch. republicans have gotten so good at disagreeing with the president they are now doing it before he even says anything. it's the equivalent of covering your ears and yelling at the top of your lungs and just about as mature. joining us from washington, d.c., democratic strategist and syndicated columnist carl fritsche who also

likes to scream at the top of his lungs. how is that for an intro? >> not bad. >> okay. so what do you make of this new, quote, grand bargain? is it dead on arrival? >> well, it's certainly the most exciting thing to grip chattanooga since the choo-choo perhaps. i mean call me a cynic. i have been in washington 10 years, and which for those keeping track at home is the entirety of the obama administration. and i have yet to see him propose anything that republicans will think, okay. let's do that. even when he -- and he said this in his speech today. even when i give them one of their ideas, they say, no. so i was not surprised that they pre-empted his remarks by saying, no. there is nothing in it for them. if speaker boehner compromisess, then he loses the speakership in a coup between the crazy tea partiers in his caucus. if mitch mcconnell, the senate

minority to minority. or. oise from kentucky, he would lose his primary and be just another, you know, republican senator who lost to a tea partier in his home state. >> another richard lugger. >> yeah. >> there is no incentive. you know what would be cool, carl, if something found some little known bill that ronald reagan presented, verbatim, have the president present it, verbatim, you know, without saying who it came from and see what the republicans said to that. because i am sure they would, the night before, do what they did this time. it's ridiculous. >> i hate to break it to you, michael, but a lot of what barack obama has been reaganesque. >> true. >> that's good point. yeah. >> it's not as if the -- it's not as if he's not trying to find room for them to work with him. >> no. >> that's a good point. >> that's a fair point to make. i just, the verbatim point hasn't been there but you are right, the spirit of what he has done very often has been like that. they have shot it down anyway. >> at a certain point, michael,

the president has to ask himself, i have now banged my head against the wall three times trying to compromise with the republicans. the same thing keeps on happening. if you've done the same thing over and over again and you are still in pain, and you continue to do it, some might call you crazy. >> well, they might. but it's a 2014 playbook thing and i think that may be the case that they do that. and, you know, and i want to ask you, also, you know, all of this is happening as the government prepares to it -- for a shutdown, a potential shutdown. do you think they are going to shut it down again? >> i hope so. not because of all much the people that are going to be harmed by it. but just so that we can finally, pull this, you know, sheet off of the republican majority and show the rest of the country what this is all about to them. they don't care about people. and, you know, we learned during the clinton administration that when the republican majority finally, went that step too far and shut down the government, a lot of people in the middle that were torn because they hated all

of washington finally, saw the republican congress for what it was and started to back the president and, hopefully, that happens again. >> yeah. >> i don't want the government to shut down but the way republicans are operate, they deserve everything they get when and if it does. >> exactly, the boom range effect of what they are doing coming back to hurt them. i want to shift gears a little bit now. larry summers angling to replace ben bernanke everyone assumed it would go to janet yellen. why is this happening? since when do people campaign for this gig? >> it's a good question. i -- i think i am one of the many who wishes that larry would take a long summer vacation. pardon the pun. but i don't think -- there are not many people in the progressive movement that are clamoring for larry summers to be in that post. so, hopefully, this announcement that things would be delayed for a while is an education that the administration knows that larry summers is not going to be the right person for the job.

>> yeah. it seems like it's a trial balloon that did not go way up in the air, and i think that you are right. >> no. it was a very bad trial balloon. it was the kind of weather balloon, perhaps, that crashes in the new mexico desert only to confuse locals into thinking there was some kind of an alien spacecraft crash. it was that bad. >> why you launch them. sometimes you see them crash. let's go from new york to d.c., and then to rome. the pope surprised everyone when he said if the person is gay and they accept the lord, who am i to judge? cardinal dolen of new york had this to say? >> what he is trying to say, charlie, in answer to your question is he is articulating well in a beautifully tender way the traditional way of the church, we would always love and treat the person with dignity. >> are you saying that he says love the sinner but hate the sin? >> yeah. that would be -- that's how -- that's the classical expression of it.

>> so, carl, i mean you know or you may not even know. i have a little bit of a pope crush which may actually be accepted by him now that we know where he stands but is there a meaningful shift here, or stojust a shift in tone? >> no. no. i don't even know that there is a shift in tone. i think the lgb. community and people that have maybe a professionive mindset are so used to being beaten and pushed around by the republican or by the -- by the catholic church that they will accept so some flowery talk as progress on the equality front. this pope said if gay people are trying to find jesus, they are personally okay and who is he to judge them? basically saying if they are celebate and they are rejecting their sexuality like a good catholic who is searching for jesus, i am okay. i am willing to give this pope the benefit of the doubt that he doesn't hate gay people. you know, even though he ejected the predaloafers.

but until the church does something of substance on these issues, i won't see any of these as signs of progress. i never thought that this pope would make me believe and agree with what the cardinal said. >> right. you know -- >> cardinal dolens said. >> i tend to agree with that. >> that's why i don't look too deeply into this pope, but he is saying things that we are not accustomed to hearing the leader of the catholic church say and in a way, i will take that as refreshing en though you can only go so far with it. before i leave, carl, there is one more thing i want to talk about. that's the super p.a.c. ready for hillary announcing they raised more than a million dollars in june and hillary clinton continued her little white house dining tour. she had breakfast with joe biden today at the naval observatory. what do you think that they were talking about, carl? what's going on? >> i think she was saying unequivocally that the vice president -- to the vice president, i am ready for some eggs and bacon. i think -- i think it's funny

because when she first left the secretary of state post, it was all employ her needing a vacation. if i was secretary clinton, and this speaks to her age, i would have needed a much longer than vacation. it speaks to her vigor and ability to keep on fighting and working really, really hard that she is already back to this. i thi i think i agree everything is ready for hillary. i think it's when she will announce her intentions. >> i asked this of bill press. she is saying, hey, listen, joe. i love you but i am going to run for president and i want to tell you now: don't tell anybody else, but i thought i would give you the heads-up? >> no. >> okay. >> if you were making that kind of a meeting, would you do it in such a public way? i don't think so. i think we will find out in the new year what the intentions of alternates of these people are. >> all right, karl, always funny, always great. thanks so much for being on the show as always. right here, republicans

argue over who is bringing home the bacon. chris christie says he shifts it home by the pork barely. paul rand literally said hog wash. >> from hogs to bulls, jason blair was a rising star at the "new york times" until it turned out that his reporting was a load of manure. a new documentary asks the question: what made him do it? while we are on the farm, we will talk about what's wrong with our food on the same day that new yorkers were set free, free, that is, to consume big gulps the size of their heads. it's all ahead right here in the war room. so stay with 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 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 asmatic kid who never played 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 happen. >> watch the show. >> only on current tv. >> welcome back to the war room. the frontrunners for the 2016 continues to battle. chris christie criticized the string of libertarianism in the republican party when it comes to warrantless surveillance. he invited those who oppose the programs to come to new jersey

and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation. senator paul punched back last night on fox news. >> it's really, i think, kind of sad and cheap that he would use the cloak of 9-11 victims and say, i am the only one who cares about these vick i see. hog wash. if he cared about protecting this country, maybe he wouldn't be in this gimme, gimme, gimme all of the money you have in washington or don't have. >> he said "hog wash." i told you he would. today in the news conference, governor christie smacked back at senator paul. >> i find it interesting that senator paul is saying -- accusing us of having a gimme, gimme, gimme attitude toward federal spending and we get 61 sentence back on every dollar we sent to washington. interestingly, kentucky gets a dollar 51 on every dollar they sent to washington. if senator paul wants to look at

where he is going to cut spending to afford defense, maybe he should look at quit spending the pork barrel spending for kentucky. >> this may not end in 2016 when the g.o.p. decide who they should lose to hillary. richard french, the host of "public affairs show, richard french live in ryebrook, new york. richard, great to have you in the war room? >> thank you, michael. how are you doing? >> immigrate. what the do you make of all of this? is this a sneak preview of the primary dates we are liable to see in 2016? >> i know a few of the players within the christie campaign, and they were doing cartwheels when rand paul took the shot at him. i will tell you something for viewers in parts of the country outside of the northeast. chris christie is not to be underestimated. the registration rate in new jersey definitely skews left

here. the democratic registration usually is about 5 to 10 points. he is going to win by 30 points going away in his race for re-election for governor, and it's for a lot of reasons. one is he comes across, whether you like him or not, with this air of authenticity and he will eat rand paul for lunch if paul tries to go over numbers with him or national security. and anybody who tries to play the 9-11 card like paul did by saying people should get over it or stop crying, i think they are playing with political fire. >> yeah. it sounds like that's the case. and, look what you did. you just went and said eat rand paul for lunch. people just can't stay away from those chris christie lines. richard, would it have been smart, though, for governor christie to ignore senator paul's attacks, to try not to have them appear as a legitimate threat? >> absolutely not. i think he consciously wants to draw a line and to prove that you can have a have a moderate and it's different than it was 10, 20s years ago. but you can have a moderate play

and he will bring up that he will throw his arm around president obama if that's in the best interest for new jersey and take on all comers in the g.o.p. if they will take issue with that. he wants to have this fight now. he feels he's got enough of a -- certainly a very big cushion here to win, comfortably in the race for new jersey g gubernatorial race he will take this on right now. he wants to get some of this stuff out of the way if he's serious about 016. he will take the conservative planks on social issues like gay marriage in new jersey. he will think that that won't hurt him for re-election here but will immunize him nationally. but these are consciously fights that christie wants to take on. he knows where the calendar is and he wants to take them on right now. >> yeah. that's important. he knows the calendar. he plays politics really well. i want to listen to another clip from rand paul. this, again, from last night. >> you know, i think it's not very smart, and he may have heard that, you know, the republican party is on life support in the northeast. republicans are in danger of

becoming an endangered species so it's not real smart for republicans to be attacking republicans. >> well, the senate, even though he is participating, does senator paul have a point? are republicans in a place where they need to take whomever they can get? >> you know, i think it's interesting. and i am sure you guys have covered it, alec is many things, not many of them good. at least i owe pine. but if you look where the koch brothers are putting their money, for example, immigration reform. even the money in the party knows they have to grow their base and they don't think the rand pauls of the world are going to be the ones that are going to get him there. so, i think -- and if you read -- and i think we are going to learn a lot more in some of the new books coming out on what happened beyond the scenes in the 2012 campaign, a lot of people in the g.o.p. actively wanted christie to get in. a lot of the money folks, they think he is their best shot, and

i really believe thatn an unless jeb bush or somebody else gets in, christie can clear the decks to a certain degree by taking on this fight now. i think he has a legitimate shot and if rand paul is the biggest hurdle action i think he is their party's nominee in a few years. >> such an interesting take on that because, you know, conventional wisdom which is often so wrong has no shot for him in south carolina. probes not even in the evangelical precincts of iowa and to say he could clear the deck quickly is interesting. i want to stay in your neck of the woods, richard, a little t bit. we are all tired of anthony wiener. i have to share this of a new york residents confronting him about his pat or present, depending upon when it ended. look at this. >> as a former new york city department of education employee, 21 years as a teacher, 9 years as an assistant principal, and i conducted myself in the manualer in which you conducted yours, my job would have been gone.

i don't understand how you feel you would have the moral authority as the head administrator in this city. >> yeah. >> to oversee employees when your standard of conduct is so much lower than the is standard conduct. >> are you not voting for me? >> i would not vote for you. >> okay. so she makes a valid point there. many valid points. does he still believe, does anthony wiener still believe he has a legitimate chance of winning this race? if not, why is he still running? >> by the way, that woman from staten island, head out to richmond county they will tell you what they think pretty clearly. there is two schools of thought on this. people within campaign that are even left, they have done the math. they don't believe he has a path to win. however, while everybody said that he dropped from 1st to 4th in the polls and that's right. he still has 16% of the vote. i don't believe he is viable. but if he could somehow get to the run-off -- and that's how they do the math here, when it comes to the may oral race in new york city, he has a

puncher's chance. i don't think there is a real chance there. then the second school of thought is, he's got to get an election out of the way if he ever wants a future in public. many people thought he would run for the city controller race here low risk, low, really, you know, kleig lights on you but he ran for mayor, surprised everybody and we know the second act that happened with the recent revelations. he has to get this race out of the way if he ever wants to run for something else. if he quits now, that's the end of a political career and he is a relatively young guy. >> those are both excellent points, just getting to the run-off would be potentially enough for him. he doesn't have to poll in the first place. he could poll in second place. >> that's really important. and then the idea that, listen, this is what he has got to good through in order to move on if he wants to do it though i don't know in what way he would ever be able to do it again but sprooifb sprooifbdz mark san fords is one of those peopleurprised mark san fords is one of those peop

people. let's go to virginia governor bob mcdonald also in hot water for accepting gifts and, in turn, granting lucrative government contracts. today, he announced, richard, he is going to try to return the gifts. contract that save his governorship and campaign of ken kucinelli? >> i think it could if people don't pay attention to the details. if they just regard it as gifts, i think a lot of people in the general public or in virginia may say, oh, well, if he is paying it back, no harm, no foul. you hit on one of the key elements which is he gave as good as he got in terms of the contracts. gu secondairly if you look at the kind of gifts he received here, not just he but other members of his family, then i think he is goes no shot. i think kucinelli is tainted about this as well. he has a heck of a lot of other problems when people hear some of his social policies including for homosexuals. but i think it's only survivable if the democrats get in -- you know, can get out of their own

way and if they can explain the kind of gifts he got and how that bought flew paying for the kids' weddings. >> right. >> using fer a ferraris. you can't make this stuff up. i don't see unless everybody is asleep at the switch. >> richard french, live, we appreciate you coming to the war room. great, smart stuff. you got to say staten island on national television. next, nobody can argo interpretingty isn't a imagimar problem but to ban sugary drinks. your mother can all she wants but can the city of new york? we will find out next. right here on the war room. ♪ (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.

>> did anyone tell the pilgrims they should self-deport? >> no, they said "make us a turkey and make it fast". >> (laughter). >> she gets the comedians laughing. >> that's the best! >> that's hilarious. >> ... and the thinkers thinking. >> okay, so there is wiggle room in the ten commandments is what you're telling me. >> she's joy behar. >> ya, i consider you jew-talian. >> okay, whatever you want. >> who plays kafka? >> who saw kafka? >> (laughter). >> asking the tough questions. >> chris brown, i mean you wouldn't let one of your daughters go out with him. >> absolutely not. >> you would rather deal with ahmadinejad then me? >> absolutely! >> (singing) >> i take lipitor, thats it. >> are you improving your lips? >> (laughter). >> when she's talking, you never know where the conversation is going to go. >> it looks like anthony wiener is throwing his hat in the ring. >> his what in the ring?

>> his hat. >> always outspoken, joy behar. >> and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? >> only on current tv. >> welcome back to the war room. this morning, an appeals court ruled new york mayor michael bloomberg's ban on sugary drinks over 16 ounces is unconstitutional, part of his fight to ban obesity in the nation's largest city. >> i am defend my city and children and you and everybody else. obesity kills. >> there are growing links between sugar and obesity. many quickly ban soda saying people don't know how much they are actually consuming. phone conversation, there are 31 teaspoons in a 32 ounce mountain dew, smaller than a big guilp.

62 in a 64 ouncer. despite at a time ruling, bloomberg promised to continue to make access to soda harder in new york city. it was one of the things in the too big around the middle apple. he started by banning smoking in bars and parks and in 2006, he banned trans fat in new york city restaurants and 2007 made chain restaurants display calorie counts. critics thing the bans infringe upon their personal freedoms and even though mayoral candidate christine quin thinks a soda ban may backfire, she still embraces the public initiative. public health is what the mayor should be worried about. she is the leading democratic candidate with 27 percents. networks may see these health initiatives continued on and on.

healthier cities, that would be delicious. joining us to look at food policy and obesity is eric jiminez, from food first, a healthy food advocacy group based in oakland, california. welcome to the war room. >> you know, we had dr. robert lus. ic from the ucsf on this show. he said that sugar is. an. a -- is tantamount to being a narcotic. do you agree? there you go. you are shaming me now, eric. you are shaming me. >> what are we talking -- why are we talking about sugar? why are we talking about bans? we have a crisis of diet related diseases. it's true in the united states. i think these sort of bans and sort of legislation is well-intentioned, but in some cases, i think it's wrong-headed, and i think that it really doesn't get at the core of the problem. >> right. >> the cause of a problem. you are trying to solve the

effects rather than the cause. we should expect to see more and more of this because the gravity of the situation. >> don't you think it's important whether you agree with bloomberg or not that he -- that now, we know these things, we are talking about them, we have talked about them as a country, certainly, that city has talked about them, putting in the dialogue, even if it's outlandish that we know there are 31 ounces or 31 spoonfuls of sugar in a 12-ounce can of mountain dew? >> you drink it anyway. those spoonfuls or 64 spoonfuls wouldn't be in there if we didn't have a dysfunctional food system, if we didn't over subsidize for the over production much sugar as we do with corn and other grains. >> right. >> the subsidized for over production and then we produce cheap, lousy food, which is making us sick with all of this extra production. >> right. >> that gets fed primarily to the poor who can only afford mass food. >> as we talk about obesity and i want to talk about the poor with you, because i think that's

the salient point here. you know, whether you are conservative or you are progressive or you are michael bloomberg, whatever, no one is going to argue we have a problem with obesity in this country. a third of adults are ainterpreting, 12.5 million, three times the number of children in 1980. all of this is estimated to cost close to $150,000,000,000 in healthcare bills. so i want to get into the poverty. but when did america get so fat? >> i think it probably started in the 1970s, with the new farm bill in the '70s, which basically married the nutrition programs and the food stamp programs and food aid programs to over production and keeping the price of food cheap by over producing and we were able to do that because we subsidized our producers. >> right. >> i think that's when it began not just in the united states but globally because suddenly you have all of this grain which gets fed to animals so we can

produce cheap meats. you have this sugar which gets loaded into our soft drinks and, of course, the soft drinks have to get bigger to accommodate the sugar. so it's really, you know, production-driven. if i think that then our tastes begin to adapt. children grow up not knowing anything else. >> right. >> and just here in the east bay where we have our offices in oakland's, people take it as a matter of course one or two people will have type ii diabetes. this falls disproportionately on the poor. >> that's a connection a lot of people, lay people who are new to this issue or understanding it don't understand. how is it the problem with childhood obesity, why does it fall disproportionately on the poor and people of color? >> quite responsible forring because they can't afford to buy good food. the bad food is what is subsidized and chief. and so that's what people eat. >> that's just the short answer. it has some sort of ironic dark

tufts and turns. >> yeah. >> for example, who are the people who suffer most from food insecurity in this current tree? the ones who work in the food industry and the people who pick the crops all the way up into wal-mart or the 7-11s or into machine donalds. >> right. >> those are the ones who have the highest level of food insecurity, and those are the gourd who use their food stamps to buy this cheap food. >> that cycle doesn't show signed of breaking. let's talk about what some of the cureative signs are. we are talk in our production today. if you went to the worst place in the poorest part of america and put the a whole foods there, whole foods is inaccessible because of the cost of their food. what is the cureative end of this in terms of getting accessibility, let's say, to the better foods, the organic foods, healthier foods and sort of putting the others aside? >> well, i am afraid it's a system change. it really is a big sea change

because at the ends of the day, people need living wages to be able to buy food at the true cost of food. now, in europe, people are willing to pay much more for their food because of the fact that, for the most part, healthcare is taken care of, their education is taken care of. there are social services, you know. and so people with afford to spend more on food. >> yeah. >> we can't, so we end up buying the cheap, lousy food. so really, the problems with the food system are indicative of a much deeper systemic problem in our economy. >> yeah. >> and our society. >> are there measures aside from these broad, sweeping changes? i would say systemic changes as you point out. are there other changes in bits and pieces? for example, what is food first doing to sort of help out in small ways to maybe get people to realize this to the point where we do make those sea changes? >> well can i think you are right. i think that because it is a sea change, it takes a tremendous amount of political will and political will is basically a

condition of social movement. there is enough social pressure to create the political will. i think that is what you are seeing in this country today everywhere, all across the country, on a local level, people are trying to take back their food system. some call it food justice. some call it food sovereignty but taking back control over their food and to a large extent, it's keeping the value of the food dollar in the community. so that means you are writing right up against the monopolyies. so when we find our local food policy coun sizzle forming in order to create regulatory frameworks at the local level, the city or the county or even the state level which favor access to fresh, healthy local food and which favor keeping that food dollar in the community where it can we cycle three, four, five times. >> what food first is all about. >> that's who we work with. >> eric hohzgimenez, thank you. up next, a new documentary looks

at repeat liar and "new york times" reporter, jason blair. >> jason blair was a great tragedy of the electronic age. he really mastered the art of pretending to be where he wasn't. audience for the visual candy. just be grateful current tv does not come in smellivision. the sweatshirt is nice and all, but i could use a golden lasso. (vo) only on current tv.

alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. 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. >> it was 1 of the big pest journalism scandals ever actually. jason blair, rejected the number 1 tenant of journalism: report the truth. instead, he plagiarized other reporter' works, cindy went places he didn't and completely made up both sources and facts. he did all of this as he was reporting on some of the biggest story of the time, september 11th, the iraq war and the dc sniper attacks. i am sure you remember them. by the time blair resigned, 36 of his articles were riddle the with plag arrestism. it was the lowest in "the new york times" 150 year history. now it's part of a new

documentary. take a listen. >> none of it was rocket science. if you take a little bit from here and steal from you here and i steal a little from you here and i steal a little from you here, no one really sees that a bunch of my stuff is stolen. they might say, that's similar but the rest of its different. what they don't know is i am stealing from a bunch of different places but it looks original. >> that's a clip from a fragile trust, a new film that chronicles the slow decline of jason blair. joining me now in the studio is the film maker behind the documentary, samantha grant. samantha has produced various films for frontline on pbs. thank you for coming into the war room to talk about this, a really interesting subject. i can't believe it's been 10 years. you know, we've heard so much. we have heard his mea culpas. we have heard, you know, all about what he did, how he did it, how the "times" reacted. what was left to be said? >> so, i wanted to tell his story because i think there are

still some lessons that can be learned. i think we also hand' heard from jason in a long time. a lot of people talked about this right when it happened. and there really wasn't a lot of coverage after the fact. >> yeah. >> from jason and from hal reins, the executive director who lost his job as a result of the scandal. >> right. >> i think with some reflex, there can be some new wisdom brought to the story. >> thus the film. let's take another clip, a look at a little bit more of the film. this is, i believe this is jason talking about the d.c. sniper attack. >> rumors started to bubble up from reporters at the "washington post," that, you know, they were covering the same stories as i, but they didn't see me at the hearings. >> he had better tips than the entire washingt"washington post had a small army of people on it because he was making it up. >> so how did he get away with this?

and how did he get away with it for so long? >> i think the fact that the internet was relatively new at the time that this was going on played a big role in how jason was able to manipulate the system. so, you know, he was a young reporter, and he was really saavy with technology and he knew how to manipulate the technology in a way that perhaps some of his editors weren't even familiar with. i think, also, he is very smart. i mean he is a really smart guy, and he sort of assessed the divanamics in the newsroom. there was already some tension in the newsroom. >> yeah. >> there was a lot of broken-down communication chains going on the news room. and he was able to manipulate those as well to his advantage. >> what did we learn about the way the "times" handled this? the fact that he was kept on, a lot of people attribute it to the fact that the "times" was very sensitive towards keeping minorities in the newsroom, hiring more minorities.

so how much did his race have to do with it in and how much did he let down black reporters, if at all, because of what happened? >> you know it's hard for me to answer the question how much did his race have to do with it. you know, how i would answer that like on a numerical scale, i don't know. >> of course. but is it talked about? >> in the film, we address that issue. really what we try to focus on in the film is the coverage and how a lot of the coverage really focused on race, when from my opinion, based upon looking at the story for seven years, his race really was not a big factor. he was excellent reporter. you know, he was -- had perfect record, great recommendations. >> yeah. >> and he rose quickly and he was just able to manipulate the system. >> yeah. >> i think a lot of the coverage really focused on race which says a lot more about what the mainstream media as a whole is focusing on its story telling.

>> right. >> than really the specific story because there is a lot of as amazing minority reporters. >> if he was an excellent reporter and this happened, how excellent could he have been if he did this? at the end of your seven-year trip with jason blair, do you -- can you answer the question as to why he did this? >> you know, that's the question that i start the film with. and i think there are a lot of reasons why he did this. is there one? no. there are many. some of them are personal. a lot of them have to do with the pressures of, you know, reporting september 11th story, but the bottom line is there is no excuse? >> of course not. >> there is never any excuse for th this. and, you know, he does apologize. >> and what's he doing now? >> he is working as a life coach now. >> ironic. he is working as a life coach, telling people how they should

live their lives despite what he's done with his. >> that's interesting. that makes me want to watch this film really badly. samantha grant, thank you. the film is called "the fragile trust" go to afragiletrust.com for more screenings. long before obamacare, lgbj set the wheels in motion for a program. the birth of medicare or as i like to call it, johnsoncare. so stick around. 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 asmatic kid who never played 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.

(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.

a >> today is the 48th birthday of medicare and tonight's epic political trivia, we harkin back to july 30, 1965. >> that's when president lyndon bjohnson signed the social security act and handed out the first medicare card. wait. it gets better. guess who was the very first recipient of the medicare card. go ahead. guess. >> harry truman. >> steve porter right here in our studio gets it right. that's right. the former president was the first enrolled beneficiary of medicare. even today, as john boehner tries to repeal obamacare almost as many time as medicare has rings on its tree. it's worth remembering such heartless conservatism is not new. ronald reagan said if we don't stop medicare, quote, one of these days, you and i are going to spends our sunset years

stelling our children and our children's children what it once was like in an america where men were free. 1961, when men were free, free to sit in a colored waiting room or drink from a colored water fountain. that america, mr. president? anyway, i die congress. medicare has coincided with americans living longer lives, provided the elderly with lower drug prices and younger disabled americans with long-term care. in 2010, 48 million americans received medicare benefits. 40 million of them, elderly. medicare covers are you familiar half of healthcare costs. so 48 years now, the government has taken care of its citizens, sometimes imperfectlying to be sure but mostly fulfilling its goals. one of the goals was to ally the fear that our elderly carried the fear that the cost of care would overwhelm them. president reagan, that sounds like a lot of freedom to me. in 17 years, medicare will be

eligible for medicare. here is hoping that it continues to mature in good health. thanks for joining us here in the war room, everybody. have a great night. stay tuned for the young turks right here. they should self-deport? >> no, they said "make us a turkey and make it fast". >> (laughter). >> she gets the comedians laughing. >> that's the best! >> that's hilarious. >> ... and the thinkers thinking. >> okay, so there is wiggle room in the ten commandments is what you're telling me. >> she's joy behar. >> ya, i consider you jew-talian. >> okay, whatever you want. >> who plays kafka? >> who saw kafka? >> who ever saw kafka? >> (laughter). >> asking the tough questions. >> chris brown, i mean you wouldn't let one of your daughters go out with him. >> absolutely not. >> you would rather deal with ahmadinejad then me? >> absolutely! >> (singing) >> i take lipitor, thats it. >> are you improving your lips? >> (laughter). >> when she's talking, you never know where the conversation is going to go. >> it looks like anthony wiener is throwing his hat in the ring. >> his what in the ring? >> his hat. >> always outspoken, joy behar. >> and the best part is that

current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? >> only on current tv.

♪ theme cenk: welcome to "the young turks." bradley manning was convict day of 19 out of 21 charges. he was acquitted of the most serious charge, aiding the enemy, but it is a very serious day indeed not just for bradley manning but for all americans and journalists. this is a terrible and disastrous decision, the fact that he got acquitted of the most serious charge to me does not mean much. it was a ridiculous,