stephanie: welcome inside the war room. michael shure is off today. i'm david sirota. the real life documentary might be called the spy who loved spying on me. the war room tarts now. >> details continue to emerge about the n.s.a.'s massive surveillance programs. that government officials assured us they weren't listening to our calls or reading our emails. >> n.s.a. cannot target your emails. >> and have not. >> and have not. >> does the n.s.a. collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of

americans. >> no sir. >> does the n.s.a. intercept americans' cell phone conversations. >> no. >> google searches. >> no. >> text messages. >> no. >> there is no spying on americans, we don't have a domestic spying program. >> are you telling the truth? it depends on your definition, i guess of truth. the narc times reports that the national supreme court administration is in fact searching the contents of vast amounts of americans email and text communications into and out of the country. that sounds like domestic spying to me. press secretary jay carney doubled down on the administration's loose definition of the word lying. >> joe schmo from kokomo wants to know if he sends and email overseas if it's being read, what do you say? >> it's not being read. the information targeted has to do with terrorist threats or

potential terrorist threats emanating from foreign persons in foreign areas. >> according to the times story, the n.s.a. collects email and text messages and searches them for key words, specifically any information relate to go foreign citizens already under surveillance. just as it did when edward snowden released top secret details of programs, the agency contends that this systemic warrantless search is in fact legal. n.s.a. spokesperson defended these programs recently saying: >> these additional powers to collect and search emails and texts were authorized bay 2008 law that expanded the patriot act to include eavesdropping on domestic soil. as long as the "target" was not an american citizen abroad" or

excuse me, was an american citizen abroad. it seems we may not be getting little entire truth. to help us get closer to the truth, we are joined we attorney for the aclu's national security project, the group that flagged 24 clause when the snowden documents leaked in june. alex, thanks for being in the war room. >> thanks for having me, david. >> how do these new revelations in the new york times today, how do these change the story? >> we now know that the n.s.a. is searching virtually every international communication in which united states citizens and residents engage in. if you send an email to family or friend overseas, the n.s.a. is searching that search and if it gets flagged set aside for later analysis by the n.s.a. for years, the n.s.a. and other

intelligence offered extraordinarily misleading explanation of their supposedly international surveillance. we now know that the international surveillance is not so international at all. it touches not only those communicating internationally, but even those communicating purely within the united states. this is a, you know, a new revelation that follows a series of revelations that call into question the credibility of the government when it defends these programs in the public. >> that montage we showed of government officials denying this just becomes more and more incriminating as reach revelation happens. many watching this program might sigh i'm not emailing terrorists. i don't have anything to hide. are they wrong? should americans be afraid that their email is being read? what do you say to people who say i want the government reading this kind of thing because i don't have anything to hide? >> part of the problem is that we simply don't know the

constraints in place to protect's americans' privacy from the n.s.a.'s all seeing technology. me have too many way to say acquire any sort of communication for them to be doing so without meaningful transparency and oversight. it is possible for the n.s.a. to ingest every single american communication. the only thank protects us are the constraints in flies prevent it from doing so and we just don't know those constraints. one thing we do know is that the n.s.a. is analyzing not just international communications, but they're monitoring even every telephone call within the country, not the contents, but the fact that you are making calls. there seem to be few bonds to the types of information that the n.s.a. wants to collect and what the technical capacity to collect. >> the worse parsing that we're seeing. you heard a lot of definitative

statements no, but you've seen a focus. president obama said the n.s.a. did not spy on americans, but used surveillance. now today, there's a debate over the world target. are semantics a way to shift the debate? is the use of semantics suggesting to us that the government is trying to hide something? >> i think it is. the government and the n.s.a. in particular has a set of definitions that relate to its surveillance activities that are at odds with the ordinary meaning of those words. if you ask the n.s.a. whether it is collecting americans' emails in the program that was revealed today, it will tell you that it isn't. it's acquiring them, but it's not collecting them, because collecting them means something else. that type of word play not only

obscures the truth but makes it impossible for every day americans to understand exactly what the n.s.a. is doing, whether it's legal for it to be doing it and whether it's necessary for us to be sacrificing basic privacy to the demands of a largely unaccountable intelligence agency. >> let me play devil's advocate. the community learned about the terror plot in yemen because they introduced a doomsday conference call, a legion of doom like conference call between 20 plus al-qaeda operatives. the argument is that this surveillance makes us safer. what's your response to that? >> that form of targeted surveillance, of suspected terrorist is exactly the form of surveillance that the n.s.a. should be engaging in. what the n.s.a. does not need to it is indiscriminate collection

or monitoring of americans' international and domestic communications. the shift is from an agency that is focused on directive surveillance to one that has adopted the mentality of collecting everything now on the theory that we might need it someday. that mentality collect it all now, ask questions later is not only inconsistent with our constitution, but unnecessary to keep us safe. the n.s.a. should engage in target surveillance. it works, but it doesn't need to implicate the privacy rights of millions of in current americans in the process of that targeted surveillance. >> now, we're back to word parsing. i'm not accusing you of word parsing, but you mentioned bulk collection of data, also in the timed story of said the term doesn't apply because emails and texts that don't have flagged terms are apparently deleted and are not saved for later. does that make this surveillance

any easier to accept? are we actually seeing bulk surveillance or should we trust the government that is just targeted surveillance. >> it underscores how misleading the government has been opinion in order for the program to operate, the government reportedly has to make of copy of virtually everything that goes over international wires into or out of the united states. it then searches that copy and it keeps no of it and deletes the rest. the n.s.a.'s theory is because it deletes most of the information quickly, it hasn't collected that information. it's as though it believes there's a five second rule that applies to our international communications. if they only look at it for a few seconds, no harm, no foul and it can go on about its business. it's extraordinarily misleading and doesn't further the debate. >> what i'm worried about is the fact that the genie is out of the bottle, now the disclosures

have confirmed what people have suspected for a long time and that in confirming that, we are going to assume no matter what congress does to reign this in, we'll simply assume this is the new normal, that we're all under surveillance all the time. is that the long term effect of this, and if it is, is there anything we can do now to reign it back in? does it even matter if congress does anything? >> you know, i think there's a real danger that if the n.s.a. convinces congress to allow it to keep its authority, to collect everything now on the theory that it might need it in the future, then we will that type of chill, then americans who might otherwise read controversial websites have informed but controversial conversations with their friends domestically and overseas will hesitate before doing so. that's the consequence of an all-seeing government and why its important for conditioning to put in place meaningful

restrictions that limit the government to targeted surveillance. there's a moment now for congress to do the right thing. there's a moment now for president obama to reign in the n.s.a., but we are certainly at a crossing point where that reform needs to take place now or we run the risk of allows the n.s.a. to collect everything and keep it indefinitely, just in case. >> thanks so much for being here and thanks for your hard work on an issue that is controversial and quite important. >> the n.r.a. say good guys carry guns. author heidi decided to test that out. you'll be surprised to say what she found out. >> how is the education reform movement like a bad 1980's movie? not leg warmers, but worse. we'll show you. >> leeing people become americans, that's the republican party's immigration in-fighting as it continues.

it's thursday in the war room and we're just getting started. stay with us. young turks! i think the number 1 thing than viewers like about the young turks is that were honest. they know that i'm not bsing them for some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know i'm going to be the first one to call them out. cenk on air>> what's unacceptable is how washington continues to screw the middle class over. cenk off air i don't want the middle class taking the brunt of the spending cuts and all the different programs that wind up hurting the middle class. cenk on air you got to go to the local level, the state level and we have to fight hard to make sure they can't buy our politics anymore. cenk off air and they can question if i'm right about that. but i think the audience gets that, i actually mean it. cenk on air 3 trillion dollars in spending cuts! narrator uniquely progressive and always topical, the worlds largest online news show is on current tv. cenk off air and i think the audience gets, "this guys to best of his abilities is trying to look out for us."

only on current tv!

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. >> give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses,unking to breathe free, and give me the dreamers, talent that is searching for purpose, those dedicated, send all these, the boundless borne to me. i lift my lamp beside the golden door. >> that ad was released by forward.us, an organization founded by mark zuckerberg to promote comprehensive immigration reformal. the movement has support from tech giants bill gates and marissa meyer of yahoo. from the tech perspective, u.s. immigrants represent one third of engineers and half of the

p.h.d.'s working in math and computer science. in other words, immigration and immigrants play a crucial role in science, technology, engineering and math. here to discuss immigration reform and other hot political topics is joe garofoli and joe williams, thanks so both of you for being here. joe garofoli, let me start with you on immigration reform. mark zuckerberg gave a speech, which you attended, first political speech i think of mark's public persona and he was talking about immigration reform. tell us what you think the tech industry's real interest is in immigration reform. >> the tech industry, as many academic studies have recently shown, they like to expand the

visa program because it gives them a alarmer pool of cheap labor that they can sort of keep for several years, and some have referred to as a form of indentured servitude. zuckerberg came at it from a very personal place. he said you know, that's not really where i come from here. his wife is a schoolteacher and he was introduced to actual dreamers, dream act kids. he spoke of a very personal connection that he has to this issue. it was kind of two different things, which was at screening for a new documentary. >> it seems like the republican party is divided in two wings on this issue. you have the business wing, some call it the country club wing of the republican party, and then you have cultural conservatives,

far right wing folks and they have a cultural animosity toward latinos. the question becomes which wing is stronger, the business wing or the cultural conservative wing. how will the tension play out? does the cultural conservative wing have an effective veto over effective policy party on an issue like immigration. >> you can see that division playing out in the fact that john boehner has refused to bring up an immigration bill citing the rule where they see to have a majority of the house republicans in favor of a particular issue before they go on and decide to vote on it. that mere fact indicates that they're nor near reaching a consensus here in large part because of the cultural wing of the party has the loudest voice at the moment. you've seen them talk about immigration, louie gomer talking about how the borders need to be scored perhaps with an electric moat and he's not kidding about that and other untoward

comments. slowly and surely, the country club whipping is starting to have influence and zuckerberg weighing in is a heavy hitter here, because he's got the billions to crack open this tough nut, because he's launched the website and the organization that's going to crank up the pressure on some of these republicans during their recess. you've seen it in of this the commercials. there's a five week campaign that's going to pressure these folks during the august realizes when they are at home, talking to their constituents. if that doesn't work, then the numbers certainly are going to be against the republicans when they come back. already, you're starting to see some of that with house whip kevin mccarthy coming out cautiously in favor of immigration reform. that's a big deal, because he's boehner's right hand guy and if he starts to recognize that this is an issue that needs to be

dealt with ahead of 2014, then surely some others are going to follow. what remains to be seen is where you get that critical mass of people saying yes to immigration reform in the house. >> let's turn to the question of california, how it would impact a state like this. california is home to a large latino population. it also has fairly high unemployment. one of the arguments that i think it's not i guess a coincidence that cultural conservatives will make, they make an economic argument. we don't want to add workers to away economy that has high unemployment. do you think the cultural wing of the republican party will be able to shroud it's scene phobia in the venire of we care about the economy to make abargument that we don't want to add workers to a belabored economy. >> you may be surprised where

some of these forces are going to go. the evangelicals, a big chunk of conservative report want a comprehensive solution. they want a pathway to citizenship. i was talking with a republican from central valley, an ag, a farmer. he has recently come onboard with a pathway to citizenship and he is out ting the evangelical forces behind him. joe's right, kevin mccarthy is key here. he's going to be the focus of protests all next week by immigration activists. he attentively came out in support of the pathway. i spoke with tech leaders close with mccarthy. they expect a vote in early october on some package of immigration bills, which against against what boehner was saying. i think this issue may swing here. republicans willis to the c.e.o. crowd when they talk about the need for this.

>> let's turn to the juster. president obama discussed the sequestration, budget cuts, automatic budget cuts, yesterday camp pendleton, speaking to ma reaps, he spoke on a wide range of issues, including sexual assault in the military, treating our veterans and the goal, to get rid of the sequestration cuts that have gotten rid of most military funding. joe williams, when the president talks about restoring cuts to the military, i looked at the quester and said i'm not for you the it, but the silver lining, maybe it's going to cut discussion about cutting wasteful defense spendion. the pot is saying the first and for most things we've got to get rid of is the defense spending. if he keeps all the social cuts

and suspends defense spending. >> basically, the president mentioned yesterday talked about restoring cuts to the support services in the military, not necessarily the weapons systems, not necessarilied spending on different unnecessary items. he wants to focus attention on the one set of government work theirs everyone says they support, the u.s. military, because that's what they are, government workers. he's attempting to us that to pivot the conversation back to talking about the real quester cuts, the real harm happening in the country, and in fact, some of the government workers that have been laid off, furloughed once, twice, a couple of times a week, including contractors for the u.s. military as well as people who provide rehab, helping the wounded warriors,

those sorts of things. in an attempt to pivot back and talk about why these cuts are harmful, this is the one object that will get the attention of congress and help mutt more pressure on that recalcitrance republicans. >> i will talk to you about the politics of the sequester. do people pay attention, do they think it's all over, everything's fine, no big teal here? >> when you talk about to the marines and say when you talk about how the sequester affects the military, you've got the word sequester back in the conversation. up until now, it's affected the most porous americans. i did a story about a woman who got a $50 increase. she worked low wage jobs her whole life. she has no room to pay 50 extra dollars, but she is below the

radar. americans don't care about her for the most part. you say well, is this going to effect the effectiveness of the marines, so he is working to call the sequester back from the radar with, because so far, the effects have been hurting people that are unseen. >> the vision of it hurting the military in particular is a big indicator to bring it back on to the stage. >> coming up, a gun control advocate who spent a month carrying a con vealed weapon. >> beyond the bullet, personal stories of gun violence aftermath. first, you might think the education reform movement is about the kids. think again. lee will explain how jeb bushes education plan has more more to do with his funders than the children.

(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 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. ç]

>> 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? >> 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. >> welcome back to the war room. i'm david sirota in for michael shure. how many the education reform movement kind of like one of my favorite movies from the 1980's, war games? [ ringing ] >> are those your grades? >> yep. i don't think i deserved an f. do you? >> i don't think he deserved an f either, do you?

education reform evan list resigned last week after emails emerged showing in his previous job at indiana school superintendent, he manipulated the statewide grading system to give an a rating to a charter school backed by one of his top political donors. two thirds of the high school classes at crystal house flunked algebra and 30% failed english. tony bennett and staff simply deleted the results for the school's ninth and 10t 10th graders. why? well, the school was founded by crystal dehawn, who has dough nateed $2.8 million to the indiana represent party and over $100,000 to tony bennett himself. these are the same people, education so-called reformers who always say that the key to school reform is accountability and we're really expected to believe that the so-called

education reform movement is all about the kids. not unless kids is a euphemism for money. with us now to discuss money, politic and education, is investigative reporter and war room favorite and one of my personals favorites, lee for this of thfong.welcome back to . >> thank you for having me. >> pushing for standardized testing, charters schools and busting the teachers union, is this story about him, what he did, a microcosm of the reform movement in large, more focused on republican donors than the kids themselves. >> i think that's right. we have to really look at the scandal for its sheer size. tony bennett is the leader of this group, has gone around the country electing other school superintendents and officials that help his values. he's famous for his tough talk of closing down public schools

using high tech testing and setting up charter schools in their place. i even heard he would ever played some type of role in a romney administration if mitt had won. this is a big scandal and it kind of underscores that remark that you just made, that this kind of mantra of the neoliberal education movement about accountability is kind of a figure leaf for the real interest, the real drivers of this movement seek to go privatize education. >> tony bennett worked for governors in florida and indiana. the education reform movement has captured a big portion of the democratic party, education secretary arnie duncan, rahm emanuel, one of the biggest shut down of public schools in the country. why does this have any rooting in the democratic party, which is supposed to be the party that is for the little guy? >> well, that's a good question. i think the drivers of this

movement and it's been kind of a marriage of convenience of technology companies, of republican anti union types, of big wall street donors, they've come together in a very sophisticated reform movement, set up foundations and connected themselves to both parties. you see wall street money pumping into the campaigns of any democratic that seeks to push for privatization for high stakes testing, for an expansion of charter schools and they've done a very good job of co opting democrats. one of the biggest groups, education reform now, their subsidiary is a group called democratics for education reform. i think there's no coincidence that these are many of the same types of people. >> let's turn to jeff basos who you wrote about obviously in the news this week since he bought the washington post. you pointed out in that piece that an aspect of his politics

that amended gotten attacks, he's one of the huge supporters of education so-called reform through his family foundation. tell us in light of basos' permanent politics, in light of many wealthy tech individuals and wall street in this issue, why are these kinds of people, bill gates, become their pet cause? >> well just to back up, there's been a lot of talk on wall street about, you know, the next big market. how do you take cafes and turn them into a starbucks, you know, and there's this $500 billion pot of money, the amount we spend every year on k-12 education that many would like to see privatized. i can't speak to, you know, exactly what's motivating basos, but what's very interesting if you look where he's been donating his money, almost biggest cause is education reformal.

many groups he is donating to are non-controversial like math and skies, but he's given to groups running attack ads against teachers' units. you to have question his political agenda. i'm reserving judgment now, because we don't know what bezos is going to do. a lot of times these people buy media to further their views. >> the washington report posted that jeb bush has been using a foundation focused on so-called education reform to launder money, his foundation isn't the only one that does this, but it's a big example of laundering corporate money, turning it into political influence on behalf of

privatizing public education all to serve the bottom line financial interest of those donors. how does a foundation like this turn a corporate agenda into legislation at let's say the state level? >> well, i can speak from experience. i've gone to conferences hosted by the jeb bush foundation, and it's very interesting. i went to one in san francisco a couple of years ago, and you go to these sessions where you have people like tony bennett presenting talking about accountability, about the different reforms that are needed, but then go into the hallway and companies like connection academy, k-12, inc., some of these very controversial virtual charter schools where there's no even brick and mortar school, it's just giving a child a computer and telling them to learn that way, you have lobbyists walkinged hallway handing author business card, giving out model legislation to the legislation and other policy makers that attend these conferences, teaching them how

to implement these reforms, what type of rhetoric to use, but also literally the legislation that they should enact in their own personal states. >> that ends up benefiting the donor's for-profit interest that they gave to the bush foundation and it then becomes legislation in states all over the country. lee, thanks for your reporting, thanks for being here. check out his article on their website. coming up, author heidi uman wondered what it would be like to carry a gun around for one whole month. what she found out, next here in the war room. stay with us. 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.

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 >> here in the war room, we're never going to stop reporting on gun death, it's been with it 37 days since the new town massacre. guns have taken the lives of 6,956 people in the united states since then, a are you ever estimate.

let's put that number in perspective, that's 268 new towns since newtown or more than two 9/11s. the n.r.a. continues to trot out their one argument, the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. author heidi yewman wondered what did it feel like to be that one good guy. for one month, she carried a gun on her hip from all times. with a proper carry permit, she took the handgun to places it was allowed, restaurants, grocery stores, even her church and starbucks. her experience became a four part series called my month with a gun. part one ran in u.s. news magazine. personal stories of gun violence aftermath, heidi, thank you for

joining me right here in the war room. >> great, thank you. >> tell us how easy it was to get a gun permit in a state like washington. tell us what got you on to the idea of doing a book like this and what you think people don't understand about carrying a gun, getting a concealed carry, what they should understand. >> i kept hearing about all these people who bought guns after newtown. i thought what a weird thing to do after all these innocent children are killed to buy a gun and protect your family. i wanted to see what's it like to buy that gun and what requirements does it take. i decided to do the absolute minimum. in my state, the state of washington, there's no training required. i got a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which took about a month from a backlog of other people getting a permit and i went to a gun store and bought the gun. that process took me about seven

minutes. i'm really scared of guns. the way i held the gun in the gun store, the guy obviously knew i didn't know what i was talking about. i asked a few questions, but i walked away with a gun not going anything about it. he knew i knew nothing bit, but he's not required to make sure i know about a gun. >> let's talk about public perceptions of guns and whether they make us safer or don't make us safer. there's a study finding. proponents flip it around typically in the national discourse, if you have a gun quarterback you're more safe and if only people in places like columbine or the theater near aurora in denver had been packing heat, those tragedies wouldn't have happened. what's your take on that?

>> you really are, you really are less safe. the thing is, is you're a good guy with a gun and you're a lawful gun owner until you're not, until your child takes that gun from under the mattress or off the shelf or wherever he gets it from and then it's too late, so my thing is like let's make sure there's proper training and let's make sure that people really do understand the risks. my son was around my gun. i accidentally left it in my purse, and my 16-year-old son almost got ahold of it. i was really freaking out about it, having the gun in the house in the first place. what happen to say me after i've had the gun in my house for two years and it's more like i treat it like car keys or my cell phone? i can't imagine. it was really frustrating and scary to have this thing that could really hurt somebody or kill somebody, and i've had friends, i have a good friend

whose son killed himself, he found the gun in the safe after his dad had given him the combination to help protect the family from the bad guy. in reality, the gun's going to be used against you or a family member before it will be used in self defense. >> we hear those kind of stories all the time. you argue in your book that it changes people said psychologist or at least it changed yours to be carrying a gun all the time. this quote from your book: >> so, it changes your psychology, at least that's what it seems like from this passage. i would ask you why does it change your psychology like

that, and i would then add would you have pulled the trigger if somebody had come into your house with that kind of thinking no would you worry that you would pull the trigger on somebody you shouldn't have pulled the trig are on? >> that's the thing. i'm a really con census mom. my husband says i overthink. i'm trying to do the best thing for my kids. that replaced my thoughts with the gun. could i kill somebody? i don't know. i hope i never find out, but this whole 30 days, i never had to pull out the gun and try and shoot somebody. there were a couple of times where i was fearful of somebody around me, but i had not been in that situation before. having the gun brought this attention to myself that i wasn't used to. >> let's talk about what happened with your article when you wrote about this. you wrote a four part series, the first goes on ms magazine

and they decided not to run the other three parts, they run on the daily beast website. they decide not to run the other three parts because of the anger from the pro gun crowd was so intense they said it wasn't worth it. is this corrosive to our ability as a country to have a civil discourse about guns? and why do you think this issue brings up this kind of intensity? it's not -- i mean there are some issues where the intensity is like this, but people get very intensely upset when you talk about gun control. >> it's very disappointing. someone had said that i should shoot myself on the blog yesterday. it's disappointing, because there's a real problem in our country with gun violence. a lot of people are dying, and it's these gun guys that are attacking me, it's their guns in their home that are at most risk for the suicides, which is more

than 50% of gun deaths. it's not the sandy hooks that's the real problem. the real problem is guns in homes that people don't have training around, and it's too bad, and it doesn't allow us to move forward. >> heidi yewman, gun control activist, author of the four month series, you can read it at the daily beast. thanks for writing it. it's a really important issue. i think people get fired up about this issue and this kind of writing is important to understand it. >> coming up next, he was called a liar, a scoundrel and a cook. in 1973 on this day, the one, the only richard nixon went on t.v. and made a historic announcement. they be we are joined by the war rooms favorite scoundrel, brett erlich. 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. >> throughout the long and difficult period of watergate, i felt it was my duty to persevere, to make every possible effort to complete the term of office to which you elected me. in the past few days, however, it has become evident to me that i no longer have a strong enough political base in the congress to justify continuing that effort. >> before the break, i said that was 1973. correction, it was 1974. yes, on this day in 1974 in light of the near certainty of

impeachment, president richard nixon resigned. he was the first and only president to step down from the office. during his resignation speech, richard nixon reiterated that he had resisted stepping down "i have never been a quit are," he said. to leave my term of office before completed is opposed to every instinct in my body. shortly after his speech, george higgins wrote an article and said: >> no matter how you feel about nixon and watergate, that day like the day j.f.k. was assassinated is a day that most people can quickly recall, assuming they were alive, they can tell where they were, they can tell who was around them, they can tell what it felt like

to watch a battered president step down from office. that stunning moment remains etched in america's collective memory. now we turn from a disgraced president to a great guy that we'll never, ever, ever give up, brett erlich. what have you got for us today? >> i have so much. steve king, representative from iowa keeps churning out the hits. he's like a vaguely racive taylor swift. he is a guy who you may remember a few weeks ago it was just, he said for every one value dick tore yep beneficiary of the dream act, there are 100 who have cavs the size of cantaloupes from lugging 75 pounds of marijuana through the desert. this man has turned his sights on climatolo something. ist:

this guy has turned putting his foot into his mouth into an exact science. >> at least steve king is pro photosynthesis. >> absolutely. it's great, scientology is more of a religion than science. climb tolling is just as much science as science. >> the more steve king opens his mouth, the worse for the republican party. >> he said we don't know where the sea level is even, let alone say if it's going to come up

globally because of c.o.2 suspend the in that how would we know where the sea level is. >> he promised to go on the steven colbert show, but he pulled out. he filled it in with this cameo laden video that's going around. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> security. >> that's kissinger. that is classic. >> i had no idea kissinger was so alive, let alone culturally relevant. >> i have to be honest, that was one of my reactions when i saw that video on line. i can't believe henry kissinger is still around. thanks for being here in the war room. i want to thank everybody for having me guest here.

the staff of the war room that ha made it easier than it should be and it was not an easy job. thank you all for watching the war room, thanks for joining us here in the war room. have a great night. 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). 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.

cenk off air alright in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks! i think the number 1 thing than viewers like about the young turks is that were honest. they know that i'm not bsing them for some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know i'm going to be the first one to call them out. cenk on air>> what's unacceptable is how washington continues to screw the middle class over. cenk off air i don't want the middle class taking the brunt of the spending cuts and all the different programs that wind up hurting the middle class. cenk on air you got to go to the local level, the state level and we have to fight hard to make sure they can't buy our politics anymore. cenk off air and they can question if i'm right about that. but i think the audience gets that, i actually cenk on air 3 trillion dollars in spending cuts! narrator uniquely progressive and always topical, the worlds largest online news show is on current tv. cenk off air and i think the audience gets, "this guys to best of his

abilities is trying to look out for us." only on current tv! ♪ theme cenk: welcome to one of the last ""young turks"" shows r. on current. we've got this one and they be we've got next week monday through thursday. you can always find "the young turks" on... that's right, it's very obvious, theyoungturks.com or you tube/what would be the letters, t.y.t., right? i'm just saying. we've got a great show four guys here tonight. later in the program, drums at