♪ theme >> welcome to "the young turks." we have an awesome show ahead for you guys. only three shows left. only three shows left on current. doesn't matter. you can find us every single day on "the youn theyoungturks.com. we're bringing in all the all-star for the final week, ana

kasparian, and jayar jackson. lindsey marrone in the house. she is a former c.i.a. officer, with a book my life as a former c.i.a. spy. lindsey's in the building. she's in the building. all right. colonel morris davis joins us. he's a former gitmo chief prosecutor and a generally kick ass guy. we got a great panel four guys. let's get started on today's topics. well, president obama reassured us at the end of last week, don't worry, we're going to do some revisions here at the n.s.a., a little course correction, if you will. one thing we're going to do is an independent board of outsiders who will help us determine if we're doing the right thing with the n.s.a. and protect civil liberties and certainly protect against abuses. we find out today who will be actually picking that board,

shepherding it and in the words of the administration, establishing the group. that will be the outsider known as james clapper, the head of the n.s.a. i think they're trying to make us l.o.l. ok? i think this is preposterous. lindsey, do you believe that the head of the n.s.a. might pick an independent board that would then say that he's doing everything wrong? >> i have a hard time believing that, and i mean, i have a hard time toughing this guy at all, since when he was asked directly if the n.s.a. was collecting data on american citizens, he answered unequivocally no only a find out a couple months later that yeah, they're collecting a lot of data. >> he says now he'll pick an independent board. i'm glad you pointed that out. we got that on tape. >> last summer, the n.s.a.

director was at a conference, and he was asked a question about the n.s.a. surveillance of americans. he replied and i quote hire, the story that we have millions or hundreds of millions of dossiers on people is completely false. the reason i'm asking the question is having served on the committee now for a dozen years, i don't really know what a dossier is in this context. i wanted to see if you could give me a yes or no answer to the question does the n.s.a. collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of americans. >> nos. >> it does not. >> not with itingly. there are cases where they could inadadvertently collect, but not with itingly. >> every time i look at that

tape, i laugh. at a former c.i.a. officer, how quickly would you have surmised that that guy was lying? >> just all the bizarre ticks, scratching his head and not making eye contact are all the things we look for when someone is not telling the truth. >> of course now we know he wasn't, saying my response was clearly erroneous. stephanie: he different add by edward snowden and we'd like to thank him for that, but that is what happened. colonel davis, thoughts on clapper picking an outsider independent board to oversee the abuses at the n.s.a. >> it's like o.j. having oversight for the panel to find the real killer.

it just, you know, reeks to no end. the president would have been better served, i've known general clapper for 30 years and i wouldn't have had an air force career without him. i like the guy a lot, but i think like many, like harold koe, many went into the office with good intentions, got into the white house and sold out to the powers that be. if they want a clean process, they need to keep him out of it and have a truly independent panel. i understand a statement came out today saying that general clapper would not be selecting the members, the white house would do it and he would only have oversight authority, but i think having him involved at all is a real problem. >> there was a lot of back pedaling there after they got a lot of grief for this, but even having him have oversight over the people who are supposed to have oversight over him makes no accepts at all.

i just want to ask lindsey and colonel davis again, based on something carl davis just said. you said people go in with good intentions and the powers that be lead him in a certain direction. colonel davis, this guy's the head of the n.s.a. if he's not the powers that be, who are the powers that be? >> it's an unfortunate situation where we have this group of, you know, insiders that, again, as you know, general clapper was at the island before being the director of intelligence. you have insiders and interest groups that all have a financial interest in perpetuating fear, inc., keeping the public scared

to death and we'll keep you safe. from what i've seen in his time at the white house, i've been very disappointed. disappointed. >> i wound up having dinner with general petraeus a couple of weeks back. totally happen stance. he seems like a decent guy. there's something when you get in there, you wind up making decisions that gets boos allen rich, contractors rich, spice on americans, abuses civil liberties. the list goes on and on. what happened. >> i think these are very insular communities. when you're working for such a place, that's your world, that's what you know. increasingly that world has expanded to include contractors, but that said, there's almost a sense of entitlement that we're the people who get to know everything and civil liberties are really not even considered,

i think. it's an insider sense of entitlement that's driving a lot of policy. i would venture to say there's a lot -- it will look at a lot more carefully how the information was leaked, not if it's justifiable to be collecting all this information on americans. >> these people are a product of the system. the way he spoke about it, he's not sure if he can do other things. who else would he choose? is this panel secret? we knew that was a seek recourt, whether or not they can allow them to do these things. we know who the people are and there's a way to check their backgrounds, at least these things are promising. i'm trying to think what would make us happy. who could he have? opponents of the president? who would we trust to put on a panel that would make sense to put together?

>> as best as you can, people who are not connected to the story. a couple names floated were important executives at google and apple. wait a minute, google and apple, look, i love google, they pay our bills on theyoungturks.com but they were intimately involved in this program. i wouldn't put anyone from google or apple in it. they were involved in prism. i don't know, respected folks outside of that? maybe the head of the aclu on it? i would. they're like the head of the aclu, are you nuts? >> that would make more sense than having government officials or anyone tied to the story get involved. i don't think there's going to be any change whatsoever. when it comes to a lot of these companies, whether phone companies or on line search engines, they make money off these searches, off giving this data to the government.

they have an incentive to keep programs like this going. so yeah, you can't have executives at google or verizon or anyone else getting involved in this independent panel. >> here's my overall take on all of this, which is that the system winds up doing a great job of selecting the people that it needs, right? so it needs somebody like james clapper to go in, no matter whether a good guy or bad guy to make the decisions so that more people get wealthy, right? so somehow, if you're not making decisions that get those contractors wealthy, and that maintained the system to lindsey's point, well, you're moved on along, until you get like a michael hayden, who started this mess in the first place and he picks a program like thin thread, trailblazer, one of them worked and one of them didn't, right? he picked the one that didn't work that was 100 times more expensive, because people got rich off that program.

i think that's how the system manipulates this whole situation until we get all the people making the wrong decisions. let me throw out an impossible question before we end this segment. how in the world would we fix that? i mean how would you get -- lindsey, you were at the c.i.a., how would you get a guy who actually cares about the constitution and civil liberties while deeply caring about our security and not be overly in flu ed by the next job he is going to have with the next defense contractor. >> there almost has to be a complete cultural overhaul in places like that. any defense expressed or questioning of policies is really quashed, and you're accused of being unpatriotic a understand not a team player. that's fundamentally wrong, the c.i.a., n.s.a., the military,

that's where we should have people questioning. there should be checks and balances. it doesn't exist. there's such a culture of secrecy, a culture of perpetuating the status quo. >> we'll leave it there. if i was president, that would drive me crazy. you know, look. if there's one place we need dissenting voices to figure out so we don't have the same problem on 9/11, which is everything agreeing to the wrong conclusion, right, it would be the c.i.a. and our intelligence difficulties. well, we'll work on it. one of my answers is get money out of politics, things magically get better. we'll see. we'll see. things are getting worse before they get better. north carolina, new bill stripping voting rights away, so over the top. wait until you get the whole picture, plus the hilarious comments of the north carolina governor trying to defender it, when we come back. 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 buz 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) current tv is the place for compelling true stories. (kaj) jack, how old are you?

>> nine. (adam) this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines. way inside. (christoff) we're patrolling the area looking for guns, drugs, bodies ... (adam) we're going to places where few others are going. [lady] you have to get out now. >> lots of terrible things happen to people growing marijuana. >> this crop to me is my livelihood. >> i'm being violated by the health care system. (christoff) we go and spend a considerable amount of time getting to know the people and the characters that are actually living these stories. (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. >> occupy! >> we will have class warfare. (vo) true stories, current perspective. documentaries. on current tv.

cenk: we're back on "the young turks." you can always find "the young turks" on "the young turks".com where we do a two hour show. we have three hours left on current. god bless you for watching us today. we've got a great panel for you guys. i'll get to them in one second. first, i want to tell you about the story out of north carolina. supreme court, was, gutted the voting rights act and immediately thereafter, north carolina thought great, we're going to jump at this opportunity to make sure we can pass new restrictive laws to make it tougher and tougher for people to vote, especially the poor and minorities. >> after driving away from anthony wilson's questions about the election bill, we finally got our answer on you tube. >> which is why i've signed today self common sense reforms into law. >> the the governor announced he signed the bill into law, posting this videotape defense of the controversial measure aimed at keeping minority,

democratic leaning voters away from the polls. mccareery addressed the attacks. >> they are more interested in divisive politics than insuring that no one's vote is disenfranchised by a fraudulent ballot. >> the governor calls it the voter i.d. bill and labels it popular. when it comes to the election booth, many support it. many other new rules in the law are not so popular, the law cuts the early voting period by a week, but extends hours, same day registration is being cut altogether, along with out of precinct voting and the state funded program to register high schoolers to vote is cut, as well. >> none of this is popular. >> the aclu and southern coalition for justice announcing a federal lawsuit against the state arguing that just hours old law violates the voting rights act.

cenk: all right, now, when the governor was asked about some of the controversial provisions in this bill, in particular asked about the new voter registration, why you are limiting that, wouldn't you want new voters, he said i don't know enough, i'm sorry, i haven't read that portion of the bill. winner. ok, number two, they asked him hey, why did you limit the number of day that is people can register ahead of time to vote. he said that's ok, because we extended the number of hours on the one day that they could do it. they're like you know that that was the democratic provision that you grudgingly agreed too. oops, number two. oops number three, he said there's plenty of opportunity for voter registration, we've got on line voter reaming strayings in north carolina. no, they don't. strike three. they don't really care about getting people to rental at her to vote. in fact, they want them to not register to vote, because they believe that's how republicans win, which is sad. let's bring in this team panel.

tommy, do you think it's going to break through to the people of north carolina as an example that hey, wait a minute, turns out republicans don't want certain people to vote and are they going to be bothered by that? >> yeah, i think so. i think this is going to backfire the same way i think it did in 2012. the people who this law is targeting are going to be the ones that are upset and hopefully make a point of turning out and voting. you know, i think it's funny, because, they talk about how the thing i like best about that reporter is when he says critics say that it's to disenfranchise. republican physician have been saying the guy from pennsylvania. another example of the media, some say this and some say that

crap. cenk: right. >> i think that it has a chance of backfiring. you know, i also think that, you know, people on this side of the -- our side should point to the republicans. there are republicans who are surprisingly good on voting rights. rick santorum favors restoring felons voting rights, did you know that? >> i did not. he should be celebrated throughout the country. jayar still doesn't believe it. >> you've got to listen the way ricrick santorum talks about tht issue. i think we should listen to it. cenk: i'm surprised that rick santorum wants them to vote. with regard to voluntarying, it reminds me to some degree of the muslim brotherhood. they win the election and immediately want to change the rules so that from then on, it's

very easy for them to win, but not the others to win. obviously by manipulating who can vote, the republicans of north carolina seem to be doing something similar. what's your take? >> i'm a native of north carolina, grew up there, spent my entire life there until i joined the military and hope to retire there. we used to be proud tar hills and have become pathetic tar holes, after running ruff shod over the people. there was an anti abortion bill tacked on to a motorcycle safety law. this is a desperate act of a party that realizes it's got a dying demographic and the best way to hold on to power is to limit the way it's coming. they can't outrun this. it's going to catch up with them at some point. north carolina used to be a progressive state. we had research triangle park,

the precursor to silicon valley that opened in the late 1950's, great universities, like duke and university of north carolina and we used to look our nose down at other southern states. it's like now we're in a race to see who can out idiot the other idiots in the south and mccareery is leading the effort. cenk: the programs you listed are true, and there's more, expanded concealed carry permits to bars and restaurants, because you know drunk people are very responsible with their guns. he's also cutting unemployment benefits, taking it to the poor. guys in the studio, does this ever catch up to them in a state like north carolina, is there some chance that the average voter goes hey, you know what, maybe these are the bad guys, like, you know, i've been voting republican a long time, but maybe i ought to check myself.

cenk: well, i mean it's possible. if you watch that report, you can see that the majority of things that this new voting law does is unpopular. people are unhappy with it. they're ok with the i.d. part of it, the rest of it they're against. there's a possibility that they would protest it, go against it. i find it very unfortunate that we always have to rely on the aclu to fight our battles for us. the aclu are literally the only organization on the right side of these issues. i think colonel morris davis is absolutely right when he says that republicans are so stubborn and so against changing with the times, adapting with the times. instead of taking a look at their own domestic policy and how unpopular, deeply unpopular it is with mill len yells, they are not conservative.

republicans want to take away the right to vote or make it extremely difficult for them to vote. i think that's going to be very, very unpopular. >> they are trying to manipulate the rules. they're trying to change it, trying to let everyone vote, because they know it's the same argument every time. they change the rules so only they get elected, because that's the plan that they have. as soon as this law passed. the first thing that came across, what was the problem. we talked about durham 2012 elections. the number of actual fraudulent voters was near zero and the people tried to prove it saying look, i'm going to put in a dead guy's name and rental at her to vote and he got arrested immediately. it's fine. they proved that they have no leg to stand on in this argument. >> i believe with colonel morris, it's a desperate and i would add pathetic backward

looking and short sighted, trying to restrict high school voting registration. they're alienating the future. that could be their future base. they're saying we don't want you to vote, and so, you know, driving them away. cenk: first of all, governor mccareery after signing the bill acknowledged that there's almost no voter fraud in north carolina, but he said just because nobody is robbing your house doesn't mean you shouldn't put a lock on it. that means nobody's trying to rob your house. nobody is doing voter fraud. it's not like there's no cost. the cost is you are disenfranchising a huge number of citizens who should be voting in that state. second of all, the reason why the republican party has hung in there as long as it has is because they get a big percentage of the white vote, but they don't among millennials. now they are losing democrats by 20 points among white

millennials. >> this is why the republican party is afraid of the liberal streak. people are not as religious as they once were in this country, people are not as intolerant of gays. people are more open minded about reproductive rights. they need to adapt to the tiles, not get rid of the right to vote. cenk: sometimes parties don't adapt to the times and they die. >> which i wouldn't mind. >> they miss the reason why this happened in the last election, going wait, you mean minorities camcame out to vote, that wasn't just in 2008. they're generally behind. they're still thinking we still got that white vote. that white vote has changed on you, too. >> to anna's point, the religious vote is becoming more and more progressive every year, as well on top of all of this,

so the wig party might be in a lot of trouble. when we come back, an amazing story, a kid needs a heart transplant. it's possible that the hospital denied him that transplant because he had bad grades in school. we'll dive into the issue, find out what might be the case here and tell you the latest on that story when we come back.

(vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. (vo) she's joy behar. >>current will let me say anything. cenk: back on "the young turks." hey, where would you find "the young turks" on line?

anybody know? oh, right, theyoungturks.com. hope you remember that next week. and this week. >> earlier today there was a huge controversy involving a 15-year-old, anthony stokes. he has an enlarged heart and has about six to nine months to live unless he gets a heart transplant. initially, the children's health care of atlanta denied the heart transplant for a very curious decision and then reversed it after media back lash. first an abc affiliate explains. >> anthony's mother said the only way to fix her so that's enlarged heart is a transplant, but he doesn't qualify to be on the list. in this letter, doctors say it's because of a history of "non-compliance." >> they say they don't have any evidence to show he would take his medicine and he wouldn't have any follow up care. >> the family continued to

assume, there is no proof this is the case, we reached out to the hospital and they didn't confirm or deny it, but the parents say that they based this whole non-compliance claim on his grades and run-ins with the law. the hospital released a statement saying the following. >> so, was, a non-statement, i don't think that they were good in either confirming or denying the claims that the parents made, but there are some pretty interesting statistics when it comes to african-americans and how many of them need organ donations and how little of them actually get its. in fact, if you look at the 2012 u.s. transplant waiting list, only 14% of black americans received the organs that they

needed, white americans 27%. this is based on information released by the office of minority health reports. cenk: all right, ana, as a look at this case, i think well look, some people, they got to make decisions on who gets the heart transplants, right? it's not like we have an unlimited number of hearts and they're just being gratuitously cruel to this kid. they are not helping their cause by not telling us their criteria. >> if there was evidence that this 15-year-old refused to take medication, then maybe we can have a discussion. the hospital has not even said that. if they are basing it on his grades and his run-ins with the law, i'm not evening having that conversation. he's been on the waiting list, now next for a transplant, he should get that transplant, unless there's hard core proof indicating that he's going to be

irresponsible and not going to take the medication necessary to keep the heart going. cenk: i understand that. you know, i, for example, if somebody was older, they would say hales, we're going to give it to a younger person and that's a legitimate way to decide. if somebody was 380 pounds or like myself, even, 245 pounds, they might say we can give it to a guy who has a better chance of success with the surgery and keeping the heart and living longer. i think those are valid, right? is it valid if the kid, no matter what the race is, has a criminal history? yes or no. >> no. cenk: i think it's a hard question. you think absolutely not. >> no. you have a criminal history, ok, so you have a criminal history. you do your time, pay the consequences for that time and then what, you continue punishing that person afterwards? that's ridiculous. cenk: it's not just a matter of this guy gets the heart or no one does. it's impossible for us to know

who else is on the list. that's why it's more complicated. >> you know what. cenk: go ahead, tommy, jump in. >> i think if you're going to deny a heart transplant to a 15-year-old kid, you better have a pretty high bar. i don't think, no, i don't think run-ins with the law and grades should be a factor at all especially talking about a 15-year-old kid. if it's me, i'm an idiot, i have a heart attack and still smoke. 15-year-old kid, come on that's a bunch of crap. with this run-ins with the law thing, you remember now this is all over the news, the way young men are profiled, over owe pleased, white kids are more likely not to be arrested, much more likely to get an intervention. that's a ridiculous standard to use. >> contain add a little more to this? >> i have a family member on a waiting list for kidney transplant and before you even get on that list, they do a number of tests to make sure you're eligible and finally put you on the waiting list.

you go through so many obstacles just to get on the list. if he's next in line for the heart, he worked get that heart unless there is some sort of indication that he isn't going to take medication. >> you had direct information on how it works. just from jumping through all the hoops, i assume are the same for a heart transplant, that probably proves that he does have the responsibility to continue treatment and necessary things to keep things going. >> nobody said you're not going to die if you don't do your algebra. you can't say the kid didn't do his homework, so he's not going to take his rejection meds. cenk: i want to be clear on a couple of things. first of all, i'm opening questions here. i'm not saying the kid shouldn't get the transplant, right? second of all, when it comes to algebra, it's not like you punish them, oh, you got bad greats, you don't get a heart, jesus, no. if they use that and the r. and

we don't know, because they won't answer the question. the idea is he's not responsible enough to do x and y, he might not be responsibility enough to take his medications on time. don't get me wrong. he's 15 years old. that's good enough reason to give him the heart if you ask me. >> if you look at this kid, he never once on the floor of the senate told somebody to go f. themselves, never shot anybody in the face, and he never committed war crimes. we gave a heart to dick cheney. >> thank you. [ laughter ] cenk: how many hearts did we give dick cheney by the way. >> if that's the benchmark then clearly this young man needs a heart. if we're going to give it to a grumpy old man, we're going to give it to a young man. >> i'm going to use this to get my kids to do their homework, for one thing. run-ins with the law, recently there was a case of an african-american man shot multiple times in his own

driveway. that was a run-in with the law. i think it's preposterous to deny this kid a heart transplant for either any run-ins with the law or for bad grades. it's, i mean it's sickening to me. >> i'm glad you brought that up. the guy who got shot in the drive we, do you know what the cops said they shot him for? non-compliance. cenk: for not immediately arrested in his own driveway. yes, it's very frustrating. one last thing on this, because colonel davis pretty much ended the heart point of the conversation, pointing out cheney got one, so that part is over. yes, on the overall number that whites are twice as likely to get organ transplants as blacks, yes, there are socioeconomic considerations. it's harder sometimes to find, i'm told, i don't know for a fact, for blacks to find suitable transplant donors, et

cetera, but nonetheless, you know, i mean, jayar, as a black man in america, you got enough issues, but then if you need a transplant, it turns out you're only 50% as likely to get it as a white person. it's got to be a little frustrating. >> it is and maybe there's always access to information and the right way to go about these things. if you look at facilities in certain neighborhoods, they're not as inviting or informational based as you would think. they may not know the right way to go about it. there's probably tons of people who don't make it on the list or have access to the list. cenk: that would only make the in connection even worse. we have to leave it right there. remember a possible change of position, he will be getting a heart transplant if they've got one. we're going into a whole different issue. steve king is one of the craziest congressman in the u house and he's been saying

things like immigrants have cantaloupe cavs. he's outdone himself this time p.m. what did he say now? we'll tell you when we come back.

cenk: back on "the young turks." as usual, quiz time. if you want to watch news clips from "young turks" at any time, where would you go? oh, right, theyoungturks.com. >> he's decided this time around, want to take you a little further over the top. first of all, he had a rally. we can't show you the pictures, because politico wouldn't give us the rights. anyway, but he had a rally where there was it looked like from the pictures about three people. it was so sad, it was awesome. any way, apparently here's what he said:

cenk: i'm amused by the fact that america is a less vital situation. first of all, of course, among the developed world, we have the highest gun murder rate out of all the countries. chile comes in number two, turkey number three. i think we're doubling or tripling turkey to give you an idea how violent the united states is. when you look at our past, american indian genocide, dropping of the nuclear bombs. you see how we're the non-violent nation. we've got the panel here,

colonel davis, the u.s., we're a very non-violent situation, right? so we couldn't want any immigrants to muddy up our gene pool, would with we? >> you guys are too young to remember this, but the b52s had a song in 1980 called private idaho, called where do we go for a better tate than this, because idaho has given us ruby red, sarah palin and steve king. it's ridiculous and the things that come out of his mouth, a contest between steve king and peter king on who can be the most insane member of the king family in the gop. again, this is a guy who makes up facts as he goes along to incite the base. i was pleads. the talk you mentioned was here in my state of virginia. i've seen bigger crowds waiting for a meatball sample at costco than turned out at his big talk. the craziness doesn't play well

here in virginia. cenk: that's a good turn of events approximate. yeah, i mean, you didn't go to ikea, see the line for meatballs then. i got to give you more steve king quotes, they're so much fun. he once suggested that we not only build a giant wall on the border, but that we make it an electric fence. he said well, electronic giant wall, we do that with live tock all the time. of course, comparing immigrants to livestock, classy. then he compared them to dogs. he said now, you want to only let in the best immigrants, he claim. he said you want a good bird dog, one that's going to be aggressive, pick the one's that's friskiest, not the one over there sleeping in the corner. that was his excuse for why not letting in immigrants who were crossing it is border, but bring in rich immigrants, the good dogs that work very hard.

recently, he said referring to people who are taking advantage of the dream act, in other words, people who did really well in school or are going to join the u.s. military. he said no, no: cenk: very classy. this one i didn't know. turns out he had an interesting thought about joe mccarthy. remember, red scare and all that. he said: cenk: now that i know that, it all makes more sense, right? lindsey, what's your take on steve king? is he a dying breed within the republican party, or does he unfortunately represent the silent -- well, not to silent majority of republicans in congress? >> i hope he's a dying breed. i mean, it's hard to even -- i don't even want to honor his remarks with any sort of reaction, because they're just so blatantly offensive. did he come over on the play

flower? i'm curious to know his background. we are a country of immigrants. we have always been a country of immigrants, and so these remarks, they're offensive to america as a country, i think, not just to any particular group of people. fundamentally unpatriotic i would say. i would hope this is a dying breed within the republican party. cenk: if he did come over on the mayflower, he would have been an updocumented immigrant. >> tommy, does steve king quietly speak for the rest of the republican caucus? or even within the republicans, is he an outlier? >> here's the thing. it's almost tempting to think that steve kipping is being put up to this by other republicans just so they can denounce him and distract from the fact that they are tripping up immigration reformal. i'm tempted to think that, but

you listen to what they say when they denounce what he says. they don't say that is a terrible thing to say. they say we don't need that sort of hateful language. what steve king's doing now, this is the stuff they've been doing all along. because they got whopped in 2012, they want to change course now. it's in their soul, in their d.n.a. they are trying to act like this guy is some kind of outlier now, but they've been encouraging and putting up with this for i don't know, centuries, for them to go ahead now and try and say oh, no, teach king is a terrible guy, look at us over here, you know, trying to do immigration reform and not succeeding. cenk: you're right. we don't need hateful words like that, we just need hateful legislation wow the words to make it pass easier. cenk: >> if i say the words, they will hear you. cenk: when we come back, two interesting notes, one, interesting study on whether

you're dumber if you're a racist. it has surprising results. >> and paula deen, not guilty. fascinating. we'll tell you all about it when we come back.

cenk: we're back on "the young turks." we only have two shows and two segments left on current. luckily, you can find us where? theyoungturks.com. we move on to paula deen. are you ready for this, are you sitting down? not guilty. what? one part that was left out is that jackson is white and partly led to the not guilty portion in the case of at least racial harassment, so let's go to an abc package on that. >> deen's former restaurant manager, a white woman with by

racial roots sued deen saying she was offended. the court said she was at best: >> still this morning, many wonder if it's all too little, too late. cenk: now, look, the fact that paula deen used the n. word came out during the trial basically through the whole process, but did anyone really think that lisa jackson was going to win this case? i've got bi-racial nieces, a response why she should be worried about the racial harassment. does anybody think this absolves paula deen? >> no. no. no. first of all, the fact that a white woman is suing paula deen for racial discrimination, i don't see why a case that has to

do has to be only offensive to black people. there's no empathy, sympathy or connection to other people in this country. we're able to separate other people and say oh, they're just others. if you have a chance to understand people's struggle, do we want to shut that down? it's ok that she has an understanding where maybe her black employees or fellow coworkers are coming from and shed offended by it. i don't see why she can't be offended as much as anyone else. we're supposed to be a collective society. >> jayar, jayar, come on. cenk: go ahead, tommy. >> well, you know, i agree that i think the key here is racial discrimination. the fact that she's white means she couldn't have been discriminated against, but if if she was cowing a hostile atmosphere, i think a white person should be able to sue for

that, but i don't think a white person should be able to sue another white person for discrimination. cenk: that's the key here. i don't think we're in a lot of disagreement on that. if she's offended by it, was, that makes sense. we're deeply offended by the unfortunately racism in this society. were you hurt by it, had financial damages. that's a hard case to prove if you happen to be white. >> all white people when they hear something racist are ok with it and feel good? cenk: no, but jayar, i'm offended by what paula deen said, but that doesn't mean that paula deen should pay me. >> i think that there's a difference between discrimination and harassment. lisa jackson couldn't have been fired or not hired because she

is not black. when i listen to that all the time, should i just quit my job? i don't think she sued for the right thing. i think if it had been a hostile work atmosphere, bu or harassme. >> i agree. she sued for the wrong thing. i think it's great that she's white and she sued. >> she's still got the sex harassment. cenk: cross your fingers on the sexual harassment thing. honestly, we don't know the story. you'd have to be involved in the case. like lisa jackson could be in it for the money, too. it's possibl at

covering up for it. the only problem is and i know you read deep into this as well, and we're going to cover it more in detail tonight, but he just asked if you were in fave of certain policies, and that doesn't necessarily mean you're racist, if you're against affirmative action or busing. >> there might have been issues

with methodology there. i think he could have done a better job in gauging what makes a person racist. if you truly believe that a certain group of people is more superior than another group of people, then i don't know how you would even do that. people can be against affirmative action and not be racist. you could be against it because you might believe that hey, all of a sudden, it makes it seem like these people didn't earn what they got, even if they really did. you see what i'm saying? >> i do. unfortunately, we're out of time. colonel davis, do you have an awesome 10 second comment? >> if you look back at all these stories from the n.s.a. surveillance through paula deen, the common thread is it's all about middle class, upper class, white protestants trying to maintain to your, an us versus them and paul lieu deem is symbolic of trying to maintain

power.

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 buz 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.

>> cenk: check us out tonight an hour from now on theyoungturks.com. a whole other show is awesome. youtube/tyt. >> john: congratulations to north carolina for taking on the completely nonexistent issue of voter fraud. because before we can tackle the real problems, we must tackle the made-up problems then we have don't have to tackle the real problems. the deficit is set to hit a five-year row. in 2010, chely wright made history as the first major country singer to come out as gay. today, she's married to her partner, a new mom of twins and she's joining us for the final week of "viewpoint." before current goes away, it is the master class summit coming right up with bot