from washington, the mclaughlin group. the american original for over three decades, the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. issue one, stand your ground. >> it's time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and so dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods. these laws try to fix something that was never broken by allowing and perhaps encouraging violent situations to escalate in public. such laws undermind public safety. >> attorney general eric holder this week addressed the naacp. the 104-year-old national association for the advancement of colored people. general holder denounced

florida's quote-on-quote stand your ground law and other self- defense laws like it that exist in 26 other u.s. states. laws that allow people who feel threaten to not run away, but rather to legally defend one's self even with deadly force if necessary. they are now under national public scrutiny in the wake of the february 12,2012 killing of trayvon martin. an unarmed 17-year-old male in sanford, florida. the shooter was george zimmerman a neighborhood watch volunteer. last week after 16 hours and 20 minutes of deliberations, a jury of five white women and one woman who appeared to be hispanic found zimmerman not guilty of murder. question, does zimmerman's lawyer base their defense on florida's stand your ground statute? pat buchanan? >> they did not, john. what they argued was self- defense. they said that trayvon martin

basically sucker punched george zimmerman, knocked him on the ground. beat him martial arts style, pound his ground and smacked his head on the cement. in those circumstances, george zimmerman brought out his concealed gun and shot trayvon martin. >> no requirement to use any statute? >> no, not at all. the sanford police believed zimmerman, the jury believed him, and others believed him. let me show you this about the attorney general. he is trying to get off what is being done to him. he is being pushed for a second hate crime trial of george zimmerman. but the fbi has investigated and found no racial profiling at all, no profiling of any kind. the jury said so he has moved on to this issue of stand your ground? >> under what circumstances does stand your ground come into play? >> well, the lawyers said they did not use stand your ground as a defense. but if you look at the judges and their instructions to the jury, it was word for word out of stand your ground laws.

if you listen to juror number 37 who gave an interview to anderson cooper on cnn, she said they discussed on at least two occasions the stand on your ground law. in her mind they were basically voting to acquit along those lines. she also pointed along that out of the six, three wanted to acquit, two favored manslaughter, and one was on second-degree murder. but the judge's instructions were quite explicit. i don't think that you can fault the jury for the decision that they arrived at. >> what kind of stand your ground defense is needed to protect the witness? >> well, i think the issue in this particular case was that there was no evidence put in by the prosecution that in fact there was a kind of violence that was put here. no claim to his self-defense.

the self-defense was the issue with nothing that was put forward in that trial by the prosecution to deny that. and therefore they have to go with that. that made the conclusion, the legal conclusion from the jury. when you read what they said in that interview with anderson cooper is a matter of law that turned the decision into a unanimous decision of when they studied the law and they realized the law, they made it clear that unless, you know you could deny the issue of self- defense, they have no case. >> no, no. >> it is a narrow league ruling. >> the role of the jury is to obey the law and to fulfill that law. that's what they were doing and that was the law. >> do you think what the attorney general said was helpful under these circumstances? >> i think it was helpful because he acknowledged that first of all there is a racial divide contrary to what the prosecutors even said that it had nothing to do with the case. but we all know better than that, in case that they had the family, you know, what they

were trying to get zimmerman prosecuted. it probably would have never happened at the racial angle that wasn't capturing everybody's attention andsuspensions. the thing is that stand your ground laws, they are designed for the benefit of the defendant in cases like this. that it broadens the parameters whereby you can use deadly force. and it eliminates any obligation to step away, and that's why it's called stand your ground. even though zimmerman didn't make that plea, the jury was well aware of it, it was in their instructions, and up to the prosecution then to show that. >> and the law was drafted by the nra in florida initially. >> enough of the ag. let's move on and go higher. on friday president obama addressed the verdict directly. >> when trayvon martin was first shot, i said that this could have been my son. another way of saying that is trayvon martin could have been

me. 35 years ago. and when you think about why in the african american community at least there's a lot of pain around what happened here. i think it is important to recognize that the african american community is looking at this issue through a oat -- through this with a set of circumstances and history that doesn't go away. there are very few african american men in this country who have not had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in the department stores, including me. there are certainly very few african american men who have not had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the

doors of cars. that happens to me, at least before i was a senator. i don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the african american community interprets what happened one night in florida. >> question, what's the impact of president obama's statement about the trayvon martin case? i'll ask you, pat. >> i think it is insidious, john. >> insidious? >> yes. for this reason. with the president stepping out politically, he is identifying with the grieving community, with trayvon martin's side of the argument. he's going all out and raising this racial profiling thing and says that it really goes on as racial profiling had nothing to do with the case. he's implying that's why trayvon martin is dead. he suggested that the african american community, that if he would have been white, you'd have a different result here.

i think the president is taking sides in what is becoming unfortunately a pretty nasty racial dispute in this country rather than doing what he did at gabby gifford's where he was magnificent. >> would he have been stopped if he was white? >> i'm glad that he was there because like i said it was a case for them. >> yes, being investigated. >> you are absolutely right. i agree with you. i agree with you. >> the stand your ground law has been around since 2005. and that we're filing getting a big debate on this thing. >> it's got enough that stand your ground had nothing to do with it. >> it was enough for the prosecution. >> yes. ask anybody, ask anybody if they think that race was not included in this. i want to say that the president's remarks on friday are going to be read by future generations. they are beautiful, they are

elegant. >> he addressed the pain that lot of people feel. he does netiquette jury's verdict. he talks about how we can move forward. that this is not a post-racial america. if he didn't speak out, what kind of a president would he be? he has an obligation to address this. and i think that a lot of people will identify with the remarks that he made. >> the president is a greater lincoln. this is a lincoln's moment that is direct and sincere. >> yes, it was a lincoln moment for him, i do agree. i think the speech is what he said was appropriate for a president, particularly a president who happens to be african american in heritage. i will also say that since i was in attendance at the march on washington where martin luther king gave his i have a dream speech. in fact i was sitting on the stage with him. i thought this was a moment of

extraordinary hope and promise for america. i don't think that it has quite worked out that way. nevertheless that they have got to comment on this as i don't see how they could do it otherwise. >> do you think that the overall attention to this is exaggerating the actual event? >> it is going far beyond the event, you're exactly right. look, the event, they had nothing to do with the racial profiling or with stand your ground. that it was racial, that's how the case got brought to court. but john, i think that the president, they should have, well, why is there no word for george zimmerman under a threat of his life. i mean his brother is getting searched. and people, they are being beaten on out there. there is vandalism and violence. why didn't they stand up to say that this has nothing to do for them. let's have an argument and a discussion as it should stop. >> where are you seeing all this violence? it is a largely peaceful protest that you must be reading the blogs.

[ laughter ] >> it is the point of people getting beat up. >> yes, that's well taken. as someone is exaggerating. >> they said it last week that it was the big quote for them to call them heads as they all said it. >> when are they raising these racial profiling things, to talk for ten minutes on racial profiling. >> because it's the elephant in the room right now for the past week. >> do you think that he was racially profiled, trayvon martin? >> that's not the issue. if that were a white peacemaker on the specifics of the case. and the reason why we're talking about it today, pat, is because the racial profiling is a great real issue of the society and it's the first time that we have gotten a serious national hearing debate inaugural view on stand your ground. and that's the real thing. >> so you think that racial profiling is as big as apparently the president thought was required for him to enter this? >> well, you know, all the way around, john. you look at eric holder's

speech earlier this week and the obama speech later. this is all, it was very personal. this is a part of the black experience in america. probably the experience, a minority that every day you need to think about your status as the minority. >> now, you know that as the nation elected as the president, barack obama, who is a black man. >> that's right. >> and you still think that the issue is there front and center for them to warrant their intrusions. and for the anticipation for them in the dialogue at this time and after the attorney general that has spoken definitively on. >> i said it earlier this week that i thought that obama, they should speak out and i understand why they don't. no matter what they say, they will be getting attacked by the various snipers on out there. i'm glad that he did. >> just a moment. do you think that he made matters better or worse? >> it's better. you know, people talk about things being worse. it's only because a lot of folks that did not need to

worry about race before and i'm hearing about it because of the twitter age, etc. you need to have a national twitter conversation. unfortunately this is what it will take. >> so far you're doing all right. >> thank you. >> i want to ask you one final question. do you think it's a close call of the president in getting involved? a close call for him? >> it was a courageous call. >> you could argue that they have to be involved. this is a major national issue. >> you don't think that it was beginning to fade? >> no, it was not, john. >> and it was beginning to fade. >> they have an issue >> i think that he had a moment, especially when he said, you know, when a black man enters a department store that there are a number of eyes on him. with a white man that's not the case. why? >> because there is a graining

impact. but on the other hand, maybe he made it more of a thing than what it was. >> john, there is racial profiling and it is because if you take a young black african american males 18 to 29, they have a big rate that 1/3 are in jail, probation. and this is why the profiling is done behind all the fear. the cabs in new york, 49 out of 50 are muggings. >> they are profiling and there's a reason for it. >> i want to hear you talk to him about that. >> let him finish. >> when you are on the receiving end of it, that's where the tension comes. when you're on the receiving end of profiling. >> and you know, it's not a part of being the minority when you walk into a store and wondering if you're being profiled. >> yes or no? >> just a moment. >> i want to point out as the president answered that

question. he said trayvon martin was statistically more likely to be killed by his own peer than what happened. >> he said that there are no excuses. >> you know, you've got to warn your children about all kinds of threats. i'm happy that i have not had to tell my children about the segregation signs. >> give me a one word answer. >> we've made progress. >> we still have a long ways to go. >> wet market. >> the president's intrusion or involvement in this matter is more of a plus than a minus. which is it? >> he is inflamed. it is more of a minus. >> the leader of the country. >> more of a plus. >> he feels great pain about this. >> yes, more of a leader of the country. >> you may think it is dying out, but the viewership. >> what's the answer? we just suppress it. it was a plus.

>> it was a plus and probably asked more about it. and that they will be a subject of this weekend's talk show, which he always manages to create an atmosphere for by what he says on thursday or friday. issue two, detroit goes bankrupt. on thursday the city of detroit filed for chapter 9 bankruptcy protection in federal court. it is the largest u.s. city to file for bankruptcy. question, what accounts for moe town's record $18 billion bankruptcy? >> well, the first place is the erosion of the population in that city from the 1.8 million to 700,000 people. the whole lifestyle of that city has been changed and it is the city that is virtually unenforceable in terms of just protection against criminals. the level of violence and criminal violence in that city is amazing. that's why a lot of people are leaving. the main industry on that city, which is the automobile industry, a lot of those companies have just left, so they have no jobs, they have no revenues, they cannot afford to

pay the police. and the police, they are the least efficient probably in any city in the country. no wonder why people are leaving and businesses are leaving and the compounds. >> i'm not understanding why this phenomenon is happening. can you address that? >> yeah, it will begin right after world war ii. they grew up there. and you know, the attraction of suburbia as the auto industry moves out of there and then a number of, excuse me, mayors like they had up in new york. you know guys with generous pensions and all these other things at the same time, tax- based views that are moving slower and slower and the crime that is horrendous out there. there's a number of efforts to rebuild it and the republicans are out of the convention right there with a big downtown effort that are lead by ford and stuff. and it is a disaster and a tragedy of the first order. it's the largest american city to go through this. and i don't know how they will get out of it. >> that's the best thing. and i almost grew up there because i was there every

summer to visit relatives in the early 50s. you're right. and really as the same problem for them and every city of america that they have had with the industrialization. and the only thing is when the auto industry left, nothing replaced it. >> right. >> and so you've got more than the king riots. i'm sorry, '67. >> but the year before it, '57, those riots only accelerated white flags and disinvestments. and then you had a series of different mayors and local conflicts politically. and again, you know, they will be down for the disinvestments. no one came down with what left and it is worse and that means you lose the police services and schools, etc., etc. >> i'm not giving you the root cause of the decline. >> and it is for all the legacy costs from all union contracts. but not having the investment for them. and why could they show the impressive delegation from detroit and from the states that they have done more to get help from the federal

government. >> well, besides federal government, it's a lot over the years for the people bringing bad luck. even the gambling boat brought new revenue as they have down some downtown redevelopment. but any time they get rolling in the economic downturn that they have nothing to do with the ruling elite in detroit. >> and they've got that picture, not just in detroit, but the mayor as well and the suburbs here as well. >> there's plenty of correct officials. but the city has been dying there for a long time to come and the collapse of the auto industry, it is really accelerating that there. >> excuse me, let me finish, pat. now, that is what's built on the steel industry and that they are now a thriving city with a lack of imagination, i guess in detroit. but they did not convert when that auto industry left them that they did not convert to anything. >> and that is the dependence industries that they went to california. >> all right, let's go a quick

segment for them and mr. bernanke and the feds. >> with unemployment still high and declining only gradually with inflation running below the committee's longer run objective, the policies will remain appropriate for the foreseeable future. >> federal reserve board ben bernanke reenforced the global markets by reporting to the u.s. congress that the feds is not retreating from its unprecedented economic stimulus known as qe3. quantitative easing number 3. for now. qe3 means that the feds pumps $85 billion into the u.s. economy every month. the feds buy bonds and other assets. but mr. bernanke is realistic. as he explains unemployment is still too high for the feds to ease off on their quantitative easing. as of june, the u.s. unemployment was that 7.6%.

underemployment is currently at 17.6% according to gallups. the feds will not stop qe3 unless unemployment drops from 7.6% to 7%. if that happens and the economy maintains their quote-on-quote modest to moderate taste of growth, then qe3 will be eased as early as this year and then terminated by mid-2014 a year from now. on the flip side, mr. bernanke noted that should the economy know that they need to stand on up there already to increase qe3 purchases. >> well, sum it all up, will you? you have about 30 seconds. >> you're dealing with the critical issue that they are not recovering that they are growing on a less than 2% despite that huge fiscal intervention. and despite that huge monetary intervention that he does not know what more to do with it and that's what they are focusing on. >> is he overly pessimistic?

>> no, not at all. he was overly optimistic. that was the problem. >> his term was up in the end of the year. will he be reappointed? >> no, he will not appoint them in one of the nasty episodes of the american public life. >> and because bernanke, they will say things like this? >> no, for whatever reasons, that bernanke is being the genius that she being the absolute transformative head of the federal reserve. that he has done an amazing job that nobody has ever done. >> he was entitled to his own appointment, serving two terms. >> issue three, immigrants a blessing? >> the house republicans, they could kill the senate's immigration reform approval. three weeks ago the senate, they passed a bill allowing 11 million illegal immigrants to apply for the u.s. citizenship over the cost of 10 years. and such a past to citizenship, says the house republicans, they would open the flood gates and the low skilled workers from mexico, they would stream over and unprotective board of driving down the u.s. wages.

undocumented immigrants they say shall not be granted any path of citizenship. and that the bill, it is not tough enough. okay. in time magazine, they find this opposition quote on quote utterly baffling. immigrants says that they are the key reasons that the u.s. population and the economic growth exceeds that of most of the industrialized worlds. and not only has the net immigration of the low skilled workers from mexico slowed down for the past decade. it is expected to reverse. the economy is growing and the mexicans migrants who make up 28% of the farm born population in the u.s. they are going home to mexico. and the fewest center estimates that the total number of the mexican immigrants who return to mexico a minimum of 65% and possibly even 95% did so

voluntarily. and also the immigrants who gain legal citizenship contributes to social security revenue. pay taxes that cut the feds budget deficit and they even grow that economy and because of the key role immigrants play in business and job creations. >> question, if immigration is a blessing, why is it so controversial? i'll ask you. >> it is controversial with a small portion of the electric republican house members who represents districts that don't have many hispanics. they don't feel any of the political pressure. if we're going to get an immigration reform bill, it is going to be because of pressure and the business community from the high-tech community. who understands all of the figures that she cites in that article. if the speaker of the house will be willing to put a bill on the floor that is not necessarily going to get a majority of the caucus. the votes are there if john boehner will let them express themselves. >> what does the sign of the

immigration bill authorize? >> the senate bill authorizes a pay out to leaderships to the citizenship that it will take 13 years. and it authorizes billions in reenforcing the border with ridiculous amount of money. all the people worried about the deficits don't seem to care about that. the border is pretty well enforced. hardly anyone is coming across anyway. just a political ploy. >> 1.6 million new workers a year to compete against americans with a 17.6% current underemployment rate for jobs. the 1.6 million new work of visas will span every industry from tourism to high-tech to blue college jobs. at the present rate of the job creations it takes eight months to create that many new jobs. >> exactly. and i will speak to that. let me speak to that. h1vs, when they come in and take jobs of the middle class jobs, engineers, you take folks coming in from the service city, the third world.

you have black unemployment twice as high. now, what in heaven's name are you bringing in millions of people and giving amnesty to millions of people when our own folks aren't working? and would they help the economy? but would they help the economy? >> they do create jobs. they find the force of 500 businesses from google. etc. and they also help to raise, well, you know to make them stable. they may buy houses, to improve the housing industry. it stimulates the economy. >> they contribute $10,000 a year in taxes and use $30,000 a year in services. >> what about existing high- tech workers and engineers? are their salaries being driven down? >> no. >> is it a monument thing? >> sure they are. those are the kind of peoples we need right now whether they come from overseas or skilled workers. we have a huge shortage of people like that. 195,000 people in the year 2000, cut down to 65,000.

we have a tremendous shortage of these kinds of engineers. and that's why the high-tech industries. let me tell you here, a political issue here. let's face it. because if you have this bill, the democrats, the republicans, they are convinced that the one big state that they have been carrying which is texas, it will never be carried by the republicans again. so there will be a political issue here as well. >> do we need the immigration for the population growth? >> yes, we do. >> out of time. bye bye, happy

. >> the university of california confirmed home(i securityr secretary janetlp napolitano. >> the university of cavipját a boeke on for the nation and the cworld. >> protesters citing a poor credentials icd a interrupt the hearing. a hefty penalty and fine both fort( pg&exdñr for the san brun pipeline explosion. two guilty verdicts in the richmond gang rape trialçó brin closure for the brutali] crime that drew national attention. >> we the jury find george zimmerman not guilty. >> and outrage or the acquittal of george zimmerman for the shooting deathñiokq o