from washington, the mclaughlin group. the american original. for over three decades, the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. >> the mclaughlin group is brought to you by seamans. every day, seamans answers are helping build a future of america. seamans, answers. >> check and make sure we are on schedule. the first technology of its kind is now providing answers

families need. seamans, answers. >> issue one, ukraine peace deal. signed a peace deal with president victor on friday to end the violent standoff that left some 80 dead and scores injured. announced early presidential elections and promised to bring opposition members into the ukrainian government. european foreign minister stayed up all night in fear of negotiating this end to the standoff. here's a short background. ukraine is a strategic cross roads between east and west. it has been caught in a diplomatic tug of war between russia and the east and europe in the west. the former soviet republic obtained independence in 1991, they tried to woo ukraine westward while eastward russia

under a succession of presidents has tried to reincorporate ukraine into its sphere of influence. for much of the country's history, western ukraine was a part of poland and is thoroughly european in outlook. while eastern ukraine dominated by russian speakers inclines toward moscow. at stake in the current standoff is whether the country leans east, west, or splits down the middle. >> but as things stand now, president obama wednesday appears to have been heard. >> the united states condemns the terms of violence that has taken place there. and we have been deeply engaged with our european partners as well as both the ukrainian government and the opposition. but we hold the ukrainian government primarily responsible. there will be consequences if people step over the line. >> question, was president

obama's warning to ukrainian president the big lever that moved ukraine away from this crisis? pat buchanan. >> president obama has been absent and president obama has been irrelevant. irrelevant to this entire crisis, john. what happened was, when they -- on that wednesday or thursday the protesters attacked the police. there was gunfire not only from the police, but from the other side. in the western part of the ukraine, people are moving into armories, police are defecting, soldiers are defecting from the government. the ukraine is on the verge of civil war and i think the president did the right thing. what he agreed to now is moving the elections up, bringing the two leaders into the party with him and i think that's the best way to solve this thing because quite frankly, if this thing is not solved diplomatic and peacefully and some of the problem is with those protesters in the street who don't want it solved. i think they could be headed for civil war that virtually

breaks the country up. >> eleanor. >> ukraine is primarily about the aspirations of the ukrainian people and they want to go with the european union. the western part of the country is closer to poland and so this is the breech that is occurring. the foreign ministers of the european union, basically talked to the president and talked to the protesters and they helped broker this union. but the incredible violence that we've seen in recent days, i think have made it clear to president putin, that this cause is lost. and so what we've seen in the last several hours, really, is that president putin is backing down. he now seems to be willing to work towards a diplomatic resolution and i think putin played his cards very cleverly up to this point, but the president has not been

irrelevant and the president and the european union appear now to have gotten the upper hand. >> rich. >> i think any time, john, the president of the united states says consequences in the international context, everyone around the world laughs up their sleeves. so pat is absolutely right. he's had no impact on this whatsoever. more the facts on the ground where the president of the ukraine has been waiverring back and forth since november between the eu and russia and the fact he seemed on the verge of completely losing control is the key factor here. and two layers to the conflict. one is the geopolitical one. the other one is ukrainian reformers pushing for something better than the authoritarian rule that they have been subjected to for so long. >> why did russia refuse to sign the agreement? >> russia was not happy about this agreement. but what happened it seems to me, given the bloodshed and violence that was leashed upon

the ukrainian people, the president, yanukovych lost a lot of support and a lot of people were no longer prepared to support him and he must have had some real feel for that before he backed down. but that to me was the breaking moment for him and it really destroyed his political base. >> there's a real problem here. whatever you say about yanukovych, he was elected democratically. he served 3/4 of his term. he would have been up for elections next year. it's a democratically elected president. not to protest, they set up barricades. they started throwing mollicof cocktails. this is not march on washington demonstration. this is a two-day by these protesters who are overthrowing a democrat elected president. >> it sounds like you were there in the streets. >> you saw the television, didn't you? >> i saw it from the beginning. these were peaceful protests

and it was the government that cracked down. >> would you tolerate that in d.c.? >> i wouldn't tolerate setting the army on them. >> after three months? >> if you had the protests intensify -- >> we didn't storm the occupy wall street settlement. >> in the thousands. >> when there's the initial reaction after ukraine pulled back from the deal with the eu in november, you know, at the prodding of putin who offered them $15 billion to do it. then there was reaction in the streets. then you had the government passing antiprotest laws and that was fuel on the fire for these demonstrations and there's no excuse for firing on these people in the middle of that square the way it happened. >> it's not about -- it's not about the democratically elected president. it's about president putin trying to exert his severe of influence and now he sees he is

in the war and ready to negotiate. >> exit question. excuse me. excuse me, let me in here. please relinquish. exit question. what are the odds that this accord will stand? pat buchanan. >> i think they are pretty good. if it's not for this accord, the army will be called in to clean these guys out and sweep them out of the square, which they should do. secondly, yanukovych realizes the end is near. >> you talk about cleaning these guys out and they are your citizens and the citizens of your country, you're in trouble. if anything, this accord is going to get tougher on the president. >> it's a 50/50 thing. you have hot heads who don't want to take it, even though they should. itst not clear whether putin wants to accept this deal. >> at this stage of the deal, putin will not interfere the way he might have interfered before all of this violence. i think that is something putin cannot associate with himself. whatever pat says about this. my impression with by far and away the overwelming amount of

violence came from the armed forces of this president. >> the foreign minister, john told the protesters, you know, give up and take this deal or you will all be dead. >> that's a statement about the nature of this government to go in and mow these people down. that's what he is saying. this is raddics, not a friend of russia. he knows what putin is about. >> i double parked recently. i got the hell beaten out of me by the police -- no, that's not right. that happened in poland. >> they are shooting police also. >> that's how they knew it was your car. the odds are low. don't forget the mclaughlin group has its own website and you can watch this program, our earlier programs on the web from anywhere in the world at mclaughlin.com. issue two, neoisolationism. >> we have allies around the world who are beginning to question america's commitment to the principles upon which

this nation is founded and they look to america for. >> in a major address on monday, house republican majority leader, eric cantor, calls for an assertive u.s. foreign policy to take the place of what he terms president obama's quote, isolationist sentiment, unquote. majority leader cantor, sited his visit to a death camp. on the 69th anniversary of the liberation. cantor warned of the effects of neoisolationism. >> standing there as the frigid wind swept through the early quiet ruins of the camps, i could not help but regret that american action in world war ii came too late to save countless millions of innocent lives. hitler's rise and conquest of europe did not come as a surprise. we must not repeat the same

mistake. we must not reduce our preparedness oraccept the notion that this nation is one of many. we must not feed global leadership to others. >> the temporary parallel to nazi germany is north korea. subject of a scathing critique by the united nations human rights council this week. the 400 page report is compiled by a commission of inquiry shared by australian, michael kirby. the commission charges north korea with quote, crimes against humanity, unquote. the report documents the systematic starvation, torture, sexual abuse, and death of prisoners. according to the u.n. quote, hundreds of thousands of inmates have been exterminated in political prison camps, unquote. the commission calls for the international criminal court to

prosecute north korea's leaders. also, the commission cautions that china's current policy of aiding and abetting north korea could expose beijing who charges. and the 193 member united nations in new york will take up the commission's findings next month and bow down its recommendations on march 28. >> question, how should president obama respond to this u.n. horror report on north korea? mort. >> i mean, his options are fairly limited, if i may say so. we absolutely have to take some stronger position in terms of what north korea is doing. i'm not sure what we can do about it because it's a ruthless country. they are very, very strong militarily in relation to their region. and i think they are going to be very, very difficult to handle. they are not going to listen to any kind of rhetoric on our

part and we have very little influence on them. >> the country that has the real influence with north korea is china. north korea is the worst situation in the world for the last 50 or 60 years. it's a total horror show. we have known about it. >> we haven't known it to the extent this report describes. >> everybody i know knew about it. i will say this. the chinese have total control of north korea. the chinese could bring down that regime. will the united states stand up and say look, china, if you don't do something about this horror show, we're going to impose economic sanctions on you. we're going to say no more chinese goods sold in the united states. is obama going do that? no. it's all talk. >> probably lots of reprecushions to that. we are talking about all talk. what mr. cantor presented there was not a thoughtful road map for foreign policy. that was loading up the ammunition for the 2014 election. for all these people who are saying obama is weak, he is not

doing anything about this, that, or the other hot spot. how many troops would they be sending to these various places? none. exactly. >> it's a double barreled speech, because it doesn't just take on the president. oftentimes took on the ron paul wing of the republican party. this is the battle on foreign policy that you see going forward. it's very likely whoever the eventual republican presidential nominee is will sound more like george w. bush circa 1999, 2000, when he was talking about a humble policy than 2004. >> hold on, please, should the united states restrict humanitarian aide to north korea? humanitarian aide is what keeps the government going. >> john, if i could make sure 2 million north koreaens were fed by sending them food and it would get to them, i would do it. i think rich is correct though.

we have a tremendous battle coming in the republican party between those who would like to intervene and syria that would like to intervene in ukraine. the conservative wing, i'm not so sure. >> this is a different level of evil that was saying in north korea thanks to this report. a different level. that far outstripped anything and we've been covering this issue for years. >> mort is right. there are only a limited number of ways we could tighten the screws. by withholding humanitarian aide. they would get some of it. >> sold iran on the international community. >> issue three, cbo smackdown. >> today the federal minimum wage is worth about 20% less than it was when ronald reagan first stood here. tom harkin and george miller have a bill to fix that by lifting the minimum wage to $10.10. it's easy to remember.

10 cents. this will help families. it will get businesses customers with more money to spend. it does not involve any new bureaucratic program. so join the rest of the country. say yes. give america a raise. >> a height in the federal minimum wage from the current level of $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour was a center piece of president obama's january state of the union address. this week, the nonpartisan congressional budget office regularly invoked by democrats blew that center piece into smitherines, small fragments. it told the lawmakers that the economic impact of the raise in the minimum wage from the existing $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour amounts to a 40% add on.

39.31% exactly. the winners would be 16.5 million workers who would welcome the height, including 900,000 who would be lifted above the poverty line. the losers would be 500,000 workers who get pink slips and the emplowers who must cope with their new burden by letting some workers go or canceling prospective new hires or canceling or modifying raises for present employees. jason is an obama factoid, a variety of jobs for somebody else. he is chairman of the white house council of economic advisers. he disputed the cbo report. saying they relied on outdated economic research to estimate the job losses due to a higher minimum wage. he did not dispute the aspects of the estimates that were favorable to the obama administration's minimum wage proposal. >> question, what impact will the cbo report have on the

congressional debate over raising the minimum wage? mort. >> i think it is going to be serious because we have a huge number of people who are not only unemployed, but one of the phenomenon of last year was the number of people that left the labor force and you're going to be in a position here because of again, an increasing amount of unemployment, if i may say so, last year we had 3.9 million leaving the labor force. this is not the time to under cut the job market. >> first of all, the cbo did not do any original research determining how many people would lose their jobs. they went back and looked at the research done by academic institutions, etcetera. we raised the minimum wage last time when george w. bush was in the office. i don't remember any outcry. >> this is not a growing economy. >> it was not a growing economy. it was an overall loss. excuse me, i have another thing to say and there is a moral force behind this.

the gap is voluntarily raising their wages for their 65,000 employees to $10.10. wal-mart will be next and over three years, this is a relatively -- >> you asked what the political impact -- >> this argument discredit the messenger. the messenger is the cbo. the cbo you and i know, whatever they put forth is practically ire irecutable. >> the republicans have a very powerful force. now they have this argument from this neutral group that will cost 500,000 jobs on top of the obama report on obama care will cost 2 million jobs and say these guys are job killing liberals and that will kill it. >> and they will be right. the cbo attempts to go down the

middle here. 500,000 job loss. the other thing it points out, only 19% of the people that will be helped by this are in poor households. so it has a huge downside. it's poorly targeted. if you wanted to do something creative that you get a bipartisan consensus, you would focus on the intc that helps low income workers and doesn't destroy any jobs. but the democrats love the minimum wage, because the political and the unions love it. >> by keeping the minimum wage low, we are subsidizing the big employers. mcdonalds and the wal-marts because they encourage their people to call and find out about how they can get government assistance. you elevate -- >> it will destroy jobs. the first wrong on the economic ladder, you are pulling that away from people in the economy where you have a jobs crisis already. >> every small marginal group, their profit margins are tiny. >> i think i will answer your questions. we raised the minimum wage for

years periodically. it's less now than it would be if it kept up with inflation. 800,000 people lost the government roles. they will go out there and spend the money. >> let me get this in. exit question. who all in the numbers crunchers, the white house or the congressional budget office? pat buchanan. >> white house can't beat the cbo anymore. >> the white house will beat the cbo and the republicans on this issue. >> are you sure? even obama? can he do it? >> there are plenty of facts that support the president's position. and the american people want the minimum wage raised. >> it's not even close. the cbo will win. >> that means there's no raising the minimum wage. >> i think a lot of comments are going to support the cbo in terms of job losses. this is not a time where we can afford additional job losses. >> and the cbo knows that and it appealed to those economists. issue four, keystone pipe dream. >> they have been dubbed the

three amigos. president barack obama, mexican president, and canadian prime minister, steven harper. they all met this week in mexico at a north american summit. to talk mostly about trade. but one issue also discussed has president obama and canadian prime minister, steven harper at large. that issue, the keystone xl pipeline. to be clear, a pipeline already exists. that pumps oil from the canadian province alberta all the way to american refineries in texas along the gulf coast. the keystone xl is a 1,179-mile long expansion, repeat, expansion of the existing pipeline that canada wants built through the u.s. it is

unfinished routes shown on the map as the dotted line. at its peek, a potential 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day could flow to the gulf. but the keystone xl has run into delays and opposition. conservationists fear habitat destruction and some native american tribes fear dirty water will accumulate on tribal land. and also others notably environmental groups, they believe the pipeline will accelerate development of canada's oil sands and so doing it, intensify greenhouse gas emissions. a long awaited u.s. state department report has ruled that greenhouse gas emissions would not be significantly affected. why? because canada will develop its oil sands anyway with or without the new keystone pipeline. and there's more. notably the well informed ken salazar, a former colorado senator who served as president

obama's cabinet interior secretary for five years, 2009 to 2013, he is a proponent of finishing the keystone pipeline for quote, at the end of the day, we are going to be consuming that oil, so is it better for us to get the oil from our good neighbor from the north or to be bringing it in from some place in the middle east? unquote. >> question, why is president obama dragging his feet on green lighting, the keystone xl pipeline? >> caught in a d dilema. it would have gone through a long time if it wasn't a political football and a cause from the environmental left and some very wealthy donors to the democratic party. so, the attack the president is taking is trying to study this thing to death. although it's the biggest

shovel ready project in america that would immediately create thousands of good blue collar jobs. >> but there are obstacles coming in from the right as well. nebraska republican governor had objections and there's been a court ruling in nebraska saying that the route is unconstitutional. so they haven't settled that. the dilema, a lot of the democratic based young people see the environmental movement. it's their civil rights movement and they see it as -- >> seven seconds, quickly. >> if you don't do it by pipeline, you do it by railroad cars that turn over and dump all this oil into the environment. it would be better to be going under ground through a pipe. >> not only will you alienate our closest ally, canada, but it won't change in any way the amount of oil that they are going to develop. >> that says it all. predictions, pat. >> ukrainian protest movement will break into pieces and some will be unattracted to american liberals. >> eleanor. >> wal-mart and big box chains will come under increasing

pressure from republicans not to raise the minimum wage. >> tea party establishment race in mississippi where they face a threat from the tea party candidate, chris mcdaniel. >> i mentioned the people abandon and looking for work, that number will continue because of the weak economy in terms of employment. >> i predict former ukrainian president will seek elective office in ukraine and she will win. bye bye. the mclaughlin group is brought do you by seamans. every day, seamans answers are helping build the future of america. seamans, answers.

the first technology of its kind. >> mom and dad, i have great news. >> is now providing answers. seamans, answers.

next on "kqed newsroom," contra costa county under fire for allegedly mistreating teens in juvenile hall. squalor, security problems, and mismanagement. an investigation of richmond's public housing agency. >> this is a health hazard to me. bugs. i don't do bugs. i don't do mice. and the president of the golden state warriors discusses michael samm and the debate over sexual orientation in professional sports. >> this is kind of an exclamation point on the things that happened in our society and certainly in sports over the last three years. ♪