a good source of vitamin b2. plus omega threes. and 25% less saturated fat than ordinary eggs. but there's one important ingredient that hasn't changed. -better taste. -better taste. -better taste. -mmmm... [ female announcer ] eggland's best. better taste and now even better nutrition make the better egg. good morning. i'm chris jansing. right now we're watching the bond hearing for george zimmerman. it's under way in florida. he arrived a short while ago in a suit and tie with his arms shackled. so far his wife and fiancee have testified but via telephone. here's what his dad said just moments ago. >> do you believe that your son is a violent person? >> absolutely not. >> and can you expound on that?

>> well, i've never known him to be violent at all unless he was provoked, and then he would turn the other cheek. >> nbc's jay gray is live for us in sanford. jay, it's been an hour now. bring us up to speed. >> reporter: yeah, chris, that telephone testimony continuing now with his mom, gladys. they have received a lot of threats and that's why the judge ruled yesterday they could do the testimony by telephone. we know that trayvon martin's parents are in the courtroom. the first time they've been face to face with george zimmerman since this. they have responded a few times specifically when george zimmerman's father was talking about him not being a violent person and turning the other cheek. we saw them converse and change their facial expressions a little bit. this is going to continue on for

quite some time as they decide whether to set bond for george zimmerman in this case. most outsiders and observers believe bond will be set and if that's the case, george zimmerman could leave the seminole county jail as early as this often. they've looked into where he will go if he's released from jail. obviously safety is a major concern in this case and they're playing that very close to the vest. it's been a concern while he's been in jail. he's been under isolation, protective custody, just to make sure he's safe. why do they want him out, people are asking, wouldn't h be more safe in jail. maybe not necessarily. he would be in remote location. that would not be revealed by the courts or anyone else and his attorneys say frankly he needs zimmerman's help in cra cracking this defense and that's why it's important to be in contact with him and not gou through the routine of trying to

get back in jail but to a place where they can work on the defense. this hearing is expected to go a couple of hours. so far testimony from three of george zimmerman's family members. again, trayvon martin's parentings in the courtroom. they could testify though. it's not clear. we do know that the special prosecutor has asked that they be in the çcourtroom. chris? >> i want to bring in kendall coffey. you don't often get bond in second-degree murder cases but it certainly does happen. what will the judge be looking for in this case? >> florida is much more favorable in terms of a defendant in this kind of scenario that the vast majority of other states based on florida's own state contry tugs provisions. the court considers things like ties to the community because a couple of considerations include flight of risk, whether he's a

dauncher to others. i believe zimmerman's lawyer is scoring some points on those issues. but the starting point we will get to at some point today is whether the state can show enough evidence to establish a standard of likelihood of guilt that is very, very high. in fact, the state's evidence is really supposed to be and must be high theiren the evidence needed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. zimmerman's lawyer can try to pick holes in that. but the state, to keep him locked up between now and the trial, will need to show their cards. they haven't done that. you remember the probable cause. there was plenty of evidence that's another in this affidavit. that evidence has got to come out today in one form or other or else george zimmerman is almost certain to be released on bail. >> let me bring in joann. obviously one of the key points is they're testifying by phone because they say they've been

threatened, they say they fear for their lives. this is notç like a jury consideration where there's a huge sympathy factor here, but tell us a little bit about the mood as we head into the bail hearing on the ground. from sanford, i know you continue to talk with people. >> sure. actually when i spoke with people from both communities i didn't get a sense that people were out to threaten george zimmerman. a prominent pastor i spoke with said she didn't feel anything would happen to him if he came back into the community, as did the former commissioner and the mayor. well, what this african-american people told me is that what people wanted was a process. they were outraged that this was a killing that didn't result in an arrest or a judicial process. now that the process has happened it's caused a lot of healing and calm over sanford

itself. the only threats to shelly zimmerman, george zimmerman's wife, is there was hate mail. she didn't get the threats but george zimmerman has. and then they cited the new black panthers. they're not really anything. they're more media. they're based out of georgia and there may be a dozen. i don't think they've judged too many of that. what they want to do is get them out there if they feel threatened, it might be safer to leave him in jail. >> indeed, thank you so much, joann. i know you're going to continue to listen in with kendall coffey and we will be continuing to follow. let's get to politics now. mitt romney'sç strength is president obama's weakness. the brand-new msn nbc/wall stret journal poll shows there is a glaring vulnerability.

the economy. romney edges the president by six points when it comes to improving the economy. >> this factory is empty. it's owned by national gypsum. it was closed in 2008 at the beginning of the downtown. had the president's plans work, president obama's plans worked, it would be open by now. but it's still empty, and it underscores the pret's policies with regard to getting this economy going again. >> i want to bring in chris hay hayes. and christine terkel. good to have both of you with us. >> good morning. >> does it matter? >> that's a profound question about politics. >> it is. is it really all about let's just keep hitting him on the economy, we know that's where he's weak. >> yeah. look.

romney has from the beginning constructed his campaign around one single plank which is the economy. and i think when it started to look in the last three months of the economic data like the recovery really was going to pick up, they started to get worried about that, but recent economic data has been a little more ambivalent and i think at this point they're pegged to that. they basically have timed it and they think the economy can't get better enough, fast enough to unburden the president from having theç major liability whh is the obvious and absolutely correct strategy from a fairly strategic perspective. the problem is when i see mitt romney speaking in front of an empty factory, all those attac s that were very effective among the republican voters, that's going to be apprised. every time he stands in front of the factories, thiyou're going seeing people.

>> it's sort of personality versus policy on economic things that they're giving at least for now the nod to mitt romney but personality, there were question this long. all but two of them went in fa favor of the president and they were all about how do you feel about this guy. and so that's what the white house -- that's what the obama campaign has to do right now is to say, but we can also level the playing field on the economy. >> right. i mean right now, about one in three voters have a favorable impressioner mitt romney. about half have a favorable improtection of barack obama. people like barack obama a lot more. mitt romney is coming off this very awkward. obama relates much better, relating with the middle class, caring what the average citizens and workings are going for. that's where he can win on it, the struggles of the middle

class. mitt romney has a silver spoon in his mouth, can't relate.$c@&% >> they'll have to look at the particular groups. what enyo tlu yyo he was winning significantly. doing very well. voters highly interested in the general election. the people who parse these things were saying romney has to take at least a couple of those from the obama column and move those over to his side in order to win the election. >> yeah. he has to narrow the margins of the latinos. that's the key. and he has to cut into margins -- if he wins women, then he wins. i mean those -- the data that you just showed, that is a good description of the two party coalitions right now. and it's important to remember, as soon as someone wins, they have a floor of about 45% of the vote, right? that's just the way our politics

are constituted right now. so it was always going to be the case that this was going to be fought in between those 10%. and the polling shows that that's basically the coalition and the republican coalition and everything's going to happen at the margins in terms of turnout and those different demographics. >> let me ask you quick because we want to go back to florida. the other thing is the different type of economics, and that's cash. this number, the romney campaign raised $87 million in the last 12 months but $100 million by american crossroads. that's going to translate to a lot of negative tv advertising, isn't it, amanda? >> last month romney rads $12 million.ç they just can't match the spending so mitt romney is going have a huge advantage in terms of money and democrats are going to have to try to catch up with these small dollar donors.

>> you can see as we're a month out from the election and it's close, i'm not -- i would not be surprised to see $50 million checks floating into these super pax. sheldon adelson already gave $50 million to the dead end no hope campaign of newt gingrich. he said he's going to pony up. yeah, we're going to see massive amounts of money and air buy particularly coming from republican side in the last month. >> chris hayes, amanda terkel. amazing stuff. have a great show this weekend. love it, love it. let's go back into the courtroom now. there's an investigator on the stand, dale galbreath. they read an aft according to what's seen on the display there. let's listen in. >> the majority of this, it was reviewed by our supervisor, bernie de la rionda.

there were several things corrected and this is the final one. >> when you swore that to be true, what did you mean that to indicate? >> that zimmerman saw martin, formed an idea in his head, and contacted the sanford police department with no facts. >> with no facts.ç and, of course, you have available to you mr. zimmerman's statements, correct? >> oh, i do. >> again, you say that he lived in the community, driving the vehicle. zimmerman felt that he did not belong in the gated community and called police. did you get that from mr. zimmerman? >> i did not speak with him.

>> did you gateser that? >>over the 911 -- excuse me -- emergency dispatch. >> you say he perceived trayvon martin as suspicious. >> correct. >> did you get any in sight? >> when talking to the dispatcher, i believe he said he was suspicious. >> did he use that word? >> without reviewing it right now and reviewing all the stuff we have, i can't honestly say if he used that word during the dispatch tape. >> he informed zimmerman that an officer is on the way and to wait for the officer, correct? >> i believe so. >> we got that from the 911 tape that was heard. >> the non-emergency tape, yes. >> non-emergency, sorry. now, i'm curious.

you then say zimmerman made reference to people that he felç had -- what was that that gave you that consideration, do you recall? >> i think he said the second line that you -- before you stopped. part of that is included that statement. >> how many different statements existed, non-emergency, emergency, how many phone calls existed of george zimmerman, communications with law enforcement? >> on this evening? >> yes. >> i believe one. >> okay. was it your determination, by using those words precisely, and the only ones you used, two phrases that used k ed expletiv.

was that by you? >> i don't disagree with it but i didn't put the quote marks on it. >> why did i disagree with it or. >> you swore it to, true? >> yes, but i did not type it. >> did someone else make the decision to put in two quotes and only two quotes to suggest that my client was using expletives? >> i don't know the decision-making process to put those in quote bus as far as i recall, those were the quotes. >> absolutely true. it's undeniable they were quotes. but is it true, all the other questions he did, all the other questions he had, everything else he did, why anthony didn't make it into quotes for a probable cause affidavit. sid you signed it, i'mç wonderg if you can give us any insight into that? >> i didn't put them in quotes. i can't testify to that. >> that's your signature. >> these ooh true. >> you say these are true.

>> i don't believe they're untrue. >> you did not put though put those phrases in quotes. >> no. >> who was in the decision-making process? >> as i said, detective ol'stein, myself, and bernie de la rionda. >> how did you get that information? >> detective olstein. >> how did he get it? >> he interviewed the witness. [ inaudible ] >> i have access to it. >> i'm going to apologize. i'm going to object to that witness's name being disclosed. it came out and i realized -- i apologize. >> you know who the witness is and you know what the name is. you don't want to reveal it at this time pursuant to court order. >> yes, sir. i have access to it, however, i do -- >> i apologize as to any inquiry. how long after the event was

that witness spoken to? >> five weeks. >> five weeks. by? >> detective olstein. >> the first one you were involved with speaking to as far as you're aware of. >> >> i have no knowledge other than whenç olstein spoke with him. >> other than that, you cannot testify today whether she had any conversations with anyone else about this event until olstein talked to you, correct? >> correct. >> any reason why it took five weeks? >> i have no answer because i was not involved in that interview. >> she told you that trayvon martin was scared because he was being followed by an unknown

male, correct? i'm sorry. i'll just back it up. he told olstein and you reviewed the affidavit, correct? >> i reviewed the affidavit. >> did you review her sworn statement? >> no. >> now, these are your words. tell me when they're truly not. he followed by zimmerman who didn't want -- [ inaudible ] where did you get the second half of that sentence from? i mean -- >> i believe that paragraph comes from olstein's interview with the witness. >> no, no, no, no. let's look at it again together. this is what the witness said.

this part of the season. he didn't want him to get away before the police arrived. i'llñunderline that for a secod because i want you to focus on it for just a second and i'm going to put it in quotes because what i want you to do is tell me how that fact that you swore to got into your affidavit. >> well, zimmerman on this affidavit -- and there, again, we're adding to what she had said. but given that, zimmerman said he didn't want him to get away because they always get away. >> so this thing right here, falsely accused. who made that determination? >> it was the three of us throughout the process. i don't recall who did which sentence in this. this was not everybody sitting

in one room. this was proofed, given to somebody else, and then prepared. >> when the police dispatcher realized what they were pursuing, he instructed zimmerman not do that. and zimmerman disregarded the police. he continued to follow him trying to return to him home. how do you know he was trying to return home. >> because of the location he was found in, and i don't have the exact measurements. it was in the back of the house sniet was 70 yards away, right? >> he came from there. i assumed he was going back there. >> okay. when you say he disregarded the police dispatcher, from your investigation, did he at thatç point hang up the phone and just do whatever he was going to do? did he disconnection with dispatch? >> he did disconnect with

dispatch. >> i want to try to keep this on a time line. you have said, now you've sworn to, that they continued to follow martin in trying to return to his home. did he disconnect at that point, do you remember? >> no, he did not because he could be heard walking, running. >> you stayed on the phone with dispatch then, did he not? >> right. for a short period of time, yes, he did. >> zimmerman confronted martin. those words. where did he get them from? >> that was from the fact that the two of them obviously ended up together in that dog walk area. >> right. >> according to the witnesses, one of the witnesses that we talked with, there were arguing words going on before this incident occurred. but it was between two people. >> right. which means they met. i'm just curious with the word

"confronted" and what evidence you have to support an affidavit you want this judge to rely on that these facts are true. and you used the word "confronted." and i want to now know your evidence to support the word confronted. if you have any. >> well, it's not that i have any. it's a word i used. i probably could have used 30 words. >> it is an antagonistic word, wouldn't you agree?ç >> it could be, yes. >> come up with a couple of words that are less antagonis c antagonistic. met, came up to, spoke with. >> got in a physical con frontation with. >> but as we are here with you today and your phenomenal of the case, you have nothing to support the cop frontation suggestion, do you? >> i believe i've answered it. i don't know how much more explanation you wish. >> any that you have. but you don't have any, do you?

>> i think i've answered the question. >> okay. the struggle that ensued, we have what we call ear witnesses concerned the struggling, correct? so we know a struggle ensued. you have evidence of that. >> yeah. >> witnesses heard people arguing, somebody struck. during this time, witnesses heard someone call for help. some of this was recorded. trayvon's mom -- trayvon's mother reviewed the 911 call and identified the voice crying for help as trayvon's voice. did you do any forensic evidence on that voice on the tape? >> did i? >> did you or are you aware of anything? >> the orlando seminole had someone do it and the fbi has had someone do -- >> is that part of your

investigation? >> yes, it is. >> has that gifrp you any insight that you're aware of as to the voice? >> no. >> did trayvonç martin's mom identify the voice the second she heard it or was there a concern with her ashlt to feed the voice? >> i did not speak with -- >> do you >> you're aware of -- >> yes. >> let me ask you again. are you aware of any concern over trayvon martin's mother and her ability to identify the voice crying for help as her son's? >> no. >> >> trayvon martin was shot in the chest. >> correct. >> mrs. zimm >> mr. zimmerman talked to the police about the event, did he not? >> yes. >> did he revoke his right to

speak with the police? >> no. >> and he actually freely spoke to them, did he not? >> yes. >> and, of course they recovered the gun and mr. zimmer happ had a gun, did he not? >> yes. >> registered to him? >> yes. >> and he had a proper permit to carry it? >> yes. >> and, of course, a casing was found from how many shots? >> one. >> was there a suggestion along the way that there were two shots? >> yes. >> where did that come from? >> one of the witnesses that lived in the perimeter. >> okay. and, of course, that determined that trayvon was shot with gunshots, correct? yes. >>ç >> one moment, your honor,f i may.

ooirks while the lawyers are conferring let me bring in kendall coffey. a lot of attention paed to the whole idea whether or not the statement is accurate, kendall and i'm going to read directly from the affidavit. zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow martin who was trying to return to his home. zimmerman confronted martin and a struggle ensued. tell us why he's making such a significant point with that. >> well, he's suggesting that that's really only circumstantially established. in other words, they don't have direct proof that those critical facts are so. it's essentially the investigator's recreation of what they think might have happened and he wanted to really pin down the investigator on that because if, in fact, those relatively important facts that

zimmerman disregarded, went after him and confronted him, if those are circumstantial because of location and putting pieces together, then certainly that makes it harder for the state in today's process, not necessarily at trial but in today's process to show that zimmerman is guilty of second-degree murder and their proof of that is greater than the standard necessary to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a trial. >> all right. as theyç continue to question investigator gill breath, we're going to take a quick break and be back with more on msnbc. [ horse neighs ] for too long, people have settled for single miles. with the capital one venture card, you'll earn double miles on every purchase, every day! [ visigoths cheer ] hawaii, here we come. [ alec ] so sign up today for a venture card at capitalone.com. and start earning double. [ all ] double miles! [ brays ] what's in your wallet? can you play games on that? not on the runway. no.

mine hurt more! mine stopped hurting faster... [ female announcer ] neosporin® plus pain relief starts relieving pain faster and kills more types of infectious bacteria. neosporin® plus pain relief. for a two dollar coupon, visit neosporin.com.

if you want something done right, then do it yourself. that's the idea behind our children, our future -- the ballot initiative to fix our schools. we've waited years for the politicians to do it. now, we can do it ourselves. our children, our future sends every k through 12 dollar straight to our schools... not to sacramento. it benefits every kid in every school, with local control of the money. that's why the p-t-a supports it. my mom likes it, too.

we're back inside the florida courtroom. they're talk about trayvon martin walking through the community, going back to the place where he was staying on the day he wasç fatally shot. let's take a listen. >> mr. zimmerman thought he was acting suspicious in his mind, in mr. zimmerman's mind,

correct? >> yes. >> and isn't the 9it a fact the informed him to wait for the officer? >> yes. >> but isn't it true mr. zimmerman did not wait for that officer? >> correct. >> in fact, he continued to follow or to pursue mr. martin, isn't that true? >> yes. >> and during the reporting, those were the language or the words that mr. zimmerman used to describe it, correct? >> yes. >> i'm not going to repeat the words for purposes of the record, but they should speak for themselves. suspect it true also you testified through investigator olstein that mr. martin was on

the phone with a lady. >> yes. >> affec in fact, it was verifit that phone call took place. >> yes. >> okay. and in the next paragraph, it was accurate that mr. martin was describing to the lae he was being followed by an unknown male and didn't know why mr. zimmerman was following him. >> correct. >> i added mr. zimmerman.ç i apologize. >> and this came from olstein informing me of this. we had split work and had done different things. >> and isn't it true that the route that mr. martin was going to or i should say the 17-year-old young man was going to was -- he was going directly to where he was living, where he was staying, is that correct? >> yes. >> okay. and isn't it true that this

young man was unarmed? >> yes. >> and isn't it true that mr. zimmerman was armed? >> yes. >> and isn't it true that, in fact, in that recording of the 911 or to the emergency operator or dispatcher that you could actually tell that mr. zimmerman leave the vehicle and continues to pursue mr. martin? >> yes. >> and isn't it true that the dispatcher or operator tells mr. zimmerman hold on -- those are my words -- but something to the effect you don't need to be following him and he still continues to follow him? >> yes. >> and, sir, you were asked about the next paragraph here that zimmerman confronted martin and a struggle unsued, and you

were asked a lot about what confronted means. if mr. martin was minding his own business and someone he doesn't know comes up to him, wouldn't you consider that a confrontation? >> yes. >> that is, mr.ç martin didn't- he was minding his own business and mr. zimmerman is the one that approached mr. martin, correct? >> let me object at this point. i guess this is cross-examination. the concern is he's talking about evidence now that is completely not in evidence. >> what's the objection? >> the objection is he's presenting facts not in evidence to this witness. >> objection sustained. >> why did he feel he was confronted? >> because zimmerman -- it was -- it was compiling the facts that we had along with the witness statements of the arg argumentative voices and the

authoritative voice being given from one of the witnesses. and in the struggle that ensued that came from several witnesses. >> but prior to that confrontation, mr. martin was minding his own business, is that correct? >> again, your honor, unfortunately this is not in evidence and he cannot present it that way to a witness. >> sustained. >> mr. martin was on his way to his house. >> yes. >> and he was unarmed. >> yes. >> okay. and there's no dispute -- i know you didn't talk to mr. trayvon's mother, but she did say to somebody or she said to you the 911 call she identified, the cry for help worked. is that not true?ç

>> yes. >> let me have a moment, judge. >> and, finally, sir, you were asked about -- that mr. zimmerman, the deft, called the state attorney's office, something about talking. he, mr. zimmerman, was aware that the police were monitoring him or that the law enforcement department was monitoring him the whole time he was out of town, right? >> yes. >> if i may have a moment, judge. i think i'm done. i don't have any further questions. >> briefly, europe. briefly, your honor. a couple of questions you were asked that continue to follow. mr. zimmerman continued to follow. what evidence do you have to support that? >> he was told not to follow him. >> mm-hmm. >> he continued on for a period

of time. >> how long? >> i don't know. i would say less than a minute before he hung up. which is prior to the encounter between the two. >> okay. any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? any other evidence? any other witnesses? >> to? >> to the fact that he, quote, continues to follow. >> we have a witness statement who observed -- that was on the perimeterç of this who observe shadows or figures running by her residence. >> and do you know which way or who they were or anything? >> they -- i cannot identify who they were, but it was at the

same time frame this occurred. >> okay. besides that, any other evidence to support your conclusion that mr. zimmerman continues to follow. >> other than this call and that witness? >> yes. >> and the fact that -- where it ended up, no. >> well, do you have some other evidence, don't you? you have mr. zimmerman's statements, don't you? >> we have mr. zimmerman's statements, shell casings, and mr. martin's body. >> let's talk about mr. zimmerman's statements to you and to law enforcement that night. now -- >> i'd object as to hearsay. it's not part of the probable cause aft and our purpose was laid out. >> i apologize. i'm trying to make a -- >> proceed. >> do you know who started the fight? >> do i know? >> yes. >> no. >> do you have any evidence that

supports who may have started the fight? >> no. >> mr. zimmerman gave a statement that very night, did he not? >> yes. >> and within that statement, he said that he saw somebody, he was concerned, he got out of his car, he called nonemergency and began to go toward the person. is that paraphrasing but pretty correct so çfar? >> paraphrasing, yes. >> okay. and if i go long in this stop me and let me know where i go wrong. >> i will. >> and then he said that he turned back around and went toward his car, did he not? >> in his statement where he was told not to, he said he continued on to find a street sipe and then went back to his car. >> okay. so he said before he knew anyone

else or did not see he said he want back to his car, correct? >> no. toward his car. >> sorry. you're right. he went toward his car. seemingly away from mr. martin though, correct? >> that part of the interview, i don't recall because i don't know if he indicated where martin was. >> okay. did he tell you started the fight? >> no. >> did he give you any indication what happened? >> no. >> not you. i apologize. are you aware of any indication of the statement he had given? >> yes. >> okay. in those statement use were aware of and part of the foundation for coming up with this probable cause affidavit, what did he tell the officers? >> that he was the victim in

this and that it was martin that ì!%59(lc%d him and assaulted >> when did he say that? when was the first time in relation to when the event happened? when did he say that? >> the initial interview that was conducted at sanford police department. >> how long after the event? >> within an hour and a half. >> and had he disclosed before making that statement what the police had gathered regarding that investigation. >> you mean to him? >> yes. >> not to my knowledge. >> would it be safe to assume then in him giving that statement to police, wherein he said, one, i turned around and went back to my car, and, two, he did not start the fight and he was assaulted by mr. martin, when he gave that statement, did he give any indication that there were or were not half a dozen witnesses who saw the whole thing?

>> i have no knowledge of that. i don't know what -- >> any insight you can give us as to -- >> i know what information he picked up from other officers at the scene. i know from reading reports there were witnesses gathered around while he was still at the scene, and this was prior to their having statements taken from him. i don't know what he picked up from overheard conversations. >> that statement he had given you -- sorry, given law enforcement that day that we just talked about, turning around than he was assaulted, do you have any evidence in your investigation to date that specifically -- >> george zimmerman's attorney continuing to press on the question do you know who started if fight as we continue to hear the testimony of an investigator from the state attorney's office. we're going to continue to listen into that. in the meantime let's talk a little more toll tick because

the tax year battle is raging on. despite a veto threat from the president the house voted, mostly along party lines, to approve a $46 billion tax cut for most employers, that just days after the president. senator kountz. it's good to see you. >> they accuse them of election year gimmicks, the gop tax cut is a temporary one and the buffett rushlgs would they say, and they're not the only ones via dropping the bucket when it comes to the deficit. where are the bold ideas in washington? what's going to get done here? >> well, chris, this is exactly the sort of pre-election posturing that drives most americans nuts. we have a slow steady recovery. we can and should be doing

things together that will strengthen that recovery. that will put a floor beneath our economy. senator marco rubio in florida and i joined in introducing a common-sense bipartisan package of proposals that would target tax relief at small businesses that invest and at higher and the senate democratic leadership yesterday proposed a comparable package of tax relief for businesses hiring. >> what are the chanceness of a realç compromise here? what are you really hoping for? >> unfortunately as you said in the opening, in the senate we were unable to get the buffett rule which promotes tax fair finance past a filibuster in the house. they spent time taking up and passing an across the board broad tax cut that the president has rejected and said he would veto because it's not targeted. at a time of record deficits, we can't afford to continue giving

multi-billion-dollar tax breaks that aren't responsibly targeted at investment and job creation. it's been a frustrating week of posturing where we haven't been able to get anything passed in a bipartisan way. i do think there are republican senators willing to work with the democrats in the senate. i'll point to the transportation bill. it's $9 million bill. it was endorsed by the u.s. chamber of commerce and the afl-cio and it came out of the senate with a very strong bipartisan majority. it now sits in the house, unaddressed, unresolved, as we keep ticking way. we're about to get to the summer construction season. the house ought to take up and pass the summer version of the transportation bill. >> and speaking of authenticings that frustrate the-mile-an-hour people, i'm sure you know from your own con cities yepts what the reaction was and now the secret service scandal. a lot of folks talking about it on capitol hill. let me play a few things that

were said yesterday. >> right now they're trying to locate the 11 pi 1 women. they have the names, the faces, the addresses. >> it's a stunning thing. it's actually disgusting. >> they go to colombia and have a fight with aç prostitute ove how much she should be paid. that's either stupid or total lack of common sense. >> the president needs to assert discipline, management directions throughout the consecutive branch and they're to be held responsible. >> let me ask you about the buck stops here not only with the president -- we already know there may be more resignations today. where do you think this should go and is it at least a legitimate question that there needs to be serious consideration whob is overseeing these supposed supervisors? >> well, chris, one of the things that has changed in the last decade about the federal government is the strength and breadth of the inspectors general and the independent reviewing authorities within each agency on the senate

judiciary committee yesterday on which i served. senator leahy and grassley. the investigators are conducting a thursdorough review. i do think the executive branch is holding them accountable as they should. the gsa scandal is something that also just reduces confidence in government, makes average taxpayers and senators furious. we have to make sure we have strong i.d.s in every branch and that they should have the ability to go in and faerret ou this. they won't stop. they will continue to work until they've got on the root of it and have resolved any questions aboutç compromising the

president. >> if that goes beyond the people who were directly involved, good, so be it. just make sure we get to the root of it. >> accountability in law enforcement is one of the principles on which strong civilian law enforcement rests. national law enforcement, we've been blessed by very strong agencies, cia, fbi, secret service. everybody embraces it for the remarkable power that they are entrusted with in our democracy. i'm also excited today to see what happens across our country because this is the day for coyfor kony 2012. i think it's gotten 88 million hits and counting on youtube and today is a national dae of action, right that you're

co-sponsoring legislation on that. >> that's right. i'm one of 43. there are senators, republican and democrat, who have been concerned about this and engaged with this for a long time. senator isaacson, senator leahy of vermont and senator carey of massachusetts have been informed. what's exciting is millions have watched the kony 2012 video. he's on the top of the list of folks who have been indicted by the international criminal court and pursuant to a senate act two years ago theyç sent 100 adviss into the region a number of months ago. our african regional military partners in the south sudan, the democratic party of the congo and the central african republican as well as the african union are doing the majority of the work in these remote jungles of hunting for

kony and his partners. the americans are simply providing intelligence, communications, and airlift. but it's an important multi-lateral effort and i'm exciting that i've heard from hundreds of delawareans and students expressing their concern about a very real humanitarian crisis in central after ka. it's rare we get this many americans concerned about something going on on the other side of the world when we have so many pressing things going on here at home. i hope we see lots of folks express their concern and lots of senators in the housework with their african ally to resolve this and bring kony to justice. we're going to continue to listen in on the bond hearing for george zimmerman. does aspirin even work on my headache?

aspirin is just old school. people will have doubts about taking aspirin for pain. that's why we developed bayer advanced aspirin with micro particles. now we're challenging you to put it to the test. visit fastreliefchallenge.com to get your free bottle.

[ male announcer ] while others are content to imitate, we'll continue to innovate. the lexus rx. why settle for a copy when you can own the original? see your lexus dealer.

younger than i am, and i did not know if he was armed or not. >> nothing further, your honor. >> and i'm sorry, sir. you're not really addressing that to the court. you're doing it here to the victim's family, is that correct? >> they are here in the court, yes. >> i understand, but i thought you were going to address your honor, judge lester, not -- so that's really addressed to the family and for the media, correct? >> no, to the mother and the father. >> okay. and tell me. after you committed this crime and you spoke to the police, did you ever make that statement to the police, sir? that you were sorry for what you

had done or for their loss? >> no, sir. >> you didn't say that. >> i don't remember what i said but -- >> you told that to the police? >> in one of my statements i said i felt sorry for the family. >> you did. >> yes, sir. >> so that would be recorded because all those conversations were recorded, right? >> yes, sir. >> okay. you're sure you said that. >> i'm fairly certain. >> okay. and so which office did you tell that to? you gave five statements, i believe, total. >> yes, sir, i'm sorry. all the names blend together. >> okay. and do you remember if it was a male or a female? >> there were both males and females. >> at the time you made that statement that you were sorry? >> yes, sir. >> let)me make sure the record is clear. you stated exactly what to those detectives? >> i don't remember exactly what verbatim. >> okay. but you're saying you expressed that concern for the loss of mr. martin or that mr. -- you had shot mr. martin, that you actually felt sorry for him?

>> i felt sorry that they lost their child, yes. >> and so you told detectives you wanted them to convey that to the parents. >> i didn't know if they were detectives. >> officers. >> i didn't know if they would. i just made the statement. >> then you called them up and left a message for them to them that? >> no, sir. >> why did you wait 50-some days to tell the parents? >> i don't understand the question, sorry. >> why did you wait so long to tell mr. martin and the victim's mother, father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them. >> i was told not to communicate with them. >> okay. so even through your attorney you didn't ask to do it right aw away, your former attorneys or anything. >> i did ask them to express that and they said they were going to -- >> but before -- before you -- you committed this crime on february 26, you were arrested -- i'm sorry. not arrested.

you were questioned that day, right? february 26? >> that evening to the 27th. >> yes, sir. and the following morning. >> mm-hmm. >> is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and the following evening too. >> yes, sir. >> okay. would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times? >> i remember giving three statements, yes, sir. >> isn't it true in some of those statements when you were confronted about someç of your inconcy tencies, you said, i don't remember. >> outside the scope of direct examination. objection. >> i'll give a little bit of way. not a whole lot. >> you when when you were contradicted in your statements you -- would you agree you changed your story as it went along? >> absolutely not. >> okay. now, sir, you were -- you had a phone at some point and you agreed to turn over that phone to the police so they could make

a copy of what was in there, right? >> yes, sir. >> okay. and in that phone did you receive or send text messages, sir. >> yes, sir. >> okay. did you ever make any reference to a reverend? >> objection. >> sustained. >> did you ever make reference. >> objection. >> i don't want you to get into other areas. >> yes, sir. >> thank you. >> my question is plr, mr. zimmerman, do you recall sending a message to someone, an e-mail, referring to the victim's father? >> no, sir, i don't. >>

jt just to anticipate, is the court ruling i can't ask him about questions he made to the police? i don't want to try to ask the question with objections being made. >> you've anticipated my ruling. >> thank you very much, your honor. >> anything further? >> i have no further questions, your honor. >> thank you. you may step down. >> no further presentation. >> state anything further? >> no, sir. >> your honor, there is a presumption of bond initially. good morning. i'm craig melvin.