revolution. it's friday, august 17th and this is "now." >> i'm ari melber in for alex wagner. joining me on the program, msnbc contributor and co-host of sirius xm the flaks, robert traynham. dana goldstein. co-creator of "the daily show" lizz winstead and of course, buzzfeed editor in chief, ben smith. if you blink this week, you may have missed governor romney's evolution in his position on paul ryan's budget plan. in making his vp selection, of course, romney seemed to listen to some of the conservative right commentators who began pressuring the governor to pick ryan, but he may not have picked up on why. take bill kristol who wrote in the days leading up to that decision, romney and republicans will be running on the romney/ryan plan no matter what. having paul ryan on the ticket

may well make it easier to defend the plan convincingly. now immediately after choosing ryan, romney started distancing himself at least a touch from the house budget chair's policy. >> i have my budget plan as you know that i've put out, and that's the budget plan that we're going to run on. >> okay. he has his budget plan but a day later, governor romney suggested he didn't actually know whether he agreed or disagreed with the signature budget proposal written by his new running mate. >> i'm sure there are places that my budget is different than his. we haven't gone through piece by piece and said here's a place where there's a difference, i can't imagine any two people even in the same party who have exactly the same positions on all issues. >> okay. they hadn't gone through every detail. then apparently they did, because yesterday, romney arrived at where members of that conservative base we mentioned always wanted him to be. >> actually, paul ryan and my plan for medicare i think is the same, if not identical, it's probably close to identical. >> close to identical.

now, that stance also has to be where team obama wants governor romney to be. the campaign released its first tv ad today that actually tied romney to the ryan budget. >> the nonpartisan aarp says obama care cracks down on medicare fraud, waste and abuse, and strengthens guaranteed benefits, and the ryan plan? aarp says it would undermine medicare and could lead to higher costs for seniors, and experts say ryan's voucher plan could raise future retirees' costs more than $6,000. >> if your head is spinning, we have someone who will help you get steady. joining us now, a journalist who has been covering how these budgets are playing out on the road, e.j. dionne, "washington post" columnist and msnbc contributor. thanks for joining us. >> great to be with you, ari. >> i want to start with you. what were you hearing out on the road and do these subtle shifts that we may be following very closely have any resonance with voters that romney is trying to reach? >> well, when i was in north

carolina earlier this week, what struck me was the democratic elation that ryan was on the ticket, and the feeling among the politicians i talked to was that they can make, the democrats can now make the ryan plan a central issue in the campaign, particularly the premium support or voucherization of medicare, which will make many senior citizens very uncomfortable, because even though the ryan and romney say we don't really -- it doesn't start for people except for people under 55, the fact they're going to pull people out of medicare will have an effect on people who are in medicare, and so the republican base is really a pretty elderly base. the over 65s voted for john mccain by eight points four years ago. >> right. >> if obama can start cutting into that vote, he doesn't have to carry it, but if he can start cutting into that vote because of ryan, then the ryan pick will

be much more of an albatross to romney than something that will propel him forward. >> right. that's the fissure people forget from last cycle. it wasn't race or gender, it was actually all voters over 50 favored mccain and over 65, the gap that you mention. i want to take a listen to this new famous white board moment and bring in ben smith. we will take a look at it. i'll narrate instead of mitt romney. what he did up here -- >> not too complicated. >> what he did was break it down and say you have seniors today and the next generation tomorrow, he sees himself as a numbers guy although the white board had more words than numbers. do you think this is a winning tact for him? >> i think the second he chose to pick ryan which a lot of his advisors thought would be a disaster for this exact reason, he certainly chose to do this. it took him a week to figure out they didn't have a way out of it, they couldn't pick the visionary and then reject the vision.

now i think you're going to see him probably putting more numbers on the white board next time. i think he'll have to figure out how to defend this plan in detail. >> lizz, this is not the only white board on the table. there is more than one white board. i don't know if you've heard. but the obama campaign put out immediately just a still image of what they say is the rescue of medicare, not what is in the romney or ryan proposal, and then today, this morning, they have another white board, two-minute video on youtube. is this just for insiders or is this a way to actually talk to the public about the solvency of these programs? >> i think when you have a white board up and you write nothing, it's problematic. part of it is that it's become so confusing that it's hard for people like me who are social critics and comedians to actually write a joke about it. i do think there's a plan to put us out of business. >> this is bad for material. >> bad for material, only because it shape shifts constantly. it's very crazy. so it's like okay, the plan is

not like mine but it is like mine but it's sort of not like mine. how do i write a joke about that? >> robert, you're laughing. >> i'm laughing because you're partially right. it's hard. this is really complicated stuff. we're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars but just as importantly, we're talking about people's livelihoods. the federal government made a promise that people that are over 65 will get their retirement benefits and obviously, they planned their lives around that. what romney is trying to do is he's trying to break it down on a white board to try to say look, first and foremost, people that are at or near retirement today, you're going to be fine. we're not talking about you. we're talking about your children and grandchildren. the question becomes whether or not that's actually resonating with the average ordinary american out there in key battleground states such as florida, michigan, ohio and pennsylvania. >> this is what i want to ask, doesn't it seem like a weird way to sell a quote improvement to a program, to say don't worry, you will never have to experience our improvement. is that a problem and what do seniors say to that?

>> i think it is a problem. it's sort of cowardly. we know seniors vote at a very high rate. they go to the polls. they're saying don't be scared, it will be a decade. on the other hand, paul ryan also wants to cut medicaid which is the program for children, for poor mothers, for the disabled, folks that either can't vote or don't vote at such high rates, and those changes will come in effect immediately. >> can i say something on this? i want to challenge what you said. i think it's actually bold. one can make the argument this is suicidal. we will see come november 6. but in terms of literally planting your flag in the sand, saying this is what i believe, this is what i stand for and it's in writing, that's pretty courageous regardless of whether or not you agree with the politics. >> let me bring in e.j. is it bold? >> it's bold if you're willing to defend it. i think part of the problem is just what you put your finger on, ari, which is if this is so good, if it's such a good idea, why don't you propose it for today's senior citizens? why are you going around saying you don't have to worry about

this? so i think that's a core problem. dana also put her finger on something important which is the deep cuts in the ryan budget on health care are cuts in medicaid. that is cutting poor people off. it's also, by the way, cutting mostly disabled elderly people off depending on how you distribute those cuts. but i have to say one thing. who knew that glenn beck would become a hero in this campaign. i believe it is glenn beck who kind of pioneered the white board in political commentary so maybe he's going to show up with romney and ryan in new hampshire next week. >> i think what i found so amusing about the white board is there isn't really a specific ryan/romney plan. there are three different ryan budgets, some of them take the affordable care act, obama's reform, as a given. some presume overhaul. the romney plan does presume overhaul. what are we actually talking about here? there isn't the specificity to really say. >> i want to play one ad, and

this fits in with what e.j. is saying, which is is it bold and are all the members of the republican party going to actually stand up for what has been their house budget proposal. this is an ad running against michigan rep. >> on medicare, the congressman's gone fishing and he's got a whopper. >> privatizing social security and medicare, phasing out of the medicare and social security plan. >> he's voted to essentially end medicare, forcing seniors to pay over $6,000 more a year. >> that's a democratic ad that is basically taking the ryan budget and throwing it down ballot races. do you expect republicans to stand up and say yes, we are proud of this and explain it with their own white boards or tools? >> clearly not. but the one thing i wanted to say was something that i think is missing in this conversation about don't worry, it's not going to affect you unless you're under 55. i just, i'm the youngest of five

kids and my mother just passed away last year at age 90, and our family had to pitch in every month to supplement both of my parents and then just my mom to just live on what's happening now. when you add that to people are underemployed or unemployed, can't save for their own health care and retirement, couple that with you're going to have to pay for it later, i'm supplementing my elderly parents now and don't have time to save for myself and there's people who can't save for themselves to live in the real world. i think that's a huge thing. i feel like people are talking about -- >> e.j., i just want to say god bless lizz for that point because we act in this debate as if the only people who care about medicare and care for the old are old people, whereas people's kids actually care about their parents, which i particularly appreciate as the years go by. but really, we could be having a good debate here if everybody, particularly ryan and romney,

were willing to go up front. everybody agrees we got to cut health care costs. they think the way to do it is premium support. that would end up throwing more of a burden on recipients of insurance. the other way to do it is to try to make changes inside the health care system so that we have a less expensive health care system. that's the debate that underlies all this. but we can't seem to get there partly because i think the republicans are reluctant to get out there and just defend their premium support program. >> right. i will give ben smith the last word. in sort of the second iteration of the defense of the plan, one thing romney said in florida is we are going to expand medicare. he was referring only to medicare advantage which most health policy experts would say is actually a replacement going to private insurance and now he's back off expansion and is defending the cuts. what were you going to say to e.j.? >> i think one of the things, old people have kids. i think the idea you can slice these demographics cleanly, that people under 55 just don't care, it doesn't matter.

it's also true the presidential campaign is not the best place to debate complicated fiscal policy. president obama has not laid out a bold plan for slashing health care spending. somebody started talking about death panels a couple years ago and that went out the window and hasn't come back. romney has gotten trapped into talking about something neither side wants to talk about. >> we will move from that to something else romney probably doesn't want to talk about next, which is the unlucky number 13. team obama has taken to issuing a letter asking him to shed some light on his own tax returns in exchange for some sort of cease-fire. the romney camp is not taking the bait and it seems the presumptive republican nominee would rather talk about anything else. stay with us. >> i just have to say given the challenges that america faces, 23 million people out of work, iran about to become nuclear, one out of six americans in poverty, the fascination with taxes i paid i find to be very small-minded compared to the broad issues that we face. [ female announcer ] did you know the average person smiles

more than 50 times a day? so brighten your smile a healthy way with listerine® whitening plus restoring rinse. it's the only rinse that makes your teeth two shades whiter and two times stronger. ♪ listerine® whitening... power to your mouth. is as much about getting there... ♪ ...as it is being there. ♪ [ birds chirping ] away is where the days are packed with wonder... ♪

[ wind whistles ] ...and the evenings are filled with familiar comforts. find your away. for a dealer and the rv that's right for you, visit gorving.com. some people think steak is only meant for special occasions. for a dealer and the rv well who said breakfast. on a tuesday. can't be special. get that great taste anytime. with kingsford match light charcoal

over the past ten years, i never paid less than 13%. i think the most recent year is 13.6% or something like that. so i paid taxes every single year. >> maybe we shouldn't have any disclosure laws at all or any disclosure traditions at all. everyone can just certify for the public that everything's fine, everything's okay, so you don't need to see my tax returns or my financial information. he has a penchant for secrecy and thinks he can play by a different set of rules. >> the obama campaign is not taking romney's word on the tax returns. campaign manager jim messina put an unusual proposal on the table this morning, penning a little note to romney's campaign

manager, writing if the governor will release five years of tax returns, i commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more. rhodes was quick with the reply all button saying hey, jim, thanks for the note. it is clear that president obama wants nothing more than to talk about governor romney's tax returns. instead of the issues that actually matter to voters like putting americans back to work, fixing the economy and reining in spending. common ground between these two pen pals is pretty unlikely but we are seeing, ben smith, a desire by the obama campaign to find any gimmick to push this forward and while it is just a gimmick, i'm comfortable -- >> there's a point there. >> he's right to say thanks for your note, let's get back to real campaigning. but it's unusual, i think, to see a presidential campaign set the bar for their opponent lower than what the objective press has said which is your father, governor romney, john mccain,

other republicans have put out way more than five years. why do you think today, this morning, the obama campaign is saying we only need five? >> it's a gimmick, just get another day out of talking about it. they don't think he will release it. every time romney made news on this it's been at a press conference. he didn't want to talk about it, wanted to talk about something else and took the bait. they're trying to fling more bait his way, hoping to get under his skin so he'll react. >> why does mitt romney like bait so much? he dropped this piece of information about 13%. a lot of people have been following this and they remember that previously, he said i'm not sure. so the 13% is genuinely new, out of his mouth. why did he do that? >> two things. one, i'm not his official spokesperson. so i don't know the answer to that. but two things. you said something that was very important. you mentioned two words, gimmick and also objective press. why are we even having this conversation when the average american out there, when i take a look at the polls, this has nothing to do with their every day life. this has nothing to do with putting food on their table or with their house being under

water. in fact, i go out on a limb and say you know what, most americans don't want to pay taxes. most americans quite frankly when they take a look at the tax reform and sit down with their accountant, they try to figure out how to pay less taxes as well. i will release mine. certainly i'm not worth like mitt romney is, but the point is this is an inside the baseball trivial conversation we're having that has nothing to do with the average american out there. >> dana, we just learned two things. number one, robert traynham is not rolling as rich -- >> i don't roll like that. i don't roll like that. >> you don't roll like that. you've been transparent about that. number two, i think robert is putting out an idea which is not a crazy idea in american politics. people do want to be rich and if they could be like mitt and have mitt's accountants and pay less taxes that would be fine. is that where this goes? >> i think robert touched on something that's real in terms of the antipathy towards tax paying. i'm interested in the way romney talks about taxes. he says he paid 13% tax rate but

if you add in charitable giving that's up to 20%. we know from what he's released he's given about $6 million to mormon church and $1 million in other charitable giving. why his payments to the mormon church should count as sort of in the same bracket as supporting our social services programs is strange to me. i think this says something about the ideology of the two parties on taxes. >> e.j., what do you think about that point, both that there is sort of a question about how he spent his charitable giving, whether it's overwhelmingly to the church and not on other things, is it our business? part of what robert is getting at is really, we should be focused on other business and not his taxes or charity. >> it's always been the voters' business to find out some basic things about candidates. if tax returns didn't matter, then romney would not have asked ryan for more tax returns when he was vetting him than romney himself is willing to put out. i think there are two reasons this has become an issue.

one is what we know so far from the release that romney has made, which as i understand, still isn't the full tax return, is that it's raised a series of other questions about offshore accounts and the like, and i think it's perfectly legitimate to say voters ought to know more than this. they know more than this about obama and so why shouldn't they know the same about romney? but the other is, the republican side has a proposal to further cut taxes on the rich, and under one of ryan's plans, romney would pay less than 1% in taxes. so it does seem relevant to the debate. but what i don't understand is why romney answered the question yesterday. he was pressed properly by the "l.a. times" reporter. he finally got impatient, gave this story another day of life, and we still don't know whether that 13%, by the way, is income taxes or all the taxes he pays. >> that's a good point. >> this story is not going to go away, i think. >> that's a key point, because

when you look at the tax rates, of course, of higher net worth individuals, the payroll tax doesn't matter to them as much. but if you look across the board, we will put a graph of this up to really give you the feeling, you pay about 15%, if you make $45,000 a year and you factor in everything you pay into the feds. romney by his estimation which hasn't been fully independently confirmed, said he was paying 13.9%. that goes to a question that's not romney's fault, right? but it is to many people patently unfair that what we have now learned, if he is to be believed, is that his tax burden as someone who in his publicly disclosed years made over $10 million, is lower than people that make $45,000. >> well, exactly. and you know, as robert cites in polls and stuff like that, i'm three times a month out on the road, onstage talking to 400 or 500 people a night telling jokes about the world we live in. the romney tax thing, it does

matter to regular folks because to your point, which i think is correct, everybody would like to have the money romney has. i think by revealing romney's taxes, for the first time, we have a conversation in the public about how you get to be that rich and mitt romney, it's not by working hard. his investment money that he pays way less taxes on. >> he's paid taxes on in the beginning, paid taxes on from the capital gains standpoint. my understanding, i'm not a tax expert, my understanding is, i hope that someone tweets this and really challenges me on this, is that romney and people that are of that wealth have paid taxes not once, twice, but three times on their money. what they're paying taxes on is they're paying taxes on the actual investments. now, to go back to your original point -- >> i just want to say, do you have time to tweet that? >> because i think this isn't a fair conversation we are having as a country. i think governor romney is feeding into this by not being transparent here.

to suggest this man hasn't paid taxes, i don't think that's accurate based on what he's released. >> i'm just going, i'm going to -- we are going to go to break. that's the claim. i will give e.j. a last rebuttal to the idea that mitt romney's done enough here. >> look, i think lizz put her finger on it. in our country, we tax income from capital at a much lower rate than income from labor. i think that is unfair and that you need equity between different kinds of incomes, and the reason this issue keeps hanging around is not just the disclosure point, but we need a big debate about tax fairness and romney's tax returns help us understand that better. >> right. and that stock equity isn't treated equitably to make your point. thank you for joining us today. after the break, you all know the campaign cash being spent this election cycle is bigger than any prior, but all those important swing voters and all

those dollars may be at basically the craziest ratio ever. we will talk about that and we will talk to julian assange's attorney after the break. [ female announcer ] research suggests cell health plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day women's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for women's health concerns as we age.

it has more of 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day 50+.

coming up, a series of deadly new attacks in afghanistan illustrate the sobering reality of america's longest running war. it's something defense secretary leon panetta knows all too well. >> one of my toughest jobs is to write condolence letters to the families of our fallen heroes and frankly, i seem to be writing more lately. more than 1,950 americans in uniform have died defending our country in afghanistan and thousands more as you know have been injured, some very seriously.

>> but how focused are americans and the candidates on afghanistan? and is a positive outcome even possible? that is next. ♪ [ acoustic guitar: upbeat ] [ dog ] we found it together. on a walk, walk, walk. love to walk. yeah, we found that wonderful thing. and you smiled. and threw it. and i decided i would never, ever leave it anywhere. because that wonderful, bouncy, roll-around thing... had made you play. and that... had made you smile. [ announcer ] beneful. play. it's good for you. his morning starts with arthritis pain. and two pills. afternoon's overhaul starts with more pain. more pills. triple checking hydraulics. the evening brings more pain. so, back to more pills. almost done, when... hang on. stan's doctor recommended aleve. it can keep pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol.

this is rudy. who switched to aleve. and two pills for a day free of pain. ♪ and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels.

want to hop in the back and get weird? no. no. ♪ ugh, no! [ sighs ] we can have hotdogs for dinner?! yes. [ male announcer ] it's nice to finally say "yes." new oscar mayer selects. it's yes food.

earlier today, a newly recruited afghan police officer shot and killed two u.s. troops on a base in western afghanistan. the incident's the latest in a growing number of green on blue insider attacks. 39 coalition members have been killed during such incidents. the deaths come a day after 11 people were killed, including seven u.s. service members, when their blackhawk helicopter crashed in kandahar province. officials say it happened after the helicopter had dropped off combat forces to help fight taliban insurgents. violence in afghanistan remains a significant problem. in fact, last month, 42 american troops were killed, making it the deadliest month for the u.s.

this entire year. earlier this week, defense secretary leon panetta tried to refocus public attention on the ongoing conflict. >> i realize that there are a lot of other things going on in this country that can draw our attention, from the olympics to political campaigns, but i thought it was important to remind the american people that there is a war going on in afghanistan, and that young men and women are dying in order to try to protect this country. >> joining us now is nbc chief pentagon correspondent, jim miklaszewski. thanks for being with us. do you have a sense of what accounts for this rising violence? >> there are a whole number of factors. first of all, we are deep into the fighting season here in afghanistan and if you listen to u.s. military officials, they believe that the taliban are

increasing some of their operations in an attempt to regain some of the territory that was lost. at the same time, you know, american forces are under a little bit of pressure because after all, defense secretary leon panetta has said he expects all combat forces to be out of afghanistan by sometime next year, as early as the middle of 2013, so they've got some ground to gain and some actual advances to be cemented. they have to make sure that whatever territory is gained in the meantime can be held. so there are some of these attacks being initiated very aggressively by u.s. forces. now, while the overall number of green on blue attacks has doubled so far this year, more than doubled over last year, the overall number of american dead is actually at a much lower pace than the few years before during the surge operation. >> on troop levels, under the

previous administration, the highest deployments were somewhere around the 30,000 level, 34,000. with the increases under this administration, it went up to about 100,000 and is now back down into the 80s. obviously the debate through this entire period has been how much you can correspond the deaths that we're seeing to the presence on the ground. are your sources and folks in the pentagon worried that as you go back down from the 80s, as is under the plan, that you are going to see increasing violence like this? >> well, certainly the key to this strategy as you know is the training up of afghan military and police forces, so they can take over security operations. but here's the problem now with this alarming spike in these attacks by so-called friendly forces within the afghan security, both army and police, is that if there is a loss of

trust between the u.s. military, who's training and arming them, and those afghans that are now killing them in increased numbers, turning guns against their own mentors and trainers, then that strategy is doomed to failure, according to some military officials. you just can't make that work if the u.s. military cannot trust the very afghans that they're training and arming, particularly if some u.s. military are expected to remain behind in training roles and advisory roles and the combat forces all leave by the middle of next year, if they're getting killed by the afghans, again, that undermines the critical strategy of the obama administration. >> right. jim, i want to bring in our panel. when we were looking at this presidential campaign just last cycle, four years ago, iraq and afghanistan were really both big issues, and here, secretary panetta specifically invoked the

campaign to say essentially it's not on the table and that he wants americans, he thinks it would be better to make sure people are aware of this. ben, why is this war which as i mentioned has more troops on the ground today than it did in 2007 and '08, why has this war fallen off the radar? >> there are two reasons. one is americans aren't focused on it and the candidates tend to go where the action is but that was true in '08 with john mccain, when he wanted to talk about foreign policy. it's something he cares about and something he felt he had a real difference to express. georgia and russia, which nobody here cared about, became a big issue then. this time it's not something romney knows a lot about. he certainly didn't pick a running mate who knows much about it, and he doesn't have clear differences to draw. he -- i think his impulse and a lot of his advisors would like to run on hold the line, stray strong in afghanistan, keep american troops there. i'm sure they looked at poll numbers and know that's unsaleable. >> i take a totally different view. with bush and cheney you had two individuals who constantly

reminded us we were at war, who constantly put the afghanistan conflict and the iraqi conflict in context. we had the surge. it was part of our psyche because the administration forced it into our psyche. i'm not sure the obama administration does that in the same way the bush and cheney administration did. >> jim, i want to go back to you. how about that? obviously there's a big difference between what the secretary of defense says and he has regular appearances anyway, versus that sort of presidential level focus. what do you make of that? >> you know, we have to go back and review the history of this, too. you'll remember that afghanistan was largely ignored as the bush administration turns its attention to iraq, even senior military leaders said the kind of resources and attention was not paid to afghanistan while the u.s. was waging war in iraq, and it was only until after the end of the war, u.s. involvement in the war in iraq, that the focus was shifted and president obama surged additional forces,

much to the chagrin of many of his constituents, who thought we should pull out of afghanistan, but the president did take the steps to ensure that there could be not a victory, necessarily, but some semblance of success down the road, and -- but this goes back to even secretary of state -- secretary of defense robert gates, who said you know, only a small portion of america is at war, when we were both in afghanistan and iraq. in some sense, that's reassuring, and do the american people have confidence in their military to do what's necessary. but in the other, of course, the military, the pentagon, both administrations have felt that america's support for those wars has not been as robust as they thought it should have been. >> that's an important point. thank you for sharing with us your views from the pentagon. after the break, julian assange's quest for asylum in ecuador. will roadblocks from uk, sweden and even possibly the u.s.

confound him? we will talk with an attorney who is on his u.s. legal team, next. well another great thing about all this walking i've been doing is that it's given me time to reflect on some of life's biggest questions. like, if you could save hundreds on car insurance by making one simple call, why wouldn't you make that call? see, the only thing i can think of is that you can't get any... bars. ah, that's better. it's a beautiful view. i wonder if i can see mt. rushmore from here. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

it's time to live wider awake. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the

comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system... from beautyrest. it's you, fully charged. at this hour, wikileaks founder julian assange remains stuck in london. yesterday, the ecuadorian government granted him asylum. he faces extradition to sweden on sexual misconduct allegations. he's also the subject of an investigation inside the united states. assange of course published documents that expose corruption and were invoked in the arab spring. he's also drawn the ire of u.s. officials for releasing thousands of sensitive cables which undermine diplomacy according to the obama administration. for a year and a half, assange had been living under house arrest in england and fighting this extradition to sweden. then two months ago, he escaped

and fled to the embassy, where he has been camped out. his supporters have also been protesting outside this week, sometimes clashing with police. grants of asylum are generally respected but in this case, the british government said it may have the authority to enter the embassy and go ahead and arrest assange. >> having exhausted all options of appeal, the british authorities are under a binding obligation to extradite him to sweden. we must carry out that obligation and of course, we fully intend to do so. the ecuadorian government's decision this afternoon does not change that in any way. >> joining the panel now is a member of assange's u.s. legal team, vince warren, executive director at the center for constitutional rights. thanks for being here. vince, let's start at the top. why is julian assange hiding in the ecuadorian embassy in london? >> well, julian assange as you know is wanted for questioning in sweden with respect to sexual abuse charges.

julian had worked feverishly to try to make sure that he didn't actually have to go to sweden for that questioning, and the reason was is that julian fears persecution in the united states with respect to his leaking activity. >> so you don't think and he doesn't think that the investigation in sweden is simply about the charges -- >> we can say almost categorically that it's not. the reason why we know that is that when mr. assange asked sweden to make assurances that if he were to go to sweden that he would not be extradited to the united states, sweden would not agree to that. when the ecuadorian embassy -- government asked the uk and sweden to make assurances that mr. assange would not be extradited to the united states, they wouldn't agree to that, either. so it seems clear to us in addition to the fact that we hear a secret indictment has already been issued, that the end game here is bringing julian assange to the united states. there's sort of a silent entity within this. >> a secret indictment from where? >> from the united states.

>> but publicly the u.s. is saying they are not putting pressure on london, the uk or any other country in this matter. should we take them at their word? >> ironically, it's too bad that wikileaks isn't around so we can get to the bottom of this. as we know from the document dumps the u.s. and uk and other governments said a lot of things that simply were not true. the question really is based upon how the u.s. has treated bradley manning, here in the military brig in terms of secret trials and abusive conditions, is it reasonable to expect that julian assange, who we expect would be accused of publishing these documents, would he be treated in the same manner. i think any reasonable person would say he probably would. >> i want to bring in dana. on the one hand, you have someone who has been part of basically disclosures that many different governments have been completely upset with. vice president biden basically likened assange to some kind of information terrorist so it is understandable that his legal team and others are skeptical of

these charges. on the other hand, there are a lot of folks who feel that a sexual conduct violation investigation is important and should be pursued. >> yeah. i think the investigation absolutely does need to move forward. what he's been accused of, having sex with women against their will without a condom is a very serious charge and it does need to move forward. that said, i'm a journalist. i'm a total first amendment absolutist. i don't trust the u.s. government with him and i wouldn't want to see him put in jail for the crime which i don't think is a crime of releasing these documents. >> i'm just curious, i don't know if this is for you or for you. i don't understand how the british government could presumably go into another embassy which is sovereign land and take someone out of that that has been granted asylum. isn't that the very underpinning of asylum? >> that's exactly it. the point is legally, they cannot. the question is politically, do they see an advantage in doing it. ecuador is a sovereign entity and the interplay between extradition which means we want you to send someone to another country to face the music, and asylum is when there is a

reasonable fear that the extradition will result in political persecution, another country can grant asylum on humanitarian grounds and essentially, asylum trumps so any activity about storming the ecuadorian embassy with the police or intercepting julian assange really flies in the face of the humanitarian principles that underlie what we're talking about. >> people who sympathize are assange should be concerned he's getting tied up with governments like ecuador which is actually extraditing a belarus dissident today with russia, whose human rights record is terrible, he's really becoming a pawn in their geopolitical fights with the united states, can he be speaking truth to power when he's sort of on that side and being co-opted by those nations? >> i think knowing how julian assange has conducted himself with respect to making all of this information public, i'm not as concerned that he is going to be a pawn in this but we do have to acknowledge that there's a whole geopolitical situation

that's happening and that it is clear that the united states, sweden and the uk have some sort of deal going, otherwise, there would be no reason why sweden wouldn't be able to conduct and i agree with you, that this is a very important investigation, they should be able to conduct that inquiry in london as opposed to sending him to sweden, where sweden requires him to be imprisoned during the investigation, and then not guaranteeing that he won't be sent some place else. >> would it be unusual if the u.s. did come out and say that they're not going to honor this kind of asylum in an embassy? to some people that just sounds like going backwards. >> not only would it -- it would be shocking, particularly since the united states itself has offered this type of asylum to folks. there is case law with the united states offering asylum to political dissidents in china, political dissidents and reporters in pakistan into the united states. >> you're saying there's a precedent for this. >> a complete precedent. there's nothing that is abnormal about this circumstance other than the fact that julian

assange seems to be, you know, the person number one that is on the u.s. and the uk's list. >> vince warren, thank you for coming here and giving your side of the story. >> thanks very much. coming up, we are going to talk about jay-z's empire state of mind. how the hip-hop star and nba owner is rewriting the investor's handbook. [ kate ] many women may not be properly absorbing the calcium they take because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. humans -- sometimes life trips us up. and sometimes, we trip ourselves up, but that's okay. at liberty mutual insurance we can "untrip" you as you go through your life

with personalized policies and discounts when you need them most. just call... and speak with a licensed representative about saving on your policy when you get married, move into a new house... [crash!] or add a car to your policy. don't forget to ask about saving up to 10% when you combine your auto and home insurance with liberty mutual. security, coverage, and savings. all the things humans need to make our beautifully imperfect world a little less imperfect. call... and lock in your rate for 12 months. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? i was skeptical at first. but after awhile even my girlfriend noticed a difference. [ male announcer ] rogaine is proven to help stop hair loss. and for 85% of guys, it regrew hair. save up to 42% now at rogaine.com.

welcome back. time for "what now." jay-z famously rapped that he was a businessman, not a businessman. well, his investments according to the "new york times" in the new york nets is proving how savvy he is. i have laughter on both sides. you know the line. the "times" is reporting he has

1/15th of 1% in the nets but he is their image, their spokesman, their political support. how is that working out? you live there. >> it's a jay-z palooza. by the time you list he will have all this stuff, you forget the nets are part of this equation. it's like this big jay-z, yeah, brooklyn has a love/hate relationship with it. >> robert, should we change the name to just be the jay-z nets? >> sounds that way. look, if his name was shawn carter which legally it is, nobody would be talking about this. but he's going big and going bold. good for him. i think it's great. >> good. well -- >> nobody else agrees with me. >> i want to go -- >> change the name of the borough. >> we should change the name of the borough. >> the next item is something that was also in the "times." this cycle, the number of truly undecided voters has shrunk to

as small as 3%. $2 billion to reach 3% of registered voters. does that make any sense? >> yeah, i think a lot of those people, it's those dollars are not going to be the ones that convince them. a lot of them are people that are paying so little attention deliberately. it is really a remarkable amount. >> i'm just astounded at the whole concept of an undecided voter. these two parties have become such polar opposites, it's crazy to me. they must never read a paper or watch the news. >> it's not just the presidential or congressional races. i was reading that joe arpaio's sheriff's race, he had $7 million in his coffer for running for sheriff. >> it's expensive to be sheriff. >> i know we're running out of time but it's so funny because the independent voter is highly educated, they inform themselves, they are not influenced one way or the other, they do independent research. one could make the argument if they're a bad investment, because they can't be swayed by

outside advertisement. they are swayed only by their own research. >> an expensive investment. thank you again to robert, dana, lizz and ben. that is all for now. you can catch alex wagner on "real time" on hbo tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern. don't miss it. alex wagner will be back on monday to host a very special women in politics discussion with an all-star lineup that includes senator gillibrand, senator hutchison and senator warren. "andrea mitchell reports" is next. good afternoon, andrea. thanks, ari. have a great weekend. the obama campaign offers team romney a taxing challenge. and digging into the medicare debate. are either campaigns offering a plan big enough to save it? we have an all-star lineup here, including democratic chair, debbie wasserman schultz, romney's senior advisor, kevin madden and traveling with hillary, well, we'll hear from a journalist who jet-setted around the globe with the traveling secretary of state.

"andrea mitchell reports" up next.

juicy brats grilled up on a thursday. the perfect use of the 7th inning stretch. get that great taste anytime