thought he would try his hand at a novel. it's story time today in "the cycle." right now in washington, a key senate committee is being briefed on a classified details about the nsa surveillance programs. programs which many members learned existed the same way we all did, from edward snowden. it's alphabet soup with the doj, din, fbi, nsa, all there to answer the senators' questions, and you can bet there will be a lot of them. we're waiting outside that will meeting like we were at a similar one this morning of the house intelligence committee. >> we have pledged to be as transparent as possible in this case. and we want to do that. we want to provide the american people the information. i think it's important that you have that information. but we don't want to risk

american lives in doing that. >> the more we can get to you in the next couple of weeks, the more the public will understand what this program is and how it balances the constitution. at least this program has thwarted ten possible terrorist attacks. >> what we're trying to do, and we've had a very long conversation today, about promoting the release of the cases that have been disrupted. these programs have thwarted terrorists, real terrorist plots, not only against americans, but in some cases against our allies. >> a new "time" magazine poll taken right after the leak finds 54% of americans say snowden made the right decision. 76% believe we'll eventually learn that the surveillance program is even bigger and more widespre widespread. with that in mind, americans are sharply divided on whether they approve of the program. but regardless, if they approve or not, nearly two-thirds say these controversial programs do help protect the country.

it's the focus of this week's "time" cover story "the informers: geeks who leak." michael sheerer wrote the article and joins us now. michael, is the problem there are too many geeks with security clearances, me being one of them? >> it's probably not the problem. the problem is those geeks, some of them are going renegade on the u.s. government. we have a national security system built to defend itself against foreign enemies, russian and chinese moles. these are whistle blowers. it's a different kind of threat if you want to keep thing secret. the national security council, white house, are all struggling with how to deal with this new, largely youth-driven, ideology online about how information should be shared about the evils of a surveillance state. the bottom line, we depend on these people to run these

operations, because young, tech-savvy people are key to the military structures and yet we can't entirely trust they're going to be on the same page with the policies. >> michael, let's talk about that ideology you bring up. what is the motivation linking these modern leakers? you quote in your story julian assange telling us radicalization of the internet educated youth in that this is them receiving their values from the internet. so, what are those values we're talking about? >> well, the internet's a big play. so, we're generalizing here, but generally speaking you're talking about that old line, information wants to be free. that regular people should have access to the same information that elites have access to. you see this battle playing out in the corporate sphere, which we're anonymous talking companies to trying to hide information, attacking scientology for trying to cut down their critics. at the same time there's a belief online that individuals should have their right to privacy, and this dates back to

the '80s and '90s in which you had a number of cryptographers they built things to protect themselves. you have julian assange who went on to build wiki leaks, which protects leakers, allowing them to leak. privacy is sacred. government, large institutions shouldn't be able to invade that. at the same time, information should not be held privately. it should be democratically shared. you saw that in the snowden leak. he's saying, look, i want the american people to see this. i want them to decide. bradley manning said almost the exact same thing. at the time he was leaking to wikileaks. he said, i think the american people should look at diplomatic cables and decide whether or not it's okay or not. >> and as the people look over that, it will take some time to see whether there's a political response. i think some of the polling can be premature. if you look a couple days out

after watergate first emerged, also through unthored leaks in that case of the fbi or the pentagon papers, it takes time to process this. as for washington's response, it's been very clear and very strong, including among members of the press, the media, the pundatocracy, if you will, critics with harshness to snowden. it seems snowden and manning have been criticized harsher than other leakers in american history. why is that? >> i think you're right about the public, there is division. our poll shows there's kricker to results. majority think snowden should be prosecuted. they don't entirely gel. the official response to these two leaks i think what you have here is an elite consensus these things are good programs. they're legal. laws were not broken in these cases. the government should be doing sometimes nasty stuff in other countries, you know, the state

department cables that manning leaked showed some things that weren't pretty but they weren't necessarily illegal. you know, working with corrupt regimes, working with dictators, things like that. i think there's an elite consensus in congress, in some portions of the media, in the white house that this is just the reality of the world we have to play this game. and i think that consensus exists. the other thing in our poll, older people more -- tend to agree with that more. it's younger people and definitely among this online community who disagree with that, who believe the world is not naturally like that. that it can be improved. >> yeah, michael, when it comes to public opinion and tension between national security and liberty, i'm not sure, even as ari says polling after a few days of an issue can't be trusted, i'm not sure it should even matter when it comes to these matters. take, for example, look at public polling around vietnam. gallup asked one question over the entire duration of that

conflict. in view of developments since we entered the fighting in vietnam, do you think the united states made a mistake sending troops to fight in vietnam? august of 1965, 61% said no. by may of 1971, 28% said no. i don't know that i trust the public writ large to tell me what is tiyranny and what isn't tyranny. >> that's a good point but there will be political consequences. you'll have primaries in 2016 in which it's likely one or both parties will be split. you'll have candidates saying these programs are bad, like rand paul. you'll have candidates, whoever the main stream republican candidate is, saying these programs are good. i think it will also matter for president obama's legacy. remember, he got elected in 2008 as the candidate of transparency, as the candidate of civil liberties. he gets into an office and endorses programs that are basically in line with president bush was doing at the end of his term. >> expands them. >> in some cases expands them, yes. >> you covered at the time,

then-senator obama did back surveillance under the amendments. i've been critical of it, to be accurate. but he has supported it and been consistent in the notion that we should have much greater domestic surveillance. >> i think the issue is a lot of people who supported obama were not aware of the details. maybe didn't buy the rhetoric if they were aware of the details. >> well, michael, we also know that preventing terrorist attacks and trying to gather intelligence to do just that has proven to be very challenging for both democratic and republican administrations. so, if not these programs, what are the alternatives here? >> that's a very complicated debate. up till now, the national security state, the intelligence community and congress has basically argued that that is not a debate that should be held too publicly. and i think that's changed. and i think that's going to be the biggest impact of this -- of

the snowden leak. it's not that these programs are likely to be rolled back. it's that we are now seeing the national security agency coming out and saying, we want to be transparent, we to want have this debate. you're seeing members of congress take public stands on this. we're going to have a debate about some of this. in the criminal sphere, for instance, where you're not dealing with national security, we have a pretty good sense of, you know, when the fbi can tap your phones and when they can't tap your phones. people generally understand there will be court orders, they're going after criminal conspiracies and listening to the calls of mobsters. they're not upset about that as long as there's a court involved. similarly, i think the american people are going to want now a better sense of exactly what these court orders are being released by the secret court, who they're allowing -- who's being listened to, whose data's being monitored. it's actually a debate president obama has hinted at wanting to have as well. he's talked about having a privacy commission to talk about this. so, i think there's the effect of this leak is that there's going to be a willingness going

forward to have this debate in public, whereas before it was -- >> privacy commission, that sounds good. >> privacy commission to solve the international promise problem. >> thank you for joining us. we're just getting started. this hour in the guest spot, a whistle-blower who was around long before snowden and says this guy is no hero. but today's "spin cycle" has it all, politics, emotion. so grab the tissues and come back. oh, he's a fighter alright. since aflac is helping with his expenses while he can't work, he can focus on his recovery. he doesn't have to worry so much about his mortgage, groceries, or even gas bills. kick! kick... feel it! feel it! feel it! nice work! ♪ you got it! you got it! yes! aflac's gonna help take care of his expenses. and us...we're gonna get him back in fighting shape. ♪ [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes at aflac.com. [ male announcer ] see what's happening behind the scenes

given way to sleeping. tossing and turning have where sleepless nights yield to restful sleep, and lunesta eszopiclone can help you get there, like it has for so many people before. do not take lunesta if you are allergic to anything in it. when taking lunesta, don't drive or operate machinery until you feel fully awake. walking, eating, driving or engaging in other activities while asleep without remembering it the next day have been reported. lunesta should not be taken together with alcohol. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations or confusion. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. alcohol may increase these risks. allergic reactions such as tongue or throat swelling occur rarely and may be fatal. side effects may include unpleasant taste, headache, dizziness and morning drowsiness. ask your doctor if lunesta is right for you. then find out how to get lunesta for as low as $15 at lunesta.com there's a land of restful sleep, we can help you go there, on the wings of lunesta.

[ roars ] ♪ [ roars ] ♪ [ roars ] ♪ [ roars ] ♪ [ male announcer ] universal studios summer of survival. ♪

two days ago it looked like sarah murnaghan was going to die

but the 10-year-old cystic fibrosis victim is recovering after getting a new lease on life with a double lung transplant. you must know about the battle she's been fighting. sarah had been prefl denied adult lungs because she's not 12 years old. that's the minimum to receive adult organs. sarah was extremely unlikely to live that long to get the organs she needed to live. lawyers were able to convince a federal judge the under-12 rule was discriminatory. that enabled the family to stop health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius from enforcing that problematic rule. now young sarah is recovering. a lot of serious questions remain like, what does this case mean for all the other sarahs out there? that's what we're going to discuss. in is a tough case in many ways, from a policy perspective, even though it's an easy question from the heart perspective. you look at someone who needs help. they should get the help they need. the rules, however, have been

built partly with a lot of input from the medical community saying we have to make tough decisions all the time. and adults fare better under this procedure. i have two big thoughts. one is that while i don't impugn secretary sebelius or the people operating under what is clearly an imperfect framework, i think we ought to have maximum flexibility between doctor and patient. and so in reading up on the case in the segment, i came across a lot of medical research about why this rule exists. but i would say it shouldn't be a zero tolerance rule. it seems to me it should be deference rule up. might defer to the judgment these kind of younger transplants are less likely or practiced less often. i don't think they should be completely ruled out. that leads me to the other point i want to make, what are we doing talking about this? you can't avoid it when you have limited resources and public policy in health care.

reminds me of what kenneth feinberg is doing in boston. a very senior practiced attorney who works a lot on cases where people need to make choices about what life is worth. and he handled the 9/11 victim compensation fund where the government was involved in trying to help the victims of that terrible tragedy, people who died and their families and people who were hurt. right now in boston, as "the new york times" is reporting, he's using these funds to decide what a limb is worth, two limbs are worth, what a life is worth. you can't do it by formula, but when you do it with individuals, it also is very tough. that's my thought. it's hard any time we have to value life. these rules should have more flexibility built into them. >> yeah. that's what's frustrating about the sebelius ruling and denying sarah, and there are others, javier costa, an 11-year-old boy in the same hospital as sarah, the same predictment. the judge ruled he should also be put on the adult list. that's frustrating. the doctors in sarah and javier's cases say getting an

adult lung transplant, they have a good chance. that should be the paramount sort of factor here. but there are no easy answers. this immediately reminded me of another case, i wrote about sarah's case in the new york daily news earlier this week. it reminded me of another case. i want to play some sound from 2005 that you guys might remember. >> this is a complex case, with series issues. but extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life. >> he was, of course, talking about the terri schiavo case and that midnight bill signing he did to try to save her life ten years -- ten days later terri died because the courts overruled that decision. erring on the side of life has to be the moral focus here. again, the problem with the adult transplants is that if you

use it in this risky procedure for a kid, you might be denying it to an adult who will probably fare better. but what i say to that is the following, that adult lung transplant to another adult doesn't have any guarantees either. these things fail all the time. so, there's no guarantee that the adult lung that sarah and javier cannot get will work to save someone else's life. the only thing we do know is that by not allowing sarah and javier and others like them to be on the adult waiting list means they will die. that is erring on the side of life. have you to do what you have to do. to protect life. >> i mean, i agree, obviously, with everything i've heard. it's a very difficult, complex, emotional situation. the only thing i would add is that she exists within a community of people who are trying to live, right? a community of doctors who are trying to mete out in the fairest way they have determined over decades of constructing this architecture how to dole out organs, lungs, hearts,

whatever, livers, et cetera, to the thousands of people who need them. four people die waiting on the list every week. they're trying to deal with this community of 1700 people who are waiting for lungs. she is not the only one who needs a lung. she and javier are not the only children at that hospital who are in the same exact predictment. i don't know if sarah and javier's decision will have an impact on the other children there. these are not purely private decisions. they are public in that they exist within the dynamic of others who are waiting for organs. it's one thing to say, if it's my kid, i would do anything. a lot of people would say that, obviously. but what if you were one of the doctors in charge of this system saying who's going to get the next heart, the next lung, i think that's a much more difficult question in terms of bioethics. >> the challenge there is the fact that they were just saying

because they're not 18 and over, we're not going to try. therein lies the problem -- >> 12. >> yeah, 12. people have brought up this might be a form of age discrimination. >> well, i think when you try to put yourself in the situation that the parents are in, it's hard not to make an emotional decision about this. >> yes. >> yes, i empathize and sympathize with the doctors, not having kids but having five god children, parents and everything in between, you want to make sure folks are doing absolutely all they can and leaving nothing out in this situation. >> no, you go to the ends of the earth for your kids. >> of course you would. >> sometimes we talk about the law and what's just and human rights and go to court and get your rights vindicated in court. i would be the first lawyer to admit courts are not a good place to adjudicate indicate this. you can't go to the courts have time you have a deadline with an organ transplant -- >> but if you didn't know what to do, you would go to court -- >> you would but medical decisions should not be made by

nonmedical personality. that's what kathleen sebelius were saying, these people have made this architecture over decades, let them -- >> in the terri schiavo case you have doctors, judges, politicians, families on different sides of this issue. >> but that's the point i'm going at. the judges only have certain tools to resolve this. in this case you mentioned age discrimination. that is a thing in the law. can you say it's discriminatory. you can also do racial discrimination and gender. if you were only giving organs to men, you would have a great case. but there's a bunch of other morals we talked about, the bioethics, that aren't in the law. judges can reach toward age discrimination but not toward the real moral question. >> right. that's for families, hopefully also for political leaders who can try to advance a change in the ethos, a change in the culture and get people to see, this is how we should deal with these in the future, because as you point out, there will be no sarah murnaghans -- >> there will be more challenges

by the courts going forward. >> exactly. >> this was our life and death conversation. i'm glad we covered it because it's a serious thing. we have more fun stuff coming up in the show. i don't know if you heard. >> what? >> we have a segment coming up next some have called the humus fajita segment. >> say it one more time. >> if you say it one more time, we'll be looped on the internet -- >> humus fajita, humus fa meet that -- >> you just did it. >> you can make any situation awkward. >> i think i just jumped my own shark and i don't even know what that means. >> or did you gump your own shark? >> up next, up next, mexico's deadliest drug cartels, the fajita part. i'm the next american success story. working for a company

where over seventy-five percent of store management started as hourly associates. there's opportunity here. i can use walmart's education benefits to get a degree, maybe work in it, or be an engineer, helping walmart conserve energy. even today, when our store does well, i earn quarterly bonuses. when people look at me, i hope they see someone working their way up. vo: opportunity, that's the real walmart. i want peacocks. peacocks? walking the grounds. in tuscany. [ man ] her parents didn't expect her dreams to be so ambitious. italy? oh, that's not good. [ man ] by exploring their options, they learned that instead of going to italy, they could use a home equity loan to renovate their yard and have a beautiful wedding right here while possibly increasing the value of their home. you and roger could get married in our backyard. it's robert, dad. [ female announcer ] come in to find the right credit options for your needs. because when people talk, great things happen.

from capital one... boris earns unlimited rewards for his small business. can i get the smith contract, please? thank you. that's three new paper shredders. [ boris ] put 'em on my spark card. [ garth ] boris' small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase every day. great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. read back the chicken's testimony, please. "buk, buk, bukka!" [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase every day. told you i'd get half. what's in your wallet?

our next guest first became a public figure when he himself became a whistle-blower, by the actual definition of the phrase. instead of spilling his information across the internet, he tried to work through the proper channels to get the truth out and he got fired for it. when he wrote his first book "operation dark heart" a memoir about his experiences in the military, the pentagon was so shaken by the information they censored parts of the book. well, now he's got a novel with an all-too believable premise. it's written from the perspective of somebody who knows how our defense department works and doesn't work. in the guest spot today lieutenant colonel anthony schaeffer, a cia-trained senior intelligence officer, a bronze star medal recipient and author of "the last line," which is on shelves now. tony, you draw an interesting

connection between mexican drug cartels and hezbollah in your book. talk to me about that theory and what's different between what's reported on conservative blogs, right-leaning websites. >> bill keith, my writing partner, did a great deal of research. we took the reality, not the perceived reality, but the reality, and looked at how things might actually transpire regarding two groups who have very diverse interests. a drug group would not want a terrorist organization to mess up its business. first off, you get a terrorist group deceiving a drug group. that's an interesting premise, something people have not talked about a great deal. so, what we do here is basically try to put together all these facts and try to actually put in the psychology of all this as well. often i think people look at -- when we -- war game things in d.o.d. we use something called game theory.

it often completely negates the human factor. we try to put this back into it and make it realistic. >> earlier, just to switch gears, we discussed the "time" poll where a majority of americans approve of edward snowden disclosing this information. >> right. >> do you think snowden is merely a leaker? is he a heroic whistle-blower? perhaps, is he both? >> he -- what he disclosed, i agree with others, needed to be disclosed. i listened to the hearings yesterday, general alexander, continues to be less than truthful about what he's talking about. with that said, snowden by the fact he chose a course completely outside the whistle-blower methods, if you will, has chosen a route which has made him a criminal. so, as much as it pains me to say this, you know, i think what he had to say was important, needs to be debated, he's chosen a route completely outside of the bounds of those available to him. as you mention in your introduction, speaker of the house denny hastert asked me to

do what i did. i didn't do it willingly. i gave congress information. they decided for me what needed to be revealed. honestly, there were things i could not testify to that were beyond top secret. so not everything about my story has been revealed to congress even. >> let's put snowden aside. i hate the leaker, love the leak. that's my motto on this. let's talk instead about the program. there are concerns that when the government, whether it's the nsa or doj or the irs, gets such a wide berth to monitor citizens, there's unlimited potential for abuse. >> right. >> maybe it's phone records now, e-mail records, maybe it's tax information and financial records, then it's your private life and gun owner and -- where does it end and why aren't we -- why are we to believe that isn't on the horizon if we're already engaging in this kind of expansion of the surveillance state now? >> well, two things. snowden actually alludes to the fact that despite the

protections he could still get into the database. i believe that's true. whatever they perceive to be restricted, they weren't. general petraeus was brought down by this. the e-mails were based on this capability. third and most importantly, the irs, other scandals, indicate there are indications that this information will not be safe. let me say something completely from a nonpolitical perspective, having used data mining, we did it completely the opposite. think about this, if you're getting 3 billion transactions a day downloaded and only look for ten, the chances are great that you will miss the information you actually need. you get -- you got to pare it down. 99.999% of americans will never touch, be a part of, be a party to a terrorist act and yet they're collecting all that data for really no good reason. >> tony, if you're in the intelligence community and you have questions about the methods they're using and what's going on, is there a real and serious way to raise questions within the community without leaking?

>> yes, absolutely. let me say the answer in two pieces. first, what they're saying that were disrupted, they talked about today and yesterday, 20 incidents or 12 incidents, those are all related to other things, imagery intelligence, human intelligence tipped them off, thereby compiling how we figured out the picture. one is never successful by itself. very rarely it is ever is. we need to say, look, we have a cohesive approach to doing it and stalk about it in enough detail people understand that this is a capability that's necessary. bright brake at the same time you have to disclose the fact there's information already out there and admit it and say, let's get past it. terrorist groups know about it. they'll adapt. we need to be focused more how terrorist groups will adapt around us rather than protect information that's already out there. >> i think part of the question goes to the internal reporting you mentioned or even what -- you said you have personal experience with. >> right. >> and it's so interesting to hear you talk about the limits here, raising the queshgs i

think a good one that bears repeating on air here which is about petraeus, what about other cases that didn't get looked at in this p.r.i.s.m. rism at the intended. i want to ask you about the limits of the internal reporting process. i know you worked with government accountable process. you worked with the government accountability project. interesting case that went up to the supreme court just this year. let me read to you a little bit of what happened there. there were two private contractors that were suspicious that their company was being asked to give bribes. they became informants. they reported their concerns to the fbi. then what happened? they were taken to camp cropper, a military prison. according to the filings in this allegedly abused and interrogated by u.s. and u.s. allies on what was then called suspicion of gun running. they said they were walled, slammed into walls as a way of interrogating them. the supreme court just this year declined to hear that case which

was brought up against rumsfeld. that's an example of people who went to the internal process, wents to the fbi. not only were the claims ignored and covered up, but they were actually detain add broad and they say, interrogated and abused. the project you worked with, government accountability project, supported them and their claims but the system didn't. what happens to people like that? >> there's -- look, there's no upside to being a whistle-blower. what happened to them i'm sure absolutely happened. look, they fired me over $67 of phone abuse, which was legal, and something -- i mean, minor issues. they do this. i'm still fighting a first amendment battle with the federal government and d.o.d. over my first book. there's no easy way forward. this is the thing. i feel i did everything i could to fill my oath of office. that is to say i feel i can sleep at night. and i think that's where snowden left the reservation. these guys are suffering, too. i'm not saying it's right. i'm saying have you to do what you can do, account for and bring up and prevent corruption. it's not ever easy for anyone who decides to dot right thing.

it's never easy. >> lieutenant colonel tony schaffer, thank you. when we come back, we're tracking another afternoon of wild weather. [ male announcer ] here's a word you should keep in mind. unbiased. some brokerage firms are. but way too many aren't. why? because selling their funds makes them more money. which makes you wonder -- isn't that a conflict? search "proprietary mutual funds." yikes! then go to e-trade. we've got over 8,000 mutual funds,

and not one of them has our name on it. we're in the business of finding the right investments for you. e-trade. less for us. more for you. the fund's prospectus contains its investment objectives, risks, charges, expenses, and other important information and should be read and considered carefully before investing. for a current prospectus, visit etrade.com/mutualfunds. ♪ there you go. come on, let's play! [ male announcer ] there's an easier way to protect your dog from dangerous parasites. good boy. fetch! trifexis is the monthly, beef-flavored tablet that prevents heartworm disease, kills fleas and prevents infestations, and treats hook-, round-, and whipworm infections. treatment with fewer than 3 monthly doses after exposure to mosquitoes may not provide complete heartworm prevention. the most common adverse reactions were vomiting, itching and lethargy. serious adverse reactions have been reported following concomitant extra-label use of ivermectin with spinosad alone, one of the components of trifexis. prior to administration, dogs should be tested for existing heartworm infection.

to learn more about trifexis, talk to your veterinarian, call 888-545-5973 or visit trifexis.com. you don't have to go to extremes to protect your dog from parasites. you need trifexis. visit our website to save up to $25. available by prescription from your veterinarian. [ male announcer ] moving object detection. ♪ blind spot warning. ♪ lane departure warning. safety, down to an art. the nissan altima with safety shield technologies. nissan. innovation that excites. ♪ we all have one. that perfect spot. a special place we go to smooth out the ripples of the day. it might be off a dock or on a boat. upstream or in the middle of nowhere.

wherever it may be, casting a line in the clear, fresh waters of michigan lets us leave anything weighing us down back on shore. our perfect spot is calling. our perfect spot is pure michigan. your trip begins at michigan.org. leading the news cycle, six months to the date since newtown families and friends of the victims gathered on the steps of the capitol. they read the name of each person lost to gun massacre. president obama will meet with them later. a massive spring storm is battering the mid-atlantic region right now. it's not just d.c. one in five americans from iowa to maryland are getting hit, including your beloved cyclist back here in nyc. meantime, nice and dry inside the capitol right now. congressional leadership is honoring their colleague john

dingell's 57 plus years of service. he overtook robert byrd last week at longest serving member of congress. now let's turn our attention to women in charge. >> yes. >> my favorite subject. we've been hearing a lot about leaning in, thanks to sheryl sandberg. one of the first women on wall street to run a successful hedge fund and a large family, she's here with us with advice on how you can have it all. with us now, karen kinnerman, ceo of metropolitan advisers and known as chairwoman to cnbc viewers. finerman is the author of "finerman's rules," secrets i only tell my daughters about business and life. thanks for being here. >> it's finerman, but i've been -- >> i'm sorry about that. >> that's okay. >> they've been yelling in my ear. finerman. i apologize. it was a producer error.

failed whale is the title of one of your chappers. how do you fail well? >> fail well if you're going to fail well, for god's sake, learn something from it. so really review what happened and go into great detail about where did things go wrong. were you sort of fooling yourself into believing things were different than they were? were you ignoring advice with wasn't consistent with what you hoped it would? really forcing yourself to look at what did you do wrong? how did you contribute to that failing so that, for god's sake, if you don't learn from failing, nothing good can come from it. >> hold on, one second. i need to ask karen a second. you also said multitasking is a recipe for fail yure -- hold on second -- if i can't multitask? >> i don't know it's a recipe for failure. i used to think it was so

efficient. i used to think i was getting so much done. then i realized every time i was switch tasks, i would backtrack to remind myself where i was, what i was doing. the more i would switch, the more i would backtrack, the less efficient i was being. you might be really efficient, but is it possible -- to me it was likely that i would actually less efficient than i could have been had i just finished each task. >> yeah. well, karen, you also talk about most women surrendering complete control of their finances, although at some point in their lives 90% of women will have to take charge of their finances. so, can you talk to us a little bit about what women can do to shed that really bad habit. >> i think they have to just realize, they don't have the luxury of not learning about it. sometimes, some women, not all, assume that the man will take care of it or that men have some, you know, genetic disposition toward learning about finance and investing. and they don't. i say, you know, you would never

surrender control over where you send your kids to school, where you live, how you vote. and yet your finances control more of your life than that, so how could you surrender that? so, you have to realize, you don't have the luxury. even if you don't make the money, you still don't have the luxury of keeping your head in the sand. you've got to realize, you have to ask questions. if you do have a financial adviser, no question is stupid. don't let any financial adviser shut you out of the conversation and make you think your questions aren't relevant or reflect some ignorance. it's fine. that's what you're supposed to be doing, learning. >> i just tweeted on facebook. i'm just letting you know. >> was it efficient? >> yes, i can multitask. >> all right. so, you're -- okay, you're the exception. we found you. you're the exception. >> i also wanted to ask you about what you say in the book, which is that for most people, working from home doesn't turn out well. why is that? >> well, for me it was a -- being a mother working from home, and i realize this is not a pc, not a popular opinion, i feel like it's the worst of both

worlds. your kid, they can get used to you leaving the house. they can't get used to being ignored. work wonders where you're really committed. just think about if you want to advance your career and you want to become the boss, then working from home really can't work at all. so, i kind of think it's similar to multitasking. you don't have boundaries between work and home and that can really make it hard to do both. >> that makes sense. >> karen finerman, sorry for messing up before. myselfmy takes. no one else's. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. up next, what it's like to be married to the american sniper as we have this emotional sitdown with chris kyle's widow. [ phil ] when you have joint pain and stiffness...

accomplishing even little things can become major victories. i'm phil mickelson, pro golfer. when i was diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis, my rheumatologist prescribed enbrel for my pain and stiffness, and to help stop joint damage. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections,

have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. since enbrel helped relieve my joint pain, it's the little things that mean the most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists. i'm on expert on softball. and tea parties. i'll have more awkward conversations than i'm equipped for, because i'm raising two girls on my own. i'll worry about the economy more than a few times before they're grown. but it's for them, so i've found a way. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. ready to plan for your future? we'll help you get there. we've been bringing people together. today, we'd like people to come together on something that concerns all of us. obesity.

and as the nation's leading beverage company, we can play an important role. that includes continually providing more options. giving people easy ways to help make informed choices. and offering portion controlled versions of our most popular drinks. it also means working with our industry to voluntarily change what's offered in schools. but beating obesity will take continued action by all of us, based on one simple common sense fact... all calories count. and if you eat and drink more calories than you burn off, you'll gain weight. that goes for coca-cola, and everything else with calories. finding a solution will take all of us. but at coca-cola, we know when people come together, good things happen. to learn more, visit coke.com/comingtogether music ... music ...

music... when a best-selling book is published after an author's death, the honor is bittersweet. that's the case of "american gun." it tells the history of the united states through ten iconic guns. the book is written by chris kyle, better known as "the american sniper," his first book, spent seven weeks at number one. it's been on the best sellers' list since being ining rerelea

paper back. i had the opportunity to sit down with chris's widow taya here in midtown. it gave us a chance to talk about chris's legacy, her family's life without him, her continued work with veterans and why this new book "american gun" is so important to her. >> i have memories of him with his old replica guns, the black powder guns and the old west guns, twirling them and doing quick draws around the house. it was just -- it was a book about his loves and his passion. it was sort of a natural fit for him. and came up with this idea, chose the ten iconic guns and wrote the stories. >> we all know chris as the american sniper, of course, but you describe him as having a smile as big as the state of texas. was it love at first sight? >> i just thought he was handsome. and when i talked to him about being in the military, his

response was, i would die for my country. how is that arrogant? i thought, you know what, he believes -- believed that with all of his heart. he was the opposite of a stereotype. he was tough, he was capable, he was very intelligent and didn't need people to know it, and he had a heart of gold. he was hysterically funny. and there were probably only a handful of times in our lives where my kids were not laughing hysterically at their dad. ♪ >> their children were the focus of taya's eulogy at chris's funeral attended by 7,000 family and friends. >> so, my sweet angels, we will put one foot in front of the other and remember how silly dad was and how we all made fun of his texas twang. and we will hug each other

tightly, just like dad would do with us. >> losing someone like chris is something that you will never get over. and they had such a unique person in chris. they've really been robbed of a lot of gifts. but the other side of that coin is that they did have someone like that, and they are old enough to know what that's like. my children have a faith that i think is inspiring to people, to adults, to me. >> that faith is what inspires taya to preserve her husband's legacy, helping vets adjust from their role as warrior to family man. she's created the website chriskylefrog.com. its logo, chris's tattoo. the focus, marriage and family life for transi guetioning vets.

she's become unintentional advocate for gun ownership rights. speaking last month in texas. >> chris said, i would love for people to think of me as a guy who stood up for what he believed in and helped make a difference for veterans. for ve >> reporter: after becoming a veteran himself, she is es he discovered a new use for gun -- healing. he participated in hunting and fishing outings for veterans. >> he mandated no cameras, because he didn't do it for the camera. i think we're in a great place in the country where people are supporting veterans. besides money, just showing up and doing something actively, helping someone. if you know a veteran, just go mow their yard. don't ask and say, you know, if you need anything call me, because most people are proud, independent, and they're not going to ask you for help. >> the trial is expected to start this fall for the fellow veteran accused of killing chris and his friend, chad

littlefield, but tea doesn't think ptsd played a role. >> i don't think of this as a case of ptsd at all. >> you think that's an excuse essentially. >> absolutely. you know, chris and i were blessed enough to know a large number of men in many different justice-related fields. big-hearted men who suffered something traumatic, and many have ptsd. they don't go around talking about it. they don't use it as an excuse. they do good in the world, they love their families. they struggle with sleep or mood swings just like a lot of people do with their internal struggles, but it dug change their character. it doesn't make you a murderer. 300,000 iraq and afghan war veterans are learning to live with ptsd. if you want to learn more about her efforts of transitioning, check out the website. while you're clicking around

online, head over to the facebook page. you'll find some web extras from my interview, including her take on the upcoming film about her husband. bradley cooper is playing chris. we'll be right back. a better life for your family, a better opportunity for your business, a better legacy to leave the world. we have always believed in this pursuit, striving to bring insight to every investment, and integrity to every plan. we are morgan stanley. and we're ready to work for you. every day we're working to and to keep our commitments. and we've made a big commitment to america. bp supports nearly 250,000 jobs here. through all of our energy operations, we invest more in the u.s. than any other place in the world. in fact, we've invested over $55 billion here in the last five years -

making bp america's largest energy investor. our commitment has never been stronger. peoi go to angie's listt for to gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. angie's list members can tell you which provider is the best in town. you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. now that we're expecting, i like the fact that i can go onto angie's list and look for pediatricians. the service providers that i've found on angie's list actually have blown me away. join today and find out why over 1 million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust.

on wednesday we hodgeored the memory of -- and later this summer we will commemorate the 50 tl anniversary on the march on washington. the irony is any day the supreme court will issue some of the largest civil rights decisions in decades. depending on what they decide,

we could be set back by 50 years or more. right after the selma march in 1965, martin luther king jr. appeared on "meet the press" where he said this about the critical role of our nation's justice system. >> there are laws that i have come into being that i consider unjust and the more conscience of the nation considered unjust. it does not mean persons were unjust people. as most of them render the decision making separate but equal the law of the land, it was justice holland who said at that time that the constitution is colorblind and rendered a dissenting opinion which has now becomed majority opinion of our country. >> today, given the conservative bent of the highest court in the land, many of us are not as optimistic as dr. king once was about the willingness to

preserve fairness, one decision is fisher versus the university of texas. the court must decide whether the school can use race as one factor among many others in the atmission prod. many more are just hoping the impact will be minimal, p extending into employment and business opportunities. i am uneasy about what the court will decide. you see as an african-american woman i'm a beneficiary of affirmative action, both formal and informal programs. perhaps i would not be sitting here today as a lawyer without it. to provide opportunities to individuals individuals who have -- and/or to prevent the recurrence of future discrimination. i find myself constantly engaged

in discussions, arguments even on whether america is post-racial or if people have arrived because we have our first black president, barack obama. his election demonstrates just how complicated america really is. folks now have what's described as diversity fatigue, and support for affirmative action, but have you looked around? disparities for communities of color reese main unreasonably high. there are grave disparity in wealth accumulation, representation in congress, state legislatures, even city councils. there are disparities in access to education, graduation rates and education funding. on most fronts, people of color continue to lag behind the majority. so i often wonder, when listening to all the red rick about affirmative action, how can you you have bootstraps to pull your slough up with no boots? how do you equal, with little or

no how can you be judged by the content of your character or in this instance when all they see the color of your skin and the associated stereotypes? it's 2013, and we've yet to truly overcome. maybe it's not the best policy, but it is much better than nothing. i'm reminded of president clinton's famous remarks about affirmative action policies in 1995. >> let me be clear. affirmative action has been good for america. we should have a simple slogan decrease mend it, but don't end it. >> i pray this nation's highest court will do the right thing by protecting future opportunities and preserving justice, equal access and fairness for all americans. now to one of the greatest advocates i know, it's all yours, martin. >> thank you, angela. it's been one of to have you as a member of "the cycle" team. it's no nsa secret.

the gop is split on immigration, handcuffed on guns action and on women's rights, well, they've done it again. the precipice of scandal overload. >> substitution, smoke screen. >> we need the president to show the courage and the leadership. >> the majority of americans are okay with listening in on our phone calls. >> it's a very different balances act. >> it's dozens of terrorist events that these have helped prevent. >> i'm a little surprised the white house hasn't made clear just how important these programs are. >> if the gop is this stupid, they deserve to die. >> immigration reform, that's a very difficult issue. >> we'll never win another national election, thank you, marco rubio. >> if the idi hadiots out thered just shut up. >> if it's a legitimate rate -- >> before i pass away, i would like a republican in the white