inmates are still sent to the castle on the cumberland. that's our report. thanks for watching. i'm john seigenthaler. this sunday we're covering the breaking news this morning. nsa leaker edward snowden on the run as the government files formal charges against him. >> plus, our own congressional summit on the hottest issues of the president's second term. the immigration fight is coming to a head with high stakes and big leadership tests for both the president and the gop. the stock market stumbles. how much volatility is ahead in the economy? and what should washington do? and the debate over spying. is the country still behind the nsa surveillance program, or does the president need to make a public case to keep it going? with us 14 capitol hill voices. assistant democratic leader dick

durbin of illinois. the top republican on the senate homeland security and government affairs committee and immigration, key conservative voice, tom coburn of oklahoma. democratic congresswoman from california, loretta sanchez, and the chairman of the house intelligence committee, republican congressman mike rogers of michigan. then our political roundtable on obama's rough patch. critical reviews of his trip to the g-8 and his efforts on syria, falling approval ratings. is his second term slipping away? good sunday morning. a busy one. breaking news that we are following this morning. nsa leaker edward snowden is on the move. he has left hong kong. he boarded a commercial flight to moscow a few hours ago, final destination unknown, but he is expected to land in moscow in just a few minutes. the hong kong government issued

a defiant statement claiming the u.s. extradition request did not fully comply with hong kong law. and wikileaks posted a statement just moments ago saying snowden is, quote, bound for a democrat theic nation via a safe route for the purposes of asylum and is being escorted by diplomats and legal advisers from wikileaks. that organization, as you know, responsible for other high-profile leaks of classified information. all of this as the u.s. has charged snoed within epps naj ad the threat of government property and they want him to face justice in the united states. many questions remain. we want to talk to the chairman of the house intelligence committee, mike rogers, with us this morning, in just a moment. but first i want to bring in the man who broke the nsa surveillance story for t"the guardian" newspaper, glen in brazil this morning. there's a very big delay between us on the satellite so i want to be mindful of that. glen, so as i begin this

morning, tell us where snowden is, where he is ultimately headed. >> well, i think the where he is question is one what you just answered, which is he's on a commercial flight to moscow, where he's ultimately headed unknown. in every conversation that i've had with him over the last three weeks he has stressed that the key contact for every decision he's making is as was reported this morning the obama administration has been engaged in an unprecedented war against whistle-blowers, people who bring transparent soy to what they're doing, and he believes it's vital he stay out of the clutches of the u.s. government because of the record of the obama administration on people who disclose wrongdoing that the political officials are doing in the dark. and he apparently is headed to a democratic country that will grant him asylum from this persecution. >> so, he does not intend to return to the united states. he intends to fight extradition. what else does he intend to do? you have been in contact with him. is there additional information

he is prepared to leak to bolster his and your claim that he is actually a whistle-blower and not a criminal responsible for espionage? >> sure. i think the key definition of whistle-blower is somebody who brings to light what political officials do in the dark that is either deceitful or illegal. and in this case, as "the new york times" article just this morning that describes that one of the revelations that he enabled that we reported is that the director of national intelligence, james clapper, went before the u.s. congress and lied outright when asked whether or not the nsa is collecting any form of data on millions of americans. his response was, "no, sir." as "the new york times" said today, even clapper has to say that statement was absolutely false. the very first conversation i ever had with mr. snowden, he showed me the folder in which he placed the documents and labeled

it "nsa try lying to congress," collecting millions of phone records of americans indiscriminately, exactly what clapper denied to the congress was being done. as for illegality, "the new york times" also said today the program exceeds the patriot act and there's a fisa court opinion that says that the u.s. government, that the nsa engaged in unconstitutional and illegal spying on american citizens. that court opinion is secret, but he showed me documents discussing internally in the nsa what that court ruling is, and that should absolutely be public. >> with regard to that specific fisa opinion, isn't the case based on people that i've talked to, that the fisa opinion based on the government's request is that they said, well, you can get this but you can't get that? that would actually go beyond the skoem of what you're allowed to do, which means that the request was changed or denied, which is the whole point the government makes, which is that there is actual judicial review here and not abuse. isn't this the kind of review

and opinion that you would want to keep these programs in line? >> i don't know what government officials are whispering to you, david, but i know that the documents that i have in my possession and that i have read from the nsa tell a much different story, which is that there was an 80-page opinion from the fisa court that said that what the nsa is doing in spying on american citizens is a violation of both the fourth amendment and the bounds of the statute. and it specifically said that they are collecting bulk transmissions, multiple conversations from millions of americans, not just people that are believed to be involved in terrorist organizations or working for a foreign agent, and that this is illegal. and the nsa then planned to try and accommodate that ruling. but i think the real issue as journalists and as citizens is, why should we have to getsz? how can we have a democracy in which a secret court rule that what the government is doing in spying on us is a violation of the constitution and the law and

yet we sit here and don't know what that ruling is because it's all been concealed and all been secret? i think we need to have transparency and disclosure, and that's why mr. snowden stepped forward so, that we could have that. >> there are reports he's ultimately headed to venezuela. is that your understanding? >> i don't -- i'm not going to talk about where he's headed or what his plans are. i think it's up in the air. i'm not sure where he's headed. he's my source for these stories. i'm not going to talk about where he's going. >> that would meet the criteria for what you've outlined this morning on where he'd like to be. >> right. well, venezuela has a democratically elected government, though it has lots of problems in its political system. and i think the real question is why should an american who joined the u.s. military, worked for the cia, worked for the nsa, why does he feel that he has to flee the united states simply because he stepped forward in a very careful way, goes to

newspapers, reveals wrongdoing on the part of government officials, why does he feel he has to flee? the mcclatchy article answered that question. it said the obama administration has unprecedentedly aggressive and vindictive in how it punishes whistle-blowers as enemy of the state. why are whistle-blowers being treated in this fashion? >> you are a columnist, you are also a lawyer. you do not dispute that edward snowden has broken the law, do you? >> no. i think he's very clear about the fact that he did it because his conscience compelled him to do it, just like daniel ellsberg did 50 years ago when he released the pentagon papers and also admitted he broke the law. the question is, though, how can he be charged with espionage? he didn't work for a foreign government. he could have stole this this information for millions of dollars and enriched himself. he didn't do any of that either. he stepped forward and learned of wrongdoing and exposed it so

we could have a democratic deit the bathe about this system and do we want to put people like that in prison for life when all they're doing is telling us as citizens what our political officials are doing in the dark. >> final question for you, but i'd like you to hang around. i just want to get pete williams in here as well. to the extent that you have aided and abetted snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn't you, mr. greenwald, will charged with a crime? >> i think it's pretty extraordinary that anybody who would call themselves a journalist would publicly muse about whether or not other journalists should be charged with felonies. the asummings in your question, david, is completely without evidence, the idea i've aided and abetted him in any way. the scandal that arose in washington before our stories began was about the fact that the obama administration is trying to criminalize investigative journalism by going through the e-mails and records of ap reporters, accusing a fox journalist of the

theory you just embraced, bag co-conspirator in felonies for working with sources. if you want to embrace that theory, it means every investigative journalist in the united states who receives classified information is a criminal, and it's precisely those theories and that climate that has become so menacing in the united states. that's why jean mayer said investigative reporting has come to a standstill, as a result of the questions you just mentioned. >> the question of who's a journalist may be up for debate. that question has been raised by lawmakers, as well. i'm not embracing anything. but obviously i take your point. mr. greenwald, just stay put if you would for just a moment. i want to bring in pete williams. i appreciate you dealing with delay as well. pete, can you bring us up to speed on where the justice department is on this? what are they prepared to do? >> the request for extradition will follow wherever he ends up. the charges were filed under seal a week ago in the eastern district of virginia right

across the river from washington, and the chinese, the hong kong government was informed of that, and the u.s. sought the next step, which is an arrest warrant. then after he was arrested the extradition process would start. administration officials say that the hong kong official came back to the u.s. just this past friday night with additional questions that the u.s. was in the process of responding when the hong kong authorities notified the u.s. that they decided to let him go. now, in their statement, the hong kong government says that the charges the u.s. filed, quote, did not fully comply with the legal requirements under hong kong law. i think it's fair to say that the u.s. is upset about this because it's the administration's claim that the filing of the charges was a back-and-forth with the hong kong authorities. they wanted to make sure that they would conform to the treaty, the extradition treaty the u.s. has, and that they'd received assurances that it would. so, this is quite a surprise, i think it's fair to say, for to the administration. but david, i think from now on

this is a diplomatic issue not a legal one, because it's quite obvious he intends to seek asylum and that's where this process goes next. >> what are the lengths to which the administration may be prepared to go? i'm not asking you to speculate, but what are going to be some of the menu of choices that they're going to have to be discussing? >> the only ones i know are the diplomater and leg eic and lega. whether there are more exotic ones, sort of grab him and bring him back, i wouldn't know and of course they wouldn't say. that would be very controversial although i'm sure there are many members of congress who would agree and others who would think that's the wrong thing to do. as far as i know, this is strictly a diplomatic and legal one. i suppose if that was going to be the course, the u.s. had the chance to do that when he was in hopg congress and chose not to. >> pete, thank you so much. one last question for glenn greenwald. glenn, respond to your critics who as you know have made a case against you, against snowden saying, look, this is not a case of a courageous whistle-blower who worked through the system

even available to whistle-blowers to report something that you may think is abuse. this is a partisan who is single-handedly deciding to expose programs that there is both support for and in doing so illegally, this is more of an agenda. there's frankly a lot of concern that one person would take it upon himself to undermine a program that a lot of people believe is actually helpful to national security. >> right. this is what the u.s. government, what you just -- the claim that you just referenced has been saying for decades. they said the same thing about daniel ellsberg, the same thing about whoever leaked the bush nsa eavesdropping program to "the new york times" in 2005 or who told the "washington post's" dre' that priest about cia blacklakes. this is how the government always tries to protect themselves from transparency is by accusing those who bring it of endangering national security.

there's been nothing that has been revealed that has been remotely endangering national security. the only people who have learned anything are the american people, who have learned the spying apparatus is directed at them. let me clickquickly say it isn' edward snowden making the decisions about what's being published. he didn't upload documents to the internet or pass them to adversary governments, which he could have been or if his motive was to harm the united states. he came to "the guardian" and "the washington post" and said i want you to be extremely careful about what it is that you publish or don't publish. only publish what americans should know but don't harm national security. and we have withheld the majority of things he gave us pursuant not only to his instruction but to our duty as journalists. that's what whistle-blowers and journalists do every single day, david. that's how americans are learned about wrongdoing on the part of the government, through this process. >> glenn greenwald, appreciate you coming on this morning and for your views. thank you very much. joining me now, democratic senator from illinois, the assistant majority leader dick

durbin. republican senator from oklahoma, tom coburn. republican congressman from michigan, the chair of the intelligence committee, mike rogers. and the democratic congresswoman from california, loretta sanchez. welcome to all of you. i want to go through some of the hot topics on capitol hill and move through some of these things. but i've got to start here with this breaking news. let me go with you, chairman rogers. reaction to what you've heard and to the developments this morning. >> well, it's concerning. obviously, what appears to be as of today that he is flying -- will catch another flight from moscow, many believe to cuba. we know there is air traffic from moscow to cuba, then on to venezuela. and when you look at it, ef ove one of those nations is hostile to the united states. if he could go to north korea and iran he could round out his government oppression tour by snowden. so you think about what he says he wants and what his actions are, it defies logic. he has taken information that does not belong to him, it belongs to the people of the united states.

he has jeopardized our national security. i disagree with the reporter. clearly, the bad guys have already changed their way. remember, these were counterterrorism programs essentially, and we have seen that bad guys overseas, terrorists who are committing and plot eight tacks on the united states and our allies, have changed the way they operate. we've already seen that. to say that that is not harm to feel the national security of the united states or our safety is just dead wrong. >> and we mentioned the fisa opinion, 80 pages long, doesn't have the opinion but has documents supporting it essentially saying the government overreached, went beyond its authority, and in fact he says we can establish illegality as opposed to what i suggested to him, a judicial review and a change was made. what do you say? >> this is obviously why the program works. there is judicial review and judicial putback, and rightly so. this is the problem with having a 1,000-piece puzzle, taking three or four pieces and deciding you're now an expert on

what that picture looks like. you're going to get it wrong. they're getting it wrong and it's dangerous. so what happened was the court looked at it and said because of a technical difficult ti you're collecting more information than you're allowed to collect. you have to fix it. they came back, they stopped collection, they went back, reviewed it, figured out how to correct that. that's exactly the kind of thing you want to do. by the way, it was reported to congress as well. we reviewed it. we agreed that they had overcollected. and we also agreed the mitigation, the way that they use technology to make sure they weren't collecting certain bits of information was adhered to. that's the way you want a classified system to work when you're not trying to tell the bad guys how we do things. >> before i bring everybody else in, what lengths should this administration go to track snowden down? the diplomatic route as pete williams reported on could be very difficult if he ends up in venezuela. you're chairman of the house intelligence committee. what should this administration do? >> they should use every legal avenue we have to bring him back to the united states.

and, listen, if he believes that he's doing something good -- and by the way, he went outside all of the whistle-blower avenues that were available to anyone in this government, including people who have classified information. we get two or three vis from whistle-blowers every single week in the committee, and we investigate every one thoroughly. he didn't choose that route. if he really believed he did something good he should get on a plane, come back, and face the consequences of his actions. >> is he gone? do you think he's gone? not to return? >> i don't -- i'm not sure i would say gone forever. i do think we'll continue with extradition activities wherever he ends up and should continue to find ways to return him to the united states and get the united states' public's information back. >> senator durbin, this is obviously being reported widely on twitter, senator, as you can understand, wikileaks tweeting he has just landed in moscow. edward snowden has just landed in moscow so, he's gone from hong continue and on his way potentially to venezuela, perhaps somewhere else. specifically react to glenn greenwald who says this

administration is criminalizing investigative journalism, criminalizing the release of information that could contribute to a healthy debate about this kind of surveillance, and that snowden is not guilty of espionage. >> well, listen, every president of both political parties' first responsibility is to keep america safe, period, but to do it within the confines of the constitution. that's exactly the debate we're engaged in now. i've ban critic of this bulk collection for years. i've offered amendments in the judiciary committee and on the floor. i believe that it should be restricted. i don't think currently it's serving our nation because it goes way too far. if there's a suspect in the city of washington with some linkage to a terrorist, will we collect the phone records of everyone who makes a phone call in area 202 for five years? if there's a reasonable and specific suspicion, we should go after those who are thought to be complicit in any act that could jeopardize america. having said that, though, this

administration has an awesome responsibility to keep us safe and when it comes to classified information has to take care that we don't jeopardize the lives of americans, our troops, our allies and friends around the world by releasing these sorts of things in a public fashion. >> senator tom coburn, you're following events this morning. how important is it at this juncture to get edward snowden back to the united states so that he can face justice? because what's clear is that he is not only seeking to avoid them but that he plans to stay in hiding and continue to leak information to bolster his own case for being a whistle-blower and not a criminal and to continue to try to press the debate here on this issue. >> well, i don't know that we're going to have a lot to influence that, david. i think the more important thing is what is nsa, how well is it looked at? it's the most oversighted program in the federal

government. i'm known as a pretty good critic of most of the programs of the federal government. i believe that this is a -- well run within the constitutional framework of its guidelines and that we, in fact, if we could talk about everything, which we can't, which is one of the problems with this, americans would be pretty well satisfied. the other thing that i think is, is that if you look at the institutions that are trusted in this country -- and we have a real waning of confidence in the institution of government -- when you look at the scale, congress is on the bot bottom and the u.s. army is on the top. and our military has done a great job running this program within the confines of the program as it was set out in congress. and also, just to counter what senator durbin said, we don't listen to anybody's phone calls.

we don't go and monitor the phone calls until we have a connection with a terrorist. and that's the key point with which you can even go to access this. so it's a whole different story than what has been blown out of proportion of what actually happens. >> congressman, you've been critical of these programs. you heard glenn greenwald saying this morning it's not as targeted as you may think, that the government is, in effect, sucking up information from e-mails and phone calls that goes way, way beyond the patriot act. there have been republicans who have said this, james sensenbrenner, who says it goes beyond the patriot act. how concerned are you? >> as you should show, i have not voted in favor of any patriot act or any of the fisa amendments or anything else that goes with this particularly because i have been concerned in this area. you know, i mean the supreme court has been pretty straightforward about the fourth amendment. they've let it err on the sense of national security. it's the congress actually who

can bring it in, but it's the congress who's actually allowed it to be much broader and have collection happen. and my biggest point is that not everybody in the congress is given access to what is really happening. and so when our american public says, hey, we don't know about this and why are you doing this, i mean, maybe we can't tell everybody in our nation, but you would think 435 members of the house and 100 senators should have access and ability to understand what the nsa is doing, what all the other act sis, intelligence agencies are doing, and actually have a good debate and maybe have to be behind closed doors, but certainly with all deference to our chairman here, he may have information, i doubt he has everything and knows everything, but certainly i am limited even when i ask. >> what about snowden? do you think, as glenn greenwald does, that it's preposterous to charge him with espionage? is that your view? >> clerly under the the laws that the congress has set and

that the supreme court entered prior rulings he has broken the law. i mean, that's where we are. >> you'd like to see him brought to justice here in the united states. >> i am very worried about what else he has and what else he may put out there. i am worried about our national security. >> chairman, let me bring you in on this. senator schumer saying this morning that there's some indication that vladimir putin, president of russia, had advance knowledge of snowden's flight and his travel plans. what are the ramifications of that if it's true? >> you know, it wouldn't surprise me. i don't have information to that effect, but it wouldn't surprise me. putin has been playing a thorn in the world's side in syria. we think they may not be playing honest with their adherence to the nuclear treaty. they're very aggressive around the world trying to regain their influence. they've modernized their nuclear fleet. russia is a country that wants to get back on the world stage and i don't think they care if they do it in the best interest of good citizen around the

world. this shouldn't surprise us. they have an aggressive intelligence operation in the united states. i'm sure they would love to have a little coffee and a few conversations with mr. snowden. that's why this is so serious and why we need to be aggressive in making sure that people understand the difference between somebody who betrays their country and gives secrets away that will protect american lives at the expense of whatever he hopes to gain in the company of the russians, in the company of the chinese intelligence services, in the company of what you can only imagine is cuban and venezuelan intelligence services as well. >> senator durbin, howard dean, a progressive who ran for president, of course, at a time when there were progress i was me meeting out west in the conference, he said something on thursday i want to show and get your reaction to about what the president ought to do. he said i think the american people are willing to give up some privacy in exchange for safety but i think president has to ask our permission. this country works because we are governed with the consent of the governed. i think the american people

support the president but he has to go on television and explain what the program is, why he thinks we need it, and what it has accomplished. do you think the president needs to do more to keep americans on board with what we're doing? >> well, the president's already started that. hae he had the first meeting with the civil liberties oversight board which has that specific responsibility within the federal government. there should be more activity, more statements by the president, and engage the public. to go back to senator coburn's point, i never said that they had access to the conversations, only to the phone records. but it's still a significant piece of information about each of us. david, we live in a world where people are tweeting every random thought that comes into their head and going to facebook every night and diggs closing things about their personal lives. we are sacrificing giving up voluntarily our privacy. the public sector and private second tar gathering information which could limit our privacy. it's time for a national conversation. where should we draw these lines? >> i want to switch gears.

i've just got a couple minutes left. again, i appreciate you all bearing with me the fact this breaking news has come up. senator coburn, let me get your views on immigration at a critical time as we're heading toward the vote, as the senate is move ong this, the house will take it up, what do you think in the end we'll end up with, if anything, on immigration reform? >> well, my hope would be that we have a cogent border security plan, that we solve the difficulty of those living in the shadows, that they can come out, and that we don't ask the american people to trust us but we actually put out a cogent plan that actually solves the problem. border with walls but also with doors, much like reagan had espoused, and a way where we continue this grand experiment where we have a mix of everybody coming here to better their families, better our kcountry, and secure and enhance both their freedom and ours. >> congresswoman, is whatever's

being debated on terms of border security in the senate, is it enough to affect what's going to happen in the house? if you look at the experience of the farm bill here, are you going to be able to overcome conservative opposition to pathway to citizenship to get reform? >> that's really speaker boehner's job to get his votes out of his conference. but i believe if you're going to look at $30 million br into border security, i mean, that's not been put aside, this whole issue of border security, because we'll have the money to do that. the whole issue that's it's an economic drain, we just found out this week, hey, it's about $900 billion in the positive. i believe from three standpoints we need to get it done and now is the time. we need to get it done from a homeland security perspective, it's better for our economy, and because it's about traditional american family values, keeping our families together. these are families that are deacons in our church, pta moms, little league coaches.

they are part of our american fabric already. >> all right. we're going to leave it there. again, i appreciate it. other topics i wanted to cover including the economy and more on immigration, but we've run out of time especially with this snowden news. thank you, all. look forward to having you back on soon. we'll come back here with our political roundtable. been a rough ride for the president of late. these controversies surrounding the irs and obviously the nsa surveillance stories just to name a few. and we're only five months past the inauguration. is his second term now starting to slip away? we're going to talk about the politics with our roundtable, former press secretary for the president robert gibbs, republican strategist mike murphy, the democratic mayor of atlanta, kasim reed, former chair and ceo of hp, carly fiorina, and nbc's chief white house correspondent and political director chuck todd as well. coming back right after this. look at them kids. [ sigh ]

they have no idea what it was like before u-verse high speed internet. yeah, you couldn't just stream movies to a device like that. one time, i had to wait half a day to watch a movie. you watched movies?! i was lucky if i could watch a show. show?! man, i was happy to see a sneezing panda clip! trevor, have you eaten today? you sound a little grumpy. [ laughter ] [ male announcer ] connect all your wi-fi-enabled devices with u-verse high speed internet. rethink possible.

the president's approval rating takes a dip, and speaker john boehner suffers a surprising defeat this week. coming up, the leadership challenges for both men as washington prepares to take on one of the biggest issues yet, immigration reform. plus, are we closer to being able to use one of these on flights during takeoff and landing? we'll talk about it with our roundtable after this brief commercial break. now it's

we are back with all this breaking news about edward snowden with our roundtable. former white house press

secretary, now political contributor robert gibbs, republican strategist mike murphy, the democratic mayor of atlanta kasim reed, former chair and ceo of hewlett-packard, carly fiorina, and our nbc news political director and chief white house correspondent, chuck todd. welcome to all of you. chuck, this is something of an embarrassment and certainly a concern for this administration that thought it had an extradition -- an agreement worked out. >> it is. when you're hearing pit peete's reporting about what happened and this political back-and-ft. worth hong kong, clearly the u.s. government has to figure out is there going to be retribution against hong kong, what is the fallout over that? and let's not pretend now he's this moscow, he's not coming back anytime soon. and the ability to get that done, i saw first hand this relationship between the united states and russia specifically between president obama and president putin, it's cheap to say it's cold war-like, but it's cold. it is a relationship that is chilly. so the idea that somehow

moscow's going to be cooperative with the united states and the u.s. government wants that, it's not going to happen. in many ways, putin always looks for little ways he can stick a thumb in the u.s. government's eyes and this is a way to do it. >> robert gibbs, you've been in the middle of these delicate situations before when you were inside the white house. not a lot of great options right now. >> no. >> you have somebody perhaps going to a place it would be difficult to get him from and who is working with journalists like glenn greenwald and others to put out information that will continue to shed light on these programs and push the debate. >> yeah. there's no question these are a lot of bad options. as chuck said, i don't think landing in havana or caracas is going to increase our likelihood that mr. snowden will be flying on a government plane back to the united states anytime soon. i think to build off of what senator durbin said, i think, you know, it is incumbent upon this administration and this white house to have a more robust conversation about these programs. i don't know that this is a huge debate that's taking place

outside of the beltway, but it is obviously one this morning that's raising inside the beltway and a greater discussion as much as you can about transparency and about what these programs are and what they aren't. i will say you lisen of the coverage and you would think we had literally millions and millions of fbi agents listening to every single call that every single american is making. that's simply not true. having that discussion actively with the american people is an important thing to do. >> part of the tactics of this and part of the debate is frankly around journalism. glenn greenwald referenced it when i asked him a question about whether he should or will face charges, which has been raised. i want to acknowledge there is a debate on twit they're goes on online about this even as we're speaking. here's what greenwald tweeted after his appearance this morning. who needs the government to try to criminalize journalism when you have david gregory to do it? i want to directly take that on because this is the problem for someone who claims to be a journalist, objecting to a journalist raising a question which is not actually embracing

any particular point of view. that's part of the tick ticks of the debate here when, in fact, lawmakers have questioned him, there's a question about his role in this, "the guardian's" role in all of this. it is actually part of the debate. rather than going after the questioner, he could take on the issues and had an opportunity do that here on "meet the press." what is journalism, mike murphy, and what is appropriate is actually part of this debate. >> absolutely. the great irony to me in all this is so-called whistle-blowers can only go to almost rogue nations to hide, because then with rule of law, he would get extradited. he's a felony and a fugitive. it's a bad sign from hong kong with its own system of law. that's up in smoke today and will have repercussions in our relationship with the chinese. so we'll see what happens. he may wind up on the run in caracas, but it's clear he's a felony and a fauj tif and he will not have a good life now. >> kasim reed, mayor of atlanta, you're outside the beltway dealing with issues like the economy and government regulation and implement take of

obama care. you heard it from glenn greenwald this morning and are hearing it from edward snowden, they want to keep a debate athrive get people focused on what they believe is not just controversial but actual abuse. >> well, here's where we are. what we know is we have a president that wants to have a path for law-abiding citizens to be removed from this process. all these members of congress, put a bill on the floor. all the chatter and debate we've been listening to can be addressed by putting a bill on the floor. but the reason people won't put a bill on the floor is because with that bill would come responsibility. and the fact of the matter is both presidents, bush and obama, have done a pretty significant job, strong job of keeping this country safe. if you're a house member or senator that puts a bill on the floor to address these issues, you know what, you're going to own it. >> right. >> and if thu yao think of how the country felt on the day of the boston bombings, that horrific incident, amplify that times 20 or 50, which are the

number of terrorist incidents that we have been able to instrument because of these kind of programs. so they need to be reined in, but these folks making these commentary from the cheap seats should put a bill on the floor. >> carly fiorina, you know, i think it's important because what congress has failed to do is actually have the gut to have a debate. if you want to debate these things, then don't pass the patriot act in perpetuity. don't give the president authority to wage a military campaign without coming back and saying, hey, maybe we ought to review this. but mike, who ran the nsa, was on last week, and he made the point these programs cannot operate in the dark. they have to be politically sustainable. here's what he said last week. >> i think it's living in this kind of a democracy we're going to have to be a little bit less effective in order to be a little more transparent to get to do anything to defend the american people. >> your thoughts. >> well, mike hayden was a great nsa leader and he's a great friend, and i agree with both him and the mayor. i think there is a moment of the

opportunity here. when we get past the specific of edward snowden, there is a moment of bipartisan opportunity to step back and say, how is it that we should be holding these vast complicated agencies accountable? i actually think the irs and the nsa scandal have something in common. whatever you think, you don't need to think the president politically mote valted the irs and you don't need to be against the nsa program to raise the profound question of when you have such vast bureaucracies. how do we hold them accountable? how does congress meet its oversight responsibility? how do the american people come to trust government again knowing that big bureaucracies actually are held in check somehow and we have a bayway wa determining that the people working in them are not abusing power but are ethical. that's an important debate. >> chuck, the glenn greenwald issue and the debate under way

this morning. >> there is a culture of transparency. we live with it now, this culture of are social media. government institutions have been slow to respond. i think when the country changes culturally government should respond to the cultural change in the country and when it comes to transparency and to what the government's doing, how much information we as a governed people expect to have, we expect to have more information, not less. we expect this. so i think this is the case with the president in particular, but congress has also failed to respond to the country culturally. this issue of journalism and whistle-blowers, i'm hesitant. on one hand, i do think that the justice department was overbearing on what they did with a number of these folks, what they did with the associated press and snowden. i've had people who are uncomfortable having phone conversations now with different sources, even on the smallest of levels. so in that respect i understand

the skittishness on the other hand. on the other hand, you know, glenn greenwald, you know, how much was he involved in the plot? it's one thing as a source, but what was his role -- did he have a role beyond simply being a receiver of this information? and is he going to have to answer those questions? there is a point of law. he's a lawyer. he attacked the premise of your question. he didn't answer it. >> two big points to this. one, it's never been easier in human history to be a whistle-blower than now. so there's a legitimate path there. the other point people have to understand -- >> i disagree. the path within government stinks. it is not a protected path. >> we disagree on that. the digital world has changed everything. the internet is an incredible tool for outlaws and terrorists. it's not surprising the security for the state is trying to compete with that. sending your cat photo around the world in a nanosecond changes everything online.

government is struggling with how to not let that be a free channel for bad people to use as a tool and on the other hand not be ubiquitous in shattering privacy. >> robert, one of the things chuck wrote about this morning was the notion of being leaderless in washington. one of the struggles for the leader of the government, the president, is finding his voice on this. he has spoken but rather cryptally about the utility of these programs and his view about it. is that a problem? >> well, one, it is hard to talk about these programs without being in some ways cryptic because, as you heard michael hayden talk about, the more transparency that we give -- and we do need to give a necessary amount in order to sustain these programs politically and in public opinion -- but you have to be careful as to not just talk about what mike talked about, which is give terrorists basically the playbook for how we're monitoring their communications. but, you know, i think it is important to have this debate. we do have to have something

that in the end comes out of this that is politically sust n sustainable. and you saw it beginning this week with the current head of the nsa talking about the plots that have been disrupted. i do think, again, an honest conversation about what is and what isn't being collected so that, like i said, i don't turn on the tv and i hear people talk about literally there must be the millions and millions of fbi agents that are listening to every single phone call in this country. not only is that -- >> be responsible -- >> not only is that -- right. not only is that not happening it's incapable of happening. >> i do think one of the reasons it's important to step back and kind of begin to talk about some of these profound questions, distrust is created when people can't square the circle. so on the one handle you hear people say, oh, we've disrupted 50 terrorist plots, and on the other hand boston happens, we were warned about this person twice, and yet somehow that occurred. and we know that terrorists get on the internet all the time and

get a how-to book to do all kinds of things. soy think people are having trouble reconciling what appears to be a lot of oversight with something like boston. and in the end, as we all know, it's human nature. if you don't know something, you assume the worst. american people have woken up to the fact that they don't know a whole lot about what government is involved in. >> let me -- >> -- in five days. >> but they also kill and wounded many. >> absolutely, but over ten-year period i would take the hand that the united states has had and the diligence that law enforcement has displayed since 9/11 and it is essential to americans that when something terrible like that hams those individuals this be brought to justice. all of these measures were necessary as it relates to -- >> let me -- i've got to get a break in here. i want to come back with our roundtable, talk about the immigration fight. also another big story this weekend, paula deen. her apology.

what it means fo so what did you think of the house? it's got a great kitchen, but did you see the school rating? oh, you're right. hey babe, i got to go. bye daddy! ...but what about when my parents visit? ok. i just love this one... and it's next to a park i love it i love it too. here's our new house... daddy! you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. zillow

we have a live picture from moscow. a media spectacle there as the flight that's believed to have edward snowden on it is being greeted by people waiting for the flight but also journalists as this will be an evolving story about snowden's arrival in moscow, where he eventually goes, and one that will be getting a lot of attention as we move forward. chuck todd asked the other question that will be getting a lot of attention moving forward, what's happening on capitol hill

this week over immigration and whether, in fact, reform is really at hand and what we end up up with in the end? >> i have been one of these people that said don't be part of this chatter that it won't get through the house and once the senate gets 70-plus votes its will get through. watching speak boehner bring a bill, the entire leadership bring a bill to the floor they thought they had the votes for and they couldn't do it, and it goes through this point you were bringing up with robert, which is i saw the president overseas essentially neutered, inability to do much on syria, not -- there isn't this sense of urgency, how do you get russia to move off its support of assad, sort of this stalemate that's going there, inability to use the platform leader of the free world there, watching the speaker of the house totally not being able to lead, makes you wonder how does immigration get the through? the senate is working. senate's a lonely, tiny little body that seems to be working with some sort of diligence here. they'll get something through. i still think they get 70, 57

votes. i'm no longer believing it can get through the house. >> lindsey graham on this program last week, mike, wurz sayingitis a death spiral for gop if they don't get reform done. but there are a lot of people in the house who might be willing to take him on on that. >> yeah. no, i've been a fanatic for this issue far long time, huge supporter of immigration reform and the bill is loaded up with this border surge, a political maneuver and an expensive one, to try to get it through the conservative wing in the house saying it's dicey. i'm hoping it passes because i'm tired of watching democratic inaugurations in washington, but it could very well fail. >> leaving aside the irony that to get conservatives to support immigration reform we should double the size of a government bureaucracy in the border patrol, but i do think one of the things that mike and many republicans that are supportive of this are going to have to face is the reality of if this dies in the house with this huge amount of border security in it, they're going to have really tough conversations with latinos and hispanics about what this

party stands for, do they really want people to -- >> i just want to get mayor reed in on something with paula deen. again, abrupt switching of gears, but a big story this weekend. paula deen of course the food channel has dropped her, aapologizing for using the "n" word in the pass, a debacle here. from your home state, what do you make of this? >> well, one, i want to remind folks that if the president hadn't been re-elected we wouldn't be having a debate about immigration. we'd be on to something else. so i don't think he's been neutered. regarding paula deen, i think it's very unfortunate. what she's basically said is she used language from her childhood and growing up in the past, but we all have to change. so i think folks will be hearing what she hz to say over the next few weeks. i think she has apologized. she'll continue to do that. i think she has apologized. she'll [ female announcer ] your smile... every day you stain it... and stain it...

and stain it. so every day, use crest 3d white toothpaste to remove up to 90% of surface stains in just 5 days. no wonder crest 3d white is the number one whitening brand. after all, every day counts. life opens up when you do. to rock a whiter smile in just two days, use these products together.

that is all for today. i want to thank everybody very much. you can watch this week's press pass conversation with economist and author jeffrey sachs on hs z new book "to move the world" about john f. kennedy.

here we go. i'm going to take you on a ride. >> stunts too insane to believe. >> it's just crazy. that must be fake. >> do not try this at home. >> i would like maybe to crash this car. >> animals acting like humans. >> not once does the bear hit himself in the face. that's really impressive. >> it's impossible not to join in. >> and pranks that push the limit. >> it took my breath away. >> we were both really scared. >> i'm like, oh, this is bad. >> millions of clicks, but what is the truth? >> you sort g