we have updates on the situation in egypt today and testimony in the george zimmerman case. first the fight over abortion rights has moved to north caroli carolina. >> the truth will set you free, but first, it will piss you off. >> surprise republican sneak attack in north carolina. >> anti-abortion bill. >> the effects of this bill will close clinics. >> enslavement and domination of me and my body and uterus. >> shame shame shame. >> a surprise move against abortion rights. >> medical misinformation, bad public policy. >> this bill does not merit debate on this floor.

>> and the process that got it here is not worthy of this body. >> a bill to ban shariah law. >> wrapped with a faux patriotic title. >> designed to shut down as many clinics as possible. >> because they don't have enough parking spaces or awning doesn't meet a certain standard. >> a woman or man should care about the issue. >> my faith and values are strong and valid and important and legitimate as yours are. >> they're hiding what they're doing. >> north carolina republicans may have picked themselves a serious fight. >> going to get out of town before the public can react. >> that crowd is going to descend on you. >> not the church, not the state, women must decide our fate. >> republicans in texas, ohio and now north carolina are trying to pass legislation that would shut down abortion clinics.

today the republican-led north carolina senate passed this bill, the family faith and freedom protection act, not one democrat voted for the bill. the bill reads no qualified health plan offered through an exchange and operating within this state shall include coverage for abortion services. the physician providing any drug or chemical for the purpose of inducing an abortion shall be physically present in the same room as the patient when the drug or chemical is administered. the department of health and human services rules shall ensure that standards for the clinic's certified for the performance of abortions are similar to those for the licensesure of ambulatory surgical centers. opponents say the bill would shut down all but one abortion clinic in the state. a senate committee added the abortion amendments to a bill banning shariah law late last night to limit debate on these

measures. this was the scene at the north carolina legislative building after the vote. the bill now heads to the desk of republican house speaker tom tillis who has announced a run for u.s. senate. if he wins the nomination his opponent will be democratic senator kay hagan who will join me in a moment. senator hagen's colleague in the senate marco rubio has agreed to be the lead sponsor of a senate bill that bans abortions 20 weeks after conception, according to the weekly standard, but a rubio adviser tells "the washington post" today, the pro life groups have asked him to introduce the bill in the senate he had not made a final decision before leaving on a family vacation this week. i expect an announcement when he gets back to d.c. next week. joining me kay hagan and msnbc's

joy reid. senator hagan what would this bill mean to the women of north carolina if it becomes law? >> well if this is a health care bill about women i am glad any state legislature in raleigh is not my doctor. when i look at what the leadership and the general assembly is doing, under a sneak attack, they put forward -- they forced a sweeping anti-women's health care bill that -- with no public notice, no transparency and that doesn't pass a public scrutiny test in north carolina. those are not the values that we hold. this is certainly a distraction. what we've got to be focused on in north carolina, everybody tells me, the number one issue is jobs and the economy. and what is our general assembly do? it once again right before a holiday weekend, with no public notice, no transparency, this is

the kind of legislation they put forward. they have been working on anti-middle class legislation, anti-women and anti-voter rights and it is wrong, it is not the values in north carolina. >> joy reid, do you get the sense there's a kind of cross-border corruption among the states taking these actions this week? >> absolutely, lawrence. when you look at what's happening in texas and ohio and north carolina, i sort of see the hidden hand of a group called americans united for life. doing research before the segment an and while the national right to life committee would like to see marco rubio sponsor that legislation nationally they get a lot more ink but americans united for life is a bill mill. they are legislation writing factory. write model legislation that really sounds very similar it to the bill in texas, very similar to the provisions here, similar to the provisions in ohio. what probably happened here is that the legislatures in north carolina looked at what's happening in texas and other states where women are fighting

these laws, where they're fighting these bills, coming out and protesting and where it's becoming national news, and they decided to make the world's most ironic sneak attack. i'm sure these legislatures couldn't tell you what shariah law is but what they think it is is what they're doing in these bills imposing a religious dictate on women. >> this issue came up in the governor's campaign debate when he was running. let's listen to how governor pat mckroiry handled this question what he would do in a situation like this, when it came up in a debate. >> if you're elected governor what further restrictions on abortion would you agree to sign? i'll start with you? >> none. >> senator kay hagan you rarely hear one word answers in political debates. that was a pretty solid and clear answer. >> well, i think just like distractions taking place in ohio and texas and now in north

carolina, i don't think people have learned about what took place in the 2012 election. women want to make their own decisions. women listen and when women's access to preventative health care and treatment is being brought in a sneak attack like what occurred last night in raleigh, they pay attention. women vote and women vote with their feet which means they work the -- in the grassroots, they work the polls, work phone banks. i don't think this is what people in north carolina want to be discussing and i think we need to go back to looking at the real issues and that's jobs and the economy. >> senator, what are the prospects for this bill, given that the governor said in the campaign that he would not sign such a bill and your potential opponent tom tillis in the house of representatives there, do you expect him to bring it up in the house of representatives and get it passed there? >> you know, lawrence, we'll have to wait and see. once again, when -- under the

sneak attack yesterday before a holiday weekend with no notice, i think this is the wrong way to put forward legislation. we'll have to see what happens in the house. and the governor in north carolina, a law can still be passed without his signature. he doesn't have to do anything. so i am concerned. >> i see. joy reid, there's real pressure on marco rubio now, when he returns from vacation. >> yeah. the idea would be that this would be a palate cleanser from his being an apost state of the republican base on immigration. this would be a chance for him to rehabilitate himself with the far right. we are looking at model legislation, model where the anti-abortion movement is trying to provoke potentially a supreme court showdown by going state to state to state and passing very similar bills and i guarantee you, lawrence, if you ask legislatures what's in these bills they probably don't know, because it's model legislation. there was a story in texas the

two sponsors of the texas bill when asked by their colleagues couldn't explain what was in the bill. these things are dangerous because they spread so quickly wherever there is a republican governor or legislature and that could provoke a challenge in the supreme court that the proponents hope will overturn roe v. wade nationally. marco rubio will be tempted to take on this issue because of the pressure put on him from immigration. >> senator hagan if marco rubio introduced a bill in the united states senate to limit abortion to 20 weeks, what will happen? >> you know, once again, i think we've got to be focused on jobs and the economy. when we go back next week we've got to take immediate action to be sure that our students' debt doesn't double. right now it's gone from 3.4% to 6.8%. that's what people are telling me. we need to work on and have a focus. when i think about a bunch of men sitting in raleigh debating how wide a hallway should be in a women's health care clinic i

think that is totally absurd. >> joy reid, harry reid has said that he would not bring up such a bill. it looks like it wouldn't have any real chance of getting through the senate. >> yeah. it wouldn't. clearly it wouldn't. these are the kind of bills that take place in the house where they do this over and over again. if marco rubio were to introduce it, to go back to your question, ted cruz would introduce a bill one upping him trying to ban abortion throughout the country. this is about getting right with the base of the republican party on the national level, these guys know that these kind of bills won't pass. they know that they don't stand the smell test nationally but they know they can provoke it in the states. i think marco rubio again, if he wants to run for president, is going to be very tempted to embrace this issue as a way to push back on those who say he's not conservative enough because of immigration. >> senator kay hagan, thank you for joining us on this important story about your state and joy reid thanks for joining us

tonight. >> coming up, it was "csi" day today in the george zimmerman trial. forensic scientist larry is here to discuss the dna and ballistics evidence heard in court and we'll get the latest from egypt where president morsi is out. and the military is in control. "i'm part of an american success story," "that starts with one of the world's most advanced distribution systems," "and one of the most efficient trucking networks," "with safe, experienced drivers." "we work directly with manufacturers," "eliminating costly markups," "and buy directly from local farmers in every region of the country." "when you see our low prices, remember the wheels turning behind the scenes, delivering for millions of americans, everyday. "dedication: that's the real walmart"

a tea party group doesn't think that senate minority leader mitch mcconnell can beat his democratic rival. matt hoskins of the senate conservative fund told "the washington post," mitch mcconnell is now the least electable republican senator. running for re-election in 2014. he could lose this race and cost republicans the majority. he needs to consider whether it might be time to hang it up. the senate conservatives fund is a political action committee launched by former republican senator jim demint.

up next, why the obama administration has announced a one-year delay in implementation of one of the mandates in the affordable care act, ezra klein will explain.

yesterday, the obama administration decided to release very big news in a way it never has before. simply by placing an announcement on the treasury department's website. we have listened to your feedback and we are taking action. the administration is announcing that it will provide an additional year before the

affordable care act, mandatory employer and insurer reporting requirements begin. that was the obama administration deciding to delay for a year the implementation of the obama care mandate on employers providing health insurance. now, you might think that republican opponents of obama care who want to see the legislation never go into effect would cheer the administration for delaying at least part of the law's implementation. but, big surprise. they didn't cheer. >> well, if he can just delay obama care what else can be delayed that he doesn't like? what is the reason we go through the legislative process if when it is all over the president can pick and choose what he is going to allow, and what he is not going to allow. what he is going to permit and what he isn't going to permit. what he is going to implement. what he isn't going to

implement. why even go through the legislative process? you know, we -- we thought egypt was a country in trouble. obama just cancelled the game. he didn't want obama care to play out so he cancelled it for now. he will play the game, we'll go back to it when he has got the congress in his back pocket. then he will reschedule the game. i mean, folks this is the stuff of banana republics. laws have no meaning. >> to explain all of this is ezra klein, editor of "the washington post" blog. and an msnbc policy analyst. ezra, what is going on here? why did the administration slip this out on the treasury website, do it so quietly, it seems like a very significant change?

>> i am not sure i can explain the limbaugh comments. i can try to explain the policy here. they have this part of the bill that says if you're an employer that has more than 50 employees and you don't offer health insurance, you have to pay a penalty between $2,000 and $3,000 for every employee over 30 employees. so it is a little bit complicated. it is worth saying in the history of these things, this is a very small ask of employers. when richard nixon put forward his health care bill he wanted employers to pay 75% of the costs. when bill clinton put forward his, it was 80% from bigger employers. this is a small fraction of health care only for those that don't provide and only about 10,000 firms employing about 1% to 2% of the work force. this is the part of the bill, though, that gets the most dangerous criticism for the obama administration because one thing it actually does do, is because it focuses on this 50 employee cutoff, it gives employers who are right around the number 50, a reason to have

fewer full-time workers, gives them a reason either not to hire or to cut hours. and so on the one hand, the reporting they got, how many workers they have and how many are full-time is complicated and on the other the stories coming out of it are very bad for them. they made a decision, this is where limbaugh has a little point, that they were just going to not enforce the penalties for a year and they say that is to streamline the reporting process and make it easier. i think a lot of people think it's for political reasons. it's not a huge deal for the bill, but it is a very big political change in the bill because it takes away republicans thought was going to be their best weapon against it, the stories of employers struggling with the bill and maybe firing people. >> i know this particular provision is not a favorite of yours in the bill, it isn't of mine either because there's so many ways to manipulate it including making full-time employees not full time, which just means 30 hours or less, there's just so many manipulations to get around it. and then there's also the financial

possibility that a company would look at this and say you know what, i would rather pay a fine of $2,000 per employee than actually pay for health insurance for those employees at $5,000 a head or something like that. >> $16,000 a head. the average employer based plan $16,000. i agree, i don't like this part of the bill. i think i'm more radical than you on this. i don't like employers being involved in health care at all. i don't think it should be working this way. what i do think is the case that you need to pick which world you're in. the world we're moving into is not a great one. if you're going to keep employers at the center of the american health care you need to ask them to do something. what we're doing for a year we're at the center and not asking very much of them. # in the long run i would love to see if this gets repealed entirely and a much better way of doing it or with a more aggressive plan. this is where you get into why the obama administration did it

the way they did it. the republican party thinks there are all of these things wrong with obama care. what they will not do under any circumstance is improve under any of them. even if they agree on what's wrong. they want it to collapse, so they won't do anything to help it. so you have situations where the obama administration, instead of being able to go to congress and say okay, you guys didn't like this part of the plan. we don't like it or we don't think it is working that well. let's change it. the only option they have -- i'm not saying it's a great one -- in this case they told the irs don't enforce the penalty on these employers for at least one year. i don't think that's a great way to run a railroad. but on the other hand i don't think it's great the way we structure the legislative process we can't make the system any better because republicans are hoping on an issue where they have already lost, it is already law, they can essentially try to get the law repealed simply by making it work very, very poorly no matter how many people get hurt along the way. >> yeah, it used to be if the

one side passed a bill and a few years down the road there were problems with it that both sides agreed there was a problem, they would work together to fix that thing to make it at least better, but you're right, there's no real legislative hope for that kind of good sense these days. ezra klein, thank you very much for joining us tonight. >> thank you. coming up, an emergency meeting at the white house with egypt once again under military control. that is next. and later, it was a day of ballistics and dna evidence in the second-degree murder trial of george zimmerman. or by phone the day it's due. got a witness to verify that? just you. you called me. ok, that checks out. at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card with payment flexibility.

♪ honey, is he too into this car thing? [ mumbling ] definitely the quattro. ♪ honey? huh? a5. what? [ sighs ] did you say something? ♪

egypt's revolution is still in the spotlight tonight, egypt. after more than two years of uncertainty, the story of egypt's revolution is still being written tonight. in cairo's tahrir square, thousands of people were celebrating after it was announced that the country's military removed president mohamed morsi from power and

suspended the constitution. nbc news has learned that president morsi and most of the members of his presidential team are now under house arrest. nbc's richard engel is in cairo with more, richard? >> reporter: good evening, lawrence, from a very noisy very boisterous tahrir square, some people calling what has happened today a coup. that is certainly the way the now ousted president mohamed morsi is describing the situation. in fact, in his own statement he said, quote, a revolution has been taken from us. but here in tahrir square, they have not calling this a coup. in fact, they are saying what has happened today was the army intervened at the people's request for change. just watch, and listen. it is the cry of millions of egyptians, an outpouring of joy and relief that a weight has been lifted from their shoulders. the end of an experiment in political islam gone wrong. >> i am crying because i'm so happy.

so happy we get rid of them. >> we are now free, egypt, out of the muslim process. >> reporter: a re-set button pushed once again in egyptian politics but proy tests and -- by protests and ultimately the military. tonight helicopters into over tahrir square dropping flags. egyptians lit them up with lasers, thanking them for driving out president morsi who they say claim neglected the needs of the people while in power. make no mistake, these celebrations are not against islam or even islam and politics but against morsi and the muslim brotherhood for using religion to win votes and then governing badly. the celebrations were triggered by this highly anticipated outrage. -- announcement. the army chief on national television outlining a road map. morsi out, the constitution suspended the head of the constitutional court, the new

president, only until early elections. the army stressed it doesn't want to run egypt. but can it be believed? and what about morsi and their supporters? they're calling this a naked coup, and a front to islam, a plot by israel and america. they're furious. the army has deployed armored vehicles to contain them, but they are armed. and some could start an insurgency. back in tahrir square, back with the winners, what about democracy? is a military intervention really what they wanted? no, but they say it was the only choice to fix the mistake they don't want to repeat. but lawrence, while the scene here appears very boisterous, celebratory and positive, there are deep concerns about what will happen next. in fact, the u.s. embassy which was located at the back of tahrir square, has ordered the evacuation of all nonemergency

personnel and their families and telling u.s. citizens living in egypt to leave. lawrence? >> >> richard engel, thank you. joining me now is bams dor dennis ross, former envoy to the middle east to former president clinton and assistant to president obama. he is now a cons lor for the washington institute for nears east policy. embassy ross, is this a positive step in the right direction for egypt at this point? >> you know, it is a very difficult question to answer. if you look at the scenes that we were just watching there is very little doubt that i think a very significant part of egyptian population feels that this was a necessary course correction. many of the people who are out there celebrating now were also a year ago celebrating the election of president morsi. it is not that they don't want democracy, it is that they feel in a sense the revolution was hijacked by president morsi and the muslim brotherhood. and they didn't necessarily want the military to be once again intervening but they felt they

had no choice. they isn't see much of a recourse. the question is, is the military going to come in and preside over a transition that really does permit political change and institutions to develop or will, in fact, they play the kind of role they did immediately after mubarak. my guess is, they don't want to play much of a role politically because they didn't do very well at the last time they tried. also, i think they look at the economic situation in egypt and know that it's going to be very difficult to produce anything positive any time soon. but i do think they intervened in no small part because they felt the country was on the road to collapse. you had the defense minister who is the one responsible for leading this intervention, warning over the last couple of months that if something was not done to create greater stability within egypt there was a dark tunnel that the military had to prevent from unfolding. and they would do so.

their ultimatum of two days ago was again, one last chance for president morsi to find a way to be more inclusive and not have a an approach to governance that was entirely governed and shaped by the desire to have control and not to share power. so i think there's a potential here for something positive, but there's enormous uncertainty right now. we have to see how the muslim brotherhood responds to this. they have failed in terms of governing. the question is, do they decide to try to mobilize their own support and react with force or do they decide to bite their time if it's the latter there may be some potential to move in a more stabilizing direction. >> president obama put on a statement tonight saying he is concerned by the decision of the egyptian armed forces to remove president morsi as an elected president. he says i now call on the egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible.

what would you be advising president obama tonight? >> well, i think the main thing i would be advising is to stick to that line. keep a focus on general principles, which are in fact, one, create a basis for drafting a constitution that in fact, can be much more inclusive. one of the problems that morsi created was that he basically tried to issue a decree where he ruled out any judicial oversight. he rushed through a referendum to ensure that a very narrow body dominated by islamist could draft a new constitution. so i would be focusing on one, drafting a new constitution, two, setting a date for new elections, three create a technocratic government that would focus on the immediate needs to address the fundamental economic problems. and also try to restore security and law and order. i think if we could emphasize those kinds of principles, and if the military was appointing

this kind of technocratic interim government, we would be on a better track and we would also be consistent with where i think most egyptian people are. one of the problems we face is more and more of those out in the street somehow felt that the united states was supporting the muslim brotherhood. that's not a position we needed to be in or wanted to be in. >> ambassador ross, thanks for joining us on this historic night for egypt. >> my pleasure. >> coming up, did george zimmerman lie to sean hannity. that was one of the questions, as well as the forensic evidence in the case.

attention. chris christie threatened to use a new jersey word on national television at the republican national convention if he didn't get enough attention. "the washington post" dan ball writes in his new book "collision 2012" that the program director wanted to cut chris christie's introduction video to save time for the convention. christie replied, ask the director if he had ever heard anyone say the "f" word on live television because that's what

he was about to do if the video didn't run. the convention director ran the christie video. coming up next, the interview with sean hannity has come back to haunt him this week. r? i would say my car. probably the car. cause as you get older you start breaking down. i love my car. i want to take care of it. i have a bad wheel - i must say. my car is running quite well. keep your car healthy with the works. $29.95 or less after $10 mail-in rebate at your participating ford dealer. so you gotta take care of yourself? yes you do. you gotta take care of your baby? oh yeah! with the bounce dryer bar, my clothes will be fresh out of the drawer for weeks. and it's great when things last a long time. well...most things. [ male announcer ] how do you get your bounce? [ woman ] can't regret fresh.

>> a lot of this case legally has to do with stand your ground. # you've heard a lot about it. and i'm just curious, prior to this night, this incident, had you even heard stand your ground? >> no, sir. >> you had never heard about it before? >> no. >> wow. >> that video was shown yesterday in the trial of george zimmerman. then today, the man who taught george zimmerman about the stand your ground law testified. >> i wanted to teach the class from a practical standpoint where these students can really relate and take something from it and apply it to their own lives. you know, with florida and other states they have what is called

the stand your ground law which evolved from the castle doctrine through case law. >> and did you cover that specifically? >> yes. >> did you discuss specifically self-defense and stand your ground laws in the connection of violent crimes such as murder? >> yes. >> that was alexis carter who taught a course in criminal law, at seminole state college where one of his students was george zimmerman. >> and actually, do you remember what kind of grade you gave him? >> i gave him an "a". you always kind of remember your smartest student, or the one that stood out the most. the one that probably was not the best student. and he was probably one of the better students in the class. >> joining me now, faith jenkins, a former criminal prosecutor, and gary casimir, a former new york city prosecutor

who handles criminal and civil litigation now. faith, the jury now knows what george zimmerman looks like when he is not telling the truth. that sean hannity tape, his response clearly is not the truth. as his -- the guy who taught him about self-defense and stand your ground law proved today. >> right, and that interview is going to be so crucial. the prosecutors are going to play that portion in their closing statements. it's not what he said, the fact that he lied, it's how he said it. he looked right at sean hannity, looked him right in the eye with his attorney sitting next to him, the entire nation watching and his demeanor is the same as it is when he's giving these statements telling his recounting of events of the night he shot and killed trayvon martin. he does not flinch for a second when he looks him in the eye and obviously did not tell the truth. he said he never heard of stand your ground, and then his professor testified that he went over this law numerous times in his class

because he wanted the students to understand the practical impact of this law. it was a clear and bold lie. >> and it is obviously something that george zimmerman understood since he got an "a" in the class. gary, sean hannity says wow, after george zimmerman says no, because it is a surprising answer. and an important answer to a good question by sean hannity. and also in saying wow, it kind of gives the person you're talking to a chance to amend what they're saying. >> sure. >> he could have said, well, i mean i knew a little bit about it or we talked about it in class once but i'm not an expert on it. >> right, i think what you're going to have is the defense team trying to explain that the self defense course, maybe they didn't use the stand your ground terminology. it is part of the self-defense law, an affirmative defense. maybe what they will try to do is the way it's being described it wasn't taught to him that way. regardless of that, though, the

question becomes, what do the facts present themselves? the effect of knowing the stand your ground law, does it change the circumstance or facts that happened? i don't think it will. the defense will say that didn't change the facts of what happened today. >> no. that means he didn't have to lie about it, but he chose to anyway. if he's going to lie about the small things because he thinks he can get away with it, he can lie about the big things. >> the prosecution is going to present that, but the jury will end up deciding what happened that night. you saw a lot of things here. a guy going to school to try to be a better quote/unquote wannabe cop. that's a rarity. the prosecution is bringing this guy out, trying to suggest oh, he is a bad guy because he is taking classes? i don't know if that's going to sell to the jury. >> no, he is an over-zealous neighborhood watch guy, he is taking these classes, wants to be a kopds and failed, but he's still trying to pursue that endeavor through neighborhood

watch. he was driving and carrying a loaded gun as well. >> i guess the question becomes, does that make you a bad person? does that make you -- you want to be a cop? you are a wannabe person? you're watching? or did he do it on his own or go to class, get as? i don't think they're going to reject him or the idea to make him into a bad person because he went to school. >> this testimony brought in a -- brought an opportunity for kind of a larger discussion of self-defense law, since there was an expert in it on the stand. i want to show what prosecutor richard manti brought out, about what they call imperfect self-defense, where you use, in effect, too much self-defense, too much power in yourself defense. let's listen to how this exchange went. >> when i'm talking about when it comes to imperfect self-defense is a situation where you do not meet the force

that -- the force that you are encountering, you meet that force disproportionately. it's -- it's excessive force. >> so i guess then the ultimate level of force in these scenarios is deadly? >> deadly force. >> like a gunshot. >> like a gunshot. >> faith jenkins, that seems to be what this case is all about. once that encounter was under way between trayvon martin and george zimmerman, what was the proper amount of force to use? >> right, and george zimmerman was -- is arguing deadly force was necessary. and the prosecutors are countering that argument with based on everything we know about george zimmerman, his attitude towards trayvon, before he ever knew him, ever saw him, the fact that he called him a punk, an a-hole, thought had he was a suspect, he was inclined to overreact. he was inclined to be the

initial aggressor in this situation. and he had his gun and it was loaded and ready to be fired. >> i think there are two different things though. when going in this direction as a prosecutor you have to be careful. you can't say on one side he's a depraved indifference murderer, second degree, and then say he was in a fight and dwroefr reacted. -- overreacted. those are two different allegations and result in very different sentences. if the prosecution is changing course, it's a sign they may be losing this case. that's not a great move. >> faith, if the jury were to go for a lesser charge in terms of a conviction, do you think it is a -- i mean, gary seems to be saying there could be a very high risk in the prosecution overcharging at this stage of the case. >> i don't think the prosecutor overcharged here with second-degree murder based on the statements that george zimmerman said about trayvon and assuming that he was committing a crime when he was just walking down the street. and referring to him as if he was a part of a group, these

people, multiple times, putting him in a category with other people that he saw in the neighborhood that he thought was suspicious and they always got away. so trayvon was not going to get away. now in hindsight, after trayvon martin is killed, everyone learned he was not doing anything wrong. that's why they charged him with second-degree murder and that's understandable. it is a high threshold. i think there's a possibility they're going to ask for a manslaughter charge. and there could be a compromised verdict. that's what happens in a lot of these cases. >> if they charged him simply because he used "f" punk or was a watchman that thought certain people committed crimes or looked a certain way, it's not enough. they got to do more than that. >> it's a depraved mind, mindset. >> not enough. not enough. >> faith and gary, thanks for joining us again tonight. >> thank you. coming up next, the forensics in the case, so far including the dna evidence on the gun. we're at the legendary southfork ranch in dallas for a cookout with world champion grill master brett galloway. he's serving his guests walmart choice premium steaks.

but they don't know it yet. they will. it's a steak-over. steak was excellent. very tender. melts in your mouth. it was delicious. tonight you are eating walmart steak. what???!! good steak. two thumbs up? look, i ate all of mine. it matches any good steakhouse if not better. walmart choice premium steak in the black package. it's 100% money back guaranteed. try it for your next backyard barbecue.

a new study by the government accountability office, the gao, found out they're paying a slightly smaller percentage in their taxes than middle class americans pay in their taxes. corporations pay on average a 12.6% tax rate, the effective tax rate for american workers making $65,500 is now just a bit higher than that at 12.7%.

the actual corporate tax rate is 35%. big corporations pay less than the lowest tax rate. mitt romney admitted to paying 13.6%. up next, the forensic evidence in the george zimmerman case. i think farmers care more about the land than probably anyone else. we've had this farm for 30 years. we raise black and red angus cattle. we also produce natural gas. that's how we make our living and that's how we can pass the land and water back to future generations. people should make up their own mind what's best for them. all i can say is it has worked well for us.

the ones getting involved and staying engaged. they're not afraid to question the path they're on. because the one question they never want to ask is "how did i end up here?" i started schwab for those people. people who want to take ownership of their investments, like they do in every other aspect of their lives.

>> what did you find distance-wise when you conducted the test with this particular sweatshi sweatshirt? >> this was consistent with residue and physical effects of a contact shot. >> so again, evidencing that the end of the gun was against the material when it was fired? >> yes. >> all right. >> that was firearms expert amy siewert on the stand today

testifying about how close george zimmerman's gun was to trayvon martin's chest when george zimmerman fired the gun. it was a day in which the forensic testimony wasn't as much about the dna that was found as it was about the dna that wasn't found. the dna analyst for the state, anthony gorgon, told the court that gun did not show dna that matched trayvon martin. he also said that he could not find george zimmerman's dna under trayvon martin's fingernails, or on the cuffs of his hooded sweatshirt. the defense tried to suggest the evidence was compromised. on don west's cross-examination the dna analyst testified about the condition of trayvon martin's hooded sweatshirt, which he said was wet, smelled like mold and ammonia and had been put in a plastic biohazard bag instead of a brown paper bag. >> ideally, yes, you would like

to air dry anything you collect, especially items of clothing that are wet, you would like to air dry them before you package them. and on top of that, you know, we encourage our agencies not to put things into plastic bags, because they don't allow the evidence to breathe and that will trap in any kind of moisture. >> and that would be a red flag to you as an analyst that there's something going on with this evidence that places the biological evidence at a risk of degradation? >> correct. >> joining me now is forensic scientist, larry kobilinsky, chairman of the science department at the john j. college of criminal justice. larry, what do you make of that last point about the potential degradation? >> i think mr. gorgon is absolutely correct. biological material has to be kept dry and cold. if you seal a piece of evidence in a plastic container, moisture is present and any kind of bacteria or fungi will grow.

of course these kinds of organisms have enzymes that will break down dna. you can lose evidence, valuable information, by storing it the wrong way. >> but that applies to the sweatshirt. it doesn't apply to trayvon martin's fingernails where there was none of george zimmerman's dna, do you consider that a major finding? >> no, i really don't. i've worked on many cases, looking at fing ernail scrapings in a post-mortem setting. and almost always, you find no foreign dna. now i have it to add something very important here, the results that we're hearing about on the gun and other dna testing where they failed to find somebody's dna that's because the testing that is used in this laboratory in florida, is the normal pcr testing. in new york city, they do a high sensitivity testing which could have provided different results. i'm not saying anything is wrong

with the results that they got but it might explain failure to get any dna where it actually exists. >> well, larry, when they didn't find the dna using the standard level of testing on a case this important does it surprise you that they didn't reach for that higher level of analysis? >> that is a very good question. they happened to use it in new york city. the fbi does not favor this kind of high sensitivity testing. but there is a lot of research going on. it has been validated. it has gone through the courts in new york. and it is what is considered to be a reliable technique. >> now, of course, arguing the other way here, had there been the presence of any trayvon martin dna on the gun, this case would be in a very different posture tonight? >> i think that is correct. you know, finding foreign dna on an object, you have got to reconstruct the dna, that would

explain the fact that he not only reached for the gun, but touched the gun. then you would have to explain that, how did it get there. that would substantiate the story that trayvon martin not only reached for the gun, but actually touched the gun. >> they spent a fair amount of time today with the ballistics witness, the defense did, trying to talk about how close the gun was, whether it was jammed into trayvon martin's body or not, and she simply testified that her testimony is simply that the gun was touching trayvon martin's clothing. and she didn't distinguish as to whether it was jammed in there, or not so hardly pushed in there. do you think there was any significance to that? >> no, i think i saw the evidence that she put forward. the gunshot residue patterns. clearly it was a contact shot. the autopsy showed that it was not. that it was a shot from an

intermediate distance. and i think it was explainable. it was a contact shot. >> dr. kobilinsky, thank you very much for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> "morning joe" is up next. welcome to "morning joe." hope everybody had a great fourth of july holiday. and the question we're posing this morning, perfect timing actually, what if we had the ability to pull together the best traits of certain presidents to buy yonically manufacture the ideal president. >> buy yonically. >> we can make them better, rebuild them. >> take all of the good parts of all of them. we've assembled another all-star panel of presidential historians to help us build the perfect president. joining us rice university professor and author of "the reagan diaries" and