mayo? corn dogs? you are so outta here! aah! [ female announcer ] the complete balanced nutrition of great-tasting ensure. 24 vitamins and minerals, antioxidants, and 9 grams of protein. [ bottle ] ensure®. nutrition in charge™. 7.1 million americans and counting. in our next hour we have new reporting on everything that's happening in the investigation of the christie administration. but we begin the morning with a bemplg mark week in health care

reform. if this was supposed to be the work that republicans gave up the ghost on repealing obamacare, it doesn't work out that way. the courthouse said they exceeded their goal of getting 7 million americans to sign up for health care. president obama time-outed that big accomplishment, sent a clear message to the law's opponents. >> the debate over repealing this law is over. the affordable care act is here to stay. >> well what just days later the house voted for the 55th time to scale back some or all of obamacare. republicans were joined by 18 democrats in an effort to raise the hours. the redumeanwhile the house committee on oversight and gof reform was hosting a hearing. and then there was louisiana

governor bobby again dal who revealed his own plan of sorts. >> i'm certainly for repealing the obamacare law but i think we need to show the american people we've got a better plan to lower health care costs and do what the president promised he was going to do in 2008. >> his plan includes turning medicaid into a block grant program for the states, allowing health coverage to be sold across state lines and introducing premium support for private plans into medicare. he was using the opposition to the affordable care act to jump start his 2016 run, the republicans were debuting their latest attack ads on health reform. >> lee has never supported obamacare and never will. in washington, lee will fight to cut taxes, repeal and replace obamacare and create jobs.

>> many hispanics are concerned about obamacare. it was supposed to help but instead over 200 million jobs. >> senator graham introduced the bill for the right of americans to opt out of the health care. >> i called to stop fighting obamacare is one call i'll never answer. >> while republicans were banging the drum for appeal, the obama administration announced that another 3 million americans had signed up for insurance through medicaid. medicare enrollment surged dramatically in states that expanded the program. the administration said the numbers could continue to grow as they got in updated figures. this is not to mention the 3 million young adults who gained insurance by staying or their parents' plans. the white house exceeded goals for signing up americans for

private health insurance through the fade rale exchanges. while we learned that another 300 million poor americans have gotten insurance, well all of that happened this week, none of it seemed to have any effect on the republican party's unyielding opposition to the law, which is just like every other previous benchmark the affordable act cleared. no matter what happens on the ground, the politics never quite budge. the republicans repeal obamacare battle krau cry never seems to end. it wasn't over in 2010, now over four years ago. it with wasn't over now that the supreme court ruled the law constitutional in 2012. it wasn't over after that election in 2012 when president obama ran on the affordable care act and won reelection. it wasn't over that november when nancy pelosi said when people see what's in the bill

they will like it. it wasn't over this week when the administration learned they had met their enrollment target. >> this law is doing what it's supposed to do. it's working. it's helping people from coast to coast. all of which makes the links to which critics have gone to scare people or undermine the law or try to repeal the law without offering any plausible alternative so hard to understand. i got to admit, i don't get it. >> there's a disconnect between the republicans and the law. the question is how many people oppose this law because they oppose him even without necessarily knowing what's actually in the law. that's why this issue more than any other has galvanized the republican base for four years now. with the gop learning into a low turnout election in which they need their base, they don't seem

ready to let it go now. here's what critics of the law were saying this week. >> i think they're cooking the books on this. >> i actually think the white house is straight up lying about these numbers. they're saying 7 million people signed up on the website that was broken for the last nine months. >> can we believe the 7 million number. >> how about young man i talked to last week out in california whose premiums doubled and his copays and deductibles tripled and his wife's hours got cut to 29 hours. >> the question now is how long can republicans continue their quest to kill the law. when did the affordable care act become an established law. >> we've got guests here to discuss this, michael steel, the former chairman of the roc and the coho host of msnbc's' "the

cycle." i can think of no better person to start with after an introduction like this. i was trying to think of what the perfect first question to ask you. i'll start with this one. we played that montage there on fox news. you don't think anything like that is going on. you accept the 7 million number. >> i accept the 7 million number. i want to see what's behind the number. i want to see how many people paid and how many people are of a certain category, they're older ore younger or sicker or healthier. all of that is going to drive what the premiums are going to be some september and october of this year when the insurance companies come around and say here's your bill. i get the sort of 7 million, bad number, it's not a real number, they're cooking the books. that's for the base, that's to get folk to stay engaged in the conversation. the polls ticked up and said 49%

as opposed to the 30% of the people support the law. it's gaining momentum as people have come into the system. that's a new reality for the party. >> what does that do for the party. i've seen projections that by 2014 the number could double, will quadruple by 2017. >> my friends on the left are focusing on the number that's out there on the big screen. it's the numbers behind the big number that are going to drive the success or failure of obamacare. if you have more sick people in the system than well people, if you have more older people than younger people, this collapses in on itself because the whole thing is premised upon having those folks pay these new premium amounts that they otherwise weren't paying. that's the reality for me. i can get behind a whole lot of the noise but it's fun sometimes. but at the end of the day, the

administration is still going to have to own up -- as i've said before, i wasn't worried about the website. that was great fodder. when we have actual patients, that's when the weight of balk care comes to fruition for me. >> we have two national reporters here. i wonder if either of you this week -- we just played some clips of thing this week. we have all of the ads being run against balm kairs. listening to republicans in washington, d.c., did either of you pick up on any change in the republican thinking on this, hey, we have to account for 7 million plus 3 million, this can't just be repeal, repeal, repeal. does this change the politics for them at all? >> immediately going into november they still have to appeal to the base, do the votes, say obamacare is going to really hurt people. but i think privately behind the

scenes there are republicans who are kind of looking at this saying, all right, it's the law, a lot of our constituents are going to benefit from it. we need the administration to help us at this point. and i think we saw that with a few republicans appealing to the administration to kind of help with some enrollment things in different districts, you're not going to hear the hard core conservatives come out and say, you know what, 7 million people, great. but i think most of them are starting to think, all right, now what do we do. how do we move forward. >> it's an interesting thing. this has been the story to me, the pig story, the politics of obamacare. you take this poll, a national poll from the end of march do you support or oppose the health care law passed by barack obama. 41% support.

the same question, do support or oppose the federal law? one way i look at this, even in this thing called the affordable care health, the federal health care law is starting to deliver actual signup numbers, the thing called obamacare may be separate in people's minds. >> it's a classic political problem here. you have the reality and the perception. and in republican politics among the base, obamacare is no good, terrible, awful and nothing, almost nothing that happens on the ground in reality is going to change that. the problem for the republicans that want to soften their stance is they're going to immediately open themselves up for attacks. >> moderate virginia republican. >> right. so this is -- this has been going on for months. any time republicans put a little bit of daylight between the full repeal stance and

themselves, they're going to get attacked from the right. i think it's going to continue through this election. it's a stand in for obama and for everything that republicans hate about democrats and obama. >> really all of the opposition to obamacare isn't so much about the law and the details and is it really going to work in reality. it's a fundamental opposition to government involvement in health care. so even though, you know, a lot of the rhetoric was around the fact that it's not going to work and there's going to be a death spiral, the real opposition is to the president himself and a fund ment fund meant tan aye etiological. those voices on the right who have an opposition are going to be isolated. think as a political strategy where you're going to be a

smaller e leg turn turning out, it can be effective for this year. past that they got to move on. >> i want to pick up what alex was saying, too, just about the name obama, and what that does to the republican base. it's consistently done for the past five years. >> drives us mad. >> how cass the republican party ever sort of just accept legitimacy with something with his name in it. we'll talk about that after this bre bre break. chinese state media has put out a tweet indicating that a chinese ship taking part in today's search effort has detected a pulse signal in the south indian ocean. we have no confirmation this is linked to flight 370 at this point. chinese media also reports that the chinese airport plane over the area spotted many white plane objects for 20 minutes.

we'll continue to monitor the situation and bring you the details as soon as they're available. we'll be right back after this. [ female announcer ] who are we? we are the thinkers. the job jugglers. the up all-nighters. and the ones who turn ideas into action. we've made our passions our life's work. we strive for the moments where we can say, "i did it!" ♪ we are entrepreneurs who started it all... with a signature. legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses, turning dreamers into business owners. and we're here to help start yours.

how much money do you think you'll need when you retire? then we gave each person a ribbon to show how many years that amount might last. i was trying to, like, pull it a little further. [ woman ] got me to 70 years old. i'm going to have to rethink this thing. it's hard to imagine how much we'll need for a retirement that could last 30 years or more. so maybe we need to approach things differently, if we want to be ready for a longer retirement. ♪ crest 3d white whitestrips vs. a whitening pen. i feel like my lips are going to, like, wash it off. these fit nicely. [ female announcer ] crest 3d white whitestrips keep the whitening ingredient in place, guaranteeing professional level results. crest whitestrips. the way to whiten.

7.1 million americans have signed up for obamacare. now i want to go to my doctor's office, there will be 7.1 million people in the waiting room ahead of me. >> so michael steel, i sort of started to set this up in the last block. i guess what i'm curious about, long term, what is the way out of this for the republican party. if obamacare is something that's going to be become part of the safety net in the country, do you change it this way or that way but the basic structure stays in place. you've got all of these millions of people enrolled now, the idea of repeal is getting more remote by the day. what is it going to take to get the republican party -- we're

hearing it this week still, no way is this settled, we're still going to repeal it, bobby jindal, repeal it. >> i think it's ultimate failure on the repeal. >> haven't we had enough failure on the repeal? >> no, you haven't. this is why. because you've only had one chamber of the house, of the government voting on it. so the battle for the senate is the next line for the repeal effort. >> yeah, but the president would never allow that to happen. >> follow the bouncing ball. so you get the senate, so then you've got now republican control. the repeal effort comes up, we know obama is not going to sign a law to take away his signature piece of legislation. >> think of it logically. >> it has to be that has to be -- >> again, we're talking about these numbers.

these numbers could start to grow very quickly. we're talking 7 million enrolled by now, 3 million medicaid. could you imagine a republican running a campaign, if 20 million are enrolled, can a rep run -- >> you're talking about a number that doesn't mean anything. because the bottom line is people's experience already in the system is not a good one. >> i understand that. >> i'm just giving you the calculation going forward in how this thing plays itself out. just because you hear or just because you're giving me 7 million people, 20 million people. yeah, but if the experience of 13 million of that 20 million is a bad experience, that gives momentum to the impetus to repeal down the road. so the battle cry goes on until 2016. >> so you think this is a good idea in. >> i didn't say it was a good idea. i'm all for repealing obamacare because iz was against it from the beginning.

i think principally to your earlier point, the government has no spice here. there are other ways in which this issue of getting insurance to 30 million people out of 230 million at that time or 300 million could have been done without upending the economy. >> suppose for one second, though -- i'll take your point. nobody has the crystal ball, so to speak. i don't know why that -- that really did just come out. nobody can see what this is going to be like in 2016. we heard all of the dire predictions they're never going to get to 7 million. they got to 7 million. and we don't know if you get to 15 or 20 million by 2016. but suppose, i think we can certain i put on the table it's a very real possibility that we'll be in a presidential election year, going to be 20 million people signed up and by and large the satisfaction will be good.

can the republican party run an election in that era? >> yes. my estimation, given what i know and who i've talked to, this fight is going to be in play until we get to the battle for the white house with the idea being the ultimate move, you got the house, the senate and the white house and then the repeal issue becomes very much more -- >> i think the piece of analysis that what you're saying missing -- i don't doubt that republicans may think that and try to do that. but the battle that has been lost webb used to have this question of whether we should have universal health care, whether that is a worthy goal, whether everyone deserves the right to have quality health care. that argument is over. and we know it's over because you see people like bobby jindal saying here's my alternative. even though he doesn't cover as many people, the goal has now become how can we extend health care to the largest number of

folk. that battle has been lost. >> that wasn't really ever the question. >> it was a question. >> to the republicans it was. >> no. i think part of the other issue is that the health care system has been transformed. and so what republicans are going to need to do in 2016 is go back to the insurance companies, back to the doctors and say, hey, we're going to go through this again and you are not going to see the level of industry support. they just went through this four years ago. they have changed. they have transformed that. they've worked on what their premiums are going to be. and i just don't see them wanting to go through -- >> there is that reality of look, the democrat base, sort of the hard core left base has wanted sing payer. and what this ended up being was market friendly insurance company, friendly plan. it's something that the insurance companies probably can live with it. what you're saying is true.

once it's on the books that becomes traumatic for them to change it. let's talk about the politics of this for 2014 and 2016. i've been hearing from democrats that it's going turn into a political winner for them. but we're looking at 2014 and we're looking of projections that republicans could take back the senate, probably going to pick up seats in thousand. for all of the good news we're talking about in terms of implementation, republicans make gains in the house and the senate. where does that leave them in. >> you could have an unusual situation with obamacare helps democrats and republicans. the numbers were up this week and most of that was driven by democrats coming back home, a lot of them were disillusioned by obama, and then especially once the website broke, but now coming back into the fold. i think the main audience that the white house is pushing for is democrats.

and of course in this election that's their key audience. they need independents, sure but they need to get the democrats to the polls because of the dropoff you have every time in midterm elections. if they can get the base excited about defending obamacare, then it could help them significantly. at the same time that it could help get republican to the polls. >> it will be interesting to see how that plays out. because it's the promise i've been hearing from democrats now and i'm still waiting to see it happen. thanks to crystal ball, we will see both of you later in the show for something very special. but before that, two important developments in the christie administration. before that, what happens next? cut!

[bell rings] this...is jane. her long day on set starts with shoulder pain... ...and a choice take 6 tylenol in a day which is 2 aleve for... ...all day relief. hmm. [bell ring] "roll sound!" "action!" (agent) i understand. (dad) we've never sold a house before. (agent) i'll walk you guys through every step. (dad) so if we sell, do you think we can swing it? (agent) i have the numbers right here and based on the comps that i've found, the timing is perfect. ...there's a lot of buyers for a house like yours. (dad) that's good to know. (mom) i'm so excited.

[ girl ] my mom, she makes underwater fans that are powered by the moon. ♪ she can print amazing things, right from her computer. [ whirring ] [ train whistle blows ] she makes trains that are friends with trees. ♪ my mom works at ge. ♪ meet shaun mccutchen. he's an electrical engineer who started a business in birmingham, alabama. what he like to do with his

money is to donate a lot of the to political campaigns, so much that he felt the rerestrictions imposed by the federal government on how much money an individual is allowed to give. so as a result, he sued the federal government, the federal election commission for what he believed was the constitutional right to give money to lots more candidates that currently rules allow. the supreme court weighed in and ruled in his favor. on wednesday, a jart of the justices ruled to strike down some of the limits on campaign contribution caps. abc established what are called base limits. mccutchen didn't dispute that in his lawsuit. the caps, the basic contribution caps stay in place. there are still bay limits that you can give to one party or group. but they also set a ceiling on how much an individual could give during a particular

campaign cycle. now almost $49,000 to candidates combin combined. those are called aggregate limits. now donors can give to as many candidates as they want, can max out to as many as they want. five justices in the majority decided there is no corruption in that. the majority narrowly defined corruption as quote, the quid pro quo bribery fielded in the gilda page. decision came only four days after presumptive presidential candidates traveled to las vegas. before he left las vegas, governor chris christie was forced to apologize for using the term occupied territories.

that casino owner gave $93 million to republican affiliated super pacs in the last presidential election. now thanks to mccutchen he has the option of giving millions more to the can dats, parties and pacs themselves. the justice felt so strongly on the decision, he said, taken together with citizens united today's hold e vis rates or nation's campaign laws. taken together what will citizens united and mccutchen lead to next? joining me now from providence, rhode island is sheldon white house and here at the table we have senior reporter andy and

buzzfeed's kate is still with us as is michael steel. i want to start with you to explain to people exactly what happened this week. it gets confusing. t shaun mccutchen was giving check to campaigns and basically the aggregate limit meant he could give to 28 candidates. if it's okay to give to 28, why can't i give to 29. can you explain what the answer to that was and what the significance of this ruling really is? >> sure. if you go back to the post slaughter gait gate era there's a supreme court decision, 1976. this decision is almost the bedrock of what the supreme court says about money, politics and keeping corruption out of our electoral system. and the court said not only is it important that we set a limit on how much me as a donor can

give you a candidate but they also said how many of those donations i can spread around the table. they said there is a real interest, the corruption or the appearance of corruption when you do that. we need to set that ceiling on how many, whether it's $1776 donations or 2,000 that you're spreading around. that is what he said and that is what the supreme court court this week struck down and say no, it's still important that one on one interaction with us, you can do that to as many people as you possibly want every election season. >> let me bring senator white house in. you had harsh words about this ruling this week. let me ask you this way. we live in an era of super pacs. we live with that reality. so when we're living in a world like that, when you look at a

guy like shaun mccutchen who is cutting cuts for $1776 is it a huge blow to the system if we can give that to 60 candidates now instead of 28 when you've got billionaires oubt there that can throw in as much as they want own independent campaigns? >> in the wake of citizen's united which is truly one of the god awful decisions that any supreme court ever rendered, mccutchen doesn't look as bad by care pair son. it's only in light of what is probably one of the worst decisions that the supreme court ever made that mccutchen diminishes in its evil effects and in its bad theory. so i mean ultimately, is the handful of people who hit their personal limit being able to bust through the personal limits itself going to be an enormous deal? no. but this is anned a-on to citizens united and it continues

in the direction that this activist five republican block on the court is determined to go down to align political pow near this country with financial wealth. and i think if they are able to perfect the alignment of political power with financial wealth in this country, we'll say very bad thing about our democracy. if you look at the craft of the decisions, they're very poorly done and citizens united is proven absolutely dead wrong in some of its assertions. it's a lousy area for the court to be involved in. they've done a very bad job of it. the outcome has been unhealthy and yet they seemed determined to proceed. mccutchen is an extra blow after citizens united. >> i was part of the lawsuit when i was chairman, yeah. >> what senator white house is saying there is what i'm hearing from a lot of people.

they're sort of saying yeah, in and of itself this ruling isn't a huge deal in context but the question is sort of the direction the court is going right now. for instance this week you had clarence thomas saying not only should the cap be done away with, the aggregate limit but all limits, all of the spending limits imposed by the decision in 1976 should go away. anyone should be able to give any amount of money to a campaign that they want. do you think that's a problem if that's where we're going? >> i do. i do have a problem with the level of money that's being placed into the political system and the distortion of that system in many respects. but having said that, up have also been from day one, a believer that money is speech. it is property that i can use to express an opinion, how i feel about an issue by supporting you. the limits are in place, $2600. the fact that i can give $2600 to 100 people i don't distorts

the system as greatly as, you know, my writing a $20 million check into one cam bane or on one issue necessarily. but again, it is part of the evolution of this. and i understand all of this, you know, highbrow disdain on the left. but then remember, then can date barack obama who was this, you know, champion of reform in the system bucked the system. mccain took the public funding -- >> the federal matches funds. >> i sit back and go really? you kind of lose sight of the fact that the champion on this on the left turned a blind eye to the system itself that was created to prevent all of this corruption and now find thepss trying to catch up in the corrupt process to get as much fun money on the table as possible. that's the problem here. so now everyone is racing to the dollar. my bottom line is this. disclose. just tell me you are. if i write a check for a dollar or a million dollars within a

24-hour period, have the campaign, the donor, the party publicly disclose that money, the amount, where you're from and the background, that's the piece of the case that was missing. remember, the democrats rushed this bill that is the core of the citizens united case through the congress back in 2009. and that's how we got here. they didn't put that one little kicker in there. >> and i hear that argument. right. >> all this crying about this sheldon, you know, just back it up. tell sheldon disclose the money. just tell, you know, the guys out in hollywood stroking big tax disclose it. >> and i think i've heard that argument too. i want to get senator white house in weigh in and i want to ask kate what's going on on capitol hill if there's going to be any response to this or could be any response to this. we'll pick it up right after this. we still run into problems. namely, other humans.

which is why, at liberty mutual insurance, auto policies come with new car replacement and accident forgiveness if you qualify. see what else comes standard at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? ♪ you have to let me know [ female announcer ] when sweet and salty come together, the taste is irresistible. sweet and salty nut bars by nature valley. nature at its most delicious.

reckless seeding. a backyard invasion. enter homeowner, and ortho weed b gon max. kills weeds without harming innocent lawns. guaranteed. ortho weed b gon max. get order. get ortho®. this in itself is a small

step but it's another step on the road to the political system that the supreme court is headed down. they wish to dismantle all limits on giving piece by piece until we are back to the days of the robber barons when anyone or anything could give unlimited money, undiscloesd and make our political system seem so rigged that everyone will lose interest in your democracy. >> senator chuck schumer hours after this week'g ruling. kate, just talking about the idea of disclosure. we're talking about mccutcheon but we's also talking about citizen's united, what we're really talking about is the influx of massive money that's come into the system and is only going to be accelerate in the next couple of years. given the reality on capitol hill right now, is there any kind of consensus that could

potentially exist between the parties on the interest of disclosure? >> i don't know if you've been paying attention to capitol hill. >> nothing changed this week. >> no, nothing changed this week. sure, there are the people -- assuming that's the case and there's going to be no legislative remedy to any of this, just what the supreme court says goes and the system is going to develop around that, i assume that means one party thinks it has an advantage mplg i don't think one side thinks it has the advantage or the other. i do see them hopping immediately into the cash race, right now people heading into the mid terms are going to be calling their big donors. the committees are going to be getting on the phone with all of the people who maxed out. he's see how much we can get now and then maybe we'll suggest disclosure after the election. i don't see it at this point,

it's like we're too far down the road in terms of not having a disclosure to suggest it. people are so scared about the amount of money coming in. i mean a vulnerable candidate has to raise millions of dollars and this just meebs they can go and pick up the phone and raise more. the person with the cash advantage often has the advantage in the election. >> well, yeah. >> it's hard to want to say i'm going to give that up. >> incumbents usually gets the cash advantage. >> senator white house to bring you back in, you were getting at it a minute ago, potentially one of the significant pieces of the ruling it sets up the next ruling, gets to what clearance thomas was talking about where maybe there'll be another case in front of the court that will say you can give as much to any campaign as you want. in the last segment we had the argument that money is speech.

i wonder from a philosophical point, if someone has a million dollars and want to give $500,000 to a congressional client. why don't they have or shouldn't they have the constitutional right to do that? >> let me start by getting back into the disclosure conversation that you all just had. because although mccutcheon probably falls relatively evenly or at least it's hard to tell how that falls between the parties, citizens united clearly was a massive gift to the republican party and i was at that point that the bipartisan issue of disclosure became partisan. and well over a dozen republican senators who had publicly spoken out in favor of disclosure, written up eds in favor of disclosure, been really out there on disclosure backed' way and said, who me?

they all voted against my disclosure bill. so that's the problem. it is partisan. it's because citizen united creates it and i think that we're not going to get a disclosure bill until there's enough demeanor money that it comes more into balance and the republicans are no longer seeing the kind of political advantage that induces them to walk away from positions that they had publicly held for years. as to the second question, if you've got a billionaire who wants to give $500 million out, the problem is that there are a lot of other people in this democracy too. if you end up in a democracy in which the billionaires own all of the air waves, all of the messages and all of the candidates, then everybody else is frozen out of it. so yeah, the billionaire has a first amendment right but the person who doesn't have a billion dollars has a first amendment right too. and to have their voice so drown

out is something that's bad for our democracy and wrong and constitutionally something that congress is capable of regulating and should regulate. indeed, that was the constitutional law of the land until the activist group of five republican judges overruled the precedent and decided to ep up the flood gates for corporate money. >> the point that senator white house is making about the incentives to get the republicans behind the idea of disclosure. if democrats can mobilize, if democrat millionaires can mobilize, does that get a bipartisan consensus for disclosure? is that what's missing here? >> i think it would help. i wish republicans would see the merits of discloe hur out of the merits of disclosure and not self pra vegas. >> good luck with that. >> all members of congress care about getting reelected. the republican side, especially with mitch mcconnell, a fervent

opponent of any kind of campaign finance in charge, republicans in the senate and the house they're not going to see the interest, there's not going to be the push to get behind -- i will say there is one senator who has been somewhat active on this and that would be lisa mer cow ski. she's been talking about some kind of disclosure bill. she's seen the light on it. but there are so many of her fellow republicans in both chambers who don't see the upside. >> that's one and you need dozens. we're at the end. i want to thank sheldon white house for joining us. another update now. chinese state media has put out a tweet indicating that a dhie knees ship has detected a pulse signal in the south ind yags

ocean. american officials are aware of the information and looking into it but so far they too cannot confirm the authenticity of the reports. they also said that a chinese plane over the area spotted many white objects for about 20 minutes. taking photos. we'll continue to monitor the story and bring you the information as it becomes available to us. we'll be right back. okay, listen up! i'm re-workin' the menu.

mayo? corn dogs? you are so outta here! aah! [ female announcer ] the complete balanced nutrition of great-tasting ensure. 24 vitamins and minerals, antioxidants, and 9 grams of protein. [ bottle ] ensure®. nutrition in charge™. became big business overnight? ♪ like, really big... then expanded? ♪ or their new product tanked?

♪ or not? what if they embrace new technology instead? ♪ imagine a company's future with the future of trading. company profile. a research tool on thinkorswim. from td ameritrade. as a police officer, i've helped many people in the last 23 years, but i needed help in quitting smoking. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix varenicline is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced the urge for me to smoke. it actually caught me by surprise. [ male announcer ] some people had changes in behavior, thinking, or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of mental-health problems, which could get worse while taking chantix. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you develop these, stop chantix and see your doctor right away, as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have a history

of heart or blood-vessel problems or if you develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping, and unusual dreams. i did not know what it was like to be a nonsmoker, but i do now. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. according to the supreme court, the only kind of corruption that matters is the narrowest possible top hatted man hands a bag of money labeled money for bribe to a liberal fat cat while the american public stands behind them bearing a barrel. >> john stewart this week. i prematurely dismissed michael steel. we're going to keep him around for one more block. senator white house basically said republicans have kind of pulled a fast one when it comes

to the issue of disclosure. you were talking about your desire. he's basically saying they were for it for years, mitch mcconnell was saying let's have the money, make sure you put a night on it. now in the wake of citizen united republicans are saying no, we're not interested in it anymore. >> to protect their high-end donors who don't want to be disclosed. that needs to be the great equalizer. >> but you do sort of now just -- the republicans did do a strategic shift. >> of course they did. you said it right. it's a strategic shift. they understood. that doesn't make it right or smart politics ultimately either for the party. you need to deal with the reality that people want to know who's writing the checks. i think a lot of the big noise in this debate goes away when you have full exposure and disclosure so that people know exactly where the dollar is

coming in. in the state of virginia, that's the way their system is set up there. you don't have the same level of concern about it. there were some other issues that came up but that had nothing to do with the physical dollar contribution. that was something else. but at the end of the day, the reality is you write the check, you fully disclose the money donated to the pub luck and the public decides whether or not that's an appropriate relationship and they won't support or will support. >> actually they're yelling at me again. it's time to go. sorry we ran out time on this one. a little disorganized. i apologize. want to thank michael steel for coming in. still ahead, some christie reporting of our own. that's coming right pup. stay with us. 've learned is my philosophy is real simple american express open forum is an on-line community, that helps our members connect and share ideas to make smart business decisions.

if you mess up, fess up. be your partners best partner. we built it for our members, but it's open for everyone. there's not one way to do something. no details too small. american express open forum. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. if you have a business idea, we have a personalized legal solution that's right for you. with easy step-by-step guidance, we're here to help you turn your dream into a reality. start your business today with legalzoom. how much money do you think you'll need when you retire? then we gave each person a ribbon to show how many years that amount might last. i was trying to, like, pull it a little further. [ woman ] got me to 70 years old. i'm going to have to rethink this thing. it's hard to imagine how much we'll need for a retirement that could last 30 years or more. so maybe we need to approach things differently, if we want to be ready for a longer retirement. ♪

marge: you know, there's for a more enjoyableent. way to get your fiber. try phillips fiber good gummies. they're delicious, and a good source of fiber to help support regularity. wife: mmmm husband: these are good! marge: the tasty side of fiber. from phillips.

the grand jury moves ahead into the investigation of the christie investigation.

but first another update on the search for the missing malaysian airlines passenger jet. the chinese media put out a tweet indicating that a chinese ship taking part in today's search effort detected a pulse signal in the south indian ocean but we have no confirmation this is linked by flight 370 at this point. they also report that a chinese plane over the area spotted many white objects for 20 minutes and took photos for examination. we're going to continue to monitor the situation, bring you more information as it becomes available and be right back. scotts wraps each seed in a brilliant coating that feeds, protects, and holds in moisture. so growing thicker, healthier grass is easier - even if you miss a day of watering. now let's spread your newfound knowledge! get scotts turf builder grass seed with water smart plus. it's guaranteed. seed your lawn. seed it! anncr: to keep your new grass growing strong, feed it with scotts starter food for new grass.

afghanistan, in 2009. orbiting the moon in 1971. [ male announcer ] once it's earned, usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection. and because usaa's commitment to serve current and former military members and their families is without equal. begin your legacy. get an auto insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve. to roll out a perfectly flaky crust that's made from scratch. or mix vegetables with all white meat chicken and homemade gravy. but marie callender's does. just sit down and savor. marie callender's. it's time to savor. just sit down and savor. (mom) when our little girl was we got a subaru. it's where she said her first word. (little girl) no! saw her first day of school. (little girl) bye bye! made a best friend forever. the back seat of my subaru

is where she grew up. what? (announcer) the 2015 subaru forester (girl) what? (announcer) built to be there for your family. love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru. when folks in the lower 48 think athey think salmon and energy.a, but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. thousands of people here in alaska are working to safely produce more energy. but that's just the start. to produce more from existing wells, we need advanced technology. that means hi-tech jobs in california and colorado. the oil moves through one of the world's largest pipelines. maintaining it means manufacturing jobs in the midwest. then we transport it with 4 state-of-the-art, double-hull tankers. some of the safest, most advanced ships in the world: built in san diego with a $1 billion investment. across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs.

and no energy company invests more in the u.s. than bp. when we set up operation in one part of the country, people in other parts go to work. that's not a coincidence. it's one more part of our commitment to america. suddenly you're a mouthbreather. well, put on a breathe right strip and instantly open your nose up to 38% more than cold medicines alone. so you can breathe and sleep. shut your mouth and sleep right. breathe right. in just a few minutes we'll have some new reporting about one of the latest fade rale subpoenas in chris christie's administration threatened sandy aid over the development project in the city of hoboken. but we're going to start this

hour with last night's breaking news about the bridge gate. we learned of a major new development yesterday. this is chris christie's long term prez secretary. and the grand jury started to hear information in the investigation. >> are you aware of when the grand jury began hearing testimony in this mat center. >> vi no information about that. as i said we're hear because we were subpoenaed to be here today and we're required to cooperate and that's what we're doing. >> does mike have any information about governor christie's -- >> i'm not going to comment to anything with respect to that. we're here to answer questions and that's what michael did today. >> after he answered questions yesterday, abc news characterized this news as confirmation that the preliminary inquiry into the governor's office has become a criminal investigation. it's not clear that that's

actually what's happened here. we've already known that a federal grand jury was involved in this investigation was subpoenas has been issued for people to submit documents. abc seems to be saying that a new federal grand jury has been appointed. if that's true, that would be enormous. seems more likely that the one grand jury that has already been looking into the matter is the one that michael testified in front of on friday morning. while we don't know for sure, that alone would be an important new development in this story as well. to talk about this i want to bring in brian thompson from wnbc, state assembly woman, halle. brian, just on the news -- i'm curious how you interpret this. what we do know is that michael was in the federal courthouse in

newark for a few hours yesterday talking to a grand jury. what do you make of this in. >> talking with people last night, you get the impression what really is going on here is that this is a just the next phase of what we knew the u.s. attorney was doing. albeit it's an important phase no question about it when you start bringing people in. it's unlikely very much that michael drun yak is a tar guest. one of the attorneys i talked with tells me you don't as a general rule bring in your target to a grand jury inkwa sigs. you bring in people who can give you information about the targets you want to go after. the tar gets are not going to sit there for two hours and say no comment, no comment, my fifth amendment privileges. what we're looking at here is they're starting to mine for

more information. it is significant though because we know that they did subpoena information out of hoboken about the allegation that you first reported of tit for tat situation that michael probably had no information about the hoboken situation. what we've seen is his involvement with david wildstein about the bridge situation. so it does seem that the u.s. attorney's office is pursuing both of these paths, the bridge and hoboken. >> it's been, for the media covering this and i think for political figures looking at it, it's difficult to discern what is going on in the u.s. attorney's office. that's a sharp departure from when chris christie was the u.s. attorney. but assemblyman, it seems to me, tell me if this is your reading

on it, this is significant because there's been an open question about whether -- if this is about the bridge closures, that's what this grand jury is looking at now. there's been an open question about was a federal crime potentially commit there had. there's wrongdoing but is it something that would be federal or would it be only state. so the fact -- not a fact but the possibility that the grand jury is looking into this, does this suggest to the u.s. attorney's office has made the decision that yeah, we think there's something federal here? >> they're not going to tell us exactly what they're doing or what they're looking for and that's how a u.s. attorney investigation is supposed to proceed. leaves a lot of us to guess and surmise exactly what they're looking at. what i have been told by better who are better practitioners about criminal law, they're not going to call people in front of a grand jury to figure out whether or not a crime was committed. they're going to be operating under some type of assumption that there's something that they're looking for testimony to

corroborate. so they've made some conclusion, we don't know what it is and frankly we don't know on what topic, whether it is on hoboken, whether it is on the bridge, whether it is on something that none of us here at the table are actually considering. they've made some conclusion that there's a need to bring michael in for testimony. we're going to have to wait and see what conclusions they reach. >> you chaired the investigative committee. you're a member on it. does your committee have any kind of communication or contact with the u.s. attorney's office where the u.s. attorney's office might tell you, hey, stay away from this area, you could be jeopardizing our investigation? have you had any kinds of conversations like that in. >> have i, no. the chairman may have. but i do think we're at a juncture where it's important that -- it's been four months. our committee maz been around for four months. we've received subpoenaed documents from over 21 individuals. we have confirmation that there is indeed a federal

investigation, a grand jury that's convened on this matter. if it truly is a nonpolitical investigation that we're doing and we want to get to what the facts are, now is the time for our committee to turn everything over to the u.s. attorney's office, let them do their appropriate job and have us do what we're supposed to do, which is to legislate and implement the reforms that have come out of this. >> are you saying take the comes you have received as a committee, turn them over to the u.s. attorney and you don't want more subpoenas from your committee in. >> i think there's a very real possibility that if we continue to do it, we could jeopardize whatever investigation is taking place on the criminal end. it's not to say that what's been done to date -- i have to give props to the chairman and cochair for bringing this to everybody's attention and to being dogged in the investigation and bringing this to. public. i think we've reached a point in

time based on what was on the news last night, let the appropriate authorities do their investigation without us potentially hampering it and let us start focusing on legislative reform initiatives which is one of the reasons we started doing this to begin with. >> she's saying, look, the feds are now involved, turn it over, let's not get in their way? >> the feds have been involved. this is a new phase of something they've been doing. they've been sending out document subpoenas has has been the committee. there are two different paths, two different end products. what we want to know is for instance, why did bridgett kelly send that e-mail so we can make sure we put in institutional safeguards so things like this can't happen again without having the answers to some of the fundamental questions we can't do the legislation that holly is talking about. so we need to continue to pursue our legislative inquiry. we are not in any way interfering with or stepping on

the toes of the federal authorities. we've been in contact with them. we know where the lanes are and what lanes to stay into. so we're able to do our legislative inquiry at the same time as they're doing their federal inquiry. >> you and christie work those lanes into this. >> let me say, steve, based on what assemblywoman just said, that would call into question the whole master report. if indeed their committee should just lay back now with the degree of involvement the federal government has. then should master have come out with his report at this point. >> and should all of the interviews that he conducted be turned over to the -- >> that's the problem. there are reference, copious reference to the report to 70 interviews. there are koip yous statements in the report about so and so said this, so and so said that. there's no footnote, no document that e could look at to say in fact they did say that or they

did imply that. we have to take randy's word for it when we hear about all of these interviews because we don't have any proof or documentation on them. >> very quickly. >> very quick question, there's a very real possibility that we will never hear from bridgett kelly. are you saying unless we hear from her we can never do the legislative reforms? >> no. what i'm saying is if we're going to look at the report as being probative of some value, we need to understand the under pinnings of it ratheren than reading the prose that he put together coming to conclusions that this person is telling the truth and this person is not. we don't have any factual background other than randy's written words telling us what kim said or what anyone else said. >> we have 21 people who have provided responsive documents and thousands and thousands of pages of factual documents that

we have received, which are for the most part contained in the report. granted, we don't have the transcripts as of yet but we do have a lot of factual basis to be able to move ghard on reform legislation. >> i got to squeeze a break in here. it sounds like there's a new debate now starting to kick up about where the legislative committee should be going into the investigation, if it should be continuing the investigation. first, we do vn update on the search for the missing malaysian airlines passenger jet. chinese media put out a tweet that they've detected a pulse signal in the south inian ocean. we have no confirmation that this is linked to the missing airliner at this point. american officials are aware of the information and are looking into it. chinese media also said this morning that a chinese air force

plane over the search area spotted many white floating objects in the serge area and took photos for examination. going to keep monitoring the story and bring you the latest as it becomes available. what super poligrip does for me is it keeps the food out. before those little pieces would get in between my dentures and my gum and it was uncomfortable. [ male announcer ] just a few dabs is clinically proven to seal out more food particles. [ corrine ] super poligrip is part of my life now. hey kevin...still eating chalk for hearburn? yea. try alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heart burn and taste awesome.

these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. alka-seltzer fruit chews. enjoy the relief! ♪ you have to let me know [ female announcer ] when sweet and salty come together, the taste is irresistible. sweet and salty nut bars by nature valley. nature at its most delicious.

so we want to follow up on a story we started to tell you about last week and report some new details about what appears to be the latest federal subpoena into allegations that chris christie's administration threatened sandy aid over a development project. last week on the show we reported that a measure was going before the hoboken council to release the lawyer on development issues, the release him from attorney-client privileges. a spokesperson for dawn zimmer tell us that they discussed events in may of 2013 and that's

when she alleges that the top official top zimmer that she wouldn't get hurricane sandy relief until she signed off on a hoboken development. joe mar seety has been allowed to talk about that until now. on wednesday night the hoboken council gathered at their meeting. we caught up with the hoboken councilman shortly before the meeting began to ask why the resolution to release him was coming up at this moment. >> he was served with a document subpoena on march 13th and this is the first opportunity that the council has to consider a resolution to waive that privilege. >> it's true. according the a letter on pril 2nd they say quote we've been advised that that on or about march 13th, 2014 his law firm has been subpoenaed to produce

documents to a federal grand jury. the waiver of attorney-client privilege would be just to the allegations. michael russo shares with us what he's been hearing from the hoboken residents >> a lot of the questions that keep coming up here are what took so long for us to really get moving with the whole situation, why did the mayor wait so long. now with this attorney-client privilege issue, the real question is not so much why did the mayor wait but why did our attorney wait. >> joe was not at the council meeting on wednesday to answer the question but mayor zimmer made an appearance. they then went into closed session. the public was let back in. a few council members offered their thoughts on a resolution.

>> one is mr. mayor zeaty is not present and did not speak to us and he represents this body. two, his attorney wasn't here. and three, our own corporation council did not convince me that the city overall would be protected with this resolution. >> i think it's important that members of the public know, members of the city of hoboken know that we're fully cooperating with and in no way obstructing a neutral and proper investigation into these matters. >> and soon it was time for the vote to take place. >> mr. bower. >> yes. >> mr. >> desh. >> cunningham. >> yooi. >> mr. doil. >> aye. >> ms. mason rjts no. >> mr. mellow. >> aye. >> mr. russo. >> aye. >> it carried 7-1 with one absengs and he's now able to

comply with the federal subpoena. he's talk about this a little bit with the panel. first, that is, i'm going to guess that is the most exposure that the hoboken city council has ever received in one moment on national television. i think we get something in the guinness book of world records for that. we mentioned in there that zimmer spokesman is telling us she has a conversation with joe the day that she had this encounter with kim in the shopping parking lot where she basically told zimmer, allege y allegedly, play ball in the development, you' get your sandy money. the other part has to do with the port thrt, david samson. we have a whole series of e-mails that we showed on the show a few months ago, the law

firm is getting in touch with him. so he seems to be a significant player on two fronts in this. >> i think if you look at it from the federal grand jury's perspective, it's going to be some sort of affirmation as to who we should believe in the she tells/he tells saga that we have right here. that's all we have, she says or she says really between kim and dawn zimmer. and the master report went to great pains to try to diss anything that dawn zimmer said with varying degrees of success depending on how much you want to believe out of certain things that they said there. but now if you can get a lawyer who presumably has a certain degree of believability in this case because he really shouldn't have any ax to grind, although obviously he's on retainer for

the city of hoboken. he's also putting his reputation on the line. he's putting his law license on the line if he's caught in a lie. then the federal grand jury is going to look at this, assuming that he does indeed testify to them and say, okay, who should we believe here. >> what about the piece of it, chairman, about the potentially complying with any subpoenas from your committee. is joe mar zeaty, is anything to do with hoboken anything you want to pursue at all? is he somebody you would want the hear from at all? >> i think what the committee is going to be looking at is the port authority. we have to go back to where this committee started, looking at how the port authority operates and how dysfunctional it is. we've seen a connection with the port authority with this in that the port authority funded the redevelopment study that impacted on the development that the mayor said she talked to kim

about. so the port authority has its tentacles everywhere. wh enwe get through the investigation on the lane closures and the port authority's functioning, this may be something that the committee will consider. >> i assume that's not something, based on what you were saying in the last segment, that's not something you want them looking at. >> if we're going to look at hoboken, we also need to look in newark. there are over a thousand signatures asking our committee to investigation? when you say look into newark -- >> just going back to hoboken for one quick second, the attorney having the privilege waived is pretty standard when there's a federal investigation taking place. there's a lot of case law that goes back and forth on this. as to the pertinence of his testimony, unless he was there with the lieutenant governor himself and partook in this conversation -- i mean, we don't know what dawn zimmer may have

told him, we don't know the exact timing of it. all we have are at the same times from her spokeswoman. i actually am happy that they waived it to have the attorney come in and say what actually transpired at that time. i don't think that merely because the spoking woman is saying that he told her lawyer at some point around the same time. we don't know what that conversation was. >> let me add very quickly. don't forget the report tried to impeach the physical evidence of the diaries and suggest they were indeed forgeries. >> the master report said look, it looks like she went back and added details to these things. >> but how does randy come to that conclusion without having spoken to the author of the diary. it makes broad assumptions about what people did. if many cases it makes broad assumes about what they felt which is really incredible for what's supposed to be unbiased

technically accurate report. it creates things that don't economist. and that whole report has to be questioned because ids was paid for by the governor's office to clear the governor's office. and the irony here is that now we have the governor's office, now holly and other committee members are saying okay, now we're done. >> in fairness, we have a law firm that respected the district party in new jersey and who representing our nonpartisan committee that we all agreed to. and there have been numerous discussions that have taken place. i am a committee member. i have no idea by way of example whatever happen with our council and the mayor of ft. lee. >> did you call him? >> we have sent letters. >> did you call him in. >> i want to understand factually what you're -- rephrase that a little bit so everybody understands the issue you're disputing. >> we're members of the committee and wear not being

shared information with. >> gratuitous effort on national tv to create fake issues. >> by way of example, we tried three times to get copies of the legal bills to see what the heck was going on. we were told by the assembly majority office that as members of the committee we were not entitled to see the bills because they didn't want us to know exactly what was taking place. >> but it's perfectly okay for randy to propair a report for over a million dollars and nonhas even seen the first bill, nobody has seen anything about this. so i don't appreciate this double standard -- >> it's not a double standardmestandard. i'm on the committee -- >> okay. i think -- let me bring brian -- >> i'm staying out of it. >> let me bring you into it because what i'm hearing here, what's interesting to me is thinking back to the beginning of the investigation by the

legislative committee and when there seemed to be broad bipartisan support for it, are we watching on that that's broken down. >> i'm seeing that now from her concern about whether or not the committee should really continue its investigative role and just jump to a conclusion and to the chairman who obviously clearly believes that these two things can go -- the federal and the legislative investigation can go along parallel paths. quite frankly there are probably precedents for both. not to overuse the water gate investigation, but you did have back then -- >> absolutely. >> -- two parallel paths. eventually it got to the conclusions that it got to and then it kicked into some more action when you actually went to the impeachment route. >> we're waiting, we should say, this is any day now we keep saying a judge is going to give a ruling on whether documents

that the committee sought from bridgett kelly whether the committee can look at this. we'll ask about that, talk about that and pick up this conversation. it got a little interesting here a second ago. we'll pick it up right after the break. but add brand new belongings from nationwide insurance... ...and we'll replace destroyed or stolen items with brand-new versions. we take care of the heat, so you don't get burned. just another way we put members first, because we don't have shareholders. join the nation. ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

. we've been having an interesting debate about the state legislative committee's role in the investigation into bridge gate with some news about what's happening at the federal level. i want to pick that up. first, brian, i know you said something -- >> i want to clarify something. when i talk ablawyers in the past who have been caught in a lie, that was a generic reference. was not referring to anybody in this case right now because we don't know of any lawyers that have been caught in a la lie and for all 0 we know none of them have lied. >> just as a generic statement. >> lawyers have been caught lying before. >> a few go back way far in history. >> you have to search far open wide for that. holly, i want to pick up. point you're making, challenging

the idea that now with more con confirmation coming out about the federal investigators role, that the legislative committee you're on that john chairs, that you should be continuing to subpoena documents, you're saying the time and place for that has passed for your committee. i want to ask you specifically about the legal question that's now pending in regards to bridgett kelly and bill stepien. they refused to comply, citing their fifth amendment rights and that is something being decided by a judge. if the judge were to say, no, they can't do that, they should turn over the documents, you want the committee to be getting those documents right now? >> i think it's more a function of in getting that and understanding that throughout this process a lot of what we received has been leaked to the media. do we now impede the investigation? do we somehow make the criminal

investigation, you know the integrity of it, do we harm it. and so that's a concern. i'm not saying that our committee doesn't have a role. our committee has a huge role here. we need to start moving forward and legislating. reform initiatives. there is so many things that we've learned through this process that we can start addressing. and i don't know the rationale for us not doing that. >> so what happens -- take us through it. >> sure. >> if you get the ruling you're looking for and the ruling is, bridgett kelly, bill stepien, turn the stuff over to the committee, what you do with it? >> we review it. >> do you release it to the public? >> what we've done in the past and the precedent was set when we had david wildstein come before the committee. there's a transcript created and the documents then get released. that's the working model. we haven't had anybody come before the committee to testify under the joint committee

format. so we haven't gotten to that point yet. but probably at the point in time when somebody comes to testify, those documents will be made part of their transcript. the transcript is public testimony. if you're looking at the transcript, then there's reference to documents be u yo u can't see the documents, the transcript then becomes meaningless. the fundamental question that's not answered today, not answered by the mastro report is why. we're led to believe by the mastro report that bridgett kelly was emotionally distraught and decided because of that to close lanes. that doesn't wash, steve. >> in terms of talking with -- having communications with federal prosecutors, is there any communication that's taking place between you, between your council -- >> our council has been in contact and we've been making very sure that what we're doing has not interfered with or impeded or in any way gotten into the lanes of what the u.s. attorney is doing. we're very comfortable with and

very confident that what we're doing has nom impact on the u.s. attorney's investigation. but we have a mission that's different than what they want do. they want to prosecute people potentially for violations of law. that's not our job. we want to find out how this could happen. there's a rush to judgment to say there's one e-mail from bridgett kelly, let's stop the show right here, blame it on her and move on. but there's more to it. >> i don't think it -- >> just to quickly point out, there was a poll that was released this week after the mastro report of new jersey reporters and where kelly and wildstein were responsible. om 11% said it was limited to them. 77% said others were involved. the public doesn't buy that. >> the public is only receiving portions of what we have received. so it's not fair to say that there's rush to judgment. it's been four months.

it's been four months since our committee convene. hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent. documents have come in from 21 separate people. that's not a rush to judgment. that is, look, we know what has happened. john, we may never know why -- with all due respect, we didn't know what thand. there's one e-mail that says time for traffic problems in ft. lee. we can't say why bridgett kelly said that or who told her. you don't seem to want to know who told her. you want to shut it down. >> and you want to -- no. >> let's -- >> your mission is to protect the governor's office. >> and your mission is to try prove that the governor did something. >> i want to know why bridgett kelly sent the e-mail. you don't want to do know that. >> everybody wants to know that. but there's a very large

possibility we will not find out. what in the judge comes back this week and says no, we doesn't have to testify. what do we do? >> we'll cross that bridge when we get to. >> there's another bridge rerns. i want to thank you all. coming up, it is the finale of what we have been building towards all season long, the "up against the clock" tournament of champions. we'll crown a national champion. don't go anywhere. gotta get going. gotta be good. good? good. growth is the goal. how do we do that? i talked to ups. they'll help us out. new technology. smart advice. we focus on the business and they take care of the logistics. ups? good going. we get good. that's great. great. great. great. great. great. great. great. great. (all) great! i love logistics.

then a little time to kick back. earn double hilton honors points with the 2x points package and be one step closer to a weekend break. doubletree by hilton. where the little things mean everything. coming up, it's the finale of what we've been building towards all season, the "up against the clock" tournament of champions. first we have an update for you chinese state media has put on a tweet indicating the chinese ship taking a part in the search effort detected a pulse signal in the south indian ocean. we have no confirmation that this is linked to the flight 370 at this point. they're quoted as saying were we

can't verify this information at this point np time. they also said this morning than an air force plane over the area spotted many white objects over the search area. they're taking photos and we'll continue to monitor the situation as it becomes available. we'll be right back. (dad) well, we've been thinking about it and we're just not sure.

(agent) i understand. (dad) we've never sold a house before. (agent) i'll walk you guys through every step. (dad) so if we sell, do you think we can swing it? (agent) i have the numbers right here and based on the comps that i've found, the timing is perfect.

...there's a lot of buyers for a house like yours. (dad) that's good to know. (mom) i'm so excited. live from studio 3 a in rockefeller center, usa, it's too many for the finals of the "up against the clock" tournament of champions. she's found her way to the championship but for the first two months working on chap toll hill she couldn't find anything to eat but she didn't know the capitol had a cafeteria. please welcome kate. before making it to the big leagues of jumpl lichl, he won a pub contest in college. it's alex wald. if you think she's hard to keep up on land, try to keep pace in

a swimming pool. say hello to college water polo player, crystal ball. and now, the host of "up against the clock" steve kornacki. >> thank you, bill wolf. thank you studio audience, a real live studio audience to today. thank you for tuning in at home for what the final matchup. today we'll crown a national champion. weave seen some sweat, some tears in this month long event and the final lists have had formidable and fierce competition to get here today. now the rules for tournament play remain the same as always. we'll have three rounds of play, 100 seconds in each round. questions are going to get harder. contestants you with ring in at

any time and you will be punished for wrong answer. all always i'll remind the true genuine live audience, please no outbusts. contestants deserve and demand absolute con trags. are you ready to play the championship game? >> yes. >> sure. >> yes. >> they are ready. we're 300 seconds from knowing our national champion. we'll put 100 seconds on the clock. this is the 100 point round. in a federal budget proposal cutting over $5 trillion over the next decade, it was also proposed that the subsidies for what railroad be eliminated. alex. >> am truck track. >> george w. bush repealed portraits on the "today" show yesterday including one of his -- >> tony player. >> tony blair is correct. 25 years after its basketball

team won the ncaa championship, president obama called for a raise in the federal minimum wage while speaking -- >> university of michigan. >> speaking at university of michigan on wednesday. this is the instant bonus question for another 100 points. who is the only president of the united states to have graduated from the university of michigan? >> i have no idea. >> the answer is gerald ford. >> okay. >> michigan football star. no pemt for kate there. 100 point question. it was reported this week that talks are underway for a sequel to the 2006 academy award winning documentary -- alex. >> inconvenient truth. >> that is the correct answer. 100 points for alex. jonathan gold smith who was on capitol hill this week to raise awareness about land mine removal is better known as the most interesting man in the world, the main character for ads for this beer. ag alex.

>> do seek kis. >> this democrat senator is running neck and neck -- kate. >> kay hagen. >> neck and neck with her opponen opponents. that ends the first round. crystal yet to get on the board. but lots of support back there, too. lots of support for everybody. 200 point round now. you can get back in in a hurry. we'll put 100 seconds on the clock. the championship match continues with this. the ceo of general motors testified on capitol hill this week about why it took her company ten years to issue a defect. name the ceo. crystal. >> mary barra. >> after passing the state senate on tuesday, this state's governor announced he will sign into law a bill to ban abortions of 20 weeks -- crystal. >> mississippi. >> that's correct.

after this red sox slugger took a wide wildly circulated selfie -- kate. >> david or tease. >> paid by samsung mobile to do it. the white house pushed back wednesday against its former press secretary robert gibbs who suggested that this portion of obamacare -- crystal. >> employer mandate. >> correct. this is an inzpant bonus question for 200 more points. gibs success ser as press secretary david carney was best known as a journalist-for-what publication. time. the answer is 'time." no penalty there. after reading a lengthy opening question, the senior indiana senator -- >> dan coats. >> that's correct. republican state senator chris mcdaniel who withdrew from a gun

rights rally this week after it was reported that he would be sharing keynote -- crystal. >> thad cochran. >> that's correct. it was revealed this week that president obama's appearance on between two ferns was actually pitched to the white house -- >> bradley cooper. >> bradley cooper actually pitched it. kate 800, alex at 400, crystal with a nice recovery at 800. we have a very close game, ladies and gentlemen. it's all coming down to the final round. 54 players reduced to the final three and this comes down to the final 100 seconds. 3000-point questions here. this is the round that will determine a national champion. knee knicks, arizona and columbus ohio were removed -- >> the rnc. >> that is correct. 300-point question.

harry reid indicated this week he will continue to serve as his party's senator leader was first elected democrat leader in what year? alex. >> 2006. >> incorrect. >> >> 2008. >> incorrect. time. it was 2004. 300 moipoint question. according to a "new york times" report this week it was anteric -- >> william henry harrison. >> correct. instant bonus question, kate. for 300 points. name harrison's successor as president. >> oh, shoot. i don't know. >> john tyler ii. no penalty there. 300 point question. andrew cuomo agreed to provide more than $300 million a year to fund what program -- >> krystall. >> more -- >> universal pre-kindergarten. >> 300 points for krystall.

>> he never would have participated if he knew it was bankrolled by don blankenship, the former ceo -- >> massy energy. >> 300 point question. one of the targets of bill marr's flip a district campaign, new york republican -- >> michael grimm. >> michael grimm fought back this week is correct. 300 point question. politically active -- >> crystal? that's the end of the match. krystal has won for the national championship with 1400 points. the balloon drop begins. it falls on the wrong person. what a touch. krystal with 1400 points. the last question gives you the title. kate, 1100. here's somebody to congratulate you. and, krystal, before we talk to you for a second, our special guest tom coliccio will tell you what you just won.

>> on behalf of everyone here at craft and coliccio, i wish to extend my most heartful and sign zero congratulations on his or her victory in up against the clock tournament of champions. we look forward to seeing you here for your victory dinner. >> this is your victory -- take this to coliccio's restaurant. this is krystall ball and her family. this is your up against the clock national champion and her family. >> greatest day of my life, steve. >> 54 started. what do we know now that we didn't know last week. our answers are coming up after this. >> good game.

we have an update now on the search for the missing malaysia passenger jet. chinese media publishing these photos of the white floating object in the search area of the

indian ocean. msnbc cannot verify this. cc tv news has indicated that a chinese ship taking part in the search has detected a pulse signal. we have no confirmation that this is linked to flight 370. we will continue to monitor this. brings us to the end of the show. i want to thank and congratulate up against the clock national champion krystall ball with a special friend. >> he gave me the answers. >> national journal's alex seitzwald and kate. thank you for joining us today at home for "up." tomorrow morning at 8:00 we'll speak with angus king to declassify information and plus we'll look at how david letterman wove politics in. forget about the 1%, we'll talk

about the .1%. that's melissa harris-perry. she's coming up next and thank you for getting "up." in the nation, it's not always pretty. but add brand new belongings from nationwide insurance... ...and we'll replace destroyed or stolen items with brand-new versions. we take care of the heat, so you don't get burned. just another way we put members first, because we don't have shareholders. join the nation. ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

-hit the beach in florida. -and a reunion in seattle. we can afford to take more trips this year. [man] when hotels have unsold rooms, they use hotwire to fill them. [woman] so we got our 4-star hotels... for half price. ♪ h-o-t-w-i-r-e ♪ hotwire.com

this morning my question, just what is cruel and unusual punishment? plus, the end of the world as we know it has already begun. and to quote nina simone, mississippi got damn. but, first, what happens when the richest of the rich just keep on getting richer? good morning. i'm melissa harris-perry and one theme reins supreme in our nation's capital this week. money, money, money, money. not just any old money, but the kind of money that widens the wealth gap between the rich and poorn