♪ the ramones started in a garage. my point? some of the most innovative things in the world come out of american garages. introducing the lighter, faster cadillac cts. 2014 motor trend car of the year. ain't garages great? boxes of flight 370. there is news that broke overnight in the chris christie investigation. we are going to tell you what it is in and what it could mean shortly. but we begin this saturday morning with the latest on flight 370. it was 36 days ago that we came on the air with reports of a malaysia airline passenger jet that had gone missing on a flight to beijing. more than a month later now, it

seems that investigation is at a critical juncture. not a single piece of debris has been found, but investigators appear to be honing in on the two important black boxes. crews on the hunt for the airliner zeroed in on what they believe are sounds of the black boxes deep on the bottom of the indian ocean. the australian air force has dropped 80 buoys as part of the search, but it's been three days since they heard any pings. the race is on to figure out where the sountds are coming from before the batteries in the black boxes die. the underwater search zone appears to be smaller than it once was. they have been able to try ang late a presumed location and r narrow down how much they need to search. it still leaves something the

size of los angeles. the surface area is roughly 16,000 square miles of ocean. as "the washington post" illustrated on tuesday, the ocean depth they are working with talking about 15,000 feet here that depth makes for a huge challenge. the empire state building stands more than 1, 200. the titanic was found at 12,500 feet of water. they found air france flight 447 at 13,000 feet. if it's there flight 370 could be 15,000 feet below. this morning tony abbott, australia's prime minister expressed confidence in the search even as he warned a difficult task remains ahead. >> while we do have a high degree of confidence that the transmissions that we have been picking up are from flight

mh-370's black box recorder, no one should underestimate the difficulties of the task still ahead of us. yes, we have narrowed down very considerably narrowed down the search area, but trying to locate anything 4.5 kilometers beneath the surface of the ocean is a massive task. and it is likely to continue for a long time to come. given that the csignal from the black boxes is fading, we're trying to get as many detections as we can so we can narrow the search area down to as small an area as possible. >> joining me now is anthony roman, a former pilot, the president of the global investigation from roman and

associates. and out in denver we have a former ntsb senior safety investigator. and greg, i'll start with you. we hear the prime minister of austral australia. he has been saying this for a few days. he is confident they are on the trail that the pings are significant and they are going to find this thing. you hear from some of the families of the victims. they are understandably skeptical. they are saying they haven't heard anything. they are not hearing the government tell them it's confirmed. it's just suspected. how confident should the families be in what the prime minister is saying? how confident should all of us be that these pings really are from the black boxes? >> that's a real good question, steve. the big thing is that the prime minister is a politician, so he's trying to be as optimistic and hopeful especially since he's been brief iing the chines and there's been a lot of let down in the past. he's trying to maintain the best face. but when you listen to ann gus

houston, he is very measured in his words, cautious about what he says and until they actually see something, they can't confirm it. and i think that you have a bit of a battle there when it comes to the chosen words only because the families have been let down. there is this huge effort to try to capture the sounds that we're all looking for, the pings, narrow down the area and race against time. and i think that right now it has to be measured, we have to make sure that we listen really to angus houston, because he's probably got the best information about the validity of those box signals, the pingers and where they may locate that box. got to remember that those signals just give us an area, don't necessarily take us to the exact location of either box. >> but anthony, are you confident that the pings are

from these boxes? could they be from something else completely or is it with a high degree of confidence we can say the flight is somewhere around here? >> confidence and fact are two different things. and i think we have to make a very serious distinction between the two. yes, there is confidence that these are coming from the black boxes. they have been analyzed both on site, on the ocean, and in the laboratories in australia. so there appears to be a very high degree of confidence, yet you have no confirmation. up until there's a visual sighting of the wreckage, can they begin to say it is likely it's mh-370. and up until they secured some of the wreckage or the black boxes, they cannot really confirm that it is. >> and i wonder too, just looking at this, we have had all sorts of reports over the last

few weeks, they found 60 pieces o of debris, they are sending out planes, none of this debris that's been turned up is actually from the flight. if we're talking about a plane that crashed into the water here and we're getting to the area where we're kind of close, shouldn't there be some piece of debris that's surfaced at this point. is it plausible that the whole plane goes down intact? >> not intact, but it is plausible that there is very little to know debris. there was an american airlines flight that was hit by a horizontal tornado that spun off the top of the rock keys about 12 years ago. and it nose dived into the ground. there was a huge crater, and there was no piece larger than three or four inches of any debris in that airport. there were no chunks left. it virtually dissent grated.

so it's very tough to say what angle they crashed at, what the sea state was at the time. there are so many variables and factors that go into this. >> and greg, i just want to ask you, beyond the question of the search that's going on right now, there's also the attempt in obviously getting the black boxes will answer a lot of this. there's the attempt to figure out what happened. if the plane ended up down there, why did it end up down there? we have seen some reports this week that it may have been flying at a very low altitude when it turned back over malaysia. what do we know now about how the plane would have gotten down there, about what happened after it lost contact on that night? >> steve, we have to be very cautious. the information that's been reported over the last couple days is not bush administrationed -- based on fact. i have been saying for the last month that the information i

have from the folks that i have been talking to is that airplane never descended after it was at 35,000 feet. there's been a lot of talk about how it climbed and descended and that just is not fact. the information that came out of the airplane coming down to 5,000 feet to avoid radar, there's no logic there because the airplane then had to climb back up not only to get to an altitude where they would have a sufficient fuel burn to get them as far as they went in the ocean, but the airplane became radar contacted again when the climb happened. so there's no logic there. we have to be careful with this kind of factoid or believed factoid and then people building a story around it. the big thing here is that when we look at this information and we look at what's been going on and we know really what is fact, we know that the satellite

information is probably the best source of information. we know where this airplane is in general terms and hopefully the pingers will or at least what is believed to be the pingers will put us in an area we can recover wreckage and get to the boxes. the boxes aren't going to tell us everything, and i think families if they are expecting they are going to have the answers from the two boxes, i want them to be cautious that it won't tell us why things happened. it will tell us what happened, it will tell us what the airplane was doing and whether automation was flying, but it's not going to tell us the why. >> still a very important piece of evidence, if and when they are able to collect that. we'll talk about that challenge about going that deep into the ocean. we'll have an oceanographer, how do you search that deep in the ocean. that's when we come back. ies. [ male announcer ] with reddi wip, fruit never sounded more delicious.

mmm. with 15 calories per serving and real cream, the sound of reddi wip is the sound of joy. you're an emailing, texting, master of the digital universe. but do you protect yourself? ♪ apparently not. when you access everything, you give everyone access to everything about you. but that's ok. while you do your thing... [ alert rings ] we'll be here at lifelock, doing our thing. watching out for things your credit card alone can't. [ alert rings ] and relentlessly protecting your identity.

get lifelock protection and live life free. [ alert rings ] get lifelock protection and live life free. disturbing the pantry. ortho crime files. a house, under siege. say helto home defense max. kills bugs inside and prevents new ones for up to a year. ortho home defense max. get order. get ortho®. can help your kids' school get extra stuff. they're the only cereals with box tops for education. you can raise money for your kids' school. look for this logo. only on big g cereals. you can make a difference. every cereal box counts.

back talking about the search for flight 370. greg fife, safety investigator, former pilot anthony roman is here. and mya is an oceanographer who studied ocean acoustics, currently a professor with columbia university. mya, just looking at this on the map and starting to read about it, it seems to me this is the most remote area of the world. it's like 1,500 miles from perth, australia. we're talking about something that's three miles deep into the ocean. what is the ocean like on the surface there and when you start getting that deep into the ocean, what is it like? >> well, it is a very remote area there, but you have to remember two-thirds of the surface of our planet are covered with ocean, so there's a lot of remote ocean out there. the good news with this search

is it's moved slightly further north. the area they were originally searching in the 40s is much worse seas so that e greatly hampers search efforts. so this area of the seas are a little better, although the winter is coming. in terms of the sea floor in that area, it's relatively flat and also relatively old so that's, again, good news in terms of comparing it with the air france flight. that's very young sea floor so it has a lot of lava exposed at the surface. in this older sea floor, what you have is heavy sediments. so the good news with the heavy sediments is when you use side scan sonar systems, you can pick out where there might be debris much more easily. you send down an acoustic pulse and it reflects back off the sea floor. an aircraft would have a much

stronger reflection than a sediment. whereas if you have lava there, it also produces a strong reflection. in this heavily sedimented area it should be easier to pick out debris. >> anthony, greg was talking about even if we get the black boxes, that's not going to answer everything. as i understand it also, this is a plane that was potentially in the air for seven or eight hours. the black boxes only record like two hours of communication, is that right? >> that's the cockpit voice recorder. that's on a two-hour loop. however, the flight data recorder records approximately 80 parameters and can record for the length of that flight. so i think you'll have significant data with regard, as greg has pointed out, with regard to the systems on the aircraft, whether it was being flown automatically, the pilots using the auto pilot and

activating it themselves when they wanted to make a right or left turn or a climb. >> just to clarify, other people are confused about this too. there's the cockpit voice recorder. that's where you hear the conversation. the black boxes we're talking about you can chart where the plane was going, what maneuvers it was making. >> where the thrust levers were, what speed it was traveling at, what altitude it was at and whether or not the aircraft was being manipulated by the pilots or a third party manually or by flight control systems. >> and so greg, on that question then of the cockpit voice recorder, we're always talking about the black boxes being indestructible. does that apply to the voice recorder? are we confident we'll hear what the pilots were saying or is that an open question? >> no, when we talk about the black boxes that outer shell,

the orange part of the box is just a piece of sheet metal, typically aluminum or steel. it's the core of the boxes that's incapslated in a water jacket for fire protection. i have done accidents where that's been totally obliterated during the exact sequence. fortunately, we were still able to get usable information. when we talk about the cockpit voice recorder and what anthony said it's on a two-hour loop, we're not sure what we're going to hear. if it was able to run or allowed to run for the full course of the flight, then it's overwritten itself several times. but if the cockpit -- if the pilot in the cockpit decided he was going to try to stop all known information about him and what he was doing or she was doing in that docockpit, they could pull the circuit breaker on the voice recorder.

we had that one time where the captain of that particular flight decided to pull the circuit breakers. what he did was when he pulled them, they stopped recording. but what we found on the cockpit voice recorder was the first two hours of the flight when he arrived at the airplane, he was talking to the first officer, talking to the crew. we got some very valuable information even though we didn't have the actual part of the flight where he took the airplane down. e we did have very good information that helped us figure out what his motive was. >> and just very quickly, mya, knowing this part of the world, you hear about the search for potentially 15,000 feet deep, are you confident they will be able to get black boxes this deep in this part of the world? >> i am, yes. the technology exists to do that. it's a lot harder when you're work at those depths so it will take longer, but they absolutely have the technology to be able to do that. >> i want to thank our guests

for getting up this morning. thank you for joining us. four american presidents traveled to texas this week to celebrate the legacy of another american president. what it means for the current president and what he's trying to accomplish. staying active can ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, this can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain, and improve daily physical function so moving is easier. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain. and it's not a narcotic you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. thischance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin

or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. so i'm going pro. [ male announcer ] new crest tartar protection rinse. the only rinse that helps prevent tartar build-up and cavities. a little swishing. less scraping. yes! [ male announcer ] new crest pro-health tartar protection rinse. it helps you escape the scrape.

(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.

this was the week that president obama and three former presidents trvl edtrvled travel austin, texas to pay tribute to lyndon johnson. he's a controversial president, one who racked up land mark legislative chaesmts on the domestic front only to see much of his legacy undone by his escalation of the war in vietnam. it was the biggest of lbj's domestic achievements that brought those presidents to the presidential library this week. that's the civil rights act of 1964, which turns 50 this summer. it was also a shameful one.

after all it had been a century since the civil war, more than 100 years since abraham lincoln's emancipation proclamation. it might have taken even longer than that if fate hadn't placed johnson in the president in 1963. he inherited from kennedy a civil rights bill that was stalled in congress blocked by the opposition of southern segregationists. johnson had once been part of that southern opposition. to embrace civil rights as congressman would have ended his political career on the spot. but his president, he was now in position to do something. warned by advisers to steer away from civil rights in his first address to congress, he skoufed at that suggestion and replied, what the hell is the presidency for then? >> no memorial or eulogy could more eloquently honor president

kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. [ applause ] >> three months of that speech, his civil rights bill passed the house and four months after that it cleared the senate and johnson signed it into law in 1964. it's a feat that 50 years later the country's first african-american president spoke of in personal terms. >> because of the civil rights movement, because of the laws president johnson signed, new doors of opportunity and education swung open for everybody. not all at once, but they swung open. not just blacks and whites, but also women and latinos and asians and native americans and gay americans and americans with a disability.

they swung open for you and they swung open for me. that's why i'm standing here today. because of those efforts. because of that legacy. >> president obama also reminded us the civil rights act was just the first of a series of historic laws pushed through congress and signed into law in the lbj years. >> and he didn't stop there. even though his advisers again told him to wait, again told him let the dust settle, let the country absorb this momentous decision. he shook them off. the meat and the coconut, as president johnson would put it, was the voting rights act. so he fought for and passed that as well.

immigration reform came shortly after. and then a fair housing act. >> there was also medicare and medicaid, major components of the social safety net we know today, pushed through congress and signed by johnson. the great society is what he called his domestic program. for a few years in the 1960s it felt like lbj could do no wrong. his popularity would never sink and influence with congress would never wane. decades of bottled up progress finally uncorked with a president with a magic touch. of course, the good times did stop for lbj. the final years of his presidency were defined by a civil rights backlash, escalating war protests and the beginnings of a political realignment that fuelled the conservative movement that seeks to roll back lbj's domestic achievements. that's not what the festivities were about this week in austin. they were about the best part of the lbj years when a president took on one challenge after another and pushed and pushed until congress went along with

him. this is the lbj who was celebrated this week and seems now to be in the midst of a reassessment by historians and pundits. a president who knew how to get things done even if the process was dirty. that's the lbj image that's taking hold. that image has spawned plenty of commentary that president obama, whose agenda has been stalled by republicans since they took over the house in 2011, could do more it if me took the same approach that lbj did. lbj governed in a different era. his biggest achievements came with monstrous majorities in congress. a year they wouldn't devote itself to using every legislative tool to fight any bill or any nominee with the president's support. no wonder as the ap reported this week no historical analogy irks them more than the comparisons between president obama and lbj.

he can cling to the addition since lbj's days, the affordable care act. but still the polarization that defines washington today and the frustration of many of the president's supporters that he hasn't been able to do more represents a sharp contrast with lbj on display this week. how accurately are we remembering the lbj years and how can any president achieve anything big as the divide only grows deeper? here now to discuss we have lynn sweet, from the "chicago sun-times." clay risen, a staff writer at "the new york times." jonathan capehart and michael beshlosh joins us in washington. i want to talk about sort of the modern day politics of how lbj

is invoked today and the unfairness or fairness of that. i want to go back to that era. we talked about the passage of the civil rights act in 1964 and more broadly the great society. to get a clearer understanding of exactly what the times were like, what lbj's role was in that and clay you have written about this and you say this sort of modern reassessment is getting it wrong and his role in the civil rights act is largely overstated. >> it's overstated, but he also deserves a lot of credit in a different way. lbj one of his smart moves was to let the people who are already running the bill to do their thing. they already knew the game plan. what johnson did was make a moral came cayce. the film you just showed, his speech right after kennedy assassination was filled with this moral urgency that he pushed through to the end and demanded a full bill.

he refused to accept compromise. that was incredibly courageous. it's not what we think of johnson doing. >> the image of johnson is, as we say, the guy who could talk to the congressmen, intimidate him and just keep them on the phone until he got a yes. >> there was some of that going on, but a lot of it was stepping back and using the power of the presidency. the soap box, as you will, to get up in every speech, every press conference and say i demand not just a civil rights bill, but the full civil rights bill. a lot of people were taken aback president senator dirkson thought he could kbo to the white house and say let's make a deal here. johnson said, absolutely not, you go talk to humphrey, but i will not accept anything less than the full bill. >> michael, when you look back as a historian at the civil rights act and all the other great society accomplishments

for johnson, so much action in congress packed into so few years. what do you see as the keys to johnson having that kind of success on the domestic front as president? >> key was he had the second most democratic congress of the 20th century. johnson can argue it it round or flat, but it would have been impossible for someone to botch that. there would have been a minimum of things that any president could have gotten in that time, but it was because johnson had these enormous legislative skills that came from the house in the '40s and the senate in the 1950s that allowed him to maximize this. but i think what clay said is absolutely right. i would even broaden the compass a little more. you can't in this society wait for a president like john kennedy or lynn ondon johnson to send off a bill to the congress. they were politicians. kennedy did it in '63 not because he wanted to damage his reelection in '64, but because

birr ming ham had happened. conservatives were saying this is getting outside of the system of law. 1965 johnson was very cautious about voting rights, which pushed him to do it was the selma march and what happened in alabama to make americans say, this is the time. so what is wonderful about our society is that when it's working well, you've got the grass roots, these things happening, congress responding to it and a president at the top. you need all these elements. >> michael mentioned it there, the majorities that president johnson as a democrat joined in congress. this is one of the most productive congresss of all time. 295 to 140. i think in the senate it was 65 to 35. the democrats had that margin. so totally different. but jonathan, i wonder when we

look there was civil rights, voting rights, great society and that was in the wake of the '64 election. there was also a backlash in 1966. they lost a ton of those seats in the house. and lbj's popularity plummeted. i wonder if you see the beginnings of really the modern story of politics and the modern political divide we now see. >> the backlash. the president -- michael said that johnson made the moral case for all the things he did, but it came with consequences. and yes, i think right now what we're seeing is this sort of clash between two different eras. president johnson had a different senate, but i also think at the time there was a rev rans for the presidency, for the office of president among members of congress, but also members of the press that just does not exist today. we have seen things happen to

president obama, also to president clinton, president bush that would never happen back in the day of lyndon johnson. so if you look at what's happening now, take for instance newtown. an event that happens along with the bombings in birmingham and all the things that could push people to do the right thing. there was a human cry in the country, do something about this. the president gets out there and makes the moral case. the moral case was not enough because the opposition to what the president and the majority of the country wanted to do was much stronger. and i would say that one of the things that president johnson had that just isn't there today that was there under clinton and bush and reagan, ear marks. it's easy to be president and

con joel if you do not vote for this i will take away fupding for your bridge, your community center, i won't do all these things. >> when you're talking about a tea party republicans who define themselves by how much government they dismantle and can go back to their constituents and brag about the power of the earmark. but lynn, curious what you make of what jonathan is saying about the basic rev rans for the presidency back in johnson's era to now. what do you make of that? >> i respectfully disagree as that a significant point of comparison between the two because you're talking about an insiders game and getting it passed, not dealing with all the forces. so if for the moment we narrow the discussion to what obama did, you mentioned a name that was very important and that was senator dirkson. obama had a willing republican

partner, the senator from illinois, a republican lion who stepped up and what he was able to do is prevent the senate from filibustering the civil rights bill. so that was a very crucial role because just as we have rules in the senate now and we have these votes to advance legislation, this bill could have been stopped without a vote. so no matter new media, old media, you need a willing partner and obama had that. >> johnson had that. >> that's what i want to pick up. we have to squeeze a break in. that's what i want to squeeze into the next block. the comparison that drives the white house crazy. why can't obama be more like johnson? i want to look at the opposition to see if there's any validity. we'll be right back. uhhh. no, that can't happen.

that's the thing, you don't know how long it has to last. everyone has retirement questions. so ameriprise created the exclusive.. confident retirement approach. now you and your ameripise advisor can get the real answers you need. well, knowing gives you confidence. start building your confident retirement today. sfx: car unlock beep. vo: david's heart attack didn't come with a warning. today his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. are we still on for tomorrow? tomorrow. tomorrow is full of promise. we can come back tomorrrow. and we promise to keep it that way. csx. how tomorrow moves. what a day. can't wait til tomorrow.

[ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite to help replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. ocuvite. help protect your eye health. their cause must be our

cause too. because it's not just -- it's really all of us who must overcome the crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice. and we shall overcome. [ applause ] >> and that's lyndon johnson in 1965, the year of the voting rights act. lynn you were talking about dirkson. >> it was lyndon johnson. i said obama a few times. >> lyndon johnson had the governing partner. >> obama does not have a partner. >> and michael, i want to get to that point with you about just sort of the way the two parties are sort of different than they were in 1964. largely, it's because of what happened in 1964 that the differences between the two parties sort of sorted out. the republicans are the right of

center party and there's this big divide that seems to get bigger largely as a as a result of '64. >> i'm glad to hear my friend lynn pumping for dirkson. illinois needs all the help it can get sometimes. but you're absolutely right, steve. johnson was brilliant in all sorts of ways. one of the most brilliant things he said was in private and people don't know much about it, which is after the election of '64, johnson told his legislative people we have this big democratic congress, two-thirds democratic senate. you may think we're going to spend four years getting our wish list through. you're wrong. by the summer i'm going to have asked all these members of congress particularly in swing districts that made it in '64 against all odds to make sacrifices and they are going to stop doing it. it turned out to be right. when you and i think of the great society, much of what he got done was done in the first

six months. goes to texas in august after the voting rights bill, it happens in los angeles, a lot of americans were outraged by that. began to be more skeptical about civil rights. suddenly the atmosphere was much more difficult by '66. so that the election of '66 he loses 47 democrats in the house. all night people are saying this guy, in some cases it should have been women, but wasn't in those days. they lost because of white backlash. that was the night that ronald reagan was elected governor of california. not on civil rights, but that was the beginning of the conservative movement. johnson was so oppression that what we did in the summer of '75 probably was fuelled by reagan. >> i guess you could see a modern parallel in 2009-2010,

obama has the majorities in congress, pushes through a huge addition in the social safety net. clay, look, stipulating the major differences we have put out there between what it was like in johnson's time, the majorities he had, the cooperation from some republicans because moderate and liberal republicans existed back then. obama just faces this wall of republican opposition right now that is impossible to breakthrough. is there anything you see when you look back to the lyndon johnson example, is there anything that he should be doing that would have gotten a little more done. >> i think that obama at least from what i know as an outsider, i think obama could be doing more on the data day meeting and groeting and should have been doing this from the very beginning. one of the things that johnson did going back to his time in the house and then the senate and the presidency was just daily upkeep of relationships and really making sure he was in

there talking to everybody, etting is up favors and things like that so a big deal he didn't have to talk to somebody for the first time. >> from democrats in washington, that's the biggest complaint i hear about this president and this administration is he has played golf with john boehner. he tried to strike the deal, but he's not on the phone with different members of the congress, different senators. he's not aggressively trying to pick them off peel. do you think that's -- >> that is a reasonable knock against the president. he is the 180 version of president clinton. president clinton was the guy, hold on to you, go to the rope lines, stay there until the last person left. president obama is the complete opposite. he's much more self-contained. he's much more comfortable in his own skin so he doesn't need,

he does not want theagelation that clearly president clinton wanted. it makes him a different kind of president and frustrating in a town that wants to be able to say, i talked to the president yesterday. i was invited to the white house. i was on marine one. i golfed with the president. i was invited to camp david. when was the last time -- i can't think of the time the president invited any member of congress to camp david. these are all the tools. the one time i can remember the president using air force one for this purpose is he took congressman eric shock with him to some sort of rally. this was the vote for the stimulus. he didn't get congressman shock's vote. we have seen instances where the president has tried to reach out through cocktails at the white house early on in his term, but they didn't yield any kind of benefit for him. they don't just do this to do

this. they do this to yield a benefit for the president in his agenda and i guess it didn't bare fruit fast enough for the president so he's like, i'm just going to go back to being me and doing things not for public consumption but behind the scenes. there are people on capitol hill, democrats in particular, who look at the white house and think, what the hell is going on? >> we have to squeeze one more break in here. i want to pick it up for what it means pr the rest of his presidency and any presidency that follows it. you look at the hyper polarization. can big things still happen? no matter who the president is, like they did in 1965, we'll ask that question when we come back. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t

have androgel 1.62% testosterone gel. the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal.

talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. [ male announcer ] how could switchgrass in argentina, change engineering in dubai, aluminum production in south africa, and the aerospace industry in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.

request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. oh, there's a prize, all right. [ male announcer ] inside every box of cheerios are those great-tasting little o's made from carefully selected oats that can help lower cholesterol. is it a superhero? kinda. ♪ this question of whether big things are possible in washington. it seems like a long time ago, but ffs only a couple years ago that a big thing did come out of washington. it's being implemented today. that was the product of president obama having big

democratic majorities in the house and the senate and even with that, just was able to get it through. but is that really what it's come to to get anything big and significant through anymore? your party needs to control everything. you need the big majorities otherwise there's no room for compromise. >> we're going to have a test in november and again in 2016. the one issue you could do something on potentially is immigration. the senate did pass a comprehensive immigration bill. president obama has been working on it for years. >> and the republican house is saying absolutely not. >> or they put up obstacles that they keep raising the bar on security before they will go to the second issue. so it's the only issue i see as a potential if republicans think they have to deliver something before the election. >> we have been having that

conversation. we're watching it right now with jeb bush make a humane comments about immigrants and get raked over the coals for it. michael, the big presidency like you had the first two years of president obama, is that possible short of those kind of majorities? >> probably not, and that's the poignant thing. if you look at dirkson as an example, the reason why dirkson remained senate leader of the republicans in the 1960s was not because this was a fire brand who was going to have go after the democrats. it was the opposite. they knew he knew the president, could make deals, could kbet things for them. the same thing was true of members of congress who were reelected because they were able to work with the other side. same thing with democrats in other times. that's all out the window. i used to be optimistic and say this huge combat in congress will probably e bait at least when there's a national

emergency. well, after 2001 after 9/11, it really didn't. maybe for a couple months after the biggest economic crisis in 2008 since the great depression. so i'm almost saying when is that going to happen? so the result is i think you're right. we're going to be in a situation where presidents who wanted to get big things done will not try to do it in a bipartisan way as johnson did with civil rights and medicare, it will be probably much more the obama model with health care where you try to get big majorities. >> up against the clock. but really quickly. what's needed is an opposition that wants to govern. right now the republican party is filled with tea party who are sent to washington to stop things. to stop government. so until the republican party gets to the point where it decides it wants to compromise, where it's not a dirty word, big things won't happen. >> until the primaries stop

killing off republicans who do any compromising, that's one of the variables. i want to thank michael beshlosh. big news this morning in the chris christie investigation. that is straight ahead. you smarter about your insurance,because what you don't know can hurt you. what if you didn't know that collisions with wildlife on the road may not be covered? and that you could be liable for any accidents on your property? the more you know,the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum - bum♪ [announcer] call 1-800-farmers and see how much you could save. why relocating manufacturingpany to upstate new york? i tell people it's for the climate. the conditions in new york state are great for business. new york is ranked #2 in the nation for new private sector job creation.

and now it's even better because they've introduced startup new york - dozens of tax-free zones where businesses pay no taxes for ten years. you'll get a warm welcome in the new new york. see if your business qualifies at startupny.com

a big week of major dwoomts in the chris christie investigation with even more of them breaking this morning. first, the latest on the search for the missing passenger jet. the prime minister of australia said this morning he feels confident the pings that have been picked up by beacons are from flight 370's black boxes. he warned that the serge is likely to continue for a long time. four pings detected this week have allowed search crews to narrow the search zone. they haven't heard a new signal in the past three days and the race is on to fine the black boxes before their batteries run out. more information as it becomes available.

i'm l-i-s-a and i have copd, but i don't want my breathing problems to get in the way of hosting my book club. that's why i asked my doctor about b-r-e-o. once-daily breo ellipta helps increase airflow from the lungs for a full 24 hours. and breo helps reduce symptom flare-ups that last several days and require oral steroids, antibiotics, or hospital stay. breo is not for asthma. breo contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. it is not known if this risk is increased in copd. breo won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden copd symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. breo may increase your risk of pneumonia, thrush, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking breo. ask your doctor about b-r-e-o for copd. first prescription free at mybreo.com

sfuel reward card is really what makes it like two deals in one. salesperson #2: actually, getting a great car with 42

highway miles per gallon makes it like two deals in one. salesperson #1: point is there's never been a better time to buy a jetta tdi clean diesel. avo: during the first ever volkswagen tdi clean diesel event, get a great deal on a jetta tdi. it gets 42 highway miles per gallon. and get a $1,000 fuel reward card. it's like two deals in one. volkswagen has the most tdi clean diesel models of any brand. hurry in and get a $1,000 fuel reward card and 0.9% apr for 60 months on tdi models. bob will retire when he's 153, which would be fine if bob were a vampire. but he's not. ♪ he's an architect with two kids and a mortgage. luckily, he found someone who gave him a fresh perspective on his portfolio. and with some planning and effort, hopefully bob can retire at a more appropriate age. it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.

still ahead this morning, the big news in the chris christie investigation. first we're kicking off with a regular feature here. a close yup look at the most pivotal races of 2014, contests that will dempl if democrats hang on to the senate and which parties will end up in control of the most important state houses. we'll start today in a state where there was some big news on thursday. >> i want you all to know about a decision i have made. starting today i'm a candidate for the united states senate for the state of new hampshire. [ applause ] >> so now it's official. just over four years ago scott brown was an unknown state senator from massachusetts. then he scored a truly stunning upset when he won a special election to fill ted kennedy's term and made him a national star and he lost that seat to

elizabeth warren in 2012. he toyed with running in another special session. he also flirted for running with governor of massachusetts this year, but now he is a new resident of new hampshire seeking to unseat democrat jeanne shaheen. a little bit about the history he's up against. in the past 200-plus years, a total of 21 people who have managed to win election to the house from two different states. there's been one person who managed to get elected governor in two different states. there have been just two senators who served more than one state in their careers. both back in the 19th century when senators were still chosen by state legislatures. scott brown is trying to be the first elected by the voters in two different states. about the importance of this particular race, it is critical for democrats to win this one and here's why. right now they have a 55-45 majority in the senate. but there are seven democratic

held seats in states where president obama lost to mitt romney in 2012. there's only one republican held seat in a state where romney lost to obama. that means republicans have a lot more pickup opportunities than democrats. plus as we have talked about before, midterm elections are bad news for the party controlling the white house. so demrats have to hang on this fall if they are going to keep the senate. they voted for obama my six points in 2012 and has gone democratic in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. jeanne shaheen is finishing her first term and is relatively popular. she has a 49% approval rating. if she wins, it's not going to save the senate for democrats, but if she loses, it means they are in serious trouble. that same poll shows shaheen starting out with a six-point advantage over brown but look closer and there's good news for

democrats. brown's unfavorable rating in new hampshire is 10 points higher than favorable rating. a lot of suspicion. does blown have a chance of overcoming it? the defeat that snuffs out what for a moment there was a bright political star. joining me to discuss this we have frank phillips, the state house bureau cheech of "the boston globe" and casey hunten who is joining us from manchest manchester. obviously, big news up there is scott brown getting into this race. we show that poll that gives him the negative favorable rating starting out ten points more unfavorable than favorable. do you attribute that to this carpet bagger charge moving into new hampshire? do you get a sense that's early on in this campaign hurting him up there? >> democrats will say that what

they see in their own sort of surveys and as they talk to people is that there's this built in trust deficit that's based on this it idea he's a political opportunist. it's not even a carpet bagging charge. that's part of it. he only moved to new hampshire four months ago. what it really is, okay, he was in massachusetts. he was a republican. he couldn't win in massachusetts as a republican so he moved to new hampshire. and that's something that voters up here don't necessarily cotten on to. i have had a handful of conversations with people since i have been here. there's definitely this sense i don't know about that guy. and that's going to be the main hurdle he's going to have to overcome is to convince people that he really does actually mean what he says and does think it's about more than just wanting to win a senate seat, any senate seat. >> frank phillips, you covered him closely and have a really good sense of scott brown. i just wonder, the question i

have when i look at this is what happened to scott brown? he wasn't able to win the senate election in 2012 against elizabeth warren, but he left that race with strong personal popularity in massachusetts. governors seat opened in 2014. looked like he could be competitive there. it seems like a rather extreme move to switch states and try to run to the senate. did something go wrong for him in massachusetts after 2012? what's your sense of that? >> i think a lot of people are wondering, including those republican who is are great supporters with him back in 2010 and in 2012. they are very disenchanted with him. privately the republican leadership and activists are wondering why he didn't stay in massachusetts. he would have had a real shot at winning the seat that kerry vacated. then he could have run this time.

he would have been a strong candidate. and i think there's some real feelings here among the republicans that they feel that he's just out for himself and gone up to new hampshire and it's playing into that narrative. i do think he's going to be a very strong candidate. he knows how to campaign and he will do well up there. i don't know if he's going to win, but he left behind some hard feelings in massachusetts. >> the other thing i want to ask you about, the race between elizabeth warren and scott brown in 2012 was significant because there was a pact between the two candidates not to allow outside money, not to allow the big super pacs that have these huge expenditures going into races elsewhere in the country. scott brown has been asked about whether he would take that pledge in new hampshire. jeanne shaheen challenged him to take that pledge. he has literally laughed it off when he's been asked about it. it looks like he has no intention of following that same

pledge. do you think he attributes his loss in 2012 in massachusetts to not having that outside republican money? and if he does, is that a fair interpretation of why he lost in 2012? >> no, that's not a fair interpretation. he had plenty of money. huge amounts of money. more money was spent in that race by multiples than we have ever seen in massachusetts. it was incredible what warren and brown were able to bring in. and they didn't need super pacs up there. and i think he's not going to have that much problems raising his own money. he's got a national network. he's still a political rock star in some circles nationally, but having super pacs come in will help him. it will be effective and it's going to wash all over massachusetts again because they are going to be using the boston media market and we'll be watching it a great race up there. >> the bst on to tv stations are probably going to make a

fortune. one thing that scott brown really emphasized in his speech on thursday night was health care, obamacare, just bashing it. in a way that sort of likes like the republican template for 2014. with the good news that's come out for the administration in terms of enrollments, but the fact that new hampshire is a state they are doing the medicaid expansion so repealing it would have extra complications in new hampshire. what do you make of that strategy? running against obamacare, he was the canary in the coal mine. he showed there was going to a backlash. but four years later, is it going to be a little different? >> there are a couple things here. the medicaid expansion was backed by many republicans in the legislature. so the politics of that up here are a little tricky. one thing democrats want to hear from scott brown is whether or not he would back to have expanded medicaid. second of all, democrats will also say that this is a place

that's heard the anti-obamacare message over and over and over again, more than maybe any other state in the country because they went through it in 2010, again in 2012 with the presidentials, we'll go through it again this time around. they are counting on there being this sense of anti-obamacare fatigue. people are tired of hearing about it. that said, it is going to be a big issue. shaheen is going to have to figure out a way to finesse her message on that. you've seen vulnerable senate democrats take this more aggressive tact of saying we need to fix this it law. so far we haven't seen senator shaheen step out with an aggressive message, so it will be interesting to see whether that's where she goes with it. >> how does she handle the affordable care act? does he run on it, run away from

it. my thanks to frank and casey. what could be big trouble just ahead for john boehner's job security. that's next. to upstate new york? i tell people it's for the climate. the conditions in new york state are great for business. new york is ranked #2 in the nation for new private sector job creation. and now it's even better because they've introduced startup new york - dozens of tax-free zones where businesses pay no taxes for ten years. you'll get a warm welcome in the new new york. see if your business qualifies at startupny.com 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. allthat's it?go out to dinner. i mean, he picks up the tab every time, which is great... he's using you. he probably has a citi thankyou card and gets 2x the points at restaurants. huh

the citi thankyou preferred card. now earn 2x the points on dining out, with no annual fee. go to citi.com/thankyoucards

plans for another conservative cue became public on thursday. one journal reported a group of conservatives say they have 50 members committed to ousting boehner and electing a new speaker. the math isn't exact. based on the current balance of the house, they need 17 republicans to defect in order to deny boehner the 218 votes he needs to win the speaker's gavel. that number will change if republicans pick up more seats, it will take more republicans to oust baoehner.

if this feels like deja vu, it should. 12 fellow republicans refused to vote for him for speaker. it was not quite enough to beat him, but it was more than enough to put a square into him. the effort was disorganized. but his national journal reporter writes, this time around unlike the ham-firsted mutiny, rebels are broadening their offensive beyond boehner's gavel. people are also fed up with eric cantor. they forced a voice vote to delay cuts in payments to doctors. cantor allowed the bill to pass without giving conservatives a chance to register their resistance and so they are mad by that. "i'm getting used to being deceived by the obama administration, but when my own leadership does it, it's just

not acceptable." now conservatives may only accept cantor as speaker if he brings another conservative into the leadership team with him. can the most conservative members pull off a cue? will boehner just step aside? can they find someone to win majority support on the house floor? given all the grief he takes from his own side, is this a job john boehner even wants to fight for anymore. we have the senior editor at the new republic. congratulations on your new gig there. i guess i will start with asking to game this out. you had a really good piece this week sort of looking at how inept the republican conservative planning has been on this, but let's say we kbet past the november elections and this group of republicans is 20 or 30 strong, enough to deny boehner those magic votes. what happens then? >> so it doesn't just go to the second place finisher. they basically go to the second round of voting. if nobody wins the majority,

they go to the third round. this process could continue indefinitely. what would r more likely happen would be either boehner would get nervous or embarrassed or acknowledge that there was too much resistance and step aside voluntarily, or he could press ahead. it sort of matters where this rebel faction has an alternative. if you have 30 or 40 people voting against him, that's a pretty strong statement, but if those 30 or 40 people are voting for a variety of different people to be speaker, then there's no alternative. there's no heir apparent to boehner and for other republicans to rally around. eventually they are going to have to either find someone or just have this disorganized sort of statement of opposition that fizzles out because there's nobody in line to succeed

boehner. >> in terms of boehner, part of it is maybe to scare him into stepping down. you're talking about what would happen next january. if we're just talking about this november's elections and you get 25 of these republicans able to g on the record saying, that's it it, we're done with boehner, do you think boehner just says, that's it, i'm done? is that the end right there? >> i personally think that the outcome of the election is going to determine whether boehner will run again. it's hard for me to see even a robust faction deposing boehner if he is speaker during an election in which republicans gain seats. particularly in an election like this where it doesn't look like republicans are poised to have a big victory. if he can pull one off for them, he can decide whether he wants to be speaker or not and they are the not going to have the juice to depose him. if they lose seats, they are going to have a stronger argument. the election is going to be a determining factor. these stories where the conservatives start getting louder and louder tend to happen

as you said, after the leadership does something to tick them off. this time it was the dock fix but earlier it was noises about immigration reform. and it happens from time to time. when boehner does their bidding, it kind of quiets down. so i think that it might be reasonable to interpret this as sort of like a statement of anger at the leadership and an effort to bully them into towing the conservative line between now and the election. >> and we're a little short on time, but that gets me to my question. you talk about these instances where boehner was forced to back down, forced to do their bidding and that's been the story of his speaker sh speakership. my question is why does he want this job when he has such little latitude to do anything on his own? >> he himself when he's asked do you like this job, he says i need this job like i need a hole in my head. he publically talks about how difficult it is. i think in a way he's worried about what happens if somebody who is much more in line with

tea party type conservatism or somebody who is more disorganized or more opportunist were to get the gavel where weather it would be worse for the republicans than his speakership has been. just because it's such a fractious group of people that he thinks he's capable of doing the best job of holding it together. that may actually be true. he's had a rough speakership, but it's not just because he's a hapless fellow. he's trueing to rule over this conference that's incredibly unruly. i don't think he has confidence that there's anybody in line to succeed him that could do a better job. >> my thanks to brian with the new republic. that big news this morning in the chris christie investigation. we have been teasing it, it's coming up next. ♪ [ male announcer ] you're watching one of the biggest financial services companies in the country at work. hey. thanks for coming over. hey.

[ male announcer ] how did it come to be? yours? ah. not anymore. it's a very short story. come on in. [ male announcer ] by meeting you more than halfway. it's how edward jones makes sense of investing.

breaking news this morning in the chris christie investigation. but first the latest in the search for the passenger jet. the prime minister of australia saying had morning he feels confident that the pings that

have been picked up are from flight 370's black boxes, but he warned the search is likely to continue for a long time. four pings detected this week have allowed crews to narrow the search zone. the race is on to find the black boxes before the batteries run out. more information as it becomes available. big news in the chris christie investigation, right after this. 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.

try new olay fresh effects everything off wipes to remove makeup. and bright on schedule eye roller to instantly depuff. for instant beauty sleep, no sleep required. we have some breaking news in the investigation surrounding new jersey governor chris christie's administration and his top political appointees. this morning's "wall street journal" reports that manhattan district attorney has issued a subpoena last month for records from the port authority of new york and new jersey. if the subpoena seeks information on some of the agency's highest profile projects in correspondence among top officials. we have not been able to confirm this independently, but this information being sought target

to a source cited by the journal relates to projects in new jersey. the construction of a new path commuter station there. while the subpoena sought kor spon sense and chris christie's administration, it didn't seek similar correspondence with the governor who shares control of the authority. this comes after the u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york subpoenaed records relating to potential conflicts of interest having to do with david sampson. until recently served as both the chairman of the port authority and politically connected law firm. he withdrew the subpoena and referred to the u.s. attorney for new jersey and journals report states that the advance subpoena covers similar ground. governor christie announced david sampson's resignation on march 28th, the day after the review asserted that neither he

nor anyone except bridget kelly and david wildstein was backbehind the lane closures that snarled traffic. soon we will be learning more about that internal review. the co-chairman of the legislative committee investigating the bridge tie-up says he's received 75 names of people that the investigators talked to for their report and that on monday, that could be a committee excepts to receive the memos. there are no recordings from those interviews, but the committee expects to get them this coming monday. as you can tell from the past few hours a lot has happened this week into the investigation of the christie administration. some other lesser known players came into the spotlight. so we're going to spend the next few minutes breaking it down for you. what you need to know, and more importantly, who you need to know to understand everything that's been happening in new jersey.

the first name to keep track of is paul fishman. he's the person who has the job governor christie used to have. he's the united states attorney for new jersey. his office has been looking into his predecessor's administration these past four months. we hadn't been hearing about what's going on in fishman's office, at least not until this week. it's when the legal news website reported that david wildstein, the fomer port authority official in the thick of the lane closures, that he recently spent days talking with investigators. no one can say just yet what that means whether he's cooperating with the investigation as part of a deal that's unclear. his attorney has made it clear that wildstein would talk for immunity. the investigation does seem to be active especially when you add this report about david wildstein to this revelation that someone testified in newark last friday. name number two to keep track of

is charlie mckenna, governor christie's chief council. he secretly met with fishman's office back in january. he knows the attorney's office well, he spent 18 years there as a federal prosecutor. that was before joining christie's administration as director of homeland security. that's the position he was in last fall when governor christie says that mckenna was among the two people he asked to look into the lane closures. the internal christie administration investigation into the lane closures he took part in preparing bill baroni for testimony before the committee last november. that's the testimony in which he repeatedly insisted the fort lane closures were part of a traffic study and blasted the town for their privileged access to the george washington bridge. he was also apparently in

contact with david wildstein after the testimony. he texted a worried baroni charlie says you did great. this is another person who was talking to the federal prosecutor fishman. and another person who has been talking with fishman in a different capacity is reid schaar, a former assistant u.s. attorn attorney. he's currently heading up the state legislature's lane closures. he argued last motto compel former christie aids to turn over their documents. which brings us to the judge who oversaw that case. her name is mary jacobson. it was her ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in new jersey. the judge denied the order to force them to turn over documents and put out a 98-page opinion calling the subpoenas

issued "extremely broad." a blanket subpoena calling for a fishing expedition justifies a blanket response. in this case, a blanket denial. jac jacobson ruled they might have had a chance if they were narrower in scope. specific documents rather than a broad swath that was requested gi by the committee. if they had done that the subpoenas might have been enforced. the committee says it's considering narrow the scope of those subpoenas and are also suggesting they will call them to testify though they are likely to only hear the fifth amendment invoked over and over again. we think there's one final person you ought to know about this week. steve sweeney, the senate president. instead of being a formal prosecutor like everyone else, he's a former iron worker.

sweeney was a footnote in the new yorker which he outlined why his mentor no longer seems to support christie. he tried to remove his son as the republican leader in the state senate because kain had tried to defeat sweeney and his allies in south jersey. on tuesday the day before the decision was happened down, sweeney suggested that the committee might be finished if they did not win their argument in jacobson's courtroom and needed to hand over those documents saying it's tomb to walk away and not interfere with the investigation. sweeney ended up walking back those comments hours later, but his point had gotten across. all the energy in the investigation of the administration has now shifted to the courthouse in newark. chris christie's former office, that of the u.s. attorney, a job whose power he is revelled in.

joining me to to talk about all of this we have lisa brennan, the reporter from maine justice who broke many of the stories with just talked about. brian wise, a criminal defense attorney and friend of the the show. paul butler, now a professor at georgetown law school. brian thompson, new jersey reporter. a friend of the show who frequently joins us on this topic. lisa, i want to start with you because your reporting was the most substantial this week and sort of advanced the story most this week. the thing that stands out most that you reported was about david wildstein meeting with paul fishman and his prosecutors for a few days. can you tell us more of the details of when that was and anything you know about what was discussed, how that came about, what we should make of what you're reporting. >> i think it's a sign that wildstein is beginning the process of maybe cutting a deal

or getting immunity. that process involves him letting them know exactly how much information he has and what the quality of the information is. and because we know he was the anonymous blogger, we know that he has a lot of information from those days and he may be going over that and the information he has with respect to all the different scandals. >> so paul, from a prosecutor's standpoint, tell us how this works. if you were dealing with somebody like david wildstein s there a way to call him in or call his lawyer in and have conversations where you find out what they know, but it's sort of office the record. there's no deal cut. what would you be doing as a prosecutor in this situation? >> i would be playing footsie, which is what these lawyers are doing. you're trying to find out what they know. even at this early stage, you're always thinking about a potential criminal trial.

who would make the best witness, whether you want to make a deal, that taints the witness a little bit. you only want to make a deal if they have the goods. you want to see what they have to share whether it's something that implicates the big guy whether it's worth your while. >> take us through pr a defense lawyer standpoint. we don't know the full circumstances of this apparent wildstein meeting with the u.s. attorney, but if you're a defense attorney and you're going in there in this situation, take us through what that conversation is like. what kinds of things are you saying? how is something like this negotiated? >> there's the fancy legal term, which is what do you know? but what you're going to do is you are going to tell the investigators i know this, this is who i can give you. if you're investigating crimes involving federal jurisdiction,

i'm not a lawyer, but i may play one on tv, but this is what i think these people may have been involved in. now as you pointed out, anything that you say during that session can't be used against you in the event that you have a falling out. but any lawyer who sends a client in to talk to any investigative body without knowing what the end game is, i have a ful funny feeling it's going to be cleaning the green room here next week. >> so what is your sense? what are people saying about it? >> i think what we're seeing here is david wildstein, who was tossed under the bus by the governor and his staff has become an enemy now of governor christie. that's pretty much common perception at this point. that if anybody is going to do damage, it's going to be david wildstein. and not to play a lawyer on tv here, brian and paul, but my friend joe hayden tells me

you're indicted by your enemies, but you're convicted by your friends. and so whoever is going to end up indicted, if anybody is indicted out of this and we're not saying the governor will or anybody on his staff, we don't know, but if there is a criminal case to pursue here, they have the first leg with david wildstein, as lisa has suggested in her reporting or appear to have the first leg or trying to develop that, and then the question is can they build that case of former friends or friends or whatever that will eventually convict whomever it is they go after. >> there's been no indication. one thing i keep saying is the process playing out in fishman's open is opaque. lisa managed to get some reporting out of there, but when you think of when chris christie was u.s. attorney, things leaked out of there all the time. . it wasn't that hard to find out. it's been very hard for reporters to find out what's going on in that office.

by all indications, there's been no indications that bridget kelly appeared before this grand jury. that bridget kelly has been in for any of these meetings. her lawyer has put out a statement saying we want a deal. is there any significance to that? >> i think she could be next. in terms of talking to prosecutors. but yes, her lawyer has put out that she's willing to cooperate and she obviously has very valuable information. so it's not clear when that will happen. i think wildstein may take awhile longer. >> so could it get to the situation where it's like who has the better -- let's make a deal? >> that's absolutely what will happen. you can't immunize everybody. they are snitches. so if there's a jury, it's going to look at their testimony

suspiciously and the more snitches you have, the weaker your case is. so i would be surprised if there's immunity for both wildstein and kelly. i think they will choose. there might be a deal with someone else. but in terms of what you said, if there's a prosecution, i'm starting to think there's going to be a prosecution. because prosecutors are kind of like vultures. if they see a juicy case, they zoom in on it. what you reported about the manhattan district attorney, we have the new york federal prosecutor and the new jersey federal prosecutor all wanting a piece of the case. it sounds like there's something here. >> i want to pick that up exactly the news about the manhattan district attorney now getting involved in this too. sort of multiple jurisdictions here. i want to pick up the conversation about what exactly the federal crime might be here and we talk about the lane closures, but there's so much involved. i want to see how that is being separated by these law enforcement entities. we'll talk about that when we

come back. gunderman group is a go. yes! not just a start up. an upstart. 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.

add vanishing deductible from nationwide insurance and get $100 off for every year of safe driving. we put members first. join the nation. ♪ nationwide is on your side can you start tomorrow? yes sir. alright. let's share the news tomorrow. today we failrly busy. tomorrow we're booked solid. we close on the house tomorrow. i want one of these opened up. because tomorow we go live... it's a day full of promise. and often, that day arrives by train. big day today? even bigger one tomorrow. when csx trains move forward, so does the rest of the economy. csx. how tomorrow moves.

without standard leather. you are feeling exhilarated with front-wheel drive. you are feeling powerful with a 4-cylinder engine. [ male announcer ] open your eyes... to the 6-cylinder, 8-speed lexus gs. with more standard horsepower than any of its german competitors. this is a wake-up call. ♪

we want to take a minute and talk about new jersey -- u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. might have seen his names in the headlines for clash iing with governor cuomo. but there's another threat here. maine justice reported this week that the public corruption unit is looking into the port authority side of the christie investigation. told that this is not yet the case. he says he doesn't know what fishman's office is doing but implied his office is watching and is ready to stand in. >> i think i can say fairly that when something is serious and something has gotten the kind of attention that the issue described has that all hands are on deck. >> you may remember that a few weeks ago, the southern district of new york subpoenaed david samp on's law firm only to

quickly withdraw that subpoena in deference to fishman. lisa is with us and you obviously reporting on what they have done and is up to now. you were doing some reporting this morning about the manhattan district attorney now maybe getting involved. i know you have been doing some reporting on that. can you talk about those two pieces? not fishman, but the u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york and the manhattan district attorney, what it is you suspect they are looking at and what role they are going to play in all of this? >> well, they have chatted with fishman apparently and they are cooperating. so they have deferred sdny's to new jersey. if when new jersey is done they feel they have more to pursue, then they can under rule six, they can begin their investigation.

>> do you think -- he deferred -- chose to defer to paul fishman. they advanced basically very similar information to what the office subpoenaed. do you suspect advance will be told to defer? >> it i think they have people in that office that i think there will be communication between fishman's office now that it's out there. i think vance will proceed and where it gets tricky is in turning over information and calling witnesses. and if there's a witness that fishman wants, fishman trumps vance's investigation so they will have to wait. but there's a distinct possibility that vance's investigation could help fishman's so there's a good reason for them to work

together. >> a couple different issue here's. we talk about wildstein and kelly and the lane closures and what was behind that, but there's also the issues about david sampson and partly through the interview with the mayor of hoboken who talked about sandy age was linked to the development project and was represented by david sampson's law firm. a big part of this seems to be the david sampson. >> at vance's level, everybody is focused on sampson right now. and i know with the committee, for example, the legislative committee that was weinberg are heading up, they are looking very seriously at when they bring their witnesses, they are not stopping with this decision by judge jacobsen. they are looking at putting witnesses on the stand again and my sourcing indicates that could very well be some of these port

authority official who is testified last fall to the transportation committee the bridge had the division had maybe the executive director of the port authority to find out what sampson's role was in an official capacity as chairman of the port authority how he maneuvered, how he worked. the governor crihristie called m a hands off guy. all of our information is exactly the opposite that he was a hands on guy. and if he was a hands on guy, that means there's probably a paper trail. there's certainly a witness trail. if you start digging into that as the committee, lord only knows what they are going to uncover that might help either the federal investigation or vance's. >> what about the legislative committee's role going forward? the judge's ruling saying you can't compel the documents. it puts something in there that technically the committee has the power to give them immunity.

but what role can that legislative committee play going forward. >> not a great deal. i have always believed that this legislative inquiry, partisan t aaa to paul fishman's big-league investigation. i really think in large part the legislative investigation jumped the shark when judge jacobson shut them down. they can talk about all they want about going forward, but i think at this point what we've seen now are prosecutors at every level fighting over their piece of turf like the jets and the sharks. there is not going to be anything left in the event the legislative committee decides they can breathe life into an investigation that i think is doa. >> so when we -- focusing back on paul fishman and the federal investigation, whether it's dealing with david samson or the bridge lane closure, we know a couple things this week. we know from judge jacobson's ruling she's basically saying, yeah, there's a federal investigation under way and we know there's this grand jury that's taking some testimony.

it suggests to me at least as a layman that paul fishman's office believes a federal crime could be involved which would put it in his jurisdiction. how long, do you have an expectation or a sense how long these things usually take to put together? are we talking about something that a year from now we're still going to be waiting for some kind of indictment or is this something that we could see in the next few weeks? >> i doubt it's going to be the next few weeks. it's more likely a year from now. in the district of columbia we have a federal investigation of our mayor that started three years ago. there was a primary where he was running. he doesn't know whether he's going to be indicted. so these things take as long as they take for the prosecutor to get evidence. you know, charging someone with a federal crime is a big deal, and again, i've said before, if you go after the king, you've got to kill them. so they only want to do this if they have got the best evidence. so they start real low. now the guy they brought into the grand jury last week is low level. they already knew what he was going to say because they

interviewed him. the only reason they brought him to the grand jury is to preserve his testimony. so it sounds like they're preparing a case but i think it's going to be longer rather than sooner. >> society political context of this is that chris christie is very much hoping to resume his political career. he went right out to vegas for that republican event as soon as the internal report was out. it sounds like this cloud will be over his head for the indefinite future. up next, what do we know now that we didn't know last week. first, the latest on that search for the missing malaysia passenger jet. the prime minister of australia saying this morning that he feels confident the pings being picked up from underwater beacons are from flight 370's black boxes. four pings detected this week by underwater buoys have allowed crews to narrow the search zone. they haven't heard it for the past three days. more information as it becomes available. we asked people a question,

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. ♪

it's time to find out what our guests know now they didn't

know when the week began. paul, we will start with you. >> i learned that if you have to be the subject of a federal investigation, it's great that it's a white collar investigator because you have great lawyers. the judge's opinion was a ringing endorsement of the fifth amendment, the value against the privilege of self incrimination. most people don't get the benefit of that process, including the 14 million people who get arrested every year. so bridget kelly and stepien are lucky. >> it helps to have top flight lawyers. left field. jeb bush may be a candidate for president, pundits say no. as long as he keeps people stringing along, it sucks all the air out of the donors and the moderate republicans who are wondering who they're going to support. when jeb bush drops out, if the investigation is short, who's left? chris christie. >> there's the chris christie comeback scenario. lisa. >> i think i learned that if you're a law firm hired by a governor who needs an internal investigation, and you're going

to do a comprehensive and exhaustive investigation, you need not record a thing. >> it makes you wonder how much of an investigation this was versus how much of a defense document this was. brian. >> as a criminal defense attorney whose clients walk into court as a two to three touchdown underdog and the notion of criminal justice being like government intelligence or jumbo shrimp, i know the constitution is alive and well in the garden state. props to this judge for recognizing this, what it was, an overly broad fishing expedition. major props to judge jacobson. >> two lawyers agree that was the right ruling this week. we'd love to have seen those documents but i guess somebody will soon enough. i want to thank paul butler, lisa brennan, brian wice. up next is melissa harris-perry. the problem isn't likely to go away... ...on its own. so it's time we do something about it.

and there's help. premarin vaginal cream. a prescription that does what no over-the-counter product was designed to do. it provides estrogens to help rebuild vaginal tissue and make intercourse more comfortable. premarin vaginal cream treats vaginal changes due to menopause and moderate-to-severe painful intercourse caused by these changes. don't use premarin vaginal cream if you've had unusual bleeding, breast or uterine cancer, blood clots, liver problems, stroke or heart attack, are allergic to any of its ingredients or think you're pregnant. side effects may include headache, pelvic pain, breast pain, vaginal bleeding and vaginitis. estrogen may increase your chances of getting cancer of the uterus, strokes, blood clots or dementia, so use it for the shortest time based on goals and risks. estrogen should not be used to prevent heart disease, heart attack, stroke or dementia. ask your doctor about premarin vaginal cream. and go to premarinvaginalcream.com

this is worth talking about. (meowright on cue. (laughs) it's more than just a meal, it's meow mix mealtime. with wholesome ingredients and irresistible taste, no wonder it's the only one cats ask for by name. thcar loan didn't start here. it began way, way back. before he had children. before he got married. it started in his very first apartment. see that overdue bill? it arrived after he moved out. and he never got it. but he's not worried. checking his credit report and score at experian.com allowed him to identify and better address the issue... ... and drive off into the sunset.

experian . live credit confident.™ ♪ 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. this morning my question, is president obama winning his leg