armed services committee, someone who knows the issue of benghazi very well, as well as what the military response was. you also have adam schiff with the appropriations and also on the permanent select committee on intelligence, so he knows a lot of the intel back ground. then you have linda sanchez, on weighs and means, and tammy duckworth, armed services committee member. tammy duckworth was wounded in had the wars over this past decade. someone who democrats like to have front and center on national security issues because she's so well versed in that culture. the big story here, joy, is that nancy pelosi after going back and forth within her conference and, there is a division in the leadership. jim cli burn said they should not participate in this because it gives too much credit to this "kangaroo court." ultimately, made the decision it was better too participate in order to check republicans on the spot, especially if there was high profile democratic members that were called before this committee through subpoena. perhaps someone like a hillary clinton. perhaps someone like a john

kerry. now with cummings on here, with smith on here, with schiff, the rest of these folks, you're going to see this really be kind of the story of the summer, and wait for these hearings to become contentious and you're going to see democrats on the spot sort of save the people that are called before to testify as well as push back on what republicans say about the investigation. so they ultimately made a decision that was better to be there than to just let the gop roll without any confrontation. >> well, i mean, look. i think that -- you got really to the question that i was going to ask you. there was, you know, as you said, a bitter division over whether or not democrats were legitimizing or potentially legitimizing what they have said is a kangaroo court by participating. what reaction are you hearing now from democrats who did oppose participating in this committee, the jim clibournes of the world? >> those folks do not like the decision, but when i spoke to one of them before i came over here, what they said is, well, we're still waiting to hear what exactly nancy pelosi agreed to with john boehner about the perimeters of how this committee

would operate. remember, joy, it gets a little technical, but a lot of the issues that were holding up democrats from participating aside from giving credit was were they going to be staem rolled simply by the rules set up? in the sense of would they be able to challenge sums? would they have subpoena power themselves? would they be stiffled because they had less members on the committee, the republicans had the controlling majority? john boehner and nancy pelosi had a series of one-on-one meetings over the last few days. i spoke to one boehner aide who told me we do not -- assurances were made that there would be equality on this and it would not hurt necessarily the construct of the committee or its ability to investigate, but i think those democrats like jim clibourn, they're going to be eegtory hear what nancy pelosi agreed to for purmz of the select committee so they feel like they were not completely railroaded on this. >> i want to bring in colonel jack jacobs, an msnbc military analyst and medal of honor winner. are you surprised by the democrats deciding to do

full-throated participation in these benghazi hearings? >> i would have been surprised if they decided to let it go by. if you are not involved, then you can't control in any way the ark of the discussion, the nashtive, and the narrative would all be on the other side. at least you get to control some of the narrative and you get to rebutt. it makes more sense for anybody on the other side of the discussion more sense for it to be involved, and not only that, if you put your big guns there, you're going to be able to stand up and get what you think is the right story through. >> one more question to you, jack. as a military matter, i mean, you've had the house armed services committee look at this. it seems that much of the military piece of this is kind of close, right? even republicans who investigated previously said that they were satisfied that the department of defense, that the united states military was honest and forth right and really couldn't have done much more. do you see unanswered questions from the military's perspective

on benghazi? >> looking at it strictly from the standpoint of somebody who has been involved in combat and who understands, like a lot of other people do, what the situation on the ground was, it seems difficult to envision that there will be any revelations that haven't already been out there. interesting questions abound, however. what was the ambassador doing in benghazi? there was an active fight going on. all that stuff is going to be answered. from the standpoint of responding with military power, you first have to ask the question, what is it that -- what's on the ground? how big a force do you need to contend with it? how are you going to deal with it? those questions were impossible to determine at the time. can't envision there's going to be any news on that story as a result of the investigation. >> what about this idea that there's been a per accepting that this is all about politics for republicans. they've been fundraising on it. various committees both inside the republican party proper and outside sending out fundraising

emails, and this sense that it was sort of unserious, do you think that now the democrats getting involved in it really legitimizing it really changes that perception? >> i think the folks who this was originally created for which can you make the argument that it was done to appeal to the red meat eaters to the house gop conference, because, remember, john boehner had tried to avoid doing the select committee for some time saying let these committees go through the process and find what they will find. he eventually had to do this because of those new emails that came out that really infuriate a lot of members of this congress. republicans will no doubt say, well, look, nancy pell owes where i is participating. she believes this is just as an important thing, and they will probably fundraise off of that down the line. remember, so much gets lost through the message once it comes from washington and goes to the home districts. it gets to be a whole other issue for the absence of local newspapers. press releases are printed in the local newspaper as fact, and you can literally print what you want, and i suspect in this case

it will be nancy pelosi being a part of this gives it credibility. >> for a hillary clinton or john kerry if they have to go before this committee, and at the end of the day that's really where you'll see can elijah cummings and the other members sort of say, hey, by our responses, we're proving to you that this is, in fact, not legitimate, that, this in fact, a side show. it is a kangaroo court. can they do that? the onus is really on them to perform that. >> it's now up to democrats to demonstrate through what they do

in these hearings to sort of say, no, this is really a done deal, ala what colonel jacobs said. >> it's interesting to see whether you can continue to claim if something is a kangaroo court if you are, too, playing the role of a kangaroo. we will continue to watch. we're waiting for nancy pelosi come out and make this formal announcement. the democrats who apparently now will participate, five democrats who will participate in the select committee on benghazi, and the united states house of representatives. we want to go now to the other big story out of washington today, which is the controversy and the veterans administration which today found president obama making his first public remarks in three weeks about the growing scandal. republicans, not surprisingly, are mounting pointed attacks on the president for how he has handled the unfolding crisis. the president spoke just a short time ago with pressure mounting on him to address a controversy involving allegations of long wait times, cooked books, and investigations of facilities in at least 26 cities. today the president promised

there would be condefenses for anyone involved in wrong doing. >> if there's any misconduct, whether it's allegations of the v.a. staff covering up long wait times or cooking the books, i will not stand for it. not as commander in chief, but also not as an american. none of us should. >> with less than six months to go before the 2014 midterms, politics are never far away. the v.a. scandal is no different. today several republicans release statements with perhaps their harshest hits to date on how president obama has managed the controversy. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell managed to mix obama care with the v.a. scandal saying when the website for obama care wasn't working, president obama publically and repeatedly pledged to get it working. i'm disappointed he has not pledged as loudly and as repeatedly to do the right thing for our nation's veterans. they deserve more attention than a failed website.

while gop chair said our veterans have had enough. they deserve results, and we all deserve more from our president. it's time for an independent investigation. colonel jack jabdz, i want to ask you about this as well. we now have another call for yet another investigation by rnc chair. let's talk about the v.a. scandal. it's from the american legion. they have, in fact, not backed off from that. do you believe the president's announcement will soften that criticism? >> i don't think so. part of the president's problem is that it took him so long to come to the fore and talk about it, and i think he and his aides figured it would go away, it would get fixed, it would go off the public consciousness. >> if you don't get to it soon and you don't demonstrate that you're really interested, especially something that's as

emotionally leyden as dealing -- taking care of our veterans, you don't do it soon, you're going to be in big trouble. >> you and i were talking off the air about colonel shinseki, who is somebody who during the run-up to the iraq war, he was the guy who was trying to tell the truth and trying -- took a lot of heat for trying to explain the real costs of war. does he have a cache of goodwill from veterans as a result of really being on the right side of being a good guy during the iraq war part of his tenure? does he get sort of any -- i guess any room to run from veterans now? >> no. short answer is no. i mean, everybody likes him. he was a great general. he was a fantastic combat soldier and a wonderful human being. i have known him for 40 years. he will be the first to tell thaw the boss is responsible for everything that happens or fails to happen. for his part, he, in fact, has reduced wait times and there are

a lot of good things that he has done, but at the end of the day too much water has gone under the bridge. it will be extremely difficult for him to fix with whatever resources he is going to be gin. fix a system that is essentially not only broken, but in my view, in my judgment, is actually incapable of delivering what we want it to deliver. >> that's a strong statement. does that go to who the specific political appointee is at the head of the v.a., or does it go to a system that is much more deeply rooted than that? >> deeply rooted than that. it doesn't matter who rnz the department veterans affairs. it doesn't matter how much money you throw at it. during sequestration, we threw more money at the department of veterans affairs because we didn't want to shortchange veterans. it doesn't matter how much money you give them. the structure of the organization is incapable of delivering what we really want and what we really need, and that is timely first class medical care for all of our veterans. it will never be able to do it no matter what you give them. >> does congress have a role to play?

the focus has been on the white house. does congress have some role to play? >> you bet it does. they're supposed to be at the forefront of structuring things for the executive branch to deliver, and they haven't been. they've been noticeably absent, quiet. everybody -- there's a lot of blame to go around, and it's at both ends. >> thank you very much for being here. >> also want to belatedly thank luke russert for being with us for the breaking news this morning. we are keeping an eye, by the way, on capitol hill where house democratic leader nancy pell owes where i is about to name the five house select committee members the democrats will send on benghazi, and as i speak, here she comes. nancy pelosi coming to the podium now. let's take a listen to what she has to say.

>> good afternoon. what happened in benghazi on september 11th, 2012 was a tragedy for the families and loved ones, for those that were lost -- who lost their lives, for america's diplomatic corps and for all americans. unfortunately, the republican obsession about benghazi has not been about the victims or their families or our country. we had hoped that the house republican leaders would not go down the path forming a select committee. we've already been there. eight reviews have been conducted in the house and senate. 25,000 documents released. it was not necessary to put the families or our country through this partisan exercise once again. over the past two weeks we have

engaged in good faith discussions with speaker boehner on the shape and standards of the select committee. we had hoped for a level of fairness and transparency and balance. especially considering the subject matter. we were want able to reach any agreement. regrettably, the republican approach does not prevent the unacceptable and repeated abuses committed by chairman issa in any meaningful way. that is all the more reason for democrats to participate it's a fair hearing and process. to try to bring some openness and transparency to what's going on. what is the purpose of this investigation? what is the timetable? what are the milestones? is what are they hoping to achieve? i could have argued this either

way. why give any validity to this effort? i do think it is important for the american people to have the pursuit of these questions done in a fair and open and balanced way as possible. that's simply not possible leaving it to the republicans. that's why i'm appointing my distinguished colleagues here today to serve on the select committee. i'm so proud of them and all that they do for the american people. and for their constituents at home. congressman elijah cummings will be the ranking member. he is the ranking member on the committee on the oversight and government reform. congressman adam smith, the ranking member on armed services committee has agreed to serve. congressman adam schiff, committee on appropriations, subcommittee on state and foreign operations. very important to this

discussion. and as a member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. congresswoman linda sanchez, and committee of weighs and means, and subcommittee of oversight. congresswoman tammy duckworth, serving on armed services committee and the committee on government oversight and government reform. mr. cummings committee. their leadership and persistence, we will do right by the families of the victims. by the way, two families have communicated with us saying don't take us down this path again. why are -- is this being done? we hope that we can shine a light on where our focus should be, preventing strategy on benghazi from ever happening again. i told the speaker in a phone call i just had with him that i'm hopeful that ranking member cummings and chairman gowdy can come to some better terms on how we proceed and it is with that hope and his great leadership

that i present the chairman of our ranking member on this committee, mr. cummings. >> thank you very much, madam leader, and i, too, agree with you that we must be in pursuit of fairness and transparency not only for the families of these great americans who we lost in libya, but also for the american people. i do not believe the select committee has called for after eight reports dozens of witness interviews in a review of more than 25,000 pages of documents. many of the so-called unanswered questions republicans have been raising recently have already been answered in these previous

reports. a fair open or dined to conduct a neutral reason, fact-based inquiry. i want to thank my colleagues who have also agreed to participate. first, as you know, i've served as the ranking member on the oversight committee for the past three years. in that role i have seen firsthand how abusive the republicans have been during this investigation. they've issued unilateral subpoenas. thief made unsubstantiated accusations with no evidence to back them up, and they have released selective excerpts of

documents and transcripts that distort the truth. in some instances, when they have exculpatory evidence right at hand. they falsely accused secretary of state of misleading congress about reducing security in benghazi, a claim the washington fact checker gave four pinocchios. second, the family members of ambassador stevens have pleaded publicly for this not to be politicized. let me read to you their words, and i quote, "what chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be used for political purposes." so i feel that i owe it to the families, of ambassador stevens and the other brave americans who lost their precious lives to

bring some minimal level of balance to this process and to check false claims wherever they may arise. in short, ladies and gentlemen, i believe we need someone in that room to simply defend the truth. defend the truth. that is why i have agreed to serve. let me just close by saying that rather than fundraising off of the murders of these four brave americans -- i must tell i find that despicable. i believe the best way to honor these men is to bring their killers to justice and work in a bipart sfwlan way to strengthen security for all u.s. personnel overseas. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> so colonel jack jacobs, just heard -- you just heard nancy pelosi announce the five

members. she's standing there with elijah cummings. very sober and in a way saying we don't think this is legitimate, and here's why we're going to participate. very odd. you and i were i think maybe agreeing on this. is the reason this feels so odd because we just have gotten out of the habit of seeing the congress do normal bipartisan oversight? i mean, when something like we lost 228 marines in beirut, we have had tragedies happen before that involve our overseas assets, and there is an investigation that happens, but why does this one seem different to you? >> very much different. we've got through a period of time in the last few years in which there's been very little bipartisan agreement on where this country is headed, how it should get there, so it seems very, very unusual. this whole thing is a little prickly. if you go back in time, and i'm old enough just to remember -- i'm old enough to remember the revolutionary war. i'm only 29. >> exactly. >> the fact of the matter is

many my recollection the congress used to do all kinds of things. all kinds of investigations into a wide variety of advancing and things that they wanted to accomplish in a bipartisan way. put a commission together where they had bipartisan investigations at the committee ask subcommittee level happened all the team. less so now. that's very uncomfortable. it's one of the reasons why every poll demonstrates that the people of the electorate has a very low opinion of the congress. very bad news when you don't like the institution. we got to change all that. >> it almost seems that you cannot come to a conclusion that a majority of americans will think is fair because the partisanship is dripping all over this. you know, when you have the united states ambassador, the united states military, you have the cia, you have things that are not in and of themselves partisan things, but the entire thing is just covered over in partisanship. >> they have to change it so the people like the mechanism. they don't even like the

mechanism now. that's no good. >> no good. colonel jack jacobs, thank you for sticking around. i really appreciate it. jack -- colonel jack jacobs, thank you so much for being here, and i want to remind you all that tomorrow we will have a twitter chat in which we will unpack the right's fixation on benghazi and who is driving it and how it could impact the republican party, the midterms and a potential hillary clinton presidential bid. that is tomorrow at 3:15 eastern time on twitter, and that is right after the show. you can also follow the conversation now. we've already started it using _#whybenghazi. we'll be right back. when folks think about what they get from alaska, they think salmon and energy. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing. across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs. 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. intercourse that's painfulit... due to menopausal changes. 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. 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. don't just visit hawaii.

visit tripadvisor hawaii. with millions of reviews, tripadvisor makes any destination better. really... so our business can be on at&t's network for $175 dollars a month? yup. all five of you for $175. our clients need a lot of attention. there's unlimited talk and text. we're working deals all day. you get 10 gigabytes of data to share. what about expansion potential? add a line anytime for 15 bucks a month. low dues... great terms... let's close. introducing at&t mobile share value plans... ...with our best-ever pricing for business. you're looking at live pictures of the white house where president obama is welcoming the seattle seahawks today. they won super bowl 48 defeating my childhood favorites, the denver broncos, 42-8.

you can watch it streaming live on nbc.com. next, we'll fwet into the explosive allegations against the nfl. some of the biggest names in football claim they were fed painkillers and lied to just to get them back in the game. we'll talk with randall "thrill hill" and a lawyer who is representing the players in this case. oh my god! look. you need to see this. show him the curve. ♪ do you know what this means? the greater the curvature, the bigger the difference. [sci-fi tractor beam sound] ...sucked me right in... it's beautiful. gotta admit one thing... ...can't beat the view. ♪ introducing the world's first curved ultra high definition television from samsung. who would have thought masterthree cheese lasagna would go with chocolate cake and ceviche? the same guy who thought that small caps and bond funds

would go with a merging markets. it's a masterpiece. thanks. clearly you are type e. you made it phil. welcome home. now what's our strategy with the fondue? diversifying your portfolio? e*trade gives you the tools and resources to get it right. are you type e*?

they say you'll never go back to your old cleaning ways again. not once you've tried mr. clean's new liquid muscle. it's a concentrated liquid gel with two and a half more power per drop. so a little goes a long way. new liquid muscle. when it comes to clean, there's only one mr. a new lawsuit against the nfl involving members of one of its most storied teams may deal a fresh setback to the league as it tries to turn the page on allegations that for decades it ignored proper treatment for players with severe injuries. now, eight former players, including three members of the chicago bears night 1985 super bowl-winning team say that the league illegally dispensed painkillers to mask player injuries. now, one allegation, the suit says former bears quarterback jim mcmahon only discovered within the past three years that he had suffered a broken neck during his career.

he believes it happened during a game in 1993 when his legs went numb after a hit. quote, "rather than sit out, he received medications and was pushed back on to the field." in announcing the lawsuit, the players' lawyer said this. >> the league brought this on themselves. handing out dangerous drugs like they're m & m's without any warnings or consequences. >> this program reached out to the nfl for comment, and while we did not receive a reply, on tuesday nfl commissioner roger goodell had this to say. >> i was only made aware of it just briefly, but i don't believe any of our attorneys have had an opportunity to look at it, and as you know, i've been in meetings all day. >> randall hill is a former nfling wide receiver who played for the miami dolphins, the cardinals, and the saints, and mel owens, is a former nfl player with the rams, and he is also one of the lawyers representing the players in this class action lawsuit. i want to start with you, mel.

can you explain this lawsuit and how it fits into the wider legal drama that's facing the nfl? >> well, i'm not going to comment on the wider legal drama. there's an independent concussion lawsuit pending in another court, but this one centers on the drug culture in the nfl that's been fostered by the nfl for many, many years and many decades. >> i mean, specifically you're essentially alleging in this lawsuit or several players are alleging that they would have an injury that this injury would be masked by the dispensing of drugs so that they don't know even how these were obtained and they were sent back to the field and then later discovered that they had these injuries that maybe had healed over time. what kind of drugs specifically are we talking about? >> first of all, what you just stated is true. that's common place in the nfl. there's many times when the trainers, the doctors would tell the player it's a sprain, and they'll continue to play on it for many, many weeks only to

discover many weeks later after the season perhaps and then you'll have surgery and say it's broken or you tore a ligament. the powerful drugs that are given out are numerous. first and foremost, the most recent drug of choice is toridal. z-pac. halls yon. we could go on. these drugs were given out in cocktail form where they were stacked or given out randomly, given out by the trainers, given out by doctors. no warnings whatsoever. no record keeping. he said as player you get all of these drugs for free over the years of your career, and then suddenly you're released, and the free supply stops overnight. many players are addicted and

turn to street dealers for the drugs formerly provided by the nfl. this then leads to other problems, such as cocaine or heroin use, bankruptcy, and prison. in your experience and players that you have known over the years who formerly played in the nfl, was this something that you saw happening? >> yeah. i have seen it happen, but, you know, overall the people i kept around me are pretty affluent. they have very long-lasting careers and are actually doing pretty well post-nfl career. >> well, i mean, are people having long-lasting careers that are being extended by this? you know, in your own personal experience, if you were hurt, were you essentially being told by the team, you know what, just take these pills and go back out on the field? do you have a personal experience with this? >> well, you know, actually, you know, there are medicines there that are available to the players, but i think it's upon each player to decide what to take and what not to take. yes, you know, it's a rough and tough environment, and they are nfl players are somewhat of the modern day gladiators.

again, you have to look at your own conscious and look deeper than yourselves to say if are you really hurt. then again, once do you that, maybe you'll come up against someone saying you're soft or you're being a sissy. you have to look upon yourself to say maybe i should take this or maybe i shouldn't. >> mel, how much of it is on the player? i mean, if you are talking about players who, you know, football is a brutal sport, very tough on your bodies, obviously, and you have a player that is admitting to being injured, you're essentially taking yourself off the field. i want to read you keith van horn, offensive tackle for the bears on that super bowl winning team in 1985. keith van horn played an entire season on a broken leg. the first month of which he required a special medical boot to reduce the swelling before he could suit up. he was not told about the broken leg for five years during which time he was fed a constant diet of pills to deal with the pain. i mean, you can say it's on the players, but there is a tremendous pressure, is there not, to extend your career as long as you can?

>> absolutely. there are few and far between guaranteed contracts in the nfl. it's the culture. i'll speak from my ten years in the nfl. when you are under the doctor's care, they are in control of your medical history. they are the ones that put you back on the field. they release you to play. once you are back on the field, you're full go. if you're not full go, you don't play. once are you under the doctor's care and they give you the medication to go back into the game, the players think that i'm okay and you trust the doctor. now, i'm in my 50s now, and i'm a lot wiser now than i was when i was 22, 23 years old, but when i'm on the team and the doctors are telling me what to do, what to take, and how to do it and clear me to play, i'm going back on the field. that's the culture of the nfl, and if you are not one of those players, then you'll be gone. again, you have to remember, what they were doing dispensing the drugs and how they are

dispensing them is illegal. there's no warnings. they didn't tell you about the stacking and the cocktailing of them, and they would give you liquor in combination with it, and the trainers would pass them out on the planes, at the facilities, and even during the game. >> i mean, rapidal, you are talking to guys in their 20s when they get into the league. there's one case who played with the san francisco 49 erdz. jeremy newbury, who now has stage three renal familiure, suffers from high blood pressure, violent headaches for which he cannot take any medication that might further deteriorate his already weakened kidneys. you are talking about long-lasting effects, and guys are keeping to the league as young men. could it possibly be the players' possibility to know what they're taking and to say no. >> as a player you have to be -- yeah, you may be young, but you still have to be mature enough to understand what you are taking and how much you are taking and why you're taking it. i was fortunate enough to be dating at the time and now i'm

married to a board certified internal medicine doctor who kind of got me through any type of medicine that i actually took. you know, again, you can also, you know, go to your own doctor. you know, i think the responsibility is a little bit of both. you know, the team, the team doctors, and also the players itself. >> we have to leave it there. thank you to both of you. >> thank you. coming up, the gop empire strikes back against the tea party, and democrats feel what might be their strongest midterm slate in years. we've got a full wrap on last night's winners and losers in the battle to the midterms. wondering what that is? that, my friends, is everything. and with the quicksilver card from capital one, you earn unlimited 1.5% cash back on everything you purchase. not just "everything at the hardware store." not "everything, until you hit your cash back limit." quicksilver can earn you unlimited 1.5% cash back on everything you could possibly imagine. say it with me -- everything. one more time, everything! and with that in mind...

what's in your wallet? [ 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. ♪

my opponent is in this race because barack obama and harry reid want her to be in this race. there isn't i dime's worth of difference, not a dime's worth of difference between a candidate who puts harry reid in charge and harry reid himself. >> president obama is not on kentucky's 2014 election ballot.

nothing about this election will change who is in the white house but we can change who is in washington d.c. >> those were two of last night's biggest super tuesday primary winners. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell and kentucky nominee alan lundgren-grimes. it is a surprise to no one that mcconnell easily prevailed over his tea party challenger matt bevin pulling in 60% of the vote, while lundgren-grimes walked away with three out of four votes on the dems side. republicans witle the their field of seven down to two candidates who now have what politico calls a nasty, brutish nine-week intra-party slugfest that leads to a july runoff. >> we are in a very solid position for the next two months to work hard, finish this job, become the nominee, win in

november. >> you know, oning thing we did do tonight is we retired three career politicians. we got one more to go. >> the one irwill face michelle nunn in the general election. another democrat who took home 75% of the vote last night. all in all the night is being called a big win for the gop establishment and a major blow to the tea party. the thought being that by avoiding a primary victory for the richard murdoff and christine o'donnells of the world, the senate has a better chance of winning a senate majority. there's still nearly six months to go, so the question is do republicans have this locked up, or do democrats have a chance to hold to the senate? robert costa is a national political reporter with the washington post, and perry bacon is an msnbc contributor and political editor at the greo.com, and i want to start with you, robert, because the slugfest to come in georgia is going to be interesting. they did retire the three candidates that seem to have the most gaff-tastic sort of

history. is the purdue matchup good news for the party or good news for michelle nunn? >> it's good news for the gop in this sense. jack kingston is a long-time congressman. he is seen as relatively polished on the campaign trail. so is businessman david purdue. they're going to be squaring off. it could be a nasty run-off, but because you don't have someone lining phil gingery in there and someone like paul brown who lost last night who has called president obama a soviet, these people lost. some more establishment candidates won. that puts the gop in a better position to hold to this red staen state scene. >> is there a preference among washington republicans between kingston and purdue? >> i think purdue is seen as more of the mitt romney school of politics. a former ceo of reebok, a businessman, can self fund and pour a lot of his own money in the race. kingston has a lot of pull in d.c. he is a former -- he is a member of the appropriations committee. he is well liked on capitol hill. i think it's mostly a draw right now. >> let's go over to kentucky.

you do have sort of this emerging theme among democrats of legacy candidates. you have michelle nunn in georgia and sam nunn, the former senator. you have also have allison lundgren-grinlz, and she's from a family that is well known in kentucky. let me play you her political ad that she's running right now and we'll talk to you on the other side. >> it seems no matter how many elections we have, nothing gets better in washington. it only gets worse. a lot of that is because the people at the top in both political parties if we keep sending them back, nothing will change. >> the polls show it's a very close race, but do democrats have a realistic belief that allison lundgren-grimes, first-time candidate, can actually take down the senate minority leader mitch mcconnell? >> mcconnell is certainly the favorite. they do think that -- there's a lot of republican dissention with mcconnell.

bevin won almost 40% of the votes, and they think grimes can really challenge mcconnell because she's a fresh face. she's a young woman. she's not run statewide before except for -- she's not run for federal office before. she can really contrast mccobbles the washington insider, and the sense is mcconnell just not beloved here. he is more feared than liked. the opportunity for grimes to really drive up democratic turnout and win if republicans stay home who are tired of mcconnell. >> to to that point mcconnell's approval rating under water in a big way. 39% prooufl. i think he has lower approval ratings than the president who is seen in a lot of ways as being a liblgt on the democrats, but ken sken a weird state. i want to go to you on that, perry, because you do have the issue of affordable care act, which is working in kentucky. is there any sense that that issue is going to wind up playing in that race in kentucky? >> my sense is right now it's going to play, but in a very negative way for grimes. despite the fact the health care law is working here, the polling

shows that people still are wary of whatever you call obama care. that polls really well. mcconnell is trying to push that. one thing that happened today is that mcconnell challenged grimes to three lincoln douglas style debates, and their stat is telling me the goal there is to get grimes on the record. they want to make sure people know she's for the minimum wage increase. she supports obama care. they want -- the mcconnell campaign wants to turn it to a campaign about issues because their view is in a red state like this, most issue-based ideas, mcconnell is in a place where most voters are. even on obama care, even though the connect program has worked here pretty well. >> who would want an increase in the minimum wage? lease go back over to you. how realistic do republicans believe that figure, that poll that shows 25% of people who voted against mitch mcconnell in that primary would actually go with allison lundgren-grimes. how realistic is that going to grimes? >> not really that realistic. here's a look at what happened last night.

you had some conservative leaders. i think this is because as much as there's been a civil war within the republican party, an idealogical one, right now republicans see the senate majority on the horizon. they know mcconnell is part of that strategy, and they reluctantly in some quarters are getting lynned him because they want to get to the 51 in the senate and get that majority. >> one more question to you, robert costa, going down to the dwv's race. >> they've done a good job of candidate selection and fielding strong candidates, and not least of which in pennsylvania where actually you have a good strong candidate to run against a very unpopular governor there. give us a little bit of the contours on that race. >> you see in the democratic nominee tom wolf, a millionaire, a successful businessman,

someone who holds a ph.d. in mathematics and industrial design from m. i.t. he is impressive on the trail and will be competitive against corbin. if democrats can flip pennsylvania, that's going to bode very well for them ahead of 2016. >> robert costa and perry bacon, thanks to both of you. >> thank you. >> thanks. coming up, we read between the lines on how the president is getting slammed for something as simple as designating a national monument. (music) defiance is in our bones. defiance never grows old. citracal maximum. calcium citrate plus d. highly soluble, easily absorbed. when folks think about wthey think salmon and energy. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america.

engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing. across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs. 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. captain: and here's a tip. bellman: thanks, captain obvious. when you save money on hotel rooms, it's just like saving money on anything else that costs money. like shoes, textiles, foreign investments, spatulas, bounty hunters, javelins... we cannot let the fans down. don't worry! the united states postal service will get it there on time with priority mail flat rate shipping. our priority has always been saving the day. because our priority...

amazing! ...is you! the amazing spider-man 2 delivered by the united states postal service.

delivered by the united states postal service. cadmium, mercury, lead. all on the periodic table. all inside these, too. now the last thing we want is for all that to mix with water. so recycle. you'll keep your planet clean, t-m-y-k. today for the 11th time president obama will sign an order designating a national monument. it will be the largest such designation of his tenure. it will protect nearly 500,000 acres in new mexico including

five mountain ranges, hundreds ever unique species of birds and plants like the oregon mountain pin cushion cactus, canyon wall art from three native societies plus real honest to goodness petrified forest and training area for the apollo forest. they say it will create millions of dollars in annual tourism revenue and jobs while preserving the prehistory, historic values for all americans. or as the headlines in the "the washington times" puts it obama seizes new mexico land for national monument in bundy like show un. being the welfare rancher who think his subsidized cattle have a right to graze for free along with his son recently staged a protest by plowing their atfs through froebtd fragile landscapes in utah that are home to sacred native american

artifacts. the "the washington times" even quoted some cattle ranchers and a local sheriff who called it a land grab and complained it will make it harder for agents to stop mexican cartels from operating across the border. yes the designated area will be administered by the dreaded bureau of land management, both cattle ranchers who use the area for grazing and paid their fees can continue to do so. but while hikers will be welcomed the area will be off limits to developers and to mining, drilling and fracking. most importantly what the president is doing comes at a time when states particularly blue states are quietly but increasingly taking action to preserve their environment by taking them out of the reach of extracted industries. state legislatures in new york, new jersey and connecticut are all either considering or passing bills that would prevent fracking states like pennsylvania from sending their fracking waste water to the nonfracking states for storage

tore deice roads. in new jersey they may have to override governor chris christie's veto but they likely have the votes. the recognition that drilling and fracking have queens like increased seismic activity like in states like ohio is growing. it's not just the president who sacramentoing to preserve what we can of our most precious natural resources before it's too late. i'll see you back here tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. eastern. visit us online. "the cycle" is up next. what you got going. >> a lot of stuff. we have a future focus show. we'll look at the future of medical care for our veterans. we'll look at what the primaries last night mean for the future of politics. we're looking at the future of inequality. we have a solution that's pretty exciting to chew over. we're also taking a look at the future of food. so you don't want to miss that.

>> we're leaning forward. >> "the cycle" is coming up next. dad!! i missed you. i missed you, too. hi buddy. mom! awesome! dad!! i missed you. ♪ oh... daddy. chevrolet and its dealers proudly support military appreciation month. with the industry's best military purchase program, for all that have served. a woman who loves to share her passions. grandma! mary has atrial fibrillation, an irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. that puts her at a greater risk of stroke. rome? sure! before xarelto®, mary took warfarin, which required monthly trips to get her blood tested. but that's history. back to the museum? not this time! now that her doctor switched her to once-a-day xarelto®, mary can leave those monthly trips behind. domestic flight?

not today! like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce afib-related stroke risk. but xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem that doesn't require regular blood monitoring. so mary is free of that monitoring routine. for patients currently well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. xarelto® is just one pill a day taken with the evening meal. spinach? grazie! plus, with no known dietary restrictions, mary can eat the healthy foods she likes. don't stop taking xarelto®, rivaroxaban, unless your doctor tells you to. while taking xarelto®, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious bleeding, and in rare cases, may be fatal. get help right away if you develop unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you have had spinal anesthesia while on xarelto®, watch for back pain or any nerve

or muscle related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. switching to xarelto® was the right move for mary. ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. no regular blood monitoring; no known dietary restrictions. for information and savings options download the xarelto® patient center app, call 1-888-xarelto, or visit goxarelto.com 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 stre 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. >> welcome to a very busy wednesday here on "the cycle." right now intolerable and disgraceful, president obama delivers his toughest talk yet on the va scandal but gives shinseki a previous. reaction to those remarks don't stream in. it's what america is talking about this afternoon and so are we. >> big results from super tuesday could give mitch mcconnell a title bump. the establishment pulls off an upset. wait is that possible? they are the yankees. msnbc is place for politic. >> donald sterling is pulling off a couch. the nba says i'm toure' i'm shocked to hear about that. >> and cycling out of control,

the chaos that's flying these days before you take off for memorial day weekend there are new rules to protect your rights when it comes to booking flights. buckle your seat belts "the cycle" is set for an on air takeoff. so when i hear allegations of misconduct, any misconduct, whether it's allegations of va staff covering up long wait times or cooking the books, i will not stand for it. not as commander-in-chief, but also not as an american. none of us should. if these allegations prove to be true, it is dishonorable, it is disgraceful, and i will not tolerate it, period. our veterans deserve to know the facts, their families deserve to