affordable care act is so meaningful in this presidency. thank you all. that is all in for this evening. "the rachael maddow show" starts now. governor mitch daniels said it was a close call. he is a republican governor. the indiana legislature was controlled by the republicans in the 2012 season. there was nothing that the legislation passed that governor mitch daniels thought about vetoing except this one thing, this one bill he said for him was a close call. he said he only signed it because in his words in the real world there will almost never be a situation in which these extremely narrow conditions are met. and that was the reason that he was willing to sign it. even as he signed it and explained to the local press why he was signing it he admitted

that he was worried about it. he said what is troubling to law enforcement officers and to me is the chance that citizens will misunderstand what the law says. and that worry turns out was understandable since there was no real way to explain what that indiana law did except this. the indiana law that lets citizens shoot cops. or another take on it. nra backed law spells out when indiana residents may open fire on police. at least when fox news covered it they phrased it as a question. should citizens be able to shoot police? the answer in indiana thanks to mitch daniels selling the legislation is yes. in specific circumstances that law only allows you to use force against the police including deadly force against the police if you believe they are acting unlawfully. only under those circumstances then you can use force against

the police. if you want to kill a police officer, if you want a legal defense where you can walk free after shooting and killing a police officer your defense in indiana has to be you think the police officer was acting unlawfully and that you believe you were preventing serious bodily injury. if that is what is going on in your head go for it in indiana apparently. the nra backed that bill. the republicans in the legislation passed that bill and mitch daniels did sign it into law. it is a remarkable law even for this current iteration of the nra and indiana. that law didn't get all that much national attention, at least in mainstream circles. in nonmainstream circles that indiana law got lots of attention and it inspired a lot of armed resistance against armed tyranny kind of stuff particularly on youtube. these two cobbled together home

made videos on youtube celebrating the indiana shooting cops law as invitation to armed revolution against u.s. government both posted not long after the law signed. you can find them on youtube. on the website they got liked, approved online by this 22-year-old woman originally from indiana, late of nevada. the reason her online history of liking or disliking things is making the national news is because she and her husband left a long online trail that more or less may explain why those two went on a shooting rampage yesterday in las vegas including ambushing two police officers at a pizza joint killing both of them and killing another man at a local wal-mart. the woman shot and killed her husband before she killed herself.

five people including two assailants killed in an orgy of gun fire in the united states. it's sort of something more than an every day occurrence but usually less than a national news story. the reason this one has risen to the level of national and intense interest is in part because of that online trail that the killers left behind as well as the unusual and seemingly political trappings of the crime scenes in vegas and how they left them. >> they walked past our officers eating lunch and immediately mr. miller pulled a hand gun out and shot officer soldo in the back of the head. there was no further movement from him in the booth. at that time officer beck immediately began to react when

he was confronted with lethal gun fire from jerad miller. he was shot once in the throat area. amanda miller then removes a handgun from her purse and both fire multiple shots into officer beck. this entire incident at the cici's is captured on video tape. we are conducting forensic review on the video. immediately upon the shooting finishing the suspects pulled the officers out of the booth and on to the ground where they placed a gadsden flag, the don't tread on me yellow flag on the body of officer beck and put a swastika on his body. mr. miller pinned a note to

officer soldo that basically stated this is the beginning of the revolution. they made the same types of comments inside of the restaurant where numerous patrons heard the commentary and walked out of the restaurant, gathered their backpacks and proceeded in a southbound direction. they then crossed over to the wal-mart and entered into the front door of the wal-mart store. immediately upon entering the store he walked into the front doors and fired off one round and told the people to get out and that this is a revolution and that the police were on the way. >> this was not a revolution, but the police were on their way. multiple police officers responded to the wal-mart where the couple apparently barricaded in the store. they apparently did not shoot out or kill anyone inside the store after the first victim.

although officers shot at them in the store the couple died by murder suicide. the female in the couple is reportedly 22 years old, the one who appears to be focused on the political goal of killing police officers at least showing interest in that. mother jones magazine reports in 2012 a week after mitch daniels signed the indiana it's okay to shoot cops law the male suspect also reportedly wrote approvingly about the law on the website of alex jones. mostly the record of his online existence is very focused on the second amendment. this is him posting something that says police will never attack armed people the way they will attack unarmed people. posted multiple videos of himself on youtube talking about the second amendment lamenting

because he was a person with so many convictions he could not legally own guns and at one point he posted on facebook he wanted help acquiring a weapon. whether or not this was meant as a serious request for help in obtaining a rifle police say they recovered from the crime scenes in las vegas no rifle. the only long gun recovered is a shot gun and recovered four handguns in the wal-mart. the other two handgun that they had may be guns they took from the police officers who they killed at the first venue. in addition to the indiana it's okay to shoot cops law and second amendment issues broadly

the male suspect from the couple -- this has received a lot of attention today -- he has an extensive online trail related to the bundy ranch and the standoff between the nevada rancher who doesn't believe in power of government authority higher than county sheriff and refused to pay grazing fees, the conflict between him and federal law enforcement officials when the fox news channel ripped that conflict into a national frenzy on the far right this spring and april the male suspect from yesterday's shootings in las vegas appears to have posted about his support for the bundy ranch fight saying this is the next waco. the ranch is under siege. we must do something. i will be doing something. on his youtube page the suspect appears to be the one asking questions, actually conducting pseudo interviews with bundy family members and supporters at

the militia standoff ranch fights. he appears to be the person behind the camera doing the interviewing. >> margaret, thank you for your testimony. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> and it's awesome that you are out here doing this. >> clyde is my brother. this is family. this is how it is supposed to be. and not even cowboy, turtle, cow, it is our freedom. they are taking it away inch by inch. >> it doesn't matter their excuse. they are taking our freedoms. >> we need to fight. america, we need to fight. >> thank you. >> my name is ryan bundy. even if the state took over this land as they should do there are still rights attached that belongs to individuals and those need to make sure to recognize those after we take this land back. >> i want to thank you for your time.

it was a very good interview. best of luck, brother. >> thank you. >> in addition to apparently conducting those interviews himself at the bundy ranch standoff you can tell he is holding his own camera. in addition to what appears to be the suspect from this weekend conducting those interviews he is the suspect of this weekend's murder of two police officers and one other person in las vegas. that suspect was briefly interviewed during the standoff by a local reno television station. >> i feel sorry for federal agents who want to come in here and try to push us around. i really don't want violence towards them. if they are going to bring violence to us if that is the language they want to speak we will learn it. >> again, that is from krnv in reno during the bundy standoff. although the young man is wearing two different kinds of camouflage there is no evidence that he appeared in any

military. the t shirt he is wearing under his camo jacket is a campaign shirt for a clark county sheriff candidate named gordon martinez, local candidate for sheriff claims to be a lifetime member of the oath keepers. remember that word from some of our previous reporting, one of the militia style groups that did set up camp at the bundy ranch. they have been around for a while on the far right fringe of conservative politics. the oath keepers and the constitutional peace officers association headed up by richard mack frequent fox news guest seen here reportedly standing there with the suspect from this weekend's shootings. the oath keepers and richard mack group and like the ideology

driving the standoff they specifically do not believe in the existence or the authority of the federal government. basically they don't believe there is any law enforcement authority higher than a county sheriff. the authority can be not just lawfully but forcefully disobeyed. it's a radical offshoot of the movement loosely aligned with the militias in the clinton era in the 1990s. at this point the functioning of the swastika imagery may have been a symbol of white supremacist or an epithet leveled at the officers who were shot by the perpetrators. it becomes necessary but bizarre to note that in august las vegas was the site of another bizarre targeting of police officers, a

bizarre and violent targeting of police officers apparently for obscure and fringe ideological reasons. it was a couple moved from indiana. it was a 42-year-old man and 67-year-old woman. according to the report when they were arrested their sovereign citizen message was they actively wanted to wage war on the police in order to start a sovereign citizen revolution. quoting from the a.p. the couple spent hundreds of hours over four months plotting to abduct, torture and kill las vegas police officers as a way to attract attention to the anti-authority movement. the two attended training sessions and shopped for guns and found a vacant house and rigged it to bind suspects to

cross beams during interrogations and recorded videos in order to explain actions and why in their words police officers had to die. they had an apartment about three miles east of the las vegas strip. they had unwittingly brought an officer in on their plans. the two were charged separately, both pled guilty to conspiracy to commit false imprisonment. there is no indication that the two sets of couples were connected in any way other than both appearing to have extremist anti-police views that they linked to a larger political movement whether or not the larger political movement accepted or linked to them. is something specific going on in nevada? doesn't seem like a las vegas specific problem? does this online trail of bread

crumbs with this couple that apparently committed the crimes yesterday and is now dead, is there online trail happening to be the political detritus of a pair of middles who would have done this regardless? their online fascinations might have easily been something else? our own desire to find meaning having us imparting to what they mean and why they said what they were doing? or is a weapons focused strain on the far right of american politics right now making this sort of thing more likely? making it more possible than it otherwise would be if no one was encouraging folks to believe that shooting police officers in a pizza shop and shooting up a wal-mart might be the way to spark an anti-government revolution? r business, and it's hard to leave these two. mom! my llama smells like you. i use tide plus febreze in the wash. it keeps their clothes and stuffed animals smelling fresher for longer. when are you coming home? just one more night.

[ female announcer ] tide plus febreze. that's my tide plus. [ female announcer ] tide plus febreze. woman: what do you mean, homeowners insurance doesn't cover floods? [ heart rate increases ] man: a few inches of water caused all this? [ heart rate increases ] woman #2: but i don't even live near the water. what you don't know about flood insurance may shock you -- including the fact that a preferred risk policy starts as low as $129 a year. for an agent, call the number that appears on your screen.

immediately upon the shooting commencing or finishing the suspects pulled the officers out of the booth and on to the ground where they placed a gadsden flag, a don't tread on me flag on the body of officer beck and threw a swastika on the top of his body. at that point mr. jerad miller pinned a note that stated this is the beginning of the revolution. >> that was las vegas assistant sheriff kevin mcmahill speaking about yesterday's double murder of two vegas police officers and one civilian during a rampage during which the alleged assailants said they intended to start a revolution. thanks for being with us to help us with the story. appreciate your time. >> my pleasure.

>> what have we learned or what have you learned in your reporting since the initial news from the sheriff's department today about the crime in las vegas? are there new details to report? >> when it comes to jerad miller it comes to his quest to try to find people that he could convince to join his crusade to try to have an armed revolution against police officers. we have been able to talk to people who knew him at the bundy ranch. also, just recently after he went to the bundy ranch and went to the las vegas group of anonymous with side arm and went to meetings and tried to convince them to try to join in some sort of armed revolution against police. members of anonymous told us they want a peaceful revolution and kicked him out of one of the meetings just late april.

>> so his political affiliations -- i mean that in a specific sense -- seem to be mostly aspirational. he wanted to be part of a larger group planning a larger anti-government action. as far as we can tell so far in terms of reporting out there i haven't seen any sign that anybody was persuaded by him other than perhaps his wife or that anybody owns him as being part of any other larger organized group. >> that is right. what he told members of the bundy ranch militia out there is that he tried to convince members of the white supremacist groups in indiana to join him in armed revolution against police but the group in indiana that he was talking about at the bundy ranch said they would not have any of that. you have a situation where jerad says he was kicked out of the bundy ranch because he is a felon. he was a felon from a felony

marijuana charge in indiana. but at this point the folks that were supporting bundy were saying that what happened is that he was talking about our revolution saying he wanted to go out and snipe police officers at night, those words coming from jerad miller according to witnesses at the bundy ranch. the folks at the bundy ranch, the supporters there, the militia groups while doing patrols and in some cases doing check points they did not want the instigation of having -- firing the first shot against police there. >> and, of course, as you mentioned his criminal record leaving the open question as to how he obtained the weapons that were obviously used in this crime at this point. do you have anything on that? i haven't been able to find evidence of how he obtained the weapons? >> i haven't found evidence of

how he obtained the weapons. a crucial date that set them off was october 10, 2013 when he posted on facebook that he finds out that he has an arrest warrant for him in indiana from a 2003 crime. the arrest warrant kept moving forward from another county in indiana. he found out in 2013. he said that he thought he was going to have supervised probation. that was not the case. once you see his posting that october 10, 2013 after that a lot of language that he posts online whether facebook or google plus starts taking a more incendiary talk of armed revolution. that date in effect is some sort of point that changes his mindset. >> investigative reporter for kls tv in vegas. thanks very much. lots still to come tonight including an important lesson about taking bribes.

turns out nobody is supposed to be able to see you doing it. that rule has been broken in a big way and that story is ahead. stay with us.

today is monday. that means tomorrow is tuesday which means tomorrow is book release day. i don't know why the books are released on tuesday. tuesday is the day. tomorrow brings hillary clinton's second memoir and

primary day. no incumbent on the hot seat more than eric cantor on the eve of the toughest primary campaign he has ever faced against a tea party republican challenger named dave brat. maybe he can cuddle up with hillary clinton's book to feel better. virginia is home to more than a contentious republican primary. virginia is the proud record holder for the most blatantly executed quid pro quo. [ brian ] in a race,

it's about getting to the finish line. in life, it's how you get there that matters most. it's important to know the difference. like when i found out i had a blood clot in my leg. my doctor said that it could travel to my lungs and become an even bigger problem. and that i had to take action. so he talked to me about xarelto®. [ male announcer ] xarelto® is the first oral prescription blood thinner proven to treat and help prevent dvt and pe that doesn't require regular blood monitoring or changes to your diet. [ brian ] for a prior dvt i took warfarin, which required routine blood testing and dietary restrictions. not this time. ♪ while i was taking xarelto®, i still had to stop racing, but i didn't have to deal with that blood monitoring routine. ♪ you made great time. i found another way. [ male announcer ] 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. xarelto® is proven to reduce the risk of dvt and pe. with xarelto® there is no regular blood monitoring and no known dietary restrictions. treatment with xarelto® was the right move for me. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor about xarelto® today. for more information including savings options, download the xarelto® patient center app, call 1-888-xarelto, or visit teamxarelto.com.

download the xarelto® patient center app, iwas thathe biggest vit gave me...ar... confidence to buy my very first car... and to walk out of that dealership... and know that i got a good deal. save time, save money, and never overpay. visit truecar.com when then-candidate george w. bush announced he had chosen dick cheney to be his vice presidential running mate he presented a story line familiar to anyone who watched a romantic comedy, the right person was right in front of me all along. >> as we work to evaluate the strengths of others i saw first-hand dick cheney's outstanding judgment.

and as we considered many different credentials i benefitted from his keen insight and gradually i realized that the person who was best qualified to be my vice presidential nominee was working by my side. >> before anybody knew how consequential dick cheney would be one was he should have picked somebody else for the job until president bush realized the man for him was in front of him the whole time. the other really consequential thing that we knew was that he would be the tie breaking vote in the united states senate. one of the responsibilities of the vice presidency is to serve as president of the senate. it is mostly a symbolic thing, swearing people in and that sort of thing until it becomes a crucially important job and not just symbolic because like dick

cheney in 2001 turns out you are presiding over a senate that is evenly split making dick cheney as tie breaker, effectively the 101st senator some asking whether he would be so tied down on capitol hill that he won't have time to participate in the administration as an active vice president. turned out that wasn't a problem. vice president cheney was an active vice president. maybe because that evenly divided senate where he was going to spend so much time breaking votes, he wasn't going to have time for anything else. that stasis in washington only lasted about four months into the bush presidency before the tie broke itself. >> good evening. by now you probably know what happened today. a republican senator left his party and formally aligned himself with the democrats. what about the future? the consequences could be profound. the democrats will have control of the senate. they will have control of the

powerful committees, legislative agenda in that half of congress. this is a major setback for president bush and his plans. the senator said he was leaving as a matter of principle. >> in order to best represent my state of vermont my own conscience and principles i have stood for my whole life i will leave the republican party and become an independent. >> republican senator jim jeffers quitting the republican party completely changed the power in the senate. it had been 50/50 with the republican tie breaking vote. now it was no longer 50/50 and democrats had control. it was the first major political bombshell of the george w. bush presidency. but politicians abruptly switching parties is a thing that happens. it is almost always shocking and disoriented when it does happen.

in new york state after the 2012 election democrats won control of the new york senate. that lasted about a month. the election was november 2012. and december of 2012 a subgroup of democrats announced that for voting purposes they were going to switch parties and caucus with republicans instead there by allowing new york state republicans to regain control of the senate. one of the democrats who switched sides back in 2012 is a state senator named malcolm smith. mr. smith was very open about how he really wanted to run for mayor of new york city. it turns out mr. smith allegedly agreed to caucus with the republicans in the state capitol with the long term hope they would let him run for mayor of new york city on the republican line on the ballot. malcolm smith was later charged with basically attempting to bribe his way on to the ballot for new york mayor. that corruption trial is going on right now in new york. the jury heard secretly taped

conversations. always a risky and provocative move to decide to change parties if you are a politician. if it seems like you were promised something in order to switch your political affiliation from one party to another or to change the balance of power in your legislative body that can land you in trouble or gross out people in your state. the state senate in virginia looked like this last night, evenly divided. 20 democrats and 20 republicans virginia. virginia is one of the states with off-year elections. who republicans chose as lieutenant governor, e.w. jackson did stuff like misspell the word commandments on his own

book about the ten commandments right on the cover. that race ended up being not just entertaining but consequential. the first elected as lieutenant governor, that person was going to have to be the tie breaking vote in this absolutely dead locked 20-20 evenly split virginia state senate. tied senate. the senate president who happens to be the lieutenant governor is the tie breaking vote. it meant in virginia democrats controlled the state senate. that was the case until last night. >> breaking news tonight. a virginia state senator is resigning. >> cbs 6 has learned philip puckett is submitting his resignation letter tomorrow. the "washington post" reports he is resigning to guarantee his daughter is confirmed a circuit judge. >> this gives republicans control of the state senate in a

time in which the commonwealth does not have a budget. >> when the news broke that philip puckett was resigning his seat in a reported deal with republicans that was supposed to land him a six figure job on a state tobacco commission the political world in virginia and beyond freaked out a little bit. the criticism was biting. the chairman of the house democratic caucus released the statement saying i am dismayed my republican friends offered a deal that reportedly insure the appointment of his daughter to the bench. senator puckett announced he would not after all be seeking the six figure job on the state's tobacco commission and says he will stay with his private sector job instead. everybody thinks his daughter will get the seat on the judgeship.

the reason this political development is such huge deal is not just because of the alleged back room dealing but also because of the material consequences of that decision. the big fight in virginia right now is about the fate of 400,000 people in virginia and whether they are going to get access to health insurance under obamacare because of expanded medicaid. democratic governor terry mcauliffe want to expand medicaid to cover the hundreds of thousands of people in the state. republicans most of whom don't want to do that. that is the big fight in virginia. that is why there isn't a budget. by handing republicans control of the state senate now critics of senator puckett argue that basically he took what he needed for himself and his daughter but his decision arguably cost the democrats any chance of securing health insurance for 400,000 people in the state.

how is that for a tradeoff? whatever you think of his decision in terms of what he was supposed to get out of it. is it a fair criticism in terms of the cost for the state and senator puckett's largely poor district. did the decision doom medicaid expansion for the state while his family got taken care of? n,

"wow, how is there no way to tell the good from the bad?" so we gave people the power of the review. and now angie's list is revolutionizing local service again. you can easily buy and schedule services from top-rated providers. conveniently stay up to date on progress. and effortlessly turn your photos into finished projects with our snapfix app. visit angieslist.com today. ♪

major change at the state capitol after a democratic senator gives up his seat in the virginia general assembly. senator philip puckett's resignation shifts power in the state senate to republicans who now have the majority. the move could hamper the democratic-backed medicaid expansion proposal in the budget. joining us now is julian walker. thanks for being here. appreciate your time tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> what are the material consequences of this senator bailing out of the state senate and effectively handing control of that body over to the republicans? >> it certainly appears to dim the prospects at least in the short term through the budget legislatively. right now virginia is just a few weeks away from the expiration of the current budget which runs through june 30. the pressure has been mounting for legislators to get together

over adopting a new spending plan. the holdup has been democrats largely support medicaid expansion or the virginia alternative to medicaid expansion through the affordable care act whereas republicans primarily and by and large are against the medicaid expansion. so the holdup has been both sides insisting one saying medicaid expansion should not be in the budget and the other side saying it should be in the budget. with the departure of senator puckett the end result appears to be there is movement forward on the budget and appears that the budget deal potentially going forward would be one without medicaid expansion. >> the republicans are able to call the senate back into session and move at whatever speed they want to to get the budget done. am i right about that? they are basically in the driver's seat at this point? >> republicans have gotten together.

the procedural rules in virginia allow nine senators to call the chamber back into session. today 20 republicans and one democrat joined together to bring themselves back into session on thursday and the house of delegates which is about two-thirds republican out of 100 members. they are also coming back on thursday to try to hammer out a budget compromise. >> let me ask you about the deal that was apparently hatched although it may have been partially abandoned now to get senator puckett to do this. it seemed like the initial terms of the deal were that he would get a tobacco commission job that could be appointed by the new republican majority in the senate and that he would also have the way cleared for his daughter to have a judicial seat in virginia. i think that is part of why this received national attention because it felt like that was the price he was selling out everything that goes with his

seat. as that deal falls apart is there any question as to whether or not that might have been an illegal arrangement? >> certainly some people are using that terminology to characterize the deal or the alleged deal. as you know there is a little bit of extra sensitivity in virginia. we just came off of a re-write of our state ethics rules governing officials. that happened because of the gift scandal that enveloped the final year of former governor bob mcdonnell facing federal corruption charges in a trial coming up here in july. as it relates to this alleged deal there certainly are criticisms of it. some people called for an investigation. they asked for the state attorney general as well as the justice department to look into this. the justice department is saying no comment. the attorney general saying he

doesn't feel like it is his role to have a place in this investigation or to initiate an investigation at this point. i can tell you that i did hear from one source that they did field a call from an fbi official today. >> thank you for helping us break that news. julian walker political reporter for the virginian pilot newspaper. i am about to blow my stack. stay with us.

as it relates to this alleged deal, there certainly are criticisms of it. one funny thing about this job is that i'm frequently given credit for destruction. i destroy blatant hypocrisy. i destroy senator richard burr. i destroy fake outrage. i destroy a myth about texas.

i obliterate gay hate. that was a good day. i destroyed that guy from the koch brothers group. i destroy any credibility that that politician might still think he has. destroy! destroy. i'm godzilla in a cheap blazer and the same haircut since 2007. i destroy. whenever i am said to have destroyed something i realize this is actually high praise, and i am appreciative. one of the important things i think you have to do in delivering the news and explaining the news and trying to increase the amount of useful information in the world is that i do think you sometimes have to point out when something dumb is going on or something hurtful or when people are not actually doing what they said they are doing. destroy. but for all the appreciated but undeserved credit that i get for destroying things i don't really destroy, the only thing i really would like to destroy but apparently i can't is what i consider to be a modern plague in the news business in this country. the news business has enough challenges in this country just in terms of the business model, having sufficient jobs, good jobs for full-time professional reporters and editors and producers.

what we could really do without in this country and in this business is what we've got, which is a plague of self-proclaimed but terrible fact checkers. hello, politifact. politifact fact-checks a state of the union stat that -- they find it is a half true statement so, they rate it half true. everybody loses their minds so they change it to mostly true. but no, actually even under their own reasoning they found it to be true. and who cares except for the fact that they don't go away. how about another one? tennis star says in 29 states it's legal for you to be fired for being gay. politifact fact-checks, finds it's a true statement, rates it half true. my head explodes. senator marco rubio says that most americans identify as conservative. politifact checks, it they look into, that find that a majority of americans do not identify as conservatives, so in other words, they found that his

statement is false. therefore, they rate it mostly true. do you remember when lawrence o'donnell said that when the g.i. bill passed in 1944 some critics of the law called it a form of welfare? politifact rated that false because they didn't understand that when someone said it was like going on the dole, they didn't understand that the dole means welfare. destroy. fact-checking is a noble thing. the desire to independently verify facts that you hear in news and political conversation, that is a noble impulse, and everybody should do it. honestly, third-graders who can spell google can do it alone without help. but instead of just expecting people to do this individually, instead for some reason as a nation we have grown a new terrible, terrible mini industry wherein an organization that apparently cannot even google has decided to take on a sort of pseudo-official role as the nation's fact-checking resource. fact checking, yes, you can do that on your own.

politifact as america's branded national replacement for fact checking? no. no, no, no. it's like if the prancercise lady brought the rights to the word "exercise" and then people all over the country decided that exercising was not for them because look at, it i'd never do that. that's what politifact is doing to our country and our news literacy. politifact is to real fact checking what prancercise is to exercise. you can do it on your own but don't call it the real word. you can't have the word "fact." and i know i have yelled about how terrible they are for a long time. but because nothing i do actually affects them, they continue to market themselves as a news brand thing. and i didn't think it was possible, but over time they have gotten even worse at what they were already failing at. por ejemplo, last week in discussing the return of prisoner of war bowe bergdahl we played some old footage from the rescue of the first american

p.o.w. who was rescued in war time since world war ii, and that of course was jessica lynch, who was ambushed along with her maintenance company on the third day of the iraq war in 2003. now, the story that emerged of her reported heroism during that ambush, that story turned out not to be true. so we reported on that last week. politifact decided to fact-check that reporting. maddow, pentagon made up story of jessica lynch's heroism. according to politifact, some people who saw the reporting questioned her assertion that the pentagon made up lynch's heroism. this is a pretty simple thing from the fact-checking perspective. did the military provide false information that led to the narrative that jessica lynch went down fighting when she was captured? let's do some googling. here's a "military times" article published after jessica lynch was rescued. it featured a named member of the military, a public affairs official, providing false information about jessica lynch's capture. navy captain frank thorp said lynch waged quite a battle prior to her capture. we do have very strong

indications that lynch was not captured very easily, he said. reports are that she fired her m-16 until she had no more ammunition. that information straight from a military public affairs official was not true. it was made up. but it landed in press reports anyway. "the new york times" also printed a story after jessica lynch's rescue that contained made up information about her supposed heroism, information that was provided to the "new york times" by a u.s. army official. so if you have the google, which i understand politifact does not have, if they did have the google they could see all that evidence of the pentagon contemporaneously pushing this false story about jessica lynch being a hero. but for politifact, their google is broken. lucky for them we played this contemporaneous reporting from nbc news the night they say they are watching. >> lynch and 14 other members of the 507th ordnance maintenance company disappeared after being ambushed near al nasiriyah.

military officials say she fought even when hurt until she ran oust ammunition. >> military officials say she fought even while hurt until she ran out of ammunition. so if you're fact checking whether or not military officials pushed a made up story about jessica lynch's heroism, well, there you go. it's kind of answered, right? did military officials say jessica lynch fought even while she was hurt? >> military officials say she fought even while hurt. >> yeah, so they did say that. so politifact rules that no, they didn't say that. politifact's entire reason for existing, it's a noble reason-s to figure out what is true and what is false in the world and tell you because you can't check it yourself. and they are terrible at that job. and the world needs good fact checking. the internet specifically needs good fact checking. what it does not need is an organization that illegally uses the word "fact" in their name, anoints themselves the arbiter of fact, and just makes an absolute mockery of it again and again and again.

i do not actually ever destroy anything other than a good dinner. but if i could start destroying things on tv, i know where i would start. destroy! . >> good tuesday morning, right now on "first look," chilling details on a shooting rampage, and what the alleged gunman told nbc news in an interview weeks ago. l.a. lockdown. a wild high-speed car chase leads to a dramatic four-hour standoff in north hollywood. not for sale, donald sterling lashing at the nba, and now he is refusing to sell the l.a. clippers. plus, a horrifying elevator ride in chile and jimmy fallon and j-lo show off their tight pants today. good morning, we learning more about the couple who shot to