>> that is all in for this evening, the rachel maddow show starts right now. i will never recline my seat into your show. >> please do. >> i think that's my takeaway here, we all recline. that's life. we all give, we all get. >> my knees to your -- never mind. thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. all of the best conversations i have ever had. all the conversations i have learned the most from talking with richard engel have begun with us standing somewhere near a map. richard is here tonight, back in new york, so we have a map ready, it's always a good idea when richard's around, here's the issue to ask him about. the u.s. air strikes right now in iraq, and with this red-hot debate right now about whether or not the u.s. should consider air strikes over the border inside syria, when the white house talks about the militant group, the sunni militia effect that they're bombing in iraq, and they may want to bomb in syria as well. when the white house talks about that group, they call them isil. >> let's be clear about isil.

isil speaks for no religion, they have no ideology of any value to human beings. >> we will be relentless against isil. >> isil -- >> a lot of terms about isil's vision. >> isil. when the administration and the pentagon talk about who they're bombing in iraq right now, and who they may want to bomb inside syria as well, they call the group isil. everybody else calls the group isis. why are there these two different names. the group in question speaks arabic, and what they would prefer to be called in english, the islamic state, so that would be i.s. frankly i think nobody cares what they would prefer to be called. there is this difference in how they are described in terms of

english language acronyms. when they are called isis, that is sometimes translated as an acronym for the islamic state in iraq and syria. that's not where it came from. it's a related term, it started off as an islamic state of iraq and alsham. it means greater syria, what we think of as the nation of syria plus what they believe to be additional territory that should be part of that same state. the difference of opinion in terms of calling them isis as opposed to isil, some people look at the islamic state of iraq and greater syria, and they don't translate greater syria as alsham, they translate it as a somewhat more familiar word, they translate it as the lavonte. that still means greater syria,

but it means more than that. it includes syria and lebanon and jordan and the palestinian territories, including some parts controlled by israel. that's much bigger, that's what the administration believes the group is referring to, and the name they use -- they used to use for themselves, that's why the administration is calling them isil instead of isis. it's an englishized akron imanyway. what's in a name in the larger sense? maybe a lot of things here, in terms of strategy that are implicated in the difference between those two terms. i mean, the administration is now talking about air strikes against isis or isil beyond the borders of iraq. they're talking about maybe striking them in syria too. they never talk about air strikes without talking about building some sort of regional coalition of other countries to be involved in a military effort like that, it wouldn't just be the united states.

if isis is a group that doesn't just have designs on taking over iraq as much as they can, and syria as much as they can, but if this group is a group that wants to take over iraq and syria and jordan and lebanon and the palestinian territories including chunks of israel. if they see that as their home base, who in the world might be interested in trying to stop that. that's a bigger audience for hey, who's in this with us. in a full blown war effort, who would join in that if those are isil's goals? so far the countries that have signed on the dotted line for part of the war effort so far, specifically for those fighting against isis in iraq. those countries so far are not much of a benetton ad, that's who defense secretary chuck

hagel says is signed on to the sending arms to the kurds part of this fight. beyond that specific issue of arming the kurds, when it comes to a broader fight against this group and everything that means, what about the arab countries? what about the other countries in the region, including the ones that are really rich, and the ones that have relatively big strong militaries? fighter jets and stuff like that? this is american journalist theo curtis, he was freed in syria this weekend after nearly two years in captivity in syria. he was held by a radical al qaeda fighter group. we don't exactly know the terms under which he was freed after being held by that group for so long, we do know that the government of the nation of qatar was the intervener basically on theo curtis' behalf. qatar negotiated for his release and they were able to secure it.

they have faced some international criticism for funding and supporting these radical sunni militias. qatar has faced criticism for funding these radical sunni groups that are fighting the assad regime in syria, so has the nation of saudi arabia, kuwait, the united arab emirates, honestly, in practical terms, maybe it's because of qatar's relationship with groups like that, that they were able to get theo curtis free. as the u.s. considers what to do next against isis if anything, who else would be part of any u.s. led effort? or if the u.s. wasn't going to lead it, who would -- who else would potentially lead that fight against them that the u.s. might participate in? would a country like qatar, which is a very rich country, a very resourceful country. should we see it strategically important that they intervene to get the journalists freed? if qatar and emirates and kuwait

and saudi arabia, have been funding some of these groups to fight against assad and syria, these groups which include isis, is it reasonable to expect that those countries might also join a fight against one of those militias? even just take the nation of turkey, turkey basically has held open part of their border with syria, to allow foreign fighters including westerners to flow into that country to join the fight against assad. does fighting isis mean turkey will close the border? keeping in mind we don't have an ambassador to turkey right now? we don't have an ambassador to turkey right now, because the united states congress is a worthless nonfunctioning excuse for a branch of government. we have no ambassador, that's not anybody else's fault, that's our fault, amazing.

meanwhile, the defense department today announced that they're in full swing. another series of air strikes. there have been 101 declared air strikes since august 8th, that's not to mention the u.s. unmanned aircraft drones, and manned aircraft. planes with pilots in them, that are currently flying over syria that are doing surveillance flights. possibly in advance of air strikes too, depending on how the debate goes in washington. adding to the whole emotional pressure of this debate, today an american mother named shirley sotloffe, she appealed directly to the leader of isis, she called him by his chosen, self-bestowed title. asked him, pled with him in

religious terms that he should please show mercy, free her son. her son is a 31-year-old journalist who isis is believed to be holding somewhere inside syria, steven sotloffe. he's the second man who isis pictured in the execution video of james foley. they threatened to kill steven in the same way if u.s. air strikes against isis targets did not stop. u.s. air strikes against isis targets have not stopped. joining us now to show us how maps can help us make sense of all of this, is richard engel. >> i commend you for digging into this, this is complicated stuff. and i commend you for taking the time to think this through, to break it down, because i think we're about to get involved more deeply into a military conflict because of all of this stuff which is very poorly understood by the general public. >> the way that i was explaining

the role of different countries there and how they've been involved so far and whether they may be amenable to u.s. overtures, is that how you see it? would you add anything to that? >> isil, isis -- i think the administration got caught calling them isil and they're stuck with itp p. >> you know why we started calling it isis? it's easier to say. it doesn't have very many friends, if you asked -- a few countries raised their hands, who wants to attack isis? everyone would raise their hands. the problem is, who do you do the next day? you attack isis, we're going to create a failed state in --

standing between iraq and syria, we're going to have a black hole in the middle of the country, a whole that is filled by this disgusting group called isis. we start attacking them. first of all, the group is going to attack back, this is a vicious group, that's to be expected. what do you fill it with? do you make a deal with bashar al assad? do you say, okay we're sorry we tried to topple your government. we know we've accused you of using chemical weapons and we have a pretty good case that you did. we're just going to look past that? and we're going to accept you, and we're going to make amends and help you reconcur your territory, are you going to do that? maybe. i don't think as many governments are going to sign on if you say, that's the goal, certainly not in the arab world. a few might. that would be an enormous crowe sandwich for the administration to eat, which i'm not sure they want to do, after all the

problems they've had in the middle east. you attack isis, everyone wants to do it, but i don't think there's a consensus on what you're supposed to do the next day to fill that gap. and the u.s. policy by the way, for the last couple years, the last three years really, for syria has been, that is a mess, that is a horrible disastrous situation, let's close that door. >> we can't fix that, let's not try to do anything? >> let's not even look there. and until we knew it was rotting inside, stink was coming out, 200,000 people have been killed according to the u.n. we closed the door, we didn't look. it didn't get better over time, it wasn't getting better over time. and the execution of this poor guy, james foley brought it to the forefront. a lot of people are finally having to say, what are we going to do about this, we have a dangerous group there. >> if u.s. drones did start dropping bombs on isis targets

in eastern syria, the way they are in northern iraq and these other places, is there a risk in the immediate sense that isis would try to change the way it's operating? that they would try to invent themselves in population centers that it would make it more dangerous for syrian civilians? >> i don't know how more dangerous it could be? the government is dropping barrel bombs. you know what a barrel bomb is? it's a barrel, like a metal steel can, filled with explosives, you open the door of a helicopter and push it out, what it falls on, it falls on. all the time they're dropping these things, they're not precise. they're firing scud missiles, artillery, that's what's coming in from above, then what's on the ground is militants like isil or isis, who will beat you, whip you, force you to accept islamic law, if they want one of the women from your family, they

will take them as a bribe, that's what's going on now, so then you add to this some drone strikes and air strikes? does it make it more dangerous? how do you get -- where do you go from 10? how does it get worse than that? >> can i ask you also, you were abducted in syria, and held for a number of days by one of these militant groups, when you look at the family of steven sotloffe trying to appeal for his release, it's so heartbreaking. i didn't play the audio -- >> i thought about that. >> is his mom saying things that will resonate, that will be heard? will it matter? >> maybe it matters to her, that you can't do nothing. she's trying, she's appealing to these people, please be reasonable. and you didn't play the audio, what she says in the audio, it's very polite and reasoned. it says you bagdadi, you are the calif, you are the leader of the

islamic empire, you have the power to grant amnesty, because you're the commander, give amnesty to my son who has no dog in this political fight, is not in charge of u.s. foreign policy, please do this for our son so i can hug him again. it's very difficult to listen to. and she seems to have almost no emotion as she's saying it, she's somewhere else. she's out of her body as she's speaking. will it help? i hate to say, i think it's tough, this group, especially if it starts getting attacked right now, is going to see it has some americans, it's going to try to use them for political gains and i'm not sure that it wants to show how merciful it is right now. >> i'm so glad you could come in and talk to me. >> thank you. >> it's great to see you, my

friend. >> i think we'll be talking more, this is an incredibly important subject we've been ignoring. i think by policy ignoring, not on your show, but as a nation, because it's so ugly, and now it's just -- it can't really be ignored any more. >> the debate on this has to get a lot smarter, a lot faster than it has been. thank you, richard. it's great to have you here, we'll be right back.

this is dash cam footage taken from a police car, watch.

>> while we're doing this, put your hands behind your back. where's the syringe that cap came off of? >> that syringe is literally a week old. >> that was an incident between a police officer and a suspect and it looks pretty clear as to what happened there, right? at least how it resolves, and it does not resolve in a good way. wait until you see it from a second angle. it turns out there were two cameras on that incident. that ends up being really important for that incident and maybe for the whole country. it's fascinating, stay with us, that story is coming up.

legalize and regulate marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol. that was the demand on one of the very first petitions to the white house. starting in 2011, the white house developed this program, if you could get 5,000 people to sign up with you on your petition, the white house would promise to respond in writing and in public on the white house website. and it turns out that not just for legal pot but for lots of things, it's no problem to get 5,000 people to sign on to something if it comes with a promise that the white house will pay attention to your cause. after the initial launch they decided they were going to raise the threshhold from 5,000 signatures to 25,000 signatures.

a lot of causes had no problem reaching that. a proposal to build a death star. yes, thereafter the white house moved to make the theshold rise higher again. you have 100,000 signatures to get the white house to respond to you, and you have only 30 days. a serious petition has blown by the 100,000 signature threshold in less than a week. the mike brown law, that would do one seemingly simple thing, require all state, county and local police to wear a camera while on duty. the petition has over 149,000 signatures, way over the

threshold and they have two weeks left on the clock to collect more signatures. judging anecdotally, this simple idea is very popular, and lots of police departments are already using cameras, either or both on patrol cars or on officers uniforms, it's not a radical idea for police to have cameras at the local level. it would be a radical change for there to be a single federal standard requiring that of all cops at all levels of policing all across the country. had the ferguson missouri police department been using cameras during the police shooting, who knows how that would have affected the case itself, who knows how it would have affected the weeks of unrest that follows that shooting. this is footage from a body camera worn by an officer at the rialto police department. they participated in a landmark study about the use of body

cameras on police officers and their effects on both officer behavior like the use of force, and the public's behavior, including public complaints about the use of force. the results of that study, the power of the cameras, the results were a shock even to the department itself. the study found that one year after officers started wearing the cameras, use of force by those officers declined by 60%. people complaining about the use of force, members of the bubble coming out to say the police had wrongfully used force against them, the complaints declined by 88% in a year. after that study, body cameras became a department wide popcy will policy. >> every uniformed officer is assigned one of these right now. this is the camera, it's small, lightweight, it has the lens, the storage system in it, and has a small microphone and small speaker system in it, to let the officers know they're recording.

it shows what we're doing realtime. it's like documentation of our actions and it's -- i mean, it's recorded, it's video, it's almost indisputable. >> and yes sometimes that indisputable record can work to the benefit of a member of the public to corroborate the citizen's version of events if the citizen has a dispute in which the officer misbehaved or the officer themselves committed a crime. sometimes it clears police officers who really were just doing their jobs despite complaints to the contrary, the 9 police officers on the solina employment have been wearing body cameras for nine months now. last week they released a remarkable video on their youtube page. celina police officer fights suspect high on heroin. it shows the angle taken from

the video camera and the officer's squad car. from this angle it looks like the officer attacks the suspect out of nowhere for no obvious reason. >> while we're doing this, put your hands behind your back. where's the syringe that cap came off of? >> that syringe is literally, probably a week old. >> video shot from the squad car. what the dash cam was able to capture sheds very little light on why that officer all of a sudden leapt on that man and forced him to the ground. you hear calm voices and then boom the officer is on top of the suspect. that's what the camera records from that one angle. because the officer was also wearing a body camera, we have another angle on that encounter, which shows the suspect charges

at the officer in that incident. it goes by fast, we'll slow it down in a second. but here's the realtime, the fast version. watch. >> while we're doing this, go ahead and put your hands behind your back. >> that's the realtime version. here it is slowed way down. you can see that moment when the suspect turns around and that encounter changes. in a split second from something that sounds calm to a violent physical altercation. body cameras can shed light on encounters between police and the people they are there to serve. it can work in anyone's benefit. they provide additional information. in celina, texas, the officers camera on his uniform happened to work in the officer's benefit in terms of making a public case that the use of force was

justified in this incident. that said, there's another side to this. having a police officer record every point of contact with members of the public while on duty means that there's a lot of video of police officers contact with the public and it's a matter of public record. that might make sense in cases where there are criminal charges involved, it does raise privacy concerns. what if in this video, one of the friends was standing in the background didn't want to be associated with this incident, what if the person was a juvenile? how would you handle those issues if the video was going to be released publicly. the issue of police using cameras, it would benefit from a lot of public notification about the fact that police are doing that, and it would benefit from a lot of public debate. the police department in denver colorado announced they would be launching a pilot program with body cameras, in the hopes that all of their officers would be

wearing these cameras by the end of the year. they released this psa video showing the police chief in denver and the mayor walking around the city telling people about this plan. >> i'm michael hancock, how are you? >> i have a question for you, we're out testing something. you notice the glasses i have on in. >> yes. >> this is a camera. we're considering fitting all of our police officers with body cameras. what do you think about that? >> i think it's a good idea. the recording doesn't record the entire time, you have to turn it on and off? >> we have a policy that will say when you can turn it on or off. if you're on a crime scene or making a traffic stop, they're required to have it on. >> i think it's a good idea, absolutely. >> there are real potentials for up sides here, in terms of transparency and accountability on both sides of the relationship between the police and the public.

but whether it's a federal law or a local police department by police department movement to add these cameras to every police interaction, there are potential risks involved with turning our every interaction with a police officer into more or less a recorded matter of public record. hold that thought. [ female announcer ] birdhouse plans. nacho pans. glass on floors. daily chores. for the little mishaps you feel use neosporin to help you heal. it kills germs so you heal four days faster. neosporin. buy three johnson & johnson first aid products and get a free bag.

while we're doing this, go ahead and put your hands behind your back. where is the syringe that cap came off of? >> two very different views of that same police incident in celina, texas. in the first shot it's unclear what led to the officer leaping on the guy. in the second shot it looks like the suspect wield around on the officer. that's why they're sharing the video about my next guest is aiming to arm his entire police department with body cameras.

thank you for being with us. >> your department already has about 125 of these body cams on your officers on the street. why did you decide to do that? >> we've been talking about body cams now for almost two years, from my perspective, it's a credibility issue, it's a -- important that we're very transparent. and key to our success is preventing crime from occurring. the citizens are more willing to work with us if they believe we'll acknowledge when we're right and when we're wrong, and that we're a credible department. i think the body cams are one of the tools that will speak to our commitment to being transparent and establishing and doing a better job and establishing credibility weren't community. >> it sounds like you -- you're

part of this decision, you agree with this decision, have there been concerns with rank and file officers, among resistance about what this will mean for them? >> well, actually, we have it as a pilot project in one of our busier districts. the feedback has been positive. i tell you what happens, we go to hundreds of thousands of calls every year, it's inevitable that something controversial is going to happen. when you have no evidence other than he said she said. he being the suspect or the complainant and the other party being the police officer. you come up with a not sustained allegation. and that doesn't help the individual that's making the allegation, certainly doesn't have the officer that feels he's doing the right thing. the body cam clears up those conflicts, so i mean we're excited about it, they're pretty much excited about it, and i think the citizens are supportive of it and excited about it.

>> we saw that tape of you and denver's mayor out on the street talking to denver residents, not to police officers, but to resident thes of the city about whether they like the idea and basically letting them know it's coming and looking for feedback. are you hearing privacy concerns or other worries from citizens? >> no. it's relatively new, one of the reasons we did the press release and the mayor and i decided to go out to the community. it's an important decision, and i think it's a decision where we get to buy in from the community, thus far, it appears we're getting that buy in as our policies evolve, and concerns will come about, we're certainly in a position to change those policies and make sure they're mitigating any serious concerns the citizens might have or the residents might have. >> as the white house now has been forced to responds to one of these citizen petitions, about whether this ought to be a federal standard, that police

officers ought to be required to have cameras on them, do you feel like this is something that should be handled town to town, department to department, chief to chief, or there should be a federal law considered on something like this? >> well, i'm not so sure it should be a federal law, but i think departments will be well advised across the nation to consider body cams much it's a win-win situation for the officers and it's certainly a win-win situation for the residents that they're responsible for providing public safety to. >> robert white, chief of the denver colorado police department. thank you for helping us understand your decision on this. thanks very much. >> thank you for having me. much more ahead, including some breaking news that may affect the control of the united states senate. stay with us.

we have one major story still on the show ahead, it's a doozy. how a surprise guilty plea and a federal bribery case today could conceivably change the outcome of who controls the united states senate this year, this is a big deal story, nobody else is covering it in the national news. and we have it here next.

december 28th, 2011, six days before the biggest event in all of republican presidential politics, six days before the 2012 iowa republican caucuses, the political ground shook beneath the state of iowa, we led our show with it that night as breaking news, watch. we do have some legitimate breaking news to report right now, out of iowa. six days to go until the iowa caucuses, there has been a rather dramatic development just moments ago tonight in the republican race for president. what you're looking at right there is a campaign event that is underway right now in des moines. it's a chain event for republican congressman ron paul of texas who you see speaking there, the two latest polls out of iowa show congressman paul in first place in the ppp poll and second in the cnn poll. ron paul appears to have scored a bit of a coup in his effort to win iowa.

an iowa republican state senator was introduced to the ron paul supporting crowd. up until tonight mr. sorenson had been serving as an iowa state co chair for the michele bachmann campaign. the reason he was being introduced at a ron paul rally was to announce that he's switching sides. six days before the 2012 iowa caucus, the co chair of michele bachmann's presidential campaign in iowa switched teams on the eve essentially of that election, the bachman campaign chair announced he was leaving the michele bachmanncamp for ron paul. that was breaking news, we covered it as breaking news, you can see i was wearing the same jacket. the allegation that followed ended up being a real political bombshell thats taken a few years to go off. because it's michele bachmann i have to tell you you can the

delivery of her news that night was bachmann-esque, but you'll get the point. >> ken sorensen personally told -- let's see. hold on just a moment. ken sorensen said to me yesterday -- ken sorensen personally told me he was offered a large sum of money to go to work for the ron paul campaign.

>> that's absurd. like i said before, the people on this campaign supported me, they worked tirelessly for me, they stuffed envelopes, they door knocked for me. i feel like i'm coming home to them. >> have you spoken to michele bachmann about this at all? she said you personally told her that you were offered a sum of money. >> that's not true. >> were you offered any money? >> absolutely not. >> absolutely not. i was never offered any money. deny, deny, deny that anything like that happened, as did ron paul himself on national television a few days later.

he told fox news sunday that did not happen. and for a time that was sort of the end of that scandal. michele bachmann placed sixth in the iowa caucuses and dropped out of the presidential races the next day. ron paul finished third. but when the political storm left behind was that there was a market in iowa which republican presidential endorsements for the iowa caucuses were being bought and sold for cash. after the dust cleared in the 2012 presidential race after barack obama had been sworn in for a second term, there was still this hangover in republican politics and in iowa politics, this hangover worry about the all-important iowa caucuses, which have such an important role in choosing presidential candidates in this country. do the iowa republican caucuses have a bribery problem? about a year later in february

2013, a former staffer for michele bachmann filed a complaint with the federal election commission. while michele bachmann claimed the only reason she lost was because ron paul was paying money to that guy to get his endorsement, what her former staffer claimed is that michele bachmann was paying too. she also had that guy on the payroll for his endorsement. that complaint was filed february 2013. later that year, october 2013 the iowa state ethics commission concluded an investigation into those allegations and on that specific complaint that the michele bachmann campaign paid the selected official, the ethics commission found that claim to be substantiated. the same day the report came

out, the michele bachmann campaign manager resigned his seat in the iowa state senate and declined in an e-mail to his supporters that he had done nothing wrong, that it was a political witch hunt and the whole thing was probably because he was so verbally against gay marriage. sure, whatever. interestingly, though, in that more than 5 hub page report from the iowa ethics commission, they were mostly looking into that michele bachmann's cam page had been paying bribes. but in addition to what he had got from michele bachmann, he also got money from somewhere else. they noted $73,000 paid to that same guy in the form of suspicious wire transfers. in november of 2013, fbi agents executed a search warrant at that state senator's home and march of this year, that michele bachmann staffer who filed the original complaint about bribes being paid for endorsements in

iowa, that staffer amended his complaint this year to say there was evidence that not only was the michele bachmann paying bribes, so too was the ron paul campaign. ron paul had denied this publicly. his campaign denied it publicly. it was just crazy michele bachmann scrolling around on her ipad that nobody believed. there was an investigation with that complaint. today, in a surprise move in what may turn out to be not just a bombshell for iowa politics and a presidential campaign that's already over and people like michele bachmann and ron paul who are already out of politics, but a bombshell for republican politics now and for republican efforts to take the senate now this year, today the surprise news is that this has all been resolved. apparently it wasn't a political witch hunt because he was

against gay marriage. it wasn't just claims from michele bachmann. today, kent sorenson pled guilty on two charges. he's facing between 5 to 25 years in prison and $500,000 total fine. he posted his plea agreement on line. the bottom line is that he admits to having taken bribes for his endorsement. he was bribed by the ron paul for president campaign. they paid him a total of $75,000 for his endorsement in iowa, where he pled guilty to, was working with the ron paul campaign to lie about the bribe money they paid to him, when the campaign wrote up its expenditures in a federal document. he also pled guilty to lying about it to investigators, which is the on obstruction to justice charge.

this is a bombshell that reaches way beyond this one iowa state senator and iowa republican politics. this is a statement that his attorney released today -- >> oh, yeah, right, you can't bribe yourself. if you're guilty of taking a bribe, that means somebody must have -- i mean, he didn't trick the ron paul campaign in describing the bribes they paid to him as payments to some film company. they didn't think they were getting film production for the price of $73,000, which is what they fold the s.e.c. they were bribing him. he's now going to go to prison for 25 years because he got caught for taking a bribe and covering it up. he's pled guilty to helping them do it. but what about them?

who was in charge of the ron paul campaign when this was happening? who done it? this man is the campaign manager now for senate minot leader mitch mcconnell. he's the top republican in the senate. he will become senate majority leader if he succeeds in his plan for republicans to take over the senate this fall. his campaign manager is jessie benton. jessie benton at the time was bribing people for their endorsements in iowa in 2011, at that time he was in charge of the ron paul for president campaign. that october before the iowa caucuses, this is the e-mail from the kent sorenson camp laying out kent sorenson's demands how much he wanted to be paid to switch his endorsement to ron paul. here's the reply saying he really wanted to get kent sorenson on board.

the following month, december 26, a ron paul campaign staffer handed kent sorenson a check for $25,000 in the bathroom of an iowa restaurant. two days later, kent sorenson announced his change of heart. now he's endorsing ron paul. shortly thereafter, he wondered on the phone whether ron paul knew about this bribery that happened. he said he didn't know about ron paul himself but he knew for sure that jessie benton knew that the ron paul campaign paid him that bribe. >> does jessie know? does the mitch mcconnell re-election campaign have a problem here? and now people are looking at 25 years in prison for accepting bribes.

we called mitch mcconnell's campaign asking if they wanted to give a statement on this matter. we have not heard back. now it's time for "the last word right now on "first look," a mother's plea for the release of her son and another american fighting for isis? epic surf draws crowds and wave riders to california ahead of hurricane marie. death on the set. a case of friendly fire while filming "cops" leaves a staffer dead. plus, what does an accused insider trader and a two paw dog have in common? we'll tell you. good morning, everybody. it is one minute and 30 seconds of pure heartache. on tape the mother of a captured american begging the murderous boss of isis to spare his life. tracie potts is live in washington this morning. tracy this comes as reports of another american killed while fighting f