i'm concerned there are officials in georgia who see this as a tripe to pounce. and, right now, we are looking to see what relief we might still have. >> the only answer to that is ever-vigilant press. thank you, gentlemen, both. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> that is all 234 for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. >> thank you. let's play spot the difference. a really big change has happened. see if you can smot what it is. this is what we were told yesterday. was con sis tent across different parts of government. yesterday, this was the line. >> i don't know whether you want to call it a war or a sustained counter terrorism campaign. >> i believe what we were engaged in is not a full flejed

war like we were before. it's a heightened counter terrorism occupation. it will have its own pace, its own dynamic, but it's counter terrorism. >> okay. that was yesterday. secretary of state john kerry both saying the same thing. this is counter terrorism. you can call it a war, 23 you want to, by it's not a war. it's counter terrorism. that was yesterday. now, spot the difference. this is today. >> make no mistake. we know we're at war with i-s-i-l in the same way that we continue to be at war with al-qaida and its afill yachts. >> yesterday, we are not at war. today, war has been declared in the lit ral sense of the word declared. today is when they started calling it war. that's when the press secretary said, for the first time, we are at war with isil.

was that a screw up? did he really meern to say that? 12 minutes later, it became clear that that was not a slip of the tongue. it is official. it wasn't true yesterday, but, today, we are declaring, and by declairing, i mean saying that we are at war. >> the united states is at war with isil in the same way that we are at war with al-qaida. so in the same way that the united states is at war with al-qaida and its affiliates around the globe, the united states is at war with isil. in the same way that we are at war with al-qaida and its affiliates around the globe. we are with isil. >> this is new today.

but if the repetition means anything, they mean it. the pentagon rolling out that new identical line saying we are at war with this group, isis. which operates in syria and iraq. the secretary of state yesterday and the national security advisor, they said we were at war yesterday. they said no, call it a counter terror operation, instead. so the white house and the pentagon think one thing and the secretary of state and the national security advisor think another? as soon as they held their briefing today, they also made clear that they have updated their verbiage as well. now their line is very clear. this is war. >> we are at war with isil the same way we're at war with al-qaida and its afill yats around the world. >> state department spokeswoman. so, as of this afternoon, it's war.

it has been tribed at their regularly scheduled press briefings on a friday afternoon. does that mean what they do is declare war now? >> i'll determine what the academic definition of war may be. >> whatever the definition of war may be, sng did change today pretty dramatically. the united states government shifted on a dime from talking about counter terrorism saying we are already at war against them. why did this traumatic change

happen today? it wasn't true yesterday, it's true today. and i'm not sure we know yet why the government made this change today to say we are at war when they wouldn't say it before. if i had to guess, i might pause it. that this is part of the reason why they have just made this sudden change. >> why is it that our allies in the middle east cannot take military action. my argument is yes, it is. but let's not pretend there is one piece of smoking intelligence.

>> i do not rule out supporting the prime minister. but i believe you have to make a better case than he did today on those questions. >> it is very clear tonight that the world has not passed emotion. it is clear to me that the british parliament reflecting the views of the british people does not want to see british military action. i get that and the government will act accordingly. >> it was one year ago in the u.k. british prime minister david cameron was very confident he was going to win that vote. and he took measures to ensure that he would win that vote. that vote in the house of commons was taken as a three-line whip, which is less exciting than it sounds, but still kind of a big deal. when parties whip the vote, they're ensuring that their party votes the way they want them to. it could be a one-line, a two line or in very severe set of circumstances, 5 three-line

whip. that is a very, very serious mat ere. that is something, supposed to be the kind of offense for which you can lose your position in the party. you can get kicked out of the party for that. well, the conservatives three-lined whipped that vote. and even so, with a three-line whip, they lost that vote. two dozen members voted now. now, this week, in our country, in the 48 hours after president obama gave his address to the nation about syria, in that 48 hour window, we have gone from basically a foregone political conclusion, that there was no way our congress was going to take a vote on this issue.

to all of the sudden, a situation where it appears like they have changed over the last 48 hours. it seems like, as a nation, that congress ought to step up and make a decision here. the squeamish should be forced to declare themselves now. in a democracy, the use of military time might require radification by the people's representatives. congress, this congress should vote on any and all military action obama takes against this new enemy. here's the new york times for even thinking they might be able to weezle out of this vote. the time says some lawmakers might be anyone to vote that they may not be able to face authorization saying they'd rather sit on the fence for a while to see whether they extend a military campaign saying it

looks like a sex campaign or a debacle. never to be underestimated is outrageous. congress should weigh in. and soon. the winds have shifted on this. it seemed perfectly clear that there was no chance that congress would do its constitutional duty and vote on whether or not we ought the go to war. but now, the informal whip count with taking a vote, at the washington post, also reporting this, too. they describe now going support among lawmakers to debate the issue.

they say the idea of an up or down volt is drawing support of a wide range of lawmakers now. further and surprising evidence came today in the news that congress is going to come back early on monday. they're coming back to d.c. a day early in part to make time to vote on part of president obama's plan for how he wants to fight isis. they want to vote specifically on whether we shoult provide more assistance to syrian rebel groups. and i almost cannot believe

these words are coming out of my mouth, but this does not seem like a partisan scheme. it seems like congress might really be coming back to washington. pretty close to election time in order to come back to washington and talk about a hard thing. it's a miracle. a small, political miracle. but kind of a miracle. and president obama is the one who appears to have brought it on with this prime time address on why the united states should fight isis and how he wants to fight isis. more than 70% of americans now say they want congress to vote on that. editorial boards across the country say they want congress to vote on that.

members of congress add mit, okay thrks is our job. we ought to be voting on this. it seems like they may be voting on this. that changed with washington with this speech. and i must say he wanted to accomplish that with this speech. but it does appear to be what he's got. and, so, as the white house is very cleanly aware, in part, because they saw it happened to their very good friend, david cameron, just last year, the white house is very keenly aware that if congress is really going to vote on this, in they're going to take it up, they're going to authorize military force. that means there's a chance that congress will vote no. and so as the winds have shifted to make it seem like yeah, maybe even before the election.

is that why the administration today made this equally sudden shift to describe us as already being at war with isis already. if we are already at war and congress votes no, then, from the white house's perspective, they can say, okay, congress, that's good to know that you don't want to start doing anything new. but we weren't already at war before you took that vote. so we're not goimpk to change anything. if we're lr at war, then the congress vote won't slow down what they're doing in the middle east. did the obama administration just declare that we're already at war today? basically, as an insurance policy in case congress vote that is we shouldn't be at war. chuck todd joins me to help me

climb down off this roof. that's next. se. like0 bonus points when i spent $5,000 in the first 3 months after i opened my account. and i earn 5 times the rewards on internet, phone services and at office supply stores. with ink plus i can choose how to redeem my points. travel, gift cards, even cash back. and my rewards points won't expire. so you can make owning a business even more rewarding. ink from chase. so you can. eenie. meenie. miney. go. ♪ more adventures await in the seven-passenger lexus gx. see your lexus dealer.

ounds] the wait is over for even faster internet. xfinity is now doubling the internet speed... ...on two of our most popular plans. xfinity continues to innovate, bringing you the fastest, most reliable internet...period. xfinity internet from comcast, now double the speed.

watch this. sam always gives you the good news in person, bad news in email. good news -- fedex has flat rate shipping. it's called fedex one rate. and it's affordable. sounds great. [ cell phone typing ] [ typing continues ] [ whoosh ] [ cell phones buzz, chirp ] and we have to work the weekend. great. more good news -- it's friday! woo! [ male announcer ] ship a pak via fedex express saver® for as low as $7.50. but they have to use special care in keeping the denture clean. dentures are very different to real teeth. they're about 10 times softer and may have surface pores where bacteria can multiply. polident is designed to clean dentures daily. its unique micro-clean formula kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains, cleaning in a better way than brushing with toothpaste. that's why i recommend using polident.

[ male announcer ] polident. cleaner, fresher, brighter every day. this is not the iraq war of 2002. but make no mistake, we know we are at war with isil in the same way we're at war and continue to be at war with al-qaida and its affiliates. the united states is at war in the same way that we are at war with al-qaida: we are at war with isil in the same way we are at war with al-qaida. pentagon, the white mouse and the state departmentenly today, using the words at war as if the u.s. is at war with isil. both of them said no, this isn't a war.

but, today, this is new from the obama administration. a small word change with a potentially very big meaning. chuck, thanks very much for being here. appreciate it. >> isn't it saying with specific notes we are at war in a way they didn't say before? >> they're not. this is basically a cave-in into not having a semantics argument with the republicans inside the beltway. and both you and i know that we can have a silly debate. but this actually has its roots. and you remember this very well. a decade ago when there was a lot of criticism, democrats in general, john kerry, he's been very careful. there was a lot of criticism lobbed at then-president bush for using the phrase war on terror.

he was a campaign against isis to campaign. >> i have a theory on this that i'm going to give you lots of opportunity to shoot down. i fully admit that this could be just completely made up. it seems to me that there's a new wind blowing in washington. not just some side issue about it, but whether or not to invoke force. if congress did take a vote on

it and they voted no, wouldn't it be more convenient that we already wr at war? then it would be oh, yeah, congress would be interested to know that you didn't want to start a new thing. >> well, i think that -- look, you're not wrong. that's not too cockamamey of a way to think. he's saying i don't need congress's confirmation. he's using the same legal justification. that's what this white house believes. i do think there is a dmachbd for a vote. elections are 52 days away. you saw our wall street george poll. you're not going to see harry

reid or john boehner. i think after the election i think you could see a vote. and frankly, it doesn't seem as if congress learned the initial lesson from the iraq war. which is why are you guys agreeing to this so quickly. why aren't you holding the administration's feet to the fire on exactly what the strategy is. how do you prevent it from happening? >> there will be some hearings starting next week. i thought it was a remarkable -- at least remarkably unexpected development that the house said they would come back a day early next week.

to be clear, you feel like if they are going to vote, maybe do it in the lame duck? >> two votes. they're going do the initial vote on monday for the training vote of that moderate syrian opposition. i think you'll see them say i think there's enough momentum where they're going to have to verbally promise to do another vote. but they'll postpone it until after the election. >> "meet the press" which is worth spending your monday morning with, chuck, thanks very much. really appreciate having you here. all right. much more ahead on tonight's show, including the super-weird red state ball lot surprises that could decide which party controls which party controls the united states senate for the next two years of the presidency.

but, first, one more thick. about the human side of these world events and this new declaration of war on isis. the folks have done a smart and excellent vote to gym kerry avenue spending two years in captivity inside syria. esquire has taken its classic feature about the fallen man photo from 9/11. it shows a man falling from the twin towers on 9/11. it's framed from the twin towers. it's one of the unforgettable images of 9/11. esquire published a seminal piece. irt gets read particularly every year around the 9/1 anniversary. this year, they decided to put the fallen man story behind a pay wall. but it ice an optional pay wall. you can still read the article

without paying, but if you agree to give them $2.99 to read that piece, that money all goes drektly to a james foley scholarship fund, which is being set up at marquette university. if you want to learn more about it, we've posted a link for you. we'll be right back. can you start tomorrow? yes sir. alright. let's share the news tomorrow. today we failrly busy. tomorrow we're booked solid. we close on the house tomorrow. i want one of these opened up. because tomorow we go live...

it's a day full of promise. and often, that day arrives by train. big day today? even bigger one tomorrow. when csx trains move forward, so does the rest of the economy. csx. how tomorrow moves. nineteen years ago, we thought, "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. ♪

we know we're not the center of your life, but we'll do our best to help you connect to what is. dad,thank you mom for said this oftprotecting my future.you. thank you for being my hero and my dad. military families are uniquely thankful for many things, the legacy of usaa auto insurance could be one of them. if you're a current or former military member or their family, get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life.

last night, we gave you a sneak peek of this chart, possibly the weirdest ever

presented on this program. it's a way of trying to keep track of one of the weirdest political stories in the country right now. yes, you, too, lola, your time is at hand. stay with us.

okay, there are three states in the country right now where, surprise, turns out who's on the ballot this year is not really who's running for office.

rather the ball lot isn't going to reflect who's running or the ballot changed at the last minute had already been done. it's not going to be who people expected to see on the ball lot. something like this happens somewhere in the elections every year. but for some reason, it's happening in a whole bunch of red state this is year. it's because of bad news for the republican party. one of these in alaska. shawn parnell was elevated to the governor ship and now he is running for reelection there. he's looking for a pretty easy walk as governor mostly because he's running against a split field. there's a good democratic candidate and a good independent

candidate running against him and they were splitting the vote against him. so what happened in alaska is that that good, independent candidate and that good democratic candidate, they decided that they would stop splitting the vote against shawn parnell and, instead, get together to try to beat him. they're now running as a fusion ticket against him. the independent is the candidate for governor. and, surprise, shawn parnell, that is not who you expected to be running against. that governor ship is seen as an independent democratic pick-up. nebraska is a really, really red state. everybody thought, like in alaska, his lieutenant governor

would step up and everybody would replace him. he announced way back in 2011 that he would be running in 2014 to replace the governor when he stepped down this year. but, then, the omaha news he recalled put in a freedom of information act request for lieutenant governor's state-owned cell phone. the lieutenant gov northerly refused to comment on this subject. again, the gov noer's name is

henaeman. so it e thanks, nebraska. and this week, lieutenant governor heideman also resigned after another kind of doe mesic dispute. and, in his case, it was a doe mesic dispute involving police. not to put too fine a point on it, but it stems from a violent conversation between the lieutenant governor who is now with their brother laney instead of lavon and less. and it all happened at the home of their mother, lola. this dispute between the lieutenant governor and lavan and lois laney and less, that happened. police report all the rest, a tearful resignation.

and now the ticket is no longer. legally. logistically. you could look it up. i love it. but because this is a wooerd election year, it appeared he would not be able to take his name off the ballot in nebraska. the scandal and the police report and the resigning from the lieutenant governor ship and trying to get his name off the ballot, it all, legally, happened too late. there's no provision in nebraska law for getting your name off the deadline after it's passed. the secretary of state has decided actually, he can take his name off the ballot. although the state deadline was september 1st, he has a duty to make sure e 4 didn't confuse volters. so, yes, nebraska is a very red

state. but the democratic candidate for governor there is a good and credible candidate. could that new scandal in nebraska, could that new scandal which is getting a lot of play in the local press, affect democrats chances of winning the local ballot. >> it's a shock this year where republicans miegts end up losing a seat, a seet that they never had to worry about before. and that is kansas. in kansas,they've gone completely unexpectedly pear-shpear pear-shaped. we've got that story coming up for you next. ...or a big steak...

...or big hair... i think we have our answer. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. so what we're looking for is a way to "plus" our accounting firm's mobile plan. and "minus" our expenses. perfect timing. we're offering our best-ever pricing on mobile plans for business. run the numbers on that. well, unlimited talk and text, and ten gigs of data for the five of you would be... one-seventy-five a month. good calculating kyle. good job kyle. you just made partner. our best-ever pricing on mobile share value plans for business. now with a $100 bill credit for every business line you add.

a gesture indicating uncertainty: this is what the affidavit says. so let's say somebody asked you a question. you're uncertain about the answer. you do not want to say out loud that you are uncertain about the answer. you don't want to say it. you would prefer to gesture your uncertainty. what are your choices? there's the classic shrug. there's the -- i guess like the wobbly hand. that's like jazz hands. and then there's the less

commonly used shoulderless shrug. one of those gestures indicating uncertainty. turns out could win the republican chances of winning the united states senate this year. here's why. this is not just any random parallelogram. kansas's county votes in the last presidential election. kansas is a very red state. very red. these are the latest three polls for the governor's race in deep, red kansas this year. the republy cab governor of kansas in that red state looks like he very well might lose his effort to get re-elected in cast cast. he is an unpopular one. his democratic opponent says that he's basically turned kansas into a far ideological laboratory.

even a lot of kansas republicans agree with some of that critique. some have publicly crossed over to say they're supporting their party's own governor. the other really national high republican is a guy named chris kobak for years, chris kobak has written antiimgant publication. he's also been the republican party's chief national marketer of all kinds of laws to make it harder to vote, starting with voter id laws and going downhill from there. chris kobak is a very smart guy. he we believe the to harvard,

yale law school and oxford. >> the last poll of deep red kansas shows chris kobak trailing his democratic opponent. not trailing by a lot but still trailing. in kansas. in kansas. a kansas -- a state that picked mitt romney over barack obama by 21 points. kansas is a state where, since before world war ii, they have sent only republicans to the united states senate. but now, maybe even that could change as well. last week, in kansas, the democrat running for senate

announced that he no longer wanted to run for the u.s. senate. the democrat's name is chad taylor. and his announcemented that he wanted to drop out, that was kind of a bomb shell. him dropping out would mean that the race for that senate seat would be between incouple bant for pat rob erts and an independent candidate greg car men. splitting the votes with mr. orman, this well-funded, basically independent guy, suddenly, has a very good chance of when to vote red and not red. this is how pat rob earths was sailing to election when there were votes against him. this is how pat roberts might very well lose his seat if one of those guys drops out. high stakings right now for republicans in kansas.

kansas is fwieng to be a top race for republicans. as he's worrying about about his own skin in his own reelection race, chris kobak is working on a little something that he's got going on in his office that could save the skin of u.s. senator pat rob erts. when the democrat went to withdraw from the senate race last week, john taylor went down to the secretary of state's office, he went down in person, deadline day, he spoke with the dechty, the state elections director. he says gave him explicit instructions as to how to go about getting his name removed from the november ballot. john taylor says he followed those explicit instructions and then says he asked the kansas elections director if his name, indeed, would be removed from the november ballot. according to mr. taylor, they told him yes. he leaves that day having heard

a yes from the director of elections. yes, your name has been removed from the november ballot. the following day, chris k, bak, secretary of state, announced that no, john taylor would not be able to remove his name because he hadn't filed his paperwork correctly. so chris kobak's office has now released a sworn affidavit from the elections director. from a guy who john taylor told him yeah, you've done it right. you're off the ballot. this sworn affidavit says yeah, john taylor did ask if his name would be removed from the ballot. but, according to the affidavit, no one ever spoke any words in response to that question. instead, he gestured but the answer was uncertain. he asked if his name would be removed from the ballot. and i, in response, gestured,

but the answer was uncertain. again, mr. taylor asked if his name would be removed from the candidate list and i gestured as to indicate we'll see. so now we know. it wasn't this, it wasn't this, it was the classic shrug. the secretary of state's office in kansas says nobody ever told chad taylor his name would be removed from the ballot or not. we gave him the we'll see shrug. why would he think that would be enough. the argument is that he saugts official advice in person about how to do this before the deadline and the response from the kansas state government was to shrug in his face. what?

in that same affidavit, he did instruct him to put chad taylor's name back on. the kansas spreechl court is going to hear this case on tuesday. they're going to make a financial decision about whether secretary of state chris kobak can force the democratic state candidate to remain on the ball lot even though he doesn't want to be there, even though he applied in person to have his name taken off the ballot. the court is going to hear that on tuesday. tuesday isn't a moment too soon to figure this out. the state of kansas has to start printing their absentee ballots for this pras a week from today. kansas has one week to figure this out before those all-important ballots are printed, which may determine who's the next u.s. senator from kansas, but, also, who controls the u.s. senate in the country. and, in the meantime, there is suddenly a giant spot light coming all the way from the beltway directed at this race.

the roberts campaign has new guys running. right? mitt romney, personally, has jumped in to help. kansas senate? that's supposed to be an easy one for republicans this fall. can washington republicans save this race for pat roberts? and, if not, can chris kobak. >> joining us now is dave helling. >> great to be here. by the way, there are a lot going on in kansas right now, not all of them involving shoulders, as you might imagine. >> i love that their defense is he asked us a direct question and our response was hmm. >> that i had're play they're playing a lot of politics with the ballot out here. and a lot of eyes are focused on the supreme court which we'll meet tuesday.

four of them appointed by a democrat, a democrat's name that you might recognize, kathleen subelius when she was governor. i think the general assumption out here in is that the court will find that chad taylor's name should come off the ballot. we do expect a rather quick decision. >> is senator pat roberts in as much trouble as he looks to be from the polling? i mean, from outside, it looks like if it is a one-on-one match between him and that very well financed independent, he might have a hard time holding on to that seat. >> pat roberts has never really had a difficult race in kansas, stretching all the way back to 1980. he's a republican in what may be the most republican state in america. and yet in that latest poll, he had 36% of the vote in kansas. 1/3 of the voters in this state say now that they would vote to reelectric pat roberts. that means he is in serious trouble. now, we have to see what kind of

campaign greg orman runs. we do have to see what happens to chad taylor's name on the ballot. but pat roberts has a lot of work to do and not a lot of time to do it. he was really hit pretty hard in the primary by a tea party guy milton wolf. he real liz made an issue of pat roberts' residency. pat roberts' is being hit by the tea party on his right and by greg orman and sort of the middle. and he's got seven weeks to figure that riddle out. >> we're watching pat roberts struggle, but what's fascinating to me, one of the most republican states in the country, we see pat roberts in trouble. we see governor brownback in trouble. what's going on with the kansas election this year? are all those individual problems? or should we connect them? >> we should connect them.

we'll see how it plays out when voters go to the polls. but what you're seeing out here, rachel, is whether or not the rubber band is snapping back from the most right ward tilt of the republican party. you do get the sense, talking with moderate republicans that they are concerned that for whatever reason, the pendulum to mix my metaphors, has swung so far to the right that it needs to come back a little bit. brownback, of course, you've talked about it on your show repeatedly, has problems on tax policy. pat roberts went very far to the right because he feared a tea party challenge. and now it's very difficult for him to get back to the middle, particularly because greg orman is not a democrat. pat roberts dppted a race against a democrat and there's a formula for that. greg orman has been very successful in if sort of saying i'm not a republican or a democrat. and that's really flummoxed, if

you will, pat roberts and his campaign. they're trying to figure out a way to push orman to the left and make their race easy. >> seeing that flown-in crew from washington try to turn that roberts campaign is just fascinating to watch. i envy you your beaks in years like this. thanks very much. best new thing in the world is both sorry needed this week and it is next.

did someone say burn? try alka seltzer reliefchews. they work just as fast and taste better than tums smoothies assorted fruit. mmm. amazing. yeah, i get that a lot. alka seltzer heartburn reliefchews. enjoy the relief.

i am so noh my gosh...now, it's not even funny. driver 1 you ready? yeah! go! [sfx] roaring altima engine woah! ahhhha! we told people they were riding nissan's most advanced altima race car. we lied... about the race car part. altima, with 270 horsepower and active understeer control. how did you?...what! i don't even, i'm speechless. innovation that excites.

[ female announcer ] we love our smartphones. and now telcos using hp big data solutions are feeling the love, too. by offering things like on-the-spot data upgrades -- an idea that reduced overcharge complaints by 98%. no matter how fast your business needs to adapt, if hp big data solutions can keep wireless customers smiling, imagine what they can do for yours. make it matter. >> best new thing in a world, yay! while u.s. elections can be

dramatic and occasionally hilarious, we do not tend to vote in our elections. even in the 2008 presidential election which more people turned out to vote than any election in the previous four decades, the percent of eligible voters who actually voted in that blockbuster election was just 57%. more than 40% of the country's voting age population didn't show up even for that one. we americans love democracy. we do not always love the act of taking part in our democracy. but it is always sort of a punch to our collective civic gut every time we hear that somebody else somewhere else in the world is doing it better than us. it does happen. you have these really high voter turnout rates from other countries, right? in most cases when there's a really high voter turnout, there's usually a catch. 2002 when saddam was still in power in iraq. they held iraqi elections and

iraqi officials announced there were 11 million voters in that election. and wouldn't you know it,er every single one of them turned out and voted for saddam hussein. 100% voter turnout and the margin of victory is 100%. seven more years. dictatorships amazingly see high voter turnout elections all the time. but in modern democracies, one of the freedoms that we all have is the freedom to vote or not to vote. and in our little democracy here, lots of us choose not to vote, and that is the way it is in lots of western democracies. there is one modern western democracy right now, though, that is challenging that norm in a mind blowing way. scotland has been part of the united kingdom for over 300 years. it still operates within the sonch state of the uk. they're now preparing for a

referendum on independence. vote yes to secede, vote no. it just takes a simple majority to pass this thing. it's a binding vote. voting is open to anyone 16 year of age or older in scotland. and you don't have to vote in this referendum, it's not compulsory, but apparently everybody in scotland wants to vote. everyone. we learned today that voter registration for this upcoming voluntary referendum in scotland next week is approaching 100%. there are an estimated 4.4 of voting age, almost 4.3 of them have registered to vote. scotland could basically have a 100% turnout for the vote next week. without a dictator to blame it on. 100% turnout where there's only one thing on the ballot, independence, yes or no. exercising your civic duty at a rate of 100% of the country, obviously that is the best new thing in the world today.

imagine if that happened here. who would be president? that does it for us tonight. we will see you again monday. but first, you now have to go to prison. due to mature subject matter, viewer discretion is advised. they were once shrouded in secrecy behind the iron curtain. >> we knew we were walking into a place where lots of people had died. >> the prisoners on death row stood against the wall. the firing squad stood here. >> but now for the first time, a "lockup" crew travels to eastern europe, and goes behind the walls of six maximum security prisons. >> there was a moment there