what's going to happen to the legal case? we'll talk about all of those stories next. every four years, there's at least one. this year, in case you were wondering, it's rob portman who is not going to be running for president. honestly, if that headline were not there, would you know who this was? rob portman crushes the hopes of millions.

even in the right wing blogs, they mean that sarcastically. he is a senator from ohio, in case you were wondering. rand paul made an official announcement that he is going to run for the united states senate. the reason that one is of interest is that there's a law in kentucky that says rand paul cannot legally run for re-election to the senate in 2016 and also for the president in 2016. his announcement today is of interest and that is going to turn out to be a really

his announcement today is of interest and that is going to turn out to be a really interesting fight from a couple different angles. there's also news today that sort of obliquely gets to be the next pet. that is news today out of texas. rik perry has been governor since 2000. since the priest governor of that state left texas to become our nation's 43rd president. just as it is clear now, he is definitely going to try to run for president in 2016. it was also clooer in the twilight days that he was going

to make a run for president and he was pretty clooerp about it. one of the issues, one of the things about texas, that was never all that easy to explain or translate to a national audience. was the texas experience with executions. texas likes to kill is e its prisoners. since the supreme court's legal execution again, texas has killed 518 prisoners. the next highest number is oklahoma which has killed 111

it ice not just because texas is a big stats or a populous state or a tough state. they have a unique enthusiasm for killing people. they are responsible for having overseen the deaths of hundreds of people while they were texas governor. in 19989, he was wanting to be president. texas had one particular execution that got a ton of nationwide attention. it put a ton of pressure on bush. carla faye tucker was sentenced to death. she had an apparently sincere mission to evangelical.

something about killing this particular one, the first woman to be executed in that state in 135 years, something about her case grabbed the conscience of even some conservatives around the country. people like newt gingrich, the leading republican at the country at that time. you also had a lot of conservatives that george w. bush, governor of texas at the time, should spare her life, even though he didn't spare so many people's lives. george w. bush was texas

governor at the time. those pleas for mercy fell on deaf ears. he ended up swer viewing the candidate specifically about the carla faye tucker case. obviously, it was one of the most unnerving things published by anybody about george w. bush before he was elected president. he was clearly not at all bothered by this particular execution.

so he saw to it that carla faye tucker got excuted. now, the texas governor who

wants to run for president is a man named rick perry. but the same type of dynamic is playing out once again. this time, it's attracting nationwide attention. even some christian conservatives to lobby the texas governor to not go through with this one. this time it's a man whose case is famous, because, specifically, he appears to be so obviously and so dramatically mentally ill. he's due to be killed by the state of texas. the list includes like gary bower.

it's this big list of pretty well-known conservative act viss who have written to rik perry saying it would be immoral for the government to take this man's life. they're saying that this guy, it would be wrong to kill him. in addition, former texas congressman ron paul, rand paul's dad, he has weighed in specifically on this case telling rand perry that he should stop this execution. a bunch of morning newspapers have done it all across the state. basically, all the major papers in the state, prus a lot of little ones, have editorialized against this specific execution.

he killed his inlaws in 1992. the prior 14 years to his crime, dating back to the time he was 20 years old, this man had been hospitalized more than a dozen times for acute instances of mental illness. he had been diagnose nosed many different times. at one point, he took everything out in his backyard and buried it. he heard voices. he thought it was controlled by unseen powers. he once nailed the curtain shot. >> he shaved his head, he changed into camouflage

fatigues, got a hunting rifle, took his wife and his daughter hostage, after a standoff with police, he e venn shlly changed into a suit and tie before he finally decide ds to turn himself in. this is his mug shot. you see him in the suit and tie. they show him from the front and the back and it's kind of strange looking. he didn't quite finish shaving the back of his head when he was preparing for this battle with satan that he thought he was engaged in. the state of texas allowed him to fire his attorneys and represent himself. he tried to issue subpoenas to john f. kennedy and to the pope. he believes the state of texas wants to excute him not because he killed his inlaws. he says he didn't. he says that was his alter ego,

a man named sarj. he has paint ds a portrait in prison of what he says sarj looks like. it's texas taking the side of satan against him who's on the side of jesus. that exkugsz considered whether someone could legally be exz cuted in this country. in 2007, they ruled that a person cannot legally be executed unless they are not well enough to have a rashl understanding of why the state plans to kill him. despite that ruling, the state of texas thinks that scott pinnetti is faking that illness. he must have been a real master

mind. his execution date is scheduled for tomorrow, 6:00 p.m. local time. the texas board of pardons and parole ruled yesterday that the execution should go ahead. legally, it's up to, basically, the united states supreme court to stay the execution sometime tonight or tomorrow. or it's up to this man. rick perry. lawyers acting on pinetti's behalf in texas said they would use the delay to get him another mental competence exam. it's unconstitutional to execute somebody who's manifestly mentally ill.

he understands what's happening with them. the last competency exam was 7 years ago. how's he doing now? the supreme court could way weigh in or rick perry could weigh in to stop this thing or at least slow it down. that said, governor perry has been very busy these days trying to make himself look like he's a reasonable candidate to be the next president of the united states e jiets e united states. >> i know your time is limited tonight, thanks very much for being with us. >> you're welt come. >> am i right to single rick perry as a last line of defense here?

>> we're also in the fifth circuit. we've asked the fifth circuit for time and resources to litigate scott pinetti's time to be executed. at this point, the supreme court has a direct appeal from the court of criminal appeals, whether it's constitutional to execute people with severe mental illness. in my experience, the supreme court waits. so my x.ation is that the supreme court will wait before ruling on the documents that we already have there. >> one of the things that's hard to understand is that there is this landmark from the supreme court.

they don't know what is happening to him and why. >> this is a really good question. the state is taking the position that he's not really mentally ill. he's had problems with drinking and drug abuse. it totally over looks the fact that those are symptoms of severe schizophrenia. >> in terms of what the supreme court will rule on and made their decision on what rick perry might make his decision on, is it your contention that

if rick perry gave a 30 day delay, that that might make the difference? >> one of the challenges here is that the state set the execution date six days out. in texas, you have to file your motion about a person's incompetence to be excuted 20 days before the execution. then we are scrambling to gather evidence. we have a lot to organizize. our belief is if we can have more time, we can adequately raise the issue and we can get scott evaluated.

no court has seen fit to appoint a mental health expert for scott pinetti. >> wow. thank you very much for your time tonight. i know it's going to be a very hard 24 hours for you. lots more ahead on this busy news night. we'll be right back. because it's milk without the lactose. and it tastes? it's real milk! come on, would i lie about this? lactaid®. 100% real milk. no discomfort. and try lactaid® supplements with your first bite to dig in to all your dairy favorites.

i'm just looking over the company bills.up? is that what we pay for internet? yup. dsl is about 90 bucks a month. that's funny, for that price with comcast business,

i think you get like 50 megabits. wow that's fast. personally, i prefer a slow internet. there is something about the sweet meditative glow of a loading website. don't listen to the naysayer. switch to comcast business today and get 50 megabits per second for $89.95. comcast business. built for business.

how would you go about firksing something like this. this is a minute man three intercontinental missile. it can carry up to three nuclear warheads. this missile has lots of different bolts on it. those bolts, like in any machine, sometimes need to be tightened. this little specific wrench system is what you need to tighten the bolts on one of these jiebt icbms. the u.s. military has 450 minuteman3 nuclear icbms. all of them have bolts that occasionally need tightening. and all of the tool kits that we have? you're looking at it. one. precisely one tool kit to maintain the hundreds of nuclear

missiles that are all parked at all of these bases. these are the three bases that house our nuclear missiles. they're in three different states. they have been sharing that one wrench set. literally, they have been fed-exing that tool kit back and forth to whichever one needed it at the moment. the one tool kit is one of the things that has turned up in a month's long pentagon talk. a couple of weeks ago, chuck hagel announced a top-to-bottom shake-up. for starters, each of those three bases, they will each have their own tool kit.

hey, so there's that. sorry, fed-ex. chuck hagel made the nuclear overhaul announcement november 14th. but then ten days later, poof, he was gone. you're going to do that. me, i've got to go. i'm resigning. so one of the more immediate questions is do you support these major changes that your predecessor just announced while he was on his way out the door. that's just one of the questions. that's just the multitrillion dollar terrifying nuclear question, but there are more. the reading out of washington right now is about who's going to replace chuck hagel as defense secretary.

all the smart money is on this man, ash carter. by training, ash carter has degrees in medical history with a particular expertise in nuclear policy. whoever takes over will be handling the nukes issue as well as a brand new war out in the middle east in iisis as well as all the other mundane tasks of managing the single largest organization on the face of the earth. the united states military. we are told to expect an announcement either way in the next day or so.

so one of my colleagues here at msnbc has been doing some reporting on why a grand jury did not shoot a police officer who shot an 18-year-old michael brown. i think what my colleague has turned up is really a big deal in this case. and that's next. stay with us. [ aniston ] when e what i'm wearing,

i tell them aveeno®. because beautiful skin goes with everything. [ female announcer ] aveeno® daily moisturizing lotion has active naturals® oat with five vital nutrients naturally found in healthy skin. where do i wear aveeno®? everywhere. aveeno® daily moisturizing lotion.. and try the body wash too. aveeno®. naturally beautiful results™.

on the night of october 3rd, 1974, two police officers in memphis, tennessee were sent to investigate a prowler at a house. when they got to the house, one of the officers ran around the back of the house and saw someone running away.

it was a 15-year-old kid named edward garner. he raced across the yard and started to climb the fence. the officer used his gun. he shot the kid fatally in the back of the head. edward garner's family pursued that case for more than a decade. in 1985, the united states supreme court threw out that law that allowed a police officer to kill a suspect just because he was running away from the police officer. and because of the supreme court, that ruling also had the effect of saying that was an acceptable use of police force. even though that's true as a matter of law, it doesn't mean that every state in the country used that law. that shooting death in the proceeds of michael brown.

one of the prosecutors passed out to the grand jury a copy of the old missouri statute. the one they had gotten rid of three decades ago. so we know when the prosecutor showed them that out dated law, we know the prosecutor told the grand jury this. it is the law on what is permissible. what force is permissible and when in making an arrest by a police officer? the prosecutor gave the grand jury that instruction, even though that was not true. and then that same day, the grand jury read the testimony of officer darren wilson himself. now, it is worth pointing out that the grand jury proceeding in st. louis county was sort of unusual by design.

he decided at the outset that he wouldn't make a case. he decided his assistant prosecutors would just dump out for the grand jury that turned up in the case everything. they would just let the grand jury sort it all out. it's a very weird way for a grand jury to decide. as those secret and unusual proceedings dragged on, st. louis public radio noted the conflict between the supreme court ruling and the law that was technically still on the books. we cannot know if the prosecuting attorneys saw the

reports. she basically tried to take it back. so this is from the transcript. >> sew keep it. just fold it in half. it will be like you never saw it because, you know.

a member of the grand jury asked. so she gave them instructions, gave them questions and then did not tell them what was wrong about the questions. >> we don't want to get into a law class where we're working one of the highest profile cases this the country in which the grand jury is getting key instructions to the case they are supposed to partially to ignore but they don't know what part to ignore. the grand jury in that ferguson case decided not to indict officer darren wilson for killing michael brown.

for the past week, me colleague, michael o'donnell has been pulling at the strings asking what effect giving that statute might have been given. >> the district attorney's office allowed the grand jurors to travel back in time when the cops could shoot someone. the assistant district attorneys did that as which these grand jurors would evalwait. >> lawrence is asking about those confusing and apparently wrong instructions for the grand jury for the past week.

raising that comment and asking over and other and over again. >> so grand jury proceedings are something we don't see much of because they're conducted behind closed doors. as far as what we know about that transcript and how things should have gone, was this a mistake by the prosecution? and if so, how big of a mistake was this? >> we can't really know of the motives of the prosecution. i can tell you it's a major mistake. it had a number of ramifications.

if you have the wrong law for a large stretch of time, you're making wrong decisions for all that aspect of the grand jury. >> once they had been given that wrong instruction about what the law was, what should have happened at that point. once the prosecutors had real ize they'd done the wrong thing, what's the right way to fix it if there is a right way to fix it. >> in our system, we don't have any sort of mandatory mechanism to force the prosecutor to correct an issue like that immediately. so, as you saw here, the issue wasn't corrected until weeks later.

we're schismly left to shake our heads. could this lead to it going before a new grand jury? iert the state or the federal government pursuing this to essentially make up for this error? >> i think right now, it's all political. so the decision by governor nixon to appoint a special prosecutor or circuit court judge, just appoint a special prosecutor to reopen an investigation. those are all political investigations. >> thanks for helping us to understand this. i find this mind boggling.

>> it's kind of an amazing story. there's a lot to say about what happened in ferguson and, now, in terms of the continuing national response in terms of how upset people are. but there's a really big problem, a really big, glaring, obvious problem that even lawyers can be left to see. anyway,we've got lots more to come. stay with us.

of course, even even after i've done all of this, some folks still think i don't spend enough time with congress. why don't you get a drink with mitch mcconnell, they asked. really? why don't you get a drink with mitch mcconnell. >> that was president obama at the correspondence dinner two years ago. this was president obama after the midterm elections last year in which mitch mcconnell became the new majority leader of the united states senate. >> are you going to have that drink with mitch mcconnell now? >> you know, actually, i would enjoy having some kentucky bourbon with mitch mcconnell. i don't know what his preferred drink is, but my interaction

with mitch mcconnell is he has always been very straight forward with me. >> i think that his favorite drink is a manhattan, but i won't tell you how i know that. tomorrow's schedule for president obama. and wouldn't you know it? turns out, hey, private meeting between mitch mcconnell and the president, at last. a midday bourbon summit. i would like to say that 2:40 in the afternoon is a little early for bourbon, but i would never say such a thing. as for what these two men might be talking about tomorrow, that story is next. [ julie ] the wrinkle cream graveyard. if it doesn't work fast... you're on to the next thing. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair has the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce fine lines and wrinkles in just one week. neutrogena®. to visibly reduce fine lines and wrinkles in just one week. started using gain flings,fe their laundry smells more amazing than ever.

(sniff) honey, isn't that the dog's towel? (dog noise) hey, mi towel, su towel. more scent plus oxi boost and febreze. it's our best gain ever!

if it doesn't work fast... you're on to the next thing. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair has the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce fine lines and wrinkles in just one week. neutrogena®. >> nine days till the government shuts down again. there's nine for the republicans in the house to sort out amongst themselves exactly how they're

going to bring thelss to fund the government even though they are so mad at president obama. if they can't sort that out over the next nine days, then the republicans will bring about the second shutdown of the federal government in about a year. incidentally, the last one we had was a hit to the economy of more than $20 billion. but maybe we're going to do it again anyway. now, the republicans in charge in washington and the leadership, they all say they don't want another shutdown, but the out-there conservative fringe in their party is a pretty big group and they're feeling pretty great after this last election. they really do want this shutdown. there's an interest fight now on the right. today, john boehner floated a plan to try to get his party together on this. he said in order to appease the tea party folks who want to shut down america's going to allow a vote on a purely symbolic we hate obama bill that's been filed by a tea party congressman named ted yoho who wants to desperately impeach the president.

that bill substantively will do nothing, but the thinking is hopefully voting on that bill that will do nothing will get the yayas out on the right. then once they've been expended, their plan will be to vote the government, except for the department of them to hoemland security which they will separate out from the rest of the goth and fund for a few months or maybe a few weeks. supposed to be a kind of punishment for the president's recent actions on immigration. jay johnson told the white house today that this was a nonsense idea, that it would hurt national security. in particular he said what it would hurt because of the timing, our plans for border security measures, immigrant detention facilities and surveillance on the border, all things republicans say they desperately want. it would also stop homeland security from hiring new secret service officers, which was the recommendation everyone thoughts was so important after the

recent secret service fiascos. break aufg homeland security and not funding them with everything else would mean those recommendations can't be fulfilled. but apparently that's the plan. it won't substantively do anything to stop the president's actions on immigration, but the homeland security agency says it will hurt homeland security. there's also a chance the white house might veto this plan if this does pass. obviously democrats won't go along with this plan. if it does pass, it will need to pass with all republican votes. so as there's this fight on the right about whether this is a good idea, there's an interesting question of whether or not they'll even be able to paz it. the tai party chorus among the republicans in congress is already saying they're against it. it's not enough, not good enough. and crucially, the outside conservative groups that have whipped up the tea party folks in congress on issues like this in the past, they say they're absolutely opposed to what john boehner is planning to do here. the heritage foundation called this strategy today a blank check for amnesty.

they say they're going to spend the next several days whipping the tea party conservatives in the house. they're going to deploy 10,000 activist against john boehner, against this plan and in favor of shutting down the government instead. anything short of shutting down the government is a blank check for amg nesty. shut it down. it's so funny today. the beltway press today is they don't want a shutdown. he has a plan to avoid a shutdown. so that must mean there's not a shutdown. let's get back to writing down whatever john mccain just said. if you look on the right at the groups that orchestrated the last shut down, they're loaded for bear right now. they say they're going to do it again. and conservatives may be ideologically out there in some cases, but they're not stupid. why does anybody think that the conservatives who want a shutdown or want impeachment or one of these other measures will be allowed to vote on the pointless ted yoho vote which does nothing and then that

they'll shut up. they're very sensitive to being patronized and treated like they're dumb by their own side. and so who knows. maybe the cob serve tifs will go along with this patronizing plan that gives them none of what they want. but that fight between the right and the very far right is under way as of now in congress. and they've got nine days to figure it out before the lights go out in the federal government. anybody who tells you they know how this is going to turn down nine days from now issic maing it up or not paying close attention. a couple of weeks ago, the daily beast has a story that involved a white supremist guy and a mainstream republican guy getting in a fight on a ski lift in montana. the mainstream republican was a foreign policy adviser to john mccain in his presidential campaign. the white supremacist guy, who he got into a fight with on the ski lift in white fish, montana, was this guy, who has founded

and run a bunch of white supremist publications and who now runs a white supremist think tank from his home in montana. all dedicated to building for a white homeland, preparing white people for victory in the upcoming global race war. not calling him a supremist as a slur. he really is. when the heritage foundation wanted to find an author and researchers for its own heritage foundation study on why immigration reform was a terrible idea, they hired this guy whose whole idea about immigration is that it's a terrible idea because nonwhite immigrants to the united states are intellectually inferior to white people. they'll never achieve much. they'll be parasites. immigrants are basically racially inferior and therefore shouldn't be let into this country. >> races differ in all sorts of ways. and probably the most important way is in iq. decades of testing has indicated that, at least in america, you have jews with the highest

average iq, usually followed by east asians and then nonjewish whites, hispanics and then blacks. these are real differences. they're not going to go away tomorrow. and for that reason, we have to address them in our immigration discussions and our debates. >> the heritage foundation is now whipping conservatives in congress in shutting down the government in opposition of immigration reform. before he was hired by the heritage foundation, he used to write for one of this guy's white supremist publications. this is his musings on how there's something about being hispanic that just inherently makes you more likely to be a criminal. sort of amazing situation, right? the main force in washington pushing for the government to be shut down nine days from now. they got their researcher on the policy over which they want the government shutdown from the white supremist blog world. and that's what makes it sort of

a perfect microcosm of washington right now, a perfect snowy little pageant version of this fight that the mainstream republican policy guy and the white supremist guy from where the heritage foundation got its anti-immigrant researcher, they both belong to the same private ski club in montana, and on the ski lift they got into a fight. apparently they also got into another fight later on at the same club. so it's the right versus the off the charts very, very, very, very far right. and in this little microcosmic pageant of what by we're going through in this country, who won that fight? basically randy scheunemann offered an ultimatum, kick him out or i will leave. apparently they kept spencer. they don't want anyone to think they kicked randy scheunemann out. they said they e-mailed both

about the fighting and they wanted to be clear that randy scheunemann quit on his own terms once he realized he belong to the same ski club to this white supremacist. we're also told the white supremacist guy finally also quit the club. his last day was on sunday. so mazel tov white fish, montana, big mountain club. one less nazi. but in the end, the result here is the same. and it's instructive. the right and the very, very, very far right are often comfortably co-existent in our country right now, but every once in a while, there is a fight. either at a personal level, a fight on a ski lift in montana somewhere, or it's a big scale fight in washington that the beltway doesn't really notice until it's way too late. usually what happens when there's a fight like this is that the far right wins.

mainstream doesn't like to fight with their right flank. when the right flank wins and they fight these things out, they usually get their way. day counting. >> good morning. right now first look, heavy flooding and dangerous mudslides in california after months of drought. how is the golden state coping. >> bill cosby alleged with sexually assaulting a woman when she was just 15 years old. >> domestic violence in every community costs our great nation. a senate hearing on domestic violence in pro sports. plus, a shark photo bombs an australian surfing competition, and the latest installment of brian williams slow jamming the news. good morning, everybody. thanks for joining us y.