r right now. stay with msnbc if you want to see that press conference. "now with alex wagner" starts right now. a bombshell investigation finds fbi analysts routinely gave flawed testimony during the course of several decades. another intruder makes it over the white house gates. and this year's 4/20 celebration in america is unlike any one before. but first, the scooby doo caravan has reached new hampshire. it's monday april 20th, and this is "now." >> i am excited to hear from you. >> the new hampshire road show. >> the second leg of hillary clinton's campaign. >> she's going to be meeting everyday americans. >> same song different location. >> in 2008, the state threw her a lifeline. >> she comes here after republicans used her as a

punching bag over the weekend. >> i could have sworn i saw hillary's scooby doo van outside. >> just listening to her is something like out of north korea. >> i'm starting to worry that when hillary clinton travels, there's going to need to be two planes, one for her and her entourage, and one for her baggage. >> hillary clinton is back in the state that gave her a comeback. after kicking off her campaign in iowa, clinton headed up to new hampshire today for a two-day stint focused on her emerging economic platform. for her debut 2016 appearance clinton chose to tour a small manufacturer of children's furniture and toys where she held a round table with employees. >> now it's not enough just to tread water. we need to get ahead and stay ahead and people need to feel that their work is being rewarded, that the deck is not stacked in favor of those at the top, that they too have a chance to go as far as their hard work and their aspiration will take

them. >> in new hampshire, the former secretary of state finds friendlier territory than in iowa. they gave clinton a much-needed victory in 2008 after she finished third in the iowa caucuses. new hampshire is also the state where clinton became famously emotional on the eve of that primary, discussing the difficult yis ofyies of a bruising campaign. >> some people think elections are a game. they it's like who's up or who's down. it's about our country, it's about our kids' futures. and it's really about all of us. >> while clinton was ultimately unable to fend off barack obama, this time she enters the race as a veritable party of one. the lone target for a very large republican firing squad. just about all of whom took their shots at clinton during a new hampshire cattle call this weekend. >> like hillary clinton, i too have traveled hundreds of thousands of miles around the globe, but unlike mrs. clinton, i know that flying is an

activity, not an accomplishment. >> hillary clinton's going to raise $2.5 billion, which that's a lot of chipotle my friends. >> when hillary clinton travels, there's going to need to be two planes, one for her and her entourage, and one for her baggage. there's a lot going on. there's more coming, too. the clinton foundation has been involved in a lot of things. so have their donors. >> that subject, the clinton foundation and its donors is generating fresh headlines today thanks to reports on a forthcoming book "clinton cash: the untold story of how and why foreign governments and businesses helped make bill and hillary rich." the book due out next month alleges that donors to the clinton foundation received favorable treatment from the state department. clinton said she's ready for the attacks, but they say more about her opponents than herself. >> it is i think worth noting that the republicans seem to be talking only about me. i don't know what they talk about if i weren't in the race.

but i am in the race. and hopefully we'll get on to the issues and i look forward to that. >> joining me now is karen finney strategic communications adviser, political editor and white house correspondent at "the huffington post" sam stein, and former senior adviser to president obama and director at the university of chicago institute of politics david axelrod. karen, how much time is the clinton team spending working on rebuttals to the rumors the questions, the scandals around donors? >> having been through this routine before with the attacks, the right wing attacks, not that much. i mean, look the reality is we have an operation that is designed to kind of do exactly what hillary was just talking about. let her focus on what she's trying to focus on and that is having a conversation with americans. we are absolutely prepared for these attacks. personally, having known her for more than 25 years, i certainly expected this would come. a little later than i expected.

we got a whole week before this came out. but no we are prepared. and part of what you saw there and part of the reason that hillary spoke to it is we're not afraid of them. we will take on those attacks as we need to. but that is not -- we're not going to let that distract from what we're also trying to do. i think any good campaign has to be able to do both things at the same time. >> was there any frustration that the foundation stopped taking foreign money and started again after the secretary left office, and now appears to sort of be revisiting that policy once again? >> here's the thing, though about this book and when we're reading these stories. this whole book is about public disclosures, unprecedented that the foundation makes. so basically they've taken publicly available information and kind of rehashed it into this sort of partisan sort of fantasy, and it's not necessarily new information. and then we find out this afternoon that they're shopping around different pieces to different media outlet like fox and "the new york times."

and in "the new york times" piece it said members of the senate foreign relations committee. well, actually so far no democrat that i'm aware of was part of that briefing and it seems that it was rand paul and marco rubio. >> so david, clearly from a political strategy point of view, there is republican ground they feel to be gained with the scandal, with the conversation around donations to the clinton foundation. but it's not just this book. it is also reuters, "the washington post." they've been doing their own digging around this. i wonder strategically speaking how much do you think this is a vulnerability for hillary clinton? >> well look i think that there will be a strategy on the republican side to chip away and she will be fair game for the media, and she knew what she signed up for when she started running. i kind of believe that some of this will resolve itself when she gets full speed here on her message. because i do think that voters

are more interested in their own lives and the future of the country than they are in these side issues. but these kinds of things tend to follow the clinton and they're very practiced at dealing with them. i'm sure as karen suggests, they know how to deal with this. >> sam isn't there sort of a danger in being too practiced or polished in this particular moment? >> yes and no. i think it's easy to deflect when you're capable of deflecting. the danger that i can see is that an information void will exist about where secretary clinton comes down on some critical positions. for instance the keystone pipeline. some of these trade deals. and in that void you'll have reports like the ones that are coming out in this book that essentially connect the dots for the readers the way that the author wants to connect the dots. some of those dot connections may be legitimate. some may be overstated. but for instance, until we get a full understanding of where secretary clinton comes down on

the keystone pipeline one will be able to say oh well this group that has a vested financial interest in that pipeline gave this amount of money to the clinton foundation. is that a conflict of interest? and so my main thinking here is that secretary clinton needs to maybe be a bit more open on where she comes down on these controversial policies and that will essentially push off this stuff off the back burner. >> hold on though sam, i think that's unfair. because we've been very clear. this is sort of a ramp-up process. the idea here, she wanted to get out and talk to people. she has a lot of ideas. and frankly, it was interesting watching what was going on in new hampshire had nothing to do with the book while there was all this scrum on the inside of the beltway, blogs and so forth about this book. so that's her process, right? so the idea being three to four weeks of this visit in the early states. having these conversations. hearing people's questions. and then start to roll out policy. i mean we have 19, 18 months here. we'll start that process may or so. so the idea is we're not going

to be knocked off our game. this is the way she wanted to do it to be able to talk to people. we've been asked different questions. we've answered those questions. last week there was a question about where she was on marriage equality, which she's had a consistent position on that. despite the way it was reported. so, you know when we're asked the question, i think part of it, though is as a spokesperson, we're trying not to get ahead of her because she's got her platform that she wants to roll out. we're not being not forthcoming. >> but the keystone pipeline is a good -- are her conversations with new hampshire voters informing her position on something like the keystone pipeline? >> in that instance, that's not what new hampshire voters want to talk about. so should new hampshire voters get to talk to her about what they want to talk about and the issues that affect their lives. the other thing i would say is all of the issues that were cited in "the new york times" story, these were all things that were priorities and issues of the obama administration. these were not things where unilaterally hillary clinton

could have said you get this and you get that and you get that. that's not the way it works. there's a bit of disinformation. and that's why i say there's a lot of just throwing different facts together to make it seem like there might be something going on. >> go ahead, david. >> you know i agree with what karen just said in the sense that i haven't read the book. i saw the story where someone who gave money to the foundation benefitted from the colombia free trade agreement. i don't think nsa why the colombia free trade agreement was advanced and ratified. and i think it's a preposterous to suggest that. i actually think in the history of this campaign what's going to be more important is not why the colombia free trade agreement was passed, but how she's going to handle this big one coming down the line which sits on the fault line of democratic politics. it's much more likely to impact on how voters react than some solve this stuff that is history and dubious history at best. >> and i guess that's a good

question. when it comes to the obama administration, the table that is being set for a future potentially democratic president, hillary clinton as it stands right now has questions on both the progressive side of the aisle when it comes to a host of different economic issues. but then there's the keystone pipeline. there's the trade deal that we're talking about. which for this democratic president, you know he has not erred on keystone and has not sided with some parts of his party in congress on the issue of trade. >> and this is something that secretary clinton dealt with in the 2008 campaign, as david remembers well. her husband's support for nafta became a huge point of controversy between her and then senator obama. to the point where she was out there saying listen, my husband passed this bill. i was the first lady. i was erring reservations about it. something i should say i reported checked out and she was one of the more skeptical people in the administration at

that time. she's going to have to reprise all of that it looks like again. and you've seen her talk skeptically about the tpp. she is talking about concerns with the currency ma niflation. but for better or worse, you know she is beholden in some respects to what the obama administration ends up doing. it's possible i can see it being a very difficult break to make. and this is the difficulty about being a presidential candidate. >> is that something the campaign is concerned about, how and when she breaks with this president, especially given the fact that much of the staff on the campaign worked in the obama white house? >> i would say it's a mix. i think the important thing about the relationship between hillary and the president is she's not going to run away from him. we're not going to see a redo of 2014 where you saw people running away. she's already talked about the economy. we're at this point thanks to president obama. we've got to make sure we keep going. she's talked about health care reform and a number of issues where the idea is i've got ideas

on how we move forward. i think that's what people really want to know. >> do you think that's going to be an integral part of the message, i can continue the things that you like about this white house? >> well she has new ideas. it's not going to be a continuation of this white house, but it's who's going to be the best person to make sure that we keep growing and moving forward. my point about president obama is they have a solid relationship. they are friends, they are confidants. that to me is what really matters. whether or not they disagree or agree on issues, i mean, that's public policy. there are places where she is going to have to disagree and there are place where is she absolutely agrees. but the important thing is it's not -- that doesn't mean she's running away from this president. i think that's the fracture that people, many reporters are trying to find. >> david, how treacherous do you think those waters are, with the president we have now and the president she would like to be? >> look, i think there's a fundamental issue facing this country and facing all advanced

economies, which is in the 21st century can you build an economy in which hard work pays people can get ahead. you don't have these yawning gapping of opportunity. if she has compelling answers to that question, i think she can do well and she needs to present those. the reason the trade issue is so tricky is because as i said, it sits on that fault line and there is this suspicion based on past trade deals that this will benefit corporate interest but not workers and not wages. and that's a case that the president's going to have to make and she's going to have to decide which side she falls on this. and it's tricky still because she was the secretary of state when the negotiations began on this treaty. or on this agreement. >> it is going to be -- >> and initiated under the obama administration. to what david was saying that's part of the balance there. >> yeah. well we can already see the sort of back and forth about how much is hers and how much is his. it is going to be a an interesting few months. thank you guys all for your time. we have breaking news right

now. we are hearing from the baltimore police department about the death of resident freddie gray. he is the man who died after being taken into police custody on april 12th. gray fell into a coma underwent extensive surgery and died yesterday. let's take a listen. >> our crime lab will be a part of this task force. our inside investigators will be a part of this task force. our training academy will also be a part of the task force that we'll bring to the state's attorney's office in the week after next at the conclusion of all of these revelations. and again, to mr. gray's family i extend my condolences to the citizens of baltimore. we will get better. and to the men and women who are dedicated to keeping the streets safe in baltimore we stand ready to answer questions. deputy commissioner rodriguez. >> thank you, commissioner.

and thank you, madam mayor, both for your leadership in these times. it certainly makes our direction and what we need to do much clearer for us. my name as you heard, is deputy commissioner jerry rodriguez and i'm in charge of the professional standards and accountability bureau. i'd like to join madam mayor and police commissioner in extending my deepest, deepest sympathies to the gray family. our mission at the direction of the police commissioner is and has always been without prejudice, to uncover the facts and we are committed to do that. as you may know my bureau investigates all major uses of force by officers. or as in this case any in-custody death results from officers' actions. i want to make it very clear, we go wherever the facts, wherever the evidence take us and we will do that again.

we will do so while demonstrating as much transparency as possible without compromising the investigation or violating any of the laws. there is a lot of misinformation in public as has been stated earlier. we want to clear up some of the confusions that may exist, and in doing so we're going to walk you through the time line of events that led to mr. gray's loss of life. we also want to share with you the progress in the investigation, our timeline our completion due date, and how we're working in partnership with the state's attorney's office. we also want to share with you the current status of the involved officers as we have been able to interview and determine them is that they are currently suspended. as we walk you through the timeline to date i want to talk

a little bit about some of the things that are out there. first of all, we're going to show you the closed circuit tv that the police department has. and i want you all to listen to what i'm about to say. it is our video that has been unedit unedited, that is raw. we are not in the business of hiding facts. we will show you that video and provide you with a copy of it. we will be looking specifically at our actions from the point that we came into contact with mr. gray up until the time that we requested medical assistance. specifically did we miss any warnings. should we have acted sooner. should we have acted in any different manner. as was discussed earlier, the autopsy was done today. and as we have stated before

that we had no evidence physical or video or statement of any use of force, there was no physical bodily injury that we saw, nor was it evident in the autopsy of mr. gray none of his limbs were broken. he did suffer a very tragic injury to his spinal cord which results in his death. what we don't know and what we need to get to is how that injury occurred. we want to get there. but we want to do it very carefully, very thorough and get to the truth of the matter. as the investigation stands today, we have interviewed all of those involved. we have two individuals that we need to interview. we're working with the medical examiners. i had folks from my bureau, investigators, homicide experts at the examination today with

the m.e.'s office. and our goal our promise to you is that that investigation will be done by a week from this friday, and we will submit it in its entirety to the district attorney's office for their review. at that point, we will work to provide any additional information that they may ask for, if any, in order to help them come to the conclusion. i believe we have a couple of -- let's show the cctv cameras. again, you will all be getting a copy of this video. it's important to note that our cctv is in a pan mode unless it is controlled by an individual. at this point, it was not. and that's why you see portions where the video scans, may come

back around, but by that time, several seconds could have passed. the only time the video will focus on a particular location or person or corner is if the investigator or the officer at the other side of the camera physically takes control of that camera and stops it from rotating.

>> okay we are listening to the baltimore mayor and deputy police commissioner jerry rodriguez, who are presenting new closed-captioned video of the incident involving freddie gray, a 25-year-old baltimore man who died after being taken into police custody about a week ago. let's go back in and take a listen. >> to dispel the rumors that have been put out there but we're going to give you a copy of it. that's right from our cameras. we have many of the other same videos that you have seen. the ones that were taken from different haven'tage points by members s -- vantage points by members of the community. as soon as that's over, i will walk you through the timeline. [ inaudible question ] this is the only one i am aware of that we have found that has captured any of the incident. and it was very little.

of our cctv cameras. i don't know the exact -- we provided everything that was on there. you're going to get a copy of it. we're going to have a copy for all of you. [ inaudible question ] there is possible 600 cameras, over 600 cameras citywide yes, ma'am. [ inaudible question ] i'll get that information for you. lieutenant, do you know what corner that is? how many do we have in that corner? say that again, please? >> there's only one camera at that intersection. >> so there's only one camera on that corner. we have over 600 citywide. [ inaudible question ] say that again? we only have one camera that

captured any of it and that was here. we'll answer some of those specifics afterwards. >> is this that camera? >> lieutenant what's the exact corner of this camera? let me go through the time line so you understand the locations. lieutenant give us the exact location of this camera again. >> that is the ongoing press conference from baltimore mayor stephanie rawlings blake and deputy police commissioner jerry rodriguez going over new closed-captioned video of the incident involving freddie gray a 25-year-old baltimore man who died after being taken into police custody over a week ago. joining me now is msnbc's chief legal correspondent and co-host of "the cycle."

ari, what do you say the police as trying to gain by presenting the closed-caption footage? >> it's hard to tell because if you're looking at what looks to be primarily an empty street a few people walking in the distance, all i can imagine here from what we're watching in realtime is the police department's attempt to say that they are not holding back any information, be it action-packed or relatively lyly vapid. what they're trying to do is say look, we're showing what we have. we put out a deadline that i would say is quite fast. they said by next friday they're going to complete this internal review turn it over to the d.a. and try to move forward. as a procedural level, and this does not speak to the substance of some of the underlying concern here which is this 25-year-old basically allegedly started out on the street was allegedly running from officers at some point, and was taken

into custody, spine 80% severed according to the family's attorney, ultimately died in police custody. that's very concerning. the video that we're looking at doesn't speak to that but it's the p.d.'s attempt to say that they're going to show what they have and not release it later as part of some sort of case they're making. that's their argument. >> i guess i wonder if you think that this sort of in a way represents a change given the events after walter scott's death. the inordinate focus we've had as to whether or not the police accounting of what happened is actually what happened. the benefit of the doubt that the public has thus far basically given the police. are we seeing an eroding of that sort of basic trust that the police gave the benefit of the doubt? is that dynamic changing? is that why the police feel like

they need to release the closed circuit? >> i think that may be part of it. i think there's an incredible amount of scrutiny when these videos surface. this incident had citizen-made video that showed this individual -- i believe we can put it up on the screen there. when freddie gray was first taken into custody, confronted pulled into the police van. >> and i think there's going to be a lot of analysis here about the injuries as you mentioned that he sustained. his spine was severed 80% from the neck down and a lot of analysis about that moment right here where he goes from the street into the van. the police chief says that he is proposing a series of new policies with some training starting tomorrow, specifically in the areas of first aid, cpr, and how to seat a prisoner in a car. one would expect that's the next natural place for the police to focus their reform efforts if

reform efforts are needed. >> and we're showing this video in this course without sound, which is a far more humane way to look at it. when you watch the original citizen-created video, there is the sound that appears to be -- sounds like this suspect wailing in pain. that is to say that it appears the injury occurred there, or part of the injury would seem to have occurred there. that's what the family's lawyer has also seemed to suggest and perhaps was exacerbated in the car. what else we learn in this press conference was the deputy police chief saying that they don't have at this juncture evidence of an assault or violence on the individual. that's what they're saying. that doesn't mean it didn't happen. doesn't mean they won't find it. they mentioned they have more interviews to do. but yes, to your opening question here, clearly this type of scrutiny, these videos, the way they spread and what would normally be a local police interaction, however controversial, quickly becomes national. the national news. more than one channel is carrying this press conference

live today. and it's national news in the papers and elsewhere to look at this. so it fits into those larger questions, but there are a lot of questions open here about how this all came to pass. >> indeed there are. thanks as always. you can catch ari on "the cycle" weekdays at 3:00 p.m. on msnbc. we'll have more for you after the break. you're so sweet. yummy! key lime pie at 90 calories. it is so good for not giving in. when the moment's spontaneous, why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical

help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial.

it could be one of the biggest criminal justice scandals of the century. for more than two decades, nearly every fbi investigator in an elite forensic unit routinely gave flawed testimony. according to a new investigation, in 95% of cases reviewed fbi examiner ins overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors. of the 268 trials reviewed 257 of them involved flawed testimony. those cases include 32 defendants sentenced to death, 14 of whom have been executed or

died in prison. both the justice department and the fbi have already notified prosecutors in 46 states to determine whether there are grounds for appeals. if these 257 cases could represent only a fraction of fbi wrong doing. 1,200 cases are still awaiting review. joining me now is the director of strategic litigation at the innocence project, chris fabricant. and democratic senator from connecticut, richard blumenthal. thank you both for joining me. the innocence project is one of the authors of this investigation. you guys have done incredible work on exonerations. how did this happen? how did this go on for decades? >> i think what the senator is calling for is a root cause analysis to figure out. it's hard to understand whether or not this was a gross scientific illiteracy on behalf of the fbi or something that was deliberate or something that was in between. i think there are many good actors who believed in what they were doing, and that they nonetheless provided scientifically invalid

testimony. you think about hair comparison evidence and it's so routinely used, and that it was available in so many different crime scenes and was so impressive to juries that the extent of the injustice caused by this it's really a mass disaster for the criminal justice system. and it's going to impact tens of thousands of cases. >> senator blumenthal mass disaster is the word the phrase of the day to describe the findings that we're learning about. to the point of the cases we still don't know about, the flawed testimony, flawed evidence that was presented, that we still don't know about, how forthcoming, are you confident law enforcement officials will be in the review of these other cases? i think there are almost 2,500 defendants that have been notified that their cases may have been affected. >> this pattern is absolutely chilling in its challenge to the integrity to the criminal justice process. so i'm going to be pressing for a prompt thorough, penetrating analysis and investigation by the department of justice, which

it owes not oblnly to the defendants, but to the american people, because the duty of the prosecutor is not just to convict. it's to do justice. and that's what director comey and the attorney general have an obligation to do. a reputation based for their integrity and they have to notify not only defendants but provide a path a means of access so those appeals really work. because ordinarily on post conviction relief, on the habeas corpus procedure, the threshold is very high. and they have to provide another means of access and here's another very important point. notification not just to these defendants, but a lot of state convictions may have resulted from evidence that's been given by forensic examiners who have been trained by the fbi. >> there's an echo effect here.

i want to talk about why this evidence in particular has proved pivotal. go back to "the washington post's" spencer hu, who talks about the importance of present this scientific evidence in trial. in practice, even before the "csi" effect a claim of a hair match packed a powerful dramatic punch in court. the testimony allowed prosecutors to boil down an ambiguous case for jurors into a single piece of incriminating evidence left at the scene. this isn't just any piece of evidence. this is the kind of we got this. when you hear about the fact of these cases that you guys examined, 32 defendants were sentenced to death. 14 have already been executed. is it possible that -- i mean for the innocence project you guys deal with this routinely. could we have put people to death based on this flawed evidence? >> absolutely. it's played a role in nearly 50%

of the 327 wrongful convictions that have been proven by post-conviction dna. we know about the case in texas where bad arson science very likely condemned an innocent man to death. i think the impact is that the court grants these experts, and as a scientist and it's presented as scientific evidence and these experts have great facility for the language of science. they present very elaborate demonstrations as to showing a purported match. what they didn't present was that the prohibited value of that match is totally unknown and grossly exaggerated in case after case after case but it was presented as scientific objective, unbiassed evidence of guilt that was very, very hard for the defense to successfully challenge. >> senator blumenthal, when you hear about this, there's a question about how the criminal justice system reforms itself but what happens to the men and

presumably women who have spent decades languaging ine ing languishing in jail. and kirk odom was exonerated after serving 20 years in jail after a crime he didn't commit was sexually assaulted multiple times, contracted hiv, tried to kill himself in jail. what happens to a man like that who is now free? should there be some kind of compensation or renumeration for what the state did to him incorrectly? >> some of those defendants, for example, in connecticut have sought and received some kind of compensation. but let's give credit first of all to the innocence project for the great work on those cases, and on this disclosure as well as "the washington post" and others who have stayed with this story. but going forward, a means of access for the justice. for the thousands potentially who may have those kinds of claims. not just compensation, but to their convictions being

reversed. a lot of these convictions relied only in part on these hair comparisons. the forensic science was only one piece of the evidence. but you are absolutely right that scientific evidence presented to a jury and i've seen it done as a prosecutor relied on it myself the jury reacts with credibility. the heads nod, the eyes open. and so it can have great impact beyond the specific point that it's used to prove. so i think there has to be an examination of all of this kind of forensic evidence, whether it's hand-writing or bite marks or ballistic analysis. this kind of forensic evidence needs standards. they're lacking now. i'm going to be introducing a bill that will not only enable but also require better standards going forward. >> and certainly there are a lot of questions for the 26 fbi agents who are responsible for this flawed testimony. and the folks that they have in

turn trained. chris and senator richard blumenthal, thank you for your time. we'll have more after the break. ou? i heard i could call angie's list if i needed work done around my house at a fair price. you heard right, just tell us what you need done and we'll find a top rated provider to take care of it. so i could get a faulty light switch fixed? yup! or have a guy refinish my floors? absolutely! or send someone out to groom my pookie? pookie's what you call your? my dog. yes, we can do that. real help from real people. come see what the new angie's list can do for you. [meow mix jingle slowly and quietly plucks] right on cue. [cat meows] ♪meow, meow, meow, meow...♪ it's more than just a meal it's meow mix mealtime. with great taste and 100% complete nutrition, it's the only one cats ask for by name. [ female announcer ] who are we? we are the thinkers. the job jugglers. the up all-nighters. and the ones who turn ideas into action. we've made our passions our life's work. we strive for the moments

where we can say, "i did it!" ♪ ♪ we are entrepreneurs who started it all... with a signature. legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses, turning dreamers into business owners. and we're here to help start yours. sunday dinners at my house... it's a full day for me, and i love it. but when i started having back pain my sister had to come help. i don't like asking for help. i took tylenol but i had to take six pills to get through the day. so my daughter brought over some aleve. it's just two pills, all day! and now, i'm back! aleve. two pills. all day strong, all day long. and for a good night's rest, try aleve pm for a better am.

wow. sweet new subaru, huh mitch? yep. you're selling the mitchmobile!? man, we had a lot of good times in this baby. what's your dad want for it? ..like a hundred and fifty grand, two hundred if they want that tape deck. you're not going to tell your dad about the time my hamster had babies in the backseat, are you?! that's just normal wear and tear, dude. (vo) subaru has the highest resale value of any brand... ...according to kelley blue book ...and mitch. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. people ship all kinds of things. but what if that thing is a few hundred thousand doses of flu vaccine. that need to be kept at 41 degrees. while being shipped to a country where it's 90 degrees. in the shade. sound hard? yeah. does that mean people in laos shouldn't get their vaccine? we didn't think so. from figuring it out to getting it done, we're here to help.

marco rubio says being gay is not a choice but that doesn't mean gay americans should have the choice to marry each other. more on that coming up next but first, jane wells has the cnbc market wrap. hi, jane. >> hi alex. i guess investors had the choice to buy. the stock market buying back from friday. the dow up 208 points. the s&p up 19. the nasdaq up almost 63. down over 200 points friday up over 200 points today. i can't keep it straight.

start the interview with a firm handshake. firm, but not too firm. make eye contact...smile. ay,no! don't do that! try new head & shoulders instant relief. it has tea tree and peppermint that cools on contact. and also keeps you 100% flake free. i use it for cooling scalp relief in a snap. mi bebé ha crecido tanto.

try new head & shoulders instant relief. for cooling relief in a snap.

other stories making news this manic manic monday. marco rubio says being gay isn't a choice but marco rubio also says marriage should remain

limited to a man and a woman. another fence jumper tries, and this time at least fails to get into the white house. but first, you may have taken a gyrocopter landing on the capitol lawn but maybe, just maybe doug hughes's stunt has restarted a conversation about money in politics. >> nobody talked about why he did it which was to bring attention to a very important issue. maybe the most important issue is that elections are bought and sold now by billionaires. this guy is a hero to me. i'm not going to make fun of him. >> none other than senator ted cruz yes, senator ted cruz broke down the reality of modern campaigning just yesterday. running for office is real simple. you just surgically disconnect your shame censor because you spend every day asking people for money. you walk up and say how are you doing, sir, can i have some 1991 great to see you. lovely shirt. please give me money. that is what running for office is like. and then there is this headline today. corporations now spend more money lobbying congress than taxpayers spend funding

congress. this year, corporations will spend $2.6 billion lobbying congress, while $2 billion will be allocated to keep congress up and running. joining me now is correspondent for the upshot at "the new york times," josh barrow editor-in-chief of "slate" julie turner, and author of "the indispensable the fix," chris chris cillizza. a lot of people will say we should cut down on both. i think the problem as i read it is that lobbyists are helping to really write legislation and tell congress people what they think about certain things because congresspeople do not have the staffing time or expertise to figure out what they think and how they should write the laws. >> yeah i think that's an issue. you want congress to be able to have the resources to reach decisions on its own. you don't want a process that's totally devoid of lobbyists. people in industries know a lot about those. they ought to be a part of the legislative process, but they should be a part of the

legislative process in conjunction with a staff on the government's side that has its own resources, that allows it to take that input without being dragged around by them. and also legislation's got a lot more complicated the last few decades. the job of congress now -- >> sure regulatory legislation is difficult. you would want some industry input, but if you talk about allocating the right resources to congress, who's going to stand up -- i mean, can you imagine any bipartisan accord on giving more money to congress? especially as public approval of congress is at an all-time low. it's sort of like a race to the bottom. it's more dysfunctional and it gets worse. >> yeah, i mean it seems like a really attractable problem. the notion that was given of giving congress more money to have an independent research arm that's better funded and can provide more information about some of the issues on the table in front of congress sounds great. but, you know, imagine what it would take to implement that. what kinds of disputes there would be about whether the information was actually impartial. whether people listen to that information.

it's impossible to imagine that being implemented. >> i mean chris, even generally, the talk of money in politics has become a foregone conclusion. the fact that this presidential cycle, $2.5 billion are expected to be spent on just part of it. i mean hillary clinton is talking about a constitutional amendment to reverse the ill effects of citizens united. do you think that is in any way something that could come to fruition? >> no. >> full stop. >> look i'm virtually certain about almost nothing, alex. but i would say that i'm virtually certain about this because the problem we always run into -- and i don't want to just sort of reiterate things we already know. but one thing we always run into with campaign finance reform is if you ask people is there too much money in politics everyone virtually says yes. the problem we've run into in the past and the past is not necessarily predictive but in the past the problem that politicians have run into is yes, people think there's too

much money in politics. no it is very rarely, except for a sliver of the electorate been something that is a persuasive or voting issue. you saw harry reid talk about the coke brothers endlessly in the 2013 mid-terms. the coke brothers are biking election. un-american, unpatriotic. it didn't really change much in the 2014 mid-terms. happened in 2010, the white house talked about campaign finance reform. so the problem is turning it from an issue that they actually vote about. >> so you don't just have to land a gyrocopter on the capitol lawn to maybe get a cursory mention in the media. okay moving on. on sunday marco rubio became the latest republican to try to square the circle on same-sex marriage. >> i believe the definition of the institution of marriage to be between one man and one woman. i also don't believe that your sexual preferences are a choice for the vast and enormous majority of people. in fact, the bottom line is that, i believe that sexual preference is something that people are born with.

>> this is a very dicey pond to be skating on, josh. i believe that sexual preference isn't a choice but i believe that marriage should just be between a man and a woman. so for the unlucky people who don't want to get married in the heterosexual fashion, they just can't get married. does this win him any points with anybody? >> to a certain extent they're tap dancing and waiting to see what gay marriage will be. at which point the politics of the question will be substantially different. a lot of republicans, the jeb bush end of the party, will be trying as best they can to take the position as well. this is an issue that's passed. we think what the supreme court did was unfortunate. but now we have to operate in this new reality. so i think they want to -- if i'm a republican candidate for president, i want to say as little of substance as possible about the issue right now. >> period. if i'm any candidate, i want to say as little of substance as possible. >> right. i mean, you can construct a moral argument around this idea that being gay is not a choice

but there are various societal effects. heritage out today with a thing claiming that gay marriage will increase the abortion rate by making marriage less appealing and therefore people won't get married and married people will get more abortions. it's crazy, but there is this argument about how it's not about the individual, it's about society-wide effects. so you can say yes, there are real gay people and it's not a choice, but for the good of society, they're not supposed to get married. >> chris i have to think that there is quiet finger crossing and whatever ceremonies republicans engage in ahead of supreme court decisions, a lot of those hoping that the supreme court takes this off the table. >> yeah. >> because that's really the only way to neutralize it. >> there's still going to be people in the party certainly. ted cruz is going to be opposed to it no matter what the supreme court says and he's going to talk about it. at the same time it allows the jeb bush part of the party -- i

kind of put rubio in there. maybe put rand paul in there. to say look it's settled legal law. i don't necessarily agree with it, but the supreme court has ruled. i personally disagree. the other thing is anyone who knows anything about polling or public opinion looks at the gay marriage debate and sees that it is effectively over. younger republicans -- and i don't mean 18-year-old, all the way up to 35. younger republicans just don't care about the issue and will not vote on it. a part of their base still cares deeply about it. they can see the writing on the wall that as the party ages, that will change. >> but julia, does the republican base care about this? it is not just 2016 hopefuls trying to get into the white house. late last night, a 54-year-old california man became the latest person to be taken into custody by the secret service after trying to scale the white house fence. is it just the season of

intruders? and what does that say? is there anything to be gleaned culturely from that? >> there have been enough incidents recently that it does make you wonder if there is a contagion effect. >> has to be. >> also it looks doable now. >> yes, it's only seven feet high. >> i love that they have just now figured out to put spikes on top of the fence. >> i think they should go more medieval. a moat. boiling oil. >> someone suggested the building of a moat around the white house. steven co in tennessee. that's why i have an ear piece in my ear. i will say there's something to be said though. this is where i want to talk culturally about it. there is something about the white house being the people's house. they closed off pennsylvania avenue and we understand why that's necessary. i think most people understand why further security precautions are necessary. but it's sad. the house used to be much more of a -- i'm thinking about andrew jackson which was a long

time ago. >> as someone who lives and works here the town is infinitely more shut off than it used to be. can i give you a quick shoutout though? carol lenick. >> thanks for ruining the g block. >> the g block is where we talk about carol winning the pulitzer prize. but i hope she's going to give you mad problems for the double mention on this hour of msnbc. josh julia, chris, thank you all very much. top industry honors have come today as chris cillizza mentioned, the 2015 pulitzer winners have just been announced and we'll tell you who they are after the break.

so if you have a flat tire dead battery need a tow or lock your keys in the car, geico's emergency roadside assistance is there 24/7. oh dear, i got a flat tire. hmmm. uh... yeah, can you find a take where it's a bit more dramatic on that last line, yeah? yeah i got it right here. someone help me!!! i have a flat tire!!! well it's good... good for me. what do you think? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. ♪ building aircraft,

the likes of which the world has never seen. this is what we do. ♪ that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. when it comes to good nutrition...i'm no expert. that would be my daughter -- hi dad. she's a dietitian. and back when i wasn't eating right, she got me drinking boost. it's got a great taste and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a delicious taste. grandpa! [ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ take zzzquil and sleep like... you haven't seen your bed in days. no, like you haven't seen a bed in weeks! zzzquil. the non habit forming sleep-aid that helps you sleep easily and wake refreshed. because sleep is a beautiful thing. and they're in! eric lipton just shared the pulitzer prize today for his work investigating the influence

of lobbyists. carol leonnig won for her coverage for the many lapses in the secret service. and for public service, goes to the post and courier of charleston, south carolina for its series "till death do us part" looking at why south carolina is one of the deadliest states in the union for women. "the ed show" is up next. good evening, americans, and welcome to "the ed show," live from new york. let's get to work. tonight -- >> it's not that i'm against gay marriage. >> whoo! >> i'm for traditional marriage. plus -- >> i'm very determined to get to the bottom of this incident. >> he has no confidence that the baltimore city police department will conduct a fair investigation. and, the gulf today five years after the spill. >> despite settlements, fines and crim