a.g. let's bring in defense attorney karen de soto, and matthew miller who knows the insides of the justice department very well. matt was an aide to eric holder. matt, let me start with you. the state of south carolina seems to be moving forward. why does the federal government need to get involved here at all? the attorney general has said if they don't get involved the racial aspect of this is not being addressed. why, sir, is the federal government getting involved? >> two reasons. on the substantive side sometimes in cases like this the federal government will bring charmings in case something happens to the state case. i think that's unlikely in this case. the state prosecutors have a lot of evidence. it's unlikely the case falls apart. it gives one substantive backup in case something extraordinary happens. also, very important symbolic

reasons. there's no south carolina hate crimes law on the books. if the racial component of this killing is going to be recognized, it's important that it be recognized, it can only be done by the federal government by the department of justice. by bringing hate crimes charges, the justice department is memorializing for history that this wasn't a random act of violence, a random murder this murder was a hate crime where someone went into a church and intended to kill people because of their race. >> are three states now with -- that do not have hate crime laws including south carolina arkansas and georgia. karen, i want to bring you into the conversation. dylann roof faces nine counts of murder, possibility of the death penalty. how much of this was about sending a message across the nation, when a hate crime is committed, we'll treat it like one. >> that has something to do with it, but a lot has do with south

carolina and they have a moratorium on the death penalty. in case that happens what has happened is south carolina a lot of other states are unable to get the third injection chemical, the drug. so therefore they're not using the death penalty now and haven't since 2013 when they ran out of the drug. >> even though south carolina has the death penalty, they wouldn't use it in the case. >> the supreme court is deciding whether it's cruel and unusual punishment to do lethal injection. that's in the supreme court right now. why not wait and see what happens at the supreme court case. this could just be another layer of protection to make sure the death penalty will happen here. >> matt how will this play out procedurally, do you expect since we have the state and federal investigation ongoing? will the state try mr. roof first? if they get a conviction do you expect the federal government will try him again even if he's

already been sentenced to death or life imprisonment by the state? >> that's one of the first questions that the attorney general will have to answer. usually the state and federal prosecutors are working together every indication is they have here and they will work out who goes first. it is usually the state who goes first. there is no requirement that that happens. the federal government could pursue its case separately see which one happens to appear first through the courts. it's unlikely and i think that's something attorney general lynch will have to answer. >> karen, legally what is needed to prove this was a hate crime? >> that he killed them with the intent due to their race. under 18 usc section 245, not only you could get the ten years if it was not a murder but you also get the death penalty. that law was extended to

homosexuals in section 249. it's extensive. >> the attorney general has said in the past hate crimes are the original domestic terrorism. so, you can start to see here why this hate crime, which seems terroristic, would sort of get her interest. >> absolutely. if you look at the entirety of the case this is someone who was not just intending to murder these individuals in the church but also someone who was -- wanting to start a race war. who had a political message. the reason you have hate crime statute observe thes on the books is to bring these cases. if you don't, you ask why do you have the laws on the books. part of the reason you bring cases is as a deterrent. we are awaiting for attorney general loretta lynch.

she will reveal federal charges against roof. only three states don't have the hate crime laws south carolina one of them arkansas and georgia what would the defense be on the over end of this to not have that law? it seems like it's commonsense to have that in place. >> in the federal layer f, if you're a state that doesn't believe in the death penalty, and you have a federal crime that does you have a second bite at the apple according to a lot of attorneys, and therefore double jeopardy. if you get acquitted at the state level, there's a hate crime level at the federal level. yes, it's great to ensure that somebody is going to get in trouble for discriminating against race religion and all of those things but is it double jeopardy at the state and federal? >> matt what's your take on that? >> it is a second bite at the

apple. that's an argument that defense attorneys often mate. as a prosecutor you look at it as an extra check. if someone goes wrong in the system, you have another way to bring charges. to your original question about why some states don't have hate crime laws t goes back to some of the issues the country has been dealing with for a long time. a number of states don't feel it is still appropriate to bring laws -- bring cases just based on racial amamus. it's been playing out for a long time and there are several states that don't have these laws that have shown to be very important. important. >> there's also the possibility that the justice department could bring charges related to killing someone while obstructing religion freedom. is that something else we could see? >> they almost certainly will

bring that charge. it's a statute in the federal civil rights code put on the books largely to deal with church arson. people who burn down charges, usually in african-american neighborhoods. it's been used to deal with violence and defacing against mosques. i would expect given this crime occurred in a church you would see the charges brought here. unlike some other charges that could be brought, that charge carries a death penalty and it would be -- if they bring death penalty charges under that statute t statute, it would be the first time in history it would be used that way. >> south carolina has a current moratorium on death penalties because they don't have access to that one drug they need. does the federal system have that same freeze the same problem getting that drug? >> no, they use different

procedures. that entire kind of question is up in the air. the supreme court did rule that some of the procedures that people deem cruel and unusual because the way drugs work could go forward. there hasn't been a federal execution in some time. and, you know, it remains to be seen when the next one will. you've seen states acquiring different drugs to put together different cocktails. and there are states still going forward with executions. you could see south carolina by the time this case is brought, by the time the appeals run their course you could see them in position to start executions again. >> karen, do you expect this is a case that will go to trial? where the government will not be particularly interested in accepting any deal? >> obviously because of the gravity of it and in a state where all the officials are elected. this is an important point when campaigning.

if you can't protect churches that's problematic. the political ramifications are clear. >> we are still awaiting for attorney general loretta lynch to come out and announce the charges. we'll bring that to you live when it happens. thank you both so much. st 4/ multiple foreign objects in the body. tweezers. (buzz!) (buzz!) if you're the guy from the operation game, you get operated on. it's what you do. (buzz!) if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance you switch to geico. it's what you do. ♪ building aircraft, the likes of which the world has never seen. this is what we do.

♪ that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. do you like the passaaadd? it's a good looking car. this is the model rear end event. the model year end sales event. it's year end! it's a rear end event. year end, rear end check it out. talk about turbocharging my engine. you're gorgeous. what kind of car do you like? new, or many miles on it? get a $1000 volkswagen reward card on select 2015 passat models. or lease a 2015 passat limited edition for $199 a month after a $1000 bonus. to folks out there whose diabetic nerve pain... shoots and burns its way into your day, i hear you. to everyone with this pain that makes ordinary tasks extraordinarily painful, i hear you. make sure your doctor hears you too! i hear you because i was there when my dad suffered with diabetic nerve pain.

if you have diabetes and burning, shooting pain in your feet or hands, don't suffer in silence! step on up and ask your doctor about diabetic nerve pain. tell 'em cedric sent you.

. as we wait for the attorney general, there's other big political news donald trump is heading to the mexican border. gee what kind of people will he expect to meet there? >> they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some i assume, are

good people. >> laredo is 96% latino. it will be interesting to see how the leader in the gop polls is received there. speaking of being received it's not going well for hillary clinton in some states. a new quinnipiac poll has her trailing candidates in iowa behind in virginia and trailing in the bellwether state of colorado two big political headlines to discuss. let's do that with jonathan allen. jonathan trump is headed to laredo what will we hear from him there? >> more of the same. he doesn't seem to be backing down a lot. if he's smart, he'll figure out a way to moderate his message a bit. i don't think he's expecting to pick up a whole lot of votes in laredo. >> just to remind the audience we got the two-minute warning for attorney general loretta lynch. she will unveil charges against dylann roof. we will bring that to you in a moment.

question here on donald trump, if there's one thing that conservatives despise more than president obama, it is the liberal media, as you know. and i do think there are folks that have tried not to cover this. now he is leading the polls. you don't have a choice. the problem is the more you cover it the more he has name recognition and the more his base wants to coalesce around him and support him. is the media to blame for this. >> i don't know if the media is to blame for this but he's made good use of the media as a foil. it is impossible to not cover donald trump. he is not only leading in the polls but lapping the field almost -- almost has twice as much percentage as the nearest competitor. >> john, we'll go to the a.g. in just a moment. if we look at the money list the amount folks have raised donald trump is trailing quite a bit. he only has 1.9 million raised. he's 13th among republicans. jeb bush is destroying the field.

is this a better barometer of who is actually leading? >> i'm not sure it is. donald trump didn't get in until right at the end. he will be able to finance his campaign. he'll just sell a couple of golf courses. >> he could finance his own campaign, but self-financers rarely win. >> it's true. it's true self financers rarely win. presumably as he builds an organization he can collect more money. he is getting support from conservative activists. >> self-funders er sers may rarely win, but they can stir up some trouble. let's switch to the other side of the aisle. as josh was indicating some troubling polls, i would say, some signs of trouble for hillary clinton in three different swing states. she is falling behind the gop favoribility numbers. under water what do you make of these numbers? one thing i was thinking partly because there is so much action

on the republican side not so much on the democratic side you're hearing a lot of hillary bashing in the press right now. >> i think that's true, but i always like to wait for the second and third polls to come out and see if there's a trend. >> jonathan sorry. i have to cut you off. attorney general loretta lynch. >> i'm joined by the head of the civil rights division and the deputy director of the fbi. we are here today to announce that a federal grand jury in south carolina has returned a 33-count indictment against dylann roof charging him with federal hate crimes and federal arms charges for attempting to kill and killing parishioners at emanuel ame church in south carolina because of their race and in order to interfere with the exercise of their religion. as set forth in the indictment several months prior to the

tragic events of june 17th, roof conceived of his goal of increasing racial tensions throughout the nation and seeking retribution for perceived wrongs that he believed african-americans had committed against white people. to carry out these twin goals of fanning racial flames and exacting revenge, roof further decided to seek out and murder african-americans because of their race. an essential element of his plan however, was to find his victims inside of a church specifically an african-american church, to ensure the greatest notoriety and attention to his actions. as alleged, roof set out the evening of june 17 2015 to carry out this plan. and drove to the emanuel ame church in south carolina. known as mother emanuel.

that was his destination because it was an african-american church of significance to the people of charleston of south carolina and to the nation. on that summer evening, dylann roof found his targets. african-americans engaged in worship. met with welcomed by the minute centers of the church and parishioners, he joined them in their bible study group. the parishioners had bibles. dylann roof had his .45 caliber glock pistol and eight magazines loaded with hollow point bullets. and as set forth in the indictment, while the parishioners of mother emanuel were engaged in religious worship, dylann roof drew his pistol and opened fire on them ultimately killing nine church members. the state of south carolina is also prosecuting roof for the murders, attempted murderers and firearms offenses that he's alleged to have committed. we commend the south carolina state authorities for their work and their quick response. it is important to note

however, that south carolina does not have a hate crimes statute. as a result the state charges do not reflect the alleged hate crimes offense presented in the federal indictment returned today. specifically, the federal indictment returned today charges roof with nine murderers and three attempted murders under the matthew shepherd and james byrd hate crimes prevention act. this federal hate crimes law prohibits using a dangerous weapon to cause bodily injury or attempting to do so on the basis of race or color. the shepherd byrd act was enacted to vindicate the unique harms caused by racially motivated violence. roof is also charged with nine murders and three attempted murders under a second federal hate crimes statute, that prohibits the use or threat of force to obstruct any persons free exercise of their religious beliefs. finally, roof has been federally

charged were multiple counts of using a firearm in the commission of these racially motivated murders and attempted murders. for these crimes roof faces federal penalties of up to life imprisonment or the death penalty. no decision has been made on whether to seek the death penalty in this case. the department will follow our usual rigorous protocol to thoroughly consider all the factual and legal issues relevant to that decision which necessarily involves council for the defendant roof. in addition consultation with the victims families is an important and vital part of this decisionmaking process and no decision will be made prior to conferring with them. the family members of those killed at emanuel ame and the survivors were informed of these federal charges earlier today. i would also note that this indictment contains allegations, it's not evidence of the defendant's guilt. as you will recall this federal grand jury indictment follows an announcement that i made on june

18th of 2015 that the department of justice was conducting a hate crimes investigation into the shooting at emanuel ame. immediately following that shooting the experienced prosecutors from the u.s. attorney's office in south carolina along with experienced attorneys from the civil rights division began working closely with the fbi, atf, state and local law enforcement officials including the south carolina law enforcement division the charleston police and the solicitor's office for the ninth circuit of south carolina. i would like to thank the many state and federal and local law enforcement official force their dedication, hard work to ensure this investigation was conducted thoroughly and expeditiously. i would also like to thank south carolina u.s. attorney bill nettles for his and his office's tremendous efforts on this case as well as the dedicated attorneys from the department apartment civil rights division

in particular i would also like to extend my thanks to charleston solicitor scarlet wilson. we have a strong working relationship with wilson and his office and look forward to our continued collaboration as the parallel state and federal prosecutions work their way through the respective court systems. thank you for your attention. any questions? who will go first, south carolina or the federal government? >> that hasn't been determined yet. we're working cooperatively with solicitor wilson. both case also proceed through the court system. we will work to reduce any unnecessary burden to the families. >> what goes into that kind of decision? what factors go into deciding who goes first? >> any number of factors. how things are progressing through the system how the judge is reviewing the case. both cases are in the early stages. have yet to have motions.

so at this point, it's difficult to say how that will impact on the schedule. >> this would fit the definition of domestic terrorism. were domestic terrorism charms considered in the case? could you elaborate on that deliberation and what some of the problems were bringing those charges? >> is no specific domestic terrorism statute. hate crimes are the original domestic terrorism. we feel that the behavior that is alleged to have occurred here fits the federal hate crime statute and vindicate their purpose. we have a defendant who is alleged to have had harbored discriminatory views towards african-americans, to have sought out an african-american house of worship, one noted because of its age and significance and also sought out african-american parishioners at worship. we think that this is exactly the type of case that the federal hate crimes statutes were conceived of to cover.

racially motivated violence such as this is the original domestic terrorism. >> 2015 if you look at the essence of the case brought forth in the indictment the fact that these people are dead today because of their race. you could speak to where we stand and what that says that this still exists? >> i think this is obviously a tragic situation. this is obviously a troubling situation. as the allegations and the indictment reflect the mindset of this young man and his specific purpose to target individuals for death because of their race. but also to target individuals for death who were engaged in religious worship as well. we have to remain vigilant about the matters. at this point we don't know much more about the defendant. the investigation is ongoing into a host of matters including those motivations.

the message that should be clear is that the federal government and our state partners are committed to investigating these matters fully and thoroughly and where we have racially motivated violence committed to acting. >> ma'am, it says in the indictment that targeted mother emanuel specifically because it was an historically african-american church how do you know? how do you know that's why he chose that church as opposed to any african-american church? how do you know it was the national significance of the church? >> i'm not going to comment on the evidence that will comfort at trial, except to note that we believe the evidence will support the allegation that roof chose mother emanuel because it was an old church and historically significant as one of the oldest african-american

churches not just in south carolina but in the nation and he was looking for the type of church and parishioners whose death would draw great notoriety for his racist remarks. >> to what extent must all other factors must be precluded f a defense lawyer gets up and says he hates everyone in the world, he hates his mother he hates gays, tomorrow he would have killed many more people who weren't black, what impact does that have? >> hopefully we would not be receiving information like that though we would act on it if we did wherever you have the possibility of multiple motivations, you have the possibility of multiple charges. as you will note. the charges here specifically say racially motivated violence in the murdered and attempted murder, but also the federal hate crime statute that prohibits using violence to

essentially prevent anyone from exercising their religion. that's not tied to race. that's tied to the exercise of religion. so we see here for example, activity that supports allegations of more than one intent as well. with respect to issues that you raise about the defendant's state of mind of course all of that will be taken into consideration as this case goes forward. i'm not able to speculate now as to what impact any other factors would have on the case. >> you suggested this was a seven-month plan. can you elaborate a little bit about how detailed this plan was? whether he made trips to the church prior to that night, june 17th? >> well -- thank you for the question. i'm not able to go into how many months he was planning. it was several months prior to the june 17th incident.

i'm not able to go into the evidence right now that would show his actions surrounding that at this point. >> following up on ryan's point. should there be a federal domestic terrorism law? for your average person who sees the way that people in law enforcement talk about different types of killings with different words, what distinction should they make when they hear talk about a shooting in chattanooga as terrorism, but a shooting here as hate crime? does it matter and should there be domestic terrorism law? >> as to which laws should or should not come out of this investigation, i will not speculate at this point in time. as to the nature of the case you touch on the issue that people may feel that because we have such a strong emphases on terrorism matters since 9/11 that when we talk about matters and don't use that terminology that somehow we don't consider

those crimes as serious. i want to be clear, nothing could be further from the truth than that. this type of crime in particular racially motivated violence for which a federal law was specifically enacted to cover, is of grave importance to the federal government. we have devoted considerable resources from the beginning of this case to make sure this interest was explored and that if, in fact the evidence supported it that the allegations were brought. because this is, in fact the architect of the original domestic terrorism. sometimes people focus on the terminology. as i mentioned since 9/11 there's been a great focus on that type of case. it should in no way signify that this particular murder or any federal crime is of any lesser significance. >> how will you determine whether or not he is a candidate for the death penalty? >> the department of justice has a process by which we consider

death eligible defendants in determining whether or not to seek that penalty. it's a detailed and thorough review process. it involves submissions from defense counsel. it involves consultation with the victims families and a review of the various factors that we would utilize to seek the death penalty to determine whether or not we feel we could prevail on those factors at trial. ultimately, after this review process which is both at the u.s. attorney's office level, it is then also here in main justice, ultimately it comes to my desk where i make the ultimate decision whether or not to seek the death penalty in any death eligible case. as i said before i want to be clear no decision has been made at this point in time as to whether or not to seek that penalty. we have an obligation to place the defendant on notice that the penalty is an option and to allow his counsel time to prepare to make those

submissions. submissions. >> can you talk about what you're doing in conjunction with the fbi to sort of close some of the issues that came up with him getting the gun in the first place? >> as announced ten days ago a review has been initiated into the procedures that allowed -- that unfortunately led to us missing the fact that mr. roof applied to purchase that gun. this is a matter of grave importance. it's something disturbing and heartbreaking to all of us reviewing this matter. that investigation is ongoing. i look forward to receiving the results from it. >> on a slightly different topic. yesterday you said you were look at the bland case. you can expand on that? you are monitoring? will you open an investigation? >> you're referring to ms. bland who died in texas while in police custody? as noted that matter is actually under investigation by local

authorities. the fbi is monitoring that case as we often do in many situations. we are awaiting the results of local investigations as well. >> could you talk about what your views are on the -- the planned parenthood videos that have been out? i know you received some letters from members of congress. there is an applicable federal law here is that something that you are -- >> you've been listening to attorney general loretta lynch who announced the u.s. government is indicting dylann roof on multiple counts of murder and attempted murder under two federal hate crime laws, one dealing with crimes committed based on race and color, another based on crimes committed in the exercise of religion. they have not yet decided whether they will seek the death penalty. it's not clear whether the federal government or south carolina will proceed first. we're back with karen de soto and matt miller. i wanted to ask matt a former

aide to attorney general eric holder what the process will look like for deciding whether to seek the death penalty here. >> the prosecutors will make recommendations. they will come up to a committee, they will review the case, talk to the victims families and make a recommendation. ultimately the attorney general decides by herself on that issue. i think in this case it's unlikely she will make a decision other than to seek the death penalty. if you look at similar cases, the boston bombing, where attorney general holder had the death penalty review before him, he decided to go forward. given the precedent in that case. these are not exactly the same. given the fact that both were political acts of murder i think it's very unlikely they'll do anything but seek the death penalty here. >> karen, just your reaction to the announcement of these charges and then also if you were dylann roof's defense

attorney, that what would you be doing right now? what would you be working on. >> i would be getting my briefs ready. i have to disagree a bit in the fact that you have victims here that are very religious. so if they are going to take victim impact seriously, these families of the victims and the victims themselves may have issue with the death penalty being used. >> they came out and said they forgive him. >> correct. so, you may have a group of people who don't want to go forward with the death penalty who are directly impacted by this devastation. that has to be weighed a bit more than what the attorney general is thinking. they have to take into consideration the victims here. >> would they seriously consider not pursuing the death penalty because the families don't want that? if that's your religious conviction and those are the people directly impacted, if you're going to ignore them that's a serious political faux pas there. it impacts the community. if this is a religious community

that doesn't believe in the death penalty, that's potentially problematic. >> i want to thank you very much. up next. new clues in the chattanooga military shootings. new testimony in the aurora movie theater trial, and new evidence in the case of the woman found dead in jail. new york state is reinventing how we do business by leading the way on tax cuts. we cut the rates on personal income taxes. we enacted the lowest corporate tax rate since 1968. we eliminated the income tax on manufacturers altogether. with startup-ny, qualified businesses that start, expand or relocate to new york state

pay no taxes for 10 years. all to grow our economy and create jobs. see how new york can give your business the opportunity to grow at ny.gov/business did you know that meeting your daily protein needs actually helps to support your muscle health? boost® high protein nutritional drink can help you get the protein you need. each serving has 15 grams of protein to help maintain muscle, plus 26 vitamins and minerals including calcium and vitamin d to support

strong bones. boost® high protein is the #1 selling high protein complete nutritional drink and it has a great taste-guaranteed! help get the nutrition you need everyday with boost® high protein. join the club at brandpower.com. i am totally blind. and sometimes i struggle to sleep at night, and stay awake during the day. this is called non-24. learn more by calling 844-824-2424. or visit your24info.com. (music) i'm supposed to tell you how it feels when you book the perfect family vacation on hotels.com. but i think he's kinda nailing it. (music) hotels.com. they don't need me right now. ♪ building aircraft,

the likes of which the world has never seen. this is what we do. ♪ that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. leading the news cycle this hour, new details in the chattanooga shooting and the heros who may have prevented more bloodshed as the investigation spreads to two continents. officials in tennessee are investigating if the suspect's friends new about the shooter's plans. law enforcement officials tell nbc news that two of them were with mohammad youssuf abdulazeez when he bought ammunition. overseas, the shooter's uncle is being detained in jordan. law epnforcement officials tell msnbc that his uncle is a

radical. the family denies that claim. sarah sarah dallof is in chattanooga with more. what's the latest? >> reporter: good afternoon. the fbi is now disclosing that a service member fired on mohammad youssuf abdulazeez as he exited his car at the second attack location. he was armed with an assault style rifle and a handgun. we're learning more about the extent of his rampage, that he entered the building and mortally wounded a service member before continuing through the building firing at people. he killed the remaining four service members in the parking lot of the motor pootl. a lot of praise offered today for the marines and their response. >> our marines reacted the way you would expect. rapidly going from room to room they got their fellow marines to safety once they had gotten to

safety some willingly ran back into the fight. all of us can be extremely proud of what our marines did that day. >> reporter: and there are 1,000 fbi agents at this point working on this case. they're chasing down hundreds of leads. there was no comment on family reports during that press conference that mohammad youssuf abdulazeez suffered from depression and suffered from abuse, and no comments about the uncle being detained in jordan. >> what a remarkable and tragic story, sarah dallof thank you very much. to centennial colorado where another mass killer is being sentenced. the penalty phase underway in the trial of james holmes. he's convicted of killing a dozen people and injuring 58 others in that aurora movie theater shooting three years ago

this week. scott cohn is outside the court. this is where family impact statements could play a huge role. what's happening so far. >> reporter: right. it's a multi-phased process. this jury the same jury that convicted james holmes last week is about to begin the first of as many as three deliberations in this penalty phase. in this first deliberation, they're looking at aggravatedinging aaggravateing factors, such as the killing of a child. this phase is likely go quickly. the jury has to come to a unanimous verdict on every phase to move to the next one and ultimately to the death penalty. next phase is mitigating factors, like mental illness. and if they move beyond that they go to victim impact. that's where we hear from families and survivors, all of whom were relieved about the guilty verdicts last week but we found they're less unanimous when it comes to the death penalty. >> he should get it.

yes. i'm for the death penalty. for him. for him. yes. yes. my granddaughter is gone. he should be gone. yes. that's how i feel. >> i'm terrified. if he gets the death penalty, i can't imagine any other response but me being devastated vying, weeping for his family. but at the same time how do i honor john's memory? you know? that's what he would have liked. i'm torn between tho. >> jansen young only survived the shooting because her boyfriend died protecting her. this penalty phase likely to last about a month. >> scott cohn thank you very much for that. now we head south to texas and the investigation into the death of a chicago woman, sandra bland, inside a texas jail cell. bland's official autopsy is now complete complete. we are awaiting those results. the texas department of public safety released some additional

dash cam video that seems to be creating more questions than answers. adam reiss has the latest. >> reporter: you can see how this routine traffic stop turned so wrong so quickly. the trooper pulls over sandra bland, runs hearser license. he tells her to put out her cigarette. she says why. it's my own car? he tells her to get out. he tells her 15 times to get out. she finally gets out. they walk around the car. according to his affidavit, she kicked him and elbowed him, but he doesn't mention the fact he used his taser or the fact he asked her to put out her cigarette. he has been placed on desk duty. this morning there was a county commissioner's meeting. several people have called for the sheriff to resign. up next, will the real iran

please stand up? is it the one obtaining our journalist for a year and talking smack about the u.s. or the one making a deal with us on nukes? the wind farm on the right was created using digital models and real world location-based specs that taught it how to follow the wind. so while the ones on the left are waiting the ones on the right are pulling power out of thin air. pretty impressive, huh? now, two things that are exactly the same have have never been more different. ge software. get connected. get insights. get optimized. ♪ to steady betty. to steady betty. fire it up! ♪ am i the only one with a meeting? i've got two. yeah we've gotta go. i gotta say it man this is a nice set-up. too soon. just kidding. nissan sentra. j.d. power's "highest ranked compact car in initial quality." now get 0% financing or a great

lease on the nissan sentra. ♪ wilkins, ng charge across america people, like basketball hall of famer dominique wilkins, are taking charge of their type 2 diabetes... ...with non-insulin victoza. for a while, i took a pill to lower my blood sugar but it didn't get me to my goal. so i asked my doctor about victoza. he said victoza works differently than pills and comes in a pen. victoza is proven to lower blood sugar and a1c. it's taken once a day, any time. and the needle is thin. victoza is not for weight loss but it may help you lose some weight. victoza is an injectable prescription medicine that may improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. it is not recommended as the first medication to treat diabetes and should not be used in people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. victoza has not been studied with mealtime insulin. victoza is not insulin. do not take victoza if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer

multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza or any of its ingredients. symptoms of a serious allergic reaction may include swelling of face lips, tongue or throat fainting or dizziness, very rapid heartbeat problems breathing or swallowing, severe rash or itching. tell your doctor if you get a lump or swelling in your neck. serious side effects may happen in people who take victoza including inflammation of the pancreas (pancreatitis) which may be fatal. stop taking victoza and call your doctor right away if you have signs of pancreatitis, such as severe pain that will not go away in your abdomen or from your abdomen to your back with or without vomiting. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. taking victoza with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, and headache. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. if your pill isn't giving you the control you need... ask your doctor about

non-insulin victoza. it's covered by most health plans. esurance was born online. they have smart online tools which saves money. they settle claims quickly which saves money. they drive an all-hybrid claims fleet which saves money. they were born online, and built to save money, which means when they save you save. click or call. bring us your aching and sleep deprived. bring us those who want to feel well rested. aleve pm. the only one to combine a sleep aid... plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. be a morning person again, with aleve pm. . welcome back. it's been exactly one year since "washington post" journalist jason rezaian was detained in iran. he's one of four americans currently being held there. president obama speaking to a group of war heroes on tuesday called for their release, but

critics charge he could have demanded it in a much stronger way by making it part of the nuke deal. >> we have four americans who are being held captive. one hasn't been heard from in a long time. one is a "washington post" reporter guilty of nothing. they refuse to make that part of the bargaining. >> speaking of that deal iran's president just came out this week and vowed to defy it. secretary of state john kerry was so caught off guard by those comments he said he didn't know what to make of them. so what does this mean? let's ask former u.s. negotiator with iran hillary mahn leverit. the president held a press conference on the iran deal last week. there was an awkward moment when major garrett questioned him about these four prisoners being held in iran. he said can you tell americans why you are content with all the fanfare around this deal to leave the hostages unaccounted for? here's how the president

responded. >> the notion that i'm content, as i celebrate with american citizens languishing in iranian jails, major, that's nonsense. you should know better. i've met with the families of some of those folks. nobody is content. our diplomats and our teams are working diligently to try to get them out. >> hillary what is your response to that exchange? was that question fair game? as a negotiator does that question complicate negotiations that are likely going on and have been going on behind closed doors? >> well certainly the legacy of u.s./iran relations and the hostility dating back to the 1979 hostage crisis when american diplomats were literally kept hostage in iran for 444 days is something that

continues to haunt u.s./iran relations and any negotiation with the government of iran. i'm afraid if we looked at this in a more hard-nosed way which is how we har nosed way we would realize that the only way we're going to be able to get a deal with the islamic repatrick of iran to deal with them constructive on a range of issue, including human rights and is to have a relationship with them is eventually to have an embassy with them. to be able to talk with them at a table rather than shooting each other either face to face or convertly. >> clearly the administration wants to have a relationship with them. and you wonder why would they leader khamenei come out and say he's going to defy this deal. >> i liken it a lot of times to the u.s. relationship with china. nixon and kissen jer own to china, it was a reality.

the late pt power of china was clear. our ability to get out the quagmire of vetoietnam was compelling and why we -- similar here. to get off this trajectory of never ending war in the mideast, the only way is come to terms with the islamic republic of iran. and along the way we are going to be able to i think much more constructively handle the differences and problems whether it is rhetoric from each side and ayatollah khamenei is not the only one arewith rhetoric. the only way to deal with this constructively is to keep talking, to make agreement after agreement. to deal with each other constructively, step by step as we've done with china. >> in fairness we haven't been calling anyone the great satan. but point taken. there's been heated rhetoric on both sides. to the best of your estimation what does the iranian regime

actually want? are they open to? are they wanting a relationship a more in-depth relationship with the u.s. in the future? you raise the prospect of ab iranian embassy. >> i've actually gone to the u.s. embassy in iran and it is now a museum. the former u.s. embassy. it is still standing. everything has been preserved and still there. but it will take some time. again, like the u.s. relationship with china, it took seven years after the opening to china after the first negotiation between nixon and kiss jer with the chinese government. it took seven years. and i think it is going to be a long road to have a normal fully constructive relationship with the islamic republic of ooimpb. but what iran wants is also similar to china. it wants to be fiercely independent in its domestic political order and in its foreign policy. but it also wants the benefits the security benefit, the financial benefits all of the benefits of having a better good relationship with the united

states. >> hillary, thank you so much for being with us. >> and we want to take you the sandra bland's family. >> -- why sandy had to be asked to put her cigarette out, why sandy had to be asked to get out of her car, why sandy had to be subject to the officer pointing a taser at her, why sandy had to be thrown to the ground and hurt. there are even more questions that have come out of texas that we had when we went down there. now there is the dash cam, and we don't know the circumstances surrounding the footage on the dash cam. we are not in a position where we are going to say that it has been tampered with. we are not in a position where

we can say that it has been tampered with. we are not in a position where we can say that it has not. we simply don't know. i'm not a forensic media examiner. but now i know that we're going to have to get one. the long and short of it is that we want everything that happened from the time that the police interfaced with sandy up until the time that she was found to have died and beyond to come to light. right now sandy is speaking. and this family feels that sandy is speaking. she's speaking saying find the truth, find the answers. we want the answers. and sandy demands them. and we will find them. the reality of it is is that when this family had to see that dash cam, the emotion that it

drew from them was extraordinary. and we want to give you an opportunity to talk to their spokesperson and ask them some questions about that. and with that should there be me the questions of me you certainly can ask me a few. >> a couple things have come to light not with the dash cam but on the video on the dash cam she duds say he suffers from epilepsy. in another video she made she said she suffered from depression and ptsd. can you shed light on that and was she taking medication and if so what was she taking for that. >> i can tell you we take issue with the notion that she was suffering from depression. she was never clinically diagnosed as this family understands. everybody has hills and valleys. and the bottom line is that there was no medication that we are aware of that she was taking to address any sort of epilepsy or dregs.

>> so you don't even -- it is not even clear that she had epilepsy either. >> the long and short of it is that regard to her medical history, none of that has anything do with why that stop took place. >> not the stop. in jail. in jail what happened? >> what i would say to you is that despite the effort to try and divert the energy and attention from what really happened we will not fall subject to it. this happened because an officer was overzealous. this happened because an officer decided that he wished to overstep his authority. and that is where our focus is going to remain for the current time. >> but it goes to whether or not -- it raises questions to whether or not she committed suicide. >> what raises questions is why it is that a 28-year-old woman who had received two job offers would take her own life. what it does is it raises questions. it raises questions why a 28-year-old woman would call her

mother in excitement about those two jobs and then take her life. sandy was a social activist. social activists don't take their own life. particularly in jail. it just doesn't make sense. >> there is a newspaper report that she had told jailers that she had tried to commit suicide in the past. is that true? >> we can't wait to see what is in all of the reports that they have. i know that you don't have them all. and neither do we. this investigation is ongoing and we look forward to it being completed. we don't know what they are alleging she told them. i know what the newspaper article said but until i see the reports i won't be in position to respond to that question. >> can you talk database. [ inaudible ] we've seen the video of online. what other things did she do as an activist? was she involved with protests with with an organization. >> sandy for the most part daily

made posts, inspirational posts. efforts to try to bring other people up. that's why there's been such a ground swell of support for her. >> were there other components to that activism we should know about? >> well if you mean speaking up for the interests of the many caring for kids and the generation behind her, yeah she was an activist. >> sir, do you think sandy did anything wrong during that traffic stop? some people are asking why didn't she just cooperate? >> well here is the problem. citizens have rights. and when you lay down your rights voluntarily, you forego the enjoyment of those rights. and i don't know that you have an obligation to give away your rights. this country was founded on the citizens in it enjoying its rights, their rights. that is what sandy was doing. >> but just to follow up on

that. if she would have just gotten out of the car and not been in anyway negative towards the police officer, whether he deserved it or not. if she would have just stepped out of the car could this all have been avoided? >> i -- >> could i address that question, please. >> your name and -- >> sharon cooper. i just would like to address the question. in looking at the video -- i've seen the video in its entirety. sandy was pulled over for failure to proper -- indicate a proper lane change. and in looking at that as her sister i simply feel like the officer was picking on her. point-blank, period. and i personally think that it's petty petty. >> do you believe he pulled her over because she was black. >> i think he pulled her over because she was an out of state resident. that is what i think.

>> ms. cooper when you see your sister crying out in anguish, what was your response? >> i'm in furted and everybody else should be infuriated as well. from the petty charge to the officer asking her -- let's be clear. he asked her, can you put your cigarette out for me please. that is not a instruction. that is not a summanceonsummons. he asked her and she simply responded no i don't have to put my cigarette out. i'm in my own car. >> did she have a court date. did she make an appearance in court. >> she did make an aferns. and had been given bond at that time. it has not been shared with us that she had a court date. >> what level of confidence do you have in the investigation that is [inaudible]. >> they have been cooperative to date. and we hope they will continue to do so. >> have you had your -- the