are palatable to folks who are not sure if they align with disruption or not but, again, we want to be very, very clear that every single candidate will be pushed to acknowledge what they're going to do to make sure that black lives matter. >> thank you both very much. i enjoyed that. that is all for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts right now. thank you for staying with us. rachel has the night off, but it is here! it is finally here and i, for one, can hardly contain the excitement. if you feel a little different today, a little more energized like there's a spring in your step that is because, yes, it has finally arrived. it is the fiorina surge. for weeks leading up to the first republican debate she had been polling to the bottom if not at the bottom of this large pack of 17 candidates. things were not looking good for carly fiorina leading up to that big debate last week. needless to say she did not make it to the prime time debate stage.

she was one of those seven candidates at that incredibly awkward, audience-free kids table debate. but despite all that, she managed to kill it. she basically won the night mainly by getting an invaluable shot of free advertising when the moderators at the big prime time debate saying her praises. >> remember, we had another debate on this very stage from 5:00 to 6:00 that included seven other candidates. this is a huge field. >> that's right. i bet they are glad carly fiorina did not appear in this hour. she unleashed a can, if you know what i'm saying, earlier. >> no opinion there. just a little shoutout. fox news then also played a clip of carly fiorina from that earlier debate for all the candidates on the big debate stage and then asked them to respond to her position. so carly fiorina got the most

high-profile shoutout you could get and the benefit of seeming like an underdog by not actually participating in the big prime time debate while still getting seen and heard and talked about at the prime time republican debate. that was a nice hat trick. and, by the way, that debate was watched by 24 million people. even just the kids table debate, even just that sad little event was watched by something approaching 6 million people which is almost double the audience of the first republican primary debate in the 2012 cycle. that was just for the kids table so, yes, ever since the debate carly fiorina has been booked on every tv show and making it known their numbers are spiking, her poll numbers are unlike anything we have seen from her so far. a new boston herald poll out of new hampshire, she's in the top five. the last time that poll was taken she was tied for dead last with pataki and lindsey graham. now she is a front-runner in new hampshire by that poll. she is also tied in fifth and a new poll out of iowa and nbc's national post debate survey she's tied for fourth place and there's a rasmussen poll out today, she tied with the other

top tier candidates. in the same poll she was stuck at 1%. she has catapulted into the top four. so this is what a come-from-behind surge looks like this year. it is carly fiorina's turn, apparently, and of course it helps that as a candidate she's virtually a complete unknown at this point. that's probably what most people know about her record and she won this debate. meanwhile, donald trump's surge shows no signs of abating even after that debate performance regardless of what you thought of it. if you look closely at the polls, some signs of trouble for trump. in that same new hampshire poll that shows carly fiorina's support rising, donald, yes, he's number one. when pollsters asked those people about their views of his candidacy, 70% say they think he doesn't have the temperament to be president or they just oppose him running. and in the other national poll, donald trump again top of the field, but look at the change from their last poll a couple

weeks ago. he has lost a ton of support. but donald trump is, whether you lining it or not, still effectively by these metrics, the front-runner for the nomination. tonight he gave his first press conference since that big debate and gave his speech at a local fund-raiser in michigan. here is how that went. >> mr. trump, in all candor, do you think during this campaign there have been some times where you feel you have gone over the top? >> i have what? >> gone over the top. >> i don't think so at all. i look at the polls. i can only go by the polls. i will be creating tremendous numbers of jobs so i think we're going to do great and then the women's health issues, i'm for that. i watched jeb bush give the worst answer the other day. i think that is going to be his 47%. romney possibly lost the election for a lot of reasons that he lost. one of the big reasons his 47%. that was a disaster. i think that jeb's answer the other day on women's health issues is a disaster for him.

he then went and said he misspoke. how do you misspeak about that? i will be great on women's health issues. i cherish women. i will be great on women's health issues, believe me. >> reporting from the trump event is nbc news correspondent katy tur. nice to see you. >> reporter: nice to see you as well. >> tell us about the crowd you saw and heard there, $25 a plate. it was packed. who are these people coming out? what did they try of trump and your reporting? >> reporter: not just packed but sold out. and there were all age ranges. a mostly caucasian crowd but everybody from college students to seniors. we spoke with a few of them and they say pretty much what you keep hearing on this campaign trail, that they like that he's outspoken, they like that he doesn't seem to be beholden to anybody. i did speak with one college student, though, before the event.

he tells me, yes, he was intrigued by the draw and came out partially because of that. because he is such a huge draw, gets so many viewers, so many eyeballs, 24 million for that debate, he has a real chance to come out and lay out his plans for the country and say specifically what he's going to do and why he will be better. he wanted to hear about education. i would imagine that he went away from this being disappointed if he was asking for any substance. maybe he wasn't disappointed he came out and gave a really big show and got huge crowds and huge applause. giving a pretty standard stump speech. he spoke to reporters beforehand and a lot of us are trying to move past the controversial comments, past the he said/she said, what outrageous thing can you say today? and now move on to giving an outline when he's going to start giving -- putting some meat on the bones, if you will.

he says he will remain flexible with that and that he'll give it when he sees fit as of now. >> that's one of the weirdest parts here. he's critical of politics as usual. something people don't like is how they, politicians, are and promised everything to different people. he was asked point blank today what would be your alternative to obama care there and this evening he said i don't have an answer to that. >> reporter: people need to trust him. when you speak to his fervent supporters they say, we do trust him. he's the man for the job. not because he knows everything but they believe he'll be able to put the appropriate people into the appropriate positions. they use "the apprentice" a lot when you're talking to them as an example how he's able to do good things, how he's able to be so successful in business. >> do they know that it was a

fictitious television show? >> reporter: i don't know. >> i'm sorry. >> reporter: that's generally what they try to say. i think what he is tapping into are people who are sick of the status quo, they're sick of politicians, they're sick of that double speak, and they don't necessarily think that he is one of them but, then again, he hasn't brought out any policy plans. tonight his biggest applause was for building a wall again. it was for isis, a strong military and perhaps the biggest cheer of the night when he said his second favorite book was the art of the deal, which he likes to talk about a lot. his first favorite book, though, was the bible. he's certainly trying to appeal to a certain base of support within the republican party, and he's been successful so far. the question is whether he'll be able to broaden it out and bring more into the fold in order to get the nomination. and if he does get the nomination, will he be able to broaden it enough to go on to

win the presidency? and that certainly is the question out there and what experts say there's just no chance of. >> nbc news correspondent katy tur out on the trail. thanks for your time tonight. the other news donald trump made tonight he was asked about a possible third party run. >> i want to run as a republican. i don't want to run a third party or as an independent, i want to run as a republican. as long as i'm treated fairly, that's going to be the case, and fairly is an instinct. it's an instinct. i know what fair is. you know what fair is. i know what it is, and i think that's happening. and, by the way, win lose or draw, i'm not just saying i have to win. i guarantee you this, if i win the republican nomination, i guarantee you all sitting there i will not run a third party candidate. do you agree? okay. >> i want to be the republican candidate as long as i'm treated fairly, he said.

that possibility haunts many republicans and it's unusual for a candidate who leads the polls here to openly challenge his party by threatening to run against it later and that was on display in probably the most consequential electoral moment in thursday's debate. >> is there anyone on stage, by a show of hands, who is unwilling to pledge your support to the eventual nominee of the republican party and pledge to not run an independent campaign against that person? again, we're looking for you to raise your hand now if you won't make that pledge tonight. mr. trump. so, mr. trump, to be clear, you're standing on a republican primary -- >> i fully understand. >> the place where the rnc will give the nominee the nod -- >> i fully understand. >> and that experts say an

independent run would almost certainly hand the race over to democrats and likely another clinton. you can't say tonight you can make that pledge? >> i cannot say. i have to respect the person that if it's not me, the person that wins. if i do win and i'm leading by quite a bit, that's what i want to do. i can make that pledge if i'm the nominee, i will pledge i will not run as an independent. >> trump has continued to taunt and threaten republicans by invoking that leverage and many have taken him at his word that he has leverage. >> well, i have leverage. i do have leverage and i like having leverage. i'm a business man. i'm a natural business man. i do like leverage. i'm not talking so much in terms. i am right now leading by a lot. not just by a little bit. i'm leading by a lot. i want to win the primaries. i want to then run as a republican. i think we will win and that gives us the best chance of winning. i don't want to do the independent thing but i do keep

it and it is leverage and there's positive things about keeping it. >> we have some new reporting tonight that casts doubt on how long trump really has this leverage. trump's basic premise he can take an off camp for a second road to the independent run. some republicans clearly buy that premise because they've been acting afraid and trying to pressure him to commit to the gop. many politicos and reporters buy the premise. you can see that in the discussion which assumes trump can ride these roads and maintain his leverage indefinitely. but that's actually not the case. it's true trump gets away with breaking many rules that other candidates have to follow. hard to imagine, say, chris christie popping the polls while bragging he may run as an independent, but there are rules and then there are laws. as a practical matter, there is an expiration date on the third party option that's far sooner than he may realize. to mount a credible, winnable

bid for president trump would need get on the ballot in virtually every state. unlike the fox news rules for debate, celebrity status does not just get a candidate into consideration. every state has separate rules. several states have high bars and some early deadlines. take a look at this. texas, key to any gop victory, to get on the ballot, independent candidates must gather over 79,000 signatures from a subset of voters not just residents or registered voters but registered voters who didn't vote in either party's primary. so organizers have to find people who are registered to vote but didn't vote in primaries. that takes a lot of time on the ground. then the crucial state of ohio. no one has won without ohio since 19 60. take a look at this. the state has a sore loser law that bars people from trying to run as independents after losing

a party primary. ohio has already thought about the kind of leverage trump wands to wield, and they've deemed it a, quote, sore loser move that is banned. candidates must be unaffiliated from any political party and the required claim of being unaffiliated must be made in good faith for the candidate to run as an independent. not only that, the ohio secretary of state who is a republican, said last week that mr. trump has already, quote, chosen a party for the election cycle and declared himself as a republican in the state of ohio. so the legal supervisor of elections there has determined trump as a republican. even if trump wanted to redefine himself as an independent and fight these rules in court, he would legally be required to exit the republican presidential primary midstream because ohio's primary is march 15. a precedent on that, a case holding candidates must not be affiliated with parties and make that claim in good faith.

so trump does have this leverage for now, but to keep this as any kind of real or credible threat, he'd have to start gathering those hundreds of thousands of signatures and he'd have to decide by early march if he wants to run as an independent with any shot at ohio and, thus, the white house. joining us now on this big story in politics is richard winger, publisher and editor of ballot access news. no better person for this discussion. >> i'm very happy to be on the show. >> tell me, does donald trump have the leverage he thinks he has on your reading of the laws including ohio? >> i'm glad you brought up ohio. in 201 1, gary johnson declared for the republican nomination. he was the former governor of new mexico and he was a republican governor. in december 2011, he said, i'm quitting this republican race. i think it's rigged. they've kept me out of the debates. i'm going to seek the libertarian nomination.

and gary johnson got on the ballot in ohio. the same thing with john anderson in 1980. he stayed a republican. he listed himself in the congressional republican. that doesn't pertain to presidential candidates. >> so what do you think is the leverage here? do you think he can play this out in a dual way in multiple states? >> i do. don't forget ralph nader in 2008 got on the ballot in 45 states. and he is not a really wealthy person. i think he's comfortable but not wealthy. 1988 the new alliance party presidential candidate got on the ballot in all 50 states. perot did it without even having to go to court in 1992. >> how early -- several of those

people, i would say nader and perot, though, were in party primaries, right? they weren't doing this two-step. how early, in your view, would trump have to start doing things as opposed to just claiming the leverage? >> well, if he's serious that he really wants to keep the independent route open, if i were him, i would not file in the presidential primaries of ohio or texas or south dakota. but we have precedence that the sore loser laws don't pertain to presidential primaries, and the reason is a sore loser law says if you are defeated in the primary, you can't run outside the major parties in november. the trouble with that theory is no person has defeated a republican or democratic presidential nomination in any one state's primary. presidential primaries are different.

the national conventions decide who wins the nomination. that's why until 2012 no third party candidate in the entire history of the country had ever been kept off the general election ballot because he or she had run in a presidential primary after major party and there's been 12 people in the history of the country who ran in major party presidential primaries and then ran outside the major parties. >> right. and you're saying that because often at the state level it's the collection of state results that leads to the total determination of who the nominee is although in this case in ohio we have a different opinion from someone who matters, the secretary of state at least thus far but, as you say, these are things that have been tested and debated. if he spends enough time, if mr. trump wants to do it, learns all these laws as well as you, publisher and editor, thank you for your time tonight. >> okay, thank you. hillary clinton has been hard at work on the campaign

trail addressing the trump phenomenon and trying to trade barbs with other republican rivals next. a fascinating new way to hear one of the most important speeches in american history. i've been volunteering at the international bird rescue for about 8 years. we see birds with all types of problems. when a bird gets oil on its feathers, it destroys their waterproofing. dawn is absolutely essential to the wash process, we use tons of it. i was surprised that they use something that i use at home, to wash the oil off the birds. it's a wonderful feeling to be able to say that i helped return this bird back to the wild. i love wildlife, how do you love wildlife? you're not at all concerned? about what now?ly? oh, i don't know. the apocalypse? we're fine. i bundled renter's with my car insurance through progressive for just six bucks more a month. word. there's looters running wild out there. covered for theft. okay. that's a tidal wave of fire. covered for fire.

what, what? all right. fine. i'm gonna get something to eat. the boy's kind of a drama queen. just wait. where's my burrito? [ chuckles ] worst apocalypse ever. protecting you till the end. now, that's progressive.

you're looking here at a live picture right now at the reagan library out in simi valley, california. candidate jeb bush is delivering a big speech there tonight on foreign policy. now we're keeping an eye on that speech in order to play you some of the most important parts in a moment. bush's aides telling us he is going to use this address to challenge hillary clinton on iraq. jeb bush has spent this whole week essentially picking a big public fight with clinton. secretary clinton has ignored her republican rivals to date, but that is apparently changing. that story is next.

take a look at this. this was the scene at the l.a. memorial sports arena last night, a campaign rally for democratic presidential candidate bernie sanders. the campaign says 27,000 people showed up to hear sanders speak. one day after another 28,000 people in portland, oregon, flocked to see him not to mention those 15,000 he drew in seattle the day before. while the surge in attendance may not give him the nomination, he remain the front-runner in terms of the number of people out to see him over the course of this entire campaign thus far. hillary clinton's campaign meanwhile has been careful to avoid positioning her as entitled to the nomination even as she sails ahead in many polls as we get closer to the waugh waugh caucuses and as bernie sanders keeps drawing the record clouds, while she can let it play out unchecked, she cannot afford to let the donald trump reality show distract from the scrutiny that should be applied to the other republican nominees.

we know this because just over the last 48 hours she's used her bully pulpit like probably never before this cycle to go after a number of leading republican contenders. >> while what donald trump said about megyn kelly is outrageous, what the rest of the republicans are saying about all women is also outrageous. when one of their major candidates, a much younger man, the senator from florida, says there should be no exceptions for rape and incest, that is as offensive and as troubling a comment as you could hear from a major candidate running for the presidency so, yes, i know it makes great tv. i think the guy went way overboard, offensive, outrageous, pick your adjective. what marco rubio says has as much of an impact in terms of where the republican party is today as anybody else on that stage and it is deeply troubling

and it should be to the press. >> that was hillary clinton on the trail trying to turn everyone's attention, our attention, reporters alike, to rubio's policy extremes. using the internet to directly confront other republicans on policy showing up on jeb bush's twitter page to talk about education and student loans and then today she went after wisconsin governor scott walker for appearing to be delighted to slash investment in colleges in wisconsin. clinton has changed her game the past couple of days in a way that is more combative, some would argue even personal maybe for good reason. the latest poll shows clinton behind in matchups against republicans, carson, walker, huckabee and rubio, all a point ahead of her. a new poll in new hampshire shows similar findings in these hypothetical head-to-heads.

will her new aggressive tactics calling out republicans by name on policies and records one right after the other, does that boost enthusiasm around her campaign? does it improve her standing in the states she feels she may be neck and neck with multiple republican potential nominees? joining us now is msnbc senior editor who covered clinton's entire 2008 campaign. this seems to be a change in the narrative, in the focus coming not from her aides, coming from the candidate. why is that? >> well, a couple reasons. all the action is on the republican side right now. her campaign is not generating the kind of interest, the kind of enthusiasm, even though bernie sanders is getting the big crowds. he's not getting the coverage the republican side is. everything is going on in the republican side so hillary clinton has to step into that race if she's going to get noticed. it helps her avoid having to get into it with bernie sanders who she does not want to engage. it allows her to focus, as she would, as a general election candidate and she's figuring out

who that person is. you can read the tea leaves who she thinks that might be. >> it was often said that early on in the 2008 cycle the clinton campaign did not see barack obama coming. >> right. >> i think it's fair to say they in the 2012 cycle along with everyone else didn't exactly see donald trump coming. what is the impact to have this sideshow? >> well, again, she has to get into it. she's in this funny position because she went to his wedding. he reminded everyone and she had to take a question about that. if she thinks he's so outrageous, why is she going to his wedding? it's a total sideshow. that's why she brought the conversation back at the press avail that you played about rubio and wants to focus on him. the campaign believes, hillary clinton believes if there's going to be a nominee between rubio and trump, it's going to be rubio. someone who actually has a chance of winning the nomination and not the circus act of donald

trump. >> women's rights and health here, in a quieter debate what marco rubio said basically abortion should be banned in all cases would have been a big deal or quote/unquote gaffe and it's not getting attention because of trump. is that correct? >> she also saw that rubio's performance was considered to be strong, he was praised for looking great at that debate and to the extent anybody could stand out next to donald trump, he did a good job. she wants to squash that bug before it grows because rubio on paper and in many ways in terms of performance could be a strong candidate. he's hispanic, he's from florida. she needs to keep him down. she's trying to keep jeb bush down, as we know, engaging today over foreign policy. yesterday they were engaging around higher education, paying for bringing down the price of tuition. she does not think the nominee

will be donald trump. >> and that donald trump makes the others look to have more sane temperaments by comparison. beth fouhy, thank you for joining us. ahead, jeb bush is in california tonight giving an address about the war in the middle east. is this the best topic for a man trying to distinguish himself from his father and brother? the details just ahead. what do a nascar® driver... a comedian... and a professional golfer have in common? we talked to our doctors about treatment with xarelto®. xarelto® is proven to treat and help reduce the risk of dvt and pe blood clots. xarelto® has also been proven to reduce the risk of stroke in people with afib, not caused by a heart valve problem. for people with afib currently well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® and warfarin compare in reducing the risk of stroke. i tried warfarin before, but the blood testing routine and dietary restrictions had me off my game. not this time. not with xarelto®. i'll have another arnold palmer. make mine a kevin nealon.

really, brian? hey, safety first. like all blood thinners, don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of a blood clot or stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you have had spinal anesthesia while on xarelto®, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. xarelto® has been prescribed more than 11 million times in the u.s. and that number's growing. like your guys' scores. with xarelto® there is no regular blood monitoring, and no known dietary restrictions. treatment with xarelto® was the right move for us. ask your doctor about xarelto®.

when you think of dr. martin luther king jr. what comes to mind? leader of the civil rights movement? preacher, activist? one of the most gifted public speakers this country has ever seen and yet check this out. here is his official transcript from pennsylvania where dr. king studied when he was in his 20s. lock closely at the transcript. martin luther king jr. got a "c" in public speaking his first year at the seminary. his professor considered him average. a "c" in public speaking for one of the greatest public speakers of all time and there was remarkable news just today about martin luther king jr., the public speaker, specifically about his most famous address ever delivered. it's an amazing discovery unveiled today. that is coming up at the end of our show.

we're looking right now at some live pictures from the ronald reagan library in simi valley, california. there you see jeb bush talking about something that is a little walk ard for him, iraq. governor bush has struggled with this topic for months.

in may his inability to answer basic questions about his brother's decision to invade. he gave four different answers in four days. he literally had years to prepare. everyone knew the questions were coming and that set off alarm bells. it was perhaps the first big sign that maybe jeb bush was not quite ready for prime time. governor bush's debate performance last week did not much alleviate those concerns. asked what he would say to the families of service members killed in the iraq war he made a shaky pivot to attacking the obama administration. >> knowing what we know now with faulty intelligence and not having security be the first priority when we invaded, it was a mistake. i wouldn't have gone in. here is the lesson we should take which relates to this whole subject, barack obama became president and he abandoned iraq, he left. and when he left, al qaeda was done for. isis was created because of the void that we left.

and that void exists as a caliphate the side of indiana. to honor the people that died being we need to stop the iran agreement for sure because the iranian mullahs have their blood on their hands and we need to take out isis with every tool at our disposal. >> that's jeb bush at last week's debate taking a question about his brother's war and giving a winding answer about the obama administration. in a speech tonight he went even further taking that attack to hillary clinton. here is what he said minutes ago. >> and where was the secretary of state? where was secretary of state clinton in all of this? like the president himself, she had opposed the surge then joined and claiming credit for its success. then stood by as that hard won victory by american and allied forces was thrown away. in all of her record-setting travels, she stopped by iraq exactly once. who can seriously argue that america and our friends are safer today than if 2009 when

the president and secretary clinton, the storied team of rivals, took office, so eager to be the history makers, they failed to be the peacemakers. it was a -- >> that is from just moments ago tonight. it's a pretty bold move on bush's part not only trying to shift the burden on to president obama's shoulders, who famously opposed the war, but also on to secretary of state clinton's and making it the centerpiece of the first major attack on clinton. and the clinton campaign appears to be itching for this fight. a top clinton aide argued in a phone call with reporters it was the bush administration that sent too few troops to iraq. they argue it was the bush administration that unleashed al qaeda there and the bush administration that set the withdrawal date for american troops. president obama and hillary clinton both argue isis is a direct outgrowth of al qaeda in iraq which grew out of the u.s. invasion.

republican voters don't have to take the obama/clinton line on this. they can take it from the man eclipsing bush and this gop primary and isn't going away, like it or not. donald trump has been so many things in this campaign. it turns out one of them in his estimation is iraq war critics. he may not have gotten around to opposing the war until over a year after it started in public but he brought that up over and over. he's taken that opposition into this primary bragging about it in a debate and posed an article from 2004 saying, quote, does anybody really believe iraq is going to be a wonderful democracy? come on, two minutes after we leave there's going to be a revolution and the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over. that was 2004. jeb bush making the argument the iraq clock has to only start in 2009 and president obama mismanaged everything from there on out.

not only are they challenging that narrative in the presidential campaign saying the clock started long before, now the punitive front-runner in the gop primary is saying something similar. jeb bush has been struggling with the legacy of his brother's war for months. it doesn't look like that struggle is going to get any easier.

we are officially snack dab in the middle of a presidential election season. everyone knows that. there's actually one issue, a sleeper issue that has bipartisan support where something could actually happen and there's news on that tonight next. look at that beautiful hotl on tripadvisor. wait. why leave the site? don't you know the tripadvisor you've always trusted for reviews, book! now checks over 200 websites to find the best price? book...book...book!

over 200 sites checked to find the best price. so don't just visit tripadvisor... book at tripadvisor.

before that huge crowd of 27,000 people in l.a. last night, bernie sanders departed from typical political talk about american exceptionalism to an area where america is lagging behind other countries. >> there is no president who will push harder for fundamental changes in our criminal justice system. we do not want to be the country on earth that has more people in jail than any other country.

>> modern presidential politics is not a field that is usually defined by appeals for a measured approach to crime. since richard nixon's law and order campaign in 1968 candidates have jockeyed over who could be tougher on crime. but that is changing. there are more calls to rethink a broken criminal justice system and not just in position papers or quiet discussions. candidates are pushing the issue, bringing it up themselves and drawing huge applause. and it's not just antiestablishment candidates like some see bernie sanders, and it's not just liberals. these calls are coming from both parties to challenge the u.s.'s harsh policies of mass incarceration. there are two major criticisms often offered against the way our justice system works here. one, that it targets minorities unfairly and, two, that an aggressive war on drugs has caused a quadrupling of our prison population over a generation. >> a primary driver of this mass incarceration phenomenon is our

drug laws, our mandatory minimum sentencing. the statistics on who gets incarcerated shows that by a wide margin it disproportionately impacts those of color. >> it incarcerated african-americans and latinos. something has to change. the war on drugs has gone awry. >> of the more than 2 million americans incarcerated today, a significant percentage are low level offenders, people held for violating parole or minor drug crimes. there is something wrong when a third of all black men face the prospect of prison. >> that is certainly understandable. the picture is actually a bit more complicated. it is a fact criminal law is frequently applied with racially disparate results, subject to stricter policing, stop and frisk, and harsher penalties for the same offenses committed by other americans.

to a degree the war on drugs is certainly also a driver of this problem. our prison population hasek mroeded since president nixon first declared war on drugs in the '70s but this problem, this mass incarceration is not just from drugs. as some states legalize marijuana and some republicans in congress talk about rolling back those mandatory minimums, there are reformers noting that even changing those laws wouldn't remove the u.s. from its position as the highest incarceration rate nation of any democracy in the world. a recent article in "the new york times" says even without its many inmates convicted of drug charges, the u.s. still leads the world in imprisoning people. a true challenge means track willing problems that run deeper than the drug war itself. >> we need to recognize that young people make mistakes. and we should not live in a world of les miserables where a

young man finds his entire future taken away by excessive mandatory minimums. >> we want to help people work and vote, we have to fix the over criminalization problem. >> we have the challenge of over criminalization, of over incarceration, and over sentencing. >> the so-called tough on crime politics have raised a generation of legislators who wanted to outdo each other in adding defining crimes and punishment ballooning activities now newly considered criminal and we've seen a generation of prosecutors facing pressure to always seek the maximum penalty. this may sound like a broad diagnosis. how do you break out the problem to challenge it and change it. the urban institute, a think tank devoted to civil rights, has a way to show how different policies can alter the mass incarceration. it would reduce the prison population 7%.

that's drugs. the topic that everyone has focused on. look at this. if we cut in half the sentences for those convicted of property crimes, look at what happens. that would remove and reduce the inmate population by 10%. you reduce the number of people behind bars for all nonviolent offenses america could cut the prison population by 23%. that's a lot of change. there's been a lot of movement here. is there political will to make any of this happen? joining us now, a very special guest brian a stevenson, founder and executive director of equal justice, nyu professor at the school of law and he went viral with 2 million views. an honor to have you here tonight. >> thank you. great to be with you. >> is there a political will on this issue now? >> i hope so. we are experiencing a political moment unlike anything we have seen in the last 40 years. i think it can't be stressed

enough, that for four decades our political discourse has been corruptioned by the politics of fear and anger. everyone is competing who over can be toughest on crime. it is like a litmus test that you had to pass before you could talk about getting elected. it created an environment that is difficult to get reform. i think we are in a political moment. think we have to denine the object ives more precisely than the candidates have done. >> we showed republicans using terms not as familiar to many people. what does it mean when with we see the tea party folks that say there is over criminalization and too much conduct can be prosecuted? >> i think many of them are motivated by the same kind of big government approach that shaped policy making in other areas. i think money is a big part of this. we spent $6 billion on jails and prisons in 1980. last year we spent $8 billion.

the truth is that most of the stuff is happening at the state level. the federal government only produce 10% of the people who are in jails and prisons. at the state level, that dramatic increase in spending on jails and prisons has compromised the ability of states to make their budgets balanced, to do the public service work and support work that electorates want. we can't sustain this level of spending. i think both political parties recognize there has to be a shift in the dollars sent to jails and prisons. now the question is how are we going to shift it? ending the war on drugs is the beginning. as you point out it is not sufficient. we need to radically redefine what are appropriate punishments for a broad range of crimes. >> what should be the purpose of prison for the less serious crimes? people are not a threat to public safety i don't think we should think of jail or prison.

we don't need to spend the kind of money that incarceration costs to manage that population. if we think of drug dependency as a health issue rather than a crime issue, for less money, not only can we keep them out of jails and prisons but help them recover. i represented people for serving life without parole for writing a bad check, stealing a bike, a slice of pizza. those are functions of mandatory sentencing laws. all of that i think we can eliminate. we have to deal with other problems. we have 50% of the people in jails and prisons that suffer from mental illness. 20% are acutely mentally ill. with we need to come up for solutions of helping them that do not involve jails and prisons. children, we began to demonize children, calling them super predators in the '80s and sent thousands to prison that created a lifetime of criminality for them. that's something else we can do. if we look at what are

reasonable responses we can create a lot of progress on this issue. >> bryan stevenson, director of the equal justice initiative and nyu school of law, thank you for your time tonight. the best new thing in the world is up next. stay with us.

we have a best new thing in the world tonight. it's a great one. we start in washington, d.c. 52 years ago. >> i have a dream. [ applause ] my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. i have a dream today. >> mlk's "i have a dream" speech on washington.

one of the well-known speeches in history but there are aspects of it people are unaware of. the most famous part where he tells the crowd about his dream was not in the original draft. we know this thanks to a former basketball player and coach who volunteered as security in that march, asked for a copy just after dr. king finished. he had been offered millions for the speech over history but refuses to sell. because of the volunteer's quick thinking we know the "i have a dream" portion, we know that is dr. king going off script. one shouted tell them about the dream. one of the most important addresses in our history they were ad libbed. in keeping with the them v theme of learning new things about this speech, dr. king had been delivering versions of the i have a dream address to

supporters around the nation, versions that can be traced back to a high school gym in rocky mountain, north carolina, in 1 r november 1962. until now, all we had were reports from the rocky mountain report to corroborate that. that changed. audio was released to the world. >> i have a dream tonight. it is a dream rooted deeply in the american dream. i have a dream that one day, down in sasser county, georgia, where they burned down churches, little black girls and boys will be able to join hands with little white boy and girls and walk the streets as brothers and sisters.

i have a dream. >> a new recording of an important speech by martin luther king jr. that is easily far the best new thing in the world today. that's our show. easily by far new thing in the world today. up next, "first look." it's wednesday, august 12th. right now on "first look," riveting new surveillance video from ferguson, missouri. police say it shows why they shot a man. trump's politics play ago cross america. >> according to the poll, donald trump is still the front runner the republican primary race. very impressive because it's the only race he hasn't offended yet. the food and drug administration is forced to speak out after a

>> i don't think if people -- if