globalists do? ever wondered? do you also know that hillary clinton uses a wheelchair? her personal vehicle had to be outfitted with a wheelchair lift because she is not a person who can actually walk. she secretly uses a wheelchair. all the times you think you've seen her walking, she hasn't been walking. did you know that? did you know hillary clinton has parkinson's disease? these things are true. i know they are true because i read them in the headlines. here, i will prove it to you. will artificial intelligence enslave humanity before the globalists do? ai, artificial intelligence, is taking over. that was a special report. here was the shock headline on hillary clinton's wheelchair vehicle. just one column over from that, there was also this seemingly competing news. hillary clinton -- does hillary clinton have parkinson's disease.

the subhead, we can all see she has very serious health problems. at this same news source, for all those stories, you can find important, maybe life-saving health information, about a powerful new micronutrient that fights the zika virus. you'll be happy the know once you've learned about this micronutrient, this website will sell you the micronutrient, curing your zika. they'll sell you that alongside their super male vitality potion. i have to say, a little steep. $59.95 plus shipping and handling. for the increase to your male vitality. if that price tag is too high for your below the belt problems, fellas, spend half that much to get the survival shield x2, apparently, according to the description, leading the way into the next generation of super, high quality iodine. the big bargain at this news site as to be this one. their deep cleanse elixir.

i don't totally understand the description here. it either has powerful nano zealites or it'll get rid of them. but they'll never be the same. all of this incredible news about the artificial intelligence that is enslaving humanity before the globalists do and the secret micronutrients that cure zika and the male vitality potions and the -- all of this stuff is, of course, available through infowars.com. infowars is the conspiracy theory website, sort of megawebsite, where the dimmer bulbs among us have gone to get themselves brightened up without benefit of a surge protector. >> the government lies out of hand. you're saying, why do you believe in the moon lander? i have sources inside nasa.

they put on some fake stuff for you. there was a lie. see, it's not just did we go or didn't we go. you were shown the tinkertoy stuff because you're not supposed to see what they have. you're not supposed to know the thousands of astronauts that have died. i should do a show on that. >> we're already in a tyranny. then operation jade helm gets announced. it was put on the army website last week. we reported on it first. >> it'll have some real admissions. mixed in to confuse the idiot public. like the 80% sugar pills. sandy hook is a synthetic, completely fake, with actors, in my view, manufacturered. i thought they killed real kids. i couldn't believe it. shows how bold they are. >> you saw them. they staged aurora, sandy hook. the evidence is overwhelming. >> there are so many gay people

because the government documents said they were going to encourage sexually with chemicals to people don't have children. i drink out of the estrogen -- for those watching, here is the inside of the juice box. if they zoom in more, see the thin plastic? it's got it. i'm letting my children drink this. after you're done drinking the juices, i mean, you're ready to go out and have a baby. you're ready to put makeup on, wear a short skirt. that is space cult, suicide cult, extermnism craziness. the transhumanist cult wants to confuse the general species, ahead of removing us. the decision has been made. cheer up. the post-human era is dawning. there will be an asexual humanoid, even if they keep us around. >> got all that? i actually think, having reflected upon this, the last

part, i think when he says that the eugenics, transgenderist cult, rendering us down, i think he means we're going to be melted and turned into candles. they'll use our fat to use soap. i think rendering, i think he's literal on that. that is the -- the pilot, the captain of america's conspiracy theory mothership. alex jones. alex jones has been around forever. i'm assuming he will be around forever. he says hillary clinton is going to kill him. he has publicly asked hillary clinton not to kill him. who knows. honestly, he'll be around a while. it is a lucrative gig he has going on. he got nationally famous, kind of came off the fringe and became bigger fringe when he proclaimed that 9/11 was not carried out by al qaeda. 9/11 was committed by the u.s.

government against our own country. he took the notoriety he earned from that 9/11 trutherism and has been running with it and expanding on the idea. very successfully the last 15 years. you sometimes have people ask, especially people in other countries, well, look at the american electorate. ask in social and serious terms, why is it an advanced and fairly well-educated country like ours is nevertheless getting to be as susceptible to political conspiracy theories as uneducated countries in far away lands? why is it we get more and more susceptible conspiracy theories as time goes on? we don't seem like the kind of country where they would have as much traction as they do now in our contemporary era in politics. part of the season, why we're so susceptible to conspiracy theories, is guys like alex

jones make a ton of money circulating them as wide as they can. they use talk radio, the internet, live stream their fake tv shows. they make a very good living doing it. and they're going to be around because of it for a long time. usually, this kind of stuff has no major effect on the united states of america. other than lowering our median iq a couple points and making us seem slightly more embarrassing on an international stage. every additional year, they have the alien people lizard on everything, we get dumber. it's the major effect it has on the united states of america. this year is different. this year, that little corner, that little niesh, this year, they're out of their corner. this year, they're presidential politics. after nbc and msnbc and iraq and afghanistan veterans of america hosted the commander in chief forum last night with hillary clinton and donald trump, after that last night, this morning, donald trump jr. woke up and tweeted this direct link to the alex jones intowars expose of what really happened on board the intrepid last night at the commander in chief forum.

got to hit the shift lock key because it's all in capital letters when you get there. what he's linked to is this infowars alex jones piece. was hillary wearing an ear piece during last night's presidential forum? this is an alex jones infowars conspiracy theory exclusive. they took a screen from last tight's commander in chief forum. with the light hitting hillary clinton's left ear in the right way, it appears a suspicious glare. i mean, if you wanted to take this accusation seriously, that she was wearing an ear piece, she was on stage for more than 20 minutes. you could take lots of angles, cameras angles, showing the same ear but without the glinted light, right? here are other images of hillary clinton's ear. the ear in question from the

same event last night. none show the secret ear piece that alex jones has exposed. but i mean, consider the source. consider the context. this ear piece story at alex jones infowars, it's running alongside other headlines up that says hillary clinton uses a wheelchair, has parkinson's disease. infowars announcing they have the video proof that hillary clinton is a mass murderer. you know, the secret ear piece thing, that's journalistically sound compared to the rest of the stuff chair putting out there. that could be a mainstream scandal. this year in 2016 with donald trump at the top of the ticket for the republican party, alex jones is no longer just broadcasting to your fillings and your molars. he is apparently with the upper echelons of the republican presidential campaign. it's reading and citing and circulating, even at this late

date of the campaign. it matters. it's not just the kook fringe, the conspiracy theory world, the part of the media machine. not even just whacky people who made their way into republican politics. it is the top of the republican ticket. it's after labor day and this is a presidential year. all day today, after donald trump jr. tweeted the infowars alex jones conspiracy theory, all day today, this was the headline about the commander in chief forum at the mega-conservative news site that drives more traffic online than anything else on the right. this was the headline all day today at the judge report. they led with this, as the most important thing in presidential politics right now. which on the one hand is hilarious, right? on the other hand, this is this great moment. this is like a snapshot, a microcosm of why this campaign is hard to follow. sort of why it's hard to get a

sense of what the narrative is of the campaign. why it can be maddening to follow what's going on in the campaign. why it can be painfully ridiculous to follow what's going on in the campaign any given day. there are two sides in the campaign. we are in a presidential election contest. we have two major parties. these are the two candidates for those parties. it just so happens that one of them is stuck on the juice boxes make you gay channel, and the other one is nevertheless trying to conduct a campaign as if this is normal politics. i mean, these are not two campaigns that are doing the same thing. not two candidates making the same kind of case. these are not two political organizations that are even speaking the same language. i mean, one side is literally tweeting infowars, which believes that invisible alien lizard people are out there. skeptics don't believe they're moving among us, secretly controlling american policy. they dress up as alien lizard people to show you the effect that the lizards are having on the united states government.

so you can recognize their work when they surface among us, even though most of us can't see them. some of us can see them. that's one side. in what is supposed to be a contest between two equally feasible political choices, to be the leader of the free world, commander in chief and president of the united states. and what we're going to talk about tonight is if you are the other side, what do you do with that? you y be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. try zyrtec®. muddle no more®. hair is delightfully fragrancedl with notes of moroccan rose

and the freshness of springtime unforgettable, whever you go the scents you can't forget... from herbal essences, blooming now! wiback like it could used to? neutrogena hydro boost water gel. with hyaluronic acid it plumps skin cells with intense hydration and locks it in. for supple, hydred skin. hydro boost.

meanwhile, bizarrely, once again, he phrased russia's strong man, vladimir putin. even taking the astonishing step of suggesting that he prefers the russian president to our

american president. now, that is not just unpatriotic and insulting to the people of our country, as well as to our commander in chief, it is scary. because it suggests he will let putin do whatever putin wants to do. and then make excuses for him. i was just thinking about all of the presidents that would just be looking at one another in total astonishment. what would ronald reagan say about a republican nominee who attacks america's generals and heaps praise on russia's president? >> hillary clinton today at a press conference with reporters. invoking donald reagan to try to make the case that it is just legitimately nutty to have an american presidential candidate saying he prefers the russian

president to the american president. simultaneously, as hillary clinton was invoking donald reagan's name to make the case, donald trump's running mate was in california, literally calling donald trump the second coming of ronald reagan. >> what you had in ronald reagan, god rest his soul, and what you have in donald trump are two men who fundamentally were raised to believe in the american dream. 1980, 2016. two different men, two different times. but so much seems familiar, does it not? >> mike pence was trying to sell donald trump as the second coming of ronald reagan today. republican house speaker paul ryan was back in washington actually having a hard time explaining donald trump's warm to the point of romantic feelings about the russian president. >> at the candidate forum last

night, donald trump had high praise for putin. i'm just curious sort of what you think about that, if you're concerned at all about -- >> i read the little snippet. vladimir putin is an aggressor that doesn't share our interests. he's violating neighboring countries. it appears that he is conducting in state-sponsored cyber attacks on what appears to be our political system. that is not acting in our interests. that is an adversarial stance and he's acting like an adversary. >> are you concerned though of donall trump praising vladimir putin? >> i made my points about putin clear. i'll leave it at that. >> the chairman of the republican party, reince priebus, got questions on this matter today. he tried to clean up further in an interview with the

"associated press." they quote him as saying donald trump, quote, was not endorsing putin at all. the chairman of the republican party is having to clarify whether or not the republican party's presidential nominee is endorsing the russian president. for the record, this is what donald trump said last night about the russian president that has everyone twisted up in knots. >> let me ask you about some of the things you've said about vladimir putin. you said, i'll tell you in terms of leadership, he's getting an a. our president is not doing so well. when referring to a comment that putin made about you, he called you a brilliant leader, you said it's always a great honor to be complimented by a man so highly respected within his country and beyond. >> well, he does have an 82% approval rating according to the different pollsters who, by the way, some are based right here. look -- >> he's also a guy who annexed crimea, invaded ukraine, supports assad in syria, supports iran, is trying to undermine our influence in key regions of the world. according to our intelligence

community, probably is the main suspect for the hacking of the dnc computers. >> nobody knows that for a fact. you want me to start naming some of the things that president obama does at the same time? >> do you want to be complimented by that ormer kgb officer. >> when he calls me brilliant, i'll take the compliment. if he says great things about me, i'll say great things about him. he's very much a leader. you can say, isn't that a terrible thing. he has a strong control over the country. >> donald trump at the commander in chief forum last night with matt lauer, restating his admiration for russian president vladimir putin. if he says great things about me, i'll say great things about him. when he calls me brilliant, i'll take the compliment, okay? here's the thing, you want to know the real crazy, lizard people, fake moon landing, juice boxes make you gay truth about this particular issue in our presidential politics?

vladimir putin never actually called donald trump brilliant. oh, no, this is going to unravel the whole thing. >> you made some comments about the american republican presumptive nominee, donald trump. you called him brilliant, outstanding, talented. these comments were reported around the world. i was wondering, what in him led you to that judgment? do you still hold that judgment? >> translator: you personally are very famous in our country. you are not only famous as a journalist in one of the biggest tv stations. but as an intellectual. why do you always change the meaning of what i said? because at the moment, you speak as a journalist, not as an

analyst. why are you juggling with what i said? i only said that he was a bright person. isn't he bright? he is. i did not say anything else about him. >> see? this is -- this shouldn't be important, but this year it is. this whole thing about trump praising putin because putin praised him. this whole thing that has turned the republican party into a pretzel because now their presidential nominee is saying he prefers the russian president to the president of the united states of america. this whole thing about putin praising trump and that led to this whole problem for republicanism, let alone the republican nominee, let alone the republican party, appears to have been a misunderstanding.

the word "brilliant" was initially reported when putin made his comments in russian about donald trump last december. the news sources who originally translated his remarks that way, they later corrected themselves, saying the russian word that putin used when talking about donald trump only means brilliant in one sense. it means brilliant in the sense of shiny. brilliant as in a bright light, not as in a bright person. nbc went to the chair of the russian department at dartmouth college and asked about the actual words putin used when he described trump in december. asked about the difference between our concept of the word "brilliant," which can mean both shiny or genius. asked about that difference between our concept of the word brilliant and the russian word that putin actually used. had putin meant to call donald trump brilliant, as in a genius, as in a smart person, which is what donald trump thinks putin said about him, turns out if that's what putin meant, he

would have used this word. i am not going to pronounce because i do not speak russian. apologies to my ancestors. he did not use that word, which would mean brilliant in the sense of being a genius, being a smart cookie. instead, putin, when talking about donald trump, used this word. which i will also not pronounce. russians use this word to mean brilliant in the sense of bright light or bright colors. and so the initial translations of putin last december calling donald trump brilliant were all corrected after the fact. the "guardian" news issued a print correction at the time, changing their translation to say that putin did not cal trump brilliant, he called him colorful. orr translations were amended to show that putin actually called donald trump a word more like flamboyant. putin himself has clarified with fareed zakaria this past june, that he did not call trump brilliant, in that genius sense. he was not complimenting him in that way.

he doesn't think he is a genius. he thinks he's flamboyant and colorful. it's not nearly as nice a thing to say. you know what? it shouldn't matter. on the one hand, who cares? on the other hand, we now have to. this is apparently an electton where the republican presidential campaign does its research at the number one online debunker of 9/11 and the oklahoma city bombing and the "challenger" disaster and the sandy hook shootings and the boston bombings and the aurora theater because they're government conspiracy theories. that's what they're circulating to the american public as the truth they ought to know about the country. their candidate is self-centered that a misspoked compliment from another foreign leader put stars in his eyes that the republican party's presidential nominee says he prefers the president of russia to the president of the united states. this stuff is crazy.

it should be irrelevant. but this is the highest level of our politics right now. and it's so easily manipulable. somebody should send a fake mark from kim jong-un to donald trump, complimenting hum on his suit or hair. wait five minutes and ask trump if he thinks the united states should give north korea a state dinner, seriously. it's not an anti aging face cream it's realizing beauty, doesn't stop at my chin. roc's formula adapts to delicate skin areas.

my fine lines here, visibly reduced in 4 weeks. chest, neck and face cream from roc. methods, not miracles. you y be muddling throughce allergies.oned witit.. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. try zyrtec®. muddle no more®. we've got lots of news

tonight. some presidential news. some not presidential news. including why a whole bunch of american public officials who tonight are rotting in jail because they were in prison for corruption, tonight, there's news about why those convicted bribe recipients and crooks had a tremendously awesome day today. it's a weird story. that's coming up. stay with us. you may be muddling through allergies. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. try zyrtec®. muddle no more®.

it's my decision to make beauty last.ix. roc retinol started visibly reducing my fine lines and wrinkles in one week. and the longer i use it the better it works. retinol correxion from roc. methods, not miracles.

so last month, on the eve of his first intelligence briefing as the republican party's presidential nominee, trump was asked if he trusted the

intelligence he was about to get at that briefing. he said he probably wouldn't trust it. >> do you trust intelligence? >> not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country. look what's happened over the last ten years, over the years. i mean, it's been catastrophic. in fact, i won't use some of the people that are sort of your standards. use them, use them. easy to use them. i won't use them because they've made bad decisions. >> that was august 16th. i won't use them. the following day, august 17th, trump received that secret intelligence briefing as a candidate. he brought two advisers with him. chris christie and retired governor michael flynn. donald trump later received a second intelligence briefing last friday. the briefings came up at last night's commander in chief forum. donald trump responded to that question by talking about those

briefings in a way that no candidate has really ever done before. >> what i did learn is that our leadership, barack obama, did not follow what our experts and our -- when they call it intelligence, it is there for a reason -- what our experts said to do. i was very, very surprised. in almost every intense, and i'm good with the body language, i could tell, they were not happy. our leaders did not follow what they were recommending. >> i could tell. i could tell they were not happy. i'm pretty good with the body language. the briefers from the national intelligence office were conveying to donald trump with their body language their policy disapproval of president obama. really? today, the office of the director of national intelligence, which conducts the briefings, would not comment on donald trump's remarkable remarks about what happened there. apparently, somebody has something to say about those briefings and what happened there. nbc news had a remarkable report on this today. look at this.

quote, four sources with knowledge of the briefing, including two intelligence officials who spoke to people in the room, said general flynn repeatedly interrupted the briefers until governor chris christie intervened. quote, two sources said christie verbally restrained flynn. one saying christie told flynn to shut up and calm down. another said he touched flynn's arm for him to calm down and let the officials continue. really? how do we know this? how could we know? who -- what? both general flynn and governor christie are denying any of this occurred. governor christie says it's untrue. it is a complete work of fiction. general flynn said the report of conduct was, quote, total bs. he said they're lying. this is a smear, lying bologna. he further said this crowd has nothing else to go after so they're trying to go after

credibility of people. i'm okay with that because i know what i was a part of and what i witnessed. asked what he meant by this crowd, general flynn replied, quote, the clinton machine. the clinton machine. how did intelligence briefings turn into this this year? intelligence briefings for the candidate, usually the least controversial thing in the whole campaign. the one thing we can count on to be a non-partisan thing taken seriously and treated seriously. how did this happen? joining us now is david, a former intelligence officer and briefer under former presidents george w. bush and bill clinton. he wrote the book on presidential intelligence briefings. he's been our secret decoder ring for these stories this year. david, nice to see you again. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me back.

>> so i don't have any inside information as a person who works at msnbc as to the sourcing of this nbc story, about what happened inside the briefing. have you ever heard of briefers leaking information from inside those briefings about what happened? especially contemporaneously, like in the same news cycle. >> certainly not ton contemporaneously. the presidents will talk about the briefings afterwards. there is a sanctity of the briefings. there is no policy recommendation. no talking after the briefing about what was discuss and had how it was discussed. that's unusual. >> the body language assertion stuck out for me. because i don't know what it means to be an intelligence officer giving a briefing like this, and also because it seems like mr. trump was reading a lot into what he described as the body language of the briefers. this idea that he was able to discern from the -- from

trying to give some subtle body language to communicate that this isn't really what i'm saying, but it's not what i'm not saying, if you know what i'm saying, i don't understand how one would do that. certainly, i don't understand why one would do that. >> david, one last logistical question. one of the things we've talked about the last couple times you've been here is the number of briefings. trump has had a follow-up briefing. because he's had a second, do you expect hillary clinton will also have a send one now? >> i suspect she will. if nothing else politically, it gives her the chance to preempt a trump comment that, well, i'm getting more briefings than she is. she doesn't care about this. it might be a good strategy for her to keep the intel briefings going as long as possible. we keep talking about donald trump and the way he's handling these briefings and what he's saying about them. that's rich fodder in this election campaign. >> david, former election -- intelligence officer and briefer and author of "the president's

book of secrets." pleasure to have you as always. thank you very much. >> thank you. much more ahead. lots of news. presidential news and not presidential news. stay with us. it's not a quick fix. it's my decision to make beauty last. roc retinol started visibly reducing my fine lines and wrinkles in one week. and the longer i use it the better it works. retinol correxion from roc. methods, not miracles. (dramatic music) (group) surprise! oh my goodness!

happy birthday! oh, you. (laughing) oh! oh! well, they say 70 is the new 60. (laughing) were you really surprised? oh, this was a wonderful surprise. you know, at our age, not all surprises can be this good. you're not kidding. (female #1) remember peggy's surprise last month when frank died? so sudden; all the funeral expenses. they were not prepared. well, i'm not going to burden my family with my final expenses. -huh? -i called about the colonial penn prram this morning. i'm alex trebek. if you're age 50 to 85, call about the colonial penn program now. your acceptance is guaranteed. you'll get free information about this whole life insurance plan that might surprise you in a good way, because it's easy to get and easy on your budget. coverage options for this plan

start at $9.95 a month for women and men age 50 to 85. that's about 35 cents a day. and your acceptance is guaranteed. you can't be turned down for any medical reason. no health questions, no medical exam. and here's the best surprise of all: once you're covered, your rate will never increase. it's locked in for life, guaranteed. so, what are you waiting for? you're right, i'm not getting any younger. i'm calling about the colonial penn program today. after this last piece of cake. (laughing) call now for your free information and free gift. (soft music) ♪ (colonial penn jingle) wiback le itin could used to? neutrogena hydro boost water gel. with hyaluronic acid

it plumps skin cells with intense hydration and locks it in. for supple, hydrated skin. hydro boost. from neutrogena if you're just listening and you're not looking at your tv, like if you're washing the dishes or listening on the bus and you're zoning out and just listening, you have to look at this. you have to look. visual. ready? may i present the u.s.s. zumwalt. 610 feet of naval badassery, seen cruising out of the bath iron works in maine. what a strange and amazing looking ship. it is the most sophisticated destroyer ever built for the u.s. navy. also most expensive, $4.4 billion for that ship. yesterday, donald trump proposed a huge, huge military buildup for the united states of america, beyond even the most 1980s dreams of the ronald reagan era.

as for how we would pay for this massive, massive, massive buildup, including more than 70 new ships for the navy, more than 80 new planes for the air force, 13 new battalions for the marine corps, 50,000 new soldiers to the army. how we'd pay for it? he just will. he just will. zumwalts for everyone. we are in this moment where important and serious stuff in american policy is kind of evaporating like bubbles from soda into the election fight. one of these has been introduced into the presidential fight. it's likely to stick. richard engel is here to talk about this next. stay with us. xwxexe

last night for the first time ever, we got to see both candidates for president participate in a forum devoted to veterans issues, foreign policy and war and peace. yes, it was short and definitely

didn't get to all the things it could have gotten to. there was a lot of dancing around stuff that should have been straightened out. yes, yes, yes. we did get something new on a key foreign policy issue that we'd never really got before. and that's great. because campaigns are supposed to be about debate. and the new thing that got introduced into what ought to be our foreign policy debate is something that is an open and interesting question that people of good faith on both sides can reasonably disagree on. it's a real question as to whether or not this is the right way to do it. we've now got a concrete proposal. this is what we ought to do. >> it is in our national security interest to defeat isis, and i intend to make that happen. >> thank you very much for your question. >> we're going after baghdadi, the leader. it will help us focus our attention, just like going after bin laden helped us focus our attention in the fight against

al qaeda. >> interesting. even as matt lauer was trying to wrap her and move to the next question, secretary clinton pushing aside the interruption and bringing us this last point. she intends to go after isis but you know what? she intends to go after the named head of isis. she names him. she says we need to go after al baghdadi, the same way we went after bin laden. she volunteered the information, went out of her way to do it and circled back to it in her press conference. >> we should hunt down the leader of isis. abubakar al baghdadi. as with that operation, getting al baghdadi will require a focused effort driven at the highest levels. but i believe it will send a resounding message that nobody directs or inspires attacks against the united states and gets away with it.

>> secretary clinton talks a lot about isis. but she is sticking a flag in this tactical, planned pursuit. she's sticking a flag and going after this leader, right? reminding everybody of what she said last night, circling back to it and saying it's important we not only go after isis as an organization but personally go after the named head of that organization. okay. let's talk about it. is that a good idea? substantively, is that a good idea? in terms of how we approach and make our priorities in counter terrorism and the fight against isis. joining us live from istanbul, turkey, is richard engel. thank you for staying us into the wee hours. i know you did it last night, too, to watch this forum. let me just start off by asking you about hillary clinton's pronouncement, whether this is a

big deal. >> no, i don't think it is a big deal. there is already a campaign to hunt down baghdadi. i know people involved in the campaign very much want to find and kill or capture baghdadi. i think it's a way for hillary clinton to remind the voters that she was involved in the hunt for bin laden and that al qaeda was decimated once bin laden was killed. i'm not totally convinced that al qaeda was totally decimated. i think it is a narrative the intelligence community has put out. i'm not at all sure that it's accurate. when you see syria right now, i think we're in a situation where isis could very well be eliminated and what we'll be left with is a very strong al qaeda base in syria. so i think she's trying to remind people of that and put the flag down. yes, i'm going to kill baghdadi, just the way i was involved in the death for bin laden. the fact remains, there are more numerically and more dangerous terrorists now in the world on the loose than there were a few years ago.

than there were five or six years ago. whether the death of bin laden or whether the death of baghdadi, there are still more and more dangerous terrorists out there now than there were before. >> that's why this seems like a substantively interesting point for her to raise and stick the flag in. there is this counterterrorism debate. as to whether or not going after the named guy, going after, you know, the head of the snake, right, picking recognizable in the west targets. people like bin laden, people like baghdadi, and focusing resources on that makes sense, in terms of a counterterrorism strategy. in decimating the organizations.

>> well, there's both. there is the idea that, sure, you shouldn't focus on the boogie man and believe that if you eliminate the leader that the problem will go away, the problem of terrorism and anger towards the united states didn't go away with the death of bin laden. but leaders do matter. some individuals are more skilled than others. if you look at the history of isis when it use to be al qaeda in iraq. when u.s. troops killed zakaria, it did set the organization back. then it set the organization back. there was another leader, a terrible leader. there are many in the counter terrorism world that wish he had been left in place because he was so efficient as a leader, by killing him, the replacement to zakaria, we ushered in a new generation of more effective leaders.

so, yes, not all terrorists leaders are created equal and killing the most charismatic ones set the organization. it's not a silver bullet. i think what she's trying to do is remind people she was involved in that very important decision and very mission that killed bin laden. but, the fact remains, there are still isis now when there was not isis before. >> and the symbolic value here is not, i mean, symbolism is important, strategically and politically. i think there are lots of different ways to argue this. i feel there was this substantive nugget that came out of last night. richard, thank you. it's great to see you my friend. >> good to talk to you. i do -- you know what, with -- in terms of national security issues and veterans' issues and getting those things spot let with this forum.

i think it's worked. i think the campaign turned towards those issues in anticipation of last night's event. the question is whether after last night's events they end up finding the substantive differences between themselves of the issues they were asked about and whether or not they get better of tweezing out the deferences and the issue whether we should be targeting benghadi personally. i would like that. try that. all right. more ahead, stay with us. begadi.

two years ago, september 2014 virginia governor was convicted on multiple melanie corruption counts. they found the personally engraved rolex and use of awesome white ferrari and more than $100,000 in gifts, cash and loans that were all accepted, court found those were a quid pro quo, after receiving those things he used the power of his office as governor to tried to help out the businessman who had given him the loot. he was convicted on 11 counts. he always maintained his innocence. he appealed his conviction and in june the supreme court threw his conviction out. the court called the governor's actions distasteful, but in a unanimous decision, they said it had not been proven that those actions counted as official corruption. since that ruling, it has been up to federal prosecutors to decide what to do next, they'll decide whether they'll try the case again or let it go. a week ago the washington post reported that they were going to

try it again, that the prosecutors who brought the charges against governor mcdonnell were raring to go. they wanted to charge him again and get, essentially, a second conviction under the terms set out by the supreme court. but that didn't happen. today the justice department announced that, no, governor mcdonnell will not be retried the charges against him will drop. with that, we lose any clear sense of what does constitute bribery of a public official any more. if what the governor took from this guy and did for this guy in return isn't corruption, then how would anyone prove bribery by any public official from here on out? so, watch the space, but particularly watch to see how

many currently imprisoned public officials use this bob mcdonnell case now to get their own convictions overturned. i'm telling you it was a happy today in a lot of minimum prison security blocks. ur moderate to e plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur. do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara®

or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®.

we've got some late breaking news tonight that's just come to us, there are indications tonight that north korea has conducted an under ground nuclear test. south korean officials say they detected a tremor emanating from north korea they described it as not being caused by an earthquake. corroborating that, the u.s. geological survey said it registered a 5.3 magnitude seismic event, indications are this is not a match ral earthquake, this is a nuclear test. if confirmed, it will be the fifth nuclear test in total, it will set off a whole new round of international incriminations and worries. if this is a new one, this is

going to be very big news in the next few days. libertarian presidential candidate gary johnson was on the msnbc, and he had a little trouble answering a basic question about syria. >> what would you do if you were elected about aleppo? >> about? >> aleppo. >> and what is aleppo? >> okay. >> no. >> aleppo is in syria. it's the -- it's the epicenter of the refugee crisis -- >> okay, got it. got it. >> got it, got it, got it. aleppo. i thought you said a leopard. i was like, what do i do about a leopard? probably run away from ii. yeah. let's talk about this syrian town of alpo, obviously that's where they make the dog food.