broken of the low show and get the real headlines with none of them or see can we live out of washington d.c. now tonight we're going to take a look back at last night's g.o.p. debate which centered around foreign policy once again there were a lot of statements to make you shutter at a few that seemed a little too realistic to be true so we're going to get into the truths and the myths of what was said with jack rice throughout the lifespan of the occupy wall movement there is one theme that is definitely held steady the excessive use of force and violence by police departments across the country so we're going to speak

to the former police chief of seattle to get to the bottom of why and see what can be changed and then in an audit moment last night g.o.p. candidate you cambridge came out sounding more reasonable than all the other candidates on stage when it came to immigration we're going to see if his idea of legal status but no guaranteed pathway to citizenship could actually work for you have all that and more fit and clear just happy hour but first let's take a look at the mainstream media has decided to miss. all right so it's now been more than two months since the occupy wall street movement first began in the park on september seventeenth and throughout the time we've seen large marches we've seen clashes with police on sundays tens of thousands of people being on the streets on either side of the battle so a new study has compiled some figures to see just how much the extra police presence and so forth has been costing the city and the mainstream media was sure to jump all over it and immediately bring in the occupy movement itself has

a lot of money in the bank. a new report shows that the occupy movement has cost taxpayers thirteen million dollars tab for the cities where they took place has reached thirteen million dollars that according to a survey done by the associated press movement claims the rich don't pay their fair share well it's been going on for more than two months now but yes he's paying the bill you are the movement is actually sitting on a lot of cash it's been sort of touted as the loose non-corporate movement it seems that we've got a lot of donations there off the organize they have live stream camera operators they publish their own newspapers who's running the show and in charge of all that money. the new york group i think of a lot of money if you want to consider you know four hundred thousand dollars or whatever it is a lot of money these days they have parcel that out to some groups around the country but there's no real national organization. now what's interesting here is there's no question as to whether cities spending that much money as to whether

that's been warranted whether bringing out hundreds of police using tear gas flash grenades having this massive police presence all of which cost money was really needed instead it's an automatic demonization of the movement and this is their fault the taxpayer money has been spent forget about the fact that they are also taxpayers was also not mentioned is that if you look at any other large event itself the city on any given day well it could cost a lot more money on that one day in the l.a. for example michael jackson memorial concert cost the city one point four million dollars for one day but you didn't hear the media acting very concerned about that now the most important thing though is once again the message that's being missed here americans are unhappy with the way their taxpayer dollars are being spent because at this point they themselves have very little say in it if the government chooses to award contracts or tax breaks to firms that top officials have going to have cozy relationships with it's called crony capitalism it's the government decided to bail out wall street instead of helping americans back to work get their

homes out from under water so let's look at some of those expenses because everybody out there remember tarp a cool seven hundred billion dollars that was given out to the banks about homeland security that pays for cities to have fancy weapons fancy machinery things that cities do not need tanks that is something that no city in the united states leaves at all and yet that homeland security budget just purposeful year two thousand and eleven was forty three point six billion dollars now it's get to the next point to this ridiculous assertion that having a couple hundred thousand dollars in the bank in some way makes the occupy movement look rich do you know how much president obama made in fundraisers held in new york on a single day earlier this year two point three million dollars and i didn't hear anybody the mainstream media griping about how much security for that even cost the taxpayers also think about the bank profits because the. zakk same banks they hope to bring down the financial system and well and were bailed out their profits just

in the third quarter of this year are thirty five point three billion dollars so they're the ones out there they're making a killing they're raking in the profits well others suffer and so occupy is trying to bring awareness to that they're just trying to wake people up to the inequality and to the lack of fairness in the system it's not like they're young lazy hippies that are just rolling in the deal they're out there and they're bringing attention to the cause and i personally think that it's worth it i think it's worth it because this is something that needs to be heard and i think that if you took a survey out there if you were to ask americans whether they'd rather have you know their money spent their taxpayer dollars on helping occupy wall streeters people that are trying to occupy trying to get people to start talking about inequality the maybe that's what they would choose but let's not act like everything else doesn't matter but occupy does and yet that's what the mainstream media to us why they talk about war spending like talk about expensive weapons systems that we don't need homeland security projects that are completely unnecessary and

a waste taxpayer money on wall street is a much better and a much easier scapegoat the real money trainers in our society that's what they choose to miss. last night c.n.n. hosted a nother g.o.p. debate and once again we got a good look at what foreign policy just might look like if any of these candidates out there were to become the commander in chief as event was hosted by two conservative think tanks and heritage foundation and the american enterprise institute and the audience questions came either from scholars of those two think tanks or those with bush foreign policy connections so was good to at least some degree see a little bit of disagreement within the field rather than just a unified bomb bomb bomb away mentality across the board but often it was left up to congressman ron paul in my opinion to be the only sane one of the group and or

mind of the other candidates the empire is expensive but our actions abroad have consequences and the constitution is meant to protect our civil liberties which others so quickly want to strip away all in the name of security and despite president obama's rather hawkish foreign policy you want to talk about expanding the war on terror launching drone strikes in yemen and somalia as well as pakistan well a lot of the candidates out there they seem to think that the president was making us less safe so let's get through some of the clips separate some of the g.o.p. foreign policy truths from the myths ok we're actually going to do that in just a minute we're waiting for i guess to get on the line and we're having a problem with that but just give us one minute now let's talk about last night's debate focused on foreign policy but it doesn't mean that a few other topics can also make it in one of the topics that have been taken in was immigration or most of the candidates railed on about the need to secure our border as if that's going to solve the problem of our lack of comprehensive

immigration reform new gingrich for once i actually made a little bit of sense most importantly your mind of the candidates immigration is a human issue. you've been here twenty five years your three kids and two grandkids you've been paying for she's obeying the law you belong to a local church i don't think we're going to the separate you from your family you forcefully interest you ugh. now we heard in the bill we heard a little bit if you don't have a heart talk that we heard from perry in the past but a sense that he has some sense completely shied away but now it has actually brought this up might we be getting somewhere and let's take a look at a very specific proposal that he referred to here to discuss this with me is amanda beadle editorial a man is going to be here in just one second we're going to talk about newt gingrich's proposal so i mean and evil is the editorial assistant for think progress dot org and newt gingrich like i said again once again said that this is a human issue for some people if you're for twenty five years and actually if you

think about it thanks so much you're going to be here ok so do you think that this is a slightly and a good thing that at least somebody one of the candidates out there reminded people that these are human beings they're living in this country they have families they don't need to be torn apart. you would think that you would be admitting that people are human would be a good thing but if you look at what's going on it's still just as crazy because it's it and his campaign exemplifies over and over that this is not amnesty they're not offering citizenship so you're looking at a plan where you include just like a class of people that this would be a race to the bottom for employers newt gingrich's plan would be reliant on that people could have legal status to long as they had jobs that the foundation that came with this plan but they saw it as a what is a way for the market to provide for people who wanted to come to the u.s. to work but the problem is that if you are legal status is based on your employment then employers have no reason to care about your working conditions because they see that your reliance on them to have your status so employers don't have to pay them as much they could have for working conditions and if workers complain they

can say oh we're going to take away your legal status you've got to go back home and all the same time is it incentivizing businesses to hire undocumented workers so then they can still so that they can get into this program is what you're saying . i'm not sure if we'll be incentivised i think the biggest problem is that it's a one way or it's not providing for citizenship it's saying that they can come here to work but then if you're not working you have to go back home so for people who have their families here they have their whole lives here then they're going to stick with the job no matter what the conditions are right now rick perry in the past you know the one that is the governor of texas the state that shares the largest border with mexico actually sounded you know remember that thing that he said at a couple of you know debates past where if you don't believe these children sort of education and you don't have a heart he quickly very quickly have to walk all of that back do you think it's too bad that last night when at least newt gingrich started. this policy that he didn't get to the details of it or not he was still talking about the fact that these are

individuals that have families was it you know a little bit of a move by perry not to get back into it i think it was i think it's he said before that he said his wife told him that it was too mean of him to say call people heartless but it was a chance that he could have stood up and said something that you've heard senator rubio say that oh we need to be their party that's pro gratian not anti illegal immigration clearly his presidential candidates for his party are not getting the message because they are not talking about people in terms of human beings they're still talking about it in these extreme terms that mitt romney last night is still apparently trying to be the anti oliebol. anti immigrant most extreme anti immigrant of the bunch because it his in the after debate in all discussions to come it's all about his comments that his advisor was a basically explained that that mitt romney's policy on immigration would be to make conditions so horrible that undocumented immigrants would have to leave why is that going to work for republicans right when if you just think about the way that

it's going to look in two thousand and twelve and president obama he got the hispanic vote last time around but this time what is he going to run or it's not like he has you know immigration policy successes for for actually. out there so it's not some rare republicans could point the finger and try to actually bring in this vote since obama hasn't satisfied that base but i don't see republicans really have a better record on and on immigration compared to the president obama at least at least the obama administration is talking about it in terms of willie's trying to. and i know many people disagree with him put at least the obama administration is meeting and saying we're trying to get rid of and go through documented immigrants who are committing crimes in the history that they've explained that they're trying to prove your ties so that they're not getting rid of a grandmother who's been here for ten years and has some of the you prioritize now that you say after so many news reports came out after people realized that they were deporting four hundred thousand people a year is a much larger number isn't even his predecessor and only then did they start

blocking it back i mean in reality is policy thus far has been much worse than the conservative president before him but i think that's where you start going to the state level because state level republicans you look at alabama arizona georgia. republicans in these states have passed. laws and as i think about what you're going to start looking you'll start looking down the ticket like not just the g.o.p. presidential candidates will look at the party saying at the state level and if if the state level they're proposing laws like alabama's i think that's where the republican party would lose voters now what do you think about the law and the justice department trying to look into other states i mean is this a least a promising sign that you have from the federal level this weary i you know going to torts of the state legislation i think it is and i think about it on underscores mostly is that we need we need a federal but we need federal immigration reform because right now it's in states coming up with their own solution that they see that would work best for them and so now utah solution is being challenged by the federal government needs to be able

to say this is what you need to be doing don't pass an extreme was stop trying to act like alabama. and do something like this utah at least they added a guest worker program where alabama admittedly but the politicians they are of said we just don't want to documented immigrants we don't care where they go just get him out of our state ok so you if you could have your way in your ideal perfect world what a comprehensive immigration look like on a national scale. i think we still got to work on that especially for the democratic party needs to figure they need to figure out what they're looking for what i would say is you have people here they obviously cannot support all of the millions of undocumented immigrants who live in the u.s. you're talking about two hundred people amnesty has to be a part of it a guest worker program has to be a part of it for those who do want to call and also you need to start looking at policies like the dream act that you have i've known students who were undocumented immigrants who went to school and got their degrees but now after college they worry that they're going to be deported just for the fact that they want to try to work of the u.s. were there needs to be a program that will get those students on

a path to citizenship because it's not their fault that they came to the u.s. it's children like two year olds and they came to the u.s. and they're still in iraq and because of choices by their parents i think we need to focus on getting students like that give them citizenship in the u.s. and let them assimilate let them have jobs and be part of our workforce and i think that you know that's one of the things we need to remind people of is there is no longer is our problem that so many people are trying to cross the border at all times if you look at it since the economy has you know gone and you have fewer people crossing the border now you have this population what is it fourteen fifteen million people yes they're living here that are undocumented but they're here and so now you really have to deal with that but is that the democrats can't even come up with a comprehensive plan i mean they're always lacking when it comes to messaging and so they want to blame it on republicans the obama administration surely does as to why comprehensive immigration reform is passed but where is the policy and everybody you look at the different regions is right now you can you see arizona's got their solution but their solutions going to look

a lot different than what people in michigan are going to be proposing because and i think that's the problem is that you've got different people looking at it from their own interest of their own states that people are too worried about being able to run for reelection or what are their voters going to say than they are about trying to focus on ok what's good for the country as a whole not just this one area of people well it's about time something out of that conversation and you know it was i've already pointed out that once it looks like somebody on the republican party might actually have a heart but it's. good to look into what those policies actually mean of course thanks so much for joining again here. still ahead tonight local police are spotted with military grade equipment at the occupy movements to find out how they got their hands on these kinds of supplies and last one is forcing to get a first response for law enforcement during peaceful protest and insight from former seattle police keep your stance for after the break.

there's the police correction of. what a protester nobody seems to know. but never a pepper sprayed the face but part of the argument that they're being overly dramatic. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then something else in here sees some other part of it and realize that everything is ok. i'm charging welcome to the big picture.

mr. proper

two plus months of the occupy movement we've documented the growth of this movement the numbers of camps that are popping up the large days of action and clashes between protesters and police and each week we see a new eviction where flash grenades and tear gas are used our new pepper spraying videos are peaceful students are sprayed in the face of questions about police actions are made and answered why of course the first response a peaceful protest by exercising a first timer right to speech and assembly always that the pressure and if police forces hadn't learned from the past and that can be ever demilitarize in the future i'll try to get some answers from somebody who has been on that side of the line joining me to discuss it is norm stamper former seattle police chief and author of breaking rank a top cops exposé of the dark side of american policing and i want to thank you so much for joining us tonight and first let's start a little bit with some history with your back story you were the chief of the seattle police department you were there during the battle for seattle and you know

how did you handle that situation no well we. thought we had planned prepared trained and everything we needed to do in advance of week this is november early part of december ninety ninety nine we had eleven months to plan and prepare for and to provide the training state department recommends fourteen months but we still thought that we were ready and we simply were not ready for the massive numbers. of our global ization demonstrators that would show up in our city and we made mistakes i particularly made the biggest mistake of the week early in the week which i think actually. the battle for seattle so what particular lessons can you say that you learned from that experience. number one do not use chemical agents on nonviolent non threatening individuals this applies across

the political spectrum i've been involved in my previous life in the san diego police department for twenty eight years there. and we can try to operation rescue an anti-abortion group who use very similar tactics that what we've seen with occupy namely blocking intersections and now leaves and seating themselves with locked arms in front of planned parenthood for example in none of those cases in the current occupy scenarios that i've seen. or in previous demonstrations from the sixty's seventy's and eighty's and ninety's have we seen really justification for using those chemical agents do you think i should ever be used or just nine cases of peaceful protests you know we also have some people some city officials out there some police departments that say well it doesn't matter if it's peaceful or not if you are blocking an area then some way that that is threatening

to the police well i think then the police need to really think through what their role is you know an ostensibly free and democratic society we lost sight of that in seattle in one nine hundred ninety nine and i'm just saddened by the fact that people have not within law enforcement learned that messages of a battle for seattle but when you say that it's people within law enforcement that the haven't learned the messages do you mean it's those that are on the ground the police that are interacting with these protesters every day or is it those that are at the top is it something about a hierarchical structure and the way that they're trained. yes it is definitely something about the structure american law enforcement is paramilitary in its orientation and i think that's a huge mistake there's a need for toughness on occasion there's a need for discipline there's certainly a need for self-control and the kind of person what i recall psychological reason

motional hardiness that would allow a police officer to look at another citizen who was demonstrating against his government. and to be sensible in the face of that we have seen i think a tendency on the part of law enforcement in this country to heighten the military response to everything across the board drug war has a huge role to play in there and so too does the what i would consider to be the misguided overreaction to domestic terrorism concerns and you could say to you that you know the the irony in this movement specifically with occupy wall street as that you know to use that their messaging that the police are part of the ninety nine percent they're supposed to be on the same side as the protesters here and yet it seems like they're being treated like enemies why do you think in that case that more police have broken rank and decided to join up because

they need to keep their jobs. i think that's huge job security particularly today as it is vitally important i know there are police officers who are very disturbed at the images that they're seen and then daily newscasts also know that the culture of policing is so strong. i mean it gets a grip on you and holds you and i remember this distinctly from my very first rookie year as a police officer thinking only ever behave that way i was criticizing police officers for behaving before i became a cop and within a breath taking in the short period of time i was doing the same sorts of things so there's a lot of power in that culture and it takes quite a bit of resistance would you think there are still ways to resist there is still a way to change the way that police in this country function to demilitarize then i mean you know i wonder if one of the aspects here is that now they have so many

flashy toys that are handed down to them from the military that their departments and when you have not just pepper spray but you also have flash grenades and now you might have a tank by not using might even mentality i'm guessing. yeah and i think there's a lot of truth to that you know so some people might call them tollways when when somebody gets a new toy they want to play with it there's some truth to that but there's also i think a general commitment in law enforcement to seek and to find alternatives to lethal force remember that pepper spray and tasers and certain other tools at the disposal of police today were intended to be used as an alternative to shooting and killing someone and now we see pepper spray for example being applied so casually as it was in u.c. davis and that and that's a very very disturbing it's

a misuse of the tool do you think about regret it at some point as you regret now what you ordered for seattle i think if their story is anything similar to mine they'll believe it what they did was right that it was unpopular they understood that going in but they really didn't have an alternative and i think over time they will come to appreciate the fact that they did have alternatives including patients i mean to use pepper spray on a line of students who are seated generally with their heads bowed. it is down salute the unconscionable and inexcusable and i suspect the weather the individual who applied that pepper spray will come to appreciate what he did wrong many many others will i not thank you so much for joining us tonight i guess we wish that they would just rather use those alternatives in a moment rather than think about them later thanks so much thank you. now here on

the show we've reported many stories of police brutality most recently involving the occupy movement and why now there are images from camps across the country showing local law enforcement dressed in riot gear wielding baton armed with cans of pepper spray and they don't hesitate to use those tools so it is aggressive police mentality have anything to do with the weaponry and supplies that they've been given to take a little look back in history back in the late one thousand nine hundred salamis created barri local police and receiving military equipment or that was overturned in one nine hundred eighty one when the military cooperation with law enforcement act allows the military to give cops access to military grade equipment so in the late ninety's the law enforcement support program was created to accelerate the transfer of these supplies and wouldn't part of homeland security was created so very grants designed to let police purchase even more quit what exactly are these supplies let's start the basics here on a typical police officers belt you'll find a handgun pepper spray canister taser handcuffs and a nightstick over several police stations across the country as well as on some

pretty fancy equipment in minnesota and vermont law enforcement have purchased the bear cat three this is a nine ton armored vehicle with bullet resistant windows gun ports care gas dispenser loud speaker and a battering ram on the front bumper and this humvee on steroids has a price tag of two hundred fifty thousand dollars and several departments including the n.y.p.d. are also using mobile watch towers even cops and i in the sky you might have seen these in parking lots and they seem like fairly simple items but they're pretty expensive too the price tag ranges between ten and one hundred thousand but montgomery county police in texas well they took it one step further and use a d h s grants to get their own it weaponized drone that's right this three hundred thousand dollars shadow how grown made by vanguard defense industries weighs fifty pounds and could be equipped with a bean that launcher and a taser having officers the ability to stop a target from the sky because the name shadow hawks sound familiar that's because they're the same brand that's used by the military in afghanistan for counterterrorism operations out of montgomery county police is promising that

they're going to use unmanned aerial aerial vehicle for much more tame reasons. we can launch this put it over a fire put it over a hazmat spill put it over a house with a barricaded suspect and literally give the incident commander the ability to look at the entire scene. with a bird's eye view so that's road is going to be used for fires then why does it come with a being that larger and a taser surely the police are downplaying this investment but looking at all those items i think it's pretty safe to say they're an unnecessary tool for local police so why do cops need its aid or drone well they don't but if they can get one and they figure why not call me crazy but these devices need to be left to the military for war situations not to use against americans for domestic purposes. now coming up next our sound off on comments or news that i read and will take a closer look at last night's g.o.p. debate over iraq.