when it's going to fix the problem there are because there are better factors or the people that are going to be hurt by having to spend a couple of more dollars are a couple of very disingenuous things about this debate one thing that they voted on was a show vote i mean it was a ride or a ceremonial thing of course people are going for going to conservatives fall out of the line secondly remember remember you can talk about this and you can say all of this is a terrible thing but when it came to the payroll tax debate i mean it was kind of obvious like if you're going to let it if you're going to let it rise like they don't want to talk democrats and want to talk about oh this is a tax increase if it goes back up they only said that one of the of the bush tax cuts both have the effect of contributing to the deficit it's true that graphic is accurate and that's not the point of contention but the idea that you can have this debate and not honestly say that it's not just a partisan one is absurd now going to the question of taxes you talk about saying how when times are good republicans say that they can't raise taxes the fact is there is something in tom your head explode of this but there is something to art laffer curve it really does have a very commonsense role obviously is that the zero in the one hundred percent points but that's that's not the question my question is bush has bush took us to

a forty year low on cap corporate taxes and a ninety year low on personal taxes and according to reaganomics that's supposed to produce ecstasy in paradise and wonders but what where are the jobs what you're talking about is the deficit this being eaten alive by entitlements i mean if you're going to use the deficit not talking about the deficit i'm talking about tax was very low you guys got your tax cuts where are jobs if you there are metrics for success that the economy's going to improve it has to do with the government not running a deficit i'm not hearing where the jobs are where is the what is the economy improving do so so you get you to cut taxes as reagan did and you borrow the money from other countries you cut taxes as george bush did you borrow the money from other countries you guys said that was going to give us jobs now you're what i want to give us the deficit what happened in the ninety's following the collapse of the cold war did clinton raise taxes like crazy no did that yes yes he did in one thousand nine hundred twenty eight and want to go to the floor that was represented and said this will. a great depression like we've never seen before and every

single republican voted against that tax increase and it brought us a balanced budget but clinton stood there as a moderate he governed to the center and he had even the you know even welfare reform resulted in resulted in a period serf i love here it's nice either we got to move along i mean i haven't heard anything about where the jobs are but we've got time for our last question a quick fire the super bowl is of course this weekend and aside from the football itself the commercials draw a lot of attention so what might we see the g.o.p. candidates being spokesman for how about ron paul a spokesman for acme pain away now with heroin or mitt romney a spokesman for acme dog carriers now you can attach one to the run for your private jet but our new gingrich spokesman for acme moon shuttles round trip fare includes two night stay in the bio in the biosphere. or other ideas this is pretty obvious is not mitt romney for just for men i mean just from that i don't know your face. cult deprogramming services for ron paul supporters ok you know i'm

going to take it on paul to do a throwback i think or a slight or something less government more filling oh well frankly a pretty good slogan and you know what he said santorum the sri well i mean i'm going to say santorum is going to is the spoken spokesman for the new acme internet search engine known results from google allowed. to be. vince thanks thanks all of course it's always for being. who acted alec i mean really have you ever seen a palette that looks like this is brock obama newt gingrich alec i haven't

this is a representative democratic republic here the united states or at least is supposed to be it's a government where we the people elect legislators to represent our interests and a corporatocracy that's a government where the legislators are own or run by corporations and there's an organization out there it's called the american legislative exchange council that appears to be taking america down the road toward corporatocracy a few times a year alec gathers together lawmakers corporate c.e.o.'s and lobbyists all together in the same high end resort hotel ballrooms to present to the elected officials model legislation written by the lawyers of alec and voted on by the corporations if the corporations approve that legislation and gets carried back to the state legislatures or even the u.s. congress by the obedient lawmakers in attendance who submitted his new laws and

it's long been speculated because he identified laws keep popping up in state after state republican lawmakers who attend alec conferences are taking their orders directly from alec and therefore legislation dealing with everything from voter id laws to harsher prison sentences for drug offenders to dismantling e.p.a. regulations have their roots in alaric. now we have some proof in florida republican public and state representative rachel bergen introduced legislation in the state in the state house back in november of last year to reduce corporate taxes something that's right in alex wheel house she got a bit sloppy though and forgot to take out alex mission statement is located at the top of all it's model legislation so the laws she introduced had a header that read whereas it is the mission of the american legislative exchange council to advance jeffersonian principles of free markets limited government federalism and individual liberty. nice words but if thomas jefferson was alive

today and read alex's proposed tax loopholes for rich people and corporations he'd barf or declare another revolution so here is state representative bergen who was handed legislation written by corporate interests at alec to reduce their own taxes and she turns around and introduces that legislation into the florida state house with no changes as if it was their own idea the alec language on the top of her office discovered the screw up they withdrew the legislation really quickly and reintroduced it without the alec mission statement but it was too late the group common cause sought and blew the whistle you know it's becoming increasingly clear what's going on in our country now that the supreme court has given corporations personhood rights and said that money is speech through super pacs and think tanks like alec we elect representatives and they represent corporations so i say why hide it from now on our lawmakers should just be honest with us take cue from

representative bergen in florida. i mean i've been pushing for to make members of congress wear nascar patches in their suits like nascar drivers so that we know of corporations are sponsoring them for years but i think they should also put a new editor on top of all the new laws they propose letting us know who a law will benefit the most for who wrote the law in the first place for example the next few weeks republicans in the us house of representatives will hold hostage either middle class tax cuts or infrastructure spending or both to try to force the president to approve the keystone x.l. pipeline and when they do that legislation should come with a nice little header that says we're as it is the mission of the cobra there's another oil barons to maximize their profits by keeping our nation addicted to dirty fossil fuels we had news this build a force the construction of the keystone x.l. pipeline or later when republicans again try to gut new wall street regulations their legislation needs to have this federal whereas it is the mission of goldman

sachs j.p. morgan wells fargo and other wall street bankers who fund our campaigns to maximize their profits with predatory lending five percent and economic destruction we introduce this bill to dismantle the consumer financial protection bureau and other wall street reforms in dodd frank or how about when house republicans again try to repeal obamacare whereas it is the mission of united health care at another for profit health insurers to make massive profits denying children's health care turning down lifesaving treatments and jacking up premiums to pay for more c.e.o. mansions we introduce this building repeal the affordable care act this is much needed transparency or that would be until we get a constitutional amendment that says the corporations are not people and that money is property and not speech then we have to have this sort of transparency to see who's buying whom on capitol hill and whose interests are being represented above

we the people. go to move to amend dot org or free speech for people dot org to put an end to the corporate takeover of our democracy that's it for the big picture for tonight for more information the stories we covered visit our website at time narbonne dot com free speech dot org. can also check out our two youtube channel stillings of tom hardy dot com this entire show is also available as a free video podcast on i tunes and we have a free tom hartman i phone and i pad app in the app store you send us feedback to twitter at tom underscore our been on facebook at tom underscore hartman our blogs message boards and telephone comment line at tom harkin dot com and don't forget to mock receive begins when you show up and get active get out there get active tag your it sit next week.

the luck. download the official anti application to go on the phone on pod touch from the i

choose ops to. watch on t.v. life on the go for. video on demand r.t.s. minefield costs and says feeds now in the palm of your. questions on the dot com. please. more news today violence is once again flared up the families are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. china corporations are rooted a player led. led mission and free accreditation free in-store charges free arrangements

for free risk free studio time free. download free broadcast quality video for your media projects and free media and on to our t. dot com. welcome to the loner show where we get the real headlines with none of the mercy or live out of washington d.c. now tonight we're going to take another look at the situation that's heating up between the u.s. and iran and israel and that is says that israel may strike iran within months but why would they want to make those kinds of statements what would be the u.s. position and is and is any of what we're hearing about iran's nuclear program even true and he's going to join us to hash it all out the jobs numbers came out for the month of january and the news was pretty good official unemployment went down to

eight point three percent real unemployment down to fifteen point one percent so do we see any trends of forming here richard s. going to help us break down all those figures and florida's republicans are looking to privatizing prisons in the state so we can speak to an experience of the young turks about why this is a no good horrible idea we're not all that morphy tonight including a dose of happy hour but first take a look what the mainstream media has decided to me it's. all right so once again we hear this horrible drumming sound it's getting louder and louder especially after report reported statement by secretary of defense leon panetta that he believes there is a very strong likelihood that israel is going to strike iran in a matter of months israel is preparing to attack iraq and to carry out that attack within months strong warning from secretary of defense leon panetta israeli leaders are considering attacking a ronny

a nuclear sites he is openly talking about israel's ambitions secretary defense leon panetta who believes there's a strong likelihood writes that israel will strike iran in april may or june israel might carry out a unilateral strike on iran's nuclear sites sometime in the spring this is a strategy to warn iran to back down or face consequences. now this is the kind of news that should make us all ask a lot of questions and that should make all of us feel very uneasy the last thing that this world needs. is another war any kind of military conflict for that matter and it becomes all the more confusing when you think of how all over the place the statements are right when i release their report on iran's nuclear program late last year there was no sign that they're currently working on developing new nuclear weapons they said that the bulk of the work that could be weapons related was all halted in two thousand and three and they have some information that modeling design work was being done until two thousand and nine but that's it then we heard from leon panetta just last weekend when he was on sixty minutes that he

believes iran could build and set off a nuclear weapon within two to three years if they decided to and the thing is when it james clapper the director of national intelligence testified before congress this week and released a report from this country sixteen intelligence agencies assessing threats to the u.s. he's pacifically said that they have no evidence that iran's leadership has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon so if there's no evidence that they've decided to do it then should we be reminding people of that should reporters be cautioning that hey maybe this is an important element to be brought into the debate now unfortunately what chuck todd over as n.b.c. did today was exactly the opposite he brought up a completely different part of this intelligence report that we heard this week and decided to see if there are any ties between the two. richard how did you interpret the intelligence report earlier this week and this is why where you sit here and you do you try to put sometimes one plus one together and see if if you are coming up with to when the intelligence report by the u.s. intelligence community to capitol hill to congress indicated that the iranians are

planning a way to strike at the united states to strike at the united states militarily you put that out what are you trying to say. i think you're trying to warn the public and the u.s. intelligence community has been burned so many times i think they are going out of their way to tell the american people and tell members of congress what the potential risks are. all right so this is where the probably eg. but instead of questioning whether this report that said that iran is now the number one terror threat to the us is a little over the top or whether it makes any sense richard just basically says that they're doing this just in case so they can have all their bases covered and he doesn't even blink when he says it like it's totally normal fearmonger way just if you think that it might save your ass at some point in the future how this should bother journalists not be completely legitimate and unquestionable explanation and b. why do i get the distinct feeling that if anything does happen between israel and

iran and the chorus for the u.s. to join in support israel of course which of course will be there either way and is there currently but that course will become all the louder because people start pointing to this report and says that iran is the number one terror threat to the united states and the mainstream media is going to ask what exactly it is that we're getting ourselves into war over again is this a criminal act against the possibility of a small scale terror attack or is this a preemptive act against iran developing a nuclear weapon which they haven't done yet neither one makes much sense and yet i get the feeling what we saw today will only continue and will become fused together until all logic leaves this discussion and all the fear stoking all around much like we saw with the buildup to iraq and i hope that i'm wrong but if today is an example hell of the last couple of months are an example of how the mainstream media is approaching the issue breaking down the real facts and logic figuring out what it is exactly would justify a war well sounds like all of that they're going to miss.

all right so now let's try to see if we can piece any of this together break it down the washington post and others have reported that leon panetta believes that there is a strong likelihood that israel will strike iran in april may or june the wall street journal is reporting that u.s. officials believe iran recently gave new freedoms and material aid to five top al qaeda operatives who had been under house arrest in the country u.s. intelligence agencies have now decided that iran is the number one terror threat. that the u.s. faces so does all of this seem rather familiar the buildup to iraq and how far do we think that this might really go here to discuss it with me is joseph cirincione president of the ploughshares fund a global security foundation just thanks so much for being here and i had a pleasure so i mean continuing on right you just heard me totally rant about this for a while but is this all just a preemptive move right i mean from everything that we're hearing there is no evidence that iran at the moment as a nuclear weapon or is necessarily working on one right this second to be ready any

time soon there is nothing imminent nor inevitable about an iranian nuclear weapon and that is the considered opinion the u.s. intelligence agencies unanimous all sixteen intelligence agencies say iran has not yet decided to build a bomb and if they did decide to do it it would take them at least a year to make the material and perhaps two or three more to fashion a device so we would and we would see them doing it they would have to take the existing facilities convert them over to weapons production and then we'd have plenty of time to take whatever actions diplomatic economic or military we wanted there is no need for this rush to war so why do you think let's examine the rights of the statements made by the defense secretary first he said that in two to three years if they wanted to they could build and use a nuclear weapon and then also saying this about israel and putting this countdown clock type of scenario on it why would he make that kind of statement publicly it's pretty explosive i take the secretary's words very seriously and i talk to

a lot of people new administration and they take the threat of an israeli attack very seriously most could be clear about this poll show the majority of israelis do not want to go to war with iran even though they also think iran is going to get a nuclear weapon there's a split in the military and intelligence community in israel many former intelligence officials heads of mossad for example my you're gonna have said this would be disastrous he called it the stupidest thing he ever heard it would set back israel's interest ten years but there is a faction in the world could party held lead by. prime minister netanyahu that seems to believe that this is the time to strike iran you saying that one of two reasons one he really means it or to return to pressure the united states and the west europe to take more economic sanctions more pressure on iran to try to crack the regime to try to force the regime apart the u.s. assessment is that there is a least a fifty fifty chance that in netanyahu means it and he will try to strike iran sometime in april may or june what's your take on sanctions do you think that

sanctions are something that can crack iran as you said or quite the opposite is this something that only pushes the button even harder and makes them want to pursue a nuclear weapons program even more if the rest of the world is turning against them and since sanctions have never worst a country into giving a nuclear weapon program or nuclear weapons but they are former pressure and they are very effective former pressure on iran you can feel it and the sanctions are getting deeper they're getting broader and the results are being felt by the man on the street in iran right now families are suffering because of the sanctions the key isn't the sanctions the key is how do you use that pressure and this is where the u.s. doesn't seem to have a clear strategy the pressure is building military threats from israel sanctions pressure from the from the whole world what's your plan now that you put iran in a corner where is the door that gives them a face saving way out i don't see a diplomatic strategy emerging from this administration let's talk about the idea of you know if iran does indeed get

a nuclear weapon we've heard certain people rick santorum presidential candidate in the debate say that the world would change overnight that this would be completely disastrous the same time we've heard people like ron paul say well you know if you look at the example around the world anything that iran should look to it's that when you acquire a nuclear weapon you suddenly get a whole lot more respect don't you i completely understand the view that it's a catastrophe on the nonproliferation expert i've always felt that if one country gets a nuclear weapon the chances of their neighbors getting it increase saudi arabia. turkey so you could end up with the middle east of not just one nuclear power israel but two three or four nuclear powers with the underlying tension still unresolved that's a recipe for a nuclear war but there's nothing automatic about that look at north career they exploded a nuclear weapon in two thousand and six their neighbors have not followed suit there are ways to contain iran the same way we've contained north korea in fact we could be should be communicating to iran that if you cross that line if you detonate a nuclear weapon if you acquire a nuclear weapon the pain is going to get worse your isolation is going to get

worse that is not your salvation that's a ticket to permanent. status and that we were just talking about this before the show you said that you just returned from iraq and the attitudes the perceptions of what exactly it is that's going on are quite different than absolutely so why are you in washington and this is a sense of inevitability about a military conflict nor you all people talk about is iran and the rest of the world particularly the middle east the nuclear issue is all about israel that's what they want to talk about and you really mediately see if you have any hope of convincing the region to support your efforts to stop an iranian program you've got to show that it's not specific to a muslim state that you're also talking about a middle east where no one has nuclear weapons including israel you're talking about a world where the countries with nuclear weapons like the united states are giving them up and we're all moving in the same path together otherwise you have no hope of getting the international cooperation you need to stop new countries from getting weapons all right so this is something that you and i have spoken about

many times over the past right in the big plan of the obama administration and renegotiating the new start treaty with russia is also to move towards a world without nuclear weapons and yet what how do we really seeing that develop you just wrote about this yesterday and you said that in fact obama is coming up on a critical decision. in terms of in terms of whether we're actually going to scale it down and what congress wants to fund and what kind of scenarios where we have to be prepared for i just wrote an article for. it's up on their website all this weekend obama got off to a fast start negotiated a new treaty with russia they both agreed to cut their deployed strategic forces by thirty percent he. started to put his policies into action in the administration but he ran into his stall his political opponents and a very resistant bureaucracy hasn't stopped the progress on the president's nuclear agenda now is his chance to restart it he's just been handed options from the

pentagon a six month study done by the pentagon and the other agencies on how he could further cut the nuclear weapons if we do not need a cold war forced anymore we do not need russia doesn't need fifteen hundred weapons ready to go with a moment's notice obama's going to be able to make decisions in the next couple of months they could determine the course of the nuclear future of both countries russia and the united states going to give us a few more details he could decide that he no longer needs to hold thousands of targets at risk right now of a nuclear war plan requires that the military keep a thousand weapons ready to fire and twenty minutes notice why what military mission possible requires that just by eliminating that requirement he could reduce the number of nuclear weapons we do so the cost of the program right now the united states is starting to build the next generation of nuclear weapons new submarines new bombers new missiles why are we going to keep this force going on indefinitely for the next several decades the president doesn't want to do that but he's got to

change the policy guidance he's got to tell the military that we can safeguard our nation with many many many fewer nuclear weapons hundreds not thousands are we going to know though if he does it or is this a secret decision well that's a very interesting question usually these decisions remain secret these are the most classified documents in the u.s. but they do show up in budget submissions they show up in program decisions but if the president really wants to capitalize on this particularly given the situation with iran he should announce this decision. in april or may this is the time to come forth with a new nuclear posture a new nuclear plant and in so doing build the international cooperation he needs for countries like iran and north korea you know the republicans are just going to love that one as fodder over coming up with the next election because are coming after him anyway you want to do what you want you going to go to town of course they're going to talk and for everything we're going to talk to them still so just in regards to what we're hearing now from leon panetta what israel might be planning if you had to make

a guess you really think that we're going to see something happen in the next couple of months that israel might strike no and i'll tell you why israel doesn't actually have the military force to stop their program it would be a prick there would be a pinprick on them that would delay for a little while but with the end result would be an acceleration of the iranian program the u.s. military does not want another war the u.s. intelligence services do not want another war the u.s. goes in one on the war i think those fundamental forces will prevail and stop this madness before it gets out of hand you know it does seem like it's just a small handful you know if you said there is a few hundred it's a few writers around here in washington d.c. that are beating these drums and hopefully we will let them have their wages thanks so much for being here and my pleasure thanks for having me. i just ahead on tonight's show ice teams up with the n.f.l. to make sure that nobody gets their hands on counterfeit goods and we're going to have january's jobs numbers for you which seem to look like they're pretty good we're going to hash out what the latest data means with richard ascalon after the break.

it's the same. people calling what you said for free and fair elections. and we're still reporting from the summit as you can hear behind me loud explosions.

you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so for you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and you hear or see some other part of it and realize everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm tom hartman welcome to the big picture.