so we heard from president obama who's talking about this peaceful rise of china about our economic cooperation versus joe biden who was was acting a little tougher right that he was saying that china didn't become this economic power in the world through some vacuum that it's all thanks to an international system and there are rules that everyone must follow and if you want to be have a relationship the game has to be played fairly so as a kind of good cop bad cop that they're doing. yeah basically you know the carrot and stick because first step is it's joe biden as you rightly pointed out and the issue is of course copyright and patent infringement which the chinese don't really respect it's a lot for property at this point that's what the united states is export its export . tatton said copyrights and if those patents and copyrights are being stolen by the chinese where by simply the chinese take the good ideas that are being developed in the states and manufacture them without any kind of. the american brains behind these ideas patents copyrights we have you then of course united

states starts to loosen that's putting it suits one strength and that's the kind of the family that i'm from we had up at the chinese continue to just rebar and copy and itzhak the next it's going to suddenly cut off very much it's that china is going to make greater and greater inroads into american markets and frankly into american exports and so that's the problem that it's passed they can't really are that without the chinese but they have to borrow a little bit in here you know that my adela can relate some. history of mental time comes all thanks i see joining us tonight. thank you thank. you he.

says it's been considering. just six countries but wouldn't do so. cold winter striking europe. syria's president and. constitution that would effectively nearly fifty years of. the pro-democracy uprising reign. stay with us.

our guys it's time for show and tell and it's programs the last time we spoke about the twenty six billion dollars housing settlement between the government and the banks but it's only think billion really enough money to make up for all of those that have suffered so he asked me if you thought the banks or the american homeowners one else in the end of this deal is going to produce for two weeks in a sense to find out what she had to say president obama said that the new twenty six billion dollar housing settlement will begin to turn the page on a period of an abuse of foreclosure by banks but we have to ask when the pages are turned in the book is closed who really won the day in american homeowners or did the banks come out ahead on the deal now don one said the banks won them by an

extremely large margin neil said it's a terrible deal twenty six billion between five giant banks the c.e.o.'s bonuses are probably more than the whole settlement and one pointed out that from the settlement families who have lost their homes come out with a track of two thousand dollars he wants to know how can two thousand dollars compared to a home now let's look a little deeper into who may really be winning from this settlement the number we quoted earlier twenty six billion is the total settlement out of that seventeen billion is credits for principal modifications smith over and you capitalism points out that these mortgages are own mostly by investors three billion of this settlement will go to refinancing eight and only five billion will be direct cash payments this will mean that fifteen hundred to two thousand per borrowed for clothes between september two thousand and december twentieth eleven so when the pages are turned in the book is close who do you think really won on i think it's pretty clear. now as always we appreciate your responses and here's our next

question for you earlier in the show and spoke to salon dot com glenn greenwald about the beating of the drum for war with iran he argues the media is actually doing the government in this buildup so. who do you think is leading the charge the media or the government let us know what you think on facebook twitter and you tube and those response just might make it. well tonight we have some news that courtesy of a foyer request which should make you feel a little uneasy about congress's ability to protect your privacy because guess what congress had no idea what the d.o.j. was doing with its wiretapping capabilities for at least four years just a short while ago reports the detail the d.o.j. is wiretapping of americans magically popped up on the department of justice is website after a handful of privacy experts got their hands on the original materials through that for a request they found out that these reports are actually old and that they're now appearing in because well they forgot to do it years ago there is

a twenty five year old law called electronic communications privacy act that requires the department of justice to reported surveillance techniques to congress every year and it details two techniques in particular first one is a pen register where officials can obtain non-content information from outgoing internet and telephone communications and those would include dial phone numbers and who received e-mails and potentially even the subject line of those sent e-mails but not it was actually said or written within the conversations the other is trap and trace capturing is also gathers non-content information from online activity and phone calls over that's for incoming communications to this is vicious individual now these two techniques are for a large part how the government gathers information about people they want to keep tabs on or to post nine eleven era they've been keeping tabs on a lot of people in fact the report shows that in two thousand and four wiretapping was used almost eleven thousand times and in two thousand and eight wiretapping was used more than twenty one thousand times that's almost doubling the amount of times the feds utilize these techniques over the course of four years and in two thousand

and nine there were almost twenty four thousand in judicial orders for surveillance meaning that we're still not sure of congress's even seen any reports for two thousand and ten in two thousand and eleven but how about this for the icing on the cake a law review articles. just that the d.o.j. didn't release any surveillance from one thousand nine hundred ninety nine to two thousand and three either so that is a huge chunk right of the nine eleven monitoring post nine eleven monitoring and congress was totally in the dark so it's scary that we haven't seen these definitive numbers until now and what's worse is that we've learned about this big government fail through for your requests which reveal that it was a staffer for former senator russ feingold who discovered that nobody was reporting this information that's right nobody else in congress was even paying attention for four or five years they either weren't aware the d.o.j. wasn't doing its job they simply forgot or i guess they just conveniently turn a blind eye so that's our government work for you on one hand the o'jays basically going unmonitored when it comes to invading

a person's privacy meanwhile congress either doesn't care or they're just giving the justice department free rein so which one is worse well it's kind of hard to tell but quite frankly both are definitely at fault here another clear sign that both chambers of the government could care less about your privacy so let's wait out right d.o.j. not reporting to congress which they're legally obliged to do or at the same time congress who shirked all responsibility for the american people's constitutional rights either through gross negligence or simply turning a blind eyes so you tell me who's the worst offender the way i see it i think they're all guilty. well a new pew study has some people up in arms if you center on the states found that more than twenty four million voter registration records in the u.s. or about one in eight are an accurate out of date or duplicate so nearly two point eight million people are registered in two or more states and perhaps up to one point eight million registered voters are dead but does this mean that the chances of voter fraud are higher or just that our paper based registration system is out of date an error prone experts will probably tell you that it's the latter but as

we watch republican led legislature is one state after another pass or push for strict voter id and registration laws becomes even more important to break down the details get the truth into this debate so here to discuss the with me as attorney and blogger behinds founder of legal speaks dot com and huffington post contributor to me thanks so much for joining us tonight for having me before we get into i guess all of the details all the information back there let's just look at this specific report that comes out today right when somebody hears that one in eight of these voter records have some kind of a problem one doesn't sound so good as it doesn't sound good and it. is the idea that there is this photo fraud rampantly running rampant and it's really not i mean if you think about it on a commonsense basis if you've ever moved from one state to the other i move from maryland to d.c. i didn't i change my address change utility bills i forwarded mail i did not change and let the whether i should have not i left the board of election supervisors know

that i had moved and likewise when people die usually the estate of the person they're taking care of everything but changing the election where they vote and their registration and letting them know the person has died there to see that just generally doesn't happen so that really explains why there are the consistencies there but that doesn't prove that there is voter fraud that there are dead people voting that they're people voting in two or three states it just shows that they're on the books for more than more than one state all right so then if that's the case right if this was. civically is an example not an example of widespread voter fraud why do we have these bills that are being passed in states all across the country to combat voter fraud as if it is a huge issue are there any statistics to say that voter fraud is a really big deal i haven't seen any so for really there's not much distance i mean back in two thousand and two to two thousand and five somewhere within that period the justice department did a survey and what they found was eighty six convictions and of those eighty six

convictions they really were not of the kind of voter and person nation the ones that we're talking about to combat voter fraud so disillusions eighty six within one year within the way eighty six of in that period of time i think it was eighty six within a three year period of time eighty six people not enough to sway in eighty six and that anything is right and again it wasn't for vote and person nation most of the convictions fell into the category of felons who think that they're eligible to but they really aren't eligible to vote because they are still on parole so and even the justice department has done an additional survey and it's come out to be some scant number like twenty four but yet and still republican led legislation is changing the laws in practically half the states to show that we need all these id laws passed and here's kind of a fun little idea right from the a.c.l.u. in minnesota they're director there just offered to pay a thousand dollars to anybody who can show a recent case a voter in person ation in the last ten years in that state i mean do you think of

those are the kind of gimmicks that you need in order to prove to people that voter fraud is not the problem because otherwise why are republicans actually getting these laws passed right why are they winning the debate on a public level when it comes to i think what we hear in the media a lot of time too i think they're winning the debate because most people think that are being polled that they have an identification so the people that are being polled they're thinking what is the big deal just get an id be over and done with it so you can vote no i.d. they're not really polling the people who are twenty five percent of african-americans. and have the correct voter i.d. a valid identification to eighteen percent of senior citizens over the age of sixty five don't have one one in five students do not have a driver's license which is one of the other things that you need in order to vote so they're winning the debate because they're not really polling a lot of those people who don't have the correct identification to vote i love the a.c.l.u. is there but i don't think that it's going to change anything because unfortunately

it's like the people that think you need a voter i.d. you need photo id to vote they think that that's the end the discussion is just so simple just get one and unfortunately the people who are going to be most affected and most harmed by it african-americans senior citizens those people who are does able many women regardless of race who changed their name when they're recently married or changed their name back in there recently divorce they're going to have some issues and some of these states and those people they're not really targeting in terms of how do you is that you know a sign of looking people might have a certain political leaning right that might vote for one party over the other you could say especially if you look at young people if you look at women and housewives if you look at african-americans well they're probably more. balanced to vote democratic rather than republican that's what this general show you well that's right said their republican led legislature that was really split down the middle i mean is there mcgrath's progress to think that no we don't need this because we don't need the law because there is no been any proof that shows that we

need the law and republicans want to flat out suppress the law i mean that's just the bottom line they want to disenfranchise groups of people who might be more than likely to vote democratic and i thought they were all about freedom or you're just got back from checking out last week and all you heard is the word freedom freedom freedom all over again but i really want to talk about this other issue too you know you mentioned if you move you change your name we do have a bit of an outdated system so there are some solutions out there for example when they released the story so their solution was to create a multi-state out. center will give officials voter registrations voter vehicle records and death certificates from other states so they can always spot something do you think that's a good idea i mean does that create certain problems legally or civil liberties issues with what would be a proper fix in your mind what i see is the issue is that it's a cost factor i mean even changing the laws in the states that are being changed on the voter id laws it's a cost that's associated with it i mean they just go on the books and get change

and people just don't come off the books and there is not a cost in terms of additional manpower additional money that's involved with it and many of the states are already poor they're already cast wrap so do we really want to put our effort into changing the database at this point in time do we really want to put effort into doing that when in fact it's not needed it's not necessary because again the people who are doing it the people who move from one state to the next who are on the books either in two states three states or whatever they're not trying to vote in two or three states all right so the problem is a little bit overblown and i guess as you were in the past to the problem this may be that why is it easier to fly than it is to in this country debbie thanks so much for joining us thank you so much. time for a quick break when we get back one lawmaker is upset the department of justice a civil rights division is hiring experienced civil rights attorneys he went for a full time report and happy hour plus of the latest sports illustrated cover and

why was t.v. host break down presidential politics into a high school popularity contest all of the return. the exits use. the books to look for.

any much. meat. to. eternal fire is the food subsists you get. to see. technology innovation all the developments. over.

our guys it's time for tonight's tool time war and the honor once again goes to lamar smith the congressman from texas but this time it is not to do with him trying to restrict speech on the internet or rather his complaints about the department of justice is hiring process so you are smith has come out and accused the department of justice's civil rights division of hiring bias and his reason is that the civil rights division is hiring too many civil rights lawyers yep that is an actual reason that he's claiming because he practicing civil rights lawyers tend to be more liberal so in smith's bizarro victimhood world because the d.o.j.

is hiring civil rights lawyers they are being biased in the letter to eric holder he said the following the same pattern as immersion one media outlets ongoing study of new hires and a visit in the divisions other ten components in the seven sections analyzed so far all seventy nine hires had a quote far left credentials these were likely either obvious on their resumes or reasonably discoverable through a quick internet search noticeably absent were new employees with resumes very obvious conservative. neutral ideological credentials now it's also know that the media outlet that has signed cites in this letter here is pajamas media a conservative operation to current headlines on the website kissing assad's ass and celebrate black history month slap a leftist author of the report because it was part of the bush era civil rights department when it's hiring practices were breaking the law so we'd have enough most credible source of the d.o.j. responded to represent of smith and the letter was obtained by mother jones and the response they outline their hiring practices a career attorney is in charge of all hiring rather than political and appoint

appointees excuse me as was the case under the bush administration internet searches of candidates aren't allowed to reduce the chance of bias now that obviously rules out reps miss suggestion of a google search to expose the radical leftist tendencies of the qualifiers and a letter also of year olds that hires can only be overruled by the head of the civil rights division a political appointee with a written statement why don't more same world representative smith would be troubled that the d.o.j. isn't able to find more qualified conservative civil rights attorneys but i think that we all know it's not a sane world right in fact that i'm sorry we're wrote about this morning in mother jones it's pretty interesting to hear smith complaining about hiring bias in the first place higher requirements have long been the being of the conservative movement's existence after all they're the ones who rail against affirmative action the very notion that one person would be hired based on age race or ideological consideration over somebody with equal qualifications being antithetical to the

principles of america well apparently not when it comes to hiring conservatives for jobs that they're simply not qualified for in that case let's have affirmative action as long as that means that they got the jobs and not the women or the minorities so for complaining of the most qualified civil rights attorneys weren't conservative rather than wondering why if that's the case we award representative lamar smith tonight's tool time award. hi guys it's time for a happy hour and joining me this evening lauren lyster host of the capital account here on r t and j.p. frere senior communications strategist with new media strategies hey guys i mean we have a valentine's day happy valentine's day ok larry i mean you know everyone's talking about gingrich and santorum and mitt romney and i was tell you how they obsess about it on the media but sometimes the way they choose to describe the scene will

and i guess you could say compare these candidates to get a little over the top so listen to this clip from morning joe today. you get the idea. newt gingrich sat alone is in his room. eating candy bars reading history rick santorum you get the idea of a bunch of brothers and they beat him because tormes that tough guy when he gets attacked doesn't get angry he just looks at mitt and you see it on the stage he's a really. i mean really if you go really in a letter and asked nothing back i was going to beat up a bunch of guys i don't worry i've grown to like the monkeys sergei's they think they're waging jihad against them he's like his teeth are really clenched all the time he's kind of always imitating i think clint eastwood in that way so i mean he might have a sound so you know if you go you know does that patient look to me i mean maybe he thought maybe he he was listening to when he talks about iranian scientists because

in that regard it sounds like rick santorum is a little darley when he talks about how sas aims great i think the u.s. needs to send that message you're entirely right now ok but do we think that gingrich is sitting in a room eating candy and that i mean actual real value that i can actually you know i don't know not only his family is quite the ladies' man something we do not only when we do. now with his you know next to him. now nancy grace. i wish that we could still play our devilish dance at a night but she knew all she does is build up these cases and i think often just scare people and spread a lot of misinformation and like she basically made the entire country think that casey anthony was guilty and now listen to what you're saying about whitney houston . i'd like to know who was around her who if anyone gave her drugs following alcohol and drugs and who let her slip or pushed her underneath that water.

i mean she's sort of saying that somebody pushed her underneath the water but are you surprised are you kidding she wants this to be her next big story casey anthony put her ratings through the roof i think they put ratings through the roof if you're going for the next case and michael jackson is probably sweating about an hour in let's admit it well compared to casey anthony i mean this could be the next big thing but the thing is the police already said that she did not. she didn't drown she was found in the. issue for nancy grace a little detail like that celebrity news coverage is always eluded me i've never quite understood why why we've become so fascinated with what happens to the celebrities after their deaths i mean they're good singers why do i want to know about their i call into her life and i know it while they're alive and to know if you especially right after their death like let them die in peace for a minute before you start talking about the drugs that are going to both around you you raise the price of their albums thirty minutes after bakaly or fine i'll come down this road with you all pretend i actually care no i'm totally

curious who did push her under the water. and let me into the ratings for the i want to show you what i can. let's get it through you know there's been a lot of debates. these days over contraception and birth control here's a little bit from mitch mcconnell. legislation that would ban any group that had just a quote moral objection not just a religious group but just to any group that had a moral objection to that would would you be willing to push that in the. yeah you know if we end up having to try to overcome the president's opposition by legislation of course i'd be happy to support it. all right so not just you know in religious organizations the catholic church doesn't have to do it but now if any organization of the boss morally objects to something he doesn't have to provide you with insurance that's crazy i think. the real compromise here the real ideal

thing the thing on which we can all agree is that health insurance should not be tethered to employment and that is that that is the absolute worst way to go about it because if you get fired from the job if you get laid off you can't bring that insurance with you so in also it destroys the better you are going to be around you need to state your case on health care well no i mean way no but the important thing i mean i do have i do know that it's good to have that guy shouldn't you be able to have the guarantee that you can have health insurance from your company so it's not just up to some of the whim of some boss want to feel what i like about this is that it's religious or moral objections so i can just see any boss being like ok let me see the price tag for all of these things ok i got a moral objection to that surgery too expensive got a moral objection to that i mean but it was a really creative way to like corporations pick and choose what they want to do i hear what you're saying but at what point do you stop i mean you're talking about a cadillac health care plan right that's that's the ideal it's got everything in it right ok so they don't force me to give people dental readings actually so i mean.

we're going to going to go all the way through and say ok everything is permissible i mean people are going to want to cut costs somewhere but i don't think that that's where the religious objections come up and i do think that once we're talking about you know forcing religious employers versus regular employers to do certain things i mean if we're talking about somebody who runs a small business for instance and employs the rest of his family not a religious organization but this person is a religious person they should be forced to purchase something that they don't that they don't agree with you know in terms of moral i don't understand why there were even be any connection i just i don't want my employer to know anything about my health care i don't want them to have any. hand in it if they are paying for my health care insurance that should be it well i think you buy an idea you should eventually and you're invited on the bracket insurance company which will not have you know much power and that should mean you almost agree with me and so you know we'll get a fist bump out of it i mean you know that's just on really still a highly debated topic now shoot we're running out of time so i think we're going to skip once we've discovered had the sports illustrated and and who is on the

cover i think we have a clip of this girl first i mean damn. all right there she is on the cover everyone always looks for is to swimsuit issue every year but what is up one of those. anyway katie bottoms and you want you to wear one all you want to me to one side and i objected on principle because it's a that's what morals yeah you know i should do in order to leave a little bit to the imagination it's like a fine and sexy if it's a swimsuit edition i mean you know there was no imagination how emissary would there is in being with playboy let alone for a maverick this big some say oh we're going to this segment is really just about having been able to show that show that clip avi that you have related to have congress are you guys you got to wrap it up thanks for joining me that's it for tonight say oh thanks for tuning in make sure we come back tomorrow kevin last

encounter hall is going to join us for happy hour in the meantime don't forget we can family l'arche on facebook and follow us on twitter there's anything you ever miss that's all you tube dot com flashy on our show and coming up next is the. culture is the same us guardian for you lot are enormous almost all we're going to take your pick off an island for them i'll be in britain and argentina against sparring over the legal status and future of these islands is this just beautiful.