the. look of the large show the real headlines with none of the mersey because i live in washington d.c. monday so that means we're going to have a monday hangover panel we're going to speak the brazilian president's visit to washington the white house backing out on forcing federal contractors to disclose their political donations and training programs for the unemployed that are running out of money then david sirota is going to join us to talk about laws being passed in the states to let corporate secrets things like what goes on in factory farms

say secret and a look at a report that says the u.s. funded trained to any k. right here on u.s. soil as we get more details about the group that's on the state department's designated list of terrorist organizations and ask why the u.s. government would arm that kind of all that morphine and i including a dose of happy hour but first take a look at the mainstream media has decided to me it's. all right so just last week it was announced by the pentagon like the lead sheikh mohammad and four coconspirators would finally be facing trial not in our federal civilian courts like the administration had been pushing for but in a military commission and the media gave it a little bit of play. police shaikh mohammad set to face the death penalty now for his role in the nine eleven attacks terrorism charges were filed for the second time because khalid shaikh muhammad the pentagon has announced a new military trial for the self-confessed mastermind this restart

a process to have the group go through a military court system. now friday show we walked through the timeline for you of how it was that this story this battle between a civilian trial and a military commission really played out and we specifically pointed out how it was the mainstream media that really pale played into the fear mongering and how dangerous it would be to try a terrorist on u.s. soil despite the fact that all these things are done all the time i mean really at the time they went completely nuts over this. with five years ago this is the most reckless dangerous and irresponsible he says giving them a platform where they can preach to the least of terrorists into the united states colleen shaikh mohammad military commissions responsible to do york for trial just blocks from the world trade center close for comfort here at war hate america. conscionable act of war for merck has been

a platform again to vehicles in our border we were here illegally. but a difference in time makes anyway the reason i'm bringing this up again is because today stranger reported on some new bits of information to give us insight into how this trial is going to play out let's not forget the same may have confessed to plotting nine eleven there's also the whole torture aspect the fact that he was water boarded one hundred eighty three times just in the first month of his captivity not to mention other techniques that were used on him so there have been some questions as to just exactly what the federal prosecutors are going to do a military commission rules also do state that evidence of taint through torture is inadmissible but here's what spencer ackerman pointed out today the government is hoping that means you can also get mody cheney of course for associates of they're hoping that with his testimony they can just forget all about the torture stuff he

conic separate plea deal one thousand years in prison for testifying against the nine eleven conspirators on a dumb thing to do with the plot or that's what officials believe and he just learned about it from chaos and after congress also never tortured so what he says can be used in the military commission and the military commissions don't allow evidence of taint through torture to be used they do have more lenient rules on hearsay evidence so how all of this plays out exactly well that has yet to be seen but there is one gigantic problem that it could all bring up the trial against them will probably be the largest terrorist. we have one of the worst things on our record though as a country post nine eleven is that our values were thrown out the window when we tortured so the largest terrorism trial goes by without addressing the issue of torture and the book has been closed without ever being read the government will continue to face no consequences their own legal actions will not hinder their legal case and this entire dark episode of our history will be left unresolved all bothers me here is that the mainstream media now they give

a damn right you saw the noise the hysteria over the possibility of a trial being held in new york city that was fake outrage that was manufactured fear and yet when it comes to the torture record the fact that nobody has been held accountable for that they don't even try to fake it again was supposed to be the government watchdog gives the government a complete pass and chooses another huge miss. all right so it's all in one day but there is a lot to talk about because the news doesn't stop over the weekend even though we might have technically not been here in the office so for this today's monday hangover let's talk money let's talk economy for a zillion president dilma rousseff is in town today discuss monetary policy energy amongst other things what specifically my obama be able to learn from resilient leader and it seems the white house has abandoned its push to force spiral contractors to disclose their political donations so i have something to do with

the election that's coming up and government funds to train the unemployed across the u.s. are drying up now to news now that some private companies are finally picking up their hiring so grab your water grab your painkillers it's time for a monday hangover. all right so here to discuss this all with me today is they have any rand as zero director of economic research for the reason the nation and matthew o'bryant associate editor at the atlantic sentiment thank you for joining me today ok let's start with brazil right last year still overtook u.k. they are now the sixth largest economy and so kind of a big deal that president taylor reserve is here visiting but what she did is she kind of went after obama about america's loose monetary policy right criticize our low interest rates and so i'm just curious what it is that you think about that i

mean it's not even something that she can pin on obama i know that jay carney just said talk to the treasury and the fed about what you would present you talk to the fed about it although president obama did. board some respects i guess maybe loosely like it to the presidency but they do. i have somewhat of a complaint in that low interest rates are hitting the emerging market countries brazil and this is trying to elevate themselves on the global stage and this this trip is part of that she's in the didn't just come to talk to president obama today she's going on to boston. to give speeches in at mit and harvard and there they are trying to push a lot of brazilian students to go to the united states to get educated deeper in sciences and in technology in brazil wants to be one of the big global players this is part of it and i think that they are a little bit afraid that the u.s. economic picture is going to slow down that progress and i think that's part of the

message. well what do you think about the if you i mean what she didn't get all of this i guess you could say was a state dinner right didn't get the red carpet treatment and so in a certain respect is that is that a bit of a shine is that saying you know you're not up there with david cameron yet a little bit brazil is probably the country's been hit the hardest by the so-called currency wars that's what they talk about and you know they have a complaint you know there the reality is you have we overvalue the question of the deficit the trade deficit with the u.s. and there's actually you know common purpose here with the u.s. brazil when you talk about china you know they both look at china so you knew the real problem here so there is some room for cooperation it's not just about you know the fed doing quantitative easing the brazilian economy. i have you know something maybe to throw at you guys i'm not quite exactly sure how you're going to respond to it but look for back chris like into friday and the president had this

women's forum at the time he made a little joke about what if there were more women in congress they have a clip i think a lot. fewer than twenty percent of the seats in congress are occupied by one. is it possible that congress will get more done if there were more women in congress thank you experts say joe thanks for the say thank you. that is that is almost guaranteed. all right all jokes aside i mean wherever you go girl power and go dilma rousseff i'm happy that there's a female president brazil but the thing about her is that she's got a seventy seven percent approval rating and i was in the latest poll that was done just in march and you know when you look at it the areas that she rang ties and were handling unemployment poverty and hunger you know i mean so there isn't anything out of her policies that you think that president obama can learn from you know that could be applied here obviously a very different country is going to hold that that's

a highly complex country different countries different economies different demographics different roles to play in the world. broadly speaking the chief has done an impressive job she kind of rode on the coattails of the predecessor to do a huge degree and i think that speaks to a lot of what she's been able to do and why she's got a lot of approval in brazil has not declined in the midst of the global turmoil over the past several years and that respect you know she's she's done a good job in the eyes for people it's understandable she has that approval rating . this is kind of me right now you know the developing economy is much different from us where we are right now so it's understandable why you know see that approval rating. you know on the other hand brazil has you know a different model is capitalism have more of a social aspect to it obama could learn from a bit if you look at things like employment shirts and look at job retraining going to talk about those areas were definitely pretty well that level let's talk about that right that's our next topic and. this is what's happening as the stimulus has

run out right here in washington what they've been doing is constantly extending unemployment insurance or anything in benefits but we haven't really been talking about a whole lot of these training programs for the unemployed and so a lot of states are starting to just who's funds are completely drying up and you know so i wouldn't do that because it's not the area that we should specifically be focusing on some people don't believe that the government can create jobs the camp the government help provide training so that now that the economy is slowly picking back up again right it looks like the private sector is hiring again so that you can actually have workers that are prepared or that are trained for the jobs that need filling this is the lowest of low for training workers if you look at the u.s. we have a much different education model in countries like france or germany where you have to tear truck you have people who go to college and you have occasional schools and that's kind of where we have workers and fall in between the cracks and the people who don't have quite the skills to fill the jobs that we need. good manufacturing

jobs and that's where community colleges and that's where job retraining program we're failing there we're getting the funds to just go away because i know that's not a priority right and obama's new budget he's asking for i think two point eight billion dollars more of these training programs in the republican budget training programs are one of the things that gets. it is actually true that leverage and skills mismatch is one of the biggest problems with the employment labor pool today and this is not actually just a unique to you right now in two thousand. in the past couple of years this is better a growing problem this is going actually going to continue to be a growing problem for the next decade as we're sort of we're shifting we're you know it's growing probably less right now than we were in two thousand and six just so we know it right we were going to action that we were yeah which is it was kind of nuts that we were spending more when we were in a recession we are now we don't necessarily have to be completely dependent on federal training programs there's a new york times article today about this in the lead in that was that a company

a band line is trying to look for more commercial truck drivers and they in there's not enough people that have been going to federal programs to get these you know to get these license and they cost money to be able to take what they can pay for that training there's no reason that we as taxpayers need to pay for the training for drivers for alice fan they can pay workers those workers can commit to a two year contract they may work for alice she used to cover the training that they have that they do anywhere else this is a model that can work it's something that american workers need to get their heads around those this is different than the way we're used to doing what we're used to being able to go and get a job can't do that anymore we're trying to be reliant on a federal program operates right and get it was you know if you really do any training when you're in college you know you're reading about now we need to excite yeah but now we need to accept that you know maybe the model is ok i want to be a commercial truck driver will rather than having the taxpayers pay the four thousand other class for this the company i'm going to work for they're going to

pay for it and then i get a guaranteed job for a couple of years from now i just i'm very skeptical of that companies these days who don't want to have to spend an extra dime because all they want to focus on is profit are going to be willing to do that training the balance right so maybe they think that maybe we need them selves off if it was that was one it's one of great legs to the absolute let's to our last story here before we wrap this up to is that a year ago about a year ago the obama administration said that they were going to force federal contractors to disclose their political donations it's been about a year now so the hill. reporting well it seems like this is dead to some people and they said yeah it's probably not going to happen before the election and i mean why do you think that is is not kind of a popular theme right now is that we want more transparency with more accountability with that actually help them in getting reelected i think on this one there was a little too much political cost you know the republicans attack this is an attack on political speech there are other parts of campaign finance reform a slam dunk for democrats you talk about corporations disclosing who's. giving

money talk about individuals and super pacs this was a little bit harder to really make a ration is there not that conduit is this is that when this is this is really the obama administration picking the wrong point to sort of like kneel down for the republicans because this is actually very very important federal contractors they can pass if their rent seeking through their donations and disguising it as a political speech we don't why it's a political speech staple by any means but we also don't like companies to be able to be giving donations that wind up getting directly related to them getting a bid that's problem that's transparency that both parties should come around to. well hopefully something will happen right there's a number of the legislation they're kind of working their way through publicly see after two thousand and twelve election after the election but that's kind of you know if you ask me kind of a week i'm a smart enough ration our guys thanks so much for joining me tonight from. coming up after the break a look into legislation aims to keep the truth hidden from you about everything

from factory farms to fracking to what's up with the legalized cover up we'll speak with author david sirota soon as they come back. down the official ante up location until i phone the i pod touch from the i choose option. one child's life on the go. video on demand. cheese month old costs and omissions for you now in the palm of your. question on the. wealthy british soil the sun. is not subscribed to the front of the.

market why not. come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with much stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into cars a report on our cheap.

the sky. the light will come down. say last year carriers will be singing. and i we have a glimmer of hope in the epic battle between copyright trolls and internet users see in this fight the copyright rolls of pornography company called hard drive productions hard drive moms who wanted their films called amateur allured nataly at first sixty three days and they found the ip addresses of ninety users who downloaded ruby through bittorrent service so in true troll fashion the company wanted to take their information to the california courts so they could physically identify the people they were pirating the material and that would force the infringers to pay out or face a lawsuit now until they reach the court hard drive the narrative down just to the infringing computers when hard drive got to the u.s. district court of northern california they didn't quite get the stamp of approval

to hunt down the pirates in person judge howard lloyd said that he would permit the discovery the judicial term for identifying individuals if the company showed good cause by proving that the person is real and if the company identified all the steps that were used to find out person that is the thing hard drive didn't quite meet the requirements judge lloyd called the company's monitoring process a fishing exercise went on so explain that just because he has the account holders name does not mean that the account holder was the one stealing the video and when president the judge the company admitted that the geo location tracker used to find the infringers most reliable but only for determining which country the addresses in not which state which is exactly what the judge would need since as a district court ruling now obviously the hard drive productions case fell apart and the judge denied their request to find the people saying the following the court recognizes that plaintive is aggrieved by the apparent infringement and is sympathetic towards its argument that lawsuits like this look like this one are the

only way for it to find and stop infringers however. the court will not assist the plaintiffs who seems to have no desire to actually litigate but instead seems to be using the courts to pursue an extrajudicial business plan against possible infringers and innocent others and i esteem that so it's like the courts are actually exercising some common sense here nobody's advocating for anyone to steal someone else's property but trolling around on the web and blackmailing people it's not the best way to teach them a lesson so this ruling is just more good news for those who oppose copyright trolls out there especially since just two months ago and they get here all right haven had seven and more of their loss was thrown out of course because they couldn't provide to the judge any reason not to dismiss their suits now the judge was ruling only affects the state of california but the more decisive decisions like his and the better the chances the trolls will be stopped for good and see me as a glimmer of hope. now we know the government likes to keep its own secrets from the

people specially when they can throw under the banner of national security but how about when it comes to keeping her part secrets and states across the country legislation has been passed to keep factory farming practices away from public view as well as the toxic chemicals that are used for fracking as well as corporate tax disclosure off the books he would think he would think of the better inform the public the better it is for the country the more transparency the easier it is for problems to be addressed so if that's the case what's behind these laws they like corporations keep their secrets well join me to discuss it is david sirota talk radio host and author of that to our future how the one nine hundred eighty s. explain the world we live in now they were thanks for joining us tonight you know you wrote about this and you mentioned a number of different pieces of legislation that were working their way through the states out there but let's start specifically with the ag gag laws that you referred to can you tell us more about where it's happening you know there's about five states right now. basically criminal i was in the act over

infiltrating a factory farm taking pictures of factory farm when i'm authorized and this is in response to the consumer backlash of the factory farming industry in light of revelations about the mistreatment of animals a sanitary conditions at factory farm so road and clean up factory farms rather than states making sure regulators are making sure the factory farms are cleaning themselves up the factory farming industry agribusiness is join together to moderate state legislatures to pass laws that simply prevent citizens from finding out what kind of atrocities are happening in most direct response why do we have any idea how much money they're really spending on this stuff you know what i'm going to curious as to what exactly the case is that they make to the legislators when they're pushing this type of you know this. bail aside from i guess the fact that it's if it's private industry that i want to learn on their property

trespassing right and taking pictures if they don't know it well the business industry is one of the most powerful corporate interests in our state legislatures right now and the amount of money they spend on lobbying and campaign contributions it's absolutely enormous again especially at the state level where a lot of the regular vision is supposed to be taken place where you basically argue is that they are going to make a private property rights argument they also make a sign or argument they essentially say that for a state to protect its own economic interests it has to prevent annoying or otherwise troublesome meddlesome activists and journalists from calling into question how those economic interests are behaving so you've got two arguments you've got a private property argument and you have it basically an economic protection argument and of course left to the wayside are questions about animal rights and human health the danger of the food supply that

a lot of these stories that have gotten inside agriculture operations have really. yeah what does that tell you about priorities and imagine that you know that a lot of these responsibilities are left up to the states but at the same time if you look at what's happening on a federal level right now you have the f.d.a. who looks like it might get slashing in the budget if there are public much especially because there is saying that well they when it comes to poultry farms we're going to let them self inspect and essentially let them self regulate because it's just too expensive. that's always the argument that the industry should be able to regulate itself and frankly that was the argument that was made back during the time it up in sinclair's that the jungle of the jungle of course was that was the famous novel that was written eighty or ninety years ago at the time right before the first food safety laws were passed in this country and the industry at that point said listen you know not to worry about the dangers of the food supply don't worry about the way workers in these factory farms are treated the way

handles are treated and ultimately we as a society said no we do have to worry about how all of this is happening and we can't trust the industry to regulate itself we can't trust the docs to guard the henhouse right now it's actually corporations in the agriculture industry making it the opposite case they've gone back to make new case that they made back in at the or any early twentieth century that we should all just simply be in love the problem is that we know that an industry that has a vested interest in maximizing profit is going to cut corners is not going to regulate especially the food supply in a way that most consumers would expect and want to be grating. yes that's right they sound very promising me at all but it's not just happening in the agriculture industry at fracking but you also bring out this piece of legislation that was passed in pennsylvania that this sounds so crazy to me tail if you can going it out i'm sure of fracking is this controversial oil and gas drilling process where oil and gas trailers pump huge amounts of water and toxic chemicals deep into the earth

to try to extract extra amounts of oil and gas from existing wells there have been questions about whether fracking has contaminated around water there and studies from duke university studies from the environmental protection agency suggesting that people have a lot to worry about in terms of those toxic chemicals getting into groundwater supplies the so the industry has responded first by trying to block any even disclosure of what kinds of chemicals it's putting into the ground so laws that have been put forward simply said the industry you have to tell us what you're doing what you're putting into the ground and the not not cause that you can't with the stuff in the ground the industry has that in some cases the industry has been forced to concede and say i will sell some state regulators in some states what kinds of chemicals were we're putting into the ground except they are even at that point in some states they are trying to kind of end around in pennsylvania they've actually passed a law which says that while the industry has to disclose the state regulators for

chemicals they're putting into the ground and physicians can have access to those that information if they're treating a patient who may have been exposed to those toxic chemicals that physicians can't actually tell a patient specifically what chemicals they have been exposed to so it's a it's a physician eric law. now you know we already thought about the fact that clearly there is money involved here obviously natural gas oil industry they've got a lot of money to throw around the agriculture industry is a lot of money if they're around but it does seem so contradictory right because we know the government as i started out this bit they like to veil a lot of things here see when they can claim that it's good for you because it's a matter of national security and therefore it's keeping you safe but then here you know this is a matter of public health and therefore public security and line is money i guess just why does money went out right why do the corporations went out in this sense when it's really about what's what's going in all of our bites because this is a body dominated political system where the ideologies change when they serve money

be there is no ideology unfortunately consistent in our politics which says the public should be served what it says is that arguments about the public and you served will shift as long as shifting those arguments means that money and property is protected by a question of many of these industries because remember many of these industries that are using the government to using the power of the law to hide information from public money you can say they have nothing to hide but there's a there's a dissonance between saying that they have nothing to hide if you will and gas industry so you know fracking is perfectly safe and at the same time saying they don't even want the public to know what kinds of chemicals are being used and if you have nothing to hide and you want to be using while you might be a political campaign contributions you get states to pass laws so let you have been for me. just makes sense david i want to thank you so much for joining us tonight thanks for having me. just ahead he said i read it and then why is the us

government training a group that they themselves list as a foreign terrorist organization mistake with rays of iraq from the national iranian american council that the apparent conflict of interest. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so for like you think you understand it and then you glimpse something else and you hear or see some other part of it and realized everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.