so. welcome to the lower show we'll get the real headlines with none of the mersey are going to live out of washington d.c. now tonight we're going to take a look at more nuclear talks with iran and a boost for nuclear spending in the u.s. defense budget the only is going to join us to get into all of the details then slipped into the n.b.a. for two thousand and thirteen is an amendment that would lift a ban on the dissemination of propaganda by the state department here at home so is that supposed to make us feel comfortable oh michael hastings who broke the story is going to join us tonight and then jolt head of law he's been fighting are a for years over insane fees for downloading and sharing just thirty songs that

this week the supreme court refused to hear his case throughout all of that and more for you tonight including a dose of happy hour but first take a look at what the mainstream media decided to miss. so the facebook i.p.o. media frenzy continues but this time there's more there's an investigation that's now being launched against facebook and morgan stanley. facebook fiasco it's getting ugly or should i say ugly or there shouldn't be questions about whether some investors got special treatment before the summer and are asking whether or not the brands that handled the deal get preferred clients negative information about facebook before the shares were less than a week after facebook stock went public shareholders are suing it now the social network and its c.e.o. mark zuckerberg distribution under way in the wake of facebook's are supporting stock performance insiders and not the average american investor allegedly got

ahead on potentially negative news about facebook the big trouble for facebook and its lead underwriter a lawsuit filed today in a manhattan court against facebook and morgan stanley behind this suit investors seeking answers about the social media giants floundering i.p.o. morgan stanley accused of setting the i.p.o. price to. hi and selling too many shares the regulators here i want to know is if morgan stanley the chief underwriter professor only told some clients that it was lowering its earnings projections for facebook instead of telling everybody regulators are looking into whether morgan stanley tipped off some clients ahead of time about a negative report on the i.p.o. as potential value plus facebook is being accused of concealing analysts low estimates of growth of facebook so the lawsuits of flying. now this is actually pretty interesting i'm not going to knock them for covering it but

this is how our world works right where the big dogs cheat their way through the system it's all about the other lowly investors they are the ones that get duped and lose big what i'd like to point out today is that this kind of thing happens all the time by this kind of thing i mean the rampant corruption if you look at our financial system our government the big industries they're all in bed with each other and every time an investigation like this is launched some kind of scandal emerges then the mainstream media is completely shocked like they never could have possibly imagined it's the same thing with j.p. morgan's massive loss worth billions of dollars right the mainstream media acting completely shocked that practice is all wall street haven't changed at all since the financial crash and so here's where i'd like to get into a few details for you if they haven't bothered following through one just so you can stay informed and in the loop now as you all know there's a probe that's been launched into j.p. morgan's laws but don't worry guess who they have hired to help them fight it and acts as the c. and force mint chief so do you want

a little more revolving door trivia the senate banking committee is going to be holding hearings on this matter they even hope to have jamie dimon himself testify well luckily for jamie dimon the staff director in charge of managing this banking committee just happens to be a former j.p. morgan lobbyist it all just goes to show you that if you think some real justice is going to come down on jamie diamond in g.p. morgan after this loss think again for some reason the mainstream media never follows through and gives you these kinds of details just like they didn't highlight was at least an attempt to remedy one area in which conflicts of interest are involved a bill introduced by senators bernie sanders and barbara boxer to ban these types of conflicts of interest at the federal reserve because what happens is you have financial executives often sitting on these fed boards even though they're the ones often receive things like financial aid from the federal reserve now i could go on for days with these problems unfortunately there are too few solutions being offered out there like this bill but if the mainstream media really cared about

informing the public about the massive amounts of corruption and they would they would tell you about it but they don't they choose to miss. well another round of the six power nuclear talks kicks off today in baghdad and the expectations are pretty low at least that so many current and former fish former officials are saying pushing the term confidence building measures as the goal now the center of the debate are of course sanctions against iran and some say that iran's tentative agreement to allow the i to inspect the parchin military complex puts the ball into washington's court but could a long drawn out process actually be the best thing for all parties involved or will the agitators in the u.s. the people they just announced days ago the u.s. is ready to strike iran get their way joining me to discuss this is joseph cirincione president of the ploughshares fund joe thanks so much for joining

a lot of pressure ok so what's your take am i right here when i say that nobody really seems to think that there is going to be a whole lot that comes out of this summit i think there is going to be a lot and i'm not even sure i'm not sure we're ready for it precisely because washington is used to the idea of iran stonewalling and promising and then withdrawing but we've seen something very interesting in the last couple of days which is a series of concrete steps by iran to start to meet the demands of the six parties who are negotiating with them this is the u.n. security council plus germany this is these are complicated negotiations this is a program that's been going on for decades iran has invested billions of dollars in it you're not going to stop this program and in day that's why it's actually good news that the talks did not end today but agreed to continue to tomorrow we'll know more by this time tomorrow what do we know now in terms of you know like you said what iran has done what proposals are being offered by the security council here's what the u.n. wants which is just have

a one stop enriching uranium to very high levels bring it very close to bomb grade levels stop doing that take. stuff that you have shipped out of the country start to dismantle those facilities fine you may be willing to do that that's to break through exchange we want you to start lifting the sanctions that you put on us this is why you ron is at the table this sanction regime is the strictest that has ever been imposed on any country in history and it's hurting iran's economy its currency is in trouble that's why you're wrong wants to talk you can see the makings of a deal here we'll know tomorrow but realistically right there very clearly these concessions that you've laid out that the both sides want can you even really look at it that way can we ever say that oh it's going to be success when iran decides that it will enrich is uranium passed over twenty percent and then that means everything will be over or vice versa right we will lift sanctions and then everything will be over is it just going to have to be this kind of maybe sort of

certain parties are pretty pleased a little bit kind of process that would you just to i don't know what i want to get out with that's what's going to happen because it's not going to be clear you know you don't buy a house in a day you're not going to stop a multibillion dollar nuclear program in a day this is going to take weeks months of negotiations some people think we're going to be in this process for years for the key is that while you're doing it to both parties get some will leave can both parties claim some victory because iran gets some relief from the sanctions the other side is sure that iran is not secretly building a bomb are you lengthening the time it would take for them to break out that's why what we expect is to have these talks produce a framework agreement that can be slowly implemented just like you laid out step by step they do something they get a reward they do something else they get a reward that's the way it's got to work is that says this guy was actually growing up perhaps the definition of these confidence building measures that's exactly what these two countries these two sides don't trust each other but that's exactly what

they're negotiating we negotiate with people we don't trust all the time banks car salesman friends you know this this is an example of where you it's not about. do you like the person do you trust you're the person you have a mutual security objective that you're interested in pursuing you have to do it piece by piece you also though do you have a very powerful very vocal group of senators dry other members of congress that have you have also the vaster to israel from the u.s. they just said what was it last week that we'll be ready to to attack iran at any time you have letters that have been written for members of congress you have this resolution that was passed in the house which a lot of people say lowers the bar for going to war with a rod and so how do you keep those people a day off and let this long process carry through there is a hardline faction in israel in the united states and in iran that actually don't want to agreement that conflict is what they prefer some of the iranians feel that yes bring it on we want you to attack the country that would unite the country

around an otherwise unpopular regime that supports everything we've been saying about the us for years who some people in israel who want to attack iran but not really for the nuclear program but to eliminate it as a supporter for hezbollah and hamas there's some in the u.s. who are still in them are the same way they were before the iraq war that we should use the u.s. military as our instrument to we make the world tehran is standing in our way let's push them aside so you still have those forces and you saw some of them appear opinion making their opinion known in the opinion pages today this is senator lieberman senator graham saying he will suspect that like it's going to people who told us that iraq was going to be a cakewalk or telling us we should attack iran i hope people learn their lesson i want to i want to switch gears a little bit we talk a lot about the defense budget here this new n.d.a. that's being pushed for fiscal two thousand and thirteen and the house passed a certain version last week and so i want to talk about a sign from the fact that they bumped up defense spending by an extra eight billion

that the pentagon didn't even ask for they're also bumping up as part of that spending on nuclear. so let's talk about that let's talk about what that might do to the the new start treaty that was just signed so i worked on the house armed services committee staff for seven years i've tracked this process for decades this is the most extreme defense bill i've ever seen come out of the house of representatives and it's part of what's wrong with washington how it's broken down there's no quick this is passed and almost triply party line so you don't get the kind of reasonable consensus among the elders that you used to get in the house so what you have is a bill that violates the law it puts eight billion dollars more than the congress passed last year limiting the amount of money you could spend on defense it actually in some ways violates the constitution it bans gay marriage is a military base is something that's allowed in states and of course it goes crazy

nukes it says we're going to construct a new anti-missile site on the east coast it says we should introduce tactical nuclear weapons back into the career it says we should spend more on nuclear weapons not less it and it says to pay for all this we're going to slash domestic programs fortunately the senate has to agree to this and so far the senate seems to be showing a little more common sense. one last thing too that i want to ask is obviously i think that you and i have spoken about this the start treaty right and the entire painful process took to get it passed many many times before and that was touted as one of president obama's biggest foreign policy achievements that of course you got a lot of naturally they're exploiting that for this coming election but i'm just wondering let's say that something does happen that republicans do get their way when it comes to defense that there are certain roadblocks that are placed into being able to follow through with implementing this treaty how much do average americans care you and i care about you know reducing the amount of nuclear weapons we talk about all the time but is that really something that is

a sticker when it comes to voting well. here's how it plays out you're right the same people who are against passing an arms control agreement back in two thousand and ten are we fighting it now and they're trying to put a stick in the spokes prevent the president from implementing this treaty denying him money saying no we can't dismantle any weapons at all what happens is the parents how the president plays this so that i think for the average american. voter they don't really care how many weapons we have as long as they feel that the president is strong is protecting america ronald reagan cut more nuclear weapons of any president on earth but everybody thought he was a strong leader this is obama's test right now his political team think that national security is a winning issue for him so they're pushing national security not just the guy who got bin laden the guy who's putting our enemies in the crosshairs but i'm the guy who's reducing defense who shifting money over to domestic resources i'm looking for obama to make a stand on this next month you bring me back if that's true i don't hear you back

because i'm going to be waiting patiently here in iowa now you something other than you know going after al qaeda and the defeating the momentum of the momentum of the talent show nuclear cuts make us stronger not weaker ok well then we'll see you back next month maybe thank you so much for joining us my pleasure. i thought it comes that i said. but i read it and then we told you about the n.b.a. but they tend to hear about an amendment included in the bill that some claim is a creeping crashes.

i urge.

all right guys it's time for you said it i read it right take time to respond to my brilliant hwang gauging viewer comments from facebook twitter and you tube because when you have something to say i listen now let's first start with a hater out there who responded to our tweet about sergeant jacob george and truthout meyerson being on the show he tweeted to us tyler hale said at the lot of show i swear you get some of the worst guests of all time now my assumption here correct me if i'm wrong tyler my assumption is that tyler doesn't like the fact that we interviewed a veteran who served three tours in afghanistan but who then chose to throw his service medals away in protest of nato this past weekend in chicago and the truth is tyler you don't have to agree with jake up but if you claim to be

a conservative libertarian but american first as it says in your twitter description you should at least listen before you name call you only one percent of americans actually have been fighting our wars in the last ten years and when so many of them now come out and protests are trying to get the rest of our attention when it comes to what the consequences are of our foreign policy of rod you owe it to them to pay attention nobody said supporting the troops means only supporting them when you agree with them now or next comment the man responded to a story that we did on monday about the fact that there have been two thousand wrongful convictions since one nine hundred eighty nine he said thank you for doing a story on wrongful convictions on monday it means a lot to me that the alone a show will go that extra mile is a subject i feel not enough americans are aware of or just don't care thank you so much now i wasn't here on monday christine was filling in for me but i think that our viewers know that whether i'm here or not you can expect a certain quality of content and that's covering those stories that are under

covered including the incredible flaws in our justice system a lot of americans have a strong. opinion when it comes to being tough on crime but very few actually hear of the often faulty results so we're happy to cover but that's also think the organizations the institutions out there that compile these statistics and reports in order to inform us all now in this case that would be the national registry of exonerations that's been compiled by the university of michigan law school and northwestern university and finally left eye on the new tweeted this to us is that after you alone show please change your twitter profile pic to something be fitting a serious journalist you are way more than just a pretty face. and i know i know i've heard a lot of complaints from our followers about that twitter avatar i'm still looking for a new pictures of bear with me and i thank you for the compliment i don't really promise that my new picture will be a serious one we all you to be able to laugh at ourselves and so why not start with your twitter avatar and then really quick i want to say thank you to all of you out

there that send us private messages on facebook but i do want to let you know that we will not be using those private facebook messages on this segment is here at the show we actually value your right to privacy so we don't know if you want to be private or not so if you actually want to read on air you can tweet it to us comment on you tube or write it on our facebook wall that's it for tonight probably back with more responses next week as usual. our we spoke in a lot about the national defense authorization bill for two thousand and thirteen that's working its way through congress the version that passed the house last week included eight billion more dollars than required thanks to republicans as well as provisions banning same sex marriage ceremonies on military installations and continuing the ban on transfers of give the detainees to u.s. soil and the white house even issued a veto threat for these reasons but the house passed it anyway there's also been a battle over amendments attempting to either overturn early limit last year's provision which allows for indefinite detention including that of u.s.

citizens while all that stuff isn't publicized there's another amendment out there that almost slipped by under the radar introduced by representatives adam smith and max thornberry bipartisan team the amendment aims to strike down a ban on the dissemination of propaganda by the state department and the broadcasting board of governors on domestic audiences now some say is creeping fascism others try to claim it offers transparency so joining me to discuss it is michael hastings rolling stone contributing editor and author of the new book the operators the wild and terrifying inside story of america's war in afghanistan my goal thanks for coming back on the show tonight has gone it's going well but i'm curious to hear you know what you have to say and this you're the first one that did the story you got the scoop obviously you thought it was important enough to write about would you go as far as you know juan cole did when he said that this is creeping fascism. certainly some people are definitely saying that look

i got the story because there were people within congress within the pentagon and evil outside you know human rights activists who did them and then raised some serious red flags primarily why does the state department and other government agencies need less restrictions in the terms of the material or propaganda that can be produced and distributed in the u.s. just just to back up a second just when exactly what this it looked that means that any of our our like the state department what they were using is produced overseas as a target you know al qaida or target other foreign population that they will then distribute that back home so that the general idea but yeah i mean i think that there's clearly some question should be raised about this i don't know if we need to be making more propaganda and making it easier for the government to spread it one i want you to go into more detail about what exactly it is that you think the state department is putting out there is always talk about war propaganda first of

all there aren't restrictions on the pentagon which i find to be very interesting but that's something that we see out there all the time when it comes to the state department the broadcasting board of governors i'm assuming we're talking about you know voice of america radio free liberty but specifically what is the state department put out there in torrance foreign audiences against al qaeda. well that's exactly it right so example that the proponents of the bill give is that the state of arm has some really great material that they produced in somalia to turn people against al qaeda that they then want to target somali you at u.s. to distance who are small and sent back home so that that's what they're sort of saying the other argument the state department is making is that this will help journalists and scholars having been a journalist now for about ten years and having dealt with the state of our regularly i am very skeptical of any claims of the state department is making in terms of trying to help me get more accurate and good information so i find that somewhat dubious but you have you have two tracks here so you have what the state

department is doing with this method which is to make it easier for any of the materials the propaganda materials they produce overseas to distribute at the united states at the same time separately and this is not included in the event it is what is what the pentagon has been trying to do now is really aggressively for the past two years which is to tear down the fire wall that traditionally separated public affairs which is talking to americans and information operations which which includes all sorts of activities that pentagon is engaged in overseas so essentially you have and they're also being with the pentagon who really want to get rid of this myth month amendment which is the original regional kind of law that this is overturning so you have a descent of assault on the u.s. population one could describe it by by these two branches of government that traditionally should be focused or are supposed to be focused on our national events and overseas both using their resources on the home front. now you know some

people would say that maybe this isn't that big of a deal anymore they say that in the internet age what does it really matter because you can go look online and probably read something that is meant for foreign audiences but you can read it from here at home and then people start to get all confused because you don't necessarily know who it's intended for in that case if it's propaganda which i want to get into that home and tell how do you know if it's true and so you know does the internet make bands like this obsolete. well that's part of the argument the proponents are making is that look the communication is it's changing because of the internet we need to make the stuff more accessible i admit but what its critics will point out is that this in a way is a way to indemnify the state department and other federal agencies against you know once stuff sort of leaks over instead it states then they won't be held accountable for it so this is just to make it easier for them to distribute this stuff across all all platforms i mean i think it should be noted that the pentagon itself. is

what's usually in these defense what's called the propaganda propaganda writer which is supposed to prevent the pentagon from using this from using propaganda of the united states what shocks me is that there is always now this is the second sort of story that i've done over the past year which deals with the sort of information operations that the government's running and so much of the response from journalists are you know this is not a big deal this is what the government should be doing which i always find quite incredible but so then i think we have to ask the question or this begs the question the entire conversation as to what exactly propaganda is right i mean on one hand you can obviously say that it's supposed to it's supposed to influence people in a certain way but are there restrictions when the state department puts stuff out there is that supposed to be factually accurate and correct or can they just make it up. right exactly now there are supposed to be restrictions and the question the question a lot of you have with this is where is the oversight going to be i mean this is

not just a this is on the front of the state department there's a push in the intelligence community to get rid of these laws i mean this is a widespread effort so the i mean how do you define propaganda what i mean i would define it as. stuff probably get as material that is not concerned with with the facts that in fact. bears no relation to the facts and that there would be no. expectation that what what the information is putting out is true now one could say that about a lot of the government puts out anyway but i think there's a distinction between fabricating events planning stories in newspapers and just sort of making up numbers making up results this sort of thing in my mind with all their propaganda and we don't know. you know what do we want our tax dollars being spent for this do we want journalists on the payroll and in other countries i think these are all legitimate questions now all good questions and you know a good point to bring up people like to claim that i work for a propaganda channel but i don't put lives out there i report on the truth and

facts and i throw my opinion obviously i just want to ask you lastly to go thing of what counts as propaganda right so right after the osama bin laden raid there was all this scandal that emerged because we found out that marc bolan kathryn bigelow who did the hurt locker had maybe met with the white house because they were going to do a film on the on the lawn and raid and today judicial watch actually got some of these documents as a court order and it turns out that they did actually give. paul some access and so i am what i have to say about that aside from of course the hypocrisy of who it's ok to to leak. well i mean clearly you know we as you talk about on your show quite a bit there is war on whistleblowers and then on the other hand you have this other track where top level of visuals are allowed to dole out classified information they think it's going to do their political advantage i mean i think it it's it's

troubling to say the least i think the idea that they're so willing to cooperate with hollywood filmmakers because they think it's going to be this glorifying picture is disturbing when so often it's so difficult to penetrate the sort of bale of secrecy surrounding our seventeen intelligence agencies the fact that they feel they're going to roll out the red that they are going to roll out the red carpet because they think there can be great you know a political gain from kind of creating you know what could i don't know what the movie's going to be but if it does i think and one would assume it's not like that act of valor movie that if you know it's propaganda or the treason one battleship. you know. not included in that criticism but but yeah i mean i think that it's this is pretty disturbing all around i was happy at least that you know people are paying attention and then calling them out on today michael thanks so much for joining us tonight. thank you. all right coming up after the break did you know the

defense budget actually cost us one trillion dollars here we're going to break down the details for you next and we'll speak with one man who's been battling with our i am over pirated music after the break we'll tell you about the true costs of downloading. is. it also going to see a story that seems so.