tonight r t a u.s. district judge is blocking indefinite military detention for american citizen judge catherine forrest says the n.c.a.a. violated the us constitution and journalistic freedom over the latest on the case. and just when the economy seemed to be work connery the u.s. census bureau says about income inequality is growing and poverty rates are stagnant one in five children falling below about lying and dr cornel west and thomas smiley will be coming into the studio to discuss this disturbing trend. and without further ado fed chairman ben bernanke announces another round of

quantitative easing this time the plan is to buy mortgage backed bonds to lower interest rates is this a last ditch attempt or a serious solution or a financial guru will break it all down for us. it's thursday september thirteenth eight pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wahl and you're watching. a victory today for reporters and activists fighting the controversial indefinite detention law a federal judge has ruled that the government cannot enforce a provision that allows the military to detain those who support terrorists or associated forces now those two words associated forces are key that's with us the plaintiff in the case against the government a group of seven reporters and activists say they believe they may fall under this category by reporting on the middle east they say under the n.b.a.

they could be indefinitely detained because their job sometimes require them to interact with terrorists well the judge granted a temporary and junction back in may but put a temper that put a temporary block on that part of the law federal judge catherine force has now made that order permanent carl mayer an attorney with merit law group and co-counsel for the plaintiffs joins us now welcome carel so i know that the latest on this today the government is now trying to appeal this ruling what does this ultimately mean for this case and how do you see it playing out. thank you as well thank you for having me on give my my greetings to dr west is covering the studio later it was interesting to work with him on this case as well what what we what today means is that the injunction that the judge issued back in may is now a permanent injunction and that has far reaching consequences it means that these indefinite detentions in the military tribunals cannot be utilized anywhere in the

united states of america not just in the southern district of new york or the new york area but any place in the united states of america so what was temporary has now been made permanent is a huge historic victory for democracy today we did learn late today that the obama administration unfortunately in our view has put in a notice of appeal indicating. that they plan to appeal this to the second circuit and probably ultimately to the supreme court we think this is ill advised because it contradicts president obama's campaign statements it contradicts his criticism of his own legislation in his signing statements and he knows as a former constitutional law professor that this is wholly unconstitutional because this language is so vague in this law and you gave some of the language earlier it talks about substantial support for associated forces and if any journalist or

activists is seen as reporting or offering opinions about groups that could somehow be linked not just to al qaeda but to any opponent of the u.s. or even opponents of our allies they could be sent to a military prison indefinitely without counsel potentially forever because the end of hostilities has no meaning so this is this is actually quite dramatic opinion that the judge wrote one hundred twelve page opinion i recommend that your listeners read it i think it's a refreshing break from the vapid austin fact free campaign that we see for the presidency between obama and romney if you want to see democracy in action you can go to our web site stop and. work or karl mayer dot com and it tells you how to get to view the opinion on line it's a real exercise in how democratic government should work very thoroughly written

extensively researched and footnoted i think this opinion is rock solid i think the obama administration can appeal it to the second circuit they can appeal to the supreme court they can appeal it to god almighty if they so choose but i don't think they're going to get this reversed because it's fundamentally founded the opinion is judge for support is fundamentally founded in actually first amendment doctrine that's been upheld time after time by even the conservatives on the supreme court. justice scalia is quoted in the opinion and i do want to read a part of that opinion carl from judge katherine forrest her ruling states quote due deference does not a limb an a b. judicial obligation to rule on properly presented constitutional questions court from a safeguard core constitutional rights a long line of supreme court precedent and here's to that fundamental principle and unequivocal language so kind of going along with that i mean your reaction to the

judge up holding. the constitution and more on these on how this law raises these questions of constitutionality. sure well that's what's so fascinating about the opinion i highly recommend it to your viewers that's what's so fascinating i think about judge forrest i think there is not too often judges are not profiled or discussed in the media and i think she ought to be because she is a very mainstream attorney former corporate attorney obama appointee and it's fascinating that she wrote this opinion and her opinion is really it's almost it's almost a class our constitutional right that's available this class is available if you read it to all americans it's disgusting as in detail how for example journalists

such as yourself and activists are protected under the first member right to free speech when they talk about issues even issues of national security and because they are so protected when congress passes a law that is so vague that law has a chilling effect on everyone speech and that is not permitted under our constitution. a journalist. your speech or your colleague speech producer speech or your or or other journalists that you work with by holding a sword of damocles over your head by threatening you with being detained by the military that's something that you that you have a fundamental right to be protected by the other right the other fundamental right you have is a right to due process meaning that let's assume they thought that a reporter for r.t.l. is engaged in acts expressive activity that supports terrorists you have a right to prove that that's not true in front of a jury of your peers what the obama administration has been saying is we're going

to take that right away from you and you're going to send you to a military prison or detain you indefinitely and that's not how the constitution works the constitution gives you those those fundamental bedrock protections and beyond that judge for. firmly and full throated lee said there are three branches of this government that's what the separation of powers is all about the executive branch the executive and congress can't just act unilaterally we as judges get to review what the executive branch does and that's what makes our democracy strong and vibrant and all too often in the last decade the executive branch has ignored. the judicial branch has ignored the judges has tried to ram down these anti civil liberties laws down the throats of the judges and i think judge forrest is now one of other federal several federal judges who are saying enough is enough we are part of the democratic process we're here to uphold the fundamental rights of all

americans the fundamental rights of journalists and activists and that's what she has done and so it is a very dramatic day for democracy and a big victory for you but we see that the government now is trying to file this appeal so fight and looks like it's going to continue do you see it karl going to the supreme court. well that i think that in large part depends on the obama administration i think they're ill advised to appeal this at all the obama administration is now lost three times they lost a temporary injunction they lost a motion for reconsideration and they lost a hearing on a permanent injunction i say three strikes you're out they ought to withdraw any attempt to appeal if they do appeal in the second circuit judge force opinion is grounded in second circuit law the second circuit is the highest appeal court in this area before the supreme court i have no doubt that the second circuit would

uphold judge force then it's a question of whether it goes to the supreme court if the administration is so intent on undermining the constitutional protections of american citizens that they want to take this to the supreme court. i wish them well in their endeavor but i don't forsee the supreme court with whether it's a conservative or liberal majority or whatever its configuration is i don't see the supreme court backing down from these fundamental constitutional principles and i don't expect they will enter a saying and of course this is a very significant case with a very serious ramifications carl do you think that it is getting enough attention in the media. i don't think so i must say i mean. we've been heartened r.t.l. has been reporting on this from the beginning there are a few radio stations around the country that i could name there's a gentleman named peter collins who has

a radio show in san francisco who has reported on this from the beginning there are a few columnists but it really shows the very very narrow scope of debate in this country that for example the major news outlets a.b.c. c.b.s. . n.b.c. nothing on this fox news nothing on it and then m s n b c nothing on it because this issue doesn't fit into their preconceived notions of there's a there's a fight between a democrat and a republican for the presidency and all they care about is their. hackneyed storyline that well there is a liberal democrat against a conservative republican the fact of the matter is there are more fundamental serious issues of democracy going on in judge force court room then on the entire campaign trail put together facts i would trade judge for one hundred twelve page opinion for every single scrap of paper and e-mail emanating out of the obama and

the romney campaign which are nothing but these attack ads and criticisms and it minutely false statements and instead you have a serious discussion of the issues and where the media is it shows they're just locked into these two parties it's unbelievable to me especially since it's the members of the media who are going to be the first ones detained in this the activist as well but they're all it's open season on activists in the media and we're fighting to protect. free speech in america where the where the media outlets other than the exception of r.t.l. and that is a very interesting point that you bring up we don't have that much time karl but i do want to ask you as you had mentioned the election season a false laying under way here to even see this the n.b.a. being an issue during the election at all. you know president obama is doing his best to take it off the take it off the table because he doesn't

want to be perceived as. weak on terrorism in unfortunately he is decided that. trampling on the rights of american citizens and supporting an unconstitutional law means more then standing up and fighting on principle it's so romney and obama they both agree that the n.b.a. was terrific stature and they're going to agree that it should be constitutional. right orginally mozart interview there were we're out of time but a really great to have you on the show that was carl mayer an attorney with the mayor and law group represents the plaintiffs in this case they give us well thank you for having me on oh poverty continues to plague america as poverty rates remain stuck at record levels this reality confirmed by a census bureau report released yesterday it shows fifteen percent of the u.s.

population lives in poverty more than forty six million americans live below the poverty line and one in five children live in poverty while the poverty rate is stuck out what it was the year before so it didn't get worse but it didn't get better it remains historically high meanwhile the income inequality gap is growing this is based on the getting index which measures household income inequality it ranges from zero which means total equality to one hundred which represents total inequality in two thousand and eleven it reached a record high of forty seven point seven percent. well earlier i spoke to a duo very outspoken about these issues we also dove into other pressing topics facing the u.s. today cornel west and tavis smiley joined me earlier they are the co-authors of the book you see there the rich and the rest of the rest of us a poverty manifesto. i think we've got to send

a fight back that says that we're going to come up with ways in which the oligarchs who have a disproportionate amount of power i think are good because oligarchs anywhere in the world have a disposer mount of power need to be accountable to make sure that poor people especially poor children of all colors can live lives of decency indignant all right we have president obama he has been dubbed the food stamp president by republicans do you think that he is done enough to address the issue of poverty in the us they have done very little of that in the health care bill. no major speech no major focus no major highlight of the issues of poverty that's one reason why we're on his poverty tour to make sure that in america there's a call of conscience and says that we are going to have massive investment in jobs with a living wage and decent housing decent education i want to ask i guess the same question to you what do you think about president obama's track record and terms of dealing with poverty the sort of could be

a lot better when he ran four years ago for the white house he said then that he wanted to eradicate poverty in america not enough done since then he said he wanted to raise the minimum wage to nine fifteen are in this country we have a minimum wage but not a living wage and we should be much further along in that fight congress right now ought to be taking up a bill to raise the minimum wage but when you suggested earlier that these numbers have not gotten worse i'm glad you came to the to the second part of study because what we do know is that the gap between those the top and the at the bottom is widening as we say in our book titled the rich and the rest of us. the gap between the have gotten the have nots continues to widen but it's not even just these probably numbers this week it's the job numbers on top of that from last week it's on top of that the report from the agriculture department that said the other day that tonight in this country the richest nation in the world fifty million people will go to bed hungry non-meat of them children on top of that it's

a report. from the capital kids foundation here in the nation's capital defies the child poverty in washington the nation's capital is worse than in mexico the point is the data keeps coming at us day in and day out that poverty is the new america norm is threatening our democracy it's a matter of national security so by any industry one has to understand that poverty is a major problem that we've got to get addressed in this country and we are in an election year what can the candidates focus on to help this problem poverty in the last and prevent this gap this income inequality gap from widening where we've got to make sure that they hit the issue of poverty head on talk about it is fairly clear mitt romney very much a right wing candidate very much open to wealth inequality increasing decreasing taxes on the well to do but we're going to put pressure on obama and we've got to create a social movement we need organize and mobilize people some of whom are willing to

hit the streets and go to jail to bear witness to the plight of poor people so that it reshapes the public conversation and we think just how serious what these numbers coming out proving how serious and pervasive the problem and poverty in the last really is you think that this is discussed in the media more lives. than not at all in fact i was one of the few advocates in the mass media who hits his head on and of course the debate coming that's a key issue we have these four debates coming of course three presidential as you know one vice presidential this back and right quick to two thousand and eight when obama ran the first time he and john mccain had three presidential debates in those three debates the word poor poverty did not come up one time this is the guy who was the leader of the free we're not mentioning of the word not one time obama didn't raise it mccain didn't raise the moderators didn't ask about it so fast forward four years two of those moderators from four years ago are back on the debate stage this time but look how much worse probably in this country is. so that

the moderators in these debates mr lehrer ms crowley ms raddatz mr schieffer have got to put this issue probably front and center in the american people can push them since they're representing us essentially to raise this issue of poverty mr romney mr obama need to have added over the issue of poverty what each are going to do about it but that only happens if those moderators push that issue and if those of us in the media get less concerned about covering the horse race as it were and more concerned about talking about the issues that ought to be discussed in this horse race it's interesting you bring up the horse race i think it's more apparent especially in an election where what he said she that who ever said what why do you why don't you think that this is a very important issue why isn't it discussed moore's simple reason the poor do not vote at the same level as the elite the poor don't make big campaign contributions the poor don't have a lobbyist up and down k. street here in washington defending their point of view and. being

that invisible because both parties are owned by big money big business big banks so that didn't leave much room for people to express themselves so you got to get out on the poverty tour and beat the drum bring the bell pick your metaphor to try to get people to pay attention to this issue and so that's why we're out here trying to get this issue boosted higher on the american agenda called the media won't talk about it the way that they're essentially saying that poor people don't matter to politicians because they don't necessarily help them get r.l. reelected but then of course is why the poor people don't matter the corporate media or the corporate media itself is too intimate big money big banks and big corporations. who get alternative voices in the american media is rather amy goodman and others but not enough not very interesting and connecting the dots there. we know what is being covered or what is getting a lot of hype right now. unavailing of the i phone five. and wanted to kind of

bring that into the conversation here because we're seeing more and more people getting ahold of these devices that make your life more easier you know i have a thirteen year old cousin that has an i phone it's i mean i could i'm going to imagine having one i mean being able to help you research and navigate and do things a lot more easily and then we have this population where it's becoming mainstream for them to get a hold of this kind of technology and we have those that simply cannot get ahold of this technology and i mean what do you think that does i mean when we have a technology gap it is that ultimately perpetuating this inequality out. well it tends to live for me i'm much more concerned about the quality of the person who is using the technology if you get the technology you want to recheck if you get the technology or listen to duke ellington if you want to be informed by turnitin voices that can be a beautiful thing the sad thing is the soup the superficiality of the culture is reflected in the superficial choices that people make given the technology that

they have so in that regard you need something internally need something in the inside of one and that has to do with courage and vision and discipline and sacrifice and everybody has access to these phones nowadays if they can afford an i phone five everybody has something that they're using the real problem though is addition what dr s. just said brilliantly is that this technology boom has not made black full wealthy it's not made hispanics wealthy it's not me you know so the point is there's still the same particular group and class of people who become billionaires off of this technology and i'm not begrudging anybody who comes up with a good idea making a bunch of money on i'm suggesting is that this technological revolution that somebody told us was going to you know to level the playing field in this country hasn't done exactly that as yet. i do want to shift the conversation a little bit dr west i know you've been an outspoken opponent of that this stop and frisk program and the n.y.p.d. i believe even got arrested because of that. a lot of people saying that this

program is racially motivated i know that you scored somewhat a victory of getting a court date and that's i mean are you confident that policies like this i know that this is a fight that you're fighting that can be done away with what we had a weeklong trial we had a guilty verdict who'd already gone to jail so that covered the time spent there in jail but most importantly right now there is a good ten thousand whistles being blown in new york city all across the five boroughs focusing on this arbitrary police power against young people no matter what color but they're disproportionately black and brown there's been a thirty four percent. freeze in stop interest because there are persons that we brought to bear again going to destroy each and going to jail and i think this social action in the social motion the movement more and more is making a difference because of the political paralysis that we are experiencing we had to do with britain enough to come brits mass incarceration. chicago very important to our solidarity with the teachers there against the city all that is

a form of fight back to where i don't really interesting and really appreciate you both coming into the studio that was dr cornel west and tavis smiley authors of the rich and the rest of us a poverty manifesto. still ahead an artsy ben bernanke is putting another band-aid on the u.s. economy it's called the q e three and it's about helping the faltering housing market so is this an answer to our economic or just another quick fix. here is mitt romney trying to figure out the name of that thing that the americans call i don't. care what you. are you know what other terrorists. want to defeat terrorism

the only liberal democrats. can really sort of. you know support you to distract us from what you and i should care about because they're a profit driven industry that's also sensationalistic garbage because of breaking news i'm having martin and we're going to break that. the federal reserve today announced its plan to help stimulate the economy the plan is to buy forty billion dollars of mortgage bonds a month until further notice this whole idea has been dubbed q e three and the hope is that this will bolster the economy and generate jobs this after fed watchers have been ramping up pressure for the central bank bank to take more aggressive steps to strengthen the economy but will this method work and how's it different

from past methods to answer that question i was joined by lauren lyster host of the capital account. there are a few things that make this different so you're calling this q e three for good reason but you might want to call this q.e. infinity or q e until further notice because unlike what the fed has done in the past or it said ok we're going to buy this amount of treasuries or mortgage backed securities and we're going to start on this date and we're going to end on this date what's different this time is the fed saying we're going to buy forty billion dollars in mortgage backed securities a month and we're going to do this and till we decide not to and ben bernanke and his statements today and in the fed's press release said that this is going to continue until the labor market gets to where they want it and improve significantly but there's no set timeline so that's what really makes it different this time also the fed is targeting mortgage backed securities so it's obviously trying to target the mortgage market in the housing market thereby by directing it

specifically to mortgage backed securities as opposed to treasuries in government bonds which have monetize the debt so those are a couple differences in terms of what exactly the fed's program is also the fed some changes it said that it will keep a very accommodative monetary policy until even after the economy approves so that improves excuse me so that even when things get better they're still going to keep this accommodative policy and they're going to keep they gave forward guidance for interest rates which have been kept near zero for years they said that's likely to continue until mid two thousand and fifteen so they extended that to laze which basically kills the price mechanism in this country and destroys. the ability of the market to understand the price of money and the price of risk because the fed is distorting it interesting. let's take a listen to what he had to say today about this purchase

additional mortgage backed securities or the progress for use of a forty billion dollars for months. the new n.b.s. purchases combine with the existing maturity extension program and the continued reinvestment of principal payments from agency debt agency m.b.'s already on our balance sheet will result in increased in our holdings of long term securities of about eighty five billion dollars each month for the remainder of the year the program of m.v.s. purchases should increase the downward pressure of long term interest rates more generally but also in mortgage rates specifically which would provide further support for the housing sector by encouraging home purchases and refinancing so there is a ben bernanke himself almost describing as a last resort touting the possible benefits of this program what do you think about his remarks what i think well that was a fancy way of saying kind of what i was saying the thing about this q.e. is that not a lot of people think that it's going to work to help the real economy so he was talking about expanding the fed's balance sheet about eighty five billion dollars

on the long end per month the fed has expanded its balance sheet more than two trillion dollars since the financial crisis it's news that balance sheet in order to try to stimulate the economy and where was unemployment liz above eight percent whereas unemployment after these measures it's still above eight percent so what is doing more of the same going to do to bring down the unemployment rate which is what this is targeting so what ben bernanke is hoping there is that he's going to go out and he's going to prop up asset prices and maybe that'll be and how's it is and maybe that will be in stocks and that people will feel richer so when they feel richer they'll go out and they'll spend their money so there will be more demand for products and for services and that this will amount to growth and that this will create jobs now that is the thinking maybe someone call it wishful thinking because there is a difference in people that believe that the problem with unemployment is cyclical meaning.