well. technology innovation all the developments around russia. the future of. the pretrial hearing for p.f.c. bradley manning continues to unfold and we are finally getting to get an in-depth look at the prosecution's case for debate today whether the accused wiki leaks or was a whistle blowing on military injustices or aiding al qaeda the latest on the case next. and we've heard a lot of criticism over president obama's pick of chuck hagel for defense secretary but perhaps the more controversial appointment the nominee first cia director has been overlooked had a look at john brennan's questionable history from drone attacks to the kill list and bush era torture tactics. and

a new study finds that homicides have actually increased in states that haven't acted these stand your ground law so this would give americans a license to kill will debate this woking don just ahead. it's tuesday january eighth four pm here in washington d.c. i'm liz wall and you're watching r.t.e. accuse wiki leaks or whistleblower accuse wiki leaks whistleblower excuse me bradley manning is back in court this week the former army private is accused of the biggest classified document breach in u.s. history among the slew of charges manning faces is aiding the enemy today the big question debated can giving classified information to wiki leaks or the media in general be considered aiding terrorists prosecutors in this case say yes but the defense says that's not the case. because the sensitive information isn't being

handed over to al qaeda members directly for more i'm joined by retired colonel morris davis a professor now at the howard university school of law welcome colonel so if convicted of aiding the enemy the most serious charge that manning faces he could face life behind bars he is accused of giving classified information to wiki leaks is it a stretch to say that doing that action can be considered aiding the enemy helping terrorists. it would really depend on the nature of the documents and to be honest i haven't gone to wiki leaks to to look at all the documents but i think the government here is overplayed their hand if you recall when the wiki leaks documents were going to come out it reminded me of the y2k scare everybody kind of braced and expected the worst and then when it came out not much happened and i think the government really overplayed this and bradley manning has offered to plead guilty to some of the lesser included offenses it was subject him to

a believe about a fourteen year sentence which you know i don't condone what he did but it needs to be kept in perspective and i think what he's offered is a reasonable offer right and there's a lot of controversy surrounding just how serious are or what the consequences were of the documents that were leaked allegedly leaked by bradley manning. if that information was proven to have compromise national security in that case what could that be considered aiding the enemy which is what he's accused of a potentially could i'm not aware of there being anything more than embarrassment that has been caused by the wiki leaks documents if there's been any operations that have been compromised or any individuals harmed i'm not aware of it but it certainly seems at this point this is more of a case of embarrassment than actual harm and it really is a very serious accusation that the prosecution is making here.

being accused of is leaking documents to the media and this happens all the time people who get sources leaking classified information or sensitive information to the media. i mean but this is this is really what makes this case different it seems to be that there are good leaks and there badly the administration has been accused of being more than happy to leak information that makes the people feel good or makes the administration look good they're supposed to be a congressional hearing with the movie coming out this week hero dark thirty and are supposed to be a congressional hearing on whether the white house facilitated leaking classified information to the producers of the movie there's been other instances like the killing of osama bin laden the internet attack on the iranian facilities that you know when it helps make the administration look good in a leak is ok when it's an embarrassment like it is with bradley manning then you

know it's a capital offense right i guess the all leaks are not created equal i do want to ask you colonel what precedent there is for this argument that the prosecution is making manning at manning's attorney david coombs said today quote that there is no case in the entire history of military jurisprudence that dealt with somebody providing information to a legitimate legitimate journalistic organization and having them publish it and that involved dealing with the with the enemy is that true and what does that mean for the case you know i'm not aware of any i agree with mr combs that this is unprecedented charging someone with aiding the enemy by giving information. to the press now again is a set i don't condone what private manning did in releasing classified documents but it needs to be kept in perspective and i think the government bit off more than they can chew when they charge this case. right i also want to ask you because i

you of course are no stranger to dealing with sensitive information as a former chief prosecutor agel on tom obey and i understand that today the defense for manning mentioned possibly calling you up to testify this is in regards to files that were released during this alleged whistle blowing document dump and some of these files contained kind of profiles of some of the detainees that were detained at guantanamo bay. the defense is saying that that information contained in those files was already in circulation what does this mean for the case and. what's your take on possibly being called up to testify about it you know my take on it is again i think the government is overplayed their hand here the documents you're referring to are called detainees assessment briefs or we refer to as baseball cards it was as you mentioned profile type information on each of the

detainees so that the chain of command and officials here in washington had some idea of who had been captured was being held at guantanamo the prior to these documents coming out on wiki leaks the government itself had published information from the administrative review boards in the combatant status review tribunals that in my opinion was more detailed and more accurate information than the information that was in these detainees assessment brief so whatever harm there there may have been seems to have been overcome by the government releasing this information itself in advance of a private manning. that's very interesting that the defense they continue to to try to get the charges against manning dropped they're saying that he's already been punished facing these harsh conditions while he was detained over it in quantico virginia and elsewhere and as this case kind of plays out. what's the likelihood of

this happening which is i think the likelihood the case being dropped. is slim to none. as i said no you know i don't condone what private manning did i think he had to get a fair. result. so i don't think the case will be dropped but his treatment and confinement at quantico is just inexcusable and i think there have been a number of people like myself former military officers who. have credit for the illegal pretrial punishment. but again i think you know it ought to be a fair and just punishment and not one this is vindictive very interesting i do don't mean to interrupt you but we have some breaking news actually in this bradley manning case i am just hearing that the judge has ruled that bradley manning will

be awarded one hundred and twelve days off his sentence on grounds of pretrial the conditions that he faced prior to his trial we've been reporting on that a lot and that are taking a lot of his supporters that are fencing that the conditions in which manning was held while awaiting trial where unfair were harsh or extraordinary so i guess this is news just coming out one hundred twelve days is what he is awarded for for facing for i guess what he's already endured what do you think about this new development well again i was there in the courtroom didn't get to see it all but it's not uncommon in the military system if the conditions of a person is put in pretrial confinement not for punishment but to be ensure their presence for trial so when a person is subjected to punishment they're entitled to extra credit so it sounds like the judges acknowledge that the government gauged in misconduct in mistreated

private manning and has given him credit for that right colonel really appreciate you coming on the show as always that was a retired colonel morris davis a professor at the howard university school of law. well there's been a lot of media controversies surrounding president obama's pick for secretary of defense but what we want to focus on the other nomination here's president obama praising john brennan as he announced his nomination to be director of the cia yesterday one of on the subject of patriots. let me say a few words about john brennan and john brennan the men and women of the cia will have the leadership of one of our nation's most skilled and respected intelligence professionals. well brennan's record working for the cia is worth talking about it's been reported that he has been a strong supporter of bush era torture tactics brennan has also been in charge of

overseeing president obama's drone campaign some things you should know about brennan he is the chief counterterrorism adviser to president obama he withdrew his name from consideration for director of the cia in the first obama administration this is over concerns over his support for the use of torture by the cia under president bush he has overseen signature drone strikes in yemen and he has authority on obama's so-called kill list for more on what this nomination means for the cia and the u.s. foreign policies future u.s. foreign policy future i'm joined now by michael brooks he is the producer of the majority report welcome there michael so good this be seen as a chance to talk more about president obama's drone campaign can we expect the the senate to publicly debate this and bring this issue to the forefront it's an issue that has been shrouded in secrecy. it's great to be with you and i think that

that's the best case scenario for this nomination is that it might lead to some actual conversation about the drone program and sort of shed more public laid on it unfortunately i don't think that that's what's going to happen in the senate i think brennan will get pushed on other issues and facts and just a couple minutes ago senator graham i think as threatens and put a hold possibly on his nomination around benghazi so i think you know you might see other issues i don't think this issue is going to have as much scrutiny as it definitely should. might not but there are important issues of course the drone campaign very controversial why don't you think that it will get more more certainly more discussion in the senate. well because unfortunately i think there is a kind of broad political consensus on this program doesn't have that

much public interest at the moment it actually is pretty popular with the public i think that just reflects more on how little is known about the way the kind of stories around it are selectively weeks it seems like this very kind of antiseptic thing. you know takes care of u.s. security without investing too many resources people don't know some of the kind of other broader implications of the program like a lot of civilian casualties of the social challenges as executive power and things like this but you know republicans. are not likely to be attacking president obama for kind of executing a really hawkish and aggressive foreign policy talk to democrats you know i think that there's a there's a partisan components of this of just sort of falling in line behind your president and i think that that's why you won't see as much scrutiny as there should be and just want to bring up some interesting statistics or figures here you know we're

just the first week into two thousand and thirteen and the drone war in pakistan there were there were there have been six strikes. just eight days in the new year thirty five people dead as a result of those attacks i know that you said that you didn't really have much faith that the senate would would be talking about this drone program but i do want that the a.c.l.u. is an organization that is calling on the senate to discuss this this very controversial program and i do want to bring up a quote from the a.c.l.u. here as part of their statement they say quote the senate should not move forward with his nomination until it assesses the legality of his actions in past leadership positions in the cia during the early years of the george w. bush administration and in its current role in the ongoing targeted killing program so the a.c.l.u. is saying brennan's nomination should not move forward until the senate determines whether his past actions of war within the law do you expect the senate will in

fact do that so far doesn't seem like a very confident. i'm not confident about that but i do think that what you might see in some of the questions that surround you if we could get out of the sort of partisan air and us of that issue you might start to look at brennan's possible role in leaks around national security successes in the obama administration and i think this brings up something really important because the administration has been unbelievably aggressive in going after whistleblowers. throughout the entire course of the administration and at the same time there's also been a certainly somebody who's been leaking and certainly some people think it's been brennan himself the process of u.s. foreign policy victories drone strikes and things like that so if you get into some of the issues around his possible weakening of national security classified national security information and some of the double standards around that that my

yield some interesting areas on which he could face some really heightened scrutiny and actually bring up some really important issues interesting michael in addition to the drone campaign another controversial aspect to brennan's history as it has in his support the extent of his support over torture techniques used under the bush administration what about that michael do you think that the senate will be examining that. senator mccain mentioned that i think it will get some profound three attention that's another issue where you know clearly this is ministration of the kind of. you know the area where it should be brought up you know it's also unclear you know

bred in really kind of self-serving way when he was skipped over for head of the cia in two thousand and eight because of these same issues which were more on the kind of front burner at the time he released a letter where he said hey look i was a big internal dissident against torture against enhanced interrogation was at the cia obviously pretty self-serving but i think in some ways we'll never really know because a lot of these things are still classified right of course he. has roll under the bush administration now obviously looks like he's going to play a big role as as the head of the cia director of the cia michael does this signal that there is this kind of continuity from the from bush to obama that their approaches are now much different and terms of foreign policy. yes and no i think that what you see with these nominations with haydel at the brennan at the cia and i guess kerry secretary of state is this is really what obama's foreign policy is

it's very different from bush in the sense that there's much more of a skepticism of conventional military force there is more of an emphasis on the plough mysie but all of the kind of hard power military stuff is getting outsourced to things like the drone program cyber warfare and things like that so there's still this real. emphasis on using military power but using it in what they perceive to be a much more politically low cost and cost effective way to project their influence militarily but not going to involve the same type of entanglements other conventional military response so i think there's some positive things about this and i think there's obviously some really negative things about this but it is an obama foreign policy and you're kind of seeing it outlined here really clearly probably more clearly than ever has before interesting michael really appreciate

you coming on that was michael brock's he is a producer of the majority report. thank you well as the country is embroiled in a debate over gun control we want to turn now to a controversial gun law referred to as stand your ground a new study finds out homicides increase after states adopts the law it's by texas a and m. university and it was conducted from two thousand and ten from two thousand excuse me to two thousand and ten a span of ten years during this time more than twenty states passed castle doctrine and stand your ground laws the study found a seven to nine percent spike in home asides and states that implemented the law part of the study states quote results indicate the laws do not deter burglary robbery or aggravated assault in contrast they lead to a statistically significant eight percent net increase in the number of reported murders in non-negligent manslaughters for more i'm joined now by neil in the cave

is a senior writer for human events on live neil great to have you here with us you so first off what i want to ask you how was fan your ground laws expanded this justification for using lethal force. well i think there's an old english tradition in common law that a man's house is his castle william blackstone talks about it in scotland terry's on on the british english law that you know to violate the sanctity of a man's house at your own risk and i think that's always been a cherished tradition in the united states and certainly certainly we're not just talking about one person a lot of times there's this family members involved it's not just property you're also there to protect your family members ok so now we have this new information this new study out from texas a and m. university showing that when these laws get implemented that

a pretty significant that's a pretty significant number almost ten percent seven to nine percent spike and homicides so when you're looking at figures like that could be stand your ground laws actually encourage violence crimes because we are seeing this spike and i think we have to sort of step back in america we don't preplan ish crime it's already against the law to kill people homicide if you look at say kennesaw georgia a place where every household is required to have a firearm you saw break ins in those kinds of things and violent crime dropped for separate asli in the it's just sort of there are criminals criminals don't go to places where they think there are going to be armed citizens to confront them that's why we see so many of these shootings happening that gun free zones. i do understand that argument it kind of does seem though that this this study kind of proves the opposite because i guess what you're talking about is this kind of deterrence effect short whereas if there is this belief that you're going to go

into a house and that person is going to be armed that there is good the criminal is going to be deterred from from just raising it was a dog right right but it seems like this this this study kind of seems like the opposite well i thing. it's kind of dangerous or unfair to people to take some large study like this and i grant there's a lot of it i mean it's an in-depth study it's what forty three pages long and so i'm not saying that they didn't do the work but there are also individuals who have the right to defend themselves and their families and that's something that's you know part of our bill of rights and so yeah it could be that there's an uptick in homicides but that still doesn't mean i shouldn't be allowed to defend myself and my family right ok. speaking of self defense short. that is the police and the states you were seeing in the trayvon martin case the

plea there is self-defense. and that's what we're seeing that that the growth whoever the suspect plead self-defense is there a capacity for that fleet to be over it used to. use to justify crimes i think i think there was a british politician who fact when she was told about these stand your ground laws she said it's just a fact justification for murder. yeah i mean in the human condition there's always going to be situations where things don't go you know clinically correct however every individual should have the right to defend himself and the people he love and and that's something in the constitution and there's been two major supreme court decisions in the last five years to back up you know the right to have weapons firearms. of course self-defense a you know the second amendment wanting to be able to protect yourself protect your family that's a big goal you know advocates gun advocates that's what they say is the reason for

being able to keep it the right to bear arms of course this is a in light of gun control debates very hot topic right now in the u.s. especially in light of the latest massacre in connecticut do you think that the time has come for the country to examine. gun control the gun laws that we do currently have i think it's always a good time to have that sort of what the president called a national conversation. but i think the fact of the matter is if there was a trained armed citizen at the school sandy hook school he could have taken down that spree shooter and that crisis would have been over i mean there was a case in in oregon just around the same time as the shooting in connecticut where there was a spree shooter in the mall there was an armed citizen who presented a firearm raised as if to shoot the shooter and the shooter then then shot himself

and ended the crisis there are other cases you know where people have gone into churches with the intent of killing people i mean there are numerous and you know there in the internet you can find them you don't always find them in the mainstream media. there's a lot of kind of proposals being tossed around some of them criminal background checks doing a psych a lot more psychic psych psychiatric evaluations on people that try to buy a gun and this other argument of closing lip loophole that as simple as closing loopholes at gun shows well i think the when they say clothes loophole for the gun show is for the background checks and i think that you know facts around background checks are good but i would i would hesitate before i would go after the gun show there was a major justice department study where they interviewed nearly twenty thousand inmates in federal prisons and asked them where they got their guns less than two percent of these people who had who were guilty of gun crime said that they got

their their guns at gun shows so i people talk about it and i know there's a lot of beer all of gun shows but it's just not the problem it's not where the the criminals are getting their guns they're not going to the holiday inn in dulles virginia buying their guns right. that's another argument that criminals don't obtain their their weapons legally but i do want to ask you neil sure. specially this whole debate is really timely in the wake of this very tragic shooting and. now to get and we are seeing here in the u.s. one gun massacre after another so are you advocating that everything should stay the same that the status quo is what it should be that that there is no change at all that is needed i think that you have to sort of go back to the gun control act of one thousand nine hundred sixty eight was a reaction not just to the killings of robert kennedy and martin luther king also president kennedy but also an uptick in violence in the cities in americans were

just trying to do something since one thousand nine hundred sixty eight we have operated under what i would call a delusion that if you eliminate guns we become safer i think if we go back to that state we had before one thousand nine hundred sixty eight there was a time when you were soon to people had guns and you wouldn't bother them and i think there are definitely parts of this country where you don't break into houses and you don't show up thinking you're going to shoot up the place because you know the people who aren't citizens will be there to stop you right bring it all back to that study these they said do it and act these laws we are not seeing that deterrence the fact that you speak of a it's a very of a of course and you very well should have that right you know and so because some professor found something you know seventy seven percent up to doesn't mean i can't protect my family doesn't i i mean i do understand your argument unfortunately we are out of time very interesting very interesting conversation that was neil mccabe

senior writer for human events on line and we're going to leave it off there but stick around we will be right back here in a half hour to see that. more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. showing operation to rule the day. wealthy british style. sometimes right let's go. around the.

market why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cons are a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines join into kaiser report. good afternoon welcome to capital account i'm lauren lyster here in washington d.c. these are your headlines for wednesday january second two thousand and thirteen happy new year it's two thousand and thirteen we're back let's reflect on some of the economic predictions that never came to be last year so our thinking can progress pragmatic capitalist colin roche is here to explain why some folks were wrong about inflation as an example and what the fed's overly optimistic past predictions mean for its future guidance and we have heard about it.