international and world in the very heart of moscow. well i'm tom are going to washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture. new information continues to pour out about the other plans of the boston terrorists intend to carry out if they hadn't been caught but despite this new information republicans are saying that zocor are starting to have had it was read his miranda rights too early in the interrogation process or publicans white or should sorry have have been read his miranda rights even earlier also the tragic explosion in west texas should be a wake up call for all of us join us the importance of effective regulation some people don't see it that way i'll talk with one of those people coming up and later

in the show your take my take live segment your chance to call in and ask a question for making comments live on the air. you need to know this new reports reveal the dzhokhar start to have the surviving boston marathon bombing suspect either stopped talking to investigators after he was read his miranda rights or wasn't read his miranda rights until after he'd pretty much said everything he had to say and republicans are jumping on these revelations to justify either even further fudging of the constitution when law enforcement officials first captured the nineteen year olds are to have last friday president obama announced the federal investigators would not immediately read him his miranda rights and only when someone is arrested arresting officers are required to remind them of their right to not incriminate themselves and to be.

represented by an attorney the fifth amendment right against self incrimination is among our most important constitutional protections because it protects us from abuse of and by the one single institution that we have empowered to imprison and even legally kill us our government but in certain situations for example when an individual in custody knows the whereabouts of a ticking bomb the supreme court has ruled the police can interrogate that individual before reminding him or her of their miranda rights this is the so-called public safety exception invoked by president obama on friday although a judge eventually read dzhokhar the start of the miranda rights warning on a monday if the i use the interim period before he was read his rights to interrogate the suspected bomber out of sardi has gone silent some republicans are arguing that he was mirandized too soon and i simply see earlier this afternoon mike rogers chairman of the house pointed committee on intelligence called the

decision to reid's already have his rights dangerous and bad policy. when you're talking about weapons of mass destruction this is as serious as it gets and we better err on the side of public safety but to have the court affirmatively push their way in is a i think it's wrong and b. we should have given the f.b.i. the time that they needed given the circumstances hey it's confusing it is horrible god awful policy and dangerous to the greater community and we have got to get to the bottom of this and we've got to fix it right now but can never be too soon for an american citizen to be reminded of his most basic constitutional rights and says might happen tonio attorney and host of ring of fire power welcome back. good are we treating our rights for security would have been franklin say about that but we're really not i think if you look at this if you look at this case first of all a judge at some point is going to be able to review all the cumulative elements of

what occurred now you know the we've always had we've always had exceptions to when you mirandize people there is as you point out the exigent circumstances is the community at risk is the possible is it possible that people were involved so once you get past that threshold once the resting officer the rest of the agency says everything's safe you know it's time to mirandize and they should go forward with it now this republican montra of they did it too soon it was just absolutely the dole brain exactly the same old brain argument we would expect from these are people who would extend this to where we have a hybrid and honestly this is what the republicans really want to accomplish the naysayers these people that are just screaming about his miranda what they want tom is a hybrid something in between how we treat a regular american citizen and this citizen who we try to characterize is an enemy combatant because once you do that then all these other things go in place where we

can put them away in a cell no no attorney no questions asked that. that's where the republicans would love to take us and fortunately for obama he understands the danger of that he's a constitutional professor he seems to understand the dangers of taking that too far in this situation but might he not i mean if the if the if the. standard here is. is there an imminent danger. the exigent circumstance or target right is there an imminent danger and and we can establish that that was determined fairly early on you know when this kid basically said no we had no more bombs you know there's no more not there's nothing taken out there and that was established presumably in the first hour or so it isn't isn't it reasonable to say that we've already started stretching this thing too far and that you know i mean we've seen so many holes drilled in our fourth and fifth amendment rights those

being the two that protect us against the government invading our homes invading our lives or even taking our lives. i'm frankly concerned about this well i think we should be concerned because you still have to have republican congressmen and people from the intelligence agencies saying gee we just did this we did we did this too soon that is a very scary message but the truth is here's here's where you know if the government messed up here's what they here's what they've done they've taken an individual a defendant that probably the facts are overwhelming from a standpoint of criminality from the standpoint of did he commit this crime yeah it's going to be pretty easy to get there but the real issue comes down to what do we do with them now had if the government overreached what you're going to have is an appellate court that says he overreached and you know what they're going to lose the right to be able to proceed with

a death penalty kind of charge in this case they're going to fence is going to argue that the conduct of these officials has interfered with ability for the prosecution to go forward with the death penalty because they're going to take some of the some of the things he said creatively they're going to say take some of the things they that he did creatively and they're going to they're going to use that they're going to use that as a defense against the prosecution the one thing that really stands out in your mind is. once he was read once he was told listen you have the right to remain silent you have the right to have an attorney present and all anything you say can be used against you after he did that after he was given that right he showed up so a judge looking in that says that's information that tells me maybe he was very low information about what his rights were the argument is you know he maybe didn't understand the right he was young he was under huge pressure he simply didn't

understand what was he was he was injured he was medicated he didn't understand was having rounding in so these things that he said without being mirandized can actually work against the state's right to be able to proceed with the. death penalty kind of prosecution i mean just in a kind of a real world scenario isn't it reasonable to assume that he was mirandized he was told he could have a lawyer he indicated that he could not afford one one was assigned to him presumably quite quickly that a lawyer would have immediately advised him shut up a note saying i mean that's that's just like kind of lawyer want to want in a criminal case is not well it is but in this case i think what was so important is here he was spilling he was talking and talking and giving him all these details about the connections between what he. doing in the ideologies behind it which was a problem for him to begin with never should have said that he was talking a lot in that all of a sudden he's mirandized and immediately they come back into the room and he won't

say anything that that tells a judge a lot about maybe what transpired so this is if you really think about it ultimately this comes down to a judge that hears the facts tries to weigh the facts in says did the did the government overreach in this situation i think once you get past the reasonable argument on exigent circumstances on the safety exception you look at the time frame of that you look at what a reasonable government investigator or the f.b.i. might have done it and you look at the reasonableness of the conduct a judge is going to say you know what you might have overreached here now and the same is speaking of the fourth and fifth amendment this is all about the fifth member of the fourth amendment our right to privacy a variation of the same the right to be secure in our in our persons our papers our our our residence. the president had threatened to veto cispa you know if it came down the line and he's sort of right and and. and yet now we discover that the

justice department has been apparently in a fairly willy nilly basis at least with or at a t. and t. we know of saying yeah go ahead spy on these people no problem is this. call cosmetic song and dance was this like yeah i'll veto it for the base or for the or for the underdog. oh yeah his talk about it is if you look at it if you look at his president's conduct he gave these people immunity understands my points people they were right in your they were right in your home they were right on your telephone in your computer on your mobile phone they were right there doing every said it is contrary to the fourth amendment there's no question any any professor would look at and say yeah this is an absolute absolute bastardization of the fourth amendment as a matter of fact you may recall tom the lawsuits were brought in the lawsuits were very well planned i read about i read a couple of there were very well what you've done wrong and they said that two. of

these communications companies and the only way out was to get the president and this administration to give them immunity and the question becomes at what point does this this president put his constitutional law professor hat back on and say you know what sometimes it's just too far the fourth amendment does matter and that they they ran rampant the intrusion of this company was rampant and i think the ag the public understands exactly exactly how far they went in allowing the government into your home so what can we do about this. well i think with this administration it's been it's been very clear that you can do very little understand the the lawsuits that were brought in this case the pleadings that were that the government saw that the regulatory agencies saw they were very clear there was nothing equivocal about it this president that listen this immunity to

a place without this president knowing about it in participating it in furthering it and that's why the bush administration policies exactly but what's so shameful about it is then he comes out he gives us this suggestion that she will this is what i'm this is what i'm doing and i'm the guy that's going to protect your right to privacy it is shameless it's shameless and it's fraudulent and once you understand it to obama's here you start understanding what we've been contending with not just in this term but last term as well so what can we do about it we can wait for the next presidential election and hope for a better ok my pap and tony thanks for joining us tonight thank you zone coming up republicans and their big business allies love to tell us that regulations hurt employers and stifle growth i say this kind of thinking fourteen innocent people died needless deaths in the city of west texas last week i discussed in peterson why he doesn't want to do what's necessary to have more workplace does it ever.

do the future good mix of commuters these days so super is the memory for that russian researchers have got a few ideas that could make cognitive computing a reality one of the processors got a radical new architecture that promises unparalleled power design for the stars as that got you all under the collar don't worry because the lead is cooling systems ensure neither you nor the globe's top super computers break a sweat. the future.

download the. publication. choose your language stream quality and enjoy your favorite. if you're away from your television just doesn't matter now with your mobile device you can watch your t.v. anytime anywhere.

in screw news that massive fertilizer plant explosion that killed fourteen people and injured hundreds more in the city of west texas last wednesday wasn't a random tragedy is apparently the direct result of thirty years of poor funding poor oversight and intensive lobbying by the fertilizer industry all the plant was storing over thirteen hundred and fifty. the allowable amount of ammonium nitrate the same material timothy mcveigh used to blow up the alfred p. murrah building in oklahoma city its management never notified the department of homeland security. just two years ago west fertilizer companies ownership reported to the environmental protection agency that there was quote no risk of fire at their west texas strapped occupational safety and health administration last inspected the facility in one thousand nine hundred five and although mobil state and federal agencies cited the plant for various safety problems in recent years it

remained open a time bomb waiting to blow up but here's the worst part of the story according to sunlight foundation the agricultural retailers association and the fertilizer institute lobbying groups they represent companies like west fertilizer have spent two point nine million dollars and fourteen point four million dollars respectively over the past fifteen years begging congress to gut fertilizer factory regulations the disaster in texas should be a wake up call to all of us of the importance of fact of regulation the dangers of corporate governance but everyone except austin peterson so after a production of freedom works an editor of the libertarian republic of austin welcome back thanks for having me tom take a look at this clip. it seems to me that this is the problem with your libertarian philosophy that when

disasters happen then we react rather than preventing the disasters in the first place it's tough to say i mean you don't always have too much prior restraint on people you want to let people be able to go out into the marketplace and take risks we have been known for two hundred years of writing and i tried to six but the problem is we're living in your world right now tom you understand we have a hyper regulatory state and we have all of these agencies that yes we do and we have all of these agencies that are once there are sixty seven years i really after shows up because people are the odds are it's on of them by giving them a good debate and i want to tell you right now there are five different agencies that were responsible for oversight of this company and none of them reported the issues that they had to osha who was supposed to be managing this in my libertarian paradise there might be a system that would be more sparse saying what we're taking care of the government wasn't big enough when no what i'm saying is that there is no responsibility when you haven't a state who is supposed to take care of things because if you think that the bible you live with you either if you want to you just just a minute ago you were saying you have five agencies reporting this to osha they did

report it they are saying that the sooner they are done and see the nanny state was eventually almost you know what i'm saying is that if you think that someone else is going to take care of your problems for you tom and what do you have an excuse to take care of yourself what i'm saying is i'm fifteen years no what i'm saying is that we have both way though if you want to you know you have to either you have regulations by the state either you have somebody who oversees oversees these things so you actually is an ex and they are you and i want people in my government who understand what ammonium nitrate is and i want them looking over this so they didn't do it they failed and look at the annual planning board of waco they failed to and what are they do they put schools and nerdier homes right next to your government making my point so not only so now you're saying that not a not great so now you're saying not only did the government not do enough for a. elation but they also didn't do enough there and what i am saying is they did too much regulation too because when you have way too much regulation there is an end once every sixty seven years that is because i decided it was a lot of regulations are easy when people understand the rules they follow them but when they are way too many rules and regulations nobody can reduce comp it's like

a company nobody is going to follow the law when there isn't any understood the more corrupt the state this was understood these rules know they did this early on but he because under state the a's re gave there they were regulated to they gave them to the department of texas they were supposed to handle it but they didn't report it to osha the state had plenty of opportunities report this to osha so this was only one did rick perry's fault as well as a brock obama's failure it's the d h s apparently because there was a charge with regularity to see only unlike just where the ones were so if you want they fail you want a more competent government know what i would like to do on a more competent regulatory i was are for the people who are responsible to be held in negligence for failing to hold up to the standards that any insurance company would hold right now because it's healthy but i love where was the insurance company while the insure i didn't they inspect because they know the government's going to do a time when you know that the nanny state is going to take care of you i don't think so you have to do it yes if it goes that way and if the insurance companies that insurance company believe that if the insurance then you know the c.e.o.

then why did the genius of the waco zoning board desired to allow schools and nursing homes to right next to a chemical plant in the genius of central aiming that's a really good question and it's and it's a great example of why cities like portland oregon that are well planned have high property values my quality of life good urban planning make make decisions don't put high schools and hospitals and it's a fertilizer plant off central i mean you're right we do we need is just a failure that's right they were they were not they were not all that smart you know rick perry appointed so idiots to this thing apparently because he failed tom these are your buddies that failing to go and put in the government right if we so you know i get your argument we need better central planning. and we need government agencies that are better at regulating right so how do we get that right well i'm just going to tell you right now that there really is no way to do it in your world right now because i'm telling you the more the case of how do we do it in your world where there is none of this well what you what i don't know you just

can't have a utopian society tom you have to have a realistic viewpoint and if there wasn't capitalism there would have been no fertilizer plant in the first place so this is our own trip absolutely because no centrally planned society can possibly create a presence that and that would allow for this kind of thing to exist so if you want that is necessarily true if you listen it could've been a cooperative you don't need capitalism you could have a clobbering there's a reason i want to know do you believe in mafia do you really believe that this is not going to ever be hosses nothing to that no never be put in and having to or whatever and of course not and we are out of time austin thank you hundred tama next week genuinely our own thank you very much heated debate. about the rest of the news last week or last month excuse me a witness in an ongoing federal class action suit against the new york city police department played a tape recording of an n.y.p.d. deputy inspector ordering an officer under his command to target young latino and

black men for random searches in shed new light on a controversial topic and the subject of that class action suit new york city's stop and frisk program for its supporters stop and frisk which allows police officers to stop question and search any individual they suspect of breaking the law is an essential tool for fighting crime and keeping communities safe from violence to its critics stop and frisk is a gross and racist violation of civil rights according to your chapter of the a.c.l.u. the american civil liberties union of the four point four million stop and frisk related incidents during michael bloomberg time as mayor quote eighty six percent of people stopped were. black or latino and for those who oppose the n.y.p.d. s policies these statistics are evidence of a deeply flawed and unfair criminal justice system joining us now is noted diaz activist with the revolution club and stop mass incarceration network you know it

you're welcome to the program. thanks for joining us a manhattan judge just dropped charges against you the other day what were the charges what happened. so i was facing two years jail time for a case that goes back to october of two thousand and eleven which was the first in a wave of protests called by cornell west and carl dix for people to put something on the line to begin to stand up against this stop and frisk policy i was actually not there committing civil disobedience but i was sort of you know identified by the police and dragged out of the crowd and targeted for the role that i have played in that neighborhood and in the movement to stand up against this you know illegal and illegitimate policy and you know there was they went out of you because you're an activist. yeah someone who is also well known in the neighborhood where we were protesting yeah i interrupted. no sign i was then also arrested in an

unrelated incident at a high school where youth who were marching for trayvon martin chanting we want justice were then sent it upon by police who were saying that they were going to take everyone to jail who didn't get out of the area quick enough they threw a fourteen year old through a window at a bank and then they also went to arrest another woman and when they ordered people to leave the area when this was happening i refused to do so and i was also arrested for and then they put these two together to try to say that there is a pattern of behavior on my on my behalf that i'm someone who does no good and really to send a message to that when people do stand with you know with these youth who are under attack all the time and who plays a role in leading in this buying others to stand up against something that they hold so dear like stop and frisk that this is what happens to you and we were allowed to send another message by building a fight to drop all those charges and there was a huge victory for people when when all the criminal charges were dropped last

tuesday. and that's a good thing yeah stop and frisk what's it like what's it like to live in a community that feels like it's continually. under siege by the people who are supposed to protect the please yeah well i mean you know you threw out some of the numbers a draw important for people to really know because like a lot of times you just hear it and it's anecdotal and you know really see how widespread it is you know nine hundred times every day this is happening like you said over eighty five percent black or latino those who are being targeted in this argument that it's about going after a preventing crime getting guns off the street is a lie by their own data that they that they've revealed which is that you know over ninety percent of these cases people or are charged with nothing and they're given no legal or legitimate reason for being stopped and often thrown against walls and then in many of these cases too they end up in far worse than just having people's

rights violated you know you have kids who never who never go home and who are taken from their families and murdered by the police because they're treated like a generation of suspects and criminals and then to have a little bit of flavor to it you know you know just imagine every time you walk home or walk to school or to work or something like that you know having hanging over your head at any point a police officer can step to you throw you into the wall search you and if you assert that you have any kind of basic rights or that you're a human being who deserved to be respected you could land yourself in jail with cases over you and this is i mean this is something that happens all that you know all the time you know you have people developing criminal records from the time they're fourteen fifteen or being harassed so so often one fifteen year old told me that he had to get a restraining order against the police in his neighborhood because he had been a time he was fourteen he had been stopped so many times his mother was a fraid for his life and now that he's fifteen the restraining order is past its time and so his mother doesn't let him go out and play with his friends as much

anymore because she's afraid for his room to be out in the streets knowing that these police are out there i mean you know and any point can do in that way and i know she diaz. thank you for. both your activism your passion and the risks that you've taken and thank you for being with us tonight sharing your story. thank you to. going up the phone lines are now open for your take my take a live segment so if you want to chance to ask me a question live here on the big picture give us a call to zero two nine zero four twenty one thirty four plus one is the country code for the u.s. maybe i'll be taking talking with you after the break. wealthy british song sung. by.

market why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kaiser report. more news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images for world has been seeing from the streets of canada. giant corporations rule today.

the international at the very heart of moscow. welcome your take my take a live our phone lines are now open so if you want to share an opinion make calm ask question live on the air give us a call to tonight zero four twenty one thirty four so you get the first call or the night nicholas and loss of vegas a necklace you want to talk about the boston are going to go are great. i really want to talk about the boston bombing. from what i.

love i love the chair i watch i really don't even pay attention to remember garbage they show. all they've been talking about strictly the bottom bar where things like they're going on behind your back those are carry your computer could be especially your card for plans to increase security in particular right no i don't. need a list of you know i've heard that put forward there are a few folks who are suggesting in fact actually a member of congress quoted one of them yesterday that this was a false flag operation.