state the other ruling was in regards told one element of the defense of marriage act or doma and in that five to four ruling the supreme court justices determined that this law which denied benefits to same sex marriages was also unconstitutional now as a result of these rulings all same sex marriages in the states that recognize it would be eligible for help tax and benefits that are already allotted to their heterosexual counterparts the court's decision also prompted defense secretary chuck hagel to announce that quote benefits will be available to all military spouses regardless of sexual orientation as soon as possible guys this is fantastic news that a huge step in the right direction for the l.g.b. community and for humanity at large but there is still much more to be done the way the supreme court ruled leaves some glaring problems first of all same sex marriage can still be banned in the thirty six states that have yet to rule on it secondly the benefits now a lot of the same sex couples won't necessarily be recognized everywhere so right

now it's still a states' rights issue but the majority of people in this country supporting gay rights it's time for the federal government to move on the right side of history i'm talking about a federal law that legalizes marriage for everyone so yes a victory today but a long road ahead until there's equal rights for all so let's go to work and let's break that. this week the texas state house was scheduled to vote on a controversial unprecedented bill that many have called an outright assault on women's reproductive rights it's called senate bill five which was all but certain to pass until it was thwarted by an epic thirteen hour long filibuster done by a little known state texas state senator wendy davis. before midnight deadline

davis was forced to stop speaking by lieutenant governor david duke hurst but that move prompted hundreds of demonstrators in the state house to erupt in outrage. thank you thank you thank you you thank. this protest effectively delayed the vote and though it was the texas bill the filibuster has brought the issue into the national spotlight to get a better grasp on how exactly it all went down i spoke earlier with one of the demonstrators who was on the floor at the texas state house katie neuron hope i first asked her what it was about this bill that had people so riled up. in texas we have a legislative session every two years for and one hundred forty days and we had special session called originally about redistricting in texas and and halfway through the session governor rick perry to say that he wanted to add abortion legislation to the bill. the call for special session s.p.v.

by by senator hagar is a bill that would require all abortion facilities to meet certain requirements which i believe currently forty two facilities only six five or six would actually still remain in existence if these requirements were promptly put in place and the requirements were more structural and or the guys you know protecting women in who were seeking abortions when really what it would do is close eighty percent of the facilities in taxes and in many cases forcing folks from el paso to have to travel six hundred miles to receive any type of medical treatment to terminate a pregnancy and not only would you have to make that trip once but because of legislation passed in two thousand and eleven you have to make that twice and so the reason why that's the problem is that is an economic burden especially for

a lot of the women they're having to make these very personal and traumatic decisions and so for. sure i'm sort of that up in there really really quickly you know you were at the texas state house when this happened epic filibuster thirteen hours a come. by an army of supporters a lot of eyes are now on wendy davis what drove the state senator to do this epic filibuster. senator davis is always an addict hits in and known for her making legislative headlines when she filibustered last session to support teachers and so senator davis is chosen to do the filibuster by the senate democrats because she is a mother of two she's a single mother of two who also you know had a lot of personal challenges in her life where she literally went from being almost homeless to being a harvard graduate and so she really embodied. what it is that the

women there are making these decisions base and and so we thought she'd be the best voice to really represent all texas women which is what she did on the house floor she read testimony from hundreds of women who wrote in who were not allowed to testify because in in the previous week senators and state representatives would not allow them to testify in the committee hearings and so has respect filibusters how is what senator davis did different than say the filibuster with senator rand paul because i as i understand the rules for filibusters are actually much more strict in texas. right so in texas as you're not allowed when you're doing a filibuster you have to get official notification and you're not allowed to sit you know and i had to lean on your desk and one of the points of or that was called on her was because senator alice helped her with her back brace which the senate

republicans are trying to say was her receiving assistance you're not allowed to drink water you know about anything you have to stand the entire time you can yield the floor to take questions that you have to be talking about specifically the topic of that and so of the. points of order last night that republicans called to try to end her filibuster which they ultimately did you have that were related to her talking about issues that they said were not germane to s.b. five and the other one was her receiving assistance because she was putting on a back brace because she'd been at that point standing for over nine hours straight where does the senate bill five stand right now i mean is it essentially dead in the water going to be revived. the governor perry can call another special session which we imagine he will because there are a number of bills that were not put there were night voted on last night was specifically the transportation legislation that was also a part of this call to the special session so we anticipate in the coming months

that coming weeks actually the governor perry will call another special session and will more than likely he can add abortion legislation to that call again but right now as it stands as the five is dead the special session ended at midnight and that decision was upheld and finally lieutenant governor you has conceded to the women of texas that the vote was not taken before midnight and so the legislation is now dead and it seems like we're seeing this kind of legislation pop up not just in texas but all across the country katie why do you think that forty years after roe v wade we're still seeing this issue at the forefront. you know i don't know it was interesting i don't know if many people know this but sarah weddington is actually a texan and lives in austin texas and i was her assistant for a few years in college and i would always ask her why is this still happening and she said if men could have children there wouldn't be a fight and so i think the fact that the original points of order on center davis

the fact that they were made by men the fact that it was lieutenant governor do hers and senator duncan acting as chair of the senate at the time. really does drugs leader line that you know it was women on the house floor who were fighting for our constitutional rights and it was men who were trying to deny them and in some pretty unscrupulous ways as well the rules of the senate are pretty clear and . i would probably say i guess maybe ten to fifteen times points of order poison ink worry and even. moves to adjourn were not heard by the republicans and jiggly sen duncan throughout the nutty welcome to the fights far from over thank you so much for shedding some insight on the issue and thanks for being there to report what is going on kate in iran who really appreciate a time. thank you of course will still be here. after three years of legal limbo

for army private bradley manning whose court proceeding finally commenced on june third of this year with today marking the tentative trial unfortunately the case has been totally closed off to the public and no cameras were allowed inside luckily artie's very own lives while has been in attendance to keep us up to date she joined me earlier from fort meade to give us the latest. already dark. i'm reading as you've been covering the trial for the past couple of weeks give us an update on what's happening right now and where the trial stands. that's right abbie we are in a week for a bradley manning's court martial here in fort meade maryland today centered around the two hundred fifty thousand diplomatic cables that were leaked to wiki leaks the prosecution alleges that manning sold because cables but manning says that he admits to leaking the cables he says he didn't steal them we heard testimony today from state department officials some of the testimony we heard testimony

specifically about this database called that center of diplomacy this database that's used by the defense intelligence community supposedly this is where these cables came from where they were taken for a couple of interesting things we learned that as much as seventy five percent of the documents are administrative so you know that means a lot of the documents probably weren't too explosive in terms of what they contained another interesting thing is that according to the testimony today there was no proof that manning hacked into the database or hacked into the computers that in order to obtain this information that it was readily. attainable to him based on the clearance that he had so a little bit of a gap there from what the prosecution is alleging that he stole these documents and i think the prosecution is also i mean they came in a really strong in the beginning with a lot of heavy charges me you know hacking in and releasing a lot of information that could be a lot of very damaging to the government have any of their other argue. it's fallen

apart as far as the trial i know it's still early on. yet as you mentioned a lot of very serious charges aiding the enemy that carries a life sentence no parole is what he would face if he is in fact charged with that also charged under the espionage act. it's interesting how the prosecution is trying to prove this as to be an act in the opening statements they said that they were going to prove that manning took this video of this airstrike in the farah province of afghanistan and that he sent this video to a man by jason katz and that caps was going to encrypt this video and all of this was done in a conspiracy with julian assange and it to get this video on wiki leaks but. pretty pretty significant had testimony was that there was no connection found between manning's computer and katz's computer the timing very didn't add up either so a pretty big hole in the defense excuse me the prosecution's theory that there was this you know big conspiracy. kind of they're the way that they're trying to go

about proving this espionage charge that is a glaring hole the obama's new favorite law what's expected be heard moving forward this week and moving on. well if they don't give us too much information too much of a hand in the future it's kind of go on a day by day basis but we are expected to hear we heard about i'd say sixty to seventy of the projected one hundred forty witnesses that the prosecution told us we were going to hear from throughout this trial supposed to go on all summer abby and i will keep you updated or you will be there and i think it's important to make note that there is no jury it's very secretive and so it's understandable they're not told too much thanks was for keeping us updated there. so we come on the show we'll speak to investigative journalist. journalist in this country and the media project stick around.

wealthy british style. that's not on. markets why not scandals find out what's really happening to the global economy with max cons or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune in to kaiser report on r g. two needs to be told language. will use programs and documentaries in arabic it's all here on all t.v. reporting from the we'll talk sports that will be ip interviews intriguing stories for you to. see then try. to find out more

visit our big don't all teeth dog call. and that's where you are she going to be like.

the latest n.s.a. leak has solidified the fact that journalists are now in the line of fire could be guilty in the court of public opinion of course i'm referring to recent calls for the prosecution of guardian journalist glenn greenwald folks were living in backwards times where politicians and pundits would rather attack the messenger and to address the message that's a reality my next guest knows all too well as an investigative journalist working in local television he was criticized multiple times simply for asking questions that go beyond official narratives and fact is someone i have highlighted on this show as a hero in one of the only journalist to directly confront president obama about his kill list and the n.b.a.'s indefinite detention clause take a look. when you signed the national defense authorization act into law you issued a signing statement at that time but said you would not use that power for indefinite detention of americans you understood the concerns that people had a judge earlier this year issued that the administration couldn't use those powers

because it's unconstitutional so why are the government's own lawyers fighting that judge's order the injunction in particular that was ben's won an award winning journalist who's most known for hosting a hard hitting ground breaking news segment called reality check which aired on a local fox affiliate in ohio earlier i spoke to ben about everything from the n.s.a. leaks to his new media venture i first asked him if he feels like the attacks that we're seeing a glance against glenn greenwald are intended to create a chilling effect for journalists and here's his response. i think that's exactly what they're designed to do book we saw this whole thing play out with james rosen a few weeks ago rosen of course was being targeted by the department of justice because he was had a source inside the military who was leaking information to him the idea. there was that he was committing criminal acts and so the department of justice including attorney general eric holder were involved in this investigation where they were ak and his e-mails they were hacking his private e-mails his phone his parents' phone

we saw this happening and we saw journalists rally around you know what's strange in the greenwald case is i don't see a lot of journalists rallying behind him other than journalists like yourself like myself there aren't as many coming out in support of greenwald the idea the notion that you would say that greenwald hates america and that's the reason he interviewed edward snowden is unconscionable it's ridiculous it's outrageous and it really is a chilling if i can already ice cold environment for journalism you know a lot of people are using glenn greenwald's open bias toward a whistleblower as fodder for his prosecution interesting we had a chance to talk to larry king about it i asked him whether he has a problem of journalists who have an open bias and this is what he had to say. journalists i mean they did perform a kind of journalism but they come with an opinion that's fine i mean have you but i call them op ed page as you would not call glenn greenwald a journalist or he could be a journalist but was is it is to some if you give an opinion you then come with

a bias so similarly ben your work doesn't shy away from taking a stand neither does mine how do you feel about people who say that that kind of work isn't journalism well i think you have to balance the to be taking a stand we're taking a position but backing it up with either facts or rule of law is not really editorializing and i had this conversation with a number of people because people look at the content that we put out will say well clearly you're taking a stand for the constitution therefore you're editorializing no not necessarily look rule of law is the standard in this country i didn't decide it was the standard you didn't decide it was a standard when the president takes his oath of office he swears allegiance to uphold and protect what the constitution of the united states every member of congress firefighters police officers military members we all pledge this. oath to the constitution and so when you take a stand that says rule of law as a standard that doesn't make you editorializing to say look clearly this is outside the bounds of rule of law it's what the

a journalist is supposed to do hold those in power accountable that's not editorializing so you have to differentiate between that and someone who looks at rule of law and says well i think in this case we can bend in this direction or in this case we can bend it in this direction and that's what the left right paradigm as you know abby has been doing for so long in this country the left right game being played in media is we're going to pull people from both sides and we're going to in cases where the constitution doesn't fit what we want we will bend it in cases where it backs up what we want to grow remain rigid to it i couldn't agree more about it in your career you've come under heat for asking questions about the boston bombing other of bands that have happened in recent months or why do you think it is that you're labeled radical or friend just for questioning an official narrative but i think that's this group think mentality that we have in media today where if you don't follow along with what everyone else is saying you're somehow on the outside of that and therefore you are either a some kind of a rogue player or you are as they like to say the truth or it's funny we hear this

term truth there all the time now you're a nine eleven truth or euro truth or you're a boston bombing truth or whatever it might be well the fact is this hear me when i say this but every journalist in america should be a truth or someone who was seeking truth not someone who sequence conspiracy theories but someone who's actually seeking after truth and if that means going beyond the narrative i mean we were woodward and bernstein were they true thirst well to an extent yes because the official narrative did not match what they found through their investigative reporting but today we would never refer to those two as truth theirs because that's a slur that's used against journalists who are actually doing their job it's amazing that to become a project term to seek truth that ban and that report you talked about how many questions were left on answered there is no follow up of course about things like the war which murder the f.b.i. assassinating to da have warnings received about these events and of course this lack of transparency breeds distrust confusion speculation what's your advice to people who have such a hard time sorting through the noise to find the truth. well i think you have to

go around mainstream media and you have to be able to support journalists like yourself like myself who are doing our part to try to answer questions i'll give you an example this past week we released a piece on ben's one dot com going through this in an n.s.a. story but what we didn't do was continue the usual narrative of deciding whether or not to try and read snowden in the court of public opinion instead we looked at number one whether he is legitimate legitimately a whistleblower and number two if he is a whistleblower that must mean the n.s.a. was committing a crime and so our investigation looked at whether or not what the n.s.a. had been doing it continues to do is in fact a crime and having it is a crime the job of a journalist is to find that information but they need the public to then rally behind that the problem we have today in our current media culture is people don't go to media to get information they go to the media to be validated in the belief system they already hold the r.t. decide whether or not something is true or untrue and now they're looking for

someone to validate that elite we have to get away from that we have to do we have to report the truth no matter how uncomfortable that truth may be and of course that's the problem with these partisan networks that actually push that two party dictatorship is what i like to call it and i report excellent i encourage everyone to watch that report that you just said about the n.s.a. let's talk about your career you became wildly popular with the second reality check on a local fox station in cincinnati ohio it was unprecedented i mean the way they are able to push very controversial topics on local television i mean did you pitch reality check did you have to fight to get it or did someone high up have your back there you know here's how it worked it was actually not even my idea it was a consulting group that came in and said there is this gap in the market that allows us to go after what they called snow style journalism we're going to be the fact checkers and from that the problem is as you know when you start checking facts it leads you to more facts and leads you to more facts and what we found after a short amount of time was that all of the sudden we're getting into stories that are really very controversial and in many. this is the mainstream media won't talk

about an example a year ago i did this story and i got a lot of heat from an inclusion from my own newsroom about the fact these different tea party groups around the country were saying they were being targeted by the i.r.s. was the first television reporter in the nation to talk about this and a lot of people said oh i see crazy he's just talking about these chin foyle had tea party people who think everyone's out to get them well then it comes out a year later and in fact that wasn't the case we were way ahead on that story and part of the reason for that is because we were fearless in the questions that we would ask and the stories we would go after we never went after stories with this presumption of what the end result would be and so time and time again we've actually been way ahead of the curve in terms of that and that's why the decision finally came along just a couple of weeks ago to leave and i said you know what it's time to step away from that and let's go out and try something different let's let's crowd source support for journalism in this country so many people happy i know they do with it was well

complain about the left right paradigm in media and about corporate media in america well their chance now is to back a project that we started called the truth and media project on kickstarter if they can back that project and help us to actually go after these stories fearlessly and without any limitation based on what corporate bosses might say and media bosses might say and that's what we're trying to much awesome and i encourage everyone to go check it out support you because we need you we need trailblazers like ourselves and to really pave the way in this new media fight that we have is it really is an information or war and i am are you going talk about the corporate media quite a bit this is this charade i mean i remember waking up to the charade when the media lockstep across both parties were selling they are was selling the iraq war on what was that realisation for you. for me it actually came a few years ago i was working down on the border for the us mexico border in el paso texas that's where i'm from starting my journalism career there and about two thousand and seven two thousand and eight when the city of what is big. same really

engulfed in the drug war i went over into mexico and really covered extensively what was happening there what were the results of not only u.s. policy and mexican policy on drugs and how it was helping to create this war but also the truth behind what was happening with government involvement on both sites the collusion between cartels and government started doing this reporting and found that so many folks in national media wouldn't even listen and it wasn't like we were just coming up with theories and we were finding all kinds of facts and evidence and proof i was working with a guy who's a documentary filmmaker and we had so much evidence of what was happening down there but networks weren't interested in it and corporate media wasn't interested in it but we found as they already had their presumed kind of the end game of what this drug war was about for some was about immigration for others it was about stricter drug policy and none of none of what they were saying actually matched up with the facts and it was at that moment that i realized i wasn't going to get very far trying to push truth to these guys because they just weren't interested in

truth they were interested in the narrative they had already designed and a lot of self-censorship going on as well ben really quickly tell people one more time where they can find you and help your project you can check out business one dot com there we have a link to the truth in media project again it's been be in as you wait in dot com check out the truth in media project and also while you're there you can check out our full disclosure on the n.s.a. and read snowden awesome ben swan amazing to have you on investigative journalist thank you so much it's a pleasure thanks. well if you're wondering what i'm doing when i'm not on air check me out on twitter at abby martin if you like what you see you can follow me there were find all my tweets link into segments from the show as well as random thoughts i have throughout the day and also please help us get breaking a set trending on twitter ok shell throw the hash tag we can get trending on the what else fails but only with your help so head to twitter check me out at abby

martin and guys that's a wrap for us here in d.c. is sure to come back and break the set all again tomorrow. real damage and complexity of this oil spill was not something you can grasp just by looking at dirty birds we have between four to five million people in this directly affected area of the coast and it's pretty clear why it's not being reported because b.p. can't afford to have a reported all along the gulf coast are clean they are safe and they're open for business if b.p. is the single largest oil contributor to the pentagon the u.s. war machine is heavily reliant upon b.p. and their oil this is a huge step backwards for democracy it's a step forward for the oligarchy carex it is toxic as it looked like spraying in

vietnam it was it was not a picture that either the government or b.p. really wanted to have out there i don't want dispersants to be the agent on. this you know this. is he. ultimately. see.

my. i've .

back with our says it can grant asylum to be on the run whistleblower edward snowden while he's not on its soil the n.s.a. leaker remains holed up in a moscow airport. on the heels of snowden's revelations over britain's huge phone and online tapping it turns out the u.k. police are secretly monitoring social networks on a daily basis. egypt's military bracing itself for mass rallies with the opposition or readying to take to the streets to vent its anger and president morsi who is about to mark his first year in the top job. a.t.m. in moscow i met.