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 in to conjure reports . that. totally sold you. did you know the price is the only industry specifically mention in the constitution which says that's because a free and open press is critical to our democracy which recall for us. will. never go on i'm sorry and on this show we reveal the picture of what's actually going on we go beyond identifying the truth rational debate and a real discussion critical issues facing america for ready to join the movement then welcome to the big picture. launch harben in washington d.c. here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture just

a few hours ago the house of representatives passed a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling so this mean that the budget wars are over will talk about data more tonight's big picture rubble also global climate change is causing a higher than average temperatures this year's olympic games in sochi russia this of course raises the question will we even be able to have the winter olympics and a hundred years and bond tanna is leading the way when it comes to cracking down on corporate tax cheats like apple i'll tell you why and how in tonight's deleting. each you know this founding fathers would be up the hall they knew what the obama administration was up to right now on monday the associated press reported that the white house is considering using a drone strike to assassin. an american citizen accused of ties to al qaeda if the

administration ends up approving that strike at this target would become the fifth american citizen killed by our government's so-called remote assassination program is that the white house is considering killing yet another american comes less than a year after the president announced reforms to the drone program during a speech at the national defense university in that speech president obama said that while it was unconstitutional for the government to kill its citizens without due process lethal force was sometimes necessary to take out americans who wage war against their mother country. for the record i do not believe it would be constitutional for the government to target and kill any u.s. citizen with a drone or with a shotgun without due process but when a u.s. citizen goes abroad to wage war against america and is actively plotting to kill u.s. citizens and when neither the united states nor our partners are in

a position to capture him before he carries out a plot his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a swat team. so does the administration as you target meet that standard does he really pose a direct imminent threat to the united states unless the white house decides to let the public in on its internal review process will ever really know for sure that fact alone should concern anyone who believes in the founding principles of this country the framers of the constitution never intended for the president and the executive branch leads to have the power to wage war anywhere anytime against anyone let alone against an american citizen in fact they did everything they could to restrict both the power of the military and the ability of the president the chief executive to use that military to wage war without end of honors and framers

believed that a military was sometimes necessary for self defense but they did not want to become a standing army during times of peace the type of standing army that they had seen overthrow governments in europe time and time again over the course of history and so in article one section eight of the constitution the founders gave congress the elected representatives of we the people the exclusive power to raise and support armies it reads to raise and support armies but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years this is the only place in the custom to show where the power of congress to appropriate money is time limited and that's because the founders were so concerned about the power of a standing army during times of peace at the same time they were so where are the of the dangers of military power the founders made the head of the military a civilian the president united states and made him accountable to the voting

public rather than to the military. and to make sure that even that vast head of the military never became the puppet of the generals the founders gave to congress exclusively in the ability to declare war the power to declare war does not exist in article two of the constitution that's the part that refers to the powers of the president it's not a power that the president has only congress article one only congress has that power the idea behind all of this was to prevent a standing army that could wage war without end and collude with the executive branch to turn on we the people and snuff out our republic as james madison wrote in a letter to a friend in war the discretionary power of the president is extending the president's influence and dealing out offices honors in a volume and has multiplied in all the manes of seducing the minds are added to those of subduing the force of the people no nation could preserve its freedom in

the midst of continual warfare. today it's obvious that james madison's worst nightmare is of come true not only do we have a massive standing army with a multi billion dollar prize today we also have an executive branch that wages war with impunity all across the globe and what's worse most of the decisions regarding that use of force abroad are made behind closed doors without any input from the voting public or their elected representatives the fact that the white house is now considering assassinating another american citizen should concern us all but tragically in light of the expansion of the military and executive branch's war powers since the beginning of the cold war it frankly shouldn't be all that surprising. standing armies and powerful executives will always threaten our liberty congress needs to reclaim their exclusive constitutional power to both declare and wars and soon put an end to this never ending so-called

war on terror. with me for tonight's big picture politics panel vince colonnades executive editor of the daily caller nate sweet progressive commentator and george landreth president of tears of freedom great to see you all again thank you for joining me tonight so you heard my rant anybody think that it's appropriate that the president of states assess that an american citizen who is not actually pointing a gun at somebody on a battlefield i do think it's appropriate that there be circumstances by which people renounce their citizenship based on their behaviors i mean we talk about the constitution obviously article three section three talks about treason there are there is a threshold by which you can cross into treasonous territory in madison as you were referencing kind of wrote about this like he didn't want the government to have too expansive a power to declare treason because that's but that's the way that tyrannies certainly come about rush told to the clerk treason really high and when john adams got close to that. seventeen ninety eight jefferson left town that nearly brought

down the government led to right election of eight hundred then referred to in history is about revolution and look what the courts have also with the way the definitions treats and i mean ultimately supreme court has narrowed it to use those have two witnesses that testified to your acts of treason and that's been narrowed down to two federal agents you have a value but still that's not justification for the president to order yours i think there has to be some justification to attack him as somebody who was no decision if you're killing americans or aiding the enemy in doing so you know i think all the examples you just brought up in some instances where due process is met by the courts and by the system of what we've set up and i think what's particularly disturbing about this instance with the president considering assassinating american citizen like he has before like our government has before four times already is that the justice the perp department is taking upon itself the sole responsibility to determine your process i mean to me at least that's totally contrary to the founding principles of this republic. george well i think if we let's let's say we go back to the day before d.-day and we find out intelligence

that there's a group of a. americans up on that ridge above normandy beach the question who would with the battleship have to shoot at a different spot would they have to do things differently i think not but the difference there of course is one it's a declared war and two it's you know but so is the huge difference and i'm not i'm not suggesting it's not that's like saying you know we're going to do is which is why much of what you said i agree with when you refer to is a rant i just would have referred to as a commentary but but but by the same time one of the things. but the same time i don't know that i want to handcuff the president so that someone like. you know someone who is effectively an american is gone the other side is attacking us that he is has his hands are entirely so i think it's a difficult issue we have to find so we're going to raise the threshold of action beyond the way beyond the way we would treat a criminal in a standoff situation if a person raises a gun but has no intention of pulling the trigger the cops can shoot to protect

themselves there is we can't get to a point though where we say that just because you're an american citizen if you're involved in acts of war against the united states there has to be a threshold by which this isn't about the president making decisions to assess these abhorrent service failed he's what he's doing and i don't know we should conflate this with all of his civil liberties violations but we should definitely take a hard look at why he's not being transparent think one of those one of the really important points i'd like to get all your takes on this before in them move along is is a lesson jeremy scahill on one interview i think was on c.n.n. said you can't surrender to a drone i mean you know if on a battlefield somebody points a gun to even go ok i give up you can do that too if you need to a swat team and i think that's that's the whole issue at stake and why you can't with a swat team in in some cases i mean if you're explicit enough clear way of white flag whatever i mean i guess that's the point i was making and i think the difference between example been stress brought up which is you know somebody waging war in the streets of our country is that we have easy access to that person what's so dangerous about the situation where the president can just unilaterally decide

that the. the person is waging war against america and therefore he deserves to die if that's totally out of any sort of public in this way that when you carry over this one there with the reason why we fit why we've talked about this five times specifically is because these are unique scenarios where these people are unreachable and the loss of human capital involved in trying to get to them is often not worth the risk well you know if we're if we're running a government by cost benefit equation that makes sense i thought we were running a government by democratic and republican principle i think considering human life is actually worth a worthy endeavor well then if the if the if you want to hand the president that kind of power shouldn't congress do that explicitly with a declaration of war then then i don't have a problem with it but the congress says you know we've got this authorization to use force this is this is this is not a declaration of war it basically says the entire world's a battlefield the president can be king forever there's something fundamentally wrong with this and i think that's the part of this is troubling and i do think that since there's been a lack of transparency with in this administration it does kind of jade our view of

things that's why i kind of used the world war two analogy because i think it it if we had a higher degree of trust and if we had a sense that we were pretty sure how it was being done and we were in fact this very very clear george bush was doing the same stuff in fact this is a bush policy that has been granted amplified and more concerned and in many ways actually drawn back i mean obama has said i'm not going to do this willy nilly we're putting some some due process in here but it's within the executive branch due process is supposed to be article three stuff it's supposed to be within the judiciary and outside a war within a war i understand you know there's different rules for war but authorization to use force is not a declaration of war yes especially when you're going to war against the new people this geopolitical unarguable that going to do it since it's just this ideological force and i think that's what that's the whole day we're going to religion or against. people who say i would say though these there it's very clear i mean. obviously following on the heels of bush the power of the executive has grown to astronomical proportions we've seen the warily wearing the way certainly of

constitution. definitions of what congress must be doing no executive no executive has ever ceded power congress obama is that he's making up laws for obamacare i mean there's more of that i think picture. world. series technology innovation all the lives developments around russia. the future covered. i marinate join me. in that impartial and financial reporting. interview and much much. only on been passed and only.

a chance our force. and the finish line of the. wall come back with me for tonight's big picture politics panel are vince colonies and it's sweet and george landreth and let's get back to it just about three hours ago john boehner brought to the floor without a majority the republicans supporting his bringing it to the floor in fact only

twenty eight republican senators voting for a clean suspension of the debt ceiling essentially call it raise the debt ceiling but as you correctly pointed out when we were off camera this is actually a suspension of the debt ceiling and until until after the after the midterms basically right until twenty fifteen. interested a who are the twenty eight republicans b. why is the big story not that george bush got nineteen claimed debt ceiling increases and nobody raised a peep was not and this is obama raised a peep about. you know obama well railed on the very symbolic he rails of the senate what about this he said that we shouldn't be doing that is irresponsible no serious you're right but there was no serious effort to impede us patriot act that's right there was you know it was a series of a certain campaign. you know i'm not here to say obama sharks are water but there was a people is ok so there was a piece but basically george bush got nineteen clean debt ceiling increases and

this is the first one obama's go right so why is that why is it up b. why is the story not being told that frame i don't get it and number three you know this is more kind of inside the beltway but i'm just curious is this the beginning of the end for john boehner speakership. i would suspect that john boehner speakership is limited just because i think he's probably getting tired of it anyway i don't know if this is a political sign i'm not even convinced that he's in a stick around for the next election but who knows i've heard those rumors yeah i mean i don't think there's anybody at least in my political memory that's been so publicly humiliated in america and in american political so frequently by both sides. but i think what's interesting about this instance is you know at least from my take you seem to see these budget wars in washington using the basic for functions of government as political tactics i think those are starting to fall out of that i mean they definitely fallen out of favor with the american public but i think now you've seen them start to fall out of favor with the republican leadership they realized they can go around the bastard rule and the boehner rule

to use democrats to pass through legislation but what's important for people to remember is the obstructionism of the republican party is not over there is only approved one judge since obama or since harry reid pushed through filibuster reform of it in the fall and the republican party has not yet ceded its right to obstruct but if you strip out to those years of the minimum wage you know earlier that they're still obstructing legislation just not ways with over the filibuster george is this the end of the owners. i kind of doubt it and i don't know i've heard the same rumors i don't know that to me that's more funk. and whether he wants the job longer and i thought you were more going to the question of would he be essentially removed from from or lose the speech that there's a there's not a line you know the tea party just one of the big tea party groups is started russian i kind of think not i mean but but the other question was why is it not getting the take of you know this is the first clean debt increase the debt ceiling increase that obama's got and i think part of it is because. the debt got so big so

fast that all the sudden the debt became a bigger issue than it used to be a better head and bush well it also happens if. the annual deficit right now is one third of what it was when george one when obama came into office during bush's presidency was continuously going up during obama's presidency it's going to continuously going down i mean i think a lot of it has been tested with the beltway media itself i think you know the so-called liberal media welcomes these sort of endless crises because it lets forces you know tune into what c.n.n. watch and less twenty four hour coverage in the next crisis all oddballs forever to exactly where the press engages you i'd actually suggest that in general the frame of reference by which we view these fights in the way republicans are considered to be obstruction is not is necessarily the right way to look at it the press often accuse inaction of actually being obstructionism and in general and nobody ever says well actually there may be some value in stopping the way the government is acting i mean if the republican party's goal is to stop the obama agenda because they think it's wrong for the country shouldn't they use the mechanisms of

government to try and do that and by that and by that token ted cruz has been a success mike lee has been a success and if you're measuring their responsibility to stop the obama agenda i don't just philosophically i don't i don't disagree with that politically i don't disagree with that and then it's up to the voters to decide ok does this republican agenda get their us or would the democratic president definitely pick sides on this question that's all i'm saying it seems like the taking the sides but with what i would argue though is that the the debt has gone up so rapidly and so high that that it's because that's what there's no ceiling associated with george. you know the interest rates are still an all time low no. it is saying i'm going to buy treasuries our debt is a fraction it's you know it's half of as a percentage of g.d.p. it's half of what your pan's is and nobody's worried about japanese bonds only being is lower than it was if you're a smaller nation than we are and they're not doing well i mean the name is and why don't you say that compared to the only reading our reason our credit rating took a decent people it's because republicans are so willing to use the debt ceiling it's a political issue in the ted it has

a very with the with the with the default exist as a whole different thing and you know moral mondays. this macro stuff that we've been talking about more micro ways been played out in north carolina in a big way mark north carolina in the last few decades since the sixty's anyway has been largely considered a fairly progressive state and you know it's been taken over by art pope you know this multimillionaire and his republican buddies and he's now the the budget director and in response to that a whole bunch of folks got together and they started doing these moral monday things and this last saturday eighty thousand people from thirty two states this is the largest movement the largest march in the south since one thousand nine hundred sixty five. eighty thousand tea partiers and showed up anywhere i mean you know glenn beck didn't get that many people on the national mall and it got wall to wall coverage for a week on all five networks i mean if if eighty thousand people showed up anywhere

for a tea party event it would have been wall to wall i didn't see this on any of that i'd say that's not a comparison but i mean look at the march for life you had hundreds of thousands of people come to the decent happens every single year very little coverage schools all over the country bus all these kids here you've been here you know more protests will certainly are i mean you will see people trying to enable these protests to get as big as they can they absolutely try to bust people and to support them i'm just saying that there's a very good example i mean if you're going to apples to apples march for life happens all the medic it's very little coverage and i'd say that's kind of unacceptable for something that's right outside the window of most journalists in d.c. i actually think a lot of this has to do i think to a degree there is a sense in which i mean to me. wants to cover tea party rallies because it's sort of like watching a train wreck you never know where you're going to see next but i also think there's a certain amount of regionalism in the mainstream media's coverage i think this is seen as a local issue to a lot of people it's seen as a north carolina issue it's not going to resonate with a lot of people obviously i disagree with that but i think i think that explains what at least part of the reason why big media outlets have been covering it to degree that they should. george is seventy eight percent of the people who

successfully read for office in the last cycle in north carolina were endorsed by this one multimillionaire are pope with the governor has now made the director of the budget and one of the first things he did was cut his own taxes and raise taxes on working people just one of the things that people were so upset about. is that good for democracy well i don't know i mean you know i'd like to be able to you know predict who's going to win seventy eight percent of the election this and you know but i don't know if that's bad or not i mean predict it or actually put the money in and make it happen because that has to be more of what's going on in the long term i don't know that works in the short run i think you may get that in the one election cycle but i think the reality is there is a cost to getting money that is perceived as you know so if he's viewed as a bad guy and people are giving him you know i get money from him that shows up in my report the public knows that make him i think i'm bought and paid for this is going to get around this is is create dozens of others and you know it would surprise me if it happens on the up as well create dozens of these front groups i

mean the supreme court is just unable to stop you next week and i think we're also what you're seeing in north carolina is why it's insufficient to just say oh we see that the koch brothers donate to this political candidate therefore we won't vote for them i think why that becomes such a problematic way to view the issue of money in politics is in north carolina at least the republican party is totally gerrymandered the local districts so it's basically impossible it takes you demonstrating in odors to elect a democrat to one voter to elect a republican to north carolina because of jerry i do want to know that there is some irony in this margin sure you saw this past week i mean there were supporting . obviously trying to knock away voter i.d. laws but they all were required to bring i.d.'s to participate in the march they were actually given flyers prior to the march and said please make sure you're carrying your photo id on you because it's a real you are going to be that's because you might be arrested i mean that's that's kind of there's some irony in that nobody's checking if you're also a nobody checking i.d.'s of the door i mean that's that's something the one you know when there's a situation where you want to look at these kids if they don't have access to the

fact the north carolina example i think this is especially important for anyone who wants to know what happens and when there is that and math amount of money in politics this is what happens when you turn politics over to the billionaires and corporate interests i think anybody who's concerned with the future of the country really needs to look at what's going on in north carolina apropos that you know the koch brothers have been funding these you know creepy speculum creepy prostate ad guy you know uncle sam and all this other stuff to try and sabotage obamacare we have twenty five states that are refusing to take medicaid money but arkansas came up with this really cute little idea hey instead of taken you know one hundred million. i don't know the number so let's just make up some numbers instead of taking a billion dollars to give health care to one hundred thousand people will take that and just you know take the money and give it to their doctors and pay their medical bills which is how medicaid works so it's a single payer program instead we're going to take that billion dollars and we're going to give it to united health care and at blue cross blue shield and they'll get to skim twenty percent legally off the top to pay for c.e.o.

salaries and dividends for the stockholders and gold plated faucets for the bathroom in the in the executive restroom and and and then they will supply private health insurance to not one hundred thousand not not one hundred thousand but maybe seventy thousand because now we have less money and then those private insurance companies will contribute to all of our republican campaigns and it works so well in arkansas all those may you know the they may not be able to maintain those that utah is look pick and has already picked it up. like susan has already picked it up utah pennsylvania new hampshire all. look at doing this this bizarre i think it's actually a good case study for republicans for figuring out what solutions they want to have when they finally if they ever finally get to power and our position repeal obamacare what they can replace it with everyone sort of agrees that there needs to be health solutions a fall is ok because this is obviously and and i want to read because i want to dress the medicaid part of medicaid as a program. year over year is now failing increasingly because doctors are refusing

to take it and the doc fixes aren't even catching up so you have all these urban areas or all these medical fixes for the medic medicare medicare fixes both medicaid and medicare the reimbursement rates are so low that doctors are turning it away so you have in these in these major cities like tons of doctors more than half who are now saying that they're inclined tell me have small quotas on taking medicare but a lot of doctors don't take any i'm sure it's so so that so having private insurance actually puts these guys have had less thought is going to come and i think what's particularly ironic here is republicans in arkansas in order to placate them democrats have to allow them to accept a republican version of a democratic plan which in its inception was created by the heritage foundation says another issue here all of your money my general impression is that if we're going to deal with health care i think we would much better off using private insurance and then helping those who need it who can't afford to get it rather than forcing us all into in obamacare situations we don't like while the obama because

we don't do it with food you know if people need food we don't make everybody get a program for food and hand out food we help feed people who need food we let people who can provide their own food will do so nobody will be sort of stuck. into it i want to in any case we'll have to wrap that up since nate church which is thanks to will be aware that coming up right now millions of people across the globe are enjoying the sights and sounds of the sochi winter olympics with climate change and global warming making winter sports a thing of the past. i

would rather ask questions to people in positions of power instead of speaking on their behalf and that's why you can find my show larry king now right here on our t.v. question for. put it on your cultural harmony why should be a good news ali face i think you're right people.

pleasure to have you with us here on t.v. today i'm sure. that. over by. the journal the prize is the only industry specifically mention in the constitution which says that's because a free and open prize is critical to our democracy schreck i'll focus. on. them again i'm sorry and on this show we reveal the picture of what's actually going on will we go beyond identifying a problem trying to fix rational debate in a real discussion critical issues facing america by a member ready to join the movement then welcome aboard.

back to the big picture i'm tom arbonne coming up in this half hour it's been just over a month since a chemical spill and was a virgin a tainted drinking water for over three hundred thousand people what's the status of that water now and is anyone being held accountable for the millions of gallons of chemicals that spilled into the elk river and it's day four of competition at the winter olympics in sochi russia we'll get an update from socially and talk about how that city is handling the pressure that comes with hosting the olympic games. in tonight's green reporter right now millions of people across the globe are tuning in to the winter olympics in sochi russia they're watching.