vision to hide bribery is free speech we might never know the actual numbers being spent to influence us elections by our corporate billionaire class which is why my friends we always need to be watching. what's going on in a city street you want to. show you what. is this you always. great . sleaze systemic deception. which. is. joining us today we go to discuss not only the 10th anniversary of citizens united but much much more is the wonderful cavalcade of personalities immigration attorney alan thank you very much our t. america correspondent rachel black. sports correspondent.

thank you all for joining us today well citizens united 10 years old how are we all celebrating this this wonderful gift that's been given to our electoral process and i don't because again i think constitutionally it was decided wrong and it's proven to the fact that it's not just about the billionaires in the united states well the companies it's about foreign companies here in the united states who are donating this money to their foreign policies so greater problem than just the amount of money that sort of spent into it not to mention that all that money could be used for something else besides the election if it was other could otherwise control so it sort of spinning out of control and that's really the problem that is really the problem well i think it's interesting that they're trying to present it as a free speech issue because of course the 1st amendment is something that we take incredibly seriously here but at the same time when you have something like this a lot of people if they're just naming it is free speech and they don't realize how much it actually impacts our elections and how much this decision has had an impact because obviously you have all of these political candidates out there who can make problems. is this way or that way but if they're getting millions of dollars from

a super pac or from an organization that is absolutely going influence their decisions on i think it's interesting too that when it 1st came out it was to protect the democrats who were getting more money than republicans which is a misconception people think republicans get more money from but it's the democrats in fact who are and if it's started like also to protect them the unions and people i think to this day also are corporations are people who are afraid to admit who they voted for so kind of protecting their privacy as well while i know people who have voted for a president donald trump and will never admit to it in public because they're ashamed because of what he stands for or what not but i think that i it's changed over time kind of what it stood for and maybe it's time to revisit it and take a look at what this means for for the presidential candidates and like rachel said where the money's coming from because money talks so it just shows our elections are bought and paid for they're not free as they should be and so they don't have the people's best interests at heart of the citizens of this country who want to

elect a leader that would you know put policies forward that would help them and their families out instead it's these billionaires that want to promote corporate greed in order to influence these elections and you see it in like for example bush the bush family you see the families out trump people are talking about his family in 202-820-2020 extension 32 maybe his son or daughter running it just stays in the rich billionaire family and i think that there's something is really gross to me when we consider that like money equals free speech that it's not about like who's actually xander stand like look if an individual wants to donate to a campaign whether they're rich or poor they have every right to do that but when you start treating a corporation as a person not just to regards to you know elections but across the board that's a very dangerous thing it's a group of people it's not one person and i think that's where we're kind of we really jumped off track with this in the original decision justice anthony kennedy who wrote the writing opinion said we now conclude that in the. expenditures

including those made by corporations do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption he went on to say that the fact that speakers id donors may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that these officials are corrupt. was just this kind of you completely naive to how politics works in the modern world or was his decision made with the direct intent to allow the super wealthy and these corporations to legally control the direction of our government i mean you think it was and i have a tape of that got this passed i think in the distance that case it was very well discussed there been years of presidents where people had said money does equal speech right and we sort of look at the democratic party today even without this in the united just in who the candidates are now it's already eliminated many of the black candidates and some of the static and it's the diversity on the stage but money alone so money alone does have an influence in deciding who even the candidates are who will be affected by citizens united so it's an oversight an overreach and just a way to sort of fund these continual continuation of what sort of putting the system with human reason you go back to the lobbyists i mean who are really behind

the scenes creating this policy and lobbying these people in congress people in office to vote this way or vote one way and it's a risk that trust or the credibility that they really rely on these people and where does that come from so it's interesting to see how easily they trust certain people after building relationships because it's again following the money and i think that's a really good point here especially when you go back to the 26 female action we had gone trump and hillary clinton were the 2 most unpopular candidates across the board and yet you still hundreds of millions of dollars going into these campaigns and it raises a lot of questions about ok what else could we be doing with that money what if we were in a system where the candidates took that money and then were able to give it back to the public in to help out and that's within their popularity and instead of this sort of race that we're in now where it's just who raises the most and who has the biggest names behind the thing that's really interesting you know it also strikes me too is the fact that both individual donors and corporate donors and in the.

jewels 1400000000 the good what we could have spent that money on outside of buying people in washington corporations almost 500000000 almost half a 1000000000 do you think that this system will ever get fixed or is it too entrenched now how politics does business here in washington d.c. i mean we ever see a congress or president say we need to stop this we need to pull back from this but because remember one of the part of hurdles is the fact that they're also then promised jobs when they leave office a lot of these same donors then when that when that candidate no longer going that politicians is done with public life it's the revolving door they get to walk back and get their cushy corporate job are we ever going to see this changed. i don't think so i mean k. street is full of people who make their living off of sort of influence and connections and so that's sort of what the problem is and the problem with democracy is the whole of the concept that we want to hold out that we have is a mockery that is one person one vote and when you only get to vote for the person who is put before you by a corporation who has no vote then your vote really doesn't matter that much right because you're sort of limited to this pool of people who are sort of protecting

the interest of that specific cohort so that's really the problem with it all and it sort of say all of a sudden when you look at the senate and everybody's a millionaire in the in the door and you go to the house and everybody's path on their way they're right so that's sort of a floor that says you're not going to have that big of a change i think the president has been president has been set so i agree with alan that it's almost too late and it's the case tree is full of just people trying to lobby these politicians one way or another and grab support from from all these other companies and that's where it kind of gets lost in translation so to speak where we've come so far that i don't think it's even worth and it's interesting because even these these candidates who are lobbying for are saying that you know talking about medicare for all or trying to make that change unfortunately like rachel said earlier sometimes it's just talk because once presented with that with that issue and that argument it's not as easy to specially with. with all your

supporters and where all your money is coming from to make it happen i think it's going to be far easier to get hair to grow might have a good to see this move forward right steve. that's a good point tara but i believe you put it no i mean when you see this might be a little preview of the next topic but a candidate such as bernie sanders when they do say get the money out of politics you see them get ostracized and silenced so that it's going to be tough to ever get a candidate very true it's very very true i want to say i can't wait stick with me we're going to go to a break right now but we'll be back with this amazing panel we have right here all right don't forget to let us know my friend during this break what you think of the top of the group over social media be sure to check out watching the hawks the podcast which is now available on spotify apple music and all those other places do listen to your favorite. or not for faber podcast coming up we discuss the follow up to what many are calling it disastrous performance by c.n.n. on its own democratic presidential debate and then we look at the decision to ban political protests at the 2020 olympic games you don't want to miss this face to the watching the hawks.

that money printing leads to the stock market going higher which makes anyone think there are geniuses in the crowd like in that see our strategy of bombing innocent people makes sense released a crack at bridgeboro money and then the bed accommodates of course because we do so for national security and the stock market it's an all time mark when everyone gets really smart thinking oh my genius i'm making so much money is go bomb more people go kill more civilians the school system our soldiers our money and then the stock market go siren that's the cycle that we're in now it's called genocide for profit it's called america.

and we're going to fulfill the repeated promises apologise to the people and promise to be you know weeds or buts to. be. free from. their burka now you want to 1st correct that. no. all. the link i link up by your. description

sound up even for the owners so how to choose the pet food industry is telling us what to feed our pets really more based on what they want to sell us than was necessarily good for the pet turns out may not be the best people belief we have animals that have you know diabetes and arthritis they have auto immune disorders allergies we are actually creating these problems it's a huge epidemic of problems i believe can be linked to very simple problem of diet and some dog owners tell heartbreaking stories about their pets less treats the larger corporations are not very interested in proving or disproving the value of their food because they're already making it a $1000000000.00 on it and there's no reason to do that research. well it's finally begun the impeachment of donald trump the president and his

supporters say the process is nothing more than a political witch the democrats in the liberal corporate media say trump is a national security threat and must be removed but in the end it would seem democracy itself being impeached. this week c.n.n. host of the last major democratic presidential primary debate before the much ballyhooed i will caucus is the candidate who made the biggest election year faceplant at this debate was. c.n.n. yes many critics and viewers are calling out c.n.n. this week for their coverage and handling of the democratic debate in fact the criticism of c.n.n. got so heated that after the debate hashtag c.n.n. is garbage and hashtags. we're trending on twitter at the heart of the criticism of

the news agencies handling of the great elizabeth warren bernie sanders he said she said campaign trails of 2020 with award winning journalist matt taibbi writing in rolling stone that over a 24 hour period before during and after the debate c.n.n. bid farewell to what remained of its reputation as a nonpolitical actor the a remarkable stretch of back julie dubious reporting commentary and heavy handed messaging episodes like this are why people hate the media many also point out c.n.n. black of questions on immigration or prison reform just to name a few when confronted with the day s. featuring all caucasian candidates so has c.n.n. handling of the supposed burning war in scandal and the democratic debate in general finally exposed them to be just as biased and agenda driven as say a fox news or and imus and b. c i will ask the panel did c.n.n. space plan this week expose them as being agenda driven. i think it absolutely did

but this isn't the 1st time we've seen this but it's nice to see that twitter is finally figuring it out and talking out about it but i think a lot of people like to say that fox news is right and c.n.n. has left it these are 2 no words that have continually pushed the same standard when it comes to our prison population when it comes to our endless wars in the middle east when it comes to government surveillance a number of issues but you don't see people like bush or obama or trump questioning c.n.n. and fox news don't really question those either and so i think it's nice that c.n.n. finally getting called out for that specifically with concern i agree with rachel i think that it's happened before i mean we saw this in the 26 election where it came out the working with the hillary clinton campaign we've seen this time and time again and twitter is catching up to this and i think viewers especially were disappointed because they want to know these are these tough questions they want answers to these and where c.n.n. really lacked that and of course they were going to spend more and sanders he schumi to because what gets ratings to them it was that but i'm glad that they

receive some backlash on twitter that these people the viewers want to know more about the real issues and not about what he said she said and the timing of of that and the fact that it all came out now it was just pretty interesting. skeptical of all of it so let me just go that way so i don't think i don't think it was a face plant by c.n.n. as much as it was the bernie bros sort of following it and running with the sort of tag afterwards that sort of breaks the democratic party it was a family conversation it was in a family setting and this sort of thing about investigating so was supposed to say did he say it after he said he didn't say it just to lead to the next question of asking how did you feel when they said it after reporting it already been there that she was said so i sort of i think it misses the point and it draws people into the worst part of media which is the reality television that has become this sort of sensational thing rather than saying well what about immigration what about prison reform what about the hungry children what about the schools rather than sort of highlighting this thing that really has no bearing on anything i don't really care what bernie said about anything right and i hate. i love him the same

thing about i don't really think that takes me to the box to vote for somebody about that position so i think it distracts a lot and it leads to the things that happened today where you saw senator sort of be confronted by c.n.n. and say you're a left wing hack so that makes the media rule in the media in general for everyone because then people turn away they become skeptical of the people providing the news of course everybody has an intent everybody has an angle sort of understand that in sort of deal with it right then and is not perfect has not been in the past we all have sort of flaws in that way but i don't really think it's trash just because of that one thing i'm not going to rate it by its worst moments doesn't it i like i actually like because it's like we could all pick apart every single news agency for all the problems that make we can pick a party we could pick apart c.n.n. we could pick apart all these companies but at the end of the day you know you have to kind of be able to sort through it yourself it does fall upon you know definitely and we we don't know who said what it's a he said she said elizabeth warren said he said he said a woman can be present he denied it so we don't audial that but the bottom line is the piers that it's a rerun of 2016 were c.n.n. obviously chose it just like the context it was set in so that if he had come out

and maybe said or clarify whether he said or not again there's no actual proof right now but of course we don't know the context if it was said between him and more bernie and warren but we do know that c.n.n. clearly is trying to silence him once again like sarah said earlier we know through e-mails that c.n.n. in the hillary clinton campaign paying colluded so clearly we don't know who c.n.n. choosing but it's not bernie sanders again i mean really i mean that's the one thing you kind of want to ask news agencies like we all understand you have a certain slant for you have a certain bias but at least lied to us a little bit don't put it on a lower i don't don't tell us that you know all these people are right it's wrong and you saw them do that to a few candidates along the campaign trail this year we're kind of that group mentality rather than listening to new ideas or things like that i think like you said to tyrrell i think people need to then decide for themselves and not think on media media and kind of really look into and goes. through a filter through the news and what to decide how you decide to face these issues

and unfortunately i think that's gone been gotten worse in the last couple of years it's interesting because you know i actually learned something. in the in the kind of interest the folly of all of this that we saw on wednesday night there was a really interesting kind of tell c.n.n. was criticized essentially for harping over how much medicare for all or single payer health care coverage would cost bush as policy i was there on the riffel pointed out on twitter and some really interesting tweet he said they just $27.00 questions about sending troops into the middle east and preventing iran from developing nukes and not once asked how they would pay for. not letting poor people die whoa that's you know what's the price tag on that essentially is what this guy that's them for interesting tweet an interesting tell that we spend more time you know kind of excited about war and asking our candidates will you send troops will you stand up when it comes to policies that actually you know are designed to help people oh well that's too expensive i mean it was absolutely and i think we see

that every single day in congress because democrats and republicans love to act like they're on opposite sides of the aisle but then when it comes to passing the military budget every year all of us a number one comes together there's no debate they don't care about the fact that a 100 some billions of dollars and we're adding more onto it this year and they don't care about these reports that are coming out saying the wars in afghanistan and iraq these were all based on lies continued on lies and we're wasting all of this money over there yet when it comes to programs like medicare for all and it may do something for the citizens here in the united states all of the sudden they don't have the money for that and they can agree on it. that's growing. they just gave 2 trillion right away after cutting snap benefits for children who needed food so if no one cares and we don't care as voters then why should they care why do we care what war cost we're going to fight we're the best with the strongest there's also this misconception that the more money that you spend on something the better it is and that's the folly of war right you think oh i'm spitting were. this is really solving

a problem and we throw more money at it money doesn't solve all problems out so i think that's where. pushback where he wants to pull troops out but it's not that easy i mean we've had them for so many years there that it's you know you can pull them out but that's going to leave them in chaos too so it's balance of ok do i pull them out how many do i pull out and the idea i deal world of course we would have tipped over the world but that's not the case then we see just a week ago also the current guy sitting in the oval office tweeted out that we spent i think it was 3 trip trillion or $3000000000.00 after he after the attack on the money he bragged about the military budget i think he said 3 trillion dollars when you see the president of the united states bragging about the military budget that kind of influences some people who has the biggest budget who's the top this guy in the world. and that's something. for the state the media is supposed to be there to say hey we're not supposed to cheerlead some things like this we're actually supposed to stand up and say not just how can we pay for health care but

how can we pay for invading another country again how could we pay for things like that but we don't see that i don't think very often that a lot of our branches of me don't see the deficit next to the dow you really don't that's a great point that's a great point and for our last topic of the day the 2020 summer olympic games in tokyo this year will not be featuring any kind of political protest or speeches by the c.b.s. news reports that the international olympic committee cited the olympic charter states that athletes are banned from protesting while on the field of play in the olympic village and during medal and during the medal another official ceremonies the committee did say that athletes could still get political unprecedented outside the olympic village in meetings and on social media with some of the most memorable and iconic olympic moments tied to political expression or protest the i.o.c. ignoring a big part of what makes the games so important to the world steve i'll start with you as a sports correspondent. they clearly don't want any distractions obviously and this

coming after recently at the pan american games when a fencer race and voting took me on the podium and then a 3rd one barrier rose at 1st and those 2 have these are being banned now they probably will be able to participate in these olympics coming up in tokyo because they received 12 months probation now clearly the i.o.c. says they're in support of freedom of expression of these athletes but this says otherwise and it goes back to 968 you mentioned history john carlos tommie smith dichotic reason the 1st on the podium they were they were banished from the team and then just recently they were given back those medals and those wins that they had so it's i think they're going too far and i would agree and that my question is where does it stop because it's easy for them to say ok just don't do it at the medal ceremonies but you can still do it on social media or you can still do it in your own free time but then what happens when they come forward and they say oh wait a 2nd let's not do this on your social media either because that also reflects who you are as an athlete and so i think it's one of those things where you give an engine there's concerns that they will eventually take a mile and make it so much so that the police can't say anything i disagree i am

actually in support of this because sometimes i want to turn on a sports game i want to turn on a movie something where it's not going to be political and for me that's been something that's kind of been kind of tough for i understand the freedom of speech and that's great but i think for this case the olympic games where you're supposed to come together as one was i think one of the few times now that we see him in the world besides sporting or and sporting events i think where the world really you see is united to leave the politics aside leave it in the village leave it on your social media i really do kind of like the idea of having them not to protest on the field and we can go the opposite of everything they stand for i don't think that it's difficult for me to understand as a lawyer how someone could control their artistry which is a sports hood and then to say what you can do at those points no one would ever say to a singer you can sing just these songs right i'm going to do it i'm kind of going off the field is also a little bit different a part of their protests is their artistry in the performance of the sport for africa. american people who are doing some sports that are not supposed be doing

and winning venus and serena have changed women's tennis for all time to the u.s. that's why there's a whole docket full of them and they're no maintenance players so i think that the part that someone should show up to work and not mentally tap into who they are and to ignore the things that are going on around them is problematic and for the. for the olympics was supposed to be about this world peace to be focused on controlling them about the protests rather than addressing the things they're protesting is the problem because then they say we take no position which to me becomes i will tolerate you acted out on a mockery either way tolerate you without really wanting to. and it's interesting to me it's like trying to trying to ban protester politics from the 200 some odd countries all meeting and rep and all these different athletes all meeting to represent their cause countries in the competition against the other countries it's kind of like i mean that's kind of impossible it's like putting out a fire with a with a score because it's like these people are going to come they're jazzed up there

they're full of like you know energy and then country pride. it whether they want to protest something in their own country something other countries are doing that's going to be hard to really tamp down stamp down especially with these historical precedents that we've seen over the years right well actually where do you think i don't see i don't think that's what actually starts in the cafeteria i think that this is what i mean so much because capron has made it has it has had a movement now for 3 years you know in protest of the social injustice going on in this country so what better way to do it when you're given a world stage like that how else 'd would you make people aware who might not be aware that there's a lot of people oppressed in this country and in other places and let's not forget was a megan was rapid no you know with women's soccer you know they're going to be competing up there too you're talk about a lot of people that are going to have a lot of things to say and maybe you're right so maybe they'll keep it off the field now and they'll keep it clean no i didn't you know you never know him and i think but i do think at the end of the in my opinion i feel that athletes are human beings and they should have a voice regardless of where it is the same we all have a voice at this table know that and you know at the end of the day if they want to

stand on the podium and raise their fists or do whatever you don't celebrate or protest in whatever way they can let's let them represent their professional public figures who have earned it so the happy hour for must make that out. at the last award show where they said do not come again i think the political and that didn't happen it's like all right everyone i want to thank you all for coming on today alan origin and thank you as always rachel blub and sorry mum to steal christine christakis great conversations we all were nice and polite and look at the dice we were to each other and made people that congress could do this and that is are so pretty they remember everyone in this world we are told that we love the facility tell you all i love my role but keep watching the hawks and have a great day in the.

the money goes in my. vows of a time about members of us a bit. more about. what went right in the side. scene that i don't defend but i'm before. him by the. body i'm not moved on. what politicians do. they put themselves on the line to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president. i want to press. you to go right to

cross the survivor before 3 in the morning can't be good. i'm interested always in the waters about how. this should be. well it's finally begun the impeachment of donald trump the president and his supporters say the process is nothing more than a political witch the democrats in the liberal corporate media say trump is a national security threat and must be removed but in the end it would seem democracy itself is being impeached. on a space flight you literally leave all your problems behind you fly high and above everyone and everything and then you see any and all borderlines on earth disappear you see that up planet is not as we're taught in schools with different countries marked in different colors separate from one another you see that all planet earth is just another it will be a big international space station. on

a mission in the vastness of space just like the sas. has built a prison called the world and it's the prison it's the prison and the cost of building that prison is 0 because it's all based on everyone in the world is still willing to accept dollars trade in dollars clear through the new york fed the u.s. dollar wherever you go you'll find a. dollar is god no matter what religion you say you are around the world the fact is you pray to the u.s. every day. the over you. know i'm. not.

so. the russian president appoints for much tax change. as the country's new prime minister to parliament overwhelmingly votes in favor of his candidacy. western media suggests to me putin's plans to devolve power to the russian parliament to stay in power beyond 2024. and libya's rebel general. reportedly agrees to abide by the cease fire currently in effect in the war stricken country and this comes hours after president said turkey would be spending more troops to libya to support the un backed government. well those are

the headlines we'll be back here next hour with another round up and stay with sophie and co.