>> the feds bring their corruption case against new jersey senator bob menendez. he says he's gonna fight till the end. who's going to win? let's get the inside story. good morning and good easter sunday to you. i'm tamala edwards. let's introduce you to the panel. first up, a good easter to george burrell, non-profit exec. marketing executive brian tierney. >> morning. >> communications executive nia meeks. >> good morning. >> are you an executive, ed? no, you're just a foreign-policy analyst. the best there is. thank you, ed turzanski, for joining us. the feds, this week, brought their case. bob menendez had known for a long time they were working on this case. it dropped 14 counts against him, a 68-page indictment. the keyword here, out of all these counts, is bribery. he says he had a friendship with a florida ophthalmologist named salomon melgen. they said what he was really doing was taking luxury travel

accommodations, hundreds of thousand of dollars in campaign contributions, for quid pro quo. menendez came out and reacted this week, and let's say he's making it really clear he's not going to make it easy for them. here's what he said. >> i'm angry because prosecutors at the justice department don't know the difference between friendship and corruption. they are dead wrong, and i am -- >> okay, now, here's the question -- is this what friendship looks like? melgen is famous as getting the greatest amount of medicare paybacks in the country. he's an ophthalmologist. he does all these procedures. the feds said, "you improperly billed $8.9 billion. you got to pay it back." menendez jumped in on his behalf to fight it. he lobbied for him to be able to get a port-security deal in the dominican republic. it turns out, actually, the coast guard was going to give away free screening equipment to the port, and they said, "no no, no, no, let's go through this company owned by melgen." and then, of course, there was the matter of him getting visas for his 20-something girlfriends.

i'm sure the wife loved that detail, melgen's wife. is that just friendship or is that something more? >> it's not my kind of friendship. i mean, i don't have those kinds of friends. what can i say? i don't have billionaires on my rolodex. but the unfortunate thing is and i think the burden of proof is gonna be really high on the justice department, to actually show that there was clear bribery. but when you look at it overall, there's an issue of perception that really does not smell too well when it comes to a public official, public service. and these kinds of deals whether they happen all the time with friends or they're kind of "wink, wink, nod, nod," it doesn't look good. and it's not gonna look good for the voters, overall. >> one detail they jumped at is all the flights. he took so many charter flights. was not reimbursing anything until it looked like he was going to get caught. that seems to be politics 101. you got to reimburse the stuff. you can stay at somebody's house, that's a friend. but you can't take the flights. >> well, you're always better off having paid the money even if you did it for the wrong. you're better off having paid the money when you actually get confronted with it. the thing that's striking to me, i think it doesn't make any difference whether this is

friendship or not. it's something he shouldn't have done. these numbers are just too big to be ignored. but what strikes me is the resounding silence that you're hearing from the political world, in large measure 'cause they all do it. maybe not to that level, but they all -- you know, we've seen it with governor christie, we've seen it with governor corbett, we've seen it with hillary clinton. all these people fly on private planes, get big prizes, and so it's a very difficult thing. i think the quid pro quo question, though, is going to be difficult. and it's a different ball game for him if he just didn't file the proper financial reports than if they can prove that he took the money in exchange for doing the things. i think also the fact that he didn't do it from a committee that he chaired and where he had real power, and it was just he as an elected official. >> well, he's gotten a lawyer who's famous for being able to beat back these kinds of charges. but then the question is, you look at 2018, that's when he's up for re-election, what happens to him then? because many people might point out this guy's not from new jersey. the senators from florida, rubio and nelson, they weren't helping him. why was bob menendez in the middle of all this?

>> that's what friends are for i guess, is what he would say, right? that song. i think what's an interesting process -- i mean, there is a long relationship of 20 years. this does seem to be pretty extreme, and some things were literally not reported that should've been reported. but there's an interesting phenomenon among elected officials -- you're so close and you're dealing with, constantly, very, very wealthy people who are legitimately funding your campaign. and all of a sudden, you start to blend, kind of, "well, they have a jet. why don't i go in the jet with them?" and, "they have a jet, and maybe i can take that jet on my own," et cetera, et cetera. and that's where the lines start to get blurred. and i think that's clearly what's happening here with menendez. i can say, if a republican was president, they'd say the republicans were out to get him. but luckily it's a democrat now, although you probably could make the case that the obama administration hasn't been too pleased with the way menendez has taken on issues as it relates to his committee role on foreign policies. >> that whisper has been out there. did the obama administration say, "look here"? >> they're probably feeling a little bit like, "you know what, we think he did some things wrong, and we have no interest

in trying to defend him, either." >> you know what, ed, i found it interesting that menendez did a good portion of his statement in spanish. you know, thinking about that cuban vote, about the hispanic vote, the importance of latinos in 2016. how tricky is this case for democrats if he's saying, you know, under a democratic president, a democratic d.o.j. they couldn't figure out that this was friendship, could this come back to hurt the democrats in some way if he, in anger, lashes out? >> that may be part of the reason why, as george pointed out, you've heard very little from other elected officials. i think a great deal in this case will depend on what the doctor says. because the doctor will be the pivot point to try to establish that there was a quid pro quo. and if he has run afoul of cms the centers for medicare and medicaid services, to the tune of several billion dollars... >> that's a lot of money. >> well, because it's not just paying that back, but then there's a multiplier that has

to be paid back. so you're paying back two or three times the amount of whatever was fraudulently taken, along with whatever jail time comes. at some point, that's a pretty expensive friend to have. so the doctor will be very consequential, and menendez is reaching for the third rail, the political rail, to try to save himself because he knows it raises the cost for anyone who's chasing him. >> very quickly, does anybody have a sense on how long this is gonna drag out? like, is this -- will we be talking about this a year from now, two years from now, or will it go more quickly than that? >> unless somebody pleads, i think definitely a year from now. >> i think it'll drag on. >> it'll be longer than that. i mean, this is just a really complicated case. you're two or three years down the road. but the big problem for me is that it's a reflection of the sense of entitlement that republicans and democrats all have about their right to these, you know, gratuities. >> these perks. and the democrats could -- i mean, you couldn't just sit there and let this happen, i mean, regardless. because if you look at this, we're talking about billions of

dollars. and had the democrats not pursued this, had the d.o.j. not pursued this, it would have been a point of negligence, it would have been a point of partisanship, and everything else. while they might be silent on one end, just fiscal responsibility, moral responsibility, this is something that has to be investigated and taken to the extremes. >> but you know, it is interesting, when you read some of the e-mails, the degree to which this one person got this kind of attention the average voter doesn't, it really -- it's the political process in both parties, but it really did make you sort of look at those e-mails and go, "wow." >> yeah. >> mm-hmm. >> all right. let's move on and talk about kathleen kane, in the news on two different fronts this week. first up, the state supreme court in pennsylvania said -- they knocked down this idea that the case couldn't move forward against her about the leaks coming out of her office. now it looks like it's up to risa vetri ferman to decide what's going to happen. this week she came out and said she's gonna be very fair about it, but the expectation seems to be that, ultimately, she is probably going to bring charges. do you guys have a sense one way or the other? >> i'll defer to brian. [ laughs ] >> i mean, i have no, you know...

i think the burden is getting so big, in terms of attorney general kane, and it is just one thing after another. the other issue, congratulations to the inquirer. people want to know what is important. angela couloumbis and craig mccoy, their investigative work, which is very difficult to do, comes up with this other part of it, which is that when a proposed casino, fellow named denaples, his application was perhaps, it seems like, was being scrutinized by another employee at the attorney general's office, who was -- excuse me, at the casino control commission -- a friend of hers. the prosecution or investigation was deferred. all of these sorts of things start to add up, and you start to say, "this seems like she's out of control." and i got to think democratic leaders at this point are saying, "this is a loser." so i would expect something to come out of montgomery county. >> the interesting thing about that story -- you know the inquirer makes it clear that they talked to a number of sources. clearly a lot of people didn't talk on the record. but it sounds like a number of people in her office, at this point, are coming out and saying, "it's craziness in here. we had this case.

we just wanted these people to come in and talk, and she shut it down. she wouldn't even let witnesses that we weren't looking to prosecute come in and talk." >> and that is exactly what you're getting, this sense of "this place is out of control." it's crazy. career people who have worked there for many attorney generals are saying, "help us. please, help us. this place is out of control." >> so, what does she do? you have this stuff coming out constantly. does she continue on or does she step down? and that's the constant question. >> what will she do or what should she do? because at this point, it gets to be a matter of effectiveness. and whether you're looking at the attorneys that are working within her purview or the people outside, when you start to really lose all that trust, how effective can you be at your job? and that's a question that's really out there, that's hanging. there are gonna be -- people are saying, "oh, she should resign." others have been saying that she should be impeached, whether these offenses are impeachable. there have been many mistakes. but, again, when you're looking at it overall, resignation might not be something that's impossible, but right now, from everything that she has projected, she plans to stay.

>> but i think she... i think -- and i've not been in any of thee discussions, but i'm sure the democrats are looking for a challenge to her. if she doesn't step aside, she's gonna get challenged in the democratic primary next year because she's a drag in the national election, going forward, if she's re-nominated. and i think, unfortunately these really look like -- you could consider it to be arrogance. i kind of think they're more rookie mistakes. i think she's just gotten in a little bit over her head, and is exercising, you know, more discretion than is really available to her. >> i don't know that it's quite that benign, but i would say that, regardless of which path she takes, it's very difficult to find a way for her to remain in not just this position, but in elective politics. i think her name is tarnished in a way that is gonna be very difficult to rehabilitate. >> on the impeachment issue, it's an interesting one, though, as it relates to the legislature. you can say, "gee, we should do that." then there has to be a sense of,

"and if we're not successful she is still the attorney general." >> mm-hmm. >> and, you know, "do i really want the attorney --" >> if you come to kill the king, you better kill the king. >> especially given how she does seem to act on whim and personal vendetta. >> let's talk about somebody whose name had been bandied about, potentially, for 2016 maybe no more. that's mike pence, the governor of indiana, who found himself in quite the brackish amount of water this week over what he thought was going to be a slam dunk -- a state version of the religious freedom restoration act. now, any number of states have these. indiana wanted to d something different, away from the federal law, away from other state laws. they wanted to, essentially, make it where for-profit companies -- before it had been non-profit, churches, groups. now it can just be any company can say "i have a religious exception." and before, it was seen as having to do with government action, hobby lobby saying, "you can't make me provide contraceptives to my employees." now they're saying that's not it. people could just say, for any reason, "i don't want to deal with you because of a religious

exception." it got pushed back there. it got pushed back in arkansas. and now the republicans find themselves in a bit of a sticky wicket. big business coming out and saying, "we will not support this," but then people like ted cruz saying, "wait a second. if you're a true conservative, you would stand up for a bill like this." is this the kind of thing that is already putting the nails in the coffin of whoever ends up being the republican candidate that they've got to fight it out on this issue before they can get to everything else? >> my sense is that this issue is going to wane, and the presidential candidates are going to try to steer clear of it. what is surprising is that pence was so unprepared to answer basic questions. >> do you think if he had been he could've won the day on this or no? >> no. >> i think no, because i think that this touches a nerve that is just exposed. and on this issue, the culture war is in high dudgeon. and the people who are for gay marriage have won, and they are

shooting anyone who's in the way who isn't agreeing completely with their point of view. so i think it's very contentious, very dangerous. and it's the sort of thing i do not think a republican presidential candidate wants to be drawn into that issue, much as mitt romney didn't want to have to talk about abortion and contraception. >> however, we've already heard two things, conservative groups come out and say they're thinking of coalescing around a candidate early, that that's their best chance of getting somebody they want, and they look at issues like this. in fact, we've seen any number of conservative groups say "hey, walmart, we're gonna get you back. hey, other groups, we're gonna get you back. and if you're a candidate that didn't stand up for this, it's gonna be a problem with us." so it doesn't seem like it's going to completely go away. >> i don't think it's very large. i mean, the ted cruzes -- you know, george and i have more of a chance of being president of the united states than ted cruz, right? and we're not even running. and if we did run, we would definitely beat him. so, this extreme -- i think people can accept that a church shouldn't have to hire a gay

employee who's notoriously gay out there, outspoken, et cetera. that's one thing. but the idea that somehow you could deny somebody service in a restaurant or place of -- it's beyond the pale. it's un-american. it's unconstitutional. >> yeah. >> so, anybody who touches this is a fool. and i think ted cruz is just trying to get his name out there. and i think a lot of these guys don't expect to win, but it helps on the speakers tour, it helps with the book, et cetera et cetera, et cetera. >> it's one of those self-inflicted wounds that are so completely unnecessary right now. i mean, you had reince priebus who's the chair of the party saying, you know, "we're having a more inclusive party." and then you have issues like this that are coming out of the -- you know, it's curious how this keeps bubbling up on the state level and it's so unnecessary. >> and to be fair, it's not just the ted cruzes of the world. you have the jeb bushes of the world at the start of the week saying, "i don't see what's wrong with it," and then having to retrench and regroup by the middle of the week. was it just that people didn't really understand what they were saying or they changed course? >> they didn't know where the wind was blowing. >> i think, you know, it's a real struggle, because if you're a republican -- these guys know

better than me, but if you're a republican candidate for president, you got to try to figure out how to win the nomination, which pulls you to the right, and then win the national election, which you have to do from the center. it's a real challenge. and the struggle for me is -- and both democrats and republicans do it, but in a sense it's the republicans... we're trying to govern this country from an ideological viewpoint, and governing every little thing. >> mm-hmm. >> and you just can't do it. it just gets too confusing. the laws all conflict one another. we should be trying to define what this great nation stands for, and that seems to have gotten lost in the discussion somewhere. >> and to some extent, it shows, unfortunately for democracy, the weakness of the political parties. when you have a strong democratic and political party the national committees, that's where you want the strength to be because they know they have to govern. when you get these extreme groups on the left and the right pulling these parties, the chairmen of both -- >> it's not about governing, it's about winning. >> and they don't win, though. it's about the next fundraiser. it's about the direct mail package. it's about that. >> it would have been interesting -- >> i would love to hear that

point, ed, but they're telling me that i got to take a break. we will come right back in a moment. >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city, powered by the world. temple.edu/takecharge. thank you, cable for taking longer to upload our family movies. for the slower internet upload speeds. for taking longer to upload my files to the cloud. for making me wait longer to share my photo albums. and for never upgrading to 100% fiber optics

thank you cable... thank you cable, because if we never had you... ...we wouldn't know the incredible difference verizon fios makes. in customer satisfaction studies, fios is rated #1 in internet speed and reliability - 8 years running. plus, fios has the fastest wi-fi available from any provider, and the most on demand titles to your tv. so join the millions who experience the difference fios makes. hurry! now is the best time. it's your last chance to get a fios triple play online at an amazing $79.99 a month guaranteed for two full years. plus, get a $300 bonus with a 2-year agreement. hurry! it's your last chance! offer ends april 18th! go to verizon.com/thefacts today. trading-in or selling your car, truck or suv? webuyanycar.com takes the hassle out of selling in just 3 easy steps. one, get your free online valuation. two, drive to your local car buying center. and three, walk out with your check in as little as 30 minutes.

buying used cars is all we do... all makes and models... no dealership pressure. we'll even settle your loan or lease. so don't wait. get your free online valuation now at webuyanycar.com >> welcome back to "inside story." i'm tamala edwards. there was a shocker. this almost seemed to be a joke

when you read the story in the inquirer this week. they took a look at l&i, which has had a lot of trouble in recent months, and they found that there were 600 inspections done on 100 properties by 9 rookies in 1 week. they put all the details back into the system under one person's name. and there have been some questions about work that this person had done in the past, as well. and the story, of course, quoted a lot of veteran l&i guys shaking their head, going, "what is this all about? they're just trying to clear the books." and alan butkovitz, the city controller, saying this is prime for a lawsuit if somebody came back through. how in the world could this even be true, that somebody thought this was a good idea? >> well, first of all, kudos again to our friends down, my former colleagues, at the inquirer for doing this kind of tedious investigative work. the fact of the matter is, you just can't believe that after a building collapses on market street and people die and the mayor's saying, "we're gonna fix this," that you could find yourself here. and that just shows how endemic

and -- i don't want to say corruption, but how the bureaucracy there, that it's just -- they're not going to change. and until you basically clear house, or put a special prosecutor down there full-time, it's not gonna change. >> but, you know, you know what life is like in city hall. if you were the mayor, and if somebody in your office lost a loved one during that situation on market street, you would think you would say, "like a hawk. we are breathing down the neck of l&i. we are going to check on everything. we will restore faith in this city and what it means to have buildings inspected." >> the question is, how do you pay for restoring faith? you know, we want to give more money to -- nobody wants to raise taxes. nobody wants to find a way to get revenues. everybody says, "we want fewer people in government, and be more efficient." well, you can't be more efficient with building inspections. there have to be real people who go out there and see. to me, the problem is the lack of integrity in it. i mean, the only way they're going to be able to inspect more properties is to hire more people, and the only people they're gonna hire are gonna be rookies. [ laughs ] and so the question is, how do you train them?

and the problem with these people, and what they appear to be trying to get around, is not the fact that they were rookies, but they hadn't got the next level of certification they need to be able to go out there. so if they had a next level of certification, they would've been able to go out there individually and do those inspections. but those -- [ all speaking indistinctly ] >> but still, it was said that it should've been the case that these relatively young inspectors be sent out with a veteran regardless of whether or not they had that next level of certification. the fact they were sending them out by themselves... >> right. the problem is that the 22nd street problem doesn't get covered if you're just sending out rookies with the same people. the pressure on the government is to inspect more properties. that's what everybody wants. and so the next property that falls down that's not inspected, somebody's gonna, "well, why didn't they get out there and inspect that property?" >> so, how do you fix it? >> you know, the other issue really, it deals with priorities. i mean, again, to george's point, we have limited number of staff, we have limited number of resources. are we going to redirect those resources where they need to be? again, i live in north philadelphia. buildings have been crumbling -- i lost a car from a building that crumbled.

that's 15 years ago. so this is nothing new. it's just that it's increasing. and when you look at the housing stock of the city, when you look at the commercial stock of the city, this is not a new city. these buildings have been around hundreds of years, some of them. so, again, if we are willing to say, "we have to invest these resources. we have to hire folks. and we have to bring in some veterans or retirees or come up with something creative," that's the plan that we haven't seen yet. that's the plan that should be demanded. and that's gonna be high on the list of priorities, i would assume, for whoever the next occupant of 215 city hall will be. >> that plan has to get paid for. [ laughs ] >> absolutely. >> it's easy to come up with the plan. >> that's what i said, it has to be a priority. if you say you're gonna divert information and you're gonna divert resources, and you say, "this is the thing that we have to do," then that's what you have to do. but, again, you have to be willing as city to say, "hey, we got to do more taxes. we have to do something. we have to work in partnerships." you have to come up with something if, indeed, that's what you want. >> and george says, "either way, you got to figure out a way to pay for it." >> yeah, i don't think it's just raising taxes, though. i think it's having the folks there who know that they're not

doing it the right way, and yet they're basically saying, "yeah, go do it that way. let's send the rookies out." somebody in a position of authority made that decision. and there's a lot of old buildings in cleveland and in -- they're not collapsing the way these are. they somehow are getting it done, you know? >> this is the back-end question, does anybody pay the price? or this is just the story of the week, and everybody goes back to what they were doing on monday? >> they had better pay a price. because there is no way to restore public confidence. and, to george's point, if we're going to have this discussion, that we have to pay what we're going to consume in terms of city services, you can't sweep this under the rug, because then the teachable moment goes with it. >> we'll see what happens. and we'll take a short break and come back to our insider's inside story of the week. jim kenney. son of a firefighter. first in his family to go to college. he's been councilman at-large, representing the whole city. a progressive voice who'll be a mayor for our neighborhoods. bringing philadelphia together...

expanding pre-kindergarten improving our schools... ...and partnering with businesses, community colleges and universities to create jobs jim kenny, the block by block mayor we need to move philadelphia ahead.

>> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city, powered by the world. temple.edu/takecharge.

>> welcome back to "inside story." i'm tamala edwards. inside stories, george, you're up next. >> there's a rumor that, on monday, a group of african-american elected officials is going to endorse jim kenney's candidacy for mayor. and i'm sure that people like bill gray and dave richardson, who helped these people get into office so that african-americans would have a seat at the table are turning over in their graves that they're voluntarily going to give up that seat. >> all right. >> the backstory in the battle of the campaign between jim kenney and anthony hardy williams is about this e.i.t.c., these obscure tax credits. these are wonderful programs that help many kids go to schools that they would not be able to go to, and it's the kenney force who's trying to stir up mud. >> nia. >> we had a lot of issues and a lot of attention brought because septa was gonna have some really offensive ads on their buses dealing with anti-muslim messaging. but a group of people filled love park last week with a "dare to understand" campaign that's really challenging people to go out there, get to know your neighbors, get to have a better understanding.

it's not about squelching free speech. it's about adding more speech. kudos to them. daretounderstand is the hashtag. >> it's gonna be interesting to see the response to those buses. i think a lot of people are ignoring them. but they are seeing the billboard. >> mm-hmm. >> let's end with you, ed. >> tam, 147 kenyans were murdered by islamist terrorists this week because they were christians. and on this easter sunday, there are two things to keep in mind relative to that. first, those departed souls have found salvation. everything's okay for them now. for the rest of us, however, we're called to have the courage to fight evil wherever it appears, regardless if it's in our communities or in kenya. we have to be our brothers' keeper. >> and this is not fair to do to you, ed. we've literally got less than 60 seconds. iran deal, good or bad? your our expert. >> bad. in many respects. because it, in effect, has given the iranians the status of a nuclear power in the making. the saudis, the egyptians, and the turks aren't going to sit by

and allow iran to be the only islamic power with a bomb. >> my guess is you'll be back at this table talking about that in the weeks and the months to come. >> and a thing or two else. >> all right. and a thing or two else. well, thank you for being with us. we hope you've had a great holiday weekend, whether you were celebrating passover or easter sunday. we will see you back here next week for "inside story." >> i'm nydia han along with kenneth moten. coming up next on "action news," christians gather for easter sunrise. church members jump into help the victim of an atv accident in philadelphia. >> there was standing room only along the streams as trout scone begins in southeastern pennsylvania. #

few yeah, i'm married. does it matter?

you'd do that for me? really? yeah, i'd like that. who are you talking to? uh, it's jake from state farm. sounds like a really good deal. jake from state farm at three in the morning. who is this? it's jake from state farm. what are you wearing jake from state farm? [ jake ] uh... khakis. she sounds hideous. well she's a guy, so... [ male announcer ] another reason more people stay with state farm. get to a better state. ♪ ♪ >> good afternoon, on this easter sunday, april 5, eva pilgrim is off, kenneth moten joins us today. >> here's some of the stories we're following for you on "action news." the pope praises the iran nuclear deal, but worries about the antichristian violence in the easter speech. >> delaware