>> i think that is an untruth. counter, ourckout camera rolls. it is not 60% off. >> that is the current price. handsntually, the clerk out what there be on thisould pillowcases. despite the fact similar price of sales a been california, oregon, state, theton them in frequent. >> i should probably go look at stickers. >> if the item your -- you are had the price increase before went on sale, ask at the checkout counter. >> there you go. >> i had no idea. >> you have to keep that in mind. >> you have to keep that in mind. [ wife ] your dad's really giving him the business... the designated hitter's the best thing to happen to baseball! but it's not the same game! [ wife ] wow, he's really gonna get us a good deal. it's better! no it's not! thee pitcher comes up and he's out! [ dealer ] he can bunt! whatever. but we're good with 0% apr for 60 months? oh, yeah, totally. thank you so much. that must've been brutal.

that is not an untruth. it turned out to be wrong.well, we got it wrong, but it was not an opportunity to try to deceive the american people. >> one of the experiences you talk about in the book, i want to phrase this the right way, your journey, your navigating your way forward in a way where everything is not a digital and what that means for leadership and decision making. this does come at some expense. one of the lessons you learned along the way about having to navigate the world politically and outside the body politic were the comedienne the digital -- were the digital. >> i have been trying to become digital to keep up with the world and my grandchildren. they live in a digital world. we're living in the world of touchscreen devices and smartphone. we're living in a world where the internet is driving some much of our life. that is the world we live in and we have to get used to it. everything is moving at 186,000 miles per second. cable television is playing a much more significant role in your life than any before. news bro

and why when the media recognizes an untruth told that we can't stand up and instead of trying to beective or being fair, tell the truth and the truth is that it is a lie. so jeff daniels plays -- listen to this. it is a quick speech. listen to what he says. >> what are the real ones? the lies. why doesn't the news ever call a lie a lie when we know it's a lie? >> he says why can't the news call a lie when they know it's a lie? we've talked about that forever. >> cenk: yeah. and look, as i watch that, i think these are some of the things we've hit over and over again but thank god they're doing them in an entertainment show so other people will pay attention. >> people are talking about this show. they're talking about things that i think is critical for us to rethink what journalists are supposed to do. another example this will be clip seven. they talk about the india story from 2010 and obama's trip to india and did it really cost $200 million a day as the right wing was leading people to believe. >> $200 million a day. this nation will spend on obama's trip to india. >> so he's t

there are a number of state laws that require and create causes of action if you tull an -- tell an untruth during the political campaign. you can imagine the work that would create the federal courts if that was ever accepted on the federal level and then finally i'm running quickly out of time, but there was a significant decision i think in this knox vs. seiu case which involved a controversial issue of when unions take mandatory fees from you, can they send it for politically-related expenditures and the law prior to knox had always been that as long as you gave the employee the nonunion employee the ability to opt out of the fees that were going for political advocacy, that was comported with the constitution, i think there was a strong indication in justice alito's opinion that from now on the constitutional rule is not to allow the employee to opt out of the payments that go for political advocacy but to make him affirmatively opt in to endorse it and if that's where they go with the law, i think that could have a very significant effect on public union employees' ability to engage i

significant because there are a number of state laws that require and create causes of action if you tell an untruthuring a political campaign. you can imagine the court, the work that would create for federal courts if that was ever accepted on the federal level. and then finally, i'm running quickly out of time, but there was a significant decision, i think, in the knox v. seiu case which involved can unions take mandatory fees and send it for political expenditures. and the law prior to knox had always been as long as you gave the nonunion employee the opportunity to opt out of the fees, that comported with the constitution. i think there was a strong indication in justice alito's opinion that from now on the constitutional rule is not to allow the employee to opt out of the payments that go for political advocacy, but to make him affirmatively opt in to endorse it. and if that's where they go with the law, i think that could have a significant effect on public union employees' ability to engage in politics and would have an even more significant effect if it was extended to private sector unions

going extent th to theoitil e ift.k mbf cases that require a great cause of action if you tell an untruth during e political campaign. you can imagine-- the work it would create for the federal court. dn,lyutf . the significant decision with the indication. which involved a controversial issue when unions take mandatory fees from you. can they spend it for political reted nde. ve the nonunion employee to opt out of the fees that were going for the political, that was reported with the constitution. i think there was a strong indition in s opinionfrom loeee oonstitutionas not payment to go for political advocacy to make it up and to endorse it and i think that could have a very signicant effect on public union employees d d aveonls, ift ctn was extended to private sector unions under the case. but i'll leave it at that. thank you. [applause] welcoming professor richard epstein. [applause] >> thank you. again, -- i sould say i wroe in the madate pinbo ree itd g er th medicaid extension. the one point i would like to make now i drafted it. [inaudible] everybody laughed. b ncry gllook the arg

this is an out and out untruth. romney was late in responding.rt him if he doesn't respond. i think he has to come out and say it's a lie and be absolute in that, in that kind of response. he couldn't look for middle ground. >> john: let me add here that the "washington post" did not retract its story. >> john: let's move on to one other story we can kick around tonight. on friday, the president made a rather unusual fundraising call from air force one on a special phone is paid for by the campaign of which he reached out to donors who supported him previously and wanted him to max out to him as soon as possible. is he running scared in the fundraising front? >> he should be. as he said in the call, according to what we know of it, he is an incumbent and this is the first time incumbent doesn't have a fundraising advantage. if you look at the superpacs, they're outperforming the superpac of the democratic side. he has a slight lead in terms of money raised by the campaign. romney is is not spending the money and benefiting from the expenditure fr

untruthful? >> no. >> now, later in the day, you sent ivory madison an email on the 1st? not remember. >> so for the commission, i'm going to go to exhibit 48 and ms. lopez, you do have exhibit binders in front of you that are tabbed. exhibit -- rather large, exhibit 48 is in the larger binder. ms. lopez, if i can approach the witness? chairperson hur: yes. >> while the commissioners are getting their binders i'll ask you to look at that email that's exhibit 48 and i'll have a couple of questions for you.

untruthful? >> no. >> now, later in the day, you sent ivory madison an email on the 1st? >> i do not remember. >> so for the commission, i'm going to go to exhibit 48 and ms. lopez, you do have exhibit binders in front of you that are tabbed. exhibit -- rather large, exhibit 48 is in the larger binder. ms. lopez, if i can approach the witness? chairperson hur: yes. >> while the commissioners are getting their binders i'll ask you to look at that email that's exhibit 48 and i'll have a couple of questions for you. does looking at exhibit 48 refresh your memory about whether you sent an email to ivory madison later on the 1st? >> yes. >> and this is a copy of that email? >> yes. >> you reference in the email, you ask ivory madison to send you the information from the therapist. >> uh-huh. >> had ivory madison offered to get some information for you? >> yes. >> you also mentioned that there's a line here that says, looks like ross, in doing research, too, i assume that means looks like ross is doing research, too? just a typo? >> yes. >> ok. what was your husband doing on ja

untruthful, when they do not have anything to do with it. host: can they be penalized or be forced to take off the air? guest: to my knowledge, no. there have been cases where an ad has been found to be so untruthful, it can be pulled. but a lot of it is shades of gray and people will make the argument, there will show you the evidence and maybe tv stations do not want to wait until the debate up who is the most correct in debating the merits of the ad. host: and a lot of these are happening during real time, so weeksannot spend reek researching. guest: absolutely, there's a very quick turnaround. you are seeing both the outside groups and the candidates and parties themselves putting out web videos within hours of news breaking. if there's a gap, for example, and president obama said the private sector is doing fine, you have the romney campaign, outside groups, all within hours and days putting up web videos to hammer him on that point. host: you brought up sheldon adelson, the casino magnate. here's an article from your old paper "politico." host: do we know much about the grass-roots institute? guest: this is the first we have heard about it. it was a grea

untruthful, was it memorable? and also some evaluations of romney and obama. importantly, we have anof 200 pure independents, that is people who do not have any partisan lens. so, therefore, they judge those ads slightly differently -- more than slightly -- than partisans because we know republicans like republican ads and democrats like democratic ads. so we have these pure independents as kind of a check. and also, of course, you know, this election in some sense is about luring that 5% who are pure independents in those 20% of the battleground states. so it's important to look at this group. we have already conducted ten ads. we have looked at ten different ads to provide our baseline. four are positive, six are negative. and the actual ads are available up on the vandy web site that is ready for your clicking on, so to speak. each ad can stand on its own, and you can look at these various variables, you can compare it to other specific ads, let's say you want to see how america the beautiful stands up to another attack ad. you can compare negative to positive, you want to see how