mr. paul paul is; is that correct. >> we're talking about both operations and entertainment separately. >> it is a bar now that is allowed to open from 6:00 to 2:00 but we're saying we're going to not only restrict their a.m. if i had musk but restrict in their opening is that it. >> that's the conversation. >> it sounds like most of neighbors are obtaining to the a.m. if i had musicmplified music and the they're open until 2 o'clock in the morning but being open for the bar activities is different but i'll open to restricting the hours from the commission feels i'd thought about the idea of being open until midnight or opened until entertainment for you know friday and saturday approximately thursday and friday and saturday until 10 o'clock i'm not making a motion but throwing that out. >> commissioner johnson. >> okay. so just real quick on the green roof i'm supportive of that change i can tell right now that if we had left it with a larger original yards i'm not sure we said have making made the decision what we said last time the green roof is better than or better in terms of the op

mr. paul: mr. president i request a live quorum call. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent to call off the live quorum call and to speak for five minutes remaining as was requested previously and as was under the consent. the presiding officer: the consent is not in order in a quorum call. mr. paul: mr. president i ask consent to call off the quorum call. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. you may proceed. mr. paul: mr. president i ask consent to speak for five minutes, the five minutes that was remaining on the opposition side. the presiding officer: is there objection? none heard. the senator from kentucky can proceed. mr. paul: let us be very clear why we're here this evening. we are here this evening was this is an important debate. this is a debate over the bill of rights. this is a debate over the fourth amendment. this is a debate over your right to be left alone. justice brandeis said that the right to be left alone is the most cherished of rights. the right

kentucky senator and republican presidential candidate rand paul vows he will not let it be renewed. mr. paul: i'm not going to take it anymore. reporter: the mass collection of american phone records falls under the was patriot act and started after the september 11 attacks. the new bill stops the ball collection but preserve some of the nsa's other surveillance abilities, powers the fbi says are critical to terrorism investigations. it passed the house by a huge margin earlier this month. >> what's the problem? a small group of senators standing in the way. reporter: the debate revealed faultlines in the republican party. an angry senate majority leader mitch mcconnell -- >> it should be warring for our country. the nature of the threat we face is very serious. as our enemies grow more sophisticated. reporter: with no more vote scheduled, the surveillance program will expire at midnight. gloria riviera, abc news washington. kellye: before adjourning, the senate voted to move ahead with the patriot act replacement bill , up for vote tuesday or wednesday. even opponents say the measure has en

mr. flower, this is the chaplain." and he said, "can you come to paul and linda curry's house?" >> reporter: mike rushed over and found his friend paul, who told an awful story. how he woke up to an odd sound, found linda not breathing. he called 911, but by the time paramedics got there, it was too late. >> paul was extremely upset. for hours i was basically holding him up and he was crying on my shoulder. >> reporter: grief, shock and at the bottom of it all, a question, what killed linda curry? >>> when we come back, a medical mystery. >> reporter: this is really detective work, isn't it? >> it is. it is. >> her strange symptoms. her sudden death. linda's loved ones would wait years for an answer, an answer that would come -- >> what's your full name? >> linda curry. >> from lind ♪ ♪ ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh ♪ ♪ hush my darling... ♪ ♪ don't fear my darling... ♪ ♪ the lion sleeps tonight. ♪ [snoring.] ♪ hush my darling... ♪ [snoring.] ♪ don't fear my darling... ♪ ♪ the lion sleeps tonight. ♪ [snoring.] take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store. >>> everyone who knew paul and linda curry, knew that

mr. paul: madam president? the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. paul: madam president? the presiding officer: is senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i would be happy to agree to dispensing with the time and having a vote at the soonest possibility if we were allowed to accommodate amendments for those of us who opposeobject to the bill. i think the bill could be made much better with amendment ofs and if we could come to an arranges to allow amendments to be voted orntion i would on, i would be happy to to. but at this point i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. mcconnell: madam president, without consent to speed things up, a cloture vote will occur an hour after the senate convenes tomorrow on tuesday. therefore, senators should expect the cloture vote at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. mr. burr: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. burr: madam president before recess, there was an attempt to try to bring finality before this bill expired. and at that time i reached out to my friend and colleague from kentucky, senator paul,

mr. snowden's accusations and facts. is glenn greenwald on the same page as rand paul? or i should say, is mr. snowden on the same page as rand paulanders: snowden is a traitor plain and simple. the guy is a traitor, and he has -- the quantity of harm that he has caused the united states is just incredible. brendan: what would your compromise be? what would your ideal legislation be? what oversight is needed that is not there now? anders: the bulk information gathering is geared to looking for patterns in the data statistical patterns in the data through network analysis to find that terrorist. you cannot find that terrorist unless you go through it all. and they do not care about whether you are calling your grandmother or who you are calling as a regular american. they are looking for patterns -- first, second, third order. tom: anders corr is with us as well and glenn greenwald will join us in the next hour. coming up, joel kurtzman on the opportunism -- on the optimism he has. he does not mince words. stay with us. it is monday morning. "bloomberg surveillance." good morning. ♪ tom: good morning, everyone. we are on a semi con

paul clen anyone? >> can we chat sometime. just got a call worried that richard clark may blind side chris. >> reporter: referring to pg&e's president. >> mr. paul clen none executive director -- >> reporter: in removing richard clark as a witness from that senate hearing. i was surprised that that happened and now to know that it was because pg&e asked for me to be replaced that i was replaced to testify before the senate. it's disgusting. >> reporter: what does that say about pg&e's power and influence in the puc? >> apparently they get what they ask. >> reporter: the internal e-mails also reveal more about the ones secret culture between pg&e and the puc. >> 4:26 p.m. on september 28th. >> reporter: clark is reading this e-mail that followed the senate hearing from pg&e's cherry to the puc's executive director. >> fyi, missed your performance but my wife loved it. his response then i'm planning a tore rid affair with her. brian cherry's response, me, too. disgusting behavior. ten days days after eight people died in san bruno, all that damage that was done. absolutely disgusting. >> reporter: a year later richard clark was removed from his di

paul butler a former federal prosecutors and professor at the george town university law school here in washington. paul walk us through where this goes from here. >> so this is an arraignment in which mr. hastert will have the opportunity too make a plea. almost certainly he will plead not guilty. sometimes defendants plead guilty but not in a case like this and not with a pit bull lawyer like tom green. >> his new lawyer tom green, a man of a loot of experience in white collar criminal allegations back in watergate, iran-contra iran-contra, whitewater. so the lawyer that the former speaker has retained is clearly experienced. he knows what he's doing. >> he's in a storied firm it brees barack obama as a young lawyer met michelle obama. it's an interesting choice. again, tom green has been around for a long time. he represented a senator back when i prosecuted anymore the 1990s. >> you were a federal prosecutor at the time. >> i was with the department of justice. he's tenacious. he's a fight-the-case lawyer and that's a surprising dmois a case like this which a lot of people expect a plea. because if you fight this case all this alleged dirty laundry about speaker hastert is going to come out. >> so the best for speaker hastert, presumably right now would be to cop a plea, is that what you're saying? >> to make some kind of deal. that is what will happen. it will be interesting to see. the department will offer something. the big issue will be whether they will insist that speaker hastert do some kind of prison time as a result of a plea bargain. almost certainly he's 73 years sold so old so he's going to fight that. but the problem with fighting it is if you go to trial and take the stand you have to tell about what the indictment calls this prior . >> paulg in. >> great to be here. >> we'll have more coverage throughout the day. i want to return to the breaking news story we've been following at this hour. authorities are actively searching farms and fields in upstate new york. two convicted murders richard matt and david sweat may have been spotted about 12 miles from the prison. on the line is the town supervisor. shawn, what do we know about this search under way in your town right now? >> well i was just down talking to the county sheriff and the law enforcement people. they have a lot of officers on the ground searching a specific area and they also have an air graft in the air looking right now. they are fully investigating the area for two suspicious men that were in the area reported by a citizen. and the police -- the state police are not taking any tip less than very seriously. >> do you know shaun, where these two individuals who are wanted by authorities, where they were spotted in your town? >> in a town called middle road

mr. paul a republican is the first presidential candidate to do so. in the age of wanting transparency and presidential elections is a good thing the paul campaign is allowingbitcoin contributions? >> guest: i don't know that i'm qualified to say whether it's a good thing. i think probably the way it's being done within election politics right now, it's limited to relatively small sums so in that sense it's like somebody giving a 20 or 50-dollar bill to a candidate that's not necessarily like someone giving $10,000 of unmarked bills to a candidate. but i think the most notable element is at rand paul decided to do that on day one of his candidacy. it shows the degree to which the bitcoin technology and the movement that grew up around bitcoin has been driven by a lot of libertarian sentiment that is also driving rand paul's candidacy. it drives home just how much bitcoin was a result of the anxiety and unhappiness they came on the financial crisis and also given rise to the popularity of libertarian candidates. this mission of central authority and that is so deeply embedded within bitcoin. there is suspicion again the federal reserve and central bank but a

paul is clearly using security and policy issues those are from the george bush administration, that if someone like paul gets traction, you'll probably hear more and more from the likes of mr. cheney. host: a few more tweaks as we have been talking, they write and that whenever anything has the words patriot, freedom, or liberty in its name, i am suspicious of the motives and purpose. sukie asks for the definitions. and your assessment of the graham and mccain political relationship, generally aligned? they are joined at the hip is karen's assessment. vernon, new york, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? um, in the patriot act, why couldn't changes have been done internally if it needed to have changes done? because all they did, they already have your name, but they have your number and they track the amount of calls. now, in the freedom act, the telephone companies keep the calls but for how long? then over 1500 telephone companies in the united states alone. if one says they will keep them for four months, and one says they will keep it for two. and another thing i have to say before you comment, last night i was listening to c-span. they called up edward snowden. i have a problem with a person who is not only changed the face of america as far as security that we had to scramble the navy, the army, the marines, the air force, to change our codes. he called them a great leader and you can -- humanitarian. and to give up classified documents to somebody else is more than a felony, it is a war crime. host: you pick up on the first part of that with timing specifically. guest: our caller from burning raises a good question in that regard because inga's king -- in gus who has been independent for a fairly long timeking speaks about its provisions and how long the phone companies will keep these records. the intelligence chairman will try to amend that in several ways, one of which i didn't mention would require coordination by phone companies that they're going to keep records less than 18 months. essentially, what burr wants to address and what the collar picked up on was the concern that if the phone company decided in upstate new york, i think it would be verizon that decided they would only keep the records for a couple of months that there would have to be some way that the united states government would know that in advance and try to adjust accordingly. host: surely is in detroit michigan for democrats. caller: good morning, my concern is this. anything that our government wants to do to protect us when it comes down to security, i am four. as far as listening in on regular conversations is something that would be kind of puzzling to me. there is a lot going on in our country and around the world. i can understand why they want the patriot act to stay. i think you have to really understand politics in the government itself about the patriot act. there are a lot of men and women who are coming into this country every day and they have been coming in for decades. nobody really knows who is really in our country anymore. they cannot even keep up with who is coming and going. if you have this situation that has taken place with isis and god knows who else, a lot of men and women are being recruited out of our country. they are coming from europe and all around to get involved with these people. whatever our government has to do to keep this country safe. it has started to get very frightening. i don't think i am the only one and i am a democrat, but i will say that when it comes down to the security of our country whatever they have to do to keep us safe, i am four. host: you're certainly not really one, embers making that exact point on the floor of the senate. guest: particularly in regards to the patriot act provisions where they would argue members -- members of congress would argue, the program has now lapsed since midnight, section 215, was not actually for people listening in on your telephone calls or my telephone calls or anyone else. it was pertaining to the meta-data behind the calls patterns of who call and the like. . one of senator paul's concerns, even with the united states freedom act, is the possibility that it could lead to bulk collection through some sort of ancillary means. it may mean -- perhaps ridiculous example but bear with me, if someone who was involved in terrorist activity and was coordinating with isis or something like that, were to call into this program this morning, would then all of c-span's phone records then be scooped up in the net from the phone companies? that is one of the things of senator paul is concerned about. host: get your popcorn and your program, but paul fight against the gop power structure could be very entertaining. reality tv for free @cspanwj. judy is calling in from hawaii from our line for independents. go ahead. caller: i stand with rand. i am just appalled that so many of these people in congress easily give away our rights to privacy. people are very uncomfortable. i have conversations that i don't want my husband to hear. we want our privacy. it has not proven effective

mr. mayor, you're also invaluable for this. the patriot act, three elements have expired. right now we're in a zombie stage. are we in danger? is rand paul standing up politics or conscious? >> i'm not for rand paules. i debated his father when i ran for president. his father believed thils. i think what they believe is wrong. i think it's dangerous. i think there is absolutely not -- no single instance since we've had the patriot act of any government whether it's bush's or obama's misusing the act. the government -- >> that we know of. >> well that we know of. we know if they did, some terrible information would be leaked about somebody. nobody's used it for political purposes. and i think both governments, the bush and the obama government could point to many instances enin which it's been helpful. i would not tinker to it. >> they did not make a solid case. >> they can't. they can't. i could give you instances when i was u.s. attorney of things that the police stopped and i can't tell you about. >> because a lot of that is confidential. >> it's classified. you got to rely on intelligence experts saying it works. >> if you get bush and obama that we need this. >> president obama doesn't want t