tv Viewpoint With Eliot Spitzer Current July 23, 2012 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
is a terrorist attack. you, you're on your own. that's how it works. all right, "viewpoint" with eliot spitzer is next. tax the rich. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> eliot: good evening i'm eliot spitzer and this is view point. it was the first of many days in court for james holmes. the 24-year-old former grad student stands accused of friday's assault that killed at least 1221 moviegoers and wounded 58 more in colorado, and with a nation still reeling from that heinous attack both presidential candidates went on the record against closing loopholes in gun laws that at least might have mitigated the violence. holmes seems numbed when he was informed of his rights. in francisco, president obama shared the nation's sorrow.
>> obama: i stand before you as our hearts still ache over the tragedy in aurora colorado. yesterday i was in aurora with families whose loss is hard to imagine. >> eliot: it's hard to imagine a democratic president so cowed by the nra that his spokesman would say, i quote the president's view is that we can take steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them under existing law. the president's views were shared by his republican rival mitt romney. >> romney: i still believe that the second amendment is the right course to preserve and defend and don't believe that new laws are going to make a difference in this type of tragedy. >> eliot: colorado's democratic governor seems fine with that. >> even if he did not have access to guns, this guy was diabolical. he would have found explosives. he would have found something poison news gas, something to
create this horror. >> eliot: how he said it was to get four weapons and 6,000 rounds of ammunition, including an ar-15 all the gun which was dismissed as just another hunting rival. >> the left always uses assault rifles. they are really used in hunting. >> eliot: funny, i never tried to see a hunter try to bag a deal with one of those. he even defended the availability of the extra capacity magazine seen used in the attack. >> there are magazines common all over the place. you simply hi cannot keep these weapons out of the hands of sick demented individuals who want to do harm. when you try to do t you restrict our freedoms. >> eliot: we can set a speed limit but we can't ban the 100 round magazine used by james holmes. murdoch tweeted, supplied, i
quote, we have to do something about gun controls, police license okay for hunting rifle or pistol for anyone without crim or psycho record no more. my pleasure to welcome to this program, the author of the domestic gunman, senator, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. you have been a proponent for gun control even in the aftermath of colorado, backing the recent measures you've had for so many years. why are we where we are. >> because of a very successful lobby controlled the actions of our country. it's outrageous. it was now in my history i've been able to do things that the nra and it's friends didn't like. one was to get a bill through
the senate that would close the gun show loophole, i'm sure you're familiar, with unlicensed dealers. i was say to spousal abuses. you could not get a gun permit, even if it's only a misdemeanor that you're convicted of. we got it through. it took a little maneuvering we got it on the budget bill and it turns out we have over 200,000 of these applications that had been denied. things can be done. it takes effort and sometimes patience and sometimes anger. >> eliot: it takes all of those in your domestic violence provision has been uniquely successful. the gun show loophole unfortunately, has been opened up again. gun shows are almost unrestricted people can go to the gun shows and buy the sorts of weapons used out in colorado. why and what could be done to get to the magic 60, which is the number in the senate these days that is required to get 60 votes to close the gun show
loophole? >> well, i think what we have to do is constantly remind the public about what price you pay if you don't take care of these things. when we saw what happened in columbine in 1999 with kids leaning out of high school windows pleading for someone to help them, to save themselves. then go to virginia tech. you say oh, that was so horrible. and then the psychiatrist who went shooting people at fort hood, and now this one. at what point do these actions so offend sensibility that we can make change? i think there will be a time, and i hope it's now. but we can do that. our sympathies go out to these families. we see the pain expressed in television newspaper picture.
and anyone who has family, the pain must be like. we wouldn't want to experience it, so we ought to take advantage of the time so that just maybe we can get the public hyped us to say enough of that stuff. we want to protect our kids. >> eliot: every time there is one of these horrific incidents we think now maybe we can build a coalition. but some how there is a mythology about the second amendment propagated by the nra. it is viewed with a mening meaning there that some how gives you the right to own a semi semiautomatic machine gun. that simply is not what it means. >> we would like to see an agreement between the contender and the president saying, look, we're going to take care of the safety of our people and not exaggerate between us who is more for a life saving than the
other. but we have to go on with this. there are indicators out there that would be very significant. for instance, why can't we shut down the availability of high-capacity magazines? it's ridiculous. this guy in aurora had 100 bullets in his drum. finally it jammed, but 70 shots went out, 58 wounded people and 12 killed people. so that ought to have a reasonable curb on availability. those magazines were designed for the police, law enforcement and military, period. now it's common equipment. >> eliot: look, there is no utility for those high magazine for hunting. they should be inaccessible to
online purchasers. i want to read something to you by richard nixon. he said guns are an abomination free from fear of gun owners, he being nixon would favor making guns illegal. richard nixon, hardly a liberal wanted a gun control position that is far more limiting than what we're even talking about right now. >> absolutely. we're not proposing that. what we're trying to do is just bringing is that shows sensibility. that shows that we care more about the lives of our children and our families than we do about satisfying the nra and it's cohorts. it's got to move that way. i hate to think what it might take beyond this to close down those possibility.
>> eliot: senator, it's sometimes much more difficult when richard nixon was much more constrictive than we are today toe where we are today. to give a speech against any meaningful gun control measures, i wish you the best of luck. >> thank you for the opportunity to talk about it. >> eliot: senator, thank you as all for your time tonight. for a look at where the republican-dominated house is leaning. congresswoman, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. so nice to see you tonight. >> eliot: you just heard the senator's rather stark and skeptical attitude about where we are going in the near term in the senate. where are things in the house you've. following this position. is this any hope for success in the house. >> we have to keep trying because it's the right thing to
do. i personally believe very strongly we should ban these high-density these high- high-capacity ammunition magazines. they're just used to kill. it doesn't imping on anyone's right to own a gun to hunt target practice. and in this case in colorado, if it hadn't jammed he would have more shoot out with the police. the republican leadership in the house has not brought a bill to the floor and probably will not bring a bill to the floor. so it's a difficult situation. >> eliot: the republican leadership seems to be in the enthat will of nra. things that you've been pushing
as a way to limit access to weapons that are used only in circumstances like what we just suffered this hast week. the horror of the shooting in colorado what is the argument against it. i've never seen a hunter pull out an semi assault we will and say gee, we're going out to shoot a dear. i've never seen them say that. >> well, banning assault weapons, banning a high capacity magazine seen, this would not infringe on your right to own a gun. look what happened after my good friend and colleague was shot in ark. gabby giffords. they wouldn't pass anything then. since that at thible i want this have. 60 other incidents that kill a lot of people, including the ones that just happened. the nra is well funded, well organized. they're in every congressional
district across the country. they're very vocal and a very effective lobby. if those of us who care will gun safety were as well organized we would be having a debate on the floor in congress tonight instead of television. it is needed, common sense and it will save lives. but we need your viewers and everyone to reach out to their congressmen and women to cosponsor these gills, also to fresh their leadership in the republican party to move this to the floor. there's not a doubt in my mind if these common sense approaches would pass. the american people would to manned it. >> i agree with you. i always felt this was an urban rural divide. folks who lived more in the reuben, they were more sensitive to the abuse of guns. 81% according to the last accept
success, 81% of the public lives in urban centers. still to your point about political organization and lack thereof, we still can't get the coalition that we need in the house to move the bills. could you build a bipartisan position to try this? >> we certainly can try this. people are dying gun violence. these kinds of proposals do not hipping on a person's right to own god bless you or depend on them. it would cut down on this senseless madman actions terrorist action, aan assault weapons high capacity magazines, they're oh used to kill people. they're machines of war. they should not be used by people who are psycho,. closing the gun show loophole is
another logical step. we worked very hard to make trafficking of guns a felony. that's not even a felony. people who are trafficking high levels of guns that's not a felony in the united states of america. we need to "countdown" on it. youright now they were a practical group of people and too many people are senselessly being killed, and there are steps we can do to prevent it. i don't think there is one law action or measure that can provide any accepts of violence, but it certainly can curb the degree of probable ability that you're exposed to it, and we would save lives. i thank you for raising it tonight on your show. >> time runs short but it has be difficult. i know i've been disappointed in
the president's response to this. i wish the president would use his persuasive kills. have you seen, mr. president use your capacity to change the public's understanding on this particular issue. >> well, i have not had the opportunity to see him. he has been in colorado, and he has not been on the floor or any of our meetings since this tragedy. i believe if we could bring a bill to the floor and pass it, he would certainly sign it into law. we have to win on the floor of congress before he can sign aha. per' working on that. we need your viewers who bring pressure on your congress members and senates. eventually the republican-led congress. >> eliot: well, thank you for your leadership on this. you will continue to fight that valiant battle. and i hope president obama will join you on that.
you want to save money on car insurance? no problem. you want to save money on rv insurance? no problem. you want to save money on motorcycle insurance? no problem. you want to find a place to park all these things? fuggedaboud it. this is new york. hey little guy, wake up! aw, come off it mate! geico. saving people money on more than just car insurance.
[ man ] ever year, sophia and i use the points we earn with our citi thankyou card for a relaxing vacation. ♪ ♪ sometimes, we go for a ride in the park. maybe do a little sightseeing. or, get some fresh air. but this summer, we used our thankyou points to just hang out with a few friends in london. [ male announcer ] the citi thankyou visa card. redeem the points you've earned to travel with no restrictions. rewarding you, every step of the way. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> eliot: warren lee hill was temporarily spared execution in georgia after a last minute reprieve that was based on the methodology execution nothing more. he was convicted of killing a fellow prison inmate in 1990
when he was in jail for another murder. there seemed to be little doubt of his guilt. but the reason people are talking about him has to do with the number of the day 70. that's mr. hill's i.q. according to the rules that should have made him ineligible for the death penalty. even the victim's family accepts this and asked for his life to be spared. but the mental capacity has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. well, this case does not invoke sympathy, the precedence here is important. those with though mental capacity should not be subject to capital punishment even our conservative supreme court recognizes that. >>overwhelming majority of the county says: "tax the rich don't go to war."
if you have an opinion, you better back it up. >>eliot spitzer takes on politics. >>science and republicans do not mix. >>now it's your turn at the only online forum with a direct line to eliot spitzer. >>join the debate now. >> eliot: unprecedented. that is the word of the ncaa used to describe today's punishment of penn state. in a press conference earlier today, executive committee chair ed ray and ncaa president mark emmert announced that penn state would be find $60 million with the funds to be used to support victims of child sexual abuse. they are banned from postseason play for four years and dropped 25 to 15 new football scholarships and and 85 to 65
total football scholarships for the next four years. they are on probation for the next five years and all this one day after penn state removed the statue of joe paterno fromouts their stadium. here the author of the book friday night lights, buzz bissinger. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> give us your assessment. >> i hate making a mistake but i did make a mistake in thinking that the ncaa would kind of twiddle their thumbs and do nothing. i have to give ncaa credit for not sitting on the investigation. they acted quickly. this is a very harsh penalty. it's much harsher than banning the bowl game for a year.
it will destroy their recruiting base, and i actually don't think penn state football ever will come back to the level that it once was. >> eliot: there had been at penn state a psychosis, a disease that winning was what this was all about. the fable team seems to dominate what the university is all about. will this break the strangle hood of football that you've described in other settings at this university? >> it's a great question. it's going to lessen it. if the team begins to lose, and it's likely they will begin to lose after the initial rush much we against the world fans won't go. that's the history. fans don't go to watch a losing team. i think that will lessen the crazy impact that it has in happy valley and i think the ncaa by taking those sanctions is trying to move penn state in that direction. but you know, the college
football culture is very very hard to get rid of. for instance, they had media day at the southeastern conference last week. three days record crowds tens of thousands of people, hundreds of people there from the media. so it's alive and well. so i think it will reduce it at penn state but i think it will virtually have no impact at some of these other big-time schools. >> eliot: that's the question i wanted to get at. you've written so well about the imbalance that manifest in the way football programs overtake towns and colleges. will this be one isolated point and will this radiate out and people will step back and say this speaks to this. >> i think it will. i think programs will say, you know what, if we try to cover
something up. this is unique in what penn state tried to cover up, but programs will say if we try to cover anything up, we will be killed like penn state was killed. college presidents have to get much much tougher. they are college presidents. they run the school. the football coaches do not run the school. i think college presidents can and perhaps will get tougher in confronting these guys no matter how many millions they make. >> eliot: certainly puts the presidents, university presidents around the nation in stronger position to point to this and say look what happens when you don't play by the rules. you have to look at so many of the schools where the college or basketball coaches are paid an enormous figure, often much more than the university presidents. will it bring into balance the dynamic sports and academics in a way that is more reasoned. >> i hope it does. i hope this is another situation which i'm completely wrong and i
have to come onto your show and apologize. i don't see it. i don't want to exaggerate. i think college sports and sports in america has become the opiate of the masses and i think when football season starts you're going to see sold-out crowds in texas georgia, lsu, alabama. that sort of fanaticism. i think people will go on as usual, not necessarily without corruption. it doesn't serve any academy purpose. it simply does not. it's fun exciting, visceral, it serve no academic purpose. it is sucking all the air out of the room. >> eliot: it has gotten bigger than it's utility. you said at the top that the ncaa surprised put. what do you think caused them to
pivot and act in a way that certainly their track record would not suggest. >> your show, shows all over the country, columnists all over the country, i think they felt that. to some degree they'll say it's almost cosmetic. the ncaa wants people to think that they're tough when there are so many problems with college football. my feeling cosmetic or not i think they heard the people. there were millions all over the country who were very very upset and offended indignant and shocked about what happened at penn state. the ncaa said forget precedence, forget all that, we have to take drastic action. and folks this is drastic action. they reduced the number of scholarships. if they think they're going to play for a team that is not going toughie to vie for a national championship, they're not going to go. this is very sophisticated.
the problem now is it's a business. it's a business. it's not about going to school. it's a business and getting maximum exposure of this pipe dream and going to the pros that .2% make. >> eliot: now will it extend to basketball where equal abuses occur. >> i can't believe you got me started on basketball. that's worse. >> eliot: we'll do that next time. thank you. >> eliot: one of the palins gets bleeped, and it's not the one you might expect. the viewfinder is next.
if you have copd like i do you know how hard it can be to breathe and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even
eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help. >> eliot: want to know where all the money went? search offshore. but first hemmingway look-alike competition, an underwater interview, and mike huckabee's favorite chicken. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> joining us now underwater. this is quite a feat doing an
interview underwater. we appreciate the time today. unfortunately we can't hear--he can hear every couple of words because she does have to keep breathing. [ . >> mama, papa. >> i live on a lake. i literally fish every day. unfortunately, i'm not a very good writer, but i can drink. >> i'm doing a terrible job this trip. >> i hate you. >> you know what's funny when you think of the hamptons you think of a she she kind of place. there is a spot called the pipe runners. it is a down and dirty outside picnic tables, everyone is out there sweaty dancing you know the kind. >> dirty dancing. >> sweaty dirty stinky dancing. >> wednesday maybe august 1st could be let's let's go to chick-fil-a day for dinner. it has treated everyone with the
dignity that every human being deserves. >> my brother is gay. i don't need to eat chicken in front of him just like i ask him not to kiss in front of chicken sandwiches. >> i'm like solo mission. >> marriage between man and a chicken sandwich. >> eliot: more on chick-fil-a tomorrow. untaxed money and offshore accounts trillions and trillions worth. that's next on "viewpoint."
yikes. >> stephanie: i guess we do know where the beef is. [ buzzer ] >> that's wrong. >> eliot: bank robber willie sutton famously said the reason why he robs banks because that's where the money is. things have changed. these days he would have to get himself a plane ticket and a passport because if he's looking for the money it's in the cayman islands, switzerland and bermuda. according to james henry the world's healthiest high net individuals have between 21 and 32 trillion-dollar of untaxed financial assets hidden away in offshore accounts.
the report reveals the major private banks goldman sachs manage this investment on behalf of the were super rich. this offshore economy is large enough to have a major impact on estimates of inequality of wealth and income and on estimates of national income and debt ratios and the most important to have very significant negative impacts on domestic tax bases of source countries. the first thing people are going to ask, is any or some of that money from the united states do we know, mitt romney with his off-shore accounts. how much of this is ours? >> none of the money in the report. the report explicit excludes money from the u.s. the u.k.
frankly, there is not that much need for americans to move their money offshore. they get taxed on their income any way. if you're going to lie about your income and assets, you might as well lie about it right here. >> eliot: whose money is it? >> these wealthy individuals who earned the money in these countries. >> or stolen. >> it's subject to taxation at any point. and if not you're taking money away from promise that would help lift people from poverty. >> eliot: this is a huge number. the u.s. gdp is 13 trillion-dollar. >> with global wealth, it's roughly, we don't know exactly 250 trillion-dollar. we're talking roughly 10%. and it belongs to individuals and you know, there's no real
reason why governments should ever have been able to get their hands on it. >> the question about some of these questions that have unstable governments, are you actually doing the wrong thing by earning money, having it in your bank account and then deciding i don't know what hugo chavez is going to do with it in venezuela. i can put it in switzerland. you can make these arguments. >> eliot: the prudent individual who has made enormous wealth in venezuela or a range of other countries around the world would in fact would want to put it in a place that is more security. that's why many buy real estate in the united states. so the money can go from russia to manhattan and they feel secure it's not going to be taken away from them. but let's make this is domestic issue. there is offshore money in the united states. why is it put there if you're mitt romney. i don't want to pick on him we do it all the time. we'll give him a two-minute reprieve. why would he have tax accounts in the cayman islands.
>> because they have different laws and sometimes he does need to pay corporation taxes. if he owns a company in the cayman islands that company may not have to pay the same kind of taxes as if this company was based in the u.s. so in that sense it's a tax haven. >> and he can set up a corporation in the cayman or somewhere else that will accept foreign money that is not taxed as u.s. rates. otherwise it might be hard to get investors in it. when they put money there it may not be subject to u.s. taxation. >> eliot: when it comes back to the u.s. is it taxed? >> yes. >> eliot: you can take it over this let it accrue and it's a very beneficial thing to do. >> and if the money comes from foreign investors, if mitt romney was lending money to lots of people, and initial reports
saying that bain capital when it first started was mostly foreign investors. those foreign investors when they take their money back from the cayman island corporation they will never pay u.s. taxes. >> eliot: right. if he was raising money overseas switzerland. they invest in bain and then they buy a company in the united states do they pay u.s. taxes. >> i would assume that they would. if the transaction is u.s. based and it goes to buy a corporation, you're going to pay corporate taxes on that money. >> eliot: one of the points that emerges from this, you need to have a global tax structure, or there are going to be gains made that they can take advantage by these people. >> there is no country in the world that taxes wealth. we could make a lot of money if we taxed a little bit. but countries don't have wealth taxes. personally maybe the united states should have a wealth tax, and probably the united states is the only country in the world that is big
enough. >> eliot: we have income with that wealth. if we don't tax the the value of your house we tax the income that you earn. mitt romney is going to israel. is he going to go to switzerland? is he going to go to the bank account and count the money. >> no, that was closed. >> eliot: going to the cayman. >> that would be the headlines. >> eliot: pretending that he's going to scuba diving, but actually going to the cayman. as far as we know that's not what is happening. thanks as walls. ben, i got to ask you. i get an e-mail from you every morning at 5:30. do you ever sleep? >> i do not. i take 15 minute lapse just naps just like leonardo da vinci. >> eliot: returning to shed more light on suspect practices ahead on "viewpoint."
[ train whistle blows ] [ ball hitting paddle ] [ orbit girl ] don't let food hang around. yeah! [ orbit trumpet ] clean it up with orbit! [ orbit glint ] fabulous! for a good clean feeling. ♪ eat, drink, chew orbit! ♪ [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> eliot: some people call the libor scandal a victimless crime but first let's check in with jennifer granholm. good evening governor, what have you got for us tonight. >> just as you've been doing and cenk's show has been talking about the gun violence. what can the voter do about it? we're going to call action to "the war room." we're going to speak to a couple of gun violence activists. that's in "the war room" at the
top of the hour. >> eliot: excellent. we like it. talk is useless. action is what we need. as always you tell the truth and you give it to us, jennifer. more "viewpoint" coming up next. >>we're going to places where few others are going. >>it doesn't get anymore real than this. >>occupy! >>the award winning series "vanguard" only on curren our conversation is with you the viewer because we're independent. >>here's how you can connect with "viewpoint with eliot spitzer." >>questions, of course, need to be answered. >>we will not settle for the easy answers. >> david: the libor scandal is perhaps the biggest market rigging conspiracy in wall street history. almost all interest rates are affected by libor. so every person with outstanding bank issue debt could be a victim of this wall streetcar tell. that's why we have to be aware when one of cnbc's in-house
apologizists for wall street implies that this criminal behavior didn't hurt borrowers. calling something a victimless crime is shorthand for saying who cares. last week larry kudlow went so far as to say that the barclays which had admitted to manipulating the rate was the sick. >> maybe you're right. the victim was the len der barclays. but i don't know the justice department says this could be a criminal prosecution. i don't get that. >> i don't get it, either. >> who is the victim? >> eliot: this is at big in wonderland logic saying the criminal is the victim. let's be clear. every person whose interest rate depend on libor is a victim. some people lost lots of money because of the manipulation. others may have made some, but the game was rigged. the integrity of the market was destroyed so the banks could put money in their own pockets our money.
kudlow's statements are ridiculous. there is something deeper here when you claim no harm, no fall, and there was plenty of harm, plenty of foul, you're denying the need to reform the structure that is causing the problem. that's where the blind spot for wall street's gross abuses really hurts. we're in the third massive wave of such fraud since 2002 alone and it's met with similar denial denials and rationallations. analysts can lie because nobody should trust them any way. subprime mortgages can be sold fraudulently because the people who borrowed is at fault. well libor can be rigged and manipulated because, well, who cares. in the real world rigging these markets and violating every one of the fiduciary relationships under lies wall street integrity has led to a general degradation
but, i'm about to change that. ♪ every little baby wants 50% more cash... ♪ phhht! fine, you try. [ strings breaking wood splintering ] ha ha. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. ♪ what's in your wallet? ♪ ♪ what's in your...your... ♪ hershey's chocolate syrup. stir up a smile. >> eliot: two monthsation on this show we brought you the story of three national security agency whistle blowers all former scene officials with unquestioned credibility who reported massive
unconstitutional invasions of privacy by the nsa. the government's response was to target them in cases that failed. they have joined forces to support a lawsuit. joining me once again former nsa official thomas drake, kirk weibe, and william dinney. mr. drake, let me start with you. this new lawsuit that appears to be moving forward threatens traps that's the wrong word, gives us the opportunity to open up this pandora's box of what the nsa is doing. do you think finally a court of law will force the nsa to be open with the public about what it has done? >> we hope so, but historically in these type of cases the government has hidden behind the state secrets clause. >> eliot: it's being challenged, and people are saying that interest is a court system
designed for this, use that instead of claiming state secret. remind us what is the magnitude that we're talking about here? who has been the subject of this unconstitution surveillance, how fast do you think it is? >> essentially the entire country. i mean, this was decisions key decisions made shortly after 9/11 which began to rapidly turn the united states the equivalent of a foreign nation for electronic surveillance. >> eliot: enormous amounts of e-mail traffic was being absorbed recorded listened to and searched. kirk, is this something that people other than the three of you at the nsa were aware of and were approving of? >> well, i would say that there are other people besides us who have thought about it, contemplated it, but eliot, it's hard to believe that your
government is going to actually do it. that was the shocker. >> eliot: you are convinced to see--one of you said there is a dos yaydosi er on almost every american citizen. it makes google seem like a joke in terms of what the united states has accumulated. is that what is going on down there? >> yes from what i can see that's what they're doing. they're building bluffdale because that storage there is going to be the overflow that is coming up next year. they'll start collecting the data there. but that facility alone can probably hold somewhere close to 100 years of communication of the world. so that center alone once you accumulate that kind of data, they're accumulating against everybody. so that then is data that is
resident in programs that can pull it together in timelines and things like that, and let them see into your life to see what you're doing in your life. >> eliot: what you're say something that essentially through satellites, because this is all electronic, they can listen to it, record it, and then run a series of algorithms through all this data and figure out who is talking to whom, and what exactly is going on in each one of our private lives? they're doing this without regard to the fourth amendment's obligation to establish probable cause. is that what you're saying here? >> yes, with the white house big data initiative, they'll figure out algorithms to figure it out without people determine who they're going to target in the base. they will go through the entire base looking at everybody. periodically cycling through so everybody will be a part of this. >> eliot: there are people at nsa who are brilliant. some of the smartest math
wizards go there to generate these algorithms. they're doing it without regard to the fourth amendment. did anyone stop and say wait a minute before we start gathering this data, we need to go to the court and get an order and not violate the constitution? did no one stand stand up and stay stop. >> no, and equal guess about why. we do know this. a company that we did a contract for, a senior official there when we showed him how the identity of americans could been from free access until probable cause had been proven, he said nobody cares about that. now, this is a man in a position to rub shoulders with those in the government, he's been around for a long time, he knew people. nobody cares about that. that was shocking. >> eliot: are you saying to us that these programs have been
designed and built or they actually have been used and are being used, and that there is a wanton disregard for the privacy rights of citizens? >> there is--there have been no fourth amendment protections built into any recent legislation that has passed congress. now this is--this is not democrats and/or republicans. it's both. it's bipartisan. no fourth amendment protections have been built in at all. >> eliot: i'm just trying to understand this, because i was in law enforcement, the three of you have 50 years in law enforcement. i was in law enforcement for many years. i don't understand how people could disregard the fourth amendment so wontonly wan tonally to use the word that you've used. if you're just scanning a huge
database base they're going to select things out and zero in on people because of it. >> that's the problem i had with it, including the fact that the fbi could interrogate these bases. that's really the threat to our democracy and people's privacy and rights. >> eliot: i want to follow up on what you said. the fbi can peer into this database? when the nsa built this huge database, the fbi is given access to it. >> that's what director mueller testified to when he was testifying to the senate judiciary committee in 30th of march 2011. he testified that they had created a technology base with dod and they could get all past e-mails and future e-mails of money.
>> the nsa assume late it. the fbi has access to it and the fbi should be bound by the fourth amendment. i'm looking at the transport here from the testimony of the general keith alexander. are you saying he's misstating what they're up to? >> the fact that they have a nsa room at the at&t building in san francisco where they documented the fiber optic lines going into a device, that device is what translates all that data into meaningful readable text. that's going to nsa. that's documented in court records. plus in "new york times" reported in 2010 where nsa had overcollected on u.s. citizens. >> eliot: look, i got to interrupt you. we're going out at 9:00. can you hang around and