tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC June 22, 2012 9:00pm-10:00pm EDT
though, what can't be overstated and what frankly makes the entire story so unbelievable is that the individual mandate is an idea republicans. republicans thought of in the 1990s, that they supported all through the 2000s, and that democrats didn't fully embrace until 2009. when they embraced it in part because they thought it would help them win republican support for their health care bill. the mandate's big political debut was in 1989, and health care policy plan. in their brief, stewart butler, the foundation's health care expert argued quote many states now require passengers in automobiles to wear seat belts for their own protection, many other require anybody driving a car to have liability insurance, but no bill makes a house protect itself from a serious accident or illness. now, heritage wasn't alone in this. milton freeman, the legendary
conservative economist, a guy so revered by republicans that in a debate last year, mitt romney said he wished he could bringham back from the dead to put him in charge of the federal reserve. he proposed a requirement that every u.s. family unit have a major medical inshrjs policy. okay, you might say these are just conservative intellectuals, doesn'tprieve anything about the republican party. fast forward to 1993, the day republican senator jon chaffee of rhode island introduced his party's alternative to the clinton bill. >> mr. president, i'm very pleased today to join with 19 of my colleagues in introducing the health equity and access reform today act of 1993. this is our health care bill, mr. president, presented on behalf of the republican senate
to the health care tax force and the co sponsors of the legislation are senators dole, bond, hatfield, bennett, hatch, danforth, brown, gordon, simpson, stevens, cohen. senator warner, spectser, luger. to start, i want to thank the distinguished republican leader senator dole for his vision in directing the establishment of a senate republican health care task force in 1990. think of it, over three years ago, senator dole set up this republican health care task force. his support and encouragement of our efforts have brought us here today. i'm particularly indected to him for that. >> all right, so that is pretty much every leading senate republican of the time, including bob dole, who is
leterally the leader of the senate republicans at the time. you want to know what was at the core of the bill, the heart bill? it was an individual mandate. it's right there in section 1501. section 1501, requirement of coverage, effective january 1, '05, every citizen who is a lawful permanent resident of the united states should be covered by a health care program as defined in 1601. that's half of an individual mandate. you might say where is the other half, where is the penalty? allow me to direct your attention to 5,000 a. failure of individuals with respect to health insurance. there is hereby imposed a tax on the failure of any individual to comply with section 1501. that, my friends, that is an individual mandate. as far as i can tell, it's the first individual mandate to appear in the united states congress, and it was in the
republican alternative to the clinton health care plan that was co sponsored by the republican leader of the u.s. senate. but it wasn't the last individual mandate. the last individual mandate remained at the center for health care thinking for the next two decades. it was in the plan that newt gingrich released when he ran the center for health care transformation. >> the real foundation, the most important part of this, is individual rights, spaublthds, and expectation of behavior. we believe that there should be must carry, that it everybody should have health inshrngs or if you're an absolute libertarian, we would allow you to post a bond, but we would not allow people to be free riders failing to insurance themselves and showing up at the emergency room with no means of payment. >> it was in the plan that mitt romney passed in massachusetts. >> what we did, i think, is the ultimate conservative plan. people have to take
responsibility for getting insurance or paying their own way. no more free riders. >> it was in the healthy americans act which senator ron white, a democrat from oregon, designed and almost a dozen senate republicans signed onto and which mitt romney said should be the republicansplan for the country. >> we have a health care plan. you look at widen-bennett, that's a health care plan that a number of americans think is a good health plan, one that we support. >> it was as late as june 2009, chuck grassley said had bipartisan support. >> i believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates. >> six months later, in december 2009, every single senate republican voted to call the individual mandate unconstituti unconstitutional. that included people who voted
for it in the support, and even some supporting the mandate at the moment. now, i want to repeat that, they voted for the bill they were currently coponsponsoring was unconstitutional. what led to the mass flip-flop on the individual mandate? democrats put a mandate into their health care bills and president obama who opposed a mandate in the 2008 campaign decided to support it. after that, in a few months, almost every single republican in the senate voted to call it unconstitutional, 12k3 the fathers of the individual mandate turned against him, too. the individual mandate wasn't the only time we have seen this happen in recent years. if you look at almost all of the major palmacies associated with the obama administration, they were in the past five years policies that major republicans supported. today, for instance, republicans almost university oppose a cap and trade plan, but you know who
first introduced a cap and trade plan into the senate, republican senator john mccain, and you know who had one in the 2008 presidential platform, john mccain. you know what he thinks of cap and trade now? cap n tax. very clever. they say deficit stimulus finance doesn't work. they oppose the theory behind it. they say you would only believe that but in 2008, george w. bush pushed and signed the, wait for it, the economic stimulus act of 2008, the $157 billion deficit finance act bit. among those supporting the legislation, congressman paul ryan. what does paul ryan think of deficit finance cuts now? >> we have proven that these temporary sugar high economics, these stemulous effects don't work to grow the economy. >> this is not how politics is
supposed to work. the way politics is supposed to work is that when you're for something and the other guys are willing to move off their position and towards your position, say going from single payer to an individual mandate or a spending based stimulus to a tax cut based stimulus, you comthat a win, call that a victory, pop the champagne, pat yourself on the back for a job well done. that's not what has happened in recent years. when the democrats take two steps to the republicans, the republicans take five steps away from the democrats. next week, the supreme court is going to rule on the individual mandate. if the republicans vote en masse to call it unconstitutional, they will have done more than flip-flop on the individual mandate. they will have burned the foundation on which most of their best health care thinking has rested and salt the earth after it. and that may not be the last of the ironies. they were fighting something they considered worse, single payer, or in the clinton bill,
an employer mandate. but if it goes, single payer and an employer mandate will be the only options left. which in this country, like every industrialized nation will have. and when democrats propose thad and have the power to pass that, in that world, what will republicans say? that this time, this time they want to compromise. this time, democrats can trust them? joining us now is oregon democratic senator john whiten who sits on the subcommittee. thanks for being here. tell me when you founded the bill. you were one of the early democrats to embrace it. when they had introduced dein the '90s, you began to look at it in the 2000s. >> it was an opportunity to break nearly 100 years of gridlock. we had worked on it decade after decade after decade, and it seems to me when john chaefy
laid out the opportunity to show that there would be some personal responsibility, you would be required to purchase a measure of health care coverage, we could tie it to what i always dreamed about, which is getting everybody in america good and affordable coverage. you have over the last few minutes described what you describe as the irony of the whole issue. i would tell you i think what you described is really a by-product of zero sum politics. on these big issues. it's always been one side has got to win, the other side has got to lose. that's what i think forces a lot of this polarization, and what i have been trying to show over the last few years and we want a great victory early this year for internet freedom when a republican, a conservative republican, senator jerry moran, teamed up with me and we were able to make sure that websites didn't become web cops, we have to break this polarization, and i tell you, it is the only way
out because this election is still not going to produce a super majority for either side in the senate. >> what always worries me about the senate now, about politics now is you describe it as zero sum election year, and you're right. what scares me about the dysfunction we see in american government right now is it's not clear to me anybody is wrong about that. the republican party experienced a very large win at the polls in 2010 based at least in part on their rock solid opposition to the health care bill which make it much less popular. mitch mcconnell has said straight out we need the american people to not see it as bipartisan. how do minorities escape that? it seems we have belt this behavior into the system itself. >> you have to get around the middlemen in washington, d.c. the middlemen essentially the lobbyists, the political consultants, the pollsters, they're one of the main reasons
why you see this kind of pollerization, because they take these sort of instant polls, show, look, we have a great opportunity to hammer the other guys. we can score in this election, and that's why on the big issues, we see everything gridlocked. i think on tax reform, we have another terrific opportunity. i and others have put together a bipartisan bill, built around what democrats and ronald reagan did where they clean out the clutter, hold down the rates, and rhee create millions of jobs. to do it, both sides are going to have to say we're going to be willing to do what's good for the country, solve a problem, and that means fighting the special interests, not each other. we'll see if it can be done. >> we'll see. oregon democratic senator john wyden, thank you for being here. i hope you're right. >> it's the only way out. >> if you're watching this show ile staying at a fanlsy resort in park city, utah, you might be a big time mitt romney donor in
town to schmooze the candidate himself. you almost certainly are not a big time barack obama donor because there aren't as many oz of the these days and that has a big implication where public policy is going to look going forward. that story is next. one that continually monitors and corrects for wheel slip. we imagined a vehicle that can increase emergency braking power when you need it most. and we imagined it looking like nothing else on the road today. then...we built it. the 2012 glk. see your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for exceptional offers through mercedes-benz financial services.
yep. the longer you stay with us, the more you save. and when you switch from another company to us, we even reward you for the time you spent there. genius. yeah, genius. you guys must have your own loyalty program, right? well, we have something. show her, tom. huh? you should see november! oh, yeah? giving you more. now that's progressive. call or click today.
sgroo it was a beautiful day today in park city, utah, as clear, and warm and dry with a high chance of chatting up the republican nominee for president provided you raised a lot of money for his campaign. mitt romney is holding a fund-raiser today continuing through sunday. the crowd includes his top fund-raisers the ones in the $100,000 and up club, the ones who persuade their wealth y friends to give, give, and give. they will have a chance to meet mrs. romney and his wife and dignitaries and cabinet members. now, we don't know much about these super donors, the bundlers who will be hanging out with the romneys this weekend. he doesn't reveal that niefrb and the law does not require him to. we know know that he and the republican party together raised $77 million last month. and we have some idea of who will be providing the
entertainment at the park city resort this weekend. among the events is a panel called media insight featuring republican strategist and super pac wrangler karl rove. i suppose this is this other role as media expert. the thing he's great at is raising money. mr. rove's american cross roads and cross roads gps have raised an enormous amount for the race. it's a nonprofit, dedicated to social welfare, so the group does not have to reveal where it gets its money. the obama re-election campaign is challenging that status, but there might not be a decision until the election is over. his other group, american crossroads is a pro romney super pac allowed to support a candidate with unlimited funds but not allowed to coordinate with that candidates, which raises the questions whether it's kosher for him to show up at a shindig for the mystery
bundlers. it's good to so you on the other side of this split screen and i'm on the other side so we don't give the appearance of cordinating. this isn't the first presidential election since the supreme court's first decision. it redrew how candidates run and win. it gave us not $100 million and counting, but it brought us sheld sheldon adelson who was talking about spending $100 million himself trying to put mitt romney in the white house. let me put sheldon adelson in perspective for you. he's worth $24.9 billion, billion with a "b" billion dollars. $100 million is four tenths of one percent of his fortune. let's say you're worth $50,000, to sheldon adelson, your
spending $100 million is the same as you spending $200. here's the difference, when someone making $50,000 gives a paolitician $200, that politicin doesn't much care. when someone gives a politician $100 million, that politician does care. and he cares even more in the next election cycle he could give the other guy $100 million. he cares at that point a lot. about keeping sheldon adelson very happy. you know how you keep him happy? make policy sheldon adelson likes. one major difference in the campaign, one policy difference, a real difference is that while barack obama wants to raise taxes on the rich, mitt romney wants to cut taxes for the wealthy and for korpshzs and for profits corporations make over seas. overseas profits like for instance the ones sheldon adelson makes for his casinos. in the voting booth, someone like sheldon adelson faces a choice between a candidate who
would raise his taxes and a candidate who would lower him and could make one person one vote decisions on which one he prefers. in this election, someone like sheld sheldon adelson also faces a choice on where to put his many, many, many, many, many, many millions. and does he want to put it with the lower taxes guy or the higher taxes guy? which is a good investment. which is going to give him a return on his investment? it should surprise no one the democrats super pacs like the counter parts to crossroads have had trouble raising money. the democrats super pacs count their increments in ones, not tens. and they often disagree with the idea of unlimited campaign giving. it's not how they think campaigns should work. arguably, the bigger problem is that they don't make policy that rich people like as much. they had a terrific article on
the difficulties they're having keeping up with republicans among rich donors. he quotes one donor as saying, kwoeltd, everything i'm doing goes against my financial interests, and he's right. the rich democrats have to do so against the immediate interest of their own tax bill. the effect on policy it has is important and it's this. if proposing to raise taxes on the wealthy costs a politician not just the votes of rich people but millions or billions of dollars in campaign support, that proposal becomes very, very, very difficult to pass. if barack obama losing this year and democrats believe it's because he got outspent, because the billionaires were on the other side, they're going to make sure they have people back on their side in 2016, and that will mean offering them policy they like better. the reality of campaign giving now is we have dragged the center of politics toward the right and very much towards the rich. joining us now is steve, the
senior writing for salon.coand cohost of msnbc's new show, the cycle. congratulations on the new gig. that's wonderful. >> thanks. i'm pretty excited about it. >> we have talked about the effective campaign giving in terms of election results, and where want to talk about it in terms of policy, if your opponent swamps you with money, don't officials think twice about electing them in the feature? >> i think it depends how the results gets interpreted by the politicians bah i can see a scenario here, this fall, where obama does despite being outspent, actually survive and wins re-election. even if he's outspent significantly, even if the super pacs lever him in the dust on the republican side, but i think you can leak at the other end of pennsylvania avenue and ask what happens in the congressional races, the house, the senate, and the super pac spending and also a situation where super pac spending could keep the republican majority in the
house, restore it in the senate, and there's a difference in how the money works. if when you're talking about the congressional and senate level, the money really matters because the candidates aren't known that much, money for television advertising is going to go farther in the average house race than it is in the presidential race. and at that point, if you end up with a split verdict, this is the real first presidential election of the super pac era and i wonder how it gets interm rlted. >> that's 100% true. i'm much more like you are, worried about the money on the congressional level, in part because barack obama is well known to the american people, mitt romney is well known to the american people. people have formed opinions. they don't have formed opinions on the guy running for senate in missouri. the reason i worry about that if anything much more is that it is sometimes harder to see, so we think a lot of the policies being generated from the white house.
the white house generates the policies in gress, and if folks in congress are saying you may be right that we should raise the taxes on the rich, but i can't lose my next election, it's what you see is the white house proposing paulalcy that is less good, and you can't even follow the money trail because you weren't in there when there was the conversation that led to that being the paulalcy that the democrats ended up proposing. >> and the other thing, you look at if you have this dynamic where obama gets re-elected and he's trying to work with congress to do like the bush tax cuts and he's at logger heads, there's going to be tension coming from a few places and one is from within the republican party. wi talk about the role of super pacs in congressional races. we're seeing them in the primaries. there was an example in kentucky a month or two ago where there was a house primary where a 21-year-old college student from texas who inherited a fortune i think frauz him grand father,
took the money, started a super pac, has his own sort of pet conservative issues and went randomly into this house race in kentucky and his candidate won. arguably because of his financial support. so you look at the republican members of congress, whatever message they might take from obama survivoring if he does, obama survivoring the presidential election against all of the money spent against him. the average republican congressman knows in his party. if he were to say, maybe we should show a little flexibility on taxes, he's going to be the target of the super pac. >> steve, senior writer for salon.com and now cohost of msnbc's newest show, the cycle, and it begins on monday at 3:00 p.m. eastern. steve, thank you. good luck on the new show. >> thanks. >> if i use the term eurozone, i'm willing to bet your eyes kind of glaze over a little bit. however, there's a eurozone story tonight that makes it compelling and easy to understand. it's an easy goal if you will. there's even video of people
in here, every powerful collaboration is backed by an equally powerful and secure cloud. that cloud is in the network, so it can deliver all the power of the network itself. bringing people together to develop the best ideas -- and providing the apps and computing power to make new ideas real. it's the cloud from at&t. with new ways to work together, business works better. ♪ with new ways to work together, business works better. ♪music plays throughout summer in new york state has something different for everyone to love. discover what you love. visit ilovenewyork.com to plan your summer trip now.
>> democracy. >> democracy. laces? really? slip-on's the way to go. more people do that, security would be like -- there's no charge for the bag. thanks. i know a quiet little place where we can get some work done. there's a three-prong plug. i have club passes. [ male announcer ] get the mileage card with special perks on united, like a free checked bag, united club passes, and priority boarding. thanks. ♪ okay. what's your secret? [ male announcer ] the united mileageplus explorer card. get it and you're in.
explorer card. until i had the shingles. i have never encountered such a burning sensation... it was like a red rash. like somebody had set a bag of hot charcoal on my neck. i had no idea it came from chickenpox. it's something you never want to encounter. for more of the inside story, visit shinglesinfo.com at liberty mutual, we know how much you count on your car, and how much the people in your life count on you. that's why we offer accident forgiveness, where your price won't increase due to your first accident. we also offer a hassle-free lifetime repair guarantee, where the repairs made on your car are guaranteed for life, or they're on us. these are just two of the valuable features you can expect from liberty mutual.
plus, when you insure both your home and car with us, it could save you time and money. at liberty mutual, we help you move on with your life, so get the insurance responsible drivers like you deserve. call us at... or visit your local liberty mutual office, where an agent can help you find the policy that's right for you. liberty mutual insurance, responsibility -- what's your policy?
there is breaking news right now from bellfaunlt, ben ben, where it's reported that there's a verdict in the jerry sandusky child sex abuse trial. he was a successful and popular penn state assistant football coach and was retired with allegations arose last year he had long been a serial sexual abuser of boys. those allegations which were painfully detailed and horrifying led to the firing of top penn state officials including joe paterno who had been his boss in the accused man's career. he stands accused of 48 counts of sexual abuse against ten boys over a period of 15 years krrb the sdaev women and five men got the case yesterday and deliberated until 9:30. they resumed today at 9:00 a.m. and they have arrived at their verdict. that verdict has not been announced. we expect there will take time for the principals to arrive in
the courtroom. nbc news correspondent ron allen has been following the trial and is in front of the courthouse. thank you for being here. >> good evening, ezra. we have been given official word that the verdict will be read in 20 minutes. it's about 15 minutes from now in open court here. we understand that jerry sandusky and his wife are on their way here to the court room. the attorney general for the state of pennsylvania is here, the attorneys are here, the media is here. and of course, the jury is here. they have been here now for some 20 hours and 48 minutes over the past couple days. they have been susequestered, unable to have contact with the outside world, outside media, telephones, families, locked up in a room to try to deliberate and try to figure out the case, the very emotional case that has weighed heavily on the community, on penn state university, on the entire surrounding state of pennsylvania, for that matter.
again, as you said, there are some 48 counts, 48 criminal counts that jerry sandusky faces. there are ten accusers, ten alleged victims. that's why it may take some time for the judge, the clerk of the court to read down the charge sheet to explain what all the charges are. with ten alleged victims, there are five charges involving one, four involving the other, some of the charges are more serious than the others. but the rules s that the courts put in place is that they -- we can not publicly tell you what the charges are until all of the charges have been read in court and court is adjournadjourned. it's a very emotional process. the defense made a very strong last ditch effort to try to raise as much doubt as they can about jerry sandusky's guilt. anyone who has listened to the case from any distance is wondering why is it taking so long to reach a guilty verdict, which middle east people think is going to happen.
the defense attorney has said this is a big conspiracy, he took the alleged victims in a group and said how could it be that all of these ten young men now, who were young boys then, how could they be telling essentially the same story? he alleged a conspiracy involving them, their attorneys out to make mmoney, so on and s forth. the proskurtds have insists this was a pattern over 15 years, at least, there's also new allegations against jerry sandusky that have been surfacing including one of his adopted sons who came out pub c publicly and said he is a victim of his own father's sexual abuse over a period of time. he didn't specify. so the case continues and continues to unravel. even after tonight, once we hear this verdict, there are still civil cases to come, more criminal cases to come, an internal investigation of penn state university. regardless of what happens tonight, this is still going to continue on, but hopefully in
the next few minutes or so, we'll know what jerry sandusky's fate is. he faces hundreds of years in jail. >> given what you have learned about the trial and gathered from other observers, is there anything that you see in the timing of the verdict or the relative speed, slow or quick, that will tell us how it's going to come down? >> no, i think all that is reading tea leaves. you know, the jury is a very odd jury. there are nine members of the jury who have some close tie to penn state university. a former professor, a current professor, student who i believe is a junior. people who know jerry sandusky, sandusky wanted the trial held here, he had the option to have it elsewhere, but he wanted it here. how does the dynamic affect things? it's unclear. they feel jerry sandusky before all this happened, a revered figure in the community, one of the greatest assistant coaches in college history dare i say
under joe paterno. who ran a charity that was doing great deeds in the community, and now they see this other individual that some can't believe it's true, but many people, just, there was a state of denial, but i think many people have come to see there's so much evidence, so much -- so many allegations all pointed in the same direction, that i think most people here as someone has said, where there's smoke, there has to be fire. and one of the most powerful parts of this entire court proceeding has been the fact there were eight alleged victims who came forward and told their stories to the court. young men who were often in tears who had hidden these secrets deep inside of them for so long, shameful, they couldn't tell anybody. but once this started to explode, once this starting to become public, they made their way to the court and told the stories. and that by every indication had a powerful impact on the jurors who were sitting there and listening to this.
it's hard to not believe what they were saying, but again, there are 48 different charges, five charges against one individual case, and six in another, so he may be charged, he may be convicted or not of a more serious sexual offense or a lesser sexual offense or something less, so again, that's why it took some time to do due diligence and go through the process carefully, it would naturally take some time to look at essentially 48 decisions that had to be made by the group of 12 people. that's why it's probably taking the peer yod of time it has. whether this is long or short, who knows. once they come out and if they will talk to us, we'll have a much better idea of what they were going through. certainly a painful and emotional process for them as well. >> you talked about the fact that sandusky wanted the trial held there and the role he played in the community and the number of people who know him. what is the atmosphere there like now? >> well, i think the short story is, and i think most people want
this to be over. it's taken a tremendous toll of the community. they want this to be over. this happened back in november. you'll remember it has led -- we have seen the death of joe paterno in january. there are top penn state officials facing criminal charges. this was a bombshell when it hit the university. university had a pristine reputation in college sports. they were the guys who wear the blue and white crisp uniforms, the conservative look, joe paterno was there with his thick black glasses, and of all the scandal that has tainted college sports in all ways. penn state was above all that or seemed to be above all that, and then this hits. this is not about money. this is about some very, very horrifying, frankly, sexual allegations, sexual abuse allegations involving young boys, as young as age 10 or 11. some have said they were abused dozens of times over many years.
they allege there was a pattern, that they were groomed. and many of the kids were -- met sandusky they say, through a charity. they were kids from broken homes, kids who were from underprivileged back grounds who saw them az this huge father figure, this icon, this person they could not dare say anything negative ability, and many of them told stories that when they cold counselors or people in the community, they weren't believed, so they were scared, so that's why they also held this inside, adding to the pain they were feeling over so many years. now, imagine you're a juror sitting there listening to all that. it's very difficult not to believe that those stories are true. but again, again, he's innocent until proven guilty, and the jury again because of their close ties to penn state university, it's a probably a very well educated jury. they have gone through this very
carefully, i would imagine. they know that their analysis, their decisions will be heavily scrutinized and heavily debated. people will know who they are in the community, i'm sure for those reasons and many others, they have taken this very seriously. >> what happens next? very specifically, watt is the timing and sort of schedule of events we're expecting from here forward? >> well, i have kind of lost track of time, but i understand mr. sandusky is in the courtroom. so a clerk of the court will bring the jury in, they will ask him as you have seen them on tv so many times, the foreman will say we have our verdict, and they will read down the list of charges, again, 48 counts. how long that will take, it's
unclear. and how long it will take to poll the jury, whether the judge will poll the jury on each count or each victim of the ten, the group of charges that involved that particular case, it's unclear. it's really a big wild card. we don't know. this could take some time, but i'm sure they want to get through it as expeditiously as possible. we're here on hold, just waiting like everyone else is to
they might find in some counts there was insufficient evidence. and others that there was sufficient evidence. his own attorney was chastised by the judge but came out and told reporters that you know, he basically thought it would be crazy if his client walked on all these zmoornlgs jerry sandusky has arrived at the courthouse. we were given a 20-minute warning some moments ago. so we're awaiting the verdict from the jury. 48 counts as ron allen reported, one of the victims alleged victims was involve involved in five counts and another in six counts. now, will they be dealt with first, do you think as this is all unfolding in the courtroom? >> i would expect it would be as to, you know, victim 1, the number of counts. as to victim two, the number of counts reading each of the verdicts. so don't be surprised if it's mixed verdicts because of the kind of testimony that appears in this case. but i would i think as his own lawyer said be surprised if it
was acquittal across the board. >> i have to ask the question. is there any chance that he would be found not guilty? >> there's always a chance. but in this one, i wouldn't be betting the farm on that, no. >> the jury asked the judge to clarify some instructions today concerning one of the alleged victims, and that's pretty standard, is it not? >> sure, sure. >> is there anything to be made of the number of hours just some 20 plus hours of deliberation by the jury? >> consciencious jury are 48 counts. it tells me they were going to be very purposeful in their findings because they know the kind of scrutiny this is going to get and they want to be able to justify it once they walk out the door. >> jerry sandusky wanted this trial to be held in this community, and there are nine people on the jury who have had ties with penn state university. was that his best move in all of this? because he had had such -- he had been such a revered person
in the community. i mean, this man was going to replace joe paterno. >> right. >> as the head football coach at penn state university. arguably the football legend of all college football in america. this man was one of his defensive coaches. they had a long association. >> but think about that, ed. when he left that program, he moved into almost oblivion. and for any coach with that kind of history, what would you expect? instant recruiting by another major university. so when this story broke, one of my first questions was, hmm, why was he basically sent off into the exile? there was probably a reason and that's back to what we talked about on your show earlier is i'd like an investigation into just how many people, whether it's law enforcement, university, football program, who knew about this. >> well, there will be civil cases coming and more criminal cases. >> there be. >> and also lawsuits.
one of sandusky's adopted sons released a statement just last night that the jerry sandusky abused him. is there any chance that information like that could get back to a skooe sequestered jury and the timing of it, apparently his adopted son met with prosecutors this week. attorneys met with prosecutors and explained what happened to him. >> yeah. >> this complicates it even further. >> well, i think the prosecutors actually approached the judge about whether or not he could testify. but also, they retained several other cases so if something happened in this case, if he was acquitted across the board, they've got other cases and here now we know that his adopted son could we'll be one of those. >> then that is the point i was getting to is if sandusky is acquitted will other accusers like travis weaver be used by prosecutors? >> they're not leaving this case. >> they're not leave ago this. >> no, no, if he's acquitted we will see more charges. the likelihood of a sequestered
yir, nowadays the bailiffs are getting really smart. cell phones are confiscated. televisions are turned off. >> give us insight into jerry sandusky with what appears to be a mountain of everyday and numerous alleged victims. he, of course, has maintained his innocence throughout all of this. >> when i watch the interviews, he did "the new york times" over the weekend, the bob costas interview, very uncomfortable, very seemingly unaware of the kind of effect. let's just say it was sort of the tingling and soing in the shower. this man doesn't seem to have any concept of the kind of trauma that that can produce in a child, much less when we're talking about sodomy and the horrible events that have been described. i think he's very unaware. i have seen this in child molesters before. there is the guy in the raincoat, the evil guy we think
about, and then there are plenty that truly in their minds think they're loving children. >> so you've seen this behavior before if other cases. >> oh, yeah. >> just total denial all the way through it. >> what they're doing is loving children, not abusing children. >> you're watching msnbc tonight. we're waiting the verdict of the jerry sandusky trial. sandusky the accused in this trial has arrived at the courthouse. and the verdict has been reached in the trial. catherine crier joins us tonight here in the studio in new york. ron allen, nbc reporter is on the ground who has been covering this trial. catherine, the impact of the community has been just absolutely gut wrenching. what this has done to penn state university, its football program. it's going to be years for them to recover. and what amazes me is that jerry sandusky doesn't recognize that. and he has maintained his innocence throughout all of this. >> yeah, and when i say that
there are molesters who don't understand, that is not at all making excuses, condoning anything. but there is a psychological state where i think this man is, i love children. i want to be with children. "the new york times" this weekend, i really miss this. and on some level, he probably doesn't understand. not only devastating the lives of these victims but tearing part an entire community. but i think it's important for this community, it's important for this country in cases like this that people who have responsibility are held to account. i don't mean a witch hunt. but i truly believe you would find. >> there were numerous people here that were given information and did not act on it. >> and beyond the number that we know, i'm sure. >> we are waiting the verdict of the jury in the jerry sandusky trial. let's go now to ron allen
outside the courthouse in bellefonte, pennsylvania. ron, i would imagine that the anticipation by the crowd is rather intense right now. >> yes, it's relatively small courtroom. i don't know perhaps a couple of hundred people. there's an overflow room where more reporters are waiting. perhaps you can see behind me, there is a huge array of media here standing here waiting, there's a podium just beyond that crowd. and that is where we expect the attorney general, the prosecutors to come out, the defense to come out and makera, after this is all decided. it is quite a night here. it's an electric night. we spent a couple days here waiting in anticipation. the thing about a jury verdict, you never know when it's going to happen. there were some thinking they might want to get this done before they go into the weekend. there was talk of going into the weekend to try and get this done. but again, as i said before, and i think that most people in this community that i've talked to
really just want this to be over. they want to take a big step forward. now, regardless of what the outcome of the verdict is, they want to get past this huge chapter because they know there are many waves to come. there are civil cases that are coming, there are criminal cases coming that involve the two penn state administrators who allegedly failed to report what they were told to police to the fbi, to the state police. to other authorities as they are required to by law. there's also an internal investigation of penn state university. a lot of who knew what and when there. the board of trustees has been overseeing that as well as the formerly fbi director louis free. so a lot of scrutiny still here at this university and you're right. it is in some ways changed penn state for dare i say forever, but certainly for the foreseeable future because it will be impossible i think for people to think about penn state as much as they would not like this to be the case without thinking about what has happened with this jerry sandusky case because it was that profound.
>> i think that every college president in this country is watching this story thinking, what if this comes to my door with these allegations? allegations brought to administrators from this point on will be handled with tremendous intensity in the education community throughout the country. we understand that the sandusky family, the entire family is there at bellefonte. but ron, you have been in that community. if you could capsulize, you say that they just want to get this over with, but is there hurt? is there anguish? is there anger? is there a wave of emotions that's going through that community and leading up to what we have seen unfold? >> i think there is all that and much, much more. there's shame, there's guilt. there's a feeling that a lot of people have that they should have known this. how could this have happened? there are a lot of people think we're just seeing is the tip of the iceberg. the charges in this case go back
over 15 years to a time when sandusky was in his early 50s. ironically in the closing arguments, his defense attorney said how could it be that a man just becomes a pedophile in his mid 50s? a lot of people say we think it happened even before that, but we don't know the about that. if you look at the cases of mr. weaver and matt shocked have come forward in recent days, they're older. they're both in their early 30s. most of the alleged victim who's testified i think the oldest was 27 or 28. so when you add matt sandusky and the other young man, it takes it back more yearstors an earlier time in jerry sandusky's life and the stories that at least one of them is telling fits the pattern, if you will. so again, a lot of people at one point were saying there could be as many as 50 victims here. now, that number has not been repeated often, but since, but there is a feeling that this continues, that there are still -- there's still more here and there may be more people who
come forward, because they feel em boldened, they feel confident and able to do this depending on the outcome of this trial. so a long, long way for this community to go, ed. >> ron, have you sensed any or heard any conversation in the community that people want him to -- want to see him get convicted? i mean, there is so much anger that is out there surrounding penn state, that the best way for penn state to move forward is if they get conclusion here and get justice. >> well, yeah, there are certainly people who there's no doubt in their mind what happened. you know, i haven't done a poll. i'm not quite sure whether it's most or many, but certainly there's a significant number of people who feel all these allegations couldn't be wrong, all these young men wouldn't put themselves through what they did he to come here and to speak to investigators first, to make what happened to them public. remember, these -- they were 10, 11, 12, 13-year-old kids when
this happened. some of them went to counselors at school. they went to other people in the community. they weren't believed. they were told, oh, jerry sandusky wouldn't do something like that in one case or more. so when -- and this is a relatively small community. when you're confronted with that as a young teen, certainly you bury this deep. and now for this to come out so many years later, it took a lot for them to -- they're now parents, they have families. they have spouses. and to bear all that out, so many people here i think that this just has to be -- there has to be some element, a lot of elements of truth to it. but again, there are multiple counts against involving each of these victims. so some involve intercourse. penetration. some involve basically endangering the life of a minor which is a lesser, a misdemeanor. anywhere up that scale of four or five different