tv The Cycle MSNBC January 17, 2014 12:00pm-1:01pm PST
talking and talking and talking and so are we. the secret is out, president obama announces reforms to the nsa, but is it enough? i'm toure. a fine line between safety and snooping. block the vote, important action in congress for anyone who cares about voting rights. i'm ari melber. a new bill meant to protect the core of our democracy. fourth down, the biggest weekend of the nfl season so far is upon us. and i can wait -- i mean i can't wait. sports, sports, sports. i'm krystal ball, the dynamic duo of mike smith. here's to hoping they have a game plan. and i'm abby huntsman, may be 3:00 here in new york, but hey, it's 5:00 somewhere.
regardless of how we got here, though, the task before us now is greater than simply repairing the damage done to our operations. the challenge is getting the details right. and that is not simple. i'm therefore ordering a transition that will end the section 215 bulk metadata program as it currently exists and establish a mechanism that preserves the capabilities that we need without the government holding this bulk metadata. during this transition period, the data base can be queried only after a judicial finding, or in the case of a true emergency. bottom line is people around the world regardless of their nationality should know that the united states is not spying on ordinary people who don't threaten our national security. >> the government will keep collecting that bulk metadata from the phone calls and keep it in government hands for now. but before intel agencies touch that data, they'll now need the okay from the secret fisa courts
which will have extra oversights. yes, an improvement over what we had. the president today delivered his much anticipated speech from the controversial nsa program brought to public light in part by edward snowden. the program we're talking about is section 215 of the patriot act. allows the government to track calls and texts, but not content. the program strips info from the calls like phone numbers and call length. and starting today, the president is giving the attorney general and the intel community two months to come up with a plan that moves the bulk metadata out of government hands. but he's not saying who, specifically, should hold on to that data. if you won't let the government hold it, that leaves only one place for that power, private companies. which is interesting given that today marks 53 years since dwight eisenhower delivered his famous warning about the growing
complex. >> in the councils of government, we must guard by the military industrial complex. the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. >> we start with julian sanchez at the cato institute. you've heard what the president wants to do. what do you think of what he's proposing? >> well, unfortunately, the devil or angel, i suppose is going to end up being in the details here. with respect to the bulk program, really what the president said is actually consistent with either continuing bulk collection and just having someone else act as an intermediary. it's also consistent with the more traditional model of letting the areaiers keep their own records as they already do and then having individual court orders for nsa to obtain the records as they need them as
specific suspicion is developed. and depends how they decide to implement this. if it's the kind of custodian model, i'm not sure why from a civil liberties perspective you should be that much more reassured it's booze allen maintaining the server this data's on instead of nsa. >> you've been writing about this for well over a decade. you care deeply about this issue, you've talked about it a lot on this show. what do you think about what the president's proposing to do? >> this was a significant speech. i think the president was wrong to sit there and let the nsa over these years expand these powers often in the dark. and i think he was wrong with his initial reaction to these leaks which was highly dismissive as we remember. now, if he was wrong before, i do think he's moving in the right direction. and if you think he's right now, then he would have to have been wrong before. can't have both sides of this issue. but it's good when politicians evolve based on the facts. these are policy changes. i do think they're a step to the point we just heard from julian,
yes, where the database lives doesn't automatically make it better or worse. the president's saying you have to have a judge look before you search. that's new, and that's good. but, that is just the president changing his mind. this is the oversight of self-control, not the oversight of separation of powers. and if he changes his mind again and gives another speech next week, he can take that back. i spoke to someone in the administration today who said, look, we're proud of this change, but absolutely this is a change we chose. the court isn't requiring it and we have the power to change again. and that leads you to the most important long-term point. whatever you think about what we know up until now, which is the next president will be able to change most of this, as well. and that's why those of us concerned about having a workable system want to drive reform through congress. they were 12 votes shy of reining in some of these programs this summer, there's a lot of votes there interested in doing something. i'd like to see something that could outlive the politics of any individual administration. >> that's why there's still a
lot of questions that remain. but julian, the president will demand the nsa go to fisa court before accessing the data. and hayden expressed concerns, comparing it to the way we operated before 9/11. here's what he said. >> the president will now demand that the nsa go to the fisa court before they ask the data a question. i was a director of nsa on september 11th. that procedure reminds me of the way we operated before the september 11th attacks. that makes me uncomfortable because in addition to this specific thing, it sends a message to the bureaucracy that we're trending back to the old ways of doing business. >> julian, this is clearly a man that understands the ins and outs of how and why the spying programs do what they do. what do you make of his concerns? and the idea that we are actually taking a step back now on the war on terror? >> i don't find this very
compelling at all. it's pretty clear that the problem before 9/11 had very little to do with insufficient intelligence collection and everything to do with insufficient intelligence sharing. it's not that nsa didn't have the resources to know that he was in the united states, for example. they chose not to share that information with an agency that might act on it like the fbi. i'm not that concerned. especially given the president's own review group agreed with basically every other expert analysis. and said this program has not really been essential, it hasn't been the key to stopping any particular attack. it may be a little bit quicker than the traditional model of getting a court order and going to the companies, there's no sign that's too high a burden for them. >> and the president did point to in his speech an example of a place where having that bulk collection of the metadata may have been useful. and the administration says they've foiled over 50 terror attacks based on the information
collected in this bulk collection of metadata. >> that's actually not true. >> what i wanted to ask you, though, is a little bit different than that. you've already said you don't see this as being particularly effective. do you think we should get rid of the bulk collection altogether? would you be satisfied with anything short of that? >> yeah, no -- i think in our constitutional tradition, you don't vacuum up indiscriminately information about people who aren't even particularly suspected of wrong doing. >> julian, let me ask you -- and one other point on that, why do you think if the administration doesn't see value in this, why would they continue the program? >> it's not that there's no value in it. it's faster, more convenient to do something on-site than have to go to a court or send out orders. it's not that there's no value to it. it's just that it's not -- it's actually fairly clear it is not value commensurate with the level of invasion that's going
on. we know they finally did kind of admit that this bulk collection didn't disrupt 50 terror events. there was one case involving a person giving a few thousand dollars to al shabab where maybe they would have found it harder to track that guy down without this program. but i don't know if that's enough of a track record to justify keeping millions of people's phone records for five years. >> so is your opposition to this about the efficacy of the program if it were more efficient, then would you be more comfortable with it? or are you really focused on, this is not what america's supposed to be about? >> well, little column "a," little of column "b." it would give me pause if there were a dozen cases where a bomb would've gone off but for this, so there's no other way to achieve the same thing. you know, you don't -- you don't. >> it's never just the only thing. but it is part of how the program works. it works with other departments altogether. not just as one solo thing. >> that's right.
you make an evaluation. does it look like the value of this relative to the more traditional model of getting individual court orders when you have suspicion. is the value of whatever speed advantage you get great enough to offset the risk of having this massive database about mostly overwhelmingly innocent people as part of the secret program? and i think it's pretty clear that, you know, whatever value there is as the review group itself concluded, it's been pretty moderate. >> all right. julian sanchez, thank you very much. good stuff. up next, the president made it clear, congress will have a role in how this moves forward. we'll get reaction from peter welch in the guest spot. "the cycle's" rolling on, it's friday, january 17.
that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call today to request a free decision guide. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide.
♪ ♪ if i was a flower growing wild and free ♪ ♪ all i'd want is you to be my sweet honeybee ♪ ♪ and if was a tree growing tall and green ♪ ♪ all i'd want is you to shade me and be my leaves ♪ grown in america. picked & packed at the peak of ripeness. the same essential nutrients as fresh. del monte. bursting with life™. female announcer: get beautyrest, posturepedic, female announcer: even tempur-pedic mattress sets, at low clearance prices. and through monday, get three years interest-free financing on selected models. don't miss sleep train's year end clearance sale. ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪
i've instructed the intelligence community and the attorney general to use this transition period to develop options for a new approach that can match the capabilities and fill the gaps that the section 215 program was designed to address without the government holding this metadata itself. and during this period, i'll consult with the relative committees in congress to seek their views. and then seek congressional authorization for the new program as needed. i'm also calling on congress to authorize the establishment a panel of advocates to provide an independent voice in significant cases before the foreign intelligence court. >> we are back in the guest spot with more on today's speech. thank you so much for joining
us, and if you could just start with some reactions to the speech and where do you see congress's role in all of this going forward? >> well, it's a beginning, but a very slim beginning and congress has been as passive in this as anyone else and it's time for congress to get involved. what you have is the balance between security and privacy is totally out of balance. second, you've got the nsa that essentially has had an unlimited budget with nonexistent oversight. and that is a bad cocktail for preserving constitutional protections. i'd like to see congress do two things. i wish the president would do two things, pass the bill which would end the bulk government collection of this metadata. this is astonishing to have all our e-mails, texts, all our phone logs in the hands of the
government. and as the president said, it's not about who the president is, it's about whether we have constraints on whoever holds that office. the second thing we need to do, we've got to publish what the budget is of each of these 16 intelligence agencies. these are black box budgets. the american people can have no idea of what the budget is, even members of congress don't. and if we go through the procedural hurdles to find out what that budget is, we have to promise not to tell you or the people we represent. >> yeah. >> so unless you have knowledge about the budget, you won't get the attention of these agencies. and then third, we've got to eliminate the gag order on these companies like yahoo and google. that are asked by the government or told by the government to turn over data. and there's two reasons for that, one is privacy, the second is this is really going to unravel the significance of these companies if our european and asian competitors use that
as the reason to ban them from competing for contracts that are important to our economy. >> you mentioned that this congress has been passive. that's certainly true on oversight and accountability. i would go further, though, i would say they have been aggressive in propping up these telephone companies and basically giving a blank check to work in secret law with the nsa. most famously, in granting them immunity in 2008. now, i know that was before your time, and i know you're talking about changing this. but how hard is it to work with a congress that basically looked at this issue and said, you know what, the most important thing is to keep the corporations protected, right, rather than actually to your point with the gag order and other things have a public debate here. and specifically, are there going to be hearings and votes on any of this soon? >> well, first of all, you're right. and i was in congress, but i
voted against that. that's appalling to keep all that secret. but here it is changing. keep in mind that jim was the republican chairman of the judiciary committee. he's a very respected person. and he wrote the patriot act. but his interpretation of what law that he sponsored in past is that the nsa has totally overreached with its own interpretation or its secret approval with the secret fisa court saying that the authority granted in that fisa act allowed the government to get the metadata. he's against that. and he and senator leahy are leading the effort to clarify that in the law. secondly, the congress you spoke about is changing. you know, on the budget proposal i have with a conservative republican from wyoming, we have very conservative republicans and very liberal democrats coming together on two issues. one, we're saying, hey, the constitutional protection of
privacy has got to be protected. and we've got to stand up. so you're seeing a new coalition develop in congress. and then secondly, this idea that it's a black box budget so you as members of the press, the people i represent as constituents, the taxpayers whose money it is, we don't even know how much year-over-year increases they're getting. that's unacceptable. so i'm seeing a new dynamic in congress and keep in mind the proposal that would've ended the metadata only failed in the house by a couple of votes. >> representative, you mentioned the need for more transparency around budgets that are as of now classified as top secret. this is something legislation you've rolled out this week. you wrote a personal letter to president obama and it has bipartisan support and is backed by a number of heavy hitters in the intelligence community. where do you see this going? and how might this change the conversation? >> well, i think we've got a shot at it. i really do. we're going to have a broad
coalition of conservatives and liberals in congress. that's number one. number two, somebody like lee hamilton who is an incredibly respected person makes the point about why this is necessary. he says the intelligence community is not going to take oversight seriously until you link it to the budget. >> exactly. >> that's true. the power of the budget is where you grab the advocate's attention. i think lee hamilton makes a really good point. and everyone knows we're not talking about sources and methods. if you have a local police investigation or a national security investigation, you don't want to intrude on the sources and methods. but some of these macro policies that really affect your constitutional rights and mine, those have to be debated. and that's the only way you're going to get reasonable balance between security and privacy. >> so, congressman, if you get the transparency that you're looking for, then what next? will you be looking to have a spend a little bit less on intelligence?
or spend that differently? what would be the next step? >> well, i don't know. you know, we don't even know what the budget is. but here's what you do know, we spend billions and billions of dollars, that's number one. number two, you know, we have 16 independent agencies, in many cases doing the same thing. so obvious questions even from a managerial standpoint, is there duplicately occasion? are they running into each other? cooperation, coordination? if this was 16 different food stamp programs or highway programs or education assistance programs, everyone would be saying why do we need 16? but since we don't even know how much we're spending and we're not entitled to kick the tires on the budget, nobody knows. it just grows and metasticizes and took a snowden revelation for the american people and congress to have a clue as to what some of these policies are that are really way over the edge. >> all right. thank you so much. >> thank you.
and up next, a major development in the fight to protect the voting rights act. details on that straight ahead. is that true? says here that cheerios has whole grain oats that can help remove some cholesterol, and that's heart healthy. ♪ [ dad ] jan? purina dog chow light & healthy is a deliciously tender and crunchy kibble blend. with 20% fewer calories than purina dog chow. isn't it time you discovered the lighter side of dog chow. purina dog chow light & healthy.
the news cycle begins with the state of california on burn notice. red flag warnings remain in effect throughout a wide portion of the l.a. area and beyond where the notorious santa ana winds are fueling wildfires. thousands of people have been forced from their homes, a handful of those houses destroyed, bone dry conditions are to blame. most areas of the state have seen just 20% of their normal winter precipitation. governor jerry brown has declared a drought emergency. the super committee formed to investigate the jersey bridgegate scandal has hit the ground running. they've subpoenaed 17 members of governor chris christie's team hoping to shed new like on the plot to creating all that traffic trouble last fall. we're expecting a full list of names by the end of business today. 50 and fabulous. first lady michelle obama turned the big 5-0 today.
and here she is proudly embracing her new aarp card. the president is planning a big celebration this weekend at the white house. cycling now, and we're moving to an important story about the first response from this news over the summer. >> as one reporter put it today, the u.s. supreme court has driven a stake through the heart of the most important civil rights law ever enacted, the voting rights act. >> we remember that. that may be changing. >> it was an honor for me to stand up here with all of these distinguished legislators to talk about an issue that really goes to the heart of our democracy. >> it is almost unreal that we were able to come together so quickly to craft a compromise that both democrats and republicans can find a way to support and move forward.
>> a bipartisan bill introduced thursday restores the core of the voting rights act adding federal supervision for states that repeatedly discriminate against voters. but there's a big exception it sidesteps a serious threat to our voter turnout and that is identification laws. toure's going to get to that part in a minute. but first, we're going to talk about the details of this compromise with blake zeff, a washington insider who has worked for president obama as well as senator clinton and senator chuck schumer. blake, welcome back to the show. >> is this called recycling if you've been on "the cycle" a number of times. >> you are a recycled product. you brought it up. >> walked right into that one. >> to any other guest. now, looking at this as a compromise, this is a very significant piece of legislation coming out as we mentioned with bipartisan support yesterday. and we know on the hill a lot of times what you see are poison pills. basically, you take something controversial like abortion, add it to a bill to sync it. what i see in this legislation,
i want to get your view is something like an antipoison pill. the voter i.d. bill is hugely important. and yet, politically, what they've said is we can target every other type of voter discrimination by putting this off to the side. quarantining this issue to keep republicans on board. what do you think, first, of that strategy? >> i think your interpretation is exactly right. democrats have decided they're not going to get this thing passed unless they give concessions to the other side. whether that's a strategy that's going to work is another question. what we've p seen in tseen in t couple of years. coming up with a compromise they then offer to republicans and then republicans not meeting them half way. and i don't mean that in a partisan way just as a matter of fact. look at food stamps, for example. democrats put together a bill that came out of the senate that had $4 billion worth of cuts to food stamps at a time that was really not something they wanted to do, brought it over to the house, which was controlled by
the republicans and they were greeted with a big fat no and counterproposal of cutting $40 billion in food stamps. given that kind of climate, these efforts to kind of reach compromises are not always slated to succeed. i don't mean to be so pessimistic about this. it's no guarantee of success. >> no, that's right. i do think we should spend a minute focusing, though, on this bipartisan support because i do think that is, at least, a step forward in this conversation. you have representative who is at least talking more optimistically about other conservatives, including eric cantor who we know has a little more power in getting things moved on the house side. do you think that we'll see a little bit more movement in the house for republicans on this? >> there is a sense. you made a good point in that eric cantor is obviously a key republican here. and he's said to be pretty open-minded on this issue. if you can get cantor on board, that'll give cover to others to hop on board, as well. a little bit too early to uncork the champagne just yet, but i think there are encouraging
signs. >> well, and blake, to get back to your pessimism, there are going to be a significant number of republicans who are opposed to this, particularly in states where they are going to face increased scrutiny, places like texas. but i'm just thinking through the messaging of this. what do you think the opposition is going to say about why this is not good? it seems like being opposed to protecting voters against discrimination, being opposed to re-upping the voting rights act doesn't seem like a very popular stance to take. what do you think their messaging and objections to this will be? >> i'm not sympathetic to what the messaging would be. but if i were to try to imagine what they've done in the past, there have been these sort of attempts to say people are going to try to come in and commit fraud and try to vote many, many, many times. >> the voter i.d. law isn't part of this. that should sidestep that criticism, correct? >> well, i think that's actually a good point.
it's anybody's guess. abby might have a better sense of where the republicans are in terms of the messaging in this than i would. but my sense is what they've said in the past, this is a solution in search of a problem, things like that. i don't buy it for a minute, these are things they've said in the past. >> we'll get you to channel steve stockman next time. >> that's closer. >> i'm not pleased or happy or celebrating about this at all because to do -- to get to bipartisanship, by leaving out voter i.d., we have left a key hurdle to voting to exercise in the franchise in place to me it seems to be too much, giving up too much, a pennsylvania court just struck down that state's voter i.d. law because as the judge found, it prevents tens of thousands of folks from voting. and if we're not dealing with voter i.d. in this thing, we're not doing what we really need to do to get people to vote and to the polls. >> i happen to agree with you 100% on the policy, and i wish the politics were there. i think the challenge for democrats is they're dealing
with the hostile supreme court and also a hostile republican congress. they feel they have to make concessions to convince both of those sides. if this is ultimately deemed to be an unconstitutional remedy by the supreme court, that's problematic, as well. so i'm totally with you. i think to not include voter i.d. laws really makes this, you know, at best an incomplete remedy. but i think they're really looking at the politics here and they're considerable both in the legislative branch as well as the judicial. >> yeah, i think that's well put. your concern and toure's, one we all share about access to the polls and, yet, that supreme court opinion which i strongly disagree with also cabins what they feel they can do. they want to negotiate within the congress and also do something the chief justice roberts would hopefully not strike down again. it would be interesting to see some bipartisan action. thanks for your views. >> thanks, guys. up next, we have a cycle style playoff tailgate. our next two segments are beer, seriously, and football ahead of the nfl championship weekend. we will start with the football
match-ups for the history books with help from, yes, espn. >> what's up, everybody? >> they're about to face off for the 15th time. we can already declare a winner in the great manning/brady debate. hey guys! sorry we're late. did you run into traffic? no, just had to stop by the house to grab a few things. you stopped by the house? uh-huh. yea. alright, whenever you get your stuff, run upstairs, get cleaned up for dinner. you leave the house in good shape? yea. yea, of course. ♪ [ sportscaster talking on tv ] last-second field go-- yea, sure ya did.
[ male announcer ] introducing at&t digital life. personalized home security and automation. get professionally monitored security for just $29.99 a month. with limited availability in select markets. ♪ really? 25 grams of protein. what do we have? all four of us, together? 24. he's low fat too, and has five grams of sugars. i'll believe it when i -- [ both ] oooooh... what's shakin'? oops. [ female announcer ] as you get older, protein is an important part of staying active and strong. ensure high protein... 50% of your daily value of protein. low fat and five grams of sugars. see? he's a good egg. [ major nutrition ] ensure high protein. ensure. nutrition in charge!
[ female announcer ] aaah, the amazing, delicious cinnamon and sugar taste of cinnamon toast crunch and cold milk. ♪ cinnamon toast crunch. crave those crazy squares. where does the united states get most of its energy? is it africa? the middle east? canada? or the u.s.? the answer is... the u.s. ♪ most of america's energy comes from right here at home. take the energy quiz. energy lives here.
i'to guard their manhood with trnew depend shields and guards. the discreet protection that's just for guys. now, it's your turn. get my training tips at guardyourmanhood.com to me, the most wonderful time of the year means sundays like this one ahead of us, nfl conference championship sunday. i'll gather a big pile of buffalo wings and watch the four best teams in football clash for a chance to go to the super bowl, which this year is in new jersey. never in my life have i seen people fighting so hard to get into new jersey. but what's it going to take to get there? it's going to be all about execution. >> well, it's really going to be about who gets secondary run support and who is quicker with the red zone read options. >> yeah. what she said.
>> and who's better at vertical stretching out of their o schemes. >> wait, what? >> you don't know your xs and os, my brother. >> don't embarrass me in front of my friends. host of espn's numbers never lie coming to us live from their set. welcome, you guys. i'd like each of you to tell me in language we can all understand, even me, who is going to win each game and why. >> ladies first. >> picks right off the bat. >> cut to the chase. >> well, at least -- and this one kind of the hurts my heart a little bit because i'm a san francisco fan. but, unfortunately, i don't have much confidence about them winning against seattle. so i have, actually, seattle winning that game. and on the other side, i think i predict a bit of an upset with new england taking out the denver broncos. >> hmm. >> i agree half with that projection. i'll go with the broncos beating the patriots, i feel like peyton manning has way too many weapons and i don't think tom brady has
enough to keep up with peyton and put up enough points. i'm going to pick her team to go on the road. >> really. wow. >> so thoughtful of you. and michael, on that point, the big rivalry, obviously, peyton manning, tom brady, they're playing for the 15th time on sunday. they go way back. how intense is it going to get? >> well, you know what, we spent all week, imagine that, talking about these two quarterbacks. and it's obviously -- it might not even come down to those two guys. both of these teams run the ball extremely well. the patriots have run the ball for an average of 200 yards in each of the last three games. denver's run defense has been decent throughout the year despite some injuries. can new england slow -- can denver slow down new england's running attack which is what tom brady has leaned on of late. conversely, denver ran the ball
for 280 yards as a team, i believe it was. because what bill belichick does exceptionally well is take away what you want to do on offense. and what do you want to take away from denver? especially the tight end division. denver's great tight end was not playing, it's reverse now. peyton has julius thomas back. >> and it seems like manning is the one that people love the most. he's the funny guy, right? >> no, yeah, i definitely think in this game it's about these two guys and their legacies. they've always been tied together their entire career. but i do think in this game, there's more pressure on peyton manning. he's the guy that's got to get back to the super bowl. a lot of people think he needs another super bowl on his resume. >> you think this is his super bowl. >> this is true. >> i need a super bowl on my resume.
>> we all need another super bowl on our resume. >> well, let me ask you, you talk quarterbacks, you have that rivalry. there's a rivalry in seattle k kaepernick versus wilson. >> i would say in this case, it was russell wilson. colin kaepernick, this has been a house of horrors to play in seattle. 3 of the 5 worst games in his career against seattle. so he's got to figure out a way to kind of outscheme them. they've been out-scheming him. he's got top come with a counterpunch. they haven't sent a five-man rush against him. they mostly use four guys to make some decisions. i think there's a lot of pressure on him to make plays, not as much pressure, in my opinion, on russell wilson because of marshawn lynch.
>> i'm not one for horror movies myself. my nerves are bad in my old age. but here's the thing about horror movies. when you watch the movie and you make it through and the second time you see it, you're like, oh, i guess that's not so scary. i can watch it now. san francisco's been in seattle a couple times the last few years. the noise of centurylink field won't bother them this time out. kaepernick's playing well, he's confident. can you believe i'm the one picking the niners? and she's a niner fan? >> i'm pessimistic, what can i say? >> well, i have to say, there's something i'm deeply concerned about this weekend, i was hoping you guys would have an update on. what is going on with the velveeta shortage? >> there's a shortage? >> yeah, a velveeta cheese shortage. run, do not walk, to your supermarket.
>> what block have we been under? >> you missed that. >> we've been worried so much about the game, we didn't worry there was no cheese left. >> it's all about priorities. >> one of the most important things here is no matter what happens, there will be a black quarterback in the super bowl once again. really excited to have you guys on the show. >> that's true. >> i envy you guys, hang out and talk about sports all the time. will you come back before the super bowl and do this again? >> i would love to. >> as long as y'all got some cheese. we'll come through. >> all right. "numbers never lie," thank you very much, you guys. you can catch more of them on espn2, weekdays at noon. up next, can't watch football without beer. it's 5:00 somewhere, which means time to crack open cold ones. your eyes really are unique. in fact, they depend on a unique set of nutrients. [ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite
to help protect your eye health. as you age, your eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite is a vitamin made just for your eyes from the eye care experts as bausch + lomb. ocuvite has a unique formula that's just not found in any leading multivitamin. your eyes are unique, so help protect your eye health with ocuvite. while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, this can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain and improve daily physical function so moving is easier. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance
of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions, or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. and ask your doctor when jake and i first set out on we ate anything. but in time you realize the better you eat, the better you feel. these days we both eat smarter. and i give jake purina cat chow naturals. made with real chicken and salmon, it's high in protein like a cat's natural diet. and no added artificial flavors.
plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. with 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+. across the country this week, millions of americans will crack open a cold one while they watch the nfl playoffs. walk into your local liquor store and you'll be faced with hundreds of different types of beer from the old staples like bud and miller to small craft brews that have popped up all over the country. deciding what beer to pick can be as tough as trying to read a peyton manning run offense. in the late '70s, there were around 90 breweries across the
country, and today there's more than 2,500. the companion to beer is the first reference book to tackle the history and the scope of the world's favorite alcoholic beverage. everything from the brewing process to pubs to food games. garrett, you know, we have a beer from each of our home states starting with utah. who knew utah made amazing beers? >> utah actually makes a lot of great beer. >> they do. and this is the black lauger. now it's becoming pretty common. and in utah, they brew some of the best. and some of those laws out there that actually keep the abvs of a lot of their beers down a bit make them really good at the things they do. they win that category all the time. >> look at that. who knew? >> do we get to drink it? >> you get to drink it. >> why are we doing this? >> this is why i'm in the
segment. >> note the technique, got a little bit of foam there. a little bit of foam there. that looks great. >> you would like some, too, huh? there we go. >> of course. >> so now we do actually smell the beer. i mean, now, you don't have to swirl it around in a bar. we don't want anybody to get hurt here. >> so you smell it? just like wine? >> just like wine. if you want to see how it tastes, you've got to smell it. >> and then we do cheers and i get a milk mustache? >> oh, i hope so. >> this is a style of beer that has coffee added to it. it's called -- no, actually i'm thinking about the next one already. >> i was going to say. you mentioned coffee. >> it's coffee-ish, though. >> i'm going to do some hosting. you mentioned coffee, we're also doing seattle which is a coffee beer. >> exactly.
here we actually have coffee. and the style of beer is actually milk stout. it doesn't actually have milk in it. >> okay. >> it has some milk sugar and that doesn't ferment out so leaves us with sweetness. >> hmm. >> and they've added coffee to this one. split shot actually is one of those -- >> and that's from -- >> i've got to tell you, i feel refreshed already. >> refreshed? >> slightly caffeinated? >> i don't know if it's the coffee. >> could be the company. >> look into that there. >> this guy's starting to get excited already. >> this is from the virginia one. >> virginia's waiting for its close-up. >> like a champagne bottle. >> we don't want to go there. >> too far. too early. >> it's nice, right? >> sorry. >> you can have some later. >> i'll have some later. >> a split shot means half caffeinated and half decaffeinated coffee. >> nice. >> i didn't know that. >> we can add coffee, we can add roasted malts, we can add ginger, whatever we like. >> what's gone on with the
virginia beer here? >> well, this guy is pretty happy. >> happy -- >> it's undergone a secondary fermentation in the bottle so it has a champagne-like carbonation. >> it looks like a champagne bottle. >> pretty color to it too. >> that's very, very good. pour some over here too. it is a pale ale, but it has spent time in a brewing barrel. a little bit of coconut in the background. >> hints of oak. >> beer has been aged in wood for thousands of years. not exactly an idea from the wine people. >> everybody else got one from their home state, but i want to do one from brooklyn. >> i'm brewing in brooklyn. i'm from new york city, born and
bred. we brew this in williamsburg in brooklyn. note the cork. >> what is this called? >> it is sirachi saison. >> i better try this one too because i live in brooklyn. >> manly toast. look at that. >> bright, lemony, super dry. it's going to work. >> i have a question. i mean, i'm not a beer expert. what advice do you have for wine drinkers? what are the best beers to try if you don't know anything about them? >> wine drinks go for things that have an acidity to them.
wheat beers are a good one to go to. >> because you don't need a developed palette? >> they're light and refreshing and they taste like beer, but they're fruity. sometimes even spices. >> why are there so many craft beers out there? it used to be you'd go in the store and have three or four kinds. >> people want to have a good time. beer is not supposed to be boring. it's supposed to be interesting. when i grew up, we had one kind of beer. beer is the most diverse beverage in the world. it can taste almost like anything. it is a recovery rather than a trend. >> we do political editorials at the end of the show, maybe we should just do a beer segment
instead of the editorials from now on. i don't know if you're free for that. >> i'm totally free for that. >> i want to point out our producers that have put this all together. they're over here. they teach us everything we know about beers. >> we want to give a shout out to our friends in england from thorn bridge hall. they have a castle. >> thank you so much for doing this. football, beer, what a man show! how better to wrap up than the pinnacle of masculinity?
ah, actually i think my eyes might ha... next! digital insurance id cards. just a tap away on the geico app. could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. everybody knows that. well, did you know that when a tree falls in the forest and no one's around, it does make a sound? ohhh...ugh. geico. little help here. this is the creamy chicken corn chowder. i mean, look at it. so indulgent. did i tell you i am on the... [ both ] chicken pot pie diet! me too! [ male announcer ] so indulgent, you'll never believe they're light. 100-calorie progresso light soups.
because women are unable to engage with men on an intellectual level, it is extremely important they stay in shape to hold a man's attention. >> i'll take a cherry danish. >> oh, dear. next time go for the salad, peg peggy. or should i say, piggy? >> as men go, chris christie is a throwback. it's an old school man using old school tactics to get his way. >> if you conduct yourself like that in a courtroom, you're rear end is going to get yourself thrown in jail. >> the expansion of society to include women is seen as an attack on masculinity. it's the world around him has
gone soft. >> this sort of femmiz femme -- that are old-fashioned tough guys run some risks. this guy is very much an old-fashioned, masculine guy. >> being a man is not why one risks saying something sexist. it is an old boring alarm bell that's been ringing for years. if you accept the idea of a war on masculinity, christie offers the chance to have a standard where ralph as a real man. he taps into something dark in
the american political soul. his -- doesn't the longing for so-called real masculinity seem to combat the feared future of women will take over and treat us like this. >> we're coming for it and we're going to abuse it much better than men. >> i don't know see how that's possible. men, we made them sleep with us for jobs. >> you think sexual harassment is bad. when we're done with you, you'll be begging for groping because us ladies work from the inside out. >> do not fear the rise of the women folk, my brothers. empowering women is good for all of us. it's time for an awesome woman named alex wagner.
thank you. happy friday. the president is laying out his proposal to reform the nsa. if nobody is satisfied, does that mean he did the job? it's friday january 17th. this is "now" live from washington, d.c. >> a landmark highly anticipat d anticipateed speech. >> the president is going to try to walk a fine line. >> nothing i have learned indicated that our intelligence agency has sought to violate the law. >> his mission here i don't think, is to change what we're doing. his mission is to make people more comfortable about what the intelligence agencies are doing. >> their rights are being protected. >> the president should not be