Return to Transcripts main page
Don Lemon Tonight
From the "Last Supper" to Chicken Farm; Brown Family Pathologist to Testify; Maryland County Remove Religious Holidays From Calendar; Bad Politics: Calling the American Voter Stupid
Aired November 12, 2014 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.
If you're like me, you have a lot of questions for the man who just went from the Last Supper to the Mennonite chicken farm in just one hour.
Mike Rowe, a possible chicken taste tester and the host of "SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DO IT."
So, first of all, that was a really great show. You were under a lot of pressure in the taste test, Mike.
MIKE ROWE, CNN HOST, "SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DO IT": I know.
LEMON: It's just you and me now.
ROWE: Well, look.
LEMON: Did the green circle chickens really taste that much better?
ROWE: Yes, they do. But after you spend a day with the woman who is basically raising them, and suddenly find yourself in a Mennonite kitchen in Pennsylvania Dutch Country and the entire represent tags of her business is depending on your blindfolded self accurately identifying the proper bird. Yes, the stakes are high.
LEMON: The stakes are high. You did a good job. So I have to tell you, though, just today, before I came to work, I had a passing moment with poultry. While driving on the highway, this truck -- look at it. It's filled with turkeys and drove past. And just weeks away from Thanksgiving. I felt so bad for the birds. And I put it out on social media. And some people were saying, hey, I hope they are free range. Poor babies.
I mean, what makes the green circle chicken so tasty, fancy diet or the free range living?
ROWE: Well, basically it's not exactly either one. The thing about the cost of a chicken. And by the way these chickens are expensive. The average chicken is $1.50 a pound. These are like eight bucks a pound. But if you do the math, essentially, a chicken is a reflection of the cost of the food you feed it. So these chickens eat like kings. I mean, they dine on the food scraps from five of the best restaurants on the planet. LEMON: Oh gee.
ROWE: So they're kind of spoiled. And they also live a lot longer. They got about 75 days on the earth before they hop in that truck you just saw. And so for a lot of reasons, they taste better. But, look, I had a 50/50 shot in the taste test. So I'm just glad it fell the right way.
LEMON: From the best restaurants. Maybe we should call them Bourdain chickens or something because they're eating -- they're eating so well.
ROWE: You know, I can put you in touch. You know, I'm sure Anthony would be -- would be flattered.
(LAUGHTER)
LEMON: I have to ask you about this next story, OK, because you know what happened today in Manhattan. But you tried about every -- just about every job out there including as a high-rise window washer when you were doing dirty jobs.
I want you to watch this clip then we'll talk.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, Mike, this looks like the tricky part.
ROWE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it is. And just slowly, I just want you to kind of jump down. Crawl down. You put one foot in your chair.
ROWE: I can't see it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stand straight up on the chair? Great. Awesome. OK. Bring this hand down to these ropes. Slowly ease yourself over the wall. Feet come through the chair. And settle in. You'll be good to go. Take your feet through. There you go.
ROWE: Gees.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Watch out. Get both legs through or you're going to be stuck in the -- there you go. There you go.
ROWE: Oh, crap.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: So I watch that when it actually aired the first time, right? And I'm asking you because today two window washers were trapped on a scaffold after a cable snapped at One World Trade Center.
Everyone really stopped in their tracks, Mike, to watch this today.
ROWE: Yes. LEMON: So the window washers were taken to Bellevue Hospital and then
they were treated for mild hypothermia. I mean, these guys have families. I can't imagine what they go through.
Why do they take these jobs?
ROWE: Well, look. First of all, it's a good job. It's an important job. It's got to be done. And you can actually make a pretty great living. The guy that I worked with in Hawaii, his name was Dino and he's got contracts on every major high rise there. And that's how they do it in Hawaii. They basically sit on a 2 by 4 Bosun's chair.
LEMON: Right.
ROWE: In the 48, you know, they use scaffolds. And look, I guess it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. If you're stuck like those guys are, you are -- you know, you're helpless in a scaffold. When you're stuck in a Bosun's chair it's a little bit different because you really have the tools with you that a mountaineer would have.
So it's just a -- it's just a different way of approaching the same basic job. But when things go sideways, there is no getting around it. You are -- you're trapped. You're helpless. And suddenly the whole world is staring at you, which is ironic because window washers typically have the most fascinating views of things going on inside the buildings.
LEMON: That -- they were almost 1776 feet up. They were about -- I would say two-thirds the way up. Were you up that high?
ROWE: We were at about -- well, we were at the very top of that building and that building is about 500 feet. Those guys today from what I read were higher than that, about 650, 700. Something like that.
LEMON: All right. Well, let's move on now. Finally, you know, your show tonight, you re-created the painting "The Last Supper." That's an interesting makeup.
ROWE: Thank you.
LEMON: How was that?
(LAUGHTER)
ROWE: The makeup is called Cadaver Gray in case anybody ever asks you. But the pageant of the masters is -- we had so much fun that day because the people who bring these works of art to life, they're called Tableau Vivant, living pictures. And it's a volunteer force of 500 people. They've been doing it for over 80 years. And it's one of the coolest ways to make art and history really accessible for regular people.
They sell out every night during the summer, 2600 people show up down at the Festival of Arts Center in Laguna Beach. And yes, I got to play Bartholomew. And I didn't have any lines. All I had to do was hold perfectly still for 90 seconds. Harder than it sound. Still, you know? An honest job.
LEMON: Yes, you're always fidgeting around. I thought I could be a part of re-creating a famous painting with you so I chose Michelangelo or if you want to say -- look at us.
(LAUGHTER)
LEMON: I think, you know.
ROWE: Wait a minute. How come you -- one of these things is not like the other.
LEMON: What are you trying to --
ROWE: How come I'm that -- well, nothing. You look good, Don.
LEMON: Thank you.
ROWE: You look fantastic.
LEMON: You look pretty good, too.
ROWE: I should turn this way. Thank you.
LEMON: There you go.
ROWE: Your show just got a little weird. I got to be honest.
LEMON: This is very -- this is very, very weird. So I'll look to see this on the blogs tomorrow. Suddenly you and I are in a relationship or something.
ROWE: Yes.
LEMON: Thank you, Mike Rowe.
(LAUGHTER)
ROWE: Thank you, Don Lemon.
LEMON: That was very weird. But we have a lot to get to tonight.
When we come right back, the grand jury is about to hear some very crucial testimony in the case of the shooting death of Michael Brown.
Will it all come down to forensics? We're going to talk about that.
Plus the town that canceled Christmas. Well, not exactly. But they're not calling it Christmas anymore. We're going to tell you why.
And the picture that's breaking the Internet. Has Kim Kardashian finally gone too far this time?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) LEMON: Welcome back, everyone. The grand jury that will decide whether to indict Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown could come down with a decision just days from now. And evidence from competing autopsies will make or break the case.
Will the jury believe the findings from the first autopsy conducted by a local medical examiner or the second autopsy by Dr. Michael Baden, the former medical examiner of the city of New York, who was hired by the Brown family.
Joining me now to discuss all this is forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht.
Dr. Wecht, I appreciate you joining us. We appreciate your expertise. Let's talk about Dr. Baden. He is testifying tomorrow in front of the grand jury. He was hired by Michael Brown's family to do a second autopsy on the teenager.
Is this unusual for an expert hired by the victim's family to testify in front of a grand jury?
CYRIL WECHT, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: In high profile controversial cases, it's not rare. It's done I would say with some frequency. In most cases, of course, that does not happen. It costs money and it's too complicated.
LEMON: OK. So there were three autopsies in total. The first by the St. Louis medical examiner, Dr. Baden's, and then there is the third autopsy conducted for the Department of Justice by the Armed Forces medical examiner.
Autopsies are -- as we have talked about, are somewhat invasive procedure. So does each following autopsy lose any integrity?
WECHT: Yes. There's no question, it is much preferable to do the first autopsy. However, with gunshot wounds if they have been properly designated and assuming they have not been cut out, then you are able to identify the wounds and trace the trajectories. And I'm sure that that was done. But there's no question that the second and third autopsy even more would have been somewhat compromised.
I have reviewed the first autopsy in detail. And I believe I have a much clearer picture in my mind of how Michael Brown was positioned than I had on when I spoke with you some weeks ago.
LEMON: So what are you saying, sir?
WECHT: Well, this is interesting. We know that the two shots in the head were downward. Remember we talked about this. One on the top of the head and straight down, recovered in the soft tissues of the face. The other one, the central forehead, straight down and exited from the jaw.
The two wounds in the chest, both have a somewhat downward trajectory. One pretty much in the middle of the chest, one a little bit toward the right side. And then some were downward, not quite as much as the head wounds. What's very interesting to me now are the two wounds -- entrance wounds, and then the exit wounds of the arm.
On the right arm, we have a wound on the forearm that enters in the back and exits in the front.
LEMON: What does that say?
WECHT: Well, I'm going to get -- let me finish with the next one. And the upper arm, the bullet goes in the front and exits from the back. Well, you don't have to be a forensic pathologist, just position you're hind, your arm like this. Bullet in the forearm entering here, exiting here. And the bullet in the upper arm entering here, the arm has to have been held in this position.
And that means that the arm -- in this position, with a slightly upward trajectory. Therefore, that arm had to have been in a position like this. With the bullets coming in and moving slightly upward. The bullets in the head downward.
Michael Brown was shot in the arm while he was standing with his arm in this kind of a position. And then, as he was falling, the two shots came in to the head and to the forehead.
LEMON: OK.
WECHT: Because if those shots had come before the arm then the arm would not have been --
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Let me ask you something, Dr. Wecht. So you're saying, if the hands are like this, is that -- is that a defensive position, that's not an exactly hands up as people have been saying? What -- does that tell you anything?
WECHT: Well, that now is subjective interpretation. The hand is in this position. Is it defensive? I would say --
(CROSSTALK)
WECHT: It doesn't seem to be offensive. Then you have also a grazing wound of the biceps area on the right arm. And then you also have a wound now which we're told on the right thumb.
LEMON: OK. So let me ask you this. If you were -- so if you were there and you were testifying, would you say that that is a surrender position? Because that has been the case from all the witnesses that he was hands up, I'm surrendering. You're saying that's not so.
WECHT: No. Au contraire. I am saying that it fits in with the hands up like this. The right arm. So the bullet enters in the back of the forearm and exits in the front of the forearm. And the bullet in this position enters on the upper arm in the front, and exits in the back. Is that an offensive position?.
LEMON: How would the grand jury interpret the information that you're telling us right now? WECHT: Well, I never bet a plug nickel on any jury. And a grand jury
which is of course influenced and -- controlled by the district attorney, you know, the old saw that any district attorney that can't get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich isn't worth very much. So, you know, I'm not going to predict.
I will predict, I will predict, this is not based on forensic science. This is just based on 52 years of dealing with this business and police shootings, I will predict that the grand jury is not going to indict the officer in this case.
LEMON: Because?
WECHT: Because there will be enough information to suggest that Michael Brown was aggressive. That he was lunging at the police officer. That the police officer felt an imminent threat of his life or well-being, and lastly before you get into the racial issue --
LEMON: Dr. Wecht, I want you to stick around. Because I mean, we didn't -- I didn't intend on having you in this next conversation. But will you just listen because we may need you to weigh in. OK?
So stand by, Dr. Cyril Wecht.
I want to bring in now David Klinger, who's a police officer in L.A. and Redmond, Washington, and the author of "Into the Kill." Also CNN political contributor Van Jones is here. And CNN law enforcement analyst and former FBI assistant director, Tom Fuentes.
Tom, what do you think what he just said?
TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, I think what it sounds like is that there's going to be enough confusion that even if Officer Wilson is indicted and charged, which is a low threshold as the doctor said. It's easy to indict anybody almost in the hands of the district attorney. What the problem is going to be is that there is so much doubt now that to convict Officer Wilson of whatever, of improperly killing Michael Brown to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt.
I think there's going to be a lot of reasonable doubt. There's going to be reasonable differences in how the forensic evidence is interpreted. There are contradictory eyewitness statements. I know we keep hearing that there is unanimity. But there isn't. I've heard many different accounts from eyewitnesses of what was going on at the time of the shootings.
LEMON: OK.
FUENTES: So I think there's a lot of doubt.
David Klinger, as you heard that?
DAVID KLINGER, AUTHOR, "INTO THE KILL": I basically concur. However, I wasn't able to see the position of the arm that Dr. Wecht was talking about so I'm not able to comment on that. But clearly, the notion of reasonable doubt is there. I think we just have to wait for a lot of information about the blood evidence and the vehicle because I think that's going to be very important, because generally if someone is just coming at a police officer, the police officer is not permitted to shoot.
There has to be something about the nature of that movement that would indicate imminent jeopardy of his or her life which is consequently there's still an awful lot out there that needs to -- excuse me, an awful lot behind the door that needs to come out before I or anyone else can really opine about may or may not have happened and therefore whether it was appropriate to shoot or not.
LEMON: I want to get your response, Van, because I realized that you're not law enforcement. But what do you think of what Dr. Wecht said?
VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I'm an attorney, and I'm from a law enforcement family so I've got a least a little bit of insight here. What was striking to me, and I think what will be shocking to the average viewer at home, to hear someone with his level of expertise say, as best he can read the evidence, it is consistent with the idea that he was not in an offensive posture, he's in a defensive posture and he was not in the arm, fell forward and got shot in the head.
That's exactly what people have been saying. That's why this thing blew up. But for him to say that and then turn right around and say, but he still does not believe that this grand jury is going to even indict this officer to get him in front of a real jury, that is shocking. Because what it says is that there is an acceptance of a certain level of what I can only call either corruption or cynicism within this law enforcement agency. That even with good evidence, that what people said happened did happen, he still does not think there will be an indictment.
LEMON: Van -- is Dr. Wecht still there listening?
WECHT: I'm here.
LEMON: OK. So I think what -- Dr. Wecht, I don't want to put words in your mouth. Van, I want you to comment on this. I think what Dr. Wecht is saying is considering all the evidence. Not just the evidence of what he talked about, you know, the trajectory of the bullets and all of that and the stance. He's saying considering what happened in the car, whatever led up to it, and everything else, that there will be enough evidence of aggression that the officer caused this. That the officer will not be indicted.
Is that correct, Dr. Wecht? Is --
WECHT: May I comment?
LEMON: Yes, go ahead.
WECHT: That's not my vote.
LEMON: OK.
WECHT: I was asked what do I think is going to happen. If I were on the grand jury I would vote for indictment. This boy was shot eight times. I'm not going to go through the trajectories again. Wearing short pants and a T-shirt. No, I would vote for indictment. I want to make it clear.
LEMON: But you don't think that they're going to do it.
WECHT: I'm telling you that if I have to -- if I have to place a bet, buying you guys a cup of coffee on the other side of the bet tomorrow, I bet you, that they will not indict.
(CROSSTALK)
JONES: And that is what --
LEMON: So what -- excuse me. So what Van is saying is correct. Van's assessment in your estimation is correct then?
WECHT: Well, well, yes.
LEMON: OK.
WECHT: Because of the way the public reacts to police and police shootings. They just bend over very far. That's a subject for a discussion another day. Is that right. I'm just telling you what I have experienced in all of my years, my decades of dealing with police shootings not only as coroner here, but in police shootings around the country. It takes a great deal to indict an officer.
And I don't want to make this into a racial issue but when the officer is white and the victim is African-American, then it's a little easier for the jury to not indict.
JONES: And that is why --
KLINGER: Mind if I jump in here for a second?
JONES: I just want to say, that is why people are upset. And here you have a white coroner who's been doing this for decades and he's saying the very same thing that people in Ferguson on the ground are saying that there is a double standard here and that's why people are upset.
LEMON: OK. Who wanted to comment? Was that David or was that --
KLINGER: I was just --
LEMON: Go ahead, David.
KLINGER: Yes. I'm just curious, for Dr. Wecht, you didn't talk about the shots to the chest. And correct me if I am wrong but is it not possible that he received shots to the chest and his hands came up at that point after he was struck in the text and took a round to the arm and then a respond to the head? And my understanding from what you're telling the audience is the only
way that it could possibly have happened is that his hands were up in a surrender possession or some position that I couldn't see because I don't have access to a screen, but is it not possible that the arm came up after the rounds to the chest hit him?
WECHT: Both shots to the chest had a downward trajectory.
KLINGER: Correct.
WECHT: So therefore he has to, once again, be bent over.
KLINGER: Correct.
WECHT: He was 6', 6'5." and the officer I think was about 6' or 6'1". So for the shots to have a downward trajectory, he's already got to be moving somewhat downward for that to occur.
KLINGER: Correct. And all I am asking you, sir, is are you confident that the shots to the arm were the first shots that hit? Is it not possible that he was bent over, shot in the chest, that the arm came up and he was struck that way?
LEMON: Quick answer if you would, Dr. Wecht.
WECHT: Very quickly. No, you see because the shots in the arm both have an upward trajectory. So if he's already going down, you see, and then he gets shot, the bullets hitting in the arm are not going to be moving upward. They would be moving downward. Somewhat similar to the shots that struck him in the head.
LEMON: OK.
WECHT: So I am just giving you my interpretation of the wounds of the head and of the chest and of the arm.
LEMON: This is --
WECHT: And the sequence in terms of what would have happened and the fatality, the lethality of certain wounds and the ability to continue to move with other wounds that would not have led to instantaneous collapse.
LEMON: It's a fascinating conversation. I wish I had all evening to speak about it. But unfortunately I have limited time here and I'm sorry you didn't get to speak a lot, Tom Fuentes, but you know, and it would be great to hear once we do see the evidence and hear the officer's side of the story. And everyone -- that's what everyone is waiting for. To see exactly what happens in this case.
So we'll move on. But you know there's lots of analysis as always here on CNN. I think the most analysis we've had from any media outlet.
So, Van, I have to ask you about this, though, before we go. The man they call the architect of Obamacare, MIT economist, Jonathan Gruber, blasting what he called, I'm quoting here, he said, "The stupidity of the American voter." He said in October of last year but the video just surfaced. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONATHAN GRUBER, MIT ECONOMIST: The lack of transparency, the huge political advantage. And basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever. But basically that was really, really critical to getting anything to pass.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Van?
(LAUGHTER)
JONES: Yes.
LEMON: What do you have to say for, you know, your party?
JONES: Well, listen. First of all, those comments, he's already apologized for -- obviously that is terrible. Let me say very clearly that what he's trying to point out is something that neither Republicans nor Democrats want to be caught saying. But they say in this town. In Washington, D.C. they say it every time all day long. How is this going to play politically? What does that mean? How can we make this thing we want to do on the right or on the left, palatable to people back home?
They don't always talk about is the policy right, is it wrong? That's 20 percent. I'm going to tell you. And they can take me away from here. Eighty percent of the conversation in this town, from Republicans and Democrats, is how will this play politically? In other words, how can we manipulate voters? And so he's --
LEMON: Van.
JONES: He got caught.
LEMON: I've got to go. But what do you think? I mean, is it -- do you think of it, support, are you outraged by it, are you not shocked? I mean, what is your reaction?
JONES: Listen, I think that it is a horrible thing for him to have said. I actually don't even think it's accurate. I mean, I think after you look at it, I think it's not accurate.
LEMON: OK.
JONES: But I will say this, for Republicans and Democrats need to fess up.
LEMON: We're going to talk more.
JONES: There is a lot of manipulation that goes on in this town.
LEMON: We'll talk more about it. We got to go. We gots to go, as we say.
JONES: We gots to go.
LEMON: Thank you very much, Van Jones.
And Van Jones and to the rest of my panel, we're going to talk more about the comments a little bit more.
Up next, though, why one school board is taking Christmas and every other religious holiday off its calendar? Is it really a war on Christmas?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DON LEMON, CNN TONIGHT SHOW ANCHOR: Students in Montgomery County Maryland won't be seeing Christmas on the calendar anymore or any other religious holiday for a matter of fact. Schools will still be closed, but Christmas vacation for example, will be called winter break. This action was taken after Muslim parents asked that schools be closed for an Islamic holiday. The board did not grant that request. Joining me now is Saqib Ali the co-chair of equality for e- coalition. Reverend Norman Gordon or, we call him Reverend Norm, the associate pastor for a Gaithersburg Presbyterian Church and then Philip Kauffman is the president of the school board, Patricia O'Neill as well, as the vice president of the school board.
So, thank you for joining us. I want to start with you Saqib, you petitioned Montgomery County school board to add a day off to the school calendar for the important Muslim holiday Eid Al-Adha. Instead, they opted to remove the names of the holiday but not add any more days off. Was that a bad decision you believe?
SAQIB ALI, FATHER; CO-CHAIR, EQUALITY FOR EID COALITION: I mean, it's just -- it doesn't make any sense. It's, it's out of touch, it's insular and the way they did it was, really condescending. What they did is they said that -- they're going to remove, what they said, they said, tried to dress it up as an inclusive move. They said, were gonna remove all the names of all the other holidays, but keep the schools open on those days -- keep the schools closed on those days and this is an inclusive move. But in reality, it's a way to continue the exclusion, of the Muslim holidays.
LEMON: OK? Philip? You heard what he said. Why just remove the names of the holidays. What was the thinking behind that?
PHILIP KAUFFMAN, PRESIDENT, MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD: Well, as you indicated it was not so much removing the names of the holidays, it was removing the names of the holidays from the calendar that is put out that shows what are the days that we are off for. We are still off for all of those same holidays as before. We do include all the religious holidays on our comprehensive calendar.
PATRICIA O'NEILL, V.P., MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD: It's a distinction without a difference.
KAUFFMAN: Which goes out to -- LEMON: It does sound like a distinction without a difference.
KAUFFMAN: We include, we include all references to all religious holidays in our comprehensive calendar. We remove days in consistent with what occurs in most other school systems that we looked at. We are going to do the same presentation as New York City, Los Angeles, Miami, Hillsboro, in this area, Fairfax County, Loudon County, the city of Alexandria -- Baltimore.
ALI: No, we were not, because those schools don't close, Fairfax doesn't close for (inaudible) Yom Kippur.
KAUFFMAN: And all those communities show --
ALI: But they don't close for those same days which you are claiming, Phil. KAUFFMAN: They didn't -- they close for Christmas and they close for in the, during the week of Easter.
ALI: But look, you want to keep the schools...
LEMON: Let him finish his statement Saqib, and then I will let you go.
KAUFFMAN: I'm saying that they close those days for winter break and spring break. The calendar where we put out, were we name the days is the calendar that shows, why are we off on those days? Under state law, we are, we are as mandated, they are --- we are closed for Christmas, and it is mandated that we are closed for the day before Easter, and the day after, or Good Friday and the day after Easter.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: OK. We do have a very simple answer to the question.
KAUFFMAN: Required by state law.
LEMON: Let me ask you, let me ask you this, Mr. President, with all due respect in. You didn't grant what they asked, right? You didn't grant the day off for the Muslim holiday.
KAUFMANN: We did not, we did not. And for next, and for next year, the Muslim holiday falls on the same day as Yom Kippur. So, it's not an issue of granting the day off.
LEMON: Then why change it to winter break then?
ALI: It is such a merely mouthed explanation.
LEMON: Why change it to winter break, when everyone knows -- it went everyone says, we're off for the Christmas holidays, we're off of the Easter holidays. Why...
ALI: I'll tell you why, the reason is simple. They want to exclude Muslims from equal treatment in Montgomery County.
LEMON: OK. ALI: And it became very glaring, and they all -- they're trying to hide that exclusion by trying to remove the names of other holidays.
LEMONS: We get your point, Saqib.
ALI: But nobody is buying that.
LEMON: We get it, OK. So, Pastor, do you think this sends -- you said a bad message to the students. Why do you believe that?
NORMAN GORDON, ASSOC. PASTOR, GAITHERSBURG PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: First of all, what I would look to say is God bless you, Mr. Kaufman and Ms. O'Neill, in Montgomery County Public Schools, you've done a great for my three girls, and I thank God for you. I think there was an unintended message shift in this departure from nomenclature, from a message of, we respect all faith tradition to faith tradition doesn't quite belong in the public sphere. So, I sympathize with Mr. Ali, because I have three girls in my school -- I'm sorry, three -- my girls in Montgomery County Public Schools. And they have gotten the subtle message in the schools that it is not OK to bring up their own faith traditions. And so, while this is a small and subtle change...
LEMON: Yeah.
GORDON: It asks and begs the question, what is the role of faith in my child's education? And I'd like to think that there is more opportunity, say if my daughter responded to a story, that she feel afraid to say -- you know, this remind me of the story of Joshua in my bible.
LEMON: OK. All right, let stand by, because I want to read, this is Patricia O'Neill the vice president and Phillip Kauffman, president, this is read the statement that, that the council on American Islamic relations said, as we are disappointed that the school board would take such drastic measures to deny fair and equitable treatment for, for the county significantly large Muslim population. There's no justice in robbing the Christian and Jewish communities of their holiday in order to deny Muslims equal accommodation. Do you feel, Patricia, that you're robbing Christian and Jewish communities of their holidays?
O'NEILL: Absolutely not. You know, we are a very diverse community. We have 154,000 students in the Montgomery County Public Schools. I'm a Christian, I'm a graduate of Southern Methodist University, and I take my faith very seriously. I believe that my role as a parent is where my faith belongs in instructing my daughters. I do not believe that we are showing any disrespect to the Christian or Jewish community. We will still be closed. And our winter break is actually a better definition for the period of closure from December 24th through January 1...
LEMON: OK.
O'NEILL: Which is mandated by state law?
LEMON: But we guys... ALI: Can I add something?
LEMON: No, I don't have time. I would love to talk more, but again, we have very limited time. I only have an hour to get everything in. So Saqib, I appreciate it, Phillip Kauffman, Patricia O'Neill and Norman Gordon, thanks to all of you.
GORDON: Thank you.
LEMON: Best of luck. We all know that Bill Maher is not one to hold his tongue. Now he has taking on Democrats over their crushing losses in the midterm elections, we gonna see what he had to say and debate it next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: It is never a good idea to call American voters stupid. A lesson that an architect of Obamacare is learning after video surfaced this week of his comments from a year ago.
Joining me now Tara Setmayer, contributor at the Blaze TV, Ben Ferguson CNN political commentator, host of The Ben Ferguson Show, Marc Lamont Hill, CNN political commentator. All right, I want to get your reaction to something that we played earlier in the show. It's the economist, Jonathan Gruber, I'm sure you've heard it, one of the Obamacare administration consultants on Obamacare, made these controversial statements about a year ago about how the administration was able to pass the Affordable Care Act, here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONATHAN GRUBER, MIT ECONOMIST: This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score demanded has taxes. Lack of transparency, that political advantage and basically, you know, call it stupidity of the American voter or whatever. But basically, that was really, really critical to get anything to pass.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Ben, you first. Is that any way to talk to the American voter, especially on such a critical issue about health care? How to pay for health care?
BEN FERGUSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That's -- I mean, that's exactly what the Obama administration thinks about the American voter, and behind closed doors at least. And he said the truth, he told the truth. They --look, they didn't want anybody to know what he was saying. Nancy Pelosi said it, we won't know until we pass it. And they knew that if they could just sit there and slam it down people's throats, and deal with it, fallout afterward. They could pass this thing. Remember, Barack Obama ran on transparency, he said, we're gonna put on C-Span, how that this sausage has made, and it never made it to C-Span. Much less to the Republican rooms where there is a conversation about it so, this is the ugly truth, and if Democrats want to know why they lost last week? This is why.
LEMON: So, I'm taking you're not upset by your tone.
FERGUSON: No, I mean, I think it's reality.
LEMON: Yeah. Tara, what do you think?
TARA SETMAYER, CONTRIBUTOR AT THE BALZE TV: Well, I think this is the epitome of liberal arrogance. This is the Ivory tower, I'm smarter than you, the average person is too stupid, so we're -- we as this bureaucrats, that this government elites are gonna come in and tell you how to live your life. And I think that is - the American people should be insulted. This was not a transparent process. They were, they, you know when they passed Obamacare, it was on New Year's Eve, in the hours -- you know, wee hours of the night. There was no transparency in that process. And for this gentleman to come out and say, not once, not twice, but there's at least three videos now, three different occasions where he made comments to this extent calling the American people too stupid. But you have the problem taking $400,000 of American taxpayer money.
LEMON: OK.
SETMAYER: To advice on Obamacare.
LEMON: Yeah.
SETMAYER: I mean, it's insulting, but Ben is right. This is how they feel about you, welcome to have progressives feel about the average American.
LEMON: I said on television to cover that. That wee, in a wee hours, beyond the QR NY (ph)
SETMAYER: That's right.
LEMON: Yeah. We got...
SETMAYER: I was on Capitol Hill during that, I remember that all.
LEMON: Marc, did the administration deceive the American people?
MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I was in exceed (ph) the American people, I think that there is clearly lack of transparency. I mean, what he spoke to exactly right, a lack of transparency in the process, and that's dangerous, that's problematic, and I think it reflects a deep sort of cynicism, that many politicians have. We saw this at the Patriot Act in 2001, we saw with this -- with Obamacare now. And this is an assumption that if we bury stuff deep enough, the American people and other politicians won't...
LEMON: That doesn't make it OK, doesn't Marc?
SETMAYER: That's right.
HILL: No. I Remember I began from the premise saying it is problematic. I'm saying -- let me finish, I didn't interrupt either of you. But I think the bigger issue for me is there's a difference between saying there's a cynicism about tax policy and a sort of economic aspects of how to get this bill through. And saying that the American people don't want Obamacare or, that Obamacare is not a good policy, the American people, I think there is the distinction in this humane, I'm not excusing bad behavior but let's not, let's not mix apples and oranges.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Well have to move on guys, I want to talk a little bit more politics here, because Bill Maher never afraid to speak his mind, he gave an interview to "The Clarion-Ledger" down in Mississippi. He had this to say about the political parties. This is -- you know the Republicans are bad, but the Democrats are no prize either with this kind of BS. Where's their big vision for America. It somehow got a lot -- mostly a lot in the weed of political correctness, I think that should be lost in the weed of political correctness. Have Democrats lost their way? And stuck in political correct BS. Who wants to answer? Tara.
HILL: No.
SETMAYER: Yes, absolutely. I mean, listen, Bill Maher, whether you agree with him or not, I disagree with him on a lot of things on often times, but I agree with him 100 percent on this aspect. Political correctness is going to be the death of this society, if we continue along with his path. I mean, work place violence instead of terrorism, upper overseas operational contingency plan, or whatever the hell they call, the war on terror overseas. You know what happened in England is an example, it did to that that child, awful child sex abuse case in England where they wouldn't, they wouldn't describe the ethnicity of the perpetrators, and they allowed this to go on for 16 years, because they were afraid of being called racists. This is a complete totalitarian attack on the freedom of thought and honesty in this country, and it's out of control.
LEMON: OK then, Bill Maher goes on to say that he doesn't feel bad for the Democrats post midterm, and he said he doesn't feel, but he feels bad for Americans. He says who needs someone to represent the common man and unfortunately are going to be even more bereft in that matter. Is Washington so polarized right now that we really can't have a conversation and there's so much political correctness that people, as Tara said are afraid of being called racist or biased or bigoted...
FERGUSON: No, I think it's funny Bill Maher tries to separate himself from this. Bill Maher is the guy that was selling this political correctness for the Democratic Party. And in fact, he's...
LEMON: He's still was politically incorrect, that what it been called.
FERGUSON: But, my point is, look what he is doing this week in Jackson. He's actually helping raise money for the Democratic Party of Mississippi, so don't act like you are not a part of this. You are one of the guys on your show every single week, doing exactly what you are now claiming you don't like being a (inaudible)
LEMON: But he does call out. You -- all right, there's a point of raising, he's is raising money. No, he calls them out. He calls Democrats out, all the time. Apparently, you don't watch the show, he calls Democrat out.
FERGUSON: No, I do watch his show, but my point is this, he was the one...
LEMON: He called Democrats out on the whole Muslim issue, and he's getting flak for that.
SETMAYER: And he called people out on the Islam -- the race radical Islamist terrorism aspect of it. I'm not defending Bill Maher, nut at least on this...
LEMON: All right. More on the other side, Marc, sorry I didn't get you in now. I'll get you in on the next.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: OK. Two seconds. Quick. Hurry, Marc?
HILL; No, I can wait.
LEMON: All right, you can wait. All right, coming up, no, if, ands, or, butts, with two t's, t-t-s about it. Kim Kardashian's latest magazine cover is causing a stir.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: So I'm back now with my panel. Let's bring them back up, because Marc Lamont Hill, I want you to respond freaking to the next story -- to what Tara and Ben were talking about. She said what's happening now with the Democrats is the epitome of political correctness run amok. You feel what?
HILL: I disagree. I think this is about being reasonable, and often times people who say, I want to be politically -- I don't want to have to be politically correct. What they really mean is I want the freedom to say, Ethnocentric, racist, homophobia stuff. Bill Maher is a whole thing of political correctness right now is about Islamophobia. He wants to be able to not just criticize ISIS, because he could gives entire release of Islam, and that's what people have been criticizing for him, and I don't let him left on the hook.
LEMON: All right.
SETMAYER: This is America. You have freedom of speech in the thought police needs to stop, that's ridiculous, it takes away honesty in the conversation.
LEMON: OK.
SETMAYER: Now, seems every thing gonna beat you're honest with the racist.
LEMON: All right. Let's talk about the if the internet...
HILL: I can disagree with your thoughts.
LEMON: Yes. OK.
SETMAYER: Yes.
LEMON: You can. Let's move on now. If the internet is broken, here's where you can blame, you can blame this magazine cover. Take a look at, it's tempting the hash tag, to break the internet. Today, a photo of Kim Kardashian's boo-tay, (ph) Tara, is this too much?
SETMAYER: Yes. But, this is capitalism. This is the Kardashian Empire doing what they do best, which is be provocative and draw attention to themselves, because they have nothing else to offer. She became famous through a sex tape. Her assets, that's what it made her famous. Do I think it's good? No, I think it's tacky and classless. But, it's her prerogative to do it and she made lots of money, but I think that powerful message...
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Here's what -- then, here's what Glee Naya Rivera, she allegedly commented on Kim Kardashian's Instagram account. She writes, "I normally don't. But, you're someone's mother."
SETMAYER: Exactly.
LEMON: Go ahead.
FERGUSON: Grounded (ph)
HILL: Oh, God.
FERGUSON: Don, I want to ask a question, that I was a second ago.
HILL: That's what I hate.
FERGUSON: Is this too much?
LEMON: Yeah.
FEGUSON: Did you say is this too much?
LEMON: Yeah.
FERGUSON: I just want to think about that for a second. Yes, yes, it is too much. In all areas, it is too much.
LEMON: I want to know when did -- listen, it's cool.
FERGUSON: Yeah.
LEMON: Do what you want to do.
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: See, there's the problem. LEMON: We're talking about Bill Maher.
HILL: First of all...
LEMON: That I have been thinking for a long time. When did we become so fascinated with butts? Because you know, lots of people have butts for a long time. Bootie did not used to be fashionable.
SETMAYER: Jennifer Lopez, Nicki Minaj.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Go ahead, Marc.
FERGUSON: This whole another world.
HILL: All right, let me be clear, let me say -- this an area of expertise, you know what I mean.
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
SETMAYER: I didn't know you had a big old butt.
FERGUSON: Wow. Wow, that just happened.
HILL: First of all, black folks have been celebrating big ass forever. The problem is -- you know, at some point, white people became obsessed with it. They're getting butt shots.
LEMON: Boom.
FERGUSON: Wow.
HILL: And now -- second to Ben's point, second to Ben's point, that, that's too much but, there is no such thing. I think we've been very careful about, policing black and brown bodies in such a way that you have certain standard of what is too much.
SETMAYER: Well, I'll never say, I didn't say that.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Hold on.
HILL: One more thing.
LEMON: Hold on wait a minute, Mr. Postman. Everyone at a time, I got ten second, hurry.
FERGUSON: I got to say this. Let me say this. I swear to you, Marc, when I saw the picture, race never came into my mind.
STEMAYER: That's right. This is not about race.
FERGUSON: When I saw that picture. This has nothing to do with race.
HILL: It is about race.
STEMAYER: It's not about race. It's about class.
(CROSSTALK)
STEMAYER: It's about why do you need to expose your behind to be famous? And what of kind of message does this send to little girls. We talk about, you know body conscious, or body shaping (ph) people. And then you wonder why you have 6-year-old little girl's twerking (ph) and shaking their behinds.
LEMON: I got to go.
STEMAYER: At birthday parties.
LEMON: I.
FERGUSON: Porn stars.
LEMON: Had got to go. Marc, I got to say this. Marc.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Too much booty in the pants. I'll see you later. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: I don't know about you, but this is the show that I'm watching, good night.
