Ape is it marked a turning point for gay and lesbian politics. America has its first openly gay senator. Plus lgbt votes helped make the difference in a tight president ial race. Only 3. 5 million votes separated the candidates. And yet, it is still legal under federal law in america to discriminate in hiring in employment on the basis of Sexual Orientation or identity. These are forgone conclusions for people of color and faiths but for the Lgbt Community the fight still rages on. With me tico, welcome to the show. Its great to go back. Eliot especially after youve had this year. One big win after another what made this happen . This years election was a turning point for americans and our movement for fairness and for justice under the law. And i think president obama has proven once and for all that elected officials can take a strong stance in favor of lgbt fairness and not fear backlash from the voters. Im not talking about his Marriage Equality, which is historic, his agencies put through dozens and dozens of changes things like hospital visitation, no discrimination in housing, and despite these wonderful advance there is was no backlash. The republicans didnt use this as a wedge issue. They didnt run ads on it. They didnt bring it up at the debate. There was silence. It means that we as gay americans, were wedge no more. Eliot expanding rights for gays and lesbians, and now its the ballot box where the public by majority vote say were believe in this conception of civil rights. Its a fundamental and very historic wonderful thing to see. There is this gaping hole in federal law. Explain why it is still there and what we wanted to do about it. Congress for many years have been dragging its feet on a very simple bill to bandies crime ban ban discriminating for being gay. We expect Real Progress now that president obama has been reelected in terms of an executive order that will ban the companies that profit from federal contracts. Thats almost one in four jobs in america. This will be a huge step forward and were expecting it pretty soon. Eliot now just so people can understand many states have passed laws that extend the rights that were talking about. But many states have not done that, and the federal government has not done that. We still have this hole that needs to be fixed. There is a patchwork of civil rights law. It is not the majority of states that have on the report thing. The right thing. Giving a fair shot in holding a job not involving their sexual ororientation or sexual identity. Eliot even if youre not for samesex marriage, you can be for the notion that you dont fire somebody because he or she or his or her Sexual Orientation. Ive always been amazed that this issue has not been expanded. But you think were going to get there. Eliot congress is behind the american people. And the exit polling shows it. There was polling of voters who actually voted a few weeks ago and threequarters of voters think it should be illegal to fire Somebody Just being gay or transgendered. They asked about the executive order to ban federal contractors, and there were 72 in support of obama signing that executive order. Its the right thing to do. He has promised to do it, and he has such a strong record on lgbt equality that im confident that the president will do the right thing in a short amount of time. Eliot im going to put you on the spot. The way you say youre confident that hes going to do it, maybe someone in the white house has whispered this is going to happen soon . No comment. I have total faith in the president to do the right thing, especially on an issue like this. Eliot as you go back a number of months, this was an issue where the white house refused to sign the order and then went to the floodgates because joe biden went on national tv and set the president up and forcing his hand on the marriage issue. This be poetic justice if this order were signed in short order. It would show and what happened last spring shows that those few folks in dc who are still afraid of gay issues and think that there is an consequence for supporting fairness for gay and transgender were wrong. Were going to have our very first openly lesbian senator Tammy Baldwin who will do a fantastic job pushing for strong jobs for all americans. And it matters so much that senators who might be centrist or still mulling over these issues will have a colleague that they see every day, who theyll get to know, who will be there advocating for us, and that will make a tremendous difference as we push forward in the congress. Eliot that is right. What a year it has been. Tico congratulations. Youve been fight for many years and a lions share has to go to you. A lot of us have been fighting, and were lucky to have straight allies, our family, friend, coworkers who support us. It took more than 50 to affirm those Marriage Equality ballots so were lucky to have so many allies, and were going to win. Eliot founder and president of freedom to work who served as lead council on the nondiscrimination act for the u. S. House of representatives. Thank you for your time. Thank you. [ boy 1 ] hey thats the last crescent. Oh, did you want it . Yea well split it. [ female announcer ] made fresh, so light buttery and flakey. Thats half thats not half guys, i have more thanks mom [ female announcer ] pillsbury crescents. Let the making begin the saying easy as pie . I get it now. Just unroll it fill, top, bake, and present. That must have taken you forever it was really tough. [ female announcer ] pillsbury pie crust. Let the making begin eliot a culmination of years of what might be called a new kind of warfare. The strike by Seal Team Six was made possible by intelligence gathering in high tech and new age. Its a war in which there are no clear battle lines no uniforms, often no distinction between soldier and civilian, and where the ethics of old may not apply. Joining me now National Correspondent mark bowden, author of the finish. Thank you for joining us tonight. Thank you eliot. Eliot you begin the book with a raid on an alqaeda commander named muthana which led to the treasure trove of information that took us there. Explain how there are little bits and pieces that created the web of the successful raid. That was the raid that general mcchrystal has cited as probably the most significant in the war in iraq because it basically delivered up a database of about 500 names of alqaeda fighters who had come to iraq through syria. So not only were they able to take apart that organization by identifying all those folks and finding them, it also illustrated that the the alqaeda movement in iraq was primarily a foreign movement, not an indigenous. Thats one of the things that helped to turn the sunnies getsal alqaeda. Eliot and you highlighted that they would use it and form and see linkages that might not have been possible to see many years back using new software and computer techniques that began to createsort of out of a Science Fiction movie where you say these are the links these are the bank its a, and thats how you figure out who is who and where to go. Well, more than that, eliot general mcchrystal, when he got all of this information took the unusual step of declassifying it and posting it at the west point combat in terrorism website so anyone in the world could research this data for whatever they wanted. He just basically used the capability of the superintendent to draw on the talents of analysts from all walks of life, and all over the world to help him take apart this organization organization. Eliot hes almost the equivalent of open source intelligence, heres what you want to know. You figure it out for us. That story illustrates the cuttingedge nature of this war against alqaeda, and finding Osama Bin Laden is one of the most famous of the examples of what can be accomplished with this new method. Eliot now to go to the other end of the war on terror, and the battle that is still being waged, you recounted in the book how the president makes individual decisions about targets, and we are at a stage in war where were using drones to target individuals including the u. S. Citizen how does that fit into the traditional mode of war in terms of a president making these individualized decisions without judicial check, without congressional involvement, how does fit into our history . Well, its a truly unique feature of modern times that the president of the United States is in effect actively engaged in the battlefield in combat. He has in effect a sniper rifle. Each day he is given a dossier of an individual who has come into the crosshairs of the c. I. A. Or military. On a regular basis has to decide whether to pull the trigger. Obviously going after bin laden was the most famous example of the president doing this. The president has always had to make Big Decisions that is lifeanddeath sometimes for thousands of people. I dont think any president before obama had played such a regular and direct role on the battlefield. Eliot there is Something Differentim not quite sure if i can articulate but there is Something Different about making the decision on one specific person rather than were at war with a nation, this military in to the coast to invade. Its a different type of subject call that the president is asked to make here. It is very direct, and also as the president told me, a tool that is very dangerous. Its relatively easy, and there is so little risk in targeting and killing someone anywhere in the world with this technology that i think due process some procedures and rules need to be put in place so that there are precedents and due process that administrations can follow in useing this tool responsibly. Eliot i think there will emerge shortly a consensus of what you said is exactly right. What is war almost becomes individualized assassination and there is a Boundary Line where due process is implicated, and well need to sort that out. Was there a plan in place to bring bin laden back alive or that e not going to be brought back alive. If hes there kill him . The president told me, and i take him at his word, that his preference was that he bring him back alive. He has fairly consistently argued and tried to get these top alqaeda leaders before judges and criminal courts where you feels thats the appropriate venue for prosecuting these people. Of course, he has been met with a great deal of political resistence with when he has tried to do that. For instance, with Khalid Sheikh mohammed. They told me if they captured capturedbinladen he would have the Political Capital to bring him to trial in federal court. Having said that you know those seals, their First Priority is getting in and out of that compound alive. When they were fired upon as they approached the house i think that pretty much effective effectively sealed the fate of every adult male in the household because they were not going to wait around and see if someone was going to shoot at them. Eliot i think thats exactly right. Of all the things you learned what was the most surprising . When admiral mcraveen outlined his plan to the president he argued if the seal team had tripped pakistans defenses tripped their alarms, and his men found themselves surrounded by pakistans armed forces and air force that he advised that they strong arm the compound and wait for washington to negotiate their extraction. It was president obama who said no, if youre going in, i want you to go in with enough force to fight your way out of the country if necessary. Clearly that was embracing of a large risk. That was embracing the possibility of actually getting in a shooting war with pakistan. So it did surprise me that it would be the president who would demand they go in in force as opposed to the military commander. Eliot that is fascinating because one presumes had there been a stand off that could have been negotiated out. Fascinating and im sure there will be more, and maybe youll write more about that as time goes on. Mark bowden, author of the spectacular new book the finish the killing of Osama Bin Laden. Thank you for your time tonight. Thank you eliot. Eliot the decision with the potential to impact every one of us. What to expect from the united eliot whats next on the docket for the justices of the Supreme Court, a look ahead at the eliot from affirmative action to Voting Rights and possibly samesex marriage the Supreme Court is set to way weigh in on a number of controversial issues this term. It is easy to say that i agree or disagree with any one of these policies. But the question for the Supreme Court will be more complicated whether theyre constitutionally permissible or precluded. With me to explain the distinction the scholar of the day, professor of law professor, thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me. Eliot begin by explaining this intellectual difference between agreeing and disagreeing with something and whether or not its permissible or precluded. A lot of things that you might think are good policy but maybe the constitution prohibits them. On the other hand there might be a lot of stuff that you think really stinks but the people can vote for it because the constitution allows it. A lot of people thought obamacare was not perfect policy, but in my view its clearly constitutional. Eliot in other words even though i might disagree with something, it may be constitutional, even though i may like it, the constitution may say no, you cant do thats why we have the constitution to settle different things, and its not just a matter of what we believe is political opinion but a question of law. Eliot the Supreme Court decides a law such as the president s healthcare reform act, which i happen to like and think is constitutional, but chief Justice Roberts who whose vote says its constitutional. It was to be decided by the people and we just had an election about that. Eliot that is the difference between the president ial process, either with the congress or executive and the judiciary which has to make sure what we do is within these boundaries. Lets take Something Like affirmative action and put it in that context. What is the constitutional issue when it comes to affirmative action. The tricky question is what those words equal protection really mean. Do they surely prohibit the kind of apartheid policies that were condemned in brown versus board of education. Those policies were designed to really stigmatize and put down to treat a second class of the blacks who had before that experienced generations of slavery and subordination. The same thing if they are used to up a racially outcome by bringing folks who have been previously excluded historically from the table, and bringing them to the table. Now just so its clear the Supreme Court has said until very recently there is no problem with using race as a factor in the context of Higher Education in particular to create a diverse intellectual environment. The question now before the court is will that continue to be the law . Exactly. Ever since the in the late 1970s, so for 35 years the basic idea that race can sometimes be taken into account in order to achieve more diversity in Higher Education. And especially when this is not being used to stigmatize or subordinate historically disadvantaged groups like africanamericans. Eliot and Justice Sandra day oconnor in voting for this when she was on the bench in her most recent decision said we think they cant continue for 25 years. We have not gotten to the end of the 25 years but clearly she was saying this was meant as a remedial effort to overcome history, as you just said, professor, a history of degradation and subordination. And a certain point they said you can no longer use race. Are we at a Tipping Point where race is no longer an issue. That was a Tipping Point, and talked about diversity, and bringing people together, between the lines were remedial ideas going on as well as pure forwardlooking diverse idea bringing folks together. One thing that was very important to her if you want a diverse military corp, where the you have to have constitutions institutions of higher he haddation, public and private, bringing races and cultures together. Eliot in samesex marriage where there is an attack on the doma act. Explain that one. Well, that one was passed at a time when almost no states had samesex marriage. Now most states do, and the trend is in favor that have. Three months three states joined the bandwagon, and california, the biggest state judicial decree to allow samesex marriage. As we see more and more states joining this bandwagon, the federal policy that allows statesthat says the federal government does not have to recognize that seems increasing increasingly weird, irrational and in some ways in violation of states rights. And here you have attention two states rights, and Civil Liberties that should exist for individuals to marry, and Congress Passing law that marriage is of individuals of different sex. Its not whether i like it or i dont like t it it, thats why we need the professor to explain this. If youre married under state law, why shouldnt you be married security purposes and income tax purposes. Cenk the Supreme Court says you must be, although well have to come back to pars the opinion and the votes, thank you as always for making the complex understandable. Thank you. Eliot weve had 50 years of nonand nuclear war but is nuclear war more likely every 1c eliot the threat posed by north korea, pakistan and iran, and what we need to be doing about it eliot in a bipolar war nuclear arms strategy was he said to under, and the doctrine of destruction led to a period of stability. As we end to a multi poller world, we head to a dangerous era. Author of the new book the