California's big spenders--in politics. Democratic AG candidate Mike Shmier. U.S. Supreme Court rules you have the right to remain silent--but you have to speak up. Later, why Western Europe is a hotbed of Muslim extremism.
Money rules and California politics
California GOP candidate for U.S. Senate Tom Campbell pulled his television advertising on Tuesday as the primary race inches to a close. Campbell states he will rely on Internet appeals and phone calls to win GOP votes while his opponent Carly Fiorina continues to spend millions of dollars on her campaign, shooting her ahead in the polls. What might happen in result of Campbell's pulled ads? Is he admitting defeat? Meanwhile in the Republican gubernatorial primary, Meg Whitman's campaign has put over $80 million into the race and Steve Poizner has spent over $24 million. How much does money matter in California politics?
Guests:
Bob Stern, President, Center for Governmental Studies
Dan Schnur, Director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California and soon-to-be Chairman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission
Mike Schmier – candidate for Attorney General
Next up on the Dem candidates for AG hot seat: Mike Schmier. Schmier has been an employee rights attorney for 35 years and owns a private practice law firm in Emeryville, California. In 2006, he successfully convinced Federal Courts to allow people the right of fair defense; now he wants to extend that right to Californians. This is Schmier’s third attempt to win the AG seat. The underdog’s campaign centers on changing a crime-filled justice system. Will his law background be enough to win him votes? Where does Schmier really stand with voters? What message is he hoping to get out there?
Guest:
Mike Schmier, employee rights attorney and former law clerk for the Chief Judge of the Federal District Court in Southern California; Democratic candidate for California Attorney General
You have the right to remain silent. But only if you say so
The Supreme Court handed down a ruling yesterday intended to clarify Miranda protections for those accused of crimes. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy said that even after hours of silence during questioning, a Michigan man had not invoked his right to silence, and a one-word answer was an admissible statement. Justice Sotomayor dissented, writing, the decision “turns Miranda upside down.” Does the ruling protect criminal suspects? Does it grant excessive influence to law enforcement? Will police interrogation tactics change?
Guests:
Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, University of California, Irvine School of Law
Kent Scheidegger, legal director and general counsel for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation introduced a friend of the court brief, arguing that the Michigan appeals court decision to uphold Thompkins’ conviction was reasonable.
The rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West
The 9/11 hijackers were Muslim but all of them had lived in Europe. How could such a radical group sink its roots into Western soil? Reporter Ian Johnson set out to discover the origins of this phenomenon and uncovered the story of a group of ex-Soviet Muslims who had defected to Germany during World War II. As that war ended and the Cold War began, West German and U.S. intelligence agents vied for control of this influential group, and at the center of the covert tug of war was a quiet mosque in Munich, radical Islam's first beachhead in the West. His book A Mosque in Munich reveals the complex history of this key group. How has the Brotherhood influenced the tenor of Western-Islamists relations?
Guest:
Ian Johnson, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The Wall Street Journal and author of A Mosque in Munich: Nazis, the CIA, and the Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West (Houghton Mifflin)