tv John King USA CNN June 15, 2011 4:00pm-5:00pm PDT
>> tomorrow senator dianne feinstein here in "the situation room." the chair of the senate intelligence committee. a lot to discuss with her. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." for our international viewers, "world report" is next. "john king usa" starts right now. good evening. we begin tonight with a new peace movement of sorts. how much the military action in libya is costing you. the cost breakdown, $800 million so far and a projected $1.2 billion through the end of september. now if you break that down on average, so far the conflict in labia costing about $10.4 million of your tax dollars every day. the white house detailed the cost because president obama is facing tough new pressure to end u.s. military involvement in both libya and afghanistan. that pressure is coming from both democrats and republicans in the case of libya the president was forced to send congress a memo and a letr and
other materials. assert he did not and does not now need congress to approve the use of american military power by part of what is now a mate owe-led mission. ten members of congress representing both parties filed a lawsuit asserting the administration is violating war powers resolution which says any president must get congressional approval within 60 days of launching a hostile military action. >> legal issue is was the president exceeding his authority, act illegally? the answer is yes. >> afghanistan is not a war of president obama's making but we know that americans are tired after nearly a decade of conflict there and now there is growing political consensus to speed up the withdrawal of american troops. 100,000 there now. 27 senators demanded that. quicker withdrawal in a letter today to the president saying now that osama bin laden is dead there is no good case in their words on justify the loss of american lives or the investment of hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars. on capitol hill, it was left to the defense secretary, robert gates to make the case it is too
soon to bring most of the troops home. >> we are not in the business of nation building. what we are trying to do is build the afghan national security forces to the point where they have the ability to dend tfet country and so that the taliban and al qaeda cannot reconstitute themselves in that country. i think that we are making considerable headway in that respect. >> in a moment, proof opposites sometimes do attract. the tea party senator ran paul and kucinich are here. let's check in with the reporters work thing story. dan lothian is and dana bash. the president sends a memo, letter under his signature. does the white house think that it has made now the legal argument to congress, can it sell it? >> well, they certainly think that they can sell this. it is all spelled out in that document you were talking about. 32 pages. but it all boils down to one paragraph on page 25.
where it reads in part, the president is of the view that the current u.s. military operations in libya are consistent with the par of powers resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization because u.s. military operations are distinct from the kind of hostilities contemplated by the resolution 60-day termination provision. in other words, no u.s. operations taking place on the ground, no boots on the ground, and there's no prospect of this escalating and so, therefore, the administration believes that it is on solid legal ground. the other bit of news is you pointed out we now have a dollar figure on what this cost so far at as of june 3. almost a quarter of a billion dollars. then other points that we saw in this memo that the administration sent up to congress spelling out the consequences of getting out of that engagement too soon. saying that it could be disastrous or detrimental for the operation. also, talking about some of the progress that's been made on the ground. then the white house going out
of its way to tick off consultation was congress, through briefings, phone calls, e-mails. >> dan lothian on the relationship with the white house. following this breaking news, let's go to capitol hill now. dana bash, what's most surprising, month liberals on the left oppose. growing number of republicans beginning to question the muss cu muscular force overseas. will it sell? >> so far it doesn't look like it is enough. i can tell you that. you are right. there definitely is more of a sense from republicans that they are not really that eager to use force. in particular, afghanistan there is a fatigue there. on libya, it is very inning because at that time beginning three months ago, republicans important the most part thought that they were okay with what the president was doing. they were going on give him a little bit of breathing space. again, i said three months ago and now it has been a 90 days and republicans you talked to more and more say that they just -- yes, they may be consulted by the white house and -- the words of one republican i talked to about what is happening but not why we
are there. and not where the mission is going. those are the key things that republicans more and more say they want to hear from the white house. you can't underestimate that dollar figure you showed dan talked about. that's a big part of it also. all of this money is being spent hundreds of millions of dollars. again, without a fair understanding from the perspective of p.m. republican ys u.s. is there. >> clear from dana bash. questions continue from capitol hill. david, gadhafi regime hanging on three months into the military campaign. it must take some delight in this big u.s. political fight. >> reporter: that's right. there have been no public statements from spokesman here in tripoli. certainly they are coming to us and other reporters asking what is this ball? what's going on in congress? what's going on in washington? certainly there will be easily -- eeg areally watching this from tripoli. any chink from nato, that they can get in and exploit that to say well, nato itself is not
unified in this campaign. and even though we can hear the nato over here right now, the government here will be looking to exploit any perceived weakness they can get in that. >> quick question. you mentioned you can hear the jets overhead. one of the administration's argument to congress is that while this military campaign is not about regime change. it is about protecting libyan civilians. any doubt what nato is trying to do? >> well, nato had said, you know, anonymous sources said to cnn that this -- could be seen as a way to target gadhafi. not just about protecting civilians. tonight owe has publicly maintained that this is about resolution 1973 of the u.n. security council and resolution on that states nato mission here is to protect the civilians and certainly in the early stages, it was obvious the gadhafi regime force was push them to miss ratty to the east athe eas.
what is nato going to do? what targets are left that can be clearly and specifically seen as protecting civilians? certainly the government will be criticizing nato and others like the african union will say there is mission creep going on. nato is looking to become the de facto air force of the rebels here in libya. certainly nato is saying they are just trying to protect the civilians and many of whom want gadhafi out. >> david, thank you. let's explore the changing politics and strange bedfellows aspect of that shift with two members of congress at the forefront. republican senator rand paul of kentucky. democratic congressman dennis kucinich of ohio. congressman kucinich, i want to start with you. you filed this lawsuit over libya. the president sent up a packet of information tonight including a legal memo asserting the administration is not in violation of the war powers resolution and he says what's happening in libya does not meet the bar for hostilities abroad.
do you agree? >> no. our lawsuit, by the way, address it is war powers act and assert that the president violated both constitution and the war powers act and not getting approval from congress within the requisite 60 day. >> you are not swayed tonight at all. >> no. i have seen the argument already. it doesn't pass legal muster. i think that when we get to court with this if we can get standing, we will win. >> senator, do you share that opinion? is the commander in chief of the united states in violation of the law? >> yes. i agree completely with congressman kucinich. i think people on the left and right can both believe in the constitution and our founders were specific. they wanted the initiation of war to be by congress. they say congress shall declare war. they didn't want the president to be able to go to war unilaterally without any congressional authority. in fact, candidate barack obama said exactly that in 2007.
we wish the president would act more like the candidate obama. >> any concern to each of you gentlemen, senator, you first, any concern at all that by publicly talking about your position right now when some believe that the military operation is near a tipping point you could embolden gadhafi? he could think the president of the united states has a political problem back home, i should hang on? >> no. i have never been a fan of gadhafi. i think we shouldn't have been sending him money. many of the people that now want to attack and get rid of gadhafi supported the bank bailout which sent the libyan national bank money through aig. we have been sending foreign aid and money to libya and i think that's been a mistake for years. now we are going to fight a war against him but most specifically we cannot and should not fight the war unless we do it through congressional action as the constitution contended. >> gadhafi can make the case i'm going hang on, america is getting stopped. >> there are lot of people in the world we prefer weren't presiding over their governments. our first challenge is abide by
our constitution. when we fail to abide by the constitution everything else that follows going to be poison. so we must go back to the founders' wisdom, separate the war power, and from the executive and to -- have it firmly reside in the hands of the congress. and that's what -- why we went to court today. i'm hopeful we will get a decision once and for all we will establish the founders intended for congress to have the war power and no president can take this country into war on his own. >> new pressure in afghanistan as well. senator paul you are among 20 senators that wrote a letter to the president food. bin laden is dead. nation build sing an idea that will not work. it is time to accelerate the drawdown of u.s. troops. gates was on capitol hill and said he understands the frustration and american people have a decade into this war. but he said there is a butt involved in coming out so past and says it is a big but.
listen. >> i know people are frustrated. the country has been at war for ten years. i know people are tired. people also have to think in terms of stability and in terms of the potential for reconstitution. what's the cost of failure. >> that was george w. bush's defense secretary. should you listen to him when he says you need more time? >> when you go to war you need objectives. i agreed to go to war. our objectives should be to disrupt the terrorists' basis, annihilate al qaeda, and to eliminate their leadership. i think we have largely succeeded in those objectives. will is another reason why you have to reconsider. one, we are not very good at building nationses. it is very expensive. our infrastructure in our country is crumbling. we have bridges and need in louisville and bridges we need in cincinnati. we can't afford to be building bridges in afghanistan. so we do have to reconsider our policy and it is also -- how
conservatives and liberals can come togethering to say how can we balance this budget. you can't do it with a foreign policy that's everywhere all the time. we need to obey the constitution and we need to think about some of our interests here in our country. >> congressman kucinich, you have been an anti-war member of congress for some time. there is a significant shift. i wouldn't say it passed any tipping point. we see a significant shift of a number of republicans questioning whether they questioned the policy or whether they question the financial aspect. what do you make of what's happening on capitol hill? >> i want to agree with senator paul. what he said. the shift that you are witnessing is a very significant shift. and it is going to change the outcome of 2012 elections. what's happen sing in the republican party, have you members who are committed to the constitution and in the democratic party have you members who are really concerned about the rising cost of the wars. people coming together and constitution and the issue of the cost and i think what happens as you see that confluence happening, john, it is going to change the outcome
of libya and of many other equations, iraq, afghanistan, and we are spending trillions of dollars at war as our domestic economy is falling apart and bridges, sewer systems need repair. we have to start taking care of things here at home. i think that more and more members have that aware must and just see these wars as being as -- as being dangerous to our national security. not enhancing our national security because they are eroding our ability to deal with things at home. >> congressman kucinich just mentioned he thought this would i am pangt the 20impact the 201 campaign. getting troops out of afghanistan as soon as possible. your father, congressman paul made that case for and time. john huntsman, another republican candidate, says it is time to get out of afghanistan. here is what lindsey graham sbas that. from the party's point of view, the biggest disaster would be to
let barack obama become ronald reagan and our people become jimmy carter. senator graham thinks the republicans will look soft and weak here. >> i think the interesting thing is since 2008 a lot of candidates are actually coming the way of ron paul. michele bachmann also said on television that we shouldn't go to war in libya without congressional authority. haley barbour talked about the troops coming home from afghanistan. there may be varying degrees but many republicans are having questions now. >> are john mccain and lindsey graham, are they wrong, out of the mainstream? >> i think we have a difference of opinion. the republican party, there are some who believe that the president should have unlimited or inherent powers to commit war and then there are those of white house think the president should be restrained by the constitution that congress should declare war as intended. this just a difference of opinion. but the republican party is not monolithic. the new york tombs this week had
a poll that had 46% of republicans saying we immediate to have a reduced footprint in afghanistan so i think you will see candidates coming towards ron paul and i think what you saw in the debate the other night. >> senator rand paul, congressman kucinich. remarkable to see you together nodding your heads in agreement. appreciate your time tonight. we will stay in touch in the days ahead. pakistan anger it is white house by detaining the inform apartments who helped the united states find osama bin laden. next, does the president's legal argument on libya hold water or do his own public statements undermine the white house case. [ male announcer ] breathe, socket. just breathe. we know it's intimidating. instant torque. top speed of 100 miles an hour. that's one serious machine. but you can do this. any socket can. the volt only needs about a buck fifty worth of charge a day, and for longer trips, it can use gas. so get psyched. this is a big step up from the leafblower. chevrolet volt. the 2011 north american car of the year.
down the hill? man: all right. we were actually thinking, maybe... we're going to hike up here, so we'll catch up with you guys. [ indistinct talking and laughter ] whew! i think it's worth it. working with a partner you can trust is always a good decision. massmutual. let our financial professionals help you reach your goals. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. introducing better car replacement. if your car is totaled, we give you the money for a car one model year newer. liberty mutual auto insurance. a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain
so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. and celebrex is not a narcotic. when it comes to relieving your arthritis pain, you and your doctor need to 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, including 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. do not take celebrex if you've had an asthma attack, hives, or 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 find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. the obama white house asserts it did not need congressional approval to launch strikes against libya and does not need congress to bless that action now even though it has been going on longer than the 60-day window allowed in the war powers resolution. who has the legal high ground? the president or members of congress suing the white house for what they say is clearly an illegal military operation? matthew waxman, associate law professor at columbia university and expert at national security law and international law. let me start that question. who is right the president or those suing him? >> this is one of the difficult
gray areas of the law. it's probably not going to be resolved in a clear way one way or another here. i think that this is an issue that's largely going to be debated and resolved through the political process i'm holding up the memo here the president sent. the white house asserts a few things. number one, no u.s. military troops on the ground. from the beginning, especially now, the united states is in more of a support role, not a leave role. therefore, they are making the case it doesn't meet the bar, legal bar, for defining hostilities. would you agree with that argument? >> i think that's certainly a reasonable argument and those are similar factors that previous presidents have pointed to in arguing that other military operations don't trigger the war power resolution's 60-day limit. on the other hand, there are other packtors here that are -- that are important, you know, the united states is providing the vast bulk of support,
support operations, including reconnaissance, command and control and so forth. the goals of this operation, especially if had include effectively deposing the libyan leadership, are quite raw. so i think that congress would also have a pretty good case in saying that this surpasses the hostilities requirement to trigger the war powers resolutions limits. >> your thoughts on that. one of the administration's argument is that we are part of the united nations resolution. we are there to protect civilians and as a force that's not taking sides in war but just protecting part after war. that's the argument on the one hand. as you know in recent days, nato has escalated takes on tripoli. nato secretary general is on the record saying this. >> we agreed that the time has come to plan for the day after the conflict. gadhafi's history. and -- it is no longer a
question of if it goes but when he goes. >> nature so on the record saying we are going to bomb until he is gone. >> i think that's right. and we have seen operations that certainly look like they are aimed at targeting gadhafi or those around hum. i think that the argument is that the -- u.n. security council resolution authorized all necessary measures to protect civilians but those civilians aren't under attack from the libyan military and that libyan military is commanded and controlled by gadhafi and, therefore, he and -- those around him are legitimate targets. at this point i think that looking at -- at the operations that are going on, one has to conclude that the -- that the objectives are quite broad and include trying to knock gadhafi from power. >> if you make that case, let me ask it to you this way. congress people are taking their case to court.
white house might have to take its case to court. if you wanted to be on the winning side and got to pick, whose case would you argue? >> i don't think this i shall lou get settled in court. these types of cases come up from time to time when president clinton was accused of violating the war powers resolution, group of congressmen sued him. that was with regard to the kosovo operations. and that n that case, it ended up getting thrown out of court. i would expect that this is going to get thrown out of court, too. traditionally courts do not like to intervene and try to resolve these kind of war powers disputes between the political branches. >> matthew waxman, thank you for your insight tonight. >> thanks for having me. still ahead tonight, pakistan detains five informants who helped the united states find and kim osama bin laden. suffice to say the white house is not happy. next, the day's other big headlines include big demonstrations in both syria and yemen. [ male announcer ] at quicken loans, we're a mortgage company
with one very simple philosophy: every client, every time, no exceptions, no excuses. maybe that's why j.d. power and associates ranked us "highest in customer satisfaction in the united states." so, we thought we'd take a little time to celebrate. ♪ all right, then, back to work helping clients. outstanding client service. just one more example of how everything we do at quicken loans is engineered to amaze. with new extra-strength bayer advanced aspirin. it has microparticles, enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief to the site of pain. it's clinically proven to relieve pain twice as fast. new bayer advanced aspirin.
look at all this stuff for coffee. oh there's tons. french presses, espresso tampers, filters. it can get really complicated. not nearly as complicated as shipping it, though. i mean shipping is a hassle. not with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service. if it fits it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate.
that is easy. best news i've heard all day! i'm soooo amped! i mean not amped. excited. well, sort of amped. really kind of in between. have you ever thought about decaf? do you think that would help? yeah. priority mail flat rate shipping starts at just $4.95, only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship.
welcome back. latest news you immediate to now. congressman gabrielle giffords was discharged from the hospital today. she is in a houston outpatient facility to continue her recovery from january's shooting when a bullet, you will remember, passed through her brain. in syria, a demonstration protesting the government's
crackdown in the northwestern part of the country. at least 8400 syrian refugees have now crossed into turkey. also big demonstration in yemen today. thousands demanding the country's interim leader set up a transitional council. in a developing story, a cia spokesman tells cnn they are looking into reports that the agency's public website has been hacked. reuters says the cia's website was unavailable for several minutes after a group announced the attack on twitter. up next, why is pakistan arresting people who helped the united states find osama bin laden? nothing helped me beat arthritis pain.
there is a new soar spot in the already strained relationship between the united states and pakistan. u.s. officials confirmed to cnn that pakistan detained and questioned a handful of cia informants who helped lead the united states to the bin laden compound in pakistan. you heard that right. a country that's officially listed as an ally on the war in terror took into custody the very people that helped the united states find its most wanted terrorist us is pet. congress already was talking about putting new strains on u.s. aid to pakistan. now the rhetoric and ideas are getting tougher. listen to this exchange today as robert gates testified before the senate. >> how long do you support governments that lie to us? when do we say enough is enough? secretary gates, i will start with you. >> first of all, i would say
based on 27 years in the cia and 4 1/2 years in this job, most governments lie to each other. that's the way business gets done. >> do they also arrest the people that help us? >> sometime. >> when they save their allies. >> sometime. >> not often. >> and sometimes they send people to spy on us. and they are close allies. so -- >> we -- >> the real world we deal with. >> live in islamabad. what's the pakistani government saying? how do they explain the arrests? >> security officials here tell us that pakistan's top spy agency arrested the suspected informants, pakistani men, who allegedly fed information to the cia before the raid on the bin laden compound last month. it is not clear, they say why they were arrested, if they are still in custody and if they will be charged with a crime. we know according to go pakistani officials some of the
men picked up were staying at a safe house rented by the cia that was being used to spy on the bin laden compound. the glaring question is this. why is the cia going after these informants for the cia and if indeed the isi was onboard with u.s. efforts to go after bin laden? you would think they would be praising the informants and fact they are arresting them suggest they are not happy with what they did. if that's the case, john, it further clouds that question that doesn't seem to be going away. is pakistan a friend of the u.s.? is it an ally? or is it at times deceiving the united states and with a double game? >> it begs the question that we know pakistani governments are not happy the united states conducted the raid without telling them. begs the question could this be payback? >> reporter: yes. it is no secret the pakistani security establishment has been seething from the bin laden raid to the fact they came in, navy s.e.a.l.s, took unilateral
action on pakistany soil, an embarrassment for the pakistani security establishment. they faced unprecedented pressure here at home. that's why some view this action as the pakistani security establishment standing up against the u.s., hitting back, and even if it means it is undermining its relationship with washington. let's dig deeper on the u.s./pakistan relationships. "the new york times" reporter who broke this story, eric schmidt. congressman, i want to start with you. you were in pakistan last week. what was the government's explanation when you met with our military, when you met with the isi officials, what was their explanation for arresting, detaining five people that helped the united states find bin laden? >> to begin with, they told us that they felt that these individuals were working against their own government. what we -- we were going to
acknowledge -- if they were working for us at all. we know why we cannot do that. what we said to them, though, was -- that these were individuals that were attempting to help fight the war against terror. to try to help pakistanis and to help them in fight the war against terror. and my issue was -- what we also communicated to them, why are you looking for people to help bring bin laden to justice? why aren't you looking for people who had knowledge that bin laden, top terrorist in the world, was living in pakistan very close to your capital? the response back to them. >> eric schmidt, that raises a big question here. what's the top priority of the pakistani government, especially intelligence service, by detaining five people who helped the united states? they are set sending a chilling message to anyone out there that may be asked for the united states for help in the future. >> that's right, john. what this shows is how fractured the relationship there is right now between the united states and pakistan and security
services. here you have the pakistani spy agency detaining these individuals. clearly concerned about what ties these individuals might reveal to the united states. that the pakistanis have to these mill tan groups, perhaps even connections with the spy age and i military to bin laden himself in this compound. >> so -- eric, to you first, then to you, congressman. what's the impact? what's the impact to this? you have pakistanin intelligence and pakistani military looking for people who helped the united states, congressman you made the point, instead of looking for people on the other side of the war on terrorism, how does the impact affect continued intelligence, military strikes, drone strikes. >> it is not good. that's for sure. again, what this shows is right now this relationship is really teetering on the edge. and -- when you have a situation now where -- t informants for -- a raid of -- on somebody as big as bin laden can be detained, this undercuts much of the other
type of cooperation that that leon panetta was its n islamabad joust friday to try too reinforce. they are trying to -- the united states and senior officials are trying to salvage this key part of the relationship. intelligence sharing and counterterrorism aspect which is still essential right now for the united states. >> and so congressman, can it be salvaged? >> the reason that chairman rogers and i went to pakistan was to try to salvage the relationship. we pointed out to pakistan we need to work together because we both have the common enemy of terrorism. and we cannot continue the way the relationship is now. >> chairman rogers and i also pointed out that congress controls the money. we are not sure whether or not congress can continue to give money to pakistan when, in fact, that monday wrip isn't being used where we think it should go. >> are you going to put strings on that money now? >> at this point we had let it be known that we want more accountability of where the money is going to be going. that was the -- that was the -- purpose of our visit and our
communication with it. >> congressman, let me stick with you. it is a simple question. if you are -- americans sitting at home in the living room watching this should the united states government, should an american citizen, trust the pakistani government right now? >> i would say that from past actions between shouldn't. let me say this. we need pakistani government to work with us because as long as we are in afghanistan we take our munitions and we take our supply through pakistan to go to afghanistan. we pointed out to pakistan that you must work with us, you have people who are being killed by terrorists also. but this -- the fact that they were so upset we did not tell them about the bin laden raid, this is an opportunity now to reset that relationship. but as members of congress we are going to hold them more accountable especially as it relates to money. >> if they are detaining people that helped us find baseball that rai --
bin laden, that raises suspicion. >> that's what american officials are looking at now. they have no evidence to indicate any senior pakistani intelligence officials knew about bin laden and bin laden living there. but i think they are quietly piecing together the information that they are getting. we are -- included in the documents they took away from the compound and from other types of intelligence they are collecting. they are building a case right now. >> congressman, how high does it go? >> let me say this. we -- do not have evidence or intelligence at this point that shows that the leadership and pakistani intelligence army had knowledge of the -- bin laden was living where he was. but it seems to me that somehow some way people within the government or the military knew he was there. that's what they are investigating. but we need to reset this relationship because it has gone south and we are trying to bring it back right now. we need it more accountability from them if we are going to
continue to fund pakistan and especially the area of intelligence. >> eric, so the sense is going forward. you hear the congressman make the case. this is a frustrating relationship. get quite angry and dis appointed. it is a necessary relationship. when you talk to your sources, intelligence community, how do they think. what do they think needs to be done to fix it. >> talking about setting bench marks. intelligence sharing on specific cases. one of these cases that they tried the other day was to give the pakistanis some intelligence on ied factories. by the time pakistani forces got to those factories, however, they cleared out. there was concern that that information had leaked all the way around. even the small little test cases they are trying right now seem to be going awry. it is going to be very small steps now to rebuild some of the confidence and trust. >> not much trust at all on a critical relationship. appreciate your time, both of
you, gentlemen. next hear why a top senator says why a pair of prisoners shouldn't be put on trial in his state but go immediately to the military prison at guantanamo bay. [ man ] ♪ trouble ♪ trouble, trouble trouble, trouble ♪ ♪ trouble been doggin' my soul ♪ since the day i was born ♪ worry ♪ oh, worry, worry worry, worry ♪ [ announcer ] when it comes to things you care about, leave nothing to chance. travelers. take the scary out of life. membership rewards points from american express. the social currency.
i really didn't see it coming. i didn't realize i was drifting into the other lane. [ kim ] i was literally falling asleep at the wheel. it got my attention, telling me that i wasn't paying attention. i had no idea the guy in front of me had stopped short. but my car did. -my car did. -thankfully, my mercedes did. [ male announcer ] a world you can't predict... demands a car you can trust. the e-class. see your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for exceptional offers through mercedes-benz financial services. [ male announcer ] an everyday moment can turn romantic anytime. and when it does, men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. ♪ cialis for daily use is a clinically proven low-dose tablet you take every day so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. ♪ tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications, and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity.
don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache, or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com.
suspects at the u.s. detention facility at guantanamo bay, cuba. a leading senate republican says he wants terror suspects arrested in his home state transferred to gitmo and tried there. the kentucky republican and senate republican leader mitch o'connell joins from us capitol hill. senator, why? these would suspects were arrested here in the united states. track record is arrested here and tried here and why do you think they should go to gitmo? >> we set up military commissions, statutory process, for trying foreign terrorists. typically captured overseas. these are not american citizens. their offense occurred in iraq against iraqi citizens. you can put foreigners in u.s. article iii courts but the question is should you? the answer is you should not. for a whole variety of reasons. number one, bring the war on terror to bowling green, kentucky. you have security problems with regard to the judge, the prosecutor, jurors. you have security problems at the local government ends up
having to pick up related to the transferring of prisoners back and forth between the jail, if you will, the prison, and -- the court system. will is no reason for american communities to be subjected to this. you remember the administration thought about doing it with ksm p, the mastermind of 9/11. he is at guantanamo. they were going to take him to new york and be tried there. you saw the reaction of new york to the possibility of this foreign terrorist being tried in new york. you are bogey to have the same reaction in bowling green, kentucky. this is not a place for these cash characters. >> i think the administration would argue ksm is a higher proceed pile than these would. you mentioned the possibility of security problems, retaliatory strikes. justice department says they simply see no evidence of that. here is their segment and since 9/11, there have been hundreds of defendants convicted in our federal court system of terrorism or terrorism related violations in none of these cases. has your judiciary district
sufshed suffered retaliatory attacks. >> that's what happened in alexandria. they got it wrong again. it created enormous problems when one of terrorists was tried over there. the justice department is simply wrong here. these are not american citizens and not entitled to the protections of the bill of rights. the focus out to be on interrogation and detention, not prosecution. maybe after intear xwags and detention occurs at an appropriate place like zbaun an opportunity know off of u.s. soil. some kind of prosecution might be in order. the way to do that, of course, at that point, would be military commission which were set up specifically for the purpose. the answer to justice department is that you can make these trials occur in bowling green, kentucky. but shouldn't. there is no reason to. >> i want to shift your subject to other issues. you are the leader of senate republicans. biggest debates on capitol hill, does the president have the legal authority to continue the military operations in libya? the white house has just sent up this memo. i have it here making the case
the united states is not acting alone. the united states does not have ground troops on the ground and the president is not subject to the war powers resolution. is he? >> well, you know, there are different points of view in the senate republican conference about the president's short and in a situation like this. >> what's the leader think? >> i have a lot of members in a lot of different places. i'm not going to announce to you tonight my view of that. we all agree that there won't be any american soldiers on the ground. that's good. we all agree it is better for the americans to be in a supporting role. that's good. we don't have a unified conference position on the question of whether or not the president has the authority to do it. >> this memo says $1.1 billion for the defense department. there are additional costs for the state department. through the end of september. is that a price worth paying for the american people right now? >> well, senator mccain, who has been to benghazi and libya, advises us that the -- rebel
group, group we obviously hope will take over the government here at some point, believes the u.s. government should be reimbursed for its expenses and we think that's a good idea. apparently libya had a lot of money. as a result obviously of their oil revenue and we would hope and expect we would be repaid. >> let me scout that issue one of reasons this comes up is that a lot of negotiations, political pressure to do something about the deficit and then the long-term debt. you are part of the negotiation was the white house right now. which wants congress to give it the blessing to raise the government's ability to borrow, raise the debt ceiling. some see a potential opening yesterday. you were among the senators that voted with your colleague, senator coburn, to try to eliminate ethanol subsidies. what a lot of people are saying that was republicans there say ri ing take something away is okay, is that on the table, tax increase? >> if you do broad tax reform, which i'm in favor of doing, it
is a complicated process. we have about a month to six weeks to work out an agreement to cut spending and the president's request of us to raise the debt ceiling. i don't think that we have the time to do comprehensive tax reform which we ought to do. i don't think we have the time to do that in connection with this particular event right ahead of us, which is his request of us to raise the debt ceiling. >> but what about some limit ed tax increases like maybe a revisit on the ethanol, maybe the oil industry subsidies the president has talked about. >> if i may answer, we're not doing tax increases in this discussion related to raising the debt ceiling. this is about spending too much. we have this problem because we spend too much, not because we tax too little. we're willing to look at the issue of tax reform, but that cannot be done in the next month. >> cannot be done in the next month. what do you hope to be done in the next month, lastly, on the question of medicare, which some republicans believe has become a bit of a political liability as
we begin at the presidential level and congressional level to get into the 2012 cycle, a cycle which you very much home to emerge from at the very end as the majority leader. >> all i can say is what it would take too get my vote for the debt credit. something for our annual discretionary spending in the next years on a continued declining path and we would have to do something about entitlement reform, and that certainly would include medicare. it's a huge problem. the president's on cabinet, the trustees of medical i sacare an social security said it's in trouble now. you can't have a credible debt reduction package and leave medicare out of it. >> thank you for your time. al gore is praising one of the republican presidential candidates. we'll tell you who and why, next. and making their factories more environmentally friendly. producing products that save on fuel and emissions, and some that can be reused again.
and the ones tomorrow will bring. somewhere in america, a city comes to life. it moves effortlessly, breathes easily. it flows with clean water. it makes its skyline greener and its population healthier. all to become the kind of city people want to live and work in. somewhere in america, we've already answered some of the nation's toughest questions. and the over sixty thousand people of siemens are ready to do it again. siemens. answers. we're going to head on into the interview. eugena . . . ms. nelson what do you think ford is doing right? they've really done it with sync. cuz i'll say, "call my husband", and it calls him. and i never have to pick up my phone.
if you could thank ford for one thing, what would it be? i don't feel like a mom in a minivan. i actually feel like a woman and then a mom. so i would say, "thank you". how do your kids feel about the edge? my fifteen year old loves it, 'cuz he thinks he's gonna' drive it in a year. number of interesting political stories. let's start here. will the governor of texas join the race for the white house. here to talk about 2012 and beyond, gloria borger and our national political correspondent jessica yellin. you spent some time in new york last night, rick perry was there. before we have the will he or won't he question, listen to this. >> if we don't do it, who will? if not now, when? are you ready to take this country back? then stand with us over the course of the next 16 months. elect those governors across this state. make a difference in america,
and we will take america back. god bless you, and through you may god continue to bless this great country we love. >> now, team perry could say he was talking about governors' races. he did mention governors. >> but the buzz in austin, the people i'm talking to, think he's running, planning to run. his body language, he sounded like he's getting ready to run. the people in the room last night when i talked to them, john, afterwards they loved hill. they said not only does he have a great message to sell because of the texas economy and the rest of his story, but he could give a speech and they just think, wow, that's so -- >> he sounded a little like george bush. >> that is true. >> the energy matters. he looks like he's having fun. if you had this conversation with him a few months ago, when you brought that up, he was, like, i don't think so. i'm think about it. his body looked very different about it. he seems more excited. >> well, and there have been developments which is that his senior staff has just quit, newt
gingrich's campaign. so there's a staff in place should he decide to run. people always thought that was a draws back because the people who were so close to him had left. he also has a story to tell. he's created jobs. he's got a natural base, tea party constituency, republican governors and head of the governors association. he's kind of a natural. >> the democrats will say he's george bush's lieutenant governgovern governor or something like that. jon huntsman will announce in the shadow of the statue of liberty. his wife sent out an e-mail said, go to our web site, check out this video. a little unconventional. we don't have to give governor huntsman a free political ad. he's on his motorcycle riding the beautiful red rocks. >> it's not him, just so you know. we've done some investigative reporting, jessica and i. we've discovered it is his bike
and his uni, but it is not the governor riding. and then there's going to be another installment -- >> will it explain acting? >> we are waiting. >> wait, a campaign where we're looking for authenticity, it is not the governor? >> it is not. it is his bike, though. >> we're not voting for his bike, though. >> the point is, he's not your average candidate. he's a little bit different and expect something unusual from him. he's not like the rest of the pack. >> let me talk about something unusual because as i mentioned his wife mary kay sent out a video. there's talk about nutd beginning riff's wife. you can see mary kay huntsman at this in new hampshire. i had a conversation with her before that. this sa i woman gung-ho about her husband running, very involved but not separate from the staff kind of way. she's very much a part of their thinking. the staff loves her. >> but well, that would be a change from a lot of other campaigns. you know, look at what happened when newt gingrich's staff --
>> she's not a terror. she seems like a lovely woman, easy to talk to. >> mitt romney's day, yesterday he had a joke, essentially said, i'll be the candidate. they wrote, governor, you won a debate, not an election. romney, the candidate without a necktie, might be forgetting that granite staters prefer hardworking and humble to highfalutin and haughty. don't worry, governor romney, al gore is on your side because governor has said climate change is manmade. al gore said good for mitt romney. i think mitt romney would like to change -- there's a disruption in the force there. he would rather have al gore be his enemy and the union leader be his frendz. >> this guy can't catch a break. people say be more authentic, do what feels natural. he does, makes some jokes. he made another joke somewhere else, and he