judiciary committee, is working on legislation to revise the fisa court. what are the main approaches of this massive surveillance operation the u.s. is running. >> i supported al franken and udall on making the rules and orders and opinions on the fisa court which are disclosed. senator franken's effort on the numbers of certain kinds of invasive actions by the government. my focus is equally important on the process. on the fisa court itself, how is it selected? right now it's only by the chief justice of the united states supreme court, john roberts, acting alone without any kind of review. >> just so folks are clear here, the foreign surveillance intelligence act set up this secret court. the court itself is secret, the judges are appointed by john roberts in secret. there is no adversarial process. it's simply a government lawyer coming before this secretly appointed judge with no one on the other side. >> that's right, and that's the second important element of my program, which is that there should be some adversarial process there, should be some kind of special advocate who take

searches for names and assign suspicion to people and track them. it has nothing to do with the fisa court. it's necessary when you're targeting a u.s. person. this database concerns loss of u.s. persons but it's done completely independent of the fisa court. >> they have to clear some bar of justification for the foreignness of the person that

. it has nothing to do with the fisa court. it's necessary when you're targeting a u.s. person. this database concerns loss of u.s. persons but it's done completely independent of the fisa court. >> they have to clear some bar of justification for the foreignness of the person that they're clearing for in order for it to be within the four squares of the law as the nsa understands it, is that right?

and the fisa court in a timely and comprehensive manner and that appropriate steps are taken to ensure violations are not repeated. the report stems from an nsa audit obtained by the post from leaker edward snowden.

there's serious abuse, in 2011, there was an 86-page ruling from the fisa court saying what the nsa was doing, systematically violated the constitution and the law.

under the fisa court, the analyst sits at his or her desk and search for things when they don't even know the person they're searching for.

different about it, is that unlike surveillance under the fisa court, the analyst sits at his or her desk and search for things when they don't even know the person they're searching for. they can search just by general key word or they search e-mail

any system to get a warrant. remember, the theme of this whole story has been that the fisa court is a rubber stamp. now the story today is, look at how the fisa court slammed the nsa, sort of like we have to pick which boat we want to ride on. the story today, the opinion today goes to underscore what folks like i have been saying all along, that the fisa court is not only looking at warrants, they are looking at the entire process of the system, and what was done in this application to say we want to keep going with the process is the fisa court went into extremely excruciating detail about is the nsa complying with the fourth amendment and the law? they found that, as you go down the system, what they are -- in the vast majority of it, but they have this one element of the program -- >> mean not getting americans' data if they can? >> no, not getting it kept in the system. that's it. >> right. >> and what they want is, no, that's not in compliance. >> okay. >> so the nsa went away and fixed it a month later. that's what we're dealing with, and they reported it to congress a month

about the fisa courts and nsa. i've got to ask you what you've learned. you're on the intelligence committee. where do you stand on this? do you think the nsa has been transparent enough? do you think the fisa courts are transparent enough? are you for this kind of surveillance that the nsa is involved with? and did this surveillance help us in this case, learning about this plot? >> in terms of the fisa court, no, i don't think the fisa court is transparent enough. i don't think they have any idea who sits on the fisa court. i think we'll be better off in a process where they're nominated by the president, confirmed. i think there should be an advocate for the privacy interests of the american people before that court. in terms of the programs themselves, the biggest question i have is about the meta data program. i've been urging nsa really for quite some time, that they ought to allow the telecommunications companies to hold their own data. and then we would only go to them when we had specific and or ti or tick u latable facts. the vast majority of telephone records within the

incidents of noncompliance are reported to the oversight committees and the fisa court in a timely and comprehensive manner and that appropriate steps are taken to ensure violations are not repeated. the report stems from an nsa audit obtained by the post from leaker edward snowden. kelly o'donnell joins me now. what kind of privacy violations are we talking about? >> what we're learning so far, these are not instances of eavesdropping on conversations or reading e-mails. it's not that kind of thing. it's that big sweeping data collection we've been hearing a lot about in the last few months. phone numbers or those kind of data were swept up while the nsa was looking for foreign intelligence targets. sometimes this was sort of sloppy, unintentional mistakes where they put in the wrong area code and swept up a bunch of numbers that way or they had some sort of break in their own procedure. some of it, apparently, unintentional. but in some instances, the audits found that there were cases where they went too far and sometimes the fisa court that does oversee this pushed back and said th

collects phone records, more transparency by the secret foreign intelligence court, that's the fisa court, and the creation of a task force of private citizens. joining me this morning barton gellman of "the washington post" who has been writing extensively about edward snowden and the nsa, special correspondent for nbc news ted koppel, and the chairman of the house homeland security committee, republican congressman mike mccaul. barton gellman, let me start with you. has edward snowden won? has he accomplished what he set out to do, which is not only get a debate going but force change in these programs? >> he has accomplished far more than anyone in his position could have reasonably hoped to have accomplished. he told me his greatest fear was that he would come out and do this and whole story would be -- you know, roiling around for a day and it would be gone. now you have president obama being forced to say that he welcomes the debate, which he welcomes sort of like the ceo who gets an angry letter yet writes back and says thank you for your interest in our surveillance programs

within the secret fisa court, the court that approves these surveillance programs and does so with only one party. that's the government appearing before it. and obama said he was willing to consider a system where there would be someone else there to leapt the other side, presumably the public interest. that could conceivably be an important step. the devil is in the details in terms of how that person is appointed. what information that person has access to. what cases that person could actual participate in. we'll have to see. then there was talk about changes to the patriot act, but that talk was entirely nonspecific. it's impossible to evaluate whether the president is contemplating any meaningful changes. >> one thing i was interested in in president obama's mention of changing the fisa court, one of the problems folks have identified, one of the problems you've talked about in some interviews is every one of the judges on it is appointed directly by the chief justice. at the moment that means all 11 justices or judges are appointed by chief justice john roberts. now, there's

contractor edward snowden including reforms to the patriot act and the fisa court. i want to bring in our panel now here in new york is msnbc political analyst joan walsh, and nbc contributor jonathan alter. and in pennsylvania, nbc contributor professor james peterson of lehigh university. joan, your immediate reaction to the president's comments on the surveillance program. were you satisfied by the four proposals that he offered as ways of improving and extending oversight? >> i don't know that i'm entirely satisfied, but i think it's a big step forward. >> cause you've been critical of the program yourself. >> i've been critical myself. i was happy to see the proposed addition of some sort of adversarial advocate to the fisa discussions. i think that that's a very interesting idea that some advocates have proposed. i think he kind of hurt himself. it was substantiative, but some of his rhetoric is going to come back to bite him comparing, proving that he did the dishes to michelle to proving to the american people that he's not, you know, abusing his powers and being big brother s

need not report the unintended surveillance of americans. in another, the fisa court, which has authority over some nsa operations, did not learn about a new collection method until it had been in operation many months. the court then ruled it unconstitutional. i think that is incredibly damning, the fact that these operations were already under way and post hoc the court says this is a violation of the constitution. >> this is clearly going to have an impact on capitol hill. lawmakers will have a hard time ignoring this because of the response you've seen from the general public and the senate judiciary chairman, patrick leahy, announced today that he was going to hold a hearing into this. so what we've seen since these revelations came to light when lawmakers said what are you worried about, this happens all the time. now they're being forced to say, no, we need more oversight because a lot of times lawmakers don't want to get in the middle of the stuff, they want the nsa to do their work and nobody wants to be seen as disrupting an effort -- >> nobody wants to be seen as weak

, for example, as i proposed, the fisa court so that it's opinions and rulings are made public so that we have an adversarial and selecting the members of the the court that enhances it's geography and background. >> let me play this. >> opinion. 86 pages long from the fisa court that ruled that much of what the nsa is doing spying on american citizens is violation of the fourth amendment and a violation of the statue. this opinion remains a complete secret. the fisa court said they had no objection to having it relieved but the obama administration says it has to be secret. >> what do you say to glenn gre greenwald? >> he has a point that they need to be classified if only for the sake of the appearance and credibility and trust of the american people in that institution. if you were to say that a court operates in secret, issues opinions in secret, its deliberations are all secret, its judges are secret in all of the work they do, it sounds a lot like the kind of star chamber or proceedings that existed at the time of our revolution and our rebellion against england. this court is a

privacy advocate to the process, declassify more nsa and fisa court documents and appoint a new group of outside experts to review intelligence. it's receiving criticism from lawmakers who believe a privacy advocate will slow down the country's anti-terror tactics. president obama and senator john mccain, has talked about how snowden has changed intelligence. >> i called for a thorough review of our surveillance operations. before mr. snowden made he's leaks. i don't think we would have gotten to the same place. and we would have done so without putting at risk, our national security. and vital ways to secure the country. there's americans that view mr. snowden as awhistleblower. there's some young people that believe he's some kind of jason bourne. >>> relations between the united states and russia are strained at best. and it goes all the way to the highest levels of government. president obama insists he doesn't dislike vladimir putin. but it's clear he's not too crazy about him, either. the president's remarks prompted a challenge from senator john mccain, who says the presi

fell as the controversy fisa courts. president obama is not done trying to reboot his economic message. first, they were called that then went behind closed doors on capitol hill yesterday. the president with sessions to rally across the middle last plan. the house speaker didn't miss an opportunity to take a dig. >> i'm not going to speak for what the president is doing or why he's doing it. if i had poll numbers as low as his, i would be out doing the same thing if i were him. if i were him. >> now, just for comparison sake here, boehner's favorability, 18%. president obama, 48%. during one of the sessions the question about the next fed chairman bubbled up. according to reports, the democratic president walked up to the microphone saying larry summers, bad choice. they were told not to believe everything they read in the huffington post. the president added summers was the rock of guibraltar. the white house is making it clear that witch scandals, things being cooked up by critics while discussion the second term agenda, president obama alluded to phony scandals calling them

how they were implemented in 2011. one release from 2011 shows that judge john baits, the fisa court chief judge said, quote, the volume and nature of the information it's been collecting is fundamentally different than what the court had been led to believe. after a major document dump, does this help or hurt the president as he tries to regain credibility? let's bring in former white house media director. i want to start with you. former administration official. you know, you've been working on some of these, nsa, trying to get some more disclosure, more sunshine on this. the administration every day, every time there's a new disclosure, feels like, they're correcting the record yet again and it looks like they haven't been coming clean with us before. >> well, it's death by a thousand cuts. it's important they get whatever else they need to get out as quickly as possible. >> you think there's more? >> there's clearly got to be more. the right approach is go ahead and get everything out into the open they can. that's why the external review board, that is one of the things the orga

haystack you have to have the haystack. >> pete, on the issue of the fisa courts, senator ron wyden is one of the critics of the president on this issue. he called the fisa court the most one-sided court in the nation. what kind of judges get appointed to sit on this court in secret. the kinds of proposals that the president made today about that court, would those be radical changes to the way that court operates? >> well, it would be a radical change because for the first time you'd have somebody in the court urging the court not to do what the government wants. the problem is who's that person going to be? and, you know, the administration does seem serious about trying to figure out a way to make this work. obviously it would have to be a person who is, has all the clearances. would it be a government official? would it be somebody at the justice debarment sort of like an ombudsman or inspector general who goes in there and tells the court, don't do whatever the government asks? you won't have a traditional adversary like in a normal court because nobody would know in advance yo

warrant. now, i do think the fisa courts need to be revised. i'd like to see a little more independence there. the fisa situation right now works more like a grand jury than it does a court system. and i think that probably needs to be revised. i'd be surprised if the administration weren't working on that. >> yeah, that's an important point. when you say grand jury, what you mean is it's tilted towards the prosecution, operates in secret. we don't have the adversarial testing of the information. i want to draw you out, though, governor, on the way we talk about safety. because it seems sometimes whether the debate is on foreign policy or these intelligence gathering methods that people want to resolve every question by saying, well, if it makes us any bit safer at all, then that's the end of the conversation. you've campaigned at times against that kind of thinking. i want to play something from avenue saddam hussein was first captured from you. >> the acapture of saddam is a good thing, which i hope very much will keep our soldiers in iraq and around the world safer, but the capture o

approval and that in that process, when you go before the fisa court, there be a public advocate, a privacy advocate so distort is not just hearing from the nsa, the court is also hearing from a privacy advocate and then they can make a decision. those are two important reforms that i think we have to make. those are distinct -- >> are you going to propose something specifically to do that? >> yes. i'm working on legislation with other members of congress to do that and i do believe we will have bipartisan support. the president has indicated, at least in general terms, that he supports at least one of those measures i stuffed. the idea of having some kind of privacy advocate taking on that side of the argument before the fisa court. you want to do it in a way that also ensures, though, that if there is a serious and legitimate case of information about a terrorist attack, that the united states can respond swiftly. we want to make sure in those cases where there is genuine and authentic suspicion and reasonable suspicion of a terrorist attack you can respond quickly but you want to

a search warrant to the fisa court would slow down the efficiency of our counterterrorism investigation. i don't think that's the right way to go. >> we cannot afford to have it on a debating society. we need decisions made quickly. yes or no, up or down. residents lives are at stake. >> a security retreat and called them dangerous politically and as policy. on the other side of the aisle, they criticized the president's weak agenda and asserted his eyes tinker around the edges of the surveillance programs. the president remained defiant and refused that snowden's leaks were toward his bid of greater transparency. >> i never made claim that is all the surveillance technologies that had developed since the time some of these laws had been put in place somehow didn't require additional reforms. that's exactly what i called for. i signed an executive order well before mr. snowden leaked this information that provided whistle blower intelligence to the community. >> it was a tough sell. trevor tim asked, does president barack obama think we are stupid? the fact is he's had yea

fisa court has that benefit. in these key cases, noted garden variety of individual warrants, but when they are interpretations of section 215, like that interpretation that led to the metadata program. that's where it's worth while for the court to hear another voice. i maybe statute tore changes may be needed. right now the chief justice picks all those people. i think it ought to be senate confirmed. >> we know that john kerry has been pressed on that during some travel it is in south america. are you concerned that these programs present a long-term problem for our international interests? >> they certainly do provide a lot of complications in terms of our international relations. some of it is played out well below the surface, because some of this is partners in europe have their own programs they don't want to talk about and fee freel to talk -- and not talk about what their own intelligence agencies do. some of the countries are the biggest beneficiaries of the intelligence work we do when we're able to share with them. if there's a threat in madrid or london or berlin, so

more access to the fisa court opinions but we need to return the patriot act to what it was intended to be and that was that it was intend as a device to go after those who are actually the suspects of an investigation and we had mr. sensenbrenner who is one of the chief authors of the patriot act come to the house floor and sand up and say he support by amendment because he thought the patriot act was being misinterpreted, misapplied by courts and by executive branch officials. >> good to see you both and so good to see actually two members who are on opposite sides of the aisle coming together for something. thank you both. >> thank you. >> is a-rod out of here? yankees slugger alex rodriguez facing a lifetime ban from baseball over alleged doping. he could make a deal for an extension. time is running out. suspensions for a-rod and about eight other major league players are expected today or tomorrow. a three-time mvp and baseball's highest paid player a-rod earned $29 million last year. a-rod's attorneys plan to appeal any suspension the league hands down. distribution systems,"

. it's a black box, the fisa court is a secret tribunal issuing secret opinions making secret law and a lot of it completely unavailable to members even of the foreign intelligence committee. >> those documents published by the "the washington post" were leaked by edward snowden. >>> this weekend has been a wash out in parts of the south. heavy rains flooded several streets in north carolina and more rain is expected through the weekend. will it end? when is the question. we have more on that. >> we're still keeping an eye on the rain up and down the east coast. it's streaming in off the gulf of mexico and the southeast will most likely see more flooding rain again today. heaviest of it is still falling along areas like new orleans, moving into mobile alabama and the western panhandle of florida. it's stretching now into northeast. at first as of yesterday it was looking like this whole storm system would stay out over the mid-atlantic but it does look like it's bringing rain to parts of washington, d.c. off and on lighter showers in new jersey and making their way up into southern ne

let's remember, the foreign intelligence, the fisa upgrade, the fisa act was passed actually in 2007 under a democratic congress and with george w. bush still in the white house. barack obama was not president in 2007. the first revelations about the nsa 215 section being used were in 2006 in "the new york times." the reaction of a democratic congress was to pass the fisa act, whose 215 section is being used right now by the nsa. this happened under george w. bush. >> listen, i worked in the white house -- >> there were no impeachment hearings. >> it was part of the effort to keep some of our methods secret. because once they're in "the new york times," they're not as helpful or useful. which is why i think president obama has done the lord's work in improving and enhancing vastly, vastly augments the surveillance state in which we live. and i applaud it. i think that's one of the things he's done that's kept us safer. >> i don't think this is a republican/democrat issue, i think it's an american issue. i hope the people have prepared for this. >> i hope so. >> one little thing, and

stories today from the post was that the head of the fisa court did not know about this until "the washington post" told him. diane feinstein, who leads a senate committee about this, did not know about them either, until "the post" broke the story. then she got the audit later on. the president's statement up to now has been congress and this court are overseeing these programs, but these stories are poking a hole in them, suggesting, no, congress and this court don't know much about what's going on. >> well, perry, it's more than poking a hole. this story as well as others recently have exposed government lying. in washington, they don't call it that. they call it misstatements or inoperative claims. the nsa and its officials have been lying, both on the record, under oath to congress, which if you're an old-fashioned kind of guy, is called perjury and it's a crime, as well as lying to the public, which while not illegal is not appreciative or constructive for the process. i want to get your response to a specific version of this in "the washington post" article, which i'll read

defender, you know, when really what it is is a search warrant to the fisa court which you wouldn't have in a normal criminal case would slow down the efficacy of our counterterrorism investigation. i don't think that's the right way to go. >> i think it would be very impractical to have it done. maybe on some general policy issue where the court's going to make a decision, perhaps you could bring in an advocate. on day to day life and death decisions, i believe absolutely not. >> the debate comes as concerns about the threat posed by al qaeda in yemen seem to have eased. all but one of those diplomatic posts closed last week have now reopened. includes the u.s. embassy in cairo. at the same time, the u.s. is dealing with more fallout from russia's decision to harbor confessed nsa leaker edward snowden. president obama got bipartisan support for scrapping face-to-face meetings with vladimir put in but many urged him to step up the pressure on the russian leader. >> he's an old kgb colonel who has no illusions about our relationship, does not care about the relationship with the united st

want to know how much this changes things. we hear about changes with the fisa court and transparency there and the court has released more of its decision making -- >> a page -- >> yeah. the court's next to to be on instagram. bob corker on fox news said i would imagine there's members of the intelligence committee themselves don't that don't fully understand the gamut of things taking place. >> one thing we've seen, the apparatus built for spying on punitively terrorists is so much bigger and more powerful than any terrorism network that it could possibly dream of targeting that there's just, you know, the institutional inevitability we see more and more of these things like the u.n., like the u.n. spying and therefore that, you know, maybe incrementally more and more people get a little worried and upset as you heard with corker there. >> and maybe congress then pushes for greater access. >> maybe. >> i mean we'll see. we're supposed to talk about miley cyrus and her twerking, but i kind of want to talk for one moment about donald trump who said trump university grants knowledge to

. that's why we set up the fisa court. >> so according to president, number one, the spying struck the right balance. number two, the spying court was working fine and number three, the spying program was, as you just heard, sufficiently transparent. that was all just two months ago. on friday, the president basically acknowledged each of those claims was off base. >> in other words, it's not in you have for me as president to have confidence in these programs. the american people need to have confidence in them, as well. i will work with congress to pursue appropriate reforms to section 215 of the patriot act, the program that collects telephone records i'll work with congress to improve the public's confidence in the oversight conducted by the foreign intelligence surveillance court. known as the fisc. i think we should consider some additional changes to the fisc. we can take steps to put in place greater oversight, greater transparency, and constraints on use of in this authority. we can and must be more transparent. so i've drengted the intelligence community to make public as muc

, a look ahead to today's politics planner. speaking snowden, president is going to be discussing fisa court with a bipartisan group of members of congress today. and we've got oprah hosting a fund-raiser for corey booker. you're watching "the daily rundown" only on msnbc. [ whispe] shhh. it's only a dream. and we have home insurance. but if we made a claim, our rate would go up... [ whispering ] shhh. you did it right. you have allstate claim rate guard so your rates won't go up just because of a claim. [ whispering ] are we still in a dream? no, you're in an allstate commercial. so get allstate home insurance with claim rate guard... [ whispering ] goodnight. there are so many people in our bedroom. [ dennis ] talk to an allstate agent... [ doorbell rings ] ...and let the good life in. the physical damage was pretty bad. the emotional toll was even worse. our daughter had nightmares. what that robber really took from us was our peace of mind. with adt, we got it back. [ male announcer ] every 14.6 seconds, a burglary takes place in the united states. so rely on the fast alarm respons

-- >> this is without warrants. >> it would be under the fisa amendment based upon the article that came about because of the congressional language in 2008, so andrea, this is another part of the package that was designed to deal with the challenge that a lot of the communications were interested in are not american in nature, but they are in america. because of the way that the internet is literally wired. so what i think that this allows nsa to do is to capture e-mails according to the article exiting the united states, but to capture the e-mails that are going to very specific select foreign intelligence targets, not just anything going abroad. >> this is all coming to light as the president is certainly reflecting a level of discoll fo -- discomfort of a broad nature of the telephone metadata program which is under 702 and he had an hour and a half meeting with senator durbin and that meeting last and a hour and a half with a bipartisan group speaking to him about the ways to narrow the number of years that the telephone records are kept or whether some other record keeping should k

the fisa courts. right now it's a rubber stamp. having a dynamic is good for privacy. that being said, this board he announced is kind of a political measure that politicians take to punt an issue. we don't know exactly the composition of the board. i believe they want to release their report in a couple months. by then we'll be talking about a government shutdown or obamacare implementation. the enthusiasm will be zapped away. >> i thought was interesting in the political story, when you read the reaction from folks in the industry, they're saying there's two separate conversations. let's keep this. there's the government spying we do or data that we collect and then there's the corporate data that we collect. clearly their interests, even in engaging in this project is to maintain what they do on the business side, separate and apart from the kinds of privacy and transparency issues we're talking with regard to the government. >> that's right. you look at the last few privacy debates we've had on the federal level in congress, the debate over one of the cybersecurity laws that

going the address. the ekd second is the fisa court, this court we know very little about and isn't public, how much authority should it have? what checks should be in place to make sure that there is at least an adversary yal proceeding there when it comes to the issue of privacy and security? so i think that we're open to changes in both. the president is committed to the safety of this country. but let's do everything we can to protect the privacy of innocent americans. >> you know, the secrecy, senator chambliss, surrounding these programs, is of course the intelligence community tells us, is necessary. the executive branch, all branches of government are involved in checks an balances. yet you have frustrated members of congress like your cheegs who put some of these questions, try to force this into the open a little bit, and you have to director of national intelligence, mr. clapper, who appeared on capitol hill, james clapper, and had this exchange that was not leveling with the american people. watch. >> does the nsa collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds o

depending on how you word it and look at it, is perjury. what court are we talking about? the fisa spying court approves 99.7% of all requests for surveillance. this is a very friendly court for any kind of broad surveillance, whether that's phone, meta data, electronic. this particular judge was appointed by george w. -- originally a george w. bush appointee, put on the courts by roberts, who's very friendly to this stuff. we have to take a big step back. you can still have the debate over whether you want really invasive surveillance of all of your electronic communications. what we learned this week, and what i think people have to get their arms around, is that we have the government lying to the very court that's supposed to oversee this, misleading that court over massive surveillance. so we haven't had the honest debate. we're finally getting little dribs and drabs it of it. you have everyone from mcconnell to president obama basically leaving us with an impression for years this was all overseen by the court, overseen as if it was okay. in fact, the court was waving a flag

the fisa court judge, he doesn't think that they have the ability to monitor those type of violations. so we're going to see, i think, a new round of hearings from senator leahy. >> all right. nia? >> we now know that the movie "the butler" is a movie worth seeing. it came out yesterday, starring, of course, forest whitaker, based on the real life of a butler who served eight administrations. oprah winfrey's in it, lenny kravitz, i think i'll go see it later today. >> it's on my list, but my list goes about three years, the last time i saw a movie. thanks to krystal ball, sam cedar, and nia-malika henderson of "the washington post." thank you all for getting up and thank you for joining us today for "up." join us tomorrow, sunday morning at 8:00, we'll have hakim jeffries on the politics of crime. >>> and up next, melissa harris-perry with joy reid sitting in. the 25-year anniversary sheds light on the state of police today. why ice cube is just as relevant as ever. that's melissa harris-perry with joy reid sitting in. thanks for getting up. # ♪ if you have high cholesterol, here's

in the fisa courts, challenging it. 99.99% of the programs tend to be approved within the courts. if something actually changes down the road you can have this conversation. so far at least, the president seems to have basically only given a little bit of ground on process, not on the actual programs. >> mike? >> richard, do you think part of the issue here is that we continue to use the phrase, by we, i mean the president of the united states, "war on terror" when it is a daily struggle with terror and the president and many other public people at the top of the pyramid have somehow don't have the confidence that the american people can be told that there are people out there each and every day who want to hurt us? >> look, war on terror is a terrible phrase. it suggests there's an end to it. there's not going to be a battleship missouri surrender ceremony. how do we stay open for business, how do we stay and do everything we need to do in the world at the same time take necessary precautions. we can't close our embassies every time there's a lot the chatter. we haven't figured