same reason you're not going to get reform of the u.n. security council. any reform has winners and losers and shockingly enough, the losers will resist it. i ended up thinking it made sense to traffic in put up these thoughts. i do think there's one or two ways things could turn out better. one is the way i fear, which is only after a crisis have essentially business as usual is no longer sustainable. the problem is we pay an enormous collective price for the crisis. this is not the way any of you should want things to happen. the alternative is something of a new majority or plurality for reforms we need. i think aker, about for leadership willing to willing to in some ways combine the best of fdr, the fireside chats for policy reform and lyndon johnson and some good retail politics to bring it about. it's a longshot? are. is it possible? definitely. no way have they given up. americans can be counted on to do the right thing, but only after they've tried everything else. the real question for me is whether we get time before the crisis forces us to unde

much attention has been paid to the internal white house e-mails and changes to the u.n. ambassador susan rice's talkingpoints explaining the source of the attack. i believe that a key question still remains to be answered. why for two weeks did the administration propagate the tale that it was a youtube video-inspired attack when officials knew almost immediately that it was cared out by afil affiliates of al qa? that's a prist simple question. -- that's a pretty simple question. why were the american people told that an antii anti-islam ye video prompted the attack when it is known at that it did not? no one -- no one, mr. president, has answered this very basic question. instead of providing answers to these questions, a top white house advisor has impugned the integrity of those seeking the truth by decrying persistent questioning as a witch-hunt. it is time for the president to put politics aside, demand accountability from his staff, step up and do his job. congress is doing its part by conducting serious oversight hearings on both the i.r.s. overreach and the bengh

the u.n. system to adapt and in developing close and cooperative bilateral relationships across the globe. but cooperation, too, requires investment in diplomacy, in technical assistance and helping friendly countries do a better job of defending against common threats. according to surveys, the average american thinks that we give about a quarter of our tax dollars to foreigners. terrible. the truth is that our entire international affairs budget including everything from the protection of our ambassadors to emergency food for refugees is equal to about 1%. i don't know about you, but i am fed up with politicians who demand a strong america and then vote to deprive our diplomats of the tools they need to protect and advance our interests. and that's why our country should have a comprehensive national security budget that will enable us not only to wage war, but also to preserve peace and to lead both on the battlefield and at the bargaining table. our second imperative is education. the tech

concerned at the emerging evidence of the use of chemical weapons, and we demand that the regime allow the u.n. to investigate these allegations. assad should be in no doubt that the world is watching and will hold him to account, him and anyone else to account who is found responsible for the use of chemical weapons. as we face up to these security challenges and those posed by iran, we also face significant budget constraints, both in london and in washington. secretary hagel and i have addressed the issue of defense reform and how we can get more bang for our buck on both sides of the atlantic. greater military cooperation is at the heart of this, and we also need to look at how we can encourage our partner countries within european nato to reform their forces to take on more of the security challenge with more effective and deployable forces. of course, the u.k. and the u.s. already enjoy a very high level of cooperation and interoperability, but we have agreed to explore what more we can do in our armed forces to drive greater efficiencies through collaboration together. yesterday, as sec

same reason you're not going to get reform of the u.n. security council. any reform has winners and losers and shockingly enough, the losers will resist it. i ended up thinking it made sense to traffic in put up these thoughts. i do think there's one or two ways things could turn out better. one is the way i fear, which is only after a crisis have essentially business as usual is no longer sustainable. the problem is we pay an enormous collective price for the crisis. this is not the way any of you should want things to happen. the alternative is something of a new majority or plurality for reforms we need. i think aker, about for leadership willing to willing to in some ways combine the best of fdr, the fireside chats for policy reform and lyndon johnson and some good retail politics to bring it about. it's a longshot? are. is it possible? definitely. no way have they given up. americans can be counted on to do the right thing, but only after they've tried everything else. the real question for me is whether we get time before the crisis forces us to unde

the u.n. is doing a great job. they are running out of money. jordan is about to fall if we don't stop this war. from a human point of view, senator mccain, we have got to get this war over and america needs to be seen as part of the solution, not part of the problem. from a national security point of view, syria is going to become a nightmare for the whole world, including the united states. mr. mccain: i thank my colleague. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to include in the record a piece by senator casey called time to act in syria. it was in the huffington post, "washington post" editorial entitled repercussions of inaction, "wall street journal" article u.s. has warned planned syria arms sale, and finally a syria arms sale, and finally a >> the situation in afghanistan and 78 and 79 was just how different it was from what we face today. many things are radically different. there are no radical leftist parties or secular parties at afghanistan today. that has all been pretty much wiped out but in the 1970s those were the powerful force

. >> between a group of u.n. the president. >> in this town nothing happens behind closed doors which is okay. this needs to be something that is transparent. at the end of the day this will affect the lives of millions of americans in fundamental ways so it is going to be a process, patty murray will be involved, paul ryan will be involved and it requires a presidential leadership. if you look back whether it is tax reform 86 or whether it is social security reform 83 the last two examples where we did something significant to improve the economy and deal with what seemed to be a huge debt and deficit problem which by the way seems small relative to what we have not always involve presidential leadership. it must. the president had ultimately been in support in order to have it become effective and inactive but the resources of management and budget and the treasury department are critical to this. the president has got to step up and show leadership. >> do you believe he started? >> in a small way and that is i

there was a u.n. arms embargo in bosnia, and that essentially froze in place the military advantage of the bosnian serbs. we armed the croatians and bosnians secretly. it was gains on the ground by croatian and bosnian forces that ended that war. and i know it will lead to more bloodshed in the short term, but i think that, you know, arming the rebels will end the stalemate there. >> my understanding is that qatar and saudi arabia are arming the rebels. >> the rebels have claimed, and it's been lifted now, but the americans were limiting the type of weapons that could go in. they did not want sophisticated weapons go in. we're trying to, i think, vet who's getting these sophisticated weapons, but we really were limiting what kind of weapon was going in. and they've had lots of small arms and rpgs, but they needed more sophisticated stuff to deal with syrian armor and those kind of things. to me, it's you arm and arm fully, or you don't arm. not sort of half and half. thank you all very much. again, i

they don't like the u.n. security council voting on sanctions against them for their military activities. and i think the same thing is true in terms of the commission of inquiry. i think we continue to document, we continue to establish the facts, and there's a growing sense that north korea is out of step with the rest of the nations in the world. and i think this commission of inquiry is part of that process. the economists intelligence unit produces reports periodically. they did a report on freedom, what countries have the greatest amounts of freedom, who are the best countries in terms of human rights and so forth. they went through a process of giving numerical values to certain kinds of criteria, and then ranking all of the nations of the earth as to how they stand on human rights. the united states was in the 20s. north korea, there were 167 countries in the study and north korea was 167. now, no matter what your country is, that's not a good place to be. and i think we need to continue that effort.

but we're not relying on the u.n. alone. we are pursuing and gathering information independently of that and working with our allies and the syrian -- most importantly, the syrian opposition. i don't -- i don't have the depth of information about the progress that's being made to assess whether or not the report you said about the evidence available, whether or not that's the case. i know that we have been for some time now working in an effort to build on the intelligence community's assessment about the use of chemical weapons to make sure that we have a case, if you will, a set of facts that can be corroborated and reviewed. and from which we can make assessments about possible policy actions. even as that takes place as you have seen at the direction of the president, we have stepped up our humanitarian assistance, we have stepped up our assistance to the syrian opposition. we have made assistance available directly to the military, supreme military council of the opposition. nonlethal assistance, but we have stepped it

this working dialogue between the u.n. that was established several years ago is working dialogue. working dialogue without special relation center for everybody, i believe, it should be maintained for the benefit of european union and nay tow -- nato. [inaudible] and my third remarking, about necessary corporation between the both institutions but also for abilities of particular -- [inaudible] especially in the -- [inaudible] and smart defense. to what extent you can say that it -- [inaudible] it should be harmonized in the progress of both. thank you very much. >> translator: thank you for that very interesting speech. you said nato was a unique transatlantic forum. and there's no doubt about that. what i think is most encouraging is that nato has concentrated on the new challenges of cybersecurity and the like. and yet, there's a general view that nato is -- the u.s.a. turning in on itself has to, some extend downgraded nato. my question to you is, to what extend is the united states now less interested in europe. and my second question -- [inaudible] and the european enthusias

and that is i don't know the level of responsibility that u.n. the president bear for this scandal but i know it's not zero and i think the american people would like to hear a little bit more from you and the president that the buck stops here as opposed to hear no evil, see no evil and i know nothing, and that may just a little bit of unsolicited advice so i'm not going to look retrospectively. i'm going to look prospectively. i know you have seen the forms that the irs has sense to american citizens. the irs now reports to you mr. secretary and as for the last two and a half months. so i've looked through these forms and i find out where the irs is asking american citizens for all of their goodies both facebook and twitter including hard copies of all advertising or social media. under your watch will it be appropriate for irs agents to ask this? >> mr. chairman i take responsibility for the management of the treasury department and the management and oversight of the irs. there is a difference between general management oversight and the very

the e-mail says hey our u.n. office? i respond, should i be? and they respond, you might want to be in the office. so i respond, can it wait until halftime? the responses you might want to be in the office. that of course is the day that lehman brothers was about to go into bankruptcy and also the day that bank of america bought out merrill lynch and the day that wall street change forever. it events that followed an ugly weeks of the fall of 2008 have been chronicled in a lot of books and history. it's aig and the tarp and all these ugly payloads and all of this economic calamity happening at that time. i'm going to focus on a couple of aspects you might not know about that are important in understanding this in a global level. in the 19s the central bankers didn't understand each other and didn't communicate and act with common assault. that a change by 2008 in by the time 2008 rolls around there is very much a sense of common purpose among these guys. they meet six times a year. they go to basle switzerland. they have two days of meetings in

so far the u.n. security council has failed to reach a consensus i strongly regret because i do believe we have a political framework that could be used as an june 2012, the so-called action group in syria issued a statement of declaration, signed by all five permanent members of the u.n. security council. in that statement, it is clearly stated the regime in damascus should initiate a process of transition leading to accommodation of legitimate aspirations of the syrian people. i do believe a solution could be based on that declaration. too bad and of course negates u.n. security council resolution. now mr. burkett asked me about the good. they have made substantial progress. this is the reason we have granted a membership action plan. they do not fulfill the necessary criteria, but i am quite impressed by the work done and the progress achieved. but there's a political statement. a couple years ago, we granted a condition based membership action plan. we have declared we are willing to activate tha

of the two weeks around then-secretary of state general colin powell giving his push for war at the u.n., february 5, 2003. a speech he would later call, general powell would later call a stain on his career. that speech was the final nail in the coffin for so many, because he had been hesitant about the war, so he had a great deal of credibility. and he said, yes, the evidence was in. there was, there were -- there was final proof that there were weapons of mass destruction. f.a.i.r. did a study to have two weeks around that address and looked at the abc world news tonight, cbs evening news, nbc nightly news and the pbs "newshour". in that two-week period six weeks before the occupation, this was extremely significant because this was the period when americans are making up their minds. about half the population was for the war, half opposed to war. in those two weeks, there were 393 interviews done around war in the four major nightly newscasts. guess how many were with anti-war leaders? well, you figure, you know, half the population for, half against, maybe 200, 150. three. three of

one is entitled -- "washington post," "iran paves over suspected nuclear testing site despite u.n. protest." the second is another "washington post" associated press, "iran expands new technology for program that could be used to make weapons." and of course it's of interesting, another one, "iranian soldiers fighting for assad in syria." i would ask unanimous consent that they be made part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. mccain: i join with 90 members of the senate to support this resolution. this resolution has extraordinary bipartisan support. the senate will send a clear and unequivocal message to the regime in tehran, and that is this: the united states will not allow you to get a nuclear weapons capability. the dangers of a nuclear iran cannot be denied, diminished or dismissed. we must continue to ratchet up pressure through sanctions as this resolution suggests. but at the end of the day sanctions are a means to an end, not an end unto themselves. and unfortunately, despite the unprecedented international sanctions that have been put

but in order to use something like u.n. membership of going to the international criminal court, or any other diplomatic or other tool at your disposal, you have to have a strategy. i have seen the slightest inkling of a stretch from palestinian politician four years. what are they doing? whether complex are they going to get the? i just don't see the. i see nothing in anything they see -- say, anything they do that if it were up to me, i would be trying to increase resistance on the ground to this grinding annexation and occupation process. i would be trying to increase pressure external in by, i don't know where you go are what where you go out what to where you go are what you do but there are many things you can do, and i would say, this is a process that was supposed, going to the letter of assurances which i have right here, u.s. letter of assurances, invitation to the peace conference which have right ere, these tattered copies ideas back in 1991. this process was supposed to end in 1997. they interacted was supposed

that would take agreement among the five permanent members of the u.n. security council. the only way forward is a political solution. but to that end, we need a strong and unified message from the international community. mr. glick asked me whether the so-called u.s. pivot to asia will weaken t transatlantic relationship. my brief answer is that will very much depend on us, the europeans. i think it's in our interests that the u.s. rebalance its interests and focus a bit more on the asia pacific region taking into account the rising powers in that region. but if we are to insure that the americans still find europe relevant as a partner, the europeans must also invest in that transatlantic relationship politically, economically and militarily. that's my point. i was asked pretty much the same question, would this u.s. pivot to asia downgrade nato? no, not in itself. but, of course, if the europeans don't invest in the transatlantic relationship, it may, it may weaken that bond. but actually we have seen a strong u.s. commitment to european security. for instance, the u.s

we operate on the basis of a u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. pan kate to insure -- mandate to insure free movement -- [inaudible conversations] [laughter] >> you asked me about afghanistan. there is a clear road map. by the end of 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission. but we will stay after 2014 with a noncombat be mission, a training mission to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisek asked me when we do anything to stop cuts in defense budgets. as you know, international decision. they toe as an alliance can't interfere with that. that's a national decision. we have a men be. mark according to which -- a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated that those allies that spent more than 2%, on defense commit themselves to stay above the 2% while those allies below 2% will try to work towards 2% benchmark. it's not a legal requirement, it's a political obligation. and whenever i visit capitals -- and soon i will visit warsaw -- i will repeat that message. and, actually, i can tell you that

we operate on the basis of the u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. mandate, to ensure free movement. you asked me about afghanistan. that in 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission, but we will stay after 2014 to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisette asked me whether we do anything to stop cuts and defense budgets. as you know, international decision as a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated those allies that spent more than 2%, 2% or more on defense commit themselves to stay above the 2% while those will try to work towards the 2%. it's not a legal requirement. it's a political obligation. whenever i visit capitals and soon i will visit, i will repeat that message. and i can tell you i've had political dialogue with governments, but also with parliamentarians in some capitals. i have seen a positive response. i can mention one country in which the main political parties have reached a broad political agreement according to which they will now move gradually toward 2%. so that his life

just google the u.n. got the google. what made him say you lie was the reference that barack obama, president obama may to the fact that health care this law was not going to be readily available and easily acceptable to anybody in this country illegally. if you're here illegally -- so you're not going to get, it's not available for those who are here illegally and the cards and jumped up and said july. why do i raised that? i raise it because of all the things that barack obama said in that speech that this republican congressman had to disagree with, the thing that really got his eye was the very idea that the president would dare say that this is not going to happen with this card says your life. we know it is and we're going to fight against it. so years ago this health issue already has this color-coded notion connected to it. it's in the past. now going forward you've got a senator who is suggesting that you shouldn't healthier on the other side of this citizenship fight. talk to me about health care and where we'r

a u.n. arms embargo which essentially froze in place the military advantage of the bosnian serbs. we armed the croatians and the bosnian secretly. there were gains on the ground, not magical american airstrikes. i know it will lead to more bloodshed in the short term, but i think that arming the rebels will end the stalemate there. >> qatar and saudi arabia are our men. >> the rebels have claimed -- and it has been lifted now, but the americans were limiting the types of weapons that could go in. they did not want sophisticated weapons going in. new american effort. that is getting these more sophisticated weapons. we really were limiting what kind of weapon was going in. they have had lots of small arms and our peas that any more sophisticated step to deal with syrian armor and those kinds of things. to me it is your arm and arm fully or you don't arm. not sort of half and half. think you very much. again -- [applause] i appreciate all the questions and it's good to have this conversation. thank you. >> while we were in arizona, book tv with the help of our local cable partner ti

yes, again, fruit is a healthy buzzword that the ngdustry is putting out there, i especially to pull u.n., as presenting these two kids and as but wh have ave for sugar? uestnd 11 grams. that is more than: 2 tablespoo. that is significant.are >> one of the fascinating things [lau about chips, and i really think this is so interesting because y love potato chips. cou i couldn't figure out why they induce such incredible cravings and people. we know that the salt is right there on the surface of the the chips, providing what the industry calls the flavor bursts.dialls your saliva races to theinto pleasure center of the brain, which sends the signals. and they say, okay, let's get o more of that. we know that the senses are soae soaked with that. and that gives the pleasurable feeling. races the chips are also loaded with h sugar, a convertito starch itself, which begins to convert to sugar thet instant it hits your tongue. so you have the holy trinity yoe there of salt and sugar and fat, all interacting.duct, but but just just make you like the potter product but to make you want more and

they draw an analogy between the daily irritations and from government bureaucrats and rules and a u.n. conspiracy to remake american businesses, put in every house that are going to regulate the temperature for you. we couldn't figure out where that came from, and then vanessa went through the fox news transcript and there it was. many of the tea partyers that we talked to told us they watch fox news six to eight hours a day. so i think there was a big push about the time we were doing our interviews to get a certain scary image of environmentalism out there, and we can report it was working. >> all right. well, on that note, thank you for takenning. it was a wonderful discussion, and -- [applause] there's a reception upstairs, and they'll be signing books, on the second floor here. [inaudible conversations] >> coming up next, elizabeth liz price foley talks about her book "tea party: three principles." >> i am delighted to introduce you to our last author, elizabeth price foley who has written book on at the tea party. you make the tea partyhahey tea party is not a party, it's a move

the u.n. is doing a great job. they are running out of money. jordan is about to fall if we don't stop this war. from a human point of view, senator mccain, we have got to get this war over and america needs to be seen as part of the solution, not part of the problem. from a national security point of view, syria is going to become a nightmare for the whole world, including the united states. mr. mccain: i thank my colleague. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to include in the record a piece by senator casey called time to act in syria. it was in the huffington post, "washington post" editorial entitled repercussions of inaction, "wall street journal" article u.s. has warned planned syria arms sale, and finally a piece by leon wieseltier that is in "the new republic." the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: i thank my colleagues. i yield. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 601 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 44, 601, a

we then had the u.n. enterprises that are on the korean peninsula to keep the people of the republic of korea free. vietnam war, very, very dramatic and important in american history. and then today, you know, we face the issues with taiwan, our relationship with japan, and present a republic of korea. so it's always been a pretty important issue set for the united states. on the other hand, it's also always been taken for granted, to a degree. admittedly, america has for a long time been a very eurocentric nation. you know, we have worried about that. we faced the soviet union in europe. when i was a young lieutenant that's where everyone was focused. then the middle east, things like 9/11, which we're now totally focused their and still remaining that way. so in a certain way the administration's so-called pivot towards asia is very much overdue. and we should celebrate the concept of doing that. i mean, the portion of the world's population that happens to be in asia is enormous. the markets that are t

i write about this, and i was just giving a speech at the the u.n. the fact that so many news organizations, um, in the time when half the population was opposed to war, the four major nightly newscasts -- abc, nbc, cbs and the pbs "newshour" -- two weeks around paul giving his push at the u.n., he was secretary of the tate at the time -- state at the time, it was a final nail in the coffin for so many because he'd been so respected for dragging his feet on war saying is the evidence in. but on that day, february 5, 2003, six weeks before the invasion, he said the evidence is in. and that swayed so many. but, you know, the population was wided. and -- divided. and these newscasts were so important at this time. they set the agenda. 393 interviews done around war in that two week period on those four newscasts. would we expect, 200, 150 would be with people for the war and against the war? no, three against the war. three anti-war leaders of almost 400 interviews. no longer mainstream media. it's an extreme media beating the drums for war. we know in

we operate on the basis of u.n. mandate. we have an obligation to implement the u.n. mandate to insure free movement. [inaudible conversations] [laughter] you asked me about afghanistan. there's a clear road map. by the end of 2014, the isaf mission will come to an end. that will complete our combat mission. but we will stay after 2014 with a noncombat mission, a training mission to help the afghan security forces. mr. lisyk asked me whether we do anything to stop cuts in defense budgets. of as you know, the it's a national decision. nato as an alliance can't interfere with that. that's a national decision. we have a benchmark according to which nato allies have stated that those allies that spent more than 2%, 2% or more on defense, commit themselves to stay above the 2 percent. while those allies below 2% will try to work towards the 2% benchmark. it's not a legal requirement, it's a political obligation. and whenever i visit capitals -- and soon i will visit warsaw -- i will repeat that message. and, actually, i can tell you that i have had political, a political d

next week it's likely the senate will vote on amends to the immigration bill that would equalize the u.n. i have been process. a lot of people thing adding that amendment would derail the bill, but you should know, that, one, it shouldn't. beyond those couples, there are over 260,000 lgbt undocumented immigrants that need that reform bill. this is an issue beyond that amendment, and we need to pass it. >> pat? >> you should already know it's mother's day. to my mother mary jane and my lovely wife julie, but in the great state of illinois, the marriage equality amendment is sitting on the speaker of the house's desk, could be called for a vote this week. so illinois returns to its greatness in representing the land of lincoln as it shall. >> and you should know my rep friend to my right with the mother's day. >> mine too. we will get -- which i city consider a historic vote. with the momentum that aisha was talking about. >> on monday the minute minute senate will be taking up the same-sex marriage big and what we saw in the house was a very civil debate. if you want to see good people ca

here is one example, u.n. retracts report of syrian chemical weapon use, lab tests confirm it is jihadi body odor. as the syrian conflict expands and seems poised to spread across the borders, the internal political pressure on president obama to do something, to get involved, to intervene in some way, is growing in a very, very palpable way. >> the whole situation is becoming more and more expansive and unfortunately the red line that the president of the united states written was apparently written in disappearing ink. the obama administration should be, i think, cognizant of what george schultz, our former great secretary of state, once told me when he was in the marine corps, his drill stricter told him, said, never point a weapon at someone unless you're ready to pull a trigger. >> john mccain, of course, has long been leading the corps ous calling for the u.s. to step into the syrian conflict, calls that intensified the signs the war might be spreading. there is no doubt the pressure from those calls for

foreign service officer, based in tripoli, took issue with the account ambassador susan rice of the u.n. gave after the attack. that it was a spontaneous attack that grew out of the protest. hicks told investigators "i thought it was a terrorist attack from the get-go. i think everyone in the mission thought it was a terrorist attack from the beginning." here's what congresswoman -- congressman darrell issa of california had to say about that. let's watch him in action. >> we know one thing, the talking points were right and then the talking points were wrong. the cia knew it was a terrorist attack. deputy chief of mission, gregory hicks, knew it was a terrorist attack. the ambassador before he died, one of the last words he ever said was, we're under attack. >> the significance. i mean, secretary clinton before she left her post as secretary of state said, what's the issue here? what is his issue there? we're not talking about saving lives or lives that could have been saved. saving chris stevens' life. we're talking about how the pr was handled by the white house. why is it so signifi

yes, of course it included what happened on the sunday talk shows after benghazi that featured u.n. ambassador susan rice. the focus for once was actually more on what happened that night when the american ambassador and three others were murdered in libya. >> later, when i heard that the situation had evolved to them going to a safe haven, and then the fact that we could not find the ambassador, i alerted my leadership, indicating that we needed to go forward and consider the deployment of the foreign emergency support team. i notified the white house of my idea, they indicated that meetings had already taken place that evening, that had taken fest out of the menu of options. i called the office within the state department that had been represented there, asking them why it had been taken off the table and was told that it was not the right time, and it was not the team that needed to go right then. >> what clearly emerged in the testimony is that in washington, the state department and the white house recognized the severity of the problem all along and were intently focused on th

the ambassador to the u.n. did the same thing. so did hillary clinton. i'm less excited about the talking points and much more excited about why they felt the need to lie for five days to the american people. if that doesn't merit an investigation, i don't know what does. >> i can't let it past that you used lie word. lie assumes malice aforethought. lie assumes someone knows what they're saying is deliberately untrue. i listened to you. just permit me a final word. i don't think the record -- >> not much. >> -- speaks to that fact. it may never speak to that fact. we've both been heard. i do thank you. danielle pletka, david corn. >>> coming up, republicans are eager to rough up hillary. some are happily discussing impeachment. we're going to look at whether there's real political fallout here. >>> also the horror of the cleveland kidnappings. how will the girls recover? we'll talk about their chances which turns out is better than you might have expected. >>> the latest in our series "the unkindest cut." how sequester cuts are hurting victims of domest

and the u.n. today voting syria should go through political transition, that the government must go. a nonbinding resolution condemning killings, human rights violations. the vote 107-12. a lot of countries abstained, russia, strong ally of syria, strongly in opposition to the resolution. if you want to know why there has not been meaningful international action, because russia supports the syrian government, put themselves in the way of anybody else doing anything there. between the u.s. and russia in general, things aren't very good. after all, russia this week arrested a u.s. embassy employee that was spying. things between us and russia aren't great. makes it remarkable that at the u.n., america did a big joint event with russia. and it was us and russia in a country less likely to do anything with us, the nation of iran. the united states, russia and iran have come together, including at this press conference at the u.n., they joined forces to try to save wrestling. earlier this year, the exe

and today the u.n. human rights council held an emergency debate on syria, drafting a statement to condemn foreign fighters. the administration has acknowledged that officials were aware of senator mccain's trip to the region, but there's been ambiguity from the white house this week to any plan of action. joining us is the president on the council on foreign relations, richard haas, the case for putting america's house in order. richard, thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you, alex. >> i think a lot of us look at this conflict with 80 thousands people have been killed, 1.5 million refugees. it is a humanitarian crisis, mass atrocities seem to be occurring in the region, yet the question is, what can and should we do? what do you think the options are as far as the white house and next steps in the coming weeks? >> well, you're right, the united states does have humanitarian and strategic stakes. at the same time we've got to balance it against what we really think we can accomplish given local rea

. >> when they go after the u.n. ambassador, apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a problem with me. to smirch her reputation, it's outrageous. >> the attacks were outrageous and now we have proof that they were wrong, too. the white house has now released e-mails debunking the myth that there was a coverup about the attack in libya. "the washington post" shows the e-mail shows the administration's response did not include political interference with the white house. susan rice was using talking points that reflected the consensus at that time and e-mails appeared to support that. the gop smear campaign against ambassador rice was wrong. that's why she's owed an apology but i won't hold my breath. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. "hardball" starts right now. >>> turn around. let's play "hardball." >>> good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start tonight with this. today was the second day of the obama offensive.

is quoting u.n. official as saying they have evidence that it was the syrian rebel forces that used the agent and not assad's regime. the u.s. is looking for the chain of command of how that was used. how do we figure out the truth in this one? and also time ticks off with lack of u.s. military involvement. how does that play out on the humanitarian front? >> the key really is to get a fact finding mission on the ground to speak to both parties to collect evidence and samples and speak to eyewitnesss and have access to the area where the alleged chemical attacks took place and then you can draw on the chain of command. the other question is whether or not the rebels have access to chemical weapons. we know western intelligence has been telling us it has been found by the regime. more importantly, despite the fact that it has been condemned by the free syrian army and the opposition, was this rebel group operating within the larger context of the opposition? >> i want to ask you this because in a piec

this is the same kind of vicious attack that the republicans launched against our ambassador to the u.n., susan rice. mrs. rice was on track to be mrs. clinton's successor, until the gop scandal machine drags her name through the mud. did the right wing forget how they smeared these dedicated servants? nice try, but we'll get you and we'll get you over and over again until we hear an apology. like it's a small horse is frowned upon in this establishment! luckily though, ya know, i conceal this bad boy underneath my blanket just so i can get on e-trade. check my investment portfolio, research stocks... wait, why are you taking... oh, i see...solitary. just a man and his thoughts. and a smartphone... with an e-trade app. ♪ nobody knows... [ male announcer ] e-trade. investing unleashed. plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+. ♪ now you can give yourself a kick in the rear! v8 v-fusion plus energy. natural energy from green tea p

>> by the end of the day, it was widely dismissed as a single account from a u.n. official who was not involved in the actual investigation for chemical weapons. right now the white house shot it down saying the rebels, a, don't have the capability, and b, questioned whether they had the intent to use it. so many questions about why the rebels would want to use chemical weapons. it wouldn't have a tactical advantage at all in being able to tip the balance of the fight on the ground in their favor. there was a lot of questions and suspicion about whether or not the rebels had it and whether if they did they would use it. that's where it ended by the end of the day. >> all right. stay with us. >> thanks a lot, it's great having you here. >> thank you. >> a packed hour ahead. dana brown joins us with the magazine's new issue. >>> plus, burt bacharach will be here onset. >>> republican candidate and former governor mark sanford joins us next. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. [ male announcer ] this one goes out to all the allergy muddlers. you know wh

last week, there was this u.n. vote, urging more recognition of the opposition. got 109 votes in the general assembly. that's in comparison to 133 for a similar vote, just a year before. it tells you momentum is shifting somewhere else. the options for that administration are all tough. certainly, the administration doesn't want to get involved militarily, and doesn't want to do so, certainly without u.n. support. u.n. support isn't going to come without russia, because russia clearly will exercise the rveto. and in the arab world, where most people in the arab world, according to my polls, do oppose the assad regime, but a majority of them don't want to see an american military intervention to solve the issue. so it's a very tough position for the administration. there are no good options on the table. >> raul, the other part of this story that paste to be getting lost is the refugee crisis. and it's a full-blown crisis at this point. refugees pouring boo lebanon and jordan, 3 million refugees at this point. what do we do about that crisis and how much worse can

the u.n. is promoting a source of protein that most of us would probably not find very appetizing. >>> and what you're looking at right there, it caused some major static. we'll explain. [ female announcer ] are you sensitive to dairy? then you'll love lactose-free lactaid® it's 100% real milk that's easy to digest so you can fully enjoy the dairy you love. lactaid®. for 25 years, easy to digest. easy to love. but kate -- still looks like...kate. nice'n easy with colorblend technology gives expert highlights and lowlights. for color that's true to you. i don't know how she does it. with nice'n easy, all they see is you. you get 5% back, on everything. everything. everything. everything. everything. everything. everything? [ all ] everything? yup! with the new staples rewards program you get 5% back on everything. everything? everything. [ male announcer ] the new staples rewards program. get free shipping and 5% back on everything your business needs. that was easy. we're not in london, are

ultimately, u.n. bureaucrats will stop at nothing to register, ban, and confiscate firearm owned by private citizens like you. the fact is, the last thing the gun grabbers at the as you know and in washington, d.c. want is for you and me to have time to mobilize gun owners to defeat this radical agenda." well, now, maeve ruston, we knows that's not going to happen and we think probably deep down, rand paul knows that's not going to happen. what then becomes the purpose of that kind of rhetoric? what's the strategy here? >> well, perry talked about what the bigger task is for rand paul right now, if he does run in 2016, which is to really fire up his base. and i think that's what we're see heerg, is, you know, in the e-mail -- >> his base are crazy people? >> you know, those are your words, not mine. >> i don't know what to say -- who this e-mail would appeal to? >> well, i'm not sure, exactly, who the e-mail appeals to, maybe even not even some people within the republican base. but, the broader point

i remember ambassador rice at the u.n. practically banging her fist on the table condemning the world for not doing more and for russia and others blocking u.n. action on syria, but then we don't follow up with anything and that -- that does -- that does make the u.s. look weaker in the eyes of many foreign leaders who i'm speaking to and that's what they tell me. >> tomorrow at this time, richard assesses the arab spring two years later and of course, considering his globe-trot be lifestyle he'll share his secrets for packing lightly while on the move. >> no, i wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances. >> well, anybody should be forgiven. >> there's a snapshot of opinion on anthony weiner's rumored run for new york city mayor. while he is hush-hush about it, and they caught wiener reported on the front of his apartment. is it a campaign ad? he's reportedly hired a campaign manager and several media sources say an announcement is coming next week. >>> republican congresswoman michele bachmann is in campaign mode for 2

and i want to sort of update everybody with the latest there, yesterday the u.n. human rights chief said the death toll was at least 80,000 people in syria. the syrian observatory for human rights said the death toll could be as high as 120,000 people. on top of a crisis that has an estimated 1.5 million refugees. ayman, is there a sense that anything can be done between these two leaders to stanch the bleeding quite literally and get some agreement for peace, the outlines of that on the table? >> well you know, that is definitely a very important question. but it does not look like the differences between these two countries. and really in terms of policy and terms of what to do about syria. is going to be resolved any time soon. there have been differences between turkey and the united states. these are two close allies, both members of nato. turkey has been pushing for a stronger u.s. role in the region. particularly with arming the rebels and perhaps imposing a no-fly zone and a light military intervention in syria. right now the united states does not seem to

the u.n. security council imposes harsh sanctions and sends in weapons inspectors to dig deeply for iraqi wmd capabilities, weapons of mass destruction. >> this went on for years. at a certain point, unbeknownst to weapons inspectors or anyone else other than iraq, it turns out that we had pretty much accounted for the full system. but we didn't know that. >> in 1998, saddam refuses to cooperate further, and the united nations pulls out the weapons inspectors. saddam virtually seals iraq off from the west. in a 1998 letter to president clinton, paul wolfowitz, donald rumsfeld and other leading neoconservatives urge the president to take action to remove saddam's regime from power. the neocons align with an urbane named ahmed alcohol by. he head the iraqi congress, defectors lobbying to get rid of saddam. >> i say to you now that the opposition is united in its aim of getting rid of saddam and establishing democracy. >> he was a very impressive and effective spokesman for the iraqi opposition t

with the u.n. ambassador for bush 41 in the gulf war, first gulf war, these are not lightweight people who came up with this independent review. now, we've got to separate out how sheryl mills, who by the way is well known for chewing out people. the idea that sheryl mills was shouting at officials for doing something that transgressed what she thought was her boss's position, not unusual. not saying it's justified, but that's sheryl mills for you. the treatment of a whistle blower or a senior official, you've got to be super careful. she clearly crossed the line. that is very different that suggesting that susan rice who was reading from cia approved talking points was misleading the american people. who was most emotional in the hearing was what could have been done differently. which is what this independent review did. could they have scrambled jets, used air power? this is not in the movies. this was a surprise attack, whatever you think the reason was for it. they're overwhelmed. the few peop

the information that came out regarding our presence there, one of the lines in the president obama's u.n. general assembly speech had one of the reasons that chris stevens was in benghazi to meet with us. well, that came out of the media, which was repeated over and over again. >> so is it true? >> no, it's not true. it's not true. i understood that he was there on the day that i arrived. i is certainly been in contact with him before so he was not there to meet with us. that's a basic fact that can be relatively easily resolved and i think there are a number of other facts that can be better resolved. i think this is an opportunity for the obama administration to -- actually, a great opportunity to essentially address a whole range of systemic problems that have been plaguing the government for decades. >> it's going to be interesting to see what comes of all of this, these investigations and these discussions. ethan chorin, thank you so much. >> today i talk with richard engel where he discusses the stages of war. plus, does he ever get time to himself, globetrotting like that? first i