the casey anthony trial. her father, george, on the stand now. let's listen in. >> get through this. >> do you need a break, mr. anthony? >> no, sir. i'm fine. >> in january -- let me know when you are okay. >> i'm okay, sir. >> on january 22nd of 2009, mr. anthony, you went and got a gun, didn't you? >> objection. >> counsel asked about the exact event. >> overruled. >> may i approach the bench? >> you may.

>> you are watching pictures now. this is the casey anthony trial in orlando. to the right of your screen, you see casey anthony standing. now she is sitting. her father is on the stand, george anthony. we watched very emotional testimony as he essentially broke down and started crying. he put his head in his hands. began to weep. the judge asked him if he needed some time or a break. whether or not he wanted to leave the stand. he at first said no and then he just became overcome with emotion. he bowed his head and just left the stand there. this has been a trial that many

people have been riveted by and watching the questioning about whether or not george had tried to commit suicide in an attempt in january of 2009. that was a month after his granddaughter, caylee's remains were found. his daughter, casey, is charged with killing the girl. take a listen to this. >> in january -- late january of 2009, you attempted to commit suicide? did you sir? >> yes, sir. i did. >> okay. and you even left a suicide note? >> yes, sir. i did. we are following other news. president obama will hold his first news conference since late winter.

reporters will press the president on a number of issues, including the debt ceiling deadline. that is 34 days away. also asking about greece's economic meltdown and the drawdown of u.s. troops in afghanistan and taking on the growing field of republicans who want his job. president obama is sure to comment on the stunning terror attack that left the kabul intercontinental hotel bombing today. it dragged on for six hours convincing hotel guests they would not get out alive. >> i wrote my little will according to islamic law. i put it in my pocket just in case. >> chaos outside greece's parliament today. inside, lawmakers approve tax

hikes and spending cuts to win a bailout for the second time. richard quest is watching the vote and the turmoil on the streets. >> reporter: i apologize for the goggles. you can just about talk with the tear gas, but the sheer amount of tear gas and pepper spray that is wafting around the place and the wind is blowing toward us and it ends up just about where we are. flash back to january in cairo's tahrir square today. relatives of those killed in egypt's revolution fought with police leaving three dozen people hurt. families are angry that the old regime is facing slow justice. wildfires will keep los alamos national lab closed through thursday. officials say the material is

protected. radiation detecters are being used to monitor levels around the lab. more details now on our lead story. president obama's news conference is about to start 30 minutes from now. we have a lot of ground to cover beginning with the debt and the negotiations with congress and the withdrawal of the troops from afghanistan and the attack by the taliban. we have the financial crisis in greece. same-sex marriage. you name it. all of these things are likely to come up in the news conference. jessica yellin is joining us. we know the q and a is about to start. these are issues the president is dealing with. why do you suppose he is holding the press conference now? >> reporter: a long "to do" list. summertime is a quiet time in

washington, but not this year. for most americans on their economic concerns are what weighs on them most. i think in the white house, i know in the white house, everyone is well weaware of it. the president for months and his economic team has been working on and helping to try to address these economic concerns with capitol hill. there have been ongoing debt negotiatio negotiations. i expect the president to come to terms and address the understanding that as we hear so often in washington, both sides need to give a little to get something done. the question is, from there, where does it go? that depends on what we in the audience ask. with republicans out there and what we hear are the economic concerns. a lot of questions about those

issues. the questions about kabul and iran and the british about iran and nuclear weapons will come up. perhaps gay marriage as well. >> jessica, i know from where you are perched there, give us the scene there. it is an interesting shot. you are facing the cameras there. what is the question that is mostly on your mind? >> reporter: i believe that the economy and where they go with the debt talks here is what most americans, while it seems process-y, it is how he works it out with congress. that may seem inside washington to most folks. it has real world consequences for everyone at home. whether or not they can get a deal done means a lot for whether americans see job growth or not and what happens with their taxes and with their

paycheck in the end. i do think that is a paramount concern. >> make sure you get a question in there. thanks again, jessica. stay with us for president obama's press conference at the bottom of the hour right here on cnn. here is the rundown of the stories we are covering in the next two hours. hotel guests cower in fear for hours in kabul. >> none of us thought we would make it. i wrote my will according to islamic law. i put it in my pocket just in case. >> we have a live report on the taliban attack in afghanistan. then more drama in the casey anthony murder trial. her parents take the stand again. later, police and protesters come to blows in the streets of athens as the greek parliament passes tax hikes and spending cuts.

objectives, risks, charges, expenses and oer informati. read and consider it carefully before investing. ♪

♪ [ male announcer ] and just like that, it's here. a new chance for all of us: people, companies, communities to face the challenges yesterday left behind and the ones tomorrow will bring. prudential. bring your challenges.

two police officers and eight civilians are dead after an overnight raid by suicide attackers on the hotel at the intercontinental in kabul. jerome starkey with the times is falling the latest in kabul. tell us what happened last night. >> reporter: it was just before 11:00 last night when a group, we believe of nine insurgents crept up on the intercontinental

hotel crept through a forested area on a slope beneath the hotel before storming into the building. the first burst into a ball room and detonated a vest. the rest ran in and fought their way to the top of the building. it was some five hours later when these five men were on the roof of the intercontinental that a nato helicopter was called out to support afghan special forces who were fighting their way through the building, but slowed down by the fact it is a huge hotel. they were not sure who was friend or foe. the nato helicopter with snipers on board opened fire on the five insurgents on the roof, effectively ending the battle. it wasn't until 7:00 this morning that the last insurgent was finally killed. two more police officers doing a thorough search of the building

found the man cowering in a hotel room on the fifth floor of the building. he detonated his vest and killed one and injured another. >> jerome, this seems like a brazen attack here. this is a hotel where people stay from around the world. how are people reacting to this? >> reporter: well, the intercontinental is one of the largest hotels in kabul. it is a landmark building and symbolic target. there was one spaniard among the dead. we know the rest of the dead were afghan. there were americans and europeans in the hotel at the time. however, the intercontinental is not the most popular with visitors.

however, those hotels have been booked out because there have been so many international conferences and delegations v e advisi advisivic visiting. >> jerome, thank you very much. the attack in the heart of kabul sends a strong message about the taliban's staying power. i want to bring in the national security member from the advisory committee. she is joining us from new york via skype. fran, you see this kind of thing. you wonder what does this mean about the transition where we are going to go from security from nato international forces to the afghan forces. is that possible? is that a good idea as the president announced last week when you see something like this? >> reporter: suzanne, you have to believe they are trying to

take control. this is the second attack. remember, the goal of the u.s. forces and afghan forces is keeping the taliban out of kabul. that has been the last perimeter. the notion in recent weeks there have been two such attacks. one before the president's announcement and one after that required nato to come in and back up with air power afghan and coalition forces. this is a real strategic embarrassment. on top of which, only recently, did secretary gates and the president acknowledge that they have started preliminary discussions. >> fran townsend, thank you very much. president obama will discuss other issues during the news conference as well as kabul. that is scheduled to begin at

the bottom of the hour at 11:30 eastern. cnn will bring that to you live. there is more drama in the casey anthony trial. her father gets angry with defense questions. >> trying to take this joy of my life away from me, sir. you can't do it anymore. i'm going to answer it. >> i'll go deeper into today's testimony after the break. [ male announcer ] this...is the network -- a network of possibilities. in here, the planned combination of at&t and t-mobile would deliver

our next generation mobile broadband experience to 55 million more americans, many in small towns and rural communities, giving them a new choice. we'll deliver better service, with thousands of new cell sites... for greater access to all the things you want, whenever you want them. it's the at&t network... and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say. but afraid you can't afford it? well, look how much insurance many people can get through selectquote for less than a dollar a day. selectquote found, rich, 37, a $500,000 policy for under $18 a month. even though dave, 43, takes meds to control his

blood pressure, selectquote got him a $500,000 policy for under $28 a month. ellen, 47, got a $250,000 policy for under $20 a month. all it takes is a phone call. your personal selectquote agent will answer all your questions ... and impartially shop the highly rated term life companies selectquote represents for your best rates. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford. call this number or go to selectquote dot com. selectquote. we shop. you save. president obama has called a news conference at the white house. we are standing by to bring that to you live here on cnn. the president is set to start speaking at 11:30.

george anthony testifies again in casey anthony's murder trial going from anger to tears. the defense is saying caylee drowned and he covered it up. they are trying to spin the statements of a man who is upset. the defense accused him of profiting from the case by giving interviews to the media. >> do you recall being on "48 hours?" >> yes, sir. >> do you recall being paid $20,000 for that appearance? >> you know, mr. baez, i have been nice to you. i have tried to answer every question to the best of my ability. and for what my wife and i might have retained from a news

organization to bring awareness of my granddaughter -- my daughter and other missing children. that is what that article was about. it had nothing to do with guilt or innocence or anything like that. >> joining me now is former prosecutor, holly hughes. we saw george anthony actually break down after that. what happened? >> you know, the defense is finally getting to the point where they are trying to get evidence before the jury that they talked about in their opening. jose baez got up and accused casey casey's father of sexually molesting her when she was 8 years old. he was vulger and distinct. he has called george back to the stand. what we see is a broken man.

yesterday we he testified, he was defy yant. he is a man trying to say he did not ever do that. i would not ever do that. then he is being attacked. you gavin afte interviews to tha and you were paid for it. what jose baez is rehabbing this man in the eyes of the jury. the jury is getting to see the real george anthony. >> why did he get so upset? he essentially tried to commit suicide? >> the reason we know that happened, one of the lines he just said, he said, mr. baez, you are trying to take my joy. meaning that little caylee was the joy of his life. he loves his daughter casey in a

fatherly pure way. i don't believe the allegations of abuse. when you are attacking him and say you hid your granddaughter's body. it is breaking this man's heart. we know from the jail tape, that casey herself said to her dad, you have been the best dad ever and the best grandfather. >> okay. we have to leave it at that. we will watch it very closely. thanks. ten minutes away from president obama's news conference. the president will discuss a wide range of issues from job growth to the wars in iraq and afghanistan. you can watch it live here on cnn. cyber aacks. in financial transactions... on devices... in social interactions... and applications in the cloud. some companies are worried. some, not so much. thanks to a network that secures it all

and knows what to keep in, and what to keep out. outsmart the threats. see how at cisco.com cisco.

president obama's news conference is set to begin a few minutes from now. he has a lot of ground to cover from the high stakes debt and budget negotiations going on to the highly anticipated drawdown of troops in afghanistan. also the u.s. mission in libya and the crisis in greece. the list goes on and on. good thing we have a good team to describe and tell us what is happening here. jessica yellin is at the east room of the white house. we have gloria with us from washington. we have national security contributor with us as well. she is on the phone with us. first of all, to you, jessica, a lot of anticipation about the news conference comes at a critical time for the president. over whether or not tax

increases should be part of any agreement to reduce the federal deficit. what do we think about the timing of the conference? will he use this to put his message out there to the people that he knows the right way to get this done? >> reporter: yes. to emphasize, suzanne, that both sides need to compromise to get something done. you have to keep in mind we are entering the start of the political season. the approval ratings are in the upper 40s. this is his first solo press conference in three months. he is trying to get a message out there that he is doing what he can to try to get the economy going to prevent the economy from stalling from the recovery from stalling. he wants to see the republicans do a little more on their end as the white house would say, to do their part as well. a message from the white house that they are doing what they can.

how about you guys come along and do your part, too. >> jessica, that is an excellent point. we are seeing the pictures from greece and the tear gas and protesters don't want to see more cuts in their government. they managed to sign on to a plan today, but that means more severe cuts for these folks in greece. is the president going to explain here what he can and cannot do when it comes to helping folks out economically? surely he has no impact there on what happens in greece. that could impact a lot of people's 401(k)s. >> reporter: that is not going to be the thrust of his main message. if he gets that question, he will answer it. his focus is on the american people and the domestic economy and what he can do in the u.s. focusing on what congress and he can work out is my expectation. we all know that not only are there american efforts going on

explicitly on multiple fronts overseas, but economic fronts overseas. the crisis in greece has a ripple effect here. he will have to address that. there is only so much the u.s. can do. as much as the white house can, they will try to pivot back to domestic politics and economy. >> that is an excellent point. i imagine the president will try to emphasize that. gloria, to you. we saw michele bachmann officially making her announcement a couple of days ago. mitt romney has put out ads attacking the president. is this a critical time for president obama? >> reporter: sure. they have been out there attacking him. they have been calling him a failed president. this is his first opportunity to respond to him at the press

conference. the thing i will watch for, suzanne, is if he draws a red line in the sand about what he will and will not accept as a debt ceiling compromise. we are used to him saying this is the general outline. you go over there in the room and work it out. whether it is on healthcare reform or on the lame duck session. there are lots of democrats who want him to come out and say i will not accept any cuts in medicare benefits. i do want to do something in the future on tax reform. i do want to push for a freeze on defense spending, which is one way we can save money. i'm looking for details here from the president. quite frankly, we are not used to getting that from the president. >> i know, gloria, that the president is hosting a group of gay rights activist to celebrate

gay pride month. in rights of the states recognizing same-sex marriage, do you believe the president will be pressed on this issue? >> reporter: of course. the president has said his views on gay marriage are quote evolving, unquote. the question is what does evolving mean? you either are for gay marriage or you are not for gay marriage. there doesn't seem to be middle ground anymore. i think, obviously, this is a question that he has to be asked. he will be compared to governor cuomo of new york, who very early on in his tenure got this bill passed through the legislation. >> i want to bring in fran townsend to the discussion here. in light of the brazen attack that we saw in kabul, afghanistan, just within the last 12 hours or so, what do you want to hear from the president? does he need to justify pulling out u.s. troops surge of 30,000 by the end of 2012?

>> reporter: suzanne, i expect he will not sound defensive about that. i think people will listen for why we shouldn't view this second brazen attack in a short period of time. the first one since the announcement of the drawdown. why this is not a strategic success for the taliban. after all, we still have surge troops there and they are able to do this. what will we expect with the drawdown that he is now announced? i think he is going to speak to the issue and he will have to explain why what he announced still makes sense. >> let's talk about the mission in libya. the president is facing very frustrated and impatient nato allies. you have britain giving this a few months. the house democrats and tea party republicans voted against the initiative last week in

congress. they are the not de-funding it, but there seems not to be so much support for this. what does he need to say to reassure allies that this mission is going well? >> reporter: suzanne, that will seem like an easy question. the question he is hoping not to get is the question about is gadhafi being targeted as part of the control structure when the president said clearly that targeting gadhafi is not part of the mission. you have a senior nato u.s. admiral saying that is part of the mission to target him. that is inconsistent with what the president has said in public. you have that question, which is a very difficult one for him in addition to crumbling support in the u.s. congress as well as among his nato allies. this is a difficult problem for him. the mission is just going on too long. people don't see the progress we would have expected to see by now.

>> fran townsend, thanks. stay with us. we will go to the press conference after the break. we will bring our panel back as well. some tough issues and tough questions just moments away. fibk . oh common. and how can you talk to me about fiber while you are eating a candy bar? you enjoy that. i am. [ male announcer ] fiber beyond recognition. fiber one. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] and just like that, it's here. a new chance for all of us: people, companies, communities to face the challenges yesterday left behind

and the ones tomorrow will bring. prudential. bring your challenges.

we are watching the white house. the president will be holding a news conference from the east

room of the white house shortly. joining us to talk about the conference is jessica yellin and gloria borger and fran townsend. fran, you know and have dealt with libya's moammar gadhafi. he is being charged with potential war crimes in the international criminal court. he is pretty much in a box and holding out now. is there any sense that the president needs to speak to moammar gadhafi or to the foreign audience? the allies to try to explain that gadhafi's running out of time here and he does need to go. there is a strong enough coalition to make that happen. >> reporter: i think the president will not dignify gadhafi to speak to him. you will hear him buck up the coalition partners.

that gadhafi has to go. there is political will to see us through the mission. i think our nato allies are unsettled by the activities in congress and the waning support here in the united states. the president will need to address our allies overseas. >> and jessica, if we could bring you back into the conversation. you were saying that the president is going to be focusing on the economy. do we expect to hear anything different in terms of his own economic plans and what he hopes to accomplish to convince the american folks that he gets it? >> reporter: i think that we will hear him once again insist he thinks things can be improved with more partnership with congress. again, he is facing this ongoing deadlock in the sense with the republicans in congress. there are these talks which are sluggishly moving forward.

they need to break the deadlock and get something done. he is coming here to say we have to make -- excuse me. we are all waiting for him to come in. we have to make some head way. we are waiting for him to layout some markers. for him to be a little bit more specific about what he wants and what he expect to hear from them. what it is that he needs the republicans to do and maybe where he will make some compromises on his side to get that compromise on their side. we are all looking for a little bit more detail from the president on the economic compromise. he is looking for in the budget talks that are happening around this looming debt ceiling. >> gentlemenjessica, we have oud cameras poised on the doors there waiting for him to come through. we may be 30 seconds away from the president. you can give us a quick scene

sett setter? >> reporter: there is a roomful of reporters waiting. i will take a seat. there is a roomful of reporters waiting for him to come in. a sea of cameras. people expecting the president to walk in at any minute. all of us are staring at the doors. >> jessica, thanks for sitting down. the president is walking in right now. >> good morning, everybody. have a seat. please. i want to say a few words about the economy before i take your questions. there are a lot of folks out there who are still struggling with the effects of the recession. many people are still looking for work or looking for a job that pays more. families are wondering how they deal with the broken refrigerator or busted transmission or financing the college education for their kids

and the possibility of layoffs. the struggles of middle class families were a big problem before the recession hit in 2007. they weren't created overnight and the truth is our economic challenges will not be solved overnight. but, there are more steps that we can take right now that would help businesses create jobs here in america. today, our administration is trying to take those steps. we are reviewing government regulations to fix any rules in place that are an unnecessary burden on businesses. we working with the private sector to get small businesses and start ups to get the financing they need to grow and expand. because of the partnership relaunched with the community colleges, 500,000 workers will receive the right skills for training for manufacturing jobs in companies across america.

jobs that companies are looking to fill. in addition to the steps that my administration can take on our own, there are also things that congress can do right now that will help create good jobs. right now, congress can send me a bill that would make it easier for entrepreneurs to patent a new idea. we cannot give other countries a leg up to open new business and create new jobs. that is something congress can do right now. right now, congress could send me a bill that puts construction workers back on the job rebuilding roads and bridges. not by having government fund and pick every project, but by providing loans to private companies and states and local governments based on merit. that is pending in congress right now. right now, congress can advance a set of trade agreements to allow them so sell in asia and

south america. to support tens of thousands of american jobs will helping those adversely affected by trade. that is pending before congress right now. right now, we could give middle class families the security of the tax cuts i signed in december will be there for one more year. there are a number of steps that my administration is taking, but there are also a number of steps that congress could be taking right now on items that historically had bipartisan support and would help put more americans back to work. many of these ideas have been tied up in congress for some time. as i said, all of them evnjoy y bipartisan support. of course, one of the most important and urgent things we can do for the economy is something that both parties are working on right now. that is reducing the deficit.

over the last few weeks, the negotiations have been made. as of last week, both parties had identified more than $1 trillion worth of spending cuts already. but everyone also knows that we will need to do more to close the deficit. we can't get to the $4 trillion in savings that we need by just cutting the 12% of the budget that pays for things like medical research and education funding and food inspectors and the weather service. and we can't just do it by making seniors pay more for medicare. we need to look at the whole budget. as i said several months ago. we have to eliminate waste wherever we find it and make tough decisions about worthy priorities. that means trimming the defense budget while meeting the

defenses. we need to maintain the fundamental security that medicare and medicaid provide. yes, we will have to tackle spending in the tax code. there has been a lot of discussion about revenues and raising taxes in recent weeks. i want to be clear about what we are proposing here. i spent the last two years cutting taxes for ordinary americans. i want to extend those middle class tax cuts. the tax cuts i'm proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owners. it would be nice if we could keep every tax break there is. but we have to make some tough choices here if we want to reduce our deficit. if we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires and keep the breaks

for corporate jet owners and keep the breaks for the oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, that means we have to cut some kids off from a getting a college scholarship. that means we have to stop funding certain grants for medical research. that means that food safety may be compromised. that means that medicare has to bear a greater part of the burden. those are the choices we have to make. so the bottom line is this, any agreement to reduce our deficit will require tough decisions and balanced solutions. before we ask seniors to pay more for health care and before we cut our children's education and cut the sacrifice to create more jobs in the economy, i think it is only fair to ask an oil company or corporate jet

owner that has done so well, to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys. i don't think that is real radical. i think the majority of americans agree with that. so, the good news is, because of the work that has been done, i think we can actually bridge our differences. i think there is a conceptional framework that does not hurt our economy right here and right now. it is not often that washington sees both parties agree on the scale and urgency on the challenge at hand. nobody wants to put the credit worthiness of the united states in jeopardy. nobody wants to see the united states default. so we have to seize this moment. we have to seize it soon. the vice president and i will continue these negotiations with

both leaders of both parties in congress for as long as it takes. we will reach a deal that will require our government to live within its means and give our businesses confidence and get this economy moving. with that, i will take your questions. i have my list here. starting off with ben feller with the associated press. >> thank you very much, mr. president. i would like to follow-up on the comments you just made as you try to reach a deal with the debt limit and cut the deficit. you keep saying there needs to be a balanced approach of spending cuts and taxes. republicans say flatly they won't -- >> they don't want a balanced approach. >> the house speaker says that plan will not pass the house. my question is will you insist ultimately that a deal has to include those tax increases that you just laid out?

is that an absolute red line for you? if it is, explain how that can get through the congress. >> look, i think that what we have seen in the negotiations here in washington is a lot of people say a lot of things to satisfy their base or to get on cable news, but that hopefully leaders at a certain point rise to the occasion and they do the right thing for the american people. that is what i expect to happen this time. call me naive, but my expectation is that leaders are going to lead. now, i just want to be clear about what's at stake here. the republicans say they want to reduce the deficit. every single observer who is not an elected official or not a

politician says we can't reduce our deficit in the scale and scope that we need to without having a balanced approach that looks at everything. democrats have to accept some painful spending cuts that hurt some of our constituents. we may not like it. we have shown a willingness to do that for the greater good. to say, look, there are things that are good programs and nice to have. we cannot afford them right now. i, as commander in chief, have to have difficult conversations with the pentagon saying, you know what? there is fat here. we have to trim it out. bob gates have done a good job of identifying $400 billion in cuts, but we will do more. i promise you is not to cut anymore. they feel like they have already

given. so, we will have to look at entitlements. that is always difficult politically. i have been willing to say we need to see where we can reduce the cost of health care spending and medicaid and medicare in the outyears. not by shifting seniors, as some proposed, but rather by reducing those costs. even if we are doing it in a smart way, that's tough politics but the right thing to do. the question is, if everybody else is willing to take on their sacred cows and do tough things in order to achieve the goal of real deficit reduction, then i think it would be hard for the republicans to stand there and say that the tax break for corporate jets is sufficiently important that we are not willing to come to the table and get a deal done. or we're so concerned about

protecting oil and gas subsidies for oil companies that are making money hand over fist, and that's the reason we're not going to come to a deal. i don't think that's a sustainable position. and the truth of the matter is, if you talk to republicans who are not currently in office, like allen simpson who cochaired my bipartisan commission. and you can't reduce the deficit to the levels that it needs to be reduced without having some revenue in the mix. the revenue we're talking about is not coming out of the pockets of middle class families struggling, it's coming out of folks who are doing extraordinary well, and enjoying

the lowest tax rates since before i was born. if you are a wealthy ceo or hedge fund manager in america right now, your taxes are lower than they have ever been. they are lower than they have been since the 1950s. you can afford it. you will still be able to ride on your corporate jet, but you will just have to pay a little more. and if we -- i just want to emphasize what i said earlier. if we do not have revenues, that means there are a bunch of kids out there that are not getting college scholarships. it means that we would not be

funding critical medical research. it means that food inspection might be compromised. you know, i have said to some of the republican leaders, you talk to your constituents, and can you them, are you willing to compromise their kids' safety so that some corporate jet owner continues to get a tax break. i am pretty sure what the answer would be. so we're going to keep having these conversations, and my belief is that the republican leadership in congress will hopefully sooner rather than later come to the conclusion that they need to make the right decisions for the country, that everybody else has been willing to move off of their position, and they need to do the same.

my expectation is that they will do the responsible thing. chuck todd? >> thank you, mr. president. there have been a lot of questions about the constitutional interpretations of a few decisions you made, so i simply ask, do you believe the war powers act is constitutional? do you believe that the debt limit is constitutional? the idea that congress can do this? and do you believe that marriage is a civil right? >> that's a hodgepodge. we're going to assign you to the spring court. i am not a spring court justice, so i will not put my law professi professional hat on here. let me focus about libya.

there is all kinds of noise about process and congressional consultation and so forth. let's talk about concretely what has happened. moammar gadhafi, who prior to osama bin laden was responsible for more american deaths than just about anybody on the planet. he was threatening to massacre his people. and as part of an international coalition under a u.n. mandate is that almost unprecedented, we went in and took out air defense systems so that an international coalition could provide humanitarian protection on the ground. i spoke to the american people about what we would do. i said there would be no troops on the ground. i said that we would not be

carrying the lion's share of the operation, but as members of nato, we would be supportive of it. because it's in our national security interests and also because it's the right thing to do. we have done exactly what i said we would do. we have not boot any boots on the ground, and our allies, who historically we complained nato sometimes have not carried enough of the load, but they have carried a big part of the load. as a consequence, we have not seen a single u.s. casualty. there's no risks of additional escalation. this operation is limited in time and in scope. so i said to the american people, here's our narrow mission and we carried out that

narrow mission in exsem prefashion. i have had all the members of congress over to talk about it. so a lot of this fuss is politics. and if you look substantively of what we have done, we have done exactly what we said to do under a u.n. mandate and protected thousands of lives in the process and as a consequence, a guy who was a state sponsor of terrorists operations against the united states is pinned down and the noose is tightening around him. when you look at the history of the war powers resolution, it

came up when we had tens of thousands of shoulders and tens of thousands of lives lost and billions spent, and congress said we don't want something like that happening again, so if you are going to start getting us into those kinds of commitmen commitments, you have to concult with congress beforehand. i think such a consultation is entirely appropriate. but do i think our actions in any way violate the war powers resolution? no. i don't have to get to the constitutional question. there may be a time in which there was a serious question as to whether or not the war powers resolution act was constitutional. i don't have to get to the question. we have engaged in a limited operation to help a lot of

people against one of the worst tyrants in the world. somebody who nobody should want to defend. we should be sending out a unified message to this guy that he should step down and give his people a fair chance to live their lives without fear. and then this suddenly becomes the celeb for folks in congress? come on. so you had a three-parter. what are the other two? >> there are questions about the constitutionality of -- >> i am saying i don't have to get to that point. let me start by saying this administration under my direction has consistently said

we cannot discriminate as a country on the basis of people of different sexual orientation. we have done more in the 2 1/2 years that i have been in here than the previous 43 presidents. making sure gay and lesbian partners can visit each other in hospitals, and making sure federal benefits can be provided to same sex couples. across the board. hate crimes. we have made sure that that is a central principle of this administration, because i think it's a central principle of america. now, what we have also done is we have said that doma, the defense of marriage act, is unconstitutional. we said that we could not defend, the federal government

poking its nose into what states are doing is putting the thumb on the scale against same sex couples. what i have seen happen over the last several years, and what happened in new york last week, i think was a good thing. because what you saw was the people of new york having a debate, talking through these issues. it was contentious and emotional, but ultimately they made a decision to recognize civil marriages. i think that's exactly how things should work. so i think that it's -- i think it's important for us to work through these issues. each community is going to be different and each state will be different to work through them. in the meantime, we filed briefs before the supreme court that

say we think that any discrimination against gays, lesbians, and transgenders. i think the actions we're taking a add men straightively are all how the process should work. >> reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> chuck, i think what you are saying is a profound recognition on the part of the american people, that gays and lesbians and transgenders are our co-workers, our friends, brothers, sisters, cousins, and they have to be treated like every other american. i think that principle will win out.

it's not going to be perfectly smooth. and it turns out that the president -- i discovered since i have been in this office, can't dictate precisely how this process moves. but i think that we're moving in a direction of greater equality, and i think that's a good thing. juliana. >> thank you, mr. president. i only have a two-parter? >> thank you. >> do you think jobs in the country is the number one concern for americans, and the business community cites the regulatory environment.

the complaint against boeing is hampering the job growth and what you yourself have called just plain dumb. >> i think it's important to understand deficit reduction and debt reduction should be part of the overal package for job growth over the long term. it's not the only part, but an important part. as i mentioned at the top, i think it's important for us to look at rebuilding our transportation infrastructure in this country. that would put people back to work right now, construction workers back to work right now. it would get done work that america needs to get done. we used to have the best roads and bridges and airports. we don't any more. and that's not good for a long-term competitiveness.

we could put people to work right now, and make sure that we're in a good position to win in the future as well. >> reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> i am going to get to it. i think that it's important to look at the tax code and figure out are their ways where we can simplify it and build on the work that we have already done, for example, saying to small businesses or startup businesses you don't have to pay capital gains when you are in a startup mode, because we want you to get out there and start a business. that's important. making sure that sba is helping to get financing to small businesses. that's important. there are a whole range of things we could be doing. i think the trade deals will be important. right now, south korea has a better deal when it comes to our trading relationship than we do. part of the reason i want to pass the trade deal is you see a whole bunch of korean cars in

the united states, but you don't see american cars in korea. let's rebalance the trading relationship. that's why we should get it passed. there are a range of things that we could be doing right now. deficit and debt reduction should be seen as part of the overall process. i think that businesses feel confident that we have our act together here in washington, and not only is the government not going to default, but we're also preparing for a future in which the population is getting older, and we will have expenses on the medicare side and social security, that businesses will feel confident investing in the united states. i don't think they are contradictory. certainly in my job, but in congress as well, they have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. we can focus on jobs at the same time that we are focusing on debt and deficit reduction.

one of the things that my administration has talked about is, is there in fact a bunch of tangle of regulations out there that are preventing businesses from growing and expanding as quickly as they should? keep in mind the business community is always complaining about regulations, when unemployment is at 3% and they're making profits, they will still complain because they want to do whatever will maximize profits. i have an obligation to make sure we're upholding smart regulations that protect our air, our water and food. if you are flying on a plane, you want to make sure there are regulations in place to assure safety in air travel. so there are some core regulations that we have to maintain. what i have done, and this is unprecedented by the way, i said

to each agency, don't look at current regulations, or don't just look at future regulations, let's go backwards and look at what are in the books and if they don't make sense, let's get rid of them. we are doing that and made changes that could save billions of dollars for companies over the next several years. you asked specifically about what decision that was made by the national labor relations board, the nlrb, and this relates to boeing, and essentially, the nlrb made a finding that boeing had not followed a law in making the decision to move a plant. it's an independent agency. it's going before a judge. i don't want to get into the details of the case. i don't know all the facts. that's going to be up to a judge

to decide. what i do know is this, as a general decision, companies have to be able to relocate and they have to follow the law, and if they are choosing to relocate here in the united states, appears good thing. what it doesn't make -- what i think defies common sense would be a notion that we would be shutting down a plant or laying off workers because labor and management can't come to a sensible agreement. so my hope is that even as this thing is working its way through, everybody steps back for a second and says if jobs are being created here in the united states, let's make sure that we are encouraging that. we cannot afford to have labor and management fighting all the time in a time when we are competing against germany and china and other countries that

want to sell goods all around the world. obviously, the airplane industry is an area where we still have a huge advantage. i want to make sure that we keep it. mark lander. >> thank you, very much, mr. president. yesterday an admiral testified before congress that he was concerned that there was not a clear procedure to be followed if a terrorists were captured alive abroad. the administration is also clear that it doesn't want to continue to send suspected terrorists to guantanamo. what message do you have for american men and women in uniform who are making risks about what they should do in the event they capture somebody alive? does the lack of the clear procedures raise the risk that

forces might be more inclined to kill suspected terrorists in the field rather than capture them alive thus depriving the u.s. intelligence of the information they can provide? >> first of all, my top priority in each and every one of the situations is to make sure that we're apprehending those that would attack the united states, and that we are getting all the intelligence that we can out of these individuals in a way that is consistent with due process of law. and that we try them, we prosecute them, in a way that is consistent with a rule of law. and frankly, they are going to be different dispositions of the case depepding on the situation. there will be sometimes when a military commission may be appropriate. there will be sometimes when article three courts are appropriate in terms of the prosecution. and we do have a process to work

through all the agencies, department of defense and department of justice and fbi, anybody else who might be involved in these kinds of operations, to think through on a case by case basis how a particular individual should be dealt with. i think that when it comes to our men and women in uniform who might be carrying out these missions, the instructions are not going to be based on whether or not the lawyers can sort out how we detain them or how we prosecute them. their mission is to make sure that they apprehend the individual, and they do so safely with minimum risks to american lives, and that's always going to be the priority, carrying out the mission. and that message is consistently sent to our men and women in uniform anytime they start to

carry out one of these missions. it's important to understand and the american people need to be assured that anytime we initiate a mission like this, our top priorities are making sure this person is not able to carry out attacks by the us, and we're able to obtain intelligence from the individuals. so that mitigates against this danger that you are suggesting that our main goal is going to be to kill these individuals as opposed to potentially capturing them. okay? mike manual. >> i am wondering, sir, if you can define for the 100,000 troops you have in harm's way in afghanistan, victory in the war,

and for their families as well, sir. >> yeah, i did not use victory in my west point speech either. what i said was we can be successful in our mission, which is narrowly drawn and that to make sure al qaeda cannot attack the united states of america or allies or our interests overseas, and to make sure that we have an afghan government and afghan people that can provide for their own security. we're being successful in those missions, and the reason that we're in a position to drawdown 10,000 troops this year, and a total of 33,000 troops by the end of next summer is precisely because of the extraordinary work of the men and women in uniform. what they have been able to do is severely cripple al qaeda's

capacities. osama bin laden got the most attention, but before that we decimated some of the upper ranks of al qaeda. they are having a great deal of difficulty operating and financing themselves. we'll keep the pressure on. in part that's because of the extraordinary sacrifices that have been made by our men and women in uniform in ofafghanist. we have an additional 100,000 afghan troops that have been trained as a consequence of this search. and it's in our national interest to make sure that you did not have a collapse of afghanistan in which extremists elements could flood the zone once again and over time al qaeda may inbound a position to rebuild itself. what i laid out was a plan in which we are going to be drawing

down our troops from afghanistan after ten very long years, and enormous sacrifice by our troops. but we will draw them down in a responsible way that will allow afghanistan to defend itself and will give us the operational capacity to continue to put pressure on al qaeda until that network is entirely defeated. >> how troubling did you find the attack on the hotel yesterday, and does that concern you that afghan forces could not step up -- [ inaudible ]. >> keep in mind, the drawdown has not begun, so we understand that afghanistan is a dangerous place, and the taliban is still active and there will be events like this on occasion. the question is, in terms of overall trend is afghan capacity

increasing? kabul, for example, which contains a huge proportion of the afghan population as a whole has been largely policed by afghan forces by quite sometime. they have done a reasonably good job. kabul is much safer than it was and afghan forces in kabul are much more capable than they were. that does not mean there will be events like this taking place. that will go on for sometime. our work is not done. but as i said in my speech, the tide of war is receding. we shifted to a transition phase. much like we have seen in iraq, where we have drawn down troops, the remainder of the troops will be coming out by the end of this year, but iraq has been able to maintain a democratic government

and to tap down violence there. we think a similar approach makes sense in afghanistan. but even in iraq, you still see the occasional attack. these are still countries that are digging themselves out of a lot of war and conflict. they are dangerous places. they are not going to be perfectly safe even if we were there, but we can improve the chances for the afghan people to defend themselves. jim shuto. >> thank you, mr. president. you are aware senators kerry and mccain have a bill on the floor to give you a way to continue with operations in areas. you said days not weeks, and are you prepared and the american people prepared for this mission with american support to continue for a further year, and is there any other definition of

success other than gadhafi being removed from power? >> first of all, jim, there is a light correction. what i told the american people was the initial phase where the americans were in the lead would take days, and perhaps weeks. that's exactly what happened. right? i mean, after around two weeks, a little less than two weeks, we transitioned where nato had taken full of the operation. promise made, promise kept. second, i think that when you have the former republican nominee for president, john mccains, and the former nominee for president on the democratic side, john kerry, coming together to support what we're doing in libya, that should tell the american people that this is important. i very much appreciate their efforts in that regard. third, when it comes to our

definitions of success, the u.n. mandate has said that we are there to make sure that you do not see a massacre directed against libyan civilians by the libyan regime. the libyan regime's capacity has been greatly reduced as a consequence of our operation. that has already been successful. what we have seen in the east and west is that opposition forces have been able to mobilize themselves and start getting organized and people are starting to see the possibility of a more peaceful future on the horizon. what is also true, as long as gadhafi is still presenting himself as the head of the libyan government and as long as he still controls large numbers of troops, the libyan people will be in danger of counter

offenses and retribution. so there's no doubt that gadhafi stepping down from power is from the international community's perspective going to be the primary way that we can assure that the overall mission of libya's people being protected is accomplished. i just want to point out. i know something that you know. the international criminal court identified gadhafi as having violated international law, having committed war crimes. what we have seen is reports of troops engaging in horrible acts, including using rape as a weapon of war. so when you have somebody like that in charge of large numbers of troops, i think it would be hard for us to feel confident that the libyan people are going to be protected unless he steps down. now what that means, whether

there is the possibility of libyans arriving at some sort of political settlement, that, i think, is something that the libyan people will vl to make a decision about. you know, because the international community is there in service of that broader goal, of a peaceful libya. >> would you accept a political settlement with him involved as success from the american perspective? >> i would accept him stepping down so that he is not directing armed forces against the libyan people. he needs to step down. he needs to go. laura mekler. >> thank you, mr. president. in the debt talks would you like to see some sort of tax breaks aimed at stimulating the economy even though it would add to the deficit itself.

and then you said in same-sex marriage, it's a positive step that some of the states in new york are moving toward that. do you now support same-sex marriage? >> i am not going to make news on that today. good try, though. >> reporter: why not? >> with respect to the debt and deficit talks, and where we need to go, i do think that it's important since we're looking at how to reduce the debt and deficit within a ten-year window as well as beyond a ten-year window, to understand that one of the most important things that we can do for debt and deficit reduction is to grow the economy. if there are steps that in the short term may reduce the amount of cash in the treasury, but in the long term mean that we're growing at 3.5% instead of 2.5%,

then those ideas are worth exploring. obviously is that what we did in december during the lame duck session, when democrats and republicans came together and we said, you know, a payroll tax cut makes sense in order to boost the economy. unemployment insurance, makes sense in order to boost the economy. all that stuff puts money in peoples' pockets at a time when they are still struggling to dig themselves out of a recession. the american people have an extra thousand on average in their pockets because of the tax cuts that we initiated. that has helped to cushion some of the tough stuff that happened in the first six months of this year, including the affects on oil prices as a consequence to what happened in the middle east as well as what happened in japan. i think it makes perfect sense for us to take a look at can we extend the payroll tax, for

example, an additional year. and other tax breaks for business investment that could make a big difference in terms of the creating more jobs right now. what we need to do is to restore business confidence and the confidence of the american people that we're on track. we're not going to get there right away. this is a tough thing. we're still moving forward. i think it makes sense as we're looking at an overall package to see if there are things that we can do to sustain the recovery so long as the overall package achieves our goals, goals that i set out, which is $4 trillion within a 10 to 12 year window, and making sure that we are bending the cost of things like health care over the long term.

>> reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> laura, i think this has been asked and answered. i will keep on giving you the same answer until i give you a different one, all right? and that won't be today. i thought you would like that one. atoni. there you are. >> reporter: if you receive a mandatory bill only because legalization are you planning to bet on that deal? and second, members of congress and the government of mexico are still waiting for answers. are you planning to replace atf

leadership and when can we expect the results of the current investigation? >> on the second question, as you know, my attorney general has made clear that he certainly would not have ordered gun running to be able to pass through into mexico. the investigation is still pending. i am not going to comment on a current investigation. i made very clear my views that that would not be an appropriate step by the atf, and we have to find out how that happened. as soon as the investigation is completed, i think appropriate actions will be taken. with respect to e verify. we need comprehensive immigration reform. i have said it before and i will say it again, and i will say it next week, and i will say it six months from now. we have to have a system that

makes sure that we uphold our tradition as a nation of laws, and uphold our tradition as a nation of immigrants. and that means going up against the borders, and making sure that we also have a pathway for legal status for those who are living in the shadows right now. we may not be able to get everything that i would like to see in a package, but we have to have a balanced package. e verify can be an important enforcement tool if it's not riddled with errors, if u.s. citizens are protected because what i don't want is a situation in which employers are forced to set up a system that they can't

be certain works. we don't want to expose employers to the risk where they end up rejecting a qualified candidate for a job because something says that person is an illegal immigrant and they are not an illegal immigrant. that wouldn't be fair for the employee and it could get the employer in trouble as well. let's make sure we have safeguards in place to prevent what i talked about before, and let's not lose sight of other components. for example, making sure that kids who have grown up here in the united states think of themselves as americans, and who are not legal through no fault of their own, and who are ready to invest and give back to our country, and go to school and fight in our military, and start businesses here, let's make sure

that those kids can stay. we need to have a more balanced approach than just a verification system. >> reporter: [ inaudible ]. >> i don't have an answer as to whether the investigation is completed yet, and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the investigation if i don't -- if it's not yet completed. jessica young? congratulations. your first question here. >> reporter: thank you -- >> no pressure. you're going to do great. >> reporter: thank you. your administration has laid out four different dates by which you said that the debt ceiling must be raised or the u.s. would face potential dire

consequences. three dates have come and gone and we have not faced financial calamities. some of your critics say these are scare tactics to force the deal. why should people believe there is a date by which a deal must be raised and can you spell out for us what you believe will happen if we do not raise that ceiling? >> well, there have not been four dates. there were four markers. it's like you're driving down the street and the yellow light starts to flash. the yellow light has been flashing. it's not a red light yet. what tim geithner said, technically speaking, we're in a position now where we're having to do a whole bunch of things to make sure that our bills are

paid. by august 2nd, we run out of tools to make sure that all the bills are paid. so that's a hard deadline. i want to -- i want everybody to understand that this is a jobs issue. this is not an abstraction. if, the united states, for the first time, cannot pay its bills, if it defaults, then the consequences for the u.s. economy will be significant. and unpredictable. and that's not a good thing. we don't know how capital markets will react. if capital markets suddenly decide, you know what, the u.s. government doesn't pay its bills, so we're going to start pulling our money out, and the u.s. treasury has to start to

raise interest rates in order to attract more money to pay off our bills, that means higher interest rates for businesses, and that means higher interest rates for consumers, and so all the head winds that we're already experiencing in terms of the recovery will get worst. that's not my opinion. i think that's a consensus opinion. and that means that job growth will be further hampered as a consequence of that decision. that's point number one. and point number two, i want to address what i have been hearing from some quarters, which is maybe this debt limit thing is not that serious, and we can pay interest on the debt. this idea has been floating around in some republican circles. this is the equivalent of me saying, you know, i will choose to pay my mortgage, but i'm not going to pay my car note, or i'm

going to pay my car note but i'm not going to pay my student loan. now, a lot of people in really tough situations are having to make those tough decisions, but for the u.s. government to start picking and choosing like that is not going to inspire a lot of confidence. moreover, which bills are we going to decide to pay? these guys said maybe we just pay the interest for bond holders, so are we really going to start paying interest to chinese who hold treasuries? and we're not going to pay folks their social security checks? or we're not going to pay veterans for their disability checks? which bills or obligations are we going to say that we don't

have to pay? and last part i want to make about this. these are bills that congress ran up. the money has been spent. the obligations have been made. so this isn't a situation -- i think the american people have to understand this. this is not a situation where, you know, congress is going to say, okay, we won't buy this car or we won't take this vacation. they took the vacation, they bought the car, and now they're saying, maybe we don't have to pay, or we don't have to pay as fast as we said we were going to. that's not how responsible families act. and we're the greatest nation on earth and we can't act that way. so this is urgent and it needs to get settled.

>> reporter: so is august 2nd a yellow light or red light? >> i think people should think of it -- look, i am the president of the united states and i want to make sure that i am not engaging in scare tactics. i tried to be responsible and somewhat restrained so that folks don't get spooked. august 2nd is a very important date, and there's no reason why we can't get this done now. we know what the options are out there. this is not a technical problem any longer. this is a matter of congress going ahead and biting the bullet and making tough decisions. we know what the decisions are. we identified what spending cuts are possible. we identified what defense cuts are possible and what health care cuts are possible and identified what loopholes in the tax code can be closed that would also raise revenue. we identified what the options

are now, and the question is are we going to step up and get this done? you know, malia and sasha, generally finish their homework a day ahead of time. malia is 13. sasha is 10. it is impressive. they don't wait until the night before. they are not pulling all nighters. they are 13 and 10. congress can do the same thing. if you know you have to do something, just do it. and i have to say, i am very amused when i start hearing comments about well the president needs to show more leadership on this. let me tell you something, right after we finished dealing with the government shutdown, averting a government shutdown, i called the leaders here

together. i said we have to get this done. i put vice president biden in charge of a process that, by the way, has made real progress. these guys met and worked through all the issues. i met with every single caucus. for an hour to hour and a half each. republican senators, democratic senators. republican house, democratic house. i have met with the leaders multiple times. as a certain point, they need to do their job. you know, this thing, which is just not on the level where we have meetings and discussions and we're working through process, and when they decide they're not happy with the fact that at some point you have to make a choice, they step back and say, well, you know, the president needs to get this done. they need to do their job.

now's the time to go ahead and make the tough choices. that's why they're called leaders. i have already shown that i am willing to make some decisions that are very tough and will, you know, give my base of voters further reason to give me a hard time. but it's got to be done. so there is no point in procrastinating or putting it off. we have to get this done. if by the end of this week we have not seen substantial progress, i think members of congress need to understand, we're going to, you know, start having to cancel things and stay here until we get it done. they're in one week, and then out one week. and then they're saying, obama has got to step in. you need to be here. i have been here.

i have been doing afghanistan, and bin laden, and the greek crisis. you stay here. let's get it done. all right. i think you know my feelings about that. karen boeing. >> reporter: thank you, mr. president. you talked about the payroll tax holiday and possibly extending that. are you worried, though, by adding a discussion of short-term measures on the economy into these discussions about long-term deficit reductions, that may complicate the conversation and make it harder to pass a debt limit? >> i will -- let me put it this way. if we have a good deal on debt and deficit reduction that focuses not only on the 10-year window but the long term, we will get it done.

and then we'll argue about other things, because i think that's very important. i will say that precisely because tough votes in congress are often avoided, that it may make sense to also deal with something like a payroll tax cut at the same time, because it does have budget implications, and the american people need to know that we're focused on jobs and not just on deficit reduction, even though as i said, the reduction helps to serve the job agenda, and we have to have confidence and a plan helping right now. but i don't think it should be a complicating factor. if mitch mcconnell and john

boehner came and said we're ready to make a deal and here is a balanced approach to debt and deficit reduction, but we want to argue about payroll tax cuts later, they're not set to expire until the end of this year, if that was the situation they presented, i think we would have a serious conversation about that. i would not discount that completely. i do think that the steps that i talked about to deal with job growth and economic growth right now are vitally important to deficit reduction, just as deficit reduction is important to grow the economy and create jobs. creating jobs and growing the economy also helps reduce the deficit. if we just increase the growth rate by one percentage point that would drastically bring down the long-term projections of the deficit, because more are

paying in to the coffers, and it makes a big difference. this may be a good place to wrap up. you know, every day i get letters from folks all around the country who show incredible resilience and determination. but they are having a very, very tough time. they are losing their homes. some have lost their businesses. some have lost work and have not been able to find jobs for months, maybe a year, maybe a year and a half. and they feel some desperation. some folks who are working, just are having a tough time paying the bills because they have not seen their wages or incomes go up in ten years and the costs of everything else has gone up.

and every day that weighs on me. every minute of every day that weighs on me, because i ran for president precisely to make sure that we righted this ship, and people to aspire to be in the middle class, if they're working hard, then they are living a better life. these structures that have been able to go on for a decade and in some cases longer, they will not be solved overnight. but we know what to do. we know that if, you know, we are educating our kids well, then they will be more competitive. we know that if we are investing in things like infrastructure, it pays off.

i was in alcoa, one of the biggest companies, and they took a big hit and they vested $90 million in a plant that makes parts for planes. just like alcoa, america has to make investments. we know we have to get control of our investment. there are some things that aren't going to solve all of our problems, but can make progress right now. and the question is whether or not democrats and republicans are willing to put aside the exspeedance of short-term politics in order to get it done, and these folks are counting on us. they desperately want to believe that our their leadership is thinking about them, and not playing games.

i think that if all the leadership here in washington has the faces and the stories of those families in mind, then we will solve this debt limit issue, and we will put in place steps like a payroll tax cut, and infrastructure development. we will continue to fund education. we will hold to a commitment to our seniors. these are solvable problems. but it does require us just getting out of the short-term, and frankly selfish approach that sometimes politics breeds. we have to think a bit long term. thank you very much, everybody. >> you have been watching president obama, a news conference in the east room and lasted 70 minutes or so. it covered a number of issues,

the debt limit, he just talked about that, and the economy, creating jobs and the u.s. troops in afghanistan as well as the mission in libya. i want to bring in our team of correspondents and analysts who talk a little about this. our own jessica, our white house correspondent, from the east room, and a plit analysts out of washington, and christine romans, and fran townsend back with us from new york. she's a member of the homeland security and advisory committee. i want to start off with you, jessica. are you in place? you're probably in the east room and getting set and ready. can you hear me? >> reporter: sorry, i hear you. will you repeat the question. >> first of all, congratulations on your new position, i understand, and we heard that the president gave you a little

shout-out there in the beginning, and that was a very nice moment. you asked an important question and one that got the president fired up over the debt ceiling and whether or not it would be raised and the deadline here. you pressed him on this, whether or not august 2nd was a yellow light as the president was indicating before or a red light in terms of whether or not the united states will be able to pay its bills. what did you make how the president responded to your question? >> he sounded quite frustrated. he took pretty clear jab at congress for suggesting that it was anything but a very clear deadline. you know, secretary geithner, treasury secretary, had suggested earlier in the year that the debt ceiling would be reached at the end of march, and that this deal had to be cut by then. and then as subsequently moved that date, because they have the power -- they call them tools in

the toolbox to move money around, if you will. the argument that they make, you hear it from economists, at some point you can't do that anymore. with our own budgets you know you can mess around only so long, and they have to cut a deal by august 2nd. the president seems frustrated with congress for suggesting that there is any more leeway past that date. his argument at the end is that congress should not take any vacations. if they can't cut a deal, he should stay until they can. he said he worked on afghanistan, and they can stay around and work on this. >> i want to bring in christine romans for a quick question on this. the president said -- he took on his republican critics. he said it's not about paying the interest rate here, and was

he right there will be areas where the government will not pay people or will not be able to pay people when we hit the august 2nd deadline? >> absolutely. the treasury secretary is putting ious in some retirees accounts. we have reached the debt ceiling. every dollar america spends, you guys, every dollar america spends we borrow 38 cents of that. if you cannot borrow anymore money, how do you come up with 38 cents? are we going to pay for the troops in the field but not for social security for seniors? pay for highway infrastructure but not pay for the interest on our debt. many are saying we will pay for the interest on our debt. some will say we will pay the interest on our debt.

the global capital markets will say that america is triaging its bills, and that's serious. the reason why he is not telling you pointblank what he thinks will happen if we default or if we hit the deadline and don't fix it, he doesn't want to spook the markets. he doesn't want to layout the looms day scenario, because you spook the market, and he's walking a fine line here. >> i want to talk about gay rights. this was interesting what i thought the president said. on the one hand he said his administration has done more for gay rights, and then he went on to say that he thought what took place in new york, the same-sex marriage legislation that went through, the debate that happened, was a good thing, and

it sounded like what he thought was the debate was a good thing, and then he was asked whether or not personally he believed that same-sex marriage was the right thing, and he said i will not make news on that today. making news on something kind of implies that you will change your position somehow, go further. he did not go further. but it seemed he was hinting something could come next. what do you make of the nuance regarding this? >> it's very nuance, because he understands what is going on in these states and public opinion has changed in this issue, and he understands the danger of him saying this is an issue that should be left to the states, which, by the way, is a position of former vice president dick cheney takes. what we see going on in the country is only a limited number of states have approved gay marriage. this is an issue that could be headed for the supreme court.

there's a case right now in california, a very celebrated case there. so this is a president that is hanging back right now politically and saying, look, this is the state's issue, and this is an issue that is going to work its way through the courts. so at this point, i am not going to say anything except to say that our administration as done more than any other administration in terms of promoting the rights of gay couples, etc. i didn't really hear any kind of a shift from him. i think that he is, as he would say, evolving on this. i think everybody knows that there's one more step, but i don't think that we heard it today. >> i want to bring in fran townsend quickly here. there were a couple things that came up. on libya, he was -- not libya. on afghanistan, he was asked to define victory in the war in afghanistan.

he would not say the word victory. he said he believes we succeed on two points. one to make sure al qaeda could not attack the united states, and two, to make sure the afghan people could protect themselves and in that way we could be successful in our mission. were you satisfied with that explanation, seeing on the heels of the attack we just saw in kabul? >> no. when he was asked about afghanistan and the drawdown, the president pivoted to talking about al qaeda, and that's because he has seen successes there, especially the killing of osama bin laden. but the recent attacks have been conducted by the taliban, and not once did he mention the word taliban. what you were waiting to hear is you would suspect with the two attacks yesterday, he would have been very clear that we're not going to negotiate with them while they're blowing up hotels and civilians.

not a word. he was not pressed on it but he did not voluntarily address the issue about the taliban which right now is certainly the greatest threat for civilians.

george anthony broke down and sobbed on the stand. he was being asked about his suicide attempt in 2009 after

his granddaughter caylee went missing. earlier he got angry when the defense asked him about how he recognized the smell of decomposition in the trunk of his daughter's car. he was asked by the prosecutor about buying a gun after caylee's death. >> mr. anthony, in august of 2008, you went and obtained a firearm, did you not? >> yes, sir. >> why did you obtain a firearm? >> two reasons. number one, i wanted to go and get answers that i believe i could get from individuals that i felt in my mind, at the time, was responsible for caylee. >> you were going to force them at gun point to tell you information that you thought they had about caylee, based on what your daughter told you. >> yes, sir. >> joining me now, former

prosecutor holly hughes. what happened? >> two big things. he got to credibly deny that sexual abuse ever happened. because jose baez, defense attorney kept pushing you, you thought your daughter was innocent, he was pushing him to saying i did back then, and george is letting the jury know i changed my mind and don't think she's innocent anymore. >> what is the significance of buying the gun? >> he wanted to prove he does underhanded things, but the reason george could not have a gun is because casey was in the house. it backfired on the defense. once again, it's not george that can't have a begun or looking bad, and it goes to show you that george still thought that baby was alive back then. if he had been part of her