ambassador to libya chris stevens should be in benghazi on that day after reports of terrorism, do you have a good answer to why he was there in a dangerous situation to begin with? >> my understanding is that chris stooemevens was in bengha because chris stevens wants to go to benghazi. i don't mean to disrespect a killed and brave man, a lot of ambassadors who are in countries like that don't actually like to have big footprints when they travel. my understanding is that stevens fit that description. but we should also point out that stevens wanted more security for diplomats in libya in general. and one of the interesting parts of the obama administration's and the white house's reaction to the benghazi controversy or scandal is the fact that they have now accepted the fact that what a lot of us were reporting in september and october -- i was with another network and i was reporting all these state

department requests being denied, all these individuals on the ground in libya asking the state department we need more security, why are you taking away our airplane, we want a tour of this security team extended. and the white house and state department was pushing back very aggressively in my report saying that's not true, this is not an issue, this is not the case. now they accept that it is true, now they accept that it is the case and it is one of the points of the three controversies before, during and after and the response to the security situation in benghazi, it is the one that they are seeding and it is the one that the independent review concludes was handled incredibly poorly by the state department. >> that's why the president went out of his way just now saying we're going to learn from those mistakes, bolster security and make sure american diplomats, other u.s. officials are not put in that kind of a situation once again. >> and, wolf, there are some democrats who make the claim this was as a result of budget cutting that they felt the necessity to do because of

republicans calling for budget cuts. but honestly, that argument hasn't gotten an awful lot of traction here. embassy security's important. >> while we wait for the start of the question and answer session with the president and the turkish prime minister, he's still involved in his opening statement speaking about u.s./turkish relations, there's a new report you broke this news, jake, an hour or so ago here on cnn. i'll read the title of this interim report on the department of justice's handling of known or suspected terrorists ae admitted into the federal witness security program. let's hold that thought for a moment because the questioning is about to begin. >> concise questions and us to give concise answers. i'm going to start with julianna goldman of bloomberg. >> fortunately, we all forgot umbrellas. mr. president, i want to ask you about the irs. >> uh-huh. >> can you assure the american people that nobody in the white

house knew about the agency's actions before your council's office found out on april 22nd? and when they did find out, do you think that you should have learned about it before you learned about it from news reports, as you said last friday? and also, are you opposed to there being a special council appointed to lead the justice department investigation? and also, mr. prime minister, what is the status on efforts to normalize relations with israel? and do you still plan to go to gaza in the coming weeks? thanks. >> okay. well, with respect to the irs, i spoke to this yesterday. my main concern is fixing a problem. and we began that process yesterday by asking and accepting the resignation of the acting director there. we will be putting in new leadership that will be able to make sure that following up on the i.g. audit that we gather up

all the facts, that we hold accountable those who have taken these outrageous actions. as i said last night, it is just simply unacceptable for there to even be a hint of partisanship or ideology when it comes to the application of our tax laws. i am going to go ahead and ask folks, why don't we get a couple of marines, they're going to look good next to us, just because i want -- i've got a change of suits, but i don't know about our prime minister. there we go. you guys, i'm sorry. but let me -- let me make sure i answer the specific question. i can assure you that i certainly did not know anything about the i.g. report before the

i.g. report had been leaked through press -- through the press. typically the i.g. reports are not supposed to be widely distributed or shared. they tend to be, you know, a process that everybody's trying to protect the integrity of. but what i'm absolutely certain of is that the actions that were described in that i.g. report are unacceptable. so in addition to making sure that we've got a new acting director there, we're also going to make sure that we gather up the facts and hold accountable and responsible anybody who was involved in this. we're going to make sure that we identify any structural or management issues to prevent something like this from happening again. we're going to make sure that we are accepting all of the recommendations that the i.g. has in the report. and i'm looking forward to

working with congress to fully investigate what happened, make sure that it doesn't happen again, and also look at some of the laws that create a bunch of ambiguity in which the irs may not have enough guidance and not be clear about what exactly they need to be doing and doing it right so that the american people have confidence that the tax laws are being applied fairly and evenly. so, you know, in terms of the white house and reporting, i think you've gotten that information from mr. carney and others. i promise you this, that the minute i found out about it that my main focus is making sure we get the thing fixed. you know, i think it's going to be sufficient for us to be

working with congress. they've got a whole bunch of committees. we've got i.g.s already there. the i.g. has done an audit. it's now my understanding going to be recommending an investigation. and, you know, attorney general holder also announced a criminal investigation of what happened. between those investigations, i think we're going to be able to figure out exactly what happened, who was involved, what went wrong. and we're going to be able to implement steps to fix it. that ultimately is the main priority i have. but also i think the american people have. they understand that we've got an agency that has enormous potential power and is involved in everybody's lives. that's part of the reason why it's been treated as a quasi-independent institution. that's also why we've got to

make sure that it is doing its job scrupulously and without even a hint of bias or a hint that somehow they're favoring one group over another. and as i said yesterday, i'm outraged by this in part because, look, i'm a public figure. if a future administration is starting to use the tax laws to favor one party over another or one political view over another, obviously we're all vulnerable. and that's why as i've said, it doesn't matter whether you're a democrat or republican, you should be equally outraged at even the prospect that the irs might not be acting with the kind of complete neutrality that we expect. and i think we are going to be able to fix it. we're going to be able to get it done. we've already begun that process. and we're going to keep ongoing until it's finished.

all right, guys. >> translator: the question about gaza. >> we're going to monitor what the turkish prime minister's saying about israel and gaza. we'll report that in a moment. i just want to bring back jake tapper and gloria borger. you heard specifically the president say he thinks the existing investigations will be sufficie sufficient, the justice department investigation as far as the abuses are concerned and any other inspector general investigations, there's no need for a special can sdal. >> he's got this new scandal so new he wasn't even asked about in the press briefing. however, we'll see if he gets asked about it. that is if we at cnn have a first report about this justice department inspector general report looking at the federal witness relocation program or witness security in which the u.s. marshals admitted that they would give former or suspected

terrorists new identities for cooperating in investigations and not provide those identities to the interested parties, the people who keep together the watch list, the terrorist watch list. which meant that these people with their new names could fly on commercial airlines despite the fact that they were not allowed to because they were obviously suspected terrorists. and, in addition, once the auditor -- once the inspector general doing its audit told the justice department about this and they try today remedy it, the justice department found that they could not locate two of these suspected terrorists. we have some excerpts from the report. in july 2012 the marshal service stated it was unable to locate two former participants identified as known or suspected terrorists and that through its investigative efforts it's concluded that one individual was and the other individual was believed to be residing outside the united states. and then of course as i just said as a result of the department of justice not disclosing information on how these known or suspected

terrorists, the new government provided entities of known or suspected terrorists were not included on the government's consolidated terrorist watch list until we brought this matter to the department's attention. therefore it was possible for known or suspected terrorists to fly on commercial airplanes in or over the united states. it's quite chilling. the justice department concedes the points, does not dispute any of them. they say the justice department agrees with the inspector general's audit report that the witness security's program for monitoring and midding needed to be enhanced for terrorism-linked witnesses. >> we're going to continue our analysis of this latest development. once again jake breaking the news here on cnn a bit more than an hour ago. the president is now answering another question over at the white house. >> -- it is important for us to make sure that we're able to get more specific information about what exactly is happening there. but separate and apart from the chemical weapons, we knowt tens

being killed with artillery and mortars and that the humanitarian crisis and the slaughter that's taking place by itself is sufficient to prompt strong international reaction. and that's why the prime minister and i spoke extensively about the steps we're taking on humanitarian efforts, the steps that we're taking to strengthen the opposition politically so that it is inclusive and representative of all the people inside of syria, the steps we need to take to continue to strengthen the capacity of the syrian opposition that are on the ground fighting to protect themselves from the assad regime and that we continue to try to mobilize the entire international community to put more and more pressure on assad so he recognizes that he is no longer legitimate and that he needs to go and that we are able to move to a political transition in which the institutions inside of syria are

still functioning, but we have a representative multiethnic, multireligious body that can bring about democracy and peace inside of syria. with respect to what i've said in the past around red lines, what i've said is that the use of chemical weapons are something that the civilized world has recognized should be out of bounds. and as we gather more evidence and work together, my intention is to make sure we're presenting everything that we know to the international community as an additional reason, an additional mechanism for the international community to put all the pressure that they can on the assad regime and to work with the opposition to bring about that political transition.

now, there are a whole range of options that the united states is already engaged in. and i preserve the options of taking additional steps, both diplomaticnd military because those chemical weapons inside of syria also threaten our security over the long-term as well as our allies and friends and neighbors. but this is also an international problem. and it's very much my hope to continue to work with all the various parties involved including turkey to find a solution that brings peace to syria, stabilizes the region, stabilizes those chemical weapons, but it's not going to be something that the united states does by itself. and i don't think anybody in the region including the prime minister would think that u.s. unilateral actions in and of themselves would bring about a better outcome inside of syria.

jeff mason. >> thank you, mr. president. i'd like to ask you about the justice department. >> uh-huh. >> do you believe that the seizure of phone records from "associated press" journali isi this week or was in overreach. and do you have confidence still in your attorney general? should we accompany in a media shield law as a response to that? more broadly, how do you feel about comparisons by some of your critics of this week's scandals to those that happened in the nixon administration? >> well, i'll let you guys engage in those comparisons. and you can go ahead and read the history, i think, and draw your own conclusions. my concern is making sure that if there's a problem in the government, that we fix it. that's my responsibility. and that's what we're going to do. that's true with respect to the irs and making sure that they apply the laws the way they were

intended. that's true with respect to the security of our diplomats, which is why we're going to need to work with congress to make sure that there's adequate funding for what's necessary out there. now, with respect to the department of justice, i'm not going to comment on a specific impending case. but i can talk broadly about the balance that we have to strike. you know, leaks related to national security can put people at risk. it can put men and women in uniform that i've sent into the battlefield at risk. they can put some of our intelligence officers who are in various dangerous situations that are easily compromised at risk. u.s. national security is

dependent on those folks being able to operate with confidence that folks back home have their backs. so they're not just left out there high and dry and potentially put in even more danger than they may already be. so i make no apologies and i don't think the american people would expect me as commander in chief not to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might get them killed. now, the flip side of it is we also live in a democracy where a free press, free expression and the open flow of information helps hold me accountable, helps hold our government accountable and helps our democracy function. and, you know, the whole reason i got involved in politics is because i believe so deeply in that democracy and that process. so, you know, the whole goal of

this media shield law that was worked on and largely endorsed by folks like the "the washington post" editorial page and by prosecutors was finding a way to strike that balance appropriately. and to the extent that this case, which we still don't know all the details of, to the extent that this case has prompted renewed interest about how do we strike that balance properly. and i think now's the time for us to go ahead and revisit that legislation. i think that's a worthy conversation to have. and i think that's important. but i also think it's important to recognize that, you know, when we express concern about leaks at a time when i've still got 60,000 plus troops in afghanistan and i've still got a

whole bunch of intelligence officers around the world who are in risky situations in outposts that in some cases are as dangerous as the outpost in benghazi, that part of my job is to make sure that we're protecting what they do while still accommodating for the need for information. so -- or the need for the public to be informed and be able to hold my office accountable. >> asked about holder as well and for the prime minister, i wanted to ask you, sir, if the united states does not step up its involvement in syria, in your view, how will that affect the war? and what plans do you have to react to the bombing of the border town that the president mentioned? >> mr. prime minister, excuse me, you're right. i have complete confidence in eric holder as attorney general. he does his job with integrity

and i expect he will continue to do so. >> translator: you are talking about the parts of the glass which is empty. i'd like to look at things with the -- >> so once again we'll continue to monitor what the turkish prime minister is saying. we'll get back to him shortly. we'll hear what the president has to say as well. they're getting into some other issues including syria and if the u.s. doesn't step up its own military involvement in syria what will turkey, which borders syria, what will turkey do? but, gloria, we just heard the president say, you know, he's got a delicate line he's got to walk. he wants to protect the first amendment, make sure there's freedom of speech. at the same time he wants to protect u.s. national security and military personnel. and if there are leaks that endanger them, he wants to make sure that something is done. >> yeah. he was talking about striking the balance properly because it is a balancing act. and he said he makes no apology

about looking into national security leaks that could endanger the lives of men and women who serve overseas. so it's very clear that he believes in some kind of a journalistic shield law so that you can protect your sources, et cetera. he didn't come out and say that he believed that the justice department overreached. obviously he cannot do that. he did express complete confidence in his friend, the attorney general eric holder, but he can't comment obviously on this specific breach. >> how much trouble do you think eric holder, jake, the attorney general is in? >> i think we're getting a question from president obama right now? oh, turkish reporter. i apologize. how much trouble do i think attorney general eric holder is? eric holder is known for being one of the closest people in the president's cabinet to the president. he has a very close friendship

with him. i've heard other members of the administration marvel at how little eric holder can do to get the president mad at him, even though he has been under fire any number of times. i should point out to follow-up on what gloria was saying. this is what presidents always say. always say, when they go after journalists. >> the president is now responding to this latest question. let's listen in. >> -- and there's been consistency on the part of my administration that assad lost legitimacy when he started firing on his own people and killing his own people who initially were protesting peacefully for a greater voice in their country's affairs. obviously that's escalated during the course of time. so the answer is, the sooner the

better. in terms of question how, i think we've already discussed that. there's no magic formula for dealing with a extraordinarily violent and difficult situation like syria's. if there was, i think the prime minister and i would have already acted on it and it would already be finished. and instead what we have to do is apply steady international pressure, strengthen the opposition. i do think that the prospect of talks in geneva involving the russians and representatives about a serious political transition that all the parties can buy into may yield results, but in the meantime we're going to continue to make sure we're helping the opposition and obviously dealing with the humanitarian situation and will do so in close consultation with turkey, which obviously is

deeply invested in this and with whom we've got an outstanding relationship with. >> translator: thank you very much. as you know, we will be meeting again this evening, so we'll have time to go in further detail. as i said before, our views do -- >> all right. so we were talking earlier this whole syria issue obviously a huge issue of concern, jake and gloria, for the u.s. and turkey. turkey especially, it borders syria and wants a much more assertive u.s. response, which apparently, jake, doesn't seem based on what we're hearing from the president, it doesn't seem to be in the works at least right now. >> this is a president who feels burned by what generals told him when it came to the first surge in afghanistan in 2009, who feels that a much greater reluctance to use american force abroad than he did in his first

term. if you look at his national security team right now, especially the secretary of state and the secretary of defense, they are much more dovish when it comes to the use of american force than their predecessors, kerry and hagel, who not coincidentally are both vietnam veterans, combat veterans, are much more reluctant than panetta or gates were at the pentagon or secretary of state hillary clinton. it's not a surprise to me. what would surprise me is that if president obama ever sent boots on the ground into syria. he's been reluctant to even send military assistance -- direct military assistance. >> he's not going to do boots on the ground. even john mccain or lindsey graham don't want that. but they want more of an air cover, if you will, or supplying lethal weapons on a more assertive basis. >> what turkey really wants is much more help with the refugee problem than they believe we're giving them. there are 400,000 refugees from syria in turkey. and it's costing them, you know,

over $1 billion a year to deal with it. and this is a real problem for them. and i think that they're looking for some assistance with those refugees from the united states. >> they are looking for some help from the u.s. and i'm sure there will be some diplomatic help, political help, financial assistance. but as far as what the u.s. and nato allies did in libya, sending in cruise missiles, having a no-fly zone if you will, there doesn't seem to be an appetite for that. >> no. none at all. none at all. i also don't think there's much of an appetite for it among the american people who are very war wary. we still have tens of thousands of troops in afghanistan. i don't think the military's particularly excited. military official not excited to enter into a new military engagement. i know we're about to break away. >> they're wrapping up. >> one other point i wanted to make. we were talking about president obama talking about how the justice department subpoenaed the records of the associated

press, a very broad subpoena of phone records to find out more about who leaked information about a terrorist plot. and president obama talked about the need to balance the first amendment and also the freedom of the press and also national security, that's what every president says. every president whether it's nixon with the pentagon papers or george w. bush with the nsa wiretapping story, every president exerts i'm doing this to keep you safe. a lot of people in the public, they say that's enough. and they believe it. but the truth of the matter is that it's not enough of an answer in and of itself. that's why there is congressional oversight of the executive branch. it's not enough just to say we're doing it to keep you safe, because the moment the american people seed that territory, then presidents can do whatever they want. >> and when you look at the specifics of this case with the associated press, you have a subpoena that was broadly drawn. >> very broad. >> that was done in secret. that they only discovered after the fact about a story that was

a successful attempt to thwart terrorism that eventually the administration revealed itself. so there are questions regarding this particular case that are different from sort of the overarching theme. >> the attorney general, eric holder, says this might be the one or two or three most severe damaging impacts on national security. >> and the associated press held the story. >> and keep in mind this administration, the obama administration, has used the espionage act more times to go after whistleblowers, individuals in the government who share potentially damaging information with reporters, they have used the espionage act to go after whether i sistleblower than every other administration combined. this is a very aggressive administration when it comes to squashing freedom of the press. >> jessica yellin, our chief white house correspondent at the rose garden where it was raining earlier. i assume it stopped raining now.

we're looking at the president. i guess he's with the family of the turkish prime minister, is that correct? jessica? we're not hearing you. we got to get jessica's microphone going. we're going to fix your microphone, jessica. and then we'll hear what you have to say. that's very important. the president has just wrapped up his news conference with the turk irk prime minister erdogan. they spoke extensively about syria. clearly the u.s. no major news on that front. the u.s. reluctant to get involved on the ground or even in the air over syria. there you see the president -- that picture's breaking up as well. jessica's microphone's breaking up. but we're going to try to reconnect with her in a moment. that's what happens when you got live television and the clouds are over washington. jessica, can you hear me now? >> i hear you. can you hear me? >> yeah. looks like the president said good-bye to the turk irk prime minister and his wife. go ahead. what's your takeaway from what we just heard from the

president? >> he's actually just walked back into the oval office. i don't know if you heard at the very end, but i did shout out a question asking him if he would comment on the witness protection program, the latest news jake brought us earlier. and he heard the question, looked at me, smiled and walked away. i shouted it again and he kept on walking. so the president does not want to engage on that front. he didn't seem to want to provide more news on any of these fronts today, wolf, except that he has faith in his attorney general. and he doesn't want to see a special council appointed to look into the irs. no surprise. no white house likes that because you never know where those can lead. broadly speaking, there was a whole lot of chuckling going on out here i have to say because the metaphor was rich. they kept us waiting for 45 minutes here while his meeting ran late. and as you were pointing out, it started raining and sprinkling. and then just as he started answering the question on

transparency and the irs, the skies opened up and rain really came down. and then he was shielded by an umbrella while he was facing the media. of course, it's the media shield that everybody's asking about these days on the other controversy regarding the doj and department of justice and associated press. i would say the rain is part of the president's what's that childhood book? oh, so, terrible very bad week. it's not been a good one for the white house. they're trying to put it back in order, but so far it's not there yet, wolf. >> not there yet. and now there's a fourth potential scandal out there, jessica. you tried to get the president to respond to it. jake is here. gloria's here. this interim report that was just released by the inspector general over at the justice department saying what, jake, that two terrorists who had received a new identity under this witness security protection program that's underway, they were allowed to move around, presumably got passports if you

will, and all of a sudden they disappear. >> well, the people in charge of providing these new identities with the witness security program, which is two different divisions within the justice department, did not share that information with the agencies in charge of putting together the terrorist watch list. so after they had their new names, these individuals -- not just these two who they couldn't find, but all of them, could theoretically have flown on commercial airplanes. let's walk through some of the things in the report. in july 2012 the u.s. marshal service stated it was unable to locate two former federal witness security program participants identified as known or suspected terrorists. and through its investigative efforts it concluded one individual was and the other individual was believed to be residing outside the u.s. it's really remarkable. we've talked a lot about this, wolf and gloria, about stove piping information, intelligence agencies having information, not sharing it. now we know because of this there were potentially hundreds of thousands of terrorists who were able to fly commercially

part of the witness security program. and two of them they don't even know where they are anymore. >> right. so they were able to fly on commercial airplanes in or over the united states. and this is key because one of the lessons learned from 9/11 is the so-called connecting the dots and not siloing or stove piping your information. and it seems to me that the fbi wasn't aware or sharing. >> the marshals service would coordinate this kind of stuff with the fbi, but apparently according to this inspector general report, they didn't do it. hold on for a minute. we're getting some reaction from the justice department. joe johns, our crime and justice correspondent is getting that reaction. what are they saying, joe? >> hi, wolf. i'm looking through a pretty lengthy statement that the justice department put out almost instantly after jake tapper broke this story. among the things they say in the statement, some of which are actually contained in the back half of the report, that no terrorism-linked witness has

ever committed an act of terrorism since entering the program. they say these individuals who actually go into this witness security program are carefully vetted. and they call them former known or suspected terrorists with emphasis on the word former. they say they started fixing all of the problems the inspector general raised all the way back in 2012 including trying to fix the information sharing and say essentially that they have pretty much accepted and fixed all the recommendations by the i.g. except for one and that is a manual review of all 18,000 case files in the witness security program. of course, the inspector general anticipated that and said that the justice department still needs to manually review all files prior to 1996 and not until then do they believe that upon completion of this review will it be possible for the department to state definitively

it has identified, located and minimized the threat of all known or suspected terrorists in the witness security program. expecting to get more because apparently the justice department was pretty prepared for this to come out of course. it's been circulating for a long time. and i'm sure they'll have more to say by "the situation room," wolf. >> do we know, joe, if these two former terrorists colluded, that they left jointly together? or were they just two individual cases that they happen to disappear? >> well, from what i can tell in the report, they say that they are certain that one individual has left the country. and they believe the second individual has left the country. so it doesn't sound like they have them both located together, wolf. >> yeah. all right, well, we're going to continue to monitor this. joe, thanks very much. i know you're going to have a lot more later in "the situation room." jake will have more coming up on "the lead". >> 4:00 p.m. eastern. >> gloria will be here throughout the day on all of

these programs. we're going to continue to monitor, get reaction to what we just heard from the president. also, there's other news we're following here in "cnn newsroom." at least ten, ten tornadoes touched down in north texas overnight devastating a town killing six people. rescue crews are searching for more victims. we're going live in a moment to the heavily damaged town of granbury. [ male announcer ] one ordinary family... with one extraordinary purpose... to get "man of steel" advanced screening tickets. [ movie announcer voice ] at walmart. see "man of steel" at your local theater before anyone else. get in line 8 a.m. may 18th at walmart. rated pg-13.

humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so we do everything we can to be there for them when they need us. plus, you could save hundreds when you switch, up to $423. call... today. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?

i remember thinking there's a lot i have to do... check my blood sugar, eat better. start insulin. today i learned there's something i don't have to do anymore. my doctor said with levemir® flexpen... i don't have to use a syringe and a vial. levemir® flexpen comes prefilled with long-acting insulin taken once daily for type 2 diabetes to help control high blood sugar. dial the exact dose. inject by pushing a button. no drawing from a vial. no refrigeration for up to 42 days. levemir® (insulin detemir [rdna origin] injection) is not recommended to treat diabetic ketoacidosis. do not use levemir® if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause symptoms such as sweating, shakiness, confusion, and headache. severe low blood sugar can be serious and life threatening. ask your health care provider about alcohol use, operating machinery, or driving. other possible side effects include injection site reactions.

tell your health care provider about all medicines you take and all of your medical conditions. get medical help right away if you experience serious allergic reactions such as body rash, trouble with breathing, fast heartbeat, or sweating. flexpen® is insulin delivery my way. covered by most insurance plans, including medicare. ask your health care provider about levemir® flexpen today. a deadly disaster in north texas. rescue crews are going door-to-door in subdivisions to check for victims of last night's powerful storms. >> oh, my god! >> oh, my goodness! >> at least ten tornadoes touched down in north texas overnight. one of the hardest hit areas was in the city of granbury about 40 miles southwest of ft. worth. residents say the storms moved

in quickly. >> the only place in our house that was probably safe enough was our hallway. and i grabbed a mattress and, you know, i -- there's just nothing left. i'm sorry. there's just nothing left. >> if you'd like to help the victims of these texas storms, you can visit our website impactyourworld at cnn.com/impact. we'll have more on these tornadoes and the impact later today. meanwhile, the nation's commander in chief is ready to combat sexual assault in the u.s. military. president obama meets later this afternoon with the defense secretary and the joint chiefs of staff to discuss these very disturbing allegations involving two service members accused of sexual misconduct in the past two weeks alone. in both cases the men had been in charge of preventing specifically chose types of sex crimes. my guest today is bridgette

mccoy. she was a private in the army. she says she was sexually assaulted many times and earlier this year she testified before a committee. thank you so much for joining us. first of all, briefly give us your story. >> well, i served in theist army between 1987 and 1991. and during that time i experienced sexual assault, sexual harassment multiple times in different situations. and i didn't report it because basically i was scared. by the time i was exiting the -- getting closer toward the end of my term, i re-enlisted and they basically started having some more sexual harassment. i reported it. and at the end of that basically my first sergeant made me sign papers to get out of the military or have to receive ucmj action against myself. so i basically took the honorable discharge is basically what he said. i can get an honorable discharge or i can, you know, have ucmj

action against me. so at that time, i mean, this was 1991. no one was really talking about, you know, protecting service members from sexual harassment. they were calling it fra tenderization. it took me so many years to fight for my benefits and to begin to speak out. >> i don't know you're working on that. as i pointed out for the second time this month a u.s. service member right now actually worked to try to prevent these kinds of sexual assaults have been themselves now accused of a sexual crime. what do you think needs to be done in the u.s. military to get on top of this problem? >> well, i believe that the military justice act that just came out today senator gill brand and senator boxer, i think that's a really solid first step towards changing things. i also believe that in order for the service members who are

experiencing sexual assault right now, they need to have some type of special victims unit or something protecting them while they're in service. and then also people who report sexual assault and then are systemically put out or systemically given bad conduct discharges, i think that those really need to be reviewed much more closely before they allow them to go through. so there's multiple steps that need to happen. i don't think it's a one-size-fits-all. i definitely don't think training is just going to change it. i absolutely believe that we need to have prosecution actually happen and that these perpetrators need to be put on the national registry for being sex offenders so they don't come out into the community and harm civilians as well. >> as you know, the number of service members, brigette,

anonymously reporting sexual assault grew by 30% in the past two years alone. that according to a recent pentagon report released last week. is this sudden spike in numbers because more people are refusing to stay silent in the face of these kinds of assaults? >> absolutely not. those numbers are not from more people reporting. it's more people are being sexually assaulted. so we need to have some things in place that actually help with the issue. removing people like this sergeant who is, you know, perpetrating in uniform, i don't believe that people who wear a uniform and who rape should be considered service members. i mean, they should absolutely be stripped of any dignity as it relates to military service. and so if we don't do those types of things first, people aren't going to come forward. and then people aren't going to get the help that they need, you know, after that. >> brigette mccoy, thanks very

much for sharing your story. thanks for your thoughts. >> thank you for having me. you've also heard about eating too much salt that is bad for you. a new report finds eating too little salt can also hurt you. ♪ (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you.

so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company,

which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. ...and we inspected his brakes for free. -free is good. -free is very good. [ male announcer ] now get 50% off brake pads and shoes at meineke.

for decades there's been a serious push underway to get americans to eat less salt because cutting back was said to be good for your heart. but now a new report calls into question all of those warnings. our senior medical correspondent elizabeth cohen is joining us from the cnn center. elizabeth, a lot of people like that little extra dash of salt on their food. so does this mean you can start feeling less guilty when pouring on the salt? >> you know what, wolf, i have to say not really. i hate to be a big bummer, but that's the answer. and when you see these numbers, you'll understand why i say that. so, right now americans eat on average 3,400 milligrams of salt. the recommendation has been to get down to 1,500. this new study from the institute of medicine says, you know, that 1,500 number is kind of low. we're not really sure it does anybody any good. and in fact it might actually hurt your heart to go that low.

so the institute of medicine says you may not need to go down to 1,500, but the reality is americans were never really anywhere near 1,500 to begin with on average. so i think that when you look at this study, what it says is maybe we don't need to go as low as we thought, but americans weren't going that low anyways. >> so how much salt should we eat? i raise the question if we don't have enough salt there could be some problems, right? >> right. you want to have enough salt, but i have to say of all the problems facing americans right now, this is not really one of them. americans get enough salt. it is not a huge public health problem. mostly that's because processed food contains so much corn fraik flakes have quite a bit of salt. people aren't dropping right and left from lack of salt but are from heart zeerz. wo disease. some say maybe 2300 is okay because anything lower than that doesn't seem to be better.

but i don't know about you, but i don't know people who measure the milligrams of salt they get. i don't know how many milligrams of sodium today i've gotten, for example. so i think people should eat more foods from the ground and the fewer foods that are processed. the minute you do that, you're eating less sodium. >> excellent psychiatrist for us. here's a reminder, speaking of food, anthony bourdain is in libya for this weekend's "parts unknown." two years since the fall of moammar gadhafi, there's some progress, some hope but also instability and a very, very uncertain future. tune in sunday night 9:00 p.m. eastern or set your dvr. "anthony bourdain parts unknown" in libya. he checks out the food and everything else. you'll want to see it. we won't see a repeat of last year's nba finals between the oklahoma city thunder and miami heat. who can we expect to see in the

finals? "the bleacher report" is next. of

. the highest paid athletes, the nba finals, and photo bombs. carlos diaz has it all in today's "bleacher report". >> hi, wolf. lebron james and the heat have advanced to their third straight eastern conference finals. it was a yo-yo battle in miami last night, the heat jumped out to an 18 point heat, fell down by 11 and came down to the last

possession of the game, the heat wait the winner of the pacers/knicks winner. look at this. craig sager, tnt, photo-bombing the picture of will smith and his son. the thunder go home. oklahoma city down by two in the final seconds. kevin durant misses the jumper that would have tied the game. a year after maketion it to the nba finals, the thunder are out in the second round and the memphis grizzlies advance to their first finals in team history. they take on the winner of the spurs/warriors series. sports highest paid athlete, floyd mayweather will make $90 million in 2013, less than a year after he was released from jail. for the second straight year, may weather topped sports illustrated highest paid athlete list and more amazingly $90 million doesn't come from endorsements. lebron james is second, $56 million in 2013, $39 million

from endorsements, drew brees completes the top three with $47 million, tiger woods who led the list in 2004 to 2011 has fallen to fifth. wolf, back to you. >> carlos, thanks very much. weech got more news coming up in the "cnn newsroom." the explosion at a texas plant that flattened a town has been under investigation now for weeks. today we get the results. we'll have a live report from west, texas, next.

we should get answers soon on what caused last month's deadly explosion at a fertilizer plant in the town of west, texas. this afternoon the texas fire marshal's office and the atf plan to announce the results of their investigation into the blast. it killed 14 people, most of them volunteer firefighters who had rushed to the scene. ed lavandera joins us from west, texas. ed, what can we expect to hear? >> reporter: well, wolf, i think the big question here today is whether or not we will get a definitive answer into what caused the explosion here in the town of west, texas, that killed so many first responders almost

a month ago. officials are not saying, at least early on, what they will announce here this afternoon, or they won't say so officially, but there has abeen a lot of intrigue swirling around a former first responder, a man by the name of bryce reed arrested last week for possessing a pipe bomb. he was taken into custody, but authorities are not saying whether or not he is connected to the explosion in any way. they have said that they have not ruled out criminal activity as perhaps one of the causes into this explosion, but there are also other things they haven't ruled out as well. we'll wait and see what kind of definitive answers we get, but, as far as bryce reed is concerned, he was supposed to have made an appearance in federal court yesterday, which was abruptly canceled shortly where after his attorney and federal prosecutors came to an agreement. he is pleading not guilty to the charge he was charged with last week. but his attorney also consistently aggressively says he has nothing to do with the explosion here. so these investigators will be

asked about that quite a bit here later on today, wolf. >> we'll have extensive live coverage, thanks, ed, in west, texas. that does it for me. i'll see you back here 5:00 p.m. eastern on "the situation room." chris chrouomo from new york pi up our live coverage right now. good afternoon, everybody. it's just after 2:00 p.m. here in the east. i'm chris cuomo live in report. we have a major new headline. the united states government has lost two terrorists out of the federal witness protection program. cnn's jake tapper got hold of a scathing audit. we'll check in with him soon. first i want to bring in cnn analyst and former fbi analyst robert ber, bob, thanks for joining us. the headline, the witness protection program has lost two