welcome to another hour of "360." both candidates faced active and retired service members explaining why they should be commander in chief. hillary clinton took questions, it was moderated by matt lauer. the candidates were asked about what prepares them to be commander in chief. they were asked about judgment and temperament. everything from fighting isis to

what should be done about ptsd, sexual assault in the military. we'll bring what you each candidate said. let's get started with some of the highlights from the hour. >> when people like me press you for details like that gentleman just. on, what your plan is, you very often say, i'm not going to give you the details because i want to be unpredictable. >> absolutely the word is unpredictable. >> yesterday you told us a little about your plan in your speech. you said this. quote, we're going to convene my top generals and they will have 30 dies submit a plan for soundly and quickly defeating isis. so is the plan you've been hiding this whole time asking someone else for their plan? >> no. but when do i come one a plan that i like and that perhaps agrees with mine, or maybe doesn't, i may love what the generals come back with. >> you have your own plan. >> i have a plan but i don't want -- look. i have a very substantial chance of winning.

make america great again. we're going to make america great again. i have a substantial chance of winning. if i win i don't want to broadcast what my man is. if i like maybe a combination of my man and the general's man, or the general's plan. if i like their plan, i'm not going to call up and say we have a great plan. this is what obama does. we're going to leave rook a certain date. >> you're going to convene a panel of judges and you've said you know more about isis than those generals. >> well, they would probably be different generals, to be honest. >> you can spark conflict, you can destabilize a region, you can put american lives at risk comfortable we afford to take that risk with you? >> i think absolutely. if you saw what happened in mexico the other day. i went there. i had great relationships, everything else. i let them know where the united states stands. we've been badly hurt by mexico. on the border and taking all of our jobs. and if you look at what happened, look at the aftermath

today. the people that arranged the trip in mexico have been forced out of government. that's how well we did. that's how well we'll have to do. >> back in august when you admitted you regret what you said, you said i can promise you this. i will always tell you the truthful. >> it's true. so let me read some of the things you said. i know more about isis than the generals do. believe me. is that the truth? >> well, the generals under barack obama and hillary clinton have not been successful. >> do you know more about isis than they do? >> i think tunneled leadership of barack obama and hillary clinton, the generals have been reduced to rubble. they have been reduced to a point where it is embarrassing to our country. >> we have to defeat isis. that is my highest counter terrorism goal. and we have to do it with air power, we've got to do it with much more support for the arabs and the kurds who will fight on the ground against isis.

we are not putting ground troops into iraq ever again and we're not putting ground troops into syria. we're going to defeat isis without committing american ground troops. >> thank you very much. >> and we're going after baghdadi, the leader. it will help us focus our attention just like going after bin laden helped us focus our attention in the fight against al qaeda. with respect to libya, again, there is no difference between my opponent and myself. he is on record extensively supporting intervention in libya when gadhafi was threatening to massacre his population. i put together a coalition that included nato, it included the arab league, and we were able to save lives. we did not lose a single american in that action. and i think taking that action

was the right decision. not taking and it permitting there to be an ongoing civil war in libya would have been as dangerous and threatening as what we are now seeing in syria. >> we'll may lot more of what both candidates said. i want to hear from our panel. national skirt commentator, mike rodgers is a volunteer advise wor the trump transition team. and cnn air force colonel. there was a moment, something that really stood out to you. i want play that for our viewers. >> did you learn anything in that briefing, not going into specific that's makes you reconsider some of the things you say you can accomplish? like defeating isis quickly? >> no. i didn't learn anything from

that standpoint. what did i learn is that our leadership, barack obama, did not follow what our experts and our truly, when they call it intelligence, it is there for a reason. what our experts. to do. and i was very, very surprised. in almost every instance. i am pretty good with body language. i could tell they were not happy. our leaders did not follow what they were recommending. >> what do you make of that? >> what he is talking about is as a presidential candidate at this stage, you start to get the classified version of the chafd briefings that the president of the united states gets. the presidential daily briefings. trump has gotten two of them. first of all i have never seen a candidate for president making political hay of that. taking advantage that they have been given these briefings and drawing a political could not choogs that the secretary of state did not follow advice.

secondly, you can read these briefings. the cia just declassified a couple weeks ago all the presidential daily briefings. most from the nixon and ford administration. they are not advice to the president. they are telling you what's happening in various countries. there is no policy recommendation. the intelligence community tries very hard to be neutral. not to suggest policy. that is the job of the other agencies and the white house. so first he is doing something as deeply dishonorable in making use of these classified briefings. secondly, he is being untruthful in terms of how he is characterizing the briefings. they are intelligence. they are not policy conclusions. it is remarkable that he would say that. >> chairman rodgers? >> well, i disagree. and again i'm somebody that had access to all of that as chairman. i think what you see happening,

in those analytical products, when the intelligence folks show up, they provide their opinion based on their analytical product and information collected on what the situation on the ground is. and i agree. they never come out and say we think you should do this. that's not their place. what i think he was getting at, and i don't know i was not part of the briefings. that intelligence was talking about the growth of isis over a period of time. at least from my understanding of public reports, that's the portion that was covered in that first briefing extensively. isis and its formation and how it developed and all of those things. so you can walk away from the briefing. i've walk away from many of them when i was chairman and said the administration's policy is not jiving with what the intelligence services are saying happened on the ground. i don't know but i'm guessing that's what he's talking about when he said they were not listening to each other. i'm not sure how they said that.

i think that's what he was saying. >> i would recommend to viewers. it is very easy to get these declassified presidential briefings from the past. take a look at them and you will see as mike rodgers says, the intelligence community is scrupulous about it. >> i want to play something that trump said about the generals and then talk to our retired military folks. >> when people like me press you for details what your plan is, you very often say i'm not going to give you the details. i want to be unpredictable. >> absolutely. the word is unpredictable. >> yesterday you told us a little about your plan in your speech. you said this. we're going to convene my top generals and they will have 30 days to submit a plan for soundly and quickly defeating isis. so is the plan you've been hiding this whole time asking someone else for their plan? >> no.

but when i do come up with a plan that i like and that perhaps agrees with minor maybe doesn't, i may love what the generals come back with. >> you have your own plan. >> i have a plan but i don't -- look. i have a very substantial chance of winning. make america great again. we're going to make america great again. i have a substantial chance of winning. if i win, i don't want to broadcast what my plan is. if i like maybe a combination of my plan and the general's plan, or the general's plan. if i like their plan, i'm not going to call you up and say we have a great plan. this is what obama does. we're going on leave iraq on a certain date. >> you're going to convene a panel of judges and you've already said you know more about isis than those generals. >> they'll probably be different generals, to be honest with you. >> when you hear a candidate saying they know more about isis than the generals, i assume generals who have been focused on fighting isis now for quite

some time. like yourself who worked in iraq for a long, long time. does that concern you as somebody who would serve? >> it does. we have a very strong history of civilian control of the military in the united states. it is one of the things that makes us very different. so we adjust what we do based on some things that the political masters want us to do. but having said that, we give strong military advice at the level of the president, at the strategic level. it takes a very long time to build a general. there are years of schooling, years of operational experience. dealing with soldiers, knowing what soldiers can do. training exercises and education. and to have an individual who has never done any of those things suggest that he knows more about a man, i'm not sure mr. trump would know a war plan

or a contingency plan if he saw it. a civilian master will say, we want a look at the assumptions a little differently. or this is the end state i want to achieve. then it is the end job of the generals to give them that as best they can with a feasibility approach. to have someone who is a businessman, who has not studied the art and science of war to say i know more about it. it is flabber gasting to me. >> in terms of what you heard, what stood out to you? >> well, i think, anderson, one of the big issues that we have is that we see an evolving nature of trump's ability to handle national security issues. and in this particular case, when you pick the trump aspect of things, you look at something a bit different from what he said at the very beginning. the idea of having a man and bringing it together one that is

developed independently by generals in the pentagon, that has some merit and it could be used as a way to determine what is the best way forward. so perhaps it is his attempt to be a little more collegial with the pentagon. as far as secretary clinton's points are kernlt, i thought it was interesting that she seemed to be a stay the course kind of presentation. both candidates say they want to defeat isis but it becomes very clear, if that happens under president obama's watch, it is going to be a very different strategic environment for them and i don't know if they've thought about that challenge for their respective campaigns. >> in terms of what you heard tonight. to have both candidates focus this, it is as close as we've gotten to a debate between these two so far. >> yeah. i think we got a preview of what the atmosphere and the questioning will be at a debate.

>> dan is saying the clinton campaign isn't happy with what went down tonight in terms of the timing of it. i guess each candidate got 30 minutes. a lot of her time was spent on iraq and e-mails. they feel like matt lauer dropped the ball in terms of follow-up and fact checking. this is what a debate is like. and debate moderators -- >> they were not on the stage at the same time debating. >> exactly. but often moderators take a different tact in terms of how they engage with the candidates and whether or not they will fact check in real-time. >> we'll have more with the panel ahead and more moments from the discussion between candidates tonight. where we explore. protecting biodiversity. everywhere we work. defeating malaria. improving energy efficiency. developing more clean burning natural gas. my job? my job at exxonmobil? turning algae into biofuels.

reducing energy poverty in the developing world. making cars go further with less. fueling the global economy. and you thought we just made the gas. ♪ energy lives here. this is eric gibson. he and his wife briana made the bold decision to buy their home four months ago. and even though they have no idea what the future has in store for them, they bought into a 30-year mortgage anyway.

because they weren't just thinking about their future... buy in. quicken loans. home buy. refi. power. ancestry helped med buildfind out that military service goes into my family pretty far back. that makes you more proud to be an american and more proud to be a veteran. i served in iraq in tikrit in 2009. when i took the ancestry dna test, i mean a few results came up that were really shocking. 11% of me comes from the part where i had served. we all come from such different backgrounds that you never know. get the deeper story of you at ancestry. get started for free at ancestry.com. (man) honey, what's a word for "large blaze"? (wife] fire. [man] thirteen letters. [wife] fire. [man] thirteen letters. [wife] really big fire! [burke] conflagration.seen it. covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

hey, do you know when the game starts? 11 hours. oh. well, i'm heading back to my room. oh, wi-fi password? super bowl, underscore houston underscore 51, underscore super bowl, backslash 51, backslash houston. got it. (announcer) want to wake up at super bowl 51? all caps. (announcer) enter courtyard's super bowl sleepover contest at courtyard.com for your chance to win.

donald trump and hillary clinton took their messages this evening, they answered questions from theit about why they should be commander in chief. donald trump has had two military briefings so far. here's some of that exchange. >> did you learn anything in that briefing again, not going into specifics, that makes you reconsider some of the things you say you can accomplish? like defeating isis quickly? >> no. i didn't learn anything from that standpoint. what did i learn is that our leadership, barack obama, did not follow what our experts and truly, when they call it intelligence, it is there for a

reason, what our experts said to do. and i was very, very surprised. in almost every instance, and could i tell. i'm pretty good with the body language. they were not happy. our leaders did not follow what they were recommending. >> joining me now, pentagon correspondent barbara starr. the comments about the briefings. what are you learning? >> those are extraordinary. that the president did not follow what the community was recommending is something that trump would not have been told in one of these briefings. he would have been given analysis of problems like iraq, russia, iran, syria. we know this over the last several weeks. i've talked directly to experts in the intelligence community who know how these briefings were set up. they know how they were going to work. fwhar analysis. they are not about recommendations. they are from some of the most senior professionals, civilian, career people in the intelligence community. not about politics at all.

so i think it remains to be seen, perhaps most charitibly, what he thought he was hearing, what he thought the body language was. very clearly, he was not told intelligence community recommendations. that would not have happened. i think the other really fascinating point that he made. he talked about the generals very broadly being, in his words, reduced to rubble. those are shocking words. in all the years i've covered the military, i've never heard anybody talk about generals being reduced to rubble. he might have been referring to the fact that there's very strong white house national security process that the military obeys the political leadership. but reduced to rubble. who are the generals he is talking about? these guys these days, they are mainly combat veterans. they have went in iraq, they have been in afghanistan, they have buried their young troops in cemeteries across this country. these are generals who know the

business of war. trump went on to talk about, he might go on to work with other generals. so i think he is really putting a lien out there that if he is elected, he is going to have to deal. with he would be coming into a u.s. military structure. he says that he respects but the general officer corps right now, he appears to be a big problem with. >> thanks very much. back now with our panel. it was interesting to hear him go full bore on staying generals, in general, i'm not sure who he was talking about, or if he knows specific generals he was talking about. >> this is a perfect illustration of what sometimes frustrates me in our discussions about trump. we try analyze, and barbara did a wonderful job trying to make sense of a stray comment he makes here or there. my guess is frankly, he doesn't know what he's talking about. i think it is very unlikely that he had any thought through idea. in a rapid fire format.

matt lauer puts a question to him. he gets flummoxes so he comes back with something. it is nonsensical. obama's first security general was a general. he listens to his generals all the time. there is no great dissatisfaction. they have not been reduced to rubble. this is no way to understand this, other than to think, he is just winging it as he does with so many of these things. then we the media have to sit and pretend that this is a carefully piece of analysis drawn on years of thoughtful analysis of the situation. i think it was something he said by the seat of his pants. barbara is right. it doesn't make any sense. >> does it make sense to you that the generals have been reduced to rubble? >> i think you argue about the color of his words. probe not the words i would have chosen. when you look at the past, i

think what donald trump is trying to encapsulate is that he didn't listen to his generals in iraq. he didn't listen to his intelligence officials on iraq. everyone advised he shouldn't do it. i think what he is trying to say is you can't walk into the general and say here the ten things you can't do. and the things you're asking for, i'm going to give you half of it. and trust me, those officers were pretty vocal when you put them that places theek intelligence commit ju that he ask them their opinion about how difficult it was. they were not political. they were not trying to say they're republicans or democrats. they're saying, if you want me to do this mission. if you want me to stabilize iraq. you can't ask me to pull out sum airily. they didn't listen to them in libya. so what i think he's saying, you're telling these generals one mission and then publicly talking about it. and the authority and the resources you're giving don't match it. so you have generals trying on

accomplish a mission with one hand tied behind their back. that's what he's talking about. >> that's a very kocogent thing em. it isn't what donald trump said. >> what about that? >> he said it a lot quicker. >> you served in iraq incredibly, did you have one hand tied behind your back? >> never. i always wanted more forces. i needed more forces to do the mission. that was the conditions of the battlefield. we deal with that. that's what soldiers do. truthfully, it seems that mr. trump had more praise for mr. putin than america's generals who have been fighting an american war for 14 years. that's disturbing. you're supposed to build relationships. i don't know. i was listening to the conversation. it seems like he thinks he can funny generals. these guys and gallons who have come up through ranks, who have serve asked been put under a great deal of pressure.

to have him stay kinds of things he said tonight were insulting to me as a general officer. i'm not trying to be defensive. i know there are things i could have done better but to have a potential commander in chief say that the general officer corps has been reduced to rubble. it goes with the narrative that everything the president, president obama or the secretary of state has touches has turned to mush and he is the only guy to fix it and i don't believe. that generals swear their allegiance to the constitution of the united states. not the man or the woman in office. >> colonel? what was your interpretation of the generals being urged to rubble? >> i thought it was very interesting to use the term. i think the general is right. there is no general that i've ever met that has been turned to rubble. i think maybe what trump is looking at is perhaps the idea of a patton like figure.

he is looking for somebody that he can find within the military will take forces from a to b and to defeat isis in a very dramatic world war ii fashion. and anybody who has studied warfare in the latter part of 20th century, the early part of the 21 century, will turn to this and say, wars aren't fought that way. we won't have set piece battles. there is no d-day invasion on the horizon and i think trump is looking at that as being his way of actually controlling the officer corps and perhaps looking at world war ii where they had a little black book that general marshall carried around that had names of people being promoted to general. maybe he thinks that's the way it works and it doesn't work that way. there are many different things that have to be learned on the part of mr. trump, as well as the trump campaign, on how it

actually works. then they can make some recommendation that's have to go through congress first before they're changed. >> we have a lot more ahead including what trump. about vladimir putin. ♪ ♪ ♪ the highly advanced audi a4. ♪

schwarzkopf presents color ultîme. a model needs vibrant hair color to light up the runway. its color blend formula locks pigment in for brilliant, vibrant colors. discover runway colors that last. color ultîme, developed with claudia schiffer. from schwarzkopf.

donald trump and hillary clinton made the case tonight on why they are qualified to be commander in chief. both candidates took questions from current and former military. matt lauer was the moderator. >> let me ask you about some of the things you've said about vladimir putin. you said i will tell you in terms of leadership, he is getting an "a." our president is not doing so well. when referring to a candidate that putin made about you, up it is a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his country and beyond. >> he does have an 82% approval rating, according to the different pollsters who some are based right here. >> he is always guy who annexed crimea, supports assad in syria, supports iran, is trying to

undermine our influence in key regions of the world, and according to our intelligence community, probably is the may not suspect for the hacking of the dnc computers. >> nobody knows that for a fact. do you want me to start naming some of the thing president obama does? >> do you want to be complimented by that form he kgb officer? >> i think when he calls me brilliant, i'll take compliment. okay? it is not going to get him anywhere. i'm a negotiator. we're going to take back our country. look at what's happening to our country. you look at the depleted military. you look at we have lost our jobs. we're losing our jobs like a bunch of babies. the fact that he calls me brilliant or whatever he calls me will have zero impact. >> but the fact that you say you can get along with him. you think the day that you become president of the united states, he will change his mind on some of these issues? >> it's possible. i don't know. and it won't have any impact. if he says great things about me, i'll say great things about

him. he is very much of a leader. you can say isn't that a terrible thing? the man has very strong control over a country. it is a very different system and i don't happen to like the system but in that system, he's been a leader. far more than our president has been a leader. >> back with our panel. what do you make of trump's interest in putin or comments about putin? >> trump has long has had this quite strange fascination with putin. >> he claims they had a relationship and george stephanopoulos illuminated fact they've never actually met. they never actually talked. >> right. he outright said they had met and they got on very well and it turned out he had never met him. one more of those strange things. i think there is a fascination he has and we can understand trump. trump likes authoritarians. he likes having the idea of having decisive power.

acting boldly. not having to wait for checks and balances in congress. when i interviewed putin and said what was it about trump? and putin walked back his comments. he started quibbling with the translation. he said i didn't say he was brilliant. i said he was bright whafl men was he was a colorful personality. that's all i was saying. if he wants to have a better relationship with russia, why should i object to that. putin doesn't like hillary clinton. so there is a strange attraction between two of them. you would think for trump whose greatest card is that he is an american nationalist who will look out for america. the fact one of america's principle adversaries, a guy trying to do harm to america, to american interests, to american troops, is lavishing praise on him, virtually endorsing him, would be somewhat, it would be like the leader of the soviet

union endorsing one of the presidential candidates and that person being happy about it. >> one of the service members tonight asked hillary clinton why she should be trusted as commander in chief. we'll play that. >> secretary clinton, thank you for coming tonight. as a naval flight officer, i they told top secret clearance and that provided me. had i communicated this information not following prescribed brokes, i would have been imprisoned. how can you expect those such as myself who were and are trusted with manager's most sense i have the information to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly krumtd our national security? >> well, i appreciate your concern and also your experience. but let me try to make the distinctions that i think are important for me to answer your question.

first, as i said to matt, you know and i know, classified material is designated. it is marked. there is a header so there is no dispute at all that what is being communicated to or from someone who has that access is marked classified. and what we have here is the use of an unclassified system by hundreds of people in our government to send information that was not marked. there were no headers. there was no statement, top secret, secret or confidential. i communicated about classified material on a wholly separate system. i took it very seriously. when i traveled, i went into one of those little tents that i'm sure you've seen around the world. we didn't want there to be any potential for someone to have

embedded a camera to try on see whatever it is that i was seeing that was designated, marked and headed as classified. so i did exactly what i should have done and i take it very seriously. always have. always will. >> obviously, tough questions for secretary clinton tonight and obviously an issue which is not going away. >> in some ways, this audience, it is an away game for hillary. these are veterans and she is likely not going to win those folks in 2012. mitt romney won them. i imagine her people will go back and look at that and figure out a better answer where she sounds less lawyerly. maybe even a little more contrite. so yes, i think this was a preview of what we'll see in the debates. a preview of what we've seen all

along. the e-mail issue is not going away. she doesn't quite have a good answer. she always sounds defensive when she is answering the questions about her e-mail and it is just going to continue, i think. >> the biggest question, 37 minutes into the program and we've spent two minutes talking about hillary clinton. that's a problem. trump is compelling. he is weird, he is authentic, the contradictions are so bizarre that you end up, he is a media hog. a natural media hog. we've spent all this time and finally we get on hillary clinton. compared to trump, it is a less exciting issue. >> we'll continue next. we'll talk about the oil. energy is a complex challenge. people want power. and power plants account for more than a third of energy-related carbon emissions. the challenge is to capture the emissions before they're released into the atmosphere. exxonmobil is a leader in carbon capture.

our team is working to make this technology better, more affordable so it can reduce emissions around the world. that's what we're working on right now. ♪ energy lives here. ...stop clicking around...travel sites to find a better price... the lowest prices on our hotels are always at hilton.com. so pay less and get more only at hilton.com.

♪ using 60,000 points from my chase ink card i bought all the fruit... veggies... and herbs needed to create a pop-up pick-your-own juice bar in the middle of the city, so now everyone knows... we have some of the freshest juice in town. see what the power of points can do for your business. learn more at chase.com/ink the first paint that kills bacteria. sherwin-williams paint shield continuously kills 99.9% of bacteria. totally breakthrough. surprisingly the same. and it's only avaiblble at sherwin-williams.

we were listening to hillary clinton and donald trump. they were asked questions by the military. one asked donald trump about his plans to defeat isis and specifically what will happen after that. here's what trump said in response. >> you really look at the aftermath of iraq. iran will be taking over. they've been doing it and it is

not a pretty picture. and i think you know, you've been watching me for a long time. i've always that, shouldn't be there but if we're going to get out, take the oil. if we would have taken the oil, you wouldn't have isis. >> how will we take oil? >> leave a certain group behind and take various sections where they have the oil. peel don't know this about iraq but they have among largest oil reserves in the entire world. and we're the only once. we go in. we spend $3 trillion. we lose thousands and thousands of lives and then we get nothing. it used to be to the victor belonged the spoils. there was no victor there. believe me. no victor. but i always. take the oil. one of the benefits we would have had if we took oil is isis would not have been able to take oil and use that oil to fuel themselves. >> let's to go our military

folks. general, you and i have talk about this before. he has said this from the beginning take. oil. i cannot wrap my mind around the concept. from a military standpoint. all i see is you're taking the oil of a sovereign nation which is our ally under this antiquated notion of to the victor goes the spoils. they're supposedly our ally. and for the percentage of the country that doesn't hate us already, wouldn't that turn everybody else against the united states? if we were stealing iraq's oil? >> not if we were in the 16th century, anderson. but we're not. we're in the 21st. i've heard mr. trump say that. it is on a long list of things that i've heard him say about what the military can and can't do. i can tell you, i can't wrap my head around it. i can't figure it out fiflts bringing other corporations in,

continuing on pump while the 19 million iraqis tone live and allow us to do that, that would be great. it is really hard to do. >> chairman rodgers, what trump has said to me early on, bring in u.s. oil companies. chevron and others. surround them while they steal the oil. surround them with troops. does that make any sense to you? >> hey, look at the time, anderson. >> we've got a lot of time. we can go to the 10:00 hour if you want. >> let me get philosophical. this was a very popular political position. never town hall i had as a member of congress, people say this is an issue. let me get to where we were. my explanation would be the same today. we do know a percentage of the revenues from that oil.

as a matter of fact interesting saudis were committed so much oil in certain circumstances. other countries committed certain amounts of oil. so when you say take it i never heard him say steal it. this notion of physically taking it out of ground doesn't make a lot of sense to me. but this notion a percentage can be for the cost of ground operations. that actually happened during course of the war. >> that's not his man. his plan is to get chevron, american oil companies in. surround them with u.s. troops. >> so he men to say percentage of the revenue. >> colonel? just again, i just think of the reaction of our allies in the rest of iraq. how they feel about us taking oil which is their future. >> it would be a nonstarter for that very reason. what you want to do. you want to build up countries like iraq, what come after isis

in the case of syria, and northern iraq. so there are going to be some significant issues with this. this 16 century, 18th century, whatever century you want to pick issue. it is something that is very similar to what you might expect a chinese military leader to say. they seem to be to be adopting this policy as well. it is not working for the time and the region. you want to raise the oil revenues of the companies affected and you want to give them a way to live their lives and that would be a sustained revenue sfraem would allow them to do it and it would be ideal. >> to the victor go the spoils, it plies that iraq is our enemy and we have crushed them and now we're taking their oil. >> it implies more than.

that it immize the american military force is there to do that. there are 18 battle cemeteries throughout world war i and world war ii. when you go to those grounds, the people that monitor those cemeteries say this is the only place that america claims as occupied territory. the places where they buried their dead. he is not the american way to steal the land and rape the women. it is a simplistic approach that is feeling a certain percentage of americans. i want to bring in our analysts. donald trump was asked about an old tweet when he suggested an attack should have been expected.

nexium 24 hour introduces new, easy-to-swallow tablets. so now, there are more ways, for more people... to experience... complete protection from frequent heartburn. nexium 24hr. the easy-to-swallow tablet is here. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

if you'try clarispray.emes to escape your nasal allergies... from the makers of claritin. clarispray provides 24-hour, prescription strength relief from sneezing, runny nose, and nasal congestion. return to the world. try clarispray today. my bladder leakage made me feel like i couldn't be the father that i wanted to be. now i use depend. i can move the way i really want. unlike the bargain brand, new depend fit-flex underwear is now more flexible to move with you. reconnect with the life you've been missing. get a free sample at depend.com.

"you don't want to live with mom and dad forever, do you?" reconnect with the life you've been missing. "well...i'm not changing." "how do i check my credit score?" "credit karma. don't worry, it's free." "credit karma. give yourself some credit."

more now with the commander-in-chief forum. matt lauer asked trump for clarification on a tweet he posted two years ago. >> you tweeted "26,000 unreported sexual assaults in

the military, only 238 convictions. what did these geniuses expect when they put men and women together? >> it is a contribute tweet. there are many people who think that's actually correct. >> so this should have been expected? is that the only way to fix it is to take women out of the military? >> since then it's gotten worse no, not take them out of the military. nobody gets prosecuted. you have the report of rape and nobody gets prosecuted. there are no consequence. when you have somebody that does something so evil, so bad as that, there has to be consequence to that person. you have to go after that person. right now nobody's doing anything. look at the small number of results. i mean, that's part of the problem. >> the panelists are trump

support support supporter kayleigh mcenany a. general hertling? >> certainly with you put young people together, these kinds of things happen to a small percentage. and the good commanders prosecute them with a vengeance and it happens. >> christine quinn, what do you make of what you heard tonight from donald trump? >> i think donald trump was pretty clear that he stands by his earlier tweet, which i find really reprehensible. he started off his statements by saying basically that making the military have men and women in it is what caused this to happen, that we should have expected it. that is in fact blaming the women who have gone into the military to serve, to say that they should have expected that if they were going to serve side

by side with men, this would happen, when in fact countless countries have brought women in their military in combat before we did and there is no evidence that that as a matter of course causes this to happen. i have to say i do agree with donald trump that more needs to be done as it relates to prosecution, but i don't think there is anything out there about what donald trump has said about women that if they're not a ten he has no use for them, his blaming victim as it relates to sexual harassment and now blaming the gender integration of the military as a cause for this that we should have expected it, you should never any day of the week in america, in our armed forces or out of it expect that you are going to be raped and sexual assaulted. that is an outrageous statement for anyone to make. >> is that the statement he was making that this was to be expected? >> no, donald trump has been

very clear and advocate for women who have been sexual assaulted. he said there have only been 236 prosecutions. i do think nothing that -- all of it i should say pales in comparison to what hillary clinton said tonight. in the fbi notes she said she didn't know about classified markings. tonight he said she has great experience with classified markings. nothing donald trump said was all that controversial. >> you know what, this is the one note campaign for the donald trump campaign over and over. but what i think a lot of what donald trump said tonight was outrageous. he basically said he's going to try to politicize how we generals and admirals get promoted in the military. that goes against the entire military structure and shows a complete lack of understanding as was said before about how

someone becomes a general or admiral in the united states. it's going to be different like it's a flick of his hand. >> back to the sexual assault, it's clear that he's missed the entire debate on this, and partly it was led by kristen gillibrand, senator from new york. it's really about whether or not this stays in the cane of command. he has wanted it not to be in the chain of command, for it to be adjudicated outside of the chain of command but this was a huge debate on capitol hill with republicans on the same side in some cases as senator gillibr d gillibrand. again, i think she hasn't done his homework on this speaking very generally and offending some people very likely. >> and that tweet you're absolutely right. that tweet shows a complete lack of an understanding of this issue and where really the path is to a justice issue. and really we heard in the colonel -- i don't want to

demote him but colonel or general who spoke who said good commanders take it seriously. one can infer from that that bad commanders don't take it seri s seriously. that's why senator gillibrand is right and why clearly donald trump has no understanding about this issue, in the same way that his statements on sexual assault in the workplace were victim blaming and showed no understanding. >> general rogers, i want you to comment on this or anything other things you thought were important. >> i saw hillary clinton say she was going to do more of the same thing. she started out listing things she wasn't going to do to beat isis. this is the same problem on the policy side that most of the military is claiming is not allowing us to be successful. i think this whole notion that everything is outrageous and everything is offensive and everything is oh, my god, half of the things i just heard the last panelist talk about i didn't hear him say. what we do have a problem is we have a high number of reported

instances of rape when it comes to women in the military and very few prosecutions. i think that's a problem. when he says, hey, there's not a lot going on about it, that's what he's talking about, that data point. all of this notion about all this other thing people are talking about he did or didn't say, he's saying we got to do something about it. i don't think it's helpful for the military, the inflammatory be offended by every third point he says. i believe as a former military officer myself that the military must do better on these -- they're not handling it in an appropriate way. i think senator gillibrand has some good understanding of how you fix it. it hasn't been done. which means now you have all of the women who aren't getting the justice they deserve. the emotion of the talk and the debate in this thing is fascinating for me as a -- >> with all due respect, mr. chairman, the issue of rape and

sexual assault is a very emotional issue. i've worked with survivors for many years in my career and maybe you've not had that or worried about that in the same way that women do -- >> this is that what i think is so unfair. i used to be an fbi agent to enforce the law. some notion because i disagree with your inflammatory notion that i don't care about it. the reality is that these women are not getting the justice they deserve and you are saying everything's okay. >> no, absolutely not. >> for political purposes you're doing that. i think that's so unfortunate. >> no. i said clearly what the military has done and disagreed with other military gentlemen is not enough. but what i said is donald trump doesn't understand the solution, which is not to keep it in the chain of command. and with all respect, sir, if you go back to the tweet, mr. trump is the one -- mr. trump is the one who said we should have expected this when women came into the military. those are his words and he has