my thanks to christopher dickey, christiane amanpour, andrew sullivan, charles blow. that's all the time we have for this edition of "ac 360 later." see you again tomorrow at 8:00 eastern for "ac 360 crisis ." jake tapper is next. tonight a special hour of cnn. >> this is not a game. >> last chance. if syria doesn't want american missiles falling on it from the sky, this might be it. and the u.s. has to trust the russians to make it happen. but is the u.s. getting played? >> it is clear that president putin has invested his credibility. >> has he? what international credibility does russia's president actually have? would he care if he lost it? >> we got a lot more stuff to do

here in this government. >> president obama ready to move on? he lets his proxies respond after president putin antagonizes the u.s. with unsolicited advice on syria. who is calling the shots here? this is "crisis in syria decision point." good evening. welcome to this special hour of cnn "crisis in syria decision point." already morning in geneva, switzerland where secretary of state john kerry is waking up for a second day of negotiations with his counterpart, russian foreign minister sergey lavrov. they'll have a number of hours nailing down the agreement requiring syria to give up its chemical weapons as the u.s. keeps waving the big stick of potential military strikes over syria's head. the united nations says that syrian leader bashar al assad has now signed the international treaty banning chemical weapons in his country. but he does want something in return. >> translator: i want to clearly express to everyone that these

mechanisms will not be carried out unilaterally. this does not mean that syria will sign these documents, carry out the conditions and that's it. this bilateral process is based first of all on the united states stopping its policy of threatening syria. also to the degree that the russian proposal is accepted. >> that's what the russians want, too. for the u.s. to remove the threat of force. but the goal posts for american and russian leaders seems very far apart. they don't even agree on who fired poison gas on whom. russian president vladimir putin claims it was the rebels, not the regime. he said so in an op ed for the "new york times." he also challenged the idea of american exceptionalism, essentially telling everyone in the united states to stop thinking we're so special. the times titled it "a plea for caution from russia" but it actually reeds like machiavellian political pokings tucked inside a scolding wrapped in the illusion of a plea, truly the russian nesting doll of

oppeds. all day reaction to it. but beyond the political reactions a ticking clock. there's not much time to get a workable solution down. the second and final scheduled day of the summit is already underway. our international correspondent jim sciutto is standing by live in geneva. how do things stand after the first day of negotiations there? >> reporter: u.s. officials told us they're many coming in with a healthy dose of skepticism. you can see why those disagreements coming out very clearly and publicly on the first day of negotiations one over the use of force. secretary kerry saying from the beginning the u.s. is going to reserve its right to use force and that's the very reason the syrians have been brought to the label. the russians saying force cannot be a part of this. also a disagreement on the timeline. how much time to give the syrians to fess up all the information that's necessary about their chemical weapons stockpiles. president assad saying in his interview he believes he has 30 days that.

would be standard. secretary kerry saying there's nothing standard about these talks because president assad has in fact already used these weapons against his people repeatedly. and that's why the focus in these talks yesterday and today are really on the nuts and bolts on achievable goals. they're focusing on how they can catalog syria's weapons, collect them, and then destroy them. and really some of the most important work going on is between the russian and american experts on chemical weapons, on defense. they're the ones who are trying to figure out where these sites are and how to get these chemical weapons out of the country and under international control. now one of the key tests the americans said they have of whether the syrians are sincere about all this is how quickly they fess up, how forthcoming they are with all this information about where these chemical sites are. of course we've had some reports today that undermine that confidence. "wall street journal" reporting that there's a special unit of the syrian armed forces that are distributing to sites these weapons to more than 50 sites. of course, the syrian opposition

saying that they believe some of these weapons have been taken out of the country already, that denied by the iraqi government. but still you have those charges here undermining that confidence. one thing to note, the hotel where these talks are taking place is the same hotel where secretary clinton gave foreign minister lavrov that famous reset button. i remember coming here a couple of years before that for some failed talks on iran's nuclear program. i think people convened here hoping this is not the hotel where diplomatic efforts go to die. we're going to know over the next 24 hours whether there's some real progress here, jake. >> jim sciutto in geneva at a haunted hotel of sorts. as woe continue to argue about whether the u.s. should get involved in syria, the state department says that unidentified forces attacked the u.s. consulate in herat, afghanistan. they reportedly drove the front gate and opened fire. we're told the attack is over and no american were killed. more details to come on that developing story. but turning back to syria, of course, the big question is

this russian plan for real? how long should president obama give syrians to comply with it? and given the close relations between the russians and the syrians, could the u.s. be getting played here? we're hashing it all out for the rest of the hour with dana bash, gloria borger and jessica yellin. also joining us is senator chris murphy of connecticut. he's one of the democrats on the senate foreign relations committee who did not vote fortresslusion authorizing u.s. force against syria. senator murphy i want to start with you. you heard jim allude to it and i'm sure you saw the report itself about the syrians trying to move weapons, these chemical weapons around, and get them out of the way of any potential inspectors. does that sound -- first of all, do you know anything about that beyond what we've read in the "wall street journal"? and second of all that doesn't really sound like a government that is ready to acquiesce to the world's demands. >> i mean first what we know is that syria's been moving weapons around for a number of days, anticipating attack.

what we also know is that we have a pretty good read on where they've been moving these weapons. it's hard to move them without u.s. surveillance being able to track them. second we also know syria doesn't want to give up these weapons. they're only going to do so if russia tells them they have to. the only way assad continues in power in sish yeah is with the permission of vladimir putin and the russian government. he's going to do everything he can to try to subterfuge this deal. putin will bring him to the table. >> do you think putin can do that? >> i think putin has two good reasons here. clearly the threat of force has made a difference here. but putin wants to be a regional player. russia's been off of the radar influence for a long time, and l putin believes he alone can bring them back into the sphere that they once were. if he is seen as an international pa rpariah by standing by a guy that gasses his people he has no credibility. and a lot of the if sort of form former satellite nations and of

russia will start to walk away from putin. i think he's got a lot of reasons why he needs to deliver on the promise that he and lavrov have made. >> syrians are moving chemical weapons around in syria in anticipation of either strikes or now a possible inspectors. and you don't think that assad would have ordered that without putin knowing about it. >> i can't certainly say that putin knew about it. what i know is that the russians have a good sense of where these weapons are. between u.s. intelligence and russian intelligence, we can find these weapons no matter where assad moves them. what we know is that they used to be spread out all over the country. they have been consolidated to a certain degree so they're easier to find than they have been before. >> so after 11:00 at night eastern you can tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> right, nobody's watching. just tell us. >> just us kids. everybody in the obama administration says the only reason why this diplomatic process is going forward is because of the credible threat of force. you as somebody who voted -- one of the few democrats i think one of two democrats who voted

against using force in committee last week, would you agree thought was because it passed, even though you voted against it, that this diplomatic process is going forward? >> i certainly can't deny that that's an element of the reason that the russians have come to the table here. >> do you regret your vote? >> no. because i wasn't being asked to vote on the threat of force. i mean, we were up to the point where we were being asked to actually vote on striking syria. and i still to this day believe that that would not be in the u.s. national interests to strike syria, even if these talks break down. for the united states to do that unilaterally, i think compromises us internationally, makes us look like the bully that we are not. ultimately i think we make the situation worse on the ground for the syrian people due to the strikes that assad may then take against his own people even with conventional weapons. i think it's just hard to unwind the u.s. commitment there in a matter of months. i think we're probably dedicated to the commitment for years. but again, i think that the threat of force certainly is an element to why putin came to the table here. but i think he had plenty of other reasons in terms of trying

to establish and maintain international credibility to try to find a way out of this. >> when you voted no, you said that part of the reason you voted against that resolution was because you objected to it but you were still moved by it. you said the president's -- the look on his face reminded me of the look in his eyes when he came to newtown shortly after the shooting. you're from connecticut. and i know that he's moved here. i wonder what it says to you about the president's leadership style that these are the two issues on which you've seen him most moved and he actually could not get action on either of them. >> it's yet to be seen what the resolution of this is going to be. so it may be that ultimately we get those weapons out of syria. and that is good news for the rest of the children who are still alive in syria today. yeah, i've watched him talk about these kids. and i really have been struck by a president who is just deeply, deeply concerned about the plight of children in this country and across the world. i just again worry about in an

effort to try to protect from future chemical attacks in syria we end up -- we may end up getting more people killed there. >> with all due respect to the president's emotion, and i recognize i'm not doubting the sincerity of it, 100,000 people have been killed in syria before the number we've been given by the government is 1400, who knows what the actual number is. certainly scores of children were killed, perhaps even 400. many of the 100,000, that 100 can be parsed and some of them are regime force and some rebels, a lot of them are innocent civilians and a lot of them are kids. of the 100,000 already killed, i think that -- i understand the argument that chemical weapons are just beyond the pale. but why? why if you are moved to help kids is the original 100 thousand -- i think this is a question that a lot of americans don't fully understand what makes dying from sarin gas worse than dying from a bullet to the head if you're a 5-year-old. >> and i think that also speaks to how this conflict plays out,

right sunny think we made it very clear that if assad was to use chemical weapons a second time that we would strike a second time. but if assad was to turn around and take out a massive conventional weapons attack, basically in return for the u.s. strike against his own people, then we likely wouldn't attack again. >> right. >> so i think these are some of the very difficult questions that we have to ask. that there are some very terrible things that assad could do after our strike that we might not actually step in and try to stop. >> can i ask you about sort of the operational theory here of the administration that may or may not be but what i've heard is that for example, say this -- these negotiations turn to garbage, doesn't work. he goes then back to congress. would you be more likely to vote for the authorization of force if all of this fails? >> probably not. because my objection was not the

simply the lack of international consensus or international effort. i really don't believe that this is in the u.s. national security interests to do. regardless of whether we have six players internationally helping us or whether we have 20. >> so youhink -- and do you think that there are lots of people in the senate who are like you? in other words, if the president were to go back to the senate now, i mean let's forget the house. that's a whole different story much more difficult. but so do you think how this plays out would really not have an impact? >> no, i think it could. i think there are a handful of members whose reluctance to sign onto this was simply due to the fact that -- i'm not one of them that the president had not done his due diligence internationally. but i think there are plenty of members, i think the majority that are skeptical right now who are skeptical not because of the lack of international consensus but just because ultimately we worry that a strike could end up tying america up, our military, our treasure, for a matter of years if not a decade. and that really has nothing to do with whether we do it alone

or with other countries. >> senator murphy and our panel, please stay with us. coming up we take a closer look at president obama' role as negotiations play out with russia over syria's strikes and how his actions will play into some of the tough policy battles he faces here at home but don't have anything to do with foreign policy. that's next on this special edition of "crisis in syria decision point." stay with us. [ male announcer ] this store knows how to handle a saturday crowd. ♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools introduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announcer ] today, cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everyone goes home happy.

and struggle to sleep comfortably together, now there's a solution. sleep number dual temp, the revolutionary temperature-balancing layer with active air technology that works on any mattress brand, including yours. whether you sleep hot or cool, sleep number dual temp allows each of you to select your ideal temperature. and it's only at one of our 425 sleep number stores nationwide. sleep number. comfort individualized.

welcome back to our special coverage "crisis in syria decision point." russian president vladimir putin has pulled off the seeming impossible. he actually got democrats and republicans in congress to agree on something, their mutual disdain for his "new york times" op ed. in the article putin took a direct shot at president obama's speech on syria writing quote it is extremely dangerous to encourage people -- meaning the american people -- to see this manyselves as exceptional whatever the motivation. while plenty of the members of the house and senate have come out swinging at putin, president

obama decided not to respond directly to that op ed. he let his press secretary jay carney do the dirty work. >> unlike russia, the united states stands up for democratic values and human rights in our own country and around the world. and we believe that our global security is advanced when children cannot be gassed to death by a dictator. it is also worth noting that russia is isolated and alone in blaming the opposition for the chemical weapons attack on august 21st. >> jay carney who as a journalist spent some years in the former soviet union. let's bring back our panel dana bash, jessica yellin, gloria borger and democratic senator chris murphy. senator as a member of the senate foreign relations committee, i don't know if that allows you a special insight into the mind of vladimir putin. but why do you think he took this shot at american exceptionalism? do you think it was just so the likes of us would be discussing it right now? why go after in an op ed purportedly to win over the american people would he take a

shot at us? >> i think most of russia's foreign policy over the last couple of years has been dedicated to the single foundational premise that they want to stick a finger in the eye of the american president. i mean, that is sort of the guiding principle here which is why some people are skeptical that this deal is going to get done. because in the end it's just really good politics for him at home to beat up on the americans. and so i think that's the reason why that op ed ends that way, because it's in part speaking much more to the russian people than it is to the americans. >> sticking a finger in the eye of the president personally? >> sure. this is about public opinion, right? >> also because he is sort of known as somebody who doesn't think american exceptionalism is really all that great. >> apologist for america. >> famous quote about the fact we think we're great and the brits think they're great and the greeks think they're great. you're just like george bush just like everybody else. >> not to say that president obama doesn't believe it american exceptionalism. and suddenly the president is talking about american

exceptionalism and you're smiling and laughing about that. >> i think that carney said today that compared to russia there's no doubt we're exceptional. >> you're exceptional. exceptional member. >> to the extent we're comparing ourselves in the a way that they've conducted themselves around the world it's pretty ease why i to make the case we're exceptional. ultimately this is about putin beating his chest about essentially sending a message to his own people. >> shirt off or shirt on? >> shirt on. >> would you dispute that putin's driving the agenda on the syria crisis? >> we need him. we've always said from the very beginning that you couldn't get anything done in syria without russia. at some level he has the cards. >> he has the cards. but doesn't this all in a way legitimize assad here? because suddenly after saying we don't need assad anymore. we'd like him gone. now he's there and we in a way through the russians of course, not directly but we now have to have him there. >> assad is there not because of assad's strength.

assad is there because there are enormous proxy interests that are dedicated to the idea that he stays in power. the russians are not the only ones. the iranians have to have assad as well. so it's just another reminder about how complicated this country is and why we should be cautious about how we engage. because it's not assad that has legitimacy here. assad is essentially there only because of the nations that support him. that's who we're really talking to here. we're talking to those nations, not necessarily to assad. >> i have a personal question to ask you. don't worry. it's okay. it's g rated. >> this is not part of the deal. >> i want to hear this. >> deals up. >> you were the only senate candidate in 2012 that president obama cut an ad for. the only one. much to the chagrin of many other candidates. it was because he really wanted you to win. >> yeah. >> you got a phone call from him on labor day weekend saying, i need your help. pay back time. and you said no. how hard was that? >> yeah. it's really hard. in part because i do inherently trust this guy. i've been with him on almost every major issue that's come

before the congress. and i do believe that he has been about as nimble as possible at negotiating the last two or three years in the middle east at an unbelievably turbulent time. but there are these rare moments in your career in congress when you get to vote on war and peace. and ultimately that can't be because somebody's asked you to do it. it has to be because in your heart you believe that you're doing the right thing. and so for this one, as i told him from the very beginning, i've been consistent in my skepticism about military action there. i would like to be with the president, but these are rare, unique votes. >> what did you say to him? because obviously he is -- we can see how torn president obama is. he doesn't want to do this. >> yeah. >> he believes or at least he argues he believes that the use of chemical weapons is so beyond the pale and gassing your own people is so horrific, and he stayed out of that conflict as long as he could, even as bodies piled up, but the united states needs to take a stand against the use of chemical weapons because if we don't do it, no

one will. we saw the british vote against it in parliament. that's not a bad argument. >> no, it's not. and i hope he's right. in the sense that i hope that the costs of inaction are not more than the costs of action. and it is a close call. you just have to weigh whether you really believe that the strike would be a true deterrent effect and whether you really believe the potential spillover effects in the region don't counter act that. and for a lot of us we just believe it's a close call but ultimately it would hurt us more. >> if he believes this so strongly why do you think he insisted on getting other people to back him up? >> because congress would talk him out of it? >> i think when there is not an imminent threat to u.s. national security interests, he may not have the constitutional authority to do this. i've said that he could have. but i think it is a close constitutional call. and i think this is a guy who came into the the presidency, i mean, with full knowledge of the

risks of an executive overreaching with respect to his -- to foreign policy powers. so i think he wanted to be careful here, appropriately. >> so you voted against the use of force. do you think as the president does that there still has to be the threat of the use of force in order for this to succeed? so how do you square that? >> yeah, i don't ultimately think there has to be the threat of force. but i will acknowledge that it certainly helps to vet. again as i said before, if i was being asked to vote on the threat of force it's different than actually voting to put planes in the air. but ultimately again, i think putin has other reasons to do this rather than just trying to protect syria from military strikes. >> so assad said that one of the other conditions for him acquiescing to this deal is that the united states stop arming what he calls the terrorists, the syrian rebels. do you think that that's worth going along with? >> listen, i think that's a good idea exclusive of the fact. >> don't arm the rebels. >> if you coauthored an

amendment with rand paul. do you think you're going to do that? >> i think this is one of the rare moments that rand paul and i are sitting on the same page. but here's the trouble with that. you guys have talked about this. if this was just the good guys against the bad guys, this would be a lot easier call for many of us but it is not. this is essentially al qaeda, not affiliate of al qaeda, actual al qaeda operatives who are embedded with the free syrian army. they're coordinating it. >> how big a terrorist presence, extremist presence is with these rebels, do you think? >> well, i think it's in the thousands. probably not in the tens of thousands. but it's pretty clear that the sunni insurgency around the globe is converging upon syria because that is the next wave in the fight. >> i have to end it there. i'm being told we have to go to a commercial break. senator murphy, you were fantastic. thanks for coming in, share your thoughts, having this conversation. dana, gloria, jessica, i don't like being around senators younger than me.

>> sorry. >> denies syria's regime is responsible for using chemical weapons to attack innocent civilians. so why is russian president vladimir putin suddenly so dedicated to disarming syria of the stockpile he helped to build? the possible motivation you did not read about in his op ed. that's coming up. . woman: everyone in the nicu -- all the nurses wanted to watch him when he was there 118 days. everything that you thought was important to you changes in light of having a child that needs you every moment.

i wouldn't trade him for the world. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. if you're caring for a child with special needs, our innovative special care program offers strategies that can help. jim, i adore the pool at your hotel.ver had to make. anna, your hotels have wondrous waffle bars. ryan, your hotels' robes are fabulous. i have twelve of them. twelve? shhhh, i'm worth it& what i'm trying to say is, it's so hard to pick just one of you, so i'm choosing all of you with hotels.com. a loyalty program that requires no loyalty. plus members can win a free night every day only at hotels.com because what you dont know can hurt you.urance, what if you didn't know that it's smart to replace washing-machine hoses every five years? what if you didn't know that you might need extra coverage for more expensive items?

and what if you didn't know that teen drivers are four times more likely to get into an accident? 'sup the more you know, the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum -bum ♪

welcome back to cnn special coverage "crisis in syria decision point." vladimir putin is a busy man what with all the shirtless horseback riding, tiger hunting, hang-gliding, running a country that is the chief provider of

chemical weapons to bashar al assad's government, the guy has a pretty full schedule. where does he find the time to write an op ed in the "new york times"? and more importantly, what's his angle? to talk about the motivations of the russian president in syria? we're joined now by senior editor for the new york republic. a moscow-based reporter for multiple news outlets and an expert we rely upon a lot. so give us insight into what vladimir putin actually believed in the op ed he wrote and in this proposal he's kind of pushing versus what is just mischief. >> so this is a classic russian tactic. you muddy the waters, make the water churn a little bit, and it hides the fact that for example it doesn't really make sense that if you even in the op ed deny that assad used chemical weapons on his people but suddenly we're interested in having him give up his chemical weapons. why are we doing that? >> exactly. >> but i think what he believes, and he's believe it the whole time, a cornerstone of his presidency, has been to as he

calls it raise russia up off its knees. he believes russia was humiliated in the 90s at the end ofd the cold war, humiliated by america. this is russia standing up to america. he's also obsessed with not having a unipolar world. not having america call all the shots across the gloenbe. he's taken the steering wheel on this. obama hasn't been able to do it. he took the steering wheel and said look i'm going to come in here and fix this in a way you can't. americans just want to bomb things but i'm the pur vary of peace. >> you're suggesting he wants to show the president up. how do you see this playing out? >> well look, i don't agree with jay carney when he said that putin is putting his prestige and his credibility at stake. that's not true. >> even spin? >> no, i think what's happening -- prestige where? if the proposal fails, it's no skin off putin's back because he can say look, i tried something. i tried a real diplomatic solution. i was able to bring both sides to the table.

if they couldn't come -- if they couldn't close the deal, he'll likely blame it on the americans and say, you know, i tried. the americans just want to bomb things. americans are always the aggressor. i mean, the '98 intervention in kosovo is still a sore subject in russia as is iraq and afghanistan. this is the trip that america is the aggressor and russia is the mature adult in the room that tries for diplomacy. >> it seemed like an amazingly american political move kind of write the op ed. we've all seen presidential candidates do this on big issues. my op ed, this is what i believe because they don't have to be interviewed by people like us, right? so you just write it, you get it out there. and that he understood that public opinion is with him on this in this country, not about assad but about any kind of intervention. and that he seemed to be kind of sly about that. maybe it was his p.r. handlers in america. but what's your sense of how -- >> how many were told he wrote it? you don't believe that?

>> come on. >> what p.r. agent is going to say we wrote it for him. >> i agree. >> the president wrote this speech, right? >> i'm not saying i believe it. but listen, it is incredibly savvy. as you know going through paragraph by paragraph, he's just constantly poking his finger at the american people. >> is he smart that way about american politics? >> he is smart. he's a very smart, very clever. >> that's all i meant, he's savvy about stuff. >> let me tell you about the p.r. angle. this was planted by ketchum in the "new york times." ketchum has been working for vladimir putin for a long time, even when he was technically the prime minister and in a building across town moscow. the people who worked at ketchum for him here in new york and in d.c. were so frustrated because they would spend time putting together plans, they would make a recommendation and the russians would do whatever the hell they wanted anyway. >> right. >> and one guy who i knew who was handling the ketchum account for putin was so frustrated with this that he decided to take it

easy and work for the health insurance industry in 2010. it was that frustrating. >> the op ed thing, i don't think an american p.r. firm would have recommended that that be the op ed that he puts in the "new york times." >> i think he has his own people write it. >> right. >> and this is putin tactic when he ran for president in 2012. >> i enjoyed the article, thank you. >> sponsored by amnesty international. >> so his presidential campaign was just a series of editorials, one in each russian newspaper. >> we get that too by the way. >> but he didn't do anything else. he skipped debates. he sent a graduate student writing editorials. but this one was a good one for him. usually they're really really boring and dry and really long this. one was good. >> you know what strikes me obviously as you said a big part of this what drives him is to return russia to the days of glory and so forth and just covering george w. bush --

>> to make him an equal partner that, people have to come to him. people have to reckon with him. >> what i was just going to say, oklahoma's n obama's not the only one to deal with this. bush read book about the czart to understand him and the machismo thing. you saw the shirtless putin. isn't that a big part of it as well? >> that's for domestic consumption. when the russians say for example that they're going to send their own parliamentary delegation to our congress to lobby congress not to strike syria, that's not -- i mean they knew that congress was going to say no. that was for domestic consumption so that people see again russia being a big boy sitting at the big boy's table. that people have to reckon with them. >> and the conversation becomes about the post-american world. >> that's right. >> more air quotes. >> here's the question. does he actually want there to be a solution to this problem? or is he just muddying the waters? >> i don't think he really cares. >> he doesn't care.

so if lavrov and kerry come up with something, fine, but it doesn't matter he's brought them to the table. he's not trying to get a nobel peace prize. >> no, he's not. and he's not going to get one. he's bought assad a ton of time. and now he's gotten obama to put aside what was one of the 2k3w0goals of military strikes to get assad from power. now we've given up on that now just talking about this one detail of chemical weapons. >> does he actually think those photos are macho? >> yes. yes. >> he thinks that makes him look good? >> that's right. and most people in russia if you look at his electorate it's women over 50. but they're actually women over -- chubby women over 50 and they think it's very -- >> can we let the american public know that's not a good look for men? jake? fyi? >> actually a lovely moment to end the conversation. >> no man scaping. >> thank you so much. wonderful for yu to comment. straight ahead, we have mt. rushmore, the grand canyon,

checks and balances, wonder bread, and breaking bad. but vladimir putin says we're not that special in what the panel thinks about his reality check for america coming up next. [ male announcer ] at his current pace, bob will retire when he's 153,

which would be fine if bob were a vampire. but he's not. ♪ he's an architect with two kids and a mortgage. luckily, he found someone who gave him a fresh perspective on his portfolio. and with some planning and effort, hopefully bob can retire at a more appropriate age. it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade. there's a lot i had to do... ... watch my diet. stay active. start insulin... today, i learned there's something i don't have to do anymore. my doctor said that with novolog® flexpen, i don't have to use a syringe and a vial... or carry a cooler. flexpen® comes prefilled with fast-acting insulin used to help control high blood sugar when you eat. dial the exact does. inject by pushing a button. nom a vial. you should eat a meal within 5 to 10 minutes after injecting novolog® (insulin aspart [rdna origin] injection). do not use if your blood sugar is too low,

or 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 and low potassium in your blood. 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. find your co-pay cost at myflexpen.com. ask your health care provider about novolog® flexpen today.

welcome back to cnn special coverage" crisis in syria decision point" on his first trip overseas as president in 2010 he was asked in a news conference whether he subscribed to the notion of american exceptionalism. here was his response back then. >> i believe in american exceptionalism. just as i suspect that the brits believe in british exceptionalism and the greeks believe in greek exceptionalism. >> greek exceptionalism. that answer didn't win the newly-elected president any awe applause from his opponents on the right a striking contrast to his endorsement of this idea in his tuesday night address to the nation. take a hlisten. >> terrible things happen across the globe. it is beyond our means to right every wrong. but when with modest effort and risk we can stop children from

being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, i believe we should act. that's what makes america different. that's what makes us exceptional. >> now, that political shift was not lost on vladimir putin or whoever wrote the op ed bearing his name in the "new york times." he wrote "i would rather disagree with the case he made on american exceptionalism. it is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional no matter the motivation." joining us a writer for the atlantic and bloomberg view. so why take on this american exceptionalism thing? i got to believe it's because he knew it would bother not just president obama but us, the people. >> look, it's not fair to say that his only policy is to put his finger in our eye all the time. he has some deeper strategic -- but yeah. look it's a policy. look, rush russia's weak.

russia lost. russia the successor state to the soviet union which lost. their policy is in many ways a resentment-based policy. so if obama embraces exceptionalism he's going to attack it. if obama denied it maybe he'd do the opposite. you cannot underestimate the role of resentment and humiliation in this relationship. >> are we exceptional? >> yeah we're exceptional. we're great. >> the truth of the matter is that i was -- >> we defeated fascism and communism in a single century. that's pretty exceptional. >> pew actually polls on this. the american people is the greatest country in the world or one of the greatest countries in the world or nothing. and it's under 50% who say the greatest country in the world. it's like 48%. 42% say one of the greatest countries in the world. it's actually not as widespread a belief as i thought that we are this shining beacon on a hill. >> it's probably the poll numbers have probably gone down. but don't you think this is about the president himself? i mean, that whole point about

exceptionalism -- and we've all parsed this op ed -- came after a point where he said, you know, i really, the president and i have developed a relationship of trust. >> developed i think presence sent developing. >> developing. okay. >> and now i will ruin it by sticking my fieyey finger in hi. now by the way he thinks he's exceptional but you're not. the implication is don't give me this. that you're better than we are, president obama, and don't ever say that. >> don't forget. step back in history. they lost. he was a kgb agent who was trained his well life to fight america. he was raised to believe that his system was superior. it turned out not to be superior. syria is a proxy for them in some ways. what syria is, syria was in the soviet sphere of influence for a long time. russia believed it inherited syria as part of its diminished sphere of influence.

having america attack syria would be a humiliating event for russia. because it can't defend its client state. its client state of many decades. there's serious currents of resentment and feelings of weakness and this lashing out -- >> this is sort of a mini mini cold war mentality. the proxy, that's what that was all about. >> we're in the 80s in some ways. >> if the u.s. is this divided over syria, what lesson do you think russia draws about how we'd react with iran? >> well, what russia thinks? you know, this is the thing. to say this in president obama's credit, the only reason vladimir putin came up with this possibly fake solution to a real problem is because he must have had enough of a sense that obama might be from his perspective crazy enough to go do this. and so i mean, we are here. >> crazy or -- >> no, crazy, bold, strong, whatever he -- look obviously,

these things have developed because president obama thought and suggested to the world that i'm going to go use force. >> you've spent time with president obama. you know him. you have a sense? i mean, he studied history. he knows that bush said i looked into putin's eyes and saw his soul. >> and obama saw the bored kid in the back of the classroom or whatever it was. >> the president knows that putin can pull the wool over his eyes and doesn't want to be fooled. what do you think is going on in his head? >> i think the president would much rather not deal with any of this at all. that's what i think. i think we're here where we are in part because the president not for wrong or terrible reasons, the president spent the last two years avoiding this subject hoping that syria would just -- look he's a domestic policy president anyway. and then he looks at impossible problems in the middle east. the middle east which is where hope goes to die. and says, i can't get involved in this. that inattention over the last two years have brought us to this place. but on the iran piece it's very interesting. i think people should be cautious about this. not you.

you're very cautious and responsible. >> thank you. >> the president has said very, very clearly, there are only two issues that matter for him from a national security perspective in the middle east. first tier problems. one defeat of al qaeda and second to prevent iran from crossing the nuclear threshold, from gaining a nuclear weapon. syria is a second tier problem for him. now a humanitarian problem, chemical weapons problem. >> it's become a big proxy problem. >> but i don't think it's correct -- and this is something that i think the israelis and the arabs both misunder stad -- i don't think it's correct to say because he's hesitating on this allowing putin or seems he's allowing putin to get the better of him on this syria question means iran will turn out to be the same thing. because he's made it very clear for years now that that is a core national security interest for the united states. >> twitter war with senior

administration officials. >> with twitter it was a love affair. >> it was written about. it was noticed because people have regard for you and your view. you were tweeting about the president's speech. >> right. >> and some members of the president's senior staff responded to your tweets taking issue with them to a degree. >> right. >> with high honor. >> i happily accept it. >> they didn't say their twitter accounts were hacked. >> right. no, no. the substantive exchange -- i tweeted, up can't believe that i'm talking about a sub stand of twitter exchange. >> me, neither. >> she doesn't even tweet. >> we'll work on that next. in the next hour. but what i tweeted was that over the last two years the american goal has shifted. it used to be to end the regime, to bring about the end of the regime. and now it is -- and there it is. we can read it. we just want to take away one of his weapons systems. so our goals have diminished. and ben rhodes, deputy national security adviser, guy who writes a lot of the president's

speeches among other duties said, you know, it remains an orderly political transition remains a goal of the obama administration. >> u.s. position remains assad leaving power is part of the political process but we must also act to specifically remove chemical weapons threats. >> what i said in response to that, that's fine that that's your goal. but it's a rhetorical goal. and we want all children to have access to unicorn rides. but i'm not knocking it. trying not to knock anytime a facetious way. but they're not working on that anymore. and the inadvertent problem here, the inadvertent problem that arising when you start negotiating with the assad regime about its cw problem, you're not talking to them about the larger problem which admirably you keep bringing up, wait, he's murdered 99,000 people without chemical weapons just with guns and bombs. >> stick with us, jeffrey. we're going to take a very quick brk come back with our special coverage of the crisis in syria. president obama did six networks interviews and even gave a rare

primetime address. but president obama apparently doesn't feel he's done trying to convince us of his plan. he's appearing this sunday with george stephanopoulos. what will he say to the media again next?

just by talking to a helmet. it grabbed the patient's record before we even picked him up. it found out the doctor we needed was at st. anne's. wiggle your toes. [ driver ] and it got his okay on treatment from miles away. it even pulled strings with the stoplights. my ambulance talks with smoke alarms and pilots and stadiums. but, of course, it's a good listener too. [ female announcer ] today cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everything works like never before.

[ female announcer ] today cisco is connecting the internet of everything. always go the extra mile. to treat my low testosterone, i did my research. my doctor and i went with axiron, the only underarm low t treatment. axiron can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include

skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about the only underarm low t treatment, axiron. and struggle to sleep comfortably together, now there's a solution. sleep number dual temp, the revolutionary temperature-balancing layer with active air technology that works on any mattress brand, including yours. whether you sleep hot or cool, sleep number dual temp allows each of you to select your ideal temperature. and it's only at one of our 425 sleep number stores nationwide. sleep number. comfort individualized.

welcome back to "crisis in syria decision point". it's time for the turning point. we barely heard from the president today on syria. a verbal pat on the back to secretary kerry white he tries to negotiate with the russians. he'll likely have to say a little bit more to george stephanopoulos. he's booked on his sunday show this weekend. it's confusing to me because president obama has done an unprecedented six interviews for networks on monday, then he did a presidential address to the nation on tuesday. apparently still has something to say. jeffrey goldberg of bloomberg view, what do you want to hear him say? what is there left to say that has not been said? >> there have been some events over the couple of days that are worthy of comment. one of the things that he has to say is, i know that vladimir putin wants me to take the threat of military force off the table. i'm not going to do that. there is a timeline here, and he should discuss as closely as he can with great detail, there's a

timeline here and i'm not going to let assad run the clock out on this for months and months and months. and i'm not going to take the threat of military force off the table because that's what's brought us to this point. >> dana bash? >> i don't think it's in anybody's interests, when i say anybody i mean us, to discourage the president from doing interviews. so just let him do them every day, right? >> live and be well. >> exactly. i think that he is going to have to beat back the idea that he is uncomfortable as commander-in-chief which his friend bob corker told me yesterday. he was voicing what other people have said if privately. and i think just on vladimir putin, he's going to have to reclaim control. >> jessica, quickly? . i think he should underscore a point which is true that he does not view syria as iran and that if iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon the response would be very different. he would see that as a direct national security threat to the united states. >> i think he has to narrow the timeline. make it clearer the use of force nonnegotiable. totally agree with you and say

this cannot go on. >> of course, the russians and assad have said that that has to go be off the table. it has to be off, the threat of force. >> right. but he needs to say it's not off the table. >> which is why this whole thing could fall apart. >> the negotiation need to be we'll take it off the table at this date if you have done x, y and z. >> that's why he has to have a timeline here. he doesn't want to tie john kerry's hands but he needs a timeline. >> our thanks to our panel for joining us and thank you for watching. you can catch me "jake tapper on the lead" 4:00 p.m. eastern. up next "piers morgan live." up next "piers morgan live." thanks for watching. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com

i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired. i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. whether you're just starting your 401(k) or you are ready for retirement, we'll help you get there.