u.k. and overseas was gradually increasing during this period. and during 2002 and 2003, we were receiving more and more intelligence showing that the u.k. was involved. i suppose the attack in istanbul in 2003 and the british consulate was a significant manifestation. bin laden made it clear that america and their aleyes are targets. -- allies are target. as time went on. when there was sharp increase of threat intelligence relating to assistance -- that's the -- >> i would like to go back to

the immediate pre-conflict period. what assessments were you making with regard to the terrorist threat that should we become involved in a u.s.-led conflict? >> in our reports in 2003 which is reflected in the reporting was that the threat from al qaeda would increase and that iraq -- >> you can watch the inquiry with former director of u.k. british intelligence tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. next, live, "newsmakers" features a reporters' round table. after that, new york congressman charles rangel speech on the house floor concerning an ethics investigation, followed by california representative maxine waters news conference about

ethics violations. >> welcome to "newsmakers" for a round table discussion a journalist who covers capitol hill and white house. when did you sit down with white house press secretary robert gibbs and did his statement about the left, congressman kucinich and others surprise you? >> it did. we sat down with him a week ago friday. we published the story after the weekend. it was a candid interview from beginning to end. there was a story before that one that didn't get much attention about christina romer's departure. also a very news worthy story. it was a candid interview and

vented the frustration what the white house is feeling towards the professional left. >> the senate came back after a recess to vote on immigration. what kind of reaction have been getting from democrats on capitol hill? >> in response to what gibbs said to sam, i mean the frustration here is that democrats have passed a lot of legislation over this past year and they are sensing they passed a health care bill, financial regulatory reform bill that reformed the credit card industry, but what a lot of liberals are concerned about is what they didn't pass, like climate change legislation or closing guantanamo bay, which the president promised he would do. and you know, what the white house and what democrat leaders want to sell to their base is that hey, we have done a lot for this country and taking a big step towards what we promised on

the campaign trail. let's get the base motivated and they haven't been able to do. >> let me issue about political capital because beginning when the president campaigned, there was a loss to scott brown and he campaigned for senator bennett. politico is saying it was a good week for the president. >> it was a good win for them, but unfortunately for them it is an anomaly. their track record in colorado was dismal especially when you look at pennsylvania when they backed arlen specter. david axelrod told me there is no proof. the elections are specific to the district or state they are being run in. that is hopeful thinking on the part of democrats because they don't want to see a wave elections. it will be a tough election for

democrats. >> i would agree with that. the president's approval rating is a big problem. he is down to about 43% in the gallup poll right now and gallup says that when presidents are below 50%, historically they lose about 36 seats in the house and of course, republicans need 40 seats in order to take back the majority. the president is facing disapproval ratings in every single issue and that is a problem when he heads on the campaign trail and a question for democrats whether they want him on the campaign trailor fundraising support or don't want his help at all. >> the president is speaking part of the weekend on the florida gulf coast. but no independent photographers -- it's a white house photograph of him in the gulf coast and the president going on vacation at the end of this month. what is the story behind this weekend's visit and the attention he has been getting with his vacations or weekend

getawaist. >> any time a -- get aways. any time the president goes away, presidents will take heat. this weekend is all about the president showing that the gulf coast is open for business. they took a lot of heat when they went to maine instead of going to the gulf. the president saying go to the gulf. the seafood is great. this is about the president going down there and putting his money where his mouth is. they were swimming yesterday. we lament when they go with the official white house photos. the purpose is, he didn't want "people" magazine to share it. and after a few intense few days on the campaign trail, it is late summer, a long year, despite the criticism from the professional left, they have worked very hard this year and i

think the president is looking forward to spending time with his family. >> in the "new york times," senator dodd is saying the democrats aren't doing enough to revel on what they have achieved in this legislative year. a new poll out this past week indicating that both democrats and republicans getting very low ratings in terms of favorable and unfavorable ratings. >> that same poll has some good news for democrats in that the generic question about which party do you want to control congress, it's about narrowly split, almost even. when you compare that to 2006 and 2008, democrats had a clear majority over voters prevering them to control congress. that is one good piece of news. the bad piece of news, the public does not have much confidence in what congress has done and 1% actually believe that this has been one of the best congressional sessions. and that is contrast with the

message that like chris dodd was saying, we passed all these bills and we need to get some credit for it. but they aren't getting credit for it and they are trying to say we are better than republicans and republicans are the party that will bring us back to the problems we had in 2008 and before. >> as you look at the poll numbers, the big numbers, unemployment at 9.5% and deficit approaching $14 trillion. >> 9.5%, that's the number you have to look at. that's what this white house and democrats can't get aaround. it's hard to message 9.5% unemployment. as long as republicans are unified in their message as to where are the jobs, that is resonating with the american voters. $787 billion on stimulus, another $26 billion last week to the states for medicaid and teachers and first responders. but still the jobs -- the number isn't going down.

the underunemployment number is is at 16.5%. this is around the president's neck that he isn't able to get around. >> that same poll showed that support for the war in afghanistan is diminishing. we saw the first of a series of interviews this morning by general petraeus trying to explain what our mission is in afghanistan and additional wikileaks' documents will be coming out. do you want to elaborate. >> the pentagon is already warning that the wikileaks, the latest leak is potentially going to be more damaging to the war effort. you know, i think that afghanistan is a big issue in terms of the democratic base. there is a lot of apprehension, not just the base, but democrats in congress, about the direction of this war and that all speaks to the larger question about the enthusiasm that the party has heading into november. that's a problem for --

politically. the economy is much larger politically. but the way the war has been going hasn't been doing any favors politically for his party. >> president heading back to wisconsin this week and another couple of wet coast trips, primarilyly to fund raise? >> we are seeing candidates sort of tentative on appearing on stage with the president. he is doing an event with senator murray and going out to ohio to raise money. he is an asset in getting people to open up their wallets, but we have to see how effective he can be. >> is speaker pelosi an asset on the campaign trail? >> depends on which district. blue dog democrats are staying away not just from pelosi but obama as well. of course they like obama and

pelosi, too, as a huge fundraiser and doing a lot of work behind the scenes to make her party is in fiscal strength and that's the one thing democrats can actually take some comfort in. while the polls show they are going to take big losses in the fall, they do have financial advantage over the republicans. they have been preparing for a bad november for a while. this is not sneaking up on the party and they are trying to make sure they are in a position of strength. >> the president making some news at the annual dinner on friday evening and following up on that yesterday in panama city, florida, on the issue of freedom of speech and freedom of religion and that mosque two blocks from ground zero. here's president obama. >> let me be clear. as a citizen and as president, i believe that muslims have the right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. [applause] >> and that includes the right

to build a place of worship and a community center on private party in lower manhattan in accordance with local laws and ordinances. this is america. and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. the principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. the founders must endure. >> and the president again yesterday saying that he wasn't really weighing in on ground zero but the first amendment. >> i wonder, it was such a politically bold move to weigh in on this in the beginning. i wonder if the truble might be from nuance. it was liz cheney who said he was before -- for the mosque

before he was against it. so it is a terribly risky move for this president to do. white house aides are saying this was his own thinking. he wants to set the record clear that he believes this is freedom of religion, but it is politically sticky. >> is this also a way for the president to draw a wedge between his point of view as we saw yesterday on the web with newt gingrich and congressman boehner and others very critical of what he said friday night? >> perhaps, because a number of democrats oppose the idea of building the mosque near ground zero. and overwhelming number of americans do, the general public as well. you are seeing not only republicans criticizing the decision, but also democrats on the campaign trail yesterday keeping distance from those remarks. it puts -- while the president says he is standing up on principle, a lot of the people in the party were nervous about those comments because they

wanted to spend the weekend bashing republicans over social security. it's the 75 of anniversary over the entitlement program, they are concerned about the gulf coast and what they can do on the economy, but they are dominated over the comments by the president over the mosque. >> the professional left as gibbs called it, was universal in their praise for the president's statement on the remarks friday night. some of the base is coming back, may not win them friends but inside the beltway, it won some kudos. >> let me bring you to the issue of ethics. in 2006, democrats were able to use the ethics investigations into congressman bob ney and tom delay very effectively. republicans are looking at maxine waters and charlie rangel. what are the similarities and differences and where do -- are

these two cases heading? >> majority -- minority leader, john boehner is trying to make a big issue. nancy pelosi said we are going to drain the swamp. whether this is playing outside the beltway and republicans aren't so sure this has much as political ressonance as the economy and debt does. it is no help to democrats. they will come back and deal with the rangel issue and the waters' issue head on, potentially a trial in september. it will distract from everything they are trying to do to create any sort of momentum heading into the polls. the party will be divided. the news coverage will be focused on it. the one-day session that the house came back to pass a bill, $26 billion to what they said would save teachers' jobs, charlie rangel went to the floor and defended his -- himself

against these charges and the party was forced to respond to that instead. and this is a distraction they don't want to deal with. >> that has been the real problem for democrats all year. late spring, democrats had been imploring the white house stay focused on jobs, jobs, jobs and then the huge oil spill. when this white house has wanted to pivot and focus on jobs, they have either been knocked off by external events or by themselves. the democrats wanted to spend the whole weekend talking about social security, instead we are talking about the president's remarks on the mosque. they have tried to stay focus on the jobs' message. >> the president who delivers that message is robert gibbs and we talked about it in the beginning of this interview. maureen dowd of the "new york times" said he needs to resign or become counsel to the president. >> there have been a few

rumblings. a couple of members of congress made that case as well. robert is in a unique position of serving a dual role, he is the white house press secretary and a good friend to the president and that creates friction. robert has made no secret he wants to focus on policy and political advice to the president 100% instead of dividing his time between that and the podium. robert said he isn't going anywhere and that's probably the case. the podium is his as long as he wants it. >> robert gibbs responding to chip reid of absence news. >> did you put your foot in your mouth or did you say something that you meant? [laughter] >> i had my feet planted firmly on the floor and nothing in my mouth to speak of. >> you answered, you said,

honestly. was this an honest and correct answer? >> i will not contradict my substitute. >> you're not backing away from it? >> i think many of you have heard frustrations voiced here. sure. i doubt i said anything you haven't already heard. >> it's not something you said in error. >> it was borne out of frustration, but i don't think it was -- again, i think it was borne out of frustration. >> white house press secretary press secretary. was that robert gibbs speaking or robert gibbs speaking for the president? >> i think this is a feeling that has been felt in the white house. sam may agree with this, but the president has told lawmakers that we have done a lot for this country and we are getting backed by our own party for things we haven't done. they criticizing for not getting the public option through but not saying we passed the most

sweeping health care bill in generations. there is definitely some frustration, but gibbs went too far from where the president would say. >> does robert gibbs say anything by accident or was this growing frustration behind that podium? >> this reflects the west wing mentality. it is a frustration in every corner of the building, including the -- by the person who lives there. there is a sense of frustration. they are working 80 hours a week and they are getting blasted by people who are supposed to be their allies. i don't know what the motivation was behind what robert said. my sense was he was just venting honest frustration unlike what we see in this town. this was authentic frustration at not getting credit from their

allies and maybe trying to throw high heat heading up to november. >> you did the interview without cameras. do you think if you would have done it with cameras, that would have changed the tone? >> my sense is. robert is better in his office than at the podium. when the cameras are on, it is natural to be more guarded. and it was very conversational. i'm from kentucky and robert is from alabama, so we share geographic organizins and we discussed his auburn tigers slipping into the top 25 pre-season. i think because it was so conversational in tone, perhaps it was easier for him to really be honest in his frustration instead of choosing his words more carefully. >> one issue that was not addressed in this congress is the issue of immigration. we heard from the white house saying they want a bipartisan agreement clearly looking at the the numbers is getting

republican support. is this an agenda item that we'll see action this fall? >> doubtful. they have been promising action on this since last year. they said they would address this at the beginning of the year. harry reid said this is going to be a top priority for us. but there isn't the support in congress to do a comprehensive bill and there isn't the time. congress isn't coming back until september 13 and off on october 8 to campaign for the rest -- until november and then they come back for a lame duck session afterwards before the end of the year. there isn't the time or political will and this is such a hot button roiling issue it's uncertain how it would play with the electorate. we are seeing how this issue is divisive over the arizona immigration law and democrats want to let the chips fall where they may and next congress when some have cooled down to put

together a bipartisan coalition. >> but that lame duck issue is likely to become an issue. republicans, newt gingrich, john boehner and others are saying if republicans get control over the next congress, they are going to campaign against a lame duck session for fear it could result in a tax increase. >> both sides are doing it. warning what could happen. that is the most immediate sort of tactic that republicans have is to say watch out. because if democrats take a hit, they'll come back and pass all kinds of horrible tax increases that will slow the economy dramatically and hurt small businesses. democrats are warning you don't want a speaker boehner. they are warning you don't want a chairman barton and warning that these are the guys once they are charged will heralded a return of the bush economic policies. both sides are trying to talk about the future in worst case

scenarios. >> senator harry reid and his republican challenger, angle in nevada. he has a slight lead in nevada, even though overwhelmingly when you come to his popularity rating, he is below 50%. >> he is an unpopular guy. he is never going to be someone that people love out there. the only way he can win is to make the campaign about his opponent and how his opponent is scary and worse than him and they are demonizing her and taking her comments on wanting to transitioning out social security and it's not the senators' jobs to create jobs especially in a state where unemployment is the highest. they are trying to get voters

away from angle. and nevada has this other thing called none of the above option. they can register their discontent by vieting for none of the candidates. and there will be a high number of people voting in that candidate. they are hoping reid can pull off the squeaker. >> why hasn't john mccain been able to maintain a strong sizeable lead. right now he is ahead over j.d. hayworth. why is that? >> he is a flawed candidate. if mccain was facing a stronger candidate, he would be in bigger trouble. hayworth was a congressman. he has some baggage dealing with the jack abramoff scandal and he hasn't been able to gain a lot of tracks and mccain has a lot more sophisticated campaign

apparatus and cash. if the circumstances were different, mccain would have more trouble. >> the tea party and its role in 2010. as we sit here on this august sunday, what role do you think they will play into the november election? >> the only role they have been played at least is confusing as to what is going to happen in november. the tea party is most effective during the primaries. but i think one of the things i will be looking at in november is how effective they were and how effective they can be leading into 2012. truth of the matter is, i don't know how effective the tea party will be. it's difficult to tell how much is a very vocal group veer success how much they can be helpful as a political movement. >> we are seeing political activity in new hampshire and iowa with rick santorum and mitt romney has been on the campaign trail, governor pawlenty.

>> right after the november elections, you will start seeing more movement where people are forming committees and more visits to those early primary states. you know, a lot of it right now is building goodwill and showing you -- what you can do on the campaign trail by fundraising and stumping for candidates and a think a lot of these perspective candidates want to see those efforts come back to help them by endorsements in the future. so, you know, we will see activity and especially with these guys spending a lot of money and helping out some of the candidates in these races. >> will this early start to 2012 have any impact on the obama agenda? we saw the "vanity" fair piece how washington is broken, the cable chatter, web sites, twitter, all of this is coming fast and furious, when you

combine that with the early jump on the republican side, does it impact the obama agenda? >> it does. i couldn't agree more with the article. these daily squirmishes knocks them off message and they are a cancer to the administration's agenda. the 2012 race is well under way. there is no denying it. there is some criticism on the hill that the president is concerned with his own re-election than helping out his party allies. i asked gibbs, when does 2012 start for you guys? he said it won't be immediately after the mid-term elections but shortly afterwards. we are hearing from tim pawlenty and mitt romney but they haven't fully engaged. >> what role do you think they'll play in this mid-term

election? who will they campaign for, will they expand beyond the early primary states? >> you will see them in the swing states, where there will be close races. even in california, boxer's race or in washington state. some of the races that for a while seemed like these were solidly democratic states that are starting to move towards the tossup column or lean republican. there will be effort among these 2012 candidates to go into these states and try to at least declare themselves a victor if the candidates turn out victorious in the fall. >> when he was in this position in 1966, nixon was able to pick and choose candidates he thought was going to win. would you see a republican campaigning in nevada with angle or romney or -- >> nevada is a curious situation because not all republicans are

totally embracing angle and not sure what to make of her candidacy. if angle starts to show that she can win this race and is competitive in the final weeks of the campaign, yes, then i think you will see some of these candidates dip their toe in there or maybe even full fledge campaigning on the campaign trail. if she starts slipping and reid starts running away with this race in the final week, those candidates will stay away and don't want to be associated with a loser. >> we heard this past week from robert gates very critical of congress for its failure to implement a budget for the defense department. will that come in the fall? >> they are going to try to do something along those lines to try to do a -- some sort of appropriations bill. it's not entirely clear. there isn't a lot of time. not only do they want to do s