various political parties. some are extreme and some are not, but we need to let people know that even if people like obama have not been military, the points that he is supporting -- and we should also encourage the whole congress accountable -- i am 100% disabled -- give all of us what we need -- host: sydney freedberg, final thoughts. guest: a, thank you for your service. b, it comes down to political decisions we want as democracy. in an earlier story, one of the marines i spoke to, a helicopter pilot, says that it is great that you put a yellow ribbon or "support our troops" bumper car, but what i

really wanted to do is go out and vote, i understand the issues and go out and vote. host: sydney freedberg, "national journal" cover story, "when johnny comes marching home again," thank you for being here. that does it for today's "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] .

>> your watching c-span, created as a public service by america's cable companies. next, senator john cornyn and senator menendez discuss how their strategizing to gain more seats in the midterm elections. and president obama announces the departure of white house chief of staff rahm emanuel, running for chicago mayor. and today's briefing with press secretary robert gibbs back at the white house. the first meeting of the financial oversight council will 2:30 eastern.at treasury secretary tim geithner is the chairman. that is this afternoon on c- span. this weekend on "book tv, explore the realities behind science fiction, a division of

einstein, and the fundamental sources of the universe with this author who has written more than six books, including his latest. join our three-hour conversation with your calls, e-mails, and tweets sunday at 12 eastern on "book tv." >> washington was from a very a domineering mother. we don't have quotations from hurt taking pride in her son. >> his soon-to-be published biography of george washington, the first large-scale single volume biography of our first president on c-span on sunday. >> senator john cornyn and senator menendez discuss how the

republicans and democrats are strategizing to gain seats in the midterm election. both are the campaign committee chairman for their parties and talk about the 37 open seats in the senate this fall. this is one vowel or. then live president -- live coverage of president obama after this. this last an hour. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentleman. welcome to the national press club. my name is theresa corner, a freelance reporter and board chairman of the national press club. we are the leading professional organization for journalists and are committed to programming and fostering a free press worldwide. for more information on the press club, visit our web site. to donate to our program, please visit www.press.org \library.

i would like to welcome our speakers, which includes the guests of our speakers as well as working journalists. i welcome our c-span and public radio audience as well. after the speech, i will ask as many questions as time permits. our guests from the right, jim, a u.s. senate press gallery. jane, editor in chief of the politics and opinion pal of yahoo! news. lisa, tribune newspaper, "the l.a. times. >> al, the hill. andrew, a german of the speaker's committee, associate editor, washington editor. debora, senior vice president and senior committee member who organized today's event. shawn.

jonathon, bloomberg and former npt president. and harb. -- herb. we all little over a month away from elections likely to bring major changes. voters are not happy. plenty of evidence that incumbents are in trouble. the tea party has tapped into a vein of discontent. the economy is still struggling. if the senate seems unable to move forward with major legislation and gridlock offsets in the final days before elections. it is not pretty. probably not a great time to be in charge of winning elections all over the country. or is it? our speakers are two men in charge of leading their partie'' efforts elections. the chair organizations that help support their party candidates, do research,

strategy, fundraising, advertising, and help get voters to pull. senator menendez jarrett the democratic senatorial campaign. it's a matter of holding on to control in the senate for him. the democrats claim 59 seats in their caucus. in november, 19, a democrat seats will be up for election. even a democratic majority leader is fighting to maintain his seat. for senator john cornyn, the chair of the national republican senatorial campaign committee, the election is about gaining control. the republicans have 41 seats. in november, 17 current republican seats will be up for election. a net gain of 11 seats with the gop back in the senate majority. republicans have begun to talk about rolling back president obama's initiatives such as health care. many pollsters say the house is far more likely to turn over than the senate. so many seats are at stake in both chambers that it seems anything can happen. bob menendez is the son of

immigrants who grew up in a tenant building in new jersey. he has a long history of public service and has held positions including school board member, mayor, state legislator, congressman, and now senator since 2006. john cornyn's texas roots run deep, the son of native texans, the winter school and attended college and taught there for a while. the often heated the call to public service, serving as a judge, member of the texas supreme court and texas' attorney general before being elected to the senate in 2002. both senators have risen two outstanding leadership positions in the senate and in their parties and both are having their respective senate campaign committees at one of the most unpredictable times. we welcome them to the national press club. we look forward to hearing their perspectives. we did a coin toss to determine who would be first.

i would like to say that senator cornyn has won the toss. >> thank you, theresa. i hope that the three foretells of good things going for it. i appreciate the national press club and the board of governors. i am glad to be in here with my colleague senator menendez. the national press club is known as the place where news happens. maybe we will make some news today. that depends on you, not on us. i appreciate the fact that this is being broadcast on c-span. welcome to all those watching this on television. i think the best indicator of the way the elections are shaping up in the next few weeks is the travel schedule for the

president of the united states. on tuesday president obama held a campaign rally in wisconsin, a state that he carried in 2008 by 13 points. last. he headline two fund-raisers in connecticut, a state that the tariffs by 23 points. i've lost count of the number of fund-raising trips that he has made to the west coast for senator boxer, a state that he carried by 24 points. following the flight pattern of air force one over the next few weeks will be fascinating. the president, will he visit states that he's won just two years ago? but in which republican senate candidates seem to have a clear advantage, states like iowa, indiana, ohio, pennsylvania, florida, north carolina, new hampshire. where the president does visit,

maybe he will have better luck than when he was helping out his favorite candidates in new jersey and virginia and massachusetts in the election where scott brown was elected on january 19 earlier this year. would he have the same effect in close races like washington, nevada, colorado, or even his home state of illinois? it is clear that air force one is going to have to navigate through some political turbulence, the same turbulence that many independent observers have noted. for example, real clear politics this is the generic ballot, congressional ballot of republicans up four points. you may say that is not a big lead in the generic ballot, but look back to 2006 when the democrats had an 11.5 pt lead

. republicans have a 13. advantage among independent voters. the same people who chose scott and nautica brown in massachusetts paribas compares to an 18% point advantage the democrats had among independents in 2006 according to exit polls. then there is the enthusiasm gap. republicans have a 20. advantage when it comes to democrats as far as enthusiasm. -- enthusiasm gap. the 2010 statewide primaries, 4 million more people voted in republican primaries this year than voted in democratic primaries. the average percentage of voters participating in statewide republican primaries was the highest in 40 years. republicans set a record turnout

in eight states. the average percentage of voters participating in the democratic primary was the lowest ever, including a record low participation in 10 states. with less than five weeks to go before the midterm elections, what should we expect to see? let me suggest a few stories that you might be falling. first, i think it's clear that the american people have gotten very tired of being lectured to as opposed to being listened to. oft month in missouri's 71% the voters voted in favor of a referendum that would have repealed the individual mandates in the health-care bill that was passed earlier this year. 71%. the next day the majority leader had this to say, "it is obvious people have a lack of understanding of our health care reform bill."

last weekend senator kerry said we have an electric --electorate that is not always pay attention to what goes on so that people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the truth. with all respect to my colleagues, that is not the electorate that i see. i see voters engaged in a way i have never seen them engaged in my adult life. they know the national debt exceeds $13 trillion. they are aware that congress spent $780 billion of money that we had to borrow in order to get the economy moving again. it failed in its goal of getting unemployment down to 8% or lower as the white has predicted. and they do know a lot about the new health-care law. we heard from them in our offices, because they took the

time to read it. it was posted on the internet and it was really phenomenal to the extent to which voters and the american people got engaged in the health-care debate. yet it was passed purely along partisan lines, using extraordinary process known as budget reconciliation in order to avoid the 60-vote requirement for ordinary legislation. then there are elements of the health-care bill that are just now coming to light like the requirement of issuing a 1099 form every time you purchase $600 worth of services or more. i know that many of my colleagues could not have been aware of this onerous paperwork requirement, but i have to tell you small business owners throughout the country are very much aware of it and they see it as another example of a washington job-killing requirement. of many texas small businesses tell me they don't have the

staff to do the paperwork and day -- others are worried that even if they do, that somebody will make an inadvertent mistake and they will be forced into an irs audit or worse. the point is the american people are not clueless. they are quite engaged. i think they are more engaged now than i have ever seen in my adult life. they are certainly not ignorant of what is happening in washington. they see what has happened and i think they are pushing back hard. yet lecturing seems to have given way to listening. this week vice-president biden told his fellow democrats in new hampshire that they needed to stop whining. in an interview and "rolling stone" tazeen president obama's said it is inexcusable and irresponsible for democrats to show less enthusiasm for their candidates than they did two

years ago. i don't think is lecturing is working very well and i think one of the things that has happened this last two years has been a very aggressive legislative agenda passed that the american people are upset with. they are worried about three things. high unemployment, runaway spending, and unsustainable debt. yet we find out there's a lot of work that should have been done that will not be. if the senate adjourned last night even though the largest tax increase in american history looms on january 1 unless congress and the president acts. for the first time in 48 years the senate failed to pass the defense authorization bill to make sure men and women in uniform have what they need. we still don't have a budget, something that most families and small businesses cannot do without. the federal government simply did not pass one. there's so much unfinished business that there are as many

as 20 bills being touted for the agenda in a lame-duck session. one casualty has been set a subject i have been engaged in quite a bit as well as senator menendez, immigration reform, something president obama's said that he would take up during this first year in office, yet it is near the second year -- end of the second year and it is still not a priority. my colleague introduced a bill either yesterday, the day that we adjourned possibly. i think this kind of serious subject matter there is much more consideration than simply to be filed today that we adjourn or to be taken up during a lame-duck session. all of this unfinished business has created a climate of uncertainty for job creators and voters. that is why some of these races are particularly important.

to the people of illinois, with virginia, and delaware, some of them will take office immediately after the votes are certified. they will be serving in the lame-duck session. i believe the voters in those states will render a clear judgment on this lame duck agenda by sending additional reinforcements to our side of the aisle. the campaign strategy of our friends on the other side of the aisle is clear. they are not running on their legislative accomplishments because it is largely unpopular. they are worried that voters will hold them accountable for the failure of those policies to meet their own stated goals. so they are running campaigns against the american people, some of the home of participating in the political process for the first time. i am talking about the tea party movement. calling some of these participants in the process guaranteed by the first amendment of the constitution to

redress their government on their grievances. they are demonizing members of the tea party movement and unfortunately president obama is engaged in class warfare given the tax debate, to separate america on an issue of taxes, will we ought to not raise taxes on anyone during a fragile economic recovery. then there's the problem of not taking responsibility, but attempting to blame others for their problems. i don't think it's going to work. the issues the american people care most about are joblessness. nevada, 13.4% unemployment. none planned 6% unemployment nationwide. spending is caring people. debts are leaving parents and grandparents wondering if the next generation will be burdened with our failure to

accept responsibility and whether they will have a better life for their children as every generation hopes the next generation will have. i predict of stormy weather we have seen in republican primaries will lead to a tsunami on november 2. the same people who made news in this cycle will make his three on november 2. >> senator menendez. i am pleased to be here with my friend and colleague, senator cornyn. i was disappointed to see something when i got here. longhorn looks like a strong

thing. and the one that represented new jersey appear disproportionate. then i got what you're telling me, that we are going to sail straight victory on november 2. so thank you for that. [laughter] it is fair to say that both of us have full plates right now. it is bigger than in previous cycles. the number of states and size of those states. it has been an intense cycle so far and a lot of ups and downs. i don't think the rollercoaster is ready to levelled out anytime soon. let me start by saying i think we recognize on the democratic side that we are facing challenges in the cycle. we have historical head winds, a reality that midterm elections for the president's party going back to the civil war. the president's party loses seats historically. we also have other challenges as

well, after two cycles of a very big democratic gains, we know to some degree the cards are stacked against us. we know that there's a tremendous economic anxiety out there in the country right now and the voters are understandably impatient. i agree with john on one thing, it seems if there is reticence to take responsibility. the responsibility of having two wars raging abroad not paid for, having a set of tax cuts of nearly one trillion dollars not paid for. and vowel the program not paid for. unbridled spending during those eight years and economic policy of the bush era that has led us to the present is not of a great recession but on the verge of a new depression. that is what democrats were struggling with low over a year- and-a-half ago. that is what people are facing

now and the choice they will have to make in this election, whether they want to go back to the essence of those who created the economic anxiety is that they have or whether they want to continue to move to the future for those moving us away from the abyss and into prosperity and growth? that is what this election is about. even though the winds may be blown against us hysterically and other allies, i want to make certain advantages that we will enjoy heading into the final four weeks into the election. before i get to those, let me make a case full what we think this election is all about. this weaker republicans have done what they have done time and time again. i smiled because he is a worthy adversary, when he said there

was not a defense authorization bill passed. guess what, republicans filibustered that defense authorization bill. that means instead of what we grew up learning, 51 votes out of the 100 is a majority. no, to be able to move followed we will insist on 60 votes. democrats of course don't have 60 votes. so republicans used the filibuster 101 * alone last year, a record high. as they used the filibuster to impede progress, then they let things not getting done. it is interesting. this past week we tried to stop the outsourcing of american jobs. we want to see it made in america to be a reality again in our country. that means not only will the products be made in america, but there will be more american jobs for american workers. republicans stood with the corporate interests once again

and filibustered to ensure that our ability to make sure those jobs are created here did not happen. a few months ago republicans did everything they could to stop wall street reform. i don't think there's anyone in the country who did not believe that while we all believe in free markets, there's a difference between a free market and a free-for-all market. what we had under the previous eight years as the regulatory process was a free-for-all market that drove excesses'. a problem with those successes was that we collectively paid for it as a country. yet they stood up and oppose wall street reform. we stood on the side of average consumer's side when they were standing with wall street and the big banks. for healthcare, they stood with the big health-insurance industries and we stood with the consumers. when we had the oil spill, when we were trying to make the

company responsible for the oil spill to ultimately pegg -- i learned that when you mess up, you clean up and you are totally responsible for it, guess what, they stood with big oil. it is pretty clear they have stood with a special interest, with wall street, with the big banks, with a big insurance, with big oil. and we have been fighting for the average person in this country. the crux of our message to voters is simply this, democrats are on your side, we are trying to create those jobs in america, we are trying to undo the baht challenges -- on to the challenges of eight years of this economic policy that cannot be turned around in 18 months, but we are clearly on our way to moving in a better direction. we want to stop tax breaks for big companies that send jobs overseas.

they want to continue to support those tax breaks for those companies that send jobs overseas. they will use their filibuster power to be able to ensure that. they want to push social security. they want to reverse the new deal. they want to privatize it. that means they want wall street to ultimately run the game on your retirement security. we don't believe in that. i agree that the american public is paying attention. i agree with that. the good news is that voters get this. they understand republicans represent the special interests. republicans have done themselves no favors by standing up with big oil come a big insurance, and big banks. look at the new "the new york times-cbs poll. when asked which party seems better in helping the middle- class, democrats 55 and

republicans 33. they do get it. they know who is on their side. democrats have not been able to snap their fingers and turn this economy around overnight because you don't take eight years of economic policy like this and turn it around overnight. but the bottom line is that we are in the process of making that change toward a better future. we have growth in the domestic economy. we see jobs growth compared with williams that were lost under the previous administration. and so, we have turned the corner and will continue to move forward. i think the one thing we can be assured of is that there is advantage is that the electorate is not yearning to go back to the failed bush economic policies of the past. i think there are other advantages that we are enjoying. this is a map, unlike 2008,

where republicans were trapped into only defending their own seats -- in some places we are clearly playing on offense. we have this decreases in missouri and in kentucky. second, their candidates, we don't believe that the tea party as an institution is a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. we obviously embrace the activism of citizens. the difference is the candidates that were elected having views that are out of the mainstream of their constituencies in their states and holding views that clearly will not succeed. there are two groups of candidates i see among the republicans. people like roy blunt, portman, mark kirk tom alltel long history of standing with special-interest that created

this economic mess. these are republicans who spent decades in washington doing favors for special interest. i believe that individuals like senator murkowski and congressman castle and others were defeated because they were seen as that part of the problem in washington. i'd think the same energy and resentment can work against individuals i mentioned. the second group is known that have grown in size and notoriety and notorietywho are more interested in adopting a strict national social doctrine than addressing the economic challenges facing working people. i looked at them and i say to myself, their positions are clearly too extreme. whether it is buck in colorado wanting to privatize medical care for veterans. or sharon angle who does not believe its her job to an

appropriate people for the people of nevada. oran johnson of in wisconsin wanting to open drilling in lake michigan. i don't think those constituents stair their views. there's a reason republicans ran against them and rand paul and sharon angle and christine o'donnell, because they knew their positions do not sell well in the general election contest. another word about the primaries, republicans in connecticut and washington state and nevada and alaska and delaware have not united behind their nominees. i believe that demonstrates how extreme these candidates' views are. in close elections, that is a big problem for them. finally, i will simply say this is a cycle of unpredictability. who two years ago or even shorter would have predicted that the hand-picked candidate

in kentucky would lose? or 33 days from the general letson, who would have said 33 days going back that christine o'donnell would have been the republican nominee in delaware? think anyone thought about paying attention to the race in alaska. these are uncertain times. i think the story line that gets locked in there is the story line that will fall flat on november 2. so i believe these races are very fluid. i believe that there is an enormous economic case for us to make. as our candidates and incumbents get out there and drive this message, as we see the gap closing on the intensity side, as we see the middle class believing that we are better off with democrats than republicans to realize their hopes and dreams and aspirations, because elections are about the future, i believe we will do very well. one prediction i will make is

that on november 2, democrats will be in the majority in the united states senate. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, senator. , thesewers at thome are the cookies they are referring to, texas longhorns and sailboats. getting to the questions, senators, if you will join me up here and we will try to get as many questions as we can. let's start with the tough questions. what do you think of efforts to change the 14th amendment and no longer give automatic citizenship to anyone born in the u.s. a specially children of undocumented immigrants? >> i think it should be a moot point, if we would do what the federal government has the responsibility to do, which is to secure the borders and

enforce laws. i think the most urgent thing we need to do in terms of national security and to restore order out of chaos in our broken immigration system is to secure the borders. there would be no need to amend the constitution if we did that. >> well, i did what several of my republican colleagues have suggested, that changing the constitution makes a lot of sense, i don't believe that. i remember what the 14th amendment was created. it was created because black people in this country were not treated as a full citizen in this country. it was determined that birthright was going to give citizenship in this country. i agree with john that what we need is to change our system of immigration, which is why i introduced a bill yesterday that is comprehensive in nature that deals with our security at the borders, that deals with our

national security interests, and it deals with our economic interests, but that realizes we need to do something with those in the united states as undocumented. it is important to bring people out of the darkness and into the light. i want to know who is here to pursue the american dream and not those here to do it harm. we need to move in this direction. >> how can the polls be counted on? >> they are a snapshot in time. that snapshot in time, they have certain merits. if they are appropriately weighted, then they can be of value. at the end of today, the most important polls are the ones taken on election day. how those results come through.

that will determine these elections, not the polls. i appreciate all of the work of those polls. we obviously use them in well -- as well for internal purposes. at the end of the day, they are a snapshot of the moment. having seen the solidity of this race, a lot of those polls were wrong in the primary contests that we saw. this saw this summer. >> polls should be judged on their own individual merits. a poll that server is registered voters does not tell you who is likely to actually vote. those trying to predict who likely voters are have their own models. i like to look at the averages. i mentioned real clear politic'' average, which serves a useful purpose in looking at that.

i think the turnout is an area where i think there has been a lot of volatility. i spoke about the turnout earlier. as much as bob and our democratic friends have and joy to the turbulence of the republican primaries that just ended on september 14, what they have underestimated is what is coming at them on november 2. many of the polls may have underestimated the intensity and the turnout that i think we are going to see which will favor republicans on november 2. >> senator menendez, it seems many democrats are running away from the president and their campaign ads. how will you be able to get anything done with these types of divisions in your own ranks even if you maintain control in the house? >> i don't think they are running away from the president. john was talking about all the

places the president is going to campaign for them. if the best thing we can have a president to do is what he's been doing, working to turn the country's economy around, to get people back to work, to grow the economy. that is the most important thing he can do and that's what he's been doing with democrats. in the face of enormous obstructions of republicans who have come to a political equations. their political equation for successful is to have this president to fail and have the majority in the congress to fail. if they fail, we will open in the seats. it is a terrible equation because it means our country will fail at the end of the day. i think the success we have had a legislatively and otherwise is because we all worked together with the president and he's making changes he promised people begin to happen even in the midst of enormous challenges. >> during the time leading up to scott brown oppose election, democrats had 60 votes in the

senate and a majority in the house and they could do anything they wanted fans did not on a purely partisan basis without securing republican votes or even trying to meet us in the middle. to me, the most telling example of what was a blow back that candidates are seeing from their participation and involvement in this failed agenda is indiana. brad ellsworth, his first ad, he was touting his formerly held posts as sheriff, making no mention of the fact he was a member of congress and voted for a lot of the bills like the stimulus and the health-care bill that were unpopular in indiana. that says it all. >> senator cornyn, would you personally support giving --

credit for his past committee slots if he's elected? >> i had not given that it thought. you are correct, that is for the conference to decide and not me. [laughter] >> to the bush tax cuts for wealthier americans be extended? which programs would you cut to pay for them, if so? [laughter] >> i am not for raising taxes on anybody during a fragile economic recovery. a number of senate democrats share that view. we would have had a vote on this, i think, but for the fact of the democratic caucus is so divided. i think it is outrageous that we left town or we are leaving town -- we have adjourned without addressing this looming tax increase that will be the single largest tax increase in american history. playing class warfare, i think, is a very dangerous approach. it does not take into account a lot of small businesses and people who reports their

business income on an individual tax return. so, i think playing class warfare and trying to -- and leaving employers and job creators in the kind of uncertainty that we see with this looming tax increase is bad for jobs and it is bad for the country. >> well, i think that we would have had some progress on tax cuts because we support clearly making the middle-class tax cut permanent, which republicans did not do when they had the tax cuts. they let that expired. we want to see them be permanent. the problem is when the republican leader in the senate gets up and says i will not let anything go forward unless we can make them all permanent. that is $4 trillion. claimt know how you can the mantle of fiscal responsibility and then come forth with a $4 trillion tax cut

that is not paid for. that is not fiscally responsible. there is that with the juggernaut between the two different views that is simply not possible to have moved forward when the only way they would have allowed us to move forward is to make those tax cuts prominent and blow not only beyond where we already are with the debt and deficits, but to blow it in the out years for future generations, totally irresponsible. >> do you think this senate spent 18 months too long on the health-care bill and should not the senate have been focused on jobs? >> the senate was focused on jobs when it came in. people forget we're restarted from. i will never forget the meeting where members of the banking committee and some members of the leadership had with chairman bernanke of the federal reserve

in november 2008 if where he basically outlined that there were things under the previous administration with henry paulson and said we will have a big financial institutions that will collapse. if so, they will create for a systemic risk to the entire economy and everybody will suffer as a result. i said, you have to have enough tools, mr. chairman, to take care of this. he responded that if you and your colleagues don't respond in the next two or three weeks, we will have a global economic meltdown. if that was two months before president obama's soak office. when he took office not only did we avoid having the whole system collapse, but we also moved towards trying to create an that was flat lines and had - ddp growth of 6.5% and how lost millions of jobs in the

previous administration before the president could do one thing, three-quarters of a million jobs in january, three- quarters of a million jobs in france brianne three-quarters of a million in march before you could get anything passed. 2 million jobs as a result of policies in the past. he went to work to try to turn that around so we would have positive gdp growth. we are nearly 3 million jobs increased. is that good enough for individuals allen there looking for a job in our country that want to have the dignity that a job brings? no, there's a lot more to do. but are we moving in the right direction from what we inherited? absolutely. >> it would not have been necessary to spend 18 months on health care if we had a genuine bipartisan outreach by the white house. instead we saw with 60 votes they thought they could pass their own bill without negotiating, without compromise.

what we got in the process is not a health-care bill which actually decrease the cost curve, but makes it worse and creates new financial burdens for employers. one reason why they are not certain about hiring people and expanding their business. it took a half trillion dollars out of medicare, which is fiscally unsustainable. one that raises premiums on people with insurance. you saw that most recently, the report from mcdonald's, where the policies that they currently have do not meet the new government mandates and are going to cost a lot more. unfortunately, the goal of health care reform was not accomplished in my view because it did nothing to deal with affordability and accessibility. instead it turned it over to washington rather than to you or me as individual consumers to control our health care decisions.

coupal pimm >> if independent candidate for senate charlie crist is elected, who wil he caucus with? democrats or republicans? >> kendrick meek is our candidate for the united states senate in florida. as this race and the next 30 days, i think will give him an opportunity to rise significantly in the polls. gov. crist is not doing that well in the polls. i think people are looking for real choice, they will turn to kendrick meek. i don't expect gov. crist to be with us. kendrick meek will come with us and caucus with the democrats. xstrata crist will not be sworn in as the new united states senator in january, i agree. mark rubio is pulling away in that race. the key was the democratic

primary that kendrick meek was nominated and democrats will come home. republicans and independents will move toward march rubio and leave governor charlie crist without much support. this is one of those races for that is getting better for republicans as each day goes by. i expect mark rubio to be the next u.s. senator from florida. >> is america declining as a world leader? if so, what should we do about it? >> i look at the election and the future with hope. i look at it with the admiration of a country that in its most difficult challenging times -- i never forget this country went through two world wars to beat fascism and nazism, this country puts a man on the moon,

this country eliminated decisions that were thought to be impossible to race and it has always met the challenges. right now the challenges that we have are largely driven by economics. there are economics of eight years of failed bush policies. the very policies that if you listen across the entire landscape of republican candidates, they largely embraced those and say they want to go back to. the last time i looked, if you want to go forward, you put your car in d 4 democrats and drive. if you want to go backwards, you put it in r for reverse. we have more allies and less enemies in the world. that is not an indication of a nation in the dark. >> one area where president

obama has embraced the bush policies and that regards. combating, regards where he is receiving bipartisan support for the efforts to eliminate safe haven in afghanistan for al qaeda. we have supported him there and will continue to support him because we think it is important for america to remain strong and to protect our people against attacks from terrorist organizations. but i think, economically, bob is right that the biggest concern on the minds of american people is getting back to work. unfortunately, the administration seems to not recognize the important role of the private-sector, of the free enterprise system of small businesses, the entrepreneurs and people who invest the capital in order to allow employers to hire and to allow our economy to grow. that is a way america will get

back to work. i worry that rather than address the tax policies, for example, that makes america and the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, tried to find ways to make american business is in our economy more competitive that our friends across the aisle want to punish them further and create a climate of uncertainty which has caused them to sit on their cash and not investing and get america back to work. i am very optimistic because i believe in the power of the midcourse correction. i think that is what we will get to november 2. >> what additional steps should be taken to improve the housing market and protect homeowners? >> let me just say one of the things that we are doing that goes to the small businesses and certainly all of those who are in the home buying market is the

bill that we passed with enormous republican resistance to give tax cuts, to give greater access to capital, to infuse greater opportunities for loans for small and midsize businesses. or the legislation we did before on the hire act to make sure we gave small businesses the ability to buy critical pieces of equipment and be able to deduct it fully within one tax year. to give tax credits to someone with a need to hire someone and will be able to forgo the payroll tax and at the same time get a thousand dollar tax credit if they keep that person employed 12 years. we are trying to help small and midsize businesses even in the face of the obstruction i spoke about. for homeowners, the first-time home buyer tax credit was incredibly important, something that we passed that helped stimulate the housing market.

looking at incentives that bring people into the market, we might yet edge wondering whether or not to get in, that would be desired. >> the difference of approaches with our friends on the democratic side believe in command and control lot of washington. they believe they can command the economy to come back to life by passing a new policy or spending more money. the fact is people are losing their houses because they have lost their jobs. the reason why it is so important to encourage private investment and to make it easier, not harder on the job creators is so people can get back to work and pay their mortgages so they will not lose their house. that is the single most important thing we could do. >> the and spending money in competitive states like ohio and florida, but president obama and vice president biden are campaigning there.

do the high-level appearance is substituted for cash? >> there is no substitute. >> i don't telegraph where i spend my money and let john know in advance as he does not let me know in advance, so i will not answer where or how we make determinations about our spending. i will say that the president's appearance in places is an enormous boost to candidates. and we welcome it. as it relates to where i'm going to spend my money in the next 30 days, you'll have to watch as we do it. >> i think the president's engagement in the elections, midterm elections when he's not on the ballot in such an aggressive way just reminds people that this really is a referendum on his policies and on what washington has been doing the last two years. i think it will energize independents and republicans to turn out to vote. i don't think it will help the

candidates literally having to separate themselves from some of the failed policies that people disapprove of like the health care bill, the stimulus, among others. i will agree with bob that we are not going to tell each other or tell you how we are going to be moving the pieces on the chessboard, but i will say that we will be looking for opportunities to move money out of states where our lead is substantial and to move into other places where we believe we can be competitive. we have seen a big expansion of the playing field, west virginia has been one of the most recent. on the west coast, washington and california. it is going to be an interesting 30 days. >> it has been reported that republican senate candidates have four times more facebook fans than democrats.

what do you make of that? how important is it to have facebook fans or twitter followers? >> i personally enjoy writing on facebook every day. ifope you will follow mae you are not already. please follow me on facebook and twitter, that's to the listening audience. we have learned the importance of communicating and listening in any way we can, perhaps without the filter that we sometimes get with the mainstream media, no incidents 0 cents intended. sometimes you don't like what you hear and sometimes it's not complementary. but if we are off to keep our finger on the pulse of america, these are some ways that are very useful. >> i have never done an account of how many friends everybody has, but i will say that i think every mode of information and

communication is incredibly important. candidates as well as incumbents have increased the spectrum of the new media that they participatein. -- in. we have had $34 million because of the supreme court decision, of unknowns, undisclosed, i call them in the shadows, $34 million on behalf of republicans of independent expenditures. that is an incredible amount. we are still 30 days out from the election. every means of communication, when you are getting faced with an onslaught of $34 million in undisclosed expenditures is very important, especially when you wonder who is giving up those moneys and you look at where republicans have been on their positions, i assume that when you have big banks and oil and insurance companies, but there's

a reason why so much independent spending is taking place on the republican side. >> last week the house gop rolled out their pledge to america. with jobs at the top issue on many voters' minds, what would a democratic job agenda look like in 2011 if they retain control of the senate? >> i think it will be a series of initiatives. and one is there is important tax policy. importance of tax policy to do, making sure we strike the right balance on capital gains and dividends. if it is important to deal with the inheritance tax as well so that people have a sense of how to plan their states. all those things bring money into the economy. it is important to look at tax policies and making sure middle- class families get a permanent tax break, because that will give them money to spend in the economy. all those things are important. as we look beyond those immediate issues, it is how do

we continue to do what we have been doing as democrats. everybody talks about the stimulus package. 45% of the entire stimulus package was tax cuts. tax cuts for the private sector , net operating loss, carry provisions, bonus depreciations, to get the private sector to be engaged in the economy. what was the higher at about? it was to get a private small businesses to be able to grow. what was the recent bill we passed on small business? to create greater capital and access to small businesses. because they will grow the jobs. we have done this in the midst of constant opposition. the amazing thing is even when republicans speak of small businesses, when it comes time to vote for them, they voted against them. that is part of their strategy, a failure at any cost, even if it means the nation's sales. that's a good reason why this

election will be so critical to the electorate to figure out why i need to go and vote. >> that demonstrates the difference between the approach of the democrats and republicans. the democrats think to put america back to work, they need to pass another government program, frequently spending money we don't have. if we have to borrow and burden the next generation. i think what a lot of small businesses, job creation the economy wants, they want predictability. they want the regulatory environment to be stable. they want the tax policy of the country to be -- not to be onerous. i think what we need is

it was along with a $13 trillion national debt burden that creates a desire to set aside line and wait to see what shakes out. >> we are almost out of time. we have a couple of important issues to take care of. remind members and guests of future speakers for it on october 6, we have the commissioner for the fda. october 8, bryant moynihan, president and ceo of bank of america october 12, general norton schwartz. second, i would like to present our guests with the traditional mug. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. [applause] >> for the last question, i would like each of you to predict one surprise on election

day in the senate. [laughter] >> i think john racey will be the next united states senator from west virginia. >> i simply think that democrats will have a lot more votes in the united states senate than people think. we will surprise people on november 2. >> thank you senator spread i want to tackle all of you for coming today. i want to thank the national press club staff. in today's event. for more information on joining the press club and how to acquire a copy of today's program, go to our website. thank you, we are adjourned. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> this weekend on c-span 3, american history tv. discovering why the presidential

elections of 1824 and 1828 or not only important but also two of the most scandalous. after 90 years, why the 19th amendment still has an impact on race and gender relations in america. 48 hours of people and events telling the american story, all weekend, every weekend, american history tv, on c-span 3. >> mr. cameron, you were an optimist once, but now all you are is a miserable, pessimistic view of what britain can achieve and to hide behind the deficit and we won't let you get away with that. [applause] >> the elected labor party member sunday night at 9. on c-span. >> we are going live to the east room of the white house. president obama will make a personnel announcement, something that has been widely talked about in washington. rahm emanuel will no longer be

white house chief of staff. he is leaving to run for mayor of chicago and pete rauss will take that job, at least temporarily. live coverage on cspan as we wait for the president.

[no audio]

[no audio] >> cabinet secretaries and white house staffers are waiting along with us from president obama to make that personnel announcement about white house chief of staff rahm emanuel who is planning to leave the job to run for mayor of chicago. the man currently full retreat -- replacing him, pete rose, has a long history of working with members of congress. -- pete rauss.

the question is whether he will be tasked with managing his challenge for a few months or permanently. white house officials are divided on whether obama will want to hand over the second half of his term to an insider or turn to someone new after the elections. the experience that pete rauss had in washington is he was chief of staff for dick durbin and served in the same position for senator tom daschle and then senator barack obama. we're waiting at the white house. the press secretary robert gibbs is there. [no audio]

[no audio]

[no audio] [general chatter] [general chatter]

[general chatter] >> ladies and gentleman, please silence all sell funds and pda's, program will begin in two minutes. [no audio]

>> president obama is expected momentarily from the east room of the white house making that personal announcement. there is a reaction in political about pete rauss. is the president not prepared to confront his team's challenges? some members of congress such as house majority whip jim cliburn said that either obama or should look outside of politics to the roles of business for rahm emanuel as permanent replacement. obama has to many aides and advisers who have never worked in the real world, according to jim clyburn. [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio] [general chatter] [general chatter]

[general chatter] [no audio] [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio] [general chatter] [shh]

[no audio] >> watching the door in the east room of the white house, waiting for president obama to announce that rahm emanuel will no longer be quite as chief of staff. he is leaving to run for mayor of chicago. the associated press writes that he leaves behind more than a staff job, it is the most influential staff job in the white house except for the president. the person who calls it is shaping the president's thinking and cornetist time and keep the white house focused on its goals. [no audio]

[no audio] [general chatter] [general quiet chatter] general soft chatter]

[general soft chatter] [general low chatter]

[random low chatter] [slightly louder chatter] [sound of cameras clicking]

>> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. [applause] >> thank you, thank you, everybody. thank you. everybody take a seat. [applause] this is not for me.

good morning, everybody. good morning, everybody and welcome to the least suspenseful announcement of all time. [laughter] as almost all of you have reported, my chief of staff, rahm emanuel, has informed me that he will be leaving his post today to explore other opportunities. [laughter] this is a bittersweet day here at the white house. on the one hand, we were all very excited for rahm as he takes on a new challenge for which he is extraordinarily well qualified. we are also losing in -- and incomparable leader of our staff and one who we will miss very much. when i first started assembling this administration, i knew we were about to face the most difficult years this country has

seen in generations. the challenges were big and the margin for error was small. two wars, an economy on the brink of collapse, tough choices about issues we had put off for decades, choices about health care and energy and education, how to rebuild a middle-class that had been struggling for far too long. i knew that i needed somebody at my side who i could count on day and night to help get the job done. in my mind, there was no candidate for the job of chief of staff who would meet the bill as well as rahm emanuel. that is why i told him that he had no choice in the matter. he was not allowed to say no. broughtnot just rahm's an array of experience in congress and the white house and politics and business, it was

also the fact that he brings an unmatched level of energy and enthusiasm and commitment to every single thing that he does. this was a great sacrifice for him and his family to move out here. rahm gave up one of the most powerful positions on capitol hill to do this. in the last 20 months, he has come -- he has succeeded all of my expectations. we could not have accomplished what we have accomplished without his leadership. from preventing a second recession to passing historic health care and financial reform legislation to restoring america's leadership in the world. for nearly two years, i have begun my work day haverahm. i have ended my work day with rahm. much to a nepos chagrin, i have intruded on his life at almost

any hour of the day, any day of the week with just enormous challenges. his advice has always been candid. his opinions have always been in cycle. his commitment to his job has always been heartfelt. he has a passionate desire to move this country forward and lift up the lives of the middle class, people who are struggling to get there. he has been a great friend of mine and will continue to be a great friend of mine. he has been a selfless public servant. he has been an outstanding chief of staff. i will miss him dearly as will members of my staff and cabinet with whom he has worked so closely and so well. now, i don't think anybody would disagree that rahm is one-of-a- kind. i am very fortunate to be able to and the baton to my wise, skillful, and longtime

counselor, pete rauss. pete has more than 30 years of experience in public service will serve as interim chief of staff as we enter the next phase of our administration. many of you remember pete as the top aide to then senator -- senate majority leader tom daschle. he is professionally known as the 101st senator. from the moment i became a u.s. senator, he has been one of my closest and essential advisers. he was my chief of staff in the senate and helped orchestrate and advise my presidential campaign. he has served as one of my senior advisers here at the white house. in that role, he has taken on a series of legislative and management changes with clarity and common purpose. there's a saying around the fixte house," let's let pete it." [laughter] he does.

he is known as a skillful problem solver and the good news is that we have plenty of problems to solve. [laughter] i am extraordinarily grateful to him that he has agreed to service our interim chief of staff and i look forward very much to working with them in this new role. obviously, these two gentlemen have slightly different styles. [laughter] i mentioned for example -- this is a couple of years ago -- i pointed out that when rahm was a kid lost part of his figure in an accident. it was his middle finger so it rendered him mute for a while. [laughter] pete has never seen a microphone or a television camera that he likes. [laughter]

and yet, there is something in common. as president of the united states, you get both the credit and the blame for what happens around here. the blame is usually desert -- deserved or i happily accepted because it comes with the territory. the credit really goes to the men and women who work in this building. it goes to people like rahm and pete and the hundreds of others here today who sometimes gets attention and sometimes don't. these are folks who get up incredibly lucrative opportunities, sacrifice enormously, and their families sacrifice enormously. they come here every day to do the best possible job on behalf

of the american people and often times they don't get the thanks they deserve. as your president and as a fellow american, i want to take this moment to say to all the staff, all the cabinet members, how proud i am of you and how grateful i am to you. and how particularly proud and grateful i am to my outgoing chief of staff rahm emanuel. [applause] [applause] >> thank you.

slightly different reception that i got my bar mitzvah at what i appreciated. [laughter] thank you, mr. president for your generous words but more importantly, thank you for your warm friendship, your confidence, and the opportunity to serve you and our country in such consequential times. needless to say, this is a bittersweet day for me, too. on the one hand, i am excited to be heading home to chicago which as you know very well is the greatest city in the greatest country in the world. i am energized by the prospect of new challenges and eager to see what i can do to make our home town even greater. these are unprecedented and great times in chicago,.,. the chicago bears are 3-0. [laughter] i am also said to leave the vice president and my terrific

colleagues at the white house and the cabinet and both sides of presidential cabinet colleagues. it has been a profound privilege to work for and with you, mr. president. i watched you confront some of the toughest challenges of our time and you have done with unfailing grace, intelligence, and courage. you have a tough -- you have the guts to make the tough calls to stop the freefall and save our country from a second great depression. you have taken on some of the most powerful interests in this town and stood up for the american people. you have been willing to challenge the worn out ideas and the still thinking that often stands in the way of progress. mr. president, i thought i was tough. as someone who saw firsthand how close are nation came to the brink and what you had to do to put america back on track, i want to thank you for being the

toughest leader and the country could ask for in the toughest times any president has ever faced. [applause] [applause] even on the hardest days, you never lost focus on why we are here, not just to score political points but to solve problems, not just to win the next election, but to make a difference to the next generation. i have served you, mr. president, as a member of your staff, but i also observed you as a friend. i have seen what you are privileged to see. the father whose heart breaks when he writes a letter to parents whose son or daughter has been lost on the field of honor, the man of quiet,

committed faith who always appeals to the better angels of our nature. and the proud product of the american dream who sees in the reams of economic statistics the child who struggles to and a single parent with limited income but unlimited potential. you have lived that american dream, mr. president, as have all right. my father and my grandfather came to this upper tube -- country for opportunity. they came here for a better life for their children. my mother marched with martin luther king because she believed that none of us is truly free until all of us are. both my parents raised me to give something back to the country and the community that

has given us so much. i want to thank you for the opportunity to repay in a small portion the blessings this country has given my family. i give you my word that even as i leave the white house, i will never leave that spirit of service behind. [applause] because my temper runs a bit different than yours, mr. president [laughter] i want to thank my colleagues for your patience the last two years that you have shown very i am sure that you have learned some words you never heard before [laughter] and an assortment of combinations of words. [laughter]

what we learn together was what a group of tireless, talented committed people can achieve together. as difficult as it is to leave, i do so with the great comfort of knowing that pete rauss will be there to lead the operation forward. from the moment i arrived, to the moment he arrived, peace has been a good friend with great judgment. he commands the respect of everyone in this building and brings decades of experience to this assignment. finally, i want to thank my wife amy and there are three remarkable children without whose love and support none of this would of been possible. i hope to end this soon so they can get back to school today and finish their exams. [laughter] mr. president, thank you and thank you all, i look forward to seeing you in chicago. [applause]

[applause] [applause] [no audio] [general chatter]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [general chatter] [generla chatter] [general chatter]

[general conversation] [general conversation]

[general conversation] >> the official announcement of white house chief of staff rahm emanuel leaving and pete rauss replacing him, the grass is the anti-rahm. pete rauss looms small where as rahm emanuel flew in the large print mr. emanuel's pension for four-letter words is legendary. one friend of mr rauss says he has never heard him swear. the 64-year-old place in inferential role.

-- influential role. pete rauss received a graduate degree from harvard and the london school of economics. he was chief of staff for then congressman dick durbin and served in that same position for senator tom daschle and then senator barack obama. he was also a co-chair in the obama transition team. tonight our campaign 2010 coverage continues. we will begin at 8:00 p.m. with candidates for california governor. maggot whitman and jerry brown square off. at 9:00 eastern, we'll show you a debate for the arizona senate between incumbent john mccain and his challenger. democratic congressman paul hodes and his challenger talk about issues important to new hampshire. finally, we will have the

colorado governor debate between the devon -- denver mayor and the american constitution party candidate. next week, the supreme court begins its new term and you can learn more about the nation's highest court with our latest book," of the supreme court." there are reporters who cover the court and attorneys who argue the cases they're revealing unique insights about the court, available in hardcover wherever you buy books and also as an ebook. this weekend and through december, listen to landmark supreme court cases on cspan radio. >> the record indicates that at no time during the interrogation and prior to his confession was he advised of his rights to remain silent or his right to counsel or of his right to consult with counsel. >> miranda vs. arizona, this saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on

cspan radio. in washington d.c. 90.1 and online. >> hello, how are you? >> california republican candidate for governor mag whitman held a press conference yesterday about allegations launched against me that she knowingly employed at a non- documented worker for nine years. she denies the allegations and held this press conference. am going to take as many quesons as you have. >> this is a political smear on my family and diverts attention from issues that matter to

california voters. our state is in a fiscal crisis. v.f. 2.3 million people without a job. -- we have 2.3 million people without a job. we are talking about things that are not on points. as i said, when the key was our housekeeper from 2000 until 2009. she was a great employee. when she confessed she had falsified her record, we were surprised and shoed.

she had broken the law. she wrote a statement, criticizing my actions. i would ask the chief law enforcement officer what he thinks i should have done instead. ignore what i was told and breaks the law? i would be interested in what jerry brown would have done, and i think he should be ashamed of what his allies have done. athis is a smear attack, and he should be ashamed.

coffee i felt bad for nicky. i am truly sorry she has been put inhis position. this is why we need a system to help employers and a temporary guest programs so that people like niki can work in this country we believe. i am confident the voters of california will take this episode for what it is -- politics at its worst. they will reject it, and we can look forward to building california together. i look forward to taking your questions. >> i want to know wt you have to say about what they are doing in regards to making her work extra hours and not

reimbursing the money, and especially you kind of say you have to find somebody to replace her. what do you have to say? >> it is completely untrue. niki came to work for us 15 hours a week. after a bit of time, she said, i would like to take when they off to deal with my youngest child. -- to take wednesday off to be with my youngest child. sometimes she worked 10 hours. sometimes she worked eight. we said, get the job done, and then you can go home. with regards to mileage, she never asked us for mileage. she ran a few of errands, but she never asked for mileage, and

on her maternity leave, she said, i am pregnant with my serve child, and i have a friend who would like to work in my place, and if that is all right with you, that would be great for me, and when i am ready to come back, my friend will go back to her job, and i will come back to work for you. i said, that sounds great. >> [inaudible] the information they believe it is providing to you puree get >> absolutely not true. neither my husband nor i received a letter, and if there is a letter, i did not know how they got it.

it is not in our house. we never saw the letter, and as i understand, normally if that was to happen, they would have sent a letter refers to the employees and then to the employer, and i think there is a question of whether employers with less than 10 employees got a letter, so we have never seen such a letter. you will go ne. >> when s confessed she was undocumented, why didn't you turn her into law enforcement? >> i was very fond of her and did not want to make an example of her. it is not an obligation of the employer to turn in illegal employees. said, i am not going to make an example of her. i encouraged her to do the right thing. what is the right thing to do? figure out how to come here

legally, but i did not think it was the right thing to turn her aunt. >> you said it was difficult to let her go. if you are trying to be the chief executive of the state of california, as difficult as it would have been, shouldn't you have not informed law enforcement that you knew of a crime being committed? i understood it would be difficult. isn't somebody who is supposed to lead a state supposed to make those difficult decisions? >> the law did not require employers to turn individuals in. i thought i did what was the right thing to do. everyone makes a decision. i felt like it was the right

thing to do to terminate niki. it broke our hearts. we had to let her go. she came to our house to tell us, and she never came back to our house to work >> [inaudible] >> i think every employer needs to make a decision. you are not legally allowed to hire undocumented workers. as soon as i found out, we made the decision to comply with the law. >> one more question. >> you are not supposed to get three. >> she is going to produce a letter that may have your name on it.

are you suggesting she may have intercepted a letter? >> it is very possible. weever saw the letter. if she had gotten a letter alerting her to the problem and saying we are going to alert t employer, she may have been on full lookout for that letter. it pains me to say that. the niki i knew was not the one i saw of fat press conference. reading from that prepared statement, those were not her words. it would pay me to believe that is what she has done, but i have no other explanation. >> each of them including the woman -- [inaudible]

>> we have one housekeeper who is documented to work there. we have a landscaping service, a company that provides landscaping, and we ask them to make sure all the workers are documented, and we have a pool service that comes to clean the pool, and that is a service as well. >> [inaudible] >> i do not remember. we play by the rules. we were very explicit with the agency's we used to find niki and other household help we have hired over the year. we need someone who is 100% documented to be here. we are going to withhold taxes, which we did with her and every other employee we have.

we have been very specific. you are next. we have plenty of time. >> she said she could not travel to mexico. did you ever asked her directly whether she was illegal worker? >> no, we ask the agency, and we got a copy of her driver's license. we got a copy of the form. we looked at the documentation, so when we hired her, i think she was legal because i had that documentation in front of me.

>> there is no signature from an employer? >> i do not know if there is a requirement to sign those documents. i do not know whether we sign it or not. we got a package from the agency when she was hired that had the document. you are next. >> you could call and get a copy of it because you are directly involved. did you contact them to see if they ever did send you a letter? >> i have not. >> would you made the region would you make that public if they sent it to you? -- would you make that public if they send it to you? >> how did her employment work?

was shyour employee? >> she was. we gave her a check every friday and left it on the counter for her. >> [inaudible] >> we did not. after she told us what happened, i called her back to say there was not anything we could do, and we had to terminate her employment. i have not talked to her since. >> she says there was a phone call. >> when she left our house, we talk to our lawyer, and he said there is nothing that could be done. i said that on saturday. i think there is nothing that can be done. i think we have to let you go.

>> you said its -- you knew it was going to cause trouble? >> not true. false allegation. >> were they in cahoots with jerry brown? >> this is what californians and americans hate about politics. here we a in a classic case of smear politics. this is how career politicians operate. i heard this morning they knew exactly what was going on there

is clear evidence. >> they came to you with the problem, but there was no recourse. there is no pathway to citizenship. would you change your opinion in that regard? >> i have said it is important to have temporary guest worker program so people can be on a temporary basis and you can actually work here, but until we prove we can get our arms around this illegal immigration problem, which is a serious problem, then i think we have to focus on getting the problem solved. we have to secure the borders. i voluntarily let niki go, but

many employers need to make sure we do. we need to eliminate sanctuary cities. i think my first solution is a temporary guest worker program. once we prove we can stop the flow of illegal immigration into this country, we can have another discussion, but i do not think people are willing to have that discussion. >> can you verify -- did this change your views? >> before i started, i had begun the verify system and talk to people about the accuracy of the system, and they admitted it was not as accurate as it should be. i did not want to make an example of nicky.

she was a part of our family for many years, and i knew if i talked about that, i would have to bring her to the floor. i think the tragedy is the niki is being manipulated. i think she did not understand what she had got herself into a. this is the sort of thing gloria does in every election. i feel badly for nicky? -- i feel badly for nicky. >> [inaudible] >> we knew about this. we knew what was going on. people have said, did you know about this? if i was worried about this and running for governor, you will recall a first announced on february 9, 2009. this did not happen until june,

so if i was going to let nike go for political expediency, i probably would have announced before i ran for governor. the truth is, we have no idea. i like the man in candidate thing. >> you wanted to hire a nanny, and as she's bonded with the family -- this is almost a decade now. there were instances she would not go back to mexico to visit family because she and could not go back, and you needed plausible deniability. you did not ask the question because you did not want to know. the scenario is your husband suspected that, which is why you claim you made the comment that you knew it was going to be a problem.

you said you did not seek it out. >> that is so untrue. that is absolutely false. we g her documentation. we never talked about her going to mexico. we talked about her children. of we talked about her husband's job. we talk about lots of different things, but your insinuation that i turned a blind eye on this is absolutely false. it is not true. >> can you tell us the employment agency. >> it is town and country resources. who has not had a chance? >> do you own the key money, and if so, will you pay her? >> we do not over money. she worked 15 hours a week. never as far as i know, did she

work more than that. if she worked 10 hours a week, we did not pay her $23 times 10 hours. we paid her 15 hours for every week she worked. often for vacations, we paid her even though she only work a couple days that we because we were out of town. >> she says you do homer -- you do or her money. >> that is simply not true. >> if she was such a close member of the family, why didn't you help her get legal? why did you help her get an attorney. >> when i talk to my lawyer, she said there is nothing you can do here. there is no legal stance for her, and it is probably not going to be helpful, so i decided, you have to make a

decision about what you have to do. you have to go home. i did not feel it was the right thing to go out and work with an immigration lawyer. >> i heard about consulting the lawyer. >> i sent her, i think we are going to have to let you go. i have to talk to m lawyer, but i am probably going to have to let you go, then i called her back and said, we have to let you go. >> why did you wait unt then to make the smear campaign? why not when you knew this would come in the final bit of the election. we the electors want to believe not in somebody that would

withhold information but somebody that would go out in the open. >> i did everything comporting with the law. en she came to me, we'll let her go. if i was going to talk about this on the campaign trail, it would have put niki of there an example. i think the consequences may be severe. i do not know who is paying a gloria. i did not know what was niki's decision. did someone say, we know you are here illegally, and we are going to expose you unless you do this? i was not going to make an example of niki, so that is why i did not. >> [inaudible] >> i think it has nothing to do with my character

what i did was absolutely the right thing to do. it is what all employers should do in california. it is illegal to hire illegal immigrants, and if you find out that you have hired someone who turnedut to be here illegally, your obligation is to let them go. that is what i did. i think it speaks volumes about my character that once i understood, i made a tough call, but it was the right call. >> the use of for her being deported? >> i am going to lea that to the immigration authorities. i support a guest worker program. but as one reason i am running for governor. i want the state to get back on track. we have spent a long time talking about this issue, and there are 2.3 million californians without a j.

there is an illegal immigration problem. r k through 12 education is th bottom of the barrel, and this is a distraction on what i think californians really care about. immigration is a federal issue, but i think there is lots we can do, so i would like to get a guest worker program. >> had you feel about it? >> i feel badly about it. she has three children. her youngest son is six or seven years old. i feel terrible about it, but the law is the law. ice is going to have to decide what is the right thing to do here. >> i h a telephone conversation with you when you said there was nothing you could do. she claims you said, i do not know you and y do not know may. >> absolutely false.

she knows it is not true, and it is not. >> one of the key issues to this letter, this puts youn a tough position. clear things up about the question. would you take a polygraph test? >> aolutely. we were stunned when nikki told us she was illegal. this woman had worked for me for nine years. we have seen the documentation. we went through an agency. that is what agencies are going to do. the woman comported with the requirements of the agency, so i

was stunned. we looked at each other and said, while. who knew? -- and said, wow. food new? >> would you take a polygraph test? >> absolutely, because we were stunned. has anyone not had a chance? >> what kind of example would this make? what is the message coupled with the fact that you chose not to make an example out of her? some might look down on the fact. >> i think the example i am setting is i work as hard as i could. my husband and i did everything we could to hire someone who was documented to work here. we were misled. many employers are misled, which is why we need a system

mentioned earlier. . >> we have three things that we are working with -- two driver's licenses, we had a social

security card, and we had an i- 9. clearly, we did everything we could. for example, had the agency been able to punch a button, matched her name and social security number, maybe it would have come up. but the system does not work that well. it is not universally used. as i have said, i think it is an important thing that we have to get into place. the anchor of this data base is social security. >> thehave to enforce it. >> if we agree that illegal immigration is a countrproblem,n

we have to enforce the law and allocate the resources. there is no point if you do not allocate the resources. >> one of the great thing sicily in force are a lot. you have to feel safe in your home and place of business. you are next. be>> we have done spanish langue

media it is translated into spanish. i have been into laino communities. i have worked hard to win the vote. i think we are nervous about it. they are wary. they took latino americans for granted. i do not. i want every boat. they are worried about that. another employee union is funding jerry brown's campaign. if you want someone to go to sacramento who is independent, who is not beholden to special interests, and i in your governor. jerry brown is tied to this that

you never be able to make change. i will go to sacramento. i will not show anyone anything. it does not surprise me. i think we will see more funneling into this campaign $300 million ha been pour in politics by the union. this is not a surprise. >> they say strong things about you. i think they are very smart. if they see it for whait is. it is a smear campaign for . i've got lots of feedback from my supporters. every single one of them says it is totally predictable. we know what is going on.

we see it is fitting manipulated and used. i think could backfire. it held me with the latino community. >> did o collar a friend? shoes around here for ne years. you m

>> she had misled us for nine years. it breaks my heart to say that, but it is the truth. my view was, you have to solve this issue. you probably have to go home and apply any more organized way to be here in the united states. it does not make a right to forge a social security number, to fill out a form where you swear under the penalty of perjury that you are legal to work in this country. it does not make it right to lie, it does not. does not make a right to live burd.

i feel terible for nike. she is stayg manipulated. >> she received packages that came to the house. those kinds of things. she occasionally did errands for us. it to of one of the boys to school if they deny it there. dishes they normal housekeeper duties for the shoe is not responsiblfor the chidren. >> ido not know the answer to

that burd. the dmv said was a legitimate and driver's license. >> is there anything else? >> not that i know of. not that i know of. i have to tell you. not that i know of. i have to tell you it surprises me in some ways. " we found out that she was here, we let her go. i've only been in politics for two years. i'm getting used to these mere politics.

[inaudible] >> you understood the situation. >> i do not remember. i o not think we did. could i be faulted for that? absolutely. we could have a maternity leave. is that all right with you? bifurcati have to look back ande oper. >> we remember so much.

>> we will get back to you. >> where would you pick of the mail? >> she would pick it up from the mailbox. she would bring it into our island in the kitchen and lay it out there and soared into jet mail, bills, and other things. -- and sort it into emailed , bills, and other things. i did not find out the issue is not legal to work here until june 2009 when she came here. i announced i was running for governor february 9, 2009.

>> you sd it never came a. do you think this is an issue that shld of been brought to the forefront? why now? >> the brown campaign is doing a massive smear campaign on me and my family. that is what we are talking about. this is what i'm going to do. we are gathered after the fact. if you feel a sense and may be wanting to go back?

>> you make decisions at the time that you feel of the right decisions. we found out the issue is illegal. we terminated her employment. i broke my heart to do it. we said you cannot be here. you cannot work for us for th. i feel it is the right thing to do. i do not feel i would do anything differently. >> we have a new kind of mailbox. you have to have a key to open. i get my own mail parent.

we've had other household help in california. all of them were documented. >> would you be willing to provide documents? >> maybe. it is important that old and we get back to the issues that californians care most about. that is jobs and the economy and getting government spending under control. here we are in a crisis. if the budget is over 100 days overdue. the legislature is no closer than they were a couple of weeks ago. we were about to miss the payment. we are about to go to neious to pay california s. this is paymeaclassic smear pol.

we have answered justabout every question there is for the . we will answer a w more and then i'll go back to tryin to solve the problems for californians. there is high unemployment. there is failing public schools. that is what i ill turn the ampaign back to. but a couple of more questions. -- i will take a couple more questions. >> they got this letter that came to your house ahea. did they cross a line? >> i guess it depends on your definition of ethics. i do not know the full story. clearly, i think she had a gun to her head.

i think this was very challenging for her. i think she has been manipulated by a very sophisticated attorney that has done this for a living for 20 years. i absolutely believe this is linked to the brown campaign, 100%. ok? >> could you go back to the statement of illegal workers? >> i do not think it is the agency's fault. they do what they are supposed to do, too. they have a copy of a driver's license and social security card. they have a copy of an i-9. they have done good work for me. i thought niki was a great employee. ithought they tried to do what was the right thing to do. >> they said that she felt

"exploited, disrespect, and financially abused powell how the respond? >> that is not true. her children came over to our house. her son often brought in -- offer a broader sense to work. they played soccer and ae back yard. -- often brought her son to work. they played soccer in our backyard. her little boys did come over and play with our dog. i have to tell you. i was hurt and stunned by what i think she was made to read in that tatement. it is simply not true. she knows it is not true. she is listening now. i feel terrible for what he must be going through.

she knowsthat is not the way it was. we will do one must question. >> [inaudible] a rethinking for ways to protect those employees? >> i do not think abused her. we pater $23 an hour. i think that is a very fair wage for why she did. she is very good at her job. we gave her tremendous work flexibility. it is what any working mother with love in an employer. if your cha has a cold or the flu, we said not to come in that day. if she had a parent teacher

conference, she left work early. that is what all employers should do. if there are employers out there that are taking advantage, that is wrong. we should not allow it. >> [inaudible] >> it is challenging. they are here illegally. by trying to go to the authorities, they jeopardize themselves. i think there are organizations that fight for the rights of workers. that is the right thing to do. we do have to get our arms around a very challenging immigration question. we have to secure the borders and told them accountable. we've got to get a temporary guest worker program some people can work here illegally. i'm going to have torun. this is longer than i thought it would be. i had to retreat interviews with

telemundo and other folks coming up. thank you for coming. i appreciate it. let's move on to solving the problems are really matter for california. thank you very much. [captioning performed by natiooooo [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> this morning, ""washington journal" talked to a reporter about meg whitman. california, held a press conference yesterday to address the allegations that she had hired an illegal immigrant as her housekeeper. here's what she had to say. >> just classic smear politics.

this is what californians and americans hate about politics. here we are, 30 days out from an election, in a classic case of smear politics. and jerry brown, this is how he operates. this is how career politicians operate. this is what they do. and i heard this morning that the brown campaign had been flagged nothinging this story two weeks ago, so they knew exactly what was going on. i think there's very clear evidence that this is brown-motivated. host: joining us on the phone this morning is john meyers, the sacramento bureau chief for kqed radio in san francisco. mr. meyers, is there any proof to this allegation that meg whitman was talking about, that this is coming from the jerry brown campaign? >> there's not a lot of proof. i mean, what she's referring to essentially is that a rumor that apparently the brown campaign says they were passing along that they had heard that ms. whitman had a "housekeeper problem," and even the reporter she conferenced there from a television station in the san francisco bay area said it had been described to him as a

rumor. i think, really, you've got two things going on here. i mean, obviously the whitman campaign has tried very hard to focus on how this came about. a lot of other folks are asking exactly about the details and the issue itself and the fact that ms. whitman had an undocumented immigrant housekeeper for nine years. she had checked all of the ex- employee's documents, that she had a social security card, she had a state driver's license, and so ms. whitman and her husband said we did everything we could. but again, immigration has been a very big issue in this governor's race, especially when ms. whitman was running for the primary back in the spring and talked very tough on illegal immigration and talked very tough on employers who hire them. so i think that's why the story continues to stick around, and it's not going anywhere yet. host: it seems like the center of the story is about this letter from the social security administration back in 2003, alerting whitman and her husband about this possibly

undocumented worker that was her housekeeper. she says she never saw the letter, but then her campaign sort of changed their tune. what is 9 latest? did she see it or not? >> well, she says she still didn't. the question is whether her husband saw it. there is this letter that she referred to, which we have to be care to feel say it's from the social security administration simply saying there's a discrepancy in the employee's name records, and so it may not be an immigration status thing, it could be someone, for instance, who got married and their name changed. so the letter very clearly says, you know, we don't want to read too much into this, you, the employer, need to check this out. but the letter had handwriting on it that could be, apparently is, at least according to the woman and her attorney, the handwriting of ms. whitman's husband that says please check on this to the employee, nikki, the ex-employee's name. ms. whitman says she never saw the letter, her husband says now it's possible, i can't remember. as you can imagine, that makes the story trickle out a little bit honger. host: and as you said, she ran

to the right on this issue during the primary, and 20% of california's he electric rated is latino voters. so how do you think this is going to play out? has she had to change her tactics since the primary to win some hispanic voters? >> she definitely has tried to do the classic pivot back to the center even before this happened, trying to talk more about the issues that she's trying to focus the campaign on, education and things like that here in california. but this one's going to be a tough one. it's getting lots of attention in the spanish-speaking press. it does reopen some old wounds. two things we should make clear here, first of all, her honorary state chairman is pete wilson, best known in california to latinos, it seems, as the main backer of proposition 187, which would crack down on illegal immigrant services from the state back in the 1990's. that didn't help her from the very beginning. and secondly, there is the second gubernatorial debate with jerry brown tomorrow in the central valley sponsored by

univision in spanish, and you're sure to believe this is going to be front and center of the questions she's asked. host: and she said yesterday during the press conference that she would take a lie detector test on this. any update on that? >> well, apparently her campaign late last night is saying, well, she'll take a lie detector if jerry brown, the democrat, takes a lie detector to prove he wasn't behind it, and on and on we go. she was asked that question about the reporter about the polygraph, she dent offer it up herself. but we've got a media circus going on right here, and this is the kind of thing that we wonder how these things come out late in campaigns. we still don't know how this happened, when it did, and why the ex-employee waited to step forward until roughly five weeks before the election. host: yeah, and what about the role that this ex-employee's lawyer is playing here? >> well, the ex-employee's lawyer, we haven't even mentioned him, we probably should, it's celebrity attorney gloria allred, who has as carefully orchestrated the media events over the last few days and seems to keep

dribbling out documents she has to prove her point and keep the attention going. you know, the whitman campaign says she's allied with jerry brown. she did give $150 to jerry brown's attorney general campaign four years ago, and a little bit more money before that, and she is a long-time democrat. but there are at least some people who think that ms. allredden joys the publicity herself regardless of partisan politics. so when you get that mixed in the middle of this, this is one of those seemingly "only in california" stories, when it gets hyped up, even on celebrity web s carefully orchestrated the media events over the last few days and >> earlier, the president obama said goodbye to chief of staff rahm emanuel. press secretary robert gibbs is likely to get some questions

about that. we will bring you live coverage when the briefing starts it. this morning, we took your calls about the tarp program. you changed your mind? "the washington post" story this morning. it says here that --

nebraska on the democratic line. have you changed your mind? caller: i didn't think tarp was very good. from the beginning, i don't think putting a cap on the amount of money that people -- i recently got into a car and if somebody put the amount of money i was able to sue dr. for hurting me more than i know i would be pretty upset.

host: tracy, go ahead. caller: it is not changed, because i never supported it. host: why not? caller: i did not think we needed to bail out anything. i think we are already broke. host: let me show you in the bloomberg latest magazine addition out this week. it says that $16 billion is the respected return on the $250 biion bank investment. the government is expected to make a $16 billion profit o that portion of tarp. what do you think? caller: tweeted bid because we might be selling gm to china? -- would that be because we might be selling gm to china? i was watching bloomberg and i am not confident and the numbers we are getting from those resources. host: wilmington, north carolina. jack, independent line.

caller: i wanted to s that the media, they pounded us before tarp, before hank paulson and ben bernanke got this through congress. they pounded us in the media. we were not going to get our paychecks. there was such a fear launched at us if this did not go through. by congressman from this district, a democrat, a blue dog, he voted against it. he had a letter from 400 different economists signed saying, do not do this. the media feared me into this because at the time ihought, well, i guess it is something we have to do. but i find out on the back side after a little more study is the fact that basically -- it bailed out all of the bankers but all of the investors lost money, it did not do a thing for them and the bail them out on the taxpayers' dime. i changed my mind and i see now that mike mcintyre was right. i think we should not have done

it and let the chips fall where they may. host: pontiac, michigan. stanley, democratic line. let us move on -- stanley, are you on this line? go ahead. william on the independent line and in new york. you are on the air. have you changed your mind? caller: no, i haven't. i believe it wasery useful because of the money is given out. i strongly believe at some point these individuals will end up paying taxes. otherwise they would not have gotten in the assistance that would allow them to generate the fund that will make them pay taxes. somehow the economy would generate funds and everybody is going to benefit. it is better to give a penny and get 10 cents and give up nothing and get nothing. host: democratic line.

massachusetts. good morning. guest: thank you for c-span. dittos to the caller from north carolina about the fear mongering. nobody wants to bail out the banks less than i did. but, however, we had to take bad medicine. our economy was very sick. and it turns out that the side effects were not nearly as bad as everybody predicted. i think it was necessary. it was a necessary operation. and i think down the road the historians are going to have to sort it out. i am glad we did it, in retrospect. i am beginning to see that maybe the new banking industry was right, they really screwed erything up and we had to do this. we had to bail them out. the whole economy- not just of

back to the question we are asking all of you this moing, on tarp, have you changed your mind? kansas city. john. republican line. what do you think? caller: no, i haven't changed my mind. it was a bad idea then and a bad idea now. i have a question. the profit thing you are talking about. i missed the source on that. host: it was "bloomberg business week, what their latest addition. love it or hate it -- most do -- tarp didn't busthe bank. $16 billion -- the expected return on that too rigid and $50 biion bank investment, the portion of the $400 billion -- the expected return on the 250 billion bank investment, the portion used. caller: how much has not been repaid?

host: "the wall street journal" looks at that. how much was put out and how much has been repaid. when it talks about the $16 billion prot, that is just one day $250 billion of gold out to the banks. -- doled out to the banks. according to the papers, from tarp, congress authorized $700 billion. according to a papers this morning, treasury only put out to these different financial sector is about $400 billion. the remainder was never spent. caller: only $400 billion. that is chump change, right? host: what do you think? caller: use said only. -- you said only. i would say that is not chump

change even in today's economy. host: did not mean to sound like i made an opinion. caller: used the term only. -- you used the term only. host: you believe obviously that is a lot of money. caller: at least in my book. the secondomponent is, all right, they make $16 billion on they 250, but what about the money to general motors and chrysler? host: take a look at this, jn. it says the auto industry financing program, general [laughter] >> i am not kidding. she will tell you all about it.

we are missing a few folks but it will be on their way. i can answer your questions. on monday, the president will attend a meeting of the economic recovery advisory board here at the white house. on tuesday, the president will join dr. biden for an event highlighting the role of community colleges. the president will join dr. biden the opening session. in the evening, the president will address the 2010 fortune magazine most powerful women summit in washington, d.c., to talk about the impact of women in business, the economy, and the steps we can take to make sure america stays competitive in the long term it. the president will award the

staff sergeant of the u.s. army the medal of honor purpose staff sgt miller will receive the medal for his heroic actions in afghanistan in 2008. the first lady will also attend that the event. later, the president will travel to new jersey to attend a dinner. on thursday, the president will travel to prince george's county, md., to attend an event with governor martin o'malley. later, to chicago for another event. on friday, the president will attend meetings here at the white house. >> [inaudible] >> sad to be determined. we were working on that before i came out -- to be determined. >> [inaudible] >> and let me give you a broad answer. pete and the president have

talked through pet's new assignment and both have come to an agreement of being chief of staff on an interim basis. the president believes this is the best thing right now for our staff organization. we had a pretty short runway with the mayor's decision in chicago and ultimately, rahm emanuel's decision. we were in the midst of looking through a two-year organizational review that was in place before rahm emanuel made any of his decisions. part of the normal course of turnover here at the white house. so, i would expect that nothing is likely to be decided upon on

chief of staff for several months. pete is -- pete enjoys the complete trust of the president. he has an important strategic sense that he has used on capitol hill as chief of staff to senator tom daschle. he is -- he has a key organizational sense that we a value here as we embark on new challenges based on that two- tier organizational front. >> [inaudible] >> that is something that he and the president will have to work through. the president is pleased with pete agreeing to do this.

there are both looking forward to it. >> is the president going to campaign for rahm emanuel in chicago? >> i don't have anything on that. i don't know the answer to that, to be honest with you you heard what the president said over the past couple of weeks and what he said today about rahm emanuel and his next endeavors. >> [inaudible] >> absolutely. [unintelligible] -- with turnover here, pete is heading, but simply because pete is chief of staff on an interim basis, that certainly does not preclude him being a permanent chief of staff. >> a completely different

subject -- iraq. is there a nominee for prime minister? what is the administration's reaction to developments for the deadline of that government? >> obviously, this is a matter for a very young democracy to figure out. we were talking about this earlier today. somebody said politics is breaking out in iraq. this is what young democracies go through to form a government, a representative government of the people. obviously, we are helping and assisting in any way we can in this process. these are decisions that have to be made by the iraqis. >> does the administration want

to see a broad based -- >> absolutely. the government that represent everybody is what everybody here is focused on it. >> osama bin laden calls on charities to give to victims of the pakistan the flood. this new approach, these new kinds of methods he is putting out, coming at the same time that officials are worried about mumbai-style attacks. i was wondering if you have any comments on this new propaganda effort. >> i do not have anything specific on the tape. our government has done quite a bit in terms of aid and help in what was very obvious tragic

events in pakistan. we understand that it is an important part of a bilateral relationship, insuring that assistance. i do not want to get into threats and what have you, except to say that the president is updated and has been an active participant in meetings every week dealing with whatever information we have and insist on that information being shared and it ensures that every department has what they need to deal with the crisis. >> i am wondering first of all if you could explain why -- >> he is not. he is a registered voter in the district of columbia. >> he voted in alaska in 2008. >> i can check on that. i don't know who he voted for,

but he voted in the mayor's race here. >> former gov. sarah palin has insinuated that she expected him as a part of a plot against her. she wrote about this in her book. she tweeted about this recently. do you have any comments on this? >> is an accusation that is based lists -- it is an accusation that is baseless. responding to the reports that it is, i have not seen the back- and-forth. >> what does the administration think about the fact that this new message is talking about the need for relief, whether for famine, poverty, or the people?

>> this is not addressed to one person. as we have said in the president has said, i do not think it is lost on the greater muslim world, that those that have perverted decorate religion have heart and killed more of their own religion than anybody else. i think that speaks volumes and maybe their new tactics speak volumes to the fact that date are very much losing the battle for hearts and minds among the muslim people. >> to follow up on iraq, 208 days that they have not been able to get a coalition government together. is there any concern that there will be a timetable in which the iraqi people are going to give up on the process? >> no, because -- look,

obviously, there is a function and caretaking government that makes governmental decisions. these are the things that a young democracy goes through. i don't think anyone has any solutions that democracy is only an election. there is formation, and then there is a governing. i think it is what young democracies go through. we have spent quite a bit of time, and the vice president in particular, in doing what we can to assist that process. we understand that the people need to make these big decisions. >> on pakistan more broadly, you have the recent missile strike that has caused so much

instability. you have reports that the military may try to install a new president. are we at a point or near a point of crisis in pakistan? is the administration ready to sound the alarm? >> i would say, chip, obviously, we are all understanding. pakistan is located in a dangerous neighborhood. obviously, everyone understands the concerns that we have. now that the concerns that the pakistan these have in dealing with extremists in lawless areas. pakistan is an important strategic partner and a key ally of the united states. we believe that pakistan the government is committed to democracy and the preservation of the civilian leadership.

we think it is tremendously important. you mentioned a series of events. we will continue to work with our allies in insuring we can do whatever is possible to assist them in their fight against those extremists, that not just threaten us but the existence of their own government in pakistan. >> as the administration sent any signals to pakistan about these reports? >> let me check and see what specifically -- >> [inaudible] >> i know ambassador paterson who is involved in all of the discussions, not just the review but the monthly meetings -- let me see if she or the state department has on these

developments. >> is he going to move into rahm emanuel's office? >> yes. >> he could stay in his office and use it as a conference room. >> pete may just -- regardless of what the time line is for several months or years, pete is the chief of staff. i have worked with him since 2004. i have known him logger it than that. there is no one in here that does not have tremendous respect for him one of the great -- i went to see pete right before this with a couple of questions i had.