the islamic state and others the save haven they needed to grow into the force we phase -- face -- tide. and terrorist are training in syria today planning to attack in america and american interest. i have heard some in this body talk about the intelligence failures of iraq. the intelligence community makes fair share of mistakes and i am the first to criticize them when they do. but these recent events including the resurgeance of isil are policy and leadership failures. they provided warning of the declining security situation in rebecca libya but they did rit

little to enhance security in benghazi. it wasn't an intelligence failure. it is a policy and leadership failure on the part of the administration. with regard to iraq, intelligence including director clapper's testimony at a january 29, 2014 hearing has been clear that iraq was vulnerable to the threat from isil. i encourage any member to read the intelligence if they are questions regarding the assessment about security in iraq and the rise of isil. it was clear in 2011 as u.s. forces were withdrawing that iraq was vulnerable to resurgeance and we have seen the violence escalate during the administration's failed policy. this was easily predicted but we have stood by and watched as it

has occurred. again, this is a policy failure. not an intelligence failure. perhaps the most concerning aspect of the foreign policy is the counter-terrorism strategy. i hear them touting the dissire of them being on the run. but nothing could be further from the truth. al qaeda is on the run but they are running from one country to the next and taking over one country and the next. violent extremism is on the rise in the middle east and the warning signs have been visible for years. that includes the benghazi attack, the rise of al qaeda affiliated groups, the

resurgeance of isil and the fall of the second largest city now in iraq. yesterday a terrorist flag raised over the largest refinery in iraq. the administration is only willing to take limited steps to curb this disturbing trend. instead of focusing on making counter terrorism operations more effective, the administration has been focused on ending the wars in iraq and afghanistan while america's enemies grow stronger. this approach has been a huge gamble that continues to jeopardize america's security. we have sidelines tools we use successfully to counter al qaeda in the years immediately after 911 including the effective long-term detention and interrogation of enemy combatants. we know far less today about terrorist organizations.

since the president ordered the close of guantanamo bay in january of 2009 our nation has been without a clear policy of detaining a suspected terrorist. without a policy, including one that identifies a facility to holding terrorist that are captured outside of afghanistan, the ability to conduct ongoing operations has been limited. i recognize there is no one-size fits all solution for handling terrorist. but our detention policies must foster intelligence collection before prosecution begins. al qaeda is determine to attack the united states. we constantly face new plots looking to murder america like the may 12th plot to put an ied on a u.s. bound aircraft.

this plot luckily didn't materialize but we will not always be that lucky. we know al qaeda in the arabian peninsula represent one of the biggest threat to the homeland. they are continually plotting against our interest and seeking new recruits. especially among the own citi n citizens and former detainees. explosive experts continue to roam free posing a threat to the safety and security of u.s. citizens. the proposed closure of guantanamo bay presents significant risks of the united states and yemen efforts to counter aqap inside yemen. a portion of the detainees remaining are yemen citizens. transferring them to a country plagued by prison breaks,

assassination and open warfare at this point could prove catastrophic. they would join other gitmo detainees and worsen the security situation. the most example of a failed and dangerous policy on the part of the administration is the exchange of five guantanamo bay detainees for sergeant bergdahl. he are happy he is back. but the deal of five individuals from guantanamo bay who make up every morning thinking of ways they can kill and harm americans wasn't the right thing to do. there are other ways to handle. yet the administration without notifying congress and that was clearly intention -- the failure

to notify congress of what they plan to do. when they signed the papers and didn't release them for two and a half weeks shows they didn't want to come to congress and that reason is because they knew there would be objections on both sides of the aisle. whether it is iraq, afghanistan or other parts of the middle east, americans have fought and died in the war against al qaeda. our nation is leery of war but the concern remains. i have asked the president to declassify the personal files on those five individuals. tell the american people what we know about them and look the american people in the eye and say this is a good deal.

i know they are going to return to the fight and seek and kill and harm americans but this was a good deal. that is for the american people to decide. and i urge president obama, my congressional colleagues and the american people not to abandon the gains we have made in the fight against terrorism since 9/11 but let's remain steady and continue to fight the good fight. and i would yield to my friend from north carolina. >> senator from north carolina. >> i ask consent to speak for up to five minutes. >> without objection. >> i want to join my colleagues to discuss the administration's misguided foreign policy especially relating to afghanistan and the threat of al qaeda, the taliban and the network, despite what the administration would have you believe, al qaeda and the taliban remain capable and

committed advisary in afghanistan. they are a threat to the safety and stability of the region and continue to attack troops and plot against the region at home. yet for some reason, this administration failed to recognize time and time again and worse they are chosen to ignore. al qaeda isn't ruined. it's senior leader ship continues to plat plot attacks and serve as an inspiration to a series of affiliates in syria and iraq and else where. these affiliates are plotting against the united states of america with thegoid guidance

and support of al qaeda's senior most leadership. the al qaeda brand is alive and well the and the strategy to end the conflict not win it reveals a profound failure to analyze threats in the region, the world and the united states of america despite what this administration has you believe: ... ork is done will not, will not, end the fighting. we cannot take the pressure off off, or our enemies will bring the fight here to our doorstep here at home. but al qaeda is not well a loan in afghanistan. it's well established that the aoccoquanlyi -- acany network is the link between the taliban and al qaeda. it is responsible for a significant number of u.s. casualties and injuries on the battlefield in afghanistan and continues to actively plan

potential catastrophic attacks against our interests and the interests of others in the region. the group routinely targets the group routinely targets but duke said car targeting civilians and using murder and intimidation tactics against the afghan people they have mounted assaults and suicide attacks on civilians and u.s. forces with a deadly effectiveness, yet the administration took until late 2012 at the urging of the senate of the united states in a bill i introduced to actually name that timing that work as a foreign terrorist fertilization. why is that important? that changes the game. provides us the full range of diplomatic and military tools to use directly against the al qaeda network. it is against that background that the administration then negotiated with a network the

release of five high-level taliban fighters for sergeants bergdahl. in other words, the president rewarded the network for its incarceration of u.s. service member, strengthened its relationships with the taliban, emboldened the taliban, and undermines the afghani government all with one decision does anyone in this administration believe that that high-ranking -- five high-level taliban officials on set free would not return to the fight? if they do, then they have not paid attention for the last decade or longer. i understand that this nation is weary of war. i understand the sacrifices made by service members, and i work every day to ensure our brave nurse, veterans who are

providing the care and treatment they deserve. their efforts should not be in vain. mr. president, we are here today , marine sgt kyle carpenter will receive the medal of honor. 19-years old was he signed up to go to the marine corps, a young marine in combat who saved his fellow marines just begun a grenade. i -- he completed his freshman year at the university of south carolina at 24-years old. he is an american hero. he could be any one of our children or grandchildren. what makes this country great is that we have people like kyle carpenter that step up when asked and to more than we could never ask of them. our service members served as sacrificed overseas so that we could be safe at home.

we cannot in good faith let the administration dishonor their efforts with a misguided policy. the continued drawdown of u.s. and coalition forces in afghanistan will provide al qaeda, the taliban, and the network with a safe haven to train the operatives and plot further attacks against the united states of america and their allies. contrary to the campaign statement of the president and vice president, al qaeda is not on the run, and i urge this administration to avoid further actions that may endanger our nation. mr. president, i yield the floor to center in off. >> the senator from oklahoma. >> unanimous consent. >> without objection. >> mr. president, the subject

today, of course, is the failed foreign policy of this president and administration. it is hard to your do it in a limited amount of time because once something happens like benghazi and we get into the middle of that, all of a sudden you turnaround and is president turns loose arguably the five most heinous terrorists from guantanamo bay. at the same time we have a policy that was going so well, and now we find out that is not working out either. if i have time now will touch on that. the first thing i want to do is mention benghazi. being the ranking member on the armed services committee, i have the opportunity to really be there and see as it was happening, the ambassador that was sent over there and was killed, a friend of mine.

we spent time together. and as we got closer he realized and started sending messages to the president and the white house task to send security over there. he said, right now that terrorists are actually training in benghazi. they had flags flying. they knew they were organizing something. so he knew that and had requested. the president elected not to let's send help at that time. the question a lot of people have is, al qaeda, they knew there was an organized attack. i can tell you how. we have four people responsible for revising the president on threats, intelligence. as cia director, at that time john brennan, the director of

intelligence, james cropper, the secretary of defense, leon panetta, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general dempsey. all of them were acknowledged when the index was hit in benghazi that day that it was an organized attack. they suspected it but the new for a fact that it was. so you are talking about the individuals who are responsible for advising the president to all of them were well aware that on the day of the end next attack in benghazi it was organized terrorist attacks. several days later gave rise to the shows in order to try to make it sound like it was some video that someone had. now, why would the president not want to that meant that this was an organized terrorist attack? it is right before the election, and he had a lot of people who thought that then on and having

been captured, there was no longer that big a threat out there in the middle east. so it was for political reasons that we ended up losing four lives. and then just recently they're saying now, they found someone who has been around for two years. the press has been talking to report two years. why all the sudden they're saying now that this is the guy that perpetrated benghazi when, in fact, this all came from the white house. i just think they are covering it up, and i am very much offended by that. the one thing i wanted to talk about and know that some other members will be here. having to do with the release of the five taliban terrorists to be released. let me tell you a side of this

that people are not talking about that i feel strongly is the reason for it. this president is approaching that last death of his second term. as is always the case when you get down toward the end of your term you start looking for a legacy. one of his legacies is closing guantanamo bay. this president has been talking about it for as long as i can remember, certainly longer than he has been president. i go back and tell people in oklahoma, why does he want to close its? and you cannot answer that. we have had that base since 1903. it is the only good deal, one of the few good deals and governments, we only pay for $5,000 per year, and have the times the cubans did not cash the check. we have this thing and have actually 778 people they're incarcerated and being interrogated prior to the time

that mr. obama became president of the united states. now we're down to 149. as far as that researchers, no one argues the fact that the humane treatment is beyond anyone's expectation. there is no place else in the world that they can do that. they are fully compliant with the geneva convention. they have had people go in there and look at the maximum-security prison and have attested to, human rights organizations, the red cross, and everyone else agrees it is a very humane place while they are interrogating. as i said, there is no place else they can do this. if we start doing this in our court system they get marin writes, constitutional rights, and people are pretty offended when they find out and this keeps us from getting information that would affect some of the others. an expeditionary legal process like there, the only one in the world were they can do this. and so this is a place where we

can actually get in there, interrogate can get information, incarcerate people, not intermingle terrorists with the prison population in this country, which is what the president has been talking about doing. i say that because these guys are terrorists, not criminals. you put them in our prison system and by definition their job is to train other people to become terrorists. that is what they would be doing . so i have to say this, too. all of the talk about osama bin laden and the fact that we do have in there i am glad we were able to bring him down. but how did we did it? through information we received through interrogation at guantanamo bay. i always say that because people wonder why in the world would he be wanting to do this, and how does he want to fulfill this expectation or lacey that he has

let me tell you. if you would take out of the 149 individuals left, the five most heinous, most dangerous taliban terrorists and turn them loose, that would put him in a position then to get rid of the rest of them with the exception of those awaiting war crime trials. so what happened, he turned them loose, number one. number two, he told the taliban exactly when the united states is going to leave. regardless of conditions on the ground. thirdly, he has said that he is going to declare an end of hostilities. now, that is a phrase from a proper phrase, end of hostilities. this is not a war. it is a hostility. if he does that, that would then give him we justification for opening the gates, turning everyone lose from guantanamo bay, and closing guantanamo bay. that, in my opinion, is the estimation. the threat because of that?

we are in a position right now where we have five people who are turned loose, even if we trusted the country to hold these five people for one year, the velocity -- philosophy would be we will turn you loose if you promise not to kill americans for a year. that does not make sense. this is something that should not have happened. we have people there making decisions, celebrating as we speak. one of the five individuals, i will end with this, a taliban commander over in afghanistan. listen to this, mr. president. he said, talking about one of the five guys, his return is about the glory, and a hundred thousand tell them fighters on the side. now they have the right lion to leave them in the final moments before victory in afghanistan. that is what happened. that is how it is viewed.

with that, i will yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> the republican whip. >> how much time remains for the allocation of this side time? >> the republicans have eight minutes remaining. >> i know we, perhaps, have another member coming to speak. i would short please advise me after i have used five minutes of the eight minutes. >> i will do that. >> i want to talk about the intersection of national security and death. over the last five years president obama has had multiple occasions to embrace real, structural, entitlement reform that would help solve our long-term debt problem. you might wonder why i am talking about that when the subjects that we are generally talking about is national security, including what has

happened in iraq and syria. it is because the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said, admiral mcmullen, when asked what the single biggest threat to our national security was, he said, it is our debt. the president had an opportunity when the simpson bowles commission released its recommendations in late 2010. as you recall, a bipartisan commission the president himself appointed to help come up with a formula to deal with this with our fiscal problems. unfortunately, once they made their recommendation in december 2010 the president walked away from it and nothing came of it. even though we are facing an addition of $17 trillion in debt, we are facing more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. perhaps it is because those numbers are so big that we have a hard time getting your head around it, people have become desensitized to the urgency of dealing with our debt

and these unfunded liabilities. the president has never once endorsed any sort of reform necessary to deal with this challenge or to prevent a future crisis. the fact of the matter is somebody someday -- probably these gunmen and women, they will be the ones to have to pay this back because our generation will have failed them unless we meet the challenges that this presents it seemed like the only part of the federal budget that the president is eager to cut its national defense. under his latest budget plan defense spending would drop from under three and a half percent said just over 2 percent of gdp by 23. at the same time we are told the u.s. army might be shrunk to its smallest size since pre-world war two. president obama needs to realize that even america's current military capabilities are proving inadequate for global

challenges. for example, one former assistant secretary of defense has declared that because of pentagon budget cuts president obama highly touted pivot to asia cannot happen. in other words, despite promote -- promoting an asian pit as a crucial element of american foreign policy, the president has failed to take the necessary fiscal steps to make sure that happens or could happen. this, of course, makes it a hollow policy, one where the promises are extravagant and the delivery is anemic. it will do major damage to u.s. credibility among our allies and adversaries. the prospect of bringing department of defense spending back to sequestration levels has alarmed senior officials in all branches of government. the chief of naval operations has said that reverting to sequestration levels in 2016 would leave the navy to small

and lacking the advanced capability needed to execute missions that the nation expects of the navy. secretary of the air force has said that going back to those spending levels would compromise our national security. chief of staff of the army said it would put our young men and women in uniform at much higher risk. in other words, the president cannot simply keep cutting defense spending and the military in order to find his other priorities. at the same time ignore this 70 per cent of spending that is on autopilot, so-called entitlement spending. that is where the big money is and where the reforms need to take place, but it won't happen without a leader. well, we all know what is happening in iraq. i know time is short. i don't want to take any more time than necessary away from my colleague from alabama. this map reflect what is

happening now in iraq. the civil war with syria, which the president had drawn a red line that once crossed there was no consequences associated with. now this border between iraq and syria has basically been wiped away. we see all of these places where the isis, a horrific terrorist group worse than to let -- al qaeda, has basically taken charge. this is what happens with failure to lead. i know time is short and i want to make sure my colleague from alabama has some time to speak. at this point i asked the rest of my remarks be made part of the record in yield the floor >> without objection. >> mr. president, the senator from alabama. >> mr. president, with consent, would not be allowed to speak for up to five minutes? >> without objection.

[silence] >> mr. president, when a nation commits itself to a military effort, it is a very significant , complex decision. i was here when we voted to utilize military force in iraq and afghanistan. the majority of the democrats in this body supported that. the american people supported that, and through tough times success was achieved in this sense that iraq has elections, a functioning government. when the u.s. military was drawing down its personnel the country had a reconciliation with the different groups, and

we are on a path that gave us some prospects, i believe it is fair to say -- critics can have different opinions, but it is clear to me that we have prospects for a successful conclusion of that effort, which would allow a relatively stable, relatively democratic nations to be established that did not provide threats to the united states or its neighbors. and so we should not have done that. well, we did that. that is what happened and was the situation when president obama took office, and he failed, in my opinion, in negotiating the time of drawdown and statuses of forces agreement that needed to be established to be able to create credibility in this new and fragile i'll regime and hold our military together,

keep them trained while the reduced dramatically our presence of military activity. we will be there as a supporting , background, equipment, intelligence, aircraft, lift capability. we have given them time frames. a very clear. well, we can't reach an agreement. we are pulling everyone out. the general talks to us recently and told us that he has 100 soldiers. i asked him if he would prefer general patraeus, and he said yes with a bit of a smile. but he only has 100 people. i guess i would say we are worried about it. one of the things that is so critical in the conduct an understanding of what we are involved in is to understand that the nature of a terrorist threat is going to be there for a long time. we are just going to be dealing

with it for a long time. it is a significant number, not a majority by any means, but a significant number of radicalized people in the middle east who want to destroy the united states. they see as as an evil force and oppose what we oppose, want to take over their neighbors and continue to expand they are regent -- recently functioning racemes that provide some freedom and order and societies and impose a theocratic government and legal system on those countries. and it is not good for us, not good for other countries, and not good for the united states and the world. one of the things we have to do is, when you capture a person committed to the destruction of the united states and is attacking our people, they are

not criminals, they are warriors and most of their activities are clearly contrary to the laws of war, so they are on lawful combatants. and they are -- when you capture a soldier in battle whether lawful or on lawful you do not normally if they have complied with the rules of war, on like this group, you do not try them per say. you hold them until the of war is over in the peace treaty has been signed and an agreement has been reached. that is not being -- not happening now. and as a result we have a confused policy that is releasing dangerous criminals like the last five we just released under this confused thinking. determined to attack president

bush, guantanamo, and it became a symbol in their mind of the policies being used to detain people who are captured. enemy combatants, lawful or unlawful. when you capture them, you hold them. you do not release them so that they can go back to work. it we send soldiers out to capture them, and once they're captured we release them so they continue with the war. as justice jackson once said, the pact is not certified. all right. one additional moments. >> is there objection? without objection. >> they have to be treated properly. they do not have to be released. recaptured, for example, one man

last year for conspiring with osama bin laden. he goes back to somalia. the 1988 bombings in east africa that killed 2204 people before 9/11, he is a treasure trove of intelligence. a group went in and captured him, took him away at risk of their lives. they took cam out on a ship. they said he was sick and not doing well. what happened? they took him to the united states justice department, turned him over for civilian trial. the purpose of capturing him was to get intelligence. he is a warrior. you want to talk to him and see what you can learn. he was placed in federal custody where it's a lawyer, speedy trial, a public trial and the things that prisoners of war do not get. yet this is all happening and

has been happening over and over again. this president has a lack of understanding of that nature of the conflict we are engaged in. the evidence is a policy that is dangerous to our safety, and it is wrong to send out the americans and capture people like this and then treat them in a way that allows them to minimize the opportunity to obtain intelligence

>> on the next "washington journal" maryland representative the 2014ards discusses elections, and democratic efforts to turn out women voters. carolina congressman walter jones talks about the military, political and options available to the u.s. concerning iraq. as always, we'll take your calls you can join the conversation at facebook and twitter. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> the i.r.s. has reported that ex-i.r.s. official lois learner's crashed computer was recycled and her e-mails have been lost. the i.r.s. commissioner testifies before the house ways and means committee about the the of the e-mails and investigation into the alleged i.r.s. targeting of conservative groups. it live starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2.

years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, new the room at congressional hearings, white house events, brechings and conferences, and offering gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. servicell as a public of private industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> next, president obama awards the medal of honor to marine corporal william kyle carpenter who was severely inured in afghanistan november 2010. laps corporate carpenter is the youngest living recipient of the medal of honor. this is 20 minutes.

>> ladies and gentlemen, the and of the united states and first lady. ♪ >> if you would, please pray with me. mighty god we pause at the beginning of this historic event to ask for your presence in this place. allow your spirit to move among here, that asered we give honor to one who demonstrated the virtues on nation was founded, we would be remindedded again of

allowed thisat has country its freedoms that so kylelike corporal carpenter have sacrificed to defend. god, we would ask that you would hear our bratty tied for molding corporal carpenter's character through the love of his gracious family and the support of miss counts will friends and mentors. deep appreciation for this marine's faithfulness, faced that day with the crews bell of self preservation or self sacrifice, he responded with valor to hisguard the life of friend. now as the nation's miest award for such selflessness and courage is draped around corporal carpenter's neck, en circle with him the depth much steadfast love, sangity file his inner most and unspoken as he carriesat the unfathomable weight of this honor, he will be enabled and

emboldened to peek on behalf of untoldourage those whose sacrifices and humble service need his firm and compassionate voice. we lift up in prayer all those who remain in harm's way globe, and pray your abiding grace on the families and friends of the marines, sailors, soldiers, airmen and coast guardsmen who have given their lives in service to this country. bestow your wisdom on those who and shape itson endeavors. may all of us as americans yield to your divine guidance and follow the example heros who loved country more than self and mercy more than life. god bless america. erica. amen. >> thank you everybody. please be seated.

on behalf of michelle and myself welcomed to the white house. the man you see before you today, corporal william kyle carpenter, should not be alive today. hand grenades are one of the most awful weapons of war. they only weigh about a pound but they are packed with tnt. if one lands nearby you have mere seconds to seek cover. planet when it detonates its fragments shootout in every direction and even at a distance the spray of shrapnel can inflict devastating injuries on the human body. up close it's almost certain death. but we are here because this m man, this united states marine, face down that terrible

explosive power, that unforgiving force with his own body willingly and deliberately. to protect a fellow marine. when that grenade exploded kyle carpenter's body took the brunt of the blast. his injuries were called catastrophic. it seemed as if he was going to die. while being treated he went into cardiac arrest and three times he flatlined. three times doctors brought him back. along with his parents who called kyle's survival are a miracle we thank god they did. because with that singular act of courage korail you not only save your brother in arms you

displayed the heroism in a blink of the night that would inspire for generations they'll are valor worthy of our nation's highest military decoration, the medal of honor. and kyle and i have actually met before during his long recovery at walter reed. he and some of our other wounded warriors came to the white house to celebrate the world series champion st. louis cardinals. some of you may be aware i'm a white sox fan. kyle likes the braves so it was a tough day for both of us. [laughter] that after the ceremony michelle and i had the chance to meet with kyle and at the time he was still undergoing surgeries. he was up and he was walking and he was working his way toward being independent again towards the man you see here today. kyle the main message we want to

send his welcome that. we are so proud to have you here. we just spent some time not just with kyle but also his wonderful family and anybody who has had a chance to talk to this young man knows you are not going to get a better example of what you want in an american or a marine. despite all the attention he is still the same humble guy from gilbert south carolina population of about 600. i guess today it's only population 590 something. these days he is also at the university of south carolina just a normal college student he says cheering for the gamecocks. you will notice that kyle doesn't hide his scars. he is proud of them and the service that they represent. and he tells me this so i'm just

quoting that he says the girls really like them. [laughter] so he is working an angle on this thing. i wasn't sure whether i was supposed to say that in front of mom that but there is a quote there. in addition to our many distinguished guests i want to welcome those who made this man that marine that he is kyle's father jim, kyle's lovely mom robin and his brothers bryce and payton one of whom is going to be joining kyle at south carolina another game and then we have one who is going to be a citadel. we also have kyle's marine brothers who served with him in afghanistan into his recovery and i also want to welcome the members of the medal of honor society whose ranks kyle joins

today. kyle and his fellow marines searched during the surge of forces that i ordered to afghanistan early in my presidency. their mission was to drive the taliban out of their strongholds, protect the afghan people and give them a chance to reclaim their communities. kyle and his platoon were in helmand province and marcia pushing their way across open fields and muddy canals bearing their heavy packs even as it could heat up to 115 degrees. in one small village they turned the dusty compound into a base. the insurgents nearby gave their answer with sniper fire and automatic weapon fire and rocket-propelled grenades. that morning call said hour-long clock was ak-47 fire. some of the men provide their bunks gearing up for another day and some were heating up their mres. somewhere in makeshift op

centers a simple mud building planning the days patrols. up on the roof behind a circle of sandbags to marines manned their posts. kyle and lance corporal nicholas eufrazio. the compound started to take fire. seeking cover kyle and nick laid down low on their backs behind the sandbags. and then the grenade landed with a flood its pan already pulled. it was about to explode and kyle has no memory of what happened next. what we do know is that they are on the rooftop he wasn't just with a fellow marine, he was already with his best friend. kyle and neck had met at training. in afghanistan they patrol together day and night friendship forged. kyle says about nick he was my point man. i loved him like a brother.

when the grenade landed other marines in the compound looked up and saw it happen. kyle try to stand lunged forward towards the grenade and then he disappeared into the blast. keep in mind at the time qaeda was just 21 years old. but in that instant he fulfilled those words of scripture greater love hath no man than this than a man who lay down his life for his friends. they found kyle lying facedown directly over the blast area. his homak was riddled with holes and his gear was melted. part of his kevlar vest was blown away. one of the doctors who treated him later said kyle was literally wounded from the top of his head to his feet. and for a moment car was still conscience -- conscious. his eyes were open but he couldn't see. kyle remembers everything went

blank and yet even then his thoughts were not of himself. one of the marines who was their remembers how kyle kept asking him one question about was whether nick was okay. as kyle strength during the way he sensed the end was coming so according to kyle's memories my last thought was to make peace with god. i asked her his forgiveness and trying to make the best and most of my last few seconds here on earth. the medal of honor is presented for gallantry on the battlefield but today we also recognize kyle carpenter for his valor and the hard fight for recovery. eventually kyle woke up. after five weeks in a coma. i want you to consider what kyle has ensured just to stand here today. more than two and a half years in the hospital, grueling

rehabilitation, brain surgery to remove shrapnel from his head, nearly 40 surgeries to repair a collapsed lung, fractured fingers a shattered right arm broken in more than 30 places multiple skin grafts great he is a new prosthetic eye, a new job, new teeth and one hell of a smile. and kyle is was the first to get credit elsewhere. his doctors at bethesda he says put him back together well. today is also a reminder that somebody with injuries as seriously as kyle's probably would not survive. so many of our wounded warriors from today's wars are alive not just because of their marble advances in technology but primarily because the extraordinary dedication and skill of our military and our va medical professionals. so we need to keep doing

everything we can in our power to give our wounded warriors and those who treat them the support that they need and i think this is a wonderful opportunity to ask doctors deborah malone and the rest of kyle's medical team who are here to please stand. i see their amazing work every time i visit bethesda, every time i visit walter reed. it's pretty rare where you have a job where you just know you are doing gods work every single day. they do an incredible job. [applause] thank you for the miracles you work for our wounded troops and veterans. kyle says he will wear this medal for all who serve and for

those who didn't make it back in for those who struggle still so today we also honor to members of his team who made the ultimate sacrifice in that deployment kyle's friend lance corporal timothy jackson of corman kentucky and lance corporal dakota argues of greenwood louisiana. our thoughts are also with the marines that kyle saved that day his brother nick. i had the opportunity to meet nick as well two years after the blasts on one of my visits to walter reed. nick also is suffered grievous wounds. as a result of traumatic brain injury he couldn't speak for more than a year. he also endured multiple surgeries. today his recovery continues. he lives at home with his family in plymouth massachusetts where he is watching the ceremony so nick on behalf of all of us i wanted to know we honor your sacrifice as well. your perseverance is an inspiration.

just as kyle was there for you our nation will be there for you and your family as you go stronger in the years ahead. if any of our wounded warriors seek an example. let me amend that. if any american seeks a model of the strength and resilience that define us as a people including this newest 9/11 generation, i want you to consider kyle. after everything he has been through, he skis, he snowboards, he has jumped from a plane with a parachute thankfully. [laughter] he trudged through a six-mile mud run completed the marine corps marathon and he says he wants to do a triathlon. he is a motivational speaker, an advocate for his fellow wounded warriors. he is thinking about majoring in psychology so he can use his own experience to help others.

he got stellar grades and by the way he's only 24 years old and says i'm just getting started. in other words kyle is a shining example of what our nation needs to encourage, veteran to come home and use their incredible skills and talents to keep our country strong. we can all learn from kyle's example. as we prepare for the reading of the citation i would like to close with his own words, a message at thing for every american. it took a life-changing event to get me to generally appreciate the precious and amazing life i have been blessed with. please take it from me, enjoy every day to the fullest. don't take life too seriously. always try to make it count. appreciate the small and simple things. be kind and help others. let the ones you love always know that you love them and when

things get hard trust there is a bigger plan and that you will be stronger for it. pretty good message. corporal william kyle carpenter should not be alive today but the fact that he is gives us reason to trust that there is indeed a bigger plan. so god bless you kyle and god bless all who serve and protect the precious and amazing life that we are blessed with. may god continue to bless and keep strong the united states of america. sempre fi. [applause] see the president of the united states and the name of the congress takes pleasure in presenting the medal of honor to lance corporal william kyle carpenter united states marine

corps for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as an automatic rifleman with company f second battalion ninth marines regimental combat team one verse burying division forward first marine expeditionary force forward in helmand province afghanistan in support of operation enduring freedom on 21 november, 2010. lance corporal carpenter was a member of the platoon sized coalition force force comprised of two reinforced marine rifle squad partnered with an afghan national army squad. the platoon had established patrol base to go to today's earlier in the a small village in the marcia district in order to disrupt enemy activity and provide security for the local afghan population. lance corporal carpenter and a fellow marine were manning a rooftop security position on the perimeter of the patrol base dakota when the enemy initiated a daylight attack with hand grenades one of which landed inside their sandbags position.

without hesitation and with complete disregard for his own safety lance corporal carpenter moves towards the grenade and an attempt to shield his fellow marine from the deadly blast. when the grenade detonated his body and sort the brunt of the blast severely wounding him but saving the life of his fellow marine. by his undaunted courage bold fighting spirit and unwavering devotion to duty in the face of almost certain death lance corporal carpenter reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the marine corps and the united states naval service. [applause]

[applause] [applause] >> let us pray. gracious god made the ceremony serve as a reminder of the responsibility that comes with receiving the greatest gift of freedom and as we depart this hallowed hall and return to our daily lives, we pray that you would a noble and empower us that when called upon we would represent the resolute fearlessness of corporal kyle carpenter and all those who wear the stars of fowler and live up

to our responsibilities bringing honor to you and to this country. it's in the strength of your name we pray. amen. >> that brings us to the conclusion of the ceremony but not the reception and party and so i want to thank everybody again for being here especially kyle's wonderful family and his parents and i understand the food here at the white house is pretty good. i party told kyle's brothers that they should be chowing down but that goes for everybody else as well. i think the drinks are free. it's still early in the afternoon. thank you very much everybody. let's give one more round of applause to our latest medal of honor winner kyle carpenter. applause go

>> as i stand before you today i am truly honored and humbled yet i accept this honor with a heavy heart. as the president put the medal of honor around my neck i felt the history and weight of a nation. i think about the continental marines who fearlessly defended their ships and fought for an idea, a new way of life. i think about the trenches of world war one and the marines who charged the bloody beaches throughout world war ii. i think about the marines of korea who lost their feet,

hands, and lives to frostbite. at the chosen reservoir and those who charged through the rice paties and fields of vietnam. i think about the marines who fought for days on end from house to house in the scorching heat through cities like fallujaha, baghdad or ramadi. i think about the marines who are with me in marjah. if i close my eyes today i can still hear their desperate medivacs being called over the radio as they bled out in the fields of afghanistan. today i accept the medal for them. i will wear it for er person that makes up our great and blessed nation. i will wear it for those who have been wounded on distant lands, but still continued to fight in battle through long and difficult days of recovery here at home. and to those who have given all and their families, i could never express in words what you mean to this nation that you so

selflessly and courageously gave for. we are forever indebted to you and your inspiring devotion to our country. i will wear this medal p for your incredible medical staff who helped keep me alive and put me back together. i will wear it for my family and those who have been there to help, love, support, and encourage me. along my journey of healing and recovery. i am proud to be a marine. i am proud of those that have raised their right hand. those who sacrificed to earn the right to wear the sacred cloth of our nation. i think all who have served who are serving and who will serving. freedom is a powerful and beautiful thing.

to be thankful for what you have, appreciate the small and simple things, be kind and help others, let the ones you love know you love them, and when things get tough, there is a bigger plan and you will be stronger for it. thank you very much. chambersburn

american history tv on c-span 3. white housegoing press secretary jay carney talks about the most difficult aspect of his job. he was the featured guest of the "christian science monitor" breakfast series. it's about one hour.

>> peter? we've got a space. p come on, brother. , brother.g-- come on you can be on tv with me. thank you for coming. just this morning is jay carney, president obama's departing press secretary and we are delighted to have him as a guest on the day he is traversing the polar extremes of the media world starting with the monitor breakfast and moving to new york for the "colbert

report." hare asecretary to say high cholesterol breakfast with us. shareis the 12th to breakfast with us. he has degrees in russian and european studies. career in journalism began with the miami herald. he moved to time magazine and was with the moscow bureau and in 1993 came to washington where he was reporter, deputy chief, and bureau chief at which point he left to become vice president communications director. he stepped in front of the podium in february 2011. whatever his new job, a says he will have more time for his wife. now on to the ever popular

process portion of the program. as always, we are on the record. no means of filing of any time while the breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what our guests as. there is no embargo when it ends. do the traditional thing and send me a subtle nonthreatening signal, the always open to interpretation finger wave or what have you. we will start by offering our guests the opportunity to make some opening comments and then move around the table. thanks again for doing this. >> thank you, dave. i appreciated. thanks, everyone, for being here. i've had a couple of opportunities now in the briefing room both when the president announced my departure and then yesterday to say a few things about the experience that gratifying andw

rewarding it's been, how imbling, and how much appreciate this process, whether it is here or in the briefing room. people constantly say when you have this job, and i'm sure it was true for my predecessors, but you have the hardest job or one of the hardest jobs. as my colleagues know on the staff at the white house, and i think many of you know, especially if you are in the regular press corps, i really enjoyed it. the briefing interactions and even the contentious ones to be stimulating and at times frustrating but in a way that i would not trade. there are things about the briefing, obviously, that could be improved.

overall, i think it's been a great thing for me. doe done the best i could serve both the president, the white house, the administration, to be asry, and also informative as i could be about what the president, the white house, the administration, and the government are doing. the earliest, best advice i had about the job was to never guess. if you did not know the answer, the surest way to get into and saywas to assume that from the podium. i try to take my own advice not always but mostly. another thing i think that i learned is the white house has become, both in fact and in the youit's covered -- no thank

-- the center of the universe in washington and the country. that pressant secretaries have to have an answer for everything. often it is the case that the best ways to go for information, especially some of the more detailed information as to agencies, congress, elsewhere. while it's true press secretaries indulge in the phrase, "i refer you to the department of whatever" in order to deflect some of the questioning elsewhere, it's also frequently true that a lot of the important work and policy development, implementation that happens is in the agencies. the spotlight is on the white house, but that's not the only game in town.

should just go to questions. it's early for me to be speaking. [laughter] if you have a long-winded question, please raise your hand. i am on my ceremonial soapbox. you told charlie rose that a good white house reporter know 15% or 20% of what's going on. carefully extrapolate a little beyond that. looking back on your experience, does the area of press ignorance follow a pattern? intel or is the ignorance random? >> i tried to explain that it this as a hit on reporters or the suggestion that they were ignorant or that this of secretiveness.

he goes back to what i was just talking about. the amount of traffic through the white house is immense. the number of issues people are working on on any given day is very broad, very deep. reporters who cover the white house on a daily basis, in particular, tend to because of the demand of news and their focus on the top one or two topics of the day and are kind of unaware of and don't have the capacity to become aware of so much else that is happening. that wase things initially and continues to be really fascinating to me about the experience of working in the white house is just how the train never stops. we've seen this just in terms of the number of issues that have

demanded our attention, your attention, dominated the news only to be replaced by an issue that has garnered equally intensive attention. that's really what i meant. we talked about that line, charlie and i, but it was based on a conversation i had won a first came to washington from my michaelnd mentor, duffy, when he told me as i was young reporter covering the white house that really we only know -- i cannot remember if he said this team, 20, 30% so i don't want to pin this on them entirely, but then we have to figure it out or extrapolated from there and i think it's a fair point. true and hasis become more so over the years i've been in washington, both as

a reporter and in the white the demand for instant information and revelation in the covering of the white house and washington coupled with the strain on resources that so many news organizations have been feeling has resulted in an exacerbation of this issue where there just is not the bandwidth in the organization to cover the agencies or congress with the depth they used to and there is a tendency to just throw folks out the white house and have them chase whatever the story of which can be, i think, frustrating for white house correspondents and certainly, on occasion, for those who work there. garrett in aajor presentation you did george washington that after you have been selected as white house press secretary, before you moved to the podium that you went through mock briefings

where robert gives "knew from personal experience just the right kind of question that would completely unsettle me." now that you're leaving, can you give us a kind of example of what the question would he? >> the risk that any press secretary in the modern age where everything is televised is to be forced by a .uestion to lose your composure sometimes that is because of a sometimes iton or is just a difficult and penetrating question. it took me a while to figure this out. the exchange win from the podium. you have the higher ground. you have the capacity to: somebody else. on somebody else.

then when you review the tape, it's pretty clear that you took the bait and let yourself be less than 100% on your game. with also true, to only people who sit in the remand suffer through the briefing and a handful of folks who have nothing better to do than watch the whole thing, experience it that way. most people just see a snippet. they often do not see the interplay between the questioner and the press secretary. they just see what i say and you have to keep that in mind when you are up there. robert was great having had done me into the kind of exchange i found out i wanted to avoid but did not always. [laughter] >> sam. >> me? thank you.

what was the toughest point as a press secretary for you in this gig? what was the best point for you in this gig? what was the most memorable? no policy because i know -- as press secretary. newton, connecticut, was emotionally low for a lot of parents in here. it was just unimaginably bad for everyone. and separating it from that, i difficultthe most period since i've been press secretary was dealing with healthcare.gov and it's pretty awful rollout and that was

because, in contrast to some of the other issues that became challenging at the podium and challenging for us in the press, this one was completely of our doing, completely our responsibility, was obviously a major legislative accomplishment of the president. we had really not gotten it i think that made everyone feel from the president on down a great deal of responsibility. it made a lot of us worry about what would happen if we could not fix it in terms of the goal of expanding the availability of health insurance to millions of americans. obviously it was a concern politically if it did not work out. in contrast to a lot of these sort of issues that burn , this was a for now

sustained bad news story. i remember that as being the biggest challenge. , because it iss more recent than some of the other issues, in many ways it's one of the best moments also. gradually became confident that the website was going to be fixed, as we became aware gradually that revising down expert rations of what the numbers would be were too low when they were going to get -- revising down expectations of what the numbers would be and when we hit one million, that was a good day. what distinguishes that is unlike a lot of things the president and the white house has to deal with and some of the toughest moments often started by events not in your control, this was on us.

felt that president responsibility deeply and others who worked on it felt it deeply and we are all indebted to the team that went in there and figured it out, got it right. >> alexis. >> he's mixing it up going to the back row. >> alexis was often my go to. [laughter] >> several former presidential press secretary's say they don't know why the gavel does not still exist in think it should be resurrected. you think there is value in trying to do the morning gavel? i'm not trigger but he remembers the cameras were put into the briefing room not that long ago, during the bush administration for the inside of the white house to be paying attention, you call out the names in the

transcript so it's clear who asked the question. can you tell us about how the breaking is carved up inside the white house and used by the staff and how the president absorbs anything that's been asked? >> after the fact? >> after, yes. >> let me answer the gavel question. .t is a great idea what i found, and i think robert found before me, is that it's very challenging to try to do at the gaggle and a briefing in the same day if you also want to be in the room during team meeting see you can stand at the podium and represent what's happening on the inside. is my daynd early on starts with the first meeting in the chief of staff's office pending if it's 7:30 a.m. or

7:45 a.m. i have five meetings before then and 10:00 or 10:30 a.m. a morning to do gaggle, that would require more prep and time, then i would miss most or at least some of those meetings and those are key. prepared and more toe comfortable trying answer questions authoritatively if i was in the room and i heard the discussion and they understood and participated in exactly what was happening. what i think would be a good idea, and this will not be universally welcomed, is to off-camera anden on camera briefings. ,t's very hard to do both especially now. what robert found out is the old days, like when i started in the early clinton years there were a

handful of people who would come to the press secretary's office for the gaggle, that does not work. robert found he had to move it to allow for all the people who had to be there and you had to take it out of the office into the briefing room. then people wanted to turn on the cameras and you get in this cycle where it was just going to be another briefing. it did not have the kind of informal value it had had in the past. i urge mymething that successor and sick -- successors to consider. i found that the gaggle's i've done on air force one were just as substantive and a lot less cameracal than the on briefings. as you know, because you were around, mike mccurdy apologize for being the press secretary who agreed that the entirety of

the briefing be on camera. i know why people wanted that. i certainly don't expect it would be reversed. it creates a different dynamic. there would be some value, i think, and having more of those off-camera gaggles. after a briefing, my team depending on what else is going on in the nature of the briefing, we sort of dissected quickly and assess where there any things we needed to get back to people on, anything where a messed up and we needed to correct -- that almost never happens. the teams who represent different areas of policy would make sure that folks off they needed to what we were saying

thet things either in policy councils are out in the agencies. in the modern communication world, this all becomes available so there was not a formal way or a more regular way of disseminating it. if there was a flag or some issue somebody needed to know about, it would move around pretty quickly. as i said, truthfully over the years, the president does not watch a lot of tv during the day and does not really ever watch any news tv. he might hear about it from somebody else if there was an interesting exchange or read it later at night and i would hear from him if he had a comment. it's usually at night. >> michael. >> i'm assuming you've got to

know him well personally. i'm kind of curious why publicly sometimes,oof unlikable. what's your view on why that public image persists? doesn'tld argue that it , when you say that broadly. the first president in more than your lifetime to be elected twice with more than 50% of the vote. you have to be pretty likable to have that happen. i think there are two things that i can say about that perception that some have. one of the very compelling and distinct things about barack obama is he was not on the national stage until fairly shortly before he was elected president. is he was, ins ways that his predecessors were

not, a fully formed person before people were looking at him as a potential president. ofwas not a creature washington. he did not spend much time here. he was a senator only for a few years before elected and that to how he is as a person compared to a lot of people who run for the office. you can argue there are downsides to that. are downsides to being a creature of washington and having those relationships, to be sure. when he took office, president obama, i would argue, was a lot more unlike and in touch with the experiences of non-washington people than the usual occupant of the office. part -- a lot of this welleen written and said

-- he's not an individual person topolitician who is reactive the emotions in the sort of swings of everyday politics in washington. there are upsides and downsides. i would argue the outbound ways the down because it means -- the up outweighs the downs. he looks at issues and challenges with a night to the horizon as opposed to winning the day. when you are on his columns team him tos team your urging do something and he does not do it that way. more often than not, he's been right in that decision. side, i've said this before, it's a great thing about this country and it says

so much that one reason i found it so easy to work with him and have developed a relationship with him is that we are not unalike, which is pretty amazing. he's three and a half years older than im, has kids a little older than mine. , i felt a lot in common with him. say one of the myths, i think i mentioned this somewhere, maybe charlie rose, when you are president of the united states and you have that they playing, there is a bedroom that's really nice and an office that's really big on the plane. if you want to be alone, you can spend all your time in those spaces. in the miles i traveled with him, which were many, never spent any time in those rooms. he's in the conference room with people around him all the time

engaged in conversations, watching sports, reading briefing books, playing cards. i think that reflects his nature. >> justin. >> i have a personal and maybe a follow-up. >> what's the question? >> i wanted to ask about russia. notow you said you are interested in the ambassador job, but there seems about -- >> my wife is not interested. [laughter] >> there are a lot of people who suggested that at some point you are interested in that job or had conversations about it. i wanted to ask if that was something you ever discussed with people or the president even though it has not come to fruition.

>> the truth is there were some --ks -- not the president who looking at my record, my interests, my background thought it would be a great idea. there was some story that said i was lobbying for it. to the extent there were any discussions, i was lobbying against it, not that it was ever a real thing. there's a certain romantic circularity to it. if i were ever able to do something like that, but it's not something i ever expressed any real interest in. .o there's that because of my seminal experience as a reporter is in the soviet union, being in what was then

leningrad with me democratizing awareand being vaguely that this lieutenant of his, was also on his team and having him now be who he is, that will always be interesting to me but not in service of the government. ande will go next to peter, .ulie, ryan, neil you've learned a lot about media that you got to see from the point of view. as you mentioned, reporters probably get 15% of what's going on. after 20 years of doing this, what surprised you most about

how it works inside the white house that reporters don't got? don't get? >> right. what surprised me -- i think what is surprising is how human the enterprise is, how small the rooms are. , very weightyd in a veryare made human way. i think there's a tendency when you cover a white house, the tendency i had, to make

about control, but did not intent account for the fact that in the a lot of these issues have to be decided, and this is true of any white house of either party, by a handful of people dealing with the best collection of fact they might be able to get but invariably an incomplete election. in a veryion challenging environment usually. you don't have the luxury when it gets to that room where the president is making the decision among the menu of options seeing the one that says you get everything you want just as you would have it be. , and ier side of that would assume this has been true

for mike houses of both parties, is that the people in that room are trying to do the right thing as they see it. encouraged by what i saw from the very beginning as people dealing with -- with the economic collapse and through this day with a tough issues in trying to get it right and the way they thought best serve the country and its people. mushy buts a little it is encouraging. , andnk there is a tendency i succumbed to it, to be very cynical about the decision-making process, very cynical about what the reasoning

behind anything that a white house does is. as a tendency to assume that politics and political considerations drive every decision. i'm here to tell you that's definitely not the case. as someone on the communications political side, it would have been a lot more convenient had it been the case, but it's just not. for the country, i think that's a good thing. >> was there ever a time you felt tension between 21 years of trying to be a truth teller, in effect, and five years now as mccurdy once said telling the truth slowly or finding ways of telling the truth that presented the best possible version of the truth but in maybe not what you would have written had you been a time magazine reporter? lot spendingd a the first two years in the white house as the vice president

communication director in essentially, a behind-the-scenes job. there's only one podium job at the white house. nearly ast have been ready to take the podium if someone had suggested i do it right out of being a reporter because i think there's a lot you need to learn about how a white house works and how the policy process works and how decisions are made about the ways that you explain and describe policy decisions that i was able to learn in two years. you and i have talked about this. hows shocked to find out the expertise i thought i had developed as a political reporter about communication strategies and white house communications was not really expertise and there was a lot to learn. i learned a lot thanks to others

in the vp office, axelrod, gibbs, others on the president's team. to go to the other part of your question -- you know, i was talking to someone yesterday about this. i tried very hard. i was not a traditional old-school reporter in that i was not an advocate i did not take sides in my reporting. i did not feel like i had a straitjacket but on me. i felt liberated. that only works if you actually believe in and agree with the policies you are advocating. i certainly did. but the problem for people not only in this job at other jobs in a white house or administration. you take a job because it's a

good career move but you don't agree with what you're doing? that's a risky proposition especially if you're having to articulate and speak about it publicly. differingstrongly views inside the policy process. those are expressed and the president and vice president insist on that. you obviously know a lot more about what's going on when you are a press secretary. i understand what mike was saying when he said you tell the truth slowly. you only do this job successfully if you tell the truth. i know he did the that -- he did that and i did. the media landscape has changed more dramatically from the time you've been in the white house than any previous time. i'm wondering if you could walk us through how to change is not

the communication strategy per se but policymaking, the idea that you not only have news popping all the time but there could be a single tweet about starts changing the conversation. when i talk to those who serve in multiple administrations, they talk about how the policy teams operate particularly in crisis situations, domestic or international, is somewhat different given the media pressures. >> i will take a couple of wax at that. that.cks at it's totally different. it's a different job and a whatrent atmosphere from it was when i first came in first term clinton and even from the bush years. ofovered the first term president george w. bush. media drives the

discussion did not even exist inn and there is no question the public-facing parts of the white house that creates a totally different dynamic. mostly it's about trying to assess very quickly, because the it, whether or not we need to chase that ball down the field or if she would take a step back to wait and see where something is going that's popping on twitter or elsewhere. push amonge great some to follow something and respond instantly and aggressively. what you find is that there is some wisdom in being discerning about doing that. twitter and social media have

newted an environment where news grabs people attention much more quickly than it used to. the fires burn brighter but they burn out faster. there is wisdom and valor in waiting sometimes to see whether and how quickly you need to react. in the policy world, there are numerous ways this has a profound effect, just this bead with which a very important information guest policy especially in the foreign-policy world where you have the impact of social media in the arab spring and elsewhere. i think it also effects the way developed,licy has too, but the way i've seen it, at least, to have the most is in generally

a good way, the rapidity with which policymakers, journalists, and everyone else get information from some areas of the world where it was never is easily available as it is now. >> miles. can tellndering if you us whether you sat in on any meetings during your tenure in constitutional amendments were discussed and whether, with , the climaterience of politics now in the changes that we've seen, the difficulties that governing is encountering. are there any kind of constitutional amendments that you yourself would imagine a big improvement in the way things get done? >> i've certainly been in a lot of meetings where policy has

been discussed. we made clear the president's views around the campaign and theissue possibility that an amendment is the only way to address some of what we've seen in the wake of citizens united. the only one that comes to mind when it comes to a constitutional amendment. [no audio] >> i have not really thought about it in terms of an amendment to the constitution. of experts on electoral politics have noted that we have a real issue, i think, when it comes to the way the district are drawn in congress and the impact it has in creating ever more polarized politics here.

i think i would associate myself with the prevailing wisdom that addressing that issue would probably be an official to the body politic. i'm not sure that requires a constitutional amendment, but it certainly would not be a bad idea. class ryan. >> you said earlier the best pieces of advice you got were not to guess. what's the best piece of advice you have passed along to josh? how do you think his experience being in the briefing room for so long might help him in a way that perhaps you did not have going in? yesterday, and i absolutely believe it, that there has never been anyone as ready to take over the job as josh is now. been abecause he's deputy press secretary from the beginning of this white house

and in my nearly three and a half years he's been the principal deputy. if i need to go do a teacher conference, baseball game, kids , i have asked josh to fill in for me at the podium a fair number of times during this time . there was nothing like that experience, i can tell you. with ae sessions i did handful of people in a room before i took the podium did not adequately simulate what the briefing is really like. josh has done that. i think it's different from answering questions on a tv show or just on the record in a conversation with a reporter. it's a unique experience and josh is ready for it. he's had it. i pass on some of the obvious advice to josh.

he's not going out for the first time. i've told him what i've learned and i think he's demonstrated that he's absorbed whatever good advice i've given them. i think what i would, however, and will tell josh going forward is that it's important internally, and this goes back to the question that alexis , to listen carefully and those meetings you are participating in so that you hear from the president and of thethe parameters policy discussion. one of the wings so useful to me in being in meetings with the president when he was deliberating over policy decisions he had not made yet

was the understanding of the universe of his thinking. that created beyond talking lines as our first answer to a question that gave me a sense of where i could go, but language i could use. i know i had a better sense of hearing him say it in those meetings what he might say if he were up there. always felt a lot of comfort if i had heard the president evenlf talk about an issue obviously if he was talking about it and he was still midstream in the decision-making process about whether you still had to protect but i was able to understand the way it was thinking about it and it gave me he -- more confidence that was accurate in his thinking. when people talk about press secretary access and their role internally, that's the most important thing, you develop an

way the president and other top policymakers think about things. >> is obviously done briefings before. do you go back and watch the game tape? everything,efore health care, national security, education, talk to me about what's new in some of those areas, what's new overnight. sometimes at the end of that process, if there is a particularly contentious issue or one where precision is important especially in foreign policy, we will do a quick back-and-forth just in my office . i don't expect josh will be doing any formal mocks. he does not need them. >> you talked about wanting to bring back an off-camera gaggle.

what are the different ways you are building the press operation from the ground up in a fantasy world? what it would look like if it was not all about -- >> the reference to the blackberry is about anachronisms? [laughter] about 36 more hours with this baby. [laughter] it's a great question. are a lot of institutional constraints on the way the press office operates and interact with the press corps. there is inertia on both sides to any attempt to change any of .hose constraints

talking about doing away with the briefing because it's become so much of a theater performance. i think that there probably is away, and we were talking about this earlier, to drain some of out. having a situation in an everyday basis, a spokesman from the white house is out there answering questions. incould be that you do that an off-camera gaggle in the press secretary is available at different points of the day to do quick interviews. maybe that's the way to do it. i don't know. i think there is some dissatisfaction on all sides with the way that the briefing has evolved.

we've done a lot within those constraints to change on the broader communications side what we do to modernize, take advantage of media development in social media. i know that has also caused some tension and i understand that. it would be that malpractice for anyone in our positions not to take advantage of social media. i know that our successors will in ways that we cannot even imagine. .'ve always believed that peter, in some ways this goes back a little bit to your question in the whole thing about what percentage of wings, what percentage of what's going .n, what reporters know

there are really good ones, and a lot of you in this room don't rely just on the briefings or the press releases for your stories. would -- wish you [laughter] reporter, the best ones certainly didn't and they do not today. it's just part of the information you get as you piece together your understanding of what's going on. >> we have about two minutes left. >> deuce around the uncomfortable truth with a ,lizzard of uncomfortable facts where there e-mails between lois lerner and other members of the irs who could have been involved in some sort of conversation. did you know about those e-mails and did you like? no.he answer is

>> did you lie? >> honestly, it's not because i'm a paragon of virtue. that would be a terrible way to do the job. when you cannot say is you don't. you take the question or you explain without revealing what you cannot say because these are internal deliberations or national security issues. , what theer question irs is dealing with the terms and, i don't know all the details about what the next things are. i addressed e-mails from lois lerner yesterday and i would just refer you to them for what else they are doing on that issue. last lastll be the

question. you understand the concept. >> and asking you are leaving with the midterms coming and there will be more of a struggle to get media attention than the white house has had in the previous year. what kind of advice would you give josh about that? how would you expect the operation to change given that? >> that's a great question. there are upsides potentially to the fact that, as i did, most of electionscited about and the intensity of coverage shifts, especially the presidential beginning immediately after the midterms. i think there's an opportunity to continue to focus on what the white house has been focused on, which is getting as much done as he can in the time that he has. governance.

and using every tool he has to make that happen. congress has not been particularly cooperative or to movean in efforts the president's agenda. an agenda shared by the majority of the american people. but that doesn't mean he cannot do a lot of important things and i think we have seen that this year. it does not mean that there are not any opportunities for getting significant legislation passed through congress. not because republicans will suddenly decide that they want to do president obama a favor, but because they will see it in compromise on to some of these issues that are actually good for the economy and good for them politically, immigration reform being one of them.

get peoplew do you to pay attention to what you are doing, there is an upside to having maybe not as much of that attention. but i think this would be true of any white house. there is the preoccupation with electoral politics in washington that is not shared outside of washington, certainly not this far out. and what you have seen us do come up president is with as many ways as we can find to have him seen and heard talk about what he believes by americans who are not tuning into -- tuning in to political shows. >> next am i