>> jenna: that's for joining us, everybody. >> jon: we hope you have a great holiday weekend. we hope you start it now. >> jenna: why not. "america live" starts right now. >> megyn: fox news alert, welcome, everyone, terror on the streets of great britain. and today investigators are trying to determine if the murder of a british soldier in broad daylight is part of a larger plot. information just coming in. welcome to "america live," everyone. i'm megyn kelly. moments ago we learned the identity of the soldier killed in front of horrified bystanders. 25-year-old lee rigby had served in afghanistan, described as a loving father to a 2-year-old boy. do you believe this? this poor man, the way he was just run down in the streets of london yesterday. and today we are learning more about the men accused

of doing it british authorities revealing that they had previously looked into these suspects for possible ties to terrorism. but apparently they determined these men were not in immediate threat. but obviously a threat they were. we must warn you that the images you are about to see are are graphic and disturbing after the deadly assault the suspects stuck around holding the weapon in his hand several at least two murder weapons, i should say. while the innocent victim's body lay motionless in the street. attackers warned of more violence to come. blamed the attack on the soldier saying he had, quote, killed muslim people in muslim countries. >> we must fight them as they fight us. an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. i apologize that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. your people will never be safe. government they don't care but. greg palkot live in london with the very latest.

greg? we are right outside the barracks. drummer. he served in some capacities, also in afghanistan. so he was in a war zone and it was a war zone here in this area southeastern london yesterday when he was slain hacked to death by his attacker thes. yet to have an identity of the politics from those attackers. sky news according to their sources and others are identifying 28-year-old michael. he and his other attacker apparently are british born, of nigerian descent with associations with islamist groups. and, yes, security services here real today had these two individuals on their radar for a while. they were not ready to move, not ready to act and so security services did not act. that has caused some consternation in the u.k. it has allowed the services to move fast.

officials making searches in three different homes in this area. taking some people in said to be relatives. trying to figure out whether there was a jihadi network behind these attacks. behind these two individuals or whether they were lone wolves. they were self-startedders as they call them here in england. if he they were, how did they get the tools to do this act? one possibility suggested that they were familiar with the late al qaeda leader anwar al-awlaki in online magazine that might have taken some cues from that. here is is a little bit of what british prime minister david cammeron had to say today. take a listen. >> first, this country will be absolutely resolute in its stand against violent extremism and terror. we will never give in to terror or terrorism in any of its forms. second, this view is shared by every community in our country. >> we watched as flowers were ellayna in front of this barracks. people upis set about the loss of this youngs

soldier. what are it might do inflame tensions between whites and minorities here. last night, megyn, we saw anti-islamic white nationalist group clash with police. we also saw three different mosques attacked in the london metropolitan area. they are watching for that tonight. back to you. >> megyn: greg palkot, thank you. just moments after the attack, a number of women actually put themselves in harm's way. several of them rushing to the victim's side. another actually had an extended conversation with one of the suspects. she explains that at first she thought the whole thing was an accident until the perpetrator started talking. listen as explain what is one of them told her and why she did not run for her life. >> what did he say to you? >> he said i killed him. i said why? i said is he a british soldier. he killed people. he killed muslim people in muslim countries and have nothing to do here.

>> were you not scared for yourself in that situation. >> no. >> why not? >> [inaudible] mother with children stopping. more important. i talk to him and then i asked him what he wanted. >> megyn: unbelievable. prime minister david cammeron later praised her for her bravery. in the next hour we take a closer look at the attack, what appears to be a delayed police response and why there is debate in the u.k. now about whether or not this really was an islamist inspired attack. fox news alert, new developments involving two of the sandals now engulfing washington. journalists and irs investigation. first, the irs scandal as you know by now likely the irs has admitted to targeting conservative groups for a period of 18 months to three years. who are applying for tax exempt status. well, now we are learning the house republicans may

call back the embattled irs official who refused to testify about her agency's targeting of conservative groups. it was her group that was doing it, but she took the fifth. yesterday, lois lerner, the woman at the center of this scandal went before congress, made an opening statement, and then attempted to assert her fifth amendment rights. in her opening statement she said she did nothing wrong, she did nothing illegal. she went on from there. well, at the time trey gowdy a former federal prosecutor said you can't do that ms. lerner, it's not how it works. either you clam up entirely or you start talking and you started talking. well, now the committee chairman darrell issa says trey gowdy was right and that lois lerner waived her right not to testify. coming up in moments, jay seq. could you low will join us now -- sekulow will join us now. he had clients coming to him tell them they felt

they were being targeted by the irs. the irs denied it he knew it was true. he kept pushing for months. now he has been vindicated. we will ask him well weather now in his legal opinion she can be dragged back and forced to testify and answer the questions she chose to stay silent on. wait until you hear what allen different wits says on it. -- dish wits says on it are demanding answers in the widening controversy over the targeting of journalists. house judiciary committee chairman bob good lap wanting to know why justice deliberately avoided telling the associated press. required to do. there is an exception to that requirement but it's very, very narrow. secret as they. james rosen we now know. politics editor and host of

power play on foxnews.com. eric holder was, before that committee, last week i think it was. and basically said this is very, very rare. we almost never do it. it's one of the top two or three worst leaks i have ever seen in my life, what the a.p. printed about what happened in yemen, that's why we had to do it all in secret. you can't -- you can't go notify a.p. that we're going to search their records and a.p. call their source and say they're searching my records and where does that lead? we find out a week later they went and got james' records as well without any notice to james. without any notice to fox and said what are the republicans pushing for? >> well, look. we'll expect to hear the president today. is he going to give a big talk about counter terrorism, et cetera. and ed henry reports that the president will make mention of this. >> probably get to hear the word unfelterred again as the president talks about

something may be irrelevant. wants the press to be ununfetterred in his pursuit. safeguards that will be put in place. another meam from this administration in dealing with these sandals is to say going forward. going forward we will do this. but bob goodlat and the house republicans are not doing that think wanted to know what's going on now and who knows what and who knows when. as rosen gate tells us that there was more here than expected. house republicans thinks there much be much more here and goodlat and the other members of his committee are going to try to make the justice department cough up the full scope of what they have been doing here as it relates to targeting the press and one expects there will be a lot more headaches to come for a justice department that is already deeply embattled. >> the dirty legality secret of the associated press story is that the a.p. actually was working with the administration to try to address its concerns

about national security matters being raised. they held off for five days on publishing it because the government was telling them there is national security concerns. they did that. they claimed they only published it when the told the national security has passed. you can go ahead now and then they did. so goodlat seems to be saying they were working with you. they showed an understanding of your position under those circumstances you couldn't go to them indication seems to be, chris, goodlat and others think this is about more than investigating a leak. this is about getting records. spying on journalists and potentially just chilling the freedom of the press right. the a.p.'s telling of the case is that they had consulted with the cia. got the cia all clear that american lives were not in danger because of the leak. election year president had

h. celebrated the one year anniversary of another big leak leaking of the details of usama bin laden. they were looking to push this narrative. call from the white house that said no. you can't go. we're not giving you an exclusive. we are rolling this thing out. the a.p. suggests that this was retributive that this overbroad record seizure was retribution for the a.p. for stepping on the white house's line. and so what you will see now, i suspect soon is that holder and his deputies are going to have to come testify. they are going to have to be subpoenaed and come up to the house and the house is going to more and more of this stuff becomes public, whether it's in the james case or this case or whoever knows how many, holder says he couldn't even remember how many. other case are out there. a tick tock a chain of custody and all that stuff. >> megyn: that's what i want to ask you because at what point does eric holder or the u.s. attorney for

the district of columbia, ron mason, who is the guy behind both of these targeting instances a.p. and and rosen gate in rosen probably loves that term because is he is an expert on watergate. when do we get to sit them down? who gets to sit them down and say how many of us he spied on and when did it happen? how many times has this happened and why wasn't notice provided? because even the laws that allow in limited circumstance the government to go after your records without telling you require them to come to you after the fact and tell you, in most circumstances. that didn't happen in rosen's case. it did ultimately happen in the a.p.'s. quick answer. >> the answer is soon and extensively house republicans that i have talked to are serious about it. they are numb to it and it's going to hurt. >> chris, good to see you. >> good to see you. displo coming up just a bit developments in the george zimmerman trial that you may not have heard of. lawyers released us a stack of new evidence just days after asking that information on trayvon

martin's drug use be allowed into trial. we have gotten some cell phone records that belong to trayvon martin and zimmerman's attorney mark o'mara joins us on the significance of these. also, did lois lerner waive her right to take theeo fifth? that's next. a we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed much is the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪

>> i not done anything wrong. i not broken any laws. i not violated any irs rules and regulations and i have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee. after very careful consideration. i have died to follow -- decided to follow my counsel's advice and not testify and answer any of the questions today. >> megyn: lois may be regretting how that went down. that was the woman at the center of the irs controversy before congress yesterday. attempting after making opening statement to invoke

constitutional right to refuse to answer questions at the congressional hearing her fifth amendment right. she pleaded the fifth. she pleaded it however after she openly stated she had done nothing wrong, she never break the law and on it went. it is that brief opening statement that has one leading republican pushing to call her back before the committee suggesting she may have waived her right to remain silent in leading republican matters because heads up that committee. were sekulow american for law and justice as viewers must know by now, without you without mark levin, we may never have known what the irs was doing because all these groups started complaining and they went to lawyers like you and talked to levine about it as well and said i think i'm being targeted and a lot of people didn't believe them. you actually did believe them and you pressed and pressed and pressed. >> we did. >> megyn: so, to your credit now here we are seeing lois lerner take the fifth or try to. let me tell what you allen different wits had to say about this on our radio interview on news max tv

after openly identifying himself as we all know as a liberal democrat saying he agreed with trey gowdy that she waived her right, listen. >> and i'm a liberal democrat. the republican congressman is obviously correct. you can't simply make statements about a subject and then plead the fifth in response to questions about the very same subject. once you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have wade your fifth amendment right. >> do you agree? >> i think allen has made and so has congressman gowdy made a very strong argument. i don't think it's crystal clear i don't think anybody could say 100%. i will tell you the problem here and i think it's a significant one for lois lerner. if she just went in there under advice of counsel i'm taking the fifth amendment right to protect myself against self-incrimination and i won't be answering any questions we wouldn't be having this discussion. she testified previously

before congress and opened up with an opening statement saying she has not lied to congress. she has not made false statement and she has followed the rules and regulations of the internal revenue service. and then, by the way, i'm taking the fifth amendment that is the problem. referring to previous testimony making an opening statement and then invehicling the 50. there is a strong argument that there is a waiver here. i know there are lawyers that disagree. there is not unanimity here. i worked for treasury and chief counsel's office for the irs, how she did that and why she did that is beyond me. i cannot understand why if they were going to invoke the fifth i probably would have told her invoke the fifth too especially with what he she knows why would she not invoke the fifth? >> you know her lawyers told her to do. this i'm assuming the lawyers told her this is how to handle it dershowitz says the lawyers committed malpractice. he wrote a book on subject matter waiver. that's what it is called when you go out there. you can't say i broke no

laws. i didn't violate any rules. i testified truthfully to you on this matter before. this considers subject matter waiver. you can't just say she waived her rights on just the one specific thing. she waives on the entire subject matter. if she comments on it, and that's what she did, you know, from the look of it. >> and she verified a document as well. megyn, it begs the question what are her lawyers thinking? this is the link between the internal revenue service and the white house. lois lerner today is in charge of tax exempt for the irs. they are institutionally incapable of doing anything with this kind of leadership in place. on top of that the fbi investigating the irs and these agents involved this is unbelievable mess that's gotten more flicked complicated. the white house story changing day by day. >> megyn: how do we get the truth? wield like the truth from lois and all the others above and below her on the

totem pole at the irs still working at the irs. what are the options now? should she be given immunity depending on a proffer of what she would testify to? what we really want to hear is her testimony right. i would consider immunity. i would tell you what else i would look into giving immunity to. that is the tax exempt agents. they receive instructions. representative with the government. you go to them give them some kind of immunity. they come clean. they tell you what they were told and who told them and then you decide whether you want to give lois lerner immunity because the reality as we know right now this went to the deputy secretary of the treasury. compromised position. gone to the office. the time line has changed from jay carney. we know that the irs in consultation with the white house was discussing how best to break the news. >> megyn: how to roll it out, the investigation and the report. we need to know answers. >> megyn: is it possible they could refer this case

to the u.s. office in d.c. we will see whether they go that far. thank you. >> thanks, megyn. >> megyn: lois earn lerner is not the only development in the irs scandal. new evidence regarding a top official who may be the one responsible for ordering the agents to target conservatives. we think we have a name. that's coming up. when you have diabetes...

your doctor will say get smart about your weight. i tried weight loss plans... but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes.

>> megyn: we're getting amazing new look when a tornado barreled through the suburbs of moore; a man huddles inside his underground storm shelters. can you see the swirling clouds, debris flying everywhere and the wind. let you watch this whole thing. it's a little and you minute.

try to imagine being in the middle of that surreal. damage some survivors return to what's left of their homes for the very first time. casey stegall joins us live

now from moore. casey? >> megyn, 8 miles from where i'm standing, past all of the debris, past all of the debris efforts that are going on. the very first funeral was held today for one of the seven children who did not survive at the plaza towers elementary school. not far from where we are. and that funeral was held this morning for 9-year-old. 9-year-old antonia candleara. i'm reading from her obituary, she had her own and most special beautiful way of looking at the world. she could find the good and joy in everything. 23 other victims are going to be laid to rest in this community in the coming days. all while those who survived continue to comb through the rubble. continue to comb through what is left of their lives, dealing with bouts of severe weather on top of it. right now, we are under a flash flood warning in this part of oklahoma. and there is a potential, we understand, for even

mortar nad dick activity for this area. if you can believe that megyn, adding insult to injury for the people who are desperately trying to pick up, bury the dead and move on with their lives. >> megyn: can you hear some the electronic car horn responses and you speak. >> megyn: where do you begin when your house is in tatters? major new developments in the george zimmerman/travon murder case which is set to go to trial in june. zimmerman's lawyer releasing a mountain of new evidence now. we have got it, including photos that he says were found on travon martin's cell phone that he believes will be critical to the defense. we will share them with you when we speak live to george zimmerman's attorney right here today. and, the feds blaming low level employees in the cincinnati office for the

irs's targeting of conservative groups. but that story may now be falling apart as a new investigation uncovers a high level manager, believed to be connected to the various staffers involved, right after the break, despite the irs officials' refusal to do so, we will name names. >> well, i don't know the precise date. i frankly was unaware. >> it's not my area. >> i don't know. >> i don't remember speaking with ms. lerner before my testimony. >> okay. >> but i don't know the details, sir. >> i'm not familiar with, u of m, that letter, i'm sorry. >> but i don't know that look what mommy is having.

mommy's having a french fry. yes she is, yes she is. [ bop ] [ male announcer ] could've had a v8. 100% vegetable juice, with three of your daily vegetable servings in every little bottle.

with three of your daily vegetable servings have hail damage to both their cars. ted ted is trying to get a hold of his insurance agent. maxwell is not. he's on geico.com setting up an appointment with an adjuster.

ted is now on hold with his insurance company. maxwell is not and just confirmed a 5:30 time for tuesday. ted, is still waiting. yes! maxwell is out and about... with ted's now ex-girlfriend. wheeeee! whoo! later ted! online claims appointments. just a click away on geico.com. i don't understand precise date. >> i frankly was unaware. >> i don't know. >> i don't remember speaking with ms. lerner before my testimony. >> but i don't know the details, sir. >> i'm not familiar with that. i'm sorry. >> i don't know that. >> megyn: they don't know anything. key figures linked to the irs and treasury department repeatedly saying they just don't know or they don't remember key facts with the irs's targeting of conservative groups. for weeks, the feds also insisted this was the work of low level employees in the cincinnati bureau of the irs but now it appears

that story may be falling apart. trace gallagher. >> great working from fox affiliate in cincinnati on this. the heart of the matter is whether this was just a group of lo level employees in the cincinnati office. put up this graphic. we will show you. this six workers have been identified who sent these scrutinizing letters to conservative groups. they include five irs agents plus one supervisor all five of theist agents have different managers. those managers have different district or territory managers. it's designed that way to prevent targeting certain groups. in other words, there is separation built into the system come back on camera and i will show you how this works. when you apply for nonprofit status the agents get 270 days to process those applications, nine months, right? they go past that nine month limit and it sends up red flags. every month after the nine months the agents have to write up a report.

give a status on each of those applications. look at this. 300 groups were targeted. they all spent between 18 months and three years in the system. some still have not been processed. every one of them went over the nine month limit. that do the math. that equals thousands of red flags. now go back to our gawsk, right? one woman handles all of those red flags. her name, you see it there is cindy thomas. she is the manager of the tax exempt division in cincinnati. she is also the only common link to the rest of those six agents. and, in 2012 she released information to investigative journalist group about conservative groups who apply for nonprofit status. also released, private information about conservative groups that were never approved for the nonprofit status. so, when you talk about the hierarchy, megyn, when you get below lois lerner who is in washington and you get into ohio and cincinnati, the person

below lois lerner is cindy thomas. she may be the next person that investigators and congress would like to talk to. >> megyn: yet, she has not yet been called to testament trace, thank you. joining me now jim jordan a member of that oversight government reform committee. congressman, great to see you, what do you make of that? will cindy thomas be added to the witness list and forced to come in and answer to whether she had a role in this? >> i think the chances are very strong. i mean, look. she answers to lois lerner, the very lady who took the fifth amendment yesterday. so obviously she is important. some of those agents below cindy thomas we have already asked them for come in with tribe interviewed with committee staff. here is the key to the whole thing. every time you pull on a string this ball unravels even more. it's going to take some time. democrats understand we need additional hearings and real investigation. this thing is going to take some time.

of government that's why we are going to get to the bottom of it. >> megyn: the way it looks right now. i may not have my power chart exactly right. stephan miller seen testify numerous times guy that looks like elliott gold. below him is joseph grant. he is the other guy who lost his job in all of this. he resigned. beneath joseph grant is lois lerner who rewe saw take the fifth. then woman named holly paz and cindy thomas. we heard some testimony about her yesterday, she is the supervisor of all these folks, one of them anyway, and they had her in all the interviews that the ig did of the low level people? >> unbelievable. >> yeah. holly paz was interviewed by committee staff. she indicated that the interviews that the inspector general did where he talked to folks trying to get to the bottom of this. she was present in those interviews. how do you get the truth when the supervisor is present with the folks trying to ask questions and

get the truth from. so even ranking member cummings said you can't do that we are trying to investigate and get at the truth here. so, again, as i said, the more strings you pull, the more this thing falls apart. and it's -- it underscores how important this is and that we're gonna have to investigate. it may take a while. we're gonna have to get to the truth. >> if this holly paz answers to lois lerner who has taken the fifth. query whether these lower level employees are going to want to say who t. was lois who told us or whether they were going to say it was holly paz who told us or cindy thomas who told us to do that woman sitting in the introduce with. they the way. -- we saw an exchange that you had yesterday with shulman, douglas shulman who was the commissioner of the irs up until relatively recently for five years. he was a bush appointee.

he sure did visit the white house a lot more. commissioner are to the irs and i want to play that exchange for the viewers. >> commissioner, did you ever go to the white house for a meetings. >> yes i had a number of occasions to go to the white house. >> how many times did you go to the white house. >> many times around budget and policy matters of tax and other things like that. >> do you have a number? any idea? >> i don't have a number. >> we just looked at the white house log. we couldn't get 2012. but in 2010, and 2011, 118 times you are at the white house. i mean that's a lot. 132 members of congress exact you about this information. 42 major news stories about this very subject, and you told congress a year ago can i give you assurances nothing is going on. everything is wonderful. we're not targeting conservative groups. are you sure you didn't talk to anyone at the white

house about this issue, mr. shulman? >> about singling out conservative groups for special scrutiny? >> well, that's what we are talking about, isn't it? >> absolutely sure did i not talk to. >> didn't come up in a casual conversation after 132 members of congress contacted you about it? are you sure you didn't bring it up with anybody at the white house? >> not to my memory and it wouldn't be appropriate and so i certainly believe i did not have any conversations. >> megyn: at this point, is there any evidence that this is tied to the white house other than antidotal evidence like that? a couple things, doug shulman wouldn't tell us anything. wouldn't answer hard any any questions. yes, here is one thing that i think is critically important. the inspector general tipped off doug shulman may 30th of last year five months before an election he told mr. shulman there was a list. key terms like tea party, the of 9-12 and patriot

were used to groups were getting extra scrutiny. he tipped off the democrat administration the inspector general didn't tell our committee when we were the ones that asked for the audit and we are the committee that oversees all the inspector generals in the government? they told the democrat administration that these terms were being used to identify groups and they didn't tell us? megyn, that's something we would like to know as republicans in an election year. we didn't know that but the other side did and they kept it quiet. >> what do you think is going to happen now with lois lerner? we had a segment about 20 minutes ago about whether she had waived fifth amendment rights by offering that statement. she didn't need to do. she could have done it on tv on the steps of congress. she didn't have to do it before you but she chose to. and now chairman issa seems to be saying he is not done with her. what happens from here. >> i think we are going to try to get her back. darrell is on solid ground. i mean, look, legal scholars argue both sides. i get all of that i thought

what congressman gowdy raised in the committee. you can't come in and assert your innocence and say i didn't do it. i'm innocent. i haven't done anything wrong and then not allow members of congress to question you. here is the irony in all of this megyn, she asserted her constitutional rights while she was trampling on' thousands of american's constitutional rights right to first amendment speech. second, she is still an employee of the irs. she is still a public servant. the taxpayers are still paying her salary. come answer the questions for goodness sake. >> megyn: we have been watching these hearings and they have been fascinating to watch. one of the congressman came out after i think it was the house ways and means committee last week stephan miller and said jeesh the arrogance of that guy. just washing this -- watching this as an observer. ms. lerner did not go in there hat wanted -- hat in hand yesterday. com issa if she's were the answers she had submitted in writing and seemed disgusted she had to look at the document. are you picking up on the tone? where is the hat in hand at

at? we're sorry, this was wrong. you have seen that witness yet? >> unfortunately i have the same reaction do you. they are supposed to be public servants to serve the american people and serve the taxpayers who pay heir salary. you would like to see that answer displayed when they come in front of congress and answer questions. >> megyn: it will be interesting to watch. what do you do with lois lerner, u.s. attorney and get a contempt order or handle it within the congress. >> i think we will try within the congress first. chairman issa and lawyers work for the oversight staff working that out as we are speaking. >> megyn: all right, sir. thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> megyn: three minutes, george zimmerman's attorney is here live with new evidence including pictures that he says come directly from travon martin's cell phone and he believes this could be potentially game-changing in this case. he's next. uncer ] from more efficient payments.

♪ to more efficient pick-ups. ♪ wireless is limitless.

available out there. i knew devry university would give me the skills that i needed to make one of those tech jobs mine. we teach cutting-edge engineering technology, computer information systems, networking and communications management -- the things that our students need to know in the world today. our country needs more college grads to help fill all the open technology jobs.

to help meet that need, here at devry university, we're offering $4 million dollars in tech scholarships for qualified new students. learn more at devry.edu.

[ female announcer ] from meeting customer needs... to meeting patient needs... ♪ to wireless is mitless.s... >> megyn: fox news alert out of london, police have made two more arrests in the brutal, brutal murder of an active duty soldier now described as an act of terror. a 29-year-old man and a 29-year-old woman have been arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to murder while their roll is somewhat unclear. two men initially taken into custody may not have been working alone. president obama issuing a statement on this moments ago saying, quote: i

condemn in the strongest terms the appalling attack against a british service member and that, quote: the united states stands resolute with the united kingdom, our ally and friend against violent extremism and terror. a couple new major developments in the george zimmerman murder case which is scheduled to go to trial in just three weeks. defense attorneys releasing a series of photos from the night trayvon martin was killed. along with some other photos. and this comes just days after the defense team asked a judge to allow information on travon martin's drug use to be admitted at trial. joining he me now from florida. mark o'mara, zimmerman's attorney. mark, great to see you. thank for coming on. >> megyn: what do you think is the most significant piece of evidence on earth that you are getting ready to submit? >> megyn, as you know, we try not to focus on particular pieces of evidence what we have done and had to do pursuant to our reciprocal discovery command is to forward information that we have to the state so that we can

use it at trial. all of the information that we released particularly today was information from travon martin's cell phone evidencing more three mentional picture. >> megyn: i believe you will argue the way travon martin has been portrayed in the press is not accurate and you intend to use these pictures we're going to go through a couple of them in text messages to prove that a couple that come to mind that you have sent pictures of it appears a gun from his cell phone. a picture of a gun and a hand holding a gun. do you believe the hand holding the gun belongs to travon martin in this picture? >> well, a premise to all of that. this information is only going to become more relevant as they handle the case. if they focus on five minutes intersection of george zimmerman and travon martin. then a lot of information about travon martin's past.

george zimmerman's past may not be relevant. if the state attempts to bring in evidence of travon in a certain way than this information may become very relevant. having said that i have to be hesitate distant to suggest my opinion of what the evidence is. that picture that you are referencing is the picture taken from the cell phone by whatever person was holding that cell phone looking at a gun in a hand and i don't want to say more than that because that's up really for a jury to decide. >> why is that relevant even arguably? >> arguably because if the issue of travon martin's propensity for violence becomes relevant then i think the jury can consider the fact that he had several pictures of a gun and, of course, there is text messages that also talk about his attempts to purchase the gun that that could be relevant concerning a propensity for violence i know you have pictures of marijuana plant cell phone. additional pictures plaintiff zimmerman's

injuries on the night in question. i want to ask you about all of that i also want to ask you about these 20 pages of text messages from travonens cell phone if you would bear with me we will pick that up after the break. >> yes, ma'am. [ male announcer ] this is george. the day building a play set begins with a surprise twinge of back pain... and a choice. take up to 4 advil in a day or 2 aleve for all day relief. [ male announcer ] that's handy. ♪

>> megyn: we continue with mark o'mara, george zimmerman's attorney. it locks like you have a picture from a cell phone marijuana plant, text messages from the phone and talk about weed and can we smoke one last time and fair amount of references to pot. how is this relevant? we know there was pot in travon martin's system the night of the event. one of the state's experts has said that level of thc in his system, while may not be enough to get you arrested for dui could definitely other state

studies out there that say that level of aggression in young males. it's relevant to show that he was on it that night and he might have been a chronic user of it. >> megyn: among the other evidence are new pictures of george zimmerman's injuries, some of which we have seen, you know, versions of before of his head bleeding in his nose and soen o. obviously you are going to show this man was under attack the night in question. it looks like you are going to use some of these text messages from travon's phone to show that he was a potentially violent guy who had some violent past episodes. what do the texts show in your view? >> travon was 17 years old. and it seems that from the text messages involved himself in some street fighting. there is some text messages and you can read them as well as i can that talk about losing one round and going back and winning two other rounds. or going back to get somebody because he hadn't

gotten enough blood. if we're talking about who travon martin was that night. if that becomes relevant, according to how the state presents it, then the idea that this is a person familiar with fighting, familiar with getting on top of somebody and other -- i think that's re relevant for a jury to look back and say what did happen in that one minute or so that we don't have audio evidence for? >> got about 20 seconds until the break. how do you like your chances right now? >> is he innocent. he has acted in self-defense we known is out there. we have it before a jury and he is going to be acquitted. >> mark, thanks for coming on. >> thank you. >> moments from now, president obama will give what the white house is building as major remarks on america's counter terrorism policy. don't go away.age 8% every 10 years. wow. wow. but you can help fight muscle loss with exercise and ensure muscle health. i've got revigor. what's revigor? it's the amino acid metabolite, hmb to help rebuild muscle

and strength naturally lost over time. [ female announcer ] ensure muscle health has revigor and protein to help protect, preserve, and promote muscle health. keeps you from getting soft. [ major nutrition ] ensure. nutrition in charge!

>> megyn: fox news alert. we are awaiting a key national security speech now by president obama. it expected to be about a major shift in the war on terror. this as we get new details this hour about the president's new effort to close gitmo brand new hour here of "america live." he can with, everyone, i'm megyn kelly. president obama is expected to speak any moment now from the national defense university in washington where he will renew his vow to close the detention center in gitmo. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. >> megyn: he is about to come out. >> this is a promise he made when he signed executive order to close the facility first term

more than four years ago. he will also comment on drone policy and counter terrorism measures. let's listen. >> it is a great honor to return to the national defense university. here at here at fort mcnair americans have served in uniform since 1791. earliest days of the public and future of warfare. for other two centuries, the united states has been bound together by founding documents that defined who we are as americans and served as our compass through every type of change. matters of war and peace are no different. americans are deeply ambivalent about war. but having fought for our independence, we know a price must be paid for freedom. from the civil war to our struggle against fascism,

on through the long twilight struggle of the cold war. battle fields have changed and technology has evolved, but our commitment to constitutional principles has weathered every war. and every war has come to an end. and with the collapse of the berlin wall a new dawn of democracy took hold abroad. and a decade of peace and prosperity arrived here at home. and for a moment, it seemed the 21st century would be a tranquil time. and then on september 11th, 2001, we were shaken out of complacency. thousands were taken from us. as clouds of fire and metal and ash descended upon a sun-filled morning. this was a different kind of war. no armies came to our shores, and our military was not the principle target. instead, a group of terrorists came to kill as

many civilians as they could. and so our nation went to war. we have now been at war for well over a decade. i won't review the full history. what is clear that s. that we quickly drove al qaeda out of afghanistan but then shifted our focus and began a new war in iraq. this carried significant consequences for fight against al qaeda, our stabbed in the world and to this day our interests in a vital region. >> meanwhile, we strengthened our defenses. hardening targets. tightening transportation security. giving law enforcement new tools to prevent terror. most of these changes were sound. some caused inconvenience. but some, like expanded surveillance raised difficult questions about the balance that we strike between our interests in

security and our values of privacy. and in some cases, i believe we compromised our basic values. by using torture to interrogate our enemies and detaining individuals in a way that ran counter to the rule of law. so after i took office, we stepped up the war against al qaeda but we also ought so change its course. we rerentlessly targeted al qaeda's leadership. we ended the war in iraq and brought 150,000 troops home. we pursued a new strategy in afghanistan and increased our training of afghan forces we unequivocally banned torture, affirmed our commitment to civilian courts, worked to align our policies with the rule of law and expanded our consultations with congress today usama bin laden is dead. and so are most of his top

lieutenants. there have been no large scale attacks on the united states and our homeland is more secure. few of our troops are in harm's way and over the next 19 months they will continue to come home. our alliances are strong and so is our standing in the world. in sum, we are safer because of our efforts. now, make no mistake, our nation is still threatened by terrorists. from benghazi to boston we have been tragically reminded of that truth. but we have to recognize that the threat has shifted and he a involved from the way that came to our shores on 9/11. with a decade of experience now to draw from, this is the moment to ask ourselves hard questions. about the nature of today's threats and how we should

confront them these questions matter to every american. for over the last decade, our nation has spent well over a trillion dollars on war heching to explode our deficits and constraining our ability to nation build here at home our service men's and their families have sacrificed far more on our behalf. nearly 7,000 americans have made the ultimate sacrifice. many more have left a part of themselves on the battlefield. or brought the shad co-s of battle back home from our use of drones to the tension of terrorist suspects, the decisions that we are making now will define the type of nation that we leave to our children. so america is at a crossroads. we must define the nature

and scope of this struggle or else it will define us. we have to be mindful of james madison's warning that no nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. neither i nor any president can promise the total defeat of terror. we will never erase the evil that lies in some human beings or stamp out the danger that lie open society. what we can do. what we must do is gition mantel networks that pose a direct danger to us and make it less likely for new groups to gain a foot hold all the while maintaining the freedom documents and yellow lights we defend. to define that strategy we have to make decisions based not on fear but on hard-earned wisdom that

givens with understanding the current threat that we face. today, the core of al qaeda in afghanistan and pakistan is on the path to defeat. remaining operatives spend more time thinking about their own safety than plotting against us they did not direct the attacks in weapon gaze or boston. they have not carried out a successful attack on our homeland since 9/11. instead what we have seen is the emergence of various al qaeda affiliates from yemen to iraq from somalia to north africa. the threat is more diffuse with al qaeda's affiliates in the arabian peninsula. aqap the most active in plotting against our homeland while none of aqap's efforts approach the scale of 9/11 they have

continued to plots of terror like blow up airplane on christmas day in 2009. unrest in the arab world has also allowed extremists to gain a foot hold in countries like libya and syria. but here, too, there are differences from 9/11. in some cases we continue to confront state sponsored networks like his that engage in acts of terror to achieve political goals. other of these groups are simply collections of local militias or extremists interested in seizing territory. lidge lent theeps groups pose threat most are interested in operating in the countries and regions where they are based. that means we will face more localized threats like what we saw in benghazi. or the b.p. oil facility in al gear i can't. local prarves, perhaps in

loose affiliation with regional networks launch periodic attacks diplomats, companies and other soft targets or resort to kidnapping and other criminal enterprises to fund their operations and finally we face a real threat from radicalized individuals here in the united states whether it's a shooter at a sikh timple temple in wisconsin. plane flying into a building in texas or the extremists who killed 168 people at the federal building in oklahoma city americans have confronted many forms of violent extremism in our history. deranged or alienated individuals, often u.s. citizens or legal residents can do enormous damage particularly when inspired about larger notions of jihad. that pull towards extremism appears to have led to the shooting at fort hood and

the bombing of the boston marathon so that's the current threat lethal, less capable al qaeda affiliates. threats to diplomatic facilities and businesses abroad homegrown extremists, this is the future of terrorism we have to take these threats seriously and do all we can to confront them. as would of shape our response, we have to recognize that the scale of the threat closely resembles the types of attacks we faced before 9/11 in the 1980s we lost americans to terrorism at our embassy in beirut, at our marine baraks in lebanon, on a cruise ship at sea at a disco in berlin and on a panam flight 103 over locker lockerbie.

in 1990s we lost americans to terrorism at the world trade center, at our military facilities in saudi arabia and at our embassy in kenya. these attacks were all brutal. they were all deadly. and we learned that left unchecked, these threats can grow. but if dealt with smartly and proportionately, these threats not rise to the level we saw on the eve of 9/11. moreovers we have to realize these threats don't rise in a vacuum. most if not all fueled by common ideology. brief that some islam is in conflict with the united states and the west and that violence against western targets including civilians is justified in support of a larger cause. of course this ideology is based on a lie. for the united states is

not at war with islam. and this ideology is rejected by the vast majority of muslims. who are the most frequent victims of terrorist attacks. nevertheless, this ideology persists in an age when ideas can travel the globe in an instant. can't depend on military or law enforcement alone. we need all elements of national power to win a battle of wills. a battle of ideas. so what i want to discuss here today is the components of such a comprehensive counter terrorism strategy. first we must finish the work of defeating al qaeda and associated forces in

afghanistan we complete for that country's security. our troops will come home other combat mission will come to an end. and we will work with the afghan government to train security forces and sustain a counter terrorism force which ensures that al qaeda can never again establish a safe haven to launch attacks against us, or our allies. beyond afghanistan would must define our effort not as a boundless global war on terror but rather as a series of persisted targeted efforts to dismantle persistent networks of extremists that threaten america. in many cases this will involve partnerships with other countries already, thousands of pakistani soldiers have lost their lives fighting extremists. in yemen we are supporting security forces that have reclaimed territory from

aqap in somalia we helped a coalition of push al shabaab out of its strongholds. in mali, we are providing military aid to french-led intervention to push back al qaeda in the bagram and help the people of mali reclaim their future. much of our best counter terrorism cooperation results in the gathering and sharing of intelligence, the arrest, and prosecution of terrorists. that's how somali terrorist apprehended off the coast of yemen is now in a prison in new york. that's how we worked with european allies to disrupt plots from denmark to germany to the united kingdom. that's how intelligence collected with saudi arabia, helped us stop a cargo plane from being blown up over the atlantic. these partnerships work.

but despite our strong perches for the detention and prosecution of terrorists. sometimes this approach is foreclosed. al qaeda and its affiliates try to gain foot hold in some of the most distant and unforgiving places on earth. they take refuge in remote tribal regions. they hide in caves and wild compounds. they train in empty deserts and rug ared mountains, in some of these places such as somali and yemen, the state only has the most tenuous reach into the territory in other cases the state lacks the capacity or will to take action it's also not possible for america to deploy a team of special forces to capture every

terrorist when when such a approach may be possible. profound risk to our troops and local civilians with terrorist compound cannot be breached without triggering a fire fight with surrounding tribal communities that pose no threat to us. times when putting u.s. boots on the ground may trigger a major international crisis. to put it another way, our operation in pakistan against usama bin laden cannot be the norm the risks in that case were immense the likelihood of capture, although that was our preference was remote given the certainty that our folks would confront resistance. the fact that we did not find ourselves confronted with civilian casualties or

embroiled in extended fire fight was a testament to the meticulous planning and professionalism of our special forces but it also depended on some luck and it was supported by massive infrastructure in afghanistan and each then the cost to our relationship with pakistan and the backlash among the pakistani public over encroachment on their territory was so severe that we're just now beginning to rebuild this important partnership so it is in this context that the united states has taken lethal, targeted action against al qaeda and its associated forces including with remoted will piloted aircraft commonly referred to as drones.

as was true in previous armed conflicts, this new technology raises profound questions. about who is targeted and why. about civilian casualties and the risk of creating new enemies about the legality of such strikes under u.s. and international law. about accountability and morality. so let me address these questions to begin with our actions are effective. don't take my word for it. in the intelligence gathered at bin laden's compound we found that he wrote we could lose the reserves to? s air strikes. we cannot fight air strikes with explosives. other communications from al qaeda operatives confirm this as well. dozens of highly skilled al qaeda commanders, trainers, bomb makers and operatives

have been taken off the battlefield. plots have been disrupted that would have targeted international aviation, u.s. transit systems, european cities, and our troops in afghanistan. simply put, these strikes have saved lives. moreover, america's actions are are legal why were attacked on 9/11. within a week congress overwhelmly authorized the use of force. under domestic law and international law united states is at war with al qaeda, the taliban and their associated forces. we're the at war with an organization that right now would kill as many americans as they could if we did not stop them first. so this is a just war.

a war waged proportionately in last resort and in self-defense. and yet as our fight swers a new phase america's claim self-defense could k. not be the end of the discussion. to say a military tactic is legal or effective is not to say that it is wise or moral in every instance. for the same progress that gives us the technology to strike half a world away also demands the discipline to constrain that power. or risk abusing it. that's why over the last four years my administration has worked vigorously to establish a framework that governors our use of force against terrorists everyone cysting upon pure guidelines and

codified in guidance that i signed yesterday. in the afghan war theater we must and will continue to support our troops until the transition is complete at the end of 2014. and that means we will continue to take strikes against high value al qaeda targets and forces amassing support on coalition forces buy by the end of 2014 would you the we will no longer have the same need for force protection. the core reduce the need for unmanned strikes. beyond the afghan theater, we only target al qaeda and use of forces the use of drones is heavily constrained. america does not take strikes when we have the ability to capture individual terrorists.

our preference is always to detain, interrogated, and prosecute. america cannot take strikes wherever we choose. our actions are bound by consultations with partners and respect for state sovereignty. america does not take strikes to punish individuals. we act against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the american people. and what there are no other governments capable of effectively addressing the threat and before any strike is taken, there must be near certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured the highest standard we can set. in last point is critical because much the criticism about drone strikes both here and at broad under stabbeddably centers on reports of civilian

casualties there is a wide gap between u.s. assessments of casualties and nongovernmental reports. nevertheless, it is a hard fact that u.s. strikes have resulted in civilian casualties. a risk that exists in every war. and for the families of those civilians no words or legal construct can justify their loss. for me and those in my chain of command those deaths will haunt us as long as we live. just as we are haunted by the civilian casualties that occurred throughout conventional fighting in afghanistan and iraq. but as commander and chief, i must weigh these heart-breaking tragedies against the alternatives. to do nothing in the face of terrorist networks would

invite far more civilian casualties, not just in our cities at home and our facilities abroad but also in the very places like kabul and mogadishu with terrorists seek a foot hold her the terrorists we are after twarves any estimates from civilian casualties from drone strikes. so doing nothing is not an option. with are with foreign governments cannot or will not stop terrorism in their territory, the primary al turn toif to targeted lethal action would be the use of conventional military options.

as i said even small military operations carry enormous risks far less precise than drones and are likely to cause more civilian casualties and more local outrage. and invasions of these territories lead us to be viewed as occupying armies difficult to contain. result in large number of civilian casuals and ultimately on those who thrive in violent conflict so it is false to assert that putting boots on the ground is less likely to result in civilian deaths or less likely to create enemies in the muslim world the results would be more u.s. deaths, more plaque seahawks down.

more confrontations with local populations and an inevitable mission creep in support of such rates that could easily isca late in the new wars. yes the conflict with al qaeda like all armed conflict invites tragedy. but by narrowly targeting our action against those who want to kill us and not the people they hide them on, we are choosing the course of action least likely to result in the loss of innocent life. our efforts must be measured against the history of putting american troops in distant lands among hostile populations. in vietnam, hundreds of thousands of civilians died in a war where the boundaries of battle were blurred. in iraq and afghanistan, despite the extraordinary courage and discipline of

our troops, thousands of civilians have been killed. so neither conventional military action nor waiting for attacks to occur offers more safe harbor. and neither does sole reliance police or security services and indeed have no functioning. this is not to say that the risks are not real any u.s. military action in foreign lands risks creating more enemies and impacts public opinion overseas. moreover, our laws constrain the power of the president. even during war time. i have taken an oath to

defend the constitution of the united states. the very precision of drone strikes and the very nature of secrecy involved in such actions can end up shielding our government from the public scrutiny that troop deployment invites it can also lead a president and his team to view drone strikes as a cure all for terrorism. for this reason i have insisted on strong ovsight of all lethal action. after i took office, my administration began briefing all strikes outside of iraq and afghanistan to the appropriate committees of congress lead me repeat that. not only did congress authorize the use of force, it is briefed on every strike that america takes.

every strike, that includes the instance where we targeted an american citizen. anwar al awlaki, the chief of external operations for aqap this week i authorized the declassification of this action and the deaths of three other americans in drone strikes to facilitate trans (sill and debate on this issue and to dismiss some of the more outland dish claims that have been made for the record, i do not believe it would be constitutional for the government to target and kill any u.s. citizen with a drone or with a shotgun without due process nor should any president deploy armed drones over u.s. soil. buy when a u.s. citizen goes abroad to wage war against america and is actively plotting to kill

u.s. citizens, and when near the united states nor our partners are in a position to capture him before he carries out a plot, his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a swat team. that's who anwar al awlaki was. he was continuously trying to kill people he helped oversee the 2010 plot to detonate explosive devices on two u.s. bound cargo planes. he was involved in planning to blow up an airliner in 2009. if faruq abdul helped him tape martyr dom video to be shown after the attack and his last instructions were to blow up the airplane when it was over american

soil. i would have detained and prosecuted al awlaki if we captured him before he carried out a plot. but we couldn't and as president i would have been derelict in my duty had i not authorized the strike that took him out. ing if my administration submitted information to the department of justice months before al awlaki was i would and briefed the congress before this strike as well. but the high threshold that we have set for taking lethal action applies to all potential terrorist targets regardless of whether or not they are american citizens this flesh holds respects the human dig any of every

human life. alongside the decision to put our men and women in uniform in harm's way. the decision to use force against individuals or groups, each against a sworn enemy of the united states is the hardest thing i do as president but these decisions must be made given my responsibility to protect the american people. going forward, i have asked my administration to review proposals to extend oversight of lethal actions outside of war zones that go beyond our reporting to congress. ooch option has virtues in theory but poses difficulties in practice. for example, the establishment of a special court to evaluate and authorize lethal action has the benefit of bringing a third branch of government into the process but raises serious constitutional i

about presidential and judicial authority. but another idea that's been suggested, the establishment of an independent oversight board in the executive branch. avoids those problems but may introduce a layer of bureaucracy in a national security decision making without inexpiring additional public confidence in the process. but despite these challenges, i look forward to actively engaging congress to explore these and other options for increased oversight. i believe, however, the use of force must be seen as part of a larger discussion we need to have about al comprehensive court terrorism strategy because, for all focus on the use of force. force alone can not make us safe. we cannot use force everywhere that a radical ideology takes root. and in the absence of a

strategy that reduces the well spring of extremism, a per perpetual war through drones or troop deployments will serve self-defeating and alter our country in troubling ways. so the next element of our strategy involves addressing the underlying grievances and conflicts that feed extremism from north africa to south asia. as we have learned this past decade, this is a vast and complex undertaking. we must be humble in expectation we can end poverty and sectarian hatred. moreover, no two countries are alike. some will undergo chaotic change before things get better our security and our values demand that we makes

the effort this means patiently supporting places like egypt and libya because the peaceful realization of individual aspiration also serve as a rebuke to violent extremism we must strengthen the opposition in syria while isolating extremist elms because end of a tyrant must not give way to the tyranny of terrorism we are actively working to promote peace between israelis and palestinians because it is right and because such a peace could help reshape attitudes in the region. and we must help countries modernize economies, upgrade education and encourage entrepreneurship because american leadership has always been elevated by our ability to connect with people's hopes and not simply their fierce.

and success on all these fronts requires sustained engagement but it will also require resources. i know that foreign aid is one the least popular expenditures that there is. that's true for democrats and republicans. i have seen the polling even though it amounts to less than 1% of the federal budget. in fact, a lot of folks think it's 25%. if you ask people on the streets. less than 1% still wildly unpopular. but, foreign assistance cannot be viewed as charity. it is fundamental to our national security. and it's fundamental to any sensible long-term strategy to battle extremism. moreover, foreign assistance is a tiny fraction of what we spend fighting wars that our

assistance might ultimately prevent. for what we spent in a month in iraq at the height of the war, we could be training security forces in libya, maintaining peace agreements between israel and its neighbors feeding the hungry in yemen, building schools in pakistan, and creating reservoirs of goodwill that marginalize extremists. that has to be part of our strategy. moreover, america can not carry out this work if we don't have diplomats serving in some very dangerous places. '' over the past decade, we have strengthened security at our embassies and i am implements every recommendation of the accountability review board which found unacceptable failures in benghazi. >> i have called on congress to fully fund these efforts to bolster security and harden

facilities, improve intelligence and if facilitate a quicker response time from our military if a crisis emerges. but even after we take these steps, some irreducible risks to our diplomats will remain. this is the price of being the world's most powerful nation. particularly as a wave of change washes over the arab world. and in balancing the tradeoffs between security and active diplomacy, i firmly believe that any retreat from challenging regions, will only increase the danger that we face in the long run. achted these why we should be grateful to those diplomats willing to serve there targeted action against terrorists. effective partnerships. diplomatic engagement and

assistance. through such comprehensive strategy, we can significantly reduce the chances of large scale attacks on the homeland and mitigate threats to americans overseas. but as we guard against dangers from abroad, we cannot neglect the dawning challenge of terrorism from within our borders as i said this threat is not new. technology and the internet increase frequency and in some cases its leith lethality. commit propaganda commit agenda and learn how to kill without leaving their home to address this threat. two years ago my administration did a progressive review and engaged in law enforcement

and the best way to prevent violent extremism inspired by violent jihadists is to work with the muslim american community which has consistently rejected terrorism to identify signs of radicalization and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting towards violence thighs partnerships can only work when we recognize that muslims are a fundamental part of the american family in fact, the success of american muslims and our determination to guard against any encroachment on their civil liberties is the ultimate rebuke to those who say the we're at war with islam. thwarting homegrown plots presents particular challenges in part because of our proud commitment to civil liberties for all who call america home.

these why in the years to come we will have to keep working hard to it strike the appropriate balance between our need for security and preserving those securities that make us who we are that meefns reviewing the authorities of law enforcement so we can accept new kinds of communication but also build in privacy protections to prevent abuse. that means that even after boston we do not deport someone or throw somebody in prison in the absence of evidence. that means putting careful constraints on the tools the government uses to protect sensitive information such as the state's secrets doctrine. that means having a strong privacy and civil liberties board to review those issues where our counter terrorism efforts and our values may come in attention.

the justice department investigation of national security leaks offers recent example of the challenges involved in striking the right balance between our security and our open society. as commander and chief, i believe we must keep information secret that protects our operations and our people in the field. to do so, we must enforce consequences for those who break the law and breach their commitment to protect classified information. but a free press is also essential for our democracy. that's who we are. and i'm troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable. journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs. our focus must be on those who break the law. and that's why i have called on congress to pass a media shield law to guard against government overreach sand i have

raised these issues with the attorney general who shares my concerns. so he has agreed to review existing department of justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters and he will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. i have directed the attorney general to report back to me by july 12th. now, all these issues remind us that the choices we make about war can impact and sometimes unintended ways, the openness and freedom on which our way of life depends. and that is why i intend to engage congress about the existing authors to use military force or amuf to determine how we can continue to fight terrorism without keeping america on a perpetual war time footing.

the amuf is now nearly 12 years old. the afghan war is coming to an end. core of al qaeda is a shell of its former self. groups like aqap must be dealt with in years to come not every collection of thugs who label themselves as al qaeda will pose a credible threat to the united states unless we thinking, actions we may be drawn into more wars we don't need to fight. or continue to grant presidents unbound powers more suited for traditional armed conflicts between nation states. so i look forward to engaging in congress and the american people in efforts to refine and ultimately repeal the amuf's mandate. and i will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue, but this war,

like all wars, must end. that's what history advises. that's what history ghands. that brings me to final topic. the detention of terrorist suspects. i'm going to repeat one more time, a a matter of policy, the preference of the united states is to capture terrorist suspects. when we do detain a suspect, we interrogate them. and if the suspect can be prosecuted, we decide whether to try him in a civilian court or a military commission. during the past decade, the vast majority of those detained by our military were captured on the battlefield. in iraq, we turned over thousands of prisoners as we ended the war. in afghanistan, we have transitioned detention

facilities to the afghans as part of the process of restoring afghan sovereignty. so we bring law of war detention to an end and we are committed to prosecuting terrorists wherever we can the glaring detention to this time tested approach is the detention center at guantanamo bay. the original premise for opening gitmo that detainees would not be able to challenge their detention was found unconstitutional five years ago in the meantime gitmo has become a symbol around the world for an american that flouts the rule of law. our allies won't cooperate with terrorist will will end up at gitmo. during a time of budget cuts we spend $150 million

each year in-to-imprison 166 people. almost $1 million per prisoner. and the department of defense estimates that we must spend another 200 million to keep gitmo open at a time here with cutting investments in education and research here at home and when the pentagon is struggling with sequester and budget cuts. now, as president, i have tried to close gitmo. i transferred 67 detainees to other countries, before congress imposed restrictions to effectively prevent us from either transferring detainees to other countries or imprisoning them here in the united states. these restrictions make no sense. after all, under president bush, some 530 detainees were transferred from gitmo with congress' support.

when i ran for president the first time. john mccain supported closing gitmo. this is a bipartisan issue. no person has ever escaped one of our super max or military prisons here in the united states. ever. our courts have convicted hundreds of people for terrorism. or terrorism related offenses including some folks who are more dangerous than most gitmo detainees. they are in our prisons. given my administration's relentless pursuit, there is no justification beyond politics for congress to prevent us from closing a facility that should have never been opened. [heckler] [ applause ]

>> quiet down, please. >> let me say, this ma'am. >> very important. this is not have. >> thank you. ma'am, thank you. you should let me finish my sentence. today i convince again call ono lift the restrictions on detainee transfers from gitmo. i have asked the department of

defense to designate a site in the utey we can hold commissions. i'm appointing an envoy whose responsibility will be to achieve the transfer of detainees to third country. i am lifting the moratorium on detainee transfers to yemen so we can review them case by case. so the greatest extent possible, we will transfer detainees who have been cleared to go to other countries. where we -- (heckler prepare prepare... >> where appropriate we will bring terrorists to justice in our courts and our military justice system. now, ma'am, let me finish. let me finish, ma'am. this is part of free speech, is

you beingable to speak but also you listening. and me being able to speak. [applause] >> thank you. >> now, even after we take these steps, one issue will remain. how to deal with those gitmo detainees who we know have participated in dangerous plots or attacks but who cannot be prosecuted because the evidence against them has been compromised or is inadmissible in a court of law. but once we commit to a process of

i think of all the wounded warriors rebuilding their lives and helping other vets find jobs. i think of the runner, planning to do the 2014 boston marathon who said, next year, you're going to have more people than ever. determination is not something to be messed with.

that is who the american people are. determined. and not to be messed with. and now we need a strategy and a politics that reflects this resilient spirit. our victory against terrorism won't be measured in a surrender ceremony at a battleship or a statue being pulled to the ground. victory will be measured in parents taking their kids to school, immigrants coming to our shores. fans taking in a ball game. a veteran starting a business. a bustling city street. a citizen, shouting her concerns at a president. the quiet determination that