we turn to new york times reporter eric schmitt. and retired lt.eral chipman, judge advocate general and as such the army's top lawyer. we welcome you both. eric schmitt, what is the best information you have about the circumstances of bergdahl leaving his post? >> right now the circumstances appear to be as the soldiers in his unit suggested that he did voluntarily walk off his base in june 2009 into a hostile environment with the taliban nearby. why he did that is still not known and that's what's going to be going on with these debriefings you mentioned in your report. clearly, this was an individual who had expressed mixed concerns about his mission in afghanistan to his parents and e-mails to his soldier comrades. exactly why he did what he did when he did it, those are answers we're waiting for. >> woodruff: eric, this is not just one comrade but several who are saying he walked away. >> that's right, that's what pentagon and officials have told us at the "new york times" as well that he did voluntarily walk away from his post in eastern afgh

. >> a recent example eric schmitt and mark zuckerberg and hastings met with the president and they were voicing concern that basically the privacy of their users was being threatened by all of this. so how do you reach that balance where you have ceos that say okay i'm willing to turn over this information because baby it's critical to our national security but that same time i need to protect my customer in all of this. >> well you don't turnover necessarily the personally identifiable information. what you do is you take the patterns that are established. you may see it as an isp. particular patterns are established and you can cordon off that information. it should not be turnover but their substantial information they can and should be turned over and it would be to to the detriment of the company because the company can put persons and places where it would establish this connect to the two ensure that company's information is used appropriately. by the same token they get the benefit of the intelligence that comes back and they enable them to avert an attack. >> doesn't seem like