i spend just as much time criticizing the clinton administration as i do the george w. bush administration. what you had was officialdom that came to buy into an idea that economists knew was false, that financial markets could be left untouched. one of the most fascinating figures to me and my narrative is larry summers, who just announced recently he is leaving as obama's chief economic adviser. because larry summers is truly one of the great economist of his generation. the winner of the very prestigious prize awarded every two years to an economist under 40. and he knew -- some of his own work in the 1980's have shown the fallacy of the idea of rational markets in finance. and yet when he became a policy maker, first in the clinton administration under robert rubin, the treasury secretary, and then later under obama, he became influenced by this idea that you could leave the financial markets alone. there was one famous moment in 2005, the height of the bubble just before things went bad -- went bad, at a retreat in jackson hole that central bankers hold every year,

. >> lily prellezo, what about the clinton administration? did they not assist? >> brothers to the rescue never asked the u.s. government for help monetary or otherwise. of course the u.s. coast guard was instrumental because they lifted people out of the raft and saved their lives, but the clinton administration, what happened after the exodus of 1994 was that the policy changed, and the dry foot came about, and then it was no longer viable to be rescuing or flying mission to rescue people just returned to guantanamo or returned to cuba. >> wet foot, dry foot policy? >> if a cube ban were leaving cuba and touched dry land, he could be processed for immigration. if they were intercepted at sea, they were returned to guantanamo. >> i want to say in the clinton administration was instrumental in terminating and three of our airplanes and i was flying one flew in a search and rescue mission and make cuba came after us and shot down two planes and i survived the third plane. the clinton administration was aware that the attack from cuba was going to take place. all t

i spend just as much time criticizing the clinton administration as i do the george w. bush administration. what you had was officials that came to buy into an idea that economist knew was false. financial markets can be left untouched. one the most fascinating figures to me in my narrative is larry summers. he just announced he's living as obama's economic advisor. he's truly one the greatest economist of his generation. winner of a very prestigious prize awarded to economist under 40. and he knew, sort of his own work in the 1980s had shown the fallacy of the idea that rational markets in finance. and yet when he became a policymaker, first in the clinton administration under robert rubin, the treasury secretary, and later under obama, he, you know, became influenced by this idea that you could leave financial markets alone. in fact, there was one famous moment in 2005 at the height of the bubble just before things went bad at the retreat, that the central bankers hold every year, a small economist at the university of chicago presented a paper saying i think we might

follows on great work done in the clinton administration. for rose gottemoeller, assistant secretary of state. robert, independent line. caller: hello, i just have two questions. why is it now just coming to the senate if the start treatynded last year? and also, why do we keep hearing that it's a national security concern that it be passed, but we're not giving more information just that it's a national security concern? host: thank you, robert. guest: great questions, robert. first i want to stress, the treaty is not just appearing now. when we got back from gena last april, we put together a whole package. 200 plus pages that goes to the senate and describes everything about it. it went to the senate in the middle of may. we started a series the hearings. 18 over the coue of the summer and used the summer all to answer the questions the senators threw our way. so the senate has had the whole summer to be looking at the treaty, and we have been working closely with them throughout that period. in september, we had the vote to recommend the

clinton administration had welfare reform, 20,000 new jobs, first balanced budget in a generation.that we were going out every day with the president going out and show people how you can do school uniforms, help people in schools, communities, homes. it's important to do both. >> it seems like this white house does not like the idea of gimmickry in any way, shape, or form. but has that kind of high-minded principle hurt them in some ways? >> isn't all communications in some way gimmickry or boiling it down in some way you can understand as don was suggesting. midnight basketball clinton got ridiculed for. it stuck in my years all these years later. president bush had tax families. it was fun to mock the people he would bring out to demonstrate how the tax cut worked. we've seen this white house do it a little bit, health care families. during midterms he was going and sitting in people's back yards and talking about their problems but hard to lock into anything memorable for people to seize on and understand. it's difficult when you're talking about things like the deficit or now

president reagan and the long economic boom of the clinton administration were also good for europe.ince the recent g-20 summit, trans-atlantic routes are emerging on the economic strategy of president obama and his european counterparts. the german finance minister used the word clueless when recently criticizing the federal reserve policy of quantitative easing, pumping $600 billion into the u.s. economy. the strategy of printing money to keep interest rates low also weakens it they u.s. dollar against the euro, making it harder for exporters in europe to compete. >> people that differ priorities. in the u.s. the priority is still on how to artificially stimulate the economy, whereas in europe, it has shifted back to long-term repair work, including fiscal prudence. >> europeans are basically saying we've got germany, sweden, switzerland, we have some economies that can show proven results and growth. >> one of america's aims at the recent g-20 meeting was to stop china from the debilitating -- manipulating currency markets. but on washington's perspective, the europeans failed to

the doctors, across the board, hospitals, you name it, they were on the other side, and the clinton administration understood that there was little hope that they would ever bring them around. >> but this was covered under our old plan. >> narrator: they buried the administration in an avalanche of negative tv commercials. >> the government may force us to pick from a few health care plans designed by government bureaucrats. >> having choices we don't like is no choice at all. >> they choose. >> we lose. >> the harry and louise ads cost and cost and cost us in the clinton years. >> it is clear that health insurance reform cannot be enacted this year. >> narrator: they were handed a devastating defeat. emanuel had seen it all. 16 years later, as president obama's chief of staff, he would try do things differently. >> what did he do that's different from what bill and hillary did? everything. everything. >> the great lesson that everyone shared, both folks like rahm who were there and historians, is you need congressional buy-in on the front end. >> narrator: the white house would hold congress' han

the farce began when the clinton administration concluded the frame wok agreement, in which the deal was they would freeze and dismantle their plutonium program for the goodies including the two nuclear reactors, where a lot of economic support. the problem is that there are two ways to develop a bomb. plutonium or uranium. we assumed all they had was plutonium. in 2002, our negotiator in pyongyang was told they had separate uranium progress. they denied it over and over again. so we had no idea. now we discover they have, as you said, vast facility, thousands of machines that look quite modern. this is not something that was done overnight. they had a parallel program while they pretended under the clinton and the bush administration to be dismantling or holding back on the you plutonium program. this means they were not stopping at all on the development of nukes. i think we will reflexibly return to negotiation. the reason this is revealed because what they want is another farcical deal in which this program is supposedly restrained in return for a lot of economic aid. their econo

follows on great work done in the clinton administration. host: next call for rose gottemoeller, assistant secretary of state. robert, independent line. caller: hello, i just have two questions. why is it now just coming to the senate if the start treaty ended last year? and also, why do we keep hearing that it's a national security concern that it be passed, but we're not giving more information just that it's a national security concern? host: thank you, robert. guest: great questions, robert. first i want to stress, the treaty is not just appearing now. when we got back from geneva last april, we put together a whole package. 200 plus pages that goes to the senate and describes everything about it. it went to the senate in the middle of may. we started a series the hearings. 18 over the course of the summer and used the summer all to answer the questions the senators threw our way. so the senate has had the whole summer to be looking at the treaty, and weave been working closely with them throughout that period. in september, we had the v

we were assured by the clinton administration that no technology would be transferred. i bought on to that for a short time. then, it became abundantly evident that this was a technological windfall for the chinese regime. that president clinton had not promised that technology would not be transferred. and when it became clear after the clinton administration had made that commitment to us that there would be no transfer of technology and when it became clear that this effort and cooperation was a colossal mistake and that technology was being transferred, no moves were made to limit the damage or shut it down. perhaps it had something to do with the fact that bernard schwartz's contributions had some impact on president clinton's re-election bid. meaning, bernie schwartz was the c.e.o. of lorel corporation, a company heavily complicit in the illegal transfer of missile technology to china. he was also the biggest single contributor to president bill clinton's re-election campaign. of course, he was not the only contributor to have a stake in this policy of sending miss

the verdict in the trial of the man accused of bombing two american embassies during the clinton administration. we'll talk about how it all could effect the administration plans going forward with the fox all stars next. >> bret: just moments ago ahmed ghailani, the first guantanamo detainee to face a civilian trial in federal court in new york was acquitted of most of the charges. in fact, cleared of 284 other counts. he was found guilty wednesday, today, of conspiracy to destroy buildings and u.s. property and tied to the attacks and destruction on two u.s. embassies in after africa in 19. the fact that he was acquitted of 284 counts, the terrorism charges is a major setback for the obama administration as it tries to move forward with plans to try the 9/11 terrorism suspects and detapeees being held in gitmo in civilian court. so what about this now? let's bring in our panel. steve hayes senior writer for "the weekly standard" henderson for the "the washington post" and syndicated columnist charles krauthammer. charles? >> this is a huge elm bare -- embarrassment to the administration and i

ignored by some of the clinton administration and by the bush administration and it continues to be ignoredday. >> environmentallists sued to get the law enforced and won. the judge ruled less water should go fwarmers and more to delta and san francisco bay. barry nelson is with one of the groups behind the suit. >> all of the fish populations in the san francisco bay and system are in free fall. >> congressmen devon nunez represents farmers in san joaquin valley. >> they want the water they've been entitled to. >> he says combination of lawsuits and legislation has gone too far. >> we need congress to in to do something. if it doesn't we'll have a death bowl. >> he says water rezroixz force warmers to idle more land. he blames the restrictions for the skyrocketing unemployment rates. one in four can't find a job here. but congressman miller says limits are not the only reason times are hard. >> big problem is that central valley with the collapse of the housing market. there is a huge number of people involved in housing construction. >> economists at university of the pacific found restri

a little is going to change nothing as during the clinton administration there was an opening there was a change of you know democrats more journalists going back and forth that doesn't exist anymore and i think it's these people think that somehow they're going to be welcomed in cuba and they're going to somehow take over some day and they're waiting for that day in behind it i think it's a lot of money they think they're going to make money why do you think the obama administration i mean you know you think of america as an open country and yet like you said journalists can't come here we can't our academics are scholars they're not allowed to interact right why well i think it's a good democrats are often worse on this issue than republicans are or just as bad they had this cuban the cubans in cuba call them the miami cubans they have so much power over not only cuba policy but latin america policy the whole the whole policy is based around isolating cuba actually destroying cuba undermining cuba and trying to undermine their relationships with other countries and there was one incid

reagan administration, the bush administration, bush one and bush two as well as from the clinton administration and my administration saying this is important to our national security. we've got the republican chairman of the foreign relations committee saying this is in our national interest to get done now. this is an issue that traditionally has received strong bipartisan support. we've gone through 18 hearings. we've answered 1,000 questions. we have met the concerns about modernizing our nuclear stockpile. we have concrete budget numbers. it's time for us to go ahead and get it done. my hope is that we will do so. there's no other reason not to do it than the fact that, you know, washington has become a very partisan place. this is a classic area where we have to rise above partisanship. nobody is going to score points in the 2012 election around this issue, but it's something that we should be doing because it helps keep america safe. my expectation is that my republican friends in the senate will ultimately conclude that it makes sense for us to do this. all right. karen. there's a mike

out there now let me ask you one thing because you know if we look back to let's say the clinton administration and when he lost both the house and the senate during his midterm elections what he did afterwards was he really kind of shifted towards the towards foreign policy that's where that's where he made some of his priorities and started becoming more active should obama do the same thing can obama even do the same thing considering the state of the economy no i don't think he can and when clinton did that we really didn't have many foreign policy challenges of course that he went into bosnia and kosovo and then al qaeda was just beginning and he did attack talk afghanistan but right now the united states if anything is overextended i mean we have one hundred thousand troops in afghanistan still fifty thousand in iraq we're fighting a counterterrorism struggle in afghanistan you have the whole question about the negotiation with iran and iran developing nuclear weapons the president trying to broker middle east peace process or you got enough foreign policy challenge he's not going to air

he's the one who negotiated the dayton accords back in the clinton administration that really brought peace to the balkans. and he has said and makes the point that you don't fix this war with the military victory. everyone agrees, the taliban surge si -- insurgency in afghanistan is part of the fabric and always will be. so you need some sort of diplomatic settlement. that's how we get out of the war, i presume. >> host: then the reports this week that the taliban might be at the table for talks is one that you would have expected. >> guest: yes, i report that there were secret talks through the saudis and, you know, but this is all very preliminary. the taliban still thinks we have the momentum and edge here. >> host: why would they negotiate? >> guest: exactly. >> host: ed from boston on the republican line. good morning, you are on. >> caller: good morning, mr. woodward. >> guest: good morning. >> caller: the russians pulled out of afghanistan after nine years. if it wasn't for charlie wilson, maybe it would have been longer. the russians at nine years, we at nine years, are we fi

. >> i am prepared to cooperate with the clinton administration.ot prepared to compromise. >> we performed medicare and saved it from going bankrupt. we reejected interrupts for the first time since 1928. >> by 1998, after a politically disastrous government shutdown, ugly impeachment battle, messy ethics investigation and dissension in the g.o.p. ranks, gingrich left the house. a few years after that, republican lawmakers were accuseded of the same bad beltway behavior as the democrats they defeated. democrats took back the house in 2006. >> bret: what have you learned from back then? >> it's opposite of the establishment. i think president clinton, insisting on the balanced budget and being prepared to fight over that, convinced our base we were serious. >> bret: several conservative analysts say newt is a solution-driven guy. has big ideas. but every once in a while he's a grenade-thrower and goes too far. >> you have to extremes, party with no ideas and party with bad ideas. party with no ideas gets no press at all. party with a lot of ideas do

when you were in the white house, did you ever see the clinton administration use the justice departmento go after somebody for political reasons? >> well, the whole clinton presidency happened pause of just that. clinton was losing ground to bush as the '92 election came out. and the special prosecutor walsh, lawrence walsh, announced five days before election that he was going to indict cap wineberger, the defense secretary in the bush white house, bush administration over iraq. and they never did. he was pardoned. but that announcement five days before election day is the reason bill clinton won the presidency. >> bill: that was iran. you said iraq. >> iraq. >> bill: what did he do in iraq. >> weapons to iraq. it was not over iran. >> bill: so the indictment -- so, that was an attempt by whom though? >> by the special prosecutor, lawrence walsh. >> bill: who was appointed by? >> by -- well, by the justice department. in this case actually by bush. >> bill: okay. so bush appointed the guy and then the guy came back and hit bush? >> that's right. >> bill: that's really not what i'm talk

jamie rubens was chief spokesperson for the state department during the clinton administration. he's not adjunct professor at columbia school of international public affairs. and finally, michael hastings, contributing editor of "rolling stone." his article, "runaway general" led to the ousting of general stanley mcchrystal. and he's the author of "i lost my love in baghdad -- a modern war story." okay, daniel, what do you make of all of this. should this have been published? things being said in the diplomatic arena from one official to another. is that our right to know? >> well, nothing in those documents, embarrassing as they are to some people and their kind of snarky comments, nothing remotely compared to what michael hastings published, what he overheard in general mcchrystal's headquarters, and i thought properly published. i think president obama made the right decision when he acted on michael hastings' reporting. the president can learn things through reporting that they don't know through channels. >> larry: knowing how you release things, what should not be reported

he's the one who negotiated the dayton accords back in the clinton administration, that really broughtpeace to the balkans. and he has said, and makes the point, you don't fix the war with military victory. and i think everyone agrees, the taliban insurgency is part of the fabric and that's always going to be there. so you need some sort of diplomatic settlement, and that's inevitably how we get out of this war, i presumed. >> host: then the reports this week that the taliban might be at the table for talks is one that you would've expected based on your reporting. >> guest: yes. in fact, i report that there were secret talks through the saudis, and, you know, but this is all very preliminary. the taliban still thinks they have the edge. >> host: so why would they negotiated? for bob ford next, boston. this is a call from ed on republican line. your own. >> caller: good morning, mr. woodward. >> guest: good morning. >> caller: the russians pulled out of afghanistan after nine years. and if it wasn't for charter wilson maybe it would've been longer been longer. so between the russians,

reagan administration, the bush administration, bush one and bush two as well as from the clinton administration and my administration saying this is important to our national security. we have got the republican chairman of the foreign relations committee saying this is in our national interest to get done now. this isn't an issue that has traditionally received strong bipartisan report. we have gone thrgh 18 hearings. we have answered 1,000 questions. we have met the concerns about modernizing our nuclear stockpile with concrete budget numbers. it's time for us to go ahead and get it done. and my hope is that we will do so. there is no other reason not to do it than the fact that washington has become a very partisan place and this is a classic area where we have to rise above partisanship. nobody is going to score points in the 2012 election around this issue, but it's something that we should be doing because it helps keep america se. and my expectation is that my republican friends in the senate will ultimately conclude that it makes sense for us to do this. all right. karen young. >> thank

clinton white house. you know, there were a lot of things that the administration did to change the way things were movingk president clinton changed his core principles. i think he looked at what was possible. frankly he and newt gingrich had a major class. he stoop up to republicans an i think it back fired. >> do you think it's because of what the administration did or because republicans let them back in the game? >> u think it was a couple of things. i thinking it was in part because president clinton stood up and made it clear to the american people based on his terms what this fight was about and people were with him. instead of -- you know, there's a lot of jargon that goes on in washington. when you make it very clear to people, this is what's at stake, this is what i'm fight oing for, they will generally come to your side. >> todd, do you think republicans are at all at risk of doing that again or do you think the obama administration is a different beast than the clinton administration? >> for the record, one of the reasons we're facing the mess that we do today when it comes to social security

in 2011, 2003, it goes back to the tax rates that existed, the higher tax rates during the clinton administrationwhat do you think they are going to do? what should they do? >> well, i think it would be prudent to extend them for one last year. in 2012, 13, when the economy is in a better place, it can digest higher rates of particularly on upper income individuals. but not in 2011. that wouldn't be prudent and i don't think they will do it. >> will they continue the employment benefits for workers about to expire, could cost about $34 billion over six months? >> yeah, i wouldn't do anything to jeopardize that. it would be prudent to extend the emergency benefits at least for a few months. at this point, if we want to address our long-term fiscal problems, we have to have an economy that is growing and we can't go back into a recession. that means no tax increases in 2011 and let's give more to the unemployed workers so we get the recovery moving forward. >> right now the unemployment rate is 9.6%. if it's anywhere close to that in two years when president obama's up for re-election, he's going t

we have seen it with the reagan and the bush administrations, the clinton administration, now, of coursene area, this goes beyond politics, this should be nonpartisan, not just bipartisan. >> eleanor cliff is a contributing editor for "newsweek" and emily miles a staff writer for roll call. welcome back, ladies. >> hi. >> eleanor, i will begin with you, leading republicans say they want a delay on this issue is that just par for the course in washington, republicans don't want the president to have any success and then vice versa? >> it is not par for the course, certainly not on these really national security treaties. international treaties, i think they infringe on our sovereignty and i think they are playing politics with this and you have establishment republican figures, former secretaries of state, henry kissinger, jim bakker, ranking member of the foreign relations committee, richard lugar, prominent republicans urging passage and i think this is a matter of politics. this is -- it is just like the ban on earmarks. it is another sop to the new tea party members on capitol hill bu

what's happened is that the previous administration is going back to bill clinton have lost their way when to comes to trade, when it comes to nafta, cafta, china, pntr, terrible mistakes that have basically cost us millions of jobs and we continue to hemorrhage jobs. the jobs respect coming here. the jobs are going there. and every time they buy a company, they close it down, they put everything on a boat and they take it back to china or it goes on a railroad car to mexico. so if we want to talk about jobs, let's talk about stopping this hole. let's talk about negotiating good trade agreements that are ones that create jobs instead of sending jobs overseas. take korea right now. korea basically is one of the most walled off countries right now. they won't let american cars in, they won't listen. you can't -- you know, different types of products, agricultural products, because they are a closed economy, but what do they do to our country? they are shippingdays over here, all kinds of cars are filling our highways and they get away with it we can't send one car there. that is wrong a

39% if the bush tax cuts lapse, back to the tax rates 3.5% higher than existed during the clinton administration. just want to be precise on that. >> that's the number they used, by the way, in their outline was the 39.6% because we don't know what will happen with that. >> nancy pelosi and a lot of the liberals, they don't want to discuss reducing social security benefits. for them, that's a nonstarter. >> it is interesting because when you read this very carefully, we have been, again, having this social security debate for, what, more than a decade. and so there aren't that many things that you can do, wolf. what is interesting to me here is that these proposals are not really the kind of structural reform that we saw during the bush years. there is no talk about so-called privatizing social security. as you were speaking about before, what they're talking about is raising the retirement rate very gradually. the difference will be that wealthier retirees will get fewer benefits, and probably have to pay more in payroll taxes. that may not go over so well. but what's important here is the mone

if they do nothing, the tax rates increase they go back to where they were during the clinton administration americans shall the middle class, but now they are going one step further, david axelrod telling huffington post in order to keep the tax rates for the middle class at the same level, they may have to do what they have previously rejected, accept the continuation of the current tax cuts for even the wealthy, those making more than $250,000 a year. the white house deputy kbhun cations director, jen psaki, saying the president made it clear that extending tax cuts for middle class families is his top priority and open to compromise to get it done. that maybe the compromise axelrod is signaling. the spokesman for the incoming house speaker, john boehner, issued a statement saying republican bes made a pledge to america to permanently stop all the tax hikes scheduled for january 1st. we are glad to see the president's most trusted adviser now agrees with this course of action. i hope he and the president will show leadership by convincing speaker pelosi to stop these tax hikes permanently

and during the clinton administration, defense spending went down a teeny bit, and then under george bush, up, up, up, and way up, and continued under president obama. more than half of this country's discretionary spending is this. more than half the discretionary spending, more than half of the things we are not stattorically required to spend but we get to decide about each year, more than half, a majority of what we spent. this is it, we as a country spent as much on defense as the rest of the world spends on defense combined. and yes, that includes china. but the republican secretary of all of that money, bob gates, who president obama held over from george bush's second term, he keeps giving speeches about how the pentagon cannot keep having budgets this big. last month 57 members of the house and senate wrote to this commission of elder statesmen thing, saying, if you guys are going to be talking about how to get our financial house in order, then you really have to consider defense. everybody billed that as a bipartisan letter, but honestly, you want to know who the republica

when the competition produced bad blood and bad publicity in the scientific community, the clinton administration arranged for the two sides to announce a truce and a tie, even though many believe that venter's company, celera genomics, was ahead. but for venter, the celebration was short-lived. the tension between making science and making money, and personality conflicts with his corporate bosses, got venter sacked a year and a half later. you accomplished all this stuff, and you got fired by the company that brought you in to do this. >> venter: yup. >> kroft: they locked the doors. >> venter: they locked the doors and sent me away. >> kroft: the experience left him deeply depressed, but he was financially well off and still in business, having endowed his research institute with $100 million in stock at the height of the biotech boom. within a few years, he was once again making waves in the world of science. only this time, at age 64, he's not just trying to decipher genetic codes; now, he's trying to create them. this is a quote from one of your critics. "he's trying to short-circuit millio

bubble and the extraction that we're just discussing even if the seeds of it were sewn in the clinton administration -- the former president's memoir sparking comparisons to its successor. both bush and obama, the e-team ready to roll right after this. [ woman ] you know, as a mom, i worry about my son playing football. which is why i'm really excited. because toyota developed this software that can simulate head injuries and helps make people safer. then they shared this technology with researchers at wake forest to help reduce head injuries on the football field. so, you know, i can feel a bit better about my son playing football. [ male announcer ] how would you use toyota technology to make a better world? learn how to share your ideas at toyota.com/ideasforgood. but these days you need more than the book. you need website development, 1-on-1 marketing advice, search-engine marketing, and direct mail. yellowbook's got all of that. yellowbook360's got a whole spectrum of tools. tools that are going to spark some real connections. visit yellowbook360.com and go beyond yellow. [ malhis day starts t

it was ignored by some of the clinton administration and it was ignored by the bush administration andt continues to be ignored today. >> reporter: environmentalists sued to get the law enforced and won. in fact, the judge ruled that even less water should go to the farmers and more to the delta and san francisco bay. >> barry nelson is with the san francisco defense council, one of the groups behind the lawsuit. >> essentially all of the fish population in the san francisco delta system are in free fall. >> congress. >> -- all the valley wants is the water they have been entitled to for decades. >> new nebraska says the combination of lawsuits and federal legislation has gone too far. >> we need the congress to step in and do something and if the congress doesn't we will in fact have a dust bowl. >> nunez says current water conditions could force farmers to idle even more land. one in four can't find a job here are. congressman miller says water limits are not the only reason times are hard. >> the big problem in the central valley was with the collapse of the housing market. a huge n

i think they've been working on this since they signed at greed framework in '94 in the clinton administration give up their nuclear program. the reason some may be be surprised in the obama administration is because for the last five years there's been a cult trying to reach a deal saying they don't have the program. this ought to be the end of that debate. the significance the risk that north korea poses should be completely evident. >> greta: we certainly got caught with our pants down if they got it built and we didn't know about it until now. shows we are falling badly on-the-job. >> in part because people in the intelligence community have been part of the denial network. a lot at the state department in the bush administration as well as the obama administration this is a case of politicizing intelligence by intelligence people. north korea has two routes to nuclear weapons, plutonium and now enriched uranium route. >> greta: we can have six-party talks cut off, the president says no. two-party talks just north korea and us, out. military action. >> forget that. >> greta: four, ignore.

the verdict in the trial of the man accused of bombing two american embassies during the clinton administration it all could effect the administration plans going forward with the fox all stars next. swing ov those r. took some foolish risks as a teenager. but i was still taking a foolish risk with my cholesterol. anyone with high cholesterol may be at increased risk of heart attack. diet and exercise weren't enough for me. i stopped kidding myself. i've been eating healthier, exercising more... and now i'm also taking lipitor. if you've been kidding yourself about high cholesterol...stop. along with diet, lipitor has been shown to lower bad cholesterol 39% to 60%. lipitor is fda approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in paents who have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease. [ fele announcer ] lipitor is not for everyone, including peoe with liver problems and women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications or ifou have any muscle pain or weakness. this

we've seen it with the reagan and the bush administrations, the clinton administration. now, of course, we are in the obama administration. and ithis one area, this goes beyond politics. this should be nonpartisan, not just bipartisan. >> secretary clinton, let me get to other areas including the war in afghanistan. listening to the president, listening and following the events that have happened at the nato summit, i wonder whether the washington clock for the war ha changed and that amerins should expect that by next july there's a token number of u.s. forces that are with drawn and really the war doesn't end for america unt 2014. >> no, david. ihink that we've been very clear about this. that the transition to afghan security leads begins next year, in 2011. it is conditioned space, so where it can happen, what pace it can happen, how many troops can be substituted for, that is what general petraeus and the military leader are going to be working on to recommend tohe president and the leaders of other countries. >> let me get on a key point, then. is it possible then e

2001, as a candidate for congress during the anthrax scare and watched norman mineta, former clinton administration secretary of transportation owho stayed over in the bush administration, pleading as the father of two airline pilots not to implement the possess the way it was going to come about he said it will create an onerous cost, an excessive economic burden on the airline industry and won't materially change the outcome of security and he advocated the use of a much more principle based and systemic method used by israelis which involves questioning and gets the bags before they go into the airport. now we have, i think we're getting into fourth amendment grounds, not as a lawyer, i'm not one, but now we have threats already penetrated a secure area. mr. carter: i don't know if this is clear for the cameras, but this is a t.s.a. employee do doing a leg search of a nun. go ahead. mr. davis: with that visual are, keep in mind, i've spent the last 26 years of my life traveling in and out of the middle east in various capacities, serving there in the military, in and out of the region, traveling