host: that from craig whitlock from the washington today program. theael o'hanlon, from perkins institution, critical of the washington post for writing. he said, "it is a serious charge to a huge -- to accuse u.s. .fficials of duplicity the washington post did a disservice with this report at a time when trust in american institutions is already weak and officials at accusing each other of line all the time -- being wrongly demeaned and diminished. next up is james from norfolk, virginia. caller: how's it going? my view on this is, it is a war of attrition as we can see. we had to take a broader view and see what we have actually done in this region. in afghanistan the taliban or major stronghold player in that region. once we moved in a lot of the people there started to look better. what i mean by that is, your females that can go to school past the age of seven. a lot of other things. human rights, a lot better around that region and iraq as well. i feel from a standpoint of a civilian you can see the tide of the war and the sentiment is going l

craig whitlock was the leading reporter. you went through thousands of pages of these interviews. ake away? craig: how blunt the people in charge of the w were about the failings of the strategy, about hey we were there, and who enemy was.the afghanar's are inh white house for bush and obama said -- we did not havthe foggiest notion of what we were dertaking in afghanistan we did not know what we were doing. 2400 liv lost --where they lost in vain? when you see things like that from generals in charge of the war, that grabs your attention. reporter: did you get any sense why they were saying these things in private to the interviewers w b weren't ey saying them in public? craig: i think what happened is that they were being interviewed by another government agency a many had assurances that they would not be quoted i name or their comments wou not make it out without their approval. the washington post took the positi that these are public records. senior government officials criticizing the war from top to bottom and the public has a right to know that. we have been fighting that

host: that was craig whitlock. again, "the secret history of the war" is on washingtonpost.com. reaction to what he was saying. guest: hundreds of thousands of people have been killed in the war. kabul was completely destroyed by the afghans themselves. and under the taliban, what remained of the afghan economy disappeared and half the publishing were imprisoned in their homes and cannot have jobs or be educated. that was not in this report, which is a very good report in many ways. anybody who knows anything about afghanistan is not surprised by the afghan police are corrupt. afghanistan has a big drug problem. what was surfaced in these reports was pretty well known. i think what the post was trying to say is there is a big disconnect between what people were saying publicly in congressional testimony and what they were saying privately. host: was it a modern-day version of the pentagon papers? guest: i think they are two very different situations. first of all, thousands of americans died in vietnam and then afghanistan, way too large a number, and civilians, but the scale is

. >> reporter: "the washingtonst waged a three year legal battle with the government to craig whitlockarned." reporter on the story. craig, you read through some -- thousands of pages of th speer views, what was the big takeaway that you came away with? >> just how blunt the people in charge of the war were about the failings of the strategy, about why we were thre, about who the enemy was. leapt out at me was from armyeu nant general doug lute, the war czar in the white house for both bush and obama, ande said we didn't have the foggiest notion of what we were wedertaking in afghanistan didn't know what we were doing. he said, 2,400 lives were lost in vain. when you see things like that from generals in charge to have the war, they vab -- in charge of the war, they grab yournt atn. >> reporter: did you get a sense from these people you talked to why -- they were saying these things private to the interviewers, but why in public?hings >> you know, that's a really haven't elaborated.a lot of them i think what happened is these people were being interviewed by another government agency,

craig whitlock, thank you so much. carol lee, thank you as well. and we'll be right back. ♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪ ♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ we're portuguese? i thought we were hungarian. can you tell me that story again? behind every question is a story waiting to be discovered. this holiday, start the journey with a dna kit from ancestry. ♪for the holidays you can't beat home sweet home.♪♪a kit we go the extra mile to bring your holidays home. before we talk about tax-s-audrey's expecting... new? -twins! ♪ we'd be closer to the twins. change in plans. at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. >>> that is all for tonight. chuck will be back tomorrow with more "meet the press daily." in the meantime, here is ari melber with "the beat." >> thank you, katy. congressional democrats now marching towards impeachment right now, re

outlet is calling the afghanistan papers a secret history of the war in their article the post craig whitlock writes that a trove of couple times will government documents obtained by the newspaper through the freedom of information act after a 3 year long legal battle reveal that senior u.s. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in afghanistan throughout the 18 year campaign making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unlistenable evidence the war had become.

outlet is calling the afghanistan papers the secret history of the war in their article the post craig whitlock writes that a trove of confidential government documents obtained by the newspaper through the freedom of information act after a 3 year long legal battle reveal that senior u.s. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in afghanistan throughout the 18 year campaign making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unless they could bill evidence the war had become unwinnable in other words. exactly what many whistleblowers activists analysts and all of us independent journalists have been saying and writing about the war since the longer writing about the longest war in u.s. history since a little after it actually began back in 2001 but that doesn't mean that this latest release of documents by the post isn't important because it is incredibly damaging to the credibility of the u.s. government and the pentagon the post reports that the documents were in fact generated as part of a federal project examining the root failures of the longest armed conflict in u.s. his

outlook is calling the afghanistan papers a secret history of the war in their article the post craig whitlock writes that a trove of confidential government documents obtained by the newspaper through the freedom of information act after a 3 year long legal battle reveal that senior u.s. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in afghanistan throughout the 18 year campaign making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unlistenable evidence the war had become unwinnable in other words. exactly what many whistleblowers activists analysts and all of us independent journalists have been saying and writing about the war since the longer writing about the longest war in u.s. history since a little after it actually began back in 2001 but that doesn't mean that this latest release of documents by the post is important because it is incredibly damning to the credibility of the u.s. government and the pentagon the post reports that the documents were in fact generated as part of a federal project examining the failures of the longest armed conflict in u.s. history and that they

investigative journalis craig whitlock joins me. "amanpour & co." is made

outlet is calling the afghanistan papers a secret history of the war in their article the post's craig whitlockwrites that a trove of confidential government documents obtained by the newspaper through the freedom of information act after a 3 year long legal battle reveal that senior u.s. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in afghanistan throughout the 18 year campaign making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unlistenable evidence the war.

craig whitlock, thank you for coming up and sharing it with our viewers. >>> thank you to our internationalng. for u.s. viewers, house democrats about to make a huge announcement on impeachment. "new day" continues now. >>> articles of impeachment will be unveiled after a contentious final day of house hearings. >> where is the impeachable offense? why are we here? >> he used his power, betrayed his oath and corrupted the election process. >> to impeach a president over eight lines in a call transcript is baloney. >> each of us took an oath to defend the constitution. the president is a continuing threat to our democracy. >> this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john berman. >> good morning and welcome to your "new day." tuesday, december 10th, 8:00 in the east. and the breaking news this morning, we're awaiting a major announcement on capitol hill. very shortly, house democrats will announce the formal articles of impeachment. these are the impeach charges against the

craig whitlock said it began with a tip about a single interview about michael flint. >> this all startedchael flynn, the retired army general had given the unpublished interview with an obscure government agency about the war in afghanistan. and you have to remember back in august of 2016 michael flynn was becoming well known, maybe even notorious for his support of then candidate trump. and his dislike of hillary clinton. but when he was in the military c flynn was known as a pretty straight shooter and someone who wasn't afraid to criticize how things were going within the ranks. so we were curious what he said in the interview. and we put in a public records request under the freedom for information act. we thought we'd get our hands on this soon. the long and short of it is it turned into a three year legal battle. >> it's interesting it starts with a single tip about a single interview. and then snowballs. you never know when a single tip is going to lead you to something. >> and this one we didn't know, because we were just pulling on the string. and we kept pulling, but it was har

knew about those mistakes as they were making them, thanks to reports by the washington post's craig whitlock 2,000 previously unpublished pages of the u.s. governme's ownart of lessons learned projec one of those offials interviewed was retired general douglas lute, former nato ambassador, and the senior official on the national security staff coordinated in afghanistan from 2007 to 2013 for presidents george w. bush and barack obama. >> good to be with you. nick: you a at the end of the bush administration and you describe the straty as lost. you gave an interview where you said we were devoid of a fundamental understanding of afghanistan. we didn't know what we were doing. there might have been a lot of tech experience was there any strategy? >> the keyword in that quote is no. what i mean is, we didn't , lly apprecia didn't have sufficient expertise on afghanistan, understanding the politics, the economics, the neighborhood, afghanis in a very tough neighborhood with pakistan to the south east.the we didn't understand the ethnicities that made upgh the people, the demographics, well enoug

knew about those mistakes as they were making thhe, thanks to reports by t "washington post's" craig whitlock, based on 2,000 previously unpublishedes of notes and interviews, part of the u.s. government's own lessons learned project. one of those officials interviewed was retired general douglas lute, former nato ambassador, and the senior official on the national security staff dedicated to the war in afghanistan from 2007 to 2013, for presidents george w. bush and barack obama dr. lute, weraome to the pr thanks for being with us. >> good to be here. >> schifrin: you arrived at the end of the administration and described the strategy as loves. you gave an interview where you said, "we were devoid of a fundamental understanding in afghanistan. we didn't know what we were doing." there might have been a lot of tactics. was there any strategy? >> i think the key wos in that quote -- it's an accurate quote -- the key wordre is "no." what i mean we did not fully appreciate, we did not have sufficient expertise afghanistan, understanding the politics, the economics, the neighborhoods. afghanistan

investigativet journ craig whitlock joins me. "amanpour & co." is made

the reporter who has been at the head of this investigation into these dogmas is craig whitlock, he joinsmisrepresented what was happening, is that your understanding of what you have discovered in these documents that it is notjust that they didn't know what was happening, they didn't know what was happening, they deliberately told the public a different story? they did and people work for them, generals, different story? they did and people work forthem, generals, military commanders, ambassadors, they were all using the same talking points over a all using the same talking points overa numberof years. all using the same talking points over a number of years. they would all say things in afghanistan are task, setbacks, challenges, but we are making progress. they always said that. they told the american people why they had to keep fighting the war, that is why it has gone on for 18 years stop these document made clear they and people working for them did not level with the american people about how the was going. how hard it did the us government try to make sure that the washington pos

host: that was craig whitlock.the, "the history -- secret history of the war" is on washingtonpost.com. guest: hundreds of thousands of people have been killed in the war. and under the taliban, what remained of the afghan economy disappeared and half the publishing were imprisoned in their homes and cannot have jobs or be educated. was not in this report, which is a very good report in many ways. anybody who knows anything about afghanistan is not surprised by the afghan police are corrupt. there is a big drug problem. what was surfaced in these reports was pretty well known. i think what the post was trying to say is there is a big disconnect between what people were saying publicly in professional testimony and what they were saying privately. host: was it a modern-day version of the pentagon papers? guest: i think they are two very different situations. looking at the amounts of americans that died in vietnam and then afghanistan, way too large a number, and civilians, but the scale is completely different. was