leon panetta saying straightforwardly, i'd like to share with our audience at this time, leon panettan the proposal back in 2012. i said wait, i have an obligation under the law. if i send prisoners from guantÁnamo, they have to guarantee that they don't go back to the battlefield. i have serious, serious reservations and concerns. what are your thoughts? >> yes, indeed. behind closed doors there are a that have very seriousntagon reservations about what was done. as none of them remember in the loop as this deal went down. kind closely as you might get one story, leon panetta no longer serving this administration, there are people who wish they could do the same. but they just can't if they don't want to be fired as other military men have been since this white house became part of power. people can say what they want to say. all that evidence, all those reports, all of those things that they are coming out with, a lot of people have seen these things. if the white house doesn't like what is being said, they will put a spin on it, including calling these men swift voters for having a

leon panetta is the new clark clifford.agel, secretary of defense, he was always against this deal. he was in pittsburgh. raised questions about it. what made the new guy on the job, hagel say, okay, boss, allegedly, go right ahead? >> that is what people in congress seemed to be confused about. we kind of discussed this before and we said we weren't comfortable with this. actually we didn't need to give you 30 days notice and we discussed it before and it would be fine when they knew before people had expressed reservations whether dianne feinstein or other republicans there was consensus before from leon panetta throughout congress that people didn't feel comfortable this kind of trade and letting go those specific taliban -- eric: what do you think this does to white house congressional relations. >> it doesn't help. they're already rocky. increasing lawmakers on both sides, both sides of the aisle increasingly frustrated with administration on this they are very unhappy they weren't told beforehand. eric: ellison barber

leon panetta to his credit said straightforward if we have the full screen, like to share interco --t. >> i said wait. i have an obligation under the law. device and prisoners from guantanamo they have to guarantee they don't go back to the battlefield. i have serious serious reservations and concerns. >> behind closed doors there is a lot of people in the pentagon right now have very serious reservations what was done but of course, none of them as the deal went down. you may get one story leon panetta and no longer serves the administration says when he thinks but other people wish they could do the same but they don't want to be fired as others have been since the white house came into power. they have to toe the line and all that evidence in the reports are out there and if the white house doesn't like what is being said they will put a spin on it up to including with all these men who have served with sergeant bergdahl had. lou: the colonel is referring to the tweets sendoff from the white house actually questioning the integrity of some of the young man who served with bergdahl

and that included hillary clinton, leon panetta, and now we know former secretary of defense bob gates. i'm told that he was, quote, very uncomfortable from a source who is familiar with this and the fundamental discussion at the time that made him uncomfortable and the others uncomfortable was about the negotiating with terrorists and hostage takers. they did not want to do that. they are all gone. something else transpired and we have this deal and early on it was something that i was told that they didn't even consider. >> if hillary clinton and leon panetta and bob gates had accepted this do you think there would be this problem? >> i think if you had a hillary clinton and leon panetta who had a lot for service and friends, if you will, in congress and including some republicans and a lot more standing on some of the national security issues, not criticizing secretary clinton but congress said perhaps. and more liberal, less cautious and less likely to have a debate in the oval office about these big decisions. they think secretary hagel and president obama are three people who, fo

leon panetta, the former head of america's spy agency and secretary of defense saying while he agreeshe administration not to ever leave a man behind, he's cautious after talks fell through in the past. >> i think the real test is going to be the conditions that are established on those that are going and to make sure that those conditions are tough and to ensure that there is tight security and that they do not return to the battlefield. >> meantime, we're also getting a new look with new photos being released of sergeant bowe bergdahl before he joined the military. jennifer griffin is live for us at the pentagon. we're seeing a softer side of bergdahl, this time from his friends, right? >> that's right, gretchen. in fact, what we are learning is that bowe bergdahl was a complicated individual with a softer side. these photos are of bowe bergdahl doing ballet when he was 16 years old before he joined the army. he was a lifter at a local ballet studio where he was introduced to meditation. his parents had homeschooled him and he was raised a strict calvinist. his friends say he wasn't

why did leon panetta oppose this originally and what changed between when leon panetta was defense secretary now chuck hagel is defense secretary. >> congressman king, thank you so much. >>> what gm is now saying about the deadly crashes and why it's still not classifying anyone in the back seat as a victim. >>> plus, he's a rookie on the late-night talk show stage but set meyers knows a thing or two about cracking a joke behind the desk. why he says it's better and more fun than "snl." nature valley crunchy granola bars contain 1/3 of your daily whole grains, so 1/3 of this commercial is dedicated to what you could do with all that energy. 1/3 of your daily whole grains means energy to make some new ocean friends. nature valley crunchy granola bars. i got more advice than i knew what to do with. what i needed was information i could trust on how to take care of me and my baby. luckily, unitedhealthcare has a simple program that helps moms stay on track with their doctors and get the right care and guidance-before and after the baby is born. simple is good right now. (anncr vo) innovations t

i have been around leon panetta for a number of years. he's an abc slults straight shooter. here's the issue. general mcchrystal and general petraeus and general alston and general allen have all made recommendations to this administration on war policy issues in iraq and afghanistan. the president has rejected summarily every single one of them during the residual forces, et cetera. it doesn't surprise me on an issue as essential as this is those who posted a fight made a recommendation we should not make this trade and provided the rationale for it. that was ignored and rejected as has all of their other recommendations over the past four to five years. >> general, thank you for being here. >> it is an under statement to say the administration has taken a lot of heat on this deal. a lot of that has fallen on national security advisor susan rice. after she decided to go on the shows this time suggesting bergdahl served the military with quote honor and distinction. then she was given the opportunity to walk that back. here's what she did instead. >> i realize there's been a

former defense secretary leon panetta says he had similar concerns when he had a chance to greenlightner swap years ago. >> i had to ensure that the greatest security would be established so that none of them would re-enter the battlefield. and that was my obligation under the law. there were very strict conditions to maintain security on each of these individuals. and those were not acceptable, either to the taliban or to the qatarees at the time. and it was for that reason that i did not support doing it at that point, because we just couldn't get them to agree to the conditions. >> those concerns are not shared by the white house, which says the swap is "not a security threat." president obama's in warsaw, poland, this morning, where he's defending the prisoner exchange and preparing for critical meetings. senior white house correspondent jim acosta live for us in warsaw. jim, what's the administration saying now that the criticism appears to be growing in washington? they must have seen this coming, and it will overshadow what he's trying to say and do in europe today. >> reporter

welcome to the fourth and final event in the leon panetta 2014 lee

former defense secretary leon panetta says he had similar concerns when he had a chance to okay a prisoner swap years ago. >> i had to ensure that the greatest security would be established so that none of them would re-enter the battlefield. and that was my obligation under the law. there were very strict conditions to maintain security on each of these individuals, and those were not acceptable, either to the taliban or to the qatarees at the time, and it was for that reason that i did not support doing it at that point because we just couldn't get them to agree to the conditions. >> meantime, president obama is in europe this morning, just landing this hour in warsaw. he's set to hold meetings with allies and some prominent critics about the u.s. role in the region. but you can be sure the bergdahl decision will hang over this entire trip. lots of questions this morning. senior white house correspondent jim acosta is live in warsaw for us. jim, what's the administration saying now in support of its decision to do this prisoner swap? >> reporter: hi, christine. yeah, you have heard the a

yesterday, leon panetta, cia director and defense secretary in this administration, he was speaking atevent in pittsburgh and he said he opposed a swap like this when he was a senior official. he doesn't fault the administration for wanting bergdahl back, but questions whether the restrictions are in place. the washington post reported that hillary clinton had opposed a swap like this when she was secretary of state. now one of her spokes people denied that. in a statement on -- or a public appearance on monday she was supportive of the move. she went into the same analysis that panetta did. you don't want to see these five prisoners go back to combat. on the other hand, you don't want to leave an american citizen in captivity. she alluded to it as being one of these hard choices which is why that's the title of her book about being secretary of state. that's instructive. this is really a hard choice here. we place tremendous weight on getting prisoners of war back. but it is not an absolute imperative in the sense that something can be so damaging to national security, that it's not w

but we do know leon panetta, the secretary of defense and martin dempsey, chairman of joint chiefs ofy saw the memorial okay. i feel certain investigators are going to want to know more about why it was she didn't see this. >> byron york, so many questions still unansd. we thank you for your time this afternoon. >> thank you. >> okay. that's going to do it for us. i'm so glad you were here with me. stick around here on the fox news channel because "a healthy you & carol alt" is next. marge: you know, there's a more enjoyable way to get your fiber. try phillips fiber good gummies. they're delicious, and an excellent source of fiber to help support regularity. wife: mmmm husband: these are good! marge: the tasty side of fiber. from phillips. and i get a lot in return with ink plus from chase i make a lot of purchases for my business. like 60,000 bonus points when i spent $5,000 in the first 3 months after i opened my account. and i earn 5 times the rewards on internet, phone services and at office supply stores. with ink plus i can choose how to redeem my points. travel, gift cards even

leon panetta at the cia. the republican hold over bob gates, you had hillary clinton at state. a lot of people look at this team when they say, no, it's not worth doing, not tough enough of a deal. they look now and see the president has surrounded himself with people who nod when he has an idea, they nod. secretary hagel at the defense department, secretary kerry at the state department, susan rice at national security. before we continue the conversation, let's listen to what hillary clinton talks to abc where she doesn't endorse the decision to make the swap, but doesn't criticize. >> of course there are competing interests and values. one of our values is we bring everybody home off the battlefield the best we can. it doesn't matter how they ended up in a prisoner of war situation. >> it doesn't matter? >> it doesn't matter. we bring our people home. >> she says that very clearly there, although, maeve, her people leaked quickly she wanted a tougher deal. >> her allies came out earlier this week and said she would have gone for a tougher deal, would have pushed for a tefr d

the budget enforcement act those procedures crafted by leon panetta, congressional leaders those procedures addressed all of the failings with strict annual spending caps on discretionary spending and something called pay as you go on revenues and entitlements. those procedures are still in effect today. none of that would have been possible without president bush. it is clear, he made a major shift in his campaign promise and the political risks were real and they were exploited by newt begin gingrich. i spent nearly 33 years staffing and working with these fine congress members and serving at the congressional budget office when it was established in 1994. it is easier to be partisan than it is to be bipartisan. there is nothing wrong with fighting for what you believe in and take a partisan position when you have to. in the end, sometimes for the greater good compromise for the greater good is better for the issuesissues that confront this country today. thank >> thank you bill. bill has touched on the key to making things work in this country is that our political leaders who come with

the budget enforcement act, those procedures crafted by leon panetta, congressman frenzel, congressional leaders, those procedures addressed all the failings of gramm-rudman hollings. those procedures are still in effect today. none of this would have been possible had it not been for president bush and his leadership. he made a major shift in his campaign promise and the political risks were real. they were exploited i would say by newt gingrich. on a personal note, i spent nearly 33 years working with these fine congressmen, serving the congressional budget office, and i have concluded that it is a lot easier to be partisan than it is to be bipartisan. nothing at all wrong with fighting for what you believe in, taking partisan positions when you have to. in the end, sometimes, for the greater good, compromise and bipartisanship is necessary to resolve not only budget issues but policy issues that confront this country today. [applause] >> bill has touched on the key to making things work in this country, is that our political leaders who come with a partisan and philosophical perspecti

as early as 2013, the intel community, james clapper and then leon panetta was asked are you comfortable with these five because president obama's been working on this since the michael hastings article ran. they said absolutely not because we're too worried about what these five will do if they return to the battlefield. all of a sudden that gets solved and they don't tell congress? there are legitimate questions that have been raised. >> also hillary clinton was against it, as well. >> true. >>ly didn't want to be viewed -- he didn't want to be viewed as cutting and running. it seems both parties are divided on this. him staying there and being held captive is something that if you're in favor of the war, you probably prefer him coming home -- this is where liberal and some on the right agree with ending the war -- you will support. >> they're yelling in my ear. we'll hear a lot more including from several u.s. soldier when served with bergdahl at the time he disappeared. all of them ascribe him as a deserter who should be held accountable for his actions. you'll also hear from the par

top spy, james clapper, he is the director of national intelligence, and then defense secretary leon panetta, strenuously objected to the transfer of these five men. on the basis that they could not guarantee that they would return or would not return to terrorism. and, in my conversations with people connected to the intelligence community, no one can point to a piece of evidence that suggests these men have turned over a new leaf. i have got right here the military review from guantanamo in 2008, and in every single one of these cases, the men are deemed to be high risk of returning to terrorism, so targeting u.s. interests and our allies. they are deemed to be a high intelligence value, which means they know a lot about the al qaeda network and the taliban. and the recommendation at that time was for continued detention at guantanamo. >> all right. so what has changed? who is in those jobs and the president making unilateral decision the people replaced those who opposed it a couple years ago. are they in favor with what the president has done or not? >> well, what we have heard from the

that gates still opposes it because the secretary doesn't want to go there at this point, but leon panettaesterday gave a speech and according to the pittsburgh newspaper he said, i don't fault the administration for wanting to get bergdahl back. i do question whether the conditions are in place to make sure these terrorists don't go back into battle. and that was a key concern that was also raised in 2011, when they were there. how can you ensure they don't go back. >> all of the president's top securitied a advisers were opposed to any such deal. >> they're gone almost all of them are gone. clapper is still there. he was strongly opposed at the time, as well. what the administration says, it's changed now because his health, bowe bergdahl's health has deteriorated and they had inside information from whatever source that this guy potentially could have been killed. >> that's right. his health was in danger, his life was in danger, and jim acosta's reporting that in fact the senators were told yesterday when briefed if word had gotten out, that they were threatening to kill bergdahl and t

in 2012 the director of national intelligence james clapper and then defense secretary leon panetta wereh transfer since the news broke over the weekend, the cia, the national counterterrorism center and clapper's office have been noticeably silent. a spokesman for clapper said he had concerns but the conditions of confinement limited the risks but we frankly don't know what those conditions are. >> thambgs very much. much more on the bergdahl story in just a moment. with more than a month after cops say a high school student stabbed to death his own classmate, apparently because she wouldn't go to the prom with him, the suspect appeared today in front of a judge. we'll explain why a jury may never hear this trial. that's next. i had to do something. i saw mdoctor. a blood test showed it was low testosterone, not age. we talked about axiron the onlynderarm low t treaent that can restore t vels to normal in about two weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especlly those who are or who may become pregnant, a

that's why leon panetta said what he said that he opposed it. >> senator, presumably this was the best deal that they could get. >> that's like saying a nuclear deal with iran is the best deal that they can get. it has to be a deal that preserves american security. >> so he would still be in pakistan or afghanistan or wherever he was? >> i'm afraid that's the case because our first obligation is not to put the lives of fighting men and women at risk by having these people return to the fight. there's a clear record of these people having returned to the fight and in leadership positions because it's a badge of honor to have been in guantanamo. these are -- these are also war criminals. a couple of them were accused of killing thousands of shiite muslims. these are the ones that used to take the women into the soccer stadium in kabul and hang them from the goal posts. i would certainly not want to release anyone who is a further risk to the united states of america. >> they are not going to free members who are members of sergeant pepper's lonely hearts band. it's going to be bad guys i

plan that had been road tested by dave petraeus who was then director of ci, and supported by leon panettae president as i sa said, he gets to make the decisions, and he was not convinced that it was right for any kind of an american involvement no matter even a small, you know, support program. so what we did was try to help with the humanitarian disaster, and the hundreds of thousands of refugees flooding into the country. >> well, it seem nos better. >> well w it is worse, because syria is a battleground for jihadists, and it has become a magnet for the extremists, and the poor moderates are badly outgunned, and are fighting literally to stay alive, and with iran supporting assad both through the revolutionary guard and most importantly sending units of hezbollah into battle on behalf of assad, it has set up this sunni shiite al low wit battle. >> and cynthia conducted that interview four days ago before iraq blew up literally and figuratively with the issue, and with the syrian answer, that is a whole lot more complicated, because now essentially, there is no border between seyria and

that's why leon panetta, that's why so many other members of congress oppose this deal -- >> what kind of restrictions would you want on these men that are not on these men? >> first of all, i wouldn't release these men. >> ever? >> second of all, i would release people -- not these men. they were judged time after time during their confinement in guantanamo, they were evaluated and judged as too great a risk to release. that was the judgment made about them, not by me, but by the people who evaluate these people. they were judged too great a risk, they're committed to returning to the fight. they're in qatar for only one year. then the leadership, mall lar omar just got his cabinet back. i'm saying we should do everything we can in our power to win the release of any american be held, but not at the expense of the lives and well-being of their fellow servicemen and women. we owe that obligation to them. when we join the military, when we join the military, we know we take certain risks. among those risks are wounding, death, imprisonment. that's why we cherish and love those men and w

joining me now to talk about it is jeremy bash, former defense secretary leon panetta during the earlys of the negotiations. he's now the managing director of beacon global strategies. also joining us, retired colonel chris tolinda, senior adviser to the defense department and is one of the main characters in my book about afghanistan, "the outpost," and spent a lot of time in that country doing a lot of work. chris, jeremy, good to see you, as always. first, just to respond to the strong charges made by bowe bergdahl and others, but does that matter? when you're talking about trying to get him home, does it matter how he came to leave the observation post or any of the questions, jeremy? >> no, i don't think it does. in fact, in all of the conversations that i was in and chris was in it as well, about a potential deal, that never came up. nor should it. >> but everybody knew it. you all knew it. >> we were worried about the stories and the claims. no one ever said he walked off or he was taken and therefore we shouldn't try to get him back. >> it didn't enter in at all? >> no. and you

young legislative assistant for the republican whip of california whose name was, wait for it, leon panetta. so things change that way. i want to tell one story, if i may. >> you have 30 seconds. [laughter] >> bumming cigarettes, i was smoking at the time. dirksen came up to the gallery and said i am like little johnny where the teacher says, johnny, can you spell straight? ht.nny says, straig she says, what does it mean? ale.the ginger [laughter] one day i walked in and he said, andy, you know about delaware, don't you? i thought he was going to talk about williams. i said what about delaware? one congressional district when the tide is out. no congressional districts when the tide is in. his idea of humor. [laughter] kiko, iame has come up, don't think he is well remembered. a lot of people don't remember he was the republican whip in the 1960's, a very influential senator. i understand he gave you insights. tell that story. whip hads the minority down the hall from the senate a hideaway office. antechambere the for the elevator that went down into the caucus room beneath. it was a big el

she wasn't convinced there was a credible threat about bergdahl's health and also, back in 2011, leon panetta, defense secretary and former cia director, has gone on the record and said he has real problems about the possible release, bergdahl for those five criminals who are staying in gitmo, so that's coming from democrats, high pro file democrats and a former member of the white house, who referred to -- not the right deal to make. >> right. it was not the right deal then. they voiced their concerns, so why the change? that's the big question. what happened in that white house, to the intelligence officials who then felt no need to continue to brief members of congress. they did not follow the law. 30 days, they're mandated to give congress before anyone is released from guantanamo. not only did they do this in secret, consult with congress, but violated the law which states that we need to be notified and i think this bodes badly for the rest of the obama administration. he cannot continue to do his foreign policy on the backs of the american people and say, your opinion and those of your

even his own cabinet, hillary clinton, leon panetta, when he was secretary of defense, were saying, dout syria. let's back the non-jihadi, national syrian rebels. two years they've been saying that. the president has done nothing. so that passivity, has let our enemies grow and grow in power. >> all right. real quick now, what can we do, what do you suggest that the united states do to fix our foreign policy problem? >> the first thing we need to do, i think, is really iraq, syria, is one theater, get behind those rebels in syria who are in a fight. these isis jihadis. get behind them now, and in a serious way. but as i said in the article, there's a lot of arabs and israelis who think -- a lot of americans who think, you're really not going to fix this until january 20th, 2017. >> and the problem is, that's going to be too late, because we see the situation crumbling on a daily basis, in just rapid succession. eliot, thank you for being with us here tonight. >> my pleasure. >> well, joining me, fox news contributor and fellow with the prague freedom foundation, richard prenl. great ha

good idea of what they were going to do i'll never forget the phone kale i got from an excited leon panetta telling me that bin laden had been taken down. those types of things are briefed to us on a regular basis. not a day goes by, bob, that i don't get briefed on some classified aspect of our intelligence community. a lot of which is ongoing operations. secondly when bergdahl was let go, what we were told and what the public was told is that because of a video that was made apparently in december of last year and viewed by department of defense in january of this year that bergdahl looked like he had lost 10 to 15 pounds, he was in poor health and they were concerned that if they did not make this exchange that his life would be in danger as a result of bad health. well, no intelligence supported that. and now they come back and because he is in decent health considering where he's been, they changed their story. they said, no, we suspected his life may be in danger if word got out of this pending possible trade that his life may be in danger. again, i can just tell you there is no intel

but just as, you know, i think 2009-2010, leon panetta said these individuals pose a. -- serious threat should never be released. neil: leaving aside the monies that might have gone back and forth, when susan rice has trouble even calling them terrorists, listen to this, i think it compounds the problem. susan rice. >> point-blank, did the u.s. negotiate with terrorists? >> with the government to who won the zero agreed that. neil: okay. the bite went on longer but made less sense -- less sense. bottom line, she did not even use that term. >> well, first of all, consider the optics. why would you bring out susan rice, the last time she may several sunday talk show appearances she was talking about an anti islamic video and the end of this for what happened in benghazi. her credibility is absolutely shot. for her to sit there and try to make the american people believe that the obama administration did not negotiate with terrorists, that is exactly what they did. alabama is a non state, nonbelligerent organization. they're not a nation state. we have established a very bad precedent. nei

>> leon panetta was there for a while. >> when you guys get together and you were dealing with a guy like newt gingrich from your standpoint, what would you say about this? >> you try to pull it apart politically, what does this mean, where are they going, what is the support system. what are they getting away with, what are the structures that he is building that are inhibitors to something that we want to accomplish, what is the impact, what is the fallout? [laughter] thus the conversations. you try to analyze this, what does it mean to the country, what does it mean to our districts or what we believe in or to the institution? everything here said this was a storm warning for the institution. >> what did it feel like when you were in the minority? what changes? >> you lose the ability to make the chain on time. -- make the trains run on time. you are in second position. first there was respect between the minority and majority. there was a handing over of the gavel. that continued for a while. it became harsher and harsher until he got where it is today. you had people who were ve

why doesn't the president just own it leon panetta opposed this deal.t secretary of secretary ofe who didn't oppose it and it went through. we can argue whether hagel ended up being district attorney siive factor there that the voice of the pentagon who usually would say no, we shouldn't go ahead of this deal wasn't there at the table and that's why tended up going forward now is the perfect time to drag him out and say fall guide president obama owns this decision. he it fits his pattern. he appeased iran. he appeased syria. he appeals putin, russia. now you see him try appease the taliban with the terrorist trade. the american people don't like it. it's a terrible trade national security. the white house is trying to politically spin something that is not politically spinnable. this is not in our national security interest quick answer, i don't have a lot of time. mary, does this hurt the president going into the mid terms, this issue? >> absolutely does. >> jim? >> yes, only if he energizes the conservative grass roots like crazy. >> what do you thin

for that reason under -- i'm told end leon panetta and chairman of joint chiefs it was judged these people were too dangerous to let go. one thing that's changed that allowed this release is the secretary of defense, and chairman decided that that is an acceptable risk. but to see details about how they will be held, how we can make sure they're not back on the battlefield before this one-year period that is part of deal is up, remains to be seen. >> schieffer: do we have any idea, you think they're going back to qatar, we have any idea under what circumstances, will they be released once they're there, what do we know? >> all weenie for sure is that they won't be ale lloyd to travel from qatar. what their freedom is, inside the country i'm not so sure although taliban's press release on this exchange said they will be living with their families. they got to get out of jail free card, let's face it. >> schieffer: david? >> i just was going to say, a lot depends here on the behavior of qatar government where they are responsible counter terrorism partner, administration was eager toe credit

in 2010, is the point that was discussed by then secretary of defense gates, then cia director leon panettam told, that when this was raised, the same exact question came up, which is you don't negotiate with hostage takers. you don't negotiate with terrorists. now, the situation is different. the war is winding down. this is a president who wants to say he ended the war in iraq. he ended the war in afghanistan. he killed osama bin laden. no soldier left behind. so the circumstances are very different right now. and as you know from the white house point of view, these really bad guys may have ended up getting set free anyway because maybe we couldn't prove the case against them. i think general jones clearly comes at this saying very black or white, you don't negotiate. john mccain, by the way, has a different point of view, which is he sort of allowed that at some point you might negotiate. he thinks this is a bad deal. >> now i want to get hillary clinton's point of view, another former obama administration official. she weighed in on the bergdahl deal on abc news. here is what she said.

no leon panetta, he was secretary of defense at that time. he said no, we can't do it. and so, to answer your question, there wasn't anything new. and a lot of this stuff that they talked about should not be classified anyway. >> the concern that we have heard from members that are on the committee, or the members that aren't on the committee on capitol hill about not being briefed beforehand. the criticism of the deal itself and also the process, is that continuing to be bipartisan? because we have heard from both parties that they're not happy with how the white house handled it. >> no, i don't think. the way this whole thing started was supposed to be this great thing in the rose room or with obama standing up and returning the prisoner and it all back fired. it was all obama then. now, all they talked about in this briefing was, well, secretary hagel did this and secretary hagel did that no, this is the president. clearly. and when you stop and realize, and i actually had the name here. and it's not classified. abdullah al-marri, not too long ago, a few months ago,

leon panetta, a former official in the obama administration said on wednesday that he doesn't fault theinistration for wanting bergdahl back but questions whether the conditions are in place to make sure these former terrorists don't go into battle. why is the white house confident that these guys aren't going to be a problem for us? >> they are confident at least for the next year, they say, because, obviously, they were released from guantanamo bay. they were on a list that were not cleared for release. this is a special case even in the release itself. they have been sent to qatar and they have insurance that they will not be allowed to leave the country for a year. during the negotiations, the taliban said, we want them to be able to leave and make the hag, the annual pilgrimage to mecca, to seek medical care if that's needed and the united states said, no, we do not accept those terms. as far as after that year, what happens to them. these guys are older, 40s and 50s. they are former -- some of them are former officials in the taliban government, pre-u.s. invasion of 2001. whether

i know leon panetta was against releasing these five prisoners.re high-value prisoners who could cause a lot of national security problems for the united states. so we have to look at the bottom of this. we have to ask ourselves, was he trying to do this -- was the president trying to do this for political reasons. was there something he wanted to get off his plate? many are making that charge. not just republicans. the fascinating thing is, the president thought he would win on this issue and it's really becoming a problem for him. >> i think he thought he was doing a good thing by bringing a soldier home. >> many are admitting the rose garden may not have been the right choice. we may come back to both of you on this, because it will be a story that keeps on going. appreciate it. >>> up next today, you can't spell pig castration without tea, the tea party favorite makes a giant leap toward washington, d.c., right up ahead. if i can impart one lesson to a new business owner, it would be one thing i've learned is my philosophy is real simple ameri

people that were opposed, leon panetta, hillary clinton was skeptical, they left.of these other factors, the impetus was on the administration to push this deal through. so, these five guys were very bad guys, everyone admits. there were some inside the administration that thought they were bad guys who wanted to kill other afghans, not necessarily americans -- not necessarily americans abroad. i guess we'll see now that they're released who was right. >> colonel davis, let's get to you now. i want to ask you first, what was your role, sir, as gitmo prosecutor. second, did you know these five taliban members? and your reactions that the five are in ill health. do you see that as being plausible nk guantanamo bay? >> my role as chief prosecutor was to review the information we had on the detainees to see which ones we could potentially bring war crimes against. out of 779 men held at guantanamo, we identified 75 that we thought potentially could be prosecuted. when i saw the names of the five individuals reported last weekend, my first reaction is, who are they? i n

clinton, writes she along with former cia director david petraeus and former defense secretary leon panettafavored arming moderate rebels. overruled by president obama. two years later, kerry says the u.s. is now prepared to step up its military involvement to weaken president bashar al assad's resolve. you, yourself, have said we're not going to change the equation on the ground until assad sees he's starting to get brusz brus little bit. >> there are a series of steps we have been taking to do exactly what you just described. >> but wolf, even if this proposal makes it through the full senate where it has a good deal of support, it wouldn't happen overnight. administration officials say they still need to work through the logistics, where it would be based, how it would work and what allies would take part, but it still would clear a real hurdle for the administration to go ahead, wolf. >> elise, thanks very much. >>> young children caught crossing the u.s. border detained under very disturbing conditions. captain obvious: this is a creepy room. man: oh hey, captain obvious. captain obvio

the former cia chief, leon panetta, they thought this was a bad idea. what has changed? >> well, what's changed this time, is that -- >> james clapper? >> yes, james clapper. there are guarantees that these guys are going to be monitored and they felt that those guarantees mitigated the risks and concerns that he had before. second of all, what i've heard is that the view is that these guys, while very senior taliban members and, of course, very important to the network do not have the human networks that they did a few years ago and finally, there are going to be fewer americans in afghanistan within a year that they are allowed to travel back to afghanistan. >> there is supposed to be almost 10,000 after 2015. let's talk about next year, 2015. let's talk a little bit about that, bob baer, because senator john mccain is clear on this point. let me pay a clip for you. >> there are taliban and al qaeda. don't you understand that? you -- like you said, you're an old man. they officially invaded afghanistan to separate these people from al qaeda, it's just damn foolishness.

>> well, leon panetta isn't secretary of defense anymore. that certainly changed.what they're saying is that these people have a travel ban for one year, you have troops that are going to be there, according to the president, for only two years more. that means they get one good year to get their whacks in on u.s. soldiers on the ground in afghanistan. some notion that this band of characters, these terrorists are not going to get reengaged in this fight in some way is absolutely naive. it's dangerous and every soldier who is on the ground should be a little upset by this. i know i am. >> absolutely. the white house has been saying well, the reason we had to act right now and why we didn't call congress was because of the guy's health. jay carney was asked about that by matt lauer and he goes, yeah, he's been held for a long time. it doesn't look like it was health oriented. it looks like it was simply political. they were trying, the white house was, to put points on the board. >> we can't -- those of us who tried to look at it and understand what they were thinki

it was rejected in part by meet congress say nothing way, in part by leon panetta and possibly by hillaryon saying no way. they all knew the question fabl circumstances of bergdahl. i have think the white house made the situation with bergdahl much worse. to take a guy who left under questionable circumstances and put his family in the white house and make it look like this great hero is coming back. martha: they had to cancel his home coming in his own hometown. >> horribly handled by a white house i believe is in a state of panic. bill: president obama taking questions now with the british prime minister traveling in europe in belgium. just want to see if this topic comes up. >> convince them to end their violence, lay down their weapons and enter into a die whrog the ukrainian government. if russia's provocations continue it's clear from our discussions here the g-7 nations are ready to impose additional costs on russia. i briefed david the new initiative i introduced to bolster our allies in eastern europe and the middle east and north africa. david will be hosting the next nato summi

. >> we also know, you remember covering this, panetta, leon panetta, defense secretary, former cia directorr, head of intelligence, he didn't like this deal. hillary clinton wasn't the only one who didn't like it. now everyone in the administration, the new secretary of defense, the new cia director, all seem to have come on board. >> they did. like josh made the point, david ignatius made the point earlier, originally this was part of a bigger negotiation. i was in afghanistan two, three years ago about reconciliation. how do you get the taliban to the table not just to get bergdahl back but to end the fighting? bergdahl was going to be a sign of trust as opposed to the end result. it's a different time now. the president has announced forces are going to be out in a couple years' time and added to the urgency of this administration saying, you know, as our troops pull out, we have less leverage plus his value drops, right, for the taliban which incloses the risk to his life. >> you think the qataris are going to deliver these assurances that the emir of qatar has given the president of th