mr. chapman dealt with the outside fellow and mr. chapman with the e-mails and whatever action was taken. all i know as i said to you in my written letters to the chairman and the committee was that he said to me after a period of time, good news, there's no smoking gun in the e-mails. i remember that quite clearly. respect his recollection. but it is not something that i would have said if i didn't remember it. >> you are a journalist. journalists are quite in quizzes of characters. did you not ask what on earth clive goodman had dropped his claim? what happened to that clive goodman? >> with respect, mr. klug was a journalist--a law-enforcement terrible damage journalist but the explain this episode to the committee in 2009. if i have fallen short of will take responsibility for that and you will not find me falling short in any kind of humility. >> you didn't ask about what happened to that case? [talking over each other] >> it was a case that i inherited. and quite frankly my focus at that time was trying to get the paper back on

mr. chapman and mr. clay, did they explain what they conducted, the email review was very, very narrow in its focus? >> i had very little contact with john chapman with this process. my main contact was daniel cloak. and if i may, i'd just like to clarify one point that mr. cloak crone i made no negotiation regarding any financial settlement that was made with mr. goodman, no, whatsoever. >> if i may, one final question then. >> sure. >> going back to the meeting we've already discussed with james murdoch, subsequent to that meeting did you ever have any conversations with him or any senior executive news corporation that you might report to suggesting that there should be further investigation within the newspapers suggesting what you'd done or there should be an external investigation regarding phone hacking as a result the email as it had been discussed in the newspaper? >> at that particular time i didn't have any specific conversations with anybody relating to that. but any -- any other issues relati

mrs. chapman's advice, please email me immediately i will take that action. the emmys were awarded last night as usual politics were on hand. >> we are raising a little girl here in hollywood but it's a pretty normal existence for her. kids are kids everywhere. yesterday my daughter had a tea party with her little friends and it was so cute. they complained about taxes, called obama a communist, and wonder how the latino kid got in. [ laughter ] >> bill: and the winner is, check five. the wounded warrior project. our charitable promotion featuring an auction is going great. top bid on this unique historical item poster signed by all five living ptsz now at $46,000. we have not seen another document like this. in addition, if you donate 25 bucks or more you get a facsimile of the document that has raised $72,000. a lot of injured servicemen are going to be helped by your generosity. if you want to bid on the auction or get inphone go to bill o'reilly.com. give you the results one week from tonight. that is reality check, pinheads and patriots on deck tonight s

mr. chapman on the editorial board has changed his tune. karen, how surprising is this editorial, at this stage of the game? >> look, there's a lot of panic going on throughout the country, within the democratic party. i mean, you've got james carville suggesting people should be fired, you know, democrats are wringing their hands, wondering why they didn't nominate hillary instead of obama in 2008. but look, democrats and the people who endorsed him are getting exactly what he promised. he promised the health care bill that voters in 2009 were very vocal about their displeasure of the bill and, you know -- and here he is today, proposing an increase on the capital gains tax, which even democrats within his own party in the senate don't support. so there's a lot of handwritinging going on, despite the fact that obama has really done everything he promised he would do, so people are getting what they asked for. martha: i want you both to take a look at this piece of sound from the sunday talk shows, this is former president bill clinton, whe

mr. chapman said in any case, a confidentiality clause wouldn't stand up to a row of beings when it comesigation? so how could taylor's lawyers enforce you to confidentiality on an email that suggested more criminal wrongdoing? you must have known that. you're a lawyer yourself. >> well, i'm just telling you there's very strict -- what confuse me here is that you simply be missing what i just said. this document came from the police. it's not as if it isn't -- hasn't been looked at, considered, experts, you know, paying close attention to it in the appropriate area which is the, you know, the police forces of this country. >> the police will have questions to answer as well but it's the case that you knew that if there was a criminal -- if a crime had been committed, taylor's lawyers could not hold you to a confidentiality clause? you knew that, didn't you? you're a media lawyer. you're a barrister? >> well, there's a confidentiality clause agreed by both size in the case of civil litigation, normally that would be to stick to the confidentiality clause. that's what's called straight deal

mr. president, let hillary clinton run. steve chapmana columnist and member of the editorial board for "the chicago tribune." good day to you. >> good to be here. >> first, there's some precedent here, what you write in your column of presidents who could have run for re-election but did not in the face of a hostile election. lpj decided ton run in '68. truman did the same in '52. make the case for the current president to sit the next one out. >> we've got about as bad an economy as we've had since the great depression. it's been going on for four years now. unemployment is not falling. the economy is barely growing at all. and the forecasts are that it's not going to grow much in the next year. so i think given that, it's hard for me to believe that the american electorate is going to go to the polls next november and give obama another four years given that he's had four years and the economy is no better. it's going to work against him. >> steve, a lot of polls show the president standing ground against gop contenders now. >> i think

mr. obama's hometown newspapers, the "chicago tribune," t "chicago tribune," is running a column called why obama should withdraw. steve chapman suggests not running might be sensible for mr. obama to do. he says the president might do the party a favor by stepping aside, taking the blame and letting someone else replace him at the top of the ticket. someone like, oh, say, hillary clinton. here's the question. how much of a problem does president obama have with his own party? go to cnn.com/caffertyfile. post a comment on my blog or go to our post on "the situation room's" facebook page. i suppose at the end of the day if you don't want to vote for a republican, you're going to vote for the president for a second term, but at the moment, he's got some problems. >> he certainly does, but as i keep saying, it's still a long time between now and november 2012. we'll see what unfolds, jack. appreciate it. lisa sylvester is monitoring some other top stories right now. lisa, a setback for a death row inmate. what's the latest? >> troy davis is about 24 hours away from his execution now that the georgia parole board has denied his re

chapman through this process. my main contact was daniel. i would like to clarify one point. i played no part in any conversation or any negotiation regarding any financial settlement that was made with mr. goodman. none whatsoever. >> going back to the meeting with mr. murdoch. did you have any conversations with them or any senior executive news corp. that he might report to suggesting that there should be further investigations of the newspaper? has it been discussed that blacks at that time, i did not have any specific conversations relating to that. -- has been discussed? >> at the time, i did not have any specific conversations relating to that spirit i never discussed it again with james murdoch. >> i would say over the course of the last 18 months, a lot of discussions have taken place. >> going back, do you not think it is extraordinary that the agreement was settled to take the case? everyone understood the significance of what he was being told. it was never discussed again. it never wanted to discuss its target to the bottom of it? -- you never wanted to discuss it or get to the bottom of the? don't you think that is extraordinary? >> i don't think that is extraordinary. the