mr. dempsey, mr. medine. senator, i think the recent the recent, you know, agreement by the justice department to allow companies to disclose more information didn't actually address sort of alk collection question. assuming i understand your question correctly, the -- sort of bulk collection question. assuming i understand your question correctly, a million of the customers are affected, then that basically says -- 's a balk collection bulk collection against this entity and i believe that is sensitive information. i think a better way to address the -- >> wait a minute. when you say the entity, you mean the company? >> yeah. >> ok. but that's sensitive information in the sense, first of all, the companies would like to be able to say that. they would like to be more transparent. they've endorsed my bill. they support my bill. >> honestly, i think there may be a split between what the telephone companies want to do and what the internet companies . uld want to do i'm not sure about that. i do see -- i see a

mr. dempsey mr. medine. >> senator i think the recent -- the recent, you know agreement by the justice department to allow companies to disclose more information didn't actually address sort of balk collection question. assuming i understand your question correctly, the -- sort of bulk collection question. assuming i understand your question correctly, a million of the customers are affected, then that basically says there's a balk collection -- bulk collection against this entity and i believe that is sensitive information. i think a better way to address the -- >> wait a minute. when you say the entity, you mean the company? >> yeah. >> ok. but that's sensitive information in the sense, first of all, the companies would like to be able to say that. they would like to be more transparent. they've endorsed my bill. they support my bill. >> honestly, i think there may be a split between what the telephone companies want to do and what the internet companies would want to do. i'm not sure about that. i

mr. dempsey -- >> i think the recent, you know, agreement by the justice department to be more disclosed information didn't actually address the collection question and a assuming i understan assue question correctly, the problem is that once anybody publishes a number saying a million of our customers are affected, then that's basically says there is a bulk question program and i believe that is sensitive information. i think a better way to address -- >> when you say the entity, you mean the company? that is sensitive information and that the companies would like to be able to say that. they would like to be more transparent. they have endorsed and supported by dell. >> honestly i think there may be a split between what the telephone companies want to do and what the internet companies would want to do. i am not sure about that. but i see a legitimate security concern about gaming or identifying or singling out -- >> that the government can say how many -- all it says is how many numbers are caught up in the bulk collection. >> but i think a better way to do it to get at the question o

mr. dempsey previously served as deputy director of the nonprofit center for national security studies and special counsel to the national security archive. prior to that, he was assistant counsel to the house judiciary committee subcommittee on civil and constitutional rights and an associate at arnold and porter. he, too, was a law clerk. in his instance for judge robert broucher of the massachusetts supreme judicial court. he served on -- as a member of several bodies addressing these issues, including the industry advisory board for the national counterterrorism center and the transportation, security administration scurep flight working group, among others. he has a b.a. from yale university and a j.d. from harvard law school. and finally but certainly not least, i'm particularly proud and pleased to welcome a native of connecticut, judge wald, who has served with extraordinary distinction for 20 years on the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia, including five years as chief judge. she has also continued her public service as a judge on the international crimin

the pentagon was called and told it was an attack and he goes to panetta and general dempsey and there is a meeting and mr. panetta testified he anyhow it was a terrorist attack and yet the word "al-qaeda" was dropped. why do you think so? >> remember they didn't acknowledge that it was a terrorist attack, not only it was al-qaeda. and still today they don't acknowledge it was al-qaeda. there is a narrative that al-qaeda is on the run and the administration wants the american people to believe that. that is simply not the case. al-qaeda is growing and for sure in north africa where you have a young population. it appears that someone is trying to shield the administration from taking responsibility. >> you think that morell will be subpoena to get him back. >> i would think that mr. morell given his career and service, i am sure he will voluntarily come back to the committees. >> we'll see if that plays out. congressman, thank you for joining us today. jamie? >> thank you, congressman, as well. there are new details of the warnings of possible attempts to attack passenger jets with shoe bombs. al-qaeda li

panetta, according to him, they go -- both dempsey and panetta go to the white house where mr. quote, no question in my mind it was a terrorist attack. so has this kind of been glossed over, what carter hamm has said? he said it's a terrorist attack. the top officials of this country go to the white house, one of them at least saying and believing it was a terrorist attack, and then for 13 days what we get is, it's a dopey movie, a dopey movie, a dopey movie, a dopey movie. >> which was ludicrous from the beginning. i mean, so we're supposed to believe that a group of angry men having watched this youtube video somehow assembled a collection of rpgs and mounted a coordinated attack over a series of hours on a u.s. position? come on. i mean, it just never made any sense. but, again, i'm unsatisfied -- and i think anybody watching this should be -- as to why? why would they go out of their way to tell such an obvious, such a transparent lie? what was the point? eric: that's the allegation, and he may be called back to capitol hill. so we'll see. tucker, we'll see you this weekend

army general martin dempsey -- chairman of the joint chiefs -- spoke a day after president obama ordered plans for a total u.s. withdrawal by year's end. mr. obama also spoke with karzai by phone, for the first time since last june. today, karzai's spokesman played down any tension between the two. >> 2014 is the year of withdrawal of most of us forces anyway. and there was no such discussion of a complete withdrawal in the conversation as suggested in the media. rather the point was to provide for an orderly withdrawal as already planned and already( scheduled >> ifill: the u.s. wants to leave about 10,000 troops in afghanistan after 2014 to help train afghan forces. so far, karzai has refused to sign >> ifill: state media in syria reported today the army ambushed and killed at least 175 rebels in a major attack. the official account said it happened south of damascus, in the ghouta area that's held by the opposition. syrian television aired this footage from the aftermath. it said the slain fighters belonged to an al qaeda-linked group, and that some came from abroad. if confirmed, it would be one of the deadliest attacks by government

mr. chairman. thank you for being here today. us with a lotnted of interesting information. managementng the review, chairman dempsey would lead and effort to find $50 billion in savings. today, you have said that retirement changes won't be part of the coming budget request. can you tell me what the status is of general dempsey's review on the compensation part? >> we were challenged as a stretch goal to try to find -- i but a decents 40, size number four compensation savings. other areas were challenged to find savings. we work hard to do that. we came up with a set of proposals that would be required to make that mark. severe. them too we have been working on a set of less severe proposals that we will consider submitting as part of the president's budget request. we are not ready to talk about those because they are not final. or 50, not make the 40 or whatever it was. it was a good exercise for us to try to see where we can find savings. thank you. senator kaine raised an issue earlier and i want to follow up on it. , includingrtment outside groups, in its review of the compensation, have you reached out to vet