so we would like to bring in peter brooks. he's a former deputy assistant secretary of defense.hank you so much for taking time to talk to us this morning. good morning to you. so this is the 15th terrorist plot foiled in new york city, this is since 9/11. where do you rank the seriousness of this one? >> well, it's obviously very serious, especially since it's the most recent. the threat is still with us. i mean, there have been 53 foiled terror plots in the united states since 9/11. in fact, some people consider what happened at ft. hood as an actual terrorist attack. so over 50 plots or attacks since 9/11. this is the most recent. a young man, a college student came in on a legitimate visa to the united states. was inspired by al qaeda, especially anwar al awlaki and tried to blow up 1,000 pounds of explosives in downtown manhattan. >> the fbi also says nafis wanted to disrupt the elections and kill a high-ranking official here. does it seem like he had any real-life al qaeda connections or real-life al qaeda training or is this guy just a wannabe? >> i think "wannabe" is a g

let's go to our distinguished guest, former deputy assistant secretary of defense, peter brooks, who worked in the bush administration. right off the top, peter s this a cover-up? >> it has an appearance of a cover-up. i think congress has to tell us more. but it doesn't look good. i think we deserve better as an american people here and this has been a disgrace and it's a travesty of trust. we deserve better from the administration from day one on this. >> one of the things i'm reading, besides the fact that everyone began to know within 24 hours that this was not a protest about this silly video, that this was an al qaeda-related attack, in fact, it's happened at 9:30 p.m. that night. it came completely as a surprise. besides that, there's also in the press and i'll ask your view on this, that the white house and the state department decided together in collusion not to put extra security in the benghazi consulate because they didn't want to give the appearance of war or hostility. in other words, that they consciously decided not to put security in. can you confirm or deny that? >>

peter brookes also with us, senior fellow for national security affairs at the heritage foundation and former cia officer, which, peter, is something we really want to talk about considering the intelligence, questions if you will, when it comes to libya. let's start it there. would there be any scenario where the state department would know about requests for extra security in libya but the white house wouldn't know? >> that's certainly a possibility. i mean you never know to what level this went but there's so many unanswered questions here, general that -- jenna, about this issue. we have conflicting stories coming out of congress, the administration. five days after the attacks still said it was a protest. probably wouldn't even be calling it a terrorist attack if the director of the national counterterrorism center hadn't testified to that effect on capitol hill. they probably wouldn't have told us there were no demonstrations if congress hadn't had a hearing this week and state was forced to divulge that situation. this just a mess. it is a national disgrace. jenna: what is the e

"outfront" tonight, peter brooks, nick burns, former u.s. ambassador to nato. see you again. nick, let me start with you. senator john mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte were the ones who sent that letter ten days ago. the assistant to the president for homeland security, john brennan was on it and they asked who knew what and when. is it fair to say they're stone walling? >> i don't think it's fair to say that at all. i think it is legitimate to ask what happened that night. why did we lose four great american public service including ambassador chris stevens. what lessons must we learn from that and how do we protect diplomats. that's the question, secretary clinton has ordered an investigation and review of the process led by one of the most respected people in washington, ambassador tom pickering and that process should not be politicized. that committee needs to take the time and the care -- what's happening is this entire process has been politicized. we ought to put our emphasis on finding out what happened. i think that's where this debate should be

peter brooks, former deputy secretary of defense, and nick burns former u.s. ambassador to nato. r, i'll start with you. >> okay. one week's time the president has dropped a reference to al qaeda. he left it out twice. we only played one sound bite. now he's put it back in. >> well, i mean, this is related to libya, erin. you know, we're all confused about what happened there other than the fact that four members are dead. they're breaking news every day, and i think the president is concerned about talking about defeating al qaeda and seeing what's going on, what happened in libya, what's going in north africa, that you talked abou he talks about afghanistan and going after the peop tha attacked us there. that al qaeda core, which is in afghanistan and pakistan. the fact of the matter is that the real problem in afghanistan is the taliban. so the message is very, very mumbled and mixed, and i increasingly get confused what he's telling us. >> the reference is in the speech consistently and then they took it out. it got noticed not just by us but by others i'm sure. do you think t

crowley and peter brooks join us. really appreciate both of you taking the time. p.j., i want to start with you on the whole issue of joe biden saying we and jay carney specifying that meant himself and the president and saying it was the state department that would have made that call. what do you think about the vice president separating himself from the state department and the fourth person in line to the presidency? >> jay carney says the responsibility for everything starts with the commander in chief and works its way down. president obama is responsible, joe biden is responsible, hillary clinton is responsible and everybody else. the vice president was stating a fact. the normal routine matters in how you balance the level of security at 100-plus diplomatic posts around the world. those decisions are made day to day, week to week at the state department. so i don't see a contradiction between you what said and the vice president said. >> you didn't think it at all strange last night that he basically said i don't know anything about it? >> i understood thi

peter brook turned it into a play in the 1970s. it's a journey of the heart sort of. it's about birds, but it's really about man and the flaws we have. >> do you actually play a bird? >> i play a couple of them. i play the peacock and that is very, very fun to play. i also play a cockatoo. we all play numerous, you know, characters in the play. >> you speak in your regular voice? >> i do. we don't have baeks. we don't have feathers. it really is a metaphore of what the bird is to you and your human form. you will see a little bit of bird in the body, but not flapping of arms. >> how are the audiences reacting to this? >> they are loving it. last night, a bunch of young people were in the audience. it was nice to see the smiling young facesen joying it. >> a lot of people know your music. you play a lot of different stumts. will you give us an example 1234. >> sure. i'll play 15 instruments. it's a cultural envoy to the state department to the middle east. this is a frame drum used throughout the world. i'm going from italy to india. >> wow. ♪ ♪ >> beautiful. wow. can

pj crawley and peter brooks, gentlemen, really appreciate your taking the time. pj, i wanted to start with you on this whole issue of joe biden saying we and then jay carney specifying that meant himself and the president. and saying that it was the state department that would have made that call. what do you think about the vice president separating himself from the state department and the fourth person in line to the presidency? >> well, i think jay carney also said that ultimately, the responsibility for everything that happened in government starts with the commander in chief and works its way down. barack obama's responsible, joe biden's responsible, hillary clinton's responsible and so forth. as to the decision itself, the the vice president was stating a fact. that normal routine matters in terms of how you balance the level of security at 100 plus diplomatic posts around the world, those decisions are made day-to-day, week to week at the state department. so, i don't see a contradiction between what you've said and what the vice president said. >> you di

peter brooks, thank you very much. luskin appreciate it. >>> here's a story that's got my patriotic blood boiling. it's a new report by the military protection project. it found that america's warriors are being denied the right to vote. it is an outrage. america's great men and women in the military. let's talk to the copublisher of this report. we welcome kindra rotunda of the military voter protection project. ms. rotunda is a former army jag attorney and a military law pro first at chapman university. kendra, welcome. >> thank you. >> what's going on here? are you saying in this that the absentee ballot process which supposedly was improved by law is not working? and so the men and women can't vote? >> it's not working and it's not working because the pentagon simply is not following the law. they're ignoring federal law. they're supposed to have military voter registration on federal bases and they're just not doing it. and it's leading to what we think are going to be record lows in military rovoter turnou by as

jenna: peter brookes, former cia operative. fellow for national security affairs.apparently left the united states in 2006. so why are we hearing from the fbi now about this guy? >> well, if you ask the fbi they say there is no specific event that has triggered this bounty that's been put out on him. that could be true and or they could be, you know, holding sensitive details to themselves and not wanting to say anything much more than that. he has been gone for six years but his coconspirator was sentenced earlier this year to 17 plus years in jail and perhaps they're finding out some new things about it. so, i mean, it is not quite clear why is is in syria which certainly isn't a safe place for anybody these days. the good news, if there is any, he is out of the united states. jenna: how effective are these type of bounties put on whatever or whoever is wanted on the wanted poster? is this an effective way actually to get suspected terrorists? >> it is one tool. of course there are drone strikes. there are other ways of, you know, getting at them as well through

joined now by peter brooks. and wally farris who is a fox news middle east and terrorism analyst. why should this shooting be classified as a terror attack? >> absolutely. first of all, as the lady was saying in the report, there is a direct link. email link between the perpetrator, major hasan, and anwar al-awlaki a senior official of al-qaida, that alone is determining that this is a terrorist action. two, the fact that the narrative of major hasan for many years he has been talking about jihad and the targeting of the enemies of his own ideology, and third the pattern. this is not happening alone. there were shootings in arkansas and killing of a u.s. military. attempts to attack military bases at for the dix and others. the administration should have day one declared it as an act of terror. martha: peter, i should mention one of the things holding up the trial right now is his lawyers are arguing he shouldn't have to shave off the beard he grew while he was in jail. this is the kind of consideration that's been given to hasan at this moment as these families wait for some just

jenna: we have the executive director of the foundation for defense of democracies, and peter brookesfellow of national security affairs at the heritage foundation and former member of the cia. mark, first to you, what is the major difference of these two gentlemen and how they will engage iran in the future? >> i think there are two fundamental differences one, governor romney made it very clear he will not allow iran to develop nuclear weapons capacity. the president believes he can catch iran if they sneak out or breakout and he believes the intelligence community which missed chinese nuke, nukes from pakistan and north korea will get it right this time. the second fundamental difference is the israeli prime minister. there are clearly daylight between the obama administration and the israeli prime minister and i think that daylight is being recognized in tehran that is not terrified by this administration and the government in jerusalem is not reassured by it. jenna: peter, respond a bit to d about the intelligence community. we talked about the intelligence community last couple

now, among our guests, bob cusack, judge napolitano, peter brooks and larry sabato.ask who won, what the debate tells us about our next steps in iran and around the world and the future for our u.s. military. plus, swing state iowa and some new polling, the countdown is on. we'll have it "happening now." bill: jon, thank you. you'll be busy, we'll see you then. suspicious letters warning republican voters in a key swing state not to bother even going to the polls. now why would that be? martha: what is that? we haven't even carved the jack-o'-lantern yet. snow. we'll show you where, we'll be right back. >> you're excited about the early start? >> oh, yeah. >> oh, i love it. nothing better. ally bank. why they're always there to talk. i love you, james. don't you love me? i'm a robot. i know. i know you're a robot! but there's more in you than just circuits and wires! uhhh. (cries) a machine can't give you what a person can. that's why ally has knowledgeable people there for you, night and day. ally bank. your money needs an ally. martha: well, fall's looking a lot li

. >> peter from brookings. one of the key components of international power is the perception of power. there have been some recent polls, mainly in europe and china, that leaders in those countries perceive our power to be less. when they think our power is less, we have less power. how does that relate to the point you made earlier? >> the chinese go through this cycle and i do not blame them. it is finally in decline. they made that judgment three times over the past 25 years. there's even a discussion within the community and there are some people saying not to get too carried away with this. the americans not go down as easily as you think. these perceptions are usually derived from america's on perception. if i were sitting outside and i saw what our economy was and i saw all this talk, i would come to that conclusion, too. what remains the case of you are not talking about the chinese are western europeans, i think this is more important than that. it is striking to me, whenever this reception -- percept

brooke. there's disappointment, peter, i think that's obvious.nt wasn't going very aggressively against mitt romney over the 47% controversy, over bain capital, the tax returns. i think vice president biden is not been shy at all in the campaign trail, brooke. that's fair to say. what we're looking at tonight is, is he as aggressive going after not the guy sitting next to him but his boss, mitt romney. you know what? i think obama campaign officials are quietly saying that's a distinct possibility. >> peter, what about the wo in k trap? ryans is a numbers guy. how far should he go tonight? will money talk translate to voters, people watching? >> right. i mean, the mission for paul ryan since he was picked is to stop talking like, you know, denison of the beltway. you know, he's done a good job of it on the campaign trail, frankly, messaging for mitt romney. however, tonight is a much bigger audience and paul ryan introducing himself to the american public. polls show that voters hav a slightly more favorable view of ryan than biden. google just r

brooke. well. her audience technology innovation all the list of elements around russia we've got the future covered. and if you. still. want to. follow in welcome to crossfire time peter lavelle from the arab spring to the arab winter where does this great liberation project stand in the arab middle east and where's it going are the forces of reaction including the western powers again in control of the pace of political change and is it inevitable that we will have to accept the idea of islamic democracy. politics. to cross out the winds of change i'm joined by used in washington he's a research director at the such a foundation in berkeley we have shapiro he is a freelance journalist and contributor to salon dot com and in london we crossed to naseem oxman he is a senior researcher at the palestine return center all right gentlemen crosstalk rolls in effect you can jump anytime you want and i see if i can go with go to you first i mean where is the arab spring going we're literally in the fall right now is there a winter approaching for the arab spring. i think so far. nothing settled at the moment the dust from the arab spring which started three years ago has not

peter baes has the latest and speaking of obamacare, it is now putting all hospitals in hi bull's-eye for letting patients go way too early. dr. mitchell brooks is here to explain. also, you would get expelled from school if ever caught cheating, but this man made it his career and is here to share secrets in his tell-all book. we will hear from the shadows dollar author later. we are on the case next on "the gerri: you thought the obamacare issue was settled? think again. why the supreme couuuuu gerri: well, the supreme court back in session for the first five sets up of obamacare as the law of the land. the president's landmark health care law may still come back to the high court. peter barnes is in d.c. with all the latest. >> reporter: well, the court issued an order today about a se called liberty university versus a geithner, secretary of the treasury. kind of under theradar. and now this case was a direct challenge to obamacare a couple of years ago. liberty university was one of the first organizations to file suit to trto stop it. a court of appeals shot down the case because of the anti in junction act of 1867. remember that? we ta

start by saying, brooke, i'm one of the most experienced stool people in the united states of america. i have a lot of experience when it comes to stools. that's a fascinating point. peter veteran democratic pollster, not a republican saying this, a veteran democrat who wants president obama to win the election. he did a focus group in the columb columbus, ohio, suburbs and said people were shocked. swing voters were shocked. where is the president? why does that matter? because people's legs are tired. they're deciding whether or not it keep the president for four more years. they're tired of slogging through the tough economy and they wanted to not only see him lay out a road map for four years, which he did not do first debate, he defended the last four years, but didn't give people a clear sense of where he was going, but they saw no fight, no spunk in him and they want someone to fight, fight to create jobs. a lot of swing voters and peter is one of them, saying people looked at the president and said, if you're not willing to fight in debate, i'm worried if you're going to fight for me, maybe you shouldn't get the job back. >> the campaign has reached a tipping po