sdo. >> we have read your recommendation 23 against a contractor officially

faltaron al re fla mentó que le prohibe llevar a mujeres a sus habitaciones mientras están concentrados sdorn el robo de objetos personales y que la debe ran cia re aplicará. >>> los jugadores lo confesaron, están muy lastimados, wre penn tieds, pidieron disculpas. >>> signo el gerente del hotel las mujeres se llevaron las tarjetas llaves y lastre garn acom bli ceso. >>> podría haberse extraviado una llave o dos en la noche del viernes, y que alguien vinculado a estas visitas pudiera venir. >>> la federación reveló las sanciones a que se hicieron acreedores los jugadores. entre ellos jonathan dos santos. >>> los jugadores están in habilitados por los próximo>>> meses de cualquier convocatorio a selección nacional y una multa de 50 mil pesos. : se dejó claro que no se zape ta ra in disciplina que y esta noche los jugadores sus tito tos viajan a argentina ahí disputaran la copa américa con un equipo ahora improvisado. >>> este evento amente meses que la selección mayor in ocurriera en faltas similares es. >>> es una constante en la selección nacional creo que la federación gere plantear y apl

sdo. >> we have read your recommendation 23 against a contractor officially recommended for our department. that could be by anyone. >> officially could be by anyone? >> it could be from another agency, yes. we will take that chairman's notes. we will take these two which i regard as clarifications, maybe we misunderstood. you posed clarifications that i did not read when i read this. you said that they would -- that we would not have to put oversight on executive for an external/internal question. we will take those into consideration. >> thank you. >> i have just a few questions and we can let you close with any comments you want to make without any interruption. commissioner hankey was making reference to dod pulling the rug out from under you and the department and saying that you have to provide protection and security to your embassy in kabul. it ended up that you hired a former group. in the dialogue you had in 2009, we realized that say you had to get the lowest price contract instead of the best value -- we jumped in to help you all deal with best value. but what is disconcerting

and you call it, that person the sdo, the suspension and debarment official. and your concern, sounds like reading the full response, by two things. one, the administrative burden and, two, with regard to the suspension and debarment official compromising that person's independence by requiring the agency head to sign off on the determination of the sdo. because we say in our recommendation that there needs to be written justification for it, and that has to be approved by the agent i head. now, we are -- agency head. now, we are happy -- i, for my part, am happy to modify that recommendation so the approval of the agency head is not required. that's not important to me and i would argue that it shouldn't be important to the commission as a whole. the issue here is whoever makes the determination to ignore a recommendation or disagree with a recommendation to suspend and disbar, whoever makes that determination that person whether within the management chain or independent, ought to have a written justification for the file as to why that determination was mad

and they have modelled these things and are sdoing everything they can to be prepared if there's some situation where a fire might get anywhere near this. one of the things that can happen with a crown fire is go out and throw embers out, even in an area where there's not trees. if an ember landed on the top of one of these canvas tents, it would just burn a hole. it wouldn't start the entire canvas tent on fire, anything like that. they' done research on what kind of foam to to encase it, even if a fire was there. >> well, senator, this is your home state. i know you have stuck it out and stayed out there to be with those folks. i may want to call you up a little later this week if you're still around to catch up and check back in and see how the status is. deal? >> i would be happy to do that. happy to do that. and you all should feel free to attend the press conferences every day where the top officials have most of the knowledge here are going to give it out to you. >> you got it. we'll give chief tucker a call there as well. yeomans work there. >> thank you. you take care. >> now

. >> when sdo we get beyond -- >> was it not targeted at jobs? question for people that don't have jobs is where did all that money go? if it was supposed to be for infrastructure, we talked about shovel-ready projects -- >> it went to a hodgepodge of things inevitably a political koch compromises. but it kept the unemployment rate out of the double digits. the 8% number was a mistake the administration acknowledged. they never should have put a number out there. but if you compare it using every economic model known to man, it clearly was the right thing to do at the time. >> it should have been bigger was the only fault n your estimation? >> in retrospect, it should have been bigger. obama administration wanted it to be bigger. congress wouldn't pass anything bigger. >> the president needs to deal with the deficit. he'll strike a big deal, to reensure his election, or fail, and it will be horrible for the economy. >> look at the front page of "usa today." i don't know what camera we can get it on. the image itself, what comes after hope? you pu