the world. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >> i saw a very upbeat newt gingrich this week. i spent time with him behind the scenes here in washington. before we sat down for our indepth interview. this is a man experienced big highs and big lows in his political career. and he's not ready at least publicly to presume he's got the republican presidential nomination all wrapped up. listen to our conversation here in washington. >> mr. speaker, thanks very much for joining us. we have new polls and i know you've seen those numbers and you're doing remarkably well. double digit leads in south carolina, florida, and iowa. you're moving up even in new hampshire. but your critics say you, newt gingrich, are fully capable of imploding if you will, making a mistake, a blunder that can turn things around. are you worried about that? >> sure. that will be a bad thing to do. i mean is it possible? i guess. on the other hand, i have had a very long career. i have a very public record. i think people are coming to decide they like substance and somebody who actually has balanced the budget, reformed welfare, cut taxes, got it done for real. so i think there is a little more resilience in my support than in some of the other folks who made a run at this. >> i've been surprised. i don't know if you have been. some of the republican congressmen who work with new the '9 o's, contract with america, republican revolution. you know these guys like joe scarborough or peter king of new york. tom coburn. they've suggested and used words like erratic, undisciplined, a train wreck. and they know you well, these guys. why are think sayiey saying tha? >> i think if you're a very aggressive leader and drive to get things done. i mean we drove for welfare reform. we drove to balance the budget for four straight years. i think in a legislative body that is sort of a go along to get along attitude, i wasn't there as a collegial job. i was there as the leader. my job was to drive through change on a scale that washington wasn't comfortable with. if you're a genuine outsider forcing change, you're going to leave bruised feelings. i don't apologize for that. i think i probably learned some more. i think i'll be more effective this time. we switched the fiscal condition in the united states by $5 trillion in a four-year period. >> you worked with bill clinton closely on that. >> i was able to negotiate with the president. >> you couldn't have done it without him. >> oh, no. if i didn't pass it, he couldn't sign it. if he didn't sign it, it didn't matter that i passed it. we had a balance. this is what the constitution is supposed to do. i think there were times when the pressure of getting things done or, you know, frankly making a compromise to get bill clinton's signature. there were some guys further to the right that said don't compromise. well, then you wouldn't get welfare. >> why would tom coburn say something, i'm parra phrasing, when newt gingrich was the leader. he had a standard for himself and another standard for others. >> i don't know. you have to ask tom coburn. i wish everybody this loved me. but i'd rather be effective representing people than popular inside washington. >> can you taste this republican nomination right now? >> i think it's -- look, remember, i was way down here and now i'm up here. i know can you go way back down here. we still have a lot of work to do. with the next four weeks in iowa, then a real rush in new hampshire then on to south carolina. and then on to florida and nevada. i mean all those are in about a month. i think if we have an interview right after nevada, we'll have a better sense of what is actually ahead. >> is it too early to say that it's yours to lose? >> well, it's either romney or mine. we're the two in the sense the two frontrunners. we're the two frontrunners. i think it's a fair thing to say without deminute r minuiminishi. we have different kinds of strengths. but romney is a very foremidable opponent. >> when obama supporters, democrats, white house officials and obama campaign officials, they say they look forward to running against you. they're nervous about mitt romney. they think he might be electable, independence might go to him a little bit more than you. but you they look forward to fighting. what goes through your mind when you hear that? >> you know, this is probably sign of my age. i remember in 1966 governor pat brown, jerry brown's father, was really concerned about moderate mayor of san francisco named george christopher. and he was really wanted to find some right-wing actor that he could beat easily. and they were thrilled that ronald reagan was running. reagan beat him by a million votes. i'm happy for the obama people to decide they want to beat up on romney. it's tough on romney. that's fine with me. when we get to the election, if i'm the nominee, after the president has the three seven hour debates, we'll see how they are. >> i'm old enough to remember jimmy carter. they were doing high fiving at that time. you have to be careful what you wish for. i want to get to foreign policy issues. we have some questions from facebook. we asked our viewers to send us some questions for you. let me go through a few of them, get your answers. you've said on occasion that it is okay for politicians to change their view if new information is available. can you recall the most important position you've changed and why you decided to make the change? >> that's a really good question without getting hung up on most important. i'll give you an example that is a little awkward nowadays, trent lott and i used to kid that we were the last two decisive votes for the department of education. it was a mistake. i think it is way too bureaucratic. we voted in 1979 to create it. i think that was an error. it hasn't worked. so that is an example. >> what else? >> i think -- for force. >> you've been criticized for the health care mandates. you supported them. >> that will be a good example in the sense that when heritage foundation and virtually every conservative tried to stop hillary care, we used mandates to block her. we thought they were less damaging. in retrospect, we were wrong. because what happens, once you go to a mandate, you turned so much power over to the government that politicians rather than the doctors end up defining health care. >> let me ask you the question i asked ron paul at that debate i moderated in tampa with the tea party express. you're a 30-year-old healthy young man. you know what, you're making a living. you have a good job. you decide not to buy health insurance. you would rather go to ball games or whatever but then you get critically ill for whatever reason. you're in intensive care. you have no health insurance. who should take care of you? >> john goodman came up with the best answer to that in a book called "patient power." we out to have a refundable tax credit to have people buy insurance. your share of tax credit goes into a charity pool. something happens you to, you're taken care of fwha charity pool so that you're taken care of. >> charity pool is taxpayer money? >> it is the tax credit you would have used to buy the health insurance. the result is that you may not get a private room. you may not get everything you want. but you are taken care of. and i think it's important to look at that and to try to figure out are there practical ways we can help people that don't insure themselves without automatically making them eligible for something everybody else gets wloshgs is paying the price, writing the check every month. >> but you know, you're a 30-year-old. they're going to take care of you. i could be in intensive care in a year. they'll take care of you. what's the insentive to buy the insurance? >> the fact is we do that. >> is it -- is that appropriate? you supported the one point mandates. >> i don't think it's appropriate. i that i it's frankly cheating all of your friends and neighbors. but i also think that the price we get into a mandate is too great and the constitutional liberty to do it. >> the state mandate was wrong and the federal government is wrong. you oppose it all. >> it politicizes the system. >> mitt romney stands by his decision in massachusetts. >> yeah. i think he was wrong. the difference between mitt and i is i think i was wrong and changed. i think he thinks he's wrong but he's being stubborn. >> complete analysis of my interview newt gingrich. that's coming up. also, what he needs to do to stay at the front of the pack. plus, a rare inside glimpse of u.s. combat in afghanistan. also coming up, dramatic new video as u.s. marines battle the taliban. and a stunning reversal of fortune for a former political and financial power house. j jon corzine says he is coolest about what happened to millions and millions of missing dollars. you're in the situation room. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of a pain free holiday. ♪ this season, discover aleve. all day pain relief with just two pills. the first droid that becomes self-aware. it remembers what you do and does it faster. create shortcuts like automatically syncing while you sleep. instinctively shape-shifting from a music stream for your workout to newsfeed during breakfast, then a gps for your morning commute. powered by verizon 4g lte, this droid is too powerful to fall into the wrong hands. forty years ago, he wasn't worried about retirement. he'd yet to hear of mutual funds, iras, or annuities. back then, he had something more important to do. he wasn't focused on his future but fortunately, somebody else was. at usaa we provide retirement solutions for our military, veterans and their families. from investments... to life insurance... to health care options. learn more with our free usaa retirement guide. call 877-242-usaa. newt gingrich has double digit leads in several key early voting states. let's talk about that and more with our cnn chief political correspondent candy crowley and ron brownstein. thanks very much for coming in. it's an amazing come back if you will from nowhere last summer. we all basically run amok. i think it's fair to say, in our latest poll. if you take a look at the numbers, iowa, gingrich had 33. romney, 20. ron paul, 17. new hampshire, look at this. romney still ahead, 35. gingrich is moving up. he's got 26% in new hampshire. that's pretty good. go to south carolina. gingrich way ahead there, 43% to 20% over romney. everybody else in single digits in south carolina. i'm very impressed, candy, florida. 48% for newt gingrich. romney, 25%. everybody else in the low single digits. newt gingrich, who would have thought? >> yeah, without a candidate setting foot in florida we should add. it is interesting. it reflects certainly the headlines. it reflects republicans. i think in some ways newt gingrich's personality matches the mood, certainly of the tea party part of the republican party. they want someone who can just take it to the president. and he has been the one who in debates and on the stump has been out there. i think mitt romney has been too cautious. he may be true to form and do something to implode himself. but mitt romney, if he wants this thing, has got to get out there and get it. >> you know this, candy knows it, who know a lot of the washington-based establishment republicans. they want mitt romney. >> and they're concerned about gingrich as a nominee. his history is he's been a volatile, political figure and often his moments of greatest triumph is when he falls deepest into the ditch. but having said that, if you look at the polls, what is really striking is the consistency across the states with the exception of new hampshire, oon when you look down at the subgroups. it's a reminder of how much this race is being shaped by national factors rather than local factors. and the dynamic really inverts what we saw earlier in the fall. through the fall, romney had a very favorable correlation of forces. the center was coalescing around him. the right was dividing among several candidates, perry, bachmann, mccain and gingrich. now the reverse is happening. tea party activists, christians are uniting around gingrich to a greater extent than we saw around any candidate. it's the center now divided. gingrich is proving kpet tlif with romney there as well. >> mitt romney surrogates are beginning to go after newt gingrich. mitt romney himself not so much. this ad came out. i'll play a little clip of it. it implied -- i use that word directly, it implied criticism of newt gingrich. >> i get in trouble, for 42 years. i've been in the same church my entire life. i worked at one company, bank for 25 years. i left that to go off and help save the olympic games. if i'm president of the united states, i will be true to my family, to my faith, and to our country. and i will never apologize for the united states of america. i'm mitt romney and approve this message. >> i'm sure he did. 42 years on the other hand, newt gingrich has been married three times. >> yeah. >> i belong to the same church my entire life. >> i am steady. i am sure. i am reliable. i am not material. i don't have three wives. i mean, you know, we get the subtext. and clearly -- and then they're putting and romney's wife is out there talking about the mitt romney she knows. they're doing what they need to do. as i say, he has been too buttoned up in this campaign waiting for everyone else to fall away. >> clearly, one of gingrich's greatest vulnerabilities is he is not steady and reliable. he was more effective as the gorilla outside leader as he was the king of the heap as speaker only two years after he was speaker he had a serious re-election fight, renomination fight as speaker that he barely won. two years after that, he was out. on the other hand, for mitt romney to center his campaign on the argument i am a man of con consistency is tough. in fact, the super pact associated with him is on the air in iowa criticizing begin begin on three issues, immigration, climate change and individual mandate on an all of them, romney at least once had the same position that they're criticizing gingrich about. >> this particular ad was about temperament. >> is it enough? in the next three and a half weeks, is it enough? in the next three and a half weeks, does mitt romney personally have to go on the offensive? there are going to be a couple debates? does he have to go on the offense sniff. >> sure. i think he has to be aggressive. absolutely. you can't expect that it's going to come to you. and he needs to be out there. i mean i don't think you're going to see wildly personal attacks if that's what you mean. but he has got to -- >> is it too late? >>, no it's not too late. i think we've seen the debates with enormous impact in the race. we've seen candidates rise and fall before. all of the republicans are willing to make up their mind, chachg their mind. the biggest concern for romney has to be that his number is actually quite steady. i mean, you know, it's not really going down tremendously in this gingrich surge. it's not going up either. what you're seeing is to a greater extent than before, the voters have always been there and are dubious of romney and are consolidating around gingrich than any other single candidate earlier in the process. >> remember that romney will have a lot of help in those debates. what we know is three tickets out of iowa. so some of those people on that stage this is getting to be their last time. so they can be very aggressive, too. >> so you think rick perry or -- >> we know that ron paul does not like newt gingrich. that we know. we have a history of that. >> we'll discuss that later, guys. don't go too far away. also, a fierce u.s. counterattack on the taliban ahead. the dramatic video we're getting captured by u.s. marines in the line of fire. plus, donald trump, he's in "the situation room." what he's calling tragic about the u.s. troop withdrawal in iraq. ohhhh.... will you marry me? oooh, helzberg diamonds. yeah, well he must have saved some money with geico. reminds me of the gecko mating call. really? how does that go? shoo be doo be doo. geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. [ male announcer ] it has an hd webcam, killer audio, and lids that switch to start every semester fresh. but mostly it helps me try new moves on and off the court. ♪ [ male announcer ] featuring windows 7 and windows 7 live messenger. get this loaded inspiron 15r at dell.com or visit one of our retail partners today. now a remarkable you are there video from the battlefield in afghanistan. it's as close as most americans will ever get to combat. a u.s. marine corps cameraman turns the lens on a fierce counterattack against taliban forces. watch this. >> i'm in a sleeping bag still. all of a sudden you hear the flair going off and rpg and fire started going off. >> just to the northwest of us across the river, there is a ridge line up there. there are caves in the ridge line that they'll crawl into and they engage us from there. >> they're using ammo. by the time after a couple hours, we probably had 100 left and that was it. it got really bad real quick. >> grenades hit inside the compound, getting close, real close. we took a casualty. took a couple casualties. you hear about people being battle tested. >> we have to get him on the bird as fast as possible. >> one hell of a day. i mean you're thinking, yeah, regular patrol. any other day. it ain't happening that way. everyone has to be ready from now on. you never know what's going to happen from now on. we lost one person, injuries. i mean who knows what's going to happen next. >> another day, man. another day. >> hopefully whoever sees this will know this is actually happening. at the end of the day, we're the ones out here. >> these are the men of first battalion sixth marine regiment in southern afghanistan. we checked in, wolf, all of the marines wounded in this fire fight are recovering. wolf? >> what an amazing video. all right. barbara, thanks very much. barbara starr is our pentagon correspondent. coming up, donald trump in "the situation room." he unleashes some of his sharpest criticism yet of president obama. we'll get analysis of the interview. candy crowley and ron brownstein are standing by. to find you a great deal, even if it's not with us. [ ding ] oh, that's helpful! well, our company does that, too. actually, we invented that. it's like a sauna in here. helping you save, even if it's not with us -- now, that's progressive! call or click today. no mas pantalones! for better or worse, donald trump is positioning himself as a potential king maker in the republican presidential race and as a possible, possible independent third party candidate. trump's political influence is under renewed scrutiny. twoint trump's office in new york city to talk about politics and foreign policy. iraq, all u.s. troops will be out by the end of this month. are you happy about that? >> tragic waste of money. tragic -- >> more than $1 trillion. >> $1.5 trillion to be exact. tragic, tragic waste of lives and money. and that we left there without taking the oil is unbelievable. iraq is second largest -- like hell it is. they have the second largest oil fields in the world. oil reserves. second largest after saudi arabia. we spent $1.5 trillion, thousands of lives and i'm not even talking about the wounded. i see them all the timement i love them. no legs, no arms, their face gets blown to pieces. and my attitude is much different. what's going to happen is iran will go and take over the oil fields. and the reserves more importantly because they're backward. they have the largest reserves after saudi arabia. now -- and the u.s. should have taken over those oil fields? >> absolutely. every soldier's family that was killed, $5 million. you know what that is? peanuts. that is peanuts compared to the kind of numbers your talking b every soldier that is wounded, three or four million dollars whether they lost their arms and limbs and their face. $3 orred 4dz million. these kids are going to be out for the rest of their lives. they're going to be paying medical bills and they don't have the money to pay them. they're going for the rest of their lives for operations. three or four or five million dollars for every soldier that was badly wounded. we have many of them walking. i see them all the time. i help them. so we leave iraq and we didn't leave by the way, they threw us out. just so you understand. i know you like the president and all that stuff. but a little less than some of the folks at msnbc. but we got thrown out of -- we got thrown out of iraq. we didn't leave iraq. they said we don't want you here anymore. the council said no. they're not sure. let me tell you, as sure as you're it issing there iran is going to take over iraq and take over those oil reserves. >> the whole thing is a waste of time? waste of money? >> much worse than that. not a waste of time. excuse me. it wasn't a waste of time. it was a waste of lives and what about t about the iraqi lives? >> president obama, you remember the president who started the war. >> hey, excuse me. have i been a supporter of bush? the answer is no. that war should have never -- look, saddam hussein did not knock down the world trade center. and one good thing about iraq, he killed terrorists. he was very good at killing terrorists. there were no terrorists in iraq. now it's harvard. it's like going to harvard for terrorism. saddam hussein killed terrorists. he would wipe them out so fast. and right now they're using iraq as the primary breeding ground for terrorists. so here's the thing. if iran is going to take over iraq and the oil reserves, why don't we just keep the oil reserves? >> that's your fear. >> how stupid, look, how stupid can we be? thousands of lives, tremendous number -- 30,000, 40,000 people horribly injured. we get nothing. what do we get? nothing? now we're handing it over to people that in a couple years will be our enemy. >> $2 billion a week, that's what the u.s. is spending to keep 100,000 troops in afghanistan right now. at least through the end of 2014, another three years. that money -- $100 billion a year. money well spent? >> no. it's not well spept. it is poorly spent. you have to understand, i'm a military person. i believe strongly. >> what would you do? >> i would get out quickly. it's just -- it's never going to be good. it's never going to be good. >> end result in afghanistan will be like the end result in iraq. >> here's the difference. you noi, probably even less except there is a difference. iraq has oil. afghanistan basically doesn't. so -- they do have some natural resources. >> by the way, you know who is taking out all those? china. while we're fighting, china is taking it out. so we're fighting. and china is taking all those mineral reserves and i mean how stupid are we? so afghanistan is different. but we have a problem with pakistan. but afghanistan, get out. we have to rebuild our country. we're rebuilding. you go to afghanistan. there is a school. it gets blown up. we rebuild it. we build a road to the school. they both get blown up. we rebuild. in the meantime, if you want to build a school in brooklyn or iowa or california, you can't build them. is there something wrong? >> yeah, i know you write about that eloquently in the book. you also write, and i've written about this as well, i don't know if you did it first or if i did it first, a trillion -- $1 billion, that's what the u.s. spent to liberate libya. $1 billion. >> much more than that, but that's okay. >> that's the official number. >> they say that, it's much more. >> the u.s. throws about $30 billion into libyan assets. i read a blog saying, you know, the billion the u.s. spent from that frozen assets and the state department says that is under international law. >> it's a sovereign country. >> to liberate their country, the u.s. got nato involved. >> here's the greatest. you take libya. so gadhafi is bombing the hell out of these people. it's over six, seven months ago. they come to the united states to help. they say please help, help. we're being routed. we're being routed. now obama would ko have said we're going to help you, we want 50% of your oil. 50% of your oil. instead, he just helped them. now they throw us out and that's the end of it. and a person who's meaner, tougher, and more vicious than gadhafi will end up taking over libya. it's already basically happening. now if we ask right now and then they say the great fighters, you know, we liberated. they didn't liberate anything. they go into a city and get routed. now they go into a city because we're bombing the hell out of that city before they walk into the city. they fought a little bit. basically, we routed the city. we killed the city. then they walk in and say we're great freedom fighters. they come from iraq and fighting us. they come from iran these people. and what do we get out of? now the $1 billion is a fony number. it's not the real number. i know that and you know. that but still, even at $1 billion, what did we get out of it? now if six months ago when these people who had lost because gadhafi, believe it or not, was a lot stronger than some people thought, they lost. it was over. had obama said we're going to help you, we want 50% of your oil, they would have said absolutely 100% okay. why didn't he do it? you said he would never do that. >> no. >> is he stupid? is obama stupid? >> it goes against -- >> why would he never do that? >> because that goes against international law. >> it doesn't go against any international law. there is no country. there is a revolution. why wouldn't obama say we want 50% of your oil and we will help you? >> you think obama would ever do that? >> why wouldn't he do that? do you think he's stupid, wolf? >> no, he's a very intelligent guy. >> you tell me that, i'm not so sure. >> he comes from a different background than you do. you're a business guy. >> here's the question. i takes you five seconds, we'll help you, but we want 50% of your oil. they will say thank you very much. in fact, you could ask the 75 and they would sign that, too. then we wouldn't have to feel so guilty if we took it. now if you go back right now and say by the way, we helped you, we would like 50% of your oil, they would laugh in your face. donald trump, vintage trump blasting president obama's foreign policies. we're going to talk about it and a lot more. candy crowley and ron brownstein are coming back. and more than $1 billion of his client's money missing. now lawmakers are demanding answers from former senator, former governor jon corzine. joining us, the host of "state of the union," candy crowley and ron brownstein. you know, he's interestingly enough, candy, he says he doesn't like the republican nominee after may when "celebrity apprentice" is overwith, he may still run. >> and we can talk about it all through "celebrity apprentice." yeah. sure, he may. i don't know if he will. i do know that the history of third party candidates, no matter how well funded, has not been good in this country. you know, he is serious? i don't know. there is still a lot of people that look back to what he was thinking about running as a republican. we don't think any of that is serious. it's not toward any love of the public life. >> okay, what it said, i'm not going to run. i'll support the republican nominee. a lot of republicans would have been happy. but by leaving that door slightly open, he irritates someone. >> and he insures attention. i find myself wondering if simon cowl has an iraq policy. but, look, i think there is a legitimate issue here, whether it's trump or not, about whether barack obama and mitt romney or newt gingrich are the only major candidates in the field in 2012. we are in a period extraordinary zaction with both parties. and the opportunities there for someone either slightly left of center or perhaps well right of center. if mitt romney is the choice, given resistance, is it completely implausible that ron paul might run? who is really raised the flag for libertarians? so, you know, it is possible that the field will be larger than it looks today. but i'm with candy. i think donald trump is unlikely to be one of those people on the playing field. >> the conservative columnist wrote a piece this weekend suggesting that if ron paul does run, it almost surely would guarantee president obama's re-election, looking at the numbers. even if ron paul could get five or eight, you know, percent of the vote. >> you know, playing the role of ross perot. >> he assumes 80% of the vote which are from republicans as opposed to from democrats. >> sure. i think that's absolutely right. and it is like, you know, ross perot redux in the sense that's what ross perot did. george bush the father and that group still hasn't forgiven ross perot for what they believe is losing them the election i think can you probably say. >> there are different clusters of discontent that could be mind for a third party candidacy. trump is that blue collar, economic nationalist. feeling that we're kind of economically overtaken by china and they're kind of skeptical of the world. paul is something very different. he's probably done a better job, i think, much better job in this campaign than before, probably better than anyone at kind of elevating and articulating the libertarian point of view. he has found an audience within that republican constituency. so if he gets to the end of the road and says newt gingrich is too statous for me and decides to go run, there will be i think some people who will be listening more than there was in 1980. >> some suggested the reason he wouldn't do it is because he wouldn't -- didn't want to embarrass his son, senator ran paul. >> we should say that ron paul has given no indication that in fact, you know, he asked repeatedly, i think we all have. he's said -- i mean never quite says no. he says you can't say no. i'm not thinking about it. it's the furthest thing from my mind. this is what i'm doing. >> the reality is that there are a big chunk of conservatives, particularly kind of national level who are dubious of both romney and gingrich for different reasons. so if one of them ends up with the nominee, you'll probably see some of that agitation with the big check on that being the reluctance to divide a vote. >> in addition to all the republican candidates out there, there is also a democratic candidate who wants to get re-elected, that would be the president of the united states. he delivered a major speech in kansas this week. and he basically laid out, i think, his agenda for re-election, i'll play a little clip. >> it's heartbreaking enough that there are millions of working families in this country who are now forced to take their children to food banks for a decent meal. but the idea that those children might not have a chance to climb out of that situation and back into the middle class no matter how hard they work, that's inexcusable. it is wrong. it flies in the face of everything that we stand for. >> he wrote a column in the national journal this week. outlining the comparisons ee r he's trying to make between himself and teddy roosevelt. >> look, he went to kansas with theodore roosevelt to deliver one of the most famous speeches of the 20th century at a ceremony dedicating a battlefield to john brown in 1910. and roosevelt basically argued that go. had to take a larger role in the economy as a counter weight to the concentrating power of great wealth and korngss and provide opportunity for average americans. that was the tradition that the president really forcefully reached for in his speech this week. there was another element of the roosevelt speech which was talking about the need for national unity as a precondition of solving problems. it is striking how much more muted that was in the president's speech, especially given the way he was introduced to us in 2004 and 2008. >> the united states of america. >> exactly. listen, i think in some sense this is almost always what elections are about when it's a republican versus a democrat. it's what is the appropriate size of government? what is the role of the rich? it's why we have a progressive income tax. it's because we believe that the rich should pay a little more for the overall good. i think what's different now and why this may have more resonance because populous themes have not particularly, if you want to call it a populous theme, have not been successful in the past. why it may have less nance now i think is that we add on to it the that not only are there the rich people but so many people think the rich people got there by breaking the rules. so there's this sort of, yeah, they're rich but they're also breaking the rules. i think that adds to, you know, kind of the potency of this mess. >> that combination produces a very volatile politics. and we're seeing that in our national life over the last decade and for many years to come. >> a tough, tough campaign general erection campaign. all right. see you on "state of the union" on sunday. more than a billion dollars missing. this former u.s. senator, ex-governor says he doesn't know where that money is. details of jon corzine's grilling on capitol hill. plus, an online mystery, whoever tracks this code has the chance to become a spy. forty years ago, he wasn't worried about retirement. he'd yet to hear of mutual funds, iras, or annuities. back then, he had something more important to do. he wasn't focused on his future but fortunately, somebody else was. at usaa we provide retirement solutions for our military, veterans and their families. from investments... to life insurance... to health care options. learn more with our free usaa retirement guide. call 877-242-usaa. our very humbling return to capitol hill for a former senate heavyweight, the former new jersey governor jon corzine who is being forced to explain how more than a billion dollars went missing if his now bankrupt brokerage firm mf global. let's bring in lisa sylvester. she has been reporting seriously on this collapse of the firm. what happened? >> jon corzine, former senator, former governor of new jersey, former head of goldman sachs. this is the first time he has spoken publicly about mf global. and corzine says mf global had so many transactions, particularly in the final days of the company that he is not certain what happened to customer money. >> do you swear the testimony you're about to give -- >> a contrite senator jon corzine on capitol hill in a much different role. the former chief of mf global was asked how his firm cannot account for more than a billion dollars in missing customer funds. >> i simply do not know where the money is or why the accounts have not been reconciled today. >> reporter: federal regulators and fbi launched investigations. corzine didn't take the fifth but he couched his responses, noting that he didn't have access to relevant documents that he says are essential to him testifying accurately. >> did you authorize a transer if of customer funds from the segregated accounts? >> i never intended to break any rules whether it dealt with the segregation rules or any of the other rules that are applicable. >> reporter: keeping customer funds separate from company accounts is a bedrock in the investment world. it appears that cardinal rule was broken. mf global placed risky bets on the european sovereign debt market, investments that led to a spectacular collapse and bankruptcy. in testimony, corzine acknowledged that the company's chief risk officer warned him and the board that the firm was overexposed. within months, the risk officer was let go. but corzine says there were other reasons why. james katulis represents mf global customers now trying to recover their money. >> you have a guy that points out exactly what they're doing. he is a whistle-blower in effect. he came to the board. and corzine is like, no. you know, how dare someone question me? >> reporter: corzine offered this to those impacted. >> i mean this with all sincerity. i apologize both personally and on behalf of the company to our customers, our employees, and our investors. >> reporter: former mf global customer james mayor found little comfort. mayor had $200,000 with the brokerage firm, only $11,000 now recovered. >> at this juncture, if we don't get any money in the next couple weeks, the only money we have left that wasn't in these trading accounts is my son's college money. >> and there will be two more congressional hearings next week. the senate agriculture committee and the house financial services committee also intend to spp corzine. as far as getting money back to customers, the trustee hopes to get about 70% of the money restored to the customers in the coming weeks. >> 70% is better than zero. still not 100%. >> and they're going to still have to haggle it out in the courts what happens to the other 30% if, people will be made whole there. >> what a fall from grace. thanks very much, lisa. u.s. troops making the long journey home from iraq. that and more coming up in our "hot shots." let me tell you about a very important phone call i made. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything. in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you from paying up to thousands of dollars... out of your own pocket. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... with all you need to enroll. put their trust in aarp medicare supplement insurance. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. the prices are competitive. i can keep my own doctor. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. call now to get a free information kit. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. and the advantages don't end there. choose from a range of medicare supplement plans... that are all competitively priced. we have a plan for almost everyone, so you can find one that fits your needs and budget. with all medicare supplement plans, there are virtually no claim forms to fill out. plus you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare. and best of all, these plans are... the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. when they told me these plans were endorsed by aarp... i had only one thing to say... sign me up. call the number on your screen now... and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan. you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, to help you choose the plan that's right for you. as with all medicare supplement plans, you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare, get help paying for what medicare doesn't... and save up to thousands of dollars. call this toll-free number now. italy, a child waits for the pope's arrival as crowds gather at the statue of the image u lat conception. and scotland, heavy winds batter a wanter front prom nand. in situate, look at. this u.s. troops play basketball during a stopover on their way back home as the withdrawal from iraq continues. "hot shots," pictures coming in from around the world. do you happen what it takes to become a spy? britain's intill jens agency wants to know and the answer may come down to a unique new online puzzle. let's bring in our own brian todd. he has details of this challenge that is now out. there. >> it s british officials have said their computer systems are constantly under attack from hackers. and they're now using some real creativity to recruit top talent to fight back. here's your challenge. 160 combinations of numbers and letters. and a countdown clock. you've got just a few days until your deadline. if you crack this code, could you be the next real life james bond? >> bond, james bond. >> maybe not. but if you're british citizens and you solve this puzzle, you could be recruited for britain's next generation of high-tech spies. posted online, publicized on fbl and twitter, it's put out by the government communications headquarters, britain's version of america's national security agency. a kind of whiz bang eavesdropping post whose mission is to help catch terrorists. this agency once posted job ads inside video games. an official tells thus puzzle got thousands of hits and at least 50 people have solved it. if you do that, you're congratulated, offered a chance to apply. what do you think of this as a recruiting tool? >> i think it's a great idea. one of the things it does is brings awareness of the need for people like this. >> former cia analyst mark stout is an expert on code cracking at the international spy museum in washington. he says for people with reasonable training and math and computer science, this code probably isn't too hard. what kind of crucial intelligence can you gather by code breaking? >> well, code breaking signals intelligence as we call it can be tremendously valuable because it's one of the rare forms of intelligence that if done properly, if you can get access to the right things, gives you the enemy's intention. what are they really thinking? >> stout and other experts say governments like britain knees cyber warriors more than ever. they want people with an interest in so-called ethical hacking. illegal hackers need not apply. how will that play? mark mayfray is a former hacker who co-founded a firm called ei digital security. he says sophisticated hackers might find this puzzle gimmicky. >> the thing that i would have found funny or interesting as a teenage hacker would have been to actually hack the server that's hosting this challenge and actually change the cha challenge to have a funny message or some other thing. other cyber experts say this code is just too easy. and an official at the british communications headquarters says it's not designed to be overly difficult. more to promote awareness of what that agency does. mark mayfray and others say if that's the goal, it's worth it to get teenagers and other young people excited about careers in legitimate cyber espionage. >> we know that code cracking also has helped take down some high profile terrorists. >> that's right. you know, mark stout, the guy we interviewed, said the governments of the u.s. and other places will never reveal that. he points to the raid that killed osama bin laden. he said that raid depended on signals intercepts, currier cell phone. they may have had to take a lot of things off the internet and decode that nfction. again, he says the national security agency is never going to reveal that. and we may never know the exact role no n. code breaking but it