Transcripts For WMAR This Week 20100627

i won't tolerate division. >> new questions on the president's strategy to win the war. that and more on "the roundtable," robin wright, george will. david sanger. and from "the washington post." >> it took president obama 45 minutes to pick a new commander. it took six months to pick a dog for the white house. good morning. when the president takes look at the world he's confronted with threats literally all over the map. in afghanistan, u.s. and international forces struggle to make headway against the taliban. iran moves ahead with a nuclear program. north korea becoming more unpredictable. new terror threats. nobody knows them better than the director of the central intelligence agency, leon panetta. he's been in the job 16 months. his first television interview 37 welcome. >> thank you. >> when this was all going down, you were with general petraeus. i want to ask you about the war in afghanistan. the second deadliest month for u.s. troops with 52 at least killed this month. are we winning in afghanistan? is the taliban stronger or weaker than when you took the job? >> i think the president said it best. a tough fight we're engaged in. serious problems here. we're dealing with a tribal society. a count with problems with gove governanc rks, trafficicing, taliban insurgency. the mission that the president's laid out is we have to go after al qaeda. we have to disrupt and dismantle them so they never attack the country again. are we making progress? we are. it's harder and slower than i think anyone anticipated. at the same time, we're seeing increasing violence in kandahar and helmand provinces. is the strategy the right strategy? we think so. we're looking at 100,000 being added by the end of august. a significant force combined with the afghans. i think the fundamental key, the key to success or failure, is where the afghans accept responsibility, are able to deploy an effective army and police force to maintain stability. if they can do that, we'll be able to achieve the progress and stability that the president's after. >> have you seen evidence they're able to do that? >> i think so. what we're seeing even in a lace like marjah, if you look at it on the ground, ingagriculture, commerce is moving back to some degree of normal. the violence is down from a year ago. some progress there. some progress in the fact that there's less deterioration as far as the ability of the taliban to maintain control. we're seeing elements of progress. this will be tough. not easy. it will demand not only the united states military trying to take on a difficult taliban insurgency. it will take the afghan army and police to be able to accept the spoenlt that we pass on to them. that will be the key. >> it seems as if the taliban is stronger than when the president took office. is that fair to say? >> i think the taliban is eng e engaged in greater violence. they're doing more on ieds. they're going after our troops. though question. in some ways, they're strong person in some ways, they're weaker as well. i think the fact that we're disrupting their operations in tribal areas of pakistan. i think the fact that we're targeting taliban leadership. you saw what happened yesterday with one of the leaders who was dressed as a woman being talken down. we are engaged in operations with the military beginning after taliban leadership. i think all of that has weakened them some. some areas, they seem to be stronger. but the fact is, we're undermining their leadership. >> how many al qaeda do you think are in afghanistan? >> i think the estimate on the number of al qaeda is relatively small. i think at most, maybe 50 to 100. maybe less. in that vicinity. the main location is in tribal areas of pakistan. >> largely lost in the trash talking in "the rolling stone" article is concerns for war. the end game is "not going to look like a win, smell like a win or taste like a win. this is going to smell like an argument." what does winning in afghanistan look like? >> winning in afghanistan is having a country that is stable enough to ensure that there is no safe haven for al qaeda, or for a militant taliban that welcomes al qaeda. that's really the measure of success for the united states. our purpose, our whole mission there is to make sure that al qaeda never finds another safe haven from which to attack this country. that's the fundamental goal of why the united states is there. the measure of success for us is do you have an afghanistan stable enough to make sure that never happens. >> what is the the latest thinking on osama bin laden, what kind of health he's in, how much control or contact with al qaeda? >> he's in very deep hiding. in an area of the tribal areas in pakistan that is very difficult. the terrain is probably the most difficult in the world. >> can you be more specific? >> it's in the tribal areas. we know he's in that vicinity. the terrain is very difficult. he has tremendous security around him. having said that, the more we continue to disrupt al qaeda's operations, and we are engaged in the most aggressive operations in the history of the cia in that part of the world. and the result is that we are disrupting their leadership. we have taken down more than half of their taliban leadership. of their al qaeda leadership. we just took down number three this their leadership a few weeks ago. we continue to disrupt them. continue to impact on the command and control. continue the impact on the ability to plan attacks in this country. if we keep that pressure on, we think ultimately, we can flush out bin laden. >> when was the last time we had good intelligence on his location? >> it's been awhile. i think it goes back almost to the early 2000s. in terms of actually when he was moving from afghanistan to fak pakistan that we had the last precise nsk about where he might be located. since then, it's been very difficult to get any intelligence on his exact location. >> we're in a new phase of the war. the threat can come from within. the honegrown terrorists, lone wolf. faisal shahzad, nidal hasan. what do the increased occurrences of these types of attacks say about the danger we face? >> i think what's happened, the more we pressure the al qaeda leadership in pakistan, and i would say that as a result of the operations, the taliban leadership is probably at the weakest point since 9/11 and their escape from afghanistan into pakistan. having said that, they are clearly continuing to plan, continuing to try to attack this country. they're using other ways to do it. >> al qaeda? >> that's correct. they're using other ways to do that. they are in some ways more difficult to try to track. one is the individual who has no record of terrorism. that was true for the detroit bomber in some ways. true for others. if they're using somebody that doesn't have a record in terrorism, it's tougher to track. if they're using people here that are in hiding and suddenly come out to do an attack, that's another potential threat. the third is the individual who decides to self-radicalize. hasan did that in the ft. hood shootings. those are the throeats we see. we're getting intelligence that shows that extreme threat we face. much harder to track. same time, i think we're doing a good job of moving against those. we work the intelligence. that area, those kinds of threats, represent, i think, the most serious threat to the united states right now. >> all three of those individuals were tied in some way to an american cleric. he's now in yemen. does being an american afford him any protection that any other terrorist might not enjoy? >> al awlaki has declared war on the united states. everything he's doing is trying to encourage others to attack this country. a whole stream of intelligence goes back to al awlaki. you can track him to the detroit bomber. to other anax the country. that have been urged by him or that have been influenced by him. he's a terrorist. and yes, he's a u.s. citizen. but he's first and foremost a terrorist. we're going to treat him like a terrorist. we don't have an assassination list. we have a terrorist list. he's on it. >> the new york times quoted they can get a power sharing arrangement. the pakistan anies are looking for a power-sharing arrangement. do you think that pakistan can force the network into peace negotiations? >> i read the same stories. we get intelligence along those lines. the bottom line is that we really have not seen any firm intelligence that there's real interest among the taliban the militant al llallies. we have seen no evidence they're truly interested in reconciliation where they would surrender arms, where they would denounce al qaeda, where they would really try to become part of that society. we have seen no evidence of that. frankly, my view is that, with regards to reconciliation, unless they're convinced the united states is going to win and they're going to be defeated, i think it's difficult to proceed with a reconciliation that will be meaningful. >> i know you can't discuss certain operations. since you've been here today, we have heard about another drone strike in pakistan. there's been much criticism of the drone program. in a situation in which there is no disclosure of who was killed for what reason, the legal principle is by definition comprehensively violated. will you give us your personal assurance that everything the cia is doing in pakistan is compliant with u.s. and international law? >> there's no question. that we are abiding by international law and the law of war. look, the united states of america on 9 c/11 was attacked al qaeda. they killed 3,000 innocent men and women in the country. ta we have a responsibility and duty to defend this country so al qaeda never conducts that type of attack again. does that make some of the al qaeda and their spothers uncomfortable? does it make them angry? yeah, it probably does. that means we're doing our job. we have a responsibility to defend this country. that's what we're doing. anyone that suggests that somehow we're employing other tactics here that mow violate international law are dead wrong. we're defending this country. >> i would like to move on to iran. do you think these latest sanctions will dissuade them from trying to enrich uranium? >> i think they'll have an impact. we had russia trying to agree the that. strong international opinion that iran is on the wrong track. that's important. the sanctions that were passed this last week will have additional impact. it could help weaken the regime. it could create economic problems. will it deter them from their ambitions? probably not. >> the 2007 national intelligence estimates said all of the work ended in 2003. you don't still believe that, do you? >> i think they continue to develop their no hoe. the nuclear capability. >> including weaponization? >> there's continuing debate on whether or not they ought to proceed with a bomb. they're developing the nuclear capability. that raises concerns. just exactly what are their intentions? where do they intend to go? we think they have enough low enriched uranium for two weapons. they have to enrich it fully to get there. if they made that decision, we estimate a year to get there and another year to develop the weapon delivery stom make it viable. having said that, the president and international community has said, you have to wake up and join the family of nations, abide by international law. it's in the best interests of iran and the people. >> they've run into technical troubles in the nuclear program. are they bad at what they do or because the u.s. and other countries are hemming them at being bad at what they do, by sabotaging their program? >> i can't speak to intelligence operations. it's enough to say that clearly they have had problems. there are robs with regards to their ability to develop enrichment. and i think we continue to urge them to engage in peaceful use of nuclear power. if they did that, they wouldn't have these concerns. they wouldn't tha have these problems. international community would be working with them rather than having them work on their own. >> how likely is it for israel to trike the facilities within the next two years? >> israel is concerned, as is the entire world with what is happening in iran. and they have a particular concern being in that region of the world. at the same time, i think on an intelligence basis, we continue to share intelligence as to what exactly is iran's capacity. they feel more strongly that iran has made the decision to proceed with a bomb. i think they know that sapgss will have an impact. they know gnthat if we continueo push iran from a diplomatic point of view, we will have impact. i think they're willing to give us the room to try to change iran dim low matticly, culturally. >> they k have agreed to not hand over the reins. they believe that this is all setting the stage for the succession to the son, kim jong un. is that how you read this? >> there's a lot to be said for that. intelligence shows that at the present time, there's a process of succession going on. >> was the warship attack part of that? >> i think that could have been part of it to establish credibility for his son. that's what went on when he took power. his son is very young, very untested. his son is loyal to his father and north korea. hisson son does not have the credibility with the military. nobody knows what he's going to be like. i think part of the provocations, skirmishes going on, are, in part, related to trying to establish cent for the son. that makes it a dangerous situation. for ho years, we have been going through these types of provocations and skirm shs with a rogue regime. >> the cia entered in a contact with black water. black water guard allegedly opened fire in baghdad in 2007 killing 17 unarmed civilians. since then, the firm has been fighting off prosecutions. earlier in the year, five officials were indicted. here's congresswoman january cjakowski, from illinois. >> i'm mist fied why any branch of the government would decide to hire blackwater, such a repeat on fender. we're talking about murder. a company with a horrible reputation that really jeopardizes our mission in so many different, different ways. >> what is your response? >> since i have become director, i have asked our agency to review every contract we have had with blackwater and what ever their new name is now, "z." to make sure they're not engaged in any cia operations. we don't contract that out to anybody. that's important. i have to tell you that in the war zone, we have needs for security pap lot of forward bases. a lot of attacks on some of those bases. we have to have security. unfortunately, there are few companies that provide that type of security. the state department relies on them, we rely on them to a certain extent. we bid out some of those contracts. they provided a bid that underbid by $26 million. they have shaped up their act. there was not much choice but to accept that contract. having said that, i tell you i continue to be cautious about any of those contracts. we're reviewing all the bid wes have with that company. >> this month, eric holder said that they're close to a preliminary review of brutal methods, what some called torture to deal with detainees. are your current officers concerned about the legal jeopardy in the future under a futured a minivags? what guarantees can you give them? >> ci sarks an agency that has to collect intelligence, do operations, take risks. we have to have the spoth of the government and the american people. with regards to this investigation, i know the reasons that the attorney general decided to proceed. i didn't agree, but he decided to proceed. i've had discussions with him. he ensures me that the investigation will be expedited. i have told my people to focus on the mission we have and let me worry about washington and those issues. think they have. i think the morale at the cia is higher than it's ever been. >> you're not privy to information about some of the ugliest toughest tactics carried out by intelligence agencies with the purpose of defending our nation. stuff that probably as a member of congress, the white house chief of staff, you suspected but didn't know for a fact. how rough sit? does any of it ever make it difficult for you to sleep at night? or run to do an extra confession? >> well, i mean -- i didn't -- i didn't realize i would be making decisions, as many decisions about life and death as i do now. and i don't take those decisions lightly. those are difficult decisions. at the same time, i have to tell you that the host rewarding part of this job. we had a tragedy where r we lost seven officers. it was tragic. at the same time, it provided a great deal of inspiration. the quality of people that work at the cia are very dedicated, committed to trying to help save and protect this country. they're not republicans, not democrats. just good americans trying to do their jobs. i think that is the most rewarding part of being the director of the cia. >> what is the flip side? >> you have to spend an awful lot of time worrying and what the hell's going to go on out there. that keeps me up at night. >> this is my last question. we only have about a minute left. what terrorist threat are we, as nation, not paying enough attention to? forget terrorist threat. what threat? >> i think the one i worry about is, again, the proliferation of nuclear weapons and that one of those could fall into the hands of a terrorist. that's one concern. a lot of stuff is out there. how worry about where it's located and who gets their hands on it. the other area is cyber security. cyber warfare is very real. it could threaten the grid system, the financial system, could paralyze the country. we have to pay attention to that. >> director lee kron panetta, thank you so much for coming here today. up next, "the roundtable." george will, robin wright, rajeev and david sanger. obama took the russian president out for a hamburger. it was awkward. the guy behind the counter was general mcchrystal. [ male announcer ] this rock has never stood still. since our beginning, we've been there for clients through good times and bad, when our clients' needs changed we changed to meet them. through the years, when some lost their way, we led the way with new ideas for the financial challenges we knew would lie ahead. this rock has never stood still. and there's one thing that will never change. we are, the rock you can rely on. prudential. our planet is alive with data. it's generated by cars on a freeway, patients in a hospital, electricity in the grid. the more we understand data, the more answers we find. patterns are easing traffic in over 400 cities... detecting disease faster, reducing energy costs by 10%. on a smarter planet, we can analyze all the data we now see to make the world work better. let's build a smarter planet. we now see to make the world work better. they're fishermen, they're shrimpers, they're laborers, they're deckhands, they're people who work in restaurants... these are the people of the gulf coast who need our help. i'm darryl willis. i oversee bp's claims process on the gulf coast. bp has got to make things right and that's why we're here. part of that responsibility is letting you know what we're doing to make it right. we're replacing the lost income for fishermen, small businessmen and others who aren't able to work until the spill is cleaned up. our claims line is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. people can call or go online and we'll help them figure out what information they need to file a claim. we've got about 900 people handling claims and 25 walk-in offices in 4 states. so far we've paid eighteen thousand claims, at no cost to taxpayers. more than fifty one million dollars. i was born and raised in louisiana. i volunteered for this assignment because this is my home. i'll be here in the gulf as long as it takes to make this right. in fact, it protects you from the most damaging rays across 100% of the uva uvb spectrum. coppertone outshines. so you can enjoy the sun. coming up next, "the roundtable" and "the sunday funnies." tç in the "rolling stone" piece, aides said mcchrystal was disappointed. >> he groans when he receives that. >> who is that, biden? did you say bite me. >> you're questioning if he's capable and mature enough? >> cow have any quote here. >> honestly, when i first read it, i was nearly sick. >> today, i accepted general stanley mcchrystal's resignation. i did so with considerable regret. but with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission. >> scenes from the mcchrystal mess. all things to discuss here. george will, david sanger, robert wright. and raje rks v. i want to go around and get your take on what you found most interesting with panetta. >> he said we're in afghanistan to prevent it from beinging a sovereignty vacuum. he said there are as few as 50 questioned there. we're trying to keep afghanistan if becoming yemen and somalia. second, the job as of december 1st is to break the momentum of the taliban. mr. pan net da did not say we had done that. third, it was to encourage reconciliation to goin get out in july 2011. he did not suggest much evidence of reconciliation. the argument since the mcchrystal debacle is the meaning of the july 2011 deadline. >> reconciliation is a key ten net of the afghanistan idea. come up with a deal. we've been pushing the ckarzai government. they don't see a key that they're ready on come to the table. that's a big red flag. >> you know a bt a lot of stuff. you're maybe most expert on iran. did he say any youg found interesting? >> he said three things that i think were notable. he believes they're still working on the designs for nuclear weapons. that's in contra vengs to the nie. he said it would take them a year to enrich into bomb fuel. and another year to turn it into a weapon. that gives you a good sense where the u.s. believes is the outline of how far they could get the iranians go. he said there was a division with the updates. no decision made. the israelis believing that the leadership does want to move ahead with the weapon. i found those interesting. >> robin? >> they took the best headlines. one of the things is the expected national intelligence informing on iran. it's been delayed over and over. we're going reverse the controversial nie? they were not working on weap weaponizizati weaponizization. now they are. how much time do we have to get them to come and talk with us? i think this will play into the questions of what do we do next. there's every independent occasion that the sanctions alone are not going to be enough to convince them to give up their enrichment program or to come back in the negotiating table. >> let's move on to the big news of the week. the dismissal of stanley mcchrystal. did the president do the right thing? >> life is full of close kauls. this is not one of them. he did the right thing and did it with the right words saying it is not behavior acceptable at the senior levels of our military. then he picked the only man around who could fill the leadership. vacuum in petraeus. this raises the question, again, of, you're sending him into a situation with the deadline. one of the reasons of setting the july 2011 dead lynne was to concentrate the mind of karzai on what? reconciliation? the incentive is minimal for reconciliation. >> and here's senator lindsey graham talking about that this week. >> i would argue that when the taliban sends around leaf lets quoting members of the administration and suggesting to people many afghanistan after july, the americans are going to leave you, that the enemy is seizing upon the inconsistency and uncertainty. >> can we do this on this timetable? david? july 2011, u.s. troops will begin to withdraw. according the vice president biden, a lot of troops. according to other members of the administration, maybe not so much. is this feasible? >> it strikes me listening to what we heard this last week and the underlying debate before the general was dismissed that general's time line and the politicians' time lines are different. they have a reason to want to withdraw by next summer. at the same time, anybody that's done counterinsurgency work tell you the same thing. it takes a decade or more. certainly, if you look at what director panetta said today about how the taliban are not yet facing any incentive to reach reconciliation, it tells you it would take a much longer time. i think that's a fundamental issue. the president said he doesn't mind dissent, he can't stand division. firing general mccrustal only submerged the dissent. it will come pack in december with a review of the overall policy. >> shrewdly. when they do the review in december, what can they accomplish in the remaining sixth months. this is afghanistan, not iraq. you don't have a middle class. not a lot of literacy among the army and police you're trying to recruit. the tribal structure. we e lied on them in iraq. in afghanistan, they've been decimated. so you don't have the kind of net work that you can turn in your favor to defeat the taliban or lure the taliban in. the obstacles we face with just a year left in the psych rl truly daunting. it's hard to see how we can be very successful. >> you just returned from afghanistan. what did you see? >> a long, hard slog there. contrary to the initial messaging out of the pentagon and the white house that it was turning successful. i saw the start of what is going to be a months long effort to try to stabilize i had president what they hoped for is that marjah would be exhibit a in showing momentum. >> it's a small town, 60,000 or so. >> and it should be a fairly self-contained fight. it is. but it's not moving as quickly as they want. i don't think the white house was under illusions that it was not going to happen. within the 18 months, and next summer, they hoped to get enough momentum that it would compel the insurgents to sue for peace. it would get the afghan government to get off the fence and move more quickly. they could field more afghan security forces. and u.s. civilian forces would go out and engage in efforts. that is taking much longer than anybody anticipated. what can you accomplish by the summer of 2011? i think the president managed to escape any short-term political peril names general petraeus to replace general mccrustal. i thing it comes at a longer-term political cost. he's putting out the guy that wrote the army field manual on this. next spring as they debate the pace of the draw down, having petraeus there is a much more formidable advocate for delaying the draw down or aten watenuati. >> it's clear to me he read the crucial paragraph about the withdrawal deadline. the phrase conditionsed based withdrawal is making it all loophole and no deadline. we hope the conditions will be good then. and that ksh hope is not a policy. >> as david pointed out. the division represented in the mcchristle firing is still there. it will play out over the next year. the political time line is what the white house is thinking about. the military is thinking about do they want to be seen to replicate the soviet experience. here they are, the mightiest military in the world, fighting alongside the mightiest military alliance in the world, against rag tag militia, no air hower, no satellite intelligence, no tanks, and the united states can't defeat that? what image does that show? >> rajiv is right that putting general petraeus in place boasters the fight for the counterinsurgency. the application of more troops so far has not quieted the taliban. it also bolstered vice president biden's case that applying more troops is not necessarily going to turn this around. i think that's why we're headed for a much bigger collision later in the year on the strategy. >> it will be between the president and his base. going into the 2010 elections, he's looking forward to 2012 hoping for three things. rapid creation of draws, the health care bill becoming more popular after it was signed. neither has happened. and third, radical improvement in afghanistan. the biggest number haunting the white house has to be republicans eerg to vote and the democrats tepid about this. afghanistan will do nothing to energize his base. >> the most concerning quote by general mckris sl not in the interviews. the most alarming thing for washington that he said recreantly was in your -- a couple of weeks ago in europe, he acknowledged it will take far more time to convince the afghans that international forces are there to protect them. that's a fundamental rerequisite. >> he said that the kandahar effect was going to be delayed. right now, president obama is in toronto. i want to move on to the g20 meeting. there's been a big debate about stimulus versus usausterity. >> in a sense, step back too quickly. we want to continue to emphasize that we're going to avoid that mistake. by making sure we recognize that, you know, it's only been a year. since the world economy stopped collapsing. >> what does this debate mean for the president's agenda? >> what this defwhat played out over the weekend in toronto smeens that the president faces opposition from republicans on capitol hill to additional stimulus activity but he's facing it from the european allies who are also concerned about growing government debt. the fallout from the greek debt crisis reverberating around continental europe. the germans, the british are concerned about thp the the president, secretary geithner, what they wanted to get out of toronto, they haven't gotten. a commitment among the g-8 al i allies. >> the president likes the g 20 more than the g 8. >> the g8 is filled, by and large, with orlando economies. all of whom are deeply in debt at this point. none of them peoples they can afford this kind of stimulus. so when he brings in the g20 for all the difficult tis of managing a group that large, and the g20 could barely agree on when to break for lunch. there are big economies there. these are countries that i think the president feels over time he can manage to help stimulate the world economy in way he never could out of the g8. >> the great economic trauma is from the 1930s. the depression. for germany, the national memory is the inflation of the 1920s that destroyed the republic and brought on hitler. they say, where did this crisis start? oh, yeah, that's in the united states. whose social policy created an unreasonably high home ownership in the united states? >> one of the things that the white house says is look at the growth rates. germany, less than 1%. europe, as a whole, about 1%. the u.s., 2.7%. how can they lecture us or disagree with us when our way is winning? >> well, look, i think the stakes in canada are really that two years ago, or the last two years, you have seen the international community respond. they respond as one voice. they've followed the same kind of pattern. for now, they're beginning to differ. recovery is about psychology. if there's a sense of uncertainty, a danger that people don't know which way things are going to go. and the u.s. keeps arguing, if cow don't keep stimulus, you're not likely to generate whether it's new jobs. if you retrench too far, it hurts the sense of recovery. there's real danger that the uncertainty generated out of canada is going to begin to play against that sense -- the momentum they've created. >> the president's in the position of saying, don't do as i do, do as i say. just the day before he left, congress could not come to an agreement on a very small extension of unemployment benefits, the most basic stimulus effort that the president tried to push. >> 1.2 million americans will lose unemployment benefit this is week. >> that's right. so there's a fundamental stimulus action and the president had to go up and tell the europeans they were not doing enough for growth. >> why can't they pass this? it seems there could be a compromise. >> partly because they believe if you subsidize something, you get more of it. we're subsidizing unemployment. they do not think it's stimulating. what stimulates is the consumer and savers' sense of permanent income. unemployment is not permanent. >> both sides in the town have an incentive to let this drag out longer. the republicans certainly playing to their base don't want to be seen as adding to the debt issues. in a midterm election. the democrats are trying to sort of push the republicans and trying make them look like the party that's deanying 1.2 million people an extension of these benefits. it will play out. they'll both try to use t for their political gain. >> the rbt rbt will continue. hopefully they'll talk about wall street reform. you can find our fact checks later on of the news makers. coming up, "the sunday funnies." okay, one more time. where do we stand? less travel? more video conferences? limit the cell phone minutes. that's not good enough. we're not leaving this room unless we can cut something else. can they really keep us here? what about all this stuff? what stuff? all this stuff. what does it cost to create all this? time, effort, people. how much? it could be millions. ♪ millions. [ male announcer ] save money. trust your business processes to xerox. xerox. ready for real business. now, "in memoriam." >> it's a wonderful day. such feeling in the air. ♪ ♪ you got me so i can't sleep at night you really got me you really got me ♪ >> this week, the pentagon released the names of 17 soldiers and marines killed in iraq and afghanistan. ♪ we'll be right back. we understand...orther, that while you may come from the same family... you know, son, you should take up something more strenuous. you have different needs and desires. - i'm reading a book. - what's a book? so we tailor plans for individuals, featuring a range of integrated solutions. - you at your usual restaurant? - son: maybe. see you tomorrow. - stairs? - elevator. to see how our multi-faceted approach... can benefit your multi-generational wealth, look ahead with us at northerntrust.com. if you were to stand at a road and the cars are whipping by, and all you can do is take a snapshot of the way the road looked 5 minutes ago, how would you know when to cross the road? 9 out of 10 organizations still make decisions this way every day... using out-of-date information. the organizations that are most competitive are going to be the ones that can make sense of what they learn as fast they learn it. that's what i'm working on. i'm an ibmer. let's build a smarter planet. and now, "the sunday funnies." >> confirmation hearings for the supreme court nominee elena kagan will be broadcast live monday on c-span squln 3. now know it's going to be boring if c-span 2 passed on it. >> you would have to be higher than keith richards to criticize the commander in chief in a time of war in front of a reporter for "rolling stone." >> great day for eliot spitzer. they're giving him a talk show. anybody can have one these days. they wanted him because he can get the most out of an hour. >> he visited the headquarter of twitters where he opened his own account. >> twitters? what is that? sounds to me like somebody's been talking to president bush. >> on the intersunsets. >> we'll be right back. sf car g ♪ ♪ this is onstar. i've received a signal .you've been in a crash., i'll contact emergency services. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 to help with my investments. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so where's that help when i need it? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 if i could change one thing... tdd# 1-800-345-2550 we'd all get a ton of great advice tdd# 1-800-345-2550 just for being a client. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 i mean, shouldn't i be able to talk about my money tdd# 1-800-345-2550 without it costing me a fortune? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 if i had my way, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 investment firms would be falling all over themselves tdd# 1-800-345-2550 to help me with my investments. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 (announcer) at charles schwab, investors rule. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 are you ready to rule? . that's our show for today. next week, an exclusive interview with senator john income cane. until then, thank you for spending part of your sunday with us. [ dennis ] when we first got fios, the first thing we noticed was our next door neighbor, looking through our picture window, at the tv. i was going to set up a chair for him, because he was watching my tv, on my front lawn! [ male announcer ] call now and get fios tv, internet and phone for just $99.99 a month, plus the fios tv movie package, free for 12 months. the fios technician came in, got everything hooked up and when he left i had the greatest picture i've ever seen. [ male announcer ] and if you don't love fios, you can cancel with no early termination fee. there's no term contract required. i love going home and working on the computer, because fios is so much faster. [ male announcer ] get fios for just $99.99 a month -- with no term contract -- plus the fios tv movie package free for 12 months. [ dennis ] switching to fios, everything was done so easily so smoothly... it was an incredible experience. [ male announcer ] call 1.866.680.fios. that's 1.866.680.3467. customers with disabilities