at the peace plan obama laid out in his speech yesterday. >> the peace based on illusions will crash on the rocks of the middle eastern reality. and the only -- only peace that will endure is one that's based on reality. on -- unshakable facts. >> a peace based on illusions. strong words indeed. i will be asking exactly what that meant and i will be asking true insider. i will have an exclusive interview with israel's ambassador to the united states mi the end of the world. >> if we don't act now it will be too late. >> some people are sure it is happening tomorrow. the guy that's predicting it said the same thing before. >> what if this guy is right? >> the story of what happened last time. and dominique strass-kahn, in america he is reviled. in france, he is a victim. >> he has been victim of premtipre preemptive punishment. >> you are an embarrassment to our party. >> republicans are off and running. and tripping over their own words. >> i don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineer. >> gloria borger talks to the governor of florida. a key state. now more on our headliner story. joining me from washington, exclusive prime time interview, michael orrin. clearly we all know now when you did get details of the speech, there was a lot of back and forth between the israeli government and the white house. what was that all about? who was involved in that back and forth? >> a number of questions to answer here. first of all, keep in mind that president obama has called for the '67 borders to be -- the 'focus point or the orientation of our peace talks with the palestinians. hasn't called for the actual return to the '67 borders. and it was not the focal point of the speech. the speech was about the situation in the middle southeast and a very small part of the speech. having said that, the overwhelming majority of israelis are against the return to the '67 borders. that's clear. and -- the reasons are very, very simple. those borders before 1967 were only nine miles wide. twice arab armies tried to cut us in half by crossing those borders, back is to the sea. tried to destroy us from those borders. they were not defensible borders. in the last 44 years, since 1967, over a half million israelis now live beyond those borders. so a return to the '67 borders would leave the half a million of our citizens in another country. very few israelis would recall returning to those borders. the president hasn't demanded that we return to those borders. simply saying that will be the starting point for negotiations. >> just so it is clear on the issue of hamas and the united nations and what -- what hamas and the palestinians intend to do in september, you and the president are in absolute alignment and i think with 99% of the american public it is the issue of the '67 borders because -- frankly, i'm a little startled that this has caused so much consternation. i want to read to you something that was said in a joint press release when the prime minister netanyahu was here in 2010 with secretary of state hillary clinton which is identical to the language that was in the speech. it says the u.s. believes the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconcile it is palestinian independent state based upon the 1967 lines with agreed swaps. this is language that is nearly word for word what was in the speech and that's why i'm -- i'm asking you right now, why is it that the israeli government is pushing back so hard when that language '67 -- '67 lines with agreed swaps was used as the template for u.s. policy in the past. what's new about it? >> i know this may sound like arcane diplomacy to you. but if you read that statement slowly you will see that the united states believed according to that statement that through good faith negotiations, the palestinian goal of an independent state based on the 1967 borders could be reconciled with israel's goal of a secure and recognized jewish state with israel. what was previously couched as a palestinian goal has now been reframed as america's position. >> i'm not sure i agree with you in terms of the syntax of that statement. i think we have to dig a little more deeply. i read the statement very carefully. the issue of swaps has been integral to what the united states has been saying for years. that's why i think everybody in the united states government is saying this is not a fundamental ship, why are you causing such a -- about something that has been integral to what we have been saying for years? >> have to give thank you same answer again. what was previously a palestinian position has now been adopted as an american position. and the possibility then arises that we would be asked in some way to go back to the '67 borders which we regard as indefensible and borders that have invited wars in the past and haven't prevented wars. borders that would leave very large numbers of our citizens beyond our borders. >> let me ask you this question then. even if there was this possible analysis would say it is different the thrust of the president's speech where he said with great clarity that the fatah, hamas alignment made it unacceptable to expect israel to negotiate with palestinian authority. where he rejected the palestinian effort to go to the united nations and seek recognition at the current moment. all of those were hugely important things the president said on behalf of israeli security, why not embrace those and say thank you, mr. president, this is why you are our single most important ally in the world. >> i think that's just what i said. we welcomed and appreciated the president's position on the pact between hamas and the palestinian authority. it is clear that everything we are talking about in terms of negotiations, whether, you know about the '67 borders or any other aspect of the negotiation is now couched in hypothetical terms. because the ball is very much in the palestinian's court. they have to make a decision. whether they stick with this pact with the terrorist organization that just -- only a few weeks ago fired a missile at a -- school bus along the israeli border, killed 16-year-old child, an organization that condemned america's action against bin laden and -- hailed him as an islamic holier warrior, this is -- this is hamas. the palestinian authority has to make a choice between a pact with that terrorist organization or negotiating peace with us. this is a position which is a very strongly held one by the obama administration and we share it and we appreciate it. >> mr. ambassador, that's exactly right. i ask you then just as a matter of raw politics, why not have those issues which you just articulated so well be the single focus of the public discourse rather than a very arcane potential disagreement about whether the '67 borders with swaps had or had not been embraced as the foundation of negotiations, it seems to me what you have done is overwhelmed so much in that speech critically important for israel's security and brought us back to a focus on the area of disagreement between two incredibly close allies. >> well, i think -- it is -- it may seem arcane to you. but for us it is a matter of national security. i live in southern jerusalem with my family, we live in an area part of pre-1967 israel. but -- the army beyond what was the jordanian boarder in 1967 begins 50 yards down our street. we won't be just in rocket range. we will be within pistol sxraeng for us, that -- arcane issue, as you stated, a matter of the life and death of our families. and -- it is not justice real made it a big deal of it. you look at the headlines of all the major papers today, "wall street journal" and "washington post," "new york times," they all headline the 1967 border change. it is not just us. but having said that, again, there are parts of the speech we very much appreciated and i think that the -- tenor of the discussion between prime minister netanyahu and president obama today showed the degree that these two leaders cooperate, they -- discussion went on twice as long was supposed to. private lunch between the president and prime minister. they -- spoke on the white house lawn for about a half an hour afterward. i was there when the -- president threw his arm around binyamin netanyahu and said good-bye, my friend. the tenor was not what -- much depicted in the press. >> i -- i agroo with that and i hope that's the case. i would also say you have to acknowledge and i don't say that the issue of what land is returned is arcane. syntax of the sentences is arcane. every agreement negotiated has taken as a premise that the '67 boundaries with necessary adjustments for security would be the framework for the negotiated resolution. two-state resolution to everybody acknowledges is necessary. i think that is the critical agreement here which we should focus on. let's move on. >> i have to respond to that. agreement since 1993 as preceded on the assumption we were not going back to the '67 border. that was the frame of reference. >> no, no. '67 borders with adjustments. thank you so much for joining us this evening. >> always a pleasure. on monday i will be speaking to former plo representative sari nusseibeh. glorn gloria, so glad to have you in the arena tonight. >> i have been working on this interview with governor rick scott of florida. as you know, it is always florida, florida, florida in presidential races. we have a great republican primary shaping up. i was talking to him about presidential politics, about the early primary there florida and, of course, what's going to happen to jewish voters in that state. now that president obama has come out with some controversial comments on going back to the 1967 lines as a starting point for peace talks. >> gloria, you are so right. florida is one of those swing states that determines the outcome unless of course, it is the supreme court that does it for us. all right. gloria, i look forward to that interview. when we come back, i will be talking to the french writer who the s making a lot of people angry. 2011, at&t is at work, building up our wireless network all across america. we're adding new cell sites... increasing network capacity, and investing billions of dollars to improve your wireless network experience. from a single phone call to the most advanced data download, we're covering more people in more places than ever before in an effort to give you the best network possible. at&t. rethink possible. in an effort to give you the best network possible. what are you looking at? logistics. ben? the ups guy? no, you see ben, i see logistics. logistics? think--ben is new markets. ben is global access-- china and beyond. ben is a smarter supply chain. ben is higher margins. happier customers... everybody wins. logistics. exactly. see you guys tomorrow. dominique strass-kahn is now free on bail. former head of the international monetary fund is now out. said to be staying at a rented apartment in downtown manhattan somewhere near ground zero. meanwhile, the french continue to have a strong reaction to the strauss-kahn arrest and it is far different from the american response. in france, the former imf chief is seen as a victim. perhaps strauss-kahn's biggest defender is french writer bernard. thank you for joining us thank you. >> you gave a full-throated defense to dominique strass-kahn earlier this week. a lot has happened since then. he has been indicted by a grand jury based upon a pretty full record, we understand. does any of that shake your confidence in your defense of him that you have articulated -- you know, far and wide somewhat to the consternation of many people? >> no. i did not change my mind. maybe he is guilty. the grand jury will appreciate that. they will decide if he is guilty or not. but for the moment, the way he was treated means that he's also a victim and he has been victim of punishment. no one knows if he is guilty or not. nobody knows what happened in his room. we will know when the people, the -- the people of the trial, the grand jury will investigate and decide. according to the american principle, this is unbearable. i'm not defending a friend. i'm defending the principle on which the bill of rights, the spirit of america, are built. >> you know, let me quibble with you a little bit. obviously i have been a prosecutor and i believe deeply in the presumption of innocence. it is an accord, foundation of our judicial system. but there is a difference between the presumption of innocence that attends to a criminal proceeding and the common sense judgments that are made by people out in the general public who see the evidence and make their determinations as a case unfolds. nobody has ever said to the public you must withhold all judgment until a jury speaks. they are the -- entitled, are they not to judge the voracity and credibility of this maid and make their own judgments even before a criminal case has been prosecuted? >> number one, there is a contradiction between the principle of the presumption of innocence and the perp walk. this perp walk, dominique strass-kahn, or any guy walk in with all the cruelty and humiliation which is involved in front of camera, photographers, hunting him, it is a contradiction. can you not say that you hold human rights and accept the perp walk. this is one point. the second point is that if the crime has been committed, it is an unforgivable crime. the rape is a crime. imagine what -- what will happen if it is proved that the crime has not been committed? i do not know. you do not know. "the new york post" does not know. the judge is not "the new york post." the grand jury is not the daily news. they are not alone to make -- to pronounce, to tell what is right, fair, or not. they are not the judge. >> you have said that dominique strass-kahn was a womanizer. he does not deny that himself. is it possible in your understanding of him that he misunderstood the issue of consent? somehow he does got -- got lost and did not realize this was not consent? >> i am not one of the 21 or 23 wise women and men who will have to decide on that. so i cannot know and i do not want to reply to this question. i just say that this flood of images showing the humiliation of the man who may be guilty or who may be innocent makes him a victim. and i say that america, who is so careful with images, is not careful in this case. just think one thing. just please think of one point. america decided not to show the image imag images of bin laden dead. not to offend the muslims. so right. but we show the images of dominique strass-kahn without any consideration of the question to know if it offends his kids, his family, himself and so on. when you deal with images, you cannot be double standard. can you not on one side say that images will offend and you will retain them. probably right. i think it was a wise decision. flood of images of the man who may be innocent all over the world. this is a problem of today. i'm confident in the american justice, i'm confident in the decision which will be taken by the -- by the people of manhattan. but -- i'm not confident in this preemptive strike, preemptive punishment, decided by some newspapers or tabloid newspapers. same in france. problem is the same. what i'm telling you i say also to the french tv. >> look, it is always a pleasure to chat with you. bewhelm. we will continue this conversation and see where this takes us. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. up next, bernie madoff ran the biggest ponzi scheme ever. but never told a story of how he did it until now. just ahead, we talked to a writer who went behind bars with madoff. [ male announcer ] at quicken loans, we're a mortgage company with one very simple philosophy: every client, every time, no exceptions, no excuses. maybe that's why j.d. power and associates ranked us "highest in customer satisfaction in the united states." so, we thought we'd take a little time to celebrate. ♪ all right, then, back to work helping clients. outstanding client service. just one more example of how everything we do at quicken loans is engineered to amaze. make no mistake about it. the 2012 presidential election is under way. politicians on both sides of the aisle are keenly aware of what the big issue is. that's jobs, jobs, jobs. one of the key players in all of this will be the governor of the vital swing state of florida. whenever the election of -- the election of 2000, bush v. gore, florida, florida florida. joining me is the republican governor of that state rick scott. i think he could become a kingmaker. welcome. >> nice to be here. >> this has been quite a wild week in republican politics. we have had donald trump getting out of the race. mike huckabee getting out of the race. newt gingrich making some mistakes. we hear tim pawlenty is getting in on monday. you are the governor of this important swing state. so tell me, are you planning to endorse a candidate at some point? >> i haven't decide whether i will endorse. i can tell you what, it is all going to be about jobs. whatever candidate -- whoever it is that can explain to the american public how they are going to get our economy going again, that's who will get elected. >> you are not going to come out and tell us who your favorite candidate is at this point? >> no. i think -- we all ought to be watching these candidates. we ought to listen what they say. have them tell us how they are going to get the economy going again. i ran -- >> are they doing that -- do you think republican candidates are doing that? they got kind of sidetracked with donald trump and the birth certificate. those kinds of issues. are republicans doing a good job of that right now? >> i think everybody can do a better job. i think we -- our biggest issue in this -- in this -- in the country is jobs. i think everybody that's running for office could do a better job explaining how we could get this economy going again. all the decisions we are making, how we get each individual to give them the opportunity to get back to work. >> we had -- an interesting flack this week with newt gingrich that came out and has since apologized for it but criticized congressman ryan's budget plan. specifically the medicare proposal in that plan that would eventually turn medicare into a voucher program. did -- did newt gingrich make a mistake? could that actually help him in a state like florida? >> well, i think we have to be very careful what happen was medicare. as you know in florida, we have a lot of senior citizens of t g florida. we have to fix medicare. they also know that -- for our entire economy to be able to control -- have the money to pay for medicare we have to get the economy going again. that will be the key. who has the right, you know, who has the right story? who has -- people believe about how they will get the economy going again. >> when your voters say to you governor, what do you think about that ryan plan that's being proposed in washington that was approved by the house of representatives, what do you tell your voters in florida? >> what i tell them is we have to have -- honest debate about what happens with medicare. we want to make sure that, you know, our senior citizens are relying on medicare and they can continue to rely on medicare. and the other issue we are dealing with our state is medicaid. the unbelievable cost of medicaid and one thing is part of paul ryan's plan is the -- doing a block grant for medicaid. which is what we need in our state and i you this most states need because we know what we need in our state. we can spend the money better. >> sounds to me like you are not endorsing that part of the ryan plan, though. >> well, i -- i -- first off with medicaid we need to absolutely get block grants. we have to do those for the -- for our state.