tv At This Hour With Berman and Bolduan CNN October 15, 2015 8:00am-9:01am PDT
to his commanders on the ground in afghanistan. it's changed because of the security situation in afghanistan, which is getting worse by the day. the taliban is making gains in parts of the country the united states was not anticipating and the white house, when you talk to senior administration officials and i talked to them last night, they said this is because the u.s. wants to leave afghanistan in a better place at some point. they want to make sure these afghan security officials are trained adequately and they want to continue to conduct counterterrorism operations, not just against al qaeda, but potentially against isis. isis is beginning to make gains in afghanistan. if isis is deemed to be threatening the homeland, the u.s. homeland from afghanistan, u.s. forces could potentially go after them in afghanistan under this new security arrangement.
the president, this is part of his legacy. he hoped to end two wars by the time he leaves office. >> as with speak, more than 3,000 troops in afghanistan, 9800 in afghanistan. that will stay there through 2015. 5500, that will stay there as you take a look at the podium, as president obama announces he'll maintain current troop levels in afghanistan this year and next year as well. this largely, jim sciutto, on the advice of military officials who have been studying the situation on the ground. the u.s. military wanted this decision. why? >> because of the reality on the ground. the fall of kunduz shows the
strength of the taliban. it's something they knew before the fall of kunduz. the taliban is active in many parts of the country, because they have been virtually cleared out from and getting closer kabul as well. they saw that reality on the ground communicated to the president. this is not just an extension of troop presence but also an expansion. it is isis on the ground there. the administration will refer to these as countermilitary operations. u.s. troops are still militarily active on the ground in afghanistan and now they have a new adversary because isis is building its presence there as well, which speaks to this question, how long do those troops stay beyond 2017? what will the necessity be? will keeping fewer than 10,000 troops on the ground for another
year and a half dramatically change the situation on the ground? that's going to be a question for the next president. i'll tell you one more thing, in the background here, thoughts of iraq. necessity have to be. remember, this is a president who pulled all u.s. troops out of iraq. he says the iraqis didn't want him there but this is a decision that happened on his watch. we saw what happened in iraq with the advance of isis there. have you to think and believe that that experience colored this decision by the president to maintain a u.s. troop presentation in afghanistan. >> defense one, a military media site said america's longest war just got longer. 40 seconds until president obama walks up to that lectern. you spent so much time in afghanistan, the new leadership, the new president gohani, he,
too, wants this increased troop presence there? >> he is one of a fractured government. yes, he's very western-friendly. a much better partner. he's sharing the government who he fought the election against, abdullah abdullah. it is a fractured administration and that hobbles the ramshackled the afghan security force who is supposed to be doing -- >> the president is approaching the lectern with joe biden, ash carter. the president. >> good morning. last december, more than 13 years after our nation was attacked by al qaeda on 9/11, america's combat mission in afghanistan came to a responsible end. that milestone was achieved thanks to the courage and the skill of our military and intelligence personnel.
they served there with skill and valor and they served with 2200 american patriots who made the ultimate sacrifice in afghanistan. i visited our troops in afghanistan last year to thank them on behalf of a grateful nation. i told them they could take great pride in the progress they helped achieve. they struck devastating blows against the al qaeda leadership in the tribal regions, delivered justice to osama bin laden, prevented terrorist attacks and saved american lives. they pushed the taliban back so the afghan people could reclaim their communities, send their daughters to school and improve their lives. our troops trained afghan forces so they could take the lead for their own security, and protect afghans as they voted in historic elections, leading to first democratic transfer of power in their country's history.
today american forces no longer patrol afghan villages or valleys. our troops are not engaged in major ground combat against the taliban. those missions now belong to afghans, who are fully responsible for securing their country. but as i've said before, while america's combat mission in afghanistan may be over, our commitment to afghanistan and its people endures. as commander in chief, i will not allow afghanistan to be used as safe haven for terrorists to attack our nation again. our forces, therefore, remain in two narrow but critical missions -- training afghan forces and supporting counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al qaeda. of course, compared to the 100,000 troops we once had in afghanistan, today fewer than
10,000 remain in support of these very focused missions. i meet regularly with my national sxurt team to continually assess honestly the situation on the ground. to determine where our strategy is working and where we may need greater flexibility. i've insisted consistently that our strategy focus on the development of a sustainable afghan capacity and self-sufficiency. when we've needed additional forces to advance that goal or we've needed to make adjustments in terms of our timetables, we've made those adjustments. today want to update the american people on our efforts. since taking the lead for security earlier this year, afghan forces have continued to step up. this has been the first fighting season where afghans have largely been on their own and they're fighting for their country bravely and and tenaciously.
afghan forces continue to hold most urban areas. and when the taliban has made gains, as in kunduz, afghan forces backed by coalition support have been able to push them back. this has come at a very heavy price. this year alone, thousands of afghan troops and police have lost their lives, as have many afghan civilians. at the same time, afghan forces are still not as strong as they need to be. they are developing critical capabilities -- intelligence, logistics, aviation, command and control. and meanwhile, the taliban has made gains, particularly in rural areas, and can still launch deadly attacks in cities, like kabul. much of this was predicted. we understood as we transitioned, the taliban would try to exploit some of our movements out of particular areas and that it would take
time for afghan security forces to strengthen. pressure from pakistan has resulted more from al qaeda coming into afghanistan. we've seen the emergence of isil. bottom line, key security of the country is still very fragile. in some places, there's risks of deter yags. fortunately, in president ghani and cheek executive abdullah, there's a national unity dpovt that supports relationship with united states. president ghani and i agreed to continue our counterterrorism efforts and he has asked for continued support as afghan forces grow stronger. following consultations with my national security team, as well as international partners and members of congress, president ghani and chief executive ann
abdullah, i'm therefore announcing the following steps. which i'm convinced offer the best possibility for lasting progress in afghanistan. first, i've decided to maintain our current posture of 9800 troops in afghanistan through most of next year, 2016. their mission will not change. our troops will continue to pursue those two narrow tasks that i outlined earlier -- training afghan forces and going after al qaeda. but maintaining our current posture through most of next year rather than a more rapid drawdown, will allow us to train and assist afghan forces as they grow stronger. not only during this fighting season but into the next one. second, i've decided that instead of going down to a normal embassy presence in kabul by the end of 2016, we will
maintain 5500 troops and a small number of bases includes at bagram, jalalabad in the east and cannkandahar in the south. our mission will not change. these bases will give us the presence and the reach our forces require to achieve their mission. in this sense, afghanistan is a key piece of the network of counterterrorism partnerships we need from south asia to africa to deal more broadly with terrorist threats more quickly and prevent attacks against our homeland. third, we will work with allies and partners to align the steps i'm announcing today with their own presence in afghanistan after 2016. in afghanistan we are part of a 42-nation coalition and our nato allies and partners can continue to play an indispensable role in
helping afghanistan strengthen its security forces, including respect for human rights. finally, because governance and development remain the foundation for stability and progress in afghanistan, we will continue to support president ghani and the national unity government as they pursue critical reforms. new proceed vinceal governors have been appointed and president ghani is working to strengthen institutions and uphold rule of law. as i told president ghani and chief abdullah yesterday, progress for the afghan people will continue to have the strong support of the united states. and we cannot separate the importance of governance with the issues of security. the more effective these reforms happen, the better off the security situation's going to be. we also discussed american
support of an afghan-led reconciliation process. by now it should be clear to the taliban and all who oppose afghan's progress, the only real way to achieve the full drawdawn of u.s. and foreign troops from afghanistan is through a lasting political settlement with the afghan government. likewise, sanctuaries for the taliban and other terrorists must end. next week i'll host prime minister sharif of pakistan and i'll continue to urge all parties in the region to press the taliban to return to peace talks and to do their part in pursuit of the peace that afghans deserve. in closing, i want to speak directly to those whose lives are most directly affected by decisions i'm announcing today. to the afghan people who have suffered so much. america's commitment to you and to a secure, stable and unified
afghanistan, that remains firm. our two nations have forged a strategic partnership for the long term. as you defend and build your country, today is a reminder that the united states keeps our commitments. and to our men and women in uniform, i know this means that some of you will rotate back into afghanistan. with the end of our combat mission, this is not like 2010 when 200,000 americans were killed and many more were injured, but still afghanistan remains dangerous. 25 brave americans have given their lives there this year. i do not send you into harm's way lightly. it's the most solemn decision i make. i know the wages of war and the wounded warriors i visit in the hospital and in the grief of gold star families.
but as your commander in chief, i believe this mission is vital to our national security interests in preventing terrorist attacks against our citizens and our nation. and to the american people, i know many of you have grown weary of this conflict, as you are well aware, i do not support the idea of endless war. i have repeatedly argued against marching against open-ended military conflicts that do not serve our core security interests. yet, given what's at stake in afghanistan, and the opportunity for a stable and committed ally that can partner with us in preventing the emergence of future threats, and the fact that we have an international coalition, i'm firmly convinced that we should make this extra effort. in the afghan government we have a serious partner who wants our help and the majority of the
afghan people share our goals. we have a bilateral security agreement to guide our cooperation. and every single day afghan forces are out there fighting and dying to protect their country. they're not looking for us to do it for them. i'm speaking of the afghan army cadet who grew up seeing attacks and bombings on innocent civilians who says, because of this, i joined the army to save lives. or the police officerexplosives. i know it's dangerous work, he says, but i've always had the dream of wearing the uniform of afghanistan, serving my people and defending my country. or the afghan commando, a hardened veteran of many missions who says, if i start telling you the stories of my life, i might start crying. he serves, he said, because the faster we bring peace, the faster we can bring education
and the stronger our unity will grow. only if these things happen will afghanistan be able to stand up for itself. my fellow americans, after so many years of war, afghanistan will not be a perfect place. it's a poor country that will have to work hard on its development. there will continue to be contested areas. but afghans like these are standing up for their country. if they were to fail, they would endanger the security of us all. and we've made enormous investment in a stable afghanistan. afghans are making difficult but genuine progress. this modest but meaningful extension of our presence, while sticking to our current, narrow missions can make a real difference.
it's the right thing to do. my god bless or troops and all who keep us safe and may god continue to bless america. [ inaudible ] >> reporter: can you tell us how disappointing -- >> this decision is not disappointing. continually my goal has been to make sure that we give every opportunity for afghanistan to succeed while we're still making sure we meet our core missions. as i've continually said, my approach is to assess the situation on the ground, figure out what's working, figure out what's not working, make adjustments where necessary. this isn't the first time those adjustments have been made. this probably won't be the last. what i'm encouraged by is the fact that we have a government that is serious about trying to
deliver security and the prospects of a better life for the afghan people. we have a clear majority of the afghans who want to partner with us and the international community to achieve those goals. we have a bilateral security arrangement that ensures that our troops can operate in ways that can protect them while still achieving their mission. and we've always known we had to maintain a counterterrorism operation in that region in order to tamp down any re-emergence of active al qaeda networks or other networks that might do us harm. so, this is consistent with the overall vision we've had and, frankly, we anticipated as we were drawing down troops that there would be times we might need to slow things down or fill gaps in afghan capacity. and this is a reflection of
that. it's a dangerous area. so, part of what we're constantly trying to balance is making sure that afghans are out there. they're doing what they need to do. but that we are giving them a chance to succeed and that we're making sure our force posture in the area for conducting those narrow missions we need to conduct, we can do so relatively safely. there's still risks involved but force protection, the ability of our embassies to operate effectively, those things all factor in. so, we've got to constantly review these approaches. the importance thing i want to emphasize, though, is the nature of the mission has not changed and the cessation of our combat role has not changed. now, the 25 military civilians who were killed last year, that always weighs on my mind and 25
deaths are 25 too muany, particularly for the families of the fallen. but understand relative to what's -- what was involved when we were in an active combat role and actively engaged in a war in afghanistan was a very different scenario. so, here you have a situation where we have clarity about what our mission is, we have a partner who wants to work with us, we're going to continually make adjustments to ensure we give the success, and we'll continue to evaluate this as we go forward as will the next president. as conditions aimprove, we'll be in a position to make further adjustments. a confident and i'm not disappointed because my view has always been, how do we achieve our goals while minimizing the strain and exposure on our men and women in uniform and make
sure that we are constantly encouraging and sending a message to the afghan people, this is their country and they've got to defend it. but we're going to be a steady partner for them. okay? thank you, everybody. >> a major announcement from president obama from the roosevelt room. one you can expect he did not want to have to make. he will not end the u.s. war in afghanistan. that war will not be over by the time he leaves office. the president announced he will maintain 9800 u.s. troops through 2016. 5500 u.s. troops will still be in afghanistan when the next president takes office. the mission of those troops, two-told, to train afghan forces and to find and fight al qaeda. the reason for this extension, the reason for this reversal of a planned pullout is simply because the afghan forces, as constituted inside that country right now, are not as strong as they need to be.
those words from president obama from the roosevelt room, just a little more than a year after he made the announcement from the rose garden that the u.s. would be pulling out of afghanistan. a major reversal in policy. i want to bring in lieutenant general mark hurtling. explain to our viewers what can 9800 troops do? what can they do over the next year that 5500 cannot do, and what will they be able to do that 30,000 would not be able to do better? >> yeah, the military conducts something they call troop-to-task analysis as part of a campaign plan. based on a lot of situations, the enemy, what the terrain looks like, what mission needs to be done, the mission assigned and allies, and president mentioned allies, that's specifically nato in this case because he received a lot of information at the nature toe
ministerial. you do an analysis and say here's the mission and what we need to conduct that. 9800 will hit the two missions -- the counterterrorism and the train and equip mission of afghan force. that will occupy their time. when you talk about a resurgence of al qaeda, potential new isis targets and an increased resurgence of taliban, the counterterrorism force is going to have to be larger. at same time, the emphasis on training and equipping more of the afghan security forces is going to have to go at a higher pace. you need more forces to do that. >> jim sciutto? >> a couple points here. as you note, john, this was a damning assessment of the situation on the ground in afghanistan. in the president's word, he says it's fragile and a risk of deterioration. in other words, they're concerned the taliban will gain more ground unless the u.s. stayses, along with afghan
forces, pushes them back. it's interesting here. the president calls this a counterterror operation against al qaeda particularly. remember, when kunduz fell, you had u.s. troops there helping to call in air strikes. in fact, as you remember, you had an american air strike that hit the msf hospital there. it is not just a counterterror operation. you still have u.s. troops doing combat support for afghan forces because afghan forces on their own haven't been able to fight back taliban. there's fudging there. the president said all major combat operations have stopped. that's true, major has stopped but combat has not stopped because afghan troops need support. the president said, that's vital not only to the security of the country but also preventing afghanistan being used as a base for terror strikes against the u.s., as they did during 9/11. the concern -- he didn't mention it, but it is true, it's not just al qaeda they're concerned
about, it is isis as well. you have two enemies on the ground in addition to supporting combat forces on the afghan side. >> a cornerstone of the obama foreign policy right now and over the last few years has been to train other country's forces, to train forces in iraq, to train forces in afghanistan and, yes, even to train forces inside syria to take the battle to the terrorists. now, in each one of these places, we have found it could not be done as fast or as effectively as the u.s. had wanted. how much of an admission is it that this strategy is flawed 1234? >> that's a final reflection of the reality. listening to the phrase, the tide of war is receding coming from barack obama's lips. ever since we had a steady drip of narrative of the afghan security forces were up to the job. they were getting into the fight. they increasingly didn't need
u.s. support to back them up. when 2014, when they had to take security of the whole country, they would be up to the job. it didn't ring write. we've heard so many speeches of barack obama that listed the achievements. this one different, as jim pointed out, in some areas the forces simply aren't as good as they need to be. we've spoken ourselves to an afghan soldier, a captain, who fled the front line of kunduz fighting the taliban and is now in germany, in fact, in brussels, saying he couldn't get the ammunition, the food, the fuel he needed to do the job there because corruption and supplies were endemic through the afghan national security ranks. there was always a problem that potentially when the american money, when the american supervision began to dry up, you'd start to see the vital supply chains, the discipline gibb to crumble. a new force, a force often plagued with simple problems as l literacy, unable to read instructionses on the weapons,
massively complex challenge but it is remarkable to hear barack obama, after so much of the pentagon's effort has been in the past four years, drumming that narrative in, the afghan national security forces will be up to the job, it's sad that they haven't and 34 provinces are racked by violence by refugees, inside afghanistan itself. not much choice the white house has had. he didn't want to continue the war indefinitely. there's not public appetite for that. the afghan government had to be left to phoned for themselves. what we're seeing here is an administration that always wants to be seen as doing something but just enough to for that to have been recognized. doesn't matter if we change the contribution on the ground. it stays what it is now until, effect live, he leaves office. it potentially bides the afghan security forces a little more time but it is, frankly, a
regular nigs of what happened in iraq. a bid for that not to be his legacy, too. a president who wanted to say the tide of war is receding. again with what he referred to as the good war, afghanistan, in which he othered the surge, frankly it worked in some areas but was never going to be able to last forever. sadly, there is a reflection that afghanistan -- american troops left behind wasn't able to fend for itself. >> want to bring in cnn historian douglas brinkley for a little perspective here. the president was asked one question after he made this announce frment a reporter. the effectively, the question was, where are you disappointed you have to make this announcement? the president claimed, no. however, you he did make clear he was not a support who supported endless war. endless war, i mean, if afghanistan at this point is not an endless war, i'm not sure what is. >> well, the president began his address by saying, in a victorious way, that the combat
mission in afghanistan has been achieved. and then he gave the big but. but we still need to leave 9800 soldiers there. the president always said he wanted to get us out of the afgt situation. as you're pointing out, it is kind of an endless war. he would like to call it something more of a police action, a security force being left behind. when you have 9,800 troops, 10,000 ultimately, with al qaeda, with the taliban and with isis surrounding you, it's still a very dangerous situation, afghanistan. so the president can't check mark this off as something that was fully achieved on his watch. >> jim acosta, it will now be an issue the next president has to take up. president obama says there will be 500 troops in afghanistan when the next president takes office. that new president will have to make a decision one way or the other what to do with them.
>> if you're wondering why barack obama's hair has gone grain, look at afghanistan and iraq. events on ground have not gone his way with events planned for his legacy. you're right. when you talk about the president saying a few moments ago, i do not believe in an endless war, that is right out of the rhetoric of the base of the democratic party. i think this issue of what to do about afghanistan is now going to be thrown right into the mix. we're going to have to find out to see what hillary clinton thinks about this decision that the president is making. my suspicion is, because she's more moderate, more like a hawk on these issues, remember, she supported the president going after osama bin laden, she'll likely support this decision by the president and bernie sanders won't. my thought is bernie sanders won't support this decision by the president. what you hear from people inside
the administration, they'll point to after the cold war. we still have military bases inside germany, in japan, south korea. that is the legacy of world war ii and the cold war. it's possible instead of fully withdrawing from place like afghanistan and iraq, as the war drags down over the next 15, 120 years, you'll have to have a u.s. presence in certain parts of the world to make sure there's no backsliding. >> and the glass half full category for this white house, they feel they have leadership in afghanistan for the first time in a long time they can work with. thank you all for being with us. a very big moment for this administration. coming up for us, the biggest sin you can commit in washington -- telling the truth. that's what a republican now says about the benghazi committee. he says the goal to go after hillary clinton.
♪ do you really think that's a good idea? if everyone jumped off a cliff, would you do it too? you'll lose interest. it's just a phase. it hurts me more than it hurts you. where are your manners - were you raised by wolves? you're going to give me a heart attack. when you have kids, you'll understand. this is the life of a rebel. sorry, mom. if you're on medicare, remember,
the open enrollment period is here. the time to choose your medicare coverage begins october 15th and ends december 7th. so call to enroll in a plan that could give you the benefits and stability you're looking for, an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. what makes it complete? it can combine medicare parts a and b, which is your hospital and doctor coverage with part d prescription drug coverage, and more, all in one simple plan for a low monthly premium or in some areas, no plan premium at all. an aarp medicarecomplete plan offers you benefits like an annual physical, preventive screenings and most immunizations all for a $0 copay. you'll also have access to a local network of doctors and much more. when you enroll in an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare, your benefits could also include routine vision and hearing coverage.
and with the pharmacy saver program, you can get prescriptions for as little as $1.50 at your local pharmacy, in retail locations like these. or pay zero dollars for a 90-day supply of your tier 1 and tier 2 drugs, delivered right to your door. now is the time to look at your options. start getting the benefits of an aarp medicarecomplete plan insured through unitedhealthcare. we've been helping medicare beneficiaries for over 30 years. we'll connect you with the right people, help schedule your appointments, and new this year, you can earn rewards for making healthy choices with renew by unitedhealthcare remember, medicare open enrollment ends december 7th. call unitedhealthcare today about an aarp medicarecomplete plan. you can even enroll right over the phone. or visit us online. don't wait. call now. ♪ ♪ ♪
a new claim this morning the benghazi commission is driven by politics and that claim, again, comes from a republican. richard hanna, congressman from new york says the committee was designed to come after hillary clinton. this comes a week after clinton will testify before that committee, a day before her closest aide will. we'll talk more about this with cnn political correspondent and mike she'cheels, head of a supec
and i want to play you that from richard hanna, during a radio interview. let's listen. >> sometimes the biggest sin you can commit in d.c. is to tell the truth. you know, and i -- this may not be politically correct, but i -- i think there is a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and get an individual, hillary clinton. >> mike, it's a week before hillary clinton is scheduled to testify. the last few weeks all there has been is this drip, drip, drip of accusations of this committee being political. can republicans, can they reverse this narrative in five, seven days? >> yeah, i mean, first of all, congressman hanna doesn't serve on the committee. i sort of disagree where he's going with this. let's look at the bigger picture of how politics plays a role in this. this committee was by john boehner, a bipartisan committee
and its job is to look at, did politics play a role in the cover-up of what happened in benghazi because the attack happened about a month before the 2012 presidential elections. since that time, the administration and the state department were not transparent about what happened and were there political motivations behind why they didn't want to know what happened, why necessity didn't run out this story, why there was a videotape that caused the attack and it wasn't al qaeda. from the very beginning, was there a political motive behind what's going on. i think what you'll see next week is the panelists -- the people on the committee are going to be asking legitimate investigative questions of hillary clinton, of abadine are going to be trying to find out the truth. i think that will speak for itself and all these commentators that are not on the committee will see what the committee's all about. >> it's an interesting moment for hillary clinton. on that debate stage bernie sanders essentially gave her a
free pass saying, i don't want to talk about the e-mails, about what happened before. it's not going away. her closest adviser testifies behind closed doors tomorrow. next week hillary clinton testifies publicly. what does she need to do in the next seven days? >> be open, be truthful. but this is a witch hunt. i've said is it from the beginning. the benghazi committee is a witch hunt. that doesn't obviate the fact that her server, and we need to separate these two things, hillary clinton has not been all together truthful on these two things. that's her political problem. the server problem and the fbi investigation of the server and the general election coming up and the republicans being able to still go after her as a candidate about her truthfulness is different than this witch hunt. but has this committee overstepped its bounds? absolutely. >> so, tell me what she does then when she's before that committee? her debate performance, widely
lauded. what will a good job before this committee be in terms of politics? >> first of all, she'll probably attack them and their legitimacy, incite these people we're talking about today, including congressman hchltd an what he's said. she needs to make the testimony about the committee and the fact she's not been forthcoming about several things, namely her server. there's going to be a mix of things. the real question is, why does this committee continue to exist? we know what happened in benghazi. there have been numerous investigations, great stories in the "new york times," other nums. at the same time, we have a lot of questions remain and an fbi investigation about the server and they're not necessarily inhe can trickably linked. >> they'll have their biggest
chance to explain to the american public why they exist. we'll see if they take that opportunity. i want to talk more about the democratic race right now. bernie sanders, his campaign saying they're going to stop with some of the big speeches to 20,000 people, 10,000 people, focus on smaller events. he's also doing things like dancing with ellen degeneres. i have to show you that video. ♪ ♪ burn baby burn ♪ burn baby burn >> a strong effort, mike. what does bernie sanders do. i know you're not in the business of giving democrats advice but where does he take his campaign over the next several weeks? >> well, look, bernie sanders is causing a huge problem for hillary clinton. i know everyone wants to say how well hillary clinton did in the debate the other night. of course, if i went and played basketball against a bunch of third graders, everyone would say i was a great basketball
player. bernie shook her hand on the debate stage and everyone sort of cheered that, well, we've sort of put the e-mail thing behind us. the problem is, the number one search on google during the debate was hillary's e-mails. really the effect of what bernie did was he brought an issue up to a lot of people that didn't know about it. the number one search on social for a candidate was bernie sanders. bernie sanders is still connecting with young voters, connecting with the left, the occupy crowd is that is the real base of the democratic party and that's causing huge problems for hillary clinton, who's out of touch, you know, she's facing a scandal. her campaign has been off message almost the entire campaign. so, the more he keeps gaining ground like this, the more hillary will move to the left up. heard that in the debate. the more these debates goes on and bernie pulls her to the left, the harder it is for her to win in the general election. i think bernie sanders is causing a humongous problem in the general elections. >> thank you for being c ining .
a big couple of days. ben carson puts his campaign on hold, sort of, to sell books. what's going on here? we're going to ask a key adviser. before earning enough cash back from bank of america to take their act to the next level... before earning 1% cash back everywhere, every time... 2% back at the grocery store... and 3% back on gas... vince of the flying branzinos got a bankamericard cash rewards credit card, because he may earn his living jumping through hoops, but he'd rather not earn cash back that way. that's the spectacle of rewarding connections. apply online or at a bank of america near you.
to build something smarter. ♪ some come here to build something stronger. others come to build something faster... something safer... something greener. something the whole world can share. people come to boeing to do many different things. but it's always about the very thing we do best. ♪ my schedule is erratic. but it's always about the very thing we do best. my hours cut. and so are my benefits. we can't survive on these wages. we need change now. real change. to improve the lives of millions of workers. to rebuild the middle class. because our families deserve better.
digestive core.r so choose ultimate flora by renewlife. it has 30 billion probiotic cultures. feel lighter and more energized. ultimate flora. more power to your gut. this will no doubt lead to even more questions about when donald trump might drop out of the race. new polls showing expansive leads in crucial early voting states. in south carolina, trump has twice the support of his closest rival, ben carson. in nevada he's up by 16 points. is it time to pick out the gildguil gulded curtains for the oval office.
our question is what is his closest rival, ben carson, going to do about him? might surprise you what he's doing on the trail right now -- actually, not on the trail right now. putting a pause on campaign events and he's on a book tour. let's discuss this with carson's business manager, a very close adviser, armstrong williams, nice to see you in person. let me read you a quote from "the national journal," a well-known writer, jim garrity, writes, why would any serious campaign for president decide to stop campaigning at a moment? will he skip any campaign events next year for the paperback version? >> where did it come he suspended -- >> douglas watts said you -- >> i just spoke with doug watts before coming on this set. he was misquoted by an abc reporter. >> fund-raisers, rallies -- >> fund-raisers, yes, but public
campaign events -- >> he does events. he talks with his campaign. he talks with people in the fields and different places. he hasn't suspended his campaign. >> suspending. no one is saying suspending. saying a couple weeks of breaks from campaign events to focus on the book tour, to keep the finances separate, rules, you can't sell a book for campaign money -- >> you can be on a book tour and the first 30 seconds about the interview can be about the book and the rest of the interview is all about the campaign. so, whatever he's doing on tour, all the questions still center around his being in the campaign, his break -- gaining closer ground on donald trump. i understand why the campaign may have those concerns, but it doesn't changes much. carson is still interacting with massive people and talking about his views, campaign and policies. >> this is interesting, another case, in a long litany of cases right now, where in a way the
carson team thinks the media has misrepresented his views or what's happening. >> no one is saying the media has misrepresented his views. i'm sure doug watts was trying to keep the campaign between fcc guidelines and dr. carson has a book out he's talking about on the campaign trail and he's also talking about policy. he's talking about issues that americans care about. >> there was another article in which you were quoted, that has been interesting. there have been all these statements that dr. carson has made, whether it be about muslims, whether it be about arming jews during the holocaust. the perception now is, according to this article, the campaign thinks, you know what, this controversy has been good for us. ben carson seems to gain. could you think that's true? >> listen, john, dr. carson's comments about muslims, comments
about the holocaust, it has to do with principle. he's not saying this because he thinks that there's going to be more ching ching ching at the cash register or he's going to solidify his support with his base. it's about what he believes. you don't want to hurt or harm people. especially the enormity of the holocaust, the impact it's had. all dr. carson was saying in that moment is i think most people would agree, if you're fighting a tyrannical government, your chances are better if you're armed and also, i mean, where would we be today if the british had disarmed us during the american revolution. >> i wasn't asking about that specifically, but do you have the sense the campaign has benefited from these comments? >> yes, well, his base, his base has responded financially, verbally. they identify what dr. carson is
saying. it's not because they're anti-anyone, it's not because they're insensitive. they just believe that dr. carson is speaking their heart, showing real leadership and telling an uncomfortable truth. leadership sometimes is just not popular. sometimes you can say things. i'm sure the establishment candidates will say it better because they're trained. they have handlers. they are training. dr. carson is aauthentic. he's natural. it may not always come out the best way but everyone knows his intentions are well meaning and it's never to harm. >> thank you for coming in and talking to us in person. we appreciate you talking to us. israel is asking all licensed gun owners to carry weapons now. they want everyone on guard after a series of attacks by young palestinians. later, we're going to speak live to israel's u.n. ambassador about this violence.
i'm only in my 60's. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses.
the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel - and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country.
[ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now - and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. new tension across israel
today. israel stepping up security after a wave of stabbings. government officials telling people there, if you legally own a gun, and many israeli citizens do, then carry it. that's just one measure the country is rolling out. after a recent string of attacks on israelis. many involving young palestinians. joining me now, israel's ambassador to the united nations. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. >> a lot of people are asking this question. are we now seeing a third intefadeh in israel? >> unfortunately, we're seeing a tide of terror that is washing the streets of israel. everyone is a target. men, women, children. when you board a bus, you're afraid to stay on the bus. we fear stabbings. we fear throwing rocks. we are worried about it. the prime minister has taken these security measures. we have dealt with terrorism in the past. i'm sure we will prevail. we will overcome this wave. first, we need to stop the incitement coming from the palestinian leadership. >> you said it's a new wave of
terror. it is an uprising, is it now a movement? >> don't want to label it now or give declaration, but we will deal with that and when you fear a new wave of terrorism, you see kids involved, youngsters involved. last monday, kids. i have three young children. 13 years old, palestinian, took a knife and stabbed an israeli. who was 12 or 13 years old. stabbed him 15 times. then the palestinians say he's dead. and they made him holy. by the way, he's not dead. he's in israeli hospital, he's being treated. but how can a palestinian boy go out of his house to stab israeli kids? the main issue is to stop the incitement coming from the palestinian leadership. >> you have the israeli government instituted a new series of security measures blocking off some areas of the city, checkpoints and others, calling on israeli citizens who are licensed and authorized to carry weapons to start carrying guns. explain to me these new measures. >> we have to take those measures to protect our civilians.
i'm sure the nypd or any other democracy would have done the same to protect its citizens. we deployed forces to region of tension. i think we know this is for the short term. for the long run is to stop the incitement that actually inflame the violence in the region. >> how do you deescalate the tension right now? because when you have 13-year-old kids willing to risk their lives to murder israeli citizens, what's driving a 13-year-old palestinian child to commit murder? >> you should look at the root of the evil. it starts with education. when you go to a palestinian public school, you see the curricul curriculum, you see the textbooks. they dehumanize the jewish people. when you watch the public television of the palestinian people, you look at a show for children in the afternoon that tell the kids, your heroes are not football players, your heroes are not celebrities. your heroes are the people who are willing to commit suicide, attacks against israelis.
so that's what's happened when a child live in such an atmosphere. he wants to be involved and he takes part. i think they should leave the children out of the conflict. they should speak about peace. yes, we have disagreements. we should negotiate those disagreements. but not sending kids to stab jews. this is not the way -- >> -- negotiate these agreements, prime minister netanyahu is coming to the united states not too long from now. should he sit down? will he sit down with abbas? >> absolutely. he said it very clearly. i'm telling you, prime minister netanyahu is willing to meet abbas everywhere, any time. it can be in jerusalem, ramallah or in washington, d.c. >> does it scare you when you see 13-year-old kids taking up arms? >> absolutely. >> but does it scare you that the atmosphere allows this to happen? >> i think when you brainwash young children, and we have seen it in different parts of the world, unfortunately. when you see kids fighting and they don't know what they're fighting about, i think weworri.
we should demand from the u.n. and the international community to condemn the usage of children for violent acts. >> ambassador, thank you very much, appreciate your time. that's all for us "an this hour." "legal view" with ashleigh banfield starts right now. hello, everyone. welcome to "legal view." breaking news today. yet another delay in president obama's long promised troop withdrawal from afghanistan. the president announcing last hour that u.s. forces will remain in the country at their current levels through most of the end of his term. 2016. this is the second time the drawdown has been put on hold this year. prolonging the american role in a war that has now lasted 14 years. officially