starting right now on abc's "this week" -- crisis in iraq. hundreds of u.s. troops moving in as advisers. a jihadist army digging in. will president obama give the order for air strikes? this morning, martha raddatz in baghdad leading our coverage. then, tax man take down. >> i don't believe you. >> new outrage in the irs scandal. how did the agency lose thousands of crucial e-mails? and justice sonia sotomayor. on the future of affirmative action. and that surprising costco run-in with hillary clinton. >> it was not planned. i can assure you. i promise. from abc news, "this week"

with george stephanopoulos starts now. good morning. i'm martha raddatz in baghdad where the battle for control of iraq has take an dire turn. the jihadist group isis gaining new ground, capturing four key towns. near the syrian border. threatening this country and the entire region. and the u.s. homeland with its growing strength. we have team coverage of the latest developments including breaking details on the u.s. special forces preparing to advise the iraqi army. we begin in baghdad, where shiite militias took to the streets this weekend in a show of force. members of the madi army who once led the fight against americans in baghdad's city, now vowing to stand up against isis. the jihadist fighters threatening baghdad's borders. isis gained critical new ground this weekend, after wiping out an entire iraqi brigade. isi sirks now controls al qa'im,

on the syrian border, giving the terror group the ability to move weapons into iraq from syria. they surrounded iraq's largest oil refinery. a portion seen here in satellite images burning. if it's overtaken, the militants would get a significant control over the gas and power supply. and iraq's security forces have little ability to regain control of all that has been lost. they have no offensive capability. and no real air power. and now, a growing fear, more westerners joining the ranks of foreign fighters descending on the country. >> we will go in a few days and fight them. >> reporter: this flashy new propaganda video showing british and australian recruits. in sponge to the terror group's march, young iraqi men are sc m

scrambling through baghdad's marketplaces to find body armor and uniforms left behind by the american mill stair. vowing to defend their city. >> i have to fight. for my family, for my country. for everything. >> reporter: if they can't find uniforms, they go any way. we saw thousands and thousands of young shiia men lining up to serve without weapons and protection. they're anywhere from 12 years old and up. some have already lost family members to the jihadi fighters. behind this battle, everyday citizens who have already been through so much. this family moved to syria during the worst parts of war in iraq. with war raging in syria, they're back. the 11-year-old and the other children have the same nightmares. what do you worry about most? the explosion, she said. the explosions. a reality that these children

have now lived with most of their lives. and when we left that family, that night, just outside that restaurant were truckloads of armed shiite militias patrolling the streets. taking the law into their own hands. now to washington, where the u.s. is still struggling with how to respond to the escalating crisis. secretary of state john kerry is in the region, as are u.s. military advisers to train the iraqi forces. here's chief white house correspondent jon karl. >> reporter: this morning, the first two teams of the military advisers that the president has decided to send to iraq are already in baghdad, preparing to work, following this promise from the commander in chief. >> american combat troops will not be fighting in iraq again. >> reporter: a decision to send special forces to help train the iraqi army coming after a tense week of deliberations with his security team. now the question, should the

president give the order for air strikes? aside from obvious targets of opportunity, two things could trigger a larger military operation. intelligence showing a direct threat to u.s. interests or progress by the iraqi government finally overcoming the sectarian divide now tearing iraq apart. >> if we don't see sunni shiia, and kurd political support for what we are doing, we won't do it. >> reporter: back home, issues from both sides. >> 300 americans is not going to solve the problem of stopping the advance of this group that is more extreme than literally core al qaeda. >> what is the objective of these up to 300 military advisers that he is proposing? what will they be able to accomplish? that has not already opinion tried and failed before? >> reporter: all of this at a difficult time. in obama's presidency. a new poll shows his approval rating has sunk to 41%. a mere 37% approve of his

handling of foreign policy. the very issue second-term presidents often rely on to stay relevant. for "this week," jonathan karl, abc, washington. >> and we'll have much more from jon later in the show. but right now, we want to turn to the former vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general james cartwright and colonel steven ganyard, a former f-18 pilot and a former deputy former assistant secretary of state for military affairs. thanks for joining us, gentlemen. general cartwright, i want to start with you. the situation in al qa'im. the border town with syria. this is a serious turn of events. >> it is. it represents the opportunity for isis to establish safe havens and escape pursuit by syrian or iraqi forces should they decide to be able to muster that kind of effort.

it also creates the opportunity for isis to move further. to move forces into iraq. they occupy about 300 to 400 kilometers along the euphrates river. they are in a commanding position. this is a defining moment for them if they can hold these positions and lock them down, it is unlikely iraq, as we envisioned it, would ever return. >> and colonel ganyard. about isis. zarkawi, the leader in iraq killed in 2006, isis has been described as zarkawi on steroids. >> this is very much the follow-on organization from his islamic state in iraq that the u.s. battled in 2006 and 2007. this is a much more capable military outfit. if we want to anticipate what is

next, think about when the u.s. killed zarkawi in 2006, they found on his body, a hand-written drawing. that showed encirclement of baghdad. it came to be called the baghdad belt. we know that isis is not going to stop. we think baghdad is next. we have to look for the potential encirclement of baghdad by the isis. >> and 130,000 u.s. troops had a hard time handling them then. general, how on earth are 300 military advisers from the u.s. going to make a difference? >> the vulnerability for isis is that it's extremely stretched. 300 to 400 kilometers is a long way to move men and equipment to encircle baghdad. if there is to be some -- on the iraqi forces as they exist

today, those advisers will help to try to create some sort of scenario in which the lines of communication can be cut off and supplied can be withdrawn or hindered from making it down to an encirclement around baghdad. >> i want to go to colonel ganyard. what about the possibility of air strikes? >> there are difficulties. because we won't have u.s. eyes and boots on the ground to be able to pick out targets. that said, out in the west where we see the supplies coming in from syria, there may be places where u.s. air power can hit supply convoys. where you find isis out in the open. once the fight comes closer to the city and the urban areas, it will be tough to pick out the targets. we need to be very careful. as soon as we drop that first bomb or shoot that first hellfire, we have picked sides. we have to make sure we're picking sides for an iraqi government that is inclusive and we're not making a broader determination of sunni versus shiia within the regional perspective.

>> thank you very much to both of you. for more, i'm joined by matt bradley of the wall street journal and alyssa johansson ruben of "the new york times." both seasoned correspondents in this regregion. you have been covering this all week. matt, you were with the shiite militias. a wild scene. some mock suicide bombers calling themselves the peace brigade. what did you see and what does it mean? >> it was a scary sight. it was repeated in cities throughout south and west iraq. we saw just tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of mostly young men, parading through the streets. armed with sometimes fake weapons. sometimes riding on trucks with fake anti-aircraft guns. all of it a bit of theater. it was aimed as intimidating and trying to send a message to the sunni part of iraq that the shiites would not be yielding, especially baghdad and the

shrines in some of the major pilgrimage cities of iraq that isis has directly threatened. this move toward shiite militias, toward civilian engagement is really quite threatening. it says we're headed back towards the kind of sectarian conflict that really almost tore the country apart in 2006 and 2007. >> and you have been with the sunnis this week. they have to feel threatened. the my or the -- minority. >> i think they feel particularly threatened in baghdad. there are fewer sunnis here than in 2005, 2006, 2007. because of the civil strife during that time. and so now their communities are a little more isolated. the people in them feel that the rising of these militias is a very dangerous moment for them. >> how did this happen so quickly? i think the rest of the world wasn't really paying attention to iraq.

suddenly, isis, this group people probably hadn't paid much attention to either, is sweeping through iraq? >> u.s. policymakers were well aware of the growing power of isis. we saw areas in especially mosul, where all this started off, isis and some of their al qaeda-inspired partners were shaking down businesses. they were starting to exercise the troubles influence they did in the height of the sectarian conflict in iraq back in 2006 and 2007. and also there were signs that the military just wasn't up to snuff. >> i want your thoughts, alyssa, on what happens now. everyone is on edge. it seems the threat to baghdad has receded. what do you think happens now? >> i think there will be an effort to somehow strengthen the army. it will come from many sources. you know, we know that the iranians are here. iranian advisers are trying to

work with the iraqi army and improve them. they have trained some of the militias to a high level. the americans sending in advisers. i think the question is is that -- is it too late for a really significant military solution. the larger question is, to what extent will iraq's de facto borders, the borders of the central government be redefined by what isis has done in the last few months. >> thanks for joining us. thanks for all of your great reporting. we'll have much more from baghdad later in the show. we return you now to washington and my colleague, jon karl. >> thank you, martha. to join us to talk about this, former vice president dick cheney. with his daughter liz, launched a new group, the alliance for a strong america. thank you for joining us. >> good morning, jon. >> you made a big splash this week with an op ed in "the wall street journal." harsh criticism of the

president. what i didn't read in the op ed is your solution, your plan right now for iraq? what would you be doing? >> well, first of all, jon, i would recognize that iraq is not the whole problem. we have a much bigger problem than just the current crisis in iraq. the rand corporation out there last week with a report that showed that there's been a 58% increase in the number of groups like al qaeda. jihadists. it stretches from west africa, across north africa. east africa. through the middle east. all the way around indonesia. a doubling of the number of terrorists out there. we have to recognize we have a hell of a problem. i worry about pakistan. a couple of weeks ago, the taliban, the same group that we just released five of the leaders of from guantanamo, they raided karachi airport. why do i care about that? well, pakistan is unique in that

it has a significant inventory of nuclear weapons. we have evidence that the man that built the pakistani program, khan, offered recently that officials were bribed for technology in enriching uranium. that the north koreans now have some,000 centrifuges operating. we had north korea try to provide syria with a nuclear reactor. the difficulty -- the spread of the terrorist groups are not recognized by the administration. the proliferation of nuclear capability and the possibility that it could fall in the hands of thrifts is nerrorists is not addressed. i think we need a broad strategy that lets us address the full range of the issues. >> let me ask you specifically on iraq. that's the crisis confronting us at this moment.

would you take air strikes? would you move special forces in? what would you do in iraq? >> well, what we should have done in iraq was leave -- >> no, no, what would you do now? >> what i would do now, jon, is among other things, be realistic about the nature of the threat. we're arguing over 300 advisers when the request had been for 20,000 in order to do the job right, i'm not sure we have addressed the problem. i would definitely be helping the resistance in syria. in isis' backyard with training and weapons in order to be able to do a more effective job on that end of the party. at this point, there are no good, easy answers. i think it is important to emphasize. the problem we're faced with is a much broader one. we need an administration to recognize the fact that we have got this huge problem. quit peddling the notion that

they got core al qaeda and therefore there's though problem out there. we have to build trust in the relationship with the friends in the region. it's important to take a broad gauge approach to it. >> you wrote, rarely has a u.s. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many. a lot of your critics, left and right, say you're the one that has over and over again been wrong on iraq and they point to statements like these. >> regime change in iraq would bring about a number of changes. we will be greeted as liberators. i think they're in the last throws of the insurgency. rand paul pointed to things like that in the wall street journal, many of those clamoring for military action now are the same people who made every false

assumption imaginable to -- about the cost, the challenge, and purpose of the iraq war. they have been so wrong for so long. why should we listen to them again? >> with all due respect, jon, i was a strong supporter then of going into iraq. i'm a strong supporter now. everybody knows my position. we spend our time debating what happened 11 or 12 years ago, we're going to miss the threat that is growing and that we do face. rand paul, with all due respect, is an isolationist. he doesn't believe we should be involved in that part of the world. i think it's absolutely essential. one of the things i worried about 12 years ago and that i worry about today, there will be another 9/11 attack. and that the next time, it will be with weapons far deadlier than airplane tickets and box cutters. we have a situation in pakistan, where there are nuclear weapons, where that technology was supposedly sold to the north koreans. the same time the president announces the complete withdrawal from pakistan, right next door, that we're missing the boat. we don't understand the nature of the threat. we're not willing to deal with it. >> you have a broader critique

that you're making now of the president's foreign policy. you write president obama seems determined to leave office ensuring he has taken america down a notch. in this op ed, you suggest the president is a fool. that is the word you used. only a fool would take the approach he's taking in iraq right now. it almost seems like you're accusing the president of treason, that he's intentionally bringing america down a notch. >> my reference didn't refer just to iraq. it referred to the fact that we have left a big vacuum in the middle east by our withdrawal from iraq with no stay-behind agreement. by the commitment he made juts a couple of weeks ago, that we're going completely withdraw from afghanist afghanistan, with no stay-behind agreement. we create a vacuum. it's been filled by sisi from syria. by their attempt to take over

all of iraq. it's being filled by places like pakistan where the taliban have just launched major attack on the karachi airport. the scope of the problem is based upon, in part, an unwillingness by the president to recognize we have a problem. they're still living back in the day with they claim, we got bin laden. terrorism solved. that was not true then, it is not true today. the problem is bigger than it's ever been. we need to dramatically reverse course on our defense budget. we're decimating the defense budget. not al qaeda. we need to go back to a two-war strategy. not the one-war strategy he has in place. we have 40 brigades in the united states army. only four are combat ready. he's dramatically limited the capability of future presidents to deal with crises by virtue of the policies he's taking. i don't intend disrespect to the president. i disagree with him fundamentally. i think he's dead wrong. i think we're in for big trouble

in the years ahead because of his refusal to recognize reality and because of his emphasis on getting the u.s. basically to withdraw from that part of the world. >> on virtually everything you just mentioned, you seem to have a debate within your own party. rand paul, many see as the front-runner for the nomination. in 2016 for the republicans. given where he stands, could you support a republican nominee, rand paul, for president? >> i haven't picked a nominee yet. one of the things that is right at the top of my list is whether or not the individual we nominate believes in a strong america, believes in a situation where the united states is able to provide the leadership in the world basically to maintain the peace and to take on the al qaeda types, wherever they show up. rand paul, and by my standards, as i look at his philosophy, is basically an isolationist. that didn't work in the 1930s.

it sure as heck won't work in the aftermath of 9/11 when 19 guys with airline tickets and box cutters came all the way from afghanistan and killed,000 of our citizens. >> we're just about out of time. i want to ask you about something you told me in 2008. just after president-elect obama said he would make mcmchhillary clinton his secretary of state. >> i think it's a pretty good team. while i would not have hired senator clinton, i think she's tough. she's smart. she works very hard. and she may turn out to be just what -- president obama needs. >> so, my question, were you right or were you wrong? did hillary clinton turn out to be just what president obama needed? >> well, i was impressed with secretary clinton in terms of her potential going in. the problem was, she was working for a president that has a

fundamentally different philosophy. we believed, had a national consensus, the world works best when america is strong and is prepared to use that strength when necessary. she has not operated in that environment. i think she's been a disappointment with respect to things like benghazi and other problems that have arisen while she was secretary. >> vice president dick cheney, former vice president. joining us from jackson hole, wyoming, thank you very much. >> you bet, jon. good to talk to you. up next, much more from martha in iraq. and george's interview with sonia sotomayor. does she think affirmative action's days are numbered? and new outrage in the irs scandal. how could the agency lose months' worth of crucial e-mail? back in just two minutes. kid: hey dad, who was that man? dad: he's our broker. he helps look after all our money. kid: do you pay him? dad: of course. kid: how much? dad: i don't know exactly. kid: what if you're not happy? does he have to pay you back?

dad: nope. kid: why not? dad: it doesn't work that way. kid: why not? vo: are you asking enough questions about the way your wealth is managed? wealth management at charles schwab.

now our "closer look" at supreme court justice sonia sotomayor. she wrote about her remarkable life story in a best seller now out in paperback. just last week end, she caught our attention again, with a surprise run-in with hillary clinton at costco. what did she reveal about one of the hottest issues before the court? george sat down with her this week. >> the book is so personal. not what you would expect from a supreme court justice. you said you wrote it to hold on to the real sonia. >> yes. >> did you succeed on your own terms? >> i think so. i told my friends, if i get

too full of myself, i wrote a really thick book so you could hit me over the head with it. >> the hard cover one. >> the hard cover one, exactly. they promised me they will. my friends would have any way. >> she's been called the people's justice. one who throws out the first pitch at yankee stadium. hangs out on "the view." >> call me sonia. >> and just last weekend, shopping at costco. you run right into hillary clinton. >> it was not planned. i can assure you. >> promise? >> i promise. everyone is telling me, there were signs out front. i went through the side door, so there were no signs at the side door, hence, i didn't know. and a nice lady at the pharmacy counter recognized me and we started chatting. she says, are you here with the other lady. i said, what other lady? she mentioned madame secretary. that's how i found out. >> one more surprise on a remarkable and riveting journey. the girl who soared from the bronx projects to princeton.

a young prosecutor, federal judge. and then the first hispanic justice on the supreme court. >> congratulations. welcome to the court. >> every case, almost by definition that you end up taelg with is a matter of great national importance. >> absolutely. it's a horribly big question. we are not doing things that make everyone happy. for every winner, there's a loser in a court case. >> you said one of the first times you realized things break down is when people lose the ability to imagine the other person's side. >> i tried very hard not to lose that here. because you have to understand every justice is passionate about the same thing. we're passionate about the constitution. you see it in our opinions. and in moments where we're sort of sparring with each other. >> you think they're getting more sharp? >> that's what everybody is saying.

i think that is a little bit a product of style. some of my colleagues have a more pugnacious writing style than others. >> justice scalia? >> no, we have others, too. it can be fun sometimes to spar. >> fiery, too. especially on the hot button issue of affirmative action. when the court upheld the ban on racial preferences for college admissions, she spoke out. from the bench in dissent for the first time. just a couple of months earlier, you said you didn't think that was a very good practice. what changed? >> linda greenhouse. >> the supreme court reporter. >> she argued for the prose of speaking dissents from the bench. >> so what was the argument that convinced you? >> the argument was that it signals to the public in a way that nothing else can does that the question is different than what the majority hads thought.

and i realize that in this fast paced internet world, reporters are no longer reading about cases before they comment on them. >> for this justice, it is deeply personal. she knows affirmative action made a difference for her and believes it is still necessary today. there's been a lot of scholarly work now. that now say, you know what? it's not the best way to ensure diversity in schools. maybe if you focused on where people live and how much money they make, you can get the same results in a way that is less fractious. >> well, the problem with that answer is that it doesn't work. >> you don't believe it? >> it's not that i don't believe it. i don't think the statistics show it works. just doesn't. if you saw it from the proposition that advantage ennures to a background that is privileged, it does. we have legacy admissions.

if your parents or grandparents have been to that school, they're going to give you an advantage in getting into the school again. legacy admission is a wonderful thing because it means even if you're not as qualified as others, you're going to get that slight advantage. but what does qualifications mean in an academic setting? a place like princeton could fill their entire beginning freshman class with students who have scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics. they don't do it because it would not make for a diverse class on the metrics that they think are important. for success in life. >> i remember talking to president obama about this a few years back. he's a supporter of affirmative action. he conceded that for example, his daughters, shouldn't get special consideration for their race because they have had so many other privileges. >> i agree. but even privileged people will

show you dramatic accomplishment that doesn't go just to grades. >> you also write about some of the sexism you faced even as a prosecutor. any as a supreme court justice or does it go away? >> it hasn't happened in awhile where somebody called me honey. people did on the federal bench. >> on the federal bench? >> oh, yeah. and i'm sure that the marshal that called me honey thought it was a term of endearment. i'm sure he wouldn't find one or use it for a male judge. >> she's one of three female justices. we talked about the difference a woman judge makes, a woman justice makes. do you think a woman president would make a big difference? >> oh, probably at least in some little girl's perceptions of herself. and that is important enough. >> and you have seen that as a justice? >> i have. i can't tell you the letters i have gotten. from children.

talking about the impression that having me on the court has made on them. >> part of a legacy still being written. you write at the end of the book, there are many more stories to tell before i can begin to say definitively who i am as a judge. you've been a judge for more than 0 years. you can't say who you are? >> it's changing every day. my colleague, justice john paul stephens, who i adore and think the world of, talked openly about the many opinions he has issued that he would write differently today. i hope that i will be able to point to things that i got wrong and felt, over time, with experience and greater knowledge, that i was flexible enough to admit that i was wrong then. and that i have gotten a better opinion today. >> that is for later. i would love to come back and

talk to you about that. >> in 20 years you might. >> thank you very much. >> i hope i'm here 20 years from now. thank you, george. >> our thanks to george and justice sotomayor. see much more of their conversation on abc news.com. coming up, surprising revelations that could shake up the 2016 field. and the irs situation is heating up. see hi the top tax man came under fire. but first, the powerhouse "round table's" big winners of the week. back in two minutes. (mother vo) when i was pregnant...

i got more advice than i knew what to do with. what i needed was information i could trust on how to take care of me and my baby. luckily, unitedhealthcare has a simple program that helps moms stay on track with their doctors and get the right care and guidance-before and after the baby is born. simple is good right now. (anncr vo) innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

and now, jon's pick. jon's big winner of the week is john brooks. some in my party have distorted this belief of peace through strength into a

misguided belief that we should project strength through war. even when we have tried to make the world batter place, our actions have often backfired. >> rand paul, by my standards, as i look at his philosophy, is basically an isolationist. >> senator rand paul and former vice president dick cheney moments ago. the round table is here now. minnesota congressman keith ellison. congressman adam kinsinger. terry moran, and just back from iraq. and greta van susteren. >> i don't agree with rand on a lot of his foreign policy positions. a few years ago, he put out a budget proposal that cut our military in half. that is frightening to me as a military guy myself. i would consider myself a defense republican. >> but he's the front-runner for the nomination. >> i don't think he is. he represents an important part of our party. kind of the libertarian

viewpoint. there is a lot of different parts of our party. one of the things that has made us strong and is our defining issue is that we understand that a strong united states of america stops things like a russian incursion. stops things like global terrorism. fills a vacuum that would otherwise be filled by bad actors. >> what is your take on cheney? >> quite frankly, i mean, why don't we get the guy who wrecked the "exxon valdez" and ask him about running an oil tanker. there couldn't be a worse person to offer views on what to do next. and by the way, he didn't do that. there is one slight sliver where i think he had something going. and that is broadening this thing. but i think diplomatically we have to widen it. get the gulf countries, and i believe, iran, in some sort of a conversation on how to get their proxies pulled back. i think that is the key to this thing. if we go using military power

off the bat, there's a real -- >> are you okay with that the president's ordered now? the up to 300 special operators? >> i don't know what they're going to do. if i knew more about it, i might be for it. at this point, it's just weird. i just don't get it. my point is here's the real thing. without the diplomatic engagement, if you use military power, you run the risk of driving isis and the sunni population together. our goal should be to separate them. to isolate isis. to do that, you have to have the gulf countries understanding that the sunni population will be cut and they'll have a role. >> it's already happening. you were over there. they don't have much military support. they have support. >> they're wealthy and well organized jihadist extremists. after spending ten days in northern iraq, every day, the overwhelming feeling i got was

people have given up. given up on iraq. given up on each other. the army won't fight for the nation. the government won't govern for the nation. i had the feeling that the people don't believe in the nation anymore. they believe in their groups. >> the problem we have here is that, everyone admits, this is a huge mess. none of the leaders have told us what we're going to get. with the 300 advisers, what are we getting? are we starting a mission creep? when jfk was president, we had 12,000 advisers. five years later, 500,000 troops in vietnam. i don't think we have identified what we're going to get, what is our national interest in this. that has to be told to the american people. right now, we look like we're flailing. >> you asked me what kind of republican i was. let's talk about what to do in iraq. i was at this table in january when isis took over fallujah. i said, we need air strikes. this is going to grow. this is dead serious. everybody at the table chuckled because they thought that was just warmonger talk.

the reality is, what we're watching in iraq is the worst case scenario. i can't imagine much worse happening. i look at this and say, advisers and special ops will stiffen the spine of the iraqi military units. air strikes for isis units in the open, to button them down where they are now, and work the political solution. which we have to work. give them the opportunity to get that taken care of and begin to push out. i think isis targets in syria ought to be free rein targets, too. >> if you're right, you have to focus on in the political reality that you just mentioned. >> i agree. >> because the thing is, these folks have sponsors here. there are proxies fighting from the iranian regime. we have to make sure -- we have to get in there diplomatically to say, look, if you guys can get maliki out or tolerate him leaving, we can try to stabilize the country. you cut the sunnis in, you have

some stability. if you just start blasting in there, you exacerbate the civil war. you could be right. without a strong diplomatic effort to try to manage the regional part. >> terry, this is -- we've been trying to do this for years. >> we have. the political elite in baghdad has failed. the feeling throughout the country is those guys, not just maliki, those guys can't do it. if the united states launches air strikes or military operations without some very dramatic restructuring of the leadership of iraq, we will be the shiia air force. >> how do we do that? how do you do that? how do we change their leadership now? >> we tried. they have to realize that -- >> that's the point. >> they have started to signal that maliki is not the guy. there are a lot of people that are coming to the realization that there's got to be a change. you have to be more inclusive.

iraqis are saying this. we should support that effort. and have a more stable environment. >> why are we do this now? we're acting as if this is brand new? this started in january. >> you have to go with what you have. >> that's what vice president cheney said. we have this problem now. six months back. no matter what we should have done before, we have to deal with what we have now. coming up, the surprises that could shake up the 2016 field. first, our powerhouse puzzler. this week, justice sonia sotomayor does the honors. >> which president first nominated me to the federal bench? >> back in two minutes with your answer. bonus if you get the right year. . bonus if you get the right year. but the energy bp produces up here creates something else as well: jobs all over america. engineering and innovation jobs. advanced safety systems & technology. shipping and manufacturing. across the united states, bp supports more than a quarter million jobs. when we set up operation in one part of the country,

people in other parts go to work. that's not a coincidence. it's one more part of our commitment to america. and i know there are many myths out there about a reverse mortgage, so i want you to know the facts. there are currently no credit score or income requirements to qualify. you can get tax-free money from the equity in your home. you can use the money to pay off your current mortgage if you have one. the remaining money can be used for anything. there's no monthly mortgage payments. and you still own your home! call today to get your free guide and dvd. it explains how a government-insured reverse mortgage works. there's no obligation. one reverse mortgage is a quicken loans company. their licensed experts can answer all your questions. call to find out what a great solution this can be. don't wait, call now!

[ female announcer ] we love our smartphones. and now telcos using hp big data solutions are feeling the love, too. by offering things like on-the-spot data upgrades -- an idea that reduced overcharge complaints by 98%. no matter how fast your business needs to adapt, if hp big data solutions

can keep wireless customers smiling, imagine what they can do for yours. make it matter. which president first nominated justice sonia sotomayor to the bench? let's see the white boards. >> i would have gotten the one. here we go. >> clinton, '98. >> i said bush. i copied off terry. >> terry. first bush, 1991. >> i said bush, but i put my source is terry. >> here's the answer from justice sotomayor. >> george h.w. bush. in 1991. >> whoa! terry moran nails it. >> nailed all the way. this week, ghosts from the past came back to haunt some of the biggest potential 2016 candidates. here's abc's senior washington correspondent jeff zeleny. >> reporter: four 2016 hopefuls. four obstacles to overcome. for hillary clinton, an old

audio recording this week that went viral. from her time as a young arkansas lawyer. she defended a rape suspect. she explained how she helped him get a light sentence, even though it seemed she believed he was guilty. >> he took a lie detector test. i had him take a polygraph, which he passed. which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs. >> reporter: fresh fodder after the 12-year-old rape victim who is mow 52 criticized hillary clinton. hillary clinton took me through hell she told a newspaper. for wisconsin governor scott walker. a more recent case. documents unsealed this week show prosecutors were trying to prove he was at the center of an illegal fund-raising scheme at the heart of his 2012 election. he says the claims are politically motivated. >> the media jumps on this. you get a spin on this. some detractors trying to claim

there is more than there is. >> reporter: and for chris christie, bridge gate still seems to hang over everything. everyone at this gathering of conservatives friday. >> i'm called lots of different names. but indirect has never been one of them. >> reporter: then, governor rick perry. dogged by his own words. this time, comparing homosexuals to alcoholics. >> i may have the genetic coding that i'm inclined to be an alcoholic. but i have the desire not to do that. i look at the homosexual issue as the same way. >> reporter: he stopped short of an apology. but backpedalled this week. >> i readily admit i stepped right in it. >> reporter: for clinton, walker, christie, perry, and all potential candidates, how they contend with the ghosts from their past is a critical part of the road map for their future. >> thanks to jeff. now back with the "roundtable." greta, you interviewed hillary clinton. how has it gone?

>> first of all, the whole thing about the rape victim. i think some of the lousiest reporting i have ian in a listening time. scott walker in wisconsin, a republican. and hillary clinton, democrat. because what she wrote in this affidavit wasn't her feelings. she said she was told this. totally routine. like wise, scott walker. the headline says he's accused of a crime by a prosecute person that's what prosecutors do. they accuse you of a crime. if they thought he committed one, they would have charged him. you have lazy reporters who don't look at the court file for hillary clinton and lazy reporters who don't understand the system in wisconsin. >> hearing the tape and hearing hillary clinton laughing about how the guy was -- she believed the guy was guilty. >> no question that that will be politically damaging. for the people that don't like her already. we're such a polarized society right now. the person you like could have done something horrible, you're still going to like them.

there's not much in the middle. that said, she was clearly zealously defending her client. that is what she's ethically obligated to do as a lawyer. >> absolutely. the people who call themselves constitutional conservatives. the sixth amendment says you have the right to counsel and that counsel must fight for your interests. if you don't like that, take it up with thomas jefferson. there is a judge, a prosecutor, a jury. your job as a defense attorney is to go after it. >> she wasn't laughing at the victim. she was laughing at the polygraph. that is very different. that's why the reporting was so sloppy about her and scott walker, too. >> and polygraphs are a joke. >> we're going to have plenty of time to debate the 2016 election. she had a terrible rollout on the book. i'm hearing it's just dropped. and the sales. but i don't think something -- >> they're claiming they're doing fine. >> i don't think something she did when she was 27. at the end of the day, look, we've all changed. i'm only 36.

i was totally different at 27. i don't think this will be a big damaging thing. there will be a lot of things on both sides to run on and have a spirited debate. i want to turn to one of the other big stories this week. the irs. a very contentious hearing with the irs commissioner. about the missing e-mails. listen to paul ryan. >> i am sitting here listening to this testimony. i just -- i don't believe it. that's your problem. nobody believes you. you ask taxpayers to hang on to seven years of their personal tax information in case they're audited and you can't keep six months' worth of employee e-mails? >> it looks horrible for the irs. let me ask you the reverse. do you really think that somebody at the irs intentionally destroyed six months of e-mails to cover up something? do you believe it's a coverup that big? >> based on the time line, no. apparently the complaint was made before there was an investigation. however, i certainly think there

is -- i doan think it is a phony scandal like the president does. neither does secretary hillary clinton think it's phony. i think it's terrible that it's dragging out this long. and that the irs tells the committee in february that the e-mails will be produced, it takes two years, they don't exist. they know about it. i thing -- think there's a lot of smoke there. do i think someone deliberately did it ahead of time? i don't think anyone is that smart or clairvoyant. >> that's the implication by paul ryan here. >> right. there is zero trust across the partisan line. the idea that it is far fetched will not be accepted as a legitimate explanation by half of the country. it would be the same if the situation were reversed. >> i don't think this is just about a lack of trust. it is about a real issue. the irs, supposed to be the most independent organization, coming after tea party conservative groups, in essence, by their own admission, and then finding out,

oh, goodness, we lost these e-mails. maybe there was no scandal. but we have to get to the bottom of it. it's not a partisan issue ads much as it is a reality. >> there is no scandal here. this is about distraction. just like the whole benghazi thing. they don't want to talk about -- >> let me ask you. aren't you concerned about six months' worth of e-mails? >> there is an e-mail where she said my computer crashed. it doesn't time out right. this is about distraction. refusing to extend -- raise unemployment -- the minimum wage. >> i think you underestimate. >> we'll pick it up next week. thank you very much. now back to martha in baghdad. >> thanks, jon. coming up here, we all remember this dramatic scene from the war. so what does this plaza look like today? and what does it say about the crisis this country faces now? we'll show you in 60 seconds.

finally this morning. we're back in baghdad, where the situation is truly heartbreaking. knowing the sacrifice that americans made here and remembering the decision to invade this country in the first place. the military did not choose this war. that is always the decision made by civilians. but they took on the task they were given, losing nearly 4500 men and women on the way. hoping that someday, it would be worth it. it is perhaps this image that is most iconic to americans. that day shortly after the invasion when iraqis tore down that statue of saddam hussein. today, this sight is just a weed-covered traffic circle. known only for the numerous bombs planted nearby in recent months.

for me, it is the northern city of mosul that leaves some of the most powerful memories. walking through the market as u.s. troops gained control of the volatile city. in 2005, an historic election. long lines of voters risking death to cast ballots. iraqi forces celebrating. >> a good friend of mine. >> reporter: and the u.s. general in charge so proud of what the iraqi people accomplished. >> there are some great people. some very brave people. and the opportunity to see them stand tall on their own was very, very rewarding. it was certainly in my life the most important day that i have personally been involved in. and a proud day for all americans and certainly for all iraqis. >> reporter: today, it is impossibly dangerous to get anywhere near mosul. it quickly fell to isis militants after the security

forces, of whom general hamm was so proud, dropped their weapons and ran. and al anbar province, where the corpses of americans working for blackwater were hung from a bridge, where the risk of snipers was so fierce we had to run from building to building to stand a chance. and where americans waged a major assault to push out the militants. our goal is not the take the town or seize the town. our goal is to return the town of fallujah back to their people. >> reporter: they did at great cost. today, fallujah, too, has fallen to the jihadists. and then, there is baghdad. the city that, for so many years, the u.s. military feared would fall. a decade ago, general peter chiarelli was determined to make life better for the people here. better electricity. a riverside park.

>> three weeks ago, this was all rubble, garbage. and it's going to be beautiful when it's done. >> reporter: this is that park today. it is beautiful. a tiny oasis of hope for families amid so much that has been shattered. of course, there is no guarantee that baghdad will not fall. the people here are determined to hold the city, no matter what the cost. after this terrible week in iraq, we end with welcome news from afghanistan. no deaths of u.s. service members reported this week. that's all for us today. thanks for sharing part of your sunday with us. check out "world news" with david muir tonight. so long from baghdad.

♪ ♪ good morning, from