Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
You can almost sense the president.
Kind of -- framing this morning his argument for congress clearly he's speaking to that audience at home today.
As the house prepares to have hearings to listen to his argument.
For a strike in Syria let's listen to what he said this morning because a slightly different with regards to the Red Line.
I didn't set a -- The world -- a -- The world set a red line when.
Governments representing 98% of the world's population said.
The use of chemical weapons are bored.
And passed -- -- Forbidding her use even when countries are engaged in war.
alignment when it ratified -- -- And he continued to explain that answer this is what he said thirteen months ago.
At the White House.
Did it very clear to the outside -- regime but also to.
On the ground.
A red line for us is.
We start saying.
A whole bunch chemical weapons moving around or be -- -- that would change my calculus can't change my question.
General Michael Hayden the former CIA director former NSA director principle that -- groups are good morning to you morning -- we have a quick.
Opportunity here to get an answer from you described how he is explaining that state and now.
-- the computer's gonna cut us off we'll come back and talk about that more what did you think about what you just heard general.
-- I I think it was a surprising statement bill I'm nominated in the speaker I saw the press conference last August I think he did set a red line I eat.
Might have been able to say that he's not the only one who has had a red line but there's no question.
That you set a red line he made it personal and he actually committed the United States.
Almost explicitly to action should that red line be -- I'm gonna ask you what that means in a moment let's get a commercial break back in two minutes right after this general thank you.
Back -- general Michael Hayden sir thank you for being impatient hitter -- a commercial break Eric if if you believe that he did set that red line thirteen months ago.
-- was thirteen months ago or thirteen years ago the comments now does it change anything in the calculus as to whether or not congress gives him the authority.
To go after Damascus yes -- -- No I I don't I don't think so bill and I think it at the end of this debate.
Congress will authorize the president to take action and frankly if you ask my personal view I think that's the correct decision.
This is a server -- question from the big Syria question.
Which is what do you do about the other 90000 people who have been killed what do you do about instability.
In the heart of the Arab world.
But I think the president's correct that haven't set a red line the word of the president of the United States has to mean something.
We have to act on that we have to -- not just the Syrians that the Iranians that we draw such lines we're serious about them and that actions have consequences.
Are there were a lot of headlines -- -- right now on about I want to stay on the comments the president made about the evidence because I think it was about -- meant so much as he has said so far publicly.
Intercepts of the chain of command he believes they have.
Talk about public sourcing for the attacks that testing of serin gas.
He said that rockets went from areas that -- controlled in areas were rebels controlled.
Is that enough to convince those -- on the -- in congress.
Well it's enough for me bill I read director clapper the Director of National Intelligence Jim -- four page white paper.
That they pushed out last Friday.
It's a remarkable document.
It really leans forward and essentially.
Exposing some intelligence sources and methods and when you put the word in there that we intercepted communications.
People with my background begin to begin to hyperventilate.
This is a very powerful case -- and have people come out of these closed hearings today saying that the intelligence is inconclusive.
They're just trying to avoid the decision this is kind of a Jack Nicholson moment you know the truth you can't stand the truth.
The truth is he use these weapons and we have evidence that he -- That point he said are we gonna find a reason not to act now Vladimir Putin speaking at the same time.
And he he is suggesting that any accusations that aside did this are ludicrous.
He went on to say that congress does does not have the right -- to rule or an act of aggression.
How much of what -- says now matters on what we do.
Bill I'd -- I think we have the facts and and I'm sure in these closed sessions the members of congress will see the weight of evidence we have that this happened.
And that the Syrian government did it it it's a policy question now though it's not an intelligence question this.
Is a question that goes to chemical weapons.
It was -- moments ago and runs about a minute listen carefully here's.
The opposition doesn't have the capability.
To deliver weapons on the scale.
These weapons are in -- -- possession.
We have intercepts indicating.
People in the chain of command vote.
Before and after the attacks.
Would knowledge of these attacks.
We can show a bit.
The rockets the delivered these chemical weapons went from areas controlled by outside into these areas where the opposition.
And the accumulation of evidence.
Gives us high confidence that aside carried this out that phrase -- company.
As a way to use yesterday to before departed for Sweden is that what members of congress are being told he's classified briefings or are they being given more information.
And more evidence.
They're being given more information they'll what they'll get in -- classified -- -- who exactly was that Syrian official and what exactly did he say.
Before during and after the attacks.
It's just going to reinforce.
What's already been put out there in the public domain at the unclassified level general is terrific to have you on today thank you sir Michael -- and we will speak again we.
Filter by section