Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
White House Press Briefing; Wake-Up Call for Parents With Sick Children
Aired November 30, 2009 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: We are pushing forward with the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM with that lady, Kyra Phillips.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Tony, thank you so much.
HARRIS: You rock.
PHILLIPS: Hope you had a great holiday.
HARRIS: I did. I know you did as well.
PHILLIPS: He got plenty of rest.
We are pushing forward, talking about goals, time frame, draw down. President Obama pushing forward on his Afghanistan plan.
And from new boots on the ground to corruption in Kabul to critics on Capitol Hill, we are covering every angle right now in the CNN NEWSROOM.
A veteran's new fight. He's cooking up a super sized lawsuit after a restaurant refuses to let his service dog in. And that's just the beginning.
Plus, tricked and then trapped. Forced to work for free in a strange country. Human trafficking is the fastest growing crime in the world and it's happening right here in the USA. We've got lots of bases to cover today and we're going to push forward on the war in just a minute.
But, first, a developing story out of the Pacific northwest where a manhunt is under way right now for a pardoned convict. He's suspected of gunning down four police officers yesterday and today he's proving to be elusive as well as brazen. CNN Patrick Oppmann live in Seattle. Patrick, police thought they had their man and then he pulled a Houdini.
PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN ALL-PLATFORM JOURNALIST: They closed the net Kyra and there was nothing in it. Police were shocked and frankly, very frustrated after spending about 12 hours locking down this neighborhood, bringing in SWAT resources, having hostage negotiators out in the early hours of the morning trying to get in touch with Maurice Clemmons, the suspect in this case, a suspect believed to have gunned down four officers yesterday in Lakewood.
They came up with nothing. They believe though that he was in this neighborhood last night. They got a very credible tip. They say there was evidence that he was outside of a home just down the street from where I am now. When they actually got into that home, they sent in a robot not taking any risks, not wanting to lose any more officers to the suspect. They found out that he apparently had fled.
PHILLIPS: All right, thank you. I'm not sure if you can still hear me, but obviously a number of questions right now while police are wondering how could...
OPPMANN: I can hear you, Kyra. Sorry about that.
PHILLIPS: That's OK. We just got a little bit of a bad connection. So hang with me here. I've got two quick questions for you. First of all, a lot of outrage about the fact that this man was even pardoned. Huckabee getting a lot of criticism with regard to that now. What can you tell us about this side of the story?
OPPMANN: Well, he was granted clemency. Apparently, we're learning the fact that he had gone to prison and received his lengthy prison sentence when he was 17 years old (INAUDIBLE) for clemency but since being released from jail had more run-ins in Arkansas and actually had run-ins in Washington state. Kyra, if this gentleman committed this crime and if he's still a suspect, he has not been charged but he was out on bail for, of all things, a sex crime involving a child, for of all things assaulting an officer.
He just was granted bail, $150,000 bail last week. There is a certain amount of outrage of what was he doing on the streets and as well, he allegedly told people, the night before the shooting that he was going to go out and talk (ph) to officers and they didn't think to tell anybody. They and a number of other people may have helped the suspect and they are in a lot of trouble with police right now.
PHILLIPS: And we'll continue to follow the hunt obviously for this man Patrick and talk to you within the next two hours. Also I'm told that we did get a statement from Mike Huckabee. We'll bring that to you, our viewers as soon as that is ready.
Meanwhile, the top military commander knows, the ambassador knows, the secretary of State knows, tomorrow night the world will know how President Obama will push forward the eight-year old Afghan war and basically make it his. The White House pretty much guaranteed to get questions ahead of the president's speech. Our senior White House correspondent Ed Henry in the briefing room right now and it was definitely a late night of high octane meetings, wasn't it Ed?
ED HENRY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right Kyra, very unexpected on a Sunday evening, unannounced meetings, the president had here in the oval office last night, 5:00 p.m., gives you an idea of the urgency of the situation. He brought in his chief of staff, Rahm Emmanuel as well as General Petraeus, Defense Secretary Gates, his national security advisor General Jim Jones and others to spell out exactly what the strategy in Afghanistan is going to be and to formally issue the orders to start implementing it so they can start getting new troops into place.
Secondly, at about 6:00 p.m. Eastern time last night, we're told the president has secure video conference with General McChrystal, of course, his commander on the ground in Afghanistan who will be implementing this and then all day today, the president has been working the phones, also had a face-to-face meeting with a key ally, Australian Prime Minister Rudd (ph) working the phones as well, talking to leaders of France, Great Britain, Russia.
We're told by White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, he's not spelling out all of the details of the strategy to these world leaders before he actually speaks to the American people Tuesday night from West Point. But giving these allies a broad outline of where he's headed and why that's key is that we're hearing from senior officials the president likely to announce sending about 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.
Of course General McChrystal wanted 40,000 so to make up that gap, he's going to need to get more combat troops from allies like Great Britain, which is suggesting it will send some, clearing reaching out to NATO as well to try to get other countries to step up.
The big question of course though, when I interviewed the president a couple weeks ago in China, he was talking about an end game, how he wanted to tell the American people about how there be an end game to this war, that it's not just a bottomless pit and the key is going to be trying to explain that to the American people at a time when he's escalating this war for a second time in one year and especially at a time when it's not clear that the Afghan government is growing quick enough to actually be able to take over an end game and actually have this handed off to them, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: Well and not only an end game Ed, I think that most Americans want to see an end to both wars in Afghanistan and Iraq but also there's the issue of how the president is going to pay for this, a lot of controversy, a lot of stress among Americans right now, especially this bad economy about a possible war tax, about how the president's going to pay for this.
HENRY: Well certainly and we're $14 trillion in debt right now, so that is hanging over this entire debate, not just on Afghanistan, but on health care, on whether to pump more money into the economy, specifically on Afghanistan, that question of a war tax has been raised and was raised again yesterday on CNN "State of the Union" by a Democrat, Congressman David Obey. He's a very powerful chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and it shows the skepticism that's out there among Democrats on how to pay for it and whether or not it's a wise strategy to even send more troops.
This president much more likely to get support from Republicans on the Hill for this new strategy than some of his fellow Democrats and that is going to be one of many important questions. How do you pay for it? Congressman Obey talking about a war surtax of some kind, taxing the rich to help pay for this thing, that there has not been enough shared sacrifice. But it's unclear, this White House hasn't taken a position on it yet and a lot of people on Capitol Hill very skeptical that they can get a tax like that through right now, Kyra.
PHILLIPS: You let us know when that briefing begins, when Afghanistan becomes a part of that conversation and we'll go back to you live, Ed thanks so much.
So say you send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Where do you put them all? They have got to be fed. They have to have beds. You basically have the population of a small city coming on pretty short notice. CNN's Fred Pleitgen actually shows us what it takes to actually prepare for this.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tens and thousands more American soldiers in Afghanistan leads to a basic question. Where will they stay? Tech Sergeant Nicholas Caldwell is building a new road at Camp Wolverine in the south. He says the Navy and Air Force engineers are working over time to expand the base.
TECH. SGT. NICHOLAS CALDWELL, U.S. AIR FORCE: We're working hard and doing as much as we can. It would be nice if we could get some help.
PLEITGEN: The base commander staff said they've been told to prepare for an increase to currently 1,800 soldiers to about 5,000. Navy Lieutenant John Critch is in charge of construction, new roads, a new air field, more housing units and a tight schedule.
LT. JOHN R. CRITCH, U.S. NAVY: Twenty soldiers is one toilet, so many soldiers to a shower. There's nowhere, we are still doing a lot of that right now just to get ready to bring in the mass of troops.
PLEITGEN: The workload is huge and subcontractors don't always perform. Lieutenant Critch says this Afghan contractor he caught on camera showed up with a few men and some wheelbarrows and only managed to lay a tenth of the agreed upon concrete and even that needed to be torn up because the quality was poor. Setbacks the military doesn't need anywhere in Afghanistan. Bases like this one in Kandahar are already overcrowded and many soldiers wonder aloud where to put the new arrivals.
CRITCH: The force of nature can be brutal.
PLEITGEN: Much of Camp Wolverine looks like this. They call this moon dust and the engineers are trying to clean it up.
CRITCH: We'll put concrete in there and then we'll backfill this whole area and then we'll come across the top of it with rock.
PLEITGEN: Right now we're standing at the perimeter of the base and some expansion is going to happen in this direction, but most of it is going to be right over here. As you can see right now, not much of the space is occupied but only a couple of months from now, this will be full of tents, containers and all sorts of other living quarters for the many soldiers that will be coming in here. And that means more work for these men who have to make sure there is space for every new soldier on the battlefield.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PLEITGEN: Kyra and Camp Wolverine where I'm at right now here in Dabu (ph) province really is a case in point for a large part of southern Afghanistan. The engineers here say that in just a few months, they have to make this place three times the size it is right now so certainly a daunting task they have ahead of them, but also really you can see what's to come here in Afghanistan as the troops here await that decision by the president. I can tell you, it is something that everybody here is talking about Kyra.
PHILLIPS: And we'll all know the answer tomorrow, Fred Pleitgen, thanks so much.
Telling your family good-bye before you head to war is hard enough one time, but seven times? Yep. Staff Sergeant Gary Hartman of Buffalo had yet another farewell party over the weekend. He's shipping out to Afghanistan this month, his seventh tour of duty overseas.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STAFF SGT. GARY HARTMAN, U.S. AIR FORCE: You just got to focus on the task at hand. Obviously it stinks a little bit that it's reality time and you're going to be away from family but I enjoy serving. If I didn't enjoy serving, you know, I wouldn't be doing what I'm doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Hartman expects to spend about six months in Afghanistan.
We're pushing forward on the next stage of the Afghan war in the next hour. We want to know what kind of partner the Afghan government is going to be. It would be nice. President Karzai is part of that solution, not a part of the problem. And as we all wait to hear just how many more troops will be headed to Afghanistan, central command's leader, General David Petraeus actually spent Thanksgiving with the troops.
One of his stops -- well, the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Nimitz. Naval aviators had a special message for their war commander as Petraeus strapped into the black aces F-18, a handwritten message on the canopy awaited him. General Petraeus, things to do before lunch: 12-mile run, 500 pushups and win a war too. After he landed, the general said life comes at you fast. I think we all can agree with that.
Let's take you live now as we are waiting to hear more about that manhunt that's underway for a pardoned convicted. We are listening to the city manager there in Lakewood. Let's listen to it live.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are very, very proud of the police officers, the men and women who make up this department and let there be no mistake, let there be no mistake about our resolve, we are very proud of these officers and proud of their leader. Chief Bret Farrar, Chief?
Thank you Mr. Mayor. First I'd like to start off by -- there's no way that I can name every agency, Federal state and local that has come to the aide of our department at this time of need and I want them all to know that I am getting their messages and their help is greatly appreciated. If I was to name them individually, we'd be here until about 3:30. So we will forego that. I hope they know that I am thinking about them as they think about us.
CHIEF BRET FARRAR, LAKEWOOD, WASHINGTON POLICE: We're a young department, put this department together in 2004 and the four we lost yesterday were four original members of the department. They were good people. They were great officers and we will all miss them very much.
One of the questions that I get throughout the day yesterday is, how is everybody doing? This is how everybody's doing. They are here. They are doing their jobs. They are working hard. They are dealing with their loss, but they are here for the citizens. We are here to carry on. This is what we do and this is where we are good.
In the face of adversity is where we triumph and we will triumph in this instance. Every one of these men and women behind me as the city manager said, through this strategy, the resolve and the dedication to the citizens of Lakewood and to each other has never been stronger. We will get through this. However, it is a very, very tough time for us and the families of our fallen officers In that respect, I had the opportunity to meet with the families yesterday and it's the hardest thing I've ever done and I hope I never have to do it again. Please respect their privacy. They are going through a very tough time right now. We are doing everything we can to assist them through this.
I would also like to extend the thanks and appreciation to the Pierce County sheriff's department specifically who is the lead on this investigation. They've worked tirelessly throughout the night and there's no doubt in my mind that this person will be brought to justice. I believe I've said that all that I can really say at this point, but again I want you to look at my family. They are strong. They are good people. They are hurting but they are working through it. And we will be there to do our job for the citizens of Lakewood. Thank you so much for coming and thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I know there may be some interest in speaking with a representative from the Lakewood police independent guild, which is the police union. If there is such an interest, the president of the union will make himself available regarding the donation fund that has been set up for the families. So if you would like to speak with him, let me know. Is that a yes? OK. Give me a few minutes and we'll be back out.
PHILLIPS: In the developing story that we continue to follow out of the Pacific northwest right now, you actually just saw a pretty emotional news conference there with the police chief of Lakewood, Washington, Bret Farrar.
Right now as he reiterated, they're thinking of the lives lost, but at the same time, a manhunt under way right now at this hour for a pardoned convict. He's suspected of taking four of his own, four of the police officers there in Lakewood, Washington. This is the man. Police need your help in finding right now, Maurice Clemmons, the pardoned convict accused of gunning down four police officers. As the hunt continues right now this hour, we of course stay on the story. At the same time, we remember four of those officers that lost their lives.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Dubai's debt crisis still in debt, still very much a crisis. Here's a look at the good, the bad and everything else right now. Forget about Dubai's government standing 100 percent behind Dubai's main investment arm, Dubai World. That's the word today from the top government financial chief. Stocks there in Dubai have plunged more than 7 percent today, the first day of trading since Dubai World asked to freeze repayments on its $60 billion debt for six months.
In a bid to prevent Dubai from defaulting, the United Arab Emirates says it will lend money to local and foreign banks in Dubai. That's the new stock market here in the U.S. and in Europe and Asia we're waiting for. All have managed to tweak out some gains as fears of a possible default in Dubai have eased somewhat. Now again I say somewhat. You've still got a big financial mess on our hands. Let's go and get straight to the region. Our Jim Boulden joins us from CNN's Abu Dhabi bureau. Jim, what more can you tell us?
JIM BOULDEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think this announcement that came today through the Dubai government was a bit of a surprise. We thought we might hear an announcement to put a lid on this that might actually solve some of the problem that maybe money from here, the oil-rich emirate of Abu Dhabi might go to Dubai as loan. But instead, the Dubai government went on TV and said, hey, it's not our debt. It's not government debt. We're not responsible for the debt. It's those people who loaned us the money and the investors who got involved in the very specific part of the Dubai government's fund. It's their responsibility. Let's hear some of that today from Dubai television.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABOULRAHMAN AL SALEH, DIR. GENERAL, DUBAI DEPT. OF FINANCE: The government is a shareholder of the Dubai World, but the company was set up that it will be on a commission basis and not guaranteed by the Dubai government (ph). Considering the diversity of the business it is doing, the risk of war, so it was decided from inception, at the time of establishing that it's a commission entity, not guaranteed by the government. So lenders and contractors that have been dealing with Dubai World on that basis, that they consider the viability of the business, the projects of the world and they provide (INAUDIBLE) on that basis, not on the basis of government guarantee.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOULDEN: So now what we might get Kyra is some asset sales. Let me tell you some of the things that Dubai World owns. They own the Barneys department store. They own half of the MGM Mirage, which is apparently opening tomorrow in Las Vegas.
They could sell that. They have 20 percent of Cirque de Soleil. They have the Queen Elizabeth ocean liner. So we might see some asset sales here, some pretty good deals for somebody out there who wants to buy some of these big assets if Dubai decides that's the way to go to try to pay off some of its debt.
PHILLIPS: We'll definitely be following that, that's for sure. Jim Boulden joining us there live from Abu Dhabi, appreciate it and of course, Wall Street has its eye on Dubai right now. Alison Kosik joins me from New York at the stock exchange. How worried are investors and tell us more about why they are so concerned and the connection that they have, Allison.
ALISON KOSIK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, I got to tell you, Wall Street not seeing much fallout from Dubai today and here is why. We already watched Wall Street react. On Friday, the Dow tumbled more than 100 points because investors did not know how much exposure U.S. banks had to Dubai World's debt and since then, investors have learned that the U.S. doesn't have much exposure there. So things have calmed down considerably. Also, the United Arab Emirates boosted confidence when it made extra funding available to banks there. So now what's happening is that there's more certainty so investors are feeling a little bit better about the situation.
So instead, investors are turning their focus to shopping, very encouraged by decent holiday shopping numbers. National Retail Federation is saying that 195 million people shopped just over the past weekend. That's 20 million more than last year. We saw the parking lots were full, even traffic at Mall of America was the highest in 17 years. We are still getting a few negative signs, people maybe out there shopping, but they're not spending as much.
Investors are getting a little bit nervous about the momentum of watching retail shares fall today. Shares of Macy's and JCPenney's are done 4 percent. I mean Kyra, the fact is, people are sticking to their lists. They're not wavering from those necessities and they're sticking to their budgets. But we've still got several weeks to go of that holiday shopping. Despite what many people think, black Friday, cyber Monday, they are not always an accurate gauge as to how the entire holiday shopping season is going to go. The busiest shopping days are ahead of us because, if you're like me, we're all a bunch of procrastinators, right, Kyra?
PHILLIPS: That is true, but then again, now is the time to get the deal. You mentioned today is cyber Monday. What do you think? Could we even see if that's going well thus far?
KOSIK: You know, it is going well. Listen to this, by mid- morning, I'm talking about 11:15 Eastern time, there's one tracking firm that said that more than 270 retail websites were getting more than four million visitors a minute. So I think it's doing pretty well right now Kyra. Most e-tailers are offering great deals, like one-day sales, free shipping, free gift cards with a purchase and analysts are saying that these retailers really need to work hard to keep people shopping through Christmas. So these kinds of deals are going to continue. How do you like that, four million a minute?
PHILLIPS: That's a lot of cash, my friend. Alison, thank you. All right. Other top stories right now, spending the next few weeks with 100 of your closest friends? Well next hour, the Senate takes up the health rare reform as Majority Leader Harry Reid tries cobbling the needed votes together. He's facing an apparently divided Democratic party.
President Obama has made his decision, the new plan for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, his inner circle getting word of it today. The rest of us find out tomorrow night by the way in the presidential address and our special coverage with the best political team on television begins 7:00 p.m. Eastern. That's tomorrow night right here on CNN.
And wedding bells for 29-year-old Chelsea Clinton. That's right. Little Chelsea is all grown up. CNN has learned that the former first daughter is engaged to marry her longtime boyfriend, investor banker Mark Nazinsky (ph) and that will happen next summer.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Taking you live to the White House briefing now, hoping to hear more about the plans for Afghanistan. Tomorrow night, the big address on behalf of the president, let's go ahead and listen in to Robert Gibbs.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: ... CEOs and small business owners and financial experts about ideas for continuing to grow the economy and put Americans back to work. I don't know when that starts yet but we can figure that out.
On Thursday evening, Mrs. Obama will join the president at the National Park Service and the National Park Foundation's annual national Christmas tree lighting ceremony held on the Ellipse at 5p.m. Eastern.
And on Friday -- we'll have more details on this later - the president will visit Allentown, Pennsylvania -- visit as part of a commitment to visit communities across the country over the nextseveral months, where he will speak with workers and share ideas for continued economic recovery.
Before we get going, a couple of quick things.
In the gaggle, I mentioned that the congressional readout and consultations would be at 4:45 tomorrow. That's now been changed to 4p.m. tomorrow. Let me add that before the president spoke this morning with President Sarkozy of France, he spoke with Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen. The president and the prime minister consulted on the upcoming Copenhagen climate change conference and the president's participation on December 9th.
The president expressed his appreciation for Denmark's leadership in this process. The president also updated the prime minister on his review of our strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and thanked himfor his country's significant contribution to the effort in Afghanistan.
The United States and Denmark are close allies and partners together around the world to promote freedom, security and prosperity.
We talked a little bit this morning about additional calls that the president will make between this afternoon and the time of the speech. I anticipate that those will include President Karzai, President Zardari, Chancellor Merkel, Prime Minister Tusk of Poland, President Hu of China and Prime Minister Singh of India.
And, obviously, many administration officials, including the vice president, General Jones, the secretary of defense, the secretary of state, chairman of the Joint Chiefs and others, will make consultation calls to our allies over the course of the next many hours before -- before the speech.
QUESTION: This is in addition to Medvedev and Brown and all that?
GIBBS: Yes, those I have just listed are a least in addition to. There could be more others.
QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) today?
GIBBS: Huh?
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Most of them, quite frankly, are likely scheduled for tomorrow.
Yes, sir?
QUESTION: We've heard a lot about the benchmarks and what the president is looking for in Afghanistan. But we haven't really talked a lot in detail about Pakistan.
What -- what's the president hoping to address with Pakistan tomorrow night? And what does he want to get in exchange?
GIBBS: Well, I think you can anticipate that a good portion of the president's speech tomorrow will discuss our relationship with Pakistan and touch on, going back to the very beginning of this administration, in a renewed engagement diplomatically with the Pakistanis, as I said this morning, to jointly address violent extremism. And I think -- I think our relationship is stronger and our efforts are stronger in dealing with that as a result of that engagement and diplomacy. The president will build on that and talk about the importance of them in the region tomorrow night.
QUESTION: Are you going to talk about benchmarks with Pakistan tomorrow night?
GIBBS: I'll let the president make a little news tomorrow. But I anticipate that the president will be pretty clear about how we're moving forward with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
QUESTION: And how much has he talked with his -- with the officials in Pakistan ahead of tomorrow's speech?
GIBBS: President Zardari is on the list and will be called either -- there is some scheduling flex, whether it's later today or first thing tomorrow. We'll have some clarity on that (INAUDIBLE).
QUESTION: But -- but in coming up with what he's going to say, how much (INAUDIBLE)?
GIBBS: Well, look, I think -- I don't remember the last time, or don't have it in front of me, the last time the president spoke directly with -- with President Zardari. But I know that many of the-- the national security team -- Secretary of State Clinton visited not too long ago, and others have made trips to Pakistan and throughout the region to strengthen our diplomatic ties.
QUESTION: How specific, tomorrow, will the president be about an exit strategy? And how specific will he be about costs?
GIBBS: Well, I think the president will reiterate tomorrow what I've said a number of times, which is that this is not an open-ended-- this is not an open-ended commitment; that we are there to partner with the Afghans, to train the Afghan national security forces, the army and the police, so that they can provide security for their country and wage a battle against an unpopular insurgency in that country.
That's, I would say, first and foremost, our primary mission.
QUESTION: You said last week, I think Wednesday, in the gaggle, that we wouldn't be there eight or nine years. Would the president spell that out as a timetable tomorrow for when troops will leave?
GIBBS: I've, again, found a good job security policy is not to get too far ahead of -- of where the president is.
I think you can be assured that the president will talk about the fact that this is not an open-ended commitment.
QUESTION: Can you follow up on the cost question as well?
Will he talk about -- I mean, you've given us figures before as to what it costs per soldier. Will he talk about how it will be paid for? Does he have a position on war tax? Is that something he'll discuss?
GIBBS: I have not heard extensive discussion of that here. I know the president will touch on costs. I don't expect to get overly detailed in the speech tomorrow.
QUESTION: When more troops are sent into a country, inevitably it results in more casualties, when the military presence and fighting is increased.
Is the president going to -- is that going to be part of the president's message tomorrow, to prepare the American people for the fact that, while an exit strategy exists, the next year or two is going to be perhaps bloodier than even the last six months?
GIBBS: Well, I -- and we've discussed this before.
I think the amount of sacrifice that we've seen from the men and women that we have there already is something that I know the president is assured by each and every day.
I think -- you know, he signs letters of condolence. He meets with the families of those that have been killed. Obviously, the trip to Dover is something that I doubt you ever truly forget.
I think the president will reiterate the importance of why we're there, but also, by all means, very early on, acknowledge the tremendous cost and sacrifice to our men and women in uniform.
I don't think there's any doubt that we are all in awe of - of the commitment from our military and our civilian side in order to get this right.
QUESTION: And just in terms of defining our terms, where does making sure that we have a stable Afghan partner and -- and nation- building begin? What's the line?
Is it just -- is it just a question of our responsibility, U.S. responsibility being training Afghan troops? It's just -- that's the safe and secure part, the safe and stable partner part?
QUESTION: Because we've heard a lot about what the U.S. intends to do, and I know you don't want to get ahead of the president's speech, but just in terms -- if you could define the terms a little for us.
GIBBS: Well, I -- I guess I would more ask you to -- I don't -- I'm unclear as to what continuum you're putting. Are you asking me to-- to put them on a certain...
QUESTION: Well, the president has said about the new strategy that it's important that we have a secure, stable ally in the Afghan...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Right. Well, and a partner that is -- and a partner that understands, as the president directly told President Karzai in a telephone call in the Oval Office, that it is time to turn -- it's time for a new chapter in our relationship as it relates to corruption and improved governance in order to address the security situation not just through training and security force needs, but also -- look, it's hard for a civilian -- it's hard for civilians to go in and improve areas -- it's impossible -- that aren't secure.
So I would say this is all part of what has to be a partnership. And I think anybody would tell you that -- that -- and I've said this, and I think, quite frankly, you've seen this from Democrats and Republicans in Congress -- without partners that are willing to do stuff in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, no number of American troops can solve all of those problems unless or until those steps are taken inside both of those countries where we see a change in the security situation.
QUESTION: So a "stable partner" means a partner that is willing to have its own troops step up.
GIBBS: Well...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: It doesn't mean a thriving democracy. It doesn't mean a great economy. It doesn't mean schools -- schools for girls.
GIBBS: Well look, I think first -- first and foremost - first and foremost, we have to have a partner that can identify, recruit, retain a security force and a police force that are able to take improved security -- an improved security environment and eventually hold that area. Once that area is cleared, that area then has to beheld.
Ultimately, the strategy will be to transfer the security responsibility of an area to the Afghans. That -- that is a big part of what you'll hear the president talk about tomorrow.
QUESTION: But that's what we want from the Afghan government.
GIBBS: That's -- I would say that's a big part of it, yes.
QUESTION: Thanks, Robert.
Going back to the war tax, you said the president's not likely to get into much detail on how to pay for it tomorrow night. Why not? When we're $14 trillion in debt, why don't the American people deserve some explanation?
GIBBS: I -- I don't -- I don't think you heard me say that they didn't deserve an explanation. Obviously, there's a...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Why won't he get into it? GIBBS: Well, I -- I -- I -- he will certainly touch on the cost. This is neither the beginning of this debate, nor will this be the end of it.
I think you'll hear the president acknowledge the resource requirements and the responsibilities and the tradeoffs that are going to have to be discussed both here and, more importantly, on Capitol Hill, as they control the purse strings.
QUESTION: So how will he have those offsets? Will he with a new tax or will it be spending cuts?
GIBBS: Well, again, I think those discussions -- once the president has a policy and can put a price tag on it, I think you'll see those more in earnest.
QUESTION: Let me ask about another subject, the state dinner last week with India.
The White House has asked the Secret Service to investigate the incident, what went wrong. As part of that review, will they just be reviewing what the Secret Service did? Will they also take a look at White House staff, the social secretary's office, and see whether they made mistakes as well?
GIBBS: I -- I -- I will check with -- with folks here. I -- I-- my understanding is that the Secret Service will look at what the Secret Service did.
QUESTION: But do you think the White House staff should be looked at as well?
There are -- there are guests who came to this event who say that at previous dinners there was somebody from the social secretary's office who was checking names. That's not really the responsibility of the Secret Service, is it?
GIBBS: No, but understand that the individuals that are listed weren't on any list. I think the Secret Service, through the director, has admitted that somebody who wasn't on a list and wasn't waved in was allowed into an event that clearly, he said, shouldn't be, and that no call or reach-out ever came to anybody in terms of staff from the Secret Service about whether or not there was confusion on a name on a list.
QUESTION: At previous dinners, there was somebody from the White House staff there checking names. So if they had been there and these people were not on the list, they might have caught that.
GIBBS: But again, the -- I assume, in absence of somebody being there, because there are working telephones in the White House, somebody would have checked; that that -- again, I think the focus of the investigation, at this point, is on the fact that none - that name wasn't on a list, that name wasn't waved in, but that -- that --that couple got into the White House.
And I think that's what the Secret Service is rightly focused on in their security investigation.
QUESTION: A follow-up, please, on that?
Normally, in the past, before this administration had come, there was always a checks-and-balances type of system at that gate with the Social Office, as well as the Secret Service.
GIBBS: I think that's what Ed just asked.
QUESTION: And that's what I'm saying. And you're saying...
GIBBS: OK. Is this a follow-up or you were -- go ahead. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt.
QUESTION: Again, there's always been a series of checks and balances. And if there was a concern from the Secret Service, they would always relay it back to -- it was a back-and-forth between the Social Office and the Secret Service.
GIBBS: What I'm saying -- what I said to Ed was...
QUESTION: Let me finish, please.
GIBBS: No, no, let me -- I think -- I think the question was asked, so let me just reiterate my answer.
Again, none of that relay happened, right?
None of that -- none of that relay happened between the Secret Service and the Social Office, whether or not the Social Office was standing at the gate or whether or not somebody was sitting in their office at the White House.
QUESTION: If you would allow me to finish, I could -- you could understand what I was saying.
The relay did not happen because that person was omitted at the gate from the Social Office. The way we understand, that person...
GIBBS: Omitted?
QUESTION: The person was fired earlier in the year.
GIBBS: But again -- but again, the...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: You can ask it seven ways. The answer continues to be, the relay didn't happen because somebody was or wasn't there.
QUESTION: But do you...
GIBBS: The relay didn't happen because nobody picked up the phone to relay the information.
I mean, I appreciate the observation that somebody could or could not have been at a certain gate. But again, you could pick up the phone, just like I can pick up my phone in the office and relay you. You don't have to be standing in my office for me to convey information to you.
GIBBS: I think the...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: ... are you saying that the Social Office -- that does not have...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: There's an investigation that's ongoing into the actions of what happened, and I'm going to wait for that to be completed.
QUESTION: The reason why we are questioning the Social Office and the Secret Service, because in the past, both have worked in conjunction and successfully were able to protect the president of the United States without anyone coming in.
And now, because the Social Office did not have that other layer of checks and balances in it...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: ... this happened. And people are questioning why this White House is not putting the onus -- some -- on the Social Office as well.
GIBBS: I'm going to let the investigation put the onus on where the onus should be.
But what I'm simply doing is explaining to you a series of facts that include the notion that, if somebody was confused about whether or not somebody was on a list at a guard tower on the exterior perimeter of the White House and there was a question, generally, somebody could pick up the phone and ask.
I'm saying that -- I'm saying that the Secret Service, in a statement that they released a few days ago, acknowledged that that didn't happen and that that was a mistake.
QUESTION: Will processes be changed at that gate from now on? Will the Social Office be working in conjunction with the Secret Service now?
GIBBS: I think, first and foremost, we're going to go through this investigation. And I would refer you to the Secret Service about operations that might change at that gate.
QUESTION: And the last question: People were saying that the president was never in danger and many people have said that is not true. They got in, and...
GIBBS: Who's many people? QUESTION: People here. Secret Service.
These people met with the president. They shook the president's hand. Who's to say they did have some kind of -- I mean, granted, they didn't, but hypothetically, what if a person could walk in and could have done something to the president?
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: I appreciate the opportunity to indulge in a grand hypothetical.
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Look, I think the president shares the concern that the director has for how this happened and how we can remedy it from happening again.
QUESTION: Are you concerned about his safety with this?
GIBBS: No.
QUESTION: Have you heard him say anything? Is he angry or is he as incredulous as the average American is that people could just walk right into the White House like this?
GIBBS: I think the president -- look, the reason there's an investigation is the president and the White House has asked for that to happen. So I think suffice to say the president is rightly concerned about what happened last week.
QUESTION: Have you actually heard him say anything...
GIBBS: I have not heard him, but it's been relayed to me.
QUESTION: Can you confirm whether or not charges will be filed against this couple?
GIBBS: I -- that is not a power bestowed on me as the press secretary.
I know they've -- according to media reports, they've been interviewed by the Secret Service. I think that's a decision that would be made by the Secret Service and the United States attorney in that area.
QUESTION: Robert, just to follow on April's question...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Well, April's question was a follow on Ed's...
QUESTION: Right. A triple follow up.
GIBBS: OK. QUESTION: The Social Office knows that list inside and out. Presumably if someone from the Social Office had been at the gate, they would have overheard the couple...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Can you refer to the following answer that I gave to April...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: No...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: ... and the follow up answer -- I understand, but...
QUESTION: They would have overheard the couple announce themselves and would have -- and it wouldn't have required a phone call. It wouldn't have -- they would have flagged it right away. Would it not have...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: If the couple wouldn't have come, it wouldn't have required a phone call.
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: I mean -- I understand. And -- and, generally, when people have questions, Cheryl (ph), when you have a question, April, when you have question, I don't have to be there in person to answer your question, despite the fact that you may announce your question.
Generally, you can pick up the telephone and reach me right therein my office...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: ... a procedure that somebody could do sitting at an exterior perimeter gate in the White House, just as they could sitting in the Briefing Room or in one of those offices.
QUESTION: All I'm saying is obviously the Secret Service didn't have questions, they didn't relay a call, but a second layer of...
GIBBS: Leaving aside the fact that that didn't happen, how did...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Yes, I think that's...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Are you concerned that -- is the White House going to do what's necessary to make sure the Secret Service is not scapegoated here and that there could be responsibility for this at the White House?
GIBBS: Of course. That's why there's an investigation.
QUESTION: But you seem to be steering the blame towards the Secret Service.
GIBBS: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Understand, I'm simply reiterating for the three questions that I got on the same subject what the U.S. Secret Service put out on this last week.
I have walked with and been next to the Secret Service for the two and a half years, virtually every single day, that the president has had the valuable and brave protection of the United States Secret Service. Nobody -- nobody is more thankful for that than the president, as well as the country.
The president has faith in the Secret Service, always has, and that's not about to change.
QUESTION: Could I change the subject for a second?
GIBBS: We'll go to Chuck and maybe somebody will...
QUESTION: Let me start with Afghanistan.
This is what -- in the March 27th speech, some of this -- some of the things he said in the March 27th speech sound like what you're previewing now. He said, "On benchmarks for Afghanistan, we cannot turn a blind eye to the corruption that causes Afghans to lose faith in their own leaders. We will seek a new compact with the Afghan government that cracks down on corrupt behavior, sets clear benchmarks, clear metrics for international assistance."
He said, "Going forward, we will not blindly stay the course," and said, "we will set clear metrics to measure progress and hold ourselves accountable for that."
How much -- how much is that March 27th speech going to end up being very applicable to what we hear tomorrow?
GIBBS: Well, look, we were asked in the lead-up to a security forces decision in March about whether there would be benchmarks. That answer then was yes and the answer now is yes. Obviously, as it relates to...
QUESTION: Are the benchmarks changing essentially? Or did we not finish setting the benchmarks?
GIBBS: Well, I don't think -- no, no, we finished setting the benchmarks, but again we're -- we're -- again, not to get ahead of what the president announces, but I think there will be some new wrinkles to -- to what we're doing. QUESTION: There have been benchmarks this whole time?
GIBBS: Yes, as reported to Congress. Absolutely.
In terms of the corruption, the governance, obviously, when you mentioned...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) election, I understand that.
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Right. And obviously...
QUESTION: Same government, though.
GIBBS: Well, somewhat up in the air as of the middle of August, right.
QUESTION: So -- but, I guess the thing is how -- what -- what is going to be different about what he says than from what he said on March 27th? Is it just, like you said, new wrinkles to -- to some of this stuff?
GIBBS: Well, I'm -- I'm going to let the president outline what the mission is going forward and discuss in depth the benchmarks that will go along with it.
QUESTION: And can you get into the -- I mean, is the president going to try to simultaneously assure folks that we're going to withdraw troops in a timely fashion and let allies know we're therefor the long haul? I mean, is -- how do you straddle...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: Well, I don't think...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: I mean, is that a balance he's going to try to strike?
GIBBS: Well, I think nobody should underestimate the commitment of a president that has thus far doubled the number of American men and women on the ground in Afghanistan. I don't -- I don't think anybody could look themselves in a mirror with a straight face and say that this president hasn't in any way been anything but resolved to doing what has to happen in Afghanistan to make this country safe.
QUESTION: Really quickly, does the president think there should be charges filed against these folks, to set an example?
GIBBS: You know, I -- I...
QUESTION: Does he want them to...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: ... some sort of punishment?
GIBBS: I have not talked to the president on that.
Again, the -- the White House would leave that up to relevant law enforcement to determine...
QUESTION: But is he...
GIBBS: ... whether a law -- well, again, I mentioned to...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: ... used as a reality TV show?
GIBBS: I -- I think the concern goes greatly beyond the "Real Housewives of D.C.," but yes.
QUESTION: Can you talk...
GIBBS: I love that we've spanned the gamut from -- we've gone from Afghanistan -- now I've just said "The Real Housewives of D.C."
QUESTION: You said it.
GIBBS: I know. It's a commentary on my life.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Security was breached. That's the kind of thing...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: On the benchmarks issue, you talk about benchmarks for success when talking about, you know, training of Afghan security forces, stability, corruption in the government. But are there also benchmarks for failure, I mean, and consequences for not reaching those benchmarks?
GIBBS: Well, I don't know the...
QUESTION: In other words, will U.S. forces be withdrawn if these-- if these benchmarks can't be meet -- met?
GIBBS: Again, I'm going to let the president outline the benchmarks.
I think what the president believes is we are -- we will besetting forward a mission that he believes can be attained.
I think part of that is we have to look at -- again, the president will look at what that mission is and make sure that what we're doing is setting out a mission and a series of resources that are -- that are attainable.
As I mentioned to Chuck a minute ago, there are now twice as many forces there than were there just a year ago.
GIBBS: I think what the president has to do clearly with the American people is let them know that we now have what's needed thereto accomplish what that mission is, rather than somehow assuming that we could do that with half of what is there now.
QUESTION: And one quick housekeeping question.
The reporters who are going up to West Point tomorrow with the press -- with the president -- not with the president, but with the press charter, will have a whole lot of time up there.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Are there going to be briefings up there, or anything available...
(CROSSTALK)
GIBBS: I will -- I -- I think we will do a briefing by phone that will allow...
PHILLIPS: All right. How many more troops are going to go to Afghanistan? What will the exit strategy be, what will the costs be? All those questions being asked to Robert Gibbs right now in the White House press (INAUIBLE).
We want to remind you, tomorrow night, live here on CNN, that decision on Afghanistan. We will finally hear from the president of the United States. He'll make an address, special coverage, 7:00 Eastern tomorrow night right here on CNN.
Also now we're getting word -- this actually happened a few days ago, actually back on Wednesday, but apparently there were some sailors on a racing yacht headed from Bahrain to Dubai. There are allegations that they may have strayed into Iranian waters. We're getting word the Iranian navy has detained them, has seized their yacht, detained them and right now, they're trying to negotiate a release. We'll follow up on that story as well. Our International Desk working that for us.
And you trust your doctor's advice to keep your child healthy. But what happens if your instincts tell you something else? One mom trusted her gut, and it saved her daughter's life.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: All right. Parents, this is your wake-up call. A teen almost dies from the swine flu after doctors tell her mom not once but twice to let her recover at home. But it's what her mom did right that actually saved her life. Here's our senior medical correspondent, Elizabeth Cohen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Jessica Samples was captain of her high school swim team, a perfectly healthy 15-year-old girl until H1N1.
(on camera): So, on September 27th, Jessica has been feeling sick but nor horrifically sick.
ANDREA SAMPLES, DAUGHTER BECAME VERY SICK WITH H1N1: No.
COHEN: And so you took her to the urgent care center.
A. SAMPLES: Yes.
COHEN: And what did they tell you?
A. SAMPLES: She was to rest for two days, 48 hours, stay out of school for 48 hours, drink plenty of fluids.
COHEN: So, the next day, September 28th...
A. SAMPLES: She had a really bad cough. And I just wanted to be safe than sorry.
COHEN: So, you brought her for the second time to go and see doctors in less than 24 hours.
A. SAMPLES: Yes.
COHEN (voice-over): Once again, doctors sent Jessica home.
(on camera): September 29th, this is now day three.
A. SAMPLES: Day three.
COHEN: She's already been to the urgent care center. She's been to the hospital.
A. SAMPLES: Yes.
COHEN: You took her in a third time.
A. SAMPLES: She said her hands and feet were numb, and I knew something was wrong. I didn't know what, but I knew something was wrong.
COHEN: How would you describe the speed of it?
A. SAMPLES: In zero to 60 in 10 seconds. That's how fast it went down.
COHEN (voice-over): After being told twice to go home, this is how Jessica spent the next two weeks: fighting for her life in the intensive care unit at Cook Children's Medical Center in Fort Worth, Texas. The virus had gone to her heart. Her heart couldn't function on its own.
Dr. Linda Thompson was one of the first doctors to treat Jessica.
(on camera): It sounds like when she got here, her heart was barely beating.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The heart was trying to beat but it just wasn't being filled with blood.
COHEN: This machine did the work that her heart and lungs couldn't do any more.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right. Correct.
COHEN (voice-over): Three times, Jessica almost died. But in the end, it was maternal instinct that saved her life.
(on camera): So, if Jessica's mother had waited another 12 hours, another 24 hours before bringing her back in, would Jessica have survived?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't think we would have pulled her through.
A. SAMPLES: My first prayer when she first woke up was, "Thank you, God, for giving me a second chance with her," something that a few days before I didn't think I was going to have.
COHEN: Your mom really saved you?
JESSICA SAMPLES, HIN1 PATIENT: Yes.
COHEN: That's pretty amazing.
A. SAMPLES: She asked like, "Mom, did I almost die?" She didn't even comprehend how sick she's been.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
