Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

White House on McChrystal Comments

Aired June 22, 2010 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY:-- economic team that has faced the greatest economic crisis that any president has faced since the Great Depression. It has taken -- it's an enormous it's an enormous task. Peter has been instrumental in -- for instance, this year's plan to freeze non-security discretionary spending for three years and has decided to leave before we get into the creation of the next budget. He's been here for two budgets, and we'll look for a replacement for him.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Can you talk at all about who his replacement might be, and will there be any other departures from the team?

GIBBS: I know of no other departures. Obviously, we're looking at a number of very talented candidates -- Jay.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Does the president consider the remarks in the story from General McChrystal and his aides insubordination?

GIBBS: I think the president is looking forward to speaking with General McChrystal about those remarks.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Can you characterize at all the president's reaction to hearing that aides of McChrystal called Vice President Biden, "Bite me," and a McChrystal adviser said Obama clearly didn't know anything about McChrystal when they first met, here's a guy who's going to run this F-ing war, he didn't seem very engaged, the boss was pretty disappointed?

GIBBS: He'll have his undivided attention tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Does the president dispute the characterization that he wasn't engaged in the first meeting with General McChrystal?

GIBBS: We look forward to -- the president looks forward to meeting with him tomorrow about what's in that article. We owe every member of this team, from the commanding general, to anybody that works in this building, to anybody that works in the State Department or throughout the Pentagon, we owe it to -- as I said earlier -- the men and women that are fighting there to implement the policy that each agreed to. Without a doubt, General McChrystal, as Secretary Gates has said, has made an enormous mistake -- a mistake that he'll get a chance to talk about and answer to tomorrow, to both officials in the Pentagon and to the commander-in-chief.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Does the president still have confidence that General McChrystal can run this war?

GIBBS: We should wait and see what the outcome of that meeting is.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Robert Gibbs --

GIBBS: Yes, ma'am.

MALVEAUX: -- why hasn't General McChrystal talked to the president yet? I mean, wouldn't the president be the first person that he would pick up the phone, he would call and apologize directly to? We know he's talked to Mullen and Gates and --

(CROSSTALK)

GIBBS: I don't know why -- I don't know. General McChrystal has not called the president. The president has not called General McChrystal. The president asked that General McChrystal come, and they'll get an opportunity to talk about this article face-to-face sometime tomorrow.

MALVEAUX: So does the president not want to hear from him right now? He wants to wait for the face-to-face meeting?

GIBBS: Well, I think right now, he's on a plane coming back here to have that face-to-face meeting.

MALVEAUX: And are the two of them going to be alone in addition to the Situation Room meeting?

GIBBS: I anticipate that, yes. I don't have a time yet for a meeting for that.

MALVEAUX: Does the president make a distinction -- Senator Carlisle makes a distinction in the comments. He says that the disagreement is not over policy, per se. But he says it's over personalities. That this is -- would have a negative impact on implementing the policy. Does the president make a distinction between the kind of criticism, personality conflicts that are taking place in the Pentagon, versus, OK, we are -- we're on the same page when it comes to policy?

GIBBS: Well, look, I will say this: I think the president believes, and I think most believe, that personality differences aside, we're here to implement a new strategy -- again, put together over the course of I think three months and 12 meetings in the Situation Room. And it's our job to implement that strategy.

That's -- the president doesn't believe that personalities, whatever your disagreements are, or whatever your disagreements were, should distract from the strategy to get Afghanistan right. The president talked throughout the campaign and throughout the time as we created this strategy in the Situation Room that this war effort in Afghanistan had for years been under-resourced. Now, there are on the order of four times the number of troops in Afghanistan, or will be, I should say, and coming into that country on a pace laid out in this new strategy.

It is incumbent upon anybody involved to put aside whatever those differences are. And this goes for any policy decision. If there's a disagreement in a room here at the White House, at the State Department, at the Pentagon, in a foreign capital throughout this world, it's incumbent upon those in the policy-making world to set aside those differences and implement the decisions that in this case the commander-in-chief has made in conjunction with both military and civilian officials.

Chip?

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is removing the general from his position at least an option the president is considering?

GIBBS: I -- again, I'm not going to prejudge the meeting. I think the president is anxious to talk to him, before he has anything else to say on that.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: But wouldn't the president know ahead of time whether or not that's an option he's considering?

GIBBS: I would say all options are on the table.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Including firing him?

GIBBS: I think all of the options are on table.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Last year, you'll recall, when there was a series of leaks in one of these meetings in the Situation Room were going on, and the president very clearly said that that was a firing offense. Isn't this worse than that? Wouldn't this be a firing offense, this kind of insubordination?

GIBBS: Again, I -- Chip, I think -- I think the magnitude of the -- and graveness of the mistake here are profound. And -- I mean, the president took everyone to task last year for, as you said, the leaks that were coming out of those meetings. He said there's a reason we don't have these meetings at Starbucks, that we have them in the Situation Room. And he takes -- he takes this seriously, because we have -- because he has made a life or death decision to put people in harm's way.

And we owe it those men and women -- some of whom were serving their third or fourth tour in Afghanistan or in Iraq -- we owe them our very best.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: If McChrystal were not so vital to the mission in Afghanistan, would this be an easy decision?

GIBBS: I will say, Chip, I think that -- I think our efforts in Afghanistan are bigger than one person. I think that there was a strategy that was -- that was borne out of discussions on both the military and the civilian side. We said this about Iraq, and it's true about Afghanistan. There is not a military solution alone to this problem, because -- and we've seen this in our efforts in Marjah. If you cannot hold an area, if you cannot create or if the type of governance structure cannot be created in order to secure that area, then you can't transfer it.

So, this is bigger than anybody on the military or the civilian side.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Were you with the president when he reacted in any way to this story? And if, how would -- how would you describe it? Was he surprised? Was he angry?

GIBBS: I was -- I gave him the article last night. And he was angry.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: How so?

GIBBS: Angry. You would know it if you saw it.

Yes, ma'am?

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Has McChrystal offered his resignation?

GIBBS: Not that I'm aware of. Again, he's not met with the president. So, I don't -- I don't -- not that I'm aware of.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Would the president accept McChrystal's resignation?

GIBBS: I think he looks forward to the talk tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Isn't pulling a general off a battlefield in the middle of a war tantamount to saying that he expects him to offer his resignation?

GIBBS: I didn't -- I'm not prejudging the outcome of tomorrow's discussion.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The purpose for calling him here.

GIBBS: The purpose for calling him here is to see what in the world he was thinking.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there a certain aspect to this serving as a shaming function? Certainly, he could elicit the information via video teleconference.

GIBBS: Well, this is -- this goes far beyond the president. Let's be clear about that. There are -- you know, the meeting tomorrow -- and I think we'll have the manifest for you in the guidance -- there are a lot of people that are involved, right? We've got a diplomatic corps that is sending civilians in to create the governance structure that I was speaking of. We've got, as I said, men and women at all levels of the military involved in this.

This is a -- these are discussions that have -- I assume, General McChrystal will have with more than just the commander-in- chief.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there any aspect to this that is about, frankly, humiliating McChrystal?

GIBBS: No, I think he spoke clearly to that in his statement that -- I think that was taken care of largely in the article.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: And last thing. What bothered the president most about what he read?

GIBBS: That we're distracting from what the president considers to be an enormously vital mission for our country and for our own forces. We're at an important time in -- in seeking to make progress in a country that we have been in for a number of years. We have dedicated, as I said, more men and women to this effort than have ever been dedicated before. And we've got a lot of work to do.

Our focus should be on that work. Our focus should be on implementing this policy, and on creating the security and the governance environment that allows our good men and women to come home -- Jonathan.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: As soon as the Walter Reed scandal broke in "The Washington Post," Secretary Gates fired the people involved. It didn't involve President Bush. When the live nuclear weapons were put on a -- accidentally put on a bomber at Barksdale Air Force Base, Secretary Gates fired the people involved.

Why would you want to have General McChrystal in this White House, and not have this handled by the secretary who has shown himself willing to make these tough decisions on his own?

GIBBS: Well, this is a decision -- this is a decision that will be made by the commander-in-chief. This is a -- as I said just a minute ago -- this is an enormously important effort, and we're in an enormously important time in that effort. I think the president believes that General McChrystal ought to have an opportunity to discuss with him that article.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: And one more thing on that. General McChrystal has already had his woodshed moment with the president. I mean, it happened last year after (INAUDIBLE). How many times can this man be taken to the woodshed by the commander-in-chief?

GIBBS: We'll know more about that tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Robert, you spoke a couple times about what's owed to the people who are serving over there. What should people put in harm's way make of their commander taking these kinds of shots at the commander-in-chief, and the comments made by his close aides about the vice president, about General Jones, about Ambassador Eikenberry and others?

GIBBS: Look, we -- I think anybody that reads that article understands, as Secretary Gates talked about, what an enormous mistake this was -- given the fact that mothers and fathers all over this country are sending their children halfway across the world to participate in this. They need to know that the structure -- the structure where they're sending their children is one that is capable and mature enough in prosecuting a war as important as Afghanistan is to our national security. I think that is one of the things that the president will look to discuss tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: What does this do to his credit -- to the general's credibility with his own rank-and-file troops?

GIBBS: I've -- I think that's a question better asked for -- to those in serving with him. Look, let's be clear. General McChrystal is a -- has fought bravely on behalf of this country for a long time. Nobody could or should take that away from him, and nobody will. But there has clearly been an enormous mistake in judgment to which he's going to have to answer to.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: One quick procedural question: When they have the meeting in the situation room, so many of the people there who are targets of this criticism will be around the table. Will each one of them have a chance to call him to task?

GIBBS: Well, look, I don't -- I -- you all may know more about calls that he has already made on this to different members that will be around that table or not. I -- again, I can't -- it's hard to speak about what the interaction would be like for that meeting since it hasn't happened.

(INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: You said that the -- they need to -- the parents of soldiers need to be sure that the command structure in Afghanistan is capable and mature enough. Did I hear you correctly?

GIBBS: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So you're questioning whether or not General McChrystal is capable and mature enough for this job he has.

GIBBS: And you have my quote right.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Robert, you said he was angry. But I was wondering, in the larger sense, was the president's anger more having to do with what the comments seemed to say about respect for the chain of command?

GIBBS: Roger, it would be hard to limit. I don't know that I could focus like a laser on particular aspects. I think you've probably read the article, too, and you could guess there are a number of points in which anger might be your reaction.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Does it matter to the president that General McChrystal has apologized and is it making these other calls to try to remedy the situation?

GIBBS: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: In what way? In what way will it effect the president's decision as to how --

GIBBS: Well, again --

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: -- this strategy can go forward, and whether or not McChrystal is still could be trusted in carry it forward?

GIBBS: Well, I think one of the questions of -- obviously, the president will get an opportunity to speak with other members on the team about the confidence and the structure that they have. And, again, Major, I just do not want to prejudge the president's conversation. That's not fair to the president and it's certainly not fair to General McChrystal.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: But the president has taken note of that, and will factor it into his consideration.

GIBBS: Absolutely.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Does it matter to the president that President Karzai today, through a spokesman, said that he would like to continue to work with General McChrystal in the theater, and that he's generally supportive of him as the operations in Kandahar will go forward?

GIBBS: I -- it is important that President Karzai has confidence in the entire team, and I think -- excuse me. Many people enjoy, at a number of different levels in that team, enjoy good relationships with President Karzai.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Just to follow up on Jake's question. So it would not be inaccurate for us to assume that from the president's perspective, General McChrystal's capability and maturity are now open to question?

GIBBS: Again, I'd -- I think there are open questions based on actions that were reported in that article that the president seeks to speak to General McChrystal about.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: One of the underlying themes in the article, separate from General McChrystal's more controversial comments, is the frustration that rank-and-file soldiers have the rules -- rules of engagement, and the frustration in dealing with the realities of trying to prosecute the counter-insurgency strategy on the ground on a day-to-day basis.

Separating McChrystal from that analysis and that theme in the article, how concerned is the president about that?

GIBBS: Well --

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: That rank and file soldiers find themselves -- if they're being accurately represented in this article -- trapped by limiting and constricting rules of engagement?

GIBBS: Well, look, I -- I've not spoken with either the president or the team on that aspect of the article. I would simply surmise that it is something that is -- has been and will be discussed in the past and in the future. I will say that we know that -- we know that civilian -- we know what civilian casualties do to the mission. We know what happens.

And you've seen both General McChrystal, you've seen Ambassador Eikenberry, you've seen others, you've seen the president speak about the anguish of -- of knowing that innocent civilians have been killed in -- in these battles. And, again, we know the effect that it has on -- on the population, in which -- which already believe -- which does not believe that the insurgency has their best interests in mind.

So, I will say that great care has been taken, and you saw it in Marjah. Great care is being taken in prosecuting a war that does not create amongst the general population sympathy towards those we're trying to defeat.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: In addition to feeling angry, is it fair to say the president at all feels betrayed since McChrystal is there because the president decided he would be there, and has largely backed McChrystal's recommendation for the counter-insurgency strategy itself?

GIBBS: Well, look, I would simply sum it up as I have before, in saying that over the course of many weeks, a strategy was defined -- refined and developed, and that each member of the team pledged to implement and agreed with that strategy. That's what we want anybody from the ambassador to the combatant commander to anybody else involved in this to focus on and focus on alone -- Mike.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: After the review last year, the -- one of the things you all stressed, and will talk about here again today, is unity and a purpose and consensus that you all had reached going forward. Given both the general's comments but also the sort of sense of dissension and disagreement that the article portrays between the various players, are you convinced that that kind of consensus still exists, and if not --

GIBBS: I can only take -- I can only take the word of those that sat in the Oval Office as the president went around, person to person --

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: But that was a lot of months ago. So, I mean --

GIBBS: Well, I understand, it just happened to be at a fairly pivotal moment, at the -- at the point in which the president lays out a decision for a strategy and ask those involved, do you agree with my decision, and do you pledge to implement it?

Look, I'm not speaking out of school to say there are disagreements in this building, probably every hour of every day, about what to do and when.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Tell us more about those.

GIBBS: I --

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Every hour --

(LAUGHTER)

GIBBS: But it is -- it's the president's job to make those decisions, and it's our job to implement them. Not to -- not to re- litigate them, but to move forward based on what the president has decided.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: But shouldn't there be -- you know, that was many months ago. You know, the times have changed. Is there a concern that that -- something needs to happen to make sure that the folks that are -- pursuing this are still on that same page?

GIBBS: I have -- the president gets, obviously, in the -- in his presidential daily briefing, in weekly memos from the combatant commanders, from the ambassadors, and weekly meetings with the secretary of state and the secretary of defense, and no one has walked into any of those meetings, and nobody has written in any memo that they disagree with the decision that they agreed with late last year.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: One last just quick question: at the briefing that he got with Karzai and senior officials --

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: OK. We've been listening into the daily White House briefing with Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. It has been largely, almost exclusively, focused on comments made by General Stanley McChrystal -- comments that are published in an article by "Rolling Stone" in which the general seemed to express some disdain or disagreement with administration, with civilian administration leaders, including the vice president of the United States.

I want to get to Barbara Starr and Gloria Borger and Roland Martin. Barbara Starr is, of course, at the Pentagon, Gloria in Washington and Roland in Chicago. They've been listening to this along with me.

We'll bring you up to speed with what it is that General Stanley McChrystal did, what kind of hot water he's in because of it, and what's going to happen as a result. Stay with us. We'll do that right after a break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: If you haven't been following the story but you were listening to the press conference we were just in, the White House daily press briefing, you'd wonder what has Robert Gibbs, the press secretary to the president, so worked up. He was really having trouble, even for Robert Gibbs, not -- or trying to hold back, as to how angry he and the administration seemed to be about the situation involving General Stanley McChrystal.

I want to bring in a few colleagues to discuss the implications of this. First of all, Barbara Starr, she's our Pentagon correspondent, at the Pentagon; Gloria Borger, our senior political analyst; Roland Martin is in Chicago, he's our political analyst as well.

Barbara, let's start with you. General Stanley McChrystal, by arrangement, gave a reporter, a journalist from the -- from "Rolling Stone," several months' worth of access. That reporter put a story together that has now been published -- and if not in fact, in tone, makes McChrystal seem remarkably critical of this administration and/or their strategy in Afghanistan.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: You know, that's the -- that's the problem here, Ali. You know, when you go through this "Rolling Stone" article, word-by-word, it's not all that inflammatory. But when you look at the overall picture, there are anonymous quotes from McChrystal aides that are quite disparaging, quite directly disparaging, of the president of the United States. That simply isn't done. And General McChrystal is responsible for commanding those aides, whether they allow their names to be used or not.

So, the problem right now is the article. It's not policy differences about the war. Everyone knows the war is not going so great right now. That's a problem. But this is about whether Stan McChrystal can continue to be the effective commander in the war in Afghanistan, whether the president can have trust and confidence in him.

Two things that Robert Gibbs said that jumped out: He called this whole situation by General McChrystal, quote, "an enormous mistake." And he also said, Ali, how to deal with it, all options are on the table. Gibbs is really struggling not to offer any hints.

VELSHI: Yes. It was interesting.

Let me just give our viewers some sense of what you just described, some of the tone that was in that article. There was a -- there was a quote there in the article that says, "The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office. McChrystal thought Obama looked uncomfortable and intimidated by the roomful of military brass."

More about this. McChrystal's first one-on-one with President Obama came months later.

Here's the quote from the article, this is quoting an adviser: "'It was a 10 -minute photo op,' says an adviser to McChrystal, 'Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's this guy who was going to run this expletive war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The boss was pretty disappointed." The boss meaning Stanley McChrystal at that point.

Gloria, let me bring you into this whole thing. When Robert Gibbs was asked about the president's reaction to the article, after he read it, he was very clear. He said he was angry.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, it's interesting, Ali, because this is a time when people are complaining that Barack Obama hasn't been angry enough about the Gulf. We don't get to see him angry. And what Gibbs said was, well, you're lucky you didn't get to see him when he read this piece. I mean, it's absolutely stunning, because these are the people who are closest to general McChrystal.

General McChrystal is the one who has already been taken to the wood shed, remember? He was criticizing Joe Biden and said that Joe Biden's proposals on Afghanistan would have us in chaos, and the president already had to chastise him once before on Air Force One.

So it's very clear to me, you don't have to be a rocket scientist here to read between the lines. When the question was asked, is McChrystal's job safe, there was no answer. When he was asked, is this a matter of insubordination, there was no answer. Has the president lost confidence in McChrystal? No answer.

It's very clear this president wants to confront him yet again, face-to-face, and that he is in real trouble. The question is, what do you do, as Barbara was saying, in the middle of a very difficult time, in a very difficult war? They're probably trying to figure out who right now can take that job.

VELSHI: Right. Let's -- Roland, listen to what McChrystal said. He apologized and said I extend my sincerest apologies for this profile it was a mistake reflecting poor judgment. It never should have happened. Throughout my career, I've lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What's reflected in this article falls far short of that standard.

And then, Roland he fired the civilian press aide who set this series of interviews up. What happens next?

ROLAND MARTIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well first of all, for you to fire the press aide, when you were running your mouth and your aides were running your mouth, I mean that's nonsense. He also called it poor judgment.

No, you are a commanding officer. And you are disrespecting the office of the president. President Barack Obama, vice president Joe Biden, as well as other officials around him.

Already, Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.. Has released a statement, demanding that McChrystal be fired, saying clearly he did not show any level of discipline or respect for the president. And so I just don't see how he survives this meeting tomorrow.

If you -- I mean, absolutely reading between the lines, listening to Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, it is clear they're not happy. But beyond his previous criticism of Vice President Joe Biden, remember, McChrystal also was campaigning publicly for his plan to be accepted by the president.

The president wasn't happy with that public campaigning. And so I just don't see how you can be the president of the United States, and have a level of trust with your general in the battlefield to execute your plan when he cannot cooperate or he trashes those around him. And remember, President George W. Bush made a change in leadership in Iraq. So it's not unprecedented.

VELSHI: All right we'll continue on with this discussion. Barbara, thanks very much. Gloria Borger and Roland martin. We will continue to follow the fallout, obviously from General Mchrystal he's on his way to Washington to meet with President Obama.

OK. Stay with us. We've got a great conversation coming up we're going to meet a woman who is working hard to make public schools better for your kids. We're going to talk about her own successes and hear solutions to the high drop-out rate. Hey listen, she's in high places what she says matters, stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. It's "Chalk Talk". I love this segment, because it's not always the top of news, but it is the top of the conversation at everybody's dinner table around this country. If you have kids in the public school system. So in today in "Chalk Talk", I want to introduce you to someone.

She was a star student in high school who went to her guidance counselor to discuss her future. She told her counselor she really wanted to go to UCLA. She was told absolutely not. She's not going to make it there. Fast forward, 30 years later, the same woman graduated from UCLA has a doctorate degree and is now one of the highest ranked public education officials in the United States of America.

Meet Dr. Thelma Melendez. De Santa Ana, she is the U.S. Assistant Secretary For Elementary and Secondary Education. Dr. Melendez Thank you for being with us.

As you know, this a topic very close to us here on this show, the ideas that are out there to help fix public education.

And I think we all have to admit, it remains something that needs to be fixed.

DR. THELMA MELENDEZ DE SANTA ANA, U.S. ASSISTANT SECRECTARY FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION: Yes, Ali, and it's a pleasure to be here with you today. Thank you.

VELSHI: My pleasure. Listen, let's talk a little bit about the challenge you face right now. Your job in this position that you're in. I mean, I can't imagine being more on the firing line. You have got to deal with something that most American families think is almost at a crisis.

ANA: Well, you know, it's -- I happen to work for a wonderful administration, and we're taking this head-on. We're looking at how we can improve public education for the American children. You know, starting with ensuring that students have higher standards, better assessments, and also looking for ways that we can invest in more effective leaders and teachers in the classrooms.

VELSHI: What would you say is working so far? I mean, you really have -- with race for the top and with different things that are being implemented in terms of standards, and in terms of testing, what would you say if you were to take a midterm look at this? What's working?

ANA: Well, you know, Race To The Top has done an incredible job of moving the reform effort across America without really -- with very little money. I think my boss, the secretary, has said that, and it's just amazing to watch.

I've gone through different states across the United States, and it just is amazing to see the reform and the focus on ensuring that all kids are successful.

VELSHI: We have a lot of teachers as friends of our show, and as friends to all of us, because they teach our kids. There are some teachers who think lost in this whole thing has been their role. There are a lot of teachers who complain to us that we seem to dump on the teachers, and the unions. Do you think that there is an unfair blame -- share of blame that's been going to teachers?

ANA: You know, I was a teacher. And I worked up until this ten months ago with teachers. And teachers are the most important person in the school system. And my boss, the secretary, recognizes that, the president recognizes it, and I recognize it. Because without the teacher, and what I call that magical moment, you know, that moment between the teacher and the student, when the student learns, we would be nowhere in this reform.

VELSHI: I know that moment well. I had a few of them when I was in school. Let's talk about that experience I referred to at the beginning. You were one of those people, and I bet there are lots of people like this in America, who have a dream, and somebody doesn't think that they should live out that dream. You wanted to go to UCLA, you had a guidance counselor who told you that's not a good idea.

ANA: Yes. And that's part of the -- I guess what is motivates me. It's part of my passion to ensure that all students have that opportunity to go to college. And you know, I was an English language learner. I'm the proud daughter of Mexican immigrants. And I was given the opportunity to do that. And so I almost didn't have that chance. So my work is really about ensuring that all kids have that opportunity.

VELSHI: And you mentioned that you were a child of Mexican immigrants. Hispanics in this country have a disproportionately high drop-out rate in school. How do we fix that? ANA: Well, part of our add -- part of the work of our administration is around improving low-performing schools. You know, 2,000 of our high schools, of our lowest-performing high schools generate 50 percent of our dropouts and 75 percent of our minority drop outs.

That's why this administration and our secretary is focused on turning armed those low-performing schools. And we're providing a lot of money and a lot of support to do some very difficult work.

VELSHI: All right. We hope you're going to come and talk to us again. Because this is something really important to us and to our viewers. Thank you for joining us today. Thelma Melendez. De Santa Ana is the Assistant Secretary For Elementary and Secondary Education in the government. Thanks for being with us.

ANA: Ali, thank you very much. It's been my pleasure.

VELSHI: Let me bring you up to speed with something that's going on right now.

There are wildfires racing through 10,000 acres in Arizona. Flames are being fanned by hot and dry, gusty winds. I'm going to check in with our man, Chad Myers, right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Okay, we've been following some remarkable wildfires out in Arizona near Flagstaff. Chad is on the case for us. Chad, it's been burning for about three days now.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: I know, 10,000 acres, multiply or divide that by 640, and you get this. The national forest, just in big trouble here. North of Flagstaff. The winds have been blowing from the southwest to the northeast.

And you can see there's a lot of air support. For a while yesterday, the air support was grounded because look at the thick smoke. But then kind of the winds blew some of the smoke away and they were able to get it. This is kind of conifer pine, this is juniper. You talk about the fuel. Did you ever take a dead Christmas tree and throw it away?

VELSHI: Right right, yes.

MYERS: That's what it looks like. It just goes up. Literally, explodes. And here are some ground pictures here, because there are some structures lost. But most of them -- most of the structures that were even in any danger at all were saved with this.

Firefighters, hot shots crew on the ground. Look at the size of that chain saw. That could cut down a big old redwood.

VELSHI: What I was looking at there was that wind. That flame was really blowing. MYERS: It was. We were talking yesterday, somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 30 miles per hour. Right now, the winds are down to 7. Gusting to 14.

That is good. 7 to 14 helps out a lot, because at 7, 10 miles per hour, sparks don't jump from one tree to the next. You don't want your firefighters fighting the forest fire here and all of a sudden the spark goes over their head and now they have two fires and they can't get out.

VELSHI: And they're trapped.

Myers: So that's why it's such a big deal to when you're going to get a ground fire going and a ground battle, you have to have the winds die off.

VELSHI: OK. A lot of property evacuated, a couple monuments evacuated.

MYERS: Sure.

VELSHI: No rain forecast?

MYERS: No rain in the forecast, but the winds are going to die down. Hot, relatively hot. 85 degrees there. It's high in the mountains, too. OK. So think about fighting a fire, carrying what was like a 35-inch bar on that steel chain saw, and you're at 10,000 feet.

VELSHI: yes.

MYERS: Which we talk about, 4,000 feet in the World Cup and all the players are out of breath. Think about these guys trying to be at 10,000 feet fighting a fire. Yes, it's not easy work.

VELSHI: All right, you'll stay on top of it for us.

MYERS: Absolutely, you need some water. I'll get you some water.

VELSHI: Thank you. You know I've got a little water here. You're taking good care of me.

MYERS: I'm back.

(CROSSTALK)

VELSHI: All right listen. Big story we have been covering, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, he is doing some crucial strategizing right now on a plane back to Washington, getting ready for an unpleasant meeting with his furious boss, who happens to be the president of the United States. That meeting is drawing closer by the minute we'll; tell you about it. And I'll bring you top stories right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELSHI: Here's a very interesting piece of breaking news. A U.S. district court judge in New Orleans has struck down the moratorium on offshore drilling that was imposed by President Obama after the Deepwater Horizon explosion, which caused the leak that you are looking at right now.

A judge has blocked the drilling ban. In other words, said that companies can continue to drill. Let me tell you what I've got here in front of me. A federal judge in New Orleans has blocked a six- month federal moratorium on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Several dozen plaintiffs had sued the Obama administration, arguing the ban would create long-term economic harm to their businesses.

They brought suit. President Obama, as you know, brought that moratorium after the April 20th explosion. It dealt with the digging in waters greater than -- deeper than 500 feet. That's what that qualified as deep-water digging. And that brought drilling off the Gulf of Mexico, in large part, many of these rigs to a stop.

A number of the companies involved in that have said it has created financial hardship for them and their workers and the communities around there. There are a number of people in those communities affected by the oil spill who want drilling to continue.

And is now a U.S. district court judge has struck down the moratorium. We're working on getting more reaction to that, and letting you know what the implications are of that, but you can bet there are some people starting up their engines right now to getting back to drilling for oil off the Gulf of Mexico.

All right, this is not a good piece of news for some of those animals that are still getting oil on them. But there is a bright spot in the despair of the Gulf spill. Birds have been rescued from the spill, and is they are being set free. We're going to show you exclusive video when we get back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. An up close, tender view of the tough situation in the Gulf of Mexico. The oil spill has created a struggle for survival for wildlife.

CNN's Rob Marciano got a firsthand look at a pelican rescue. Birds that were soaked in oil and in danger of dying were cleaned up. Then he accompanied the birds on a flight from the Gulf Coast to Texas, and he took part in their release. Look at this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROB MARCIANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): It's an exciting day, isn't it, Dr. Mulcahey?

DR. DAN MULCAHEY, WILDLIFE VETERINARIAN: Yes. This is going to be the largest release to date of pelicans, that have been taken in as a result of oiling from the oil spill, and we're going to release up to 40. MARCIANO (voice-over): Wildlife vet Dan Mulcahey leads a carefully selected team that gets these birds from rescue centers back into the wild.

MULCAHEY: It is all about the animals. And that's our goal.

MARCIANO: These animals spent the last few weeks being nursed back to health. Now, they're on a Coast Guard plane getting a second chance.

(on camera): I'm pretty excited about this flight. Here we go. Let's take these pelicans home.

(voice-over): We climb over the Louisiana wetlands en route to similar habitat in Texas, far away from the spill.

(on camera): We just got airborne and there is a sense of relief among the crew that everything went relatively smoothly getting these birds on board. But they know there is some urgency. They have to get these birds back on the ground and back in the water just as quickly as possible.

(voice-over): It's a pretty tight squeeze inside the plane, but the passengers seem remarkably calm.

We land in Rockport, Texas, where another team is anxiously waiting.

(on camera): So now the delicate -- expeditious process of unloading these birds. Twenty kennels need to come out and be unloaded into these vans and they'll be transported about 45 minutes away into a wildlife refuge that has a whole lot of other pelicans.

(voice-over): The bird-carrying caravan rolls toward the coast, in the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, the release point. The rest happens quickly. We carried the kennels to the water, raised the roof and release the pelicans.

How about that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are they troopers (ph) or what?

MARCIANO: These are wild animals and can be dangerous. So they've been reluctant to let me participate until now.

(on camera): We can do this, baby. This is exciting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ready?

MARCIANO: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).

MARCIANO: Go to the bottom. Lift off the top.

Fly, pelican. (voice-over): Stubborn bird, giving me the stare down.

(on camera): These guys don't want to go.

(INAUDIBLE)

MARCIANO: Come on, guys. You got it. I know you don't want to leave, but come on, guys.

(voice-over): Finally, these two take flight.

(on camera): That was the last one. That's just an incredible feeling.

Look at them. That's awesome.

Rob Marciano, CNN, Aransas National Wildlife Refuge.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VELSHI: Kind of how we all feel around Rob. Nobody really wants to leave the guy.

All right. From the wave of celebration sweeping the country, you'd think South Africa had just won the World Cup. We're going to go live to Johannesburg to get the real story. It's a little bit different. And we're going to show you a fan fest in Soweto.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Let's go back to South Africa where the World Cup, a huge fan fest in Soweto, just outside of Johannesburg where the Soccer City stadium is. Fans celebrated wildly, even though their team, South Africa, was knocked out. This is an example of World Cup fever and pride over hosting the games. South Africa, as you know, is the first African country to host the World Cup.

CNNi anchor and reporter, Isha Sesay joins us live from Johannesburg as she does most days, explaining this seeming contradiction. They have lost, and they are happy.

ISHA SESAY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, it's the end of the road for South Africa Bufana Bufana (ph), but Ali, the reason everyone is so proud is because the boys played the game of their lives against France. This side was playing for pride while the France side, well, were just trying to salvage something of their reputation after all the infighting they've had over recent days. And Bufana Bufana really took the fight to France. The final score in this match, 2-1.

We were at that fan fest in Soweto, and we looked around at the crowds as they danced and they cheered. They blew their vuvuzelas. And we were looking for the faces of disappointment and despair, but there just wasn't any of that because the South Africans really feel absolutely proud that in this, their final match in the World Cup, the boys did them proud, Ali. And really, the comments that we heard echoed the comments of the coach who said, "I'm proud of the boys. They made this country proud. They proved that they've made progress."

So, Ali, they didn't get a victory, but you know, they feel that the night belongs to them.

VELSHI: Remarkable story, though. I mean, they're the first host country not to make it out of the first round. But -