Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Gates Recommend New CENTCOM Commander

Aired July 08, 2010 - 14:00   ET

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

POPPY HARLOW, CNNMONEY.COM: Of course, he fixed it. He's the iPhone doctor. And, you know, Don, he said the worst ones are the phones that people drop in the toilet and then they bring it to them. He says he fixes them most of the time, but he has a pair of rubber gloves around for that one.

It's amazing. It's all word of mouth. No money spent on advertising and customers are even sending him their iPhones as all the way from Greece. Can you believe it?

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: All right. How many phones, how much business does this guy do? Could this guy retire soon? Is he going to be a gazillionaire?

HARLOW: I kept pushing him to tell how much money he was making. He wouldn't disclose. He got a lot of competition out there.

I mean, by 5:00, he fixed seven iPhones and he walked out of his apartment. There was a line of people, Don, waiting down the hall coming after work. So, I mean, you got to believe $70, $75 a pop. This kid is doing pretty well -- a year after he was bar tending to make a living.

LEMON: If you build a bridge, as they say, they will come. Thank you, Poppy Harlow. Appreciate it.

HARLOW: You got it.

LEMON: All right, everyone. It is top of the hour.

Pushing the war on terror to a whole new level -- new suspects arrested are charged in just the last few days. And all of them allegedly had their sights set on the U.S. and beyond.

Schoolchildren in Mexico get more than fire, tornado and hurricane drills these days. Ducking and covering from drug gangs is part of the curriculum now. It is my "XYZ."

And want to know where LeBron James might be going? Want to know why he's making such a big deal with this worldwide news conference tonight? Stick around. We have got some answers for you.

We're going to start right now with this -- we're talking about the terror suspects, the ones who were arrested in Norway. The feds charged an alleged al Qaeda operative with helping to mastermind the New York subway plot. And another terror suspect arrested in Britain. All examples of what authority say is al Qaeda's global reach really and continued determination to kill Americans and their allies.

And here's what we know right now. Three suspects were arrested today, two in Norway, one in Germany, one of them in Norwegian Uighur, origin is a Muslim ethnic group in China -- a Uighur, from an ethnic group in China. The others are an Iraqi and an Uzbek, both permanent residents in Norway. All have lived there for many years now.

Authorities say all of those arrested are linked Najibullah Zazi. Remember him? They call him the leader of the aborted, attempted, the plot to set off a bomb in New York, the subway system there. Zazi has pleaded guilty and cooperated with prosecutors. He is awaiting sentencing. This plot allegedly was planned by al Qaeda.

U.S. officials yesterday charged al Qaeda operative Adnan El Shukrijumah and four others in an alleged al Qaeda plot to stage attacks in the U.K. and the U.S. He is a Saudi American and he has lived in New York and Florida before fleeing the United States after 9/11. He is now believed to be in Pakistan.

Other recent plots allegedly by al Qaeda: The attempt on the by Nigerian Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow a Detroit-bound jetliner on Christmas Day. And U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan, who allegedly killed 13 people last November at Fort Hood, Texas; Accused Time Square car bomber, Faisal Shahzad, who allegedly sought training from Pakistani Taliban. And then there's David Hedley, the Pakistani-American who pleaded guilty to helping to plan the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, in 2008.

A lot of names to read there and a lot that's going on.

We have some breaking news to tell you about right now. We're going to go to Secretary Gates. He's at the Pentagon.

General James Mattis, who serves as a commander of the U.S. Joint Forces, he is just recommended him for the joint forces in Iraq. He served at NATO, as supreme allied commander, transformation there. Also, he commanded the first Marine Expeditionary Force.

Again, this is who he is recommending for Iraq. That is the gentleman right there.

Breaking news: Secretary Gates is just announcing that moments ago. He is going to be the new commander in Iraq.

Now, take a look at the information that we have about him. He served as a commander of the U.S. Marine Forces in Central Command. He graduated from Central Washington State University. That was back in 1972.

And again, all this information I want to tell you is just coming in here. This was just announced. I'm getting some of it in my ear.

He's also a graduate of the Amphibious Warfare School, a Marine Corps command and staff college in the National War College.

This breaking news, again, is just coming in. We want to listen in to Secretary Gates. He's going to give us more information about this breaking story.

ROBERT GATES, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: -- department engagement with the news media. For starters, when I took this job more than 3 1/2 years ago, I spent my first few months on the job telling military audiences that the press was not the enemy and that to treat it as such was counterproductive and self-defeating. Accordingly, in my approach to media relations, I have attempted to be as straightforward and cooperative as possible, and encourage this department's leaders to do the same. None of that has changed.

In short, last week's memo was not about how the media does its job, but about how this department's leadership does ours. It is not a change of policy, but a reaffirmation of an existing policy that was being followed selectively as best. It reflected the fact that for sometime now, long before the recent "Rolling Stone" article, I have grown increasingly concerned that we had become too lax, disorganized, and in some cases, flat-out sloppy in the way we engage with the press.

As a result, personal views have been published as official government positions and information has gone out that was inaccurate, incomplete or lacking in proper context. Reports and other documents, including on sensitive subjects, are routinely provided to the press and other elements in this town before I or the White House know anything about them. Even more worry, some highly classified and sensitive information has been divulged without authorization or accountability.

My hope is that this new guidance will improve the quality of press engagement by ensuring that the people the media talk to can speak with accuracy and authority. This should not infringe or impede the flow of accurate and timely information to you or to the public. That is not my intent nor will I tolerate it.

An additional personal observation: Over the last two years, I have lost a first rate Central Command commander and an outstanding commander of ISAF in Afghanistan due to their own missteps in dealing with the media. I've had to recall a combatant commander to Washington for a verbal reprimand for speaking out inappropriately on a sensitive foreign policy issue.

I've had two very different presidents, each on several occasions express concern to me about senior defense officials, both civilian and military, speaking out inappropriately on foreign policy issues. These instances, together with my own frustration with premature disclosures of personnel, budget, and other options under consideration, led me to conclude several weeks ago that we need greater coordination and discipline.

Effectively communicating what we do and how we do it remains a top priority for me. In fact, I consider it my duty. It's a responsibility I have not only to the commander-in-chief and to you in the media, but to the American people. I take it very seriously and I expect everyone else in this department to do the same. On that note, we'll take your questions -- Ann.

REPORTER: I and many of my colleagues have a lot of very basic questions about how this new media policy is going to work on the ground. And I hope that you'll have some very specific guidance about who is covered, what's covered, and whether this amounts to a prescreening policy.

I want to ask you something more broad on that point. Since your predecessor was widely criticized for reining in dealings with the press and somebody had a bunker mentality, does this mean that you are also developing late in your tenure here a worry that the press has, in fact, become the enemy?

GATES: No, not at all. And this is not about you. This is about us. This is about us doing things in an uncoordinated way. It is about people in this department speaking out on issues where they don't have all the facts, where they may not have the perspective. It is about somebody in one part of the world, in the military or senior defense civilians, speaking out on an issue without realizing the same subject is being addressed in a different place and also is sensitive, and is trying to give them that kind of situational awareness.

A lot of interviews you ask for are already vetted through public affairs, or orchestrated through public affairs. And so, this is as much about our being better coordinated and our making sure what the -- what the parameters of an interview are so that people that are being interviewed, if you will, stay within their lane and are not speaking out about issues that they don't know about everything about or they might not be informed at all.

So, this -- this is more about our being more intelligent and thoughtful about how we respond to requests for interviews and to try and make sure that the information you're getting is accurate, as well as making sure that our people aren't speaking out about issues where they may be treading on sensitive ground and not even know it.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: I wanted to ask both of you about the nomination of General Mattis. I'm sure both of you recalled that back in 2005, not on background but in front of television cameras in southern California, General Mattis said, quote, "Actually, it's a lot of fun to fight. You know, it's a hell of a hoot. I like brawling. You into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap around women for five years because they don't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left. Anyway, so, it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

Given the fact that you said you are nominating General Mattis due to his judgment and his influence on you, and this was said in 2005 and he was then reprimanded in writing by the commandant of the Marine Corps of the time and asked to watch his words more carefully, he nonetheless is going to an extraordinarily sensitive part of the world where the military is trying to demonstrate it is about something more than killing.

Do you have concerns about General Mattis' remarks and his views about this which he has expressed in public?

GATES: Well, first of all, as you point out, that was five years ago. Action -- appropriate action was taken at the time. I think that the subsequent five years have demonstrated that the lesson was learned. Obviously, in the wake of the "Rolling Stone" interview, we discussed this kind of thing, and I have every confidence that General Mattis will be -- will respond to questions and speak publicly about the matters for which he is responsible in an entirely appropriate way.

STARR: Also can I follow up very briefly on the media memo? Because, again, in it, you say, sir, any means of media and public engagement -- any means -- with possible national or international implications. That is perhaps I think the broadest by any measure bounding or restriction any means of public engagement.

Could you explain -- do troops and commanders and the people in the United States military give up -- I'm quite serious -- their right to free speech, their right to speak freely? Does any public engagement they have -- which is what your words say -- now have to be screened? What rights of free speech does a person in the United States military have?

GATES: Let me ask the chairman.

ADM. MIKE MULLEN, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: From my perspective, this isn't at all about the First Amendment. It's very much about what the secretary laid out in terms of coordination and synchronization and the discipline. It is not in any way, shape or form meant to preclude the -- you know, the proper engagement with the press.

And all of us in the military understand that being in the military, we follow certain guidelines. And this is to actually in great part emphasize guidance that has been out there for an extensive period of time, but we just -- we just walked away from. And so, I think in light of what's -- certainly in light of what's happened recently, but it isn't just the "Rolling Stone" piece, it was -- just to reaffirm what the secretary said. It's something he and I talked about for longer than that, and the need to, in fact, ensure that we're coordinated, synchronized and that -- and that we do tell our story.

And my engagement with the military, since the "Rolling Stone" article, it's important that: one, we don't see the press as the enemy, and I've said that; two, that we don't overreact here; and three, that we do tell our story. And so, it's -- and it is a -- it is a challenge today, because of the 24-hour news cycle, because of the pace, we understand that. And that in engaging the press and the media, we have to do it from the position in which we're qualified to do that, very specifically.

STARR: I don't mean to take too much time, but any engagement -- are you, in fact, saying that a trooper in the field before he e- mails, has a telephone conversation, posts something on his Facebook page, Twitter, has any public engagement with the media, it must be cleared by this building?

MULLEN: If I were to use the trooper in the field who is very specifically, let's say with an embed, I think the rules with respect to that embed should be understood going in and then just follow those rules very specifically, as an example.

You know, one of the comments I'd like to make just specifically about General Mattis. You know, I've watched -- I've known General Mattis for a number of years, but I've also watched him very closely in the last couple of years and one of the hats that he had in addition to joint forces command, was one of the allied commanders in NATO -- and I watched him interact in NATO at the highest levels, diplomatically, politically, and on very sensitive subjects.

And I've had every confidence, you know, that skill -- I watched that skill. And he didn't just execute it, I watched him do it exceptionally well. So, I have great confidence -- great confidence -- that he will be able to carry out the duties of this command without presuming his confirmation.

STARR: His remarks don't trouble you?

MULLEN: I think the secretary addressed that.

REPORTER: Mr. Secretary, in the interest of information and even accountability, it's often difficult to find senior military leadership who are willing to engage the media. Are you at least bit concerned that your memo could have a further chilling effect on their willingness to talk, not only to the media, but to the American people? And just out of curiosity -- what was your reaction when your memo against leaks was leaked.

(LAUGHTER)

GATES: That it was highly predictable.

(LAUGHTER)

GATES: Look, let me -- let me address this more broadly. We need more internal discipline about how we coordinate the substance when people are going to be interviewed or going on one of the television talk shows or sitting down with you all, to make sure that they are not talking about issues that are outside of their area of knowledge, their area of expertise, and to make sure they know if there are some areas, even within their areas of expertise, that maybe sensitive because it's in the middle of a decision-making process or something.

The idea is not to turn off the interview. The idea is to try and help the person who is giving the interview understand what the sensitivities are. After all, every time before the chairman and I come down here, we sit down with people from our public affairs office. And here are the issues, here's what the press has in mind, here's what's on their minds. That's the kind of thing we're talking about.

So when people do have interviews, they have greater situational awareness. We're going to have to use some judgment in this. The reality is, stories in the press, and you've heard me say this before, whether it was the stories on the treatment of outpatient, wounded warriors at Walter Reed in "The Washington Post," or stories about MRAPs in "USA Today," have been a spur to action for me in various areas.

So the kind of reporting you do, as far as I'm concerned is one of the tools that I have in trying to lead this department and correct problems. If you're not -- and we understand that, as the chairman suggested, speed in responding to you often will be of the essence. And this burden will fall on the public affairs office.

And I fully expect that if they're not being prompt enough, that we will hear about that from you all. And we will take corrective action, because the purpose here is to be as responsive to you as we've always been. But for us to do a better job of preparing people before they have interviews and -- and we will -- we will make adjustments as we go along.

And I would just say, you know, if you're the captain in a unit that has an embedded reporter, as long as you're within the guidelines and the rules, we expect you to be open with that embedded reporter. On the other hand, if you're a captain in this building working on budget options, I expect you to keep your mouth shut.

(LAUGHTER)

REPORTER: To pursue another aspect of the memo and your comments today, which is the authorized release of classified information -- charges were filed this week against Private Manning in the so-called Wikileaks case. How significant a breach of national security do you view that? And given that a young shoulder is alleged to have had relatively free access to information, was able to download it and take it out of his headquarters -- are you ordering any kind of review of security clearance processes, computer security or any other steps that are necessary?

GATES: Well, first of all, Tom, I don't know the seriousness of the breach. I'm not familiar with the investigation that took place. And so, would basically have to say, I defer to the Army in terms of the specific case.

In some respects, what this illustrates is the incredible amount of trust we place in even our most junior men and women in the uniform. And I would be loathe to change that because of a few examples, or because there are a few bad apples. We have more than 2 million men and women in uniform. And I believe we should always err on the side of trusting them, because virtually all of them, not 100 percent, but nearly 100 percent, give us reasons every single day to continue trusting them.

So, no, I haven't ordered a review. If the results of the investigation suggest that might be necessary, then we'll take a look at it at the time. But my instinct is to take these on a case-by-case basis.

MULLEN: The only thing I would add to that, Tom is, that I think it's being appropriately handled in the chain of command. I think that any commander, when they look at a case, looks at the facts as he or she understands them, and the mitigating factors as well -- the specifics of which I'm just not familiar with here. And then, obviously, if it looks like it's going to be something that it is just locally, then it comes up and I think we would look at making adjustments, but there's no indication of that right now as I see.

REPORTER: (INAUDIBLE) you said on the memo, if everybody is following the spirit and the letter of the memo, are you confident that stories like, stories about the MRAP and the Walter Reed problems would emerge the way they did? It's not acknowledging that there are always be leaks, but I'm just wondering if you're confident that would still happen?

GATES: Actually I am. And it's largely because of my confidence in the persistence and the skills of the people sitting in front me.

REPORTER: Can I just ask (INAUDIBLE). The 400,000 surveys went out electronically, I think, yesterday. Can you give us a sense of how much that will inform this review that Carter Ham and Jeh Johnson are doing? Can you kind of talk to and just tell us how much we should expect from that?

GATES: Well, I think that we see this, as -- as I've said all along, beginning with the testimony that the chairman and I gave several months ago, I think it is very important for us to understand from our men and women in uniform that the challenges that they see -- first of all, to get their views on this issue and then the challenges that they see implementing the change in the law. That will help us prepare better to implement those changes when and if the law is changed.

I would say that this survey is a very important element of this effort -- in part because while General Hamm and General Counsel Jeh Johnson have talked to dozens of troops in dozens of military facilities, and we have gotten several tens of thousands of comments and views on -- by e-mail on in response to the request for people's thoughts on this. This size sampling is this most significant element of getting the views of the troops. And to be honest about -- and we designed it -- it has been designed in partnership with a professional survey company, and according to the best practices that they have for that industry.

I would tell you that I put my opinion (ph) in only one respect and that is, the original was to sample 100,000 active duty and 100,000 in the reserve component. And I suggested -- I strongly suggested that they double the size of the sample, that I wanted -- I wanted a significant percentage of the force to have an opportunity to offer their views on this.

I'm aware that there's at least one group that has suggested that gays and lesbians in the service not fill in the report. The good news is, a number of the other advocacy groups have urged gays and lesbians in the force to fill in. I strongly encourage gays and lesbians who are in the military to fill out these forms. We've organized it in a way to protect their privacy and the confidentiality of their responses through a third party, and it's important that we hear from them as well as everybody else.

But I think we're satisfied that this is an important element of this effort and that it's being done in a very professional way.

LEMON: The defense secretary there in Washington leading a press conference. Really, two things here they're talking about: the memo that went out talking about access to reporters and military and what-have-you. That's one aspect.

The other one is James Mattis. He is going to be named as -- at least that's his recommendation -- to be named to CENTCOM, the head of CENTCOM. As you know, General Petraeus was the head of CENTCOM until the president was tapped to go over and lead the forces in Afghanistan.

The interesting though that our Barbara Starr brought up were some controversial comments that were made back in 2005. Lieutenant General James Mattis who commanded the Marine expedition of Afghanistan and Iraq, he made these comments during a panel discussion.

And here's what Barbara was talking about. He says, "Actually, it is quite fun to fight them." He was talking about over in Iraq and Afghanistan. "It is a hell of a hoot," Mattis said, prompting laughter from some military members in the audience.

"It's found shoot some people. I'll be right up there with them. I like brawling. You go into Afghanistan, you get guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil," Mattis said. "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway, so it's a hell of a lot fun to shoot them."

So it's interesting, this choice after what happened with Stanley McChrystal in the "Rolling Stone" interview.

That memo that came out last week, they have said the administration, and also the defense secretary said, it didn't have anything to do with the timing of the "Rolling Stone" interview that got Stanley McChrystal in trouble, but again, Barbara and other reports questioning him about that.

And this is really -- what's at stake here is how you get your news about the military, how you get your news about what's going on overseas in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is all changing now. The defense secretary said, you know, I expect those guys to avoid by the rules of engagement, abide by the rules of war when they're out on the field, if they're being embedded with some.

But if someone who is working for him, if they're doing accounting and other things, he says, "I expect them to keep their mouth shut." That was an interesting part of that.

We're going to continue to follow that. Our Barbara Starr in Washington, as soon as she's done, we'll try to get her up. She'll be reporting about this throughout the evening here on CNN.

In the meantime, we're going to talk about what's going on down in the Gulf, of course. But we're also going to talk about those terror suspects. Those terror suspects that have been -- some have been arrested, others have been charged. Some from Norway, others in the U.K., other parts of the U.K., and some being indicted here in the United States. What in the world is going on?

Stick around. We'll tell you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Welcome back, everyone. Day 80 of this oil disaster, when is it going to stop? That's right it is day 80, its been 80 days now since the Deepwater Horizon well sprung that leak into the Gulf of Mexico.

And at last check, more than 3, 585,000 barrels of oil have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico. Now there's some good news though for this disaster. The government's point man on the BP disaster says the first relief well could intercept the leaking well in 7 to 10 days, but Admiral Thad Allen says the capping procedure is not expected to be completed until mid august.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ADM. THAD ALLEN, NATIONAL INCIDENT COMMANDER: We are down to the final days and weeks of closing in on to a point where we can intercept the well. Our target date remains the middle of August because there's a number of uncertainties related to what happens when we get down and penetrate the well bore, which I'll talk about in a minute. There are certain things that could move that date up. But for right now my official position is it will be the middle of August before this well is capped.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: This is helping as well. A turn for the better in the weather, and now skimming boats are restarting their clean-up efforts. They were put on hold during hurricane Alex. Rough seas also delayed plays to hook up the helix producer, which could bring in up to 25,000 barrels of oil a day from that well.

That would increase the overall daily collection capacity to 53,000 barrels of oil a day. BP says it recovered about 24, 575 barrels on Wednesday, bringing the total number of barrels removed from the Gulf of Mexico to about 706, 700.

Meantime, oral arguments challenging the Obama administration's six-month ban on exploratory deep water drilling begin this afternoon in a federal appeals court in Louisiana. This follows a scathing report released by an advocacy group of extensive oil industry ties among the courts judges.

Let's talk now about that press conference we just saw ion Washington from the Secretary of Defense and also talk about what is going on with tier (ph)

International Security Analyst, Jim Walsh joins us. Jim before we get to the terror, we'll talk about that-about these alleged suspects, these suspects I should say. Let's talk about--it's interesting with Mattis, him being recommended, considering the question that Barbara Starr asked at the press conference. What do you make of that? Why him with that in his past?

JIM WALSH, INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST:: Well I think this was a really interesting press conference. I'm glad you guys carried so much of it live. What I saw was a real tension. Barbara I think rightly asked Secretary Gates is this policy so broad that no soldier can send an e-mail-can have any form of public engagement without having to get it checked out in advance?

And then Gates response he says no, it doesn't go that far. And then the other questions were about Mattis and his comments, that he got reprimanded for, about saying things like I like to shoot people.

And in some ways it sort of demonstrates the point that on one hand, people in the military can't go out making statements all the time about whatever happens to cross their mind on issues that are incredibly sensitive that might impact U.S. foreign policy. You know that might alienate an ally or make a war in Afghanistan more difficult.

So Gates is right about that. You can't have everyone shooting off their mouth. On the other hand, it's also clear that Barbara is right to say you can't make guidelines so broad that no one can say anything. It's about finding that balance.

LEMON: Because it should It needs to be about transparency. Especially if you're going to have the media covering-media has been covering wars since you know it was around. So there ha s to be some sort of transparency, so where's the line, that's the question.

WALSH:: Yes absolutely. There has to be transparency not only because the public has a right to know. But even as Gates himself admits in the press conference, he relies on the media to find problems to solve at Walter Reed, at other places in the military where there's incompetence and bureaucratic failure. And the only way you solve that is if it comes to light with journalists. So I think you have to have some clear rules.

LEMON: What do you know about General Mattis?

WALSH: Well, I have not met him personality. Clearly, the head of joint chiefs has a high degree of respect for him. He went out of his way in that press conference to vouch for him. Yes, he had this misstep five years ago. I've made mistakes, I think we all should be allowed to outlive our mistakes. And you know-- those comments, in some ways you don't want military people to say that in a public form, but you want military people in your army who want to fight. That's the sort of people you want in your military.

LEMON: Ys, and nobody' perfect and I'm sure everyone believes in redemption. So listen, I want to get to the terror. We talked about the five in Norway, and then we talked about what the attorney general here is doing. Eight people who are either charged or arrested for terror. How concerned should we be? Not only as Americans but in the U.K. and other parts of the world hearing about these new names?

WALSH: Well, you know it's a good news-bad news story. It's bad news obviously Al Qaeda is still out there, they're still trying. But Don, compare that to where we were ten years ago, going back to 2001. Back then, Al Qaeda had thousands of people training in Afghanistan, undergoing years of training and then they would send those people out, those veterans out to-- across the globe to engage in attacks.

Very different situation here. We have three Norwegians, you know, whether they're citizens or green card, lived in Norway forever. These guys are novices. And they're probably been recruited because they have some ideological passion that they're angry about.

But they don't have any experience, so they have to be taken back to Pakistan to be trained. And the moment that happens, that opens them up to being observed, trips the wires, allows our intel people to find them. And the scale of the attack. You know, this isn't a 9/11 scale attack.

They're talking about trying to attack a subway, which is awful, but it's not 9/11. So bad news, they're still coming after us, good news, we're better at getting after them, and they are being forced to recruit novices, don't have the same level of training and face a lot more obstacles.

LEMON: And probably better getting information out of the ones who are caught as well.

WALSH: Absolutely.

LEMON: Thank you Mr. Walsh. Appreciate your expertise, have a good one.

WALSH: Thank you Don.

LEMON: So when does 90 degrees, when does that feel balmy? you've been wilting in 100 degrees, that's when. Extreme heat, a little less extreme fortunately today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: What can we say? It's hot! It is, warm, it's balmy. You keep going.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: We're not making light of it thought I mean , people are suffering.

LEMON: Look at that 83, really?

MYERS: That's a happy temperature right there. Right now. Cool air a lit bit. Yes, 93, though, in D.C. You went from there to here, and that's where the heat went. Charleston now 97, Charlotte 97, and Atlanta 95 degrees. . So yes, it's a little bit cooler in New York. But you know what, I still think we're going to get up into the 90s today.

But look at this, look at Richmond, Virginia, 104, Philadelphia 103, that felt good. Not the humidity is higher today, so it's not really even though temperature may be down, it may not feel all that much better because of the humidity.

Let's talk about tropical humidity thought look at this. That was not Bonnie, never made it tropical depression No. 2. I would love to have gotten rid of a name, wouldn't that have been great? Because you know we have 20 more to go before the end of the season.

But rain showers all the way from Houston through San Antonio down to Mexico. There's a lot of flooding. We'll talk about that flooding in the next hour across parts oft he Rio Grande.

Not a big storm,, not really a big event at all for the oil which is here. Remember how Alex did this? But the winds were 105. And so we did have winds coming into the oil. With this, winds are only 35, no wind whatsoever.

LEMON: I mean, everything just with that, the time of year, the hurricane season, all of that, it's just awful. Stay cool. Stay in the air conditioner.

MYERS: That's my job.

LEMON: Thank you Chad Myers you know what, they have been pressing him man-to-man for a week. Now the NBA's most valuable free agent maybe ever, right? He's the most valuable ever. We'll break it down on live TV for you, why Lebron James' decision on where he'll play is a big deal. Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Look at this. See that Lebron bobble-I wonder how much this is worth, this belongs to someone in the news room. But maybe I can sell it on eBay. If you want to buy it, shoot me a tweet at @DonLemonCNN. You're not getting it back. You should hear what I just heard in my ear. Max Kellerman in New York do you think I can get money for this? It probably isn't worth much is it?. This little bobblehead

MAX KELLERMAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, What uniform is he wearing?

LEMON: He's wearing the Cavs, Cavalier uniforms. KELLERMAN: Yes, I don't know. I don't know. If he was in a Knicks uniform, maybe. Or a Heat uniform. Actually, it would be really good if he was in a uniform to the team he's not going but everyone assume he's going there, right, so it's like the error baseball cards. They're very valuable.

LEMON: Ok so you know we're going to-the predictions, everybody's got a prediction. You think what?

KELLERMAN: I think he's going to the Knicks. I think that when you divorce the commentary from the information that's come out, the information consistently leads me to the conclusion he's headed to the Knicks.

Although because the salary cap came out $2 million more than what people thought, it gives the Heat some more breathing room. Certainly if Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh are both in Miami, with Lebron James, they immediately become the favorites to win the NBA championship.

In terms of what other pieces they need to perfectly balance out the roster. They'll find them very quickly, everyone is going to want to play with those three guys.

So there's clearly some upside there. But the fact it, Dwyane Wade has already won a championship. He's as good as Lebron or Kobe. Just about. He's right there. He won a championship with Shaquille O'neal in Miami by having the greatest finals anyone has had since Michael Jordan was in his prime. And no one really talks about Dyane Wade to the extent that they talk about Kobe Bryant or Lebron James.

Had Dwayne Wade done that in New York or Los Angeles, he would be, it would be his and Kobe's league.

LEMON: Ok Max, let's-I want to play this from Larry King,. You're talking about which, where Miami, wherever he's going to go. I want to play this and then we'll talk. Because I have my on opinion on this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEBRON JAMES, NBA PLAYER: And I understand, that me going down as one of the greats will not happen until I win a championship. So, for me the team that I decide to go to or staying in Cleveland that ultimately has the best chance for me to win a championship, not one year, but multiple years for me to continue to get better and help that team to win. I think ultimately would be my decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: And I would have to say to you, sir, that would be Miami. That's what I think.

KELLERMAN: I would agree. If his --

LEMON: It's a dream team when you think about when they played on the all-star team or whatever. It was Chris Bosh, it was Dwyane Wade it was Lebron James.

KELLERMAN: Well the dream team, if Lebron goes to if Lebron goes to Miami, that is the dream team minus Kobe. I mean actually if I had to rank the value on the dream team, I'd say Lebron one, Dwyane wade two, Chris Bosh, or Kobe Bryant, three, four.

So you're essentially recreating the dream team. And if that is his guiding thought, if that really is the thing that determines where is he'll go, the most possible championship, then you have to figure Miami. \ Although the bulls have a good, young nucleus and LeBron would fit in. Really, here's the other thing wherever Lebron goes, they're a second- round playoff team.

Then it's a question of who else you have around him. So take New York, which by the way, is the No. 1 media market in the world. Not just this country, in the whole world. The biggest market in the world.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: We get that. But I want to get to this. Because some people have been talking about it. I know that you talked about it. You talked about this big event that's supposed to happen tonight that most people say it is not Lebron James.

He is much more real than that and that it's being pumped up, what have you. What do you say to that? Is it complete? That's he's somewhat selling out.

KELLERMAN: I don't think -- I don't know what the problem is-I don't know they problem that the press has with this press conference. If you're not interested, don't watch. I mean the fact is no one is holding the gun to anyone's head saying you have to watch this press conference.

The reason it's being televised live, and the reason we are talking about it is because it's compelling. Because basketball is a sport where one player making more of a difference than on any other team sport except for maybe a goalie in hockey. And Lebron James is a huge difference maker and we're all interested..

LEMON: That's going to have to be it, and I spoke with Lebron James here on "CNN NEWSROOM" a couple years ago. And he's he has a charity and he's very committed to it and on his website or what have you . And he's trying to raise money. He said hat's what this event is about, so we'll see a lot of people will be tuned in.

Thank you sir, appreciate it stay cool there in New York City today.

All right, we'll see. Let's go to the White House now. The White House demanding more answers from BP And our Ed Henry broke that story,. he is back in the stake out. What is that on your face. Did you break your razor when you got married or something?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: All right it is time now for our "Daily Conversation" with CNN Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry. Ed Henry broke some news for us earlier today on the Gulf oil disaster. Ed what are you hearing.

ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well it's interesting Don what you're referring to is the fact that the administration now fired off this letter to BP, basically saying they have 24 hours to answer some tough questions on safety issues as to whether they can really move forward on two big issues.

No. 1, BP is telling the administration that they want to get this helix line up and going that contains some more oil. But at the same time, they also want to put in this new thing called a sealing cap. But in order to do that, you've got to take top hat down.

And once you take top hat down, that's going to mean that more oil will be seeping out in the short term. In the long-term, though, BP and the administration is confident that you could have the potential with this new cap in place, as well as helix coming on line, a lot more oil will be contained in the long term, but the administration fired off this letter because obviously given BP's track record of making promises throughout this process, we've heard before, we're going to cap more oil, get this well killed, it hasn't happened.

So they want to make sure that in the next 24 hours, BP shows they really do have a plan to move forward on these two operations at the same time. And then it can actually work. The key here is that there's a window right now, government scientists think, of about eight days of a weather window when there's not going to be a threat of a tropical storm where they can actually move forward in these two operations.

So you should look for that this weekend Don.

LEMON: And Ed I think you must have--when you were going to your live shot, you must have tripped over that hole behind you where I see the dirt mover and you got dirt on your face. Did anybody tell you.

HENRY: No did I get dirt?

LEMON: You know it's actually a cost-cutting thing. I think I'm saving the company about 30 percent or 40 percent on makeup if I don't shave down here.

LEMON: How many e-mails did you get from management?

HENRY: I got a lot of e-mails. I thought--here's the thing, I was on my honeymoon and I decided for the first time ever just not to shave for about eight or nine days. And I thought when I came back, I was going to get a lot of emails saying, well you're trying to Wolf Blitzer. And no knock on Wolf but I'm actually getting more so my friend out in San Francisco, who I was just out there when the president was in San Francisco, I got to tell you, you've got a lot of fans out there who think I'm copying Dan.

LEMON: I know Dan Simon. And you, sir, are no --

HENRY: I'm no Dan Simon.

LEMON: Or Max Kellerman.

HENRY: Or Wolf Blitzer for that matter:.

LEMON: Or Wolf Blitzer,. Hey listen I'm just having a little fun for you. Congratulations, bit way, on your nuptials. We're very happy for you. And get a razor, will you? They're cheap.

HENRY: Maybe I was going to kind of let the folks -- I thought maybe you, Ali, folks on Twitter can decide. Do you like it or not?

LEMON: We'll see we'll have a little twitter war going on. Thank you, sir there's pictures of the nuptials there, the Elvis and everything. Thank you congratulations to you. All right remember fire drills in schools? Well, tornado drills. What about that? But you've never heard of shootout drills. It's a sad fact of life in Mexico it's "XYZ" coming up.

(COMMERICAL BREAK)

LEMON: It's time now everyone for the "XYZ" of it. So you ask your children what they did at school today and they reply, we learned how to survive a gun fight. What? Sounds far fetched? Not in Mexico.

Schools across that nation are responding in the only way they know how to raging to gun fights between rival drug gangs and cartels. They're teaching kids how to basically duck and cover if a shootout breaks out. At least nine of them broke out in school zones since in mid October including one that lasted for an hour near a preschool. There have been more than 5700 drug related killings across Mexico this year alone.

If this doesn't get our attention about the growing violence on our border and beyond, then what will? Hopefully schools in Mexico will go a step further. Hopefully they'll teach kids about the dangers of drugs and the dangers of a lifestyle with crime. Of course, these aren't easy lessons to teach, but they just might prevent a new generation of drug traffickers from taking shape.

And in the end, the way to fight is not with guns but through education. That's my "XYZ". "RICK'S LIST" My friend Rick Sanchez coming up after the break.