Return to Transcripts main page

Rick's List

General McChrystal Under Fire

Aired June 22, 2010 - 15:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Most definitely, the thing that we are going to be discussing is McChrystal, McChrystal, McChrystal.

By the way, who did you think would be on the list you don't want to be on today? Here's the rest of the LIST.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ (voice-over): Here's is what is making your LIST today.

Is Commander Stanley McChrystal finished, after outlandish comments in "Rolling Stone" magazine?

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Those are comments that he's going to have to deal with respect to the commander in chief, vice president, and his national security staff.

SANCHEZ: And that's not all. What he and his inner circle say about Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, and former Marine Commander and National Security Adviser Jim Jones.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is McChrystal's job safe?

GIBBS: We will have more to say after that meeting.

SANCHEZ: Is this insubordination? What does the law say? And should the president have seen this coming?

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Can you characterize at all the president's reaction to hearing a McChrystal adviser said Obama, he didn't seem very engaged?

GIBBS: He'll have his undivided attention tomorrow.

General McChrystal has made an enormous mistake.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It makes me sick. We will never have Pat back.

SANCHEZ: Remember McChrystal's involvement in the Pat Tillman cover-up?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is about what they did to Pat and what they did to a nation.

SANCHEZ: His previous comments about the vice president, his stab at President Obama on foreign soil? And now this: The author of the "Rolling Stone" shocker joins me live.

The lists you need to know about. Who's today's most intriguing? Who's landed on the list you don't want to be on? Who's making news on Twitter? It's why I keep a list.

Pioneering tomorrow's cutting-edge news right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: It is good to be back.

Topping our LIST right now, it is almost MacArthurish in scope, but maybe worse, a military commander and his inner staff mocking, indirectly criticizing an American president and several advisers, including experienced military advisers that were being mocked and criticized.

But it may be even worse, because you could argue that while MacArthur criticized President Truman, he was never known to give on- the-record interviews using vulgar language to mock his own colleagues in front of a reporter. The question now is -- well, the question now is this question that was asked of Robert Gibbs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is McChrystal's job safe?

GIBBS: We'll have more to say after that meeting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Will McChrystal be asked to resign? That is up to the president of the United States. But it doesn't sound like McChrystal should be holding his breath.

So far, only one person has been fired. And it's not the general -- or asked to resign. It's one of the general's subordinates who handled public relations for him. In fact, we have got new information on that that I'm going to be sharing with you in just a moment. The president, it could be argued, has been given reason in the past for removing McChrystal.

But, in both of those cases, he has given him a second and third chance. It is important to note as well that McChrystal's comments are being criticized both on the left and on the right, with many on both sides calling for the commander's resignation.

The reporter who broke this story is Michael Hastings. He's going to be joining us in just a moment from Kandahar, Afghanistan, for his very first interview. We will look forward to that.

In the meantime, CNN's Barbara Starr, who's been getting reaction all day long to this story, is joining us as well.

Barbara, I can't help but think that General McChrystal is in real big trouble, not so much because of what he said, but the way he said it and whom he was talking about when he said what he said.

Am I wrong?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, who knows where to begin on this one, Rick.

It starts with "Rolling Stone." This is not a publication that military generals typically talk to. What on earth was he thinking giving an interview to "Rolling Stone," which we all know is a magazine that's a bit edgy?

And it's important to note, so far, no one has said "Rolling Stone" made any mistakes or any of what they reported was inaccurate. No one is questioning the accuracy of what they said. There's a real...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: And, by the way, when you say he gave an interview to them, this is not an interview as most of us think about an interview, where Barbara Starr goes to the Pentagon and sits down with a commander and does an interview. This was a guy hanging around General McChrystal for something like three or four months. That's like unprecedented access.

(CROSSTALK)

STARR: I don't know if it's three or four months, but he was with him certainly for some extended period of time. We often do that. We -- not perhaps for that length of time, but we travel with top commanders, get inside the wire, if you will, see what they're really thinking, see what they're really like.

And Michael Hastings sure got, you know, that firsthand look.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

STARR: But what's really on the table here, Rick, is the comments that came from McChrystal's staff about the president of the United States, disparaging comments from anonymous senior staffers.

And what is General McChrystal's responsibility for his own senior staff making disparaging remarks about the commander in chief? That is a real problem.

SANCHEZ: Well, and it's not just the commander in chief. I have never heard the vice president of the United States referred to as "Vice President Bite Me." That doesn't seem to me to be becoming an officer.

How about what he said about the French? Here's a country that the United States of America needs as an ally in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. When he's meeting with the French ambassador, he says, in front of a reporter, "I would rather have my, you know -- well, my ass kicked by a room full of people than go out to this dinner."

And one of his aides says, "Some French minister," vulgar word, it's vulgar word "gay."

I mean, this stuff is -- this is not difference of opinion stuff. You just mentioned what he said about Obama. Here's another one in here. One aide calls Jim Jones, Jim Jones, a fellow military guy, Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and veteran of the Cold War, a clown, a clown, who remains stuck in 1985.

Just one more, and I didn't call you on here so I could read to you. But listen to what he says about Richard Holbrooke, who's generally a respected guy. He says the -- "One of his aides says, the boss says he's like a wounded animal. McChrystal checks his BlackBerry. 'Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke,'" he says it in front of the reporter, as if showing disdain.

Then he says, "I don't even want to open it." And then one of his colleagues says about Holbrooke, Richard Holbrooke, our envoy, he says, "Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg," almost as if referring to -- I think the audience gets it, you know, what he is talking about here.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Some of this stuff is even vulgar, Barbara.

STARR: Well, look, some guys may call this locker room chatter, I suppose.

The real issue here is, this was said in front of a reporter. No one's disputing it. And this is the type of command climate, if you will, that surrounds the four-star general leading the war in Afghanistan while troops are out in the field.

There's another picture that's drawn in that article, Rick -- I know you've read it -- of a night of drinking in Paris. The troops aren't out drinking in Paris. So, these are some of the problems, and these are the questions in front of the president now with...

SANCHEZ: By the way, by the way, just -- I -- it's almost like you and I are having this chat. He went drinking in Paris with about 15 or 20 guys on his anniversary with a wife that he rarely sees, according to the article, more than 30 days a year. She specially flew in to Paris to see her, and he takes her drinking on her anniversary with 20 guys.

Now, look, it's easy to be real judgmental about this kind of stuff. But I bet you there are some women there who are thinking, wow, what was he thinking?

STARR: Well, look, let's -- let's -- let me leave that alone.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

STARR: Let me come back to the issue of the president's confidence in General McChrystal, the ability of General McChrystal to command this war and see it through to achieve the progress that he has promised by the end of the year and to have -- real bottom line here -- the trust and confidence of the troops in the field, the tens of thousands of American and NATO forces that are out there giving it their all every single day...

SANCHEZ: Yes. That's a good point.

STARR: ... because, you know, Rick, one of the really telling things in this article, Michael Hastings talks about being with McChrystal when he met with some troops down south, and those troops were not really happy with the general. They were very reserved in their support of him. That may be the most serious issue at hand.

SANCHEZ: Yes, I like when Hastings says at the end of that -- that little synopsis that you just described to the viewers, when he was done talking, no one clapped.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: It's almost as if, well, not well-received, as you would say.

Barbara, Michael just called in. Michael Hastings is now on the line, I understand. He's just called in to us. Again, this is the very first interview we do with the author of this article that everyone is talking about. He's in Kandahar. And he's just called in to us.

Barbara, could you stick around and we will tag-team him?

STARR: You bet.

SANCHEZ: I think you have got a lot of perspective on this that I may not be able to share.

So, when we come back, the first interview with Michael Hastings, the author of this -- this interview in "Rolling Stone" with Commander McChrystal that everyone seems to be talking about and that the president will be addressing in his office tomorrow.

Stay right there. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we are joined now by Michael Hastings, the very first interview that he's doing. He's in Kandahar.

I was just talking to him during the break, and I was telling him that his article is certainly the talk of the country right now.

Barbara Starr is going to be joining us as well. She's at the Pentagon. And she's been following up on getting reacts to this story throughout the day and she's been doing great work with that.

All right, let's go right to Michael. I should let our audience know there's going to be a little bit of a delay, which is certainly understandable, given how far away he is from us.

Michael, let me start with the very first question. Did General McChrystal know that you were doing an interview -- with him with all these months you spent with him, did he know that this was an article that could end up costing him some problems, possibly embarrassing him with some of the comments he made? Did he know that?

MICHAEL HASTINGS, "ROLLING STONE": I think they became aware that some of the things they had said to me over that time perhaps were inopportune, and they may have wished that they hadn't had said them and said them as often. But I think it's also clear I had a tape recorder and a notepad in my hand most of the time. So, certainly, I got word from his staff before the story was published that there was some serious concern about parts of story.

SANCHEZ: Do you feel comfortable quoting his staff as much as you do? Do they truly represent the man and his office?

HASTINGS: Yes, I'm totally comfortable of that.

And one of the reasons I didn't want to name staffers is that I just don't think -- I think the subject is a profile of General McChrystal. And to bring other people into -- into the story, I don't think it would have been helpful.

But -- and it also gave me the chance to sort of describe in an unfiltered way their boss' true feelings. They call General McChrystal the boss. They're very loyal to him. And they worship the ground he walks on. And they have a good reason to. General McChrystal, in many ways, is a very impressive man.

SANCHEZ: One more thing, and then I'm going to let Barbara shoot a question at you.

But did you -- do you feel comfortable that you were a real fair straight shooter in this story, or do you look at it now and feel like, if you had to do it over again, you would have done it differently?

I guess what I'm trying to say, Michael is, did you color this in any way, either intentionally or unintentionally -- we all do this in this business -- we look back at our work and wonder -- did you color it in any way in a disparaging way?

HASTINGS: No, I don't think so. I think the story speaks for itself. I think the comments speak for itself.

And, as a journalist, I try to do the best that I can to report what I see and what I hear and also what I think. And, clearly, I have been a critic -- and this is publicly documented -- of counterinsurgency in the past. So, my views on a lot of this stuff -- are not -- are very easy to find on the Internet, if one wants to find them. Or, on the radio, I have talked a lot or on TV. So, I'm perfectly comfortable with the piece. And, to me, it's succeeding in the fact that people are talking about Afghanistan. It is a really important issue. It often gets left off the table. There's 140,000 Americans here. We're spending billions and billions of dollars.

And, to me, it's hope -- it's actually a hopeful sign that we are discussing serious policy issues and flaws that are in -- or what I believe to be are in General McChrystal's plan.

SANCHEZ: Barbara Starr?

STARR: Michael, the thing that I find the most curious, in terms of some of these statements that his senior staff made that were disparaging of the president of the United States, was General McChrystal aware his staff made those comments? Was he there at the time? Did he try and stop any of it? It seems extraordinary that he would let this go.

HASTINGS: I don't think so.

I think General McChrystal has a -- has a career of taking risks. And (INAUDIBLE) staff (INAUDIBLE) high tolerance for taking risks. And I think bringing me in to the inner circle, a reporter from "Rolling Stone," was also creating a calculated risk.

I think he -- they're very aware of what -- what not only General McChrystal's staff, but many soldiers think of President Obama. I think the (INAUDIBLE) criticism and sort of disparaging comments were aimed mostly at the other sort of civilian pieces of the puzzle, not excluding General Jones.

But I still see this as very, very, very solid in terms of the relationship between General McChrystal and President Obama and what the sort of feeling is.

I mean, ask any of McChrystal's team how they felt (INAUDIBLE) President Obama almost a year before he came to -- before he visited Afghanistan -- that was in March -- or ask them about the conversation President Obama had with General McChrystal the night before Marjah. You can go down the list. And, clearly, this is a relationship that's been strained from the beginning.

And this is obviously a sign of this strain and frustration. And I think the big frustration is, does the president really believe in the mission in Afghanistan? That, I think, is at the root of the problem.

SANCHEZ: Do you -- did you spell out throughout the process what was on the record and what was off the record? What kind of prior explanation did you have with the general? And, in short, was everything said that you quoted accepted to be on the record by all the parties involved?

HASTINGS: There were no ground rules that were given to me. And (INAUDIBLE) I had a tape recorder and a notepad out the entire time. So, I think it was all very clear that it was on the record. And there were parts that were off the record that I didn't use. So...

SANCHEZ: Really? Like what?

(LAUGHTER)

HASTINGS: Yes. There's a lot I didn't use.

SANCHEZ: I guess since you have an agreement...

HASTINGS: That's off the record.

SANCHEZ: Well, all right. I will leave that alone.

The last thing I want to do is get you in trouble. And, by the way, you know, it's a respected part of what we do. If you tell someone you're not going to talk about what they say, you don't talk about what they say.

Of all the comments made, Michael, the clown comment that was made by one of his aides about Jim Jones, also the comment about the BlackBerry, that really ugly, snipey comment about Richard Holbrooke, and the comment, for example, about Ambassador Eikenberry, no love lost between these two men there, were you taken aback when you started hearing them be that critical of these men?

HASTINGS: Yes, I was completely taken aback. I suspected, obviously, that there were tensions there.

But the candor in which they were delivered from the minute I arrived in Paris was extraordinary. Most of the material that we use in the story that takes place in Paris happened within 24 or 48 hours of me arriving there.

SANCHEZ: Really?

HASTINGS: So, this wasn't like after almost three months of -- or years of building their trust and finally sort of saying these things. This was right off the bat. I mean (INAUDIBLE) a few hours after I landed in Paris, I believe.

SANCHEZ: Barbara Starr?

STARR: Yes.

Michael, I want to shift gears to when you went with him in Afghanistan down, I think, south, and he met with some troops that had come under attack, had lost some of their buddies. And they -- they did not give him a warm reception, by all accounts.

HASTINGS: Yes. No.

In fact, I think this is one of the most significant issues with the American strategy in Afghanistan right now, is that the troops aren't buying it. It's as simple as that. I have not found a soldier on the ground in Afghanistan who likes the new rules of engagement and who really thinks these directives are worthwhile.

I stopped at Kandahar today. I had a soldier come up to me and say, hey, I heard you did that story on General McChrystal. You know, we like the guy, but it's good that that's getting out there. That's a true sort of anger and it's sort of being expressed.

And it's really a widespread, widespread feeling. And I think the failure to communicate his strategy is also a failure, in some senses, of his leadership.

STARR: You know, it sounds like he gave them the same briefing that he might give a bunch of other commanders or he might give here in the Pentagon.

And, see, I know General McChrystal. I have covered him for years. It just seems so out of character that, on that trip, at least, he did not connect with the soldiers on the ground.

SANCHEZ: In fact, you write, Michael, you write, following up on Barbara's question -- this is toward the end of the article -- "The Taliban, he insists, no longer has the initiative." But then he goes on to tell the troops as well, "But I don't think we do either."

He's being critical of his own plan there, although he's defending his own plan.

HASTINGS: Yes.

SANCHEZ: I found that interesting.

HASTINGS: Well, I think this is the problem with counterinsurgency. It's very hard to get people motivated to go do it because it's so complex, because the results are very intangible, if you see the results at all.

But I think (AUDIO GAP) that particular...

SANCHEZ: And I think we're losing communication with Michael. Is that just me, guys, or control room? Did we just lose him? All right. It looks like we have lost him.

Boy, I will tell you, we got just about everything we could out of that.

Hey, Barbara, is there -- let me ask you something real serious now. In fact, you want to do this? Maybe we will get a break in. I'm going to read something to our viewers and then I want you to respond on the way back. All right?

We know what he said. We know what he apparently and his staff said about the vice president. We know what he said about Eikenberry and about the clown reference to Jim Jones, the comment about Richard Holbrooke. Let me read you something, all right? This is Article 88 of the United States Military Code. "Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, Congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of military department, the secretary of transportation," and on and on -- I can read the rest of them -- "in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

This is what the guidelines seem to say about an officer who says -- quote -- "contemptuous words against these officials." And obviously the list goes in -- from top to order -- from top bottom in hierarchical form, president, vice president, Congress, secretary of defense, blah, blah, blah.

Is there a possibility that, beyond whatever the president decides tomorrow, that he, in fact, could have other repercussions as a result of this, even the possibility of a court-martial?

Barbara Starr with that answer when we come back. Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right, and look who's joining us now as well, because this obviously has political implications? Gloria Borger is joining us as well. And she's going to be tackling some of the issues that the Obama administration is now dealing with, calling him back.

I don't know if you guys saw the Robert Gibbs briefing today. But I will tell you, I will tell you, that was fascinating television.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

SANCHEZ: And sometimes it was fascinating not just for what was said, but for what wasn't said as well.

But I promised I would give Barbara a crack at this question that we have had throughout the day. I read you what the code seems to say. And this is Article 88. Angie Massie, my executive producer, was nice enough to call this up for me. She gave it to me. I just read it to our viewers.

In case you missed it, I will give you another crack. Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, and blah, blah, blah, in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

Barbara, is this possibly a court-martialable offense?

STARR: Oh, Rick, you're putting me on the spot.

I think the answer is absolutely not. When you read this article -- let's all take a deep breath -- General McChrystal himself does not say anything directly contemptuous of the president of the United States. His senior staff certainly does. Names are not attached to that. The question for General McChrystal may be right now, how can he keep that senior staff, knowing what they have said?

I guarantee you, he knows exactly who said what. This is a very small group of men around him. They have been together for years. They have fought through the wars together. He trusts them. He knows them. They are the ones, perhaps, who have caused a fundamental problem here in terms of saying things about the president.

They said it. It may seem like a very fine point. But General McChrystal may have to demonstrate that he is willing to discipline his own staff for what they said. He is not going to face a court- martial.

SANCHEZ: Gloria Borger, is there any question in your mind that there's some lack -- or there's some level of insubordination throughout this interview?

BORGER: No. Yes, there clearly is. There's a lot of arrogance in this.

And I think the question that Barbara was talking about is really the main question, which is, is -- to what degree did the senior staff really parrot what their boss thought and to what degree were they channeling him?

And you have got to believe, given the fact that these folks are very close, they spend an awful lot of time together in war zones and out of war zones, that they are parroting him.

And then the question for President Obama is, can he let him get away with it? Can he let General McChrystal get away with it?

SANCHEZ: Yes.

BORGER: I mean, they're in the middle of a very tough time in a very tough war. It's not so easy, as President Truman learned with General MacArthur, right? It's not so easy to get rid of your key general.

But we're also in a time, Rick, and we have been talking about this for weeks, the questions being asked about President Obama, is he tough enough? Today, we heard Gibbs say, yes, he got really angry at this. And maybe there's a sense that this is so insubordinate, that he has no other choice.

But firing him...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: But the real question may be is, why is he there to begin with? This is not a first offense. This is the general who basically called out the vice president of the United States on a policy issue in the past and may very well have undermined the president of the United States by talking about his policy preference...

BORGER: Right.

SANCHEZ: ... before sharing that policy preference with the president of the United States, and, by the way, doing it on foreign soil.

So the president of the United States, it seems, could argue, I've given you not one, but two chances.

BORGER: Right, absolutely. I mean, this wouldn't be the first time that he had been taken to the woodshed.

And I've talked to a couple of folks who also say to me, look, this may be part of a larger issue here, and Barbara can speak to this, about tensions within the administration, about a Gates faction versus a Joe Biden faction, for example. Joe Biden came under assault in this piece, was made a joke of in this piece.

And I think if the president's talking to the vice president about this, he may get some interesting advice.

SANCHEZ: It's interesting. I've been following the reactions. On my way in to work today I was listening to Glenn Beck's show. Glenn Beck is asking for his resignation, saying he's dishonored his position -- Glenn Beck.

Democrats now coming in as well, our own Dana Bash sent me this tweet -- I think she should talked to someone. Byron Dorgan she talked to, Byron Dorgan, who says, "It's just unbelievably inappropriate," quote, "It just can't be allowed to stand." There you go.

Barbara Starr, I imagine we're going to get a lot more reaction like this, won't we?

STARR: There's politics and there's military necessity here. One of the questions on the table -- and this is why Bob Gates may be the most annoyed man in Washington right now, is McChrystal really the only one who could run this war? If you want to replace him, could somebody else do the job?

You have to remember, McChrystal was put in there because Bob Gates and Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said they had to fire Dave McKiernan, the last guy. He wasn't getting the job done. Stan McChrystal was the only man who could do it. That's dangerous territory to tread on.

SANCHEZ: You know what I want you to do for us, Barbara, explain -- there may be some people out there who are wondering, and they're saying, what are they talking about, Barbara, Gloria, and Rick sitting here? Why can't a general come out and say these things? It's a free country. He has a right to do whatever he wants to do.

But there's something that we've adhered to in this country for a long, long time, which basically is that there is a civilian authority over the military. Can you give the lowdown on that to our viewers so they can understand and help maybe put this thing in perspective for them?

STARR: People talk about that, Rick. Is there a debate between Gates and the generals, between the generals and the White House? There is no debate. In the United States the president of the United States is commander in chief. There is, in fact, civilian control of the military.

If you are in the military and you don't like what the president is doing, you have one choice and one choice only, and that is to resign and move on with your private life. You do not criticize the president of the United States or the civilian control of the military in this country as long as you are wearing the uniform.

And I take it right back to those young troops in the field. Any mixed message to them about who's in charge, who's in control, is really not a good thing. They need to know that the president is running the war.

SANCHEZ: I'm glad you put that in perspective. Go ahead, Gloria.

BORGER: It's not only a mixed message, which it would send, but it's also distracting to the people -- to the folks serving in the field. You don't want anything to distract them from their mission.

And when you hear about McChrystal's aides going out and talking about not only the president of the United States but also calling the national security adviser a clown, what are they to think about the policy they're out there defending?

SANCHEZ: Yes. Yes. It would seem that you could make an argument that it undermines the very thing they're there to do.

My thanks to both of you. This is an important conversation, an important national conversation, and we are going to continue it. My thanks to both of you, and we'll hopefully be able to talk to you again soon.

Meanwhile, he's been a key part of the president's economic team. So why is the White House budget director suddenly up and leaving?

Also, General McChrystal's now infamous article in "Rolling Stone" did more than just put him in the hot seat. It gave us a glimpse into the man behind the four stars. I've got the list of the top five things you didn't know about General McChrystal. We're on it, exclusive information. This is your list, "RICK'S LIST." And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, this is Sarah from Washington. How dare this McChrystal do what he's doing. He should be fired right on the spot. You do not ever go over the head of your president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. We're continuing our coverage on General McChrystal's shocking comments in this article in "Rolling Stone." They did more to get him in hot water with the president. It gave us a very rare view of who the general really is.

Now, I've created a list for you, the top five things you may not even know about him. Number five, McChrystal is a writer. At West Point he was the managing editor of the school magazine and even wrote short stories that foreshadowed many of the issues that he would face in his career.

Number four, did you know he's what some call a military brat? His father retired as a two-star general who served in Korea and Vietnam. His four brothers all joined the military as well.

Number three, he's a health nut. Starts every day in Afghanistan with a seven-mile run, and ran five miles to work every morning when he was at the Pentagon. Sleeps only four hours a night, eats one meal a day.

Number two, he is a Bruce Lee fan. His daily itineraries often have Bruce lee quotes in them. He even carries a custom-made set of nunchakus in his convoy engraved with his name and four stars.

Number one, though, some would say he's not that romantic. Since the Iraq War began in 2003, he's seen his wife less than 30 days a year, and for their recent 33rd wedding anniversary, he took her and 20 of his staff people to an Irish pub in Paris, with his staff.

Here's the question I'm asking you, and I'm serious. I want you to tweet me. The twitter board is all but exploding. Just in the last half hour we had something like 3,000 or 4,000 people sending in messages about this story.

So let me ask you this question then. Tomorrow, when McChrystal meets with the president of the United States, he should walk in and immediately apologize. That's A. B, he should walk in, apologize, and then immediately resign. That's B. Or, c, he should be fired on the spot.

What do you think? Let me know your answers, more perspective. This is your list, "RICK'S LIST." Your national conversation continues after the break. High arches.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: There is one big story today that we're following for you. In case you haven't heard, it's the comments made by General Stanley McChrystal in an interview in "Rolling Stone" magazine.

And I know some of you are just now getting home from work, so let me give you a couple of the highlights so you know what we're talking about. In our business, we have a tendency to want to cover the story and give you what the reaction is before you get a chance to know what the facts are, so let me share some of those with you.

In this article, he criticizes the French -- uses some -- he and his staff, his inner circle, use very derogatory language, refers to Joe biden at one point as "Bite me," criticizes the president of the United States, says the president of the United States clearly didn't know anything about him.

Some really contentious conversation about Jim Jones, calls him a clown. One aide of his calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and veteran of the cold war a clown. Critical of Richard Holbrooke. Critical as well of Ambassador Eikenberry. I could go on and on.

Obviously that is why this is the big story in the news, that a U.S. commander would use this kind of language and allow these opinions, these very strong, critical opinions of some of his own colleagues and his supervisors to go out on the record as it has.

We understand he's apologized and he's now flying back to meet with the president of the United States.

Joining us now is a former top CIA field commander in Afghanistan, Gary Berntsen, who is also the author of "Jawbreaker," a nonfiction account of the war. He's also a Republican senatorial candidate from New York, and he's good enough to join us now.

I should mention that Mr. Berntsen is a big part of a book that I'm writing now. He talks extensively as he's talked to me in the past about some of the huge mistakes that were made at the outset of the war in Afghanistan that some could argue would have possibly even ended the war if things had been done differently.

So let's talk Afghanistan. What do you expect -- first of all, Gary, are you there?

GARY BERNTSEN, (R) NEW YORK SENATE CANDIDATE: I'm here.

SANCHEZ: Good to see you. Listen, what do you expect that the result of this will be on the guys and gals on the ground there in Afghanistan? I can't imagine this could be positive in any way, right?

BERNTSEN: No, of course. He made very, very unfortunate statements. However, this is probably our best special operator, the leader of many operations whose commander of the joint special operations command when they killed Zarqawi in Iraq, which really led to reducing the violence significantly.

SANCHEZ: Do you know him?

BERNTSEN: I've not met him but I have many friends that have worked very close with him and admire him greatly. Actually my son is in the army seasoned admires him greatly and is under his command. SANCHEZ: What got into him? Why would we say some things that are really according to most people I've talked to so unbecoming of a military man and especially with as high a rank as he has?

BERNTSEN: Unfortunate, sometimes are 7,000 miles from the flag out there and they may say things that they will regret later.

What we need, though, in Afghanistan, more than anything else, is continuity of command. And the situation is extremely complicated. It's violent. We've had maybe eight or nine commanders in the last eight or nine years. We do not need to be flipping another commander right now.

He needs to go in. He needs to apologize, and then we need to move forward and we need to get him on the ground to help bring this conflict to an end.

SANCHEZ: But you could argue, Gary, that that would be fine if it was the first time or a simple mistake. But you could really argue that this is the third time he's had a propensity toward insubordination.

BERNTSEN: You still have to look at a greater good for America and the lives of those people on the ground there. It's unfortunate his relationship with the White House is poor. And I would say to you that I would not want to lose him.

And I know that many of the special operators on the ground out there, the CIA people, very, very much respect him, enjoy working with him, trust him greatly. And even though a few comments were made, I think he's going to have to apologize, I'll say this, I believe the president needs McChrystal more than McChrystal needs the president right now.

SANCHEZ: An interesting perspective. Gary Berntsen, my thanks to you for taking time to join us on this and sharing that perspective. We're going to get as many reactions to this as we possibly can. You're watching your list. This is your national conversation. I'm Rick Sanchez and this is "RICK'S LIST."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.

The big news, obviously, is what's going on with General Stanley McChrystal. I've been asking many of you what your comments are. By the way, we also got reactions now from Joe Lieberman and from John McCain, both saying essentially they support McChrystal.

As to whether the punishment should be yea or nay, most are noncommittal, allowing the president to have his meeting with him. And I guess the big news on that will come out tomorrow when the president meets with him.

By the way, stand by, because I'm going to share more information with you in just a little bit, and that is the reaction that came today from Robert Gibbs at the White House. It's quite interesting when he was asked to characterize how angry or if the president was angry. He also was asked to characterize the mistake that McChrystal may have made.

And he was also asked to describe what's going to happen tomorrow, all very consistent answers. In fact, take a look at this piece of sound right here as we go into the tease.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is McChrystal's job safe?

GIBBS: We'll have more to say after that meeting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: It was like a cut at the knees, "We'll have more to say at that meeting." I think most of the people in the room knew when he was saying by that. That's reaction from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

We've got a lot more. In fact, we put the whole thing together for you and he goes through that litany of questions. We'll have that when we come back. Stay right there. This is your national conversation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez. The big story, General McChrystal, and again, a lot of comments from all of you. There's not a lot of you defending General McChrystal's actions, but there was one. We put that at the top of the list.

From the top, "God bless General McChrystal for saying what he believes in and telling what his commanders in chief need to here, not what he wants."

Number two, "McChrystal is completely out of line and shows no respect. He should resign. This man is responsible for our military." Wow.

Number three, "The general should, a, explain what he meant and why, b, apologize, and then, c., fired on the spot." The next one, "B, fired on the spot. The commander in chief must command and have the full trust of their soldiers, especially the military."

Now I want you to hear something else. After McChrystal's situation and the article that came out, Robert Gibbs, the press secretary for the president of the United States had his briefing today. He was asked a bevy of questions about this.

Watch the way he answers them and watch as he answers more and more questions about how he starts to get more specific about what he might see tomorrow. Go ahead and roll that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is McChrystal's job safe?

GIBBS: We'll have more to say after that meeting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you characterize at all the president's reaction to hearing that General McChrystal called Vice President Biden "Bite me" and a McChrystal adviser said clearly Obama didn't know anything about McChrystal when they first met. He didn't seem very engaged and the boss was very disappointed.

GIBBS: He will have his undivided attention tomorrow.

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.

I think our efforts in Afghanistan are bigger than one person.

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

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How so?

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

(LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What bothered the president most about what he said?

GIBBS: We're distracting from what the president considers to be an enormously vital mission for our country and our own forces.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: General McChrystal has already had his woodshed moment with the president last year after London. How many times can he be taken to the woodshed by the commander in chief?

GIBBS: We'll know more about that indeed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Indeed. Is Commander Stanley McChrystal finished after outlandish comments in "Rolling Stones" magazine? I spoke to the author of the "Rolling Stone" shocker. It's an exclusive interview. We're going to replay part of that for you in case you missed it.

Also, the president says no more drilling until we figure out how to do it safely in the Gulf. And now a judge has overruled the president of the United States. How will this affect the situation in the Gulf? That's on top of Poppy's "CNN Money List." There she is. We're coming right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back to "RICK'S LIST." I'm Rick Sanchez. The president of United States has said until we learn how to do deepwater drilling, he's going to put a moratorium on it. But now a judge has come back in a federal court in New Orleans and blocked the president's moratorium.

That's atop of Poppy Harlow's CNN Money List today. I bet that will have an impact on Wall Street. A lot of folks are going to be saying, if we drill again we probably would do better in the bottom line as well, right?

POPPY HARLOW, CNN MONEY LIST: Yes, big news for big oil. This decision came down in the last hour and a half. As you said, the federal judge in New Orleans overturning the president's decision.

So technically I guess the deepwater drilling at these rigs, that could go back into effect unless the White House can get a stay on that. They are appealing immediately to the fifth circuit.

But what you're looking at, folks, look at the side of your screen. BP and Anadarko, those are the two biggest companies involved in that Deepwater Horizon rig that exploded. They are the two companies with the most at stake here. They have the most deepwater drills in all of the Gulf of Mexico. They have 24 together Rick out of the 70 total. This could be very good news for those companies. Looking at their stocks, right now as the trading day wraps up, they're down about two percent and (INAUDBILE) closed down about four percent. But this is very big news for big oil going to be really interesting, to see how the global markets react to this, as markets open around the world.