Return to Transcripts main page
Rick's List
General McChrystal Resigns
Aired June 23, 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: There's so much going on T.J. As a matter of fact, you know what? We're going to -- we have just been told moments ago that we have got some brand-new video that is coming in right now from Toronto. You're going to see some video with an awful lot of shaking on it. We're going to turn that around as soon as we come back.
First, though, here's the list of the LIST.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ (voice-over): Here's what's making the LIST today.
Is this President Obama's MacArthur moment with a general who's caught criticizing superiors and colleagues openly?
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today, I accepted General Stanley McChrystal's resignation.
SANCHEZ: Determining the fate of General Stanley McChrystal after his scathing comments in "Rolling Stone."
MICHAEL HASTINGS, "ROLLING STONE": He's a risk-taker. And, sometimes, they push the envelope to get their message across.
SANCHEZ: What happens now in Afghanistan after the man in charge is heard saying that, after nearly nine years, we still don't have the initiative? The most correspondents working every detail of the story, from Afghanistan to the White House to Congress.
And the winner is?
NIKKI HALEY (R), SOUTH CAROLINA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: This is a great night.
SANCHEZ: Nikki Haley comes out on top after a long, bruising, personal and attack-filled Republican primary. How do you like me now?
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: All right, before we go anything else -- and obviously we're going to be rooted in the Stanley McChrystal story and everything that's coming out of Washington on that.
But, before we do that, I have just been told that we have got some brand-new video. This video is coming in from Ottawa, Canada. They have just -- let's watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh (EXPLETIVE DELETED).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: You see people running in front of the speaker. The guy at the dais looks like he's a little shaken himself, not just from the shaking, but he's trying to figure out what's going on. Why is my audience leaving the room?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't always exit with such drama, but...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Well, he is this time. Let's watch this again, and I will give you the information.
This is a 5.0 quake they felt there in just the last hour. And we are just now starting to get some of the general reports on what may have happened. And whenever you cover a story like this, more often than not, some of the -- more often than not, some of the video and some of the reports come in usually a little bit afterwards.
So, we're going to watch this for you. There are no indications at this point that this has been -- that this has had any kind of disastrous impact on the area. But there may be some reports forthcoming. And, as they do, you can depend on us here on CNN.
I know on this show particular we have got a ton of people who watch us every day from Canada. So you can depend on us.
Angie, let me know as soon as we get any kind of video, any kind of information, anything that would quantify either the damage or the effect that this has had on the people there. We will bring to it you right away.
That's a promise we will keep.
Meanwhile, the big story that everyone all over the world has been following is the story affecting General Stanley McChrystal.
Will he will relieved of his duties after the outlandish things that he was quoted saying not only about his superiors, but also about some of his colleagues, in "Rolling Stone"? The decision was up to one man, the president of the United States. Let me share with you some of the things that the president goes over when he comes out and he makes this speech, because he did, in fact, relieve Stanley McChrystal of his duties in Afghanistan.
It was one heck of a moment. He said I -- he did it -- he says he did it with regret. He said, interestingly enough, and this is important, that there's no difference between Obama as the president and his policies in Afghanistan and the policies of Stanley McChrystal. It all came down to one thing: conduct, conduct. And the president said it time and time again, conduct that undermines civilian control and erodes the trust of his other members of the military.
Here now -- this is about two minutes, I believe. I want you to listen to what the president of the United States said when he made this decision, surrounded by some of his top brass there outside the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Today I accepted General Stanley McChrystal's resignation as commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. I did so with considerable regret, but also with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission in Afghanistan, for our military, and for our country.
I'm also pleased to nominate General David Petraeus to take command in Afghanistan, which will allow us to maintain the momentum and leadership that we need to succeed.
I don't make this decision based on any difference in policy with General McChrystal, as we are in full agreement about our strategy. Nor do `I make this decision out of any sense of personal insult. Stan McChrystal has always shown great courtesy and carried out my orders faithfully.
All Americans should be grateful for General McChrystal's remarkable career in uniform.
But war is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general or a president. And as difficult as it is to lose General McChrystal, I believe that it is the right decision for our national security.
The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general.
It undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. And it erodes the trust that's necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.
My multiple responsibilities as commander in chief led me to this decision. (END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: So, who will succeed him? In fact, it will be General Petraeus, a decision that's being applauded around Washington.
In fact, John McCain, just moments ago -- this is interesting -- This is the opponent of President Obama. He's speaking still live. Moments ago, I was told that he applauded the president for his decision to relieve the general of his command. Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: ... talked to Senator Levin, and it will be done very soon.
The concern that we have is the -- and the issue that will be raised in General Petraeus' confirmation hearings is exactly what is meant by withdrawal in the middle of 2011, whether that is -- quote -- "etched in stone," as the president's spokesperson, Mr. Gibbs, stated, or whether it will be conditions-based.
Obviously, we feel very strongly that it needs to be condition- based because if you tell the enemy when you are leaving, then obviously it has an adverse effect on your ability to succeed.
So, that is a major concern. And there's still a great deal of ambiguity about that issue. I am convinced that we can succeed in Afghanistan with the leadership and the talent of the young men and women who are serving.
But we have to send a message that we will do whatever is necessary in order to achieve success, and that -- and if that means a longer period of time or even an increase in troops as necessary, that those actions will not be precluded in consideration of the facts on the ground at the time.
I would remind you that, during the Bush administration, during the Bush administration, the three of us stood up for an increase in troops when it was opposed by then Secretary Rumsfeld. We stood up for a surge when it was opposed by President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld.
And it's not anything that is a -- but an honest difference of opinion between ourselves and the president of the United States. The withdrawal of U.S. troops must be based on conditions at the time, not on an arbitrary date.
SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (I), CONNECTICUT: Thanks, John.
Because General Stan McChrystal is a brave war fighter...
SANCHEZ: All right, Joseph Lieberman up now. Let's go ahead and listen to him. Let's stay on this.
LIEBERMAN: ... of the multinational forces in Afghanistan, the unfortunate and inappropriate comments that he made in the article presented President Obama with a very hard decision.
But I think the president today stepped up and dealt with it directly and strongly, and made the right decision in accepting General McChrystal's offer of resignation.
SANCHEZ: All right, there you go. So, that's two -- we understand Lindsey Graham may be coming to the mike as well. But that's two general opponents of the president when it comes to many of the president's policies, including some of his policies on the war in Afghanistan.
You heard John McCain allude to that moments ago. He's not in favor of the president's summer deadline for tipping off the enemy as to when you're getting out. He thinks that perhaps that should be prolonged, a point that's not exclusive to John McCain, by the way. It's made by a lot of people, including some military officials.
But the bottom line is and the top story remains that this general has been removed of his -- relieved of his command in Afghanistan. And the president, once again -- and we're going to be talking about this throughout the show -- did it for the following reasons.
Pure and simple, he said the conduct undermines civilian control and erodes trust in the military. He said that he won't tolerate division in the military.
He says he's saddened to lose a soldier like this that he admired, he said. But he said that, to defeat al Qaeda, what we need most is unity as a nation.
Our Pentagon correspondent is Barbara Starr. She has been following the story since yesterday. She's been making news.
Barbara, what do you have?
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Rick, this is now reverberating around the Pentagon and reverberating all the way to Kabul.
General Petraeus, as well-known in military circles, if not better than General McChrystal, of course, he will be making his way to Kabul probably we can assume as soon as he is confirmed.
What we are learning is General McChrystal is not expected to even return to Afghanistan. His staff will go back, pack up his personal goods, and send them to him.
I think the thing that the president said that is being heard by the military the most is that war is not bigger than -- one man is not bigger than the war, the war is not about one man.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
STARR: General McChrystal became the face of this war. I think, when General Petraeus takes over, you will see him probably try and take a slightly lower profile than we're used to seeing him over the last several years. He's going to want to do whatever he can to get the job done Rick.
SANCHEZ: Yes, that -- you make a great point, Barbara.
That was so interesting when the president started -- the president used this speech -- and I don't know if it was a great political move. I will let the people who write speeches make that decision.
But it was interesting to see him talk to the soldier in the field. And he essentially was saying to them, Barbara -- you heard the part of the speech where he said, you know what, if you -- if the lowest-ranking private can't do this, then a general can't do it either.
He was almost talking from a point of equality. How -- why -- why -- what's the background on that? Amplify on that for us, if you would.
STARR: Well, look, the reality is, of course, a four-star general gets a lot of privileges that a private 1st class doesn't, except...
SANCHEZ: Right.
STARR: ... except for appropriate conduct. Everybody is supposed to obey the same rules. Nobody gets a free pass. And the red line was saying disparaging remarks about the president of the United States.
Even if President Obama didn't take it personally, he can't let that stand, because it's an -- it's essentially disparaging the office of the president. That is not done in this country. That is conduct unbecoming. So, that's the first thing that probably led to General McChrystal not being able to stay on.
So, that message went out to the troops, which is, I'm going to hold a four-star as accountable for his action -- actions as I would hold you, Private 1st Class.
But, Rick, the other message to the troops here is, I know the fight is tough. This whole counterinsurgency thing is causing a lot of stress on the force. Troops feel they're fighting with a hand tied behind their back, that they can't go into combat as much as they might think they need to, all of that a real strain on the force. The president's aware of that. He is going to put Petraeus in to try and take charge of that issue.
SANCHEZ: Oh, yes.
That's going to be -- well, you know what? We're going to talk a little bit more about that with Michael Scherer when we come back here in just a moment. He's the "TIME" magazine White House correspondent. And he's writing about this on this day as well, as well as there's a political side to this story, too, because there was a -- you know, a lot of people were really wondering -- this is one of those decisions where the president has to make a decision.
And a lot of people really didn't know which way he was going to go. And no matter where he went on this, there was a possibility that he would be catching some grief and some criticism, either from the left or from the right. We're going to talk about that part of the story as well with our own White House correspondent, Suzanne Malveaux, in just a little bit.
Stay right there. There's a lot more that we need to get to. And we're still getting more reaction from both the Hill, from Republicans and Democrats, on this story, and we're going to bring you a lot of that in just a moment.
Also, this:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HALEY: Thank you very much. God bless you. Let's take it to November.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: What a story this is in South Carolina. The rumors of alleged affairs did not seem to hurt Tea Party favorite Nikki Haley. She could be the next governor of South Carolina. And guess who reunited for her victory party? Would you believe if I told you it was the Sanfords? That's ahead.
And then more with our team, including Atia Abawi, who is on the ground now in Kabul with reaction from Afghanistan about one stepping out and the other stepping in, Petraeus back in charge.
First, let me remind you where and how this all started. It's this man, Michael Hastings. He wrote the controversial article. And I was lucky enough to get the very first interview with him yesterday. Let me take you back to just a little bit of that as we continue here on RICK'S LIST.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL HASTINGS, "ROLLING STONE": 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.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: There is so much reaction coming in.
Welcome back. This is your national conversation. I'm Rick Sanchez. This is RICK'S LIST. A lot of information coming in on this decision by the president of the United States to ask -- or to relieve Stanley McChrystal of his duty as commander in Afghanistan.
Let me tell you who we have got coming up. We have got Michael Scherer. He covers the White House for "TIME" magazine. He's standing by. We have got Atia Abawi. She's joining us from Kabul with the very latest on what's going on there. And, of course, our White House correspondent is Suzanne Malveaux.
Suzanne, I understand that you have got some information for us. So, I'm going to just toss it right to you. What have you got?
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: OK, Rick, well, here's how we want to do it.
Obviously there is a briefing that's happening right now with a senior administration official inside the White House. My colleague Dan Lothian is actually there covering it. And he is sending me messages through the BlackBerry, all the latest information here.
So, we're going to give it to you as we're getting it here. But we understand that first how it started, the president met with McChrystal for about 30 minutes or so. He accepted his resignation.
And then what happened was there was a meeting for about 45 minutes between the president, the vice president, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gates, as well as General Jones.
They all decided in a huddle what's going to happen next. Who are we going to decide to hand off this position to? One of the names that was on the list was General David Petraeus, that they had made this decision together, and that then it was the president who met with Petraeus for about 40 minutes or so one-on-one to offer him the position, then tell him, look, I want you to be my guy to command Afghanistan.
So, he asked him to go. And then, after that, he went to the Situation Room, that big meeting that they had with the national security team, to explain his decision, why Petraeus was the one that would be doing this. And that lasted for about 30 minutes.
The tone of that meeting, we're told, was -- the president was very stern, and he walked through the decision that he had made. Since then, Rick, we have also learned that the president has reached out to the British prime minister, Cameron.
He's also reached out to Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai. He's also reached out to the leadership, the Senate leadership, to try to urge this confirmation process to continue forward in a very expedient way. And this senior administration official tells us -- obviously, this it their take on this -- that the main focus was that the president was explaining to folks that, look, we can have our disagreements and our debates, but we don't want this to devolve in pettiness and that this issue of trust was actually a pretty big deal.
So, that's actually the latest we're getting here from inside the White House as they give us this information on background.
SANCHEZ: Was there any -- I'm curious. And it's not just for you, but for anybody else out there who happens to know.
Michael, maybe you know. You have certainly been sniffing around all day as well. Is there any information out there that would lead us to believe that anyone in the vicinity of the president of the United States was pushing the president to forgive and retain Stanley McChrystal?
And, as a caveat to that, did McChrystal himself in any way argue for his position or for the excusal of any of the things he said or did? Does anybody know?
Suzanne, I will start with you.
MALVEAUX: Well, we know that General McChrystal offered an apology and then an explanation and then quickly his resignation. I know that Barbara Starr has reported that they really -- they didn't really get a sense that the president was going to be hearing anything else.
We know just from some of the things that happened is that -- from this morning, when I spoke with a senior administration official, they said, look, they asked the Pentagon for a list of names to replace him, that the president was very much prepared to let him go during that meeting.
Obviously, he wanted to hear him out, but he was very prepared that they were ready to change the leadership.
SANCHEZ: I guess, Michael Scherer, that's what I'm curious about. If you're going to be dressed down by somebody, if you're going to be called into your boss' office, do -- sure, you may be able to say, I understand you're upset and I'm willing to resign, but let me under -- let me make sure that you understand the context of what happened here.
Has any of that come out? Is there any context to this "Rolling Stone" article, either from Stanley McChrystal or any of his aides?
MICHAEL SCHERER, "TIME": The one bit of contest we have heard is that there were other statements made to the "Rolling Stone" reporter that have yet to come out because they were made off the record. So, presumably, even worse things were said than what we heard.
I'm sure -- what's interesting about the White House reaction to this is, immediately, the senior staff put in place a system whereby the president would have time to deliberate on this. They bought him an entire day yesterday whereby he didn't have to make a decision. They had the flight back.
I'm sure, during that entire time he was taking advice, both from his senior staff, the Pentagon and people outside that inner circle, so that when McChrystal finally arrived at the White House this morning, he probably was already leaning in one direction or another.
And my guess is that there wasn't much McChrystal could have done at that point, given the facts as they were when he walked in that room.
SANCHEZ: Well, you know what? We had the daily guidance and press schedule for the president today. And we saw the list of all the people who were invited. And it seemed like this is almost a list of everyone who could have been invited accept Stanley McChrystal.
And when there's a meeting just before a meeting with you and you're not invited to that preliminary meeting, that's usually a pretty good sign that whatever is going to be said to you is not a good thing.
Atia Abawi is following the situation from Kabul as well.
Atia, what is the -- when will we get an understanding of how this is going to go over with the troops over there, and how important is it that it's someone like Petraeus who's going to be taking over, as opposed to, well, somebody who may have been subservient to Stanley McChrystal?
ATIA ABAWI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's very important that it's actually Petraeus that's taken over. It's important to the Afghan government and it will be important to the troops and the commanders on the ground here in Afghanistan. We're already hearing little by little from the troops on the ground. And there is mixed reactions.
Many of the people like McChrystal, not necessarily for his tactical directive that puts them in harm's way more so than in the past, but it protects the civilians, but at the same time they saw him as a great leader. He did bring some sort of change in Afghanistan.
He brought a change when it came to the American and the NATO perception with the Afghan government and some of the Afghan people.
And you mentioned, who was supporting -- who wanted McChrystal to stay? I can tell you right now, it was President Karzai who went to President Obama in a teleconference call and said that he wanted McChrystal to stay in Afghanistan.
But I also just got off the phone with his spokesperson, Waheed Omer, and they say that they're happy with President Obama's decision to put Petraeus in place because he's an experienced man. They're sad that General McChrystal is going, but they're happy about the decision that Obama made with General Petraeus.
SANCHEZ: Well, you know what? There's a lot that we need to talk about here. And I think part of the conversation and I think a lot of folks sitting at home are wondering about what our troops are doing in Afghanistan want to know.
And if you read this interview in "Rolling Stone," there's a couple of interesting parts to this. And we have got -- I know we have got to get a break in. But I want to talk about this when we come back.
I'm quoting here from the article. This is a Staff Sergeant Kennith Hicks. He's talking to McChrystal while McChrystal is visiting the troops. He says: "Sir, some of the guys here, sir, think we're losing, sir."
This is what Hicks says to him. McChrystal comes back and he says, "The Taliban no longer has the initiative, but I don't think we do either."
This is the commander on the ground in Afghanistan saying that we no longer have the initiative in Afghanistan. And people sitting at home listening to me read this are wondering, if we don't have the initiative after nine years in that country, when will we?
These are questions to ask. And I have got great panelists who are going to be joining us throughout the next couple of hours.
You're watching your national conversation. I'm Rick Sanchez. This is RICK'S LIST.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HASTINGS: 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 that opening scene took place a few hours after I landed in Paris, I believe.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
Atia Abawi is standing by in Kabul, Michael Scherer, as you know, the White House correspondent for "TIME" magazine.
Michael and Atia, both, when I read this article, first, I was -- and as I told Michael yesterday, Michael Hastings, who wrote this story, was good enough to join us here. I was taken aback, first and foremost, by the brash way in which the general discussed his superiors, his colleagues and the brash way in which, almost disrespectful way, he allowed them to discuss those other people.
But then, when I gave it a second reading, I started reading about what's going on in Afghanistan. And in these conversations that he has with troops, like the one I read a moment ago, it sounds like there's a bunch of guys out there, troops, Americans, who are disappointed and are confused about the direction in which the war effort is going.
And then, in this one line, I hear -- and I will read it again.
Michael, I will begin with you, then, Atia, you.
He says to them, "Look, the Taliban doesn't have the initiative, but I don't think we do either."
What's he saying when he says we don't have the initiative? This is a man who's already been given 31,000 more troops from the president and his policy or his strategy is the one that we are essentially going forward with.
Michael?
SCHERER: This isn't a secret in Washington or in Afghanistan that things aren't going as they expected.
But I do agree with you. This "Rolling Stone" article really did break new ground. You have quoted advisers to McChrystal saying, when this thing's over, it's not going to look like a win, it's not going to smell like a win, it's not going to taste like a win.
There's another point in the article where a McChrystal adviser says that he -- that if Americans were paying more attention to the war in Afghanistan, they would be more upset.
What we know is that the Marjah offensive did not go as well as we wanted it to. McChrystal was quoted a number of weeks ago calling it a bleeding ulcer. We know the Kandahar offensive, which was supposed to be the big summer make-or-break offensive, has been delayed, mainly because they haven't been able to make the partnerships they need to make with the Afghan government. .
And I agree with you that once this dust is cleared, President Obama has done very well at asserting himself as the commander in chief, of handling the situation with McChrystal. But this has raised again these issues which the White House really doesn't want to talk about until the end of the year when they have a scheduled review of how well the strategy is proceeding. I think one of the interesting things about Petraeus being put in place is that Petraeus because he's been there from the beginning with this strategy probably will have more flexibility in shifting subtly the strategy as we go forward and changing the policy to fit what has been working, what hasn't been working, because so far, almost everyone agrees it hasn't been working as well as we wanted it.
SANCHEZ: That's an interesting point. I agree with you. I think when the dust settles and everyone's done talking about the potential disruptive way or some people have been saying undisciplined way in which the general and his staff were allowed to talk and the way they've been now castigated for that, the real story will be what's going on in Afghanistan.
One side note, by the way. Ken Allard is a guy I really respect. He's been e-mailing me back and forth today. He does something called "The Daily Caller." And this is interesting because Ken doesn't suffer fools gladly, and that means members of the media or members of the political circles.
He says, "While arrogance is a civilian prerogative, it's appearance among the unwashed military classes is uppity and unforgivable." He's writing of course about Stanley McChrystal, a guy who he says is a fantastic soldier who he respects incredibly so.
Atia, back to you, this conversation I was just having a moment ago with Michael, I want to introduce it with you. If the troops are frustrated and they really don't understand their mission or they want to push forward more, I know Americans don't get, as Michael just alluded to, that things in Afghanistan aren't going well.
But do the troops sense that? Do you get from them that they don't think that this thing in the end is going to turn out gloriously?
ABAWI: Well, you know, Rick, the troops on the ground are confused. I was there in Marjah with the marines. I was there for the air assault. I was there for the couple of weeks when they were under hard fire.
We were being shot at. We were stepping on IEDs that luckily didn't go off. I experienced only a couple of weeks of that, they're experiencing months of that.
But when I asked them that question, how does it feel to have to restrain yourself, of course, they were frustrated. But they say they understood. They say that they knew they had to win the hearts and minds of the Afghans. They also knew the biggest problem was civilian casualties.
And when we go back to that statement you read from the article where it says, quote, "We don't have the initiative, too." I think that's misrepresented in the article.
I've spoken to General Stanley McChrystal on many interviews and behind closed doors and he's explained that to me as well. He's not using that as a factor of bringing the troops down. He was hoping to use that as a motivating factor to show them that they need to ramp it up, this is a chance to defeat the Taliban.
Right now, obviously, I should also mention, I know Michael Hastings. He was here. He lived with us the 30 days he was spending with General McChrystal.
And I know Michael in way that he has a purpose for writing this article as well. If you notice the last two pages of the article was an anti-war sentiment, and he is not for the war in Afghanistan. Neither was he for the war in Iraq, and he made that message clear in the article in "Rolling Stone."
SANCHEZ: Then you wonder -- you get to a lot of questions here about why, then, allow someone with "Rolling Stone," given what we know about "Rolling Stone," they're a very progressive magazine, why allow them not to just do an interview but to follow the general for something like a month, which is a big part of the story as well.
Stay right there. Gloria Borger, Roland Martin.
ABAWI: A simple Google search.
SANCHEZ: Would have done it, right? Well, that's interesting. Gloria Borger and Roland Martin are standing by as well. This is a big national conversation that we're having today.
In case you're just now getting home from work, Stanley McChrystal has been relieved of his duty as commander in Afghanistan. General Petraeus will be filling in for him in his stead. The reception so far has been positive on both the Democratic and the Republican, international reaction coming in as well, and we're going to share it with you.
One other side note, we know many of you didn't get to hear the president's comments. It was a historic comment for the president to make flanked by all his men. And we're going to have that for you as well. We'll play the entire thing throughout this show.
You're watching "RICK'S LIST." I'm Rick Sanchez. A lot going on and we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right, I'm going to let you hear what the president said in just a moment. I know many of you are just getting home from work and you didn't get to hear this historic moment, the president of the United States essentially relieving a top general of his command during a war in Afghanistan.
Before we do that, let me introduce our next guests -- Gloria Borger is joining us as well as Roland Martin. What I'm interested in, Roland and Gloria. I'm surprised a little bit by the fact that on the right, look, the president need this had like he needed a hole in his head, right? Last thing he needed was another problem in addition to BP. But you wondered, depending on what he did, what kind of reaction he would get from the right. And all the reaction we're seeing so far from the right, including the two we've played for our viewers here, is congressmen and senators coming before the cameras and saying, you know what, we think the president did the right thing.
Are either one of you surprised by that?
GLORIA BORGER, SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I'm not surprised at all.
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I'm not surprised at all.
SANCHEZ: Gloria, I'll start with you.
BORGER: General Petraeus was there at the inception of the counterinsurgency strategy. He's somebody who has the confidence of an awful lot of Republicans.
And I think what's going to be really interesting, though, Rick, is to see whether the entire strategy and this notion of starting to draw down the troops a year from now starts coming out in his confirmation hearings that we're going to see next week. You already heard John McCain questioning the virtue of a drawdown.
And so there was supposed to be a policy review in December that was built in. I think we're going to see it next week.
SANCHEZ: You know what's interesting is a lot of Americans would ask themselves, Gloria, just to pick up on that one point for just a moment -- a lot of Americans would ask themselves when it comes to Afghanistan, well, we weren't necessarily succeeding. It wasn't going well when we didn't have a deadline. So what makes us think that we're not doing well because we have a deadline? It seems to not work either way.
BORGER: Right. And that's the question. And in reading the "Rolling Stone" piece, I know you've been talking about this for a couple of days -- when you read the "Rolling Stone" piece, I think the real question it raises is how the troops feel about the counterinsurgency strategy and whether they believe that it ties their hands when they're out there in the field.
And those are questions that are going to be revisited. But largely politically, we're going to go back and have the argument that we had when the president first had his Afghanistan review. We're going to see it all over again on Capitol Hill next week.
SANCHEZ: Roland, did you want to say -- go ahead. Pick up on that, Roland.
MARTIN: First and foremost, it's no surprise you don't see Republicans somehow coming to the defense of McChrystal. Obviously conservative critics try to go after the president by trying to tag him as being responsible, in essence taking up the mantra of McChrystal supporters in that "Rolling Stone" article.
But the reality is you can't stand here and say we're going to become the guy who disrespected the chain of command, who actually had conduct unbecoming of an officer. And so if any Republican comes out and sides with McChrystal, they're nuts.
But also here's what jumps out at me in this article. This is a president who largely followed the plan McChrystal offered. And so, sure, you had folks like Vice President Joe Biden question it. But how can the McChrystal supporters even sit here and blast the White House because they're the ones in the field executing the plan he wanted? Maybe their frustration is their plan isn't working.
SANCHEZ: Did you notice in this article -- this is fascinating because McCain just came before the cameras and he said the president did the right thing.
He criticizes Jim Jones or his staff criticizes Jim Jones. And then it goes on to say, "Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, and then get back for their Sunday talk shows." So they don't like McCain, they don't like Kerry.
Guess what they like? In this article, there is one politician who McChrystal --
BORGER: Hillary!
SANCHEZ: Hillary Clinton. They like Hillary Clinton.
BORGER: But it's not because they like Hillary Clinton. It's because they consider Hillary Clinton to be on their side in certain internal wars that the White House might be having.
Hillary Clinton is known to be a little bit more hawkish, for example, than Joe Biden, and she was during the entire review on Afghanistan. So it's really no surprise.
SANCHEZ: I'm just wondering out loud. He criticizes Jim Jones who's a marine. He criticized Biden whose son is over there, was over there. He criticizes Holbrooke.
So if the only criticism had been at the president, would the right be so apt to defend the president on this day? Just a question. And by the way, we have to get a break in -- go ahead, Roland. I knew you would jump on that bait.
MARTIN: There's no doubt you would have that. But you can't have Republicans who are always talking about they believe in the strong military except somebody who disrespects the chain of command. They would look like total hypocrites.
SANCHEZ: And respectfully speaking, almost everyone in this country has said that the chain of command is important and they have been resoundingly critical of everything McChrystal has done even though they agree he's a great soldier and served his country well. Let's get a break in, but we understand we have Dana Bash on the other side. She's about to make some news for us. "RICK'S LIST" continues. Let's get this break in and we'll come right back. More news from Washington, Dana Bash, as usual, coming forward with more information, as you expect from us here on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: I promised you at the beginning of this newscast with as many correspondents as we have following this story we would get new increments of information coming in from time to time. Our senior Congressional Correspondent is Dana Bash. She's telling us she has something to report. Let's go right to her. Dana, what have you got?
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Rick, what's been fascinating as we've talked to member of Congress and getting reaction to today's bombshell event is that this has really exposed big concerns on both sides of the aisle, not with the personality of General McChrystal, but with more importantly perhaps the Afghan policy.
And we heard from the president's fellow liberals -- remember we're four and a half months before an Election Day, and that has to be mentioned as part of this -- who are already saying this is true, we have to get the troops out of Afghanistan. That is the last thing the president needs at the surface right now.
And then Republicans, in fact, lead Republicans as you saw on your program, John McCain and others, saying this exposes the fact that the whole coordination with the civilian leadership and the military is dysfunctional. And by the way, they're saying, no, no, we shouldn't bring the troops home starting in July 2011.
So we are seeing that elevate to the top of the new cycle right now, which is not what the president needs right now.
Beyond that, the whole question of General McChrystal -- Lindsey Graham, I'm not sure if you saw this earlier, fascinating. He is not only a senator. He is a member of the JAG corps, a military lawyer. And he was asked whether or not he thought General McChrystal could be served a court-martial with insubordination. Listen to his emotional response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: The statements of the general not only were outside the norm, they really did put in question military subordination to civilian control. How do you think "Rolling Stone" is a good group to have follow you around for a month is a judgment question?
(LAUGHTER)
The second thing is -- let me just say this to these officers who are unnamed, to these officer who are unnamed, I understand you're warriors and you've been shot at and you're brave. But you let yourself and your army down.
The language used, the cavalier attitude, the disrespect, even though you may have disagreement, was unacceptable. This is a low point, in my view, for the armed forces in a very long time. And I am glad the president made this decision. And some other officers need to be looked at.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Wow.
BASH: Yes, pretty strong stuff. Our Barbara Starr has been saying she does not believe General McChrystal will be court-martialed for insubordination. It's unclear if any of his juniors will be.
But you saw Senator Graham and Senator McCain who's steeped in military matters, many of them yesterday and to this morning not wanting to get ahead of the president. But now that the president has made his decision there, they are making it very clear publicly they believe it was the right decision with regard to what is proper as a general in the United States military.
SANCHEZ: But the real irony here, Dana, is, have these actions by the general and his men forced Americans ironically enough to now start looking at the situation in Afghanistan and begin to wonder if the effort is worth it if in fact it's causing this type of consternation and frustration amongst the men and women fighting the war and the superiors who are leading them?
BASH: You're exactly right. And that is precisely what the point is among many of the more progressive Democrats that we've been hearing from today. And that is precisely what is causing a potential problem for the president, not just with the policy, but also politically.
Look, this is a president, this is a Democratic Party who already has a base that is really demoralized, and one of the main issues is the fact that he sent 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
And so it is very possible that you might have, as you said, this now in the forefront, and some of these rank and file members of Congress and maybe more importantly the base who says, you know what, forget it. This is a reminder. This is not what we signed up for.
But again, it's important to point out on the other hand you have John McCain and many other Republicans here saying, no, we have to stay the course. This from their perspective this is evidence of how the policy doesn't go far enough. He said today maybe we should send more troops.
SANCHEZ: Good reporting. Dana bash, as usual, bringing us up to date. That piece of sound you just shared with us from Lindsay Graham was probably as telling as anything else we've seen.
As we go to break, the beginning of the story yesterday when I was talking to Michael Hastings, the reporter who was there for a month as previously mentioned with General McChrystal. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HASTINGS: There were ground rules that were given to me. I think it's all very clear that it was on the record. And there were parts off the record that I didn't use.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: This is one of those historic moments -- Eisenhower versus Patton, Truman versus MacArthur. In this case history will write President Barack Obama versus Stanley McChrystal.
What you're about to see, and you can get your DVRs ready if you want, was the highly anticipated comments from the president of the United States about two hours ago when he came out and made his decision that everyone wanted to know. What was he going to do about this wayward general who had said some things most presidents would not accept?
Well, here now the president's own words, and you'll hear his comments in their entirety. Have at it.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BARACK OBAMA, (D) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Good afternoon. Today I accepted General Stanley McChrystal's resignation as commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. I did so with considerable regret but also with certainty that it is the right thing for our mission in Afghanistan, for our military, and for our country.
I'm also pleased to nominate General David Petraeus to take command in Afghanistan, which will allow us to maintain the momentum and leadership that we need to succeed.
I don't make this decision based on any difference in policy with General McChrystal as we are in full agreement about our strategy. Nor do I make this decision out of any sense of personal insult. Stan McChrystal has always shown great courtesy and carried out my orders faithfully.
I've got great admiration for him and for his long record of service in uniform. Over the last nine years with America fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan he has earned a reputation as one of our nation's finest soldiers. That reputation is founded upon his extraordinary dedication, his deep intelligence, and his love of country.
I relied on his service, particularly in helping to design and lead our new strategy in Afghanistan. So all Americans should be grateful for General McChrystal's remarkable career in uniform.
But war is bigger than any one man or woman, whether a private, a general, or a president. And as difficult as it is to lose General McChrystal, I believe that it is the right decision for our national security.
The conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general. It undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system, and it erodes the trust that's necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.
My multiple responsibilities as commander in chief led me to this decision. First, I have a responsibility to the extraordinary men and women who are fighting this war and to the democratic institutions that I've been elected to lead. I've got no greater honor than serving as commander in chief of our men and women in uniform.
And it is my duty to ensure that no diversion complicates the vital mission that they are carrying out. That includes adherence to a strict code of conduct. The strength and braveness of our military is rooted in the fact that this code applies equally to newly enlisted privates and to the general officer who commands them.
That allows us to come together as one. That is part of the reason why America has the finest fighting force in the history of the world.
It is also true that our democracy depends upon institutions that are stronger than individuals. That includes strict adherence to the military chain of command and respect for civilian control over that chain of command.
That's why as commander in chief I believe this decision is necessary to hold ourselves accountable to standards that are at the core of our democracy.
Second, I have a responsibility to do whatever is necessary to succeed in Afghanistan and in our broader effort to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda. I believe that this mission demands unity of effort across our alliance and across my national security team. And I don't think that we can sustain that unity of effort and achieve our objectives in Afghanistan without making this change. That, too, has guided my decision.
I've just told my national security team that now is the time for all of us to come together. Doing so is not as an option but as an obligation.
I welcome debate among my team, but I won't tolerate division. All of us have personal interests. All of us have opinions. Our politics often fuels conflicts. But we have to renew our sense of common purpose and meet our responsibilities to one another and to our troops who are in harm's way, and to our country.
We need to remember what this is all about. Our nation is at war. We face a very tough fight in Afghanistan. But Americans don't flinch in the face of difficult truths or difficult tasks. We persist and persevere. We will not tolerate a safe haven for terrorists who want to destroy Afghan society from within and launch attacks against innocent men, women, and children in our country and around the world.
So make no mistake. We have a clear goal. We are going to break the Taliban's momentum. We are going to build Afghan capacity. We are going to relentlessly apply pressure on Al Qaeda and its leadership, strengthening the ability of both Afghanistan and Pakistan to do the same.
