joining us david sanger of "the new york times", david martin of cbs news and former fbi deputy director philip mudd. >> i think the most important message that its president's probably going to have is that cyberissues, whether it's cybersecurity, cyberespionage, whether or not it's possible to come to some kind of an agreement between the united states and china, how to limit the use of these weapons, that these have moved it from the periphery of the u.s. china relationship where they really were even a year or two ago. and they have now moved to the center. >> rose: we conclude way conversation dow not want to miss it is with sir ken robinson, not only is he the person who has been voted number one among all the ted talks, he's also written a book for you called finding your element, how to discover your talents and passions and transform your life. >> if you look at the odds of you being here at all, then really strikes me as sad that people settle for so little along the way. i know people have desperate circumstances, sometimes. i mean i-- i don't do all the old soldier thing abou

joining me david sanger from the "new york times", david martin national security coespondent for cbs news and from memphis, philip mudd, a former deputy director of national security at the fbi an counterterrorist center of the cia. i am pleased to have all of them on this program. let me go to david martin, tell me david, this "washington post" story we all read today and you guys all know the background of the report, but what is the significance of what we're looking at here in terms of u.s. skat stuart. >> there are two things, one, the list of compromised weapons and technology, by my account there are 58 systems on that list. everything from the newest jet fighter to still undeveloped technologies like electromagnetic rail guns. and that is simply being stolen from clas find pentagon and defense contractor networks. so that's a compromise of secrets. but the other thing in this report and which i actually find more alarming is e degree to which u.s. military operations are dependent on networks which are vulnerable to cyberattack. and they actually say in this report that penta

you cannot compare the fact of james rosen and say david sanger at the "new york times." david sanger has been getting intel from someone at the obama administration from four months in when he started reporting on north korea. he has not been given the same scrutiny of that james rosen has, simply because david sanger reports in a very fluffy way and a positive way towards the administration. james rosen has not done that, the ap didn't do that and they're the ones getting pressured. >> i want to get your reaction, ellen, to what dana milbank in "the washington post" wrote. to treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job, seeking out information the government doesn't want made public, deprives americans of the first amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. so if the administration is spying on reporters and accusing them of criminality just for asking questions, well, who knows what else this crowd is capable of doing. your thoughts? >> well, you know, i am a member of the white house press corps, the white house press association. it to

david sanger is the chief washington correspondent of the "new york times." we're trying to catch him before they haul him off to jail because he has some pretty good leaks that he's been reporting on at the "new york times." and, of course, our own political director john dickerson. john, you don't seem to be in trouble. >> well, not yet, but i haven't started talking yet, bob. ( laughter ). >> schieffer: well, i don't know where we start this morning. let's start with this whole business. lois, this whole business with the president suddenly all these controversies that he is finding himself engulfed in. and then we hear the white house say this morning, they have given out orders they'll devote only 10% of their time dealing with these issues. >> yeah, i'd like to see that. handicap. a second term presidency by its very definition, the president is on the clock. every day he's losing power, and this just accelerates that clock. so it's distracting. it's impact his ability to execute his legislative agenda. and i don't think that they can spend just 10% on

we're going to have to leave it there, david sanger, from "the new york times" from harvard today, thank you so much. have a gooood nig. here youou go. you, , too. i'm goining to dream about t that steaka. i'i'm going toto dream about thatat tiramisu.u. whwhat a nightht, huh? but, u um, can thehe test drivie be over nonow? head b back to the d dealership?p? [ mamale announcncer ] it's praractically y yours. but we stitill need yourur signaturere. volklkswagen sigign then dririe is back. anand it's nevever been eaeasir to get a a passat. that's's the powerer of german n engineerining. get $0$0 down, $0 0 due at sig, $0 depososit, anand $0 firstst month's p pt on any n new volkswawagen. vivisit vwdealaler.com tododay. try align. it's the number one ge recommended probiotic that helps maintain digestive balance. ♪ vietnam in 1972. [ all ] fort benning, georgia in 1999. [ male announcer ] usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection and because usaa's commitment to serve military members, veterans, and their famili

they didn't take david sanger's records. they took evidently just records of high-ranking people within the administration that would have known on the federal side, which seems to have made more sense. however juan will jams talking over the -- juan will jams talking over the weekend said you can't pick on eric holder. all he did was sign it. he wasn't behind it. but this story, he does look like he did more than sign it. >>gretchen: i thought president obama's speech which had to do with the war on terror, they brought up this exact topic. wasn't it a little weird in that speech on thursday? it was weird he acknowledged this was going on and he also talked about the attorney general. i thought it was an interesting timing. on friday we found out the attorney general had a link to it. >>steve: the good news is the fact that the attorney general will be investigating what's going on. so eric holder will be investigating eric holder. we'll find out. here's dr. krauthammer talking about how the obama administration actually cr

and david sanger and mark mazzetti will also join us on "morning joe." we're here with sonya talking about the walmart low price guarantee. charcoal. if someone else advertises a lower price, walmart will match it at the register. i didn't know that. i'm full of good ideas! okay. not so much muscle! wow! that's the walmart low price guarantee! bring your last grocery receipt and see for yourself. actually it can. neutrogena® ultra sheer. its superior uva uvb protection helps prevent early skin aging and skin cancer, all with the cleanest feel. it's the best for your skin. neutro foour neighbors.... and our communities... america's beverage companies have created... a wide range of new choices. developing smaller portion sizes and more.. low and no-calorie beverages... adding clear calorie labels so you know... exactly what you're choosing... and in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks... with lower-calorie options. with more choices and fewer calories... america's beverage companies are delivering. >>> joining us from tfrom the pentagon is jim mi

>> you have to buy david sanger's book is to find out what the word. is i don't know i do think it's odd we're condemning the obama administration for being overly aggressive when all the people on the hill, we sats around this table did he crying the leak and talking how important it was to get to the bottom of it. i think criminalizing leak investigations 6 proved to be a bad counterproductive. we had with v plain plain and joe wilson and all the rest. doctor valerie plame. >> now you have more. >>. >> i'm not sure it rises to the level of benghazi and the irs. i agree. if you are leaking classified information in a way that is going to compromise counter terrorism activities, i'm an american before i'm a journalist. i hope we get the persons particularly if it's going to affect countered terrorism activities. so did the administration behave within the parameters of the law and to charles' point whether it's casting too wide a net. >> bret: the scandal is what is next when we come back. [ male announcer ] hunt...farm...or trail... polaris has what y

sanger's report "the new york times" -- >> there has been -- >> cyber attacks on the -- >> there have been a wide array -- of these investigations. michael, is there political traction for this? it's interesting to me as we look at these scandals rotating around, this seems to have less political traction, calling for the head of whoever's at the leak in the fist place. >> right, but that hasn't scholarshiped republicans today from saying they're concerned about what the justice department has done. holder is scheduled to talk more. i spoke with chairman goodlet this afternoon and says he has some, a lot of questions for the attorney general. he was very concerned about the broad breadth of this subpoena. the former attorney general under president bush said he had real concerns about this, there's inevitably going to be politics, but the timing of this for the obama administration was not good. >> it may get buried because washington has a real instinct for the trivial. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> we now have a full report from the treasury inspector general. i'll have the de

. >> sean: remember david sanger reflects well on the obama administration when they had drone strikes and seal team 6 killed osama bin laden. bob gates, shut the blank up. >> right. obama himself will reveal actually national security information that will harm the united states if it reflects on him. burr here in this case, the big story that they are claiming was national security leak is north korea was going to start testing nukes again in response to u.n. sanctions, this is not like we're dealing with a tracking program. >> sean: this is deeper. i wanted your thoughts. >> bush administration didn't talk to either the newspapers or media in those cases. >> sean: this is how far they went. 80 abetting co-conspirator in an es knee entangling case and they are tapping our bureau, our pentagon, our state department and our executives? >> it does sound very disturbing mayor rudy guliani covered some of this journalists have extra privileges. but beyond that you can't do this to any american unless it will harm national security. that is what the felony is. where the felony here? why wa

joining us now is david sanger, the chief washington correspondent of "the new york times," the author of the very important book "confront and conceal" which is now out in paperback. could the anians, david, wipe out, or at least undermine much of the u.s. power grid? >> wolf, at this point, we don't know how good they are. 18 months ago, when they first began to organize what they announced was a cyber core, it didn't look like they were very good. and most of the attacks that they were doing at that time were what are called denial of service attacks. they basically barrage other computer systems, bank machines, and then hope to bring them down. what we've seen since last summer, though, was much more sophisticated. so the saudi attack, the attack against one of the biggest oil producers you referred to in that piece that just ran now, was in fact pretty effective, because it did destroy data. it did not actually get into the oil production side. it was on the administrative side. in the case of the most recent attacks, which we reported a few weeks ago, clearly from the middle east

and david sanger is also a pulitzer prize winner from "the new york times." now, i'm feeling very lucky and honored to be on, being able to moderate this esteemed panel and i would like to start a question with dana. i'm hopeful that we'll have a few questions but hope it will be a conversation and then we will open up to questions from the public. dana come in the front lines interview that you did, you quoted, you said we tried to figure out a way to get as much information to the public as we could without damaging national security. and my question for you is how did you decide what was and was not damaging to national security? >> well, first of all, thank you for being there. obviously, it's an issue close to my heart, and i'm sure the other journalists up here, but i do think it's important to probe this issue of this line that in my mind to try to have, which is the public's right and my responsibility to bring information to the public in the national security realm. because it is highest stakes, the most important thing the government does, and we s

. >> we know that your colleagues, two of your colleagues, who i know of at least, david sanger have already been investigated, those are cases still pending. and now today we learn that james rosen, our colleague at the state department correspondent from fox news, was investigated years ago on the question of reports he was filing on north korea. this administration has had a posture of investigating that goes well beyond what the bush administration had done. >> yeah. and the argument that the administration typically makes when you question them on this, is -- these are legal investigations. these are not investigations that are ordered by the president. the president doesn't even know about them. he finds out about them the same time the rest of us do. i think it begs the question, who sets the tone. the aggressive approach toward cutting down, plugging leaks is something that sat at the very top of the administration. so i think it's slightly difficult for the white house to argue that the president is merely a bystander in the process. i things that the james rosen case, in pa

the new york times chief washington correspondent david sanger, pulitzer prize winner and author of "confront and conce conceal" and it makes us think we are in a perpetual war against terror. not any specific organization but when small groups of people homegrown or foreign, can commit acts of terror, and it is impossible to stop the small groups, are we in a perpetual war? >> we are in a low grade. and the most interesting thing to my mind about the bombings and the horrific nature of it all is about what a different debate we would be having in this country today if it looked like it was directed by al qaeda, and of course it does not look like it has been. ten years ago we would be just about certain. maybe even five years ago that it would be. so it is probably that we're in a better place if our biggest concern is homegrown terror of which we have had forms long before the/11. if you think back it oklahoma city. think back to the turn of the century. and while are all deeply disturbing, it is different than saying there is a full scale war on. as you suggest, we've got much bigg

. >> this is from "the new york times" today by david sanger, an article i'm sure you read, lead paragraph, the obama administration explicitly accused china military of mounting attacks on american government commuter systems and defense contractors saying one motive could be to map military capabilities that could be exploited during a crisis. and then it says while some recent estimates have been-- have more than 90% of cyberes meanage in the united states originatin originating-- cyberespionage originating in china. so what should the president do? >> you know, the theft that is taking place, the intellectual property theft, western companies both here in the united states, in europe is just-- it's nothing like this has ever happened. the threats that are being probed from the standpoint of what you 21wst laid out in our defense capabilities. you know, china is a country that we should have a good relationship with, charlie. it's a country that has 1.4 billion people that are having an increasing standard of living and hopefully will create a situation over time where we become closer

it's an incredible story, david sanger in iran. it's clear that information was classified and it is very, very clear from the articles that it was leaked by senior administration officials. there's no way it wasn't. so the question is, okay, fair's fair. if you're going to go after some low-lying guy in the state department for leaking something, then you should be going after whoever the senior administration officials are. and the other shoe to drop in all this is there is no way in my humble opinion that "the new york times" was not subject to the same kinds of warrants. we haven't seen them yet. but i would bet they're going to come out. because if they went after the a.p.'s phone records, there's no way that holder could have pursued -- >> the kill list was printed in "the new york times" and there are a number of very controversial pieces in the times as printed. michael before we let you go, the future of eric holder here. a.g.s tend to occupy the catbird seat historically. alberto gonzales was not without controversy, jane

david sanger is a pillow to her prize from the "new york times ." i feel honored and lucky to be able to moderate this esteemed panel. i would like to start the dana, and then we will open the question up to the public. in an interview you did, you said we tried to figure out a way to get as much information to the public without damaging national security. the question for you is how do you decide what was that was was not damaging to national security? >> thank you for being here. obviously, this is an issue close to my heart and i'm sure the other journalists appear. to probet is important iss issue of the line which the public's right and my responsibility to bring information to the public in the national security realm because it is high-stakes and it is the most important thing the government does. we should know what a are doing in our name. but, there is a line where you can cross it and actually endanger lives. or in danger operations, which is a very important but controversial question because that is more difficult to assess. , since no

. >> david sanger gets away with both those things. go back four, five, six years. dana priest writes the story unearthing the secret prisons the cia kept amongst our allies to talk to high-value targets. she publishes that story, it blows up our secret prisons and she gets a pulitzer prize -- i almost said surprise. james rosen gets his parents' lines tapped and she gets a medal. >> so it's a double standard. jinx. let's tell you about another scandal going on on capitol hill today. lois lerner, she was in charge of that unit within the irs that would look into the exempt status, tax exempt status for the 501(c)(4) status. did the buck stop with her? they claimed the buck stopped with her with regard to targeting conservative groups like tea party and patriot groups. it was announced yesterday she was going to plead the fifth. do you have see her lips moving there? that's now how she looks today. she's only going to say i take the fifth so i don't know anything. >> she would know who told the irs nonprofits tax exempt organization division to do what she did and th