Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

WEATHER PRESENTER: Chance of showers and isolated thunderstorms in the afternoon, with highs around 75 degrees. Tonight, partly cloudy in the evening, then clearing with lows around 60. Thursday, mostly sunny, highs, 80 to 85. Thursday night, mostly clear in the evening, then becoming partly cloudy, with lows around 60. Friday, partly cloudy, with a 20% chance of showers and thunderstorms, highs again, 80 to 85. It's 11:00 o'clock.

[THEME MUSIC]

GARY EICHTEN: And good morning. I'm Gary Eichten, inviting you to stay tuned for midday, here on Minnesota Public Radio News. Coming up, this first hour, the McChrystal controversy. General Stanley McChrystal met privately with the president this morning. Will he keep his job? We'll talk with Congressman and long-serving Army Command Sergeant Major Tim Walz, right after the news. We'll take your questions as well.

LAKSHMI SINGH: From NPR News in Washington, I'm Lakshmi Singh. It is a goal for the US.

COMMENTATOR: Denied again, and Donovan has scored. Oh, can you believe this? Go, go, USA, certainly through.

LAKSHMI SINGH: The sound of the US scoring its first and only goal against Algeria, in the World Cup in South Africa, this past hour, moments ago, courtesy of ESPN. The US has now advanced at the World Cup. Former President Bill Clinton is there to root on the US team.

We are expecting to hear, at some point today, from President Obama, about his meeting this morning with General Stanley McChrystal and whether McChrystal will keep his job as the top US commander in Afghanistan. We're joined now by NPR's Scott Horsley, who's been covering developments from the White House. Hi, Scott.

SCOTT HORSLEY: Good to be with you, Lakshmi.

LAKSHMI SINGH: Good to be with you too. Now give us an update on what that meeting was all about.

SCOTT HORSLEY: Well, General McChrystal had a command performance here at the White House this morning. He was summoned to explain the disparaging comments that both he and his aides were quoted as making about other members of the president's national security team in a Rolling Stone article. The general arrived here at the White House, a little over two hours ago. He and the president met privately for about 30 minutes, and then General McChrystal left.

Now his departure came before another meeting, this one with a wide array of officials who are involved in the Afghan war, including some of those who had been badmouthed in that article. It could be telling that General McChrystal is apparently not at that larger meeting, but we've had no official word yet from the White House about whether General McChrystal was dismissed by the president.

LAKSHMI SINGH: OK, Scott, thank you. That's NPR's Scott Horsley, covering developments from the White House. New home sales take an unexpected nosedive. They plunged 33% last month to a record low after the special federal tax incentives for homebuyers expired. Economist Diane Swonk of Mesirow Financial says one of the biggest problems is high unemployment.

DIANE SWONK: One of the biggest things that we need is employment. At the end of the day, it's all about jobs. It's about people qualifying for mortgage with income, with income that's accountable.

LAKSHMI SINGH: New home sales fell to an annual pace of 300,000. Talks are stalled over whether to replace a moratorium on whaling with a limited quota. NPR'S Paul Brown has more on the impasse.

PAUL BROWN: The moratorium is designed to protect devastated whale populations, but Japan, Norway, and Iceland continue whaling. They've caught thousands of whales since the ban was introduced more than 20 years ago, and they face continued international condemnation.

Japan wants formal permission to hunt a certain number of whales, and the US is willing to allow that. But Japan doesn't want to stop whaling in the Southern Ocean, where most whales feed. A compromise plan from the chairman of the Whaling Commission would lift the moratorium for a decade, but keep whaling under strict control.

LAKSHMI SINGH: NPR'S Paul Brown, this is NPR.

ANNOUNCER 1: Support for news comes from Sit4Less, selling all colors of the Herman Miller Aeron chair online, including Sit4Less True Black, online at Sit4Less.com.

PHIL PICARDI: From Minnesota Public Radio News, I'm Phil Picardi. The organizers of the Twin Cities Pride Festival are trying to stop an evangelist from attending the event. Brian Johnson says he wants to hand out Bibles at the festival, at Loring Park, in Minneapolis.

But Pride Festival organizers say they have the right to keep Johnson off the grounds because they paid for use of the park. The Minneapolis Parks Board says Johnson has free speech rights and should be allowed to attend. Festival organizers are trying to get a court to issue an injunction to reverse that decision.

DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton says he will voluntarily release a summary of his personal income tax information. Dayton made the pledge today during a news conference related to senior citizen issues. State law does not require such a disclosure, but the former US Senator and heir to the Dayton department store fortune told reporters he will make his financial information available within two weeks.

MARK DAYTON: I'll disclose a summary, I'm not going to disclose the particular details. But within two weeks, I'll disclose the summary, along the lines of what President Obama has disclosed, along the lines of what President Bush disclosed before him. That outlines my income and the taxes paid.

PHIL PICARDI: Dayton says political rivals should be held at the same standard. He's running in the August 10 DFL primary against Margaret Anderson Kelliher and Matt Entenza. Those candidates have not responded to Dayton's challenge.

The Hennepin County Medical Center says the incomplete cleaning of a medical instrument poses little risk to the 2,600 patients on whom it was used in the last three years. Hospital officials say workers clean the instrument used for endoscopic ultrasound according to manufacturer instructions, but those instructions were incomplete.

And the USA scored a goal in extra time. They beat Algeria 1-0 in World Cup soccer. The US advances to the next round. This is Minnesota Public Radio news.

[THEME MUSIC]

GARY EICHTEN: And good morning. Welcome to Midday, on Minnesota Public Radio News. I'm Gary Eichten. General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, is back in Washington this morning, called on the carpet by President Barack Obama for comments that McChrystal and his top aides made to Rolling Stone magazine.

Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings, in an article posted on the Rolling Stone website and due on newsstands this Friday, reporter Hastings quotes McChrystal and his aides as disparaging the president, the vice president, the US ambassador to Afghanistan, special envoy to Pakistan, the president's national security advisor, and several US senators.

McChrystal has publicly apologized for what he calls his poor judgment, but apologies may not be enough. There is widespread speculation that he will be sacked as the US commander in Afghanistan. Others, however, have been arguing that replacing McChrystal at this point would seriously undermine the US war effort in Afghanistan.

President met privately with General McChrystal for about a half hour this morning. So far, there is no word on McChrystal's fate. If the president has a statement, as we expect he will, we plan to provide live coverage of the president's remarks.

Meantime, joining us from Washington this morning is Minnesota first district Democratic Congressman Tim Walz, highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the US Congress. Congressman Walz, who represents Minnesota's first district along the southern border, retired from the Army as a Command Sergeant Major after serving 24 years in the Army National Guard.

As always, we invite you to join our conversation. If you have a question or a comment about the McChrystal controversy, give us a call, 651-227-6000, 651-227-6000, toll free number 1-800-242-2828. You can also send in your question or comment online. Go to mprnewsq.org and click on Send a Question. And by the way, if you're interested in reading that Rolling Stone article yourself, we have a link to the magazine at mprnewsq.org.

Congressman Walz, thanks for joining us.

TIM WALZ: Well, thank you for having me, Gary.

GARY EICHTEN: Did you have a chance to read the article yet?

TIM WALZ: I did.

GARY EICHTEN: What did you think?

TIM WALZ: Well, I think like many people, I'm disappointed. The bigger picture here is it's very unhelpful in our strategy on a critically important issue. And that's securing America and making sure that folks who wish to bring us harm, especially in the area of Afghanistan and Pakistan, are brought to justice.

So, very disappointed, I think the general himself summed it up pretty well when he said it showed incredibly poor judgment. So it's a trying time, but I think we need to not lose the focus here. We've got the troops in the field. They're doing important work. And we need to stay focused on making sure they're able to secure this country.

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman, can you help us understand why would this general, or any general for that matter, say all of these things in front of a reporter?

TIM WALZ: Yeah. I certainly can't--

GARY EICHTEN: And this was over, apparently over an extended period of time. It wasn't like, well, they goofed up one day, and the reporter got some juicy quotes and ran off and published. Coz this went on for quite a long while.

TIM WALZ: Yeah, I'm really struggling with trying to understand that. I personally know General McChrystal, and I know Ambassador Eikenberry, and General Jones, and the others involved in this. And I'm struggling to try and understand it because it is truly, it seems to me, for General McChrystal, totally out of character.

It's disturbing to me because it seems to be a little more cultural amongst his closest staff. And I don't understand that either. I know there are those that are saying, well, he's a soldier, not a politician. At this level, there's a skill set that's much broader. He's a diplomat. He's a politician. He has to understand business interests as well as military strategy.

And so I'm not sure what goes into this. Yeah, it doesn't appear like it was a gotcha moment type of thing. It appears like it was as, you say, it was thoughtful, and it took time to develop all this. And it doesn't appear like the general said that any of this was taken out of context or anything. So I can't look into his heart and understand it. It just seems incredibly out of character. And as I said, very disappointing.

GARY EICHTEN: Now, last fall, he got in trouble, McChrystal did, for basically disparaging the vice president's plan, counterterrorism plan, did that publicly. The president apparently called him to task. Does this say something about McChrystal's judgment, I mean, his ability to function at this level?

TIM WALZ: Well, I think that's the question. I don't think any of your listeners would be surprised, Rolling Stone is kind of an edgy magazine. I don't think many of us have read it in many years, but they're being read now. The judgment to do this interview, to allow this person this type of access at a time of war and a critical time. We have a supplemental funding issue coming up, and we have an offensive in Helmand and Kandahar that is going to prove very difficult, and we're going to see casualties.

So being in that type of mode, I start to wonder. And the general, he's questioning the vice president's strategy and things like that, is absolutely appropriate in a professional setting away from the press. I mean, that's what he should do. But the country team that was involved in here, the US ambassador, the special representative, Richard Holbrooke, former General Jim Jones, the security advisor, those people are all part of the same team.

And so it is, to me, it's very unhelpful because the general is an important part and one that I truly respect his long service and outstanding and unquestioned service to this country. But this is a lapse in judgment. And I think that's the question we in Congress need to ask. Because overall, civilian oversight of the military is an absolute constitutional responsibility and a foundation of rule of law.

GARY EICHTEN: Should he be fired?

TIM WALZ: Well, that'll be for the commander-in-chief and the chain of command to make that determination. And I assume that that 20 minutes this morning was not pleasant, and it shouldn't be. But I know from our perspective, we're still riding herd on this thing in terms of oversight. I've been out to Langley and the CIA. We spent time in the basement of the Pentagon, trying to figure out, are we making progress in this thing? Are we securing America? Is this the right strategy? And I think everyone needs to be doing that.

So the general has a role in this. And I think the president will determine-- and I hope his determination is made on, obviously, from a question of public insubordination or things like that. I know the president doesn't have the ego that this is about him or insulting him. This needs to be about what's best for securing the country. So that judgment will be made, if removing General McChrystal increases our security or weakens it. And I trust that the advisors around the president are helping him decide that.

GARY EICHTEN: What would be the soldierly thing to do here, Congressman, for General McChrystal to submit his resignation, essentially let the president off the hook?

TIM WALZ: Well, I think probably, and that's what he's doing. I think you submit it, and you let the president make that determination. And I think he's done everything at this point that his long service and the honor that he's served with shows that we're all prone to mistakes. We're all prone to poor judgment, as he said. It's to understand. But what he needs to know is he can submit or not submit his resignation. It still lies with the president. He serves the president.

And I think unlike any other enlisted soldier or whatever, these jobs are appointed. They become part of a team on a much different level other than just following orders. They're expected to give their input. They're expected to be a part of the decision-making process. But I think also at that level comes the responsibility that there's one boss, and everyone knows who that is. And you can have disagreements, absolutely.

And I would hope he'd have the ability to vent those, but not in this manner. So I think the soldierly thing to do would be to apologize, as he did, to offer to his resignation, if the president is going to accept or not accept it, and then focus on what's best interest of the country.

GARY EICHTEN: A couple more questions for you, Congressman, then I want to get the listener questions here. If the general is dismissed, will that hurt the US war effort?

TIM WALZ: Well, that's yet to be seen. But as I said, that's my number one concern at this moment, above all else. And that's what we're trying to assess on our side. We've been asking for things as far as benchmarks of progress, things we've been making headway in, and what the overall strategy is.

General McChrystal was put into this position because he was-- and I believe it was the correct judgment-- he was the best to do this counterinsurgency work that needed to be done in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And what we need to assess is, is there someone else that has the ability? I don't doubt the troops will do whatever is asked of them, whichever mission. But we owe it to them to make sure we're providing them the best possible people.

But a part of this is not just carrying out the military side of this. There has to be the integration. It will not be won by the military. Everyone has said that. It will be facilitated by the military and won with a cooperative effort with State Department, with the Afghan people, with economic aid and all of that. And the thing that troubles me the most is about this whole article disparaging those very people.

But the silver lining might be, is that, I think you read the article, you said, Gary, is some people might be somewhat surprised, high praise for Secretary Clinton. And that's what we're trying to figure out. And at this time, I have to be very honest. I don't know. We're looking at some of the names that are coming forward and what the implications of this would be.

But I think from our allies' perspective and then from an enlisted soldiers perspective in the field, I don't think there's any doubt that this sense of uncertainty is something they don't need. They need absolute confidence. They need absolutely knowing that we are in total alignment, that we are going to provide them a mission they can succeed at, with the resources necessary. And we don't need to be distracted by this. So that's what we need. I hope that's on everybody's mind as the decision is made.

GARY EICHTEN: Let me ask you this, Congressman, from a soldiers perspective, if McChrystal isn't fired, would that undermine the really central bedrock principle of civilian control of the military?

TIM WALZ: I don't think so, if it's handled correctly, Gary. I think if there's a rising above it, if this is a McClellan-Lincoln moment type of thing or something like that, where we get the idea that both of these gentlemen can check egos and both of them can come to the understanding that, without a doubt, their central role is to protect this nation's security and to provide for those troops in the field.

I think, as a soldier's perspective, I would see it as the willingness to come together over the right things, so I think if it's handled correctly. If it appears that the president backed down, as the general had intimated in the article, that the president was intimidated by them in the first place, then yes, I think that's a very dangerous thing.

And I think all of us who so love the democracy, we sometimes can forget how fragile it is. And the genius of our system is that clear separation on military power with the civilian leadership. And that can never be put into question. So I think this has to be handled very delicately. But I think the answer is yes, that the general could certainly stay if it were handled correctly. And he was apologetic for all the right reasons. And we saw a change in attitude amongst his staff. I think that is possible.

GARY EICHTEN: We are talking this hour with Minnesota first district Congressman Tim Walz, who is the highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the US Congress, having spent 24 years in the Army National Guard, retired as a Command Sergeant Major. And he has joined us this hour to shed some or provide some perspective on this McChrystal controversy. General Stanley McChrystal met privately with President Obama this morning for about 20 minutes.

The question now is whether or not McChrystal will be fired for the comments that he and his aides made, that were published in Rolling Stone magazine. And we're awaiting word from the president, if he issues a statement here in the next while, during midday, well, of course we'll get it on as soon as he does.

Meantime, we're talking with Congressman Walz about the situation. Love to have you join our conversation, 651-227-6000 or 1-800-242-2828, or you can go to mprnewsq.org and click on Send a Question. Robert, go ahead please.

SPEAKER 6: Good morning. There's a very important point that I've not heard anybody mention. And that is you have a general at this level who lack the skill to approach the president and tell him that he had these issues. Suppose you found out your spouse-- I had these kind of thoughts about you, but you never mentioned it. I can tell you, you have a failed marriage.

They have a failed communication line if that general lacks the capacity to approach the president in private and explain that he has these issues. I'm sure he believes the things that he says. Without that communication link, it seems to me the whole process is bound to fail.

GARY EICHTEN: OK. Congressman.

TIM WALZ: Yeah. Well, it's a fair point. I'd say there are several things about that. I think you're right. The general going public like this, that's what the shock is by many of us. I doubt-- and I have personally watched the articulate nature of General McChrystal. This is a very smart individual. He has the skills necessary.

The question would be, did he-- several things could be at stake here. Did he have the desire to do that? Maybe he felt like he didn't have the means to. And this is what I'm trying to figure out in this whole relationship. Did he did he feel like he could approach the president with his concerns? I believe he could. I feel like we have the ability to approach. And whether it be healthcare or other issues, this White House has proven to listen.

But he's absolutely right. And I think that's what's most challenging because this is a team effort. And if those skills are not there, or if the avenue is not there, or the will is not there to do it, the military alone cannot do this. So I think the comments made especially towards-- there's two people in here that really shook me up a little bit, the comments. And they were made by staff around the general, but with Ambassador Eikenberry, himself a three-star general.

And the reference to Jim Jones as a clown is the most damaging thing I have-- this is a four-star Marine combat veteran, national security advisor. And if there's those types of things happening, that becomes very challenging. Gary, before you go to your next call, as I said, I'm on the floor voting. I'm going to have to step away for about 20 seconds here. So I'll come back on then, if that works for you.

GARY EICHTEN: You bet. We'll stand by, Congressman. Thanks for doing so. Meantime, I'm wondering if we could get some callers on the line here, just to get some comments. As you know, we've got a question of the day on this very subject. You've probably heard Eric's announcement earlier today.

Basically, the question of the day is that the commander in charge of the Afghanistan war is in trouble for being openly critical of the Obama administration. Should Americans hear directly what's on the general's mind? And I'd like to have you weigh in on that question. Meanwhile, Jay is standing by. Jay, go ahead please.

AUDIENCE: Sure, thanks.

GARY EICHTEN: You bet.

AUDIENCE: Here's a converse of the previous question. I mean, let's just say that McChrystal had been extremely frustrated in his attempts to communicate his viewpoints with the administration. Was the right thing for him to do, and maybe some of his staff members, resign first and then let loose?

And I'm thinking back to the Iraq War, in what I consider some of the utterly misguided and clearly misguided decisions made by the civilian leadership. And as a citizen, I was deeply disappointed that some of the senior military officials didn't do that, say, hey, we're out of here, we're resigning, and then let loose. It seems like the soldiers deserve that, and the country deserves that.

GARY EICHTEN: All right, thanks, Jay. I think Congressman Walz, you're back with us?

TIM WALZ: Yeah, I slipped back on. I caught Jay's comments.

GARY EICHTEN: What about that?

TIM WALZ: No, no, I think he makes a strong point. Because the general-- and I don't question his commitment to this country or the security. But if he feels truthfully that the way things are being handled, whether through state or through special representative Holbrook or whatever, and if it got to the point where he got this frustrated, that may have made sense. So I think Jay brings up a good point. And this communication and this control has to be there.

I guess it's-- I keep coming back to the term so disappointed. We certainly as a nation cannot allow ourselves to be distracted from this. The message that we're sending to our troops in the field, to the allies, and maybe most importantly, to those that want to do us harm, is we can't ever be questioned as being committed to this. So Jay brings up a good point.

GARY EICHTEN: I'm wondering, Congressman, would you hear similar comments made by all command staffs, just not in the presence of reporters? I mean, are these attitudes fairly common across time? Oh, the civilians, they don't know what we're doing out here, and we don't get the support, and this, that, and the other thing.

TIM WALZ: Well, it's interesting you would say that because I think it does reinforce those stereotypes that civilians had. But I have an office staff with a lot of-- it's actually a very unique mix, a West Point graduate, an enlisted soldier, both Iraq veterans.

And then I have the head NATO pilot who started working for my office on veterans issues. But he flew General McChrystal at times. And we all got together and had these conversations. We don't think so. And we're pretty shocked by this. Now these folks have every right to have political opinions, and they have every right to either support or not support. But I think this is very, very rare.

I obviously maybe didn't agree politically with everyone I served with, but it was always a very strong understanding that there was no place for that in the daily work. Now after work or things like that, it might be one thing, but I can't ever imagine it happening in front of a reporter because of the commitment that was there to the-- these guys don't take an oath to a president, they take an oath to a Constitution.

And that is so over-- it's just overarching in that Soldier's Creed that I think that that's what shocks me about this as much as anything. I would never have expected this. I mean, it's so out of character.

GARY EICHTEN: Now what about the argument we've heard from some of McChrystal's defenders on this? They've said, now look, he's not actually quoted as saying anything all that bad in this article. His aides maybe go around the bend a little bit. But they argue that, hey, it's his aides who have said the bad things, not General McChrystal. He should not be held accountable.

TIM WALZ: Well, in the military, the buck stops with the commander. That is not a defense. Probably more disturbing, it's the age. Because then it becomes an issue of command climate. So while the general himself did not-- and I think there's something to be said about that. I think General McChrystal would be the first to say, you are responsible for those that serve under your command, especially in his command staff.

That's a very important relationship. And it's one that I had some experience with. My job was to be the senior enlisted advisor in a company as a first sergeant, for a lot of years, to the commander, and then in a battalion as a sergeant major with the commander. And your job is to be their voice. But make no doubt about it, that commander sets the tone.

And while I had the ability to step aside and tell him, with all due respect, sir, anything said publicly or anything said to the troops, you just couldn't waiver. So I don't think that's probably a strong defense. And I don't think it's one General McChrystal would do. He understands this. He is an honorable soldier who will stand up and say, no, things were said that shouldn't have. And that's exactly what he said.

GARY EICHTEN: Kayla, you're next. Go ahead, please.

AUDIENCE: Hi. My question is, out of all the media coverage, I haven't heard any mention of words like court martial or dishonorable discharge, which is typically the way that one deals with this type of poor judgment, bad behavior, and I would even consider it maybe even seditious behavior by General McChrystal.

And I get a little concerned when we talk about will you fire him or you get resigned. But in the military, there's something called a dishonorable discharge. There are actual penalties that are in place to deal with this type of behavior from officers and enlisted people who don't basically abide by the chain of command. And considering that Obama is the commander-in-chief, you would have to consider what he did insubordinate, at the very least.

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman, does what we know about this situation warrant a court martial?

TIM WALZ: Well, again, they will determine that. I think your caller is expressing a frustration that a lot of people have. There's always the belief-- and I have to tell you, during the whole situation in Iraq, with Abu Ghraib, it seemed to me that there were an awful lot of enlisted soldiers taking the fall. And a lot of people have this perception that what applies to high-ranking officers doesn't apply to enlisted. I don't think that's the case.

One of the things is there is a little different distinction between enlisted soldiers and a commissioned officer. Because you can resign or leave your commission. Whether this warrants because of insubordination or anything, that will be determined. That's not typically the way it's done.

There are channels for that in the United States Code of Military Justice. But I think that's one of the things. Of course, there's a chain of command to determine that. And in this case, General McChrystal's chain of command is the president and Secretary Gates at the Department of Defense, and those will weigh in.

GARY EICHTEN: Leah, from Jackson, Minnesota, sends in an online, saying, doesn't anyone want to look at whether there is truth in what the general said? In a war zone, says Leah, there is no political correctness. What do you think about that?

TIM WALZ: Yes. And that was my point with Robert's call. He mentioned that maybe the general doesn't possess the skills. And I bring up the fact that maybe the general didn't feel he had the need to do that. And I think the answer is that, yes, we have to look at that, and what's the best strategy?

We have to look also that perhaps the general strategy is wrong, which others have said, have brought that up. I don't agree with that. I happen to think General McChrystal's strategy was the best choice to make in Afghanistan, and we continue to monitor that, but absolutely, these concerns.

But I think it goes back to that's probably irrelevant in terms of if those were there. There has to be ways to bring these up. I mean, I've stood, several occasions, stood in front of General McChrystal and point blank asked him, is the strategy working? Are you getting the resources? Are we hampering the hands of your soldiers with rules of engagement that put them at risk over what the mission needs to be done? And got straightforward answers for that.

He and his staff had access to bring to me. And I can go to the press and say these things, and other members, not just-- from both sides of the aisle. So yes, we are looking at that, Leah. And yes, I think that's a legitimate thing to bring up. But it still doesn't-- we're a country of rule, of laws. The Constitution clearly spells out civilian rule of this, and disparaging them was not the way to go.

And that goes back to what Jay was saying. If he was so frustrated and there was no way out, he could have made this statement loud and clear by simply resigning and saying, I'm not being listened to. And if you wanted to shake up the system, I think Jay is right about that. That certainly would have as much as a Rolling Stone article.

Gary, I have one last vote here, while you get ready to take the next question, if that works out, then I'll be back for good.

GARY EICHTEN: That's good. We'll take a break for news, and we'll talk to you in a couple of minutes. We're talking with Minnesota first district Congressman Tim Walz, a Democrat who represents Southern Minnesota, retired from the Army as a Command Sergeant Major, 24 years in the Army National Guard, highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the US Congress. He's joined us from Washington this morning to talk about the McChrystal controversy.

Of course, president has met or been meeting this morning with General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan. Meeting didn't last very long, about 20 minutes. Essentially, the president has called the general on the carpet for comments that are reported in Rolling Stone magazine, this week's issue, of very disparaging comments from the general and his aides about pretty much everybody in the National Security team, the president, the vice president, US ambassador to Afghanistan, special envoy to Afghanistan, the National Security advisor, US senators.

There's a lot of talk that the general is going to be fired. There's other speculation that perhaps he won't because it would hurt the war effort, goes the argument. We're expecting to hear from the president himself any time now. And as soon as he issues a statement, we'll go live to Washington.

Meanwhile, if you'd like to join our conversation with Congressman Walz, the number to call 651-227-6000 or 1-800-242-2828, or go online at mprnewsq.org and click on Send a Question. Congressman, we'll be back right after the news.

ANNOUNCER 1: Support for this program comes from Newgate Education Center, a local school funded entirely by car donations, that provides automotive career training and transportation services for people in need. Information on how to donate your car is at Newgateschool.org.

ANNOUNCER 2: Programming supported by Twin Cities pride's 38th annual Loring Park Pride Festival and parade June 26 and 27th. Twin Cities Pride, commemorating and celebrating our diverse heritage, inspiring an achievement of equality and challenging discrimination, TCPride.org.

CATHY WURZER: Tomorrow on Morning Edition, the latest news from around the world and the state of Minnesota. I'm Cathy Wurzer. We'll let you know what happened overnight and look forward to the day ahead. Weekday mornings until 9:00, on Minnesota Public Radio News.

PHIL PICARDI: From Minnesota Public Radio news, I'm Phil Picardi. There's still no word on whether Stanley McChrystal is still the commander of the war effort in Afghanistan. He met privately at the White House with President Obama this morning to discuss the unflattering comments he made in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine. Before today's meeting, two military officials said McChrystal was prepared to submit his resignation.

The military has announced six more NATO deaths in Afghanistan, including three Americans and a British Royal Marine. In all, 73 members of the international force have been killed so far this month in Afghanistan, including 44 Americans.

The Coast Guard says BP has removed a cap that was containing some of the oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico. Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen says an underwater robot bumped into a venting system that sent gas rising through a vent that carries warm water down to prevent ice-like crystals from forming. Allen says the cap has been removed, and crews are checking to see if crystals have formed before putting it back on.

A fire near Flagstaff, Arizona is now 20% contained. More burnout operations are planned later today to help remove dead trees and brush that fuel a wildfire. The fire once threatened homes and forced evacuations, but that threat has now subsided.

A large union for state employees is running radio ads defending the services state workers provide. The $100,000 ad campaign from the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees started today, and it will continue through September. A union leader says the union wanted to speak directly to Minnesotans, as the government considers cutting state services.

And USA has advanced to the next round of the World Cup soccer tournament in South Africa. Landon Donovan scored in the first minute of stoppage time, and the USA beat Algeria 1-0 today. Showers and thunderstorms possible across the region, highs in the mid 70's to low 80's. This is Minnesota Public Radio News.

GARY EICHTEN: And this is Midday, on Minnesota Public Radio News. Good morning. Gary Eichten here, 25 minutes before 12 and over the noon hour. Oliver Stone, award-winning film director at the National Press Club, Stone is out with a new movie. This one is titled South of the Border, talks about politics in Latin America. And we'll hear from Oliver Stone at the Press Club over the noon hour.

This hour, we are talking about the McChrystal controversy. General Stanley McChrystal met briefly with President Obama at the White House this morning. This after remarks that he made to Rolling Stone magazine lit a fire across, well, certainly across the country and really around the world. Questions about whether McChrystal will be fired or whether he'll be allowed to stay on.

We're expecting a comment from the president soon. We'll have live coverage as soon as that occurs. Meantime, we're talking with Minnesota first district Democratic Congressman Tim Walz about the controversy. A full bank of callers, let's get back to questions from our listeners. Maurice, go ahead please.

AUDIENCE: Yes, it's Marie, in Duluth.

GARY EICHTEN: Oh, I'm sorry.

AUDIENCE: That's OK. I absolutely believe McChrystal should be fired. I think that President Obama is very level headed and very cool at what he does, but I don't think he has any choice. My father was in World War Two, and it is outright insubordination. And if he doesn't fire him, I think he will lose respect with the other troops. McChrystal has shot his mouth off before. And I think he just cut his throat this time.

GARY EICHTEN: Thanks, Maureen. Congressman.

TIM WALZ: Well, yeah, as I said earlier, Gary, I think how this is handled, and there's obviously about two things that can be done. Either they can send him back into the field and tell him not to do it again, or he can be removed from his position. And both bring risk to them again. The president I know, and I agree with Marie, I think he's very level headed on this. I think we'll make the decision which is in the best interest of the security of the country.

And the thing that troubles me is-- and it's General McChrystal-- like I said, I can't look into his heart on this. But in all the work we've done, whether it be over at State Department, with the CIA, or be in-country in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and seeing it, I do see a cohesive strategy. I do see the country team there, from General Jones on this end with the National Security advisor, to Admiral or Ambassador Eikenberry, integrating the strategy, and making a difference, and starting to gain some ground.

I know there's a huge frustration with America on this. I understand that clearly. But I'm also convinced that securing this part of the world and getting Afghan to stand up, the Afghan people to stand up, and the Pakistanis to take some control of their frontier regions is critical. So I think Marie makes a very valid point. It's one the president, I'm sure, will factor in.

GARY EICHTEN: Is McChrystal's strategy actually working in Afghanistan, Congressman? I ask that because Lord knows there's been a lot of negative reports coming out of Afghanistan. Marjah, that operation, that was going to be a model. That's turned into what McChrystal himself calls a bleeding ulcer. The Kandahar operation has been delayed. Rolling Stone's article, based on Hastings' reporting, indicates that fundamentally the policy is a failure. The people were supposed to be counting on, the Afghans, according to the article, view us from-- the range as intensely wary of us to openly hostile. None of this sounds good.

TIM WALZ: Well, I don't agree with everything in the assessment from the perspective on Rolling Stone. And I have stayed on top of this. While I'm not, I'm certainly not pleased, and we certainly don't rest a minute of following this. But I think we've been actively engaged.

We've been asking that the strategy, the coordination, I can tell you from being in the basement of the Pentagon, where I stand in a room now, where the coordination amongst our NATO allies and amongst different agencies now, there's no barriers between them. The dividers between the offices have all been taken down. And there's an Afghan and Pakistan cell that works down there, that has real-time information, that's working together.

And I think from stopping attacks here at home, like in Times Square, to starting to make some progress with the locals to get them on board, I do believe there's progress. But I've been under no illusion that, how do you measure victory in this and how do you measure success needs to be laid out very, very clearly. And the ultimate goal here is to secure the United States by denying free havens to those folks who have the reach and the ability to carry out multinational attacks or cross-nation attacks, like al-Qaeda.

So I'm still convinced that of the strategies out there, that we were working towards the right one. No one thought it would be easy, and General McChrystal amongst them. We heard today the reports of more deaths, and I think that was anticipated. We just have to make sure that we're continuing to reassess this.

And I am always-- I think that's the problem we had in Iraq. And I think it's the problem we had in the first eight years of this Afghan war, that noone was asking those questions. No one was trying to get to the heart of this. And that has changed. And so perhaps General McChrystal is frustrated that for the first time in a long time, somebody's watching. Somebody's asking for accountability. Somebody's asking for benchmarks of measurements.

So I think, Gary, yes, there are things working well, but I also think obviously there's things that aren't working well. And you didn't need this article, just put a punctuation mark on it that if we're going to continue to have this separation between the Department of Defense, the State Department, and other members of this country team, it'll be very, very difficult to do what we need to do.

GARY EICHTEN: Do you think, setting aside the Rolling Stone controversy, that otherwise, Stanley McChrystal is the man for the job?

TIM WALZ: Well, yes. Before this article came out, I would say so. And I say that on personally knowing him. I say that by being absolutely relentless in our oversight of this. There are questions that this administration has not answered for us yet, that I think was brought up by our working with people in the military, working with our connections of people on the ground. That's my job, to provide oversight of checks and balance on the White House. Why, he's the commander in chief.

We watched for many years, during the first parts of the Iraq war and the Afghan war, where people said, don't question the president, don't do anything. And I totally disagreed with that. The soldiers can't do it, or most often, don't do the questioning. That's our job to do this. So I come back to Leah's question, that yes, we're asking these things. And yes, if General McChrystal was not being heard, we're asking those questions.

But I have to tell you, for the most part, he was talking about things that were working to us. And we were getting answers that showed we were making progress. So I'm a little baffled by this because General McChrystal has gotten to direct a lot of this, from a commander's vision on the ground.

It was very difficult, probably very unpopular for many members of Congress, myself included, to authorize an increase of troops. And General McChrystal said it. I think I still believed it, that we were moving in that right direction. But yeah, before this article, I think so. But I think, Gary, you summed it up at the start of this interview. It does bring into the question of judgment. And I need to go back and question that as we always do.

GARY EICHTEN: What about General David Petraeus? Now, as I understand it, Petraeus is at least nominally McChrystal's boss, is he not?

TIM WALZ: Yes he is.

GARY EICHTEN: Where does he weigh in on this? What does he-- I mean, does he believe the same things McChrystal does? Does he?

TIM WALZ: I certainly don't think so. And I say that again. And I think his relationship, when I had the ability to be there with him in Iraq-- and he and, at that time, Ambassador Crocker had what appeared to me a very good working relationship, very candid, very open. And while it was a different style of leadership that I witnessed in Iraq, it felt to me that with General McChrystal, we had that. He obviously had a different situation and a very challenging one.

But I have never felt that General Petraeus harbored any of that. And I think General Petraeus would be very clear about going to the president and speaking to him about that. And so this is what-- the comments that were in here, that they can't get through, that's one thing I'm having a hard time justifying.

Because I feel like you can, I feel like, with this administration, I questioned them as hard as I questioned the previous administration. And some of the things they've done, I haven't received satisfactory answers. So we're still on top of them, but they've listened.

GARY EICHTEN: Patrick, your question please.

AUDIENCE: Hey, thanks, Gary. Bob Woodward reported in his book, State of Denial, that the same type of communication breakdowns and squabbles were occurring between the military and civilian leadership people. I just want to ask, Representative, are people in Congress aware of these issues as they're occurring? Do they have an idea of them? And why haven't we gotten better at working together, given the severity of the situation that we're dealing with?

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman.

TIM WALZ: Well, I think they are, Patrick. And I don't necessarily believe you have to be a member of the military to be able to do this. There's not that many here that are. I do think it's helpful somewhat to see the culture. I spend my time talking to the enlisted soldiers because I think you get a pretty unvarnished opinion of what's going on.

And I've, at times, felt like where there was frustration, I can tell you there was great frustrations before we changed the strategy and before General McChrystal came in in my first visit in early 2007-- I guess it was fall of 2007, but a great frustration that we were not adapting to the situation, we were not changing the way things were going. And they were expressing that. And I think that manifested itself in General McChrystal being put into the position.

So, yes, I do think they hear it. I'm not so certain. Our military leadership is hesitant to get involved, as I don't think Patrick or any of our listeners needs to be told we have a very strained political relationship going on in this country now and very volatile. And these folks are probably a little hesitant of where that's going to go because everything has vast political ramifications, it feels like now.

And that's a great disservice because this needs to be, again, I keep coming back to out of this whole thing, what's best for the security of this nation and how best to serve those troops in the field. So if it is happening and if some members aren't seeing it, they need to do a better job. They need to get to the field. They need to get to Afghanistan and ask these questions.

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman, how do you suppose this is playing with the troops in the field? So you're a, I don't know, sergeant out in Helmand Province, and you see all of this unfolding. What is the enlisted Joe make of this?

TIM WALZ: Well, my sense is, is that there is a strong belief and support of General McChrystal. He is a soldier soldier. He has always led from the front. He would never ask any soldier to do anything that he himself wouldn't do and has done. So because of that, I think from their perspective on this, there is a sense of that. And our job is to make sure, as I said again, to provide the mission, to provide the resources, to provide the overall national security strategy.

But from the average troop in the field, my thought would be they would be citing and saying, well, what General McChrystal did maybe wasn't right, and I don't agree with him on this, but he's our general. And my take, I have to tell you, Gary, from being on the ground over there, they believe in the mission. They believe strongly in the mission. These are folks that are, remember, all volunteers.

And so I'm guessing that there's a little bit of angst amongst them that they certainly don't want to see their general hung out to dry. And I think we need to be careful of if this is an incident here, no matter what the outcome of it is, it does not change one bit 30 plus years of service to this nation. And there's a respect inside the ranks that will be given to General McChrystal for that.

GARY EICHTEN: How does this compare with the Truman-MacArthur thing back during the Korean War? General Douglas MacArthur, seen as a national hero by so many people, kept getting crossways with the Truman administration, and finally, Harry Truman fired him. And there was quite a to-do about that. How does this compare?

TIM WALZ: It's interesting you bring that up. My staff and I, I asked them to go back and we pulled this up and we all had a little history lesson that chairman of the Joint Chiefs at that time was Omar Bradley, another great hero, George Marshall as Secretary of Defense. And we went back and looked at it. I think it's pretty similar.

The statement that was given by the President, I read that this was a direct quote, "Deep regret that concluded that General Douglas MacArthur is unable to give his wholehearted support to the policy of the United States government and in these matters, pertaining to his official duties. It is fundamental that military commanders must be governed by the policies and directives issued under our Constitution."

But we went further on and there was some assessments of this that said the removal head far more to do with overall strategy, in terms of nuclear strategy. So I think it's probably similar. I think you're seeing somewhat of a disconnect between the two. You see two powerful figures that have important roles to play. But at the end of the day, and I don't think anyone in the military or outside of it understands is, the president will make the ultimate decision.

We're a democracy governed by rules of law, and the Constitution is very clear. The fallout, though, is not quite so clear. But in terms of-- I think it's a great analogy. I think it's probably very similar.

GARY EICHTEN: Shannon, your question please.

AUDIENCE: Well, it's a comment I'd like his just take on. I'm suspicious that McChrystal, in fact, wants out. He can't quit because he's McChrystal. And this gets it all into the public eye and gets him out. What do you think?

GARY EICHTEN: What do you think about that, Congressman, that this was a kind of a cry for help, if you will?

TIM WALZ: Well, I can't see into his heart, but my experience, and especially with these types of individuals, I don't think that's how they would-- that that's how he would do it. I don't think that's how he'd want to do it. I think he'd want to do it on his own terms. And I think maybe the caller is saying that this was his own terms.

It's just not a way that a soldier that has purposely-- his background was not one in the public eye by design. He was a Special Operations person that for lack of a better term, the black ops types of guy, that they don't want this. And I never got the feeling talking to him that this was an individual with an ego that wanted publicity. I saw him as much more of just buckle down and do it.

But I can't speak for his heart, and I don't know what's his heart here. And I have to tell you that if you wanted to hear the theories flying, the house gym this morning was one of those places across the spectrum of what this meant. And I don't think any of us will know for sure until General McChrystal clarifies it further, which I would assume at some point he will.

GARY EICHTEN: Afghan president Karzai says he hopes that McChrystal will stay on as commander, that he won't be sacked. Will that likely carry much weight one way or the other with the administration? Karzai is not thought of all that kindly by some members of the administration.

TIM WALZ: And he falls in that category with me. I understand that as an ally, and I certainly will not disparage president of Afghanistan, but I have been frustrated, might be the best term to say, to a certain degree. But at the end of the day, we want to see a peaceful, prosperous Afghanistan.

But our role in being there, and I'm not going to waver one bit from that, is national security, protection of the United States and the region. And so, yes, he's one of our allies. He takes part in it, he will not-- this is an internal US security decision that will be made by us and for the good of what we need to do.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go back to the phones. Terry, you're up next. Go ahead, please.

AUDIENCE: Hi. Obviously, there's been a lot of media coverage and interest in this story, but one question I haven't heard asked yet is just how legitimate of a news source would we consider a pop culture music magazine, the Rolling Stone. I'll listen off the air.

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman?

TIM WALZ: Well, Gary, you might be better placed for this than me, seriously, I think. And Terry's got a good point. But one thing, Terry, that I saw-- and I saw the editor come on, it wasn't the actual author. But I think by all accounts what I saw-- because that was one of the questions I thought early on. By all accounts, they followed journalistic best practices. They did verification.

This wasn't, as Gary had mentioned earlier, a kind of a gotcha thing on the spur of the moment where somebody gets a camera stuck in their face and asked a question and they're surly about it, and then it gets blasted across YouTube. This was a very deliberate overtime event that I think was probably exacerbated, it sounded like by the volcano that ended up sticking this reporter with them longer.

But I think, Terry, by all accounts that I've seen on this, it appears like the general or none of his aides have contradicted any of the statements because that is always a first concern. And by most accounts, I guess, it sounds like Rolling Stone got it right.

But as Gary said, the real judgment question here, and again, I don't want to disparage their writers or anything, but I don't know if I would be doing a Rolling Stone interview if I'm the general in charge of the longest war in US history at one of its most critical stages with funding coming up in front of Congress and an offensive happening that is going to cost American lives. It just seems to me wrong for a lot of reasons. It seemed far too light-hearted for me in the sense of what's at stake here.

GARY EICHTEN: We should note, by the way, that neither the general nor his aides have claimed that they were misquoted or misrepresented in any way, shape, or form. I mean, they're owning up to whatever it was reported. But it comes back, does it not, Congressman, to this question of, what in the world were these gentlemen thinking?

Clearly, this was on the record for a long, long period of time. And they're in a sensitive political position. It's not just that they are war fighters. It's a political position, is it not?

TIM WALZ: Well, it is. And the issue here is that no one, I don't believe, expects them to have to speak on the record extensively. You can have embedded reporters. And I'm a fan of transparency and everything. But every general has the right as anyone does. And even members of Congress, you make a decision on this of whether you take the questions or not. There'll be some that will avoid certain shows because they're fearful of the question that would be asked.

And I think you know your audience or know what's coming. You should expect. Did anybody think Rolling Stone was going to be Atlantic Monthly? No. It had to be a shock value, so I don't know.

And I think it begs some of the questions of how much stress this command team is under because I'd have to be very honest with you, Gary, when this story came out, I would have never imagined, especially with my personal knowledge of the general and knowing him and some of these folks involved, I would have never imagined it happening.

So it's an important question of what was going on with them or why was the need. And that'll be laid out. I think many of your listeners are understanding our grandchildren will read about this. Our goal needs to be to get it right in such a way that we've secured the nation for them and made the right decisions.

GARY EICHTEN: I've got to say, given your role as an overseer, a member of Congress, do you have confidence in General McChrystal yourself going forward, given the-- well, what the general calls his own poor judgment, given the political sensitivity of the role that he is supposed to serve, given the fact that he's supposed to work with these other people, the ambassadors and the national security advisors and so on, all of whom have been disparaged.

As one who oversees these things, can you go forward with confidence that General McChrystal is the man for the job?

TIM WALZ: Well, my confidence has been shaken, there's no doubt about that. And as I said, with General Jones especially, I know some of your listeners may be familiar with the general, I don't think anyone would question. And as far as a pretty apolitical figure just simply one that's based on competence, it really shakes me.

And I have to be honest, I wonder now what this group has-- as we went and I spent time with them, and I rode down the streets of Kabul, sitting next to the general and talking, I wonder what they thought of us. I hope it was that these guys are doing their job as civilian leaderships and being competent in how they do it. But it does shake me a little bit.

So I think, Gary, when I'm going to watch-- it sounds like there's going to be an announcement here at 1:30 coming out of the White House, 1:30 Eastern, we'll watch and see what the president decides as his decision. And I think it's how everything is handled from here on out. I'm a firm believer that this general has earned certainly the benefit of the doubt and the rule of law to apply to him because of what he's done for this nation.

But I also am a little more cautious than maybe I was on this. And it's maybe a good lesson for all of us here. I think it was one of your earlier callers who asked is-- Patrick asked about state of denial in Woodward's book, or are we aware as we should be? And I don't know if we could ever saw this coming, but maybe we should have tried harder to see that there was this disconnect.

I always felt like-- and I tell you, Gary, when I talked to these sergeant majors on the ground, I went to every one of them, I said, is the rules of engagement hampering your troops by not allowing them to defend themselves and do their job? And had they said yes to me, I would have come here and screamed my lungs out that something had to happen.

That's the job we're supposed to do, and we're doing it. And none of them said any of these things. None of them said any of these things. And that was in briefings inside the closed room in the embassy, where they could have spoken, and they have spoken candidly.

GARY EICHTEN: Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

TIM WALZ: Thanks, Gary.

GARY EICHTEN: Minnesota First District Congressman Tim Walz, highest-ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the US Congress, joining us as we get ready for the president's announcement, which is expected to come up at about 12:30 our time. We'll have live coverage.

ANNOUNCER 1: Each weekday, Minnesota Public Radio News invites you to join the conversation on mprnewsq.org. The commander in charge of the Afghanistan war is in trouble for being openly critical of the Obama administration. Today's question, should Americans hear directly what's on a general's mind? Go to mprnewsq.org to leave your answer and see the answers of others or send a text to 677-677. We'll share some of your answers this afternoon on All Things Considered.

ANNOUNCER 2: Programming is supported by Taste of Minnesota, featuring a new family entertainment village with storytelling, music for kids, skateboard park, NBA nation and more, July 2 to 5 at Harriet Island. More online at tasteofmn.com.

GARY EICHTEN: And today's programming is supported in part by Scott and Ellen Ulring celebrating 20 years of marriage. Again, make sure you weigh in on that question of the day. Commander in charge, should Americans hear directly on what's on the general's mind? This is Minnesota Public Radio News 91.1 KNOW, Minneapolis-Saint Paul. Those of you in Central Minnesota, you are tuned-- or North Central Minnesota, I should say, you're tuned to KNBJ 91.3 in Bemidji.

ANNOUNCER 2: Programming is supported by Opportunity Partners, helping people with all kinds of abilities have a place they can call their own. Having a home deepens their connection with family, friends, and neighbors. Building community value at Opportunity Partners.