summit today so we saw some pictures of them listening as the various speakers were there. it s all good. chris, i want to switch gears to the wall street report that the obama administration will release convicted israeli spy jonathan pollard from prison at some point. what is the significance of this? what do you hear if anything from government officials? reporter: well, the significance is that the wall street journal says it has been told that the reason that this would happen is because they sort of want to appease israel who has been very upset about the u.s. push for this iran nuclear deal. but u.s. officials i talked to say that couldn t be further from the truth. in fact, i got a statement from the nfc saying mr. pollard s status will be determined by the parole position. there is zero linkage between mr. pollard s status and foreign policy considerations. he got a 30 year sentence that is over in november so should he be let out a few months
many believe the move would help ease tensions with israel over the iran nuclear deal but the spokesman for the national security council says there is absolutely zero linkage between mr. pollard s status and foreign policy considerations. he added, a parole board will decide whether to let pollard go. cnn military analyst lieutenant colonel rick francona shared his reaction to it. listen. it doesn t matter who he spied for. the information he gave to the israelis went way beyond the scope of the authorized exchange between the united states and israel. it s okay to tell other countries what you know but it becomes dangerous when you start telling them how you know it. you start compromising your sources and methods. and he did just that. many of the systems he compromised we have never, ever recovered from. so i understand the life sentence. so i understand he ll be released in november. i guess i m going to have to live with that. suggestions that pollard
according to them he s been a model prisoner and in their view thet information, the classified information that he allegedly or that he was convicted of passing to the state of israel is no longer of any harm to the united states. it doesn t matter if he goes back to israel. where he has israeli citizenship. we should also note wolf that the white house and the injures depend are pushing back again the idea that there is any quid pro quo here that the u.s. is trying to curry favor with israel as a result of the disagreements over the iran talks. we have a statement from the national security council that says quote, mr. pollard s status will be determined by the united states parole commission according to standard procedures. there is absolutely zero linkage between his status and foreign policy considerations. again, this is a case that as you know wolf having spent so much time researching this issue, you know that there s a
federal agency is trying to recover from a massive cyber attack that compromised the records of more than 21 million people including their social security numbers. the attack also exposed information about employment residency and police families finances, criminal records, user names, pass words vl. justice correspondent pete williams joins me from washington. pete, at this point what do we know about the folks who may have been responsible for this? the government as a policy matter in general hasn t said although intelligence officials have said they believe it s china. there doesn t seem to be much doubt about this but there won t be what you might call a formal declaration of that because it s going to involve a lot of foreign policy considerations, it will immediately raise the question of what do we do in response and the question of retaliation, if you will, has always been a rather sensitive one that s not
check on the immigration status of people they arrest that is the part of the arizona law the court upheld. that part of the alabama law won t be in any trouble. but there are other parts of the alabama through are similar to what the court struck down in arizona. those two parts of the law would be no reason to think they wouldn t be in trouble in arizona as well. but stepping back from the individual provision of the law, going forward, the thing you have to remember is that the basic hallmark of the supreme court s decision on arizona, fundmentally, immigration a federal matter and that one of the things the federal government has to balance is foreign policy considerations. how other countries look at how