about mattis recommendations on the military side in afghanistan than we do on tillerson on the diplomatic side. in general, the three big voices of moderation within the president s national security team tillerson, mattis and mcmaster have been arguing for some form of continuation of u.s. military and diplomatic involvement in afghanistan. not the complete pullout option. they keep running into the president himself who asks them in every meeting, why aren t we winning? what can we do to fix this? i don t like any of these options. none of these options show me how we re going to win. that s a question that none of them can really answer because for 16 years we haven t won and every u.s. official who has been engaged in afghanistan over that time has faced a version of the same question and it used to be standard practice for every u.s.
with officials a complete withdrawal is on the table. a partial withdrawal and this is eric prince former of blackwater and the option where you put one person in charge. you reduce u.s. presence and you do it for less money. and then the third is the addition of another 4,000, appreciately, u.s. troops. but i would just add on all this that the decision we have right now, which is no decision, is essentially its entirely other option. that s the status quo. that s where we re at right now and since the general, general nickelson in february said we re at a stealemate taken over two districts in afghanistan and 21 of the 34 are seeing open conflict. this is not a war as the president said in that closed door national security meeting that the u.s. is winning. hallie? hans, stick around for a minute. i want to go to ann. when you look at your reporting based on your reporting, who is on the same page and who is not? are secretary tillerson and mattis aligned here? well, we know, i t
basically the goal should be to get the robber out of the bank. key bank has this to say. our policies and procedures are in the best interests of public safety and are consistent with industry standards. money, which is insured, can be replaced. lives cannot. the fbi which advises banks on the best and safest approach believes. in no way do we suggest physical confrontation with a robber. too many thing cans go wrong. but nickelson says letting this guy get away with it isn t the answer. i have to represent him so he cannot do this again, so he cannot come to our branch and
try to rob us again. the robber won t be visiting this branch or any bank soon. he pleads guilty to the bank robbery and is sentenced to three years behind bars followed by three years of parole. and that s a medal of award for nickelson. he said despite being fired, if he had it to do all over again, he would. coming up, a convenience store owner makes a startling decision. i said, please, don t shoot me. convenience stores are notorious targets for thieves. it s a change of job, you yes, ge makes powerful machines. but i ll be writing the code that will allow those machines to share information with each other. i ll be changing the way the world works. (interrupting) you can t pick it up, can you? go ahead. he can t lift the hammer. it s okay though! you re going to change the world.
and 911 reportings are at issue today. we are working to confirm reports the judge extended the temporary gag order sealing these documents. he has a gag order for trial participants not being able to talk. lisa wheel is here with us. we are getting word and we have not confirmed but the trial date is set for next july. it will take a lot of time to get this ready. the supreme court ruled on gag orderers on trial participants are generally considered to be unconstitutional. the supreme court said gag orders on the media is unconstitutional. they have not ruled on trial participants. is there a real difference? yes, in 1966 shepherd v