get to the bottom of this. he continues to insist his twitter account was hacked. the congressman says he does not want to make a federal case out of it. the congressman sat down with cnn's wolf blitzer this afternoon. >> did you send that picture to that college student in washington state? >> i did not. she says she never got it and doesn't know me. i certainly don't know her. this seems like it was a prank to make fun of my name. when you're named weiner, that happens. got 40,000-some-odd twitter followers. this seems like a prank that has an enormous amount of attention. >> this is the picture. i'm sure you've seen it by now. is this you? >> i can tell you this. we've hired a firm -- i've seen it. a firm that we've hired to try to get to the bottom of it. i can tell you this, that photos can be manipulated. photos can be of one thing. changed to look like something else. we're going to get to the bottom of what happened. maybe jon stewart last night had it right, unfortunately. we're going to find out. this has turned into a kind of international whodunit. what it really was i think a prank. i'm treating it like a prank and trying to get back to the work i'm trying to do. i understand you want to pursue the story and we're going to try to help you best we can. >> we want to resolve it, once and for all. you would know if this is your underpants -- >> the question is -- i appreciate you continuing to flash that at me. look, i've said the best i can, that we're going to try to get to the bottom of what happened here. but, you know, i just want to caution you, you understand this, you're a pro, that photographs can be manipulated. photos can be doctored. and i want to make sure that we know for sure that what happened here. it certainly doesn't look familiar to me. but i don't want to say with certitude to you something i don't know to be the certain truth. >> you would like to get to the bottom of it. have you asked capitol hill police or new york police or fbi or any law enforcement authority -- >> have i called -- >> -- to investigate? >> have i called the cops or fbi because someone sent spam? no. however, i did get a firm, a law firm who specializes in these things, who specialized in white collar crime. i've got someone who is -- and they're going to get someone who is an internet security expert to get to the bottom. >> you deleted some photos from your twitter account. why did you do that? >> i deleted everything -- >> have you asked some of your followers? >> from my facebook account? >> no, from your twitter account? >> no, i haven't. i was literally there tweeting about hockey. for those of you who follow my twitter feed, my bloody tivo didn't record enough time so i missed the end of the tampa bay/boston game. i'm a big hockey fan. i tweet about hockey. i see this thing pop up. i immediately delete it, okay. i immediately delete the photo. i thought i deleted -- i'm not 100% sure -- i deleted the photo. and then without any password or anything, i was able to get into the account where this photograph was hosted somehow and i deleted that and other photographs that were in there as well, although it was nothing very controversial in there, but i deleted everything. i immediately tweeted, nope, my system has been hacked, you know, darn it. >> are you protecting anyone? >> yes. >> who? >> i'm protecting my wife who every day is waking up to these insane stories. that are getting so far from reality. you know, we've been married less than a year. to watch her watch these stories, gets crazier about what is essentially a prank, a hoax. wendy went to bed that night not batting an eye. this is a goofy thing that happened. she married a congressman. she knows a little something about living in public life. with that, goes a certain amount of, you know, aggravation. i don't think she imagined it would be this. these bizarre stories about people connected to me by eight or nine rings of connection on social media. i'm protecting her the best i can. >> all right. we're going to leave it at that note. just to recap, you didn't send that photo to that woman in washington state. >> i did not send it to that woman. >> you're not 100% sure whether the photo is actually you. >> what i am going to say is we're doing everything we can to try to answer that question. we're doing an investigation. i want to caution you, photographs can be doctored. can be taken from one place and put in another. so that's -- i want to make it clear, this is in my view not a federal case. in my view, this is not an international conspiracy. this is a hoax. i think people should treat it that way. >> wolf blitzer join us now. wolf, it was a riveting interview. the rest of it can be seen online, i should point out. he was so frank with you. yesterday, he seemed to be obfuscating. would you take us into the room? what happened before and after the sit-down? >> he wanted to give us the story. he did one interview with each the networks. it was basically one after the other. everybody had a little time to set up their own crews, their lights. we told them we would do it live. he said fine. originally supposed to be five or six minutes. we went closer to 20 minutes. he didn't complain at all. he wanted to get his story out. we asked him all the tough questions. not easy, as you know, jessica, for a reporter to ask those kinds of questions. but, you know, he's a congressman. it comes with the territory. he answered the questions. left some of the answers vague i should say. but he did the best he could. >> but he really did reveal more to you and answered more directly than he had in the past -- >> he denied frankly that he sent that lewd photo. >> most compelling part in the interview to me was when he spoke about a woman, his wife, who you and i both know and respect. it seemed to strike a nerve. >> they've been married for less than a year. all of us who know hu an, she's a wonderful woman. she's been working for secretary of state hillary clinton for a long time. worked for her earlier up in the hill. certainly in the clinton campaign. it must be so hard for her to read these stories. you read "the new york post," the "new york daily news," you read some of these story, and it must be awful for her. so my heart goes out to her. clearly, it struck a nerve when i said, who are you trying to protect, and he said, i'm trying to protect my wife. >> instantly, i didn't expect that. these are public people but private people too. >> especially if you know his wife as we know her and we've known her for many years, you know, heart goes out to her. >> yeah. on social media, you know, you have almost half a million followers on twitter which dwarfs -- i think he has about 53,000. do you think this will be a turning point for how public officials use social media? >> i think it better be. he was very active. i followed him on twitt twitter -- @repweine re. he sent us all kinds of tweets. telling us what he was doing, hockey teams or whatever. i tweet. you tweet. we all tweet. when you send out -- when i send out a tweet to my 450,000 or almost 500,000 followers, a lot of them think i'm directly sending something to them. and they establish a little personal relationship with me. and then they'll send me back replies. some of them, you know, i noticed you were wearing that tie. i think that's a sort of -- >> you write back sometimes -- >> sometimes i do but i try not to get into anything personal or anything like that. you don't want to make people crazy or anything like that. but i try to use it as a way to tell my followers on twitter what i'm doing. what they can expect to see behind the scenes in "the situation room." who's going to be on the show. give them a little advance word on that and they seem to like it. >> everybody's going to be a little more careful -- >> i think members of congress have to be really careful right now. especially in what they call the direct replies, the direct messages, to some of their followers. >> wolf, thank you, great interview. >> thank you. >> that was wolf. you heard a very different tone fom the congressman than in his press conference from yesterday. today, he even admitted he might not have handled things as well as he should have when he first spoke about the story. here to talk about crisis management in the age of twitter and 24 hour cable tv, chris lahane, former assistant counsel to president bill clinton. and terry hot, a senior strategist for the 2000 and 2004 bush/cheney campaigns. thanks for being with us. you're both used to helping candidates, right and left, basically extricate their feet from their mouths during tough times. i have to say, i thought that congressman weiner was refreshingly candid in this interview. he admitted he didn't handle it so well yesterday so that's why he talked to wolf today. let me ask you first, do you think by speaking fairly frankly to wolf he answered questions he hadn't answered before, he put the story to rest today? >> but not soon enough and not directly enough. you only get one real chance to set the record straight. and honestly it's got to be at the very front end of this. and you have to make enough news that you've satisfied some of the tough questions. ultimately, in this case, it's tough because he has an emotional attachment to the story. but you can't think that you can control a story like this. especially not in the age of twitter. you've got to be honest and straight forward. rip the band aid off and tell the truth from the beginning. >> or else it's too late. chris, in your view, has it happened too late? has he hurt his political career? >> look, i think he took a big step forward today. really seemed to answer the money question people were looking for. which is whether he did or did not, you know, send the photo to that particular woman. he answered directly. i agree. if he had answered this way two days ago, would not be here today even talking about this. i think potentially the way he handled it at the front end potentially created a mountain out of what may be a molehill. this will rise or fall on the facts. assuming he answered the questions today accurately and honestly, i think this will recede into the background. if on the other hand there are issues that come up that are related to this and some of the story unravels -- and, again, i believe he did answer honestly today, but if it turns out not to be the case, you have a bigger issue on the other side. >> you're shaking your head no. >> i just think he too quickly embraced this status of a victim. i think that the american people are -- they've seen this story before unfortunately. it confirms what they believe about their politicians. and in his case, not to be able to be direct, to let the story continue to fester, at this point, i believe he thought that he controlled the story and in fact because he said he was a victim, everybody just throws up their hands and says, just one more politician. >> well, do you think he should stop talking now? is that your -- >> in this case, less is more. the story has run its course. it should have run its course days ago. he just kept thinking he could get on top of it. and he can't. >> let me ask you that chris, because he made the case that the media's made too much of this. and to be honest, he's never been a crusader on social issues. you can't argue he's been a hypocrite here, a morality hypocrite. he apparently for all evidence we've seen, he didn't break the law. so it does raise the question, is this getting too much media attention? >> well, in the grand scheme of things, given what the country and the world is facing it's unquestionable a very minor issue. i think he had a basic challenge in the first 24 hours which is that he needed to be able to answer some of these questions but if he didn't have the answers, didn't have all the information, take a day, get yourself ready, get all the facts together, and then knock it out of the park when you're ready. i think what has happened is he gave out bits and pieces over a multiple day process. and basically threw more flames on the fire. and this became a much, much bigger story. than it really needed to be. >> we call this death by a thousand cuts. >> right. >> in this case, self-inflicted wounds. >> now, both of you have -- >> i was going to say, it's the classic example, right, finding yourself in the hole, you're supposed to stop digging, not continue to dig. >> a lot of people on capitol hill tweet. it's a new phenomenon. but this might be a cautionary tale to a lot of people. do you think this will change the way people on capitol hill tweet or use social media or should it? >> i do. i think it's going to be a wake-up call for a lot of folks. in particular, this is an issue i've been dealing with, with several of my clients in the sports world, which is really coming up with a set of established protocols and procedures. how do you friend on facebook? what are your rules? how are you going to handle tweets? who's actually doing the tweets? in some case, it's staff, in some case, it's the actual member or -- i'll analogize to a situation that took place maybe 15 years ago, with issues with contributors who may have had issues in their backgrounds and campaigns developed comprehensive vetting processes. ultimately, when you took money you shouldn't have, you're at least able to point to a process that you tried to stop it. i think you'll see a similar process that will manifest itself with how these people communicate on social media. >> do politicians get a private life anymore? >> no, and they haven't for quite some time. in the age of twitter and facebook, they've been quick to embrace these technologies as powerful tactics for political organization but they've been slow to understand that they're entering a new world, where their privacy is -- is porous. and they shouldn't have much of an expectation. you know, all of these tactic, twitter and facebook and other social networks devices, for companies or for individuals, it has to take place in a proper strategic context. you don't just do the tactics because they're quick and cool. you do them because they fit into a broader message, a broader point about what you're trying to achieve. if they don't, then you have to be really careful about what they can do. the unintended consequences. >> as chris is saying, everybody is beginning to develop their own strategies. >> that's right, that's right. >> interesting to follow. thank you, terry hot and chris lahane, for being with us. there is troubling news from libya tonight. pro-gadhafi forces may have started using one of international terrorism's most devastating weapons. but there are also worries about the rebels who are battling gadhafi. if nato gives them weapons, could those weapons end up in the hands of terrorists? that's next. they are the purest way to gauge success. ♪ maybe the only way to gauge success. but the most powerful thing about humble beginnings is that they are... ♪ ...humbling. ♪ show where you're going without forgetting where you're from. ♪ and today, we're re-inventing aspirin for pain relief. with new extra-strength bayer advanced aspirin. it has microparticles so it enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief right to the site of your tough pain. ♪ in fact, it's clinically proven to relieve pain twice as fast. new bayer advanced aspirin. extra strength pain relief, twice as fast. had a tree that bore the most rare and magical fruit, which provided for their every financial need. [ thunder rumbling ] [ thunder crashing ] and then, in one blinding blink of an eye, their tree had given its last. but with their raymond james financial advisor, they had prepared for even the unthinkable. ♪ and they danced. see what a raymond james advisor can do for you. tonight, libyan rebels say a huge explosion outside a ben ghazi hotel was a car bomb. they call it an act of terrorism that shows the irresponsible and criminal nature of gadhafi's regime. nato has just extended its mission in libya, even though the mission's goal is still cloudy. and it doesn't help when the top u.s. general in africa is publicly worrying about weapons being shipped to the rebels ending up in the hands of terrorists outside libya. so why does the obama administration seem to be doubling down on libya's rebels now? with us, cnn national security analyst peter bergen and national security contributor fran townsend, who is on the cia's external advisory board and has traveled in libya at the invitation of the gadhafi government in the past. fran, by extending the nato mission, is the alliance, is the administration doubling down on the libyan strategy and is the mission any clearer now to justify that? >> well, jessica, look, i think the president was very clear about u.s. support to the nato mission. the u.s. has got some unique capability they can provide and then the mission all comes under the supreme allied commander of nato who is in u.s. navy admiral, jim stavrat. all of the nations that are operating, all the forces, are under his command. so the u.s. is in pretty seriously. now, the question becomes, you know, what's going on on the ground and how effective can it be? there are reports it is oil minister defected to italy. we heard earlier that more than 100 soldiers defected to italy. it looks like the inner circle around him is crumbling while nato continues to pound his installations. so the question is, how long will he survive as the people abandon him, around him? >> peter, your take, how significant is the defection of the oil minister in particular? is this just a sign of the crumbling political environment or is this particular minister more significant? >> i don't think he's more significant than any of the other significant ministers we've seen defect. >> even though oil is so crucial there and the ability to refine it could help the rebels if they got that expertise? >> that's true, but i mean, you've also had senior cabinet ministers in the past, closest intelligence minister to gadhafi defect. that was an even bigger deal. so, you know, i just -- defections are never a good thing for these kinds of regimes. that is the beginning of the end. >> right, so -- okay. it's a help for the rebel, clearly. fran, you've met gadhafi. clearly, a plus for the rebels. does this kind of defection have any effect on gadhafi's personal state of mind? >> no, i mean, look, i've met him, i think he's nut, he's crazy, so i don't think he's moved -- this is a man who from the very beginning of this conflict said he would rather spill his blood on libyan soil and die a martyr than leave voluntarily. so the fact is, i think the regime is crumbling. what i think that means, jessica, is that it's more likely he's going to end up martyred. there's no good end for him. if he's unwilling to leave, either nato forces wind up kill him in an air strike, his inner circle crumbles to the point that they assassinate him or it crumbles to the point they allow the rebels access so they can assassinate him. there are no positive potential outcomes for gadhafi in any of this. >> this was startling to me. the general in charge of the u.s. african command added a twist to the nato mission by saying this. he said, quote, there is a very real concern for all the regional partners and the united states shares this concern about the proliferation of weapons from libya to other places, including those under the control of al qaeda and others. so general carter f. ham, in charge of africa command, peter, is saying that weapons going to libya could be ending up in the hands of al qaeda. do you buy it? >> i'm very skeptical of that. we've seen, you may recall, there were discussions of glimmer of al qaeda in the opposition. we still haven't seen evidence of that. there's a group called the li