Romney talks with George Stephanopoulos

Martin H. Simon/ABC

With the first presidential debate less than three weeks away, Mitt Romney is spending lots of time getting ready behind closed doors.  In his first comments on that debate prep, he told me that Sen. Rob Portman is a tough stand-in for a president who basically lies in debates.

“I think the challenge that I’ll have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren’t true,” Romney said. “I’ve looked at prior debates.  And in that kind of case, it’s difficult to say, ‘Well, am I going to spend my time correcting things that aren’t quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?”

The former governor told me he’s tempted to use Ronald Reagan’s famous line against President Carter in a 1980 debate, “There you go again” — the same line that Bill Clinton turned on Romney and the Republicans at the Democratic convention in Charlotte.

When I asked if Portman was crushing him in early debate preps, Romney was coy.

“I’m not revealing those kind of secrets.  But I will never debate Rob Portman again,” Romney said with a laugh.

“He’s very good,” he said.

[Senator John McCain expressed a similar sentiment after going against Portman in his 2008 debate prep. McCain later told the New York Times, laughing, "I hate him still."]

The debates are at a critical moment in the campaign with the latest polls showing Obama gaining an edge over Romney in the key battleground states.

Romney told me the debates “may well be” the campaign’s make or break moment.

“Sometimes there’s something big that happens and they become deciding. Other times, it’s like, well, nothing really changed. We’re in the same spot we were before the debates.  I can’t predict what’ll happen.  But I think it’ll be revealing one way or the other,” he said.

Romney said he wasn’t concerned about new polls showing him trailing in Virginia and Ohio — even though it’s virtually impossible for him to get the 270 electoral votes he needs without victories in those two states.

“Well, I’m ahead in a lot of other states, too.  I saw one this morning, ahead in Florida, ahead in North Carolina.  Gosh, we’re even tied in Wisconsin,” Romney told me. “These polls are going to bounce around a lot.  I don’t pay a lot of attention day to day to which state’s up and which one’s down.  But I believe that when the final decisions are being made by the American people, they’re going to ask themselves, “Who do I have confidence in to keep America safe?  And who do I believe can get our economy doing what it needs to do?”

Romney said the most important numbers in this election are 23, 47 and 16: ”23 million Americans out of work or underemployed, 47 million people on food stamps,  $16 trillion in debt.  And now the Federal Reserve, it says, “Look, this economy is not going well,” he said.

And it’s because of those economic conditions some Republican allies are worried. George Will on “This Week” said “If the Republican Party cannot win in this environment, it has to get out of politics and find another business.” Laura Ingraham said “If you can’t beat Barack Obama with this record, then shut down the party, shut it down.”

“Well you know, beating an incumbent is never easy.  The president exudes an air of likability and friendliness, which is endearing,” Romney told me. “But at the same time, I think people recognize that he has not done the job they expected him to do and that he promised he would do.”

The race will be decided by “the people in the middle” who “won’t make their mind up until the very, very last moment,” the former governor said.

And many of those people — 63% of registered voters — want more details about what a Romney presidency would look like, according to our latest ABC News/ Washington Post poll.

The former governor cited his 59 point – and more than 150 pages - economic plan that he released, but acknowledged that “people aren’t going to sit down and read a book.”

“So that means that in the speeches I give over the coming weeks I need to lay out some of the principles that were described in that book.  And I will in more detail,” he said.

Democrats say Romney’s plan would cause a $2,000 tax hike on the middle class - something Romney disputes and points to a number of studies that say his plan to cut taxes will not increase the deficit, including one by Harvard professor Martin Feldstein.

Feldstein says Romney’s math will work, but he would have to eliminate the home mortgage, charitable, state and local tax deductions for incomes greater than $100,000.

When I pressed Romney on that point, he conceded that he actually hadn’t read the Feldstein report that he and Paul Ryan cite on the campaign trail.

“I haven’t seen his precise study,” he said.

“I said that there are five different studies that point out that we can get to a balanced budget without raising taxes on middle income people.  Let me tell you, George, the fundamentals of my tax policy are these.  Number one, reduce tax burdens on middle-income people.  So no one can say my plan is going to raise taxes on middle-income people, because principle number one is keep the burden down on middle-income taxpayers,” he said.

Romney defined middle income as $200,000 to $250,000 a year and less.

“Number two, don’t reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest.  The top 5 percent will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today.  That’s principle one, principle two.  Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs.  And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now,” he said.

When I asked if he and his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, would specify which loopholes they would close in order to pay for the tax cuts, Romney said he’s relying on his experience as Massachusetts governor.

“I’ve found that you have to work with the people across the aisle.  My legislature was 87% Democrat.  So if I’d have come out and said, “Here this is my bill.  This is the way I want it,” you’d never get it done,” he said. “You lay out your principles.  Those are my principles, don’t raise taxes on middle-income people, make sure the high-income people pay the same share they’re paying today, encourage growth by bringing down rates, and finally simplify the code.  Those are my principles.  I’ll stick with them.  And I believe that’s going to help get the economy going and grow jobs.”

I also asked the presidential candidate about a recent poll number that showed registered voters by a 19% margin would prefer to have dinner with Obama instead of Romney.

So what’s dinner like at the Romney house? “Chaotic,” he said.

“You’d have grandkids climbing all over you. Probably some food would be thrown from one side of the table to the other by one of my grandkids. It’d be a lot of fun,” he said.

“So I can’t tell people who would have more fun at whose table.  But I can tell you the president’s a person that a lot of people like.  I don’t dislike him myself and wish him the very best.  But I think the American people are looking for someone who has the capacity to help them get good jobs and more take-home pay.  And I do,” Romney told me.

Editor’s note: This blog has been updated to reflect that in responding to a question from ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Mitt Romney defined middle income for Americans as $200,000-$250,000 and less.

View the original article here

Chicago teachers go on strike after talks fail

  DON BABWINCHICAGO -- City officials vowed to keep hundreds of thousands of students safe when striking teachers hit the picket lines Monday and school district and teachers union leaders resumed negotiations on a contract that appeared close to being resolved over the weekend before the union announced both sides were too far apart to prevent the district's first strike in 25 years.

The walkout in the nation's third-largest school district posed a tricky test for Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his city, as parents and school officials begin the task of trying to ensure nearly 400,000 students are kept safe.

School officials said they will open more than 140 schools between 8:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. so children can eat lunch and breakfast in a district where many students receive free meals. The district asked community organizations to provide additional programs for students, and a number of churches, libraries and other groups plan to offer day camps and other activities. But it's not clear how many families will send their children to the added programs.

Police Chief Garry McCarthy said he was deploying police officers to those sites to ensure kids' safety but also to "deal with any protests that teachers may, in fact, have" while protecting their rights. He also was taking officers off desk duties and redeploying them to the streets to deal with potential protests - and thousands of students who could be on the streets.

Emanuel said he will work to end the strike quickly.

"We will make sure our kids are safe, we will see our way through these issues and our kids will be back in the classroom where they belong," Emanuel said Sunday night, not long after the union announced it was going on strike. "I would like all the parties to do right by our children. ... Our kids belong in the classroom. The negotiators belong at the negotiating table and finish their job."

The two sides were not far apart on compensation but were on other issues, including health benefits - teachers want to keep what they have now - and a new teacher evaluation system based partly on students' standardized test scores, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis said.

"This is a difficult decision and one we hoped we could have avoided," she said. "We must do things differently in this city if we are to provide our students with the education they so rightfully deserve."

"This is not a strike I wanted," Emanuel said. "It was a strike of choice ... it's unnecessary, it's avoidable and it's wrong. " More than 26,000 teachers and support staff were expected to hit the picket lines at 6:30 a.m. Monday.

Both Emanuel and union officials have much at stake. The walkout comes at a time when unions and collective bargaining by public employees have come under criticism in many parts of the country, and all sides are closely monitoring who might emerge with the upper hand in the Chicago dispute.

The timing also may be inopportune for Emanuel, a former White House chief of staff whose city administration is wrestling with a spike in murders and shootings in some city neighborhoods and who just agreed to take a larger role in fundraising for President Barack Obama's re-election campaign.

As the strike deadline approached, parents spent Sunday worrying about how much their children's education might suffer and where their kids will go while they're at work.

"They're going to lose learning time," said Beatriz Fierro, whose daughter is in the fifth grade on the city's Southwest Side. "And if the whole afternoon they're going to be free, it's bad. Of course you're worried."

School board President David Vitale first announced Sunday night that talks had broken off, despite the school board offering what he called a fair and responsible contract that would cover four years and meet most of the union's demands. He said the talks with the union had been "extraordinarily difficult."

Emanuel said the district had offered the teachers a 16 percent pay raise over four years, doubling an earlier offer.

Lewis said she would not prioritize the issues, saying that they all were important to teachers.

That included concern over a new evaluation that she said would be based too heavily on students' standardized test scores, which she said would be unfair to teachers because it could not adequately account for outside factors that affect student performance, including poverty, violence and homelessness.

She said the evaluations could result in 6,000 teachers losing their jobs within two years.

City officials said they did not believe that was true but said the union would not tell them how they came to that conclusion. Emanuel said the evaluation would not count in the first year, as teachers and administrators worked out any kinks. Schools CEO Jean-Claude Brizard said the evaluation was mandated by state law but "was not developed to be a hammer," but to help teachers get better.

The strike is the latest flashpoint in a very public and often contentious battle between the mayor and the union.

When he took office last year, Emanuel inherited a school district facing a $700 million budget shortfall. Not long after, his administration rescinded 4 percent raises for teachers. He then asked the union to reopen its contract and accept 2 percent pay raises in exchange for lengthening the school day for students by 90 minutes. The union refused.

Emanuel, who promised a longer school day during his campaign, then attempted to go around the union by asking teachers at individual schools to waive the contract and add 90 minutes to the day. He halted the effort after being challenged by the union before the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board.

The district and union agreed in July on how to implement the longer school day, striking a deal to hire back 477 teachers who had been laid off rather than pay regular teachers more to work longer hours. That raised hopes the contract dispute would be settled soon, but bargaining continued on the other issues.

---
GET THE LATEST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FROM ABCNEWS.COM ---
Get Eyewitness News Delivered

Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters | Text Alerts

(Copyright ©2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Get more U.S. & World News »

teacher, strike, u.s. & world news

View the original article here

Obama talks exclusively to ABC News

President Obama has abandoned his longstanding opposition to same-sex marriage but says the decision on whether or not to legalize the unions should be left up to individual states, which are "arriving at different conclusions at different times."

"I think that's a healthy process and a healthy debate," Obama told ABC News' Robin Roberts in an exclusive interview on "Good Morning America."

Speaking just one day after voters in North Carolina approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions, the president, who had opposed the ballot measure, conceded the outcome in the critical swing state was reasonable.

"This debate is taking place at a local level," he said. "And I think the whole country is evolving and changing. And, you know, one of the things that I'd like to see is that a conversation continue in a respectful way."

Thirty states now have constitutional amendments or statutes banning same-sex marriage. Six states plus the District of Columbia have legalized the unions. The issue will be put directly to voters in Minnesota, Maine, Washington and Maryland in November.

Eager not to alienate key swing voters, Obama also reached out directly to same-sex opponents, telling Roberts that many Americans who disagree with him "are not coming at it from a mean-spirited perspective."

"They're coming at it because they care about families," he said. "And they have a different understanding, in terms of, you know, what the word 'marriage' should mean. And a bunch of them are friends of mine, you know, pastors and ... people who I deeply respect."

As for his personal evolution on the issue, Obama cited New York state, which approved gay marriage in June 2011, as an example of how compromise could be reached with religious groups, many of which oppose same-sex unions.

"I asked myself right after that New York vote took place, if I had been a state senator, which I was for a time, how would I have voted?" Obama told Roberts. "And I had to admit to myself, 'You know what? I think that I would have voted yes.'

"It would have been hard for me, knowing all the friends and family that are gays or lesbians, that for me to say to them, you know, 'I voted to oppose you having the same kind of rights and responsibilities that I have,'" he said.

Obama added that his shift on the issue came through conversations with staff members, openly gay and lesbian service members and his wife and daughters.

"At a certain point, I've just concluded that, for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married," he said.

"The winds of change are happening. They're not blowing with the same force in every state," he added. "I think that as more and more folks think about it, they're gonna say, you know, 'That's not who we are.'"

Obama had been moving in the direction of supporting same-sex marriage since taking office in 2009 but has consistently stopped short of backing it outright. His announcement just six months from Election Day could have an electoral impact.

Obama has always stressed support for civil unions for gay and lesbian couples that provide the rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples, although not defined as "marriage," and opposed efforts to ban gay marriage at the state level, saying that he did not favor attempts to strip rights away from gay and lesbian couples.

But the president's position became a flashpoint this week when Vice President Joe Biden pronounced himself "absolutely comfortable" with allowing same-sex couples to wed.

Obama aides insisted there was no daylight between the positions held by the president and his vice president when it comes to legal rights, but as other prominent Democrats also weighed in favor of gay marriage, the disconnect became difficult for the White House to explain away.

"I've been consistent in my overall trajectory. The one thing that I've wrestled with is this gay marriage issue," Obama told Roberts when asked about the timing of his announcement. "And I think it'd be hard to argue that somehow this is something that I'd be doing for political advantage because, frankly, you know, the politics, it's not clear how they cut."

Polls show most Americans under the age of 40 support same-sex marriage -- a 61 to 35 percent margin in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll. But most over the age of 65 -- 54 percent -- oppose it.

A racial gap persists, as well, with majorities of whites and Hispanics favoring same-sex unions while blacks are largely opposed, 55 to 41 percent.

"In some places that are going to be pretty important on this electoral map it may hurt me," Obama said. "But, you know, I think it was important for me, given how much attention this issue was getting both here in Washington, but [also] elsewhere, for me to go ahead, 'Let's be clear: Here's what I believe.'"

The announcement completed a turnabout for the president, who has opposed gay marriage throughout his career in national politics. In 1996, as a state Senate candidate, he indicated support for gay marriage in a questionnaire, but Obama aides later disavowed it and said it did not reflect the candidate's position.

In 2004, as a candidate for the U.S. Senate, he cited his own religion in framing his views.

"I'm a Christian," he said. "I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

He maintained that position through his 2008 presidential campaign and through his term as president, until today.

As president in 2010, Obama told ABC News' Jake Tapper that his feelings about gay marriage were "constantly evolving. I struggle with this."

A year later, the president told ABC's George Stephanopoulos, "I'm still working on it."

"I probably won't make news right now, George," Obama said in October 2011. "But I think that there's no doubt that as I see friends, families, children of gay couples who are thriving, you know, that has an impact on how I think about these issues."

Obama's decision has political connotations for the fall. The issue divides elements of the Democratic base, with liberals and gay-rights groups eager to see the president go further, but with gay marriage far less popular among African-American voters.

Obama's likely Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, opposes gay marriage and fought his state's highest court, as governor, when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage in 2004. Romney said on the campaign trail Monday that he continues to oppose gay marriage.

"My view is that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman," Romney said. "That's the position I've had for some time, and I don't intend to make any adjustments at this point ... or ever, by the way."

Also Read

View the original article here

Mom in child tanning bed case talks to GMA

The New Jersey mother accused of allowing her 5-year-old daughter to use a tanning booth has denied the allegations after she was arrested and charged with second-degree child endangerment.

Although Patricia Krentcil doesn't deny that the child has been to the tanning salon with her, she says daughter Anna suffered from outdoor sunburn.

"The pediatrician said that she's got a little sunburn, but it was that only weekend we were out doing the gardening," Krentcil, 44, said.

It was Anna's school nurse who noticed she had a rash, and when the little girl told her it was from going tanning with her mother, the school notified child services. Krentcil said that while her daughter was in the room with her at the salon, she was never in the tanning booth.

"I never once in my life let me daughter, especially at that age, go into a tanning booth," Krentcil said.

She describes the girl's burns as not severe, and says she was told to put ointment on the rash, which she says is "just over-the-counter stuff."

Officials acknowledged the school's involvement and say they believe that Krentcil took the child into the tanning booth without the salon's knowledge.

"The little girl went to school and reported she had these burns and that caused the school to contact authorities," Katherine Carter, spokeswoman for the Essex County Prosecutor's Office, said.

Carter declined to name the Nutley, N.J., tanning salon, citing the "ongoing investigation."

Ultraviolet lights in tanning beds are not only dangerous for children, but the UV light can damage DNA, causing mutations as well as formations of dangerous skin cancer cells.

"There's really no excuse to take a young child to a tanning salon," New York dermatologist Doris Day said. "We often consider going to a tanning salon the equivalent of smoking for the skin and the younger you start, those affects are cumulative."

Because of the negative effects, New Jersey law doesn't allow anyone younger than 14 is to use a tanning facility. Teens older than14 are allowed to go to salons but only with parental consent.

Krentcil is out on $25,000 bail, while her daughter in now in her father's custody.

Also Read

View the original article here

Afghan claim of US prison abuse strains key talks

  By KAY JOHNSONKABUL, Afghanistan -- Afghan investigators accused the American military Saturday of abusing detainees at its main prison in the country, bolstering calls by President Hamid Karzai for the U.S. to turn over control of the facility and complicating talks about America's future role in Afghanistan.

The investigators also called for any detainee held without evidence to be freed, putting the U.S. and Afghan governments on a collision course in an issue that will decide the fate of hundreds of suspected Taliban and al-Qaida operatives captured by American forces and held indefinitely.

Karzai took Washington by surprise Thursday when he ordered that the U.S. military turn over full control of the prison outside Bagram Air Base within one month, a seemingly impossible deadline given U.S. security concerns about the prisoners and the Afghan government's weak administrative capacity. The countries had been working on phasing a transfer of responsibility of the prison, which hold 3,000 detainees, over two years.

The demand was the latest episode of political brinkmanship as negotiations continued for a Strategic Partnership Document with America that will determine the U.S. role in Afghanistan after 2014, when most foreign troops are due to withdraw. Karzai has demanded an end to unpopular night raids by U.S. troops and control over detainees as a condition of the pact and could be seeking leverage by pushing the detainee issue now.

Karzai spokesman Mohammad Sediq Amerkhil said Saturday that the president's remarks were a direct response to the investigation team's report of abuse and prolonged detentions.

The charges are reminiscent of allegations surrounding the U.S.

treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where admitted Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is held.

Detainees interviewed during two visits to the U.S.-run portion of the Parwan detention center outside Bagram Air Base - about 25 miles (40 kilometers) north of Kabul - complained of freezing cold, humiliating strip searches and being deprived of light, according to Gul Rahman Qazi, who led the investigation ordered by Karzai.

Another investigator, Sayed Noorullah, said the prison and all detainees must be transferred to Afghan control "as soon as possible," adding, "if there is no evidence ... they have the right to be freed."

U.S. Embassy spokesman Gavin Sundwall said Saturday that American officials only recently received the commission's report.

He said the U.S. investigates all allegations of prisoner abuse.

"We will certainly take seriously the report and study it," he said. He added that the U.S. is committed to working with the Afghan government on a joint plan to turn over detainees "in a responsible manner." He would not specify what time frame would be considered responsible.

Karzai's recent relationship with the U.S. has been rocky, even though he came to power after the 2001 American-led intervention to drive the Taliban regime from power for sheltering al-Qaida. He has frequently lashed out at Washington, although he needs U.S.

military and financial strength to back his weak government as it battles the Taliban.

Last year, he accused the U.S. and its allies of serving only their own purposes in the country, and has told a Pakistani television station he would support Pakistan in any war against the United States. In 2010, he was said to have threatened to join the Taliban if foreign donors pressured him too much.

The rhetoric is seen as a play for support from an Afghan population that resents the U.S. presence and is angered by reports of Afghans detained indefinitely and of residents whose homes are invaded without warning. Less clear is exactly what Karzai hopes to gain from Washington with the politics of confrontation.

The Taliban seek to use anti-American resentment to discredit Karzai's government. On Friday, the insurgents mocked the president as a puppet of foreign powers in a statement that specifically mentioned Afghan detainees "Ostensibly, he speaks of national sovereignty and of the welfare of people but practically, we see that there are thousands of Afghan detainees who have been suffering in the Bagram Air Base and other American bases now for years, and without a trial," the Taliban said.

The Parwan detention center was opened in 2009 to replace an older prison inside the base itself. The deaths of two Afghan prisoners at the previous facility in 2002 led to abuse charges against several American troops.

U.S. and Afghan militaries jointly run the new facility. The Afghan side controls a section holding about 300 detainees whose cases are slated to be tried by Afghan judiciary, while U.S. forces control the rest of the facility.

Qazi, who led the investigation run by the Independent Commission for Overseeing the Implementation of the Constitution, said U.S. officials told him only the 300 detainees in the Afghan section had legal cases against them.

He said he was told that that 2,700 others in the American-run section were suspected Taliban members captured using classified intelligence and were considered a threat if freed.

Prison officials made it clear that many detainees had no evidence against them that would hold up in Afghan court, said Abdul Qader Adalatkhwa, the deputy leader of the investigation.

"So this is their concern," Adalatkhwa said. "That when they hand over the detainees to the Afghan side ... most of these people might get freed."

Holding suspects without prosecuting them raises the risk that innocent people could be caught in limbo with no way to challenge their imprisonment, Qazi said.

He said the investigation team interviewed a 71-year-old man who claimed he had been beaten in detention and had no idea why he had been arrested. Another man told the team he was arrested after coalition forces found a cache of ammunition buried 400 yards (400 meters) away from his home and blamed him. He said the bullets weren't his, but he could not convince anyone.

The prison also holds al-Qaida and other terrorist suspects from several different countries captured in what the U.S. considers battlefield conditions.

It's unclear what would happen to those foreign suspects if they were turned over to Afghan custody, but Adalatkhwa implied that they, too, might be released unless there is evidence to charge them with a crime.

"The legal procedures of Afghanistan would apply to them," Adalatkhwa said.

---
Associated Press writer Rahim Faiez contributed to this report.

---
GET THE LATEST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FROM ABCNEWS.COM

---
Get Eyewitness News Delivered

Facebook | Twitter | Newsletters | Text Alerts

(Copyright ©2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Get more U.S. & World News »

afghanistan, u.s. & world news

View the original article here

Report: Sandusky talks about Paterno, case

In this Aug. 6, 1999 file photo, Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno, right, poses with his defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky during Penn State Media Day at State College, Pa. ((Paul Vathis/AP Photo ))

  Eyewitness NewsNEW YORK -- Former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky said he never spoke with Joe Paterno about any suspected misconduct with minors, the New York Times reported Saturday.

Jerry Sandusky has been charged with 40 counts of molesting eight boys over 15 years and is free on bail while awaiting a preliminary hearing Dec. 13. A grand jury investigating Sandusky said in a report that some of the allegations occurred in the team showers, including a 2002 allegation in which a graduate assistant testified he saw Sandusky assaulting a young boy.

University trustees fired Joe Paterno on Nov. 9, four days after charges were filed against Sandusky, amid mounting pressure that school leaders should have done more to prevent alleged abuse.

During a lengthy interview at his lawyer's home, Sandusky in an interview with the Times painted a picture of chaotic but friendly scenes involving children he described as extended family at his State College, Pa., home. The descriptions sharply contrast the shocking allegations involving children outlined in a grand jury report.

Sandusky told the newspaper he and Paterno never spoke about the alleged 2002 incident or a 1998 child molestation complaint investigated by Penn State campus police.

"I never talked to him about either one," Sandusky said.

"That's all I can say. I mean, I don't know." He worked for Paterno for nearly 30 years.

Messages left Saturday by The Associated Press seeking comment from representatives for Paterno were not immediately returned.

Paterno testified before the grand jury looking into the abuse allegations that a graduate assistant told him in 2002 that he witnessed in the team shower in the team locker room, and that he relayed the report to his superior, athletic director Tim Curley.

The graduate assistant later met with Curley and Gary Schultz, a university vice president who oversaw campus police. But authorities said the allegation was not passed on to authorities.

Curley and Schultz are charged with failing to report the 2002 allegation and lying to the grand jury. Curley is on administrative leave, while Schultz has stepped down. Lawyers for both men have said their clients are innocent.

Prosecutors have said Paterno is not a target of the investigation.

Paterno's son, Scott Paterno, told the AP last month the first and only incident reported about Sandusky to Paterno was in 2002.

Paterno has said in a statement that specific actions alleged to have occurred in the grand jury report were not relayed to him Still, the state's top cop criticized the way school leaders handled allegations and said Paterno and other officials had a moral responsibility to do more.

The 84-year-old Paterno initially announced his retirement effective at the end of the season, saying that the scandal was "one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more." The trustees fired him anyway, about 12 hours later.

Sandusky said in the report he never sexually abused any child and that prosecutors have misunderstood his work with children. He described a family and work life that "could often be chaotic, even odd, one that lacked some classic boundaries between adults and children," the Times reported.

He described scenes in which his State College, Pa., home turned into a makeshift recreation center with wrestling matches and sleepovers. Children playing in their home with dogs after football games.

"It was, you know, almost an extended family," Mr. Sandusky said of his household's relationship with children from the charity he founded, The Second Mile. He characterized his experiences with children was close with as "precious times," and said the physical aspect of the relationships "just happened that way."

Allegations involving two victims occurred in Sandusky's home, according to the grand jury report.

"Victim One testified that Sandusky had a practice of coming into the basement room after he told Victim One that it was time to go to bed," the grand jury report said. "Victim One testified that Sandusky would `crack his back,"' which was described in the report as Sandusky getting on to the bed and "rolling under the boy."

Sandusky told the Times, "They've taken everything that I ever did for any young person and twisted it to say that my motives were sexual or whatever ... I had kid after kid after kid who might say I was a father figure. And they just twisted that all."

He is accused of mining the ranks of his Second Mile charity to find underprivileged boys to abuse. Sandusky also said that the charity never restricted his access to children until he became the subject of a criminal investigation in 2008.

He said he regularly gave money to the disadvantaged boys at his charity, opened bank accounts for them and gave them gifts that had been donated to the charity.

"I tried to reward them sometimes with a little money in hand, just so that they could see something," he said. "But more often than not, I tried to set up, maybe get them to save the money, and I put it directly into a savings account established for them."

The paper said he grew most animated when talking about his relationships with children and most disconsolate when he spoke of Paterno and Penn State, and the upheaval caused by his indictment.

"I don't think it was fair," he is quoted as saying.

During the interview, Sandusky said his relationships and activities with Second Mile children did cause some strain with Paterno. He told the paper he worried that having some children with him at hotels before games or on the sideline during games, could have been regarded as a distraction by Paterno.

NY TIMES INTERVIEW: NY TIMES INTERVIEW WITH JERRY SANDUSKY

---
GET THE LATEST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FROM ABCNEWS.COM

(Copyright ©2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
Get more U.S. & World News »

penn state nittany lions, jerry sandusky, joe paterno, u.s. & world news
// perform JavaScript after the document is scriptable.OTV.common.modules.promoCarousel.promoCarouselInit("/wabc/xml?id=5758260&ptnr=promoCarousel");

View the original article here

Karzai confirms peace talks; Kabul attacked

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, second from left, reviews the guard of honor with the Chairman of the Pakistani Senate Farooq Naik, right, at Chakala airbase in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, Wednesday, March 10, 2010. (AP Photo)

  Eyewitness NewsKABUL, Afghanistan -- President Hamid Karzai acknowledged Saturday that the U.S. and Afghan governments have held talks with Taliban emissaries in a bid to end the nation's nearly 10-year war, even as suicide attackers launched a bold assault in the heart of the county's capital, killing nine people.

The attack, which occurred just blocks from Karzai's office, shows the parties have a long way to go to reach a political settlement as the Obama administration weighs a major withdrawal of its forces. The White House neither directly confirmed or denied Karzai's statement.

Three men wearing camouflage fatigues that are frequently worn by Afghan soldiers stormed a police station near the presidential palace, with one of them detonating an explosives vest just outside the gates as two others rushed inside and began firing, an Interior Ministry statement said.

The crackle of gunfire echoed through the usually bustling streets for about two hours before security forces killed the two remaining attackers. Insurgents killed three police officers, one intelligence agent and five civilians in the attack, according to the ministry statement.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed responsibility for the attack in a text message to The Associated Press.

Attacks in the Afghan capital have been relatively rare, although violence has increased since the May 2 killing of Osama bin Laden in a U.S. raid in Pakistan and the start of the Taliban's annual spring offensive.

The last major attack in Kabul took place last month when a suicide bomber wearing an Afghan police uniform infiltrated the main Afghan military hospital in late May, killing six medical students. A month before that, a suicide attacker in an army uniform sneaked past security at the Afghan Defense Ministry, killing three.

Kabul is one of seven areas scheduled to begin to be handed over to Afghan security control in July - part of NATO's efforts to begin transferring security responsibilities ahead of its planned 2014 withdrawal from the country.

The assault occurred shortly after Karzai announced during a speech to youth at the presidential palace that members of his peace council and the U.S. have begun preliminary peace negotiations with the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan for five years and sheltered al-Qaida before being driven out of power in the U.S.-led invasion in late 2001.

Reports about such talks have surfaced in recent months, but Karzai's statement was the first public confirmation of U.S.

participation. Publicly, the Taliban say there will be no negotiations until foreign troops leave Afghanistan.

"In the course of this year, there have been peace talks with the Taliban and our own countrymen," Karzai said. "Peace talks have started with them already and it is going well. Foreign militaries, especially the United States of America, are going ahead with these negotiations."

President Barack Obama is weighing a range of options for starting the withdrawal of some American forces.

The U.S. has roughly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. When the president sent an additional 30,000 U.S. forces to Afghanistan at the end of 2009, he did so with the caveat that some of those troops would start coming home in July.

U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner said only that the U.S. has "consistently supported an Afghan-led" peace process.

"Over the past two years, we have laid out our red lines for the Taliban: They must renounce violence; they must abandon their alliance with al-Qaida; and they must abide by the constitution of Afghanistan," Toner said. "This is the price for reaching a political resolution and bringing an end to the military actions that are targeting their leadership and decimating their ranks."

Karzai said some Taliban emissaries who have met with members of the peace council he set up last year were only representing themselves, while others were speaking for the broader movement.

The exact nature of the contacts was not immediately clear, and Karzai said no government official outside of the council had contact with them.

Karzai's rambling speech was the latest tweak to the U.S.-led coalition trying to control a message about a war grinding toward the decade mark. It likely overstates the progress of the delicate negotiations both his government and others face in identifying and wooing potential Taliban leaders.

Many of the movement's leaders remain either unknown or underground since fleeing Kabul at the start of the U.S.-led invasion. Mullah Mohammad Omar, the Taliban's one-eyed leader, has not been seen publicly since 2001.

Officials also have been duped before. Late last year, a Quetta, Pakistan, shopkeeper posed as the Taliban's former aviation minister, Mullah Mohammed Akhtar Mansour, and met twice with Western officials before they realized they had been tricked.

However, such talks may be gaining momentum after the U.N.

Security Council voted unanimously Friday to treat al-Qaida and the Taliban separately when it comes to U.N. sanctions, a move aimed at supporting the Afghan government's reconciliation efforts.

Meanwhile, violence persists. Insurgents attacks targeted three convoys ferrying fuel and supplies to NATO troops in western and eastern Afghanistan over the weekend, killing nine Afghan security guards and torching at least 15 fuel tankers, officials said.

In the eastern city of Jalalabad, insurgents kidnapped a provincial council member for Logar province and three of his family members.

Three NATO service members also were killed Saturday - two in southern Afghanistan and one in the east, according to the alliance. At least 33 international soldiers have died in Afghanistan so far this month, raising the death toll for 2011 to 239.

---
Associated Press writers Ahmad Seir and Amir Shah contributed to this report.

(Copyright ©2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) Get more U.S. & World News »

afghanistan, taliban, u.s. & world news

View the original article here