Eliza Browning
AC360° Associate Producer

In October, three people died in a sweat lodge run by self-help guru James Arthur Ray. It turns out that 12 weeks before the tragic incident, another woman’s life came to an end during another one of Ray’s workshops. But this one received little attention – in part because Ray’s company maintained a low-profile about it. The woman was participating in one of Ray’s scenarios in which she wandered around San Diego as a homeless person, without any identification or possessions. But this woman ended up jumping off a building and killing herself in the process. And if you think that’s bad, the story only gets worse. Gary Tuchman has the details for us tonight.

Earlier today, at least 112 people were killed in central Baghdad and more than 400 were wounded when suicide bombers exploded their cars in a series of five terrorist attacks. The attacks shattered a two-month period of relative calm in the capital that had existed since twin car bombings in late October. The passage of Iraq’s election law has led to intense controversy in the Iraqi parliament and a vote which was planned for January has been pushed back. Is Iraq facing an increased risk of danger? Are we leaving too early?

Robert Gates, the U.S. Defense Secretary, arrived in Afghanistan and spoke with President Karzai today. Karzai told Gates that his country would need international help for 15-20 years. Gates promised the US would not abandon Afghanistan as they had done in the past.

Keep reading

Amanda Knox looks on during a session of her trial last week at the courthouse in Perugia, Italy.

Cate Vojdik
AC360° Writer

U.S. Senator Mary Cantwell is urging Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to help American college student Amanda Knox, who was convicted of murdering her study abroad roommate in Italy and sentenced to 26 years in prison. Senator Cantwell, who represents Knox’s home state, has issued a statement saying she has profound concerns that Knox has been failed by the Italian justice system. She wants Secretary Clinton to intervene and ensure that Knox gets a fair appeals trial. Tonight, Anderson talks to the senator about why she thinks U.S. officials need to step in. We’ll also hear from Former Assistant Secretary of State James Rubin. Even if Secretary Clinton decides she wants to intervene, can she? How m uch leverage does she have?

Also tonight: science, skepticism and allegations of conspiracy. World leaders have gathered in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate summit but leaked emails from an internationally-renowned climate research unit are threatening to overshadow the talks. Climate change skeptics say the emails are proof that scientists have manipulated data and public perception of global warming. We’ll explain the controversy. You can decide if you think it’s a conspiracy or much ado about nothing.

Keep reading

Delegates arrive at the summit building in Copenhagen as talks get under way.

Eliza Browning
AC360° Associate Producer

In Copenhagen today, 15,000 people from 192 countries are hashing out a successor to the Kyoto Treaty, the global agreement regulating greenhouse gases. The current agreement expires in 2012. So what are the key issues that will be tackled by members of the summit? What impact will emission limits have on industries, the economy and jobs? And do most Americans care? Enough to do something about it? Already today, a European official claimed that the U.S. and China have not offered to go far enough to combat climate change.

But the climate change summit is at risk of being overshadowed by what some are calling “Climate-Gate.” At the University of East Anglia, thousands of pieces of correspondence between some of the world’s leading climate scientists were stolen and leaked on the internet. Apparently, hacked emails from some of the scientists have ignited allegations that scientists “cooked the books” on some of the impact of global warming. Will this email leak lead to more debate about the truth behind global warming? What do you think? We’re looking into the the emails and following the money trail – who benefits from making the argument that global warming is man-made? We’re keeping them honest tonight.

Keep reading

Amanda Knox is driven into court at midnight in Perugia, Italy, to hear the verdict in her murder trial.

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

American Amanda Knox is facing 26 years in an Italian prison after a jury convicted her of murdering her roommate Meredith Kercher, while they were exchange students in the city of Perugia in 2007. Knox's Italian ex-boyfriend was also convicted. Raffaele Sollecito was sentenced to 25 years.

The two were convicted of all charges, except theft. They must pay 5 million euros to the victim's family. Knox must also pay 40,000 euros to a man who she falsely accused of the killing.

When the judge read the jury's verdict, Knox started to weep and said "No, no."

In a written statement, Knox's parents said they were "extremely disappointed" in the verdict.

"While we always knew this was a possibility, we find it difficult to accept this verdict when we know that she is innocent, and that the prosecution has failed to explain why there is no evidence of Amanda in the room where Meredith was so horribly and tragically murdered," they said.

"It appears clear to us that the attacks on Amanda's character in much of the media and by the prosecution had a significant impact on the judges and jurors and apparently overshadowed the lack of evidence in the prosecution's case against her."

Prosecutors said Kercher died during a sex game in which Knox taunted her while Sollecito and an acquaintance Rudy Guede sexually assaulted her. Guede was convicted in a separate trial and is appealing.

Tonight on 360°, you'll hear from Knox's aunt.

"They [the jury/the italian legal system] screwed up. They made a huge mistake. People are cheering about it now. I'm disgusted by that. I'm absolutely disgusted my family had to come out of that courtroom and hear people cheering Amanda has been convicted of something she had nothing to do with it," said Janet Huff on CNN's Campbell Brown show.

"What upsets me most about this is, i guess you can't change an entire country's way of justice and their court system, but the fact their jurors are not sequestered, they are allowed to go home, talk to their friends, reads the newspapers and go online, read whatever they want and believe it or not that does affect their decision-making process," she added.

Do you agree with the verdict? Share your thoughts below.

Join us for this story and much more starting at 10 p.m. ET on CNN. See you then!

Eliza Browning
AC360° Associate Producer

The cost of just getting the health care bill passed is raising eyebrows on Capitol Hill. Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu eventually voted yes to debate the bill, but only after the Senate apparently added $300 million dollars in federal spending for her state. And she is a Democrat. It turns out getting support from Republicans may cost billions of dollars. Could one particular tax loophole benefiting one state have anything to do with a potential “yes” vote? Drew Griffin is keeping them honest tonight.

An Italian jury has begun deliberations in the murder trial of American student Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito. Yesterday, Knox took the stand for a third time, telling jurors that she is not an "assassin" who killed her former roommate. Knox and Sollecito are charged with murder and sexual violence in the November 2007 stabbing death of Meredith Kercher. Knox and Kercher, a British exchange student, were roommates. The verdict may come down as early as this afternoon. We’ll have the latest developments tonight.

We’re learning this morning that the U.S. jobs market improved significantly in November, as employers trimmed the fewest jobs of any month since the start of the recession. Approximately 11,000 jobs were lost in November – a striking contrast from the 125,000 jobs that economists forecasted for the month. The unemployment rate, now at 10 percent, posted the biggest one-month decline in more than three years. So where are the jobs and who is most affected? We’ll break it down for you tonight.

Keep reading

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

The White House is coming under fire for not having its social planner testify at a congressional hearing today on the state dinner security breach.

The ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, New York Rep. Peter King, addressed the panel's Democratic Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson.

"This was a bipartisan request, Mr. Chairman. A bipartisan request to the White House which prides itself in being open, which prides itself on cooperation – but in this instance they are stonewalling. And for our committee to work with the White House there has to be an element of trust. They have breached that trust, " King said.

Do you agree? Should White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers have been at the hearing?

Thompson said he didn't think Rogers had to testify, since the hearing focused on security issues.

Rogers wasn't the only no-show. Tareq and Michaele Salahi who are accused of crashing the state dinner last month also stayed away.

"Maybe they didn't show because they were on the guest list," joked Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Arizona.

But Thompson isn't laughing over the Salahis skipping the Q-and-A session. He said they will subpoena the couple to try to get them to testify on another date.

The one person who did show up on Capitol Hill was Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan.

"In this case, I fully acknowledge that proper procedures were not followed and human error occurred in the execution of our duties. This flaw has not changed our agency standard which is to be right 100-percent of the time," Sullivan said.

That was met by some anger from another Republican on the committee, who wanted to hear from the White House Social Secretary.

"I am very impressed by your willingness to take responsibility for this incident. But, you know, I never, ever expected, you know, we always expect the Secret Service to take a bullet for the president. We don't expect the Secret Service to take a bullet for the president's staff," said Rep. Charles Dent of Pennsylvania.

We'll have the latest on this story, including new insight on Mrs. Salahi's claim she was a Washington Redskins cheerleader.

Join us at 10 p.m. ET on CNN. See you then!

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

Pres. Obama's inner circle is on the offensive trying to get Congress and the American people on board with the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan.

The commander-in-chief revealed last night in a speech at West Point that he's ordering an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan over the next six months. He also wants to start bringing home U.S. forces in July 2011, just a year-and-a-half from now.

Most Republicans are backing the plan, but several Democrats are questioning Pres. Obama's decision.

The new strategy was debated on Capitol Hill today when Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke with two key committees.

A key exchange between Secretary Clinton and Rep. Gary Ackerman, (D) New York, gives a good sense of the emotions at play.

"I'm trying to think this thing through. I think the best I come up with is that we have a shack that is on fire, but it is located next to the dynamite factory and the question that I think I know the answer to but my constituents keep asking - Is it worth risking the lives of those who respond to the fire in a place that may or may not hold a lot of value in and of itself? And what is going to be the result and what would happen if we don't respond?"

"I guess the question I will ask is this, as of 8 o'clock last night do we have a new war or do we have an old war under new ownership," Ackerman added.

Secretary Clinton responded to the questions.

"I think it is fair to say that if the president could have concluded that this was an old war that could be wound down and walked away from, that would certainly have been an easier choice. He is, as we all are, well aware of the political and economic and the loss of young men and women that this decision presages, but the dynamite factory is there and unfortunately it's been stocked with even more dynamite in last couple years and therefore we feel we have to address it," she said.

Meanwhile, General Stanley McChrystal, who requested the extra troops, briefed U.S. forces in Afghanistan on the new war strategy.

"If you think about where we are now, even though it's eight years, this is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. I think it is the end of the beginning. I think everything changes right now," he said as he channeled the words of Sir Winston Churchill during World War Two.

Tonight on 360°, you'll hear from the Gen. McChrystal's boss, Gen. David Petraeus – who is the chief of U.S. Central Command.  We've also gathered our team of reporters who've been to Afghanistan to dive into whether the war plan makes sense.

Join us for this story and much more starting at 10 p.m. ET. See you then!

Ed Rollins
CNN Senior Political Contributor

After months of review, President Obama has made a decision that will not please the base of his party. The majority of Democrats in Congress are opposed to expanding or prolonging the war in Afghanistan. Many Americans share their concern.

This decision to send 30,000 additional troops into combat, which I support, will be second-guessed for the rest of his presidency. And if it doesn't go well, it may cost him his presidency.

For a man who began his campaign as the "anti-war" candidate, this had to be a gut-wrenching decision. Critics will argue President Obama should have learned the lessons of Vietnam and remembered how that war destroyed Lyndon Johnson's presidency .

President Obama was only in elementary school during that period, but many of the leaders in Congress grew up as part of the George McGovern wing of the Democratic Party. The anti-war movement was their introduction to political activism. They are furious that their president is continuing the Bush war effort. Many will call it folly, and some will call it reckless. I call it leadership.

Keep reading

U.S. troops search for militants in the mountainous Taliban stronghold in Paktika Province in Afghanistan.

Maureen Miller
AC360° Writer

Pres. Obama says the war in Afghanistan is not lost. But he says for several years it has "moved backwards." He has a new strategy that he hopes will change that course.

The commander-in-chief announced tonight at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York he is deploying 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan in the first part of 2010.

Pres. Obama is also seeking more support from NATO allies.

The boost will mean about 100,000 U.S. troops will be in the region, along with about 45,000 NATO troops.

Pres. Obama is ordering the Pentagon to have the new troops in Afghanistan within six months. Pres. Obama said the additional forces "will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011."

Pres. Obama's Senior Adviser David Axelrod discussed the new approach this evening on CNN's "The Situation Room".

"We feel that the sooner that we get in there we can stop the momentum of the Taliban, train up Afghan troops and begin to transfer authority or responsibility for the security there, and that's - that's our goal," said Axelrod.

A Pentagon official admits the six month timeline to get the new troops on the ground is "very aggressive". Though, the official is confident the military can get the job done.

What do you think of Pres. Obama's decision? Share your thoughts below.

Adding 30,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan could be a political liability for Pres. Obama. Already some members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are voicing their concerns over the Afghan war strategy.

"At a time of great economic crisis here in the United States, I would respectfully suggest that rather than nation-building in Afghanistan we should do a little more nation-building here at home," said Rep. Jim McGovern, (D) Massachusetts, at a news conference on Capitol Hill.

"I am here today because of my concern that we are about to wear out and break the military," said Rep. Walter Jones, (R) North Carolina, at the same event.

Since the war in Afghanistan began following the September 11th terrorist attacks more than 900 Americans have been killed in the region.

We'll have all the angles on Pres. Obama's speech tonight on 360°. We hope you can join us for our special coverage. See you then!

Eliza Browning
AC360° Associate Producer

President Obama will travel to the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, New York, today where he is expected to announce his second escalation of U.S. forces in Afghanistan since he came into office. According to reports, he will send more than 30,000 U.S. troops to the region and will seek further troop commitments from NATO allies to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban in the country.

Tonight we’ll be digging deeper on Obama’s speech. How did he do? Was his mission and strategy clearly defined? Tom Foreman will be fact-checking his speech. Do you think his message succeeded in swaying those opposed to the plan? It took him nearly three months to come up with the strategy. How did he make the decision to proceed with this particular plan? We’ll be breaking down his points with our panel of experts and we’ll talk about how Afghan leaders are responding to the plan.

Will the deployment of more troops improve the situation in Afghanistan? When will they arrive? Earlier this fall, Anderson, Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Michael Ware visited the region where the spoke to troops in Helmand Province. They’ll talk about how the new deployments affect troops on the ground. When the new troops get to the region, the total U.S. commitment in Afghanistan will be close to 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, bolstered by about 45,000 NATO forces.

Keep reading