Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Alberto Gonzales' Confirmation Hearing; Andrea Yates' Murder Convictions Overturned; In Indonesia, UNICEF Works to Help Struggling Children

Aired January 14, 2004 - 10:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: We've got to run. Here's Daryn and Rick down at the CNN Center now. Good morning, guys.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR: Thank you, Bill. A lot of news developing just as we come to you. Thank you very much.

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR: Yes. As a matter of fact, something happening just moments ago. Now, here's what's happening right now in the news.

And here it is. Andrea Yates will get a new trial. An appeals court, moments ago, overturns the murder conviction of a Houston mother. Yates has been serving a life sentence for drowning three of her five children in a bathtub. The appeals court ruled jurors may have been prejudiced by a prosecution's witness's false testimony. We're going to have a lot more on this story. In fact, Daryn is going to have an interview for you in just a moment.

Nearly $4 billion in aid has been pledged worldwide for the tsunami survivors. But with concerns the governments may not honor their pledges, the U.N. is calling for the money up front. They say it's happened in the past where the donors have not come through. Health officials have issued a warning that disease could double the current death toll.

Also, Alberto Gonzales' confirmation hearing is under way on Capitol Hill. You're looking at part of that confirmation, as we speak. That's John Cornyn of Texas. He's introducing John Gonzales as, "A solid American," he says. The attorney general nominee is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gonzales plans to tell the panel that he would abide by global treaties and the nation's non-torture policies. The former White House counsel, though, has been criticized for approving a 2002 memo. Critics say the Justice Department memo contained a too narrow definition of torture. And at one point he call the Geneva Convention code "obsolete."

A winter storm is now spreading snow and freeing rain from the Midwest to New England. The storm knocked out power to tens of thousands. The icy weather is being blamed for traffic deaths in several states. Cold air linked to the storm dropped the temperature in one Minnesota town to 43 below zero. Wow.

And here we go. Hello again everybody, I'm Rick Sanchez. KAGAN: And good morning, I'm Daryn Kagan.

We're going to get started right away with breaking news on Andrea Yates. We begin with this stunning news out of a Houston courtroom. An appeals court there has reversed the murder convictions of Andrea Yates. Of course, you remember, she's the Houston mother found guilty of drowning her children in a bathtub.

Our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins us on the phone from New York.

Jeffrey, good morning.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Hi, Daryn.

KAGAN: This appeal and overturning the conviction apparently centers around a television episode that never existed.

TOOBIN: You know, Daryn, this sounds like an episode of "Law and Order." And it's actually about an episode of "Law and Order." It's really an extraordinary turn of events.

What happened was, as most people probably remember, Andrea Yates claimed she was insane at the time she killed her children. So that was the defense. An insanity defense. The prosecution called a very celebrated, very famous expert on the insanity defense, Dr. Park Dietz of California, who's testified that he had been a consultant on an episode of "Law and Order" broadcast fairly close to the time of the murders, where a woman killed her children, and claimed insanity successfully as a defense.

That was his testimony, suggesting that she had conspired to get this idea to kill her children and get away with it. What the appeals court said was we now realize, there was no such episode of "Law and Order." This testimony was false, as Park Dietz later admitted. So this could have misled the jury into thinking that she cooked up this plan. so she gets a new trial.

KAGAN: So does that mean that she walks out of prison today?

TOOBIN: By no means. Her lawyers will certainly ask for bail pending a new trial. But the Texas prosecutors have a couple of options, as well. They could -- this was an intermediate appeals court, the Texas First Court of Appeals. They could ask the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the highest court in Texas on criminal cases, to overturn this appeals court.

So, the appeal might not be over. Or they may simply say that she does not get bail pending appeal. But the -- the fact is, she will get a new trial unless some new court intervenes.

KAGAN: And of course, this will bring back to the forefront the issue not just of postpartum depression, but postpartum psychosis. Which is what her lawyers argued that she was suffering from. And that what Andrea Yates really needed was mental health help, not to be in prison. TOOBIN: Absolutely. And this is an issue that the legal system continues to struggle over all the time. Which is the insanity defense. Because at some level, all of us know that people who commit crimes like this one, drowning her children, are not in their right minds.

But the legal system doesn't want to give people an excuse, doesn't want to give people carte blanche to do these terrible acts. So, this is a struggle. How you define the insanity defense has never been cleanly resolved. And now, this issue will be brought back before a jury again.

KAGAN: Jeffrey Toobin in New York. Thank you for that.

We're going to have a lot more on the case of Andrea Yates just ahead. Once again, an appeals court in Houston ruling that she will get a new trial. Our Ed Lavandera covered the original trial extensively. He'll be joining us in just a bit.

SANCHEZ: Now we're going to turn to some of the developments in the evolving tsunami story. And there are new developments, as well as new video still coming in.

World leaders meeting in Indonesia's capital vow to work together to prevent the crisis from mushrooming. And they're embarking on a rebuilding process that could take, they say, a decade. The United Nations is going to coordinate the relief efforts. And U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is urging nations to immediately pay the $4 billion that they collectively pledged.

The World Health Organization is saying that $60 million is needed immediately to defuse a potential outbreak of disease. They say basic needs, such as clean water are not met by the end of the week, another 150,000 people could possibly die.

And we mentioned moments ago, that we continue to get new video. Moments ago, we have received this. It's video that came in to the CNN newsroom, and illustrates just how powerful the first tsunami waves were and how unexpected. There's the wave. There's a man, you saw him right in the middle of your screen who happened to be on the beach, as many went when the ocean suddenly seemed to subside or go back in. To some the curiosity of seeing the water was just irresistible.

And that was that one man who wandered onto the surf only to have a new surge rush in and sweep him away and continue onto the land. The video was shout by a restaurant owner who happened to be in that area of Thailand.

CNN has deployed its worldwide resources around the region to try and cover the many facets of the crisis in this unfolding story. We have 19 reporters, dozens of people behind the scenes. In this hour, Dr. Sanjay Gupta will explain the growing medical and psychological concerns for children in the area of Sri Lanka. Stan Grant tells us how it's difficult to report while at the same time, try and hold back tears on a story like this. We begin though, with the plight of the youngest victim. UNICEF says at one top priority now is finding missing children, reuniting them with their families. The organization has set up a center to try and care for children and protect them from the threats of both nature and man.

CNN's Atika Schubert, she's in Banda Aceh. She's following the story there from Indonesia, where one such refuge is now finally up and running.

Atika, to you.

ATIKA SCHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Rick. We actually were able to follow around with government officials today, as they went from displacement camp to displacement camp, trying to register the tens of thousands of children that have been displaced by this disaster.

Fortunately, many of the children they found were already with family members. Of course, many children have lost other family members, brothers and sisters, or one parent. But what they found was that the extended family appears to have taken these children in. And when the extended family is also missing, then neighborhoods and other communities chip in and try and bring in these orphans.

But what UNICEF is doing is it's trying to register the number of -- all of these children, their identity. And then also talk to parents, and be sort of a registration center for parents who are missing their children. That way they're hoping, against all odds, that possibly they might be able to reunite these families that have been separated by this disaster -- Rick.

SANCHEZ: Atika, one wonders if there is still a possibility that these children will, in fact, be reunited with uncles or aunts, or other family members. We're hearing so that it seems to be so difficult to try and bring the families together.

SCHUBERT: It's a very remote hope for many families. But obviously, UNICEF and the government doesn't want to give up until it's exhausted all possibilities. And what they find -- what's important to them is that these children that may, in fact be orphaned, find themselves in a safe environment. If not with immediate family members, then with extended family members, or at least with a community that they're familiar with.

And one of the things that we found going to displacement camps today, is that even though kids were not related to the families they were staying with, their neighbors took them in as one of their own. We talked to one particular boy, who just happened to be in the neighborhood of this man. And he took him in to the refugee camp and he's practically adopted him now. So some odd stories coming from that angle.

SANCHEZ: Yes, people helping people.

Atika Schubert reporting to us from Banda Aceh. We thank you. Daryn, over to you.

KAGAN: We realize here at CNN that the images, the stories they can be overwhelming, hard to put in perspective. So as we continue our coverage, we're going to use our maps and telestrator to give you an idea of where we're going from one region to the next.

Now, Banda Aceh, that's where we just heard from Atika Schubert. We're going to head to the south there to Jakarta. This is where a donor conference happened today. World leaders to set priorities and how to best deliver life-saving help before those discussions happened though, they had a moment of reflection.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Minutes of silence begin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: The nations have pledged $4 billion for the relief and recovery. The United Nations will coordinate the mission.

All right. Now we want to focus, go from Indonesia. Which we are over here over to the country with the greatest -- well, Indonesia is the country with the greatest death toll. Over to Sri Lanka, the second greatest death toll.

However, in Sri Lanka, if you look at the percentage of the population, it has had the highest impact. Two U.S. senators here in Sri Lanka, including majority leader Bill Frist and Democrat Mary Landrieu from Louisiana. Today they visited a refugee camp there to deliver packages and promises.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BILL FRIST (R-TX), MAJORITY LEADER: We'll be looking at ways that we can participate in the longer-term to help the people of Sri Lanka who have been hurt, who will have long-term psychological scars. And in terms of that long-term reconstruction, we'll be looking at things of economic develop development, return to jobs and the like.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: Senator Frist is himself a medical doctor. He says that the short-term relief supplies appear to be going well, but the destruction is even worse than he had imagined.

Our own medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is also in Sri Lanka. He says even as the region calculates tens of thousands of children, who died in the tsunami disaster, there is no way to measure another toll suffered by this generation. And that is the loss of innocence.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: It's not surprising that 12-year-old Du Shara Naomi and 5-year-old Madra both wake up screaming at night.

N. PREMADAFA DE SILVA (through translator): When she goes to sleep, she asks whether the tsunami will also come to this place. Several times throughout the night she wakes from sleep and shouts. She has nightmares.

GUPTA: The two girls along with their mother ran for high ground, as the tsunami wrapped itself around their country. Their father found them here, five kilometers from their home.

Even though they're in a displacement camp now, most would consider the De Silva family lucky. Everyone in their family survived. But more than a week later, it's abundantly clear that it's not just the physical, but the psychological damage that is of major concern.

DE SILVA (through translator): As a man I can bear it. But for my girls, I am doubtful that they can handle it. So I don't show my fear to my wife and my children for their own sake.

GUPTA: As their father hides doubts of their recovery, the mother does what she can to shield them from traumatic memories.

KUMARI KAJAKARUNA DE SILVA, MOTHER (through translator): I'm in a difficult situation. I don't like to talk to my daughters about it because I know that with the help of these teachers and music class, they will soon come through a certain level of understanding. That is why I don't want to remind them again.

(CHANTING)

GUPTA: In a country where you'll be hard-pressed to find a psychologist or counselor to deal with these emotions, music therapy seems to make a difference for the De Silva children.

IROHANLE GUNAWARDHANE, MUSIC TEACHER (through translator): These children have lost their teachers, schools, books and everything. Music activities will help them stay focused on their education. Also, these children show some abnormal behavior such as: loneliness, depression and stress. By doing music, maybe they can forget these things and enjoy life.

GUPTA: As Ironhanle teaches the children patriotic songs of ancestors who also overcame adversity, they join the countless generations who have used music to sway emotion and to assuage fear. As they sing, you can almost see the nightmares disappear. Even if it's just for a little while.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, Sri Lanka.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: CNN is going to look deeper into the effects of the disaster on the young. Our prime time special "Saving the Children" airs tonight at 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific.

SANCHEZ: The president's choice for the next attorney general is his lawyer, Alberto Gonzales. There he is. He's in front of a Senate confirmation hearing today. And just for a little background on this, he's expected to be confirmed. However, there will be questions raised about a memo he wrote where he said that part of the Geneva Convention was obsolete. Let's listen in to his opening statement.

ALBERTO GONZALES, NOMINATED TO BE U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I would not have the audacity to appear before this committee today if that commitment were not the core principle that has guided all of my professional endeavors.

Our government's most basic obligation is to protect its citizens from enemies who would destroy their lives and our nation's way of life. And the Department of Justice's top priority is to prevent terror attacks against our nation.

As we fight the war on terror, we must always honor and observe the principles that make our society so unique and worthy of protection. We must be committed to preserving civil rights and civil liberties.

I look forward, if I am confirmed, to working with this committee, the Congress and the public to ensure that we are doing all we can do so.

Although we may have differences from time to time, we all love our country and want to protect it, while remaining true to our nation's highest ideals. And working together, we can accomplish that goal. While I look forward to answering your specific questions concerning my actions and my views, I think it is important to stress at the outset that I am and will remain deeply committed to ensuring that the United States government complies with all of its legal obligations as it fights the war on terror, whether those obligations arise from domestic or international law.

These obligations include, of course, honoring the Geneva Conventions whenever they apply.

Honoring our Geneva obligations provides critical protection for our fighting men and women and advances norms for the community of nations to follow in times of conflict.

GONZALES: Contrary to reports, I consider the Geneva Conventions neither obsolete nor quaint.

After the attacks of 9/11, our government had fundamental decisions to make concerning how to apply treaties and U.S. law to an enemy that does not wear a uniform, owes no allegiance to any country, is not a party to any treaties and, most importantly, does not fight according to the laws of war.

As we have debated these questions, the president has made clear that he is prepared to protect and defend the United States and its citizens and will do so vigorously, but always in a manner consistent with our nation's values and applicable law, including our treaty obligations.

Having said that, like all of you, I have been deeply troubled and offended by reports of abuse. The photos from Abu Ghraib sickened and outraged me, and left a stain on our nation's reputation. And the president has made clear that he condemns this conduct and that these activities are inconsistent with his policies.

He has also made clear that America stands against and will not tolerate torture under any circumstances.

I share his resolve that torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration, and commit to you today that, if confirmed, I will ensure that the Department of Justice aggressively pursues those responsible for such abhorrent actions.

Chairman Specter, if I may add a personal note, I want to congratulate you for your chairmanship of this important committee. And I look forward, if confirmed, to the many occasions that we will discuss important issues facing our country in the months and years ahead.

Senator Hatch, I want to thank you for your dedicated service as chairman of this committee, for the good working relationship we have enjoyed, for all the many kindnesses you have shown me personally.

GONZALES: I appreciate the good working relationship I've enjoyed with Senator Leahy during my tenure as counsel to the president. I know him to be a person of good will and dedication. And I have great confidence that, if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, we will build upon that as we reach across the aisle to work together to serve the American people.

Mr. Chairman, it is a distinct honor to appear before the committee today. I appreciate the time and attention that members of the committee and their staffs have dedicated to this hearing and to consideration of my nomination.

And I look forward to answering your questions, not just at this hearing but, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, in the months and years ahead as we work together in the noble and high calling of the pursuit of justice.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R), PENNSYLVANIA: Thank you very much, Judge Gonzales.

We will now begin, as stated earlier, 10-minute rounds. And I will observe my time limit meticulously and will ask others to do the same.

Senators necessarily have other obligations, will have to move in and out of the hearing room, so that if it is possible to gauge the timing, knowing how long it will be before their turn up is, it is very useful in arranging schedules. And there will be ample time, as I have said earlier, on multiple rounds. I'm advised that there may be some photos used. And obviously senators have full latitude on the range of questioning. But I would ask my colleagues to be sensitive to photos. There are children present in the room today and we are being televised.

So that, while we want to have all of the facts and give full latitude to senators on their rights to question, we may want to be in executive session or we want to give children a chance to leave or take whatever other precautionary measures that seem appropriate by all concerned on a consensus of what the committee thinks ought to be done on that sensitive subject.

And now, if the lights will show to limit my 10 minutes, I will begin at the outset of your testimony Judge Gonzales. You've already covered the matter, but I think it is important to have an unequivocal statement and really a repeat of an unequivocal statement of the position of the administration and your personal views.

Do you approve of torture?

GONZALES: Absolutely not, Senator.

SPECTER: Do you condemn the interrogators -- and you already answered this in part -- at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo -- but again for the record -- do you condemn the interrogators' techniques at Abu Ghraib shown on the widely publicized photographs?

GONZALES: Let me say, Senator, that as a human being I am sickened and outraged by those photos. But as someone who may be head of the department, I obviously don't want to provide any kind of legal opinion as to whether or not that conduct might be criminal.

And obviously anyone that is involved in any kind of conduct that he is subject to prosecution, I would not want to do anything today to prejudge that prosecution and jeopardize that prosecution.

But obviously if that conduct falls in the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, I will pursue it aggressively, and you have my word on that.

SPECTER: Well, having some experience in the prosecution of criminal cases, I don't believe the condemnation of that conduct would impact on what happens at a later date.

But I thank you for your statement of rejection of that and condemnation of those practices.

Do you similarly condemn any similar interrogation techniques at Guantanamo?

GONZALES: I'm not sure of which specific techniques you're referring to, Senator. But obviously there is a range of conduct that would be in clear violation of our legal obligations, and those I would absolutely condemn, yes, sir.

SPECTER: Well, there will obviously be a good bit of questioning on this subject. And I intend to turn to other matters, and we'll come back to the subject in later rounds to the extent that, as chairman, I think further amplification is necessary.

But I do want to move on to what I consider to be the number one issue facing the country, and that is the issue of the fight on terrorism and the balancing of civil rights with some focus on the Patriot Act, which we enacted shortly after 9/11.

SPECTER: Starting with the Patriot Act, I already commented that we had this wall which precluded law enforcement from using evidence of crime which had been obtained through search and seizure warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And now that evidence may be used in a criminal prosecution.

To what extent has that provision and the other provisions of the Patriot Act been of real importance in our fight against terrorism?

GONZALES: Well, of course, Mr. Chairman, I have not been at the department, so I may not know all of the details of specific successes that the United States and the Department of Justice have enjoyed as a result of the tools given to us by the Patriot Act.

But I am told that they have been very significant, and that for our career prosecutors, for the U.S. attorneys out in the field, they have been very, very beneficial in allowing our law enforcement personnel to defend this country.

I believe that in part because of the Patriot Act there has not been a domestic attack on United States soil since 9/11.

SPECTER: The Patriot Act has stimulated the national counterterrorism center, and that is now part of the new legislation formalized on the national intelligence director.

And I will not go into any detail at this time, but I would urge you to be very diligent there. And this committee is going to exercise oversight on that issue, because it is my own view that had we had proper coordination of all the information prior to 9/11, 9/11 might well have been prevented.

And the FBI has the guiding hand on the national counterterrorism center, and that comes under your purview.

Let me turn now to the issue of the Patriot Act, aspects which have been the subject of concern and legislation is pending where we have people on both ends of the political spectrum, those on the right and those on the left, on concern.

The act requires the court to issue an ex parte order, that is on the application of law enforcement, for an administrative subpoena on a showing which is less than the traditional judicial determination of probable cause. And there's been concern expressed about access to many private records, illustrated by the concern over library records.

Is there any reason in your judgment, Judge Gonzales, why the production of those records might not be subjected to the traditional standard of probable cause before the issuance of the warrant?

GONZALES: Let me just say, Senator, I am also aware of a great deal of debate about the provisions of the Patriot Act. And there are concerns about possible infringement of civil liberties.

I welcome that debate. I think that we should always question the exercise of the power of our government.

The founders of this country -- that is what motivated them in connection with framing the Constitution, concerns about the exercise of government power. And so, I am one of those people that is likewise concerned.

With respect to access to library records, to take a specific point, obviously you're referring to Section 215 of the Patriot Act. 215 relates to obtaining business records. It never mentions library records.

215 allows the government to obtain certain types of business records -- hotel records, credit card records, rental records, transportation records -- in connection with -- it's got to be related to a foreign intelligence operation.

GONZALES: And the government cannot do that without first going to a judge. Government goes to the FISA court and obtains a warrant to do that.

SPECTER: But there is no requirement for a showing of probable cause before that judicial order is entered, Judge Gonzales. And the question is, why can't we have that traditional probable cause requirement on the obtaining of those records?

GONZALES: Certainly, Senator, you could do that. But right now, today, a prosecutor could obtain a grand jury subpoena if it was relevant to a criminal investigation without meeting that standard and obtain access to those very same library records.

SPECTER: But when the prosecutor obtains those records on a grand jury subpoena -- and I have some familiarity with that -- it's subject to judicial supervision. There can be a motion to quash.

Well, I don't want to take up all of our time there. But we also have the sneak-and-peak issue. And you will be here to take a look at that when we have hearings on renewal of the Patriot Act. But that is a matter which, I think, has to be weighed very carefully in the balance.

Let me turn now to the standards of detention on aliens. And immediately after 9/11, as the inspector general's report showed, some 702 aliens were detained without any showing of cause: concern that they might be terrorists, but no real evidence or indications that they were terrorists.

And we have seen the Department of Justice exercise authority after an immigration judge has ordered the release of an alien, and that has been upheld by the board of review, for the Department of Justice to overrule those two levels of judicial review and maintain the detention.

And the issue of standards is really of critical importance. And there has never been a delineation by the Department of Justice of those standards.

At one point Attorney General Ashcroft testified that it wasn't sufficient simply to say "national security," but there had to be some relationship to the individual on the likelihood of flight or on the problem of a criminal record or something relating to the individual.

My yellow light is on now, so I will stop the questioning before my red light appears, and give you an opportunity to respond as to your views as to what kind of a standard is appropriate for the detention of aliens.

GONZALES: Let me just begin by answering your question by saying, Senator, that I do not support or favor the mistreatment, not only of aliens, but anyone by the Department of Justice.

You have to recall that these actions taken by the department were shortly after 9/11. There was a great deal of concern that there may be a second wave of attacks. People didn't know. And so there were undocumented aliens that were rounded up.

I am told is that everyone who was rounded up was either out of status with respect to immigration status or had criminal charges pending against them. There was an independent basis to hold these people.

I am aware of the report by the inspector general. I haven't reviewed it in great detail. I understand the department has made most of the changes recommended by the I.G. Obviously, it's something that I am concerned about.

As to the specific two cases you mentioned, I'm not aware of the details of those cases.

And as to the standard, quite frankly, Senator, that would be something I would have to look at and be happy to get back to you in the event that I am confirmed.

SPECTER: Thank you.

Senator Leahy?

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), VERMONT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And, first off, I wanted to thank both Senator Salazar and Senator Cornyn for their introduction. Senator Salazar, a Democrat who is showing bipartisanship here, similar to, I remember, Senator Carnahan coming to introduce Attorney General John Ashcroft even though he is the man who'd run against her husband.

I would also note that, while Al Qaida doesn't have POW protection, Geneva still applies, as Secretary Colin Powell has stated very emphatically. I don't want to leave the impression that somehow Geneva doesn't apply just because it involves Al Qaida.

But I'd like to ask you a few questions about the torture memo that is dated back in August 1st, 2002, signed by Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee. And he's now a federal appellate court judge.

LEAHY: The memo is addressed to you. It was written at your request. And it concludes -- this is actually the memo here; it's a fairly lengthy memo, but addressed "Memorandum for Alberto Gonzales, counsel to the president."

And it says, "For an act to violate the torture statute, it must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death."

In August 2002, did you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Senator, in connection with that opinion, I did my job as counsel to the president to ask the question.

LEAHY: No, no. I just want to know, did you agree -- I mean, we can spend an hour with that answer. But my -- I'm trying to keep it very simple.

Did you agree with that interpretation of the torture statute back in August 2002?

GONZALES: If I may, sir, let me try to -- I'll try to -- I'm going to give you a very quick answer. But I'd like to put a little bit of context.

Obviously we were interpreting a statute that had never been reviewed in the courts, a statute drafted by Congress. We were trying to interpret -- interpretation of the standard by Congress.

There was discussion between the White House and the Department of Justice, as well as other agencies, about what does this statute mean? It was very, very difficult.

I don't recall today whether or not I was in agreement with all of the analysis. But I don't have a disagreement with the conclusions then reached by the department.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the department to tell us what the law means, Senator.

LEAHY: And do you agree today that for an act to violate the torture statute it must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death?

GONZALES: I do not, Senator. That does not represent the position of the executive branch.

As you know...

LEAHY: But...

SPECTER: Let him finish his answer.

LEAHY: But it was the position in 2002?

SPECTER: Wait a minute, Senator Leahy. Let him finish his answer.

GONZALES: Senator, what you're asking the counsel to do is to interject himself and direct the Department of Justice, who is supposed to be free of any kind of political influence in reaching a legal interpretation of the law passed by Congress.

GONZALES: I certainly give my views. There was, of course, conversation and give-and-take discussions about what does the law mean. But ultimately, ultimately, by statute, the Department of Justice is charged by Congress to provide legal advice on behalf of the president.

We asked the question. That memo represented the position of the executive branch at the time it was issued.

LEAHY: Well, let me then ask you, if you're going to be attorney general -- and I'll accept what you said and let's put on the hat if you're confirmed as attorney general -- the Bybee memo concludes the president has authority as commander in chief to override domestic and international laws prohibiting torture and can immunize from prosecution anyone -- anyone -- who commits torture under his act. Whether legal or not, he can immunize them.

Now, as attorney general, would you believe the president has the authority to exercise a commander-in-chief-override and immunize acts of torture?

GONZALES: First of all, Senator, the president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances. And so you're asking me to answer a hypothetical that is never going to occur. This president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances, and therefore that portion of the opinion was unnecessary and was the reason that we asked that that portion be withdrawn.

LEAHY: But I'm trying to think what type of opinions you might give as attorney general.

Do you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Sir, again...

LEAHY: You're a lawyer, and you've held a position as a justice of the Texas Supreme Court. You've been the president's counsel. You've studied this issue deeply. Do you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Senator, I do believe there may come an occasion when the Congress might pass a statute that the president may view as unconstitutional. And that is a position and a view not just of this president, but many, many presidents from both sides of the aisle.

Obviously, a decision as to whether or not to ignore a statute passed by Congress is a very, very serious one, and it would be one that I would spend a great deal of time and attention before arriving at a conclusion that, in fact, a president had the authority under the Constitution to...

LEAHY: Mr. Gonzales, I'd almost think that you'd served in the Senate you've learned how to filibuster so well. Because I asked a specific question: Does the president have the authority, in your judgment, to exercise a commander-in-chief-override and immunize acts of torture?

GONZALES: With all due respect, Senator, the president said we're not going to engage in torture. That is a hypothetical question that would involve an analysis of a great number of factors.

And the president...

LEAHY: How about this way: Do you think that other world leaders would have authority to authorize the torture of U.S. citizens if they deemed it necessary for their national security?

GONZALES: Senator, I don't know what laws other world leaders would be bound by. And I think it would -- I'm not in a position to answer that question.

LEAHY: Well, the only reason I ask this is this was the -- this memo was DOJ policy for a couple years. And, you know, it sat there from some time in 2002 and then just a couple weeks before 2005, late on a Thursday afternoon, it seems to be somewhat overwritten. Of course, that may be coincidentally because your confirmation hearing was coming up.

Do you think if the Bybee memo had not been leaked to the press -- because it had never been shown to Congress, even though we'd asked for it -- do you think it would still be the overriding legal opinion?

GONZALES: Sir, that I do not know. I do know that when it became -- it was leaked, we had concern about the fact that people were assumed that the president was somehow exercising that authority to engage in torture. And we wanted to clarify the record that the president had not authorized or condoned torture, nor had directed any actions or excused any actions under the commander-in-chief-override that might otherwise constitute torture.

GONZALES: And that was a reason that decision was made to delete that portion of the...

LEAHY: Well, do you think there's any connection whatsoever between the policies which actually you helped to formulate regarding the treatment interrogation of prisoners, policies that were sent out, Department of Defense and elsewhere, and the widespread abuses that have occurred? Do you acknowledge any accountability for such things, any connection?

GONZALES: Senator, as I said in my remarks, I categorically condemn the conduct that we see reflected in these pictures at Abu Ghraib.

I would refer you to the eight complete investigations of what happened at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, and there are still three ongoing. I'm talking about the Taguba report, the Fay-Jones-Kerr (ph) report, the Schlesinger report, the Navy I.G., the Army I.G., Jacoby, Ryder, Miller, all of these reports.

And if you listen to the press briefings given in connection with the rollout of these reports, they do conclude that with respect to the conduct, not reflected in the photos, not the conduct that we find the most offensive, but conduct related to pure interrogations, that there was some confusion...

LEAHY: The same report you talk about say the Department of Defense relied on the memo, is quoted extensively in the DOD working report on interrogations. That report has never been repudiated, so apparently they did rely on the memo. And when we find out about the abuses, we never find out from the administration, we find out because the press reports them.

Is there any accountability here anywhere?

As I mentioned earlier, my son was in the military. He was held to very, very strict standards.

LEAHY: He's trained for combat, held to very, very strict standards. The vast majority of the men and women in the military are held to those same strict standards.

I'm just trying to find out where the accountability is for this terrible blot that you and I both agree is a terrible blot on the United States.

GONZALES: I believe that is a very good question, Senator. And that is why we have these eight completed investigations and these three pending investigations. And while we've had four hearings involving the secretary of defense, you've had 18 hearings involving the deputy secretary, undersecretary of defense, you've had over 40 briefings with the Congress, because we care very much about finding out what happened and holding people accountable.

Unlike other countries that simply talk about Geneva, if there is an allegation that we've done something wrong, we investigate it. We're very serious about our commitments, our legal obligations in Iraq. And if people have done things that they shouldn't have done in violation of our legal obligations, they are going to be held accountable.

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: So there you have it. Pretty direct line of questioning, as you were seeing right there. In fact, two lines of questioning that you were seeing there. One the memo itself that was set in 2002. That was a memo sent by Mr. Gonzales to the president where he referred to the Geneva convention as quote "obsolete and quaint," said they did not apply to and al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners. And that's the heart of the manner.

But in saying that the best defense is a better offense -- you saw when Gonzales came out at the very beginning and said I don't think it's quaint and I don't say it's obsolete. But nonetheless, then you saw Senator Patrick Leahy try to form what appeared to be a quid pro quo, saying it was because of that memo that incidents like Abu Ghraib and some of the things that took place as well in Cuba, happened as well.

In fact, here's a direct quote that we read you on that. This comes from an anti-war group that says, in their charge, that it was "the radical legal reasoning that opened the door to the terrible abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay," as well. So expect that to be, on a critical sense, the line of questioning that we will be seeing here on this very important Senate confirmation hearing possible of Alberto Gonzalez -- Daryn, over to you.

DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Ed Henry is on Capitol Hill. He's in Washington listening to the confirmation hearing. Ed, good morning.

ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: So it appears what's happening here is, by all reports, he will be confirmed, but first, he must stand up to his intense questioning, especially by the Democrats on the committee.

HENRY: Absolutely. We have seen an almost complete overhaul of President Bush's cabinet for his second term. But most of those nominees appear that they're going to get through rather easily. And it appears now Democrats want to find at least one person where they can zero in on some charges, where they can at least rough up the administration a little bit and show that even though the Democrats are not running the house, the Senate or the White House, they want to show they're still alive and kicking and they want to zero in on this torture policy.

They feel that this is a forum for them, this confirmation hearing of Judge Gonzales, to fight back and say that they are against some of the administration's policies. In particular, as Rick mentioned, they're zeroing in on policies dealing with the handling of prisoners in the war on terror and whether or not that opened the door to abuses at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and other prisons around the world.

That's what you're going to hear throughout this hearing. The Republicans are saying basically that Judge Gonzales is being held as a scapegoat here. The Democrats are just picking on him and that, in fact, he is not to blame for the abuses of a few bad apples -- Daryn.

KAGAN: And right now looks like on the screen they were showing the moveon.org commercials there. Also on Capitol Hill while this Gonzales hearing is taking place, electoral college votes being counted today. Talk about what that significance is.

HENRY: That's right. That's usually a very routine matter where there's a joint session of Congress in the chamber of the House of Representatives. Vice President Cheney will be presiding. But this rather routine matter, actually, as you remember, became a very contentious matter in 2001 when some House members from the congressional black caucus stood up and objected to the counting of the electoral votes from Florida, because of disputed votes there. That became a very famous scene in the movie "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Now today when the votes are counted for this past election, we're going to see some members of the congressional black caucus stand up and object to the counting of the electoral votes from Ohio. The difference this time is that it could actually go further than it did in 2001. In 2001, as you remember, no senator would stand up from the Democratic party and sign that petition to block the votes being counted from Florida.

This time, this morning, Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer has announced she will sign that petition and she will join forces with these House members. That procedural will force this where the Congress will break up, the Senate and house will each go their own way, and they will have to vote on this challenge. Since the Republicans run the House and Senate, they're going to be able to block the challenge in the end.

But what this will do, again, will allow the Democrats to make some political points. They want to say there were some disputed votes in Ohio. And overall they want to say that they want election reform from coast to coast. So again, we're seeing really political theater in both chambers here in the Senate in this hearing room behind me.

We know that Judge Gonzales is going to be confirmed. But Democrats want to make their political points. Also over in the House of Representatives later today, about 1:00, we know that George W. Bush is eventually going to get all of those electoral votes. He's going to be sworn in as president on January 20th. But for now, Democrats, a little political theater, want to make some political points -- Daryn.

KAGAN: All right there. And you're there as our theater critic today on Capitol Hill.

HENRY: That's right.

KAGAN: Ed Henry, thank you.

SANCHEZ: We do expect some very terse questions to be asked of Alberto Gonzales. So what we're going to do here is we're going to dip in from time to time, depending on the line of questioning, when we see fit.

KAGAN: We're going do that. Also we have our tsunami coverage ahead, business news and what's being done to help the children affected by the tsunami? That's all ahead. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we welcome you back to CNN LIVE TODAY. Back to our tsunami coverage as well. Much of the region struck by the tsunami relied on tourism before the disaster and is probably going to rely on tourism before its future recovery as well. So the race is on to try to rebuild and reassure as well.

CNN's Jim Boulden explain.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JIM BOULDEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Wendy Hone booked her holiday to Sri Lanka a few weeks before the tsunami. Now she's determined to do her bit to help the stricken island by going in there in two week's time.

WENDY HONE, TOURIST: I wasn't thinking of it as before as helping tourism for Sri Lanka. As such I was looking at it as a holiday. Now I feel as I'm going out there to help get tourism back on their feet.

BOULDEN: Sri Lankan officials say 70 percent of their tourism areas are intact. And in the tiny Maldives Islands, about 70 percent of tourism is now operating. But still, it's tourism industry is suffering. Hotel bookings have dropped to less than 50 percent, even though only three tourists died in the Maldives.

HASSAN SOBIR, MALDIVES HIGH COMMISSIONER: If you want to do a crude estimate of the (INAUDIBLE) accounting of tourism contribution the Maldivean economy, it's as high as 80 percent. The economy depends on tourism, so that's all I (INAUDIBLE)

BOULDEN: Thailand suffered the largest amount of tourist deaths. The tsunami hit the country's most popular resorts, and while 70 percent of hotels in Phuket were not damaged, only 20 percent of rooms there are now full. And travel to that part of Thailand is now down almost by a third. Still the region can take heart by the recovery of other destinations. Bali and Indonesia took only one year to recover from the nightclub bombing in 2002. And Asia saw tourists come back in force after the SARS outbreak of 2003. But this time, it may be harder to recover.

ALEX KYRIAKIDIS, DELIOTTE: The repair to the infrastructure that's necessary, the restoration work, the delivery of sanitation, clean water and all the infrastructure is in my view unprecedented in terms of damage and is going to take several years to restore.

BOULDEN: Other parts of Asia are expected to see an increase in travelers. If tourists can't make it to the Maldives, or to Sri Lanka or Thailand, tour operators are switching them to other spots in the sun, hoping to retain some of the $25 billion tourist dollars usually spent in South Asia.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Jim Boulden bringing us that story -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Well, now let's go to a seasoned traveler who witnessed the devastation firsthand, along with the challenges to rebuilding tourism. Mary Beth Bond is the adventure travel editor -- what a cool job that must be -- for "Travelgirl" magazine, and was vacationing with her family about 100 miles away from Phuket, Thailand. She joins us now from San Francisco.

Good morning.

MARYBETH BOND, ADVENTURE EDITOR, "TRAVEL GIRL" MAGAZINE: Good morning. It's nice to be with you.

KAGAN: In more ways than one, I'm sure.

BOND: Oh, yes.

KAGAN: Yes. So you and your family were in the region when the tsunami hit?

BOND: We certainly were. We flew in and out of Phuket. And so we did see areas, but there are still so many resorts and so many beaches that are untouched.

KAGAN: And what we're seeing from the economic impact that tourism has, they would really like to get people to go back. Would you go to these untouched areas right now?

BOND: Absolutely. I would go back in a second. The very reason that we went to Thailand was for the wonderful culture, the pristine beaches, the dance, the people. It's the land of smiles. And if there's one thing that as a travel consumer we can do, that is don't cancel your travel plans unless you're going to an affected area. Go ahead and travel.

KAGAN: Kind of like that woman we just saw on the piece.

BOND: Exactly.

KAGAN: It's not just about sending money to charities, you really need to help these areas rebuild their economies and their tourism.

BOND: And there are many beaches, many areas that are not affected. We were in Kosamui (ph). That isn't affected at all, and the airports are running well. The infrastructure in Thailand is strong. You can go. You can have a wonderful vacation. And of course our hearts go out to the victims and their families. But I would return to Thailand in a snap.

KAGAN: OK, so what if you want to go, what would you suggest?

BOND: I'd suggest you contact your travel agent and you make sure that the resort, the area you're going to is not affected. As you just heard, many of the resorts aren't, or they were minimally damaged. Go to an area that didn't have the tsunami. KAGAN: And do you think the areas that were affected, especially we're talking Thailand, because that's where you were, that they will rebuild?

BOND: They are rebuilding. They're already fixing their pools, and they want us there. You know, they love American travelers. And again, I don't think that it's a problem in a lot of areas. There's fresh water. It's clean. The pools are filled. The sun is out. So I would just check with your travel agent and travel.

KAGAN: All right. We wish you safe travels. Mary Beth Bond From "Travelgirl" magazine, thank you.

BOND: Thank you very much.

SANCHEZ: And as we come back here, it's now just now six minutes before the hour on the East Coast, and we'll bring you the very latest.

KAGAN: We'll be checking on your morning forecast just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(WEATHER REPORT)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired January 14, 2004 - 10:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: We've got to run. Here's Daryn and Rick down at the CNN Center now. Good morning, guys.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR: Thank you, Bill. A lot of news developing just as we come to you. Thank you very much.

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR: Yes. As a matter of fact, something happening just moments ago. Now, here's what's happening right now in the news.

And here it is. Andrea Yates will get a new trial. An appeals court, moments ago, overturns the murder conviction of a Houston mother. Yates has been serving a life sentence for drowning three of her five children in a bathtub. The appeals court ruled jurors may have been prejudiced by a prosecution's witness's false testimony. We're going to have a lot more on this story. In fact, Daryn is going to have an interview for you in just a moment.

Nearly $4 billion in aid has been pledged worldwide for the tsunami survivors. But with concerns the governments may not honor their pledges, the U.N. is calling for the money up front. They say it's happened in the past where the donors have not come through. Health officials have issued a warning that disease could double the current death toll.

Also, Alberto Gonzales' confirmation hearing is under way on Capitol Hill. You're looking at part of that confirmation, as we speak. That's John Cornyn of Texas. He's introducing John Gonzales as, "A solid American," he says. The attorney general nominee is appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gonzales plans to tell the panel that he would abide by global treaties and the nation's non-torture policies. The former White House counsel, though, has been criticized for approving a 2002 memo. Critics say the Justice Department memo contained a too narrow definition of torture. And at one point he call the Geneva Convention code "obsolete."

A winter storm is now spreading snow and freeing rain from the Midwest to New England. The storm knocked out power to tens of thousands. The icy weather is being blamed for traffic deaths in several states. Cold air linked to the storm dropped the temperature in one Minnesota town to 43 below zero. Wow.

And here we go. Hello again everybody, I'm Rick Sanchez. KAGAN: And good morning, I'm Daryn Kagan.

We're going to get started right away with breaking news on Andrea Yates. We begin with this stunning news out of a Houston courtroom. An appeals court there has reversed the murder convictions of Andrea Yates. Of course, you remember, she's the Houston mother found guilty of drowning her children in a bathtub.

Our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins us on the phone from New York.

Jeffrey, good morning.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Hi, Daryn.

KAGAN: This appeal and overturning the conviction apparently centers around a television episode that never existed.

TOOBIN: You know, Daryn, this sounds like an episode of "Law and Order." And it's actually about an episode of "Law and Order." It's really an extraordinary turn of events.

What happened was, as most people probably remember, Andrea Yates claimed she was insane at the time she killed her children. So that was the defense. An insanity defense. The prosecution called a very celebrated, very famous expert on the insanity defense, Dr. Park Dietz of California, who's testified that he had been a consultant on an episode of "Law and Order" broadcast fairly close to the time of the murders, where a woman killed her children, and claimed insanity successfully as a defense.

That was his testimony, suggesting that she had conspired to get this idea to kill her children and get away with it. What the appeals court said was we now realize, there was no such episode of "Law and Order." This testimony was false, as Park Dietz later admitted. So this could have misled the jury into thinking that she cooked up this plan. so she gets a new trial.

KAGAN: So does that mean that she walks out of prison today?

TOOBIN: By no means. Her lawyers will certainly ask for bail pending a new trial. But the Texas prosecutors have a couple of options, as well. They could -- this was an intermediate appeals court, the Texas First Court of Appeals. They could ask the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the highest court in Texas on criminal cases, to overturn this appeals court.

So, the appeal might not be over. Or they may simply say that she does not get bail pending appeal. But the -- the fact is, she will get a new trial unless some new court intervenes.

KAGAN: And of course, this will bring back to the forefront the issue not just of postpartum depression, but postpartum psychosis. Which is what her lawyers argued that she was suffering from. And that what Andrea Yates really needed was mental health help, not to be in prison. TOOBIN: Absolutely. And this is an issue that the legal system continues to struggle over all the time. Which is the insanity defense. Because at some level, all of us know that people who commit crimes like this one, drowning her children, are not in their right minds.

But the legal system doesn't want to give people an excuse, doesn't want to give people carte blanche to do these terrible acts. So, this is a struggle. How you define the insanity defense has never been cleanly resolved. And now, this issue will be brought back before a jury again.

KAGAN: Jeffrey Toobin in New York. Thank you for that.

We're going to have a lot more on the case of Andrea Yates just ahead. Once again, an appeals court in Houston ruling that she will get a new trial. Our Ed Lavandera covered the original trial extensively. He'll be joining us in just a bit.

SANCHEZ: Now we're going to turn to some of the developments in the evolving tsunami story. And there are new developments, as well as new video still coming in.

World leaders meeting in Indonesia's capital vow to work together to prevent the crisis from mushrooming. And they're embarking on a rebuilding process that could take, they say, a decade. The United Nations is going to coordinate the relief efforts. And U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is urging nations to immediately pay the $4 billion that they collectively pledged.

The World Health Organization is saying that $60 million is needed immediately to defuse a potential outbreak of disease. They say basic needs, such as clean water are not met by the end of the week, another 150,000 people could possibly die.

And we mentioned moments ago, that we continue to get new video. Moments ago, we have received this. It's video that came in to the CNN newsroom, and illustrates just how powerful the first tsunami waves were and how unexpected. There's the wave. There's a man, you saw him right in the middle of your screen who happened to be on the beach, as many went when the ocean suddenly seemed to subside or go back in. To some the curiosity of seeing the water was just irresistible.

And that was that one man who wandered onto the surf only to have a new surge rush in and sweep him away and continue onto the land. The video was shout by a restaurant owner who happened to be in that area of Thailand.

CNN has deployed its worldwide resources around the region to try and cover the many facets of the crisis in this unfolding story. We have 19 reporters, dozens of people behind the scenes. In this hour, Dr. Sanjay Gupta will explain the growing medical and psychological concerns for children in the area of Sri Lanka. Stan Grant tells us how it's difficult to report while at the same time, try and hold back tears on a story like this. We begin though, with the plight of the youngest victim. UNICEF says at one top priority now is finding missing children, reuniting them with their families. The organization has set up a center to try and care for children and protect them from the threats of both nature and man.

CNN's Atika Schubert, she's in Banda Aceh. She's following the story there from Indonesia, where one such refuge is now finally up and running.

Atika, to you.

ATIKA SCHUBERT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Rick. We actually were able to follow around with government officials today, as they went from displacement camp to displacement camp, trying to register the tens of thousands of children that have been displaced by this disaster.

Fortunately, many of the children they found were already with family members. Of course, many children have lost other family members, brothers and sisters, or one parent. But what they found was that the extended family appears to have taken these children in. And when the extended family is also missing, then neighborhoods and other communities chip in and try and bring in these orphans.

But what UNICEF is doing is it's trying to register the number of -- all of these children, their identity. And then also talk to parents, and be sort of a registration center for parents who are missing their children. That way they're hoping, against all odds, that possibly they might be able to reunite these families that have been separated by this disaster -- Rick.

SANCHEZ: Atika, one wonders if there is still a possibility that these children will, in fact, be reunited with uncles or aunts, or other family members. We're hearing so that it seems to be so difficult to try and bring the families together.

SCHUBERT: It's a very remote hope for many families. But obviously, UNICEF and the government doesn't want to give up until it's exhausted all possibilities. And what they find -- what's important to them is that these children that may, in fact be orphaned, find themselves in a safe environment. If not with immediate family members, then with extended family members, or at least with a community that they're familiar with.

And one of the things that we found going to displacement camps today, is that even though kids were not related to the families they were staying with, their neighbors took them in as one of their own. We talked to one particular boy, who just happened to be in the neighborhood of this man. And he took him in to the refugee camp and he's practically adopted him now. So some odd stories coming from that angle.

SANCHEZ: Yes, people helping people.

Atika Schubert reporting to us from Banda Aceh. We thank you. Daryn, over to you.

KAGAN: We realize here at CNN that the images, the stories they can be overwhelming, hard to put in perspective. So as we continue our coverage, we're going to use our maps and telestrator to give you an idea of where we're going from one region to the next.

Now, Banda Aceh, that's where we just heard from Atika Schubert. We're going to head to the south there to Jakarta. This is where a donor conference happened today. World leaders to set priorities and how to best deliver life-saving help before those discussions happened though, they had a moment of reflection.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Minutes of silence begin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: The nations have pledged $4 billion for the relief and recovery. The United Nations will coordinate the mission.

All right. Now we want to focus, go from Indonesia. Which we are over here over to the country with the greatest -- well, Indonesia is the country with the greatest death toll. Over to Sri Lanka, the second greatest death toll.

However, in Sri Lanka, if you look at the percentage of the population, it has had the highest impact. Two U.S. senators here in Sri Lanka, including majority leader Bill Frist and Democrat Mary Landrieu from Louisiana. Today they visited a refugee camp there to deliver packages and promises.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BILL FRIST (R-TX), MAJORITY LEADER: We'll be looking at ways that we can participate in the longer-term to help the people of Sri Lanka who have been hurt, who will have long-term psychological scars. And in terms of that long-term reconstruction, we'll be looking at things of economic develop development, return to jobs and the like.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: Senator Frist is himself a medical doctor. He says that the short-term relief supplies appear to be going well, but the destruction is even worse than he had imagined.

Our own medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is also in Sri Lanka. He says even as the region calculates tens of thousands of children, who died in the tsunami disaster, there is no way to measure another toll suffered by this generation. And that is the loss of innocence.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: It's not surprising that 12-year-old Du Shara Naomi and 5-year-old Madra both wake up screaming at night.

N. PREMADAFA DE SILVA (through translator): When she goes to sleep, she asks whether the tsunami will also come to this place. Several times throughout the night she wakes from sleep and shouts. She has nightmares.

GUPTA: The two girls along with their mother ran for high ground, as the tsunami wrapped itself around their country. Their father found them here, five kilometers from their home.

Even though they're in a displacement camp now, most would consider the De Silva family lucky. Everyone in their family survived. But more than a week later, it's abundantly clear that it's not just the physical, but the psychological damage that is of major concern.

DE SILVA (through translator): As a man I can bear it. But for my girls, I am doubtful that they can handle it. So I don't show my fear to my wife and my children for their own sake.

GUPTA: As their father hides doubts of their recovery, the mother does what she can to shield them from traumatic memories.

KUMARI KAJAKARUNA DE SILVA, MOTHER (through translator): I'm in a difficult situation. I don't like to talk to my daughters about it because I know that with the help of these teachers and music class, they will soon come through a certain level of understanding. That is why I don't want to remind them again.

(CHANTING)

GUPTA: In a country where you'll be hard-pressed to find a psychologist or counselor to deal with these emotions, music therapy seems to make a difference for the De Silva children.

IROHANLE GUNAWARDHANE, MUSIC TEACHER (through translator): These children have lost their teachers, schools, books and everything. Music activities will help them stay focused on their education. Also, these children show some abnormal behavior such as: loneliness, depression and stress. By doing music, maybe they can forget these things and enjoy life.

GUPTA: As Ironhanle teaches the children patriotic songs of ancestors who also overcame adversity, they join the countless generations who have used music to sway emotion and to assuage fear. As they sing, you can almost see the nightmares disappear. Even if it's just for a little while.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, Sri Lanka.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: CNN is going to look deeper into the effects of the disaster on the young. Our prime time special "Saving the Children" airs tonight at 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific.

SANCHEZ: The president's choice for the next attorney general is his lawyer, Alberto Gonzales. There he is. He's in front of a Senate confirmation hearing today. And just for a little background on this, he's expected to be confirmed. However, there will be questions raised about a memo he wrote where he said that part of the Geneva Convention was obsolete. Let's listen in to his opening statement.

ALBERTO GONZALES, NOMINATED TO BE U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I would not have the audacity to appear before this committee today if that commitment were not the core principle that has guided all of my professional endeavors.

Our government's most basic obligation is to protect its citizens from enemies who would destroy their lives and our nation's way of life. And the Department of Justice's top priority is to prevent terror attacks against our nation.

As we fight the war on terror, we must always honor and observe the principles that make our society so unique and worthy of protection. We must be committed to preserving civil rights and civil liberties.

I look forward, if I am confirmed, to working with this committee, the Congress and the public to ensure that we are doing all we can do so.

Although we may have differences from time to time, we all love our country and want to protect it, while remaining true to our nation's highest ideals. And working together, we can accomplish that goal. While I look forward to answering your specific questions concerning my actions and my views, I think it is important to stress at the outset that I am and will remain deeply committed to ensuring that the United States government complies with all of its legal obligations as it fights the war on terror, whether those obligations arise from domestic or international law.

These obligations include, of course, honoring the Geneva Conventions whenever they apply.

Honoring our Geneva obligations provides critical protection for our fighting men and women and advances norms for the community of nations to follow in times of conflict.

GONZALES: Contrary to reports, I consider the Geneva Conventions neither obsolete nor quaint.

After the attacks of 9/11, our government had fundamental decisions to make concerning how to apply treaties and U.S. law to an enemy that does not wear a uniform, owes no allegiance to any country, is not a party to any treaties and, most importantly, does not fight according to the laws of war.

As we have debated these questions, the president has made clear that he is prepared to protect and defend the United States and its citizens and will do so vigorously, but always in a manner consistent with our nation's values and applicable law, including our treaty obligations.

Having said that, like all of you, I have been deeply troubled and offended by reports of abuse. The photos from Abu Ghraib sickened and outraged me, and left a stain on our nation's reputation. And the president has made clear that he condemns this conduct and that these activities are inconsistent with his policies.

He has also made clear that America stands against and will not tolerate torture under any circumstances.

I share his resolve that torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration, and commit to you today that, if confirmed, I will ensure that the Department of Justice aggressively pursues those responsible for such abhorrent actions.

Chairman Specter, if I may add a personal note, I want to congratulate you for your chairmanship of this important committee. And I look forward, if confirmed, to the many occasions that we will discuss important issues facing our country in the months and years ahead.

Senator Hatch, I want to thank you for your dedicated service as chairman of this committee, for the good working relationship we have enjoyed, for all the many kindnesses you have shown me personally.

GONZALES: I appreciate the good working relationship I've enjoyed with Senator Leahy during my tenure as counsel to the president. I know him to be a person of good will and dedication. And I have great confidence that, if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, we will build upon that as we reach across the aisle to work together to serve the American people.

Mr. Chairman, it is a distinct honor to appear before the committee today. I appreciate the time and attention that members of the committee and their staffs have dedicated to this hearing and to consideration of my nomination.

And I look forward to answering your questions, not just at this hearing but, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, in the months and years ahead as we work together in the noble and high calling of the pursuit of justice.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R), PENNSYLVANIA: Thank you very much, Judge Gonzales.

We will now begin, as stated earlier, 10-minute rounds. And I will observe my time limit meticulously and will ask others to do the same.

Senators necessarily have other obligations, will have to move in and out of the hearing room, so that if it is possible to gauge the timing, knowing how long it will be before their turn up is, it is very useful in arranging schedules. And there will be ample time, as I have said earlier, on multiple rounds. I'm advised that there may be some photos used. And obviously senators have full latitude on the range of questioning. But I would ask my colleagues to be sensitive to photos. There are children present in the room today and we are being televised.

So that, while we want to have all of the facts and give full latitude to senators on their rights to question, we may want to be in executive session or we want to give children a chance to leave or take whatever other precautionary measures that seem appropriate by all concerned on a consensus of what the committee thinks ought to be done on that sensitive subject.

And now, if the lights will show to limit my 10 minutes, I will begin at the outset of your testimony Judge Gonzales. You've already covered the matter, but I think it is important to have an unequivocal statement and really a repeat of an unequivocal statement of the position of the administration and your personal views.

Do you approve of torture?

GONZALES: Absolutely not, Senator.

SPECTER: Do you condemn the interrogators -- and you already answered this in part -- at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo -- but again for the record -- do you condemn the interrogators' techniques at Abu Ghraib shown on the widely publicized photographs?

GONZALES: Let me say, Senator, that as a human being I am sickened and outraged by those photos. But as someone who may be head of the department, I obviously don't want to provide any kind of legal opinion as to whether or not that conduct might be criminal.

And obviously anyone that is involved in any kind of conduct that he is subject to prosecution, I would not want to do anything today to prejudge that prosecution and jeopardize that prosecution.

But obviously if that conduct falls in the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, I will pursue it aggressively, and you have my word on that.

SPECTER: Well, having some experience in the prosecution of criminal cases, I don't believe the condemnation of that conduct would impact on what happens at a later date.

But I thank you for your statement of rejection of that and condemnation of those practices.

Do you similarly condemn any similar interrogation techniques at Guantanamo?

GONZALES: I'm not sure of which specific techniques you're referring to, Senator. But obviously there is a range of conduct that would be in clear violation of our legal obligations, and those I would absolutely condemn, yes, sir.

SPECTER: Well, there will obviously be a good bit of questioning on this subject. And I intend to turn to other matters, and we'll come back to the subject in later rounds to the extent that, as chairman, I think further amplification is necessary.

But I do want to move on to what I consider to be the number one issue facing the country, and that is the issue of the fight on terrorism and the balancing of civil rights with some focus on the Patriot Act, which we enacted shortly after 9/11.

SPECTER: Starting with the Patriot Act, I already commented that we had this wall which precluded law enforcement from using evidence of crime which had been obtained through search and seizure warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And now that evidence may be used in a criminal prosecution.

To what extent has that provision and the other provisions of the Patriot Act been of real importance in our fight against terrorism?

GONZALES: Well, of course, Mr. Chairman, I have not been at the department, so I may not know all of the details of specific successes that the United States and the Department of Justice have enjoyed as a result of the tools given to us by the Patriot Act.

But I am told that they have been very significant, and that for our career prosecutors, for the U.S. attorneys out in the field, they have been very, very beneficial in allowing our law enforcement personnel to defend this country.

I believe that in part because of the Patriot Act there has not been a domestic attack on United States soil since 9/11.

SPECTER: The Patriot Act has stimulated the national counterterrorism center, and that is now part of the new legislation formalized on the national intelligence director.

And I will not go into any detail at this time, but I would urge you to be very diligent there. And this committee is going to exercise oversight on that issue, because it is my own view that had we had proper coordination of all the information prior to 9/11, 9/11 might well have been prevented.

And the FBI has the guiding hand on the national counterterrorism center, and that comes under your purview.

Let me turn now to the issue of the Patriot Act, aspects which have been the subject of concern and legislation is pending where we have people on both ends of the political spectrum, those on the right and those on the left, on concern.

The act requires the court to issue an ex parte order, that is on the application of law enforcement, for an administrative subpoena on a showing which is less than the traditional judicial determination of probable cause. And there's been concern expressed about access to many private records, illustrated by the concern over library records.

Is there any reason in your judgment, Judge Gonzales, why the production of those records might not be subjected to the traditional standard of probable cause before the issuance of the warrant?

GONZALES: Let me just say, Senator, I am also aware of a great deal of debate about the provisions of the Patriot Act. And there are concerns about possible infringement of civil liberties.

I welcome that debate. I think that we should always question the exercise of the power of our government.

The founders of this country -- that is what motivated them in connection with framing the Constitution, concerns about the exercise of government power. And so, I am one of those people that is likewise concerned.

With respect to access to library records, to take a specific point, obviously you're referring to Section 215 of the Patriot Act. 215 relates to obtaining business records. It never mentions library records.

215 allows the government to obtain certain types of business records -- hotel records, credit card records, rental records, transportation records -- in connection with -- it's got to be related to a foreign intelligence operation.

GONZALES: And the government cannot do that without first going to a judge. Government goes to the FISA court and obtains a warrant to do that.

SPECTER: But there is no requirement for a showing of probable cause before that judicial order is entered, Judge Gonzales. And the question is, why can't we have that traditional probable cause requirement on the obtaining of those records?

GONZALES: Certainly, Senator, you could do that. But right now, today, a prosecutor could obtain a grand jury subpoena if it was relevant to a criminal investigation without meeting that standard and obtain access to those very same library records.

SPECTER: But when the prosecutor obtains those records on a grand jury subpoena -- and I have some familiarity with that -- it's subject to judicial supervision. There can be a motion to quash.

Well, I don't want to take up all of our time there. But we also have the sneak-and-peak issue. And you will be here to take a look at that when we have hearings on renewal of the Patriot Act. But that is a matter which, I think, has to be weighed very carefully in the balance.

Let me turn now to the standards of detention on aliens. And immediately after 9/11, as the inspector general's report showed, some 702 aliens were detained without any showing of cause: concern that they might be terrorists, but no real evidence or indications that they were terrorists.

And we have seen the Department of Justice exercise authority after an immigration judge has ordered the release of an alien, and that has been upheld by the board of review, for the Department of Justice to overrule those two levels of judicial review and maintain the detention.

And the issue of standards is really of critical importance. And there has never been a delineation by the Department of Justice of those standards.

At one point Attorney General Ashcroft testified that it wasn't sufficient simply to say "national security," but there had to be some relationship to the individual on the likelihood of flight or on the problem of a criminal record or something relating to the individual.

My yellow light is on now, so I will stop the questioning before my red light appears, and give you an opportunity to respond as to your views as to what kind of a standard is appropriate for the detention of aliens.

GONZALES: Let me just begin by answering your question by saying, Senator, that I do not support or favor the mistreatment, not only of aliens, but anyone by the Department of Justice.

You have to recall that these actions taken by the department were shortly after 9/11. There was a great deal of concern that there may be a second wave of attacks. People didn't know. And so there were undocumented aliens that were rounded up.

I am told is that everyone who was rounded up was either out of status with respect to immigration status or had criminal charges pending against them. There was an independent basis to hold these people.

I am aware of the report by the inspector general. I haven't reviewed it in great detail. I understand the department has made most of the changes recommended by the I.G. Obviously, it's something that I am concerned about.

As to the specific two cases you mentioned, I'm not aware of the details of those cases.

And as to the standard, quite frankly, Senator, that would be something I would have to look at and be happy to get back to you in the event that I am confirmed.

SPECTER: Thank you.

Senator Leahy?

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), VERMONT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

And, first off, I wanted to thank both Senator Salazar and Senator Cornyn for their introduction. Senator Salazar, a Democrat who is showing bipartisanship here, similar to, I remember, Senator Carnahan coming to introduce Attorney General John Ashcroft even though he is the man who'd run against her husband.

I would also note that, while Al Qaida doesn't have POW protection, Geneva still applies, as Secretary Colin Powell has stated very emphatically. I don't want to leave the impression that somehow Geneva doesn't apply just because it involves Al Qaida.

But I'd like to ask you a few questions about the torture memo that is dated back in August 1st, 2002, signed by Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee. And he's now a federal appellate court judge.

LEAHY: The memo is addressed to you. It was written at your request. And it concludes -- this is actually the memo here; it's a fairly lengthy memo, but addressed "Memorandum for Alberto Gonzales, counsel to the president."

And it says, "For an act to violate the torture statute, it must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death."

In August 2002, did you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Senator, in connection with that opinion, I did my job as counsel to the president to ask the question.

LEAHY: No, no. I just want to know, did you agree -- I mean, we can spend an hour with that answer. But my -- I'm trying to keep it very simple.

Did you agree with that interpretation of the torture statute back in August 2002?

GONZALES: If I may, sir, let me try to -- I'll try to -- I'm going to give you a very quick answer. But I'd like to put a little bit of context.

Obviously we were interpreting a statute that had never been reviewed in the courts, a statute drafted by Congress. We were trying to interpret -- interpretation of the standard by Congress.

There was discussion between the White House and the Department of Justice, as well as other agencies, about what does this statute mean? It was very, very difficult.

I don't recall today whether or not I was in agreement with all of the analysis. But I don't have a disagreement with the conclusions then reached by the department.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the department to tell us what the law means, Senator.

LEAHY: And do you agree today that for an act to violate the torture statute it must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death?

GONZALES: I do not, Senator. That does not represent the position of the executive branch.

As you know...

LEAHY: But...

SPECTER: Let him finish his answer.

LEAHY: But it was the position in 2002?

SPECTER: Wait a minute, Senator Leahy. Let him finish his answer.

GONZALES: Senator, what you're asking the counsel to do is to interject himself and direct the Department of Justice, who is supposed to be free of any kind of political influence in reaching a legal interpretation of the law passed by Congress.

GONZALES: I certainly give my views. There was, of course, conversation and give-and-take discussions about what does the law mean. But ultimately, ultimately, by statute, the Department of Justice is charged by Congress to provide legal advice on behalf of the president.

We asked the question. That memo represented the position of the executive branch at the time it was issued.

LEAHY: Well, let me then ask you, if you're going to be attorney general -- and I'll accept what you said and let's put on the hat if you're confirmed as attorney general -- the Bybee memo concludes the president has authority as commander in chief to override domestic and international laws prohibiting torture and can immunize from prosecution anyone -- anyone -- who commits torture under his act. Whether legal or not, he can immunize them.

Now, as attorney general, would you believe the president has the authority to exercise a commander-in-chief-override and immunize acts of torture?

GONZALES: First of all, Senator, the president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances. And so you're asking me to answer a hypothetical that is never going to occur. This president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances, and therefore that portion of the opinion was unnecessary and was the reason that we asked that that portion be withdrawn.

LEAHY: But I'm trying to think what type of opinions you might give as attorney general.

Do you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Sir, again...

LEAHY: You're a lawyer, and you've held a position as a justice of the Texas Supreme Court. You've been the president's counsel. You've studied this issue deeply. Do you agree with that conclusion?

GONZALES: Senator, I do believe there may come an occasion when the Congress might pass a statute that the president may view as unconstitutional. And that is a position and a view not just of this president, but many, many presidents from both sides of the aisle.

Obviously, a decision as to whether or not to ignore a statute passed by Congress is a very, very serious one, and it would be one that I would spend a great deal of time and attention before arriving at a conclusion that, in fact, a president had the authority under the Constitution to...

LEAHY: Mr. Gonzales, I'd almost think that you'd served in the Senate you've learned how to filibuster so well. Because I asked a specific question: Does the president have the authority, in your judgment, to exercise a commander-in-chief-override and immunize acts of torture?

GONZALES: With all due respect, Senator, the president said we're not going to engage in torture. That is a hypothetical question that would involve an analysis of a great number of factors.

And the president...

LEAHY: How about this way: Do you think that other world leaders would have authority to authorize the torture of U.S. citizens if they deemed it necessary for their national security?

GONZALES: Senator, I don't know what laws other world leaders would be bound by. And I think it would -- I'm not in a position to answer that question.

LEAHY: Well, the only reason I ask this is this was the -- this memo was DOJ policy for a couple years. And, you know, it sat there from some time in 2002 and then just a couple weeks before 2005, late on a Thursday afternoon, it seems to be somewhat overwritten. Of course, that may be coincidentally because your confirmation hearing was coming up.

Do you think if the Bybee memo had not been leaked to the press -- because it had never been shown to Congress, even though we'd asked for it -- do you think it would still be the overriding legal opinion?

GONZALES: Sir, that I do not know. I do know that when it became -- it was leaked, we had concern about the fact that people were assumed that the president was somehow exercising that authority to engage in torture. And we wanted to clarify the record that the president had not authorized or condoned torture, nor had directed any actions or excused any actions under the commander-in-chief-override that might otherwise constitute torture.

GONZALES: And that was a reason that decision was made to delete that portion of the...

LEAHY: Well, do you think there's any connection whatsoever between the policies which actually you helped to formulate regarding the treatment interrogation of prisoners, policies that were sent out, Department of Defense and elsewhere, and the widespread abuses that have occurred? Do you acknowledge any accountability for such things, any connection?

GONZALES: Senator, as I said in my remarks, I categorically condemn the conduct that we see reflected in these pictures at Abu Ghraib.

I would refer you to the eight complete investigations of what happened at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, and there are still three ongoing. I'm talking about the Taguba report, the Fay-Jones-Kerr (ph) report, the Schlesinger report, the Navy I.G., the Army I.G., Jacoby, Ryder, Miller, all of these reports.

And if you listen to the press briefings given in connection with the rollout of these reports, they do conclude that with respect to the conduct, not reflected in the photos, not the conduct that we find the most offensive, but conduct related to pure interrogations, that there was some confusion...

LEAHY: The same report you talk about say the Department of Defense relied on the memo, is quoted extensively in the DOD working report on interrogations. That report has never been repudiated, so apparently they did rely on the memo. And when we find out about the abuses, we never find out from the administration, we find out because the press reports them.

Is there any accountability here anywhere?

As I mentioned earlier, my son was in the military. He was held to very, very strict standards.

LEAHY: He's trained for combat, held to very, very strict standards. The vast majority of the men and women in the military are held to those same strict standards.

I'm just trying to find out where the accountability is for this terrible blot that you and I both agree is a terrible blot on the United States.

GONZALES: I believe that is a very good question, Senator. And that is why we have these eight completed investigations and these three pending investigations. And while we've had four hearings involving the secretary of defense, you've had 18 hearings involving the deputy secretary, undersecretary of defense, you've had over 40 briefings with the Congress, because we care very much about finding out what happened and holding people accountable.

Unlike other countries that simply talk about Geneva, if there is an allegation that we've done something wrong, we investigate it. We're very serious about our commitments, our legal obligations in Iraq. And if people have done things that they shouldn't have done in violation of our legal obligations, they are going to be held accountable.

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: So there you have it. Pretty direct line of questioning, as you were seeing right there. In fact, two lines of questioning that you were seeing there. One the memo itself that was set in 2002. That was a memo sent by Mr. Gonzales to the president where he referred to the Geneva convention as quote "obsolete and quaint," said they did not apply to and al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners. And that's the heart of the manner.

But in saying that the best defense is a better offense -- you saw when Gonzales came out at the very beginning and said I don't think it's quaint and I don't say it's obsolete. But nonetheless, then you saw Senator Patrick Leahy try to form what appeared to be a quid pro quo, saying it was because of that memo that incidents like Abu Ghraib and some of the things that took place as well in Cuba, happened as well.

In fact, here's a direct quote that we read you on that. This comes from an anti-war group that says, in their charge, that it was "the radical legal reasoning that opened the door to the terrible abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay," as well. So expect that to be, on a critical sense, the line of questioning that we will be seeing here on this very important Senate confirmation hearing possible of Alberto Gonzalez -- Daryn, over to you.

DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Ed Henry is on Capitol Hill. He's in Washington listening to the confirmation hearing. Ed, good morning.

ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: So it appears what's happening here is, by all reports, he will be confirmed, but first, he must stand up to his intense questioning, especially by the Democrats on the committee.

HENRY: Absolutely. We have seen an almost complete overhaul of President Bush's cabinet for his second term. But most of those nominees appear that they're going to get through rather easily. And it appears now Democrats want to find at least one person where they can zero in on some charges, where they can at least rough up the administration a little bit and show that even though the Democrats are not running the house, the Senate or the White House, they want to show they're still alive and kicking and they want to zero in on this torture policy.

They feel that this is a forum for them, this confirmation hearing of Judge Gonzales, to fight back and say that they are against some of the administration's policies. In particular, as Rick mentioned, they're zeroing in on policies dealing with the handling of prisoners in the war on terror and whether or not that opened the door to abuses at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and other prisons around the world.

That's what you're going to hear throughout this hearing. The Republicans are saying basically that Judge Gonzales is being held as a scapegoat here. The Democrats are just picking on him and that, in fact, he is not to blame for the abuses of a few bad apples -- Daryn.

KAGAN: And right now looks like on the screen they were showing the moveon.org commercials there. Also on Capitol Hill while this Gonzales hearing is taking place, electoral college votes being counted today. Talk about what that significance is.

HENRY: That's right. That's usually a very routine matter where there's a joint session of Congress in the chamber of the House of Representatives. Vice President Cheney will be presiding. But this rather routine matter, actually, as you remember, became a very contentious matter in 2001 when some House members from the congressional black caucus stood up and objected to the counting of the electoral votes from Florida, because of disputed votes there. That became a very famous scene in the movie "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Now today when the votes are counted for this past election, we're going to see some members of the congressional black caucus stand up and object to the counting of the electoral votes from Ohio. The difference this time is that it could actually go further than it did in 2001. In 2001, as you remember, no senator would stand up from the Democratic party and sign that petition to block the votes being counted from Florida.

This time, this morning, Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer has announced she will sign that petition and she will join forces with these House members. That procedural will force this where the Congress will break up, the Senate and house will each go their own way, and they will have to vote on this challenge. Since the Republicans run the House and Senate, they're going to be able to block the challenge in the end.

But what this will do, again, will allow the Democrats to make some political points. They want to say there were some disputed votes in Ohio. And overall they want to say that they want election reform from coast to coast. So again, we're seeing really political theater in both chambers here in the Senate in this hearing room behind me.

We know that Judge Gonzales is going to be confirmed. But Democrats want to make their political points. Also over in the House of Representatives later today, about 1:00, we know that George W. Bush is eventually going to get all of those electoral votes. He's going to be sworn in as president on January 20th. But for now, Democrats, a little political theater, want to make some political points -- Daryn.

KAGAN: All right there. And you're there as our theater critic today on Capitol Hill.

HENRY: That's right.

KAGAN: Ed Henry, thank you.

SANCHEZ: We do expect some very terse questions to be asked of Alberto Gonzales. So what we're going to do here is we're going to dip in from time to time, depending on the line of questioning, when we see fit.

KAGAN: We're going do that. Also we have our tsunami coverage ahead, business news and what's being done to help the children affected by the tsunami? That's all ahead. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: And we welcome you back to CNN LIVE TODAY. Back to our tsunami coverage as well. Much of the region struck by the tsunami relied on tourism before the disaster and is probably going to rely on tourism before its future recovery as well. So the race is on to try to rebuild and reassure as well.

CNN's Jim Boulden explain.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JIM BOULDEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Wendy Hone booked her holiday to Sri Lanka a few weeks before the tsunami. Now she's determined to do her bit to help the stricken island by going in there in two week's time.

WENDY HONE, TOURIST: I wasn't thinking of it as before as helping tourism for Sri Lanka. As such I was looking at it as a holiday. Now I feel as I'm going out there to help get tourism back on their feet.

BOULDEN: Sri Lankan officials say 70 percent of their tourism areas are intact. And in the tiny Maldives Islands, about 70 percent of tourism is now operating. But still, it's tourism industry is suffering. Hotel bookings have dropped to less than 50 percent, even though only three tourists died in the Maldives.

HASSAN SOBIR, MALDIVES HIGH COMMISSIONER: If you want to do a crude estimate of the (INAUDIBLE) accounting of tourism contribution the Maldivean economy, it's as high as 80 percent. The economy depends on tourism, so that's all I (INAUDIBLE)

BOULDEN: Thailand suffered the largest amount of tourist deaths. The tsunami hit the country's most popular resorts, and while 70 percent of hotels in Phuket were not damaged, only 20 percent of rooms there are now full. And travel to that part of Thailand is now down almost by a third. Still the region can take heart by the recovery of other destinations. Bali and Indonesia took only one year to recover from the nightclub bombing in 2002. And Asia saw tourists come back in force after the SARS outbreak of 2003. But this time, it may be harder to recover.

ALEX KYRIAKIDIS, DELIOTTE: The repair to the infrastructure that's necessary, the restoration work, the delivery of sanitation, clean water and all the infrastructure is in my view unprecedented in terms of damage and is going to take several years to restore.

BOULDEN: Other parts of Asia are expected to see an increase in travelers. If tourists can't make it to the Maldives, or to Sri Lanka or Thailand, tour operators are switching them to other spots in the sun, hoping to retain some of the $25 billion tourist dollars usually spent in South Asia.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Jim Boulden bringing us that story -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Well, now let's go to a seasoned traveler who witnessed the devastation firsthand, along with the challenges to rebuilding tourism. Mary Beth Bond is the adventure travel editor -- what a cool job that must be -- for "Travelgirl" magazine, and was vacationing with her family about 100 miles away from Phuket, Thailand. She joins us now from San Francisco.

Good morning.

MARYBETH BOND, ADVENTURE EDITOR, "TRAVEL GIRL" MAGAZINE: Good morning. It's nice to be with you.

KAGAN: In more ways than one, I'm sure.

BOND: Oh, yes.

KAGAN: Yes. So you and your family were in the region when the tsunami hit?

BOND: We certainly were. We flew in and out of Phuket. And so we did see areas, but there are still so many resorts and so many beaches that are untouched.

KAGAN: And what we're seeing from the economic impact that tourism has, they would really like to get people to go back. Would you go to these untouched areas right now?

BOND: Absolutely. I would go back in a second. The very reason that we went to Thailand was for the wonderful culture, the pristine beaches, the dance, the people. It's the land of smiles. And if there's one thing that as a travel consumer we can do, that is don't cancel your travel plans unless you're going to an affected area. Go ahead and travel.

KAGAN: Kind of like that woman we just saw on the piece.

BOND: Exactly.

KAGAN: It's not just about sending money to charities, you really need to help these areas rebuild their economies and their tourism.

BOND: And there are many beaches, many areas that are not affected. We were in Kosamui (ph). That isn't affected at all, and the airports are running well. The infrastructure in Thailand is strong. You can go. You can have a wonderful vacation. And of course our hearts go out to the victims and their families. But I would return to Thailand in a snap.

KAGAN: OK, so what if you want to go, what would you suggest?

BOND: I'd suggest you contact your travel agent and you make sure that the resort, the area you're going to is not affected. As you just heard, many of the resorts aren't, or they were minimally damaged. Go to an area that didn't have the tsunami. KAGAN: And do you think the areas that were affected, especially we're talking Thailand, because that's where you were, that they will rebuild?

BOND: They are rebuilding. They're already fixing their pools, and they want us there. You know, they love American travelers. And again, I don't think that it's a problem in a lot of areas. There's fresh water. It's clean. The pools are filled. The sun is out. So I would just check with your travel agent and travel.

KAGAN: All right. We wish you safe travels. Mary Beth Bond From "Travelgirl" magazine, thank you.

BOND: Thank you very much.

SANCHEZ: And as we come back here, it's now just now six minutes before the hour on the East Coast, and we'll bring you the very latest.

KAGAN: We'll be checking on your morning forecast just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(WEATHER REPORT)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com