Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
9/11 Investigation: How is White House Responding?
Aired March 24, 2004 - 08:00 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: Good morning.
Getting ready for another intense day in the 9/11 hearings. Two of the most controversial figures in Washington -- CIA Director George Tenet and former terrorism chief Richard Clarke defending their part in the war on terror.
Kobe Bryant's lawyers question the woman accusing him of sexual assault, a hearting that will put her sexual past on trial.
And the day the conversation about Mars changed forever, ahead this hour on AMERICAN MORNING.
ANNOUNCER: From the CNN broadcast center in New York, this is AMERICAN MORNING with Soledad O'Brien and Bill Hemmer.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: It must be spring. The fruit stands out there are right in front of the Burger King sign.
HEMMER: Two days in a row.
O'BRIEN: If that doesn't...
HEMMER: Just for Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bill's apples on display.
O'BRIEN: It is a very nice look.
HEMMER: Get 'em now.
CAFFERTY: At the corner of 50th and Sixth there.
HEMMER: Come on up.
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Welcome back, everybody.
In just a few minutes, we're going to take a look at the changes in Hamas brought on by Israel's assassination of the group's founder. Is the man who is now in charge even worse for Israel than the man they killed? We'll take a look at that.
HEMMER: Also this hour, the Supreme Court hearing arguments that could take the words "under god" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. This morning we'll talk to the superintendent of the school district back in California where the whole matter started. How are schools now turning this dispute into a learning experience? Those questions and a whole lot more for the high court today.
O'BRIEN: Hello, Jack.
CAFFERTY: Good morning.
Coming up in the Cafferty File and in keeping with CNN's reputation as the most trusted name in news, we will tell you why a 25-year-old guy married his grandmother. And we will also tell you about a death threat. Barbara Bush threatens to kill the president's father. Stay tuned for details. Shocking.
O'BRIEN: No. Really? No.
CAFFERTY: I wouldn't make that up.
HEMMER: The most trusted name in news.
CAFFERTY: That's right.
O'BRIEN: No. I don't believe it.
CAFFERTY: This ain't the "F" word network you're on here, you know?
HEMMER: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that's what I'm talking about.
CAFFERTY: I mean we do the real stuff here.
O'BRIEN: A 25-year-old man married his grandmother?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: How old was she?
CAFFERTY: The aristocrats. It's a carnival act. I -- how old is she?
O'BRIEN: Yes.
CAFFERTY: Eighty.
O'BRIEN: Really?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Wow. What a...
CAFFERTY: I stopped this program dead cold, didn't I?
O'BRIEN: Can you legally...
CAFFERTY: You guys better do the news.
O'BRIEN: Sorry, I just -- I was thrown for a minute. HEMMER: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Eighty?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Is that legal?
CAFFERTY: I don't know. Well, listen, I have to go read the rest of this. I don't know yet.
O'BRIEN: All right. All right, well, talk about a tease today, Jack.
Thank you, I think.
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Let's get right to our top stories this morning.
In Colorado, Kobe Bryant set to face his accuser. The woman is expected to testify today behind closed doors about her sexual history, information that the defense claims could destroy her credibility. The woman is accusing Bryant of sexually assaulting her last June. A judge will decide whether her testimony can be used during the trial. We've got more on the story coming up in just a moment.
There's also word this morning that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is going to make an historic visit to Libya tomorrow. That's according to a senior government official, who is traveling with the prime minister. The official says that Blair will meet with Libya's leader, Moammar Qaddafi, on the outskirts of Tripoli.
Spain is honoring the nearly 200 victims of the Madrid train bombings. A state funeral led by the king, Juan Carlos, is being attended by some 1,500 mourners. Among them, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who's also expected to hold talks with Spain's incoming prime minister.
In California, potential grand jurors who may hear the case against Michael Jackson report for duty tomorrow in Santa Barbara County. That's according to sources who are familiar with the case. The prosecution reportedly plans to present two weeks of closed door testimony in the child molestation case. However, the D.A.'s office will not confirm that. Michael Jackson has been invited to appear.
And in Mexico, six British divers who have been trapped in a cave for a week turned down help from Mexican soldiers and rescuers. The entrance to the cave, about 110 miles northeast of Mexico City, was blocked by flood waters. Well, now all six are holed up. They've got plenty of food, apparently, sleeping bags, a two way radio. They're reportedly waiting for experienced cave diving experts from Britain. The word is that they're incredibly bored but fine.
HEMMER: That's one way to get away from it all. O'BRIEN: Went to, you know, hey, being bored is probably the best thing you could be in those circumstances.
HEMMER: Right.
(WEATHER REPORT)
HEMMER: A bit later this hour, the 9/11 Commission resuming its probe into failures in the war on terror. Among those to be questioned this morning, former White House advisor Richard Clarke, accusing the president of not being aggressive enough in going after al Qaeda.
How is the White House responding?
John King live from the White House with more this morning there -- John, good morning.
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bill, the White House responding quite aggressively and consider the stakes. This is a president who is defined by 9/11, who is running for reelection on the theme that he has provided steady leadership in the wake of those terrorist attacks. Dick Clarke will tell the Congress, we are told -- tell the Commission, I'm sorry, we are told, that the White House ignored the clues that it could have perhaps prevented the 9/11 attacks.
In part of the counter-offensive, the White House Chief of Staff Andy Card this morning telling me that view is just simply flat out wrong.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KING (voice-over): The president says there should be no doubt.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Had my administration had any information that terrorists were going to attack New York City on September 11th, we would have acted.
KING: Mr. Bush also rebutted any suggestion he ignored or underestimated the terror threat.
BUSH: Whether it be a Hamas threat or an al Qaeda threat we take them very seriously in this administration.
KING: The president's early commitment to confronting al Qaeda is called into question in this new book by former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and is a major focus of the commission investigating the September 11th attacks.
Secretary of State Powell says the president compared the Clinton administration approach to al Qaeda as swatting flies and wanted more.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: He decided early on that we needed to be more aggressive in going after terrorists and especially al Qaeda. KING: That more aggressive plan was ordered soon after Mr. Bush took office on his desk when the Twin Towers fell, too long in the making to some.
BOB KERREY (D), COMMISSION MEMBER: Why in God's name I got to wait eight months to get a plan?
KING: The hearings are in part a credibility test for the Bush White House as Clarke and others suggest the administration put al Qaeda on the back burner early on because it was obsessed with Iraq.
PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I've never been dismissive of al Qaeda and I think precisely because I think terrorism is such a serious problem.
KING: The administration says Clarke's sharp criticism now contrasts with his time on the National Security Council staff. In his resignation letter 14 months ago Clarke wrote: "It has been an enormous privilege to serve in the Bush White House" and wished the president "good fortune as you lead our country through the continuing threats."
And the White House says Clarke is wrong to claim the president signed a directive shortly after 9/11 ordering military options for war in Iraq.
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This is another example of his revisionist history.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: The White House chief of staff, Mr. Card, this morning also saying that 51 times in those months before the September 11 attacks President Bush was given intelligence reports about the al Qaeda threat. Andy Card and others at the White House saying the president took that threat quite seriously, but they say there were no indications at all, Bill, that al Qaeda planned attacks here in the United States.
HEMMER: John, if we could get back to this letter revealed at the White House yesterday. Apparently during Richard Clarke's resignation, quite flattering terms, praised the president on the day of 9/11 and the way he behaved in the days after that.
How is the White House playing that letter after this book came out over the weekend?
KING: Well, the White House released that letter as part of its counter-offensive against Mr. Clarke. In that letter, 14 months ago, Mr. Clarke said it had been a privilege to serve the president in the 24 months he served in the Bush administration. He did, as you noted, applaud the president's leadership on 9/11 and he wished the president "good fortune" as he continued to confront the terrorist threat.
The White House is saying that that was the Richard Clarke they knew when he worked here in the White House. They say he never raised any of his concerns about the war in Iraq, never raised any of his concerns that the administration was underestimating the threat. They now believe Richard Clarke is raising those concerns for profiteering, to sell his book and, perhaps, Bill, to try to influence the presidential election.
HEMMER: John, crystal ball. In one hour the hearings start. Can we expect to see that letter today presented for Richard Clarke when he starts his testimony?
KERRY: The administration certainly has made the letter available public. Whether it has submitted it as evidence to the Commission, we do not know. I'll certainly ask that question.
HEMMER: All right, John, thanks.
John King from the White House.
Again, we'll cover it here live this morning on AMERICAN MORNING, 9:00 a.m. Eastern time the expected start today. CIA Director George Tenet the first for the testimony today on Capitol Hill -- Soledad.
O'BRIEN: The Palestinian militant group Hamas is under new leadership in the Gaza Strip. Abdel Aziz Rantisi will be the group's acting head in Gaza, at least until leadership elections are held in September. Rantisi replaces Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was killed on Monday in an Israeli missile strike.
Stephen Farrell is a Middle East correspondent for "The Times of London." He has interviewed and spent time with Rantisi.
And Stephen Farrell joins us from Jerusalem this morning.
Nice to see you.
Thanks for being with us.
Why don't you start by filling us in on exactly who is Rantisi? What's his background?
STEPHEN FARRELL, MIDDLE EAST CORRESPONDENT, "THE TIMES OF LONDON": Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi is a 57-year-old pediatrician. He trained in Egypt and he has been a long time follower of Sheikh Yassin. He was one of the original half a dozen founders of Hamas back in 1988 during the first intifada. So, he's been involved with the organization right from the very beginning and he's an instinctive hard-liner.
O'BRIEN: As a hard-liner, then, what kind of support does he have across all of Hamas?
FARRELL: Rantisi is viewed as a safe pair of hands by the young bucks, if you like, the young guys who are out on the streets, drumming up support, even launching attacks against Israeli troops in the refugee camps of Gaza, who are putting together the military activities in the West Bank and Gaza. And Hamas insists that he's part of the political, not the military leadership. But that's a distinction that Israel flatly rejects.
O'BRIEN: There have been, as you well know, threats of attacks against the United States. And Rantisi apparently recently claiming that he will not attack the United States.
What do you read into that strategy, which directly contradicts the word that came right after Yassin's assassination?
FARRELL: Yes, I think you have to pay careful attention to the rhetoric, but also remember that it is rhetoric designed for an audience. I mean Rantisi's first words were a call to Islam, this is an attack on Islam, this is an attack not just on Yassin, not just on Palestinians, but it's a war against Islam by the Zionists, as he termed it, and their American allies.
There is -- I don't think we will see an attack by Hamas outside the borders of Israel on America. I think it's extremely unlikely. There was, remember, one attack within Gaza on an American convoy a few months ago and the general reaction to the Palestinians, among the Palestinians was that this was, this was a mistake, this was an error and whoever did it, it still isn't clear.
It hasn't been repeated and I think at this time, with its leadership under severe threat from Israel, its funds frozen across large parts of the world, I don't see Hamas going on the offensive against a nuclear superpower. It already has one nuclear power to deal with as an enemy, and that's Israel.
O'BRIEN: Is the expectation that Abdel Aziz Rantisi will take Hamas in a new direction, new direction meaning more violence, more attacks, more bombings?
FARRELL: Well, I think they can certainly expect violence, attacks and bombings. They may target high profile Israeli individuals in response to an attack on the most high profile individual within their organization, or they may just launch a slew of suicide bomb attacks in Israel. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait and see what happens.
The, I think the fact remains that they have known, really, that Yassin was a marked man for many, many months, since Israel declared, effectively, open season on the Hamas leadership last summer. So this has all been factored in. The discussions have taken place at the political leadership. The military leadership has been told what to do or has decided what to do. Hamas insists that policy will not change.
That said, Israel tried to kill Rantisi last summer, also, and narrowly failed. It killed Yassin, to whom he was very close. So he may take this personally.
O'BRIEN: Stephen Farrell of "The Times of London" joining us this morning. Thank you very much -- Bill.
HEMMER: Still to come, the 9/11 hearings resume today, this morning, in fact. What will the CIA director, George Tenet, have to say before that panel?
O'BRIEN: Also today, for the first time since they met last June, Kobe Bryant will meet his accuser in a closed door hearing. We're going to take you live to Eagle, Colorado for the latest on that.
HEMMER: Also, was Mars once covered in salt water? The lead NASA scientist for Mars exploration about the latest discovery and what it may mean.
Back in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: The woman accusing Kobe Bryant of sexual assault will answer questions today behind closed doors about her own sexual past. It will be the first time that Bryant and the 19-year-old woman will meet face to face since they first met last June. Today's hearing will determine if details of her sexual past should be introduced as evidence at Bryant's trial.
Koa Radio reporter Alex Stone with us live from Eagle, Colorado, back here on AMERICAN MORNING.
Good to have you back, Alex.
ALEX STONE, KOA RADIO CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Bill.
HEMMER: Whatever happened to the rape shield law? How are they getting around this part of the state law in Colorado with these questions today?
STONE: Well, Bill, the rape shield law is what is being really debated today in the courtroom. That is the reason why the judge is having this hearing today. Kobe Bryant's defense attorneys are trying to prove to the judge by having the accuser on the stand that her information, her sexual history, they say, is so relevant in this case, because they make the claim that she was with so many other people, according to the defense, around the time she was with Kobe Bryant, that they say that comes into play because they think, at least they've made the claim in court, that the injuries to her body could have come from somebody else or from just having a lot of consensual sex.
So the judge could decide it is relevant and could allow it into trial, when there would be a jury present.
HEMMER: It's my understanding that there are a limited number of people inside that room today -- the judge, attorneys for both sides, the accuser, obviously.
Is it a sure thing that Kobe Bryant will be present there today?
STONE: We understand Kobe Bryant will be here today. In one other hearing several months ago, he did miss it. That was a hearing when the accuser's mother testified. We understand he will be here. That last hearing that he did miss was because he was sick. He could feasibly come in and be sick again, but we do understand that he will be here in the same courtroom with the accuser today.
HEMMER: And defense attorneys are looking for four days of questioning? Will that fly?
STONE: There are media reports that they are looking for four days, that they say they need four days. But it looks like, at least right now, Bill, that that would not fly because this is only a two day hearing and we know they've flown her in for this hearing. They would have to fly her in again if the judge would allow it. It's unknown, but it's also somewhat unlikely that they would allow her to come back in for another day of testimony.
HEMMER: Well, thanks for coming back and talking to us.
Alex Stone there, KOA Radio there in Colorado.
Appreciate it -- now, Soledad.
O'BRIEN: And it's time to check in with Jack and the Question of the Day, which is all related to all of this.
CAFFERTY: Indeed, it is.
Should Kobe Bryant's accuser be forced to talk about her sexual history in this closed court hearing?
Annette writes from Florence, Alabama: "In ordinary cases, I'm in full support of the rape shield laws. However, in this particular case, I cannot be. It has nothing to do with the fact that Kobe is who he is. If someone else's semen had not been found in her panties when she did go to the hospital, no one would have cared about her sexual past."
Brandon writes: "Of course she should have to disclose her past. With the ridiculous amount of false accusations out there, a message needs to be sent that you cannot arbitrarily accuse someone of rape without consequences. So many of us know someone who has been unfairly accused of rape and not enough pressure is put on the accusers." Brandon's in Minot, North Dakota.
Charlie writes: "How can the court expect women to come forward in future rape cases if they're forced to tell the world about their past sexual experiences? Common sense shows that this is a ridiculous decision that can only lead to other victims not wanting to come forward."
And Steve in Pennsylvania writes: "Fortunately, decisions about what evidence is heard in court are made by judges informed by pertinent law, not by viewers informed by news coverage and some vague notion of what seems fair."
Steve, you have a point. I'm not sure I agree with you, however. I've known a few judges that have done some kind of silly things along the way. So -- and I have great faith in the collective wisdom of the people who watch this program by virtue of the choice they make here.
HEMMER: Collective faith.
O'BRIEN: Absolutely.
This turn, I think, very interesting because people are arguing both sides of this. And I think each side, to some degree, has a valid point. I mean obviously people bring in, you know, other things so some of them are a little random. But for the most part, I think the people are arguing two sides and they have a valid point arguing that.
CAFFERTY: The other question we may have to revisit is how sick are we getting of this whole story? And the answer is quite.
O'BRIEN: I can tell you...
HEMMER: You think so, huh? I'm interested in it.
O'BRIEN: I love legal cases because I just -- you learn so much about the law.
HEMMER: Right.
O'BRIEN: I mean I think it's fascinating.
HEMMER: I agree with you 100 percent.
O'BRIEN: To sit down and talk to Linda Fairstein about that...
HEMMER: Yes, I'll tell you, the other thing is that this is such a personal matter, too, and so often times we talk about the possibility of their coming face to face and today is the day. And what they get out of it is what we'll wait for to see so. I think the viewers are dead on, by the way, in those e-mails.
O'BRIEN: Very interesting.
HEMMER: Very nice.
CAFFERTY: Yes, well, they, you know, they're good.
O'BRIEN: They are lawyers. Jack was wrong.
HEMMER: Yes.
CAFFERTY: Right.
HEMMER: Harold is, too.
In a moment here, two words make for a huge case before the Supreme Court. The controversial matter "under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance. We'll get to that in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: It appears the number of gays dismissed from the U.S. military dropping significantly. A gay rights group says dismissals last year fell to the lowest level in almost 10 years. About 800 gays and lesbians dismissed last year. That's down 17 percent from 2002, 39 percent lower than 2001.
The report by the Service Members Legal Defense Network says the decline is due to U.S. action in Afghanistan, also in Iraq. The Pentagon not offering a comment, saying it has not yet seen that report.
O'BRIEN: Should the words "under god" be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance? The Supreme Court is considering that today. It's a controversy about the separation of church and state because the Pledge is recited daily in many public schools.
David Gordon is the superintendent of the Elk Grove Unified School District, which is where the case began.
And he joining us this morning from Washington, D.C.
Nice to see you, sir.
Thanks for being with us.
DAVID GORDON, SUPERINTENDENT, ELK GROVE (CALIFORNIA) UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: Good morning, Soledad.
Happy to be with you.
O'BRIEN: Thank you very much.
Michael Newdow argues, of course, that the words "under god" are a religious intrusion upon the students in your school and, in fact, schools across the country.
Why do you disagree with him and why do you think that that reference to god actually does belong in the Pledge?
GORDON: Two reasons, Soledad. Number one, we believe very strongly that the words "under god" don't represent coercion or pushing religion on children. Rather, they're an expression of the role of god and religion in our history, which is a 200 or 300-year- old process. And, secondly, under our state law, parents have an absolute right to opt their children out of saying the Pledge if they're uncomfortable in doing so.
O'BRIEN: At the same time, there are certainly critics who say that opting out sort of is -- doesn't work, because with all the peer pressure in schools, the kids feel pressured to do it anyway, regardless of what their parents have sort of authorized them to do.
Why do you disagree with that? GORDON: Well, in our schools for the last 25 years, we've made great efforts to include special education children. If you walk through our classrooms, you have many, many students with disabilities in the regular classroom. Our teachers do a very, very good job of helping our students learn to embrace differences and I have great confidence that if a child simply didn't want to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance, that the teachers and our principals would help them to not feel ostracized at all.
O'BRIEN: As you well know, two years ago it was California's federal court that ruled against the use of "under god" in the Pledge.
How literally have things changed? What literally has been the effect in what you do in your schools now?
GORDON: Well, the Pledge goes on under a stay granted by the Supreme Court. So the practice of saying the Pledge has not changed. What has changed is we've tried to use this as a learning experience not only for our students, but our whole community, to teach them about how wonderful our democracy and our system is because we fight these issues out in the courts, not in the streets, and do it very respectfully.
O'BRIEN: You are heading to the Supreme Court right after we finish this interview, actually.
What's your expectation about when the Court will rule on this?
GORDON: We expect toward the end of May, early June before the Court closes out its current term.
O'BRIEN: All right, well, good luck to you.
David Gordon, thanks for being with us this morning.
We certainly appreciate it.
GORDON: Thank you, Soledad.
O'BRIEN: Bill?
HEMMER: Just about 35 minutes away from George Tenet, the politics and the partisanship of the 9/11 hearings. Jeff Greenfield's careful eyes and ears ahead in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Get the latest news every morning in your e-mail. Sign up for AMERICAN MORNING quick news at cnn.com/am.
Still to come this morning, a desperate effort in the Atlantic to save the life of a rare whale. A look at that story is ahead, as AMERICAN MORNING continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
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 March 24, 2004 - 08:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.
Getting ready for another intense day in the 9/11 hearings. Two of the most controversial figures in Washington -- CIA Director George Tenet and former terrorism chief Richard Clarke defending their part in the war on terror.
Kobe Bryant's lawyers question the woman accusing him of sexual assault, a hearting that will put her sexual past on trial.
And the day the conversation about Mars changed forever, ahead this hour on AMERICAN MORNING.
ANNOUNCER: From the CNN broadcast center in New York, this is AMERICAN MORNING with Soledad O'Brien and Bill Hemmer.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: It must be spring. The fruit stands out there are right in front of the Burger King sign.
HEMMER: Two days in a row.
O'BRIEN: If that doesn't...
HEMMER: Just for Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bill's apples on display.
O'BRIEN: It is a very nice look.
HEMMER: Get 'em now.
CAFFERTY: At the corner of 50th and Sixth there.
HEMMER: Come on up.
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Welcome back, everybody.
In just a few minutes, we're going to take a look at the changes in Hamas brought on by Israel's assassination of the group's founder. Is the man who is now in charge even worse for Israel than the man they killed? We'll take a look at that.
HEMMER: Also this hour, the Supreme Court hearing arguments that could take the words "under god" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. This morning we'll talk to the superintendent of the school district back in California where the whole matter started. How are schools now turning this dispute into a learning experience? Those questions and a whole lot more for the high court today.
O'BRIEN: Hello, Jack.
CAFFERTY: Good morning.
Coming up in the Cafferty File and in keeping with CNN's reputation as the most trusted name in news, we will tell you why a 25-year-old guy married his grandmother. And we will also tell you about a death threat. Barbara Bush threatens to kill the president's father. Stay tuned for details. Shocking.
O'BRIEN: No. Really? No.
CAFFERTY: I wouldn't make that up.
HEMMER: The most trusted name in news.
CAFFERTY: That's right.
O'BRIEN: No. I don't believe it.
CAFFERTY: This ain't the "F" word network you're on here, you know?
HEMMER: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that's what I'm talking about.
CAFFERTY: I mean we do the real stuff here.
O'BRIEN: A 25-year-old man married his grandmother?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: How old was she?
CAFFERTY: The aristocrats. It's a carnival act. I -- how old is she?
O'BRIEN: Yes.
CAFFERTY: Eighty.
O'BRIEN: Really?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Wow. What a...
CAFFERTY: I stopped this program dead cold, didn't I?
O'BRIEN: Can you legally...
CAFFERTY: You guys better do the news.
O'BRIEN: Sorry, I just -- I was thrown for a minute. HEMMER: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Eighty?
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Is that legal?
CAFFERTY: I don't know. Well, listen, I have to go read the rest of this. I don't know yet.
O'BRIEN: All right. All right, well, talk about a tease today, Jack.
Thank you, I think.
CAFFERTY: Yes.
O'BRIEN: Let's get right to our top stories this morning.
In Colorado, Kobe Bryant set to face his accuser. The woman is expected to testify today behind closed doors about her sexual history, information that the defense claims could destroy her credibility. The woman is accusing Bryant of sexually assaulting her last June. A judge will decide whether her testimony can be used during the trial. We've got more on the story coming up in just a moment.
There's also word this morning that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is going to make an historic visit to Libya tomorrow. That's according to a senior government official, who is traveling with the prime minister. The official says that Blair will meet with Libya's leader, Moammar Qaddafi, on the outskirts of Tripoli.
Spain is honoring the nearly 200 victims of the Madrid train bombings. A state funeral led by the king, Juan Carlos, is being attended by some 1,500 mourners. Among them, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who's also expected to hold talks with Spain's incoming prime minister.
In California, potential grand jurors who may hear the case against Michael Jackson report for duty tomorrow in Santa Barbara County. That's according to sources who are familiar with the case. The prosecution reportedly plans to present two weeks of closed door testimony in the child molestation case. However, the D.A.'s office will not confirm that. Michael Jackson has been invited to appear.
And in Mexico, six British divers who have been trapped in a cave for a week turned down help from Mexican soldiers and rescuers. The entrance to the cave, about 110 miles northeast of Mexico City, was blocked by flood waters. Well, now all six are holed up. They've got plenty of food, apparently, sleeping bags, a two way radio. They're reportedly waiting for experienced cave diving experts from Britain. The word is that they're incredibly bored but fine.
HEMMER: That's one way to get away from it all. O'BRIEN: Went to, you know, hey, being bored is probably the best thing you could be in those circumstances.
HEMMER: Right.
(WEATHER REPORT)
HEMMER: A bit later this hour, the 9/11 Commission resuming its probe into failures in the war on terror. Among those to be questioned this morning, former White House advisor Richard Clarke, accusing the president of not being aggressive enough in going after al Qaeda.
How is the White House responding?
John King live from the White House with more this morning there -- John, good morning.
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bill, the White House responding quite aggressively and consider the stakes. This is a president who is defined by 9/11, who is running for reelection on the theme that he has provided steady leadership in the wake of those terrorist attacks. Dick Clarke will tell the Congress, we are told -- tell the Commission, I'm sorry, we are told, that the White House ignored the clues that it could have perhaps prevented the 9/11 attacks.
In part of the counter-offensive, the White House Chief of Staff Andy Card this morning telling me that view is just simply flat out wrong.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KING (voice-over): The president says there should be no doubt.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Had my administration had any information that terrorists were going to attack New York City on September 11th, we would have acted.
KING: Mr. Bush also rebutted any suggestion he ignored or underestimated the terror threat.
BUSH: Whether it be a Hamas threat or an al Qaeda threat we take them very seriously in this administration.
KING: The president's early commitment to confronting al Qaeda is called into question in this new book by former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and is a major focus of the commission investigating the September 11th attacks.
Secretary of State Powell says the president compared the Clinton administration approach to al Qaeda as swatting flies and wanted more.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: He decided early on that we needed to be more aggressive in going after terrorists and especially al Qaeda. KING: That more aggressive plan was ordered soon after Mr. Bush took office on his desk when the Twin Towers fell, too long in the making to some.
BOB KERREY (D), COMMISSION MEMBER: Why in God's name I got to wait eight months to get a plan?
KING: The hearings are in part a credibility test for the Bush White House as Clarke and others suggest the administration put al Qaeda on the back burner early on because it was obsessed with Iraq.
PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I've never been dismissive of al Qaeda and I think precisely because I think terrorism is such a serious problem.
KING: The administration says Clarke's sharp criticism now contrasts with his time on the National Security Council staff. In his resignation letter 14 months ago Clarke wrote: "It has been an enormous privilege to serve in the Bush White House" and wished the president "good fortune as you lead our country through the continuing threats."
And the White House says Clarke is wrong to claim the president signed a directive shortly after 9/11 ordering military options for war in Iraq.
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: This is another example of his revisionist history.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: The White House chief of staff, Mr. Card, this morning also saying that 51 times in those months before the September 11 attacks President Bush was given intelligence reports about the al Qaeda threat. Andy Card and others at the White House saying the president took that threat quite seriously, but they say there were no indications at all, Bill, that al Qaeda planned attacks here in the United States.
HEMMER: John, if we could get back to this letter revealed at the White House yesterday. Apparently during Richard Clarke's resignation, quite flattering terms, praised the president on the day of 9/11 and the way he behaved in the days after that.
How is the White House playing that letter after this book came out over the weekend?
KING: Well, the White House released that letter as part of its counter-offensive against Mr. Clarke. In that letter, 14 months ago, Mr. Clarke said it had been a privilege to serve the president in the 24 months he served in the Bush administration. He did, as you noted, applaud the president's leadership on 9/11 and he wished the president "good fortune" as he continued to confront the terrorist threat.
The White House is saying that that was the Richard Clarke they knew when he worked here in the White House. They say he never raised any of his concerns about the war in Iraq, never raised any of his concerns that the administration was underestimating the threat. They now believe Richard Clarke is raising those concerns for profiteering, to sell his book and, perhaps, Bill, to try to influence the presidential election.
HEMMER: John, crystal ball. In one hour the hearings start. Can we expect to see that letter today presented for Richard Clarke when he starts his testimony?
KERRY: The administration certainly has made the letter available public. Whether it has submitted it as evidence to the Commission, we do not know. I'll certainly ask that question.
HEMMER: All right, John, thanks.
John King from the White House.
Again, we'll cover it here live this morning on AMERICAN MORNING, 9:00 a.m. Eastern time the expected start today. CIA Director George Tenet the first for the testimony today on Capitol Hill -- Soledad.
O'BRIEN: The Palestinian militant group Hamas is under new leadership in the Gaza Strip. Abdel Aziz Rantisi will be the group's acting head in Gaza, at least until leadership elections are held in September. Rantisi replaces Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was killed on Monday in an Israeli missile strike.
Stephen Farrell is a Middle East correspondent for "The Times of London." He has interviewed and spent time with Rantisi.
And Stephen Farrell joins us from Jerusalem this morning.
Nice to see you.
Thanks for being with us.
Why don't you start by filling us in on exactly who is Rantisi? What's his background?
STEPHEN FARRELL, MIDDLE EAST CORRESPONDENT, "THE TIMES OF LONDON": Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi is a 57-year-old pediatrician. He trained in Egypt and he has been a long time follower of Sheikh Yassin. He was one of the original half a dozen founders of Hamas back in 1988 during the first intifada. So, he's been involved with the organization right from the very beginning and he's an instinctive hard-liner.
O'BRIEN: As a hard-liner, then, what kind of support does he have across all of Hamas?
FARRELL: Rantisi is viewed as a safe pair of hands by the young bucks, if you like, the young guys who are out on the streets, drumming up support, even launching attacks against Israeli troops in the refugee camps of Gaza, who are putting together the military activities in the West Bank and Gaza. And Hamas insists that he's part of the political, not the military leadership. But that's a distinction that Israel flatly rejects.
O'BRIEN: There have been, as you well know, threats of attacks against the United States. And Rantisi apparently recently claiming that he will not attack the United States.
What do you read into that strategy, which directly contradicts the word that came right after Yassin's assassination?
FARRELL: Yes, I think you have to pay careful attention to the rhetoric, but also remember that it is rhetoric designed for an audience. I mean Rantisi's first words were a call to Islam, this is an attack on Islam, this is an attack not just on Yassin, not just on Palestinians, but it's a war against Islam by the Zionists, as he termed it, and their American allies.
There is -- I don't think we will see an attack by Hamas outside the borders of Israel on America. I think it's extremely unlikely. There was, remember, one attack within Gaza on an American convoy a few months ago and the general reaction to the Palestinians, among the Palestinians was that this was, this was a mistake, this was an error and whoever did it, it still isn't clear.
It hasn't been repeated and I think at this time, with its leadership under severe threat from Israel, its funds frozen across large parts of the world, I don't see Hamas going on the offensive against a nuclear superpower. It already has one nuclear power to deal with as an enemy, and that's Israel.
O'BRIEN: Is the expectation that Abdel Aziz Rantisi will take Hamas in a new direction, new direction meaning more violence, more attacks, more bombings?
FARRELL: Well, I think they can certainly expect violence, attacks and bombings. They may target high profile Israeli individuals in response to an attack on the most high profile individual within their organization, or they may just launch a slew of suicide bomb attacks in Israel. Unfortunately, we'll have to wait and see what happens.
The, I think the fact remains that they have known, really, that Yassin was a marked man for many, many months, since Israel declared, effectively, open season on the Hamas leadership last summer. So this has all been factored in. The discussions have taken place at the political leadership. The military leadership has been told what to do or has decided what to do. Hamas insists that policy will not change.
That said, Israel tried to kill Rantisi last summer, also, and narrowly failed. It killed Yassin, to whom he was very close. So he may take this personally.
O'BRIEN: Stephen Farrell of "The Times of London" joining us this morning. Thank you very much -- Bill.
HEMMER: Still to come, the 9/11 hearings resume today, this morning, in fact. What will the CIA director, George Tenet, have to say before that panel?
O'BRIEN: Also today, for the first time since they met last June, Kobe Bryant will meet his accuser in a closed door hearing. We're going to take you live to Eagle, Colorado for the latest on that.
HEMMER: Also, was Mars once covered in salt water? The lead NASA scientist for Mars exploration about the latest discovery and what it may mean.
Back in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: The woman accusing Kobe Bryant of sexual assault will answer questions today behind closed doors about her own sexual past. It will be the first time that Bryant and the 19-year-old woman will meet face to face since they first met last June. Today's hearing will determine if details of her sexual past should be introduced as evidence at Bryant's trial.
Koa Radio reporter Alex Stone with us live from Eagle, Colorado, back here on AMERICAN MORNING.
Good to have you back, Alex.
ALEX STONE, KOA RADIO CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Bill.
HEMMER: Whatever happened to the rape shield law? How are they getting around this part of the state law in Colorado with these questions today?
STONE: Well, Bill, the rape shield law is what is being really debated today in the courtroom. That is the reason why the judge is having this hearing today. Kobe Bryant's defense attorneys are trying to prove to the judge by having the accuser on the stand that her information, her sexual history, they say, is so relevant in this case, because they make the claim that she was with so many other people, according to the defense, around the time she was with Kobe Bryant, that they say that comes into play because they think, at least they've made the claim in court, that the injuries to her body could have come from somebody else or from just having a lot of consensual sex.
So the judge could decide it is relevant and could allow it into trial, when there would be a jury present.
HEMMER: It's my understanding that there are a limited number of people inside that room today -- the judge, attorneys for both sides, the accuser, obviously.
Is it a sure thing that Kobe Bryant will be present there today?
STONE: We understand Kobe Bryant will be here today. In one other hearing several months ago, he did miss it. That was a hearing when the accuser's mother testified. We understand he will be here. That last hearing that he did miss was because he was sick. He could feasibly come in and be sick again, but we do understand that he will be here in the same courtroom with the accuser today.
HEMMER: And defense attorneys are looking for four days of questioning? Will that fly?
STONE: There are media reports that they are looking for four days, that they say they need four days. But it looks like, at least right now, Bill, that that would not fly because this is only a two day hearing and we know they've flown her in for this hearing. They would have to fly her in again if the judge would allow it. It's unknown, but it's also somewhat unlikely that they would allow her to come back in for another day of testimony.
HEMMER: Well, thanks for coming back and talking to us.
Alex Stone there, KOA Radio there in Colorado.
Appreciate it -- now, Soledad.
O'BRIEN: And it's time to check in with Jack and the Question of the Day, which is all related to all of this.
CAFFERTY: Indeed, it is.
Should Kobe Bryant's accuser be forced to talk about her sexual history in this closed court hearing?
Annette writes from Florence, Alabama: "In ordinary cases, I'm in full support of the rape shield laws. However, in this particular case, I cannot be. It has nothing to do with the fact that Kobe is who he is. If someone else's semen had not been found in her panties when she did go to the hospital, no one would have cared about her sexual past."
Brandon writes: "Of course she should have to disclose her past. With the ridiculous amount of false accusations out there, a message needs to be sent that you cannot arbitrarily accuse someone of rape without consequences. So many of us know someone who has been unfairly accused of rape and not enough pressure is put on the accusers." Brandon's in Minot, North Dakota.
Charlie writes: "How can the court expect women to come forward in future rape cases if they're forced to tell the world about their past sexual experiences? Common sense shows that this is a ridiculous decision that can only lead to other victims not wanting to come forward."
And Steve in Pennsylvania writes: "Fortunately, decisions about what evidence is heard in court are made by judges informed by pertinent law, not by viewers informed by news coverage and some vague notion of what seems fair."
Steve, you have a point. I'm not sure I agree with you, however. I've known a few judges that have done some kind of silly things along the way. So -- and I have great faith in the collective wisdom of the people who watch this program by virtue of the choice they make here.
HEMMER: Collective faith.
O'BRIEN: Absolutely.
This turn, I think, very interesting because people are arguing both sides of this. And I think each side, to some degree, has a valid point. I mean obviously people bring in, you know, other things so some of them are a little random. But for the most part, I think the people are arguing two sides and they have a valid point arguing that.
CAFFERTY: The other question we may have to revisit is how sick are we getting of this whole story? And the answer is quite.
O'BRIEN: I can tell you...
HEMMER: You think so, huh? I'm interested in it.
O'BRIEN: I love legal cases because I just -- you learn so much about the law.
HEMMER: Right.
O'BRIEN: I mean I think it's fascinating.
HEMMER: I agree with you 100 percent.
O'BRIEN: To sit down and talk to Linda Fairstein about that...
HEMMER: Yes, I'll tell you, the other thing is that this is such a personal matter, too, and so often times we talk about the possibility of their coming face to face and today is the day. And what they get out of it is what we'll wait for to see so. I think the viewers are dead on, by the way, in those e-mails.
O'BRIEN: Very interesting.
HEMMER: Very nice.
CAFFERTY: Yes, well, they, you know, they're good.
O'BRIEN: They are lawyers. Jack was wrong.
HEMMER: Yes.
CAFFERTY: Right.
HEMMER: Harold is, too.
In a moment here, two words make for a huge case before the Supreme Court. The controversial matter "under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance. We'll get to that in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: It appears the number of gays dismissed from the U.S. military dropping significantly. A gay rights group says dismissals last year fell to the lowest level in almost 10 years. About 800 gays and lesbians dismissed last year. That's down 17 percent from 2002, 39 percent lower than 2001.
The report by the Service Members Legal Defense Network says the decline is due to U.S. action in Afghanistan, also in Iraq. The Pentagon not offering a comment, saying it has not yet seen that report.
O'BRIEN: Should the words "under god" be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance? The Supreme Court is considering that today. It's a controversy about the separation of church and state because the Pledge is recited daily in many public schools.
David Gordon is the superintendent of the Elk Grove Unified School District, which is where the case began.
And he joining us this morning from Washington, D.C.
Nice to see you, sir.
Thanks for being with us.
DAVID GORDON, SUPERINTENDENT, ELK GROVE (CALIFORNIA) UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: Good morning, Soledad.
Happy to be with you.
O'BRIEN: Thank you very much.
Michael Newdow argues, of course, that the words "under god" are a religious intrusion upon the students in your school and, in fact, schools across the country.
Why do you disagree with him and why do you think that that reference to god actually does belong in the Pledge?
GORDON: Two reasons, Soledad. Number one, we believe very strongly that the words "under god" don't represent coercion or pushing religion on children. Rather, they're an expression of the role of god and religion in our history, which is a 200 or 300-year- old process. And, secondly, under our state law, parents have an absolute right to opt their children out of saying the Pledge if they're uncomfortable in doing so.
O'BRIEN: At the same time, there are certainly critics who say that opting out sort of is -- doesn't work, because with all the peer pressure in schools, the kids feel pressured to do it anyway, regardless of what their parents have sort of authorized them to do.
Why do you disagree with that? GORDON: Well, in our schools for the last 25 years, we've made great efforts to include special education children. If you walk through our classrooms, you have many, many students with disabilities in the regular classroom. Our teachers do a very, very good job of helping our students learn to embrace differences and I have great confidence that if a child simply didn't want to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance, that the teachers and our principals would help them to not feel ostracized at all.
O'BRIEN: As you well know, two years ago it was California's federal court that ruled against the use of "under god" in the Pledge.
How literally have things changed? What literally has been the effect in what you do in your schools now?
GORDON: Well, the Pledge goes on under a stay granted by the Supreme Court. So the practice of saying the Pledge has not changed. What has changed is we've tried to use this as a learning experience not only for our students, but our whole community, to teach them about how wonderful our democracy and our system is because we fight these issues out in the courts, not in the streets, and do it very respectfully.
O'BRIEN: You are heading to the Supreme Court right after we finish this interview, actually.
What's your expectation about when the Court will rule on this?
GORDON: We expect toward the end of May, early June before the Court closes out its current term.
O'BRIEN: All right, well, good luck to you.
David Gordon, thanks for being with us this morning.
We certainly appreciate it.
GORDON: Thank you, Soledad.
O'BRIEN: Bill?
HEMMER: Just about 35 minutes away from George Tenet, the politics and the partisanship of the 9/11 hearings. Jeff Greenfield's careful eyes and ears ahead in a moment on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'BRIEN: Get the latest news every morning in your e-mail. Sign up for AMERICAN MORNING quick news at cnn.com/am.
Still to come this morning, a desperate effort in the Atlantic to save the life of a rare whale. A look at that story is ahead, as AMERICAN MORNING continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
