Return to Transcripts main page
CNN IN THE MONEY
Two U.S. Soldiers Missing After Fuel Convoy Attack; A New Spiritual Awakening in America?
Aired April 10, 2004 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JACK CAFFERTY, HOST: Coming up on IN THE MONEY, threats and promises as the fighting spreads in Iraq. Washington digs in. We'll look at the forces shaping an escalating war.
And making history. We'll focus on Condoleezza Rice in a look at the Bush war cabinet.
God gets personal. See the new shape of worship behind a surge in religious belief. All that and more after this quick check of the headlines.
HOLLY FIRFER, CNN ANCHOR: Amid a rash of kidnappings and hostage-taking in Iraq, Australian TV footage shows masked men holding an apparent American in the back of a car between Baghdad and Fallujah. The man tells of an attack on his convoy before the car drives off.
The Pentagon confirms two U.S. soldiers and four civilian contractors are missing after an attack on the fuel convoy.
Fierce fighting continues to rage across Iraq. Coalition forces are battling a Shiite cleric's militia in al-Kut, and are trying to retake the southern city.
Clashes also continue in Baghdad and in the north.
In Fallujah U.S. forces continue taking fire from Iraqi insurgents despite efforts to establish a ceasefire. Members of Iraq's governing council met with Fallujah leaders and leadership of the anti-coalition forces to try to bring calm today.
More news later, IN THE MONEY starts right now.
ANNOUCER: From New York City, America's financial capital, this is IN THE MONEY.
CAFFERTY: Welcome to the program. I'm Jack Cafferty. Coming up on today's edition of IN THE MONEY: Plan B, Iraq was supposed to be peaceful and prosperous by now, and on track to go solo in June. Find out what has to change before the babysitter can go home.
Plus, from the Cold War to the hot seat, Condoleezza Rice made her name as an expert on Soviet affairs. As the world checks out her 9/11 testimony, see what she brings to the Bush war cabinet. And a crash course in crime and punishment. A look at what the Tyco fiasco could mean for big-name trials still ahead. We'll get the low-down from top lawyer Alan Dershowitz.
Joining me today, a couple of the IN THE MONEY veterans: CNN correspondent Susan Lisovicz, back after a well-deserved vacation. We enjoyed Christine Romans, but she ain't no Susan Lisovicz; and "Fortune" magazine editor-at-large Andy Serwer.
I'm just kidding, Christine.
SUSAN LISOVICZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We love her, too.
ANDY SERWER, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, "FORTUNE": You're in hot water already, Jack.
CAFFERTY: All right, well, let's talk about terrorism and the market, then, for want of something better to do, get off the hook. Earnings season, off for the first quarter, looking pretty good. The stock market though got a real case of cold feet on news of the escalating violence in Iraq, sold off big time on the day before the long holiday weekend. Nobody wants to be in a long position in case something would happen. What does this situation in Iraq say about the market going forward? Is it able to trump earnings? Is it able to trump good economic news?
SERWER: I think it does, Jack. I think we're a prisoner of foreign affairs right now. The economy has clearly recovered to an extent. Obviously the job situation matters. We've seen that, how the market responded to that positive jobs report. But the situation in Iraq is so overwhelming psychologically that it's going to continue to impact the markets.
LISOVICZ: Donald Rumsfeld said this week that there were going to be good days and bad days. And clearly this was a bad week in Iraq. The market has been able to shake off a lot of bad instances because it comes with the territory. It, of course, didn't shake it off when we had this bombing in Madrid. But when you have this kind of talk of maybe more troops, additional time there, the quagmire references, that's where investors start to get a little nervous.
CAFFERTY: Well, and the bombing in Madrid was a commuter train or two. This is happening in cities all over the country. Somebody made the point that during the war a year ago, the coalition forces failed to take on the elite Republican Guard. They were allowed to simply walk away from the battlefield with their money, their weapons, and their leadership, and melt back into the community. Well, I wonder if that's not who we're seeing now, and all of a sudden this widespread organized resistance.
SERWER: Yes, well, I mean, how much worse could things get? Let's hope we don't find out.
CAFFERTY: All right. Thank you. In Iraq this week, you don't have to be carrying a gun to be a target. As the insurgency spreads, fighters have begun kidnapping non-combatants. And that of course raises the stakes for people like aid workers, civilian contractors, and journalists. For a look at how, we're joined now from Baghdad by CNN's Jim Clancy.
Ominous developments indeed, Jim. What is the word on the street about the growing risk to the civilian population, not the Iraqi civilian population, but the Western civilian population?
JIM CLANCY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Iraqis are plenty enough worried about themselves. They can let the journalists fend for themselves as well. All the journalists are here, the aid workers as well, mostly by their own choice. They want to be part of this, they want to cover it, they want to be in on the rebuilding of Iraq and they've come here. Astounding that they should be targeted by someone? Hardly. This has happened in conflicts many times before where hostages become a currency, if you will, for them to get what they want.
And what we have seen this week is there has been an uptick in the number of higher-level people that have been arrested by the coalition. Among them, there have been Sunni militants. Also among them, there have been people like Mustafa al-Yaqoubi, a top aide to that militant young Shia leader, Moqtada al-Sadr. Once he was taken away, suddenly we saw this all begin.
Is there a link? Gee, I think there probably is, Jack. And that's making it more difficult for everybody here. I think you'll see us change our strategies in the way that we cover stories. Unfortunately, it prevents a lot of people from going out and getting the news and talking to people, because they simply don't know what to expect.
As journalists, we don't want to carry guns, we don't want anybody with guns with us. We want to go out and talk to people, and bring the story out. This changes a lot of the ability to do that. And believe me, it's a big impact, one that affects each and every one of us -- Jack.
CAFFERTY: All right, Jim, appreciate the report. Take care of yourself, be safe. CNN's Jim Clancy reporting from Iraq.
The White House this week announced that it's sticking to its June deadline for a transfer of power in Iraq. But the insurgents have a different kind of transfer of power in mind. And the way the Shiite factions play the next round could make all the difference to U.S. plans for Iraq's future. For more on that now, we're joined by Tony Karon, who is here in New York City, the senior editor for Time.com.
Tony, it's nice to have you on the program.
TONY KARON, TIME.COM: Hello, Jack.
CAFFERTY: Based on what I've been able to read and listen to on the news in the last few days, the guy holding all the cards in Iraq is Sistani, the moderate cleric. If he decides to support the United States, the more radical cleric is in trouble. If, on the other hand, he decides to throw his forces behind the radical Shiite cleric, the United States could pack up and start heading home, yes?
KARON: Well, yes, although it's not quite as simple as that. Sistani ? Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical cleric, probably commands the support of about 30 percent of the Shiite population. Obviously Sistani is far more influential. They share the goals of putting the Shiites in power in Iraq. I don't think there's chance that Sistani would back the United States per se. He's refused to meet with the United States thus far. He is also responsive to the Shiite community, and the fact that they feel defiant (ph) plays against the United States. So it's really a question of whether some sort of consensus can be achieved that brings him on board, and gets him to put out the fires, rather than expecting him to come out and support the U.S. as such.
LISOVICZ: Tony, are you sensing, especially because we're at a critical time with the turnover close at hand at this point, that forces that may have been opposed to each other are now in fact finding strength in each other, sort of giving credence to that old adage, the enemy of my enemy is my friend?
KARON: Well, yes. I think both these forces have to stake a claim. I think, just to step back a second, we should be clear that this hand-over of power is not a hand-over of power, it's a largely symbolic transfer to an Iraqi authority of the trappings of sovereignty. Real power in Iraq is to remain in the hands of the U.S. military. The U.S. military commands who not only commands the largest force there, but also the Iraqi security forces will be under his command, not the command of their own government.
So what this is, though, is a case of the various forces in Iraq really stepping up and staking their claim, particularly the Shiites now who really want to push towards democracy in the sense of majority role, immediate elections, which they will win. And the U.S. plan hasn't really allowed for that thus far. They're staking their claim and being prepared to butt heads about it.
SERWER: Tony, Andy Serwer here. How are you?
KARON: Good, how are you?
SERWER: I want you to do a little role-playing for us here and pretend that you're a member of the Bush cabinet. What would you be telling the president to do right now?
KARON: Well, that's a tough one. Obviously the United States can't afford to have the credibility of its forces there challenged in the way that it has been. So it has to put town the revolt. But really, what it needs more than ever now is to create consensus among enough of a group of Iraqis that could actually put out the fire in some way. That means basically giving Sistani more than he's been given up to now, giving Sistani more of an incentive, and internationalizing things a lot more than they have been, essentially making clear the U.S. is not going to prescribe to Iraqis the way that this thing is going to go, that they are going to basically be given their elections very soon, and the U.S. is committed to seeing that that happens and bringing in international forces to change the mix of the forces that are keeping security there.
CAFFERTY: Wasn't it a little naive though from the get-go, Tony, to expect that the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shiites were suddenly going to forget thousands of years of bitter hatred for each other and sit down at a table and say, OK, let's come together and figure out how to share the resources of this country? I mean, these people can't stand each other. And the Shiites are the largest piece of the population. If in democracy the majority rules, the Shiites in Iraq are probably going to wind up calling the shots, aren't they?
KARON: Well, absolutely. I think it was naive to underestimate the power of the ethnic divisions. And as Bob Kerrey said this week in questioning Condoleezza Rice, was anybody thinking about the consequences of putting a largely Christian army in the middle of a Muslim country and saying, we're going to sort of remake this country according to our specification? That was probably a little naive to begin with also.
LISOVICZ: Tony, can you address yet another area that may be providing even more problems in Iraq, and that is the abundance of private contractors, a week ago, this horrific development where four Americans who were serving as private contractors, assassinated, on Friday, a large explosion at a hotel that housed not only journalists, but private contractors? Do you see that as a problem, or something that is helpful to trying to restore stability in Iraq?
KARON: Well, I think it's a very dangerous area, because these private contractors -- and let's be clear, essentially we're talking about mercenaries, people who are playing a military role but they're not in uniform. The problem is they're not under the command of the United States forces. And they're not actually covered by any legal framework that allows them to both bear arms and particularly to return fire. In fact, I saw something by a military (UNINTELLIGIBLE) this week that speculated that they might actually fall under the designation, "unlawful combatant." So I think you heard mutterings from Congress this week that this situation needs to be brought under control a little. I think it's a symptom of the fact that the manpower needs in Iraq were not fully being met by the sort of troop deployments that were being made there.
CAFFERTY: Tony, I appreciate you joining us. We're going to have to leave it there, thank you for being on the program.
KARON: You're welcome.
CAFFERTY: Tony Karon, senior editor of Time.com.
Coming up on IN THE MONEY, how to build a cabinet. Condoleezza Rice and the rest of the Bush war cabinet have decades of experience. We'll see what you think of the way they're using it.
And later, air raid. We'll tell you why the feds want Clear Channel Communications to clean up and pay up.
Plus, you can't hide from God. From the newsstand to the TV to the movies, religion feels like it's everywhere these days. Let's find out which came first, the demand or the deluge. Back in a moment.
CAFFERTY: Well, the Bush wartime cabinet brings old school knowledge to a new school fight, people like Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, have experience with past conflicts including the Cold War. But the big question this week was how they've handled the top U.S. threat of the 21st Century, the threat of terrorism. And that put Condi Rice in the spotlight in front of the 9/11 Commission.
For a look at Condoleezza Rice and how well she fits her job, we're joined now from Washington by James Mann, who's author of "The rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet." For those of us who don't know, and I include myself, where did this name come from? Did they dub themselves the Vulcans? And if so, why?
JAMES MANN, AUTHOR, "THE RISE OF THE VULCANS": That's right, they actually gave themselves the name the Vulcans. It was during the 2000 campaign, actually in 1999. And Bush's foreign policy advisers were headed by Rice, who came from Birmingham, Alabama. Above the city is a 50-some-foot statue of Vulcan, the god of the forge, because Birmingham is a steel town.
CAFFERTY: All right. That explains it.
MANN: Kind of a joke.
CAFFERTY: How did she do, do you think, the other day?
MANN: You mean this?
CAFFERTY: Yes, this past week in front of the 9/11 Commission?
MANN: I thought it ended up as a stalemate. I thought she was very cool and handled herself well. I thought that some of the commission members scored some points of their own in focusing on the August memo and so on. But she also scored some points of her own. And it was sort of the draw that I thought it would be.
LISOVICZ: Well, James, I like your observation that Condoleezza Rice is used to giving recitals, because she was a competitive piano player, as well as a figure skater. But let's talk about her interest in the Soviet Union. And this may be -- as poised and polished and intelligent as Condoleezza Rice obviously is, this may be a detriment at this time in the world. What's your view?
MANN: Well, she's one of a number of people on the Bush foreign policy team whose experience was set during the Cold War. She's actually one of the younger members of the team. But the framework is dealing with great powers and dealing with other countries or rogue states even. But not so much -- there's not so much experience in dealing with terrorist groups like al Qaeda. That really was beyond their experience in the past.
SERWER: James, assuming that the president wins reelection, what do you think Condoleezza Rice's role might be going forward, and also, some of the other cabinet members, like Powell?
MANN: I think -- my own guess is Secretary Powell will resign. I think he will call it a day after four years. Condoleezza Rice has been mentioned a number of times as a possible secretary of state. And I think that's possible. I could also ? she's -- of the current members of the Bush foreign policy team, I think she's among the most conflicted about working in government. She has worked in government, and then has left from time to time. And I could also see her leaving for electoral politics, or some business job, where she jokes about wanting to be football commissioner. If I had to bet I would bet?
SERWER: Why not?
CAFFERTY: It would probably be easier than what she's doing, right?
SERWER: Although Paul Tagliabue might not like that idea.
MANN: That's right. I think the job's occupied. But if I had to bet, I would say that if Bush is reelected, that she'll be in the next administration as secretary of state or defense.
CAFFERTY: Let me ask you about this memo, this PDB, they called it, dated September 6 -- or maybe it was August 6, the Presidential Daily Briefing memo, that supposedly was titled "Osama bin Laden has Designs on Attacking Inside the United States." The White House had classified that document. She was -- Condoleezza Rice was asked about it at length during the commission hearings. And the next day, the White House says it's agreed to declassify that document. What was in that document, do you suppose, that caused it to be classified in the first place? And why would the White House knuckle under so quickly and say, OK, we'll release it, if there was something in fact that they wanted to protect in there?
MANN: Well, it's part of a pattern in which they've retreated during these hearings of the September 11 Commission. The intelligence community in the United States is always interested to the point of obsessed with protecting anything that could conceivably lead to sources of information. And there may have been something in that document that they felt might jeopardize sources. They obviously, when pressed over the last couple of days, decided to release it. I think the interesting thing is it has ? I come from a newspaper background, it certainly had a very catchy headline, it said Osama bin Laden was planning attacks in the United States. And they went to considerable lengths, I think , for a while, to keep that headline out of the public eye.
LISOVICZ: James, let's go back to the Vulcans. There was a lot of attention when George W. Bush came to office, that he was the CEO president, he was on time, he surrounded himself with experienced people. Well, no one's really taking the fall for 9/11. CEOs do get sacked, or they sack people in charge of things. There has been a lot of focus as to why the CIA director and FBI chief are still, for instance, holding their titles. What's your opinion about that? I know loyalty is a big -- also very important to the president.
MANN: I think you're asking a very good question. If this was a business corporation, you would think that it would not be the same team in all respects that came in in 2001, certainly, the head of the CIA. And I think you can only explain it by loyalty and also a kind of fear that if they admit they're wrong, that's somehow the slippery slope and it will cost them politically.
CAFFERTY: James Mann, the author of "The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet," thank you for joining us, I appreciate it.
MANN: Thank you.
CAFFERTY: All right. We're going to step aside here and try and earn a couple of dollars to send down to CNN headquarters in Atlanta. They need the money down there. But we will be back after this commercial break.
And coming up when we return, radio silence. Clear Channel yanks Howard Stern from six stations. But they couldn't dodge a fine for carrying his show. Find out how Wall Street reacted to that.
And new moves for Michael Jackson. See what lessons the Tyco fiasco holds for big upcoming trials, including Jackson's day in court.
Plus, the straight story. We'll show you some software that could stop another Jayson Blair scandal and actually force college students to do some research before writing their term papers, instead of just swiping it from somebody else. Back after this.
LISOVICZ: a juror No. 4 in the Tyco case.
And voters in the L.A. suburb of Inglewood voted down Wal-Mart's efforts to build a super store in the area. Wal-Mart shares fell $2 a share a day after the no-vote.
SERWER: All right, thanks, Susan.
The FCC finally broke out its ticket book yesterday and slapped a maximum indecency fine on one of the nation's largest media companies. The commission hit radio giant Clear Channel Communications with a fine of almost half a million dollars for indecent material broadcast on, guess where? the Howard Stern show. Clear Channel reacted by pulling Stern off of all its stations permanently. And that's sure to cost the company a lot more than just half a million bucks in advertising revenue.
It has already been a rocky few years for Clear Channel. Look at that, they're way down, that stock is, from highs set five years ago, making Clear Channel Communications our "Stock of the Week." It didn't always look that way for Clear Channel, though. The stock was an incredible one in the 1990s. I think, Susan, it went from like a buck to $100, almost, from '92 to 2000. But since then, not so great.
LISOVICZ: Radio deregulation, the big word for Clear Channel, a little-known company in Texas, just really made hay with that news, and did really well. But in terms of Clear Channel, I think the news?
SERWER: Howard Stern.
Yes, it's almost like the FCC is finally flexing its muscle. I think that's really the story there.
CAFFERTY: Yes. I have a question, though. Howard Stern has been hanging out, doing the Howard Stern program for 20 years. I worked with him when he was at WNBC FM across the street here, when he was just getting started in New York. And anybody who knows Howard Stern knows if you turn on the Howard Stern show, you're going to get the Howard Stern show.
Now there's suddenly there's half a million dollar fines being meted out, because of the Howard Stern show. Janet Jackson showed portions of her anatomy to an absolutely innocent audience during the Super Bowl. Nobody asked to see Janet Jackson's breast. It was shown to them anyway. No fines against her, no fines against CBS, no fines against MTV or any of the people responsible for that deal. But they're chasing down Howard Stern. Is there hypocrisy at work here?
SERWER: Well, I think there is. I think there is hypocrisy at work. And you know what's interesting is, you talked about Clear Channel, they're out of San Antonio, run by the Mays family, Lowry Mays. I went down and visited them a couple of years ago. And they are conservative people, but they've been making hay off of this guy for years. All of a sudden we get this changing environment. I'm not sure why they're going after him. It's the same thing as they've been doing here for years.
LISOVICZ: Well, the change is the $495,000 fine. That's the change there. But you know, frankly, it's kind of funny to see Howard Stern as the martyr. What's going to happen now? He's comparing it to McCarthyism. The big difference from say 50 or 60 years ago is that you have things like satellite radio. And so there is -- for all those Howard Stern fans out there, there is -- you're going to be able to find him if you want him.
SERWER: Well, this company is a huge -- they own thousands and thousands of billboards, radio stations, TV stations.
LISOVICZ: And venues.
SERWER: And yes, that's what actually hurt them, is getting into that rock 'n' roll business. It's the rock n roll.
SERWER: Right. Exactly.
SERWER: All right. We're going to have to leave it at that. We've got a lot more to come here on IN THE MONEY. Just ahead, we've got a mistrial in the Tyco case. Will the Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson trials suffer the same fate? We'll talk about juries and high profile cases with master lawyer Alan Dershowitz.
And more Americans are finding new ways to worship and connect with God, and they don't include going to church. We'll look at that new trend coming up.
FIRFER: I'm Holly Firfer. IN THE MONEY will continue after a check of the top stories.
Fire officials say a propane tank explosion near the U.S.-Mexican border has killed at least one person and injured a number of others. The explosion reportedly leveled two buildings, one of them a restaurant on a town on the Mexican side of the border.
Australian TV footage shows a captive believed to be an American taken hostage, when his convoy was attacked by Iraqi insurgents. Two U.S. soldiers, two German security personnel, and four American contractors are unaccounted for in Iraq. And at least three Japanese civilians are being held hostage.
This stretch of beach in Hawaii is where California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger this week plunged into the role of lifeguard. The action hero-turned-politician helped rescue a man struggling in the surf about 100 yards offshore. Schwarzenegger was in Hawaii for a 10-day get-away with his family.
More news later. Now back to IN THE MONEY.
LISOVICZ: The Tyco mistrial still has a lot of people complaining about the jury system. But legal expert Alan Dershowitz thinks there were good things and bad things about the way things turned out. Mr. Dershowitz, of course, is a professor of law at Harvard University and the author of a new book, "America on Trial," which will be available on May 11.
Welcome back to the program.
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Thank you so much.
LISOVICZ: I've read your article in "The Wall Street Journal." One thing I didn't know was that had the Tyco trial been held elsewhere, there would have been a conviction because it doesn't have to be a unanimous verdict.
DERSHOWITZ: That's right. Several years ago, the United States Supreme Court allowed various states, including Oregon, to have less than unanimous jury verdicts, nine to three verdicts, 10 to two verdicts. And many people feel that's in violation of the Constitution, because when the Constitution was written, the jury meant 12, and it meant unanimous. And some people were very suspicious that this nine-to-three verdict began to be introduced when more minorities and women started to serve on juries, in order to diminish the impact of minorities and women on jury verdicts. But in any event, the federal system and New York require unanimity. So when you even one juror holding out, that's a hung jury.
CAFFERTY: Alan, Jack Cafferty. This trial ended, sadly, because of the publication of the name of the woman known as juror No. 4. I believe in both "The Wall Street Journal" and in "The New York Post," much in defiance of custom, which is not to identify jurors in a trial. This thing cost somebody $12 million. I assume the taxpayers get stuck with the tab. What ought to happen to the news media in this case that were just -- couldn't have been any more irresponsible than to pull a stunt like this?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, you know, I think there are two sides to this. You have at least one or two journalists saying that they saw her give a kind of OK sign. If that happened, that's a newsworthy event. And the public is entitled to know why somebody would give that kind of an OK sign. Of course, she denies it. The judge said it was ambiguous. Today's "Wall Street Journal," or Friday's "Wall Street Journal" has a series of letters in it from readers complaining bitterly to "The Journal" about its decision to name the person. And the marketplace applies. If you don't like your newspaper, you have a right to complain. But the law permits "The Wall Street Journal" to do this.
CAFFERTY: I understand it permits it, but it isn't just probably very good common sense. And letting her be known as juror No. 4, whether she flashed an OK sign or not, until the verdict came in, certainly wouldn't have harmed anyone, would it?
DERSHOWITZ: No, I don't think so. And especially -- you put your finger right on it. The issue is not whether to print her name, the issue is when to print her name. I mean, for example, if there was evidence that one juror was a holdout because the juror was a racist, or a sexist, or possibly subject to a bribe. Surely that would be an interest to the public and the public has the right to know it. But probably it's better for the journalists to withhold that information until after the case is over. And there's plenty of time then to do the investigation. But you know, with 24-hour-a-day cable, competition, everybody wants to be the first out with information that the public is anxious to hear. And then of course "The New York Post" ran with it, with headlines like "The Batty Blueblood" et cetera, et cetera. And that led people to call -- or at least one person to call and write a letter. And that's what actually precipitated the mistrial. That's the tragedy, that it ended as the result of external factors, not that it ended with a hung jury. That's would have been a perfectly legitimate resolution.
SERWER: Right. Professor Dershowitz, I want to change gears here and talk about jury selection. Some say this process has gotten perverted, the whole notion of defense and prosecution selecting and hand-picking. Some say, just get the first 12 people in who don't know the person. I mean, take the Michael Jackson case, which we might be seeing, how many people don't have an opinion about Michael Jackson? What's your take on that?
DERSHOWITZ: Well, you know, nobody ever promised Americans a perfect trial. And when you're a celebrity, and everybody has a view of you, you can't get a perfect trial. The idea is to get the best possible trial. England has a different approach to this. They basically forbid virtually all newspaper coverage of an ongoing case, and then they do pick, not quite the first 12 they come across, but they have far, far less intrusive jury investigation and selection. But because we have an open press, and because we have so much attention, you really do have to inquire a little bit of the jury to find out if they're predetermined.
You go back to the earliest age of our history when Aaron Burr was put on trial -- a former vice president, the man who killed Hamilton, he was put on trial for treason. He virtually picked the 12 jurors who were first. And he asked many of them, he conducted his own voir dire, he said to them, and this is in my new book "America on Trial," he said to them, do you think I'm guilty? And most of them said, yes, sure, we read it in the newspaper, you're guilty. He said, fine, I want you on that jury, because I want to be able to prove that what you read in the newspaper isn't true, as long as you have an open mind. And he won his case.
CAFFERTY: Proving -- oh, he did win his case, I was going to say, that would lend some credence to that old line about an attorney who has himself for a lawyer or an idiot for a client.
DERSHOWITZ: He also had a very good lawyer.
CAFFERTY: How much harm would be done by keeping the media out of these criminal proceedings until the thing is over? I understand that the media would be the first to go screaming about our constitutional right, and freedom of the press, and yadda yadda yadda. But the fact of the matter is, there are things corrupting the system and making it more expensive and bulkier and more burdensome and troublesome than perhaps it need be.
DERSHOWITZ: I think if the press were kept out of a trial, or if the television were not allowed into the trial, it would be in many ways much worse, because judges behave much better when they're under public scrutiny. And juries aren't the problem here. In many instances, judges are the problem. Judges have political ambitions. they want to be liked by the governor or the president. They want to be promoted. They're often former prosecutors. And I think the media keeps them correct. And I think a little bit of public scrutiny in a democracy of the way one of the most important branches of our government operates, is a good thing which sometimes has bad effects.
And in this case, clearly the combination of factors, mostly the revelation of the name which led then to the letters which led then to the mistrial, clearly was not the right way for the system to operate. We shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater. The jury system works effectively, if you believe better 10 guilty go free, than one innocent be wrongly confined. It's a very important check on government. The fact that we have 12 strangers come in, they form a unit, then they disappear.
What I don't like is jurors now writing books, because what I'm concerned about is jurors feeling they have a stake in one outcome. I don't want to have to hear about a juror who ever says, gee, I'd have a better book contract if I voted guilty, or if I voted not guilty, that would make a more interesting story. That would truly corrupt the system.
LISOVICZ: We're going to revisit that next time, because surely there's a lot more to talk about. Alan Dershowitz, professor of law at Harvard University, the author of a new book called "America on Trial: The Cases that Define Our History." Thanks for joining us.
DERSHOWITZ: Thank you so much.
LISOVICZ: Up ahead on IN THE MONEY, blessed are the newsmakers. We'll ask the boss of BeliefNet.com what's driving the religion boom.
And the digital cop that guards your morning paper. Find out about software that can bust a plagiarist before the stolen goods get into print.
SERWER: For a 2000-year-old news story, Christianity is grabbing a lot of air time and headlines these days. everything from the front of "Time" magazine, that's a Time Warner property like us, to coverage of Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ." But it's not just Christianity. Religion and spirituality of all kinds is booming. And Steven Waldman, the editor-in-chief of BeliefNet.com, is going to tell us what's up.
So Steven, is it really true that there is a resurgence of religious belief in this country and worldwide?
STEVEN WALDMAN, BELIEFNET.COM: I think actually the intensity of feeling about faith and spirituality has been pretty consistent for not only the last 10 years, but probably the last few thousand years. What I do think you're seeing, though, is the media and popular culture in general embracing religion on a very broad scale.
LISOVICZ: And that brings me to my question, Steven, because I am so late out of the gate. I'm finally reading "The Da Vinci Code." And everybody's been talking about "The Passion." But Catholic churches are actually hand handing out leaflets after Mass, a Catholic response to "The Da Vinci Code." So there is just all of this popular culture or popular media out there that are talking about different facets that in some cases we didn't know about, in some cases enlightening, in some cases not. What's your thinking on that?
WALDMAN: Well, "The Da Vinci Code" isn't even the best-selling religion book of the last year. There's another one called "The Purpose-Driven Life" that has sold way more than "The Da Vinci Code." So books, magazines, TV, movies. ABC News the other night had a three- hour prime time special on Jesus and Paul. All of the other networks have as well. It's really enormous. And it is kind of across the board. You see it most in Christian topics. But in Eastern religions there's a tremendous interest. Kabala, as I'm sure anyone who follows Madonna knows, is very popular as well.
CAFFERTY: Unfortunately, I can't have that discussion with you.
(LAUGHTER) CAFFERTY: However, talk about the media driving an increased awareness of spirituality in this country, media tends to reflect what's going on in society. And what's going on in society is the biggest segment of the population, the Baby Boomers, are beginning to deal with their own mortality, which would seem to give, as a natural extension, rise to some increased awareness of things beyond our own mortal selves.
WALDMAN: I really think that is a lot of what's going on here. The Baby Boomers, as you said, the upper end of the range is dealing with their own mortality, themselves or their parents. The younger end of the range is getting married and having kids, which also forces you to deal with how you're going to raise them, how you're going to teach them values, and also just the miracle of having kids and raising them.
And so you have the pig and the python, so to speak, that part of the population that naturally is going to be more interested in spiritual matters is huge and moving into that realm.
SERWER: All right. So that explains why maybe popular culture is picking up more on religious themes these days, Steven. But I want to ask about fundamentalism. You're seeing a rise in fundamentalism across the globe. Obviously with Islam being a large part of what I'm talking about, what does that have to do with it?
WALDMAN: The rise of fundamentalism in the rest of the world seems to have more to do with the end of the Cold War and in general, a fear on their part of Western culture permeating and attacking their cultures. And so it's to some extent a reaction to that. So I think that's more the issue there than it is the aging of the Baby Boomers.
CAFFERTY: Steven, we're going to leave it there. I appreciate you joining us on the program. Steven Waldman is the CEO, editor-in- chief of BeliefNet. Thank you.
WALDMAN: My pleasure.
CAFFERTY: Lots more to come on this tidy little program, including guys like Jayson Blair copying other people's work. How do you go about catching them before they can do the damage? Well, there's a solution and we'll reveal what it is. It's not something college kids are going to want to hear about, however.
And we may not have any solutions to your problems, but at least we can listen. Don't expect solutions, that's not why we're here. You can e-you're your thoughts to IntheMoney@CNN.com.
First, though, Susan has got this week's edition of "Money & Family."
LISOVICZ: April 15 is just around the corner. If you still haven't started your tax return, it's time to get going. Last week, we began discussing tax tips from the IRS that might take some of the pain out of the filing process. Here are a few more suggestions. First, if you have questions about your return, the IRS can help. By calling the IRS toll-free hotline, you can access messages on over 150 tax topics. If you need one-on-one assistance, the IRS has a staff help line that will be up and running through April 15.
Second, stop by the IRS office that's nearest to you. These offices provide free tax assistance. They can also help you find locations for volunteer income tax assistance and tax counseling for the elderly. To find the IRS location nearest you, contact the IRS toll-free help line.
Third, save time by filing your return online. The IRS e-file is the quickest and most accurate way to get your taxes done. And if you file online, you'll receive your tax return in half the time it would take if you had sent it in by mail.
I'm Susan Lisovicz for "Money & Family."
CAFFERTY: With all the plagiarism in newspaper journalism lately, news directors and newspaper editors need help making sure their reporters aren't stealing material. But never fear, the computer folks have just the thing for them. Our Web master Allen Wastler explains.
I've got a daughter in college who will be heartbroken to hear about this. Not suggesting that Lea isn't an honest person.
ALLEN WASTLER, MONEY.COM: This is just coming to light now. But actually since 1996, these programs have been around. They've been used mostly in college and universities. And now newspapers are saying, oh, can we borrow that for a minute? And what it is, is its software. iParadigms does one called iThenticate. But other outfits do it too, CFL, Glad (ph) and what-not. And what it does is, you know how you do keyword searches on search engines? It goes a little bit beyond that to make like a whole cyber fingerprint of a piece of work. And then it can take that and compare that through the Internet to different things and different databases and come up with rough matches to it. And you go, oh bingo. Aha, we want to talk to you about this little piece right here that you copied.
SERWER: Are editors really going to do that, I mean, spend the time to go through stories like that?
WASTLER: Actually "USA Today" apparently used one of these programs to help on the Jack Kelly investigation.
CAFFERTY: They may use it over at "The Times."
WASTLER: They probably should.
CAFFERTY: After Jayson Blair got through with them.
WASTLER: Apparently the software-makers are saying a lot of their new clients want, shhh, this is just between us that we're using this, OK, because they don't want a whole lot of publicity...
CAFFERTY: How about down there in Washington. They might be able to sell some of that software down there in Washington, Joe Biden, and some of those guys might...
WASTLER: I think it can have a lot of applications. And actually they did a survey of 30,000 college students, 36 percent of them admitted to some sort of cut and pasting type thing. You just saw Jayson Blair, too. They won a Pulitzer Prize this year, right? "The New York Times"? I think -- I was talking to a colleague. It should be like the NCAA. If you have that big a problem with the team, you shouldn't be in the competition. All right, for those college kids that are having so much fun, we've got Book-A-Minute Classics. OK? Why read the whole thing? We'll give you -- OK? Here, "The Sun Also Rises," by Ernest Hemingway. It was in Europe after the war, we were depressed, we drank a lot, we were still depressed. There, that's the book.
CAFFERTY: I like that.
WASTLER: "Beowulf." A wonderful epic, OK? Hey, let's build a big old dining hall, and call it Herot. Cool. Grendel comes, kills people, Beowulf kills Grendel, you rule, Beowulf, all right!
SERWER: It's like the Cliff's Notes of the Cliff's Notes, right?
LISOVICZ: You should teach literature.
CAFFERTY: What's the name of it?
WASTLER: It's Book-A-Minute Classics.
CAFFERTY: Book-a-Minute Classics. All right, thanks, Allen.
Well, we've heard what the legal experts have to say. What do you think about the jury system in this country? Coming up, we'll read some of your e-mails. that was our "Question of the Week." And if you want to weigh in on any other issues that may be troubling you, Bunky, the address is IntheMoney@CNN.com.
CAFFERTY: Time now to get your thoughts on the American jury system and how to fix it, assuming you think it's broken.
Robert wrote this: "Let's create jobs and solve the jury problem all at once. It's time to have professional juries. Just imagine, a jury that understands things like DNA and evidence rules. But I realize this wouldn't be popular with lawyers who usually try to confuse juries." That's their job.
Lucy from Signal Mountain, Tennessee writes in with this: "It's getting more difficult to get a jury of one's peers and harder to get unbiased judgment. I'd prefer bench trials or have my fate determined by a legally trained panel."
And Larry from Princeton, Texas wrote this: "Why blame juries, when the Tyco case was declared a mistrial because of the media? After juror No. 4's name was revealed in the newspapers, the case was dead. Just like police immorality let O.J. go free, the media's immorality destroyed this case."
Time now for our e-mail question for this week. But let me just warn you, if you don't have anything nice to say we may not read your letter next week. "What is the next best move for the U.S. to make in Iraq?" Send your answers and other comments to IntheMoney@CNN.com.
Also you can check out our show page at money.com/inthemoney. That's where you can learn more about the show, get the address of the fun site of the week.
Thank you for joining us for this edition of IN THE MONEY. Thanks to the regular gang, CNN financial correspondent Susan Lisovicz, "Fortune" Magazine editor-at-large Andy Serwer, and Money.com managing editor Allen Wastler.
Join us tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern when we'll look at the 9/11 Commission and talk to a man who says he warned America about terror attacks long before September 11, former Senator Gary Hart will be a guest on the program tomorrow at 3.
Hope to see you then.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com