Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Senate Intelligence Committee Attacks Prewar Intelligence; Same-Sex Marriage Debate Starts in Senate
Aired July 09, 2004 - 18:00 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.
JOHN KING, GUEST HOST: Tonight, the Senate Intelligence Committee launches a scathing attack on the intelligence used to justify the war against Saddam Hussein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT ROBERTS (R-KS), SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Today, we know these assessments were wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Democrats say the Bush White House shaped prewar intelligence on Iraq. One of those Democrats, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is my guest tonight.
Police across the nation increase security after the latest terror warning. Tonight, I will talk with former White House Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath about that warning and whether it was justified.
The Senate begins to debate on conservative demands for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Democrats say it is a huge distraction from much more important issues.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT LEAHY (R-VT), SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE RANKING MEMBER: When we should be considering measures to strengthen homeland security, Republican partisans are focused on devising wedge issues for partisan political purposes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: President Bush and the Kerry-Edwards campaign take their election battle to some of the most closely contested states in this country. Tonight, three leading journalists will join me and discuss a dramatic week on the campaign trail.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Friday, July 9. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs who's on vacation, from Washington, John King.
KING: Good evening.
The Senate Intelligence Committee today said prewar assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction were simply wrong. The committee accused U.S. intelligence analysts of exaggeration and mischaracterization.
The bipartisan report said there is no evidence the Bush White House pressured those analysts to make their conclusions fit the administration thinking. But Democrats said this report does not tell the entire story and insist there was pressure to build a case for war.
We begin our coverage with National Security Correspondent David Ensor -- David.
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: John, the -- we are likely to hear -- we are likely to hear more about a new director before the November elections.
I'm at a loss here. The Senate -- I should say that the Senate panel's report is blunt. It says the justification for the war in Iraq that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was just plain wrong and that the U.S. intelligence community was to blame for the mistake.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: Well, today, we know these assessments were wrong, and, as our inquiry will show, they were also unreasonable and largely unsupported by the available intelligence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ENSOR: Senator Rockefeller then said that if -- that they would have not voted in the Senate for the war, in his opinion, if they'd known what they know today.
At the CIA, the deputy director took the unusual step of holding a news conference to respond, saying steps have already been taken to make sure such mistakes are never made again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, CIA DEPUTY DIRECTOR: So my first message to you is a very simple one. We get it. Although we think the judgments were not unreasonable when they were made nearly two years ago, we understand with all that we have learned since then that we could have done better.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ENSOR: Senator Rockefeller also complained that the Republicans refused to include in this report anything on the alleged misuse of intelligence by President Bush and his team. That part of the report will have to wait for a second phase, which is unlikely to be completed before the presidential election -- John.
KING: And, David, in your report there, we see an acting director of Central Intelligence, Mr. Mclaughlin. Will this report and its damning conclusions in any way affect the administration's search for a new CIA director, do you think, and the reforms the administration is willing to accept?
ENSOR: Well, you heard Senator Roberts say today that he doesn't think at this point that the White House can sit with an acting director in the form of John McLaughlin, who, after all, has been involved in many of the decisions that have been made over the last few years.
They -- he did call him a very competent person, but he is certainly suggesting that the White House should go ahead and look for someone else. It's going to be difficult to find someone that doesn't have a pretty tough time getting confirmation in the Senate, though -- John.
KING: David Ensor, our national security correspondent.
Thank you, David.
White House officials said today's Senate report proves what they have been saying for some time now, that perhaps the intelligence community provided a flawed product, but there was no White House effort to twist the intelligence or exaggerate the threat. President Bush said the issue now should be how to make the intelligence agencies better.
White House Correspondent Dana Bash has our report -- Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: John, as you know, sometimes in Washington, there are debates that are white hot, but just don't resonate outside of Washington. This time, the White House knows all too well the Iraq debate does matter, particularly on the campaign trail to voters this election year.
So the president, who is on a bus trip through the very important State of Pennsylvania, talked about this report at every stop and was quick to point out that he was not the only one who got the claims of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq wrong, that Congress and the U.N. did also, and he said, bad intelligence or not, his decision to go to war was the right thing to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They haven't found the stockpiles, but we do know he could make them, and so he's a dangerous man. He was a dangerous man. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power. America is safer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: But Democrats on the Intelligence Committee said that their 511-page report that they put out today is really only half complete because it doesn't look at what the administration did with the intelligence that they had, whether or not it was exaggerated or misused in order to make the case for war, and Democrats say they also want to know really whether or not there was any pressure on intelligence agencies to exactly change their data.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RON WIDEN (D), OREGON: Again and again, whether it was by linking 9/11 and Saddam and the war on Iraq, again and again, what you saw was the intelligence was essentially used as a rationale, as a kind of trampoline to go to war despite the factual evidence indicating that the threat was not imminent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: And, John, the White House,, of course, says that any suggestion that they misused or even twisted data in order to make the case for war is nonsense, and Republicans on the committee are pointing out that there is a second phase and they are going to look at whether or not the White House did misuse intelligence. But the Democrats say that's not going to come out until after the election and it's simply unfair to voters -- John.
KING: After the election for phase two, Dana, but Iraq, of course, already a major issue in the campaign. How is this report likely to change the tone and tenor of that campaign debate?
BASH: That really depends on how much the Democrats who were complaining today can be heard and how much the voters listen to them. Really, he risks for the president are immeasurable here because, if you look at our polling -- CNN's polling since May, Americans have said that they do not think war in Iraq was the right thing to do, and, of course, as you know the Bush campaign has been focused on the fact that the president's credibility is perhaps his top asset.
So, if the Democrats can penetrate with voters that perhaps the president did misuse the intelligence and that they should focus more on that between now and the election, it certainly could hurt the president's credibility even more -- John.
KING: Dana Bash at the White House.
Dana, thank you very much.
As politicians debate the reasons for going to war in Iraq, the fighting continues and more Americans being killed. The military today said three more American troops have died in Iraq. One of those soldiers was killed in mortar attack in Samarra, and another died of his wounds in Baghdad. The third soldier was killed in a nonbattle- related incident.
The latest deaths bring the number of U.S. and coalition troops killed in Iraq to more than 1,000. The vast majority of those troops and those deaths have been Americans.
One of the divisive domestic issues facing voters in this election year is gay marriage. Today, the Senate opened the debate on conservative calls for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Congressional Correspondent Joe Johns has our report -- Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: John, this is a familiar script, a cultural issue in an election year, social conservatives pushing traditional values while trying not to scare off the votes of social moderates. On the floor of the United States Senate today, Senator Orrin Hatch making the case for the constitutional amendment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: I worry that the American family will not be able to sustain itself against this continued attempt to marginalize the importance of traditional families and the importance of every children having a loving and supportive mother and father.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Senator John Cornyn there of Texas.
Meanwhile, Democrats are making the case that this is simply all politics. They say a lot of it has to do with Massachusetts. Massachusetts, of course, is the place where the court ruled that gay marriage was OK. John Kerry is from Massachusetts. The Democratic national convention is scheduled for later this month in Massachusetts.
Senator Patrick Leahy actually of Vermont on the floor today saying the Senate has better things to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAHY: It's a shame and a sham. When we should be considering measures to strengthen homeland security, Republican partisans are focused on devising wedge issues for partisan political purposes. Well, that's wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now a supermajority of the United States Senate is required in order to clear a constitutional amendment. Even supporters of this amendment right now saying they don't think they have the votes.
Back to you, John.
KING: And, Joe, any sense of when they will try to have a vote?
JOHNS: Yes, Wednesday is what we've heard latest, but, as you know, things change very rapidly in the United States Senate. Very hard to tell.
KING: Indeed, they do change rapidly.
Joe Johns keeping track of a critical debate for us.
Thank you, Joe. And that brings us to the topic of tonight's poll question. Do you think the Senate debate on gay marriage is a crucial topic for Congress or a distraction from more important issue? Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll bring you the results later in the show.
And still to come, senators blast CIA analysts for prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats say that criticism does not go far enough. Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein is my guest.
Major cities step up security after the latest warning about a possible al Qaeda attack. Was the warning justified? Former Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath will join me.
And U.S. Marine Corporal Wassef Hassoun arrives in an American military base in Germany. Investigators are trying to solve the mystery of his disappearance in Iraq. We will have a live report from the Pentagon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: As we reported, the Senate Intelligence Committee report out today finds bipartisan agreement that prewar intelligence on Iraq was seriously flawed. Republicans and Democrats, however, disagree about whether the nation's intelligence agencies were pressured to change their findings to help the White House build its case for war.
Earlier, I talked with a member of the committee, Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California, and I asked her what she believes the truth is.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA), INTELLIGENCE CMTE.: Our staff, our investigative staff on the intelligence committee found -- talked to no one that said they had been under pressure. They interviewed a lot of people, and they didn't find anyone that made that claim.
Mr. Kerr, as you'll see in the report, the ombudsman and I think even George Tenet said at one point that there was some pressure.
So it is really -- the staff investigation itself, in terms of talking directly to somebody who felt they had been pressured said no, none.
KING: Senator, you say there should be a director of national intelligence in addition to a CIA director.
George Tenet has stepped down. The president is looking for a new head of the CIA. Has the administration, in your view, consulted enough with Congress about what to do next, how to reform to make sure this never happens again? And do you think the administration will change its stated opposition to creating that new position?
FEINSTEIN: Well, do I believe that he consulted with Congress? The answer is no. Certainly not on the Democratic side. There has been no communication on this report that I'm aware of. I think what you have is an intelligence community, 80 percent of the budget is controlled by the secretary of defense. A majority of agencies are actually under the Defense Department's control.
You have a DCI, George Tenet, who is the head of one agency, one out of the 15, the CIA. He can't really chart strategies across the board of all agencies. So he kind of becomes a figurehead in many respects. I really believe that.
KING: Senator, I want to ask you a question a bit off topic, but the homeland security secretary came out yesterday. He said the American people should be on alert and be concerned that al Qaeda is in operational mode, planning to attack some time between now and the November elections.
You are privy, Senator, to the most sensitive intelligence. How worried should the American people be?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think -- I can only tell you for myself. I'm worried. This is a pivotal time for an attack: two big conventions, an election coming up. Where, when and how this attack would take place, there's no information that I've seen.
I think the Department of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, was correct. I believe it's important to warn people. My own view is intelligence coming off the street is very often more valuable than intelligence coming from an operative who may not be anywhere near the problem is.
So it alerts the American people to look -- to stop, look and listen. And if you see something that looks suspicious, or individuals that appear suspicious, pick up the phone and call the FBI and let them know that. I think that's extraordinarily important
The so-called chatter, which is, you know, bits and pieces coming in in different ways, is very high. And the people that evaluate this believe that the sources are credible. That's really all I can tell you.
KING: Well, let me ask you this, then. I think on this day, as the American people see the headlines coming out of this report about Iraq, they might ask the question if the intelligence community got it so wrong when it came to Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and other issues, why should they believe the intelligence community when it says al Qaeda is preparing to strike?
FEINSTEIN: Well, we know for sure that they will strike if they can. We know for sure that there are cells in this country. We know for sure that they are spread in many countries throughout the world. And we know that what has been happening in Iraq has cemented a desire to attack more.
I mean, I think all of that is pretty common sense. So if you put two and two together, I think you get four, not five.
KING: Pretty common sense and fairly sobering. Senator Dianne Feinstein, thank you for your time today.
FEINSTEIN: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: On a bit of a lighter note now, call this a partisan food fight. At issue, a staple American product, ketchup. A group of Republican investors have developed an alternate to Heinz ketchup. They call it W ketchup. The company's Web site asks, "If you don't support Democrats, why should your ketchup?"
It is, of course, a reference to Democratic Senator John Kerry's wife, Theresa Heinz Kerry, who is an heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune. The people behind W ketchup insist the W stands for Washington, as in George Washington, not the other president, Dubya.
Still ahead tonight, the Pentagon discovers what happened to some of President Bush's missing military records from the Vietnam War era.
Plus, a U.S. Marine who disappeared under suspicious circumstances in Iraq is headed back to the United States. We'll have a live report from the Pentagon up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, from Washington, John King.
KING: The Pentagon has cleared up the mystery of what happened to at least some of President Bush's missing military records. The Pentagon says payroll records of President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard were accidentally destroyed. The records were on microfilm and damaged during a project to restore them.
Critics have said those records are critical to answering questions about whether President Bush shirked his duty during the Vietnam War.
An American Marine who disappeared in Iraq and resurfaced in Beirut is now at a U.S. military hospital in Germany. Corporal Wassef Ali Hassoun is undergoing medical tests while the military investigates just what happened to him.
Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre has that report -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, another day and still more questions than answers about the mysterious disappearance, then reappearance of Marine Corporal Wassef Hassoun who today left Beirut, Lebanon, the U.S. Embassy there, boarded a military transport plane and was flown to the U.S. air base in Ramstein, Germany.
There, a base spokesman says he will get a full medical evaluation and then begin the process of a debriefing in which he'll have to explain his 18-day disappearance between the time he left his unit in Iraq and showed up in Lebanon.
Today, the U.S. military took the unusual step of acknowledging publicly what they have only been saying privately, which is that when Hassoun left that they thought he might be a deserter. He's seen here in a videotape which military investigators are looking at to see if they believe it's a genuine videotape or something that might have been faked in order to cover up the desertion.
A statement from the U.S. Central Command today acknowledged, "after initially being listed as missing, a preliminary inquiry into his absence indicated he had deserted, and, as a result, he was subsequently characterized as a deserter."
The Pentagon points out that this is all the subject of an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. There was evidence, we're told, that when he left his unit in Iraq that he clearly did not intend to return and was heading for Lebanon, but it's going to be up to Corporal Hassoun to fill in the blanks and provide a story that will -- or an account that will satisfy the military as they investigate this incident -- John.
KING: Jamie McIntyre on an intriguing mystery at the Pentagon.
Thank you, Jamie.
Today's highly critical Senate report about prewar intelligence on Iraq raises disturbing questions about the quality of U.S. intelligence on other threats to this country.
Yesterday, government officials said they have credible intelligence al Qaeda is planning a major attack on the United States. Police departments in major cities responded to that warning by increasing security, especially in Boston and New York, which are hosting the political conventions this summer.
Joining me now from Boston is former White House Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath. He is now a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Sir, thank you for joining us.
Let me start with the basic question. When Secretary Ridge came out yesterday, he said he had no specific information as to when, where or how al Qaeda might strike, but that there was a continuing stream of evidence that al Qaeda wanted to strike between now and the election. Can you help the American people understand as specifically as you can what is that intelligence?
RICHARD FALKENRATH, FORMER WHITE HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISER: The intelligence, I think is most likely al Qaeda leadership talking about possible attacks against the homeland but not actual intelligence into the plotters themselves into the operatives who might be moving into place, getting ready with the weapons and preparing to carry out the attack, and so there's a real difference between hearing something at the sort of operational manager back in Pakistan or Afghanistan level versus hearing it here or among the operatives as they move closer to the United States.
KING: Well, sir, you left the administration not long ago. At that time, what was your assessment and the administration's assessment of perhaps how many al Qaeda cells and how many al Qaeda operatives are this country now?
FALKENRATH: We don't know. Hopefully none. There may be none, but we don't know. If we knew, they would be taken down. Our biggest fear is a cell that was put in place prior to 9/11.
In my personal judgment, that's rather unlikely, but if there is a cell still here that was put in place that long ago, they certainly have the potential to carry out a very devastating attack, and another alternative is they try to deploy a cell into the United States from outside this time.
I think that's more likely, but I think those sort of operatives are likely to be less capable and more likely of getting detected and arrested before they attack.
KING: Secretary Ridge spoke publicly of intelligence gleaned from the arrests of some operatives overseas in England, in Italy and in Jordan. Other senior officials in private conversations say they have key details from those arrests suggesting the possibility of attacks in the United States, and they believe the evidence that there are personnel in place to carry them out. How trustworthy are interrogations like that, in your view?
FALKENRATH: It varies a great deal, and a lot of time is spent trying to interpret that information, and there are never any certain answers. We know that they try to deceive us once they're arrested. There are certain ways to try to judge whether they're being receptive or not, but there's -- it's not a science. It's much more of an art form.
We know that they would like to strike us, and we know that they're intrigued by what happened in Madrid and are interested in could they strike us before the election, and so that is clear, and that is widely talked about among al Qaeda operatives and their sympathizers.
KING: Now the secretary said there was no intelligence suggesting New York and Boston as targets, but you see the Boston backdrop behind you. Both of these conventions to be held in port cities which are considered more vulnerable than most cities, in cities with mass transit systems that could provide attractive targets.
In a way, are these two "bad" cities to be having these conventions in at this time?
FALKENRATH: Well, any American city presents a lot of vulnerable targets. We're free and open. We congregate in very large numbers. Boston and New York are going all out to provide the best possible security for those conventions. But we should not fool ourselves into thinking that just because they're two high-profile convention happening in these two big cities that al Qaeda is going to look just at these cities. They could easily go elsewhere to carry out a mass casualty attack.
KING: Richard Falkenrath, help me with this question. A fairly damning report from the Senate Intelligence Committee questioning the quality of the U.S. intelligence that was used to go to war in Iraq. How confident are you and how confident should the American people be when they hear Secretary Ridge and others in the administration saying al Qaeda wants to strike. Why should they believe that intelligence?
FALKENRATH: They should -- it's a very troubling report about the Iraq intelligence. I personally am very troubled by this, having been a consumer of that intelligence since 1999. I believed it, that there were going to be weapons stockpiles in Iraq, and there are not. So it's very, very concerning.
What the American people can know is that the intelligence that's being provided now about al Qaeda and other terrorist threats to the homeland is scrutinized more carefully than any other intelligence in the entire U.S. system today. It's gone over every single day with the president of the United States in the Oval Office with his senior- most advisers and is looked at very, very hard.
There are no guarantees that they will get it exactly right, they're probably missing some things, they're probably misreporting some things, but that's the nature of the business. They work very hard to penetrate these operations abroad and everywhere they can possibly think of, and they sometimes have some very important successes, which mostly cannot be talked about in public.
KING: Richard Falkenrath, former deputy Homeland Security adviser at the Bush White House.
Sir, we thank you for your thoughts tonight.
FALKENRATH: Thank you.
KING: Thank you.
And now a look at your thoughts on the Department of Homeland Security's latest terror warning.
Michael of Niwot, Colorado, "Playing politics by using the fear of terrorism is a dangerous game. Crying wolf in order to gain votes only makes us weaker in this fight and should be a crime."
Jan Bates from Newport News, Virginia, "If the administration issues or fails to issue a warning, Democrats will be critical. It will be too early, too late, too specific, too vague, too political."
Bud Winer of Fortville, Indiana, "Why would terrorists want to try and disrupt an election in this country. Our election officials are capable of doing that themselves."
Send us your thoughts. They are always welcome at loudobbs@cnn.com.
The United Nations' highest court is calling on Israel to tear down a controversial wall in the West Bank. The World Court says the barrier violates international law and infringes on the rights of Palestinians.
Alessio Vinci reports from the West Bank.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ALESSIO VINCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: One of the reasons why the International Court of Justice believes that the barrier being built by the Israelis is illegal and should be dismantled is because portions of the barrier are being built on Palestinian land in the West Bank, and, therefore, the Palestinians are saying that it is not separating Israelis from Palestinians, as the Israelis claim, but it is separating Palestinians from Palestinians.
There are some instances along this 186-kilometer route so far being built where some Palestinian farmers cannot reach their field or some Palestinian workers cannot reach their place of work. Now the Israelis are saying that they are making some concessions. They're making some changes to this barrier in order to facilitate access to the areas where the Palestinians are being cut off. But the Palestinians are saying that the barrier should not be there in the first place.
But what are we talking about? I'm going to step out of the way here for one second and show you one portion of this barrier. In this particular case it is a concrete wall. The vast majority of the barrier is actually a chain linked fence surrounded by barbed wire as well as ditches to prevent cars from driving through it. But in this particular case, at the Kalandia Checkpoint just outside of Ramallah, it is a concrete wall.
The Israeli forces are saying that this wall is necessary because the Palestinians on the other side of the fence, on the other side of the barrier are actually shooting into Israeli-held territory and therefore they have to build a wall especially in populated areas so that they can prevent the Palestinian militants from shooting inside.
But Palestinians are pointing out, especially in this area, they are pointing thought there's nothing on this side of the barrier and there's no point whatsoever of building on this particular location, for example, a wall.
At the same time Israeli officials are saying that ever since this barrier was built a year and a half ago, in the areas where it has been built, the number of suicide bombers coming across into Israeli proper territory has been reduced dramatically. And, therefore, they're saying this barrier works because it is preventing Palestinian would-be suicide bombers from reaching Israeli targets and blowing themselves up. I'm Alessio Vinci, CNN, at the Kalandia Checkpoint in the West Bank.
(END VIDEOTAPE) KING: In tonight's campaign journal, the presidential candidates made their way through key battle ground states today. President Bush made his 30th visit to Pennsylvania, a state Al Gore won by 4 percentage points back in 2000.
The president's daughter Jenna made her first campaign appearance with her father today. President Bush is making several stops on a day-long bus tour through Pennsylvania.
Senator Kerry and his runningmate Senator Edwards, meanwhile, raised $7 1/2 million last night at a celebrity fund raiser in New York. Today, Kerry and Edwards are campaigning in West Virginia and New Mexico, two of the most don't closely contested states.
Mr. Bush won West Virginia in 2000, Al Gore won New Mexico.
And when we return, the race within the race, what the vice presidential candidates mean to the election. We'll have that report. And three of the nation's leading journalists will join us.
Also ahead, an American hero shares the story of his dramatic experiences in Iraq.
And "Made In America," we feature the companies fighting to keep American jobs on American soil. Tonight, a small Pennsylvania furnituremaker that is proud to say its products are made in the USA.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Senator Kerry's choice of Senator Edwards as his runningmate this week has already had, at least, a modest impact on the campaign. The new Kerry-Edwards ticket delivered a bounce in the poles of between three and four points. But it is unclear whether the choice for vice president will have such a big impact come election day. Bruce Morton reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): John Edwards and Vice President Dick Cheney are very different men, does it matter?
STUART ROTHENBERG, ROTHENBERG POLITICAL REPORT: There's going to be a stark choice here if voters decide to make a choice on the basis of the vice presidential candidates.
MORTON: But they usually don't. The only vice presidential pick in the last half century that changed the outcome of an election was in 1960, John Kennedy from Massachusetts, a Roman Catholic, never had a Catholic as president, trying to convince voters he wouldn't take orders from the pope.
JOHN F. KENNEDY, FRM. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I am sure that here in the state of West Virginia, that no one believes that I'd be a candidate for the presidency if I didn't think I could meet my oath of office. MORTON: He desperately needed help in the conservative, but still Democratic south, chose Texan Linden Johnson and got that help. Look, carried Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and won the election.
The next Massachusetts Democrat to run was Michael Dukakis in 1988. He chose a Texan runningmate, too, Lloyd Benson, but the south by then was not just conservative, but Republican. Connecticut Yankee turned Texan George Herbert Walker Bush carried Texas, swept the south, rolled to an electoral landslide win. How about other years?
KEATING HOLLAND, POLITICAL ANALYST: Six and ten, seven and ten Americans generally as two-thirds as high as 74 percent in a couple of years say no, it's not going to affect my vote at all.
MORTON: It can have effects at the margin, make a candidate spend more time in a particular state. The Bush campaign is buying ads now in John Edwards' North Carolina. If Kerry picked someone else, they wouldn't be.
But these aren't decisive differences. Al Gore was a popular choice as Bill Clinton's runningmate, but there's no evidence he changed anything. Dan Quayle was a criticized choice as the first President Bush's running made, but Bush won anyway.
HOLLAND: It's not a vice presidential election, it's a presidential election, people are voting for president.
MORTON: He's got that right. Sorry, guys. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: The latest opinion poll shows Senator Kerry leading the president, but not by very much. A "Time" magazine poll of likely voters released just today put Senator Kerry four points ahead of the president, that's outside the poll's margin of error.
Joining us now for tonight's newsmaker, Ron Brownstein national political correspondent for the "Los Angeles Times," Rik Kirkland, managing editor of "Fortune" magazine and Steve Shepard of "Businessweek."
Gentlemen, back to the campaign for a second. I want to begin, though, with this damning report by the Senate Intelligence Committee today, which of course will have an impact on the campaign camp. It says that the intelligence was simply wrong.
Rik Kirkland, let me begin with you, what's your assessment of how this plays out as the American people hear that the case the president used to go to war in Iraq was simply wrong.
RIK KIRKLAND, "FORTUNE": Well, I think it certainly reinforces why George Tenet stepped down. I mean, the folks that have really been indicted here are the analysts at the CIA. And the question, which is unanswered is how much political pressure was put on them? I think if people felt like the president and his staff really put pressure on the CIA to twist the results that would really hurt the president. The fact that he was misled by the CIA, remember in Bob Woodward's book Tenet stood up and said it's a slam dunk, that stuff is there, it kind of helps get Bush off the hook a bit. So I'm not sure he's damaged.
KING: Off the hook, Steve Shepard? Democrats, in an addendum, said they believed there was pressure. The report, obviously, bipartisan for now, phase two will look into the question of pressure. How do you think you see that playing out?
STEVE SHEPARD, "BUSSINESSWEEK": I don't think he's off the hook at all, because either he was misled or he deliberately lied. So either way it's a problem.
But I think what the report doesn't deal with is why was the intelligence so faulty? What went wrong? Why do we get such bad information. And more importantly what will we do about it in the future? And the report doesn't deal with that. And I think Americans are entitled to have that information.
KING: A debate over intelligence reform to come. But Ron Brownstein, if you follow the president on the road it is striking that in almost every speech, even when the issue is the economy, or education, he takes time to talk about the war in Iraq. He is still trying to justify, sell to the American people, a war that began a whole long time ago.
RON BROWNSTEIN, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": A good reason for that, John, was in, for example, our last "L.A. Times" poll, over 80 percent of people who thought the war was worth it said they were going to vote for George W. Bush, over 80 percent of people who said they thought the war was not worth it, said they were going to vote for John Kerry.
I think this report is very much of a sort of a two-edged sword, or playing out at two different levels. On the specifics, as you pointed out, it does not add new allegations against the White House. It doesn't say they pressured CIA agents or analysts. It says, for example, the CIA did not provide the information to correct the controversial 16-words in The State of the Union.
But at the macro level, essentially, what we have here is a report from a Republican-controlled committee in the Senate saying that information in which was case was based was fundamentally, overwhelmingly wrong. And that cannot help the president at a time when polls show, two different polls released in late June, almost half the country already believes that he misled them deliberately before the war.
So, I think in the broad sense it's hard to see how anything is a long-term problem.
KING: Let's look at polling data on the state of play of the presidential campaign right now. Just after the Edwards choice, heading into the Democratic convention. He's the horse race now -- we're in the new "TIME" poll out today -- Senator Kerry, 48.7 percent, President Bush, 45.1 percent. Take out the margin of error, that gives you a dead heat. Steve Shepard, are you surprised that it's this close right now? Too early to judge if there's an Edwards bounce, maybe?
SHEPARD: Yes, it's too early to judge. I mean, I think the president is clearly vulnerable, but it remains to be seen how well Kerry emerges as a candidate. People still don't know him and the Edwards factor is a little bit unknown, although it was a very good choice for Kerry. I think it will help him some but it really -- Kerry has to emerge. Bush has to lose, but Kerry has to win.
KING: Rik, let's talk about the vice presidential pick. Steve says a good choice. At first glance everyone said this will help in the South. Now people are looking at the West Virgnias and the Iowas and small-town America. What's your assessment?
KIRKLAND: I'm not sure whether Edwards himself can win Bush southern state. I think he can make it harder for the Republicans in the South, he'll have to put more money in there. That will help. I think he is strong with the areas, the rural areas. He connects well with ordinary folks. I think the pick, while vice presidents don't necessarily win elections or really change them it does say something Kerry needed to say about himself, which is he's confident enough to get a guy who's actually a better campaigner than he is and he doesn't mind that and he added some necessary excitement to a pretty (UNINTELLIGIBLE) campaign.
So it is a definite plus for him.
KING: Ron, is there a possibility if Edwards does tightens things up in the South that the issue portfolio changes a little bit. That perhaps the president has to talk more about social issues to boost his numbers in the South, that perhaps he does not want to be talking about, saying the key suburbs of the Midwestern states.
BROWNSTEIN: Well, John, in fact, I think we saw that this week. I thought one of the most interesting things that happened this week was, along with the appointment of John Edwards, the Republicans dramatically amplified their discussion of social issues.
When the President Bush went to North Carolina on Wednesday and was asked why he would still carry the South even with John Edwards on the ticket, he said because the Democratic ticket does not share their values.
Vice President Cheney last weekend talking about partial birth abortion and guns and other social issues. This is something that they think plays for them not only in the South but also in that small-town rural communities which are so important in the Midwest in deciding who was going to win this election.
One caveat. A lot of Democrats were hoping that John Edwards will help them improve their showing there. He ran under the banner of being born in a small town. When we looked at the results in the three big Midwestern primaries, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin, only in Missouri did he run any better in rural communities than he did statewide. No better in Ohio or Wisconsin. He may be able to appeal there. But it's still an unproven proposition.
KING: The indictment of Ken Lay brought back to the front pages this week an issue. Corporate scandal. It had slipped a little bit, the Martha Stewart trial obviously keeping it there. Rick, let me start with you.
You see Ken Lay being led into court. Will that will have any impact, obviously it has an impact on Wall Street. Do you see a political impact there at all?
KIRKLAND: Very subtle. And I just think the Bush people can say rightly that they've had a pretty good record of going after a corporate crime and whatever connections which are obviously deep. They have the business community. They have not pulled any punches in trying to get indictments and convictions and make people serve time and Ken Lay is the latest example of that. So I don't think it's a major factor, though, either way.
KING: Steve Shepard, has this administration sent a message to the boardrooms across this country? No more nonsense?
SHEPARD: Well, I think the message has gotten to the boardrooms whether it's from the administration, I don't know. But there's legislation on the books, surveys actually. It's being implemented. Reforms are being made, governance is changing in corporations, accounting is changing.
So the message is getting through. What's most disturbing about the Ken Lay case is the excuse that he's using which is "I didn't know what was going on." This is a man who was very, very highly paid to be the CEO of one of America's major corporations. These were his closest lieutenants who were doing this. The fraud was essential to the profitmaking of Enron and for him to say, "I didn't know what was going on" is absolutely terrible. If he didn't know he should have known. Whether they can make that into a criminal case in court remains to be seen, but it's really outrageous his defense so far.
KING: Ron Brownstein, Ken Lay was among the biggest financial benefactors, supporters of this president. He used to have a nickname, Kenny Boy. Ask about him at the White House this week, it seemed like they were saying Kenny who?
BROWNSTEIN: Well, you know, look, that's pretty understandable. They've been that way ever since Enron landed. I agree that by and large the administration can say it is trying to aggressively enforce the laws although there's more question about their regulatory diligence.
Excuse me, John. What this really is is a marker to me of the era of mass investment. We're in a period now where a majority of Americans either through their 401 (k)s or directly own stock and they are in effect creating a consumer pressure for tougher regulation and tougher enforcement of laws to prevent corner cutting and fraud. We have a mass constituency now for a cleaner stock market than we've ever had before and I think what we're seeing is a manifestation of that.
KING: All right. Ron Brownstein of "Los Angeles Times." Rik Kirkland of "Fortune" magazine. Steve Shepard of "Businessweek." Gentlemen, thank you all very much and have a great weekend
And a reminder now to vote in tonight's poll. "Do you think the Senate debate on gay marriage is a crucial topic for Congress or a distraction from more important issues?" Cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll bring you the results a bit later in the show.
Turning now to our feature series, "Heroes." Last week we told you the story of First Sergeant Kevin Remington. He risked his life and the lives of others to serve Sergeant Brandon Erickson in Iraq. Tonight, Sergeant Erickson is back home in North Dakota and adjusting to life after war. Casey Wian has his remarkable story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SGT. BRANDON ERICKON (RET.), NORTH DAKOTA NATL. GUARD: It feels really good to run. Especially after you've been in the hospital for five months.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A year ago Brandon Erickson was in Iraq working as a mechanic. On July 22 he nearly lost his life riding in a convoy when insurgents set off a homemade bomb.
ERICKSON: They ambushed us with about nine to 14 rocket- propelled grenades and small arms fire. My driver was killed at that time from a stray bullet.
WIAN: Erickson's right arm was mangled and he lost a lot of blood. First Sergeant Kevin Remington braved enemy gunfire and got him out.
ERICKSON: He kind of grabbed me by the face and he said, "Brandon, we're going to get you out of here safe. Do you believe me?" And I said, "yes."
WIAN: Remington pulled Erickson behind a tire to shield him as the battle raged on.
ERICKSON: We had the gun truck which was our truck with the most firepower going back and forth the kill zone. Those guys were amazing.
WIAN: When the firefight finally ended, Remington and the other soldiers got Erickson to the hospital. He lost half his blood. His right arm was amputated. When he awoke from surgery, he called girlfriend Dana Parry. I was more worried that she was going to break up with me because I only had one arm now.
DANA PARRY, GIRLFRIEND: It was so good he was alive. He's such a great guy, he deserved a second chance.
WIAN: Erickson was awarded a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for bravery.
1ST SGT. KEVIN REMINGTON, NORTH DAKOTA NATL. GUARD: Talk about courage. You know, it's not all about the courage under fire. The courage that people have to move on like he's doing and an example that sets for other soldiers who may be in a similar circumstance. The courage that our young soldiers are showing over there every day just going on the road.
WIAN: Erickson has retired from the military and is going to college looking forward to a career in public service. Casey Wian, CNN, reporting.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: A great story. Tonight's thought is on heroes. "We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look."
Those are the words of the 40th president of the United States. Ronald Reagan.
When we return, "Made in America." We look at a small furnituremaker in Pennsylvania that builds all of its products right here at home. We'll have the story of Madison Square Furniture.
And a former custodian in Massachusetts has found a new way to clean up. We'll have details. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: 67-year-old Geraldine Williams is in shock tonight. She's the big winner of the $294 million megamillions jackpot. That's the second largest cash total ever for a single ticket Lottery winner. The formal school custodian has three children and eight grandchildren. She still works cleaning homes, or at least she did as of this morning. Williams is taking her winnings in a lump sum of $117 million after taxes which means she won't have to worry about cleaning houses anymore unless she wants to.
Now "Made In America," a celebration of companies that choose to keep jobs right here in the United States. Tonight, Madison Square Furniture, a company in Pennsylvania that focuses on workmanship and its workers in addition to the bottom line. Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Inside this 117- year-old building, wood transformed in the hands of workers into furniture. The building, the tools, the employees who have an average of 19 years working at the company all have an air of permanence. There's a reason for that.
MICHAEL PETERSON, PRES. MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: You see, our people understand that it's not just a dining table. That dining table is a place that mom's going to prepare the Thanksgiving Dinner for two or three generations of family members and share and create memories. That dining table is the piece that's going to be handed down from mom to daughter. And then that daughter to her daughter.
TUCKER (on camera): When it comes to competing with overseas manufacturers, Madison Square can't and doesn't compete on a price basis, choosing instead to emphasize the quality of its workmanship and its workers.
(voice-over): That pride can be seen in the attention that is given to detail. And in an even more important way.
BRADLEY WISEMAN, MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: I take a lot of pride in what I do, because I personally own some of this furniture that's made here.
TUCKER: My any standard, it's a small manufacturer, only 40 employees. But any talk of surrendering to overseas competition touches a nerve.
PETERSON: If we start farming all of these job, what is going to be left in this country? What is the foundation of this country? It has to be, we have to be more connected as people. It's not just about buying American, it's about being American.
TUCKER: His employees understand.
MARK LAURO, MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: I prefer to buy American- made products even if it costs more, the quality is better than when you buy from overseas. I'd rather support our workers if at all possible.
TUCKER: Bill Tucker, CNN, Hanover, Pennsylvania.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: Still ahead, the latest in the case against Martha Stewart. And Nevada loses an appeal over a proposed nuclear waste site, but environmentalists are claiming victory. We'll tell you why when we return in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: A federal appeals court today rejected arguments from the state of Nevada trying to block a proposed nuclear waste site. Nevada claimed the Bush administration's plan to build the Yucca Mountain waste site was unconstitutional, but environmentalists are claiming victory because the court upheld their arguments to safeguarding the environment from radiation. The Yucca Mountain site is located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
On Wall Street, stocks closed the week with modest gains. The Dow rose almost 42 points, the NASDAQ added 11, the S&P gained almost 4.
Another high profile corporate crime trial has ended in a mistrial. Christine Romans has the report from New York -- Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT: John, a day after his father and brother were convicted on fraud and conspiracy charges a mistrial for Michael Regas, he is the former executive of Adelphia, the cable company his father, John Regas founded.
Now, the prosecution pledges to retry this case. And his father and brother Tim Regas will head back to court September 21. They face decades in prison.
And in a lower Manhattan court today, Martha Stewart's lawyers requesting she receive community service for her conviction. They argue sending Stewart to jail could hurt the employees of her company. Now, legal experts predict 10 to 16 months in jail. She will be sentenced a week from today, John. This time next week, Martha Stewart will know if she's to spend the holidays in prison -- John.
KING: Christine Romans in New York. Thank you.
And still ahead, the results of tonight's poll. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Now the results of tonight's poll: 95 percent of you say the Senate debate on gay marriage is a distraction from more important issues.
Thanks for joining us tonight. Please join us Monday. Lou will be back, along with our special report "Broken Borders." Otis Graham, author of "Unguarded Gates: A History Of America's Immigration Crisis" will join Lou.
For all of us here, have a great and a safe weekend. Good night from Washington.
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 July 9, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JOHN KING, GUEST HOST: Tonight, the Senate Intelligence Committee launches a scathing attack on the intelligence used to justify the war against Saddam Hussein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT ROBERTS (R-KS), SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Today, we know these assessments were wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Democrats say the Bush White House shaped prewar intelligence on Iraq. One of those Democrats, Senator Dianne Feinstein, is my guest tonight.
Police across the nation increase security after the latest terror warning. Tonight, I will talk with former White House Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath about that warning and whether it was justified.
The Senate begins to debate on conservative demands for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Democrats say it is a huge distraction from much more important issues.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. PAT LEAHY (R-VT), SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE RANKING MEMBER: When we should be considering measures to strengthen homeland security, Republican partisans are focused on devising wedge issues for partisan political purposes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: President Bush and the Kerry-Edwards campaign take their election battle to some of the most closely contested states in this country. Tonight, three leading journalists will join me and discuss a dramatic week on the campaign trail.
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Friday, July 9. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion, sitting in for Lou Dobbs who's on vacation, from Washington, John King.
KING: Good evening.
The Senate Intelligence Committee today said prewar assertions that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction were simply wrong. The committee accused U.S. intelligence analysts of exaggeration and mischaracterization.
The bipartisan report said there is no evidence the Bush White House pressured those analysts to make their conclusions fit the administration thinking. But Democrats said this report does not tell the entire story and insist there was pressure to build a case for war.
We begin our coverage with National Security Correspondent David Ensor -- David.
DAVID ENSOR, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: John, the -- we are likely to hear -- we are likely to hear more about a new director before the November elections.
I'm at a loss here. The Senate -- I should say that the Senate panel's report is blunt. It says the justification for the war in Iraq that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was just plain wrong and that the U.S. intelligence community was to blame for the mistake.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: Well, today, we know these assessments were wrong, and, as our inquiry will show, they were also unreasonable and largely unsupported by the available intelligence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ENSOR: Senator Rockefeller then said that if -- that they would have not voted in the Senate for the war, in his opinion, if they'd known what they know today.
At the CIA, the deputy director took the unusual step of holding a news conference to respond, saying steps have already been taken to make sure such mistakes are never made again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN MCLAUGHLIN, CIA DEPUTY DIRECTOR: So my first message to you is a very simple one. We get it. Although we think the judgments were not unreasonable when they were made nearly two years ago, we understand with all that we have learned since then that we could have done better.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ENSOR: Senator Rockefeller also complained that the Republicans refused to include in this report anything on the alleged misuse of intelligence by President Bush and his team. That part of the report will have to wait for a second phase, which is unlikely to be completed before the presidential election -- John.
KING: And, David, in your report there, we see an acting director of Central Intelligence, Mr. Mclaughlin. Will this report and its damning conclusions in any way affect the administration's search for a new CIA director, do you think, and the reforms the administration is willing to accept?
ENSOR: Well, you heard Senator Roberts say today that he doesn't think at this point that the White House can sit with an acting director in the form of John McLaughlin, who, after all, has been involved in many of the decisions that have been made over the last few years.
They -- he did call him a very competent person, but he is certainly suggesting that the White House should go ahead and look for someone else. It's going to be difficult to find someone that doesn't have a pretty tough time getting confirmation in the Senate, though -- John.
KING: David Ensor, our national security correspondent.
Thank you, David.
White House officials said today's Senate report proves what they have been saying for some time now, that perhaps the intelligence community provided a flawed product, but there was no White House effort to twist the intelligence or exaggerate the threat. President Bush said the issue now should be how to make the intelligence agencies better.
White House Correspondent Dana Bash has our report -- Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: John, as you know, sometimes in Washington, there are debates that are white hot, but just don't resonate outside of Washington. This time, the White House knows all too well the Iraq debate does matter, particularly on the campaign trail to voters this election year.
So the president, who is on a bus trip through the very important State of Pennsylvania, talked about this report at every stop and was quick to point out that he was not the only one who got the claims of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq wrong, that Congress and the U.N. did also, and he said, bad intelligence or not, his decision to go to war was the right thing to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They haven't found the stockpiles, but we do know he could make them, and so he's a dangerous man. He was a dangerous man. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power. America is safer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: But Democrats on the Intelligence Committee said that their 511-page report that they put out today is really only half complete because it doesn't look at what the administration did with the intelligence that they had, whether or not it was exaggerated or misused in order to make the case for war, and Democrats say they also want to know really whether or not there was any pressure on intelligence agencies to exactly change their data.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RON WIDEN (D), OREGON: Again and again, whether it was by linking 9/11 and Saddam and the war on Iraq, again and again, what you saw was the intelligence was essentially used as a rationale, as a kind of trampoline to go to war despite the factual evidence indicating that the threat was not imminent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: And, John, the White House,, of course, says that any suggestion that they misused or even twisted data in order to make the case for war is nonsense, and Republicans on the committee are pointing out that there is a second phase and they are going to look at whether or not the White House did misuse intelligence. But the Democrats say that's not going to come out until after the election and it's simply unfair to voters -- John.
KING: After the election for phase two, Dana, but Iraq, of course, already a major issue in the campaign. How is this report likely to change the tone and tenor of that campaign debate?
BASH: That really depends on how much the Democrats who were complaining today can be heard and how much the voters listen to them. Really, he risks for the president are immeasurable here because, if you look at our polling -- CNN's polling since May, Americans have said that they do not think war in Iraq was the right thing to do, and, of course, as you know the Bush campaign has been focused on the fact that the president's credibility is perhaps his top asset.
So, if the Democrats can penetrate with voters that perhaps the president did misuse the intelligence and that they should focus more on that between now and the election, it certainly could hurt the president's credibility even more -- John.
KING: Dana Bash at the White House.
Dana, thank you very much.
As politicians debate the reasons for going to war in Iraq, the fighting continues and more Americans being killed. The military today said three more American troops have died in Iraq. One of those soldiers was killed in mortar attack in Samarra, and another died of his wounds in Baghdad. The third soldier was killed in a nonbattle- related incident.
The latest deaths bring the number of U.S. and coalition troops killed in Iraq to more than 1,000. The vast majority of those troops and those deaths have been Americans.
One of the divisive domestic issues facing voters in this election year is gay marriage. Today, the Senate opened the debate on conservative calls for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Congressional Correspondent Joe Johns has our report -- Joe.
JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: John, this is a familiar script, a cultural issue in an election year, social conservatives pushing traditional values while trying not to scare off the votes of social moderates. On the floor of the United States Senate today, Senator Orrin Hatch making the case for the constitutional amendment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: I worry that the American family will not be able to sustain itself against this continued attempt to marginalize the importance of traditional families and the importance of every children having a loving and supportive mother and father.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Senator John Cornyn there of Texas.
Meanwhile, Democrats are making the case that this is simply all politics. They say a lot of it has to do with Massachusetts. Massachusetts, of course, is the place where the court ruled that gay marriage was OK. John Kerry is from Massachusetts. The Democratic national convention is scheduled for later this month in Massachusetts.
Senator Patrick Leahy actually of Vermont on the floor today saying the Senate has better things to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAHY: It's a shame and a sham. When we should be considering measures to strengthen homeland security, Republican partisans are focused on devising wedge issues for partisan political purposes. Well, that's wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JOHNS: Now a supermajority of the United States Senate is required in order to clear a constitutional amendment. Even supporters of this amendment right now saying they don't think they have the votes.
Back to you, John.
KING: And, Joe, any sense of when they will try to have a vote?
JOHNS: Yes, Wednesday is what we've heard latest, but, as you know, things change very rapidly in the United States Senate. Very hard to tell.
KING: Indeed, they do change rapidly.
Joe Johns keeping track of a critical debate for us.
Thank you, Joe. And that brings us to the topic of tonight's poll question. Do you think the Senate debate on gay marriage is a crucial topic for Congress or a distraction from more important issue? Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll bring you the results later in the show.
And still to come, senators blast CIA analysts for prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats say that criticism does not go far enough. Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein is my guest.
Major cities step up security after the latest warning about a possible al Qaeda attack. Was the warning justified? Former Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath will join me.
And U.S. Marine Corporal Wassef Hassoun arrives in an American military base in Germany. Investigators are trying to solve the mystery of his disappearance in Iraq. We will have a live report from the Pentagon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: As we reported, the Senate Intelligence Committee report out today finds bipartisan agreement that prewar intelligence on Iraq was seriously flawed. Republicans and Democrats, however, disagree about whether the nation's intelligence agencies were pressured to change their findings to help the White House build its case for war.
Earlier, I talked with a member of the committee, Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California, and I asked her what she believes the truth is.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA), INTELLIGENCE CMTE.: Our staff, our investigative staff on the intelligence committee found -- talked to no one that said they had been under pressure. They interviewed a lot of people, and they didn't find anyone that made that claim.
Mr. Kerr, as you'll see in the report, the ombudsman and I think even George Tenet said at one point that there was some pressure.
So it is really -- the staff investigation itself, in terms of talking directly to somebody who felt they had been pressured said no, none.
KING: Senator, you say there should be a director of national intelligence in addition to a CIA director.
George Tenet has stepped down. The president is looking for a new head of the CIA. Has the administration, in your view, consulted enough with Congress about what to do next, how to reform to make sure this never happens again? And do you think the administration will change its stated opposition to creating that new position?
FEINSTEIN: Well, do I believe that he consulted with Congress? The answer is no. Certainly not on the Democratic side. There has been no communication on this report that I'm aware of. I think what you have is an intelligence community, 80 percent of the budget is controlled by the secretary of defense. A majority of agencies are actually under the Defense Department's control.
You have a DCI, George Tenet, who is the head of one agency, one out of the 15, the CIA. He can't really chart strategies across the board of all agencies. So he kind of becomes a figurehead in many respects. I really believe that.
KING: Senator, I want to ask you a question a bit off topic, but the homeland security secretary came out yesterday. He said the American people should be on alert and be concerned that al Qaeda is in operational mode, planning to attack some time between now and the November elections.
You are privy, Senator, to the most sensitive intelligence. How worried should the American people be?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think -- I can only tell you for myself. I'm worried. This is a pivotal time for an attack: two big conventions, an election coming up. Where, when and how this attack would take place, there's no information that I've seen.
I think the Department of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, was correct. I believe it's important to warn people. My own view is intelligence coming off the street is very often more valuable than intelligence coming from an operative who may not be anywhere near the problem is.
So it alerts the American people to look -- to stop, look and listen. And if you see something that looks suspicious, or individuals that appear suspicious, pick up the phone and call the FBI and let them know that. I think that's extraordinarily important
The so-called chatter, which is, you know, bits and pieces coming in in different ways, is very high. And the people that evaluate this believe that the sources are credible. That's really all I can tell you.
KING: Well, let me ask you this, then. I think on this day, as the American people see the headlines coming out of this report about Iraq, they might ask the question if the intelligence community got it so wrong when it came to Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and other issues, why should they believe the intelligence community when it says al Qaeda is preparing to strike?
FEINSTEIN: Well, we know for sure that they will strike if they can. We know for sure that there are cells in this country. We know for sure that they are spread in many countries throughout the world. And we know that what has been happening in Iraq has cemented a desire to attack more.
I mean, I think all of that is pretty common sense. So if you put two and two together, I think you get four, not five.
KING: Pretty common sense and fairly sobering. Senator Dianne Feinstein, thank you for your time today.
FEINSTEIN: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: On a bit of a lighter note now, call this a partisan food fight. At issue, a staple American product, ketchup. A group of Republican investors have developed an alternate to Heinz ketchup. They call it W ketchup. The company's Web site asks, "If you don't support Democrats, why should your ketchup?"
It is, of course, a reference to Democratic Senator John Kerry's wife, Theresa Heinz Kerry, who is an heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune. The people behind W ketchup insist the W stands for Washington, as in George Washington, not the other president, Dubya.
Still ahead tonight, the Pentagon discovers what happened to some of President Bush's missing military records from the Vietnam War era.
Plus, a U.S. Marine who disappeared under suspicious circumstances in Iraq is headed back to the United States. We'll have a live report from the Pentagon up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Sitting in for Lou Dobbs, from Washington, John King.
KING: The Pentagon has cleared up the mystery of what happened to at least some of President Bush's missing military records. The Pentagon says payroll records of President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard were accidentally destroyed. The records were on microfilm and damaged during a project to restore them.
Critics have said those records are critical to answering questions about whether President Bush shirked his duty during the Vietnam War.
An American Marine who disappeared in Iraq and resurfaced in Beirut is now at a U.S. military hospital in Germany. Corporal Wassef Ali Hassoun is undergoing medical tests while the military investigates just what happened to him.
Senior Pentagon Correspondent Jamie McIntyre has that report -- Jamie.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, another day and still more questions than answers about the mysterious disappearance, then reappearance of Marine Corporal Wassef Hassoun who today left Beirut, Lebanon, the U.S. Embassy there, boarded a military transport plane and was flown to the U.S. air base in Ramstein, Germany.
There, a base spokesman says he will get a full medical evaluation and then begin the process of a debriefing in which he'll have to explain his 18-day disappearance between the time he left his unit in Iraq and showed up in Lebanon.
Today, the U.S. military took the unusual step of acknowledging publicly what they have only been saying privately, which is that when Hassoun left that they thought he might be a deserter. He's seen here in a videotape which military investigators are looking at to see if they believe it's a genuine videotape or something that might have been faked in order to cover up the desertion.
A statement from the U.S. Central Command today acknowledged, "after initially being listed as missing, a preliminary inquiry into his absence indicated he had deserted, and, as a result, he was subsequently characterized as a deserter."
The Pentagon points out that this is all the subject of an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. There was evidence, we're told, that when he left his unit in Iraq that he clearly did not intend to return and was heading for Lebanon, but it's going to be up to Corporal Hassoun to fill in the blanks and provide a story that will -- or an account that will satisfy the military as they investigate this incident -- John.
KING: Jamie McIntyre on an intriguing mystery at the Pentagon.
Thank you, Jamie.
Today's highly critical Senate report about prewar intelligence on Iraq raises disturbing questions about the quality of U.S. intelligence on other threats to this country.
Yesterday, government officials said they have credible intelligence al Qaeda is planning a major attack on the United States. Police departments in major cities responded to that warning by increasing security, especially in Boston and New York, which are hosting the political conventions this summer.
Joining me now from Boston is former White House Homeland Security adviser Richard Falkenrath. He is now a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Sir, thank you for joining us.
Let me start with the basic question. When Secretary Ridge came out yesterday, he said he had no specific information as to when, where or how al Qaeda might strike, but that there was a continuing stream of evidence that al Qaeda wanted to strike between now and the election. Can you help the American people understand as specifically as you can what is that intelligence?
RICHARD FALKENRATH, FORMER WHITE HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISER: The intelligence, I think is most likely al Qaeda leadership talking about possible attacks against the homeland but not actual intelligence into the plotters themselves into the operatives who might be moving into place, getting ready with the weapons and preparing to carry out the attack, and so there's a real difference between hearing something at the sort of operational manager back in Pakistan or Afghanistan level versus hearing it here or among the operatives as they move closer to the United States.
KING: Well, sir, you left the administration not long ago. At that time, what was your assessment and the administration's assessment of perhaps how many al Qaeda cells and how many al Qaeda operatives are this country now?
FALKENRATH: We don't know. Hopefully none. There may be none, but we don't know. If we knew, they would be taken down. Our biggest fear is a cell that was put in place prior to 9/11.
In my personal judgment, that's rather unlikely, but if there is a cell still here that was put in place that long ago, they certainly have the potential to carry out a very devastating attack, and another alternative is they try to deploy a cell into the United States from outside this time.
I think that's more likely, but I think those sort of operatives are likely to be less capable and more likely of getting detected and arrested before they attack.
KING: Secretary Ridge spoke publicly of intelligence gleaned from the arrests of some operatives overseas in England, in Italy and in Jordan. Other senior officials in private conversations say they have key details from those arrests suggesting the possibility of attacks in the United States, and they believe the evidence that there are personnel in place to carry them out. How trustworthy are interrogations like that, in your view?
FALKENRATH: It varies a great deal, and a lot of time is spent trying to interpret that information, and there are never any certain answers. We know that they try to deceive us once they're arrested. There are certain ways to try to judge whether they're being receptive or not, but there's -- it's not a science. It's much more of an art form.
We know that they would like to strike us, and we know that they're intrigued by what happened in Madrid and are interested in could they strike us before the election, and so that is clear, and that is widely talked about among al Qaeda operatives and their sympathizers.
KING: Now the secretary said there was no intelligence suggesting New York and Boston as targets, but you see the Boston backdrop behind you. Both of these conventions to be held in port cities which are considered more vulnerable than most cities, in cities with mass transit systems that could provide attractive targets.
In a way, are these two "bad" cities to be having these conventions in at this time?
FALKENRATH: Well, any American city presents a lot of vulnerable targets. We're free and open. We congregate in very large numbers. Boston and New York are going all out to provide the best possible security for those conventions. But we should not fool ourselves into thinking that just because they're two high-profile convention happening in these two big cities that al Qaeda is going to look just at these cities. They could easily go elsewhere to carry out a mass casualty attack.
KING: Richard Falkenrath, help me with this question. A fairly damning report from the Senate Intelligence Committee questioning the quality of the U.S. intelligence that was used to go to war in Iraq. How confident are you and how confident should the American people be when they hear Secretary Ridge and others in the administration saying al Qaeda wants to strike. Why should they believe that intelligence?
FALKENRATH: They should -- it's a very troubling report about the Iraq intelligence. I personally am very troubled by this, having been a consumer of that intelligence since 1999. I believed it, that there were going to be weapons stockpiles in Iraq, and there are not. So it's very, very concerning.
What the American people can know is that the intelligence that's being provided now about al Qaeda and other terrorist threats to the homeland is scrutinized more carefully than any other intelligence in the entire U.S. system today. It's gone over every single day with the president of the United States in the Oval Office with his senior- most advisers and is looked at very, very hard.
There are no guarantees that they will get it exactly right, they're probably missing some things, they're probably misreporting some things, but that's the nature of the business. They work very hard to penetrate these operations abroad and everywhere they can possibly think of, and they sometimes have some very important successes, which mostly cannot be talked about in public.
KING: Richard Falkenrath, former deputy Homeland Security adviser at the Bush White House.
Sir, we thank you for your thoughts tonight.
FALKENRATH: Thank you.
KING: Thank you.
And now a look at your thoughts on the Department of Homeland Security's latest terror warning.
Michael of Niwot, Colorado, "Playing politics by using the fear of terrorism is a dangerous game. Crying wolf in order to gain votes only makes us weaker in this fight and should be a crime."
Jan Bates from Newport News, Virginia, "If the administration issues or fails to issue a warning, Democrats will be critical. It will be too early, too late, too specific, too vague, too political."
Bud Winer of Fortville, Indiana, "Why would terrorists want to try and disrupt an election in this country. Our election officials are capable of doing that themselves."
Send us your thoughts. They are always welcome at loudobbs@cnn.com.
The United Nations' highest court is calling on Israel to tear down a controversial wall in the West Bank. The World Court says the barrier violates international law and infringes on the rights of Palestinians.
Alessio Vinci reports from the West Bank.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ALESSIO VINCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: One of the reasons why the International Court of Justice believes that the barrier being built by the Israelis is illegal and should be dismantled is because portions of the barrier are being built on Palestinian land in the West Bank, and, therefore, the Palestinians are saying that it is not separating Israelis from Palestinians, as the Israelis claim, but it is separating Palestinians from Palestinians.
There are some instances along this 186-kilometer route so far being built where some Palestinian farmers cannot reach their field or some Palestinian workers cannot reach their place of work. Now the Israelis are saying that they are making some concessions. They're making some changes to this barrier in order to facilitate access to the areas where the Palestinians are being cut off. But the Palestinians are saying that the barrier should not be there in the first place.
But what are we talking about? I'm going to step out of the way here for one second and show you one portion of this barrier. In this particular case it is a concrete wall. The vast majority of the barrier is actually a chain linked fence surrounded by barbed wire as well as ditches to prevent cars from driving through it. But in this particular case, at the Kalandia Checkpoint just outside of Ramallah, it is a concrete wall.
The Israeli forces are saying that this wall is necessary because the Palestinians on the other side of the fence, on the other side of the barrier are actually shooting into Israeli-held territory and therefore they have to build a wall especially in populated areas so that they can prevent the Palestinian militants from shooting inside.
But Palestinians are pointing out, especially in this area, they are pointing thought there's nothing on this side of the barrier and there's no point whatsoever of building on this particular location, for example, a wall.
At the same time Israeli officials are saying that ever since this barrier was built a year and a half ago, in the areas where it has been built, the number of suicide bombers coming across into Israeli proper territory has been reduced dramatically. And, therefore, they're saying this barrier works because it is preventing Palestinian would-be suicide bombers from reaching Israeli targets and blowing themselves up. I'm Alessio Vinci, CNN, at the Kalandia Checkpoint in the West Bank.
(END VIDEOTAPE) KING: In tonight's campaign journal, the presidential candidates made their way through key battle ground states today. President Bush made his 30th visit to Pennsylvania, a state Al Gore won by 4 percentage points back in 2000.
The president's daughter Jenna made her first campaign appearance with her father today. President Bush is making several stops on a day-long bus tour through Pennsylvania.
Senator Kerry and his runningmate Senator Edwards, meanwhile, raised $7 1/2 million last night at a celebrity fund raiser in New York. Today, Kerry and Edwards are campaigning in West Virginia and New Mexico, two of the most don't closely contested states.
Mr. Bush won West Virginia in 2000, Al Gore won New Mexico.
And when we return, the race within the race, what the vice presidential candidates mean to the election. We'll have that report. And three of the nation's leading journalists will join us.
Also ahead, an American hero shares the story of his dramatic experiences in Iraq.
And "Made In America," we feature the companies fighting to keep American jobs on American soil. Tonight, a small Pennsylvania furnituremaker that is proud to say its products are made in the USA.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Senator Kerry's choice of Senator Edwards as his runningmate this week has already had, at least, a modest impact on the campaign. The new Kerry-Edwards ticket delivered a bounce in the poles of between three and four points. But it is unclear whether the choice for vice president will have such a big impact come election day. Bruce Morton reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): John Edwards and Vice President Dick Cheney are very different men, does it matter?
STUART ROTHENBERG, ROTHENBERG POLITICAL REPORT: There's going to be a stark choice here if voters decide to make a choice on the basis of the vice presidential candidates.
MORTON: But they usually don't. The only vice presidential pick in the last half century that changed the outcome of an election was in 1960, John Kennedy from Massachusetts, a Roman Catholic, never had a Catholic as president, trying to convince voters he wouldn't take orders from the pope.
JOHN F. KENNEDY, FRM. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I am sure that here in the state of West Virginia, that no one believes that I'd be a candidate for the presidency if I didn't think I could meet my oath of office. MORTON: He desperately needed help in the conservative, but still Democratic south, chose Texan Linden Johnson and got that help. Look, carried Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and won the election.
The next Massachusetts Democrat to run was Michael Dukakis in 1988. He chose a Texan runningmate, too, Lloyd Benson, but the south by then was not just conservative, but Republican. Connecticut Yankee turned Texan George Herbert Walker Bush carried Texas, swept the south, rolled to an electoral landslide win. How about other years?
KEATING HOLLAND, POLITICAL ANALYST: Six and ten, seven and ten Americans generally as two-thirds as high as 74 percent in a couple of years say no, it's not going to affect my vote at all.
MORTON: It can have effects at the margin, make a candidate spend more time in a particular state. The Bush campaign is buying ads now in John Edwards' North Carolina. If Kerry picked someone else, they wouldn't be.
But these aren't decisive differences. Al Gore was a popular choice as Bill Clinton's runningmate, but there's no evidence he changed anything. Dan Quayle was a criticized choice as the first President Bush's running made, but Bush won anyway.
HOLLAND: It's not a vice presidential election, it's a presidential election, people are voting for president.
MORTON: He's got that right. Sorry, guys. Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: The latest opinion poll shows Senator Kerry leading the president, but not by very much. A "Time" magazine poll of likely voters released just today put Senator Kerry four points ahead of the president, that's outside the poll's margin of error.
Joining us now for tonight's newsmaker, Ron Brownstein national political correspondent for the "Los Angeles Times," Rik Kirkland, managing editor of "Fortune" magazine and Steve Shepard of "Businessweek."
Gentlemen, back to the campaign for a second. I want to begin, though, with this damning report by the Senate Intelligence Committee today, which of course will have an impact on the campaign camp. It says that the intelligence was simply wrong.
Rik Kirkland, let me begin with you, what's your assessment of how this plays out as the American people hear that the case the president used to go to war in Iraq was simply wrong.
RIK KIRKLAND, "FORTUNE": Well, I think it certainly reinforces why George Tenet stepped down. I mean, the folks that have really been indicted here are the analysts at the CIA. And the question, which is unanswered is how much political pressure was put on them? I think if people felt like the president and his staff really put pressure on the CIA to twist the results that would really hurt the president. The fact that he was misled by the CIA, remember in Bob Woodward's book Tenet stood up and said it's a slam dunk, that stuff is there, it kind of helps get Bush off the hook a bit. So I'm not sure he's damaged.
KING: Off the hook, Steve Shepard? Democrats, in an addendum, said they believed there was pressure. The report, obviously, bipartisan for now, phase two will look into the question of pressure. How do you think you see that playing out?
STEVE SHEPARD, "BUSSINESSWEEK": I don't think he's off the hook at all, because either he was misled or he deliberately lied. So either way it's a problem.
But I think what the report doesn't deal with is why was the intelligence so faulty? What went wrong? Why do we get such bad information. And more importantly what will we do about it in the future? And the report doesn't deal with that. And I think Americans are entitled to have that information.
KING: A debate over intelligence reform to come. But Ron Brownstein, if you follow the president on the road it is striking that in almost every speech, even when the issue is the economy, or education, he takes time to talk about the war in Iraq. He is still trying to justify, sell to the American people, a war that began a whole long time ago.
RON BROWNSTEIN, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": A good reason for that, John, was in, for example, our last "L.A. Times" poll, over 80 percent of people who thought the war was worth it said they were going to vote for George W. Bush, over 80 percent of people who said they thought the war was not worth it, said they were going to vote for John Kerry.
I think this report is very much of a sort of a two-edged sword, or playing out at two different levels. On the specifics, as you pointed out, it does not add new allegations against the White House. It doesn't say they pressured CIA agents or analysts. It says, for example, the CIA did not provide the information to correct the controversial 16-words in The State of the Union.
But at the macro level, essentially, what we have here is a report from a Republican-controlled committee in the Senate saying that information in which was case was based was fundamentally, overwhelmingly wrong. And that cannot help the president at a time when polls show, two different polls released in late June, almost half the country already believes that he misled them deliberately before the war.
So, I think in the broad sense it's hard to see how anything is a long-term problem.
KING: Let's look at polling data on the state of play of the presidential campaign right now. Just after the Edwards choice, heading into the Democratic convention. He's the horse race now -- we're in the new "TIME" poll out today -- Senator Kerry, 48.7 percent, President Bush, 45.1 percent. Take out the margin of error, that gives you a dead heat. Steve Shepard, are you surprised that it's this close right now? Too early to judge if there's an Edwards bounce, maybe?
SHEPARD: Yes, it's too early to judge. I mean, I think the president is clearly vulnerable, but it remains to be seen how well Kerry emerges as a candidate. People still don't know him and the Edwards factor is a little bit unknown, although it was a very good choice for Kerry. I think it will help him some but it really -- Kerry has to emerge. Bush has to lose, but Kerry has to win.
KING: Rik, let's talk about the vice presidential pick. Steve says a good choice. At first glance everyone said this will help in the South. Now people are looking at the West Virgnias and the Iowas and small-town America. What's your assessment?
KIRKLAND: I'm not sure whether Edwards himself can win Bush southern state. I think he can make it harder for the Republicans in the South, he'll have to put more money in there. That will help. I think he is strong with the areas, the rural areas. He connects well with ordinary folks. I think the pick, while vice presidents don't necessarily win elections or really change them it does say something Kerry needed to say about himself, which is he's confident enough to get a guy who's actually a better campaigner than he is and he doesn't mind that and he added some necessary excitement to a pretty (UNINTELLIGIBLE) campaign.
So it is a definite plus for him.
KING: Ron, is there a possibility if Edwards does tightens things up in the South that the issue portfolio changes a little bit. That perhaps the president has to talk more about social issues to boost his numbers in the South, that perhaps he does not want to be talking about, saying the key suburbs of the Midwestern states.
BROWNSTEIN: Well, John, in fact, I think we saw that this week. I thought one of the most interesting things that happened this week was, along with the appointment of John Edwards, the Republicans dramatically amplified their discussion of social issues.
When the President Bush went to North Carolina on Wednesday and was asked why he would still carry the South even with John Edwards on the ticket, he said because the Democratic ticket does not share their values.
Vice President Cheney last weekend talking about partial birth abortion and guns and other social issues. This is something that they think plays for them not only in the South but also in that small-town rural communities which are so important in the Midwest in deciding who was going to win this election.
One caveat. A lot of Democrats were hoping that John Edwards will help them improve their showing there. He ran under the banner of being born in a small town. When we looked at the results in the three big Midwestern primaries, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin, only in Missouri did he run any better in rural communities than he did statewide. No better in Ohio or Wisconsin. He may be able to appeal there. But it's still an unproven proposition.
KING: The indictment of Ken Lay brought back to the front pages this week an issue. Corporate scandal. It had slipped a little bit, the Martha Stewart trial obviously keeping it there. Rick, let me start with you.
You see Ken Lay being led into court. Will that will have any impact, obviously it has an impact on Wall Street. Do you see a political impact there at all?
KIRKLAND: Very subtle. And I just think the Bush people can say rightly that they've had a pretty good record of going after a corporate crime and whatever connections which are obviously deep. They have the business community. They have not pulled any punches in trying to get indictments and convictions and make people serve time and Ken Lay is the latest example of that. So I don't think it's a major factor, though, either way.
KING: Steve Shepard, has this administration sent a message to the boardrooms across this country? No more nonsense?
SHEPARD: Well, I think the message has gotten to the boardrooms whether it's from the administration, I don't know. But there's legislation on the books, surveys actually. It's being implemented. Reforms are being made, governance is changing in corporations, accounting is changing.
So the message is getting through. What's most disturbing about the Ken Lay case is the excuse that he's using which is "I didn't know what was going on." This is a man who was very, very highly paid to be the CEO of one of America's major corporations. These were his closest lieutenants who were doing this. The fraud was essential to the profitmaking of Enron and for him to say, "I didn't know what was going on" is absolutely terrible. If he didn't know he should have known. Whether they can make that into a criminal case in court remains to be seen, but it's really outrageous his defense so far.
KING: Ron Brownstein, Ken Lay was among the biggest financial benefactors, supporters of this president. He used to have a nickname, Kenny Boy. Ask about him at the White House this week, it seemed like they were saying Kenny who?
BROWNSTEIN: Well, you know, look, that's pretty understandable. They've been that way ever since Enron landed. I agree that by and large the administration can say it is trying to aggressively enforce the laws although there's more question about their regulatory diligence.
Excuse me, John. What this really is is a marker to me of the era of mass investment. We're in a period now where a majority of Americans either through their 401 (k)s or directly own stock and they are in effect creating a consumer pressure for tougher regulation and tougher enforcement of laws to prevent corner cutting and fraud. We have a mass constituency now for a cleaner stock market than we've ever had before and I think what we're seeing is a manifestation of that.
KING: All right. Ron Brownstein of "Los Angeles Times." Rik Kirkland of "Fortune" magazine. Steve Shepard of "Businessweek." Gentlemen, thank you all very much and have a great weekend
And a reminder now to vote in tonight's poll. "Do you think the Senate debate on gay marriage is a crucial topic for Congress or a distraction from more important issues?" Cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll bring you the results a bit later in the show.
Turning now to our feature series, "Heroes." Last week we told you the story of First Sergeant Kevin Remington. He risked his life and the lives of others to serve Sergeant Brandon Erickson in Iraq. Tonight, Sergeant Erickson is back home in North Dakota and adjusting to life after war. Casey Wian has his remarkable story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SGT. BRANDON ERICKON (RET.), NORTH DAKOTA NATL. GUARD: It feels really good to run. Especially after you've been in the hospital for five months.
CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A year ago Brandon Erickson was in Iraq working as a mechanic. On July 22 he nearly lost his life riding in a convoy when insurgents set off a homemade bomb.
ERICKSON: They ambushed us with about nine to 14 rocket- propelled grenades and small arms fire. My driver was killed at that time from a stray bullet.
WIAN: Erickson's right arm was mangled and he lost a lot of blood. First Sergeant Kevin Remington braved enemy gunfire and got him out.
ERICKSON: He kind of grabbed me by the face and he said, "Brandon, we're going to get you out of here safe. Do you believe me?" And I said, "yes."
WIAN: Remington pulled Erickson behind a tire to shield him as the battle raged on.
ERICKSON: We had the gun truck which was our truck with the most firepower going back and forth the kill zone. Those guys were amazing.
WIAN: When the firefight finally ended, Remington and the other soldiers got Erickson to the hospital. He lost half his blood. His right arm was amputated. When he awoke from surgery, he called girlfriend Dana Parry. I was more worried that she was going to break up with me because I only had one arm now.
DANA PARRY, GIRLFRIEND: It was so good he was alive. He's such a great guy, he deserved a second chance.
WIAN: Erickson was awarded a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for bravery.
1ST SGT. KEVIN REMINGTON, NORTH DAKOTA NATL. GUARD: Talk about courage. You know, it's not all about the courage under fire. The courage that people have to move on like he's doing and an example that sets for other soldiers who may be in a similar circumstance. The courage that our young soldiers are showing over there every day just going on the road.
WIAN: Erickson has retired from the military and is going to college looking forward to a career in public service. Casey Wian, CNN, reporting.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: A great story. Tonight's thought is on heroes. "We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look."
Those are the words of the 40th president of the United States. Ronald Reagan.
When we return, "Made in America." We look at a small furnituremaker in Pennsylvania that builds all of its products right here at home. We'll have the story of Madison Square Furniture.
And a former custodian in Massachusetts has found a new way to clean up. We'll have details. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: 67-year-old Geraldine Williams is in shock tonight. She's the big winner of the $294 million megamillions jackpot. That's the second largest cash total ever for a single ticket Lottery winner. The formal school custodian has three children and eight grandchildren. She still works cleaning homes, or at least she did as of this morning. Williams is taking her winnings in a lump sum of $117 million after taxes which means she won't have to worry about cleaning houses anymore unless she wants to.
Now "Made In America," a celebration of companies that choose to keep jobs right here in the United States. Tonight, Madison Square Furniture, a company in Pennsylvania that focuses on workmanship and its workers in addition to the bottom line. Bill Tucker reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Inside this 117- year-old building, wood transformed in the hands of workers into furniture. The building, the tools, the employees who have an average of 19 years working at the company all have an air of permanence. There's a reason for that.
MICHAEL PETERSON, PRES. MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: You see, our people understand that it's not just a dining table. That dining table is a place that mom's going to prepare the Thanksgiving Dinner for two or three generations of family members and share and create memories. That dining table is the piece that's going to be handed down from mom to daughter. And then that daughter to her daughter.
TUCKER (on camera): When it comes to competing with overseas manufacturers, Madison Square can't and doesn't compete on a price basis, choosing instead to emphasize the quality of its workmanship and its workers.
(voice-over): That pride can be seen in the attention that is given to detail. And in an even more important way.
BRADLEY WISEMAN, MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: I take a lot of pride in what I do, because I personally own some of this furniture that's made here.
TUCKER: My any standard, it's a small manufacturer, only 40 employees. But any talk of surrendering to overseas competition touches a nerve.
PETERSON: If we start farming all of these job, what is going to be left in this country? What is the foundation of this country? It has to be, we have to be more connected as people. It's not just about buying American, it's about being American.
TUCKER: His employees understand.
MARK LAURO, MADISON SQUARE FURNITURE: I prefer to buy American- made products even if it costs more, the quality is better than when you buy from overseas. I'd rather support our workers if at all possible.
TUCKER: Bill Tucker, CNN, Hanover, Pennsylvania.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: Still ahead, the latest in the case against Martha Stewart. And Nevada loses an appeal over a proposed nuclear waste site, but environmentalists are claiming victory. We'll tell you why when we return in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: A federal appeals court today rejected arguments from the state of Nevada trying to block a proposed nuclear waste site. Nevada claimed the Bush administration's plan to build the Yucca Mountain waste site was unconstitutional, but environmentalists are claiming victory because the court upheld their arguments to safeguarding the environment from radiation. The Yucca Mountain site is located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
On Wall Street, stocks closed the week with modest gains. The Dow rose almost 42 points, the NASDAQ added 11, the S&P gained almost 4.
Another high profile corporate crime trial has ended in a mistrial. Christine Romans has the report from New York -- Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT: John, a day after his father and brother were convicted on fraud and conspiracy charges a mistrial for Michael Regas, he is the former executive of Adelphia, the cable company his father, John Regas founded.
Now, the prosecution pledges to retry this case. And his father and brother Tim Regas will head back to court September 21. They face decades in prison.
And in a lower Manhattan court today, Martha Stewart's lawyers requesting she receive community service for her conviction. They argue sending Stewart to jail could hurt the employees of her company. Now, legal experts predict 10 to 16 months in jail. She will be sentenced a week from today, John. This time next week, Martha Stewart will know if she's to spend the holidays in prison -- John.
KING: Christine Romans in New York. Thank you.
And still ahead, the results of tonight's poll. Please stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Now the results of tonight's poll: 95 percent of you say the Senate debate on gay marriage is a distraction from more important issues.
Thanks for joining us tonight. Please join us Monday. Lou will be back, along with our special report "Broken Borders." Otis Graham, author of "Unguarded Gates: A History Of America's Immigration Crisis" will join Lou.
For all of us here, have a great and a safe weekend. Good night from Washington.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
