Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Fmr. Nat'l. Sec. Advisor Samuel Berger May Have Broken The Law; Interview with Fmr. Ambassador Joe Wilson; Recap of Martha Stewart Interview
Aired July 20, 2004 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. The former national security advisor for President Clinton, Samuel Berger, today under a federal criminal investigation.
Will Martha Stewart serve her time or try to stay out of jail with an appeal?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARTHA STEWART, FMR. CEO, MARTHA STEWART LIVING OMNIMEDIA: My company needs me. I would like to get back to work. I would like this to be over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: This morning, more on that exclusive interview only with CNN's Larry King.
And a hostage free today in Iraq. How does this impact the coalition?
Those stories ahead on AMERICAN MORNING.
ANNOUNCER: From the CNN Broadcast Center in New York, this is AMERICAN MORNING with Bill Hemmer and Soledad O'Brien.
HEMMER: And good morning, everyone. Welcome to Tuesday here. Soledad resting in the final weeks of her pregnancy. Heidi Collins with us today.
Good morning.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.
HEMMER: It's a busy news day, isn't it?
COLLINS: It is a busy news day.
HEMMER: I'll tell you what.
Some of the other news making headlines this morning.
Former National Security Advisor Samuel Berger may have broken the law by removing classified documents out of a screening room while he prepared to testify before the 9/11 Commission. Some documents said to be still missing.
We'll look at how serious this could be and what exactly was taken. Very intriguing story for us today.
COLLINS: Yes, it is.
Also this morning, former Ambassador Joe Wilson is with us. He was very critical of some of the president's statements about Iraq WMDs, weapons of mass distraction. Now, there may be evidence that Wilson was wrong. We will ask him about it.
HEMMER: Also this hour, we'll talk to golf's newest celebrity, in such a big way, too. Todd Hamilton just back in the states after winning the British Open. We'll ask him about the pressure and his approach to playing Royal Troon. His wife is with him, as well.
COLLINS: And so is the claret jug.
HEMMER: Nice.
COLLINS: Yes.
HEMMER: What a week it has been.
COLLINS: We'll see if we can get that.
HEMMER: So, we'll talk with the champ today, as well.
COLLINS: Maybe he'll let us touch it.
HEMMER: Yes, that would be nice.
COLLINS: I don't know.
Hi, Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.
Little-known incentives to join today's all volunteer Army -- free boob jobs and other cosmetic surgery performed on the taxpayers dime, all you've got to do is ask. We'll take a look.
HEMMER: Wow.
COLLINS: My goodness. OK.
Very good, Jack. We'll see you a little later on.
CAFFERTY: Well all right, Heidi.
COLLINS: All right. To the news now.
Samuel Berger, national security advisor to former President Clinton, is being investigated over whether he improperly removed classified documents while preparing for testimony before the 9/11 Commission. Bob Franken is live in Washington now with more. Good morning, Bob.
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi.
And the investigation has included a search of Berger's home in February. Berger, of course, was the national security advisor during the entire second term of the Clinton administration.
At the behest of the president, former President Clinton, in July, September and early October, he went to the national archives in Washington to go through thousands of pages of documents in preparation for Clinton's testimony, his questioning by the 9/11 Commission, and also Berger's.
In late October, the archives told Berger that some of the highly classified documents were missing. Now, Berger's lawyer says that he had taken his notes and had accidentally taken documents.
Reading from the statement from Berger, "I inadvertently took a few documents from the archives. I also took my notes on the documents reviewed. When I was informed by the archives there were documents missing I immediately returned everything I had, except for a few documents that apparently I had accidentally discarded."
He goes on to say, "I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but had no intention of withholding documents from the commission and to the contrary, to my knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton administration was produced."
Berger himself testified before the 9/11 Commission about these documents, which had to do with after action reports, as they're called -- highly classified, after action reports after the millennium and efforts to battle terrorism leading up to the millennium.
Berger testified on March 24th.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAMUEL BERGER, FMR. NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: During this millennium period, plots were uncovered in Amman against the Radisson Hotel and religious sites and against the Los Angeles airport.
Terror cells were broken up in Toronto, Boston, New York and elsewhere.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FRANKEN: Officials say that the investigation is ongoing. The timing is something to take note of. The information about the Berger investigation comes out just a couple of days before the 9/11 issues a report which is expected to be highly critical of both this administration and the previous administration -- Heidi?
COLLINS: All right. Bob Franken, live from Washington this morning. Bob, thanks so much for that.
So, what are the legal implications for Sandy Berger now? Here with us this morning, senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin to sort it all out.
OK. We just heard in Bob Franken's report that Sandy Berger has admitted to inadvertently taking documents and accidentally discarding some of them. What are the legal implications?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is the kind of accusation it's especially important to take a deep breath and say, "We don't know exactly what went on here, because this is an extremely murky area." What's classified? What isn't classified? Whether notes are classified or documents are classified. There is -- this is ripe for confusion here.
So, before you conclude that Sandy Berger did anything wrong, much less criminal, you need to know a lot more.
COLLINS: Right. Exactly. And there is a lot of murkiness. You and I have been talking about classified documents. And these were after action reports, as Bob said, known to be highly classified.
But still, that is not a determination, as you say?
TOOBIN: Right. What can happen when you have a classified document is, everybody takes notes on documents.
If you write down the classified part of the document, then your notes are automatically classified. If the document says, "Our spy in Moscow is John Jones," if you write that down, that's classified.
But if you take notes on the unclassified part of the document, your notes are not classified. And it's not always clear what the classified part of the document is and what part of it isn't classified.
COLLINS: OK. So how often, then -- because of that very murkiness, as we've been saying -- how often do these cases actually get prosecuted?
TOOBIN: They're very rarely prosecuted for the felonies they can be, but occasionally there are criminal cases that come out of it.
Mr. Deutch, who was head of the CIA under President Clinton, wound up getting in trouble because of that, and President Clinton at the end of his term pardoned John Deutch.
So, that was a very serious situation.
COLLINS: Right.
TOOBIN: But there it was a more systematic problem. He had brought a personal computer at home. He was handling highly classified documents in a systemic way, improperly. That was -- that was deemed really bad.
Sandy Berger had every right to be in the national archives, had every right to take notes. If he did something wrong...
COLLINS: But not take them out.
TOOBIN: Right. If he did that wrong, that, it seems like the kind of thing that is likely not to be criminally prosecuted, but we don't know at this point.
COLLINS: All right. Well, Jeffrey Toobin, we will talk with you...
TOOBIN: And I should add that I do have an axe to grind in this
COLLINS: Iran-Contra.
TOOBIN: Because I -- when I was a prosecutor in Iran-Contra, I was accused of removing classified documents. I was cleared ultimately. But it is the kind of thing where it can be confusing.
COLLINS: All right. It seems a little subjective.
All right. Well listen. We are going to talk with you again in just a few minutes about Martha Stewart.
TOOBIN: Martha Stewart...
COLLINS: If you'll hang around for that, we would appreciate it.
TOOBIN: A little bit of a different subject.
COLLINS: Yes.
All right, Bill back over to you.
HEMMER: Heidi, thanks for that.
Last summer, former Ambassador Joe Wilson cast serious doubt on the president's case for war in Iraq. Now, intelligence critiques seem to be shaking Wilson's story about a key statement included in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.
They are the 16 words that helped lay the foundation for war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: That was in January of 2003. Fast-forward six months, and the White House was saying it should not have included those words in the State of the Union address.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The agency cleared the speech. It should not have been cleared with that sentence in. And I can tell you that had there been a request to take that out in its entirety, it would have been followed immediately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: Two new reports this month -- one from the Senate Intelligence Committee and another from the British government -- revisited the issue. The British report says there is evidence suggesting Iraq wanted uranium from Niger.
That contradicts Joe Wilson, the man who started the firestorm last summer. He had visited Niger at the request of the CIA and wrote in the "New York Times," "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
A week later, columnist Robert Novak reported that Wilson's wife, CIA officer Valerie Plame had recommended her husband for the Niger job, something he has denied repeatedly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE WILSON, FMR. ACTING AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ: Nothing that I did had anything to do with my wife, who is really not a party to any of this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: The Senate intelligence committee report also says that's not true, that a memo from Plame helped Wilson get the job.
Former Ambassador Joe Wilson with us now this morning live in D.C. And welcome back to AMERICAN MORNING. Thanks for your time today.
This can be very thick in its language. And for the sake of our viewers, we'll try and keep it simple, as best we can, as we weigh through what we believe to be facts and not.
Take the British report first, Mr. Ambassador, on the screen: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union address of 28 January 2002 was well-founded."
The question: Did Iraq seek uranium in Niger at any point?
WILSON: The article that I wrote was based upon a briefing, based upon documents that purported to be a memorandum of agreement covering the sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq. I went out there. I came back. I concluded that such a transaction was highly unlikely as I wrote in my article.
Now, let me just suggest, with respect to the British report, on October 2nd of 2002, the deputy director of Central Intelligence told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that one place where he believed the British stretched beyond where we would stretch is on the points where Iraq was seeking uranium from African locations.
On October 6th, the director of Central Intelligence called the deputy national security advisor and told him the president should not be a fact witness on the issue related to Iraq attempting to purchase uranium from Africa because the reporting was weak.
That was confirmed in a fax the same day to the National Security Council, which also added, this is one of the two issues where we differ with the British.
All this was in 2002, three months before the State of the Union address.
HEMMER: Let me stop you there. Let's try and get to the bottom of this here and cut through.
Why are the British still, even as late as last week saying the words may have been true -- the 16 words in the State of the Union address -- which directly contradicts the trip you made to Niger at the time?
WILSON: Well, I think you have to ask the British that. My understanding is having taken quick, brief look at the Butler report, is that it relates to a meeting in 1999, the purpose of which is broadly disputed within the international intelligence community.
HEMMER: Let me go to another point now. The Senate intelligence report that finds that your report out of Niger actually helped bolster the case for most intelligence analysts -- how is that possible, based on what you found on your trip?
WILSON: Well, again, that was apparently in the conclusion of the report. In my letter back to the senators, I point out nine areas in the body of the report that would suggest that, in fact, my report and the other reports -- mine was but one of three that were submitted from the field -- did not bolster the case.
And the two quotes that I cited to you suggest that the reporting was so weak, that the director of Central Intelligence did not want the president to be a witness of fact on this case.
And we're not talking about whether or not we should have remained vigilant about Iraq and its intentions. I've always believed that we should have. We're talking about whether this particular transaction, based upon documents that later turned out to be forgeries, could have or did take place.
HEMMER: Mr. Ambassador, people are now calling you a liar. Your response to that is what?
WILSON: Well, I think -- I think when the facts are known to everybody, the truth will be very clear.
This is part of a partisan smear campaign over the last several days. The Republican National Committee has been sending out blast faxes and blast e-mails focusing on me. Ironically, just a week before the convention, I seem to be their worst enemy.
But again, this is designed to confuse people from the basic facts. And the basic facts are two -- one, the president's spokesman, himself, acknowledged the 16 words did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. I did not put those words in the State of the Union address.
And two, somebody close to the president of the United States exposed my wife as a CIA operative. And that may be a federal crime. And that's being investigated by a special counsel and by the FBI.
HEMMER: You take us right to the next point regarding your wife. Apparently she wrote an e-mail within the CIA. And on the screen it says, "My husband" -- meaning you - "has good relations with both the prime minister and the former minister of mines, not to mention lots of French contacts both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity."
You say she did not recommend you for that trip to Africa? It's my understanding that she took you to the CIA, took you into an office, introduced you to a number of people inside, then turned around, walked out the door and closed the door behind her.
Can you not see on the surface, that it's logical to conclude that she would have offered you for this trip?
WILSON: What I have said is that she served as a conduit from people at the agency. But more to the point, what is has the CIA said about this? Several months before I ever spoke about my wife, during the period after she had been outed by Bob Novak and before the Justice Department, in the end of September, opened its investigation.
On July 22nd, the CIA said to a couple of journalists -- let me see. I have it right here -- "She did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. They, the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story, were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising. She worked alongside the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger."
The CIA has repeated that since, including to David Ensor on CNN, including to Doyle McManus in the "L.A. Times."
HEMMER: I don't have much time for this. The "Wall Street Journal" wrote a piece today. And just to pull some statement of what they wrote, they said, "This is a remarkable record of falsehood," referring to you.
It continues, "We certainly know what critics would say if President Bush had been caught saying such things."
In a word or two, your response to that?
WILSON: Well, again, the "Wall Street" editorial page, I believe, is part of this smear campaign and that they just simply don't know what they're talking about. The facts are clear. The 16 words should not have been in the State of the Union address. The president, or the White House, has acknowledged that. This transaction did not and could not have taken place. And my role in this was, as I reported in the "New York Times," was a very small one.
Go back and read the original opinion piece.
HEMMER: Ambassador Joe Wilson in Washington. Thanks for your time this morning.
WILSON: Thanks a lot.
HEMMER: All right -- Heidi?
COLLINS: All right. Well, it's time for us to take a look at some of the other news of the morning. We have Daryn Kagan standing by to do that for us.
Hi, Daryn.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Heidi, good morning. Let's start in Iraq with the release of a Filipino hostage.
Images of truck driver Angelo de la Cruz coming in to CNN just about an hour ago. He was turned over to the embassy at the United Arab Emirates in Baghdad earlier this morning.
Insurgents have also released an Egyptian truck driver. He was freed after Saudi -- his Saudi employer agreed to pull out all of its workers from Iraq.
The U.S. Marine translator who disappeared from his post in Iraq only to turn up in Lebanon is sticking to his story. Yesterday at a Marine base in Virginia, Corporal Wassef Ali Hassoun insisted he is not a deserter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CPL. WASSEF ALI HASSOUN, USMC: I was captured and held against my will by anti-coalition forces for 19 days.
This was a very difficult and challenging time for me. Since my release, I've been fully participating in the repatriation process.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAGAN: Corporate Hassoun was reported missing in Iraq June 20th. That changed to captured after the June 27th release of this videotape. Hassoun took no questions after making his statement yesterday.
President Bush says the U.S. is still exploring whether Iran was involved in the September 11th terrorist attacks. The president has accused Iran, who he has included in the so-called "Axis of Evil" of harboring al Qaeda members and supporting Islamic militant groups. The CIA has said there is no evidence to suggest an official connection between Iran and 9/11.
And to Los Angeles County this morning -- hundreds of former evacuees are waking up in their own beds for the first time in days. They were allowed to go home yesterday as calm winds and cooler temperatures helped fire crews contain parts of a 6,000 acre blaze. That is almost half contained at this point.
Fire officials say it was sparked by a bird that flew into a power line. One bird, all that damage.
Heidi, I'll be back in about a half hour. Right now, back to you.
COLLINS: That is unbelievable. All right, Daryn. Thanks so much for that.
For the first time since being sentenced for lying, conspiracy and obstruction of justice on a stock sale, Martha Stewart talked live about her ordeal. The domestic diva answered questions on "LARRY KING LIVE."
CNN's national correspondent Frank Buckley reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Martha Stewart sentenced to five months in prison and five months of home detention vowed an appeal.
She told Larry King she hasn't ruled out simply serving her sentence.
MARTHA STEWART, MARTHA STEWART LIVING OMNIMEDIA: On the one hand: business, Wall Street, advertising -- they would like to see finality. They would like to see an end to all of this.
LARRY KING, HOST, CNN's "LARRY KING LIVE": Obviously.
STEWART: I, as a person with rights, with a belief in the judicial system and fairness think that an appeal is the way to go. So what do I do?
BUCKLEY: Stewart whose legal troubles over the past couple of years provided cable TV and tabloid news with an endless source of stories, struck back at the pundits.
STEWART: Pundits are out there saying, oh, she should go in.
Do they know what it's like to go to jail?
BUCKLEY: She struck a softer cord toward those who described her as arrogant.
STEWART: I wish I were perfect. I wish I were just the -- you know, the nicest, nicest, nicest person on Earth; but I'm a businessperson in addition to a creator of domestic arts, and it's an odd combination.
No excuse -- but if I were a man -- you know, no one would say I was arrogant.
BUCKLEY: And in true Stewart-style, she promised a new product would emerge from her legal troubles.
STEWART: I think I'll write a book because I think it could be helpful to other people. Just, just about -- just about what lawyer to choose, how to behave, how to attend an interview. I mean, there's things that -- you know, there's no "how-to" book about this.
BUCKLEY: The final chapter in Stewart's legal tome still to be written.
Frank Buckley, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Jeffrey Toobin doing double duty for us, this morning. Our segal -- senior legal analyst, that is.
TOOBIN: A "how-to" book. She did everything wrong. Don't walk into the FBI and lie to them. That should be the first chapter in her "how-to" book.
COLLINS: We'll see.
TOOBIN: Anyway, let me digress.
COLLINS: We'll see.
TOOBIN: Yes.
COLLINS: Let me ask you, obviously, she talked on Friday after the sentencing. She was on "LARRY KING" last night. Does any of that -- or anything that she said in that interview or the statement that she made -- will that affect the appeal process if, indeed, she goes that route?
TOOBIN: I don't think, at this point. The appeals court judges are going to decide based on the facts in the law in the case. She's all about trying to preserve her company at this point. And I think going public, saying her company is going to try to thrive again, that's the best thing she can do from a business perspective. Legally, I don't think it matters much.
COLLINS: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, that's all we have time for. We appreciate it very much.
TOOBIN: OK. All right.
But she may go in to prison. That was interesting. She had not said -- she had not said that before, that she might abandon her appeal.
COLLINS: True.
TOOBIN: That was interesting last night.
COLLINS: May go straight there.
All right. Very good. Thanks so much, Jeff.
Bill, back to you.
HEMMER: Heidi, thanks for that. Back to Jack right now, fresh off Martha from last night. I know you were up late.
CAFFERTY: I missed it. I planned to do it, but I got busy down in the basement putting the Christmas tree lights away.
A few good men and women may be getting better looking. The "New Yorker" has got a great story about military personnel being entitled to free cosmetic surgery. They and their families can get face-lifts, and nose jobs, and breast enlargements and liposuction all at the tax payers' expense.
Between 2000 and 2003, Army doctors performed 496 breast enlargements and 1,361 liposuction surgeries.
However, it should be noted, for breast enlargements patients must supply their own implants. They don't have those. You've got to bring your own.
One Army private who knows several female soldiers who got free breast surgery says, "We're out there risking our lives. We deserve benefits like that."
And an Army spokeswoman says they do these procedures so the surgeons can have someone to practice on. Having been to a military dentist, I would hesitate, I think.
But -- and there's a difference between cosmetic surgery and reconstructive surgery, which the Army surgeons would be required to be proficient in for treating persons who are wounded in combat.
We're talking about breast implants, here, OK.
So, the question is: Should the military pay for cosmetic surgery?
You can e-mail us and blast, eloquent or not, at am@cnn.com.
HEMMER: Just to be clear, you've got to bring your own silicone, right.
CAFFERTY: Bring your own implants. I guess saline or silicone, or whatever. You know, just show up with your own deal.
HEMMER: Thank you, Jack. CAFFERTY: You got it.
HEMMER: Back to the Christmas lights.
Chad Myers now at the CNN Center watching the weather. Good morning, Chad.
CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: I don't know if you can find them on eBay or not. I'm just kind of wondering where you can pick those up.
(WEATHER REPORT)
MYERS: Back to you guys in New York.
HEMMER: All right. Thank you, Chad for that.
In a moment here, get the very latest on the Kobe Bryant matter -- word his accuser considered removing herself from the case. May have done it twice, in fact. You might be surprised to see who is getting blamed for that.
Back in a moment on that story.
COLLINS: Also ahead, we're "Minding Your Business." Alan Greenspan gets ready for a victory lap on Capitol Hill. We'll explain.
HEMMER: Also, it took Todd Hamilton 17 years as a pro to make it to PGA. Now he is on top of the world. We'll talk to him, the newly crowned British champ a bit later this hour here on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: Welcome back, everyone.
Fed chairman Alan Greenspan back on Capitol Hill today. Will the message today be, I told you so?
Christine Romans working for Andy, "Minding Your Business" this morning. I told you so, what?
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, not too long ago you had a lot of people saying that the fed needed to start raising interest rates quickly because the economy was growing strongly. But there was a June lull. And so Mr. Greenspan's slow, measured pace of raising interest rates might be right after all.
Not too hot, not too cold. Probably a Goldilocks situation is what he's going to say. He'll probably take a little bit of a victory lap saying that we're going to watch this. We're going to monitor inflation. A spike in inflation will be transitory.
I'll give you five bucks if he actually uses the word transitory today.
HEMMER: Yes. You think so.
ROMANS: A lot of "green-speak" today.
And we'll probably hear him say that things are going just fine, everybody.
HEMMER: What you've found out, though, higher interest rates is the concern, right now.
ROMANS: Right.
HEMMER: Well, it's the consideration, perhaps not a concern -- a bit overstated. But the mortgage rates continue to drop.
ROMANS: That's the...
HEMMER: What's the juxtaposition here?
ROMANS: That's such an interesting development because the market is actually telling us it is not concerned that the economy is so strong it will create inflation. And so, market interest rates are falling.
For you, that means mortgage rates have been falling and the 30- year is back to six percent.
HEMMER: But that's going right against conventional wisdom.
ROMANS: It is. So I guess if you have to refinance, take a look at the rates.
COLLINS: I'm taking your notes because I'm about to buy a house, so I'm just going to hang on to these.
All right. Thanks so much, Christine.
ROMANS: You're welcome.
COLLINS: Still to come this morning -- the prosecution makes a surprising accusation in the Kobe Bryant case, and it isn't directed at Bryant.
Stay with us on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired July 20, 2004 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. The former national security advisor for President Clinton, Samuel Berger, today under a federal criminal investigation.
Will Martha Stewart serve her time or try to stay out of jail with an appeal?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARTHA STEWART, FMR. CEO, MARTHA STEWART LIVING OMNIMEDIA: My company needs me. I would like to get back to work. I would like this to be over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: This morning, more on that exclusive interview only with CNN's Larry King.
And a hostage free today in Iraq. How does this impact the coalition?
Those stories ahead on AMERICAN MORNING.
ANNOUNCER: From the CNN Broadcast Center in New York, this is AMERICAN MORNING with Bill Hemmer and Soledad O'Brien.
HEMMER: And good morning, everyone. Welcome to Tuesday here. Soledad resting in the final weeks of her pregnancy. Heidi Collins with us today.
Good morning.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.
HEMMER: It's a busy news day, isn't it?
COLLINS: It is a busy news day.
HEMMER: I'll tell you what.
Some of the other news making headlines this morning.
Former National Security Advisor Samuel Berger may have broken the law by removing classified documents out of a screening room while he prepared to testify before the 9/11 Commission. Some documents said to be still missing.
We'll look at how serious this could be and what exactly was taken. Very intriguing story for us today.
COLLINS: Yes, it is.
Also this morning, former Ambassador Joe Wilson is with us. He was very critical of some of the president's statements about Iraq WMDs, weapons of mass distraction. Now, there may be evidence that Wilson was wrong. We will ask him about it.
HEMMER: Also this hour, we'll talk to golf's newest celebrity, in such a big way, too. Todd Hamilton just back in the states after winning the British Open. We'll ask him about the pressure and his approach to playing Royal Troon. His wife is with him, as well.
COLLINS: And so is the claret jug.
HEMMER: Nice.
COLLINS: Yes.
HEMMER: What a week it has been.
COLLINS: We'll see if we can get that.
HEMMER: So, we'll talk with the champ today, as well.
COLLINS: Maybe he'll let us touch it.
HEMMER: Yes, that would be nice.
COLLINS: I don't know.
Hi, Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.
Little-known incentives to join today's all volunteer Army -- free boob jobs and other cosmetic surgery performed on the taxpayers dime, all you've got to do is ask. We'll take a look.
HEMMER: Wow.
COLLINS: My goodness. OK.
Very good, Jack. We'll see you a little later on.
CAFFERTY: Well all right, Heidi.
COLLINS: All right. To the news now.
Samuel Berger, national security advisor to former President Clinton, is being investigated over whether he improperly removed classified documents while preparing for testimony before the 9/11 Commission. Bob Franken is live in Washington now with more. Good morning, Bob.
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Heidi.
And the investigation has included a search of Berger's home in February. Berger, of course, was the national security advisor during the entire second term of the Clinton administration.
At the behest of the president, former President Clinton, in July, September and early October, he went to the national archives in Washington to go through thousands of pages of documents in preparation for Clinton's testimony, his questioning by the 9/11 Commission, and also Berger's.
In late October, the archives told Berger that some of the highly classified documents were missing. Now, Berger's lawyer says that he had taken his notes and had accidentally taken documents.
Reading from the statement from Berger, "I inadvertently took a few documents from the archives. I also took my notes on the documents reviewed. When I was informed by the archives there were documents missing I immediately returned everything I had, except for a few documents that apparently I had accidentally discarded."
He goes on to say, "I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but had no intention of withholding documents from the commission and to the contrary, to my knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton administration was produced."
Berger himself testified before the 9/11 Commission about these documents, which had to do with after action reports, as they're called -- highly classified, after action reports after the millennium and efforts to battle terrorism leading up to the millennium.
Berger testified on March 24th.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAMUEL BERGER, FMR. NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: During this millennium period, plots were uncovered in Amman against the Radisson Hotel and religious sites and against the Los Angeles airport.
Terror cells were broken up in Toronto, Boston, New York and elsewhere.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FRANKEN: Officials say that the investigation is ongoing. The timing is something to take note of. The information about the Berger investigation comes out just a couple of days before the 9/11 issues a report which is expected to be highly critical of both this administration and the previous administration -- Heidi?
COLLINS: All right. Bob Franken, live from Washington this morning. Bob, thanks so much for that.
So, what are the legal implications for Sandy Berger now? Here with us this morning, senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin to sort it all out.
OK. We just heard in Bob Franken's report that Sandy Berger has admitted to inadvertently taking documents and accidentally discarding some of them. What are the legal implications?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is the kind of accusation it's especially important to take a deep breath and say, "We don't know exactly what went on here, because this is an extremely murky area." What's classified? What isn't classified? Whether notes are classified or documents are classified. There is -- this is ripe for confusion here.
So, before you conclude that Sandy Berger did anything wrong, much less criminal, you need to know a lot more.
COLLINS: Right. Exactly. And there is a lot of murkiness. You and I have been talking about classified documents. And these were after action reports, as Bob said, known to be highly classified.
But still, that is not a determination, as you say?
TOOBIN: Right. What can happen when you have a classified document is, everybody takes notes on documents.
If you write down the classified part of the document, then your notes are automatically classified. If the document says, "Our spy in Moscow is John Jones," if you write that down, that's classified.
But if you take notes on the unclassified part of the document, your notes are not classified. And it's not always clear what the classified part of the document is and what part of it isn't classified.
COLLINS: OK. So how often, then -- because of that very murkiness, as we've been saying -- how often do these cases actually get prosecuted?
TOOBIN: They're very rarely prosecuted for the felonies they can be, but occasionally there are criminal cases that come out of it.
Mr. Deutch, who was head of the CIA under President Clinton, wound up getting in trouble because of that, and President Clinton at the end of his term pardoned John Deutch.
So, that was a very serious situation.
COLLINS: Right.
TOOBIN: But there it was a more systematic problem. He had brought a personal computer at home. He was handling highly classified documents in a systemic way, improperly. That was -- that was deemed really bad.
Sandy Berger had every right to be in the national archives, had every right to take notes. If he did something wrong...
COLLINS: But not take them out.
TOOBIN: Right. If he did that wrong, that, it seems like the kind of thing that is likely not to be criminally prosecuted, but we don't know at this point.
COLLINS: All right. Well, Jeffrey Toobin, we will talk with you...
TOOBIN: And I should add that I do have an axe to grind in this
COLLINS: Iran-Contra.
TOOBIN: Because I -- when I was a prosecutor in Iran-Contra, I was accused of removing classified documents. I was cleared ultimately. But it is the kind of thing where it can be confusing.
COLLINS: All right. It seems a little subjective.
All right. Well listen. We are going to talk with you again in just a few minutes about Martha Stewart.
TOOBIN: Martha Stewart...
COLLINS: If you'll hang around for that, we would appreciate it.
TOOBIN: A little bit of a different subject.
COLLINS: Yes.
All right, Bill back over to you.
HEMMER: Heidi, thanks for that.
Last summer, former Ambassador Joe Wilson cast serious doubt on the president's case for war in Iraq. Now, intelligence critiques seem to be shaking Wilson's story about a key statement included in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.
They are the 16 words that helped lay the foundation for war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: That was in January of 2003. Fast-forward six months, and the White House was saying it should not have included those words in the State of the Union address.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The agency cleared the speech. It should not have been cleared with that sentence in. And I can tell you that had there been a request to take that out in its entirety, it would have been followed immediately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: Two new reports this month -- one from the Senate Intelligence Committee and another from the British government -- revisited the issue. The British report says there is evidence suggesting Iraq wanted uranium from Niger.
That contradicts Joe Wilson, the man who started the firestorm last summer. He had visited Niger at the request of the CIA and wrote in the "New York Times," "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
A week later, columnist Robert Novak reported that Wilson's wife, CIA officer Valerie Plame had recommended her husband for the Niger job, something he has denied repeatedly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE WILSON, FMR. ACTING AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ: Nothing that I did had anything to do with my wife, who is really not a party to any of this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEMMER: The Senate intelligence committee report also says that's not true, that a memo from Plame helped Wilson get the job.
Former Ambassador Joe Wilson with us now this morning live in D.C. And welcome back to AMERICAN MORNING. Thanks for your time today.
This can be very thick in its language. And for the sake of our viewers, we'll try and keep it simple, as best we can, as we weigh through what we believe to be facts and not.
Take the British report first, Mr. Ambassador, on the screen: "We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union address of 28 January 2002 was well-founded."
The question: Did Iraq seek uranium in Niger at any point?
WILSON: The article that I wrote was based upon a briefing, based upon documents that purported to be a memorandum of agreement covering the sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq. I went out there. I came back. I concluded that such a transaction was highly unlikely as I wrote in my article.
Now, let me just suggest, with respect to the British report, on October 2nd of 2002, the deputy director of Central Intelligence told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that one place where he believed the British stretched beyond where we would stretch is on the points where Iraq was seeking uranium from African locations.
On October 6th, the director of Central Intelligence called the deputy national security advisor and told him the president should not be a fact witness on the issue related to Iraq attempting to purchase uranium from Africa because the reporting was weak.
That was confirmed in a fax the same day to the National Security Council, which also added, this is one of the two issues where we differ with the British.
All this was in 2002, three months before the State of the Union address.
HEMMER: Let me stop you there. Let's try and get to the bottom of this here and cut through.
Why are the British still, even as late as last week saying the words may have been true -- the 16 words in the State of the Union address -- which directly contradicts the trip you made to Niger at the time?
WILSON: Well, I think you have to ask the British that. My understanding is having taken quick, brief look at the Butler report, is that it relates to a meeting in 1999, the purpose of which is broadly disputed within the international intelligence community.
HEMMER: Let me go to another point now. The Senate intelligence report that finds that your report out of Niger actually helped bolster the case for most intelligence analysts -- how is that possible, based on what you found on your trip?
WILSON: Well, again, that was apparently in the conclusion of the report. In my letter back to the senators, I point out nine areas in the body of the report that would suggest that, in fact, my report and the other reports -- mine was but one of three that were submitted from the field -- did not bolster the case.
And the two quotes that I cited to you suggest that the reporting was so weak, that the director of Central Intelligence did not want the president to be a witness of fact on this case.
And we're not talking about whether or not we should have remained vigilant about Iraq and its intentions. I've always believed that we should have. We're talking about whether this particular transaction, based upon documents that later turned out to be forgeries, could have or did take place.
HEMMER: Mr. Ambassador, people are now calling you a liar. Your response to that is what?
WILSON: Well, I think -- I think when the facts are known to everybody, the truth will be very clear.
This is part of a partisan smear campaign over the last several days. The Republican National Committee has been sending out blast faxes and blast e-mails focusing on me. Ironically, just a week before the convention, I seem to be their worst enemy.
But again, this is designed to confuse people from the basic facts. And the basic facts are two -- one, the president's spokesman, himself, acknowledged the 16 words did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. I did not put those words in the State of the Union address.
And two, somebody close to the president of the United States exposed my wife as a CIA operative. And that may be a federal crime. And that's being investigated by a special counsel and by the FBI.
HEMMER: You take us right to the next point regarding your wife. Apparently she wrote an e-mail within the CIA. And on the screen it says, "My husband" -- meaning you - "has good relations with both the prime minister and the former minister of mines, not to mention lots of French contacts both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity."
You say she did not recommend you for that trip to Africa? It's my understanding that she took you to the CIA, took you into an office, introduced you to a number of people inside, then turned around, walked out the door and closed the door behind her.
Can you not see on the surface, that it's logical to conclude that she would have offered you for this trip?
WILSON: What I have said is that she served as a conduit from people at the agency. But more to the point, what is has the CIA said about this? Several months before I ever spoke about my wife, during the period after she had been outed by Bob Novak and before the Justice Department, in the end of September, opened its investigation.
On July 22nd, the CIA said to a couple of journalists -- let me see. I have it right here -- "She did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment. They, the officers who did ask Wilson to check the uranium story, were aware of who she was married to, which is not surprising. She worked alongside the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger."
The CIA has repeated that since, including to David Ensor on CNN, including to Doyle McManus in the "L.A. Times."
HEMMER: I don't have much time for this. The "Wall Street Journal" wrote a piece today. And just to pull some statement of what they wrote, they said, "This is a remarkable record of falsehood," referring to you.
It continues, "We certainly know what critics would say if President Bush had been caught saying such things."
In a word or two, your response to that?
WILSON: Well, again, the "Wall Street" editorial page, I believe, is part of this smear campaign and that they just simply don't know what they're talking about. The facts are clear. The 16 words should not have been in the State of the Union address. The president, or the White House, has acknowledged that. This transaction did not and could not have taken place. And my role in this was, as I reported in the "New York Times," was a very small one.
Go back and read the original opinion piece.
HEMMER: Ambassador Joe Wilson in Washington. Thanks for your time this morning.
WILSON: Thanks a lot.
HEMMER: All right -- Heidi?
COLLINS: All right. Well, it's time for us to take a look at some of the other news of the morning. We have Daryn Kagan standing by to do that for us.
Hi, Daryn.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Heidi, good morning. Let's start in Iraq with the release of a Filipino hostage.
Images of truck driver Angelo de la Cruz coming in to CNN just about an hour ago. He was turned over to the embassy at the United Arab Emirates in Baghdad earlier this morning.
Insurgents have also released an Egyptian truck driver. He was freed after Saudi -- his Saudi employer agreed to pull out all of its workers from Iraq.
The U.S. Marine translator who disappeared from his post in Iraq only to turn up in Lebanon is sticking to his story. Yesterday at a Marine base in Virginia, Corporal Wassef Ali Hassoun insisted he is not a deserter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CPL. WASSEF ALI HASSOUN, USMC: I was captured and held against my will by anti-coalition forces for 19 days.
This was a very difficult and challenging time for me. Since my release, I've been fully participating in the repatriation process.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAGAN: Corporate Hassoun was reported missing in Iraq June 20th. That changed to captured after the June 27th release of this videotape. Hassoun took no questions after making his statement yesterday.
President Bush says the U.S. is still exploring whether Iran was involved in the September 11th terrorist attacks. The president has accused Iran, who he has included in the so-called "Axis of Evil" of harboring al Qaeda members and supporting Islamic militant groups. The CIA has said there is no evidence to suggest an official connection between Iran and 9/11.
And to Los Angeles County this morning -- hundreds of former evacuees are waking up in their own beds for the first time in days. They were allowed to go home yesterday as calm winds and cooler temperatures helped fire crews contain parts of a 6,000 acre blaze. That is almost half contained at this point.
Fire officials say it was sparked by a bird that flew into a power line. One bird, all that damage.
Heidi, I'll be back in about a half hour. Right now, back to you.
COLLINS: That is unbelievable. All right, Daryn. Thanks so much for that.
For the first time since being sentenced for lying, conspiracy and obstruction of justice on a stock sale, Martha Stewart talked live about her ordeal. The domestic diva answered questions on "LARRY KING LIVE."
CNN's national correspondent Frank Buckley reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Martha Stewart sentenced to five months in prison and five months of home detention vowed an appeal.
She told Larry King she hasn't ruled out simply serving her sentence.
MARTHA STEWART, MARTHA STEWART LIVING OMNIMEDIA: On the one hand: business, Wall Street, advertising -- they would like to see finality. They would like to see an end to all of this.
LARRY KING, HOST, CNN's "LARRY KING LIVE": Obviously.
STEWART: I, as a person with rights, with a belief in the judicial system and fairness think that an appeal is the way to go. So what do I do?
BUCKLEY: Stewart whose legal troubles over the past couple of years provided cable TV and tabloid news with an endless source of stories, struck back at the pundits.
STEWART: Pundits are out there saying, oh, she should go in.
Do they know what it's like to go to jail?
BUCKLEY: She struck a softer cord toward those who described her as arrogant.
STEWART: I wish I were perfect. I wish I were just the -- you know, the nicest, nicest, nicest person on Earth; but I'm a businessperson in addition to a creator of domestic arts, and it's an odd combination.
No excuse -- but if I were a man -- you know, no one would say I was arrogant.
BUCKLEY: And in true Stewart-style, she promised a new product would emerge from her legal troubles.
STEWART: I think I'll write a book because I think it could be helpful to other people. Just, just about -- just about what lawyer to choose, how to behave, how to attend an interview. I mean, there's things that -- you know, there's no "how-to" book about this.
BUCKLEY: The final chapter in Stewart's legal tome still to be written.
Frank Buckley, CNN, Los Angeles.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Jeffrey Toobin doing double duty for us, this morning. Our segal -- senior legal analyst, that is.
TOOBIN: A "how-to" book. She did everything wrong. Don't walk into the FBI and lie to them. That should be the first chapter in her "how-to" book.
COLLINS: We'll see.
TOOBIN: Anyway, let me digress.
COLLINS: We'll see.
TOOBIN: Yes.
COLLINS: Let me ask you, obviously, she talked on Friday after the sentencing. She was on "LARRY KING" last night. Does any of that -- or anything that she said in that interview or the statement that she made -- will that affect the appeal process if, indeed, she goes that route?
TOOBIN: I don't think, at this point. The appeals court judges are going to decide based on the facts in the law in the case. She's all about trying to preserve her company at this point. And I think going public, saying her company is going to try to thrive again, that's the best thing she can do from a business perspective. Legally, I don't think it matters much.
COLLINS: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, that's all we have time for. We appreciate it very much.
TOOBIN: OK. All right.
But she may go in to prison. That was interesting. She had not said -- she had not said that before, that she might abandon her appeal.
COLLINS: True.
TOOBIN: That was interesting last night.
COLLINS: May go straight there.
All right. Very good. Thanks so much, Jeff.
Bill, back to you.
HEMMER: Heidi, thanks for that. Back to Jack right now, fresh off Martha from last night. I know you were up late.
CAFFERTY: I missed it. I planned to do it, but I got busy down in the basement putting the Christmas tree lights away.
A few good men and women may be getting better looking. The "New Yorker" has got a great story about military personnel being entitled to free cosmetic surgery. They and their families can get face-lifts, and nose jobs, and breast enlargements and liposuction all at the tax payers' expense.
Between 2000 and 2003, Army doctors performed 496 breast enlargements and 1,361 liposuction surgeries.
However, it should be noted, for breast enlargements patients must supply their own implants. They don't have those. You've got to bring your own.
One Army private who knows several female soldiers who got free breast surgery says, "We're out there risking our lives. We deserve benefits like that."
And an Army spokeswoman says they do these procedures so the surgeons can have someone to practice on. Having been to a military dentist, I would hesitate, I think.
But -- and there's a difference between cosmetic surgery and reconstructive surgery, which the Army surgeons would be required to be proficient in for treating persons who are wounded in combat.
We're talking about breast implants, here, OK.
So, the question is: Should the military pay for cosmetic surgery?
You can e-mail us and blast, eloquent or not, at am@cnn.com.
HEMMER: Just to be clear, you've got to bring your own silicone, right.
CAFFERTY: Bring your own implants. I guess saline or silicone, or whatever. You know, just show up with your own deal.
HEMMER: Thank you, Jack. CAFFERTY: You got it.
HEMMER: Back to the Christmas lights.
Chad Myers now at the CNN Center watching the weather. Good morning, Chad.
CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: I don't know if you can find them on eBay or not. I'm just kind of wondering where you can pick those up.
(WEATHER REPORT)
MYERS: Back to you guys in New York.
HEMMER: All right. Thank you, Chad for that.
In a moment here, get the very latest on the Kobe Bryant matter -- word his accuser considered removing herself from the case. May have done it twice, in fact. You might be surprised to see who is getting blamed for that.
Back in a moment on that story.
COLLINS: Also ahead, we're "Minding Your Business." Alan Greenspan gets ready for a victory lap on Capitol Hill. We'll explain.
HEMMER: Also, it took Todd Hamilton 17 years as a pro to make it to PGA. Now he is on top of the world. We'll talk to him, the newly crowned British champ a bit later this hour here on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HEMMER: Welcome back, everyone.
Fed chairman Alan Greenspan back on Capitol Hill today. Will the message today be, I told you so?
Christine Romans working for Andy, "Minding Your Business" this morning. I told you so, what?
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, not too long ago you had a lot of people saying that the fed needed to start raising interest rates quickly because the economy was growing strongly. But there was a June lull. And so Mr. Greenspan's slow, measured pace of raising interest rates might be right after all.
Not too hot, not too cold. Probably a Goldilocks situation is what he's going to say. He'll probably take a little bit of a victory lap saying that we're going to watch this. We're going to monitor inflation. A spike in inflation will be transitory.
I'll give you five bucks if he actually uses the word transitory today.
HEMMER: Yes. You think so.
ROMANS: A lot of "green-speak" today.
And we'll probably hear him say that things are going just fine, everybody.
HEMMER: What you've found out, though, higher interest rates is the concern, right now.
ROMANS: Right.
HEMMER: Well, it's the consideration, perhaps not a concern -- a bit overstated. But the mortgage rates continue to drop.
ROMANS: That's the...
HEMMER: What's the juxtaposition here?
ROMANS: That's such an interesting development because the market is actually telling us it is not concerned that the economy is so strong it will create inflation. And so, market interest rates are falling.
For you, that means mortgage rates have been falling and the 30- year is back to six percent.
HEMMER: But that's going right against conventional wisdom.
ROMANS: It is. So I guess if you have to refinance, take a look at the rates.
COLLINS: I'm taking your notes because I'm about to buy a house, so I'm just going to hang on to these.
All right. Thanks so much, Christine.
ROMANS: You're welcome.
COLLINS: Still to come this morning -- the prosecution makes a surprising accusation in the Kobe Bryant case, and it isn't directed at Bryant.
Stay with us on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
