Return to Transcripts main page
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Reporter Found Guilty of Contempt; Chirac Speaks Out Against U.S., Britain While at U.K. Ceremony
Aired November 18, 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.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, freedom under fire. A Rhode Island television reporter have been found guilty of contempt of court for refusing to disclose his confidential source.
JIM TARICANI, WJAR REPORTER: I made a promise to my source, which I intend to keep.
DOBBS: Tonight a "New York Times" reporter, Judith Miller, is also fighting a battle to protect her confidential sources. She's our special guest.
I'll also be with Floyd Abrams, who is representing "The New York Times," and Mort Zuckerman, editor-in-chief of "U.S. News and World Report."
In Iraq, a top U.S. Marine commander says the assault on Falluja has broken the back on the insurgency. General David Grange is my guest.
And shocking testimony on Capitol Hill. A government scientist says the FDA is not protecting the public from dangerous drugs, and he says Vioxx is only one of the drugs we should be worried about.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting Americas against another Vioxx.
DOBBS: And my guests tonight include Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. We'll be talking about U.S. foreign policy.
And conservative reverend Jerry Falwell. We'll be talking about values, poll sticks and the moral, if not silent, majority.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Thursday, November 18. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, a television news reporter faces up to six months in jail in a case that critics say is simply an assault on the freedom of the press.
Jim Taricani was convicted today of criminal contempt for refusing to name a confidential source who gave him a videotape of a city official taking a bribe in Providence, Rhode Island.
After today's hearing, Taricani said he never expected to face jail time for simply doing his job.
Deborah Feyerick reports from Providence.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Calling the guilty verdict an assault on journalistic freedom, investigative reporter Jim Taricani said he'd continue protecting the identity of his source.
TARICANI: I made a promise to my source, which I intend to keep.
FEYERICK: A federal judge finding that promise directly defies a court order, one requiring the reporter to divulge who gave him a copy of an FBI surveillance tape.
TARICANI: When people are afraid, a promise of confidentiality may be the only way to get the information to the public.
FEYERICK: The tape shows a top aide to the former Providence, Rhode Island, mayor, taking a cash bribe inside city hall. Both men would later be found guilty of corruption.
But at the time the tape aired on the local NBC station, everyone involved in the case was under a gag order. The judge saying he didn't object to airing the tape; he objected that someone had broken the law by giving in to the reporter in the first place.
Rhode Island legal expert, Edward Roy.
EDWARD ROY, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER: It is extremely rare, I think, for someone to have defied a court order, as Mr. Taricani did. Although I think the difference in this context is, from what I understand, his argument is that he was basing it on his First Amendment rights as a journalist.
FEYERICK: Taricani is one of a dozen reporters around the country risking fines or prison for not revealing sources. Others are under investigation for source leaks concerning former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee, an outed CIA agent Valerie Plame.
Free speech experts say prosecuting journalists could have a chilling effect.
JOSEPH CAVANAUGH, 1ST AMENDMENT ATTORNEY: There's an important element of the First Amendment that's being infringed, and that is the ability to gather information.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FEYERICK: Taricani has paid $85,000 in fines. Those fines and his legal fees are being covered by his network. He faces up to six months in prison when he's sentenced in December and is considering whether or not to appeal.
Because the reporter received a heart transplant several years ago, his big concern right now is what impact prison will have on his health -- Lou.
DOBBS: Deborah, what is the next step for Taricani?
FEYERICK: The next step right now, he's talking with his lawyers. He's trying to figure out whether he's going to take this all the way. But the judge kept citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling back from 1972, saying that's what he based his decision on, to hold him in contempt.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Deborah Feyerick, reporting from Providence.
As Deborah reported, Taricani's case is only one of many like it across the country. "New York Times" reporter Judith Miller, "TIME" magazine reporter Matt Cooper, also found guilty of contempt for refusing to identify their confidential sources.
"New York Times" reporter Judith Miller will be my guest still ahead here tonight. She will be joined with First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams representing "The New York Times," and Mort Zuckerman, the editor-in-chief of "U.S. News & World Report."
Turning now to Iraq, a top U.S. Marine commander today said the offensive in Falluja has broken the back of the insurgency. General John Sattler also said U.S.-led forces have found documents in Falluja that will help American forces hunt down terrorists and insurgents.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LT. GEN. JOHN SATTLER, U.S. MARINE CORPS: We found a number of ledgers which we're from the process of exploiting right now to list out individuals. It lists fighters from other countries, other parts of the globe, not just immediately surrounding the country of Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: U.S. and Iraqi troops in Falluja are still facing attacks from surviving anti-Iraqi forces. Today, one American Marine and one Iraqi soldier were killed in an ambush.
One of this country's closest allies in the Iraq war, Tony Blair, today met with one of America's harshest critics, President Chirac of France. The two men tried to put on display, a sense, at least, of unity in London, as they celebrated the 100-year alliance between Britain and France.
Earlier, President Chirac launched a new attack on both British and American policy.
Kitty pilgrim reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On the eve of the festivities, French President Chirac criticized his host and denigrated Britain's alliance with the United States.
Iraq was still the sticking point. He clearly would not let it go.
To "The Times" of London, he groused, "Britain gave it support, but I did not see much many return."
To the BBC, he claimed the world was more dangerous because of the war in Iraq, in effect, blaming the United States.
JACQUES CHIRAC, FRENCH PRESIDENT (through translator): There's no doubt that there has been an increase in terrorism. And one of the origins of that has been the situation in Iraq. I'm not at all sure that one can say that the world is safer.
PILGRIM: Prime Minister Tony Blair has been trying to mend relations between the United States and Europe. This week, before the Chirac visit, Blair pointedly stated Europe should drop the criticism.
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: It is not a sensible or intelligent response for us in Europe to ridicule American arguments and parody their political leadership.
PILGRIM: That statement was rebuffed when Chirac, in interviews, stated he doubted that Britain could be a, quote, "honest broker in improving transatlantic relations."
The British are going all out to woo Chirac. During festivities that celebrate the 100 years of friendship between Britain and France, Chirac was feted by the queen, stayed at Windsor Castle, and regaled with "Les Miserables," a musical celebrating French history.
Prime Minister Blair doing his best to play down the awkwardness of Chirac's public criticism.
BLAIR: I think the differences at the time of the conflict were well known, but both of us are now working under U.N. Resolution 1546. Both of us want to see a stable and a Democratic Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Chirac also said history will prove who is right and wrong. But for now, France has refused to send troops. And the French president said the way things are now, I can't imagine there will be French troops in Iraq -- Lou.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Kitty pilgrim.
Well, joining me now for more on the war on Iraq is our CNN military analyst, General David Grange.
General, good to have you with us.
Is general Sattler right? In point of fact, do you believe that the insurgency's back has been broken?
BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I don't think the fight in Falluja, what they found so far, has broken the back of the insurgency. It definitely gave them a severe blow, maybe several.
And the back, I think, of the insurgency will be broken. It depends on the momentum now from this success carried throughout the rest of Iraq in these hot spots.
DOBBS: In following that up, today in "The New York Times," a seven-page classified report, that from intelligence officers, attached to the 1st Marine Expeditionary. They say they need more troops. That's the only way to read it. Do they need more troops?
GRANGE: I think right now is a key time that more troops would help. Not that the troops there aren't qualified, but people are racing from one city to another.
This is a key period of time, up through the elections in January. Both the enemy insurgents are in a race for time. These next two months till the end of December.
The same with the coalition forces and the Iraqi military. And that's their final objective. And so who can subdue the other the fastest during this time and take control and provide security is going to be the winner.
DOBBS: And winning is the only -- only option available in this -- in this war.
General, as you and I have talked at various stages of the war in Iraq, including the assault on Baghdad itself, and in the 18 months following the takeover of Iraq, troops at every point have been the issue, boots on the ground.
Why in the world, with so much at stake and with the security of our troops at stake, their very lives, would we not make every effort to not put more U.S. forces in there to assure maximum security and success?
GRANGE: Well, and the key is to put the troops in the right spots, the right types of troops. It's all tied to the -- to the training of the Iraqi forces, which is going to take awhile to get the quality you need, those that you can trust.
But take Falluja as an example. Falluja, once the fighting, the main fighting is over, there's still going to be small pockets of resistance for some time to come. And someone has to maintain security of that city for some time to come, and someone has to maintain security of that city of 50,000 buildings and the cordon around it until the Iraqi forces can truly take charge of the whole thing. That's going to take some time. And then you have to worry about Ramadi, Samarra, Tikrit, et cetera.
DOBBS: So you're saying we do need more troops. GRANGE: I think you need more troops right now.
DOBBS: General David Grange.
Thank you very much, sir.
GRANGE: My pleasure.
DOBBS: A new warning tonight about Iran's nuclear ambitions. This warning coming from Secretary of State Colin Powell who said the United States has intelligence that suggests Iran is trying to develop nuclear warheads for new ballistic missiles.
Secretary Powell did not provide specific information. His warning follows a report that Iran has a secret nuclear weapons facility in Tehran itself. That report coming from an Iranian opposition group, the National Council for Resistance in Iran.
Still to come here tonight, freedom under fire. A Rhode Island reporter convicted of contempt of court. Two leading journalists facing jail time as well. And I'll be joined by an editor, one of those journalists and a top First-Amendment attorney.
And a government scientist says Vioxx is not the only drug we need to be worried about. We'll have that special report.
And President Bush demands quick action by lawmakers to push key legislation through Congress. We'll have a report from Washington.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: A shocking warning tonight from inside the Food and Drug Administration. A drug safety scientist for the FDA says his agency simply cannot protect us from dangerous drugs. During the Senate investigation today on the Vioxx drug recall, that scientist said Americans are virtually defenseless.
Christine Romans reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A damning assessment of the Food and Drug Administration from the inside.
DR. DAVID GRAHAM, FDA OFFICE OF DRUG SAFETY: Today in 2004, we are faced with what may be the single greatest drug safety catastrophe in the history of this country.
ROMANS: Because of problems at the FDA, he named five other drugs currently on the market that he says need better scrutiny.
Senator Chuck Grassley charges the FDA and drug companies have become far too cozy, and he's angry that Merck aggressively marketed Vioxx even after concerns emerged about its risks. SEN. GRASSLEY (R), IOWA: The bottom line is consumers should not have to second-guess the safety of what's in their medicine cabinet. The public should feel confident that when the FDA approves a drug, you can bank on it being safe and, if the drug isn't safe, that the FDA will take it off the market.
ROMANS: Twenty million Americans have taken Vioxx to ease their aches and pains, not knowing it may raise risks for heart attack and stroke, but Merck says it followed the rules. It pulled Vioxx as soon as clinical studies concluded the drug was not safe.
RAYMOND GILMARTIN, CHAIRMAN & CEO, MERCK: Mr. Chairman, Merck believed wholeheartedly in Vioxx. I believed wholeheartedly in Vioxx.
ROMANS: Dane Gasio does not believe in Vioxx anymore.
DANE GASIO, FORMER VIOXX USER: I still have a time getting out and riding my bikes or going for long walks just because it gets painful. You know, I have a lot of secondary problems, I guess, that arose because of my health getting so bad.
ROMANS: The father of four and former jet engine mechanic for the Air Force says he took Vioxx for 18 months to ease pain in his hands. He ended up in and out of hospitals with mysterious coronary troubles and a blood clot in each lung.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Lou, he's 28 years old. Dane Gasio says he doesn't like to take medicine, but he took Vioxx. He also says he's not the kind of person who likes lawsuits, but he'll go to court. One hundred and five million prescriptions written for Vioxx since 1999. There are a lot of people like Dane Gasio going to go to court.
DOBBS: When you hear someone like Senator Charles Grassley expressing his concerns and deep concerns, it's a reason for all to pay attention.
We will put up a list a number of times during the course of this broadcast of those drugs that the FDA scientist said that you might ought to be concerned about. We will take him at his word and put those back up here on the screen during the course of this broadcast.
Christine, thanks very much.
Christine Romans.
Elsewhere on Capitol Hill, Senator Arlen Specter tonight said he has the support of fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee. He will become their chairman.
Conservative groups had called for Republicans to block him from becoming chairman. They said he tried to warn President Bush against nominating judges who oppose abortion. Senator Specter denies that and today pledged to give the president's nominees quick hearings and early votes. The Judicial Committee will vote on that chairmanship in January.
Congress has several days remaining in its lame-duck session. Tonight, President Bush is urging lawmakers to take action on a number of items not finished before the election.
Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Bush is flexing his political muscle, pressuring Congress to follow his lead. The White House Office of Management and Budget sent letters to the Appropriations Committee chairman urging discretionary spending be limited to no more than $819.4 billion and recommends vetoing any spending bill that exceeds the agreed upon spending limits. Good news for fiscal conservatives.
STEPHEN SILVINSKI, CATO INSTITUTE: A letter of this sort, as sternly worded as it is, is somewhat uncharacteristic, but it shows that they're at least hoping to threaten with a veto the spending bill that's going to come out of Congress soon.
SYLVESTER: It's not unusual for the president to give Congress some direction, but, in this case, he's using a heavy hand. So far, the Republican-led Congress seems to be following in lockstep with the president on the $819 billion spending limit.
A spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee said, "We intend to live within that number to the penny. This will be a clean and lean appropriations bill."
The president has also taken a hands-on approach to the debate over the 9/11 intelligence bill, making several phone calls to keep the negotiations from stalling. Time is running out with Congress set to leave for the holidays by the end of the week.
STEPHEN HESS, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: They don't hear every day from the president of the United States, and it is a Republican majority in both chambers of Congress. And if the president wants it and the president makes his phone call vigorous and strong enough on the point, I think most members would try to give the president what he wants.
SYLVESTER: Political experts say the president is running things a lot like a CEO in charge, directing Congress from the top down.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: Despite the threat to veto the spending bill, President Bush has yet to veto any bill in his four years in office -- Lou.
DOBBS: Lisa, it looks like that may -- may -- change.
Lisa Sylvester -- thank you very much -- reporting from Washington.
In Britain tonight, the visit by French President Jacques Chirac has prompted a temporary but highly symbolic goal -- highly symbolic change at Windsor Castle.
Queen Elizabeth is hosting the French leader there to mark the 100th anniversary of the alliance between Britain and France. The visit includes a performance of "Les Miserables" is what is now being called -- well, Windsor Castle has its own stage, and that theater is being called the Music Room, the name change only due to President Chirac, however. The room's real name is the Waterloo Chamber, named, of course, for the 1815 defeat of Bonaparte by the British.
Still ahead here tonight, freedom under fire. A television reporter now facing jail for doing what journalists have done for decades. My special guest is another journalist facing the prospect of jail, "New York Times" reporter Judith Miller.
I will also be talking with leading First-Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams, "U.S. News & World Report" editor in chief Mort Zuckerman about the assault on the First Amendment.
And illegal alien laborers swamping one American community. The local government's solution has taxpayers there outraged. We'll have that story for you and a great deal more still ahead here tonight.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The absence of a clear federal immigration policy is forcing many local communities to find ways to deal with the invasion of illegal aliens. One Florida town is considering a plan that would use outrageous amounts of taxpayer money to find a solution to its problems.
Bill Tucker has that story from Jupiter, Florida.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hundreds of workers line Center Street every morning in Jupiter, Florida, willing, ready and illegal. That doesn't stop employers in search of cheap day laborers from hiring them. This is not a commercial street. It's a neighborhood, with much of the illegal activity taking place within yards of school bus stops. Residents are angry.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it's absolutely wrong that they're allowing these people to do this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The landlords here are harboring illegal aliens, and it's depressing our property values.
TUCKER: The police can make arrests, but they cannot deport.
RICHARD WESTGATE, JUPITER POLICE CHIEF: We have called INS in the past. The illegal immigrant situation with the Guatemalans is not a high priority item with INS, but it is a local problem. TUCKER (on camera): In the face of anger and complaints from the community, the township is considering buying this building to make it the gathering place for the day laborers at a cost of $1 million to the taxpayers.
(voice-over): The project has the support of many on the town council, but not all.
KATHLEEN KOZINSKI, JUPITER TOWN COUNCIL MEMBER: I'm not opposed to a government-sponsored program that assists legal citizens who have Social Security numbers to try to find work. I'm not opposed to that at all. But, as I mentioned before, I am adamantly opposed to the town buying a building for the purpose of fostering illegal activities.
TUCKER: Local activists, though, are pushing for the project, using the argument that the illegals are part of the community and willing to work.
TIMOTHY STEIGENGA, CORN-MAYA ADVOCACY GROUP: As long as the federal government is not enforcing immigration laws everywhere, then the local government has the duty to make the situation as safe and as clean and as best for all residents of Jupiter as it possibly can, and that's what we think a labor center will do.
TUCKER: As of now, no decision has been made over the creation of a day laborer center.
Bill Tucker, CNN, Jupiter, Florida.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Still ahead, one of our most precious freedoms under fire. A reporter tonight facing jail time for simply doing his job. Tonight, I'll be joined by Mort Zuckerman, editor in chief, "U.S. News & World Report." Floyd Abrams, one of the country's leading First- Amendment attorneys and Judith Miller, a "New York Times" reporter, fighting her own battle to defend her First-Amendment rights and yours.
And the Bush agenda for the next four years: foreign policy, intelligence reform and the politics of values. Conservative Reverend Jerry Falwell, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, are my guests.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: In a moment, freedom under fire. I'll be joined by our panel of experts on the issue of protecting journalists' rights and your right to know.
But, first, a look at some of the top stories tonight.
Fears of another mad cow case in the United States. The Department of Agriculture investigating an inconclusive test for the disease. The USDA says the cow in question never entered the food chain or feed chain. Final test results will be expected over the course of the next week.
In Florida, some grave passengers saved their bus from plunging almost 200 feet into the water. That bus traveling along the Sunshine Skyway Bridge when the driver collapsed of a heart attack. Passengers were able to regain control of the bus after it hit a concrete barrier on the bridge. The driver later died at an area hospital.
For the first time following the September 11 attacks, airports will be able to hire their own baggage screeners. Beginning today, airports can apply to make the switch from federal to private screeners. The Transportation Safety Administration will still oversee the private screening companies hired by the airports. The federal government was brought in when private screeners were found to be incompetent.
And, as promised, the list of drugs one scientist for the federal drug administration says we should be concerned about. Meridia, Crestor leading off those drugs, and Meridia is a weight loss drug; Crestor, a cholesterol drug. Bextra and Accutane as well as Serevent. Now those five drugs the leading drug safety expert at the FDA disagreeing with his agency saying that those drugs bear greater scrutiny.
A reporter in Providence, Rhode Island, at we reported to you at the outset of this broadcast, faces up to six months in jail, after he was convicted today of criminal contempt. Jim Taricani refused to disclose who gave him a FBI videotape showing a city official taking a bribe.
Taricani called his conviction an assault on journalistic freedom. He said he never expected to go to jail for simply doing his job. That case one of many, unfortunately, like it around the country.
Joining me now to discuss what is categorically a mounting assault on the freedom of the press are Mort Zuckerman. He is the editor in chief of "U.S. News & World Report." Floyd Abrams joins us as well. He's one of the leading attorneys in this country specializing in the First Amendment. And Judith Miller, reporter for "The New York Times." She has also been found guilty of attempt contempt of court for refusing to reveal information about her confidential sources. She's appealing that decision. Floyd Abrams is representing her and "The New York Times."
We also tonight invited several government officials to join us for this discussion. They either declined or simply did not respond to our invitation. Thank you all for being here. Judith, you are, at this point, squarely in the crosshairs of what is a broadening assault on the first amendment, by any definition.
JUDITH MILLER, "NEW YORK TIMES": Absolutely. There are a dozen reporters in my situation, though perhaps not as far along.
DOBBS: And you are, at this point, appealing. Floyd Abrams, where do we stand?
FLOYD ABRAMS, FIRST AMENDMENT ATTORNEY: Well, we're arguing the appeal on December 8th in the court of appeals in Washington. And that involves Judith Miller and Matt Cooper of "Time" magazine, and we'll hear from that court.
DOBBS: Judith, at this point, you're putting your person at risk. Is there, in your judgment, I think I should say, first of all neither you nor "The New York Times" published anything to do with the material involved in this.
That's correct, isn't it?
MILLER: That is correct, I'm facing jail for something I never wrote.
DOBBS: And what is it precisely that the government wants to get from you, that is, in any way, material to their -- to the broader investigation?
MILLER: Well, they want to talk to me about an alleged source that I may have had a conversation with about who leaked the name of Valerie Plame, the wife of Joe Wilson. And the government says that because government officials have signed waivers of their confidential discussions with journalists, that I'm no longer bound by my pledge of confidentiality to the people I may have discussed this issue with.
DOBBS: Assuming those people were the ones who were your sources.
MILLER: Assuming those people were the ones, and I simply will not go down this road and begin to discuss potential sources, because that would mean that no one would ever come to me again and feel confident that I would protect him or her if they choose to expose wrongdoing or tell me their side of the story. I mean, this is not about me. This is about the public's right to know.
DOBBS: Mort, the idea that journalists, their editors and their publishers, you often find yourself in the role of all three, to be assaulted in this way.
Is this a turning point in the history of the first amendment?
MORT ZUCKERMAN, "U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT": Well, it very well can be. I think it's outrageous what's going on. The case that you mentioned I think is outrageous, and going after Judy is outrageous on many grounds, on its own merits. But on the fact, for example, that one of the other people who did publish this information, at least to the public knowledge, we don't know whether he has been interrogated by the special prosecutor or not. I mean, spending millions of dollars to go after this case, I think, is absolutely ridiculous.
We are in a position now where it seems to me what is required, although it's highly unlikely politically, is some kind of federal shield law to protect journalists and their sources both for confidential information and indeed nonconfidential information, because otherwise they're not going to be able to do their job at a time when the role of journalists, in exposing wrongdoing on the part of government officials or at least concealed policies on the part of government officials is absolutely necessary and essential.
DOBBS: Floyd, in the Taricani case in Providence, the judge made it very clear, he was relying upon what is considered a muddled decision, the 1972 Supreme Court decision. Which was -- is not explicit, certainly not to the satisfaction of those of us who are engaged and were protected by the First Amendment.
What is your thought about the idea of relying on the '72 case?
ABRAMS: Well, the '72 case called Branzburg vs. Hayes was a 5 to 4 opinion in which the fifth judge, Justice Louis Powell, also wrote a separate opinion of his own saying, in effect, that there really ought to be some way to balance the interests, every case issue by issue as to how much people really need this information. So the reality is, we don't know what that case means. One justice said, this was four and a half to four and a half. And we don't really know the ultimate impact of the case. We may find out in our case.
But at this moment, the law is muddled. And one of the results of that, is that when prosecutors go to court and say, we want this information, we have some good reason, we need the information, unfortunately, there are some judges who have agreed and are really sort of cracking down. And that's one of the things that I find particularly distressing about the whole thing, because this arises at a time in our history when we've never needed an alive, vibrant, inquiring press more. And in which it may be that the press has never been more disliked by the public.
DOBBS: And one could argue that talented, and I'll say this in front of you, talented, energetic journalists digging for truth have never perhaps been scarcer in our craft. The idea that others have, in point of fact, given limited testimony about their sources in this case has occurred with journalists from NBC, "The Washington Post," and "Time" magazine, although Matt Cooper resisted, going farther than that limited -- the journalist at "Time" magazine going farther than that limited response.
Does that weaken your case, in your mind?
And I know that -- I'm asking both of you. I'm going to ask you first, Judith, if I could.
MILLER: Well, I think every journalist has to come to his own decision about cooperating. I think that I decided from the very beginning that I didn't want to go down the road of beginning to testify about people who may or may not have been sources. I don't think that their decision affects the principle at stake here in this case.
ADAMS: And I'd also add that the experience of Matt Cooper, who I represent, sort of bears witness to what can happen. He was told and I was told, that if he would just testify about one source, that -- and that source then gave his permission, gave his permission, he never would have done it if the source had agreed. But if he would talk about the one source, that would be the end of it. And the prosecutor said, look, if I have to call you back again, I will. Well, sure enough, that's what happened. The questions were about the one source. He answered the questions. And, again, only because the source said he could. And then a week later, we got another subpoena. And so now they want to know everybody else other than that source to whom he spoke. So, you know, while journalists may disagree about some aspects of almost tactics, the reality here is that this is no end.
ZUCKERMAN: A slippery slope. A very slippery slope.
MILLER: Which is why I didn't want to go down that road to begin with.
DOBBS: Mort, as you talk about a shield law, 31 states have a shield law in this country, yet there is no federal overarching protection, as you suggest. We need one. The politics of this are also, obviously, pertinent. The likelihood, in your judgment that a shield law could be enacted?
ZUCKERMAN: Well, somebody asked me about that, and asking whether it was next to zero. I said that overstates it, it's zero. There is no chance that such a legislation will be enacted in the present political environment. The press is very unpopular. And the control of the both houses and, indeed, the administration, I think their views are very, very different about this. I mean, I frankly think they treat the press as the enemy, and this is not going to be something they're going to give to the press to enhance their capability to function.
ABRAMS: That's sort of ironic, if I may, that this all began with Bob Novak, then whom no one is more conservative, and who himself made a promise of confidentiality. And while we don't know what's going on with Mr. Novak, we do know that he promised confidentiality and then he did a column based on that promise of confidentiality.
DOBBS: Newspaper column. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Since he is also a colleague of ours.
ABRAMS: Indeed. My point is...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: But as we look at the situation that you're in, Matt Cooper and Jim Taricani, and now a widening spread of this, the press is not particularly popular with the public in this, and often has to dig up unpleasant facts for the public. The political climate is not right for a shield law. What is the most appropriate strategy to take here? Is it simply within the court system itself and hope you win on appeal?
ABRAMS: Yes. I mean, there are only two places to go. DOBBS: I'm not suggesting that with Floyd Abrams, that you don't have considerably more than a hope.
ABRAMS: Thank you. No, all we've got is the courts and the Congress, the only place we can go. And if we don't win in one of them, then the world is going to change. Because we really can't go on with a system where the law is clear, and it's not now. But it's clear that journalists can't promise confidentiality. If they really can't, they won't.
MILLER: Especially, in an environment of growing secrecy.
ABRAMS: And if they won't.
MILLER: I mean, since 9/11, for understandable reasons, but still, so much more is now classified or determined to be, quote, sensitive, which means it's not distributed. And unless the public wants to hear only from those who are authorized and blessed to speak from the government, we need to encourage those whistle blowers to come forward. And you can't encourage that if they believe that we can't protect them. That's what's at stake here.
ZUCKERMAN: Another problem, though, that is emerging is the definition of a journalist. With the Internet, almost anyone can self-declare themselves to be journalists. And so where do you draw those lines? That's going to become an increasingly difficult issue.
ABRAMS: Many of the states who have these shield laws, you mentioned 31 states, define journalist very broadly to adjust your point, Mort. And to say basically, people that gather information for dissemination of it to others. That's who gets protected.
DOBBS: Well, there is no question about the credentials of certainly the "New York Times," "U.S. News & World Report," and no question about your courage. And all of us in the craft, it is too easy and simply too (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to say thank you. But with great respect and thanks, Judith Miller, Floyd Abrams and Mort Zuckerman.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Would you support a federal shield law for reporters? Yes or no. Please cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll have the results coming up for you later in the broadcast.
Still ahead here tonight, I'll be talking with prominent Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein about U.S. foreign policy, changes in the Bush administration, and the direction of the next four years.
And the conservative Reverend Jerry Falwell says the president's re-election is the result of what he calls an evangelical revolution. We'll be talking about that and perhaps the role of Latinos and women voters as well. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, there are new concerns tonight about Iran's nuclear ambitions. Secretary of State Colin Powell today said the United States has intelligence that suggests Iran is trying to develop nuclear warheads as well as new ballistic missiles. It comes as an Iranian opposition group has warned Iran has a secret nuclear weapons facility in Tehran. I talked earlier with Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, and asked her thoughts about these warnings.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: Well, I think it's hard to know. I've heard the various reports. I think it's very important that the IAEA get in there and be able to do unannounced inspections. I hope that the Europeans, in their agreement with Iran, have taken into consideration the need for long-term, specific inspections. I think that's the only way to learn this.
And then, of course, the United States, by its methodology of observation may be able to pick something up as well.
DOBBS: In that regard, CIA Director Porter Goss is creating quite a stir at the CIA. They are moving people out of there, the top two positions in the clandestine service. Your thoughts as to what kind of job he's doing.
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think it's too easy to assess. I think we all know there need to be changes. The question that I have is how it's being done. I've just written a letter to him indicating more fully what I thought. But I read parts of the letter that has been in the public press. And the wording, if you read it just in strict English, is that the CIA must carry out the president's policies.
Well, I think in terms of intelligence, it's not just the president that receives this intelligence, it's the Congress that has the obligation to declare and fund war. And therefore what we're interested in is unbiased, apolitical reporting that has state of the art analytic style to it, is peer-reviewed and that we can take as is close to fact as possible.
And this is where I think the failures are. I think they are structural. I don't think they're individual. I think they're in the analytic division. They have to do with analysts being able to evaluate the source correctly, to know whether the source of human intelligence is credible or not.
DOBBS: And Senator, another important change, the most important in the cabinet, Secretary of State Powell stepping down to be replaced by Condoleezza Rice. What are your -- what's your reaction to her appointment?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I know Condoleezza Rice. I think very highly of her. I think she has an opportunity to be a brilliant secretary of state. I think what's very important in these hearings is to scope out her strategic vision of where the next four years are going to go.
And I would be hopeful that a solution between the Israelis and the Palestinians is at the top of the list, because I believe that this crisis, left unsolved, really can exacerbate a clash of civilizations. And now that Yasser Arafat has died and there are people on the horizon like Abu Mazen and Abu Ala and Dahlan, the possibilities of a very constructive Palestinian leadership that has the technical leadership, strength and ability to forge an agreement is there.
And I think the Israelis have to be pushed. I am very hopeful that Prime Minister Sharon will not have a set of qualifications, now that Arafat is gone, that need to be filled before he can enter into negotiations for a final settlement agreement.
I think the road map is dead. I think we should move to final settlement. And I think the only way is to have a Palestinian state and an Israeli state living side-by-side, and that that Israeli state can have safe and secure borders.
And that's what needs to be discussed and an agreement needs to be struck. A lot of work has been done. We know the parameters by and large of that agreement. And I think it needs to be pushed. So I would hope that this new secretary of state would be able to have a special envoy, perhaps former Secretary Powell to go over, spend time in the region. And it be a major exercise of senior leadership diplomacy.
DOBBS: Senator Dianne Feinstein, thanks for being here.
FEINSTEIN: You're very welcome, thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming right up, why Reverend Jerry Falwell is leading a mass recruitment effort. He is my guest when we continue. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, a warning tonight about at least 5 drugs now on the market that may pose major risks to consumers. The same government drug reviewer, the drug safety scientist who raised safety questions about Vioxx also today in a Senate committee hearing, raising serious concerns about these drugs: Meridia -- Meridia and Crestor, a cholesterol drug, Bextra, Accutane, an acne drug and Serevent. Those 5 drugs -- he said the sales of those drugs, in fact, should be limited or stopped altogether.
We bring that to you just in the interest of public information. But those -- that warning coming from one of the leading drug safety scientists today on Capitol Hill.
President Bush's decisive re-election inspired my next guest to create the Faith and Values Coalition. Reverend Jerry Falwell joins me tonight from Washington D.C. Good to have you with us.
REV. JERRY FALWELL, FAITH AND VALUES COALITION: You -- why do you feel compelled to start this now? Apparently the evangelical Christians did well on November 2. FALWELL: Well, Lou, 25 years ago, as you know, I started the Moral Majority that became the religious right and for 10 years led that group. Then went back to Liberty University, Thomas Rowe Church, my primary ministry for the last 15 years.
We saw the culmination of November 2 of 25 hard years of work by people of faith in this country committed to the Judeo/Christian ethic. And 30 million evangelicals came out to the polls, most of them voting for George Bush and for 11 family initiatives and for pro- life, pro-family senators, congressmen. So we're launching a coalition that has a threefold purpose.
One, we want to help the president get good, strict constructionist judges appointed to the Supreme Court and federal courts in general. Two, to get the federal management amendment passed as quickly as possible, defining the family as a man married to a woman. And then voter registration beginning immediately to strengthen the president's hand in '06 and '08 and hopefully get another good George Bush-type elected in '08.
And anyone interested in knowing more about the new coalition may go to the Web site, faithandvalues.us.
DOBBS: Reverend Falwell, another conservative religious leader, Dr. James Dobson, saying that Arlen Specter was not acceptable to him on the Judiciary Committee. It now appears he will be the chairman of the committee. Are you comfortable with him?
FALWELL: Well, I've spent the day today here in Washington with James Dobson and a number of religious leaders. Yes, we are well aware that he is the chairman. He has made a firm commitment to all of us in writing and publicly and to the president, that he will, in fact, give a fair hearing to every nominee to the court and all the president's proposals, send them out to the Senate floor for a full vote. That's all anyone can ask.
I believe the senator's a man of integrity. I take him at his word. I may disagree with him from time to time, but I believe he's an honorable man who will do what he said he'll do.
DOBBS: Your organization, the others that you were talking with, many of the others that you talked with today absolutely opposed to gay marriage in this country, a constitutional amendment, as you've said, one of the priorities. And styling it as defensive marriage, the integrity of marriage, yet the fact of the matter is, gay marriage has very little to do with the difficulties facing most marriages in this country today. In point of fact, all of the research says it is about money. It is about changing values, broader certainly than simply our times that we now live in. And, in fact, divorce rates in some of the Bible Belt states, so-called are higher than those and those nasty blue northeastern states, for example. How do you rationalize that?
FALWELL: Well, Lou, there's no question the family is facing severe pressures. You're right. Gay marriage is only one of the problems. But it's the one that is attempting to redefine marriage as something other than a man married to a woman. It's a fundamental challenge that must not be allowed to prevail. And most Americans went to the polls 3-1 in most of the 11 states voting on the initiatives, 3-1 take the position that we don't want that in America. And the reason for the coalition, we're going to get about a 10 million more voters to the polls in '08 to see to it that we keep a president who believes that.
DOBBS: Reverend Jerry Falwell, we thank you for being here. Come back soon.
FALWELL: Thank you.
DOBBS: This looks like it's a topic we're going to be discussing a lot in the months and years ahead. Reverend Jerry Falwell, thank you.
Still ahead, the results of our poll tonight. And a preview of what's ahead here tomorrow. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight, 61 percent of you would support a federal shield law for reporters. 39 percent say you would not.
Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us here tomorrow. Tomorrow, legislation on recommendations from the 9/11 commission stalled in Congress. Joining me tomorrow, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Senator Pat Roberts and Senator John Rockefeller. We'll find out when those 9/11 recommendations are going to be passed. Please be with us.
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is coming up next.
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 November 18, 2004 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOU DOBBS, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, freedom under fire. A Rhode Island television reporter have been found guilty of contempt of court for refusing to disclose his confidential source.
JIM TARICANI, WJAR REPORTER: I made a promise to my source, which I intend to keep.
DOBBS: Tonight a "New York Times" reporter, Judith Miller, is also fighting a battle to protect her confidential sources. She's our special guest.
I'll also be with Floyd Abrams, who is representing "The New York Times," and Mort Zuckerman, editor-in-chief of "U.S. News and World Report."
In Iraq, a top U.S. Marine commander says the assault on Falluja has broken the back on the insurgency. General David Grange is my guest.
And shocking testimony on Capitol Hill. A government scientist says the FDA is not protecting the public from dangerous drugs, and he says Vioxx is only one of the drugs we should be worried about.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting Americas against another Vioxx.
DOBBS: And my guests tonight include Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. We'll be talking about U.S. foreign policy.
And conservative reverend Jerry Falwell. We'll be talking about values, poll sticks and the moral, if not silent, majority.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Thursday, November 18. Here now for an hour of news, debate and opinion is Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: Good evening.
Tonight, a television news reporter faces up to six months in jail in a case that critics say is simply an assault on the freedom of the press.
Jim Taricani was convicted today of criminal contempt for refusing to name a confidential source who gave him a videotape of a city official taking a bribe in Providence, Rhode Island.
After today's hearing, Taricani said he never expected to face jail time for simply doing his job.
Deborah Feyerick reports from Providence.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Calling the guilty verdict an assault on journalistic freedom, investigative reporter Jim Taricani said he'd continue protecting the identity of his source.
TARICANI: I made a promise to my source, which I intend to keep.
FEYERICK: A federal judge finding that promise directly defies a court order, one requiring the reporter to divulge who gave him a copy of an FBI surveillance tape.
TARICANI: When people are afraid, a promise of confidentiality may be the only way to get the information to the public.
FEYERICK: The tape shows a top aide to the former Providence, Rhode Island, mayor, taking a cash bribe inside city hall. Both men would later be found guilty of corruption.
But at the time the tape aired on the local NBC station, everyone involved in the case was under a gag order. The judge saying he didn't object to airing the tape; he objected that someone had broken the law by giving in to the reporter in the first place.
Rhode Island legal expert, Edward Roy.
EDWARD ROY, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER: It is extremely rare, I think, for someone to have defied a court order, as Mr. Taricani did. Although I think the difference in this context is, from what I understand, his argument is that he was basing it on his First Amendment rights as a journalist.
FEYERICK: Taricani is one of a dozen reporters around the country risking fines or prison for not revealing sources. Others are under investigation for source leaks concerning former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee, an outed CIA agent Valerie Plame.
Free speech experts say prosecuting journalists could have a chilling effect.
JOSEPH CAVANAUGH, 1ST AMENDMENT ATTORNEY: There's an important element of the First Amendment that's being infringed, and that is the ability to gather information.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FEYERICK: Taricani has paid $85,000 in fines. Those fines and his legal fees are being covered by his network. He faces up to six months in prison when he's sentenced in December and is considering whether or not to appeal.
Because the reporter received a heart transplant several years ago, his big concern right now is what impact prison will have on his health -- Lou.
DOBBS: Deborah, what is the next step for Taricani?
FEYERICK: The next step right now, he's talking with his lawyers. He's trying to figure out whether he's going to take this all the way. But the judge kept citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling back from 1972, saying that's what he based his decision on, to hold him in contempt.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Deborah Feyerick, reporting from Providence.
As Deborah reported, Taricani's case is only one of many like it across the country. "New York Times" reporter Judith Miller, "TIME" magazine reporter Matt Cooper, also found guilty of contempt for refusing to identify their confidential sources.
"New York Times" reporter Judith Miller will be my guest still ahead here tonight. She will be joined with First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams representing "The New York Times," and Mort Zuckerman, the editor-in-chief of "U.S. News & World Report."
Turning now to Iraq, a top U.S. Marine commander today said the offensive in Falluja has broken the back of the insurgency. General John Sattler also said U.S.-led forces have found documents in Falluja that will help American forces hunt down terrorists and insurgents.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LT. GEN. JOHN SATTLER, U.S. MARINE CORPS: We found a number of ledgers which we're from the process of exploiting right now to list out individuals. It lists fighters from other countries, other parts of the globe, not just immediately surrounding the country of Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOBBS: U.S. and Iraqi troops in Falluja are still facing attacks from surviving anti-Iraqi forces. Today, one American Marine and one Iraqi soldier were killed in an ambush.
One of this country's closest allies in the Iraq war, Tony Blair, today met with one of America's harshest critics, President Chirac of France. The two men tried to put on display, a sense, at least, of unity in London, as they celebrated the 100-year alliance between Britain and France.
Earlier, President Chirac launched a new attack on both British and American policy.
Kitty pilgrim reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On the eve of the festivities, French President Chirac criticized his host and denigrated Britain's alliance with the United States.
Iraq was still the sticking point. He clearly would not let it go.
To "The Times" of London, he groused, "Britain gave it support, but I did not see much many return."
To the BBC, he claimed the world was more dangerous because of the war in Iraq, in effect, blaming the United States.
JACQUES CHIRAC, FRENCH PRESIDENT (through translator): There's no doubt that there has been an increase in terrorism. And one of the origins of that has been the situation in Iraq. I'm not at all sure that one can say that the world is safer.
PILGRIM: Prime Minister Tony Blair has been trying to mend relations between the United States and Europe. This week, before the Chirac visit, Blair pointedly stated Europe should drop the criticism.
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: It is not a sensible or intelligent response for us in Europe to ridicule American arguments and parody their political leadership.
PILGRIM: That statement was rebuffed when Chirac, in interviews, stated he doubted that Britain could be a, quote, "honest broker in improving transatlantic relations."
The British are going all out to woo Chirac. During festivities that celebrate the 100 years of friendship between Britain and France, Chirac was feted by the queen, stayed at Windsor Castle, and regaled with "Les Miserables," a musical celebrating French history.
Prime Minister Blair doing his best to play down the awkwardness of Chirac's public criticism.
BLAIR: I think the differences at the time of the conflict were well known, but both of us are now working under U.N. Resolution 1546. Both of us want to see a stable and a Democratic Iraq.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PILGRIM: Chirac also said history will prove who is right and wrong. But for now, France has refused to send troops. And the French president said the way things are now, I can't imagine there will be French troops in Iraq -- Lou.
DOBBS: Thank you very much, Kitty pilgrim.
Well, joining me now for more on the war on Iraq is our CNN military analyst, General David Grange.
General, good to have you with us.
Is general Sattler right? In point of fact, do you believe that the insurgency's back has been broken?
BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I don't think the fight in Falluja, what they found so far, has broken the back of the insurgency. It definitely gave them a severe blow, maybe several.
And the back, I think, of the insurgency will be broken. It depends on the momentum now from this success carried throughout the rest of Iraq in these hot spots.
DOBBS: In following that up, today in "The New York Times," a seven-page classified report, that from intelligence officers, attached to the 1st Marine Expeditionary. They say they need more troops. That's the only way to read it. Do they need more troops?
GRANGE: I think right now is a key time that more troops would help. Not that the troops there aren't qualified, but people are racing from one city to another.
This is a key period of time, up through the elections in January. Both the enemy insurgents are in a race for time. These next two months till the end of December.
The same with the coalition forces and the Iraqi military. And that's their final objective. And so who can subdue the other the fastest during this time and take control and provide security is going to be the winner.
DOBBS: And winning is the only -- only option available in this -- in this war.
General, as you and I have talked at various stages of the war in Iraq, including the assault on Baghdad itself, and in the 18 months following the takeover of Iraq, troops at every point have been the issue, boots on the ground.
Why in the world, with so much at stake and with the security of our troops at stake, their very lives, would we not make every effort to not put more U.S. forces in there to assure maximum security and success?
GRANGE: Well, and the key is to put the troops in the right spots, the right types of troops. It's all tied to the -- to the training of the Iraqi forces, which is going to take awhile to get the quality you need, those that you can trust.
But take Falluja as an example. Falluja, once the fighting, the main fighting is over, there's still going to be small pockets of resistance for some time to come. And someone has to maintain security of that city for some time to come, and someone has to maintain security of that city of 50,000 buildings and the cordon around it until the Iraqi forces can truly take charge of the whole thing. That's going to take some time. And then you have to worry about Ramadi, Samarra, Tikrit, et cetera.
DOBBS: So you're saying we do need more troops. GRANGE: I think you need more troops right now.
DOBBS: General David Grange.
Thank you very much, sir.
GRANGE: My pleasure.
DOBBS: A new warning tonight about Iran's nuclear ambitions. This warning coming from Secretary of State Colin Powell who said the United States has intelligence that suggests Iran is trying to develop nuclear warheads for new ballistic missiles.
Secretary Powell did not provide specific information. His warning follows a report that Iran has a secret nuclear weapons facility in Tehran itself. That report coming from an Iranian opposition group, the National Council for Resistance in Iran.
Still to come here tonight, freedom under fire. A Rhode Island reporter convicted of contempt of court. Two leading journalists facing jail time as well. And I'll be joined by an editor, one of those journalists and a top First-Amendment attorney.
And a government scientist says Vioxx is not the only drug we need to be worried about. We'll have that special report.
And President Bush demands quick action by lawmakers to push key legislation through Congress. We'll have a report from Washington.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: A shocking warning tonight from inside the Food and Drug Administration. A drug safety scientist for the FDA says his agency simply cannot protect us from dangerous drugs. During the Senate investigation today on the Vioxx drug recall, that scientist said Americans are virtually defenseless.
Christine Romans reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A damning assessment of the Food and Drug Administration from the inside.
DR. DAVID GRAHAM, FDA OFFICE OF DRUG SAFETY: Today in 2004, we are faced with what may be the single greatest drug safety catastrophe in the history of this country.
ROMANS: Because of problems at the FDA, he named five other drugs currently on the market that he says need better scrutiny.
Senator Chuck Grassley charges the FDA and drug companies have become far too cozy, and he's angry that Merck aggressively marketed Vioxx even after concerns emerged about its risks. SEN. GRASSLEY (R), IOWA: The bottom line is consumers should not have to second-guess the safety of what's in their medicine cabinet. The public should feel confident that when the FDA approves a drug, you can bank on it being safe and, if the drug isn't safe, that the FDA will take it off the market.
ROMANS: Twenty million Americans have taken Vioxx to ease their aches and pains, not knowing it may raise risks for heart attack and stroke, but Merck says it followed the rules. It pulled Vioxx as soon as clinical studies concluded the drug was not safe.
RAYMOND GILMARTIN, CHAIRMAN & CEO, MERCK: Mr. Chairman, Merck believed wholeheartedly in Vioxx. I believed wholeheartedly in Vioxx.
ROMANS: Dane Gasio does not believe in Vioxx anymore.
DANE GASIO, FORMER VIOXX USER: I still have a time getting out and riding my bikes or going for long walks just because it gets painful. You know, I have a lot of secondary problems, I guess, that arose because of my health getting so bad.
ROMANS: The father of four and former jet engine mechanic for the Air Force says he took Vioxx for 18 months to ease pain in his hands. He ended up in and out of hospitals with mysterious coronary troubles and a blood clot in each lung.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: Lou, he's 28 years old. Dane Gasio says he doesn't like to take medicine, but he took Vioxx. He also says he's not the kind of person who likes lawsuits, but he'll go to court. One hundred and five million prescriptions written for Vioxx since 1999. There are a lot of people like Dane Gasio going to go to court.
DOBBS: When you hear someone like Senator Charles Grassley expressing his concerns and deep concerns, it's a reason for all to pay attention.
We will put up a list a number of times during the course of this broadcast of those drugs that the FDA scientist said that you might ought to be concerned about. We will take him at his word and put those back up here on the screen during the course of this broadcast.
Christine, thanks very much.
Christine Romans.
Elsewhere on Capitol Hill, Senator Arlen Specter tonight said he has the support of fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee. He will become their chairman.
Conservative groups had called for Republicans to block him from becoming chairman. They said he tried to warn President Bush against nominating judges who oppose abortion. Senator Specter denies that and today pledged to give the president's nominees quick hearings and early votes. The Judicial Committee will vote on that chairmanship in January.
Congress has several days remaining in its lame-duck session. Tonight, President Bush is urging lawmakers to take action on a number of items not finished before the election.
Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Bush is flexing his political muscle, pressuring Congress to follow his lead. The White House Office of Management and Budget sent letters to the Appropriations Committee chairman urging discretionary spending be limited to no more than $819.4 billion and recommends vetoing any spending bill that exceeds the agreed upon spending limits. Good news for fiscal conservatives.
STEPHEN SILVINSKI, CATO INSTITUTE: A letter of this sort, as sternly worded as it is, is somewhat uncharacteristic, but it shows that they're at least hoping to threaten with a veto the spending bill that's going to come out of Congress soon.
SYLVESTER: It's not unusual for the president to give Congress some direction, but, in this case, he's using a heavy hand. So far, the Republican-led Congress seems to be following in lockstep with the president on the $819 billion spending limit.
A spokesman for the House Appropriations Committee said, "We intend to live within that number to the penny. This will be a clean and lean appropriations bill."
The president has also taken a hands-on approach to the debate over the 9/11 intelligence bill, making several phone calls to keep the negotiations from stalling. Time is running out with Congress set to leave for the holidays by the end of the week.
STEPHEN HESS, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: They don't hear every day from the president of the United States, and it is a Republican majority in both chambers of Congress. And if the president wants it and the president makes his phone call vigorous and strong enough on the point, I think most members would try to give the president what he wants.
SYLVESTER: Political experts say the president is running things a lot like a CEO in charge, directing Congress from the top down.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: Despite the threat to veto the spending bill, President Bush has yet to veto any bill in his four years in office -- Lou.
DOBBS: Lisa, it looks like that may -- may -- change.
Lisa Sylvester -- thank you very much -- reporting from Washington.
In Britain tonight, the visit by French President Jacques Chirac has prompted a temporary but highly symbolic goal -- highly symbolic change at Windsor Castle.
Queen Elizabeth is hosting the French leader there to mark the 100th anniversary of the alliance between Britain and France. The visit includes a performance of "Les Miserables" is what is now being called -- well, Windsor Castle has its own stage, and that theater is being called the Music Room, the name change only due to President Chirac, however. The room's real name is the Waterloo Chamber, named, of course, for the 1815 defeat of Bonaparte by the British.
Still ahead here tonight, freedom under fire. A television reporter now facing jail for doing what journalists have done for decades. My special guest is another journalist facing the prospect of jail, "New York Times" reporter Judith Miller.
I will also be talking with leading First-Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams, "U.S. News & World Report" editor in chief Mort Zuckerman about the assault on the First Amendment.
And illegal alien laborers swamping one American community. The local government's solution has taxpayers there outraged. We'll have that story for you and a great deal more still ahead here tonight.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The absence of a clear federal immigration policy is forcing many local communities to find ways to deal with the invasion of illegal aliens. One Florida town is considering a plan that would use outrageous amounts of taxpayer money to find a solution to its problems.
Bill Tucker has that story from Jupiter, Florida.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BILL TUCKER, CNN FINANCIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hundreds of workers line Center Street every morning in Jupiter, Florida, willing, ready and illegal. That doesn't stop employers in search of cheap day laborers from hiring them. This is not a commercial street. It's a neighborhood, with much of the illegal activity taking place within yards of school bus stops. Residents are angry.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think it's absolutely wrong that they're allowing these people to do this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The landlords here are harboring illegal aliens, and it's depressing our property values.
TUCKER: The police can make arrests, but they cannot deport.
RICHARD WESTGATE, JUPITER POLICE CHIEF: We have called INS in the past. The illegal immigrant situation with the Guatemalans is not a high priority item with INS, but it is a local problem. TUCKER (on camera): In the face of anger and complaints from the community, the township is considering buying this building to make it the gathering place for the day laborers at a cost of $1 million to the taxpayers.
(voice-over): The project has the support of many on the town council, but not all.
KATHLEEN KOZINSKI, JUPITER TOWN COUNCIL MEMBER: I'm not opposed to a government-sponsored program that assists legal citizens who have Social Security numbers to try to find work. I'm not opposed to that at all. But, as I mentioned before, I am adamantly opposed to the town buying a building for the purpose of fostering illegal activities.
TUCKER: Local activists, though, are pushing for the project, using the argument that the illegals are part of the community and willing to work.
TIMOTHY STEIGENGA, CORN-MAYA ADVOCACY GROUP: As long as the federal government is not enforcing immigration laws everywhere, then the local government has the duty to make the situation as safe and as clean and as best for all residents of Jupiter as it possibly can, and that's what we think a labor center will do.
TUCKER: As of now, no decision has been made over the creation of a day laborer center.
Bill Tucker, CNN, Jupiter, Florida.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Still ahead, one of our most precious freedoms under fire. A reporter tonight facing jail time for simply doing his job. Tonight, I'll be joined by Mort Zuckerman, editor in chief, "U.S. News & World Report." Floyd Abrams, one of the country's leading First- Amendment attorneys and Judith Miller, a "New York Times" reporter, fighting her own battle to defend her First-Amendment rights and yours.
And the Bush agenda for the next four years: foreign policy, intelligence reform and the politics of values. Conservative Reverend Jerry Falwell, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, are my guests.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT continues. Here for more news, debate and opinion, Lou Dobbs.
DOBBS: In a moment, freedom under fire. I'll be joined by our panel of experts on the issue of protecting journalists' rights and your right to know.
But, first, a look at some of the top stories tonight.
Fears of another mad cow case in the United States. The Department of Agriculture investigating an inconclusive test for the disease. The USDA says the cow in question never entered the food chain or feed chain. Final test results will be expected over the course of the next week.
In Florida, some grave passengers saved their bus from plunging almost 200 feet into the water. That bus traveling along the Sunshine Skyway Bridge when the driver collapsed of a heart attack. Passengers were able to regain control of the bus after it hit a concrete barrier on the bridge. The driver later died at an area hospital.
For the first time following the September 11 attacks, airports will be able to hire their own baggage screeners. Beginning today, airports can apply to make the switch from federal to private screeners. The Transportation Safety Administration will still oversee the private screening companies hired by the airports. The federal government was brought in when private screeners were found to be incompetent.
And, as promised, the list of drugs one scientist for the federal drug administration says we should be concerned about. Meridia, Crestor leading off those drugs, and Meridia is a weight loss drug; Crestor, a cholesterol drug. Bextra and Accutane as well as Serevent. Now those five drugs the leading drug safety expert at the FDA disagreeing with his agency saying that those drugs bear greater scrutiny.
A reporter in Providence, Rhode Island, at we reported to you at the outset of this broadcast, faces up to six months in jail, after he was convicted today of criminal contempt. Jim Taricani refused to disclose who gave him a FBI videotape showing a city official taking a bribe.
Taricani called his conviction an assault on journalistic freedom. He said he never expected to go to jail for simply doing his job. That case one of many, unfortunately, like it around the country.
Joining me now to discuss what is categorically a mounting assault on the freedom of the press are Mort Zuckerman. He is the editor in chief of "U.S. News & World Report." Floyd Abrams joins us as well. He's one of the leading attorneys in this country specializing in the First Amendment. And Judith Miller, reporter for "The New York Times." She has also been found guilty of attempt contempt of court for refusing to reveal information about her confidential sources. She's appealing that decision. Floyd Abrams is representing her and "The New York Times."
We also tonight invited several government officials to join us for this discussion. They either declined or simply did not respond to our invitation. Thank you all for being here. Judith, you are, at this point, squarely in the crosshairs of what is a broadening assault on the first amendment, by any definition.
JUDITH MILLER, "NEW YORK TIMES": Absolutely. There are a dozen reporters in my situation, though perhaps not as far along.
DOBBS: And you are, at this point, appealing. Floyd Abrams, where do we stand?
FLOYD ABRAMS, FIRST AMENDMENT ATTORNEY: Well, we're arguing the appeal on December 8th in the court of appeals in Washington. And that involves Judith Miller and Matt Cooper of "Time" magazine, and we'll hear from that court.
DOBBS: Judith, at this point, you're putting your person at risk. Is there, in your judgment, I think I should say, first of all neither you nor "The New York Times" published anything to do with the material involved in this.
That's correct, isn't it?
MILLER: That is correct, I'm facing jail for something I never wrote.
DOBBS: And what is it precisely that the government wants to get from you, that is, in any way, material to their -- to the broader investigation?
MILLER: Well, they want to talk to me about an alleged source that I may have had a conversation with about who leaked the name of Valerie Plame, the wife of Joe Wilson. And the government says that because government officials have signed waivers of their confidential discussions with journalists, that I'm no longer bound by my pledge of confidentiality to the people I may have discussed this issue with.
DOBBS: Assuming those people were the ones who were your sources.
MILLER: Assuming those people were the ones, and I simply will not go down this road and begin to discuss potential sources, because that would mean that no one would ever come to me again and feel confident that I would protect him or her if they choose to expose wrongdoing or tell me their side of the story. I mean, this is not about me. This is about the public's right to know.
DOBBS: Mort, the idea that journalists, their editors and their publishers, you often find yourself in the role of all three, to be assaulted in this way.
Is this a turning point in the history of the first amendment?
MORT ZUCKERMAN, "U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT": Well, it very well can be. I think it's outrageous what's going on. The case that you mentioned I think is outrageous, and going after Judy is outrageous on many grounds, on its own merits. But on the fact, for example, that one of the other people who did publish this information, at least to the public knowledge, we don't know whether he has been interrogated by the special prosecutor or not. I mean, spending millions of dollars to go after this case, I think, is absolutely ridiculous.
We are in a position now where it seems to me what is required, although it's highly unlikely politically, is some kind of federal shield law to protect journalists and their sources both for confidential information and indeed nonconfidential information, because otherwise they're not going to be able to do their job at a time when the role of journalists, in exposing wrongdoing on the part of government officials or at least concealed policies on the part of government officials is absolutely necessary and essential.
DOBBS: Floyd, in the Taricani case in Providence, the judge made it very clear, he was relying upon what is considered a muddled decision, the 1972 Supreme Court decision. Which was -- is not explicit, certainly not to the satisfaction of those of us who are engaged and were protected by the First Amendment.
What is your thought about the idea of relying on the '72 case?
ABRAMS: Well, the '72 case called Branzburg vs. Hayes was a 5 to 4 opinion in which the fifth judge, Justice Louis Powell, also wrote a separate opinion of his own saying, in effect, that there really ought to be some way to balance the interests, every case issue by issue as to how much people really need this information. So the reality is, we don't know what that case means. One justice said, this was four and a half to four and a half. And we don't really know the ultimate impact of the case. We may find out in our case.
But at this moment, the law is muddled. And one of the results of that, is that when prosecutors go to court and say, we want this information, we have some good reason, we need the information, unfortunately, there are some judges who have agreed and are really sort of cracking down. And that's one of the things that I find particularly distressing about the whole thing, because this arises at a time in our history when we've never needed an alive, vibrant, inquiring press more. And in which it may be that the press has never been more disliked by the public.
DOBBS: And one could argue that talented, and I'll say this in front of you, talented, energetic journalists digging for truth have never perhaps been scarcer in our craft. The idea that others have, in point of fact, given limited testimony about their sources in this case has occurred with journalists from NBC, "The Washington Post," and "Time" magazine, although Matt Cooper resisted, going farther than that limited -- the journalist at "Time" magazine going farther than that limited response.
Does that weaken your case, in your mind?
And I know that -- I'm asking both of you. I'm going to ask you first, Judith, if I could.
MILLER: Well, I think every journalist has to come to his own decision about cooperating. I think that I decided from the very beginning that I didn't want to go down the road of beginning to testify about people who may or may not have been sources. I don't think that their decision affects the principle at stake here in this case.
ADAMS: And I'd also add that the experience of Matt Cooper, who I represent, sort of bears witness to what can happen. He was told and I was told, that if he would just testify about one source, that -- and that source then gave his permission, gave his permission, he never would have done it if the source had agreed. But if he would talk about the one source, that would be the end of it. And the prosecutor said, look, if I have to call you back again, I will. Well, sure enough, that's what happened. The questions were about the one source. He answered the questions. And, again, only because the source said he could. And then a week later, we got another subpoena. And so now they want to know everybody else other than that source to whom he spoke. So, you know, while journalists may disagree about some aspects of almost tactics, the reality here is that this is no end.
ZUCKERMAN: A slippery slope. A very slippery slope.
MILLER: Which is why I didn't want to go down that road to begin with.
DOBBS: Mort, as you talk about a shield law, 31 states have a shield law in this country, yet there is no federal overarching protection, as you suggest. We need one. The politics of this are also, obviously, pertinent. The likelihood, in your judgment that a shield law could be enacted?
ZUCKERMAN: Well, somebody asked me about that, and asking whether it was next to zero. I said that overstates it, it's zero. There is no chance that such a legislation will be enacted in the present political environment. The press is very unpopular. And the control of the both houses and, indeed, the administration, I think their views are very, very different about this. I mean, I frankly think they treat the press as the enemy, and this is not going to be something they're going to give to the press to enhance their capability to function.
ABRAMS: That's sort of ironic, if I may, that this all began with Bob Novak, then whom no one is more conservative, and who himself made a promise of confidentiality. And while we don't know what's going on with Mr. Novak, we do know that he promised confidentiality and then he did a column based on that promise of confidentiality.
DOBBS: Newspaper column. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Since he is also a colleague of ours.
ABRAMS: Indeed. My point is...
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: But as we look at the situation that you're in, Matt Cooper and Jim Taricani, and now a widening spread of this, the press is not particularly popular with the public in this, and often has to dig up unpleasant facts for the public. The political climate is not right for a shield law. What is the most appropriate strategy to take here? Is it simply within the court system itself and hope you win on appeal?
ABRAMS: Yes. I mean, there are only two places to go. DOBBS: I'm not suggesting that with Floyd Abrams, that you don't have considerably more than a hope.
ABRAMS: Thank you. No, all we've got is the courts and the Congress, the only place we can go. And if we don't win in one of them, then the world is going to change. Because we really can't go on with a system where the law is clear, and it's not now. But it's clear that journalists can't promise confidentiality. If they really can't, they won't.
MILLER: Especially, in an environment of growing secrecy.
ABRAMS: And if they won't.
MILLER: I mean, since 9/11, for understandable reasons, but still, so much more is now classified or determined to be, quote, sensitive, which means it's not distributed. And unless the public wants to hear only from those who are authorized and blessed to speak from the government, we need to encourage those whistle blowers to come forward. And you can't encourage that if they believe that we can't protect them. That's what's at stake here.
ZUCKERMAN: Another problem, though, that is emerging is the definition of a journalist. With the Internet, almost anyone can self-declare themselves to be journalists. And so where do you draw those lines? That's going to become an increasingly difficult issue.
ABRAMS: Many of the states who have these shield laws, you mentioned 31 states, define journalist very broadly to adjust your point, Mort. And to say basically, people that gather information for dissemination of it to others. That's who gets protected.
DOBBS: Well, there is no question about the credentials of certainly the "New York Times," "U.S. News & World Report," and no question about your courage. And all of us in the craft, it is too easy and simply too (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to say thank you. But with great respect and thanks, Judith Miller, Floyd Abrams and Mort Zuckerman.
That brings us to the subject of tonight's poll. Would you support a federal shield law for reporters? Yes or no. Please cast your vote at CNN.com/lou. We'll have the results coming up for you later in the broadcast.
Still ahead here tonight, I'll be talking with prominent Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein about U.S. foreign policy, changes in the Bush administration, and the direction of the next four years.
And the conservative Reverend Jerry Falwell says the president's re-election is the result of what he calls an evangelical revolution. We'll be talking about that and perhaps the role of Latinos and women voters as well. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, there are new concerns tonight about Iran's nuclear ambitions. Secretary of State Colin Powell today said the United States has intelligence that suggests Iran is trying to develop nuclear warheads as well as new ballistic missiles. It comes as an Iranian opposition group has warned Iran has a secret nuclear weapons facility in Tehran. I talked earlier with Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, and asked her thoughts about these warnings.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: Well, I think it's hard to know. I've heard the various reports. I think it's very important that the IAEA get in there and be able to do unannounced inspections. I hope that the Europeans, in their agreement with Iran, have taken into consideration the need for long-term, specific inspections. I think that's the only way to learn this.
And then, of course, the United States, by its methodology of observation may be able to pick something up as well.
DOBBS: In that regard, CIA Director Porter Goss is creating quite a stir at the CIA. They are moving people out of there, the top two positions in the clandestine service. Your thoughts as to what kind of job he's doing.
FEINSTEIN: Well, I think it's too easy to assess. I think we all know there need to be changes. The question that I have is how it's being done. I've just written a letter to him indicating more fully what I thought. But I read parts of the letter that has been in the public press. And the wording, if you read it just in strict English, is that the CIA must carry out the president's policies.
Well, I think in terms of intelligence, it's not just the president that receives this intelligence, it's the Congress that has the obligation to declare and fund war. And therefore what we're interested in is unbiased, apolitical reporting that has state of the art analytic style to it, is peer-reviewed and that we can take as is close to fact as possible.
And this is where I think the failures are. I think they are structural. I don't think they're individual. I think they're in the analytic division. They have to do with analysts being able to evaluate the source correctly, to know whether the source of human intelligence is credible or not.
DOBBS: And Senator, another important change, the most important in the cabinet, Secretary of State Powell stepping down to be replaced by Condoleezza Rice. What are your -- what's your reaction to her appointment?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I know Condoleezza Rice. I think very highly of her. I think she has an opportunity to be a brilliant secretary of state. I think what's very important in these hearings is to scope out her strategic vision of where the next four years are going to go.
And I would be hopeful that a solution between the Israelis and the Palestinians is at the top of the list, because I believe that this crisis, left unsolved, really can exacerbate a clash of civilizations. And now that Yasser Arafat has died and there are people on the horizon like Abu Mazen and Abu Ala and Dahlan, the possibilities of a very constructive Palestinian leadership that has the technical leadership, strength and ability to forge an agreement is there.
And I think the Israelis have to be pushed. I am very hopeful that Prime Minister Sharon will not have a set of qualifications, now that Arafat is gone, that need to be filled before he can enter into negotiations for a final settlement agreement.
I think the road map is dead. I think we should move to final settlement. And I think the only way is to have a Palestinian state and an Israeli state living side-by-side, and that that Israeli state can have safe and secure borders.
And that's what needs to be discussed and an agreement needs to be struck. A lot of work has been done. We know the parameters by and large of that agreement. And I think it needs to be pushed. So I would hope that this new secretary of state would be able to have a special envoy, perhaps former Secretary Powell to go over, spend time in the region. And it be a major exercise of senior leadership diplomacy.
DOBBS: Senator Dianne Feinstein, thanks for being here.
FEINSTEIN: You're very welcome, thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DOBBS: Coming right up, why Reverend Jerry Falwell is leading a mass recruitment effort. He is my guest when we continue. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: As we reported, a warning tonight about at least 5 drugs now on the market that may pose major risks to consumers. The same government drug reviewer, the drug safety scientist who raised safety questions about Vioxx also today in a Senate committee hearing, raising serious concerns about these drugs: Meridia -- Meridia and Crestor, a cholesterol drug, Bextra, Accutane, an acne drug and Serevent. Those 5 drugs -- he said the sales of those drugs, in fact, should be limited or stopped altogether.
We bring that to you just in the interest of public information. But those -- that warning coming from one of the leading drug safety scientists today on Capitol Hill.
President Bush's decisive re-election inspired my next guest to create the Faith and Values Coalition. Reverend Jerry Falwell joins me tonight from Washington D.C. Good to have you with us.
REV. JERRY FALWELL, FAITH AND VALUES COALITION: You -- why do you feel compelled to start this now? Apparently the evangelical Christians did well on November 2. FALWELL: Well, Lou, 25 years ago, as you know, I started the Moral Majority that became the religious right and for 10 years led that group. Then went back to Liberty University, Thomas Rowe Church, my primary ministry for the last 15 years.
We saw the culmination of November 2 of 25 hard years of work by people of faith in this country committed to the Judeo/Christian ethic. And 30 million evangelicals came out to the polls, most of them voting for George Bush and for 11 family initiatives and for pro- life, pro-family senators, congressmen. So we're launching a coalition that has a threefold purpose.
One, we want to help the president get good, strict constructionist judges appointed to the Supreme Court and federal courts in general. Two, to get the federal management amendment passed as quickly as possible, defining the family as a man married to a woman. And then voter registration beginning immediately to strengthen the president's hand in '06 and '08 and hopefully get another good George Bush-type elected in '08.
And anyone interested in knowing more about the new coalition may go to the Web site, faithandvalues.us.
DOBBS: Reverend Falwell, another conservative religious leader, Dr. James Dobson, saying that Arlen Specter was not acceptable to him on the Judiciary Committee. It now appears he will be the chairman of the committee. Are you comfortable with him?
FALWELL: Well, I've spent the day today here in Washington with James Dobson and a number of religious leaders. Yes, we are well aware that he is the chairman. He has made a firm commitment to all of us in writing and publicly and to the president, that he will, in fact, give a fair hearing to every nominee to the court and all the president's proposals, send them out to the Senate floor for a full vote. That's all anyone can ask.
I believe the senator's a man of integrity. I take him at his word. I may disagree with him from time to time, but I believe he's an honorable man who will do what he said he'll do.
DOBBS: Your organization, the others that you were talking with, many of the others that you talked with today absolutely opposed to gay marriage in this country, a constitutional amendment, as you've said, one of the priorities. And styling it as defensive marriage, the integrity of marriage, yet the fact of the matter is, gay marriage has very little to do with the difficulties facing most marriages in this country today. In point of fact, all of the research says it is about money. It is about changing values, broader certainly than simply our times that we now live in. And, in fact, divorce rates in some of the Bible Belt states, so-called are higher than those and those nasty blue northeastern states, for example. How do you rationalize that?
FALWELL: Well, Lou, there's no question the family is facing severe pressures. You're right. Gay marriage is only one of the problems. But it's the one that is attempting to redefine marriage as something other than a man married to a woman. It's a fundamental challenge that must not be allowed to prevail. And most Americans went to the polls 3-1 in most of the 11 states voting on the initiatives, 3-1 take the position that we don't want that in America. And the reason for the coalition, we're going to get about a 10 million more voters to the polls in '08 to see to it that we keep a president who believes that.
DOBBS: Reverend Jerry Falwell, we thank you for being here. Come back soon.
FALWELL: Thank you.
DOBBS: This looks like it's a topic we're going to be discussing a lot in the months and years ahead. Reverend Jerry Falwell, thank you.
Still ahead, the results of our poll tonight. And a preview of what's ahead here tomorrow. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: The results of our poll tonight, 61 percent of you would support a federal shield law for reporters. 39 percent say you would not.
Thanks for being with us tonight. Please join us here tomorrow. Tomorrow, legislation on recommendations from the 9/11 commission stalled in Congress. Joining me tomorrow, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Senator Pat Roberts and Senator John Rockefeller. We'll find out when those 9/11 recommendations are going to be passed. Please be with us.
For all of us here, good night from New York. "ANDERSON COOPER 360" is coming up next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
