Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Major Flooding in the Washington D.C. Area; Controversy Caused by Proposals for Troop Cuts in Iraq by Pentagon

Aired June 26, 2006 - 08:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm Bob Franken in Washington, otherwise known as Capitol City Beach. We've had some serious flooding.
ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm Ed Henry at the White House, where the Bush administration is considering major troop cuts. Democrats are crying foul because it sounds suspiciously similar to a timetable. That story coming up.

ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'm Andrea Koppel in Washington.

Iraq's prime minister offering amnesty to insurgents. This idea is stirring up controversy with Congress. I'll tell you who's saying what coming up.

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Also ahead this morning, Warren Buffett takes philanthropy to new heights. He's giving away billions of dollars to somebody who's even richer.

Those stories all ahead on this AMERICAN MORNING.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to you.

I'm Miles O'Brien.

S. O'BRIEN: And I'm Soledad O'Brien.

Welcome back, everybody.

M. O'BRIEN: We begin with a messy commute all along the East Coast this morning. Heavy rains prompting a lot of flooding, especially in the Mid-Atlantic States. Take a look at Washington, D.C. this morning -- streets washed out, the city and environs still sodden from the weekend deluge.

AMERICAN MORNING'S Bob Franken has his galoshes on this morning.

He joins us from D.C. -- good morning, Bob.

FRANKEN: Well, you need them in Washington a lot of the time, don't you? But today they're for real. Note to self -- don't try and drive your Jeep through the 12th Street tunnel when there's heavy rains. That Jeep has been there quite a while. Other vehicles were, too. It's sort of the sad story of the capital today, lots of transportation problems. Streets flooded. Lots of people caught unawares by this heavy rain, which caused a lot of flash flooding. It's not just Washington, D.C. they have been mudslides on some of the roadways in outlying Virginia. Also, rail transportation has really been disrupted today, both from suburban Maryland and suburban Virginia.

So it's really quite a mess. And it's also quite a mess as you go out further, to the eastern shore. Towns like Federalsburg in Maryland and Seaford in Delaware are really, really getting hammered. Just huge amounts of rain.

But there's been quite a bit of it here, trapping people, in many cases, causing people to make some bad judgments, like the driver over there. And so the watchword here in Washington, as people pump out and really cringe at the possibility that there may be more flooding, the watchword is here, is to be patient. And the other watchword is probably, if you can avoid it, stay off the streets, not like that street sweeper just did.

In any case, the flooding is very serious here and the possibility is very good that there may be more. Things are really saturated after a weekend of this and there could be more rain coming, which would be a real problem here -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: Well, we know the street sweepers are running OK, Bob.

Tell us, are the -- is the Metro Rail and everything going well?

How is the commute going in that -- on that front?

FRANKEN: Not well at all. As a matter of fact, some of the stations downtown are closed off. Some of them have to stop on the way in. Some of the commuter trains like the MARC, which is the Maryland Area Rapid Commute setup, is not coming in all the way because the rails are flooded.

It is, to use a technical term, a mess.

M. O'BRIEN: that is the technical term.

Bob Franken, thank you very much.

let's get more on the messy weather now.

Chad Myers is looking at it for us -- Chad, it looked like it was relatively clear there. But it looks like more trouble is headed that way today.

CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes, more trouble is coming.

M. O'BRIEN: Huh?

MYERS: Yes, absolutely, Miles. You've got a problem when you pave most of the city. Well, the pavement doesn't absorb the rain. It just washes away or moves somewhere else. And then it gets into the low spots. And that's exactly what happened, that urban flooding there at Washington today.

The same thing for Baltimore. They were flooded, too. I mean just all the way up into Rockville. Places like Reston, Virginia were completely underwent.

(WEATHER REPORT)

S. O'BRIEN: Democrats today accusing the White House of using troop cuts to score political points. The Pentagon has a plan, reportedly, to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq starting this fall if conditions allow.

Two Democratic plans to bring troops home were voted down last week.

Ed Henry live for us at the White House -- hey, Ed, good morning.

HENRY: Good morning, Soledad.

That's right, military sources tell CNN that General George Casey, the commander in Iraq for the United States, does -- is considering, at least, a plan that would pull two combat brigades out of Iraq this fall. That would be the equivalent of about 7,000 U.S. troops rotated out of Iraq in the fall. Secondly, the Casey plan would rotate out about 21,000 more U.S. troops by the end of 2007, according to the "New York Times."

Democrats charge the White House, which has repeatedly refused to set a time line for bringing home troops from Iraq, is now giving into the political pressures of the mid-term elections because, of course, those troop cuts would start in September, just two months before those critical mid-term elections.

They also charge the White House is being hypocritical now. As you noted, last week there were those two Democratic plans to start setting a timetable, bringing troops home. Republicans charged then it was cut and run. Now, they're taking a close look at the Casey plan -- Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: Let me ask you a question, then.

The Casey plan sure sounds like a timetable with a big caveat, the big if at the end.

But isn't that a timetable?

HENRY: Absolutely. No matter what you call it, basically, whether it's a loose timetable or a hard timetable, there is some sort of a timetable here. That's why Democrats are pouncing on it. Senior Republicans like John Warner insist, though, that since there are so many caveats attached here that, in fact, it's going to be decided by facts on the ground and that there is not a hard timetable. Take a listen to Senator John Warner and Democrat Russ Feingold.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN WARNER (R-VA), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: We will move to reduce our troops as soon as this new government gets up and gains the full confidence of its military to direct them to put down the insurgency.

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: And I wonder what all this talk was about how a timetable is a bad idea, that we can't tell the terrorists what we're going to do.

Well, General Casey just told them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: So there certainly does seem to be a "timeline" here. But what the Republicans are stressing, as John Warner did, is that there is not a firm, hard deadline like the Kerry-Feingold plan last week, which said (AUDIO GAP)...

S. O'BRIEN: As you can see, obviously, we lost our satellite linkup with Ed Henry.

We're going to have more on this story when Ron Brownstein joins us for a little more analysis of this very issue. And obviously we'll fix those problems coming to us from Ed Henry at the White House -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: The Space Shuttle Discovery is set to launch this Saturday. People around the country and around the world will be watching. And I'll be there, of course.

But a special group of teachers will also be watching, with a new perspective -- firsthand knowledge of what the astronauts are going to go through.

David Waters from our Central Florida News 13 affiliate reports.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

DAVID WATERS, NEWS 13 CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): These school teachers are doing hands-on science where you don't need your hands or your legs. They're floating, experiencing weightlessness thanks to a plane diving to create zero-gravity for 30 seconds at a time.

BOB SPRINGER, FORMER SPACE SHUTTLE ASTRONAUT: Astronauts say it's the same feeling in orbit.

It's absolutely like it. This is true zero-gravity.

WATERS (on camera): The astronauts that are stationed on Discovery are about to experience this. But now teachers in all 50 states will get to experience this, as well. (voice-over): Zero-G normally sells seats on its plane for almost $4,,000. But the company and Northrop Grumman partnered for what they call weightless flights of discovery. They're giving the flights to school teachers so they can inspire future scientists and engineers.

DR. PETER DIAMANDIS, ZERO-G CEO: What these teachers will do is bring back the video, the photos, the experience, and be able to relate firsthand what it's like to teach them the difference between weight and mass, to show them that an apple -- you know, Newton's Law doesn't work when you're weightless in zero-G.

WATERS: Rich Regan wants to show students how Newton's three laws of motion work in weightlessness.

Zero-G

RICH REGAN, TEACHER: This is a very exciting opportunity and students will respond a lot better to my explaining something I've actually done and experienced rather than something we've just read about.

WATERS: But Regan says it's trickier than he anticipated because he's not used to the weightless environment.

REGAN: You've got to control both your body and the experiment. And you're moving around and it's a little bit chaotic. There's other people. And it takes a while to get used to controlling your body in weightlessness.

WATERS: No textbook can show what these teachers say they can demonstrate to their children on video, such as how water turns into a globe shape without gravity pulling it down or how these marbles act in a jar without gravity.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was absolutely fantastic. It was really a lot of fun.

WATERS: And it's fun-they'll take back into the classroom after they come back from cloud nine.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

M. O'BRIEN: And that was from David Waters of our Central Florida News 13 affiliate.

He's been trying to get a ride of one of those.

S. O'BRIEN: You've done that, right?

M. O'BRIEN: I've done that a few times and...

S. O'BRIEN: It looks like it would be -- you might get like motion sickness.

M. O'BRIEN: You might say that. S. O'BRIEN: Really?

M. O'BRIEN: As a matter of fact, I was on with some college students years ago...

S. O'BRIEN: Did you throw up?

M. O'BRIEN: I did not. I'm pretty good on that. But there were 18 students. Sixteen of them were so-called "kills" as they said.

S. O'BRIEN: Oh, is that what they call it?

M. O'BRIEN: And one of them had to be carried off in a stretcher.

S. O'BRIEN: Oh, yes, that would be me.

M. O'BRIEN: She was...

S. O'BRIEN: That would be...

M. O'BRIEN: She was having a very hard day.

S. O'BRIEN: Oh.

M. O'BRIEN: But she said oh, I'll do it again.

S. O'BRIEN: Uh-huh.

M. O'BRIEN: Yes. OK.

S. O'BRIEN: Maybe not.

All right.

Coming up this morning, billionaire Warren Buffett's decision to give away most of his fortune. We're going to talk to the writer who broke the story and get some details about why Buffett is donating to that foundation run-by Bill Gates.

M. O'BRIEN: Also, that plan by the top U.S. general in Iraq to start bringing troops home. A little politics in there, perhaps. Some are alleging that.

S. O'BRIEN: Also, one woman challenges the diplomatic immunity of U.N. officials by taking a sexual harassment claim all the way to the Supreme Court. We've got her story just ahead on AMERICAN MORNING.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

M. O'BRIEN: A proposal to offer amnesty for insurgents in Iraq drawing fire in Washington this morning. Iraq's prime minister, Nouri Al-Maliki, out with a reconciliation plan, hoping to stem the violence that is hobbling his fledgling government. But some are worried, in Washington in particular, it may mean terrorists who have killed American troops could be walking free one day.

CNN's Andrea Koppel live now from Capitol Hill with more on this -- good morning, Andrea.

KOPPEL: Good morning, Miles.

That plan laid out by Iraq's new prime minister says it would only offer amnesty for prisoners who were not involved in any terrorist activity, war crimes or crimes against humanity. Some U.S. senators are calling the idea of a reconciliation plan in itself a positive step forward for Iraq's new government, but at the same time they worry that the plan, which is still being worked out, might include amnesty for insurgents who have killed American soldiers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "FACE THE NATION," COURTESY CBS NEWS)

SEN. RICHARD LUGAR (R-IA), FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: We've been advised very strongly through our ambassador that that is unacceptable to us. At that point, all of the factions in Iraq may come down upon us. But nevertheless, we have been sort of holding the fort, trying to provide at least some basis in which they will find unity, because it's in their interests. It's also in ours.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.

LUGAR: To see a disintegration of Iraq and civil war is not in anyone's interests.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOPPEL: Now, on "LATE EDITION" yesterday, Iraq's oil minister told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that amnesty would only be offered to those insurgents now carrying weapons who are willing to come into the political process. But what's unclear, Miles, is whether amnesty might be offered to those who planned or financed attacks against Americans -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: This will be an interesting one to watch, because that's a difficult tightrope on both sides for that one to proceed.

Let's talk about something else that's going on underneath that dome today. Flag burning, of all things. Is that a burning issue on most Americans' minds this morning? I don't know, but as far as politicians go, this is going to be a subject this week.

KOPPEL: Well, that's exactly what Democrats are saying. They're saying there are hardly any instances where people are out there burning the flag these days and they're accusing Republicans of basically what they say is a transparent election year ploy, a carefully timed debate. We're a week out from the 4th of July holiday, four months from mid-term elections. And it's a way to kind of fire up the party's conservative base on issues that they care about most in the hopes of inspiring them to turn out on election day. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FEINGOLD: Oh, no, it always comes up just before July 4th. It's a political game. It's outrageous. And we have more important things to deal with, such as getting our troops out of Iraq, helping our veterans, making sure that we get health care for all Americans. That's more important than trying to mess up the constitution.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOPPEL: The amendment would protect the American flag from what they say is physical desecration by changing the U.S. constitution. It's been rejected by the Senate before. But its chief sponsor, Utah Republican Orin Hatch, predicts, Miles, that it will have the 67 votes needed to pass.

Debate gets underway later today, with a vote as soon as tomorrow -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: Andrea Koppel in Washington.

Thank you -- Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: There's word this morning that the U.S. commander in Iraq has a plan that calls for big troop reductions starting in September and going right through the end of 2007 if -- and this is a big if -- the situation outgoing improves.

The "New York Times" is reporting that General George Casey plans to cut roughly 7,000 troops by the end of the year and then 21,000 more by the end of next year.

Ron Brownstein is a CNN political analyst, also an "L.A. Times" columnist.

He is in the nation's capital this morning -- good morning to you, Ron.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": Good morning, Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: Nice to see you, as always.

BROWNSTEIN: Nice to see you.

S. O'BRIEN: In this report, they also say that the president has been briefed on General Casey's plan.

Is that significant?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, sure. I mean it's a sign that they are taking this seriously. And, you know, in a way, it's not a surprise. There certainly was a widespread expectation among politicians in both parties last year that the administration would announce troop withdrawals before the mid-term elections. I think it has been a general sense that this was the principal lever that was in the president's control to affect how Americans viewed Iraq.

Now, conditions on the ground have not cooperated this year. They have not been able to float this idea until now. And, of course, that is the great variable, as you've made clear and all of the senators talking about this have made clear, this is dependent upon progress on the ground and we'll have to see if that cooperates.

S. O'BRIEN: So when the Democrats complain hey, that's our plan, our plan, which, by the way, was not embraced at all last week, are they right?

BROWNSTEIN: Not exactly, I think. I do think there are important differences.

First of all, the harder Democratic plan from John Kerry and Russ Feingold had all of the troops out by the end of '07. So this is clearly very different than that.

On the one that the Democrats did reach a consensus on, which is important in itself, the alternative that would require the president to begin removing troops by the end of this year, there is still a difference. And I think John Warner put his finger on it.

The Democrats are basically arguing that we need to -- from a political decision here in the U.S. -- begin removing troops to put pressure on the Iraqi government to reach political accommodations that might reduce the violence.

The administration, what the administration is talking about is removing troops in response to progress on the ground there.

Now, you can say it's a distinction without a difference, but I do think there is, in fact, some space between those two positions and reflected in the fact that the administration is very clearly leaving open the possibility of not moving ahead with this program if events and conditions don't allow it.

S. O'BRIEN: A cynic might say well, really, all this is because of the timing. We're coming up on the mid-term elections. We're coming close to the general election in 2008. I mean, General George Casey, the same guy we're talking about here, had this to say just last Thursday.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. GEORGE CASEY, U.S. ARMY: It would limit my flexibility. I think it would give the enemy a fixed timetable and I think it would send a terrible signal to a new national -- government of national unity in Iraq that's trying to stand up and get its legs underneath it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

S. O'BRIEN: That's General Casey saying why he doesn't like timetables. And he began by saying very strongly, I don't like it.

And now -- so why this now?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, I think, first of all, American troops are going to come out of Iraq some day. And at some point there is going to be a plan to begin reducing our numbers there. So in that sense, if now, it was going to be another day.

But certainly, as I said, no one doubts that the administration would like to be able to begin removing troops from Iraq before the mid-term election, and certainly in large numbers before the 2008 election. That is the principal way the president has -- the principal tool the president has within his control to try to indicate progress to the American people.

The interesting question is how it will be received. If events on the ground are improving, I think it very clearly will be a plus for Republicans. On the other hand, if there is a large amount of violence, if violence remains very strong in Iraq, then there is the danger that this would -- if, in fact, we go ahead -- that this would not be as positive and it would be seen as, in effect, validating what the administration accused Democrats of -- leaving before the mission was completed.

So, in the end, I think no matter what we do, conditions on the ground are going to be the principal determinant of how Americans view the status of our mission in Iraq.

S. O'BRIEN: Which honestly is what you and I -- or you have been telling me for the last several years.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes, thank you.

S. O'BRIEN: Ron Brownstein for us this morning, CNN's political analyst and "L.A. Times" columnist.

Thanks, Ron.

BROWNSTEIN: Thank you.

S. O'BRIEN: Nice to see you, as always -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: More serious charges after an alleged atrocity by some U.S. soldiers. Two Pennsylvania National Guard soldiers now charged with the killing of an unarmed civilian in Ramadi in February.

CNN's Kathleen Koch live now from the Pentagon with more -- good morning, Kathleen.

KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Miles.

And, yes, yet another set of charges coming out over the weekend involving U.S. soldiers in the death of an Iraqi civilian. In this case, Specialist Nathan B. Lynn of the Pennsylvania National Guard is charged with voluntary manslaughter for allegedly shooting an unarmed man in front of a home in Ramadi where Lynn was doing security for members of his unit. News released on the February 15th incident says that Lynn and Sergeant Milton Ortiz, Jr. were also each charged with one count of obstructing justice for allegedly conspiring with another soldier who allegedly placed an AK-47 near the mortally wounded man as he was dying.

Now, new charges have been brought against that soldier because he was redeployed and demobilized before the criminal investigation began.

Now, another set of charges have also been brought against Sergeant Ortiz. He's charged with assault and communicating a threat for allegedly -- in March, on March 8th -- placing an unloaded weapon against the head of an Iraqi man and threatening to take him to prison.

Now, both men have been taken to Baghdad, sent there to a military base, transferred while they try to determine whether or not court martial proceedings should begin -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: Kathleen, whenever we hear about stories like this, we hearken back to the Haditha and the allegations there. That happened the latter part of last year. Allegedly, 24 unarmed civilians shot and killed by Marines. And yet we still don't have any progress to report on that.

Why not?

KOCH: Miles, that's a very complicated incident. And as you pointed out, it occurred back in November. And it was months before any kind of investigation began. So they have had difficulty in collecting evidence, pristine evidence, in the case, to determine exactly what happened. Also, they've had a lot of difficulty getting the family members to agree to exhume these bodies so that some kind of forensic investigation -- forensic evidence gathering could take place.

So right now, as of this point in time, no charges have even yet been filed in that incident -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: Kathleen Koch at the Pentagon.

Thank you very much.

KOCH: You bet.

M. O'BRIEN: Coming up on the program, one woman's sexual harassment suit and how it could challenge the idea of diplomatic immunity for U.N. officials.

Plus, billionaire Warren Buffett, the second richest man in the world, giving away a huge chunk of that fortune.

Why the charitable mood? Why now? We'll ask the writer who broke that story ahead on AMERICAN MORNING.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) S. O'BRIEN: In Houston, attorneys for Andrea Yates are preparing to do battle again. Yates was convicted of drowning three of her five young children back in 2001. That conviction has been overturned and now this retrial, with opening statements this morning.

Court TV reporter Beth Karas is in Houston this morning.

Hey Beth, good morning to you.

BETH KARAS, COURT-TV: Good morning.

S. O'BRIEN: give us a little history.

Why was this case reversed in the first place?

KARAS: It was reversed early last year, Soledad, because the state's psychiatric expert, Park Dietz, had given some erroneous testimony at the trial in 2002. He was a consultant at the time to the TV show "Law & Order." And he told the jury that a few weeks before Andrea Yates killed her children, a "Law & Order" episode had aired where a woman drowned her children and was found not guilty by reason of insanity.

And the prosecution summed up, saying to the jury that Andrea Yates, who used to watch that television program, likely saw it and copied it, saw a way out of her unhappy home life, where she was overwhelmed with raising five children.

Well, as it turns out, no such episode aired or even exists. Park Dietz did bring it to the attention of the prosecution and the judge. The judge did not grant a mistrial. But an appellate court did overrule the conviction.

S. O'BRIEN: What's the defense's strategy, then, going to be in this case this time around?

KARAS: Well, this time it's an insanity defense again. But this is probably going to be a longer trial than the first trial because she's been incarcerated for four years. There's four more years of psychiatric history to present to the jury. The defense is adding some expert witnesses also, in addition to the nine psychiatrists and two psychologists who testified for the defense before, some treating psychologists and psychiatrists, some were hired just for the purposes of evaluating her for trial.

So it is a psychiatric insanity defense and the defense is hopeful that this jury will find her not guilty by reason of insanity.

The first time around, one juror was leaning toward insanity, but when he heard Park Dietz's testimony about the "Law & Order" episode, he changed it to sanity and then she was found guilty.

S. O'BRIEN: And I know you're not in the business of giving guesses on these kinds of things. But, you know, when four years has passed and I think emotions have sort of calmed a little bit. The story is not on the front page every single day. Do you think that the defense has a chance to win on an insanity plea this time around, Beth?

KARAS: You know, I think, Soledad, that they do have a better chance. Since Andrea Yates was found guilty, Deanna Laney, here -- also in Texas, was found not guilty by reason of insanity for killing two of her children with a rock, saying that god told her to do it. So Texas jurors were open to her mental illness and did find her not guilty by reason of insanity.

It's a tough defense for attorneys when they assert it. It might work this time around. The defense found that this jury pool was much more open. There was much more dialogue last year -- last week, rather -- in talking about mental illness and the insanity defense.

So they are hopeful. But it takes 12 of them to agree.

S. O'BRIEN: Yes, it sure does.

All right, Beth Karas from Court TV.

Beth, nice to see you.

Thanks.

KARAS: Thanks.

M. O'BRIEN: Coming up on the program, a group of women that says you'd better listen to your grandmother, especially when it comes to a message as important as theirs.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com